Loading...
05-6-98 Agenda and Packet FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER OLD BUSINESS 1. Bloomberg Companies is requesting site plan review to remodel a portion of the Frontier Building, which is part of the Entertainment complex, located just east of the Chanhassen Cinema. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. The City of Chanhassen (LGU) during the year 1998 hereby provides notice that it has applied for a wetland alteration permit as part of the 1998 Trail Projects. This application proposes to impact 1.4 acres of wetlands along portions of Hwy. 7, Galpin Blvd., Powers Blvd., Great Plains Blvd. and Pioneer Trail. The proposed impact from the trail projects will be mitigated by the creation of new wetlands and wetland credits from the City's wetland bank. 3. RSS/Perma Green, Inc. request for a conditional use permit and site plan review to allow a golf improvement center/driving range to be located south of the intersection of Great Plains Blvd. and T.H. 212, on property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate District, RSS Golf Improvement Center. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 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. I , CITY OF PC DATE: 4-15-985-6-98 .\\I 7 CHANHASSEN CC DATE: 5-26-98 CASE #: 98-7 SPR By: Al-Jaff:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review to remodel a portion of the existing Frontier building into retail LL space with a variance to allow Non-Street Frontage Signs Z LOCATION: North of the railroad tracks and Pauly Drive, East of the Cinema and South of West 78th Street V , APPLICANT: Bloomberg Construction Inc. Herbert Bloomberg illb 525 West 78th St. 7008 Dakota Avenue CL Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Q 934-5850 934-5850 PRESENT ZONING: CBD, Central Business District ACREAGE: Approximately 1.9 acres DENSITY: N/A ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- CBD,Frontier Center S -BG,Twin Cities Western Railroad E-CBD,Frontier Center/Dinner Theatre Q W-BG,Cinema Q .. WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: Generally a level parcel with the exception of.the northeast corner, W with an existing building and parking lot. 1-1 (f) 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial Ewan!sir• qq;Eirettet ‘4111S& -.:" ritp.14, 4944' II: Ili Ww-! ..�'�,,A�Z�' �,�;,,N � �� I%�� � �� Lake 1.rir.!''..• '� gip© ►di ,-,.!.7,4,, kwow p „r = big ID i . /�' , lot" * MI.-: •Illh • .:-L__\gol —4 aii." 44. Ili. • • 41° M-435 PAIK "AO 411* Al OA" *411111111117 ii&74 a ��14 4 ��lPagatik 41 17 fig eo. Ala 1110?‘,lier rita Dr Ezikv Art / 41--------4-7-r-Frfl - r I --a, . ; NM Mb.-- kit/� • ' • N • 1Aksi 75th Si illA/ is:A ' 3Z "•"I4 • or ion ,. %,—,, „0, w wr .e . 41 4.1 k • *. rii <, to, KIMBERLY LANE ' `� J Et u • o MN NM - WI7rth AIJ Nicholas Way ®iNlid"% I r \a III l (1 l - ity Center / \ i.�m. P kilo d} iiiN/14W! I . k urine L7 t ( 1 WILII hill ri mar II i,'411 1 .,,_ i za ION r- g ,:mitimZi*V /Or rth St. ., L ' _fir te�(1 , Iri NM Road Wes NI- :11C1t1 5 e , Air State 5 !�� Fan Hw ip -A, ■ lam A him sle 10;(AI Um rilin 4 __.- II. , 1 i -MN z pp- i a •4,1� atl x 3 e ��� !!���' �fag Lake . _ :.. Ill ' 1 r. Park " �f//1' i a 4TIISIVill 7 \ ' / ir a a,,rao a, . l,miry _ �� ,, `' ace Marsh 7� — Lake Park ;% m w Lake Susan =_. �"- N � au 4F 71 Mayfield Court �t; p.I! � 2 Mission Hills Dr Ai a 7 it1P. 3FriscoCrt m. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 2 Since the April 15, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, changes to the plan took place. This staff report has been revised accordingly. All new information will appear in bold and impertinent information has been struck. Due to the history of this project, staff will introduce the background section first then proceed with the summary and analysis. BACKGROUND On August 3, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed a conceptual proposal from Lotus Realty for the Entertainment Center. They found the proposal interesting,but had concerns about the style of architecture. They recommended that the city hire a consultant to review the proposed facade design and application to the building. The Planning Commission felt the proposed uses were compatible with the downtown area. The City Council reviewed the concept on August 22, 1994, and concurred with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Numerous staff members had in-depth discussions regarding this proposal. Several meetings with the applicants took place to incorporate some recommendations we found suitable for this type of development. This area was studied in the Chanhassen Vision 2002 process, which was completed in the summer of 1994. This area was identified as one of the building blocks for the downtown area. The study stated, "The Dinner Theatre is the cornerstone of an entertainment center. This proposed entertainment center will mix uses to include theaters, restaurants, commercial recreation, hotels and related uses. The entertainment uses will be concentrated, allowing visitors to park once and shop twice in a common parking area and move to the various destinations on foot. Its emphasis on night time activities will extend the downtown's daytime vitality into the evening hours." The proposal was intended to implement the findings of the Vision 2002 proposed uses. On January 22, 1996, the City Council reviewed and approved an application for: 1) Site Plan Review to remodel the existing Chanhassen Bowl/Filly's and a portion of the Frontier building into an Entertainment Center 2) A variance to allow Wall Projecting Signs, Sand Blasted Signs, and Non-Street Frontage Signs 3) Vacation of a portion of Pauly Drive. This application was approved unanimously by the City Council with conditions. The south elevation of the Frontier Building was reflected on the plan. As a condition, the remaining sides (east and west)needed to be presented prior to issuance of a building permit. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 3 Following the site plan approval, the project was presented to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for financial assistance. The project received tax increment financing in the amount of $1.5 million to cover the boardwalk, facade, landscaping, and parking lot improvements. The Frontier Building's portion was $211,000 to assist in the facade of the building and $7,000 to build the sidewalk in front of the Frontier building. There was also $300,000 for the parking lot, however, this space was to be shared by the entire Entertainment Complex. Frontier's portion of the TIF was $314,667. We must point out that the HRA approved the TIF based upon the site plan approved by the City Council,which was presented to them. To date, Cinema is the only entity that has a signed contract with the City. On September 9, 1996, the City Council reviewed and approved the phasing of the project by allowing the Cinema portion of the Center to proceed ahead of the balance of the project. In order to provide adequate parking, the Cinema built the parking lot which is located south of the Frontier Building. On February 20, 1998, the applicant for the Frontier building submitted an application for a building permit to remodel the structure. The design was inconsistent with the approved plans. Through conversations with the applicant and his representatives, we concluded that it has always been their impression/understanding that they need to get site plan approval and that the approved plan was a concept only. We informed the applicant that they have the right to take this application through the process which would include the Planning Commission, City Council, and Economic Development Authority. The applicant was willing to go through these steps, hence, this application. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY - The applicant is requesting to remodel a portion of the Frontier Building into retail space. The building has 3 facades that need to be remodeled. They include the south, east, and west walls of the building. The existing materials used on the building include wood and glass on the south elevation and corrugated metal,wood and block on the east and west elevations. Since the opening of the Cinema and future development of the Entertainment Complex, this area is envisioned to be one of the most frequented and busy portions of downtown. The owner of the property wishes to add a facade that resembles the image of the Dinner Theatre Complex (i.e., mansard roof, wood shingles,wood siding,roof mounted channeled letter signs,brick veneer at the base of the building, etc.). The west side of the building is proposed to remain corrugated metal, with the addition of five light fixtures that resemble those found on the Cinema. Staff informed the applicant that corrugated metal was not an acceptable facade finish and suggested that since the west elevation is part of an alley, the applicant might want to consider some alternatives that are creative including a mural concept. The plans show three 12 x 4 foot = = =.. : - • =• •=. : • framed, three dimensional murals. Though interesting in design,they leave the majority of the Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 4 corrugated metal exposed d d'o not provide any detail. This is not an acceptable solution. The east elevation is proposed to be covered with lap siding and brick veneer along the base. Mansard canopies are proposed at the entrances. Through discussions with the applicant, they explained that this roof line will also tie in with the High Timber Lounge. Staff agrees that the lounge has an inviting appearance, however, the height of the building is lower than the Frontier and the pitch of the mansard roof is steeper,which makes the roof line blend better with the building. The proposed mansard roof on the south elevation is substantially larger and has minimal architectural interest and detail. Staff discussed this issue with the applicant's representatives. They believe that the proposed roof signs will provide the architectural interest which will also blend in with the Dinner Theatre Complex facade and sign criteria. The design of the exterior of the building could be improved drastically. These improvements include: • provide wall covering along the west side of the building that would cover the corrugated metal and add architectural interest. • extend the brick veneer higher so it is the main material on the facade of the building. • - - - - - -• s - - • . - . • The sign band should be lowered below the roof line. • change the design and-scale of the mansard roof along the south elevation by adding some architectural detail such as dormers. • -: . •- . . _ .. • . . - - - -- . . . . ' - - --- . , Since the last Planning Commission meeting, staff had several meetings with the applicant. Some issues have been resolved and we believe progress has been made. The applicant provided detail on screening and improving the surrounding area. There are still some issues that must be addressed and the following constitutes our analysis of the request. SITE PLAN REVIEW General Site Plan/Architecture The applicant is requesting to remodel a portion of the Frontier Building into retail space. The site is zoned Central Business District and is located north of the railroad tracks and Pauly Drive, east of Chanhassen Cinema and south of West 78th Street. Site access is provided via existing Pauly Drive and a curb cut on Market Boulevard. Parking is located to the south of the existing building. Internal circulation of the parking lot has been approved as part of the overall site plan approval for the entertainment center. All landscape islands, parking lot, and curbs have been installed, however, landscape materials will not be installed until weather allows. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 5 The building has three facades that need to be remodeled. They include the south, east, and west walls of the building. The existing materials used on the building include wood and glass on the south elevation and corrugated metal, wood and block on the east and west elevation. The site on which this building is situated is a highly visible one and will likely become one of the most important areas in the Chanhassen CBD. Since the opening of the Cinema and future development of the entertainment complex, this area is envisioned to be one of the most frequented and busy portions of downtown. Staff appreciates the fact that the building is being renovated. We also understand that setting an architectural standard for this building is difficult in part due to its location. The site plan approval requires architectural consistency with the surrounding area. However, at the same time, this site is essentially the transition point from the Cinema building to the Dinner Theatre complex. A design that would combine the style of the old town theme, along with other downtown buildings is a sound one. The owner of the property wishes to add a facade that resembles the image of the Dinner Theatre. The windows on the south elevations are proposed to be lowered and enlarged, the wood painted or treated with a stain, and a new mansard roof added. The west side of the building is proposed to remain corrugated metal. Staff informed the applicant that corrugated metal was not an acceptable facade finish and suggested that since the west elevation is part of an alley, the applicant might want to consider some alternatives that are creative including a mural concept. The plans show three 12 x 4 foot • . • . - - • . - . • :-• : . • - . 3 dimensional murals. They leave the majority of the corrugated metal exposed . This is not an acceptable solution. The plans reflect the addition of€ems five new light fixtures through the alley and along the west wall, that match those found on the exterior wall of Chanhassen Cinema. This component will give the alley a sense of balance and make it more pedestrian friendly. Also, the sidewalk is being extended along the west side of the frontier building which is consistent with how this area is envisioned. It provides continuos pedestrian movement around the Frontier/Dinner Theatre Buildings. The east elevation is proposed to be covered with lap siding and brick veneer along the base. Mansard canopies are proposed at the entrances. The applicant . - . - •• - - _ - . . . . . . .•_ - . - . . . Since the last Planning Commission meeting, the applicant changed the design of these canopies. Originally, there were three proposed canopies. Two of these canopies have been combined into one and the overall design has been changed to reflect a 45 degree angle. The design remains as a mansard with shingles but improved over the previous submittal. A large garage door along the east elevation is being removed and a wall is taking its place which is an improvement to what is out there. A sidewalk is proposed along all three sides of the building which will make the area pedestrian friendly. Landscaping is being introduced around the building which is another improvement to the site. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 6 The applicant is not showing the roof top equipment on the building-ner--tfash-enelesure. Beth Such must be shown on the plans. All roof top equipment must be screened from views and the . - - - - . . . - . .. •. - ' - - • - . . - - :.' . A trash enclosure is located along the east side of the building. There are two proposed structures. One will serve the lower level and the second will serve the upper level of the building. The exterior material for the structure is proposed to be decorative block to match the retaining walls currently found along the rear of the Dinner Theatre. The doors are proposed to be made of 5% inch wide cedar wood. The stain on the wood will match that used on the building. Also, along the northeast corner of the building, there is a storage/delivery area for a tenant in the Dinner Theatre building (Maytag). The applicant is proposing to install an 8 foot privacy, board on board fence, to screen this area. The zoning ordinance allows 8 foot fences in commercially zoned areas for the purpose of screening. This will provide a much needed improvement in this portion. Signage on this building will require a variance. The current sign ordinance specifically states that signs are permitted on buildings with a street frontage. The Frontier building has no direct frontage onto a public right-of-way. Staff is recommending approval of the sign variance with the condition that the applicant lowers the sign below the roofline. Landscaping Landscaping for the proposed development occurs near the building on the south, east and west sides. The north side is currently part of the Dinner Theatre Complex and has not incorporated landscaping into its appearance (to do so would mean removing cement and creating planting spaces). The south side, the entrance near the new movie theater, has landscape groupings at the edges of the building. -- - : .. . . - !c°. - _ -, . . . . . . :. ---. . - . - A mix of ornamental trees, evergreens, deciduous shrubs and perennials decorate either side of the entrance. The revised landscape plan is an improvement on the original plan. The applicant has used staff's recommendation to develop the revised plan and staff finds it Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 7 acceptable. Landscaping in the northwest corner has also been revised to include all of the planting elements mentioned above. One area that the applicant could improve is along the base of the columns supporting the mansard canopy. This would be an ideal location for adding flower boxes which will add color and interest to the area. Lighting The only light fixtures shown on the plan include feuf five fixtures along the west elevation that match those on the east wall of Chanhassen Cinema. Signage Signage is intended to advertise as well as enhance the architecture of the building. The applicant is proposing back lit channeled letters on a raceway along the proposed mansard roof. It does not appear that this design will allow the signs to become an integral part of the building architecture. Also, Section 20-1303. states "Highway, general business districts and central business districts. Wall business signs. Wall business sign shall be permitted on street frontage for each business occupant within a building only." Staff is not opposed to recommending approval of the variance. We strongly believe that the applicant should be able to advertise the business. However, there are more suitable locations for the sign that would make the sign act as an accent and architectural feature. Staff recommends that signs be lowered below the canopy of the mansard roof. We also believe that a different type of lettering is suitable in this area. The applicant mentioned the sign on the High Timber Lounge as a good example. Staff agrees that it is architecturally compatible with the building and compliments the roof line. It is constructed of wood and has painted as well as raised letters and logo. We believe that such design is more suitable for the Frontier Building. The intent of the sign ordinance is to establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise their name and service while promoting public safety and enhancing the image of the community. In addition, the ordinance provides standards to ensure that signage is an integral component of the building's architecture. Granting variances should only be permitted when it enhances the image of the building. Staff recommends the variance be granted with the condition that the sign band be lowered below the canopy and the type of sign used is architecturally compatible with the building. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 8 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: Granting the variance will allow the businesses to advertise their products. The design and location of the sign should become an integral part of the architecture. 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 variance is based are not applicable to other properties with the CBD, Central Business District. The location of the building is driving the request. 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 does not appear to be based upon a desire to increase the value of the parcel. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The alleged hardship is not a self-created hardship, again, it is the location of the building. 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. Finding: The variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements. Steps will be taken to ensure that the appropriate size and type of fasteners are used to attach signs to the building. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 9 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 significantly impair light and air to adjacent property. Granting the variance will not increase congestion of public streets or endanger public safety. Based on the findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval of the variance with the conditions that the applicant lower the signs below the canopy and consider utilizing a style that is compatible with the building. Should the back lit letters be approved, the location of letters and logos shall be restricted to below the canopy. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination. Tenant neon illuminated signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area. GRADING & DRAINAGE Based on the plans, there are no site improvements outside the building remodeling and landscaping improvements. The parking lot and utility improvements are already in place. Based upon the revised plans,the roof appears to have a poor drainage design along the west side. The applicant is proposing to sheet drain the roof into a 4" deep, 3 foot wide concrete flume (trough) running parallel and adjacent to the corrugated metal wall. The applicant is proposing to collect the water in the flume then pipe it through trenches running under the sidewalk, and into the alley. The design should be revised to collect the roof runoff into down spouts and conveyed underneath the sidewalk. UTILITIES The building is served with city sewer and water. No additional connections are proposed. The applicant should be advised that there may be additional sewer and water hook up charges due at time of building permit issuance since it appears the building's use is being intensified. The City charges a sewer and water hook up charge for each sewer available charge (SAC) imposed by the Metropolitan Environmental Service Commission. The 1998 sewer and water hook up rates are $1,264.00 and $1,584.00, respectively. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 10 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; 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. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 11 (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 generally consistent with the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance, and the site plan review requirements. The site design as it relates to street furniture and architectural design, could be improved as recommended by staff. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE: On April 15, 1998, the Planning Commission reviewed and tabled action on this application. The applicant was directed to work with staff and prepare a presentation that addressed the proposed site plan, specifically, pedestrian movement, overall design along the south portion of the building,and how it ties in with the rest of the entertainment complex. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends - . .. ' . - . • - - • . - --- - . - - - -- • r -- . - - ' .. . - . . . . . - .-, .. - the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission approves the Site Plan for the Frontier Building (#98-7 SPR), with a variance to allow signs on a building that does not have direct frontage on a public street, as shown on the site plan dated March 23, 1989, and revised on April 27, 1998 with the following conditions: rhodeflenfifens, summer, and fall months. of-the-Wilding, 4. All existing and proposed roof top equipment shall be screened from views, specifically from Highway 5. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 12 5. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. 6. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to below the canopy. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination. Tenant neon illuminated signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area. The applicant shall consider utilizing a font/sign style that is compatible with the building. 7. The applicant and/or their assignee shall be responsible for any additional sewer and water hook up charges associated with remodeling the building based on the number of SAC units determined by the Metropolitan Environmental Sewer Commission. 8. A44 roof top equipment and trash enclosure must be shown on the plans. All roof top 9. Fire Department recommends the following policies be followed(copies attached). Policy#01-1990 Policy#02-1990 Policy#04-1991 Policy#06-1991 Policy#07-1991 Policy#29-1992 Policy#34-1993 Policy#36-1994 Policy#40-1995 Policy#44-1997 10. The west elevation shall be redesigned in a fashion that would minimize the appearance of the corrugated metal. "- . - - • •- . •- - -.. - . - . - - - . - • . The brick on the building shall be extended higher. 11. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. Frontier Building May 6, 1998 Page 13 12. The applicant shall add some architectural interest to the mansard roof along the south elevation. This could be done in the form of dormers. 13. The applicant shall add flower boxes around the base of the columns along the south elevation. 14. The design should be revised to collect the roof runoff into down spouts and conveyed underneath the sidewalk." ATTACHMENTS 1. Plans for previously approved Frontier Building. 2. Application. 3. Memo from Steve Kirchman, dated April 6, 1998. 4. Memo from Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector, dated April 6, 1998. 5. Memo from Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, dated April 7, 1998. 6. Planning Commission minutes dated April 15, 1998 7. Plans dated March 20, 1998,revised April 27, 1998. g:\plan\sa\frontier bldg.doc • I el •'•--••-------7.:=_7:1 r •1011.11.11111. ar— il t 1---i-il____ 1 ,- A rn li• tit-ri E / r . . .. .,,_.,.tr_.,,.. _ Lii-:-.1H, S .,_,...-,;, ,, eliil . . . 1 • 1 it-={ s +t„ I. t .1t ! :-:. . • M C64 .1.-.1.-:.1 . - .-. ---- t!..1 1 \a ;..-4,•;._:.. r �J_ W Zr:::4-..--7-' IIIi r vv Ct,, I --ti.1 r -i � . ill. . —___IIHT K.z 1 , . __ i :. r7-7 r. -r.,....-,.ir--, ..,,,.._z ...-- c-e . ,, ... ,... r- ' . . 1- • fit't klbiltti i CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: 13/cc'/yt5 'G C' 1c 1 OWNER: /14-----e-24.-/z- 4-,c :(6f-// ADDRESS: /1-1. 7e5ZI(/ ..5t• ADDRESS: 7C-'CSf' /12/4-1(:- /1-4 12.4-%fit'(! 5-5-1/7 i/7 en/ht, ,,5-3-37 7 TELEPHONE (Day time) 7,3•:74 ._ TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) Subdivision' TOTAL FEE $ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE-When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME &VT/�_� �l �=/f t Cie 7 LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT YES NO PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. • ,--Let " • z, d/91 PP Signature of Applicant / Date' 9 Signature of Fee Owner Date G /L/i� 4^0 Application Received on '�2- i. Fee Paid , 0 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. 101 CITY OF CHANHASSEN MEMORANDUM G90City Center Drive,POBox 147 TO: SharminAl-Jaff,Planner II Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 FROM: Steve A. Kirchman,Building Official Phone 612.937.1900 General Fax 612.937.5739 DATE: April 6, 1998 Engineering Fax 612.937.9152 Public Safety Fax 612.934.2524 SUBJECT: 98-7 SPR(Frontier Building,Bloomberg Companies) 11eb nag wu'uci.chanbassen.i nn.us I was asked to review the variance proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, MAR 2 3 , 19 9 8 , CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT." for the above referenced project. I have no comments or recommendations concern ingthis site plan review 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/safet}'tsak\inemos\plan\V o-comnt Tl. c;...,.tri. ..1.,.,,... d.......... ..................h,.1...,1.G.. ...1:.....1. I. ..1..._.,.., ...,..... .,.., .1.- 1......, .,,!1.. ...:�.1.....G. d l 1:.... ,... . .,,J . 101 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 City Center Drive,PO Box 147 Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 MEMORANDUM Phone 612.937.1900 TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II General Fax 612.937.5739 Engineering Fax 612.9379152 FROM: Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector Public Safety Fax 612.934.2524 lr'eb wu'zuci.chanhassen.mn.us DATE: April 6, 1998 SUBJ: Request for site plan review, The Frontier Building, a portion of the entertainment complex, located just east of the Chanhassen Cinema, Bloomberg Companies. Planning Case 98-7. Site Plan I have reviewed the site plan review 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 requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. Attached are the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention policies which must be followed during the course of the project: Policy#01-1990 Policy#02-1990 Policy#04-1991 Policy#06-1991 Policy#07-1991 Policy#29-1992 Policy#34-1993 Policy#36-1994 Policy#40-1995 Policy#44-1997 If you have any questions, please call me at 937-1900 ext. 262. g:\safety\gh\p l rev98-7 Ti,,,t^in.nFr/ian/,ancon A armnino mmmunin with rloan lnboc nualih cr/innlc a r(7nrminn.Al/4 1MM ttirinina h,/(i110(COr and 17oatitikl nark A moat mart,to I;ho n„rl nln„ CITY OF CHANHAOSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 .. (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS 1. Fire alarm systems shall meet the requirements of NFPA 72 1993 Edition. 2. Shop drawings shall be submitted to the Fire Department for app-_val. Shop drawings shall included the following. Approval and acceptance must compiy with NFPA 72 1993 Edition 1-7.l. a. Connection diagrams. b. Specification data sheets. c. Schedules. for each device, including: location. function_ zoning. d. Complete diagrams indicating: devices, components. interconnecting wiring, indicate labeling and descriptions on equipment. e. Floor plans indicating device and component locations.conduit. raceway and cable routes. f. Power connections. including source and branch circuit data. Plan layout and details of: fire alarm control panel. fire a:arm subpanels transponders. annunciator. 3. Wiring may be either a Class A or Class B Wiring System. (Exception: When a fire alarm system is used to actuate an extinguishing system that protects a special hazard with high value,Class A circuitry wilt be required.) 4. All components of the sstem must be U.L. listed for their application, compatible and installed per NFPA 72E. National Electric Code and manufacturers requirements. 5. Alarm verification is required for all systems using smoke detectors. 6. When Central Station notification is required or otherwise provided. it must be through a C"".L. listed communicator. or NEPA Listed Control Panel. .all Ce:.tral Stations must be Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Pre% cation Policy -1990 Date: 0= 19.'90 Revised: 35/09/96 Page 1 c: - 7. The alarm systems shall be audible above the ambient noise level in all areas of the building. Alarm horns in each unit and all public areas, i.e. party room, pool, laundry rooms. Horns shall be directly connected to the building alarm systems and supervised. 8. The system shall be zoned per Chanhassen Fire Department requirements. 9. A U.L. 71 Certificate is required on the system. The U.L. 71 Certificate shall be current and required for the life of the alarm system and the life of the building. 10. A fully-function annunciator must be provided if the control panel is remotely located. 11. Health care, day care. and assembly occupancy notification must be by chimes, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Marshal. 13. All systems using. standard horns or speakers must be set for temporal time. 13. The Chanhassen Fire Marshal must be contacted for final inspection of the completed job. The inspection will include: a. Test for proper operation of each device. b. Random testing, for system trouble. c. Random testing for round fault trouble. d. Correct operation on battery or standby power. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy =01-1990 Date: 0-1/19/90 Revised: 05/09/96 ApproN,ed - Page 2 of 2 .„... CITY OF 4 CHANHASSEN „ 11?;:,. ..... .:.:: .:, ....... ,,i;... . ..., ,.. . 7:,. .. ,.. •,, :.:. 4:: ,, .. '-'= , . •''i' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY EXTERIOR LIGHT AND HORN OVER FIRE DEPARTMENT SPRINKLER CONNECTION 1) Exterior Light and Horn for indicating Fire Department Sprinkler Connection shall be: a. Simplex model number Horn - 31T-115-R Light - WH3T-115-FR • or b. Wheelock 7004-T c. Notifier 5542862 or equivalent per Fire Department approval. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy: #02-1990 C , Date: 09/04/90 G �{ Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 es- f' f i Or PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF C 1.1 A 1121. SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS 1. Fire Marshal must witness the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per NFPA 13-8-2.1. 2. A final inspection by the Fire Marshal before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at construction sites. Details are available. 4. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided and in operating condition during all phases of construction. 5. The use of liauefied petroleum las shall be in conformance with NEPA Standard 5S and the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A list of these requirements is available. (See policy #33-1993) 6. All fire detection and fire suppression systems shall be monitored by an approved CL central station with a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final occupancy is issued. 7. An 11" x 14" As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. (See policy X07-1991). 8. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use. The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: 12/23/94 Pare 1 of 2 9. High-piled combustible storaee shall comply with the requirements of Article #81 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height. For certain special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. _ 10. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (See policy #06-1991). 11. Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G, Exception#5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (See policy #05-1991). 12. Maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line policy must be followed. (See policy #36-1994). Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #01-1991 Date: 11/22/91 ti Revised: 12/23/94 Approved - Public Safety Director Page 2 of 2 . . . . : ; . .. 0 f: .. p.1., CITY OF V. !."''' .-..°. • _ CHA, NIIASSEN ,-- . '."- ,,, J 1 _ :., ..• ... 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 =wad CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE 1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18" . NO 2 . Red on white is preferred. PARKING FIRE 3 . 3M or equal engineer' s grade LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. /.\ 4 . Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE 5 . Signs shall be posted at each end of the fire lane and at least at 7 ' 0" 75 foot intervals along the - fire lane. , • 6 . All signs shall be double sided facing the direction of travel. 7 . Post shall be set back a minimum of 12" b::t not more than 36" from the curb. - 8 . A fire lane shall be required in (NOT TO GRADE front of fire dept. connections SCALE) extending 5 feet on each side and along all areas designated by the Fire Chief. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL BY THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention ', Policy =06-1991 '/ / Date: 1 '15/91 ,� U: /.7" - Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 cf 1 If v Or PRINTED O . RECYCLED PAPER CITYOF ANHASSEN:(1), ' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REGARDING PRE-PLAN Prior to issuing the C .O . , a pre-plan, site plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval . The following items shall be shown on the plan. 1) Size 11" x 17 " (maximum) 2 ) Building footprint and building dimensions 3 ) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes 4 ) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped or dead end 5 ) Fire hydrant locations 6) P . I .V. - Fire Department connection 7 ) Gas meter (shut-off) , NSP (shut off) 8 ) Lock box location 9 ) Fire walls , if applicable 10 ) Roof vents, if applicable 11 ) Interior walls 12 ) Exterior doors 13 )- Location of fire alarm panel 14) Sprinkler riser location 15) Exterior L . P. storage, if applicable 16) ?-_az . Nat . storage, if applicable 17 ) Underground storage tanks locations, if applicable 18) Type of construction walls/roof 19) Standpipes PLEASE NOTE: Plans with topographical information, contour lines, easement lines, property lines, setbacks, right-of-way lines, headings, and other related lines or markings, are not acceptable, and will be rejected. Chanhassen Fire DePa-ttt'ent ire Prevention Policy -.07-1991 ;,`�``�/` - �_ Revised: 02/18:94 Approved - Puo_�ic Safe:y Director Page 1 of 1 A CIIYOF ..,„, . .': A evii ' ClIANNASS : N' ,, .... ., _.. y...„ ..„,.....„,. „ .A.,7. .. IT s+. .: y► 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 )1.."44.\ ' ".‘3 — 1, F';' : (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 ` CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director, Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address :numbers are posted. Other Requirements-General . 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from-the background. • 2. N:mbers shall not be In script 3. If a structure Is rot visible from the street,additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size and location must be approved. -- 4. Numbers on mail box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4". However, requirement #3 must still be:met_ 5. Acministrative authority may require additional numbers If deemed necessary. R eslden ttal Requirements(2 or less dwelling unit) 1. Minimum height shall be 5 114". 2. Eu;iding permits will not be !Mated unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Comrnerdal Requirements 1. M:-!mum height shall be 12". 2. St-.p Malls a. Multi tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. If address numbers are Iccated on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the b_•::dings main entrance. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention / Policy y29-1992 Date: 06/15/92 Revised: Approved — Public Sary Director Page 1 of 1 ti o PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY 0 F 111111-1A2rt: 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 WATER SERVICE INSTALLATION POLICY FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS 1) The Inspections Division shall be responsible for issuance of permits. No permit shall be issued until approval of plans have been obtained from the following: a) Engineering Depattnient b) Fire Marshal c) Minnesota Department of Health d) Plumbing Inspec:or 2) Plumbing inspec:ors will do all installation inspections and witness the hydrostatic and conductivity tests. Inspection and Test Requirements a) All pipe shall be inspected before being covered. Phone 937-1900, ex:. 31. to schedule inspections. A 24 hour notice is required. bl Conductivity test is required. The pipe shall be subjected to a minimum 350 amp test for a period of not less than 5 minutes. • c) Hydrostatic test required. All pipe shall be subjected to a hydrostatic pressure of 150 psi for 2 hours. Allowable pressure drop shall not exceed 1 PSI. dl Pipe shall not be run under buildings - ti FPA 243-3.1. 3) Upon approval of the hydro test. the plumbing inspector shall submit a copy of the inspec:ion report to the utility superintendent. The inspection report shall note whether t e system is ready for main flush and drawing of water sample for the bug test. Inspections Division Water Service Installation Policy T34-1993 Date: 04/15;93 Revised: 4;17/96 Page 1 of 2 4) Water main flushing shall be witnessed by the utility superintendent. a) Watermain flushing may be scheduled by contacting the utility superintendent at 474-2086. A 48 hour notice is required. b) The utility superintendent shall obtain a water sample for a bacteria test after the main flush and deliver to a testing company. The contractor shall be responsible for testing costs. Allow two weeks for testing results to be returned to the City. c) -Upon receiving approval of the water sample test, the utility superintendent shall submit a copy to each plumbing inspector and turn water on to the tested and approved sections of the piping. 5) An additional supervised flush and flow test will be required and witnessed by the Fire Marshal for services supplying fire suppression systems. The flush and flow test shall be performed in accordance with 1991 edition of NFPA 13. Sec. 8- 2.1. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal at 937-1900. ext. 132. 6) Watermain installations shall comply with: a) Minnesota Plumbing Code. Chapter 4715 b) Chanhassen Engineering Department. Watermain Specifications c) National Fire Protection Association. Chapter 24 7) Only authorized city employees are permitted to operate city water control valves. For water turn on or off contact the utility superintendent by phone 474-2086. A 24 hour notice is required. Inspections Division Water Service Installation Policy =34-199: Date: OT. I�r'9: /7 Revised: 0411- 96 Approved - Pubic Safety Direc:o r Page 2 of_' C i TY F CHANHAssEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 • CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIZE OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE ON A COMBLNATION DOMESTIC/FIRE SPRLNKLER SUPPLY LINE 1. Domestic water line shall not be greater than 1/4 pipe size of the combination service water supply line. 2. 1 1/2"domestic off 6" line. 3. 2"domestic off 8" line. 4. 2 1/2 domestic off 10"line. Option 1: Domestic sizes may be increased if it can be calculated hydraulically that the demand by all domestic fixtures will not drop the fire sprinkler water below its minimum gallonage required. Option 2: Combination domestic and five line service shall have an electric solenoid valve installed on the domestic side of the service. This valve shall be normally powered open and close on loss of electric power or signal from the system water flow indicator. Must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Mechanical Inspector. Chanhassen Fire Department Water Line Sizing. Policy #36-1994 � ""\., Date: 06/10/94 Revised: .Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 CITY OF , CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 1. Permits are required for all sprinkler work. 2. A minimum of four sets of plans are required. Send, or drop off plans and specifications and calculations to: Mark Littfin,Fire Marshal City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen.MN 55317 • 3. Yard post indicators are required and must have tamper protection. 4. All control values must he provided with tamper protection. 5. All systems tests must be witnessed by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal. Appointments can be made by calling the Fire Marshal at 937-1900, ext. 132, between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM. Monday through Friday. Please try to arrange tests at least 24 hours in advance. All revisions of 25 heads or more will require a test. 6. Main drains & inspector test connections must be piped to the outside atmosphere. 7. Water m:w not be introduced into sprinkler piping from the City main until the Fire Marshal xvitnesses a flush test per NFP.-\ 13-8-2.1. S. The City of Chanhassen has adopted Appendix E (see 1305.6905 appendix chapter 3S of the MBC). Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Division Policy'40-1995 Date: 01/12.95 Revised: 03/12/97 Page 1 of 9. All systems must be designed to NFPA-13, 1991 edition and Chapter 6 Standards. All attic systems are to be spaced at a maximum 130 square foot coverage. 3/4" plastic piping will not be allowed at any time in attic space. 10. All equipment installed in a fire protection system shall be UL listed or factory mutual approved for fire protection service. 11. : Fire, protection systems that are hydraulically calculated shall have a 5 psi safety factor at maximum system flow. 12. Acceptable water supplies for fire sprinkler systems are listed in NFPA-13; 1991 ed., Chapter 7. Swimming.pools and ponds are not acceptable primary water supplies. 13. Pressure and gravity tanks shall be sized per the requirements contained in NFPA-13 and 22. Duration of the water supply shall match the hazard classification of the occupancy. 14. Include spec sheets for fire sprinkler heads- dry pipe/pre-actionvalving. 15. The definition of inspection is contained in MN Rule 7512.0100 Subpart 10, and states that inspection means: 1. Conducting a final acceptance test. 2. Trip test of dry pipe,deluge or preaction valves. 3. A test that an authority having.jurisdiction requires to be conducted under the supervision of a contractor. Only licensed fire protection contractors are permitted to conduct these tests. 4. All other inspections including. the inspectors test, main drain and other valves are permitted under NN Rule 7512.0400 Subpart-2G,as maintenance activities and do not require a license as a fire protection contractor. 16. Per Section 904.3.2.and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, an approved audible sprinkler flow alarm to alert the occupants shall be provided in the interior of the building in a normally occupied location. (Location must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal). 17. In existing systems,the following shall apply: 1. If any changes in the hydraulically most demanding area, or an addition of 20 or more heads.hydraulic calculations will need to be provided. 2. If an addition or chance of 20 or more heads to a system, a test %%ill need to be completed. Chanhassen Fire De a�tm=nt Z/ Fire Prevention Division Po!:,:y-40-1995 Date: 01/12.:95 Revi.ed: 03/12.97 I A coved-PublicSafety Directo: Pa�_e: 2 of 2 pNHass C * MN * IEN FIRE DEPT. CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 97 • 7610 Laredo Drive • Chanhassen, MN 55317 tri4Bus. Phone 934-9191 • Minnewashta Station No. 2 • Phone 474-7094 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY Labeling Fire Rated Walls General Numbers and/or letters shall be placed on all rated fire walls identifying.their rating. Said numbers and/or letters shall be not less than 5 inches high x 3 inches wide,with a minimum V. inch stroke and shall contrast with the background. Requirements are for new and existing construction. Occupancy Requirements This policy is in effect for all occupancies except Group R-3. Other Requirements 1- Identi:cation shall be marked 10 feet from every corner or change of direction and every 30fee: thereafter. Identification shall be on both sides of interior walls. Idenc:::cation can be hidden from plain view, i.e., above ceiling. tiles or in attic spaces. A!1 other locations must be approved by one of the following: Fire Marshal, Fire Inspec:or, Building Official. or Building. Inspector. Exam^le: 1 hr(1 hour fire wail) • Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy =44,-199 • Dare: 01/03,9" Re%ised: Page 1 of 1 A._pr.e.- - ?-:r;ic Sarery Direc:o 1110 CITY OF MEMORANDUM CHANHASSEN TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff,Planner II 690 Ci Center Drive,PO Box 147 FROM: David Hempel,Assistant City Engineer `L City Pe �. Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 Phone 612.937.1900 DATE: April 7, 1998 General Fax 612.937.5739 Engineering Fax 612.937.9152 SUBJ: Site Plan Review - Frontier Building (Bloomberg Company) Public Safety Fax 612.934.2524 Web to tviu.ci.chanhassen.,n.us Upon review of the plans dated January 22, 1998,revised March 20, 1998, prepared by Design 1,I offer the following comments and recommendations: GRADING & DRAINAGE Based on the plans, there are no site improvements outside the building remodeling and landscaping improvements. The parking lot and utility improvements are already in place. UTILITIES The building is served with city sewer and water. No additional connections are proposed. The applicant should be advised that there may be additional sewer and water hook up charges due at time of building permit issuance since it appears the building's use is being intensified. The City charges a sewer and water hook up charge for each sewer available charge (SAC) imposed by the Metropolitan Environmental Service Commission. The 1998 sewer and water hook up rates are $1,264.00 and $1,584.00,respectively, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant and/or their assignee shall be responsible for any additional sewer and water hook up charges associated with remodeling the building based on the number of SAC units determined by the Metropolitan Environmental Sewer Commission. jms c: Anita Benson, City Engineer \ fsl\voMeng\dave\pc\frontier.spr.doc TIw City nF('Irnnhaccvu A nrilv,il,a rnrn:nnnih,With rival,layvc nunlih crhnnlc a rha.,ni++a ilmm+tnvnr thrinina trr.ci.rv+coc and haantAl basis. A araat nlary to lino +nnrl, awl Ala City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 Date: 4/1/98 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Sharmin Al-Jaff,Planner II Subject: Request for site plan review the Frontier Building, a portion of the Entertainment complex, located just east of the Chanhassen Cinema, Bloomberg Companies. Planning Case: 98-7 Site Plan The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on March 23, 1998. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on Wednesday, April 15, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than April 6, 1998. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments 8. Telephone Company a. City Engineer (US West or United) b. City Attorney c. City Park Director 9. Electric Company d. Fire Marshal (NSP or MN Valley) e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator 10.Triax Cable System g. Forester 2.Watershed District Engineer 11. U. S. Fish and Wildlife 3. Soil Conservation Service 12. Carver County a. Engineer 4.MN Dept.of Transportation b. Environmental Services 5. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 13. Other 6. Minnegasco 7. MN Dept. of Natural Resources r• City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 Date: 4/1/98 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II Subject: Request for site plan review the Frontier Building, a portion of the Entertainment complex, located just east of the Chanhassen Cinema, Bloomberg Companies. Planning Case: 98-7 Site Plan The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on March 23, 1998. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on Wednesday, April 15, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than April 6, 1998. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments 8.Telephone Company a.City Engineer (US West or United) b.City Attorney c. City Park Director 9. Electric Company d. Fire Marshal (NSP or MN Valley) e.Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator 10.Triax Cable System g. Forester 2.Watershed District Engineer 11.U. S.Fish and Wildlife 3. Soil Conservation Service 12. Carver County a. Engineer 4.MN Dept.of Transportation b. Environmental Services 5. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 13. Other 6. Minnegasco 7.MN Dept. of Natural Resources _9e ` �.__.. _ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ad 3 0 0 PLANNING COMMISSION . c m Vi NM Wednesday, April 15, 1998 A at 7:00 p.m. - EMI II `° City Hall Council Chambers C ter ©`. (5690 City Center Drive Win"ii.. 37q, ��iJthSt= iip .1 SUBJECT: Site Plan Review to 0 10 ®. I ! Remodel a portion of - . the Frontier Building ���1110 W AIM APPLICANT: Bloomberg Companies -,„4ey '�16 r .I I LOCATION: East of the Chanhassen Cinema 31 .... 5,,,,, _ NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Bloomberg Companies, is requesting site plan review to remodel a portion of the Frontier Building, which is part of the Entertainment complex, located just east of the Chanhassen Cinema. 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 overview 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 and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project. please contact Sharmin at 937-1900 ext. 120. If you choose to submit written comments. it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on April 9, 1998. 79TH STREET CENTER TIRES PLUS %B.C. BURDICK ATTN: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 684 EXCELSIOR BLVD 600 WEST TRAVELERS TRAIL EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 BURNSVILLE, MN 55337 NATIONAL LODGING COMPANIES, INC TIRES PLUS GROUP 9855 WEST 78TH STR. 701 LADY BIRD LANE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 BURNSVILLE, MN 55337 BLOOMBERG COMPANIES APPLEBEE'S#95198 545 WEST 78TH STREET. PO BOX 730 1025 WEST EVERETT ROAD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 LAKE FOREST. IL 60045 THE CHANHASSEN BANK TOM-DON REAL ESTTE HOLDINGS 600 WEST 78TH STREET 600 WEST TRAVELERS TRAIL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 BURNSVILLE, MN 55337 CHANHASSEN BOWL 581 WEST 78TH STREET CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 COUNTRY SUITES 591 WEST 78TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 AMERICANNA COMMUNITY BANK 600 WEST 79TH STREET PO BOX 790 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MEDICAL ARTS 470 WEST 78TH STR. #260 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 RIVIERA CLUB 560 WEST 78TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WEIS ASSET MGMT INC CHANHASSEN RETAIL LTMD PARTNERSHIP PO BOX 386056 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55438-6056 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 4. The proposed commercial development of 1.37 net developable acres is responsible for a water quantity fee of$5,974.00. This fee is due payable to the City prior to the City signing the final plat. 5. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees pursuant to City Code. 6. Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds Third Addition, is subject to full park and trail fees per city ordinance. One third of these fees will be paid prior to recording the final plat. The remaining two thirds shall be paid at the time the building permit is granted. 7. 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. 8. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water, and plumbing permits from the City's building Department. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: BLOOMBERG COMPANIES IS REQUESTING SITE PLAN REVIEW TO REMODEL A PORTION OF THE FRONTIER BUILDING, WHICH IS PART OF THE ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX, LOCATED JUST EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN CINEMA. Public Present: Name Address Herb Bloomberg Bloomberg Companies Clayton Johnson Bloomberg Companies Bob Davis Design One Bob Copeland Chanhassen Cinema Amy Roberts National Lodging Selvig Huseth Chanhassen Dinner Theater Debbie Lacer Frontier Building Britta Bloomberg Bloomberg Companies Maita Bloomberg Devine Bloomberg Companies Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. 27 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Peterson: Questions for staff. Sharmin, do you have a rendering of what we originally looked at when we first started looking at the entertainment complex and what was then, I hate to say a couple years now probably but can you give us a sense and do you have any renderings of that that you can share? Al-Jaff: This is what the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed...entertainment complex was proposed. It is intended to have an interfaced brick facade. There are two tones of...that would be used on the building. It doesn't spell out exactly which interfaced brick they would be using. However these are the three tones that have...presented at the previous meetings. Peterson: The whole front was to have been one of those three style bricks essentially. We didn't at the time, I don't recall any side elevations. Al-Jaff: No. It was to be...It was a condition of approval. Peterson: Other questions of staff. Seeing none, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? And if so,please come forward. State your name and address please. Clayton Johnson: Clayton Johnson. I'm Vice President of Bloomberg Companies here in Chanhassen and a little bit of introduction. We've been involved in the downtown development and redevelopment ever since 1986 and I realize now that it's been a while since we've had a project before you because I look up here and I don't recognize, Ladd's about the only one that I recognize. But I think by way of explanation, our role in the downtown development has been two fold. In many cases I would classify us as a passive, as an active partner. We've been a part of the hotel project. We've been a part of Market Square. In all of those projects our role was passive. In other words, we were a landowner. We were an investor and we had a certain amount of influence on the architecture but by all means we did not control. The project that you've referred to here and that Sharmin has presented was the one that you saw I think back in 1995 or 1996. We were not the applicant on that project. That project failed and the reason it failed was a number of things but primarily economic. So when we took over in 1996, Bob Copeland representing Copeland-Mithun and ourselves representing the Bloomberg Companies sat down with staff and we said, it appears this project is doomed. Is there any way that we can resurrect it and bring it back to you in stages or in phases. And as you recall that, a presentation has been made on the cinema project and the cinema project did go forward and our only involvement in the cinema project was one of very strong support. Obviously when we found that we had somebody that was willing to come in and invest a million, a million and a half in that corner and the way it looked,we thought anything was going to be an improvement and we backed that with a $100,000.00 investment. We at the Bloomberg Companies wrote a check for the construction of the parking lot. And the staff report refers to the support that's coming from the HRA and I think I'd like to take that separately. I really think that's an issue that should go to the Council and go to the HRA and obviously this project will not be built if we don't have their support but I don't think it's a Planning Commission item. We're really excited. We've been working at this, as you know, since 1995-1996. We have a plan and we have a plan we're very 28 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 excited about. It's a comprehensive plan. It deals with all, where this plan when it was submitted only dealt with the front elevation and there was some comment about obviously there had to be something done with the rest of it. Our plan is really comprehensive. It deals with all three sides of the building. It deals with what has become, I don't know if you've been there since the cinema's opened but all of a sudden it's a pedestrian walkway. People are going from the front to the back so our plan addresses that. We've got sidewalks planned and additional lighting planned and some interesting things on that alley. Our plan has two things that this plan did not have. It has tenants. It has financing. And it's a reality. And with that I'd like to introduce, since we're an active owner,we're going to own this property. Mr. Bloomberg has been 100% involved in it's design. He's going to own this and his family is going to own it for the next 50 years. They feel very strongly about the architecture that goes into this. So I'm going to ask Bob Davis from Design One to come up and present the architectural side of this and Bob's association with us is long term. He is, at one time was our employee. Is now an independent architect on his own and he and Herb go back a long ways. In fact back to the days of the historic renovation I believe of the St. James Hotel so I'm going to ask Bob to present the plan and then I'll be available to ask questions. And I think during the public hearing, you're going to hear from our neighbors. We've gone out and asked our neighbors what they think of this plan and I'd be disappointed if a bunch of them aren't here tonight to support us. Okay? Bob. Bob Davis: Thanks Clayton. My name is Bob Davis. I'm an architect representing Bloomberg Companies. As Clayton mentioned I go back with the company quite a ways. I first started working with the Bloomberg Companies in 1965. This building was in existence at that time. In fact it survived the tornado of 1965 which maybe, I don't know if anybody here remembers. I do. I was in the old Post Office building. But we need to get onto business here. I think as I read the staff report, Sharmin has said if you agree with this proposal there are some conditions. I'd like to move right onto those conditions and discuss those and review what we think and what we will change and what we think is perhaps inappropriate to change. So if I take a look at the recommendations on page 9, and there are 11. The first three address landscaping, and I will concede that the landscaping plan originally presented on your drawings was pretty brief and done quite quickly. We have gone to a registered landscape architect and asked him to review the comments, to review the plan and rework the landscaping. That is done. I have a plan here that I'd like to show. If the camera can pick this up. This addresses and does change and is in compliance with the first three items on the recommendation. Do we have anybody here with a good landscape background? I'd sure like to take that up if anybody on the Planning Commission is. Sharmin, could you comment on the changes? Look at these and. Aanenson: No. It's too short of notice for us to give any comment at this time. We haven't seen this since the 2°d and. Bob Davis: Well we talked to Sharmin about it. Aanenson: I'm the Planning Director and I would advise that at this point we think it's too short of notice to try to comment on that without,just seeing it on the spot. 29 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Why don't we just go through the rest of your comments. Bob Davis: Okay. Well I want to go back to that a minute though. I concede that we are changing the landscape to comply with the first three items on the recommendation. Peterson: So noted. Bob Davis: Number 4 speaks of the rooftop equipment. There is none. There will be none. This is a curved roof behind the facade. Equipment will be, if it's placed on the ground, will be screened in a mechanical area. So in my mind, item 4 is not an issue. We don't intend to have any rooftop equipment. Item 5 I think, we certainly intend to comply with the ordinance. I'd like to bring up one item on the sign relating to number 6. And specifically lowering the sign. Fred, you have a couple of photographs. I'd like to place before you some photographs of the High Timber Lodge signs and can we pick this up on, this one here. As I mentioned, I've worked with Herb Bloomberg since 1965 and this plan is an interpretation of his design ideas that go back to the origination of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, the Frontier Lumber Company, and those original buildings which had the frontier character. Specifically the shingle roofs. And this is, do I need to pass these around so you can see this a little better? Peterson: It's coming in clear on the TV here so. Bob Davis: Okay. So you can see this signage and how it relates to the sign. Let me put up another drawing here so you can get an idea, little better of what we are proposing on the building. The south elevation that's been referred to here. The roof is actually above the signs. The existing roof structure. There's a dotted curved line here and that is the roof. Peterson: The height above street level is approximately, the sign? I'm comparing the Timber Lodge. Bob Davis: Okay, so we're, I don't want to guess at this. 20 feet. Peterson: Significantly higher than, you've comparing it to a Timber, the Timber sign which would be significantly less in overall height than what you're offering here, correct? Just a couple questions. Bob Davis: I think we should look at the two this way and look at the proportion. There's been some discussion about the proportion of these. Can we do it this way? Peterson: Well again, the question is, would the signs on this be 10 feet, 20 feet higher than the one on the south? Bob Davis: 20 feet total height. Not very much higher. Probably 4 feet higher. Although I think rather than to guess, we should really have specific numbers and I think we can get a scale out of a briefcase. 30 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: It's not that important of a question. I'm just trying to get scope and scale of what you're trying to do. Bob Davis: Okay. Okay, I believe this is an appropriate adaptation of the back elevation reflecting what has been done on the High Timber Lodge, and we're taking that as a standard. These signs do exist across the front of the Frontier building as well. If we proceed on with these items, number 7 is not an issue with us. I think it's a documentation that has to be met and it's not, the applicant does not have any objection to number 7. Number 8 talks again about rooftop equipment and trash enclosures. There will be no rooftop equipment. Trash enclosures will be designed and will comply when the tenants are specifically in hand and we know whether the requirement is a simple little container or big dumpster and obviously it's an ordinance that has to be complied with. The applicant certainly has every intention of complying with the screening of trash enclosures as to whatever size they will be. Item 9 is documenting some ordinances again which have to be met. I don't think it's an issue we need to talk about. We certainly will comply. Item 10 has three items. It speaks of the corrugated metal, adding a color canopy or adding a color canopy and raising the brick on the building. If we look at the elevation here on the back, this is an extension of the rest of the architecture and design of the Dinner Theater, the furniture store, the front of the lumber building of using wood shingles and mansard shapes and I'm just saying to you, I don't believe we should add a canopy. I don't think it's appropriate. There isn't canopies on the front. We can go across the street and find some but why should we add a few canopies to this building? I think that whole concept should be dismissed and we say we look at these as the same material and the same form and a pitched roof shingles, same color. There was a note somewhere here adding color to this side. I think with the landscaping, the materials, the variation of color, the teal doors, the bronze windows, I think there certainly is color here. Raising the brick on this building, there was some note about using brick on some of these facades. The brick is shown to the window height. I think that's appropriate. I, as an architect stand before you and say this is my choice. This is Herb Bloomberg's interpretation of continuing 45 years of building in this community. The metal siding on the side, and this was discussed with the planning department,and is elaborated here. Can we get a close up of these three murals on the side of the building? Can you see that on your screens or do you want this up in front of you? Why don't you do that. Three dimensional figures on those murals... I should remind you that this elevation is an alley. This is not fronting the parking lot. This is not fronting a street. Yes, I think the applicant chooses to propose this solution. I think it's a good solution. As I say, this is an alley. This is not fronting a parking lot or the front street. So we're asking to drop number 10 from your items of recommendation. The other items,with the exception of lowering the sign on item 6, I think we're in concurrence and I'd like you to consider this proposal this evening as being a good addition to a building that needs a new life. Clayton, is there anything that I've missed in your understanding of what the owner. Clayton Johnson: No. Only that again I would urge you to take action tonight rather than table the issue. This is a project we've been working on for such a long period of time that we finally get to the point where the financing's in place and the tenants are anxious to occupy on or about August 1 and very honestly we're on a time schedule that has to move along and we still have to go through Council and HRA. 31 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Joyce: Can you convince me of the economic hardship of changing the corrugated metal... What are we talking about? Clayton Johnson: Well I don't look at it as an economic hardship. We look upon it as, we've looked at the possibility of putting siding on there. We think siding on that great big wall is ugly. Joyce: So in essence you want the corrugated metal? Clayton Johnson: We want it. Joyce: That's a look you want? Clayton Johnson: And painted, repainted and put the murals on there which will add some interest and the only other solution that's been recommended is to side it and very honestly, Mr. Bloomberg does not want to put siding on that big massive wall and Bob, I don't know do you. Bob Davis: Well it is a structural wall too. That is the wall. It's not your traditional metal building type of siding that you could take off and replace something else. That is a structural wall. It's heavy gauge steel. It's put together with impact bolts. It is the wall. Brooks: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Peterson: Go ahead. Brooks: I don't know the history of this building. Can you give me a little background? It was originally a lumber building? Bob Davis: It was a lumber yard. It was built in 1965. I started working for Mr. Bloomberg in 1965, January, and that building was being built then. Survived the tornado. It was a lumber building and a hardware store. Brooks: What I see here are so different from what's there now. Why aren't you just razing the building and then building something new? Clayton Johnson: Let me explain the HRA's participation in all of the downtown projects have always been limited to a pay as you go plan. In other words, the HRA has never come to us and said here's the, the building currently is valued at$800,000.00. The HRA has never come to us and said, tear that down and start over. They've always said, come to us with a plan that you provide the financing. We will be putting about$500,000.00 to $600,000.00 into the building. Right now the building pays taxes of$25,000.00. When we're done it pays $75,000.00. Okay. It's not economically feasible without any kind of assistance to redevelop that building and tear it down, and I describe it,Bob described it as a lumber yard. It's an airplane hangar. It's an airplane hangar. It's an ice arena. These buildings, these baleen buildings are what was used to 32 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 build ice arenas all over the midwest. It's an airplane hangar. That whole facade is a curtain wall. And by the way in the staff report they refer to the refurbishing of the material. No. That whole wall comes out. That's all new material. All natural materials of wood, and brick and stone. And I've got to tell you, you know I want to explain the passive versus active role. When we were a passive investor in this project that you saw 3 years ago, believe when I go back and look at that, and I look at the notation on the top, and it refers to plastic cornice. I would like you to go with me when I tell Mr. Bloomberg we're going to put vinyl siding on one of his buildings. It just would never fly. He is, in all of his architecture and all of his design, it's natural materials. It's stone, it's wood, it's glass and when he built my house he wouldn't even put vinyl underneath my washing machine. He put stone so. Peterson: This item is a public hearing. May I have a motion to open the same and a second please? Blackowiak moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address...name and address please. Bob Copeland: My name is Bob Copeland. I am one of the owners of the Chanhassen Cinema and I'd like to give you our thoughts on this project. First of all, we want to urge you to approve this project and we'd like you to approve it this evening. We think it's a good design. We like the design and we think it's just a tremendous improvement over what is there now. We also want to suggest to you that you not compare this design that you have now to what was approved 2 V2 years ago. What was approved 2 %2 years ago is just not relevant anymore and it's just not an option. As far as the west side of the building goes, the corrugated metal that is in the alley between our two pieces of property, we think it's just fine. We're happy with that corrugated metal there and we don't see a need to do anything with it. Also I'd like to let you know that I, the bowling alley people, the owners of the bowling alley,wanted to come to the meeting this evening. They weren't able to come. They asked me to pass along to you that they concur with what I'm telling you and that they want to urge you to approve this this evening. Basically, I think there are two options that you have before you. One is to disapprove this and the building will stay a warehouse. It will be a rundown warehouse and there will be plywood over the windows and the facility that you see there will be there indefinitely as a warehouse. The other option is to approve this facade as proposed to you this evening and we'll have, what will appear to be a new building here. So I would also urge you to not table this this evening. It needs to be dealt with and we might as well deal with it starting tonight. So if you have no questions, thank you. Peterson: Anyone else? Amy Roberts: My name Amy Roberts. I come here representing National Lodging. We're the owning entity in Country Suites and I've never done this. I'm very nervous. Bear with me. I think that everybody here wants to improve what the current situation is with that building and that's really all that needs to be done. We cannot let the situation go the way it is anymore. 33 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Everybody driving on TH 5 sees how bad it is. It's one of the first reflections of Chanhassen that you see. And something has to be done. There are many bits and pieces about this that I would see differently done but in the end we need to do something. And another point about this is that Herb Bloomberg did have a great deal to do with the design of County Suites at the time and with the Timber Lounge. And sometimes it doesn't always look that good or sound that good, but in the end when it comes together, it looks like the Timber Lounge. And I think we need to have a little faith. Maybe if you're really, really opposed to some things like the corrugated metal,that there's something that can be done down the road but I don't want this project not done over some of these issues. Thank you. Peterson: Anybody else? Selvig Huseth: My name is Selvig Huseth and I'm the Managing Director at the Chanhassen Dinner Theaters and have been an employee there for over 20 years and I would just like to say that the ambiance and the feeling that you get when you walk into the Dinner Theater and the hundreds of comments that we get every month from people personally and in letters, how warm the atmosphere and enjoyment that they have at the Dinner Theater is because of the vision and architecture that Mr. Bloomberg has designed. And we don't make a change in the Dinner Theater, even though he's not our owner anymore, without conferring with him about it. We don't change the carpet without asking his opinion on it because we totally trust his design ability and his architecture vision and I think that these ideas that are being proposed extend his whole idea of the whole complex and I totally trust what he has in his head and it's like she said. You know you might not understand when he's explaining. I don't because I'm not an architect. When he's explaining it directly to me but it always ends up looking fantastic. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Debbie Lacer: Hello. My name is Debbie Lacer and I'm one of the tenants in the Frontier Building. I've been there for 8 years. I guess I'd like to say a lot of what Selvig just said in that I think the ambiance over there is very warm and friendly. I know I've stayed there with my company, although there have been many other places that would probably be more convenience in terms of being high tech and easier to load and more storage and whatever, but the ambiance there is a wonderful small town feeling and I think that building brings that environment to our town and I think it's very important that we preserve some of that for Chanhassen. We're growing very fast here. I've been a resident in town for 11 years so I've literally seen the whole of downtown main street developed in that period of time and yet the Frontier building reminds me of some of the historical relevance of this city and I think it's very important that we keep that here. I also know from my business, I do a lot of traveling around the midwest, that we are literally on the map because of the Dinner Theater. I meet hundreds of customers when I'm out and about throughout the Midwest and it has continually surprised me how many people have visited our town because of that theater. And I think because of that I've come to really admire the Bloombergs and what they have brought to our city and I think it's very important, especially since Herb is able to continue to design for our buildings here,that we recognize that talent and we accept and honor the fact that he has done this for many, many years. He is an expert at it. he's built some lovely things for us here and I think it's really important that we maintain the 34 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 historical value that he brings to our city. I think to continue this building in the manner that he started it and trust the fact that he will finish it tastefully, is what we should look at because that's just as important as whether it's brick in our eyes or someone else's. He really contributes a lot. Thank you. Britta Bloomberg: My name is Britta Bloomberg. I'm a shareholder in Bloomberg Companies. Herb is my father. This has been our home for over 40 years. This has been the place that we've made our lives and have really set down our roots. I want to just make a couple observations about my father's design career. Here in Minnesota he has a statewide reputation for his fine quality of his design, the workmanship, and nationwide he's had a reputation, in particular through the baleen steel buildings of which the Frontier building is. That was a baleen steel constructed building for the lumber yard and hardware store. It also was constructed to be the headquarters of Bloomberg Companies. That's where we had our company offices for many, many years before we moved them to a smaller location. But I think that it's important to really bring some, put some confidence in the quality of the design that has come forward in this. Some of dad's other work that has really a particularly notable reputation in this area, the Old Log Theater, and then Hazeltine National Golf Club, the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. I would really urge you to approve this plan. And I also want to add that one of the reasons that I thought it was important that I come tonight is to let you know that we're in this for the long haul. My father is at a point in his career where he's ready to see us kids become a lot more involved and we really see this as our future. Bloomberg Companies is here to stay and we feel that it's really important to be able to move forward with the plans that are being made right now for how we can continue to conduct our business here in Chanhassen. I think my dad's brought incredible vision to this town over the last 40 some years and I would really urge you to approve this plan. Peterson: Thank you. Malta Bloomberg Devine: Hi. My name is Maita Bloomberg Devine and I'm also one of Herb's daughters as well as a shareholder in Bloomberg Companies and I look at this plan and I just see a continuation of the things that he has done for the Dinner Theater and the Frontier building. Bringing the building from the front around to the back and continuing that so it has a really nice look to the building. People can drive into the back from the other side of town, not from the main street and be invited into the town. I always admired my father's creativity and his design and over the years I've been in a lot of his homes,as well as his larger buildings that he has built and have always been amazed at the people coming to me and saying, being excited about discovering things in his building and being amazed that what has worked for him,they would have never thought of it. I think after all the years that he has done this in this city, that we need to have a little confidence that he does have that vision and that he can see it through. I think he sees things that a lot of us don't. I think the plan is fine as is. I was really pleased with it. I think it's really exciting. I think it would be a wonderful addition to this city. Like it was said earlier, it was built as a hardware and lumber building and it's taking that structure and transforming it into something that's very appealing to the public and it's going to work for retailers and it's going to make a nice addition to this city so I really hope that you will look at this and think it's a good idea and good plan and move forward. Thank you. 35 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Thank you. Anyone wishing to address the commission? Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz, long time member of the city of Chanhassen. I can remember when Herb moved out here. The village had a population, I've got the sign home in my garage, of 120 people. That was the village and that included the township and it took an awful lot of courage for a man to come out and put a complex up like he did here in Chanhassen and expect to make it work like he did. It really is a centerpiece of a suburban area as far as the Dinner Theater is concerned. When I was Mayor and I used to go to some of the Mayor's functions down at the city, people asked where I was from. I said I was from Chanhassen. Oh that's where the Dinner Theater is and I think Herb has been doing a real good job for Chanhassen and I can see that some of the things that you see on paper here probably don't look quite right to you now but I can assure you that if Herb has designed this thing, it will look good after a while. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, may I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Brooks moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. I assume that nobody wants to be the first one to comment on this one. But Ladd, if I could ask maybe for your comments. A historical perspective might add... Conrad: Yeah, yeah. Al's been here longer than I have so. This is a tough one. In a lot of cases I want to just beg the question, get out of it. The TIF money confuses me a little bit. I don't understand that. It's not our job but it does, it does confuse me a bit. I have one comment and you approached our meeting on a very negative slant tonight because I think obviously you and staff aren't getting along. You didn't address us. It's them. So whether you had good points or not, I couldn't tell. You were challenging their recommendations. I can't vote on this tonight because I think you might have some good ideas but you didn't tell me why. You went straight to the negatives and you didn't come in and say this is why we're doing this. This is how it fits. T• his is what our intent is. You went straight to the negatives so I can't react tonight. I think there's some things that you can work on with staff. There's some things that you have some definite differences on. There's some things that I can bend on a little bit. I think you have some points but you didn't make those points other than, you didn't make them to make me feel that I could make a rationale decision for the community of Chanhassen. You know we obviously respect Herb. We obviously respect the Dinner Theater. It's a cornerstone of the community. You know it really is. I don't even need to underline that yet tonight's presentation was not what I can say I can make a decision on. So you know,and some of these are real tough to figure out. Once you get into architectural things, it's really tough. I hate us getting involved in that. I really do because we're just individuals that are lay people but you're forcing us to get into that and boy, we make mistakes and to trust us is a tough one for a Planning Commission to do. So I'm going to shut up and basically say, I think you've got to come back. I think you've got to come back with the reasons why we should go with your plan and at interim I'd prefer that you try to iron out a couple of these things. For instance, for instance the alley way. I don't know what it's 36 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 used for. I don't know if there's going to be any pedestrians on there. We've talked, I've been here for a while so I know some of the things we've talked about. I don't know if we've got traffic going in or out. I don't know if that baby should be closed up or not. If it's closed up, if there's no, if it's just for vagrants out there, then I don't need pictures on the walls back there. But on the other hand, if it's going to be, if we're going to make this an active retail center, I expect something to happen. I don't know what your vision is and you didn't share it tonight so it's, I don't even want to get into the details because I can't make a good decision. I think we should get out of this and have the applicant come back and make a positive presentation in two weeks. Peterson: Kevin. Joyce: Ditto. That's it. I agree with everything he said. Peterson: LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah I agree. I guess I felt pressured to want to like this, the architecture and the ideas that were put forth. I guess I need to be sold on the project like Ladd said, and many of the points that are in the staff report I think are extremely valid. We're dealing with the design now that is so much different than the one that was presented 2 1/2 years ago I guess and I actually like the one that was the original site plan a lot better than what was presented here tonight. So I guess like Ladd, I don't really want to go on and on and on except that I just can't see this moving forward to Council. Peterson: Matt. Burton: I agree with all the comments so far. I think that we have a very good staff here and... respect their opinions and I think everybody up here does and I think it's important for the applicant to work with the staff and come back with a better proposal than this. Or at least address more of the issues that are out there. I don't like leaving open and saying that down the road something may happen. I want to address as much as we can right now and I don't we can do that with what's been presented to us. And I understand that the neighboring tenants want something going on there. I think we all do. But I think we want to go with more definition than we have now so I agree with my fellow council members that I would table this matter. Peterson: Alison. Blackowiak: I agree with what's been said. There have been substantial changes since the initial approval and I think that's a big issue for all us. But also we've got to look at the big picture. We have an entertainment complex. So I would like to know specifically where does the boardwalk go? How is that going to continue? What plans are there for the alley way, like Ladd said? Are there going to be pedestrians going through there? We have to look at that. What's going to happen to the remaining buildings down there? I mean I realize that that's not your issue specifically but these are some questions that I need to have answered before I would feel comfortable moving forward with any kind of approval. I don't doubt the ability of Mr. 37 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Bloomberg to do a plan that's going to be wonderful but I think that we're coming from two different points right now with...what was previously approved and what the vision is today and I think we need to find some common ground and we're not there yet. Peterson: Thank you. Allyson. Brooks: I agree with all of the comments. I do strongly feel something absolutely has to be done with that Frontier building. It is not a very pleasant, visual piece on the landscape. I think we all want something...done. I don't think anybody's against that whatsoever. I do agree with the presentation discussion very strongly. I think it's great that Herb Bloomberg has done these things for the community but I would really like the next presentation to focus on the issue. The building, because I was losing track of why we're here. The issue is fixing the building, which is something I think we all want...to happen. You know as long as we're giving testimonials, I think our planning staff is very good and has done a lot for the vision of Chanhassen... But I think you have some tenants that you want to make by August? I think coming back in two weeks shouldn't stop that deadline. It's just a matter of coming together and...if it can happen. Peterson: Thank you. I look at the entertainment complex and as it was originally envisioned and I thoroughly found that to really add a uniqueness and character to the city that I liked a lot. And we have started that entertainment complex by setting a standard with the theater. The cinema I should say, and I really see this building tying more closely to the cinema and farther west than I do tying it to the Dinner Theater that some people have spoke of this evening. Tying it to more of the rustic look and that so I really would, essentially what I'm rambling on here saying is, I really see this tying in much more closely to what the cinema is and what the rest of the entertainment complex is intended to be. And I know there's economics involved in that and sometimes you have to wait for things to happen but I think the intent and our approval back then is, that I feel as strongly today as... I don't see this fitting the design itself with the rest of the entertainment complex that I envision down the road. With that in mind, a motion please. Conrad: Your signal Mr. Chairman is that you saw, and my signal was I didn't get the applicant's good pitch. Your signal was, you saw it and you didn't care for it. I'm not interested in extending out the applicant's, I don't take any great pleasure in wasting two weeks of their time. Well, I'll float the motion. I think before I make it, if you don't like this, the intent for me to table this motion, I've got to tell you that it's to get a better presentation so I can understand the different elements and what they're trying to do. That's my problem. I don't think you should vote for my motion if you read it, you see it, you understand it, don't delay them. Brooks: But within the two week period there's some things. Conrad: Something could happen but they don't agree with staff. There's definitely, that's real clear. And we're, without that agreement, you know we're sort of in chaos here. We have a tough time with this one so again I'm going to make the motion. I can't call on your Clayton. But I would make the motion, and Mr. Chairman we should have some discussion after this. I would make the motion to table this item for two weeks to give the applicant time to review a few of the subjects with the ones that are palatable with the city staff, and reduce the number of 38 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 variances or the number of issues outstanding but to come back in that two week period and give us a proactive approach as to why we should be approving the building as presented. That'd be my motion and my rationale. Peterson: Is there a second to that motion? Brooks: I'd second it. Peterson: Discussion. Conrad: Then don't vote for it if you've got a clear shot because then that's just not fair to the applicant. Peterson: Whenever we table something, I think it's very important that we send the applicant away with the perspective of what we're looking for in return. Ladd has articulated certainly one perspective. I have tried to articulate that architecturally I don't feel as though it fits. I don't know whether the rest of the commissioners have a sense of where you're at in that continuum or you have a different vision and I think it's important for the applicant that you offer those this evening. That whether we do that after the motion or while we're in this discussion... Conrad: My motion should fail if you really want to provide some design recommendations to the applicant tonight. Anyway. Peterson: ...perspective. Joyce: I think Ladd hit it right on the head. That's why we want to discuss that for because I think cooler heads will prevail. I think in two weeks we can come together, I really believe this, and work this out. Peterson: How do you feel about the difference in architectural style to what the entertainment complex. Joyce: This architectural style, I think a lot of it has to do with taste. I think it's a 1960's style, because that's what the theater, when it was built. And you can pick that away if you want. I mean some people like the 1960's style. That's kind of what their stuff was so in one sense, that's what we've living with right now. That's the building. But on the other side, what I like about what Ladd said is,we have this corrugated wall. How is that going to function inside the development? You didn't tell me that. All you said is we want to keep the corrugated wall and that was that. So you know, is it an alley? Isn't it an alley? Do you want to shut that off? Fine. I mean if you sat down and thought this through, I mean and give us some positive feedback on what we're going to do there, I'd feel a lot better on just voting on it. My discussion is, I think two weeks of cooling off period and being creative and thinking this through is a lot better than just making a decision, a rash decision right now. Peterson: Design wise you're saying you're open? 39 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Joyce: I don't think, yeah I am open to the design. I'm not going to get into an argument over taste once again. I don't know how much authority we have to force certain aspects of the design down. I don't understand the TIF financing either or the HRA involvement. This isn't a PUD. I'd almost like to have two weeks just to digest this myself so I can figure out, I'm a little confused on that. How much authority we have to say...it's their building. If it was a PUD, I'd say no. If it was a PUD, I'd say I'd like to change this but it isn't. Peterson: LuAnn, your comments? Sidney: Well I think I fall in the area where you know I would like a design change and you know hearing Craig speak I agree with him in that I see this tying more into the cinema complex, that's in the cinema style. Not necessarily with the Dinner Theater style. And I'm trying to think, because you want to use the same materials as what's in the Chanhassen Dinner Theater area but I guess I have a problem with some of the design elements like big canopies reminds me of Menards in Fridley when I look at that and I'd like to see something different and I think you can modify that to make it a little bit more appealing. So you know there are things I think that you know if you're willing to give and take and work with staff, I think the application could work. But at this point I'm not comfortable with the design maybe as much as Ladd. Peterson: I won't go all the way around. Any other comments regarding that? Brooks: I have one. Peterson: Please. Brooks: Well I think we have to remember that we're remodeling a building and we're not ripping down a building. A question about razing versus remodeling and because we're remodeling I fall on the side of Ladd. Whoa. And there's only so much you can do. I mean anything is better than what we've got. I mean if this situation where Milo, the magic architect was coming in to give us something absolutely fabulous that he always did, I mean and it's over by the Dinner Theater and you know...I think well at least it's blending in with that. If we do something way too funky and we try to push them to do something funky and entertainment like, well then we have style conflicts with the rest of the buildings that are there. The other thing we talked about, Country Suites and Timber Lodge, and I don't find them an architectural beacon. I mean they're traditional,bland, suburban architecture. So I think...which is remodeling the building...better. Blackowiak: I don't like to settle. I mean I think we should go for the best possible design that we can get on this site. And now let's not just say well let's just settle for this because it's a remodel. You can do wonderful remodels. I know you can. I want to see the big picture. I want to see how it's going to fit in. I really think we need to look, I want to see where the boardwalk's going. I would like to see a rendering that might show the Chanhassen Cinema next to the proposed remodel of the Frontier. I mean how is it going to fit together? I need to know that before I can approve it. I want to know what's going to happen to the other buildings, and again I 40 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 said it's not your concern what's happening to those other buildings but if you're doing...and you've got these four little buildings down on the right there on the southeast corner, they're going to have to address that issue as well because if you're trying to make it pedestrian friendly, nice looking area, we've got some more work to do. I just am not comfortable but I don't want to settle. Again, it's remodel. That's fine but we can make it a nice one. I think we should strive to do that. Burton: I agree with the other comments. I don't like it the way it is now. I think it looks old and dated and I don't think it really fits in at all. I don't think it's right to use the Dinner Theater side as a comparison. First of all this is much higher structures than those are because it's on the back side of the hill. And it doesn't match with the neighboring neighbors. I'm not an architect. I know I don't like what I see. I think to get some more time here and consider the staff's comments and meet with the staff, I think you can come back in short order a different design and a different plan, or at least be able to explain why...and address the other concerns before tonight. Peterson: We have a motion, we have a second and I think we have plenty of direction. Conrad moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the Bloomberg Companies for a Site Plan Review for remodeling of the Frontier Building. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Herb Bloomberg: ...they had me build their home on the lake...Hazeltine possibility. I'm not much of a golfer at all hardly but Todd Heffelfinger...built a nice home for him and he told me ...invited me to design the build...and they knew that I had no experience. So we went ahead and did it. The interesting thing was, and the case I think did I mention it was Don...party and he said I wish I had a dollar for everybody who said they wanted to buy my house. In the meantime the same thing happened to Todd and Lucy Heffelfinger... They had me build their home overlooking the lake. About this time, about 1976 I was surprised by a magazine that came, this happens to be Business Week. ...magazine and there was my face. The Baleen Company had decided to do an advertising campaign, and this was in '76 when the Dinner Theater was kind of on shaky ground. We were really worried...hoping to survive and we did survive. ...pop up in Business Week, Sports Illustrated, Time magazine and so forth. Maybe more that I don't even know about. And what it said, and the comment was a picture of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. But the headline was, ...a Baleen builder builds trust. And that was the nicest compliment I ever had in my life. And some times it takes a little trust. I wish you could re-open your meeting and pass this for me tonight. What could you lose? Would you have that trust with me? I've only worked here for 42 years. I've never had any kind of a hint of a lawsuit or a problem with any customer. From coast to coast. Then if I say my hometown now that I've been in for 42 years wouldn't trust me enough to finish my own building? I can't believe that. Maybe I'll have to accept it. But I think you'd be better, you'd feel a lot better if you passed that tonight. I think you'd brag about it later on and I know I won't disappoint you. Thanks. Peterson: Thank you. 41 1101 CITY OF MEMORANDUM CIIA luwSEN TO: Planning Commission 590 CityCenter Drive,POBox 147 FROM: Phillip Elkin,Water Resources Coordinator Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 Phone 612.937.1900 DATE: April 27, 1998 General Fax 612.937.5739 Engineering Fax 612.937.9152 SUBJ: Wetland Alteration Permit for City Trail Project 98-1 Public Safety Fax 612.934.2524 Web uwu:ci.chmnhassen.mu.us Upon review of the site plan drawings prepared by Howard R. Green Company, March 9, 1998, I offer the following comments and recommendations: BACKGROUND These proposed wetland impacts are the result of proposed construction of city trails as part of the 1997 Park referendum. Wetland Impacts There are approximately 1.4 acres of wetlands impacted in 24 different wetland basins along portions of Hwy. 7, Galpin Boulevard, Powers Boulevard, Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. Most of the impacts are along existing roadways where the wetlands have already been impacted by road construction and are all classified ag/urban. The Park and Recreation Commission has held individual public hearings for each section of the trail,and has taken into consideration minimizing wetland impacts. Wetland Mitigation Most of the impacts are below 2,000 square feet and therefore would be exempt from mitigation if they were projects by themselves. Since the City is proposing the trails as one project,we are required to mitigate for the total impacts. Therefore, the city is proposing that mitigation for all wetland impacts be accomplished by withdrawing credits from the city's wetland bank. There are two good reasons to proceed this way; 1)normally,wetland impacts are mitigated within the impacted wetland. For this project that would require 24 separate projects, all minor in size (less than 4,00 square feet)but heavy in cost(easement acquisition, mobilization and construction costs). 2)The bank was created for city road construction projects. The 1997 changes to the Wetland Conservation Act, made an exception to mitigation in road construction. The burden of mitigation no longer falls on the city, Tho r;n nfC7,n„Imre„ A nrmr;nv rornm+nrity With rlonn lnhir nvnhn rrhnnlr n than ll mer,Imnntn+nrr thr;,d,uer h,,1;norror 414 hon,,tS,/hark A errant nlnro mvt nlno Planning Commission April 29, 1998 Page 2 but on the State of Minnesota. There are currently 4.5 acres of wetlands in the city's wetland Bank. The impacts to wetlands along the Bluff Creek trail site will be mitigated within that wetland. This will be accomplished in conjunction with a City wetland restoration project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit 98-1 as shown on site plan drawings prepared by Howard R. Green Company, March 9, 1998 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Wetland Conservation Act and the City of Chanhassen Surface Water Management Plan requirements. 2. The applicant receive permits from the jurisdiction agencies such as the Army Corps of Engineers, MN DNR and the Bluff Creek Watershed District. 3. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the existing wetlands." G:\eng\phillip\Admin\planning\TRAILW AP.pc WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT GENERAL NOTICE FOR WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT City of Chanhassen NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Wednesday,May 6, 1998,at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive. The City of Chanhassen (LGU) during the year 1998 hereby provides notice that it has applied for a wetland alteration permit as part of the 1998 Trail Projects. This application proposes to impact 1.4 acres of wetlands along portions of Hwy. 7, Galpin Blvd., Powers Blvd., Great Plains Blvd. and Pioneer Trail. The proposed impact from the trail projects will be mitigated by the creation of new wetlands and wetland credits from the City's wetland bank. Persons interested in viewing the above mentioned application should contact the city at the address listed below. Persons interested in receiving mailed notice of each project within the jurisdiction of the above mentioned LGU can be put on a mailing list by contacting the LGU at the address listed below. Phillip Elkin, Water Resources Coordinator Authorized Local Government Unit(LGU) Official City of Chanhassen, 690 City Center Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 937-1900 ext. 105 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on April 23, 1998) g:\englPhi I l ip\wet lands\trailNotification 2161) ' 1 I� J I Wetland Impacts Wetland areas impacted by construction of the trails shall be handled in accordance with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The City of Chanhassen is the LGU for administration of the WCA, and will be the coordinating agency for wetlands that are not MnDNR Protected Wetlands. The US Army Corps of Engineers shall be notified of wetland impacts to determine if nationwide permits are to be issued. As summarized in Tables 2 and 3, the total overall wetland impact, including both jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional wetlands as defined by the WCA, is approximately 1.844 acres. Wetland impacts have been minimized throughout the design of the trails by varying trail placement/alignment and profile grades. The wetland impact areas that remain were minimized to the best extent possible within spatial and geographical constraints. Approximately 0.413 acres of the impacted wetlands are characterized as incidental, since they were a direct result of the construction of the existing ditches and roadways. 1 These are exempt from wetland replacement, as described in Part II of the WCA e Administration Manual, Exemption 5: Incidental Wetlands. This results in a net total of approximately 1.431 acres that would require mitigation at a ratio of 2:1. Ceil Strauss, of the Waters Division of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, noted that all MnDNR Protected Wetlands should be avoided: no fill will be allowed. However, crossing of these wetlands may be possible with pedestrian bridges subject to certain conditions. This should only be an area of concern for any wetlands that may be associated with MnDNR Protected Waters as described in the next section. Larry Zdon, of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, noted that any trail with impacts greater than 0.5 acres will require Section 401 Water Quality Certification. He also noted that he generally coordinates this with the Corps or the LGU, and that a Joint Project Notification Form is generally used as an application for the certification. Mitigation Plan Mitigation will be accomplished in two ways: through use of banked wetland credits and through wetland restoration. Currently, the City has accrued 2.44 acres of new wetland credits and 16.8 acres of public value credits. These banked wetland credits will be utilized for mitigation on all trails except Bluff Creek Trail. Wetland impacts on the Bluff Creek Trail will be mitigated through the 1998 Bluff Creek Wetland Restoration Project, as administered by Phil Elkin, City of Chanhassen Water Resources Coordinator. This project will restore and create a significant amount of wetlands,planned to exceed the required mitigation area for Bluff Creek Trail. I I 801380J 2 1 Table 2: Summary of Wetlands Mitigated with Banking Credits i -.T -- '--,1,-,n-''''-‘!r�'- 1 Total WC�A Mitigation •"k,4-4.-.7. 1 - jl 1.- w ' Impact Impact (acres).: (acres),.- (acres) a NWC:; : :_ P'c I Highway 7 Trial 0.315 0.028 0.028 0.028 Galpin Boulevard Trail 0.320 0.289 0.289 0.289 Powers Boulevard Trail 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.096 Great Plains Boulevard Trail 0.047 0.022 0.022 0.022 Pioneer Trail/Great Plains Boulevard Trail 0.070 0.000 0.000 0.000 Totals 0.848 0.435 0.435 0.435 Table 3: Summary of Wetlands Mitigated with 1998 Wetland Restoration Project f w' "" Total 'VCA Mitigation Areas � •- Trail - Impact Impact (acres) r 4,- ' t.‘;"4:.. .:-'''''''r (acres) (acres) NWC PVC Bluff Creek Trail 0.996 0.996 0.996 0.996 Totals 0.996 0.996 0.996 0.996 Crossing MnDNR Protected Waters For each portion of the trails that cross a MnDNR Protected Water, the City would need a "Work in Bed of Protected Waters" permit. According to Ceil Strauss, the general characteristics of the permit are as follows: • Completion of Joint Project Notification Form to provide general information and attachment of an addendum including (1) a plan view to scale, (2) a cross-section view, and, (3) if a bridge is proposed, a hydraulic analysis or statement claiming no impact signed by a licensed engineer. • The US Army Corps of Engineers will be involved only if wetland impacts are involved in the proposed crossing. • The timeframe for review and approval is typically 2 months, which includes a 30-day comment period. Following the comment period, the permit is approved or changes are requested in accord with any comments. 801380J 3 • Notes on crossing structures: • Ideal crossing would be pedestrian bridges. • Minimize impact to the stream,banks, and wildlife and fish • Least flood impact • If culverts are proposed, Fisheries and Wildlife must be involved in the review process to ensure minimal impact on wildlife. • The types of culverts that may be allowed depend on the stream; e.g. an arch type may be required to leave a natural streambed. As an alternative to individual permits for each crossing, the City may apply for a general permit. The City has considered this possibility in the past, and may find this to be a good time to proceed for several reasons: • The timeframe for approval of the general permit is 2 months, the same as for an individual permit. • Future individual applications avoid the 30-day comment period as required by individual permit applications. Each application only requires a 10-day DNR review and approval period. • The general permit would be valid for an extended period of time, which is typically a number of years. I Floodplain and Surface Water Management Issues Within the scope of this project, the watershed districts are generally responsible for (1) ensuring minimal floodplain impact from stream crossings and (2) ensuring that 1 appropriate grading and erosion control practices are followed during construction of the trails. The trails currently cross floodplain areas within the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District at three points: • The area of the Highway 101 S. Connection Trail between Lake Susan and Rice Marsh Lake. • The south end of the Bluff Creek Connection Trail at its crossing over Bluff Creek. 111 • Galpin Boulevard Trail at the crossing over Bluff Creek near its south end. I 801380J 4 The following information was obtained from Bob Obermeyer, the engineer for the watershed district: • If culverts are used for the stream crossings, stream modeling is generally necessary to verify that the proposed structures would not cause backwater elevation increases in excess of 0.5'. • However, if the existing culverts under the roadways are simply extended by a section or two (8-12 feet) to accommodate the trail, then the impact on backwater elevations would be considered negligible and no analysis would be necessary. • If bridges are constructed, then the low steel must be 1 foot above the 100-year flood elevation. Alternatively, it may be acceptable for the approaches to be low enough to allow passage of water in flood conditions, or the overall bridge can be low enough to allow complete submersion. Mr. Obermeyer also mentioned that the watershed district has been granted a general permit from the MnDNR, and it has not yet been determined whether the watershed district or the MnDNR would review and approve the permits for these crossings. 801380J 5 I 1 Highway 7 Trail 1 Summary of Wetland Impacts f -4.,,t--,,,,,,--..ce. L., :4, d -o. e� Vii` .. - ... '..114. _,:;:7,-....-t.,-.--„7,: t.,,,, _r Impact Impact 3 an 1Detian 'Da~"S et1D ''A roximate Stationing a���. ,M,.. PP - . •- Area fts Area acres Exem too H1 A 4+10 -8+40 5242 0.120 5 H2 A 14+90 - 15+10 43 0.001 5 H3 B 18+20 - 18+80 156 0.004 5 IH4 B 19+30 - 19+50 34 0.001 5 H5A E 34+50 - 36+30 1620 0.037 5 1 H5 E 36+75 -40+50 4314 0.099 5 H6 F 41+70 -42+50 1104 0.025 5 1 H7 G 43+00 -44+60 1199 0.028 Total Wetland Impact= 0.315 ITotal Exempt Wetland Impact = 0.287 Total Wetland Impact Area Requiring Mitigation = 0.028 acres I Mitigation Summary ITotal Wetland Mitigation Area Required (2:1) = 0.055 acres Required Bank Credits: I New Wetland Credits = 0.028 acres IPublic Value Credits = 0.028 acres Note: These wetlands are primarily nonjurusdictional. Wetland Data Forms have not been completed. I 1 I 1 1 i 0 0 (0 C 0 aI 0 0 1_ a >_.Q J co Q Q _ I o r, LJ 1\ ts, 1 1D 0 ,1 Cr) ' z ��' k .Rga� LANA Q (j \.0 0 ca .4\t.,\ z _i 1 (n CC 1' \ 1 0 i" S' �RESs 0. ,�` Q W Q ,.,.3 1 O i a,. U IL 0 N ` AVENUE , WOOD O = 1 O CE Li • V____ �-N�EG AVcr1U� > Q \. �` P`�L�)c- F— 0) Cf) \ �� E U 0) I‘ N\05, c3. • °c-.''s\Y"- >- Q \. Y; QQ ``� I Q- = nn Zw (-5z z � w _ I NW 1kP N L- STEVE HALL PAMELA ILLIES JODY PETERSON 6221 ARBOR LANE 6221 CYPRESS DRIVE 6210 ELM TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 DIANNE S TESCHENDORFF WILLIAM GLEASON SCOTT& CHERYL STURM PAUL S SCRAPER 6210 BARBERRY CIRCLE 6230 CYPRESS DRIVE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR. MN 55331 6220 ELM TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 MICHAEL DETERMAN HAZEL C JOHNSON DEBBIE BAK 6211 BARBERRY CIRCLE 6231 CYPRESS DRIVE 6221 ELM TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR. MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TED I & SHERIE BIGOS ROBERT J ROY HOWARD WROGE 3221 HIGHWAY 7 3110 DARTMOUTH DRIVE 6230 ELM TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 JUDY ANN DIAL JOHN WEBER CAROL REICH 6220 BARBERRY LANE 3220 DARTMOUTH DRIVE 6231 ELM TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 ERIC RAETHER MARK NELSON ROGER SMITH 6200 CYPRESS DRIVE 3230 DARTMOUTH DRIVE 6200 ELM TREE AVE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR. MN 55331 LYNNE BROWN SCOTT HANSON HILDEGARD FORNER 6201 CYPRESS DRIVE 6201 DOGWOOD 6200 FIR TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 DORIS E. HANSON KURT WEIMER EDWARD EVANS 6210 CYPRESS DRIVE 6211 DOGWOOD 6220 FIR TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 JACK SCHILTGEN ANTON GUENTHER JAMES HAGAN 6211 CYPRESS DRIVE 6221 DOGWOOD 6221 FIR TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 KATHY LE CRONE KENNETH HOGAN MARTIN BEUKHOF 6220 CYPRESS DRIVE 6231 DOGWOOD 6230 FIR TREE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 3EORGE HARPER KATHY KOCINA 6231 FIR TREE 6301 GREENBRIAR AVE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 CHRISTINE C HUNTER EILEEN BOYER 3236 FIR TREE 3630 VIRGINIA AVENUE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 WAYZATA, MN 55391 JOSEPH LEUKUMA DAN STOFLET 3240 FIR TREE 3502 MAPLEWOOD CIRCLE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 ROGER R ROBINSON ROBERT CRIPPA 3300 FIR TREE 3503 MAPLEWOOD CIRCLE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 STEVEN MARBEN GERALD KRUSE 3201 FIR TREE AVENUE 3510 MAPLEWOOD CIRCLE XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 OSEPH A& SARA J PIEHAL CHARLES RIENSTRA ;241 FIR TREE AVE 3511 MAPLEWOOD CIRCLE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -OM RUHLAND TERRY L SHERWOOD •211 GREENBRIAR 3520 MAPLEWOOD CIRCLE :XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 IARVIN ONKEN CRAIG ALAN KOUBA 221 GREENBRIAR 3520 HIGHWAY 7 -XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 AMES THOMPSON 231 GREENBRIAR XCELSIOR, MN 55331 'ATRICIA L MCINERNY 311 GREENBRIAR :XCELSIOR, MN 55331 I Galpin Boulevard Trail I Summaryof Wetland Impacts P 4 trii 3'A' ilit ilri-1`*4?1J3 14 ,I.si rdi.r.i.7i)x f.;14 ti. ' _'I .‘; .t1-1 ... :�L tii!j,, I G1 L 2+00-4+ 10 1710 0.039 G2 K - - I G3 G4 J = - - I G5 H 30+80-32+00 528 0.012 IG6 G G7 F 48+50-54+50 6756 0.155 IG8 E 55+20-59+00 3580 0.082 G9 D - - -I = G10 C G11 B 92+50-94+50 1378 0.032 5 IG12 A Total Wetland Impact= 0.320 ITotal Exempt Wetland Impact= 0.032 Total Wetland Impact Area Requiring Mitigation = 0.289 acres I Mitigation Summary ITotal Wetland Mitigation Area Required (2:1) = 0.577 acres 1 Required Bank Credits: New Wetland Credits= 0.289 acres 1 Public Value Credits= 0.289 acres I I I 1 SEE OTHER SILL FOR NORTH H • 8 - 1 11 III tel 1 • toNcgc�eS o UU � rl Ov • 'r 2 l HUNTER DRIVE 1►I 4q • ST1C WAY I � TRAIL CROSSING 3 � ' k AT MAJESTIC WAY () s TRFFT /i ^Ir L.UR '' ► / ►'TRAIL BEGINS AT CONNECTION ,I WITH EXISTING TRAIL :ALPIN NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5 ‘-1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS (;AI PILI PCI II c‘ in nr, Tr% A ,, 0 600 EN RAIL AT lk MAYFLOWER ROAD 1 I 4 if ::,?:-t,;, O,p�L MELODY HILL111' �� F ` \—MOLINE CIRCLE Oft' - MELODY HILL ROAD 55TH ST. a y�S 14RIDGE COU WO CRESTVIEW DF Ri - n:431.11 EW CIRCLE ur ,..--------- ,I I 1111 tikiE LUCY ROAD P @p6 i1i i 0 SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SOUTH HALF -.GALPIN I M CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS ' t' r� ` GALPIN BOULEVARD TRAIT 0 soo . ��GiOIG�v..12� PAISLEY PARK ENTERPRISES MARTIN KUDER KENT S ANDERSON ATTN ACCOUNTANTS 6831 GALPIN BLVD 1900 MOLINE CIRCLE 7801 AUDUBON ROAD EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 HANHASSEN, MN 55317 SARA SCHMANSKI THEODORE BENTZ RICHARD OCONNOR 5410 GALPIN BLVD 7300 GALPIN BLVD 6261 GALPIN BLVD EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 KATHRYN E. VON GROSSMANN EARL C GILBERT III /O LO BROS CONSTRUCT C 2030 MELODY HILL ROAD 6901 GALPIN LAKE BLVD C/O NGACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 935 WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA, MN 55391 ADE & MARIKO DAVIS MARTIN C & BETH KUDER MARK R. & TANYA ERICKSON 5301 HUMMINGBIRD ROAD 6831 GALPIN BLVD 2216 HUNTER DRIVE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 ICH & SEDA OTTO J. HENNESSY/D. RENGERS JULIE BEYER-FITZGERALD ;291 HUMMINGBIRD ROAD 7305 GALPIN BLVD 7327 FAWN HILL ROAD D(CELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ;LEN & JOAN HANSEN LARRY & BETTY VANDEVEIRE CHARLES & IRENE SONG ;281 HUMMINGBIRD ROAD 4980 CTY RD 10 EAST 7200 GALPIN BLVD :XCELSIOR, MN 55331 CHASKA, MN 55318 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 [ARK & CHRISTINE SASS JEROME CARLSON LUNDGREN BROTHERS CONST 275 HUMMINGBIRD ROAD 6950 GALPIN BLVD 935 WAYZATA BLVD :XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 WAYZATA, MN 55391 IMOTHY J. RAINEY MICHAEL & JANE SCHLANGEN CENTEX HOMES 271 HUMMINGBIRD ROAD 1941 MELODY HILL CIRCLE 12400 WHITEWATER DRIVE #120 'XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 'IMOTHY & SUSAN DEVINE CARY B. MARTINSON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INC 231 HUMMINGBIRD ROAD 1940 MELODY HILL CIRCLE 15 CHOCTAW CIRCLE XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9505 ;COTT MEZZENGA BENNO SAND ROTTLUND COMPANY INC 731 GALPIN BLVD 1910 MOLINE CIRCLE 2681 LONG LAKE ROAD ,XCELSIOR, MN 55331 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 ROSEVILLE, MN 55113 • Bluff Creek Trail Summary of Wetland Impacts :Plan IDr etlan• FS eat D .Approximate Stationing 'c,4rea=(ft:-} Area(acres} , "`Exempt�o�. BC1 A 30+15 -30+40 71 0.002 BC2 A 7+50 - 15+90 30902 0.709 e' BC3 A 1+50 -6+60 12428 0.285 Total Wetland Impact= 0.996 Total Exempt Wetland Impact= 0.000 Total Wetland Impact Area Requiring Mitigation = 0.996 acres Mitigation Summary Total Wetland Mitigation Area Required (2:1) = 1.993 acres 1998 Wetland Restoration Plan: New Wetland Credits= 0.996 acres Public Value Credits = 0.996 acres TRAIL ENDS AT EXISTING 7-VALLEY vlEW COURT TRAIL CONNECTION ! TRAIL CONNECTS TO •• VALLEY RIDGE TRAIL 1 MI . . . .i /' �!- / \ ! I t� j��/ALLEY RIDGE TRAIL NORTH I !!>, •• /. 0 C/ \ '' '. z . \.. `� ti 1 1114 vir ALLEY RIDGE PLACE I 011111 Ai I/44441- F1- RIDGE TRAIL 50vp / i \ I J VALLEY \VIEW PLACE GcCOURT, /m � �o I. r1 \.. ,/ . . ,. / , r ` .,. . ,ri) ,• \ , • , i • TRAIL BEGINS AT I • AUDUBON ROAD , . 6e Z, j i >~ ( L_ TRAIL EXTENDED ALONG I NORTH SIDE OF BLUFF CREEK IEX.BLUFF �' CITY OF CHANHASSEN ) .11 ' l; 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS 1: BLUFF C:RFFR m II T`r1AIA,Cr' rr1C 40� K T STEPHEN & MARY MONSON JOHN & JANET ST. ANDREW NANCY & AL GOMEZ 8850 AUDUBON ROAD 1811 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8748 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL COCHRANE CHARLES FOLCH MICHAEL WARTHEN 1751 SUNRIDGE COURT 1815 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8755 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JEFF & GAIL MOODY WILLIAM BROWN JAY GRIZZLE 1800 SUNRIDGE COURT 1839 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8760 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ALLYSON & GARY UTPADEL DWAYNE B & SALLY E STUCKEY PHILIP STANDAFER 1831 SUNRIDGE COURT 1785 VALLEY RIDGE TRAIL SOUTH 8767 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DANIEL & ROBIN EDMUNDS DUANE B. FREETH JENNIFER ANDERSON 13050 DAHLIA CIRCLE 71222 1827 VALLEY RIDGE TRAIL SOUTH BOX 577 8772 VALLEY VIEW PLACE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DANIEL & ROBIN EDMUNDS Bluff Creek WAP names / 1861 SUNRIDGE COURT r� CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 , JACK BECKER DAVID MARION 1751 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8724 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 M. GREENLEE & D. HUM TIMOTHY A & NANCY G THUL 1761 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8729 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 • CARY FEIK DOUGLAS A & CINDY L MERRIGAN 1773 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8736 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 SHARON & PAT ARBOGAST KIM MOTSCHENBACHER 1801 VALLEY RIDGE TR SO 8743 VALLEY VIEW PLACE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 Great Plains Boulevard Trail Summary of Wetland Impacts Ili'>." '•1CI)t`? : 1 i tfiA'lo., iY gitisi�t.l r'.- r lir:0t? ,1 {: ."i rnate Station n' -.,:..)::Y-.= ::.i.-::_ A1 mac+,-k it=' i-hfll,a is ClOr L 5+70 -7+00 1061 0.024 5 C2 K - - - C3 J 33+00- 34+40 976 0.022 R Total Wetland Impact= 0.047 Total Exempt Wetland Impact= 0.024 s= Total Wetland Impact Area Requiring Mitigation = 0.022 acres . f Mitigation Summary r Total Wetland Mitigation Area Required (2:1) = 0.045 acres U. Required Bank Credits: F New Wetland Credits = 0.022 acres ! Public Value Credits = 0.022 acres k EGIN PROPOSED TRAIL AT EXISTING TRAIL 1-111 1 ' (.0 4 � � 1 RAIL ON THE WEST SIDE OF �oo,N°i/ CREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD P\G����Py TRAIL ON THE EAST SIDE OF GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD TRAIL CROSSING 0,4 , • AT 86TH STREET CONNECT TO SIDEWALK �I I 1 � fi TRAIL ENDS AT —11'1 CHANHASSEN HILLS 3 DEVELOPMENT wG gI . ;.H WY101 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS 0 600 GREAT PLAINS Rnlll RVARn TRAII Pioneer Trail/Great Plains Boulevard Trail Summary of Wetland Impacts Impact Impact an= ai` 'elt i': ��A I 1 1.=. •• mat;.Sr a :ft• Area (ft,2) Area (acres) : Exemption GP1 A 34+80- 36+05 734 0.017 5 GP2 B 43+10 -44+90 1716 0.039 5 GP3 C 53+50 -54+60 346 0.008 5 GP4 D 62+00 -62+20 106 0.002 5 GP5 E 67+90 -68+80 146 0.003 5 Total Wetland Impact= 0.070 Total Exempt Wetland Impact= 0.070 Total Wetland Impact Area Requiring Mitigation = 0.000 acres Mitigation Summary Total Wetland Mitigation Area Required (2:1) = 0.000 acres Required Bank Credits: New Wetland Credits = 0.000 acres Public Value Credits = 0.000 acres • • I k I I BEGIN TRAIL AT KIOWA TRAIL -....e."<a) ek, . I r I o ! . ` ► TRAIL ON THE EAST SIDE m OF GREAT PLAINS BLVD. s �� EST v '�i� 6TH ST.Q ' G� +u I i C-- FOXFORD ROAD I j I f �I\ QPG� zTtpir TRAIL ON THE NORTH SIDE ! f Le ,- OF PIONEER TRAI �`'Li MEADOWLARK LANE \'' / A'_ : V . I _ FOXr ORD ROAD I _ I1 ` j �0J — o =� PION R 'A . .•.'. 'I. - `rr Y Lv� 0 'Z 0 LII W ‘ ..../G W LZ 0 tai o END CITY TRAIL AT a HENNEPIN COUNTY TRAIL X.PIONEER CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS 1!13 PIONFFR TRAIT /GRRAT PI tIKIC Ai yin TDAII 0600 (e- Ra; tirnf JIM SOMMERS PAUL & CHERYL LOKKESMOE MAGDY & JUNE L EBRAHIM 8683 CHAN HILLS DR NO 9650 FOXFORD ROAD 521 PINEVIEW COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHRIS & DEB HOL JOHN S. JACOBY WILLIAM & NANCY PARKER 8687 CHAN HILLS DR NO 8516 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 540 PINEVIEW COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GREG GUTSCHOW TERRY OWENS RICHARD ASPLIN 8691 CHAN HILLS DR NO 8520 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 541 PINEVIEW COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GREG & GERRY BARETTE ROME NOONE ROGER NOVOTNY 8695 CHAN HILLS DR NO 8522 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 560 PINEVIEW COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 THOMAS JESSEN STEVE STROMSNESS PAUL ZAKARIASEN 9570 FOXFORD ROAD 8526 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 600 WEST 96TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DAVID WONDRA AL H. KLINGELHUTZ ROGER & KIM LEE 9590 FOXFORD ROAD 8600 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 600 WEST 96TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PAUL J & MARY M MARTIN DON HALLA PAUL PEARSON 9610 FOXFORD ROAD 10000 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 601 WEST 96TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHASKA, MN 55318-9465 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ROBERT SCHOEWE JOYCE E. KING WAYNE HOLTMEIER 9611 FOXFORD ROAD 9391 KIOWA TRAIL 8524 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 • DOUGLAS & REBECCA DUCHON TIMOTHY & DAWNE ERHART 9630 FOXFORD ROAD 9611 MEADOWLARK LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DAVID & SHARON GATTO DAVID R & BEVERLY ERICKSON 9631 FOXFORD ROAD 520 PINEVIEW COURT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 Powers Boulevard Trail Summary of Wetland Impacts Impact Impact Plan ID Wetland Data Sheet ID . Approximate Stationing Area (ft. ) Area(acres) Exemption_. P1 A - - - P2 B 37+60-40+10 4176 0.096 P3 P4 P5 DD - - - P6 - Total Wetland Impact= 0.096 Total Exempt Wetland Impact= 0.000 Total Wetland Impact Area Requiring Mitigation = 0.096 acres Mitigation Summary Total Wetland Mitigation Area Required (2:1)= 0.192 acres Required Bank Credits: New Wetland Credits= 0.096 acres Public Value Credits= 0.096 acres I i f I 1 i SEE OTHER SIDE FOR NORTH HALF / / / L--CHAPARREL o� '� LANEJam JOv \ 9 Q. / ,t? -CHAPARREL COURT / ‘ \ `PIMA LANE i ` TRAIL ON EAST SIDE OF ( r- POWERS BOULEVARD 1 I � PON11AC LANE 1 I I \ BUTTE COURT SADDLEBROCK TRAIL II •�` p ,,l TRAIL ENDS AT CONNECTION WITH EXISTING SIDEWALK -SADDLEBROOK CURVE EX.P WERS • • CITY OF CHANHASSEN /N 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS a 0 600 POWERS BOULEVARD TRAIL TRAIL BEGINS AT BOUNDARY I le WITH SHOREWOOD I. E e if 0, 1 HOLLY LANE V �A,„,i WILLOW CREEK i 0 • PLEASANT VIEW ROAD TRAIL ON EAST SIDE OF � POWERS BOULEVARD I P 1 / J I �0 . V� P d ' ' IF 001 /IdPGP V / \<G n,z. 0 . / StiEN -7o -4,1/0046, /C / 7? eF / RpgO SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SOUTH HALF EX.PWER S CITY OF CHANHASSEN .. • 1998 PROPOSED TRAILS 0 600 POWERS BOULEVARD TRAIL >o s 6t Vd (f' -'A-P TERRANCE KROELLS DAN FUNDINGSLAND MARJORIE KING 1071 CHAPARRAL COURT 6870 CHAPARRAL LANE 6974 PIMA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 ALAN SNIDER ANN & DAN RODNING BRIAN BYRNE 1080 CHAPARRAL COURT 6880 CHAPARRAL LANE 6901 REDMAN LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 KEVIN L GRENGS MICHAEL AHRENS JR DENNIS KNUDSEN 1081 CHAPARRAL COURT 6900 CHAPARRAL LANE 6991 REDMAN LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 MIKE HARPER & SARA JOHNSON FRED W BERG FRED J. ROGERS 1091 CHAPARRAL COURT 6910 CHAPARRAL LANE 6920 TECUMSEH LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DARYL KEIM KIMBERLY J WEISPFENNIG MARK LATHROP 1100 CHAPARRAL COURT 6920 CHAPARRAL LANE 6850 UTICA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 DAVID DREALAN GARY SEMAN THEODORE KOLTES 1110 CHAPARRAL COURT 6950 PIMA LANE 6851 UTICA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 MATHEW HARDY BARBARA E. WILLE 6800 CHAPARRAL LANE 6952 PIMA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOSEPH HAMILTON ELIZABETH K. HAMILTON 6820 CHAPARRAL LANE 6954 PIMA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ALLAN OTT CHRISTA WILSON 6840 CHAPARRAL LANE 6956 PIMA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 STEVEN KVIDERA FLORENCE A COLVIN 6850 CHAPARRAL LANE 6970 PIMA LANE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CITY OF CHANEAS :EN P.C. DATE: May 6, 1998 g. C.C. DATE: May 20, 1998 CASE: 98-8 SPR 98-2 CUP STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: 1) Conditional Use.Permit for Alteration of a Flood Plain 2) Interim Use Permit for a Golf& Driving Range Z 3) Site Plan Review for a Golf& Driving Range VQ LOCATION: Just south of Trunk Highway 169/212 at Hwy. 101 _1 APPLICANT: RSS CL Jeff Helstrom and Chris Bixler c/o Perma Green, Inc. 8276 Scandia Road Waconia, MN 55387 Jeff- 936-4091 Chris - 472-8137 PRESENT ZONING: A2, Agricultural Estate District ACREAGE: 90 acres s ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - A2, northeast BF District W-A2 Q E-A2 �--� S- A2 121 WATER AND SEWER: Not available. PHYSICAL CHARACTER: Wetland and flood plain on most of the property. A portion of the property is being farmed. (I) 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Parks and Open Space and Large Lot Residential Iran (Hwy 14 -_; Ti_ aI1 .P , ornmig, ■ .... . 1,, .-,, _ , %o�JkA • T° ° urse,.,..„.. ..,.) . _ . . . e- ��Bluff ~ $'a ---, , Creek illriiii Per 1111111 .,I‘ ,_ cree6wood . 11%, . 1 41 ow . e iiirt-/ecl--- . I — e<�eQ m (_,_, _, :_ ,I ),,, Tom: �. � to � Cio�� s sive , ft". ' . ., .�5 2,2 FiyinB • ,gee' 0 ,7 { -) ----' k. ...,.,, S� 1 .,./-// ( MN Valley National ells Wildlife Refuge Lake ,69 r:f Geo°� �n� �°y. -,:i. \� City of Chanhassen II City of Shakopee Raguet Wildlife F-- Management Area ...0.- ` - s -`-�- iesa ( 11 Co O O p O O O p O O O O O r� r•1 in Tr m ,N.� r-1 O 00 - O O O i-1 1-1Ol O O O O O O O O [� N O Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 2 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY The applicants, Jeff Helstrom and Chris Bixler, are requesting approval for a Golf Improvement Center which includes a golf driving range and a chip and putt course. The property is located in the southwest corner of Hwy. 169/212 and Hwy. 101. This area is zoned A-2 Agricultural Estate District and is guided for Parks, Open Space or Large Lot Residential. A golf course/driving ranges is an interim use in the A-2 District. The subject site is located next to the Minnesota River Wildlife Management Area (see Attachments D). The Golf Improvement Center includes two driving ranges and a pitch and putt course. The driving ranges are 100 yards wide by 300 yards deep and 65 yards wide by 290 yards deep. The pitch and putt course comprises 9 holes with the longest hole at 40 yards. All but a portion of the parking and the existing home are in the Flood Plain. The southern 1/3 and the number six hole of the pitch putt are in the wetland. When this project was first presented to the staff, the two lots adjacent to Hwy. 169/212 were shown as future commercial. The land south of Hwy. 169/21 is never proposed to have sewer. The majority of the property is in the flood plain and good planning practices are to avoid development in the area. Following are the applicable ordinances: • Section 20-576 Interim Use in the A-2 District - Golf driving ranges with or without miniature golf courses. Section 20-265 Standards for Golf Driving Ranges. • Section 20-381-384 Interim Use Permits. • Section 20-232 Conditional Use Permit- General Issuance Standards. • Section 20-351 Conditional Use Permit for activity in the General Flood Plain. • Section 20-407 20-418 Wetland Alteration and Permitting. This application proposes the northern portion of the property as future development. The area which is not in the flood plain is where the parking and golf center should be developed. This site could be developed with less impact to the flood plain and the wetland. The driving range nets should be eliminated from the site because of the potential impacts of potential terrestrial and migratory wildlife in the management area. The golf activity should not propose intensification of buildings in the flood plain. BACKGROUND The subject site is approximately 90 acres and the vast majority of the property is in the flood plain of the Minnesota River. This means the site is subject to periodic flooding. This area is defined by the FEMA map as a Zone A., which means the flood elevation has not been established (see Attachment A). The applicant must apply to FEMA for a map amendment. Golf Improvement Center April29, 1998 Page 3 There is a creek(Assumption Seminary Creek) on site and a large wetland located on the eastern portion of the site which is under the jurisdiction of the DNR. While the creek is not adjacent to the Golf Improvement Center,branches of the creek are found throughout the subject site. The city's wetland inventory shows this area as a natural wetland which requires a 75' principal structure setback and a 40 foot buffer strip. The subject site is one of the few parcels not included in the Minnesota River"Raquet"Wildlife Management Area (see Attachment D). The subject site is in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management primary zone. This entire property has been identified as an area whose development pattern needs to be sensitive to the watershed, including the wetland and the creek. The City Council has not adopted the Bluff Creek Overlay District but has approved the first reading. The management plan did an inventory of some of the natural resources in the area including vegetation and wildlife (see Attachment E). The site is a farmstead where a home and barn still remain on the property. A portion of the property has been farmed although the limits of the farming activity is limited to the water level. Last April (1997), the majority of the property was flooded when the Minnesota River flooded. The home on the site is proposed to be remodeled for an office and the barn is proposed to be used as a maintenance building. Both of these buildings need to meet building codes and the issues raised by the Building Official. Access to the site is via a new traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 101 and Hwy. 169/212. A drive access to the existing home was put in place by MnDOT during installation of the signal. WETLANDS Existing Conditions The proposed site is surrounded by natural wetlands with DNR protected wetlands 10-222w to the west and 10-221w to the east. These wetlands are part of larger wetland basin which surrounds the site on three sides all sides. These wetlands have been classified natural wetland by the city although adjacent wetlands have been affected by the agricultural activities. They are connected to flood plain basins along the Minnesota River which have important natural features such as calcareous fens,trout streams and wildlife habitat. The site itself is currently used for agricultural activities and it is difficult to determine if the crop rows are within the wetland boundary. The applicant has provided the city with a delineation report which was completed in March,which is not the ideal time to determine wetland boundaries. In fact,the report states that identified boundaries should be verified in the growing season. The city would propose that the applicant cease all farming activities and allow native vegetation to grow to determine an accurate wetland boundary. Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 4 Wetland Impacts The proposed plan shows the back 1/3 of the nets within the current delineated wetlands. It is the opinion of the city that construction of these driving areas are considered as wetland impacts. The westerly driving area will require mowing and maintenance for the retrieval of golf balls. The easterly driving area will have a net underneath, but mowing and wetland alterations will also be necessary to keep plants from growing into the nets. This activity also takes away the wildlife habitat,which is an important function of wetlands especially in this area. Ordinarily the city acts as the LGU(Local Governing Unit) for wetland impacts within the city. However, since the wetland impacts associated with this project are greater than 3 acres (3.5 acres), the jurisdiction and regulatory agency becomes the Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant will have to apply for an individual permit from the Before the applicant proceeds with such a permit, it should be noted that the first consideration in reviewing any wetland alteration permits that wetland impacts are avoided if possible. The applicant can reduce the impacts and possibly avoid all impacts by moving the driving ranges north towards Hwy. 212, into the upland area. Wetland mitigation If the wetland impacts remain over 3 acres,the Army Corps of Engineers will determine the required mitigation as part of their individual permit process. This mitigation must, at a minimum, satisfy the State of Minnesota's required 2 to 1 replacement ration,but will most likely be more restrictive. Wetland impacts will also be based on the revised wetland delineation. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL . The site, for the most part, has been employed in agricultural use in the past. There are areas of trees and vegetation which will be impacted by the grading. Minimal grading is proposed to develop the parking lot, golf tees and greens. A landscape earth berm approximately two feet high is proposed along Trunk Highway 212. Most of the grading activities are proposed within the flood plain which is typically flooded in the spring. The fill proposed within the flood plain to develop the golf greens and tees is proposed to be mitigated on site. Approximately 6,500 cubic yards of material is proposed to be excavated and filled within the flood plain boundaries. Importing or exporting material for site development is not anticipated except for construction of the parking lot. The plan denotes a couple of trees proposed to be saved within or very close to the proposed parking lot facilities. This may be a little unrealistic without transplanting the trees first_ The site generally sheet drains from the north to the south into the backwaters of the Minnesota River valley. Approximately 75%of the site is subject to annual flooding. Given the use, a high amount of chemical fertilizers may be used on the greens and driving tees. From a water quality standpoint, all the runoff will eventually be directed into the Minnesota River valley/wetland. Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 5 Two storm water ponds are proposed to pretreat most of the storm water runoff from the site. However, both ponds are proposed within the flood plain and therefore will be subject to flooding basically defeating the purpose of a water quality pond. The proposed storm water pond in the driving range area is merely an aesthetic value and will serve little or no water quality value. The alternatives would be to relocate the one storm water pond which is proposed to pretreat runoff from the parking lot to outside of the flood plain. This may result in redesigning or relocating part of the parking lot. Another alternative would be to limit or prohibit the use of fertilizers within the flood plain. This would result in the deletion of one of the ponds. The storm water pond proposed to pretreat runoff from the parking lot will need to be located outside of the flood boundary and constructed in accordance with NURP standards. Detailed drainage calculations to verify the pond size in accordance with NURP standards will be required. The outlet control structure proposed (baffle weir structure) will need to be replaced with an outlet control structure in accordance with the City's detail plate number 3109. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water service is not available to the site. Utility service is not anticipated to be provided to this property or for that matter any property south of Hwy. 169/212. The existing septic mound should be evaluated to see if it is functioning properly. An alternative mound site will also need to be located and preserved prior to any construction activities commencing. ISTS sites. Chanhassen City Code, 18-40(2)g, requires two ISTS sites when property is subdivided. The intent is to have an alternate site for use in the event of the failure of the ISTS on the primary site. Although this property is not being subdivided, a change in use from residential to commercial is being proposed. It is important to have an alternate site for a number of reasons. 1. Estimating sewage flow for a dwelling is straightforward; estimates for commercial enterprises are more difficult. Failure of the ISTS due to overloading may render the existing ISTS site unusable. 2. Should the existing ISTS be too small, and alternate site may provide room for expansion. 3. Should the primary site be damaged during initial construction, the alternate site will be available with minimal disruption. 4. Should the primary site be damaged later,a new ISTS can be installed with less disruption of the business. Sewage flow. As noted earlier, sewage flow determination for commercial establishments is a more difficult process than that for residences. The applicant should have a licensed site evaluator and designer submit system sizing requirements for the anticipated flows based on the requirements of Individual Sewage Treatment System Standards, Chapter 7080. The evaluation and design will be necessary before establishing final site plans in order to assure the availability of the area necessary for the ISTS sites. Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 6 STREETS Access to the site is from Trunk Highway 212 at a signalized intersection. Currently, there is a 24-foot wide bituminous driveway from Trunk Highway 212 servicing the existing dwelling. The plans propose a parking lot with future parking expansion capabilities. There are no landscape islands proposed to break up the sea of asphalt. Staff recommends adding some landscape islands. City Code 20-1118 typically requires establishments of this nature to have paved parking areas and drive aisles with concrete curb and gutter or bituminous curbs to direct runoff into a storm water drainage collection system. However, given the nature of the use, staff believes it would be appropriate to allow sheet drainage across the parking lot and only install curbing along the south side of the parking lot to direct stormwater runoff into an underground storm sewer system to convey the water to the pond, thus eliminating the potential erosion on the banks of the pond. SITE PLAN REVIEW The existing home is proposed to be remodeled and used for an office and the existing barn is proposed to be used as an maintenance building. The standards for golf ranges states that buildings shall not exceed 800 square feet and be painted an earth tone. There is not enough information on the building at this time to ensure compliance with this condition. Staff is unable to provide findings on the site plan until additional information on lighting, remodeling of the existing buildings (restaurants as a part of the club house is not a permitted use), signage,and impacts of the driving range nets. Building code requirements The occupancy classification of the existing building will be changed from an R-3 occupancy to a B or M occupancy. The building code requires a building be brought up to code when a change in its use occurs. Likely areas where code deficiencies may occur include, exiting,accessibility, access to other levels,and separations. Accessibility requirements may include site issues that should be addressed before site plans are finalized. Building issues can be resolved during the building code plan review process. Accessibility. The submitted plans do not indicate an accessible route from the parking lot to the accessible building entrance. Accessible parking is also shown incorrectly. An eight foot wide van access aisle and signage is required; two accessible parking stalls are required; accessible signage is required at the head of parking stalls and access aisles. Section 20-110 of the City Code states the Planning Commission and the City Council shall consider compliance with the following: 1. Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guidelines, including the comprehensive plan,official road mapping and other plans that may be adopted; 2. Consistency with this division; Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 7 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 neighboring developed or developing area; 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. Creations of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site feature,with special attention to the following; • an internal sense of order for the buildings and uses on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants,visitors and general community; • the amount and location of open space and landscaping; • material, textures, colors and details of construction as a expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and uses and; • vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, with of interior drives and access pints, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. 6. Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through the 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. 7. Within the HC districts, consistency with the purpose, intent and standards of the HC districts. LANDSCAPING Minimum canopy coverage requirements for the proposed development is 10% , or 2.07 acres. Existing canopy coverage for the site is 8.5%, or 1.76 acres. According to plans, the applicant is proposing to remove all canopy coverage outside of wetland areas. Since the applicant is removing canopy coverage in excess of what is allowed by ordinance, multiplier of 1.2 is used to calculate the required replacement plantings. The required minimum canopy coverage of 90,169 sq. ft. (2.07acres) times 1.2 equals 108,203 sq. ft. or 2.48 acres. One replacement tree provides 1,089 of canopy coverage, therefore the applicant will be required to plant 99 trees within the proposed development. A buffer yard planting will be required along T.H. 212. According to city ordinance, buffer yard 'B' will be required at a 30' standard. For every 100', one overstory tree, two understory trees, and two shrubs will be required. Frontage along T.H. 212 measures approximately 575 feet. Minimum required buffer yard planting totals are 6 overstory trees, 12 understory trees, and 12 shrubs. The applicant's landscape plan meets the minimum requirements for the buffer yard plantings. Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 8 SIGNAGE The applicant is proposing a 64' by 16' high sign. The ordinance only permits a monument sign 24 square feet in area and 5 feet high in the A-2 District. Anything larger requires a variance. INTERIM USE PERMIT The purpose and intent of the Interim Use Permit is: 1. To allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is obtained or while the permanent location is under construction, and 2. To allow a use that is presently acceptable but that with anticipated development will it be acceptable in the future. Section 20-382 of the city Code state"an application for an IUP must include at a minimum a site plan that clearly illustrates the following: proposed land use, building and functions, circulation and parking areas, planting areas and treatment, sign locations and type, lighting, the relationship of the proposed project to neighboring uses, environment impacts and demand for municipal services." The planning commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the council shall issue interim permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: 1. Meets the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in section 20-232 of the City Code, which are: • Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. • Will be consistent with the objective of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. • Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. • Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. • Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the person or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. • Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. • Will not involve activities, processes, material equipment and conditions of operations that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise smoke, fumes, glare, odors rodents, or trash. Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 9 • Will nor result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenice of historic features of major significance. • Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. • Will not depreciate surrounding property values. • Will meet the standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. 2. Conforms to the zoning regulations 3. The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district 4. The date of the event that will eliminate the use and can be identified with certainty. 5. The use will not impose additional costs on the public to take the property in the future; and 6. The use agrees to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for permission of the use. Section 20-384 states that an interim use shall terminate on the happening: 1. The date stated in the permit; 2. Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued; 3. Upon a change in the city's zoning regulations which renders the use nonconforming. There is insufficient information on the impacts of the driving range nets and the wetland delineation to give a recommendation at this time. Staff is recommending as the RGU that the applicant complete a discretionary Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) to determine the environmental affects of the Golf Improvement Center on the wildlife and natural features of the site. Standards for golf driving ranges with or without a miniature golf course: 1. The location of the driving range is limited to being adjacent to TH 5 and TH 212 and access must be from a collector or arterial witch leads to TH 5 or TH 212. 2. Hours of operations shall be from sunrise to sunset. 3. Provision of adequate parking areas and submission of landscaping plan in conformance with article VIII of the zoning ordinance(section 20-1124). 4. Building on the site may not exceed eight(800) square feet and shall be painted in earth tones. General Flood Plain Section 20-351 of the City Codes states that a conditional use permit shall be issued by the city council in conformity the with provisions of this chapter prior to the erection, addition or alteration on any building, structure or land,prior to the change of a nonconforming use and prior to the placement of fill or excavation of materials within the flood plain. 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. 2. Will be consistent with the objective of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. • Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 10 3_ Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing t existing or planed neighboring uses. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the person or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. Will not involve activities, processes, material equipment and conditions of operations that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise smoke, fumes, glare, odors rodents, or trash. 8. Will nor result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenice of historic features of major significance. 9. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. 10. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. 11. Will meet the standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission table this item based on the following: 1. Staff needs additional information on compatibility with surrounding uses and the impacts of improving buildings in the flood plain as well as amending the FEMA map defining the flood line. 2. There is insufficient information on the impacts of the driving range nets and the wetland delineation to give a recommendation at this time. Staff is recommending as the RGU that the applicant complete a discretionary Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to determine the environmental affects of the Golf Improvement Center on the wildlife and natural features of the site. 3. Staff is unable to provide findings on the site plan until additional information on lighting, remodeling of the existing buildings(restaurants as a part of the club house is not a permitted use), signage, and impacts of the driving range nets. ATTACHMENTS 1. The subject site is located next to the Minnesota River Wildlife Management Area (see Attachments A & B). A. FEMA map as a Zone A Golf Improvement Center April 29, 1998 Page 11 B. Zoning map. C. Land use map. D. Wildlife Management area map. E. Bluff Creek Management Plan inventory F. Application G. Acorn Environmental Consultants, Wetland Delineation Report dated April 2, 1998. H. Memo from Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer dated April 30, 1998. I. Memo from Steve Kirchman, Building Official dated April 28, 1998. i o � 1 I . ATTACHMENT B c 0 0 0 » n n e - n n n n n CITY OF � 9101 _-- CHA NHASSEN 9200 930: 5400 _. ZONING MAP 5500 9603 9700 RR Rural Residential District 9100 RSF Single Family Residential District 557:R4 Mixed Low Density Residential District 10000 • R12 High Density Residential District =0100 omminEno PUDR Planned Unit Devel./Residential District 1023D 10300 PUD Planned Unit Development District 10400 A2 Agricultural Preservation District 10500 CBD Central Business District 10630 BH Highway & Business District :0700 BF Fringe Business District 10100 10900 BG General Business District M 11000 BN Neighborhood Business District 11100 IOP Industrial Office Park District 1100 • OI Office & Institutional District 11300 NE Natural Environment Lake 11400 RD Recreational Development Lake — o - HC-1 - Hwy 5 Overlay District 1 n N HC-2 - Hwy 5 Overlay District 2 __ fag" r '' r�; ;:.-- r�'° RD PUDR , '.., ',—ii jba__=--: Ia. -_ed" J. •• f Lak Susan P,acc ....II_ S ✓, E bfarsh La kc _ ..,►°" PUD =�_ -� • a v.n• !!!a�lr.n - off , ..... Z PuDE ---- t v R4 RSii6 I A w,..„ _ -- - 511 : .. . d ,......\ M RR o�,..r" �•,�-�� RSF A2 L man Blvd(G R 16) a . RD PUDR _ _ La 1'r P ! Pilei� at w a tA2 o f— t k ...n E ew t ° �tSf\II(H.+v 14� f1 4,. n�.a.. � R `°� RR — _, .�_ - -4— _ r.....1 „ — 1 44 Tell I °`.4 .... W" Oft Ifg . a"`-tt W..F I • I ea Lane la. . Rd _ _ - t'' .— • tat RR 5 212 F o6 _ Q� 1S l�F/J — 1' Lc — r�- Ricc . ll Lr�kc -–.--_--—_ IQ. +. ppm - - � - - _ t�� A2 , OP., �11 9 .o0C CITY OF ATTACHMENT C CHANHAS SEN 9! 9400 2000 LAND USE PLAN 9500 9600 9700 9400 9900 Residential - Large Lot* * 1000 0 • (2.5 acre minumum 1/10 acre outside of MUSA) :0100 �' J Residential - Low Density 10200 �� (Net Density Range 1.2 - 4 u/Acre) 10300 r� 1 Residential - Medium Density 10400 (Net Density Range 4 - 8 u/Acre) 10500 ▪ Residential - High Density 10600 (Net Density Range 8 - 16 u8/Acre) 10700 Commerical 10600 10900 Office/Industrial N 11000 Office 11100 . Parks/Open Space 11200 11300 {_ Public/Semi-Public 11400 Mixed Use CI MUSA LINE N Proposed T.H. 212 D o C h h SCALE 1:24000 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 FEET . • .......•.... -.,-..„ .,..,.. , 1 ......,,-•--..m._. 111111; ° i. - .• --•,:e .\ ; 7........-.........&N. .....- . •_ . •. -• •----.•- ---F-4at, . .. ..,....•,•11•1461.6 a/.1.• Anc......,,........... ...11.47114,,O.NNIV_:"--4.114:' 11F.P41111 ll ......,.....--WqrP-- -mat:7.,. : :••:.-.y.0 • • • •--,..0 . • 0•1111.. !'•,, ... : .. . • 1/4„:ii,, --%e V.,:::is• , 1 g o 11,,„, ., _ ,._ /7:11.Irl...,..-*i_ .. _ 16.._,N. ...„...- s • ,.„••• IV_ II III . •!-...... ..9,... .-f. •• .-.....-_,,-...-,a. i.4.....,4._,...... t ........ .%.,41,, :Mr.-. • .e. ' :...... .„,....14 -.r...41-.1-1= f -••----.. ----- gr: f....-, ,:; La k c S u.sa n .._ _ .-•..•r_--,,,,.........;,.__,,,...-., 11..........--..f........74---....)=.............ZO.....,:l.....:!.,.......'"1-- ...........5.1 ffar..a...............,...... .,....,..11,...411,....1110,..0,•••=7.,..069,0/. 40•11 .....,,,naa•laull1”1.01•• ISSIVOIM.MinKer...,.......FM•1011%. . ...,..X,-- ,==...”114.1Mitlaai h 1 a k c ii II Ii .......-.....,-.....•••:..............., , 4 Ittnrillm r-r.tr.t•-•- iv. """----1" ,.... .....t,,..= a T S - 4•••••ts•se•Amtwa,.••••-...1.•..e...r.,- ,. ••••••••,..••••,,,,r,•....r....,..,...mii, wremoureagmerrisonnndrAMS. '._, '.1"... ,..--74'._1 ...WNW ...~odstaw, andlaw.4111011,—. 1•14.0•4/1”1 .4•11M 1..../=.....lIcri;iiit?9 II j --- —r... --- .. 1 Aareinr."1/4p.I.,,......,•,roomames••...••••H . , ,,,„Imge — 2:::agewrinie-Ltigitrie.• p ..dr . .11.1.1:41.1Martiai. ;%1'.1..••,....i_. r=7-.11 , ....... 6.611.5m.-.1-1-111 111.16.-...611,117,6 .....,•11.1166•••• Ailifv,. ..,............_....„ 49, •••..,,.—______............... ..„_,...,....-.: Noillr:•••••••• •-e.1' T..3=.-.....2‘mme tWt'e,-- 'stage - '........=.,-.:4. • • ..p:,...— --• .......z= . •911 .4••••••...sein.dgi _ ,.., ....leueri- gmtildne.weam.ar.:4==- .7,3:=0-"Aar. --A,, . 4.••••,,••••• •t.'"""'"•:1 .• 1.,e....,-,,,,-t_ _........- _.....,,,.........1-, ,Z.,••••.............row.. - 'go,..,..1.2====1, , A/ 1111lit . '",.ti--"1""".......;'. . .•' '''-' ...,-----,..;,„,-.,...„...,.....„...,kra.....-wrz.............. 4.0.:4G.,• . -,:.•...--tim.C .:.-. - jle Adinery.wartm="°_, AtirrApar A. : - 1 -......a...0....94 .=,:---"'"="--.-ir-...r.z.--'41rACtr`Z.".m. ' :wit.ba.'"'.'""""6-a.s...... .- .... ......... ,--mingii= '........,.....r.......... momme- .iraw....--....940,...--,.,...... .-...1., . - -_ •Adv..,....a.a........... olli L.//40311M.ONAMMII.N..VIRESNIIMEMINER r •ig_-Vedb:01.,..."14111 :011110111'• . ..x11114.111 ....im... .„..... ..... •-i : .. , :EVA*1741141-0.174 Cr.=.1='_,.,....--7.,," -- .-""""'"Zy',.-::Gr.: . ,•••..... ...'"r"Fr -... 71'1'72 'II I liNsir.g..~.......r.s..........E1.5.i,i.)h. N:• - '7.: .•••=74,4m.s.zr...„1,..„ . =m+..s..... ...... .. % '''I'lli,13=*.rar."'"""""......iiiN,,,,...„.,;,,.,.7:' ,WE;;;71.-4..=0- k...... ""..... ................. .. •• am-immom. swew=."•-•'-- ...einnon. ...................s............. As..-manows.. ----,==.0, IlliNim;•.-..-4.:„.:.,:--V" _,,L'Ial. - • .-,.......e...==Neitzziez...-.4 -9--, /A 1 1 . .. .,.. . _as m.r.=•ill.•••is h.. h....miakv•rw, m. m,p..„............,.o•••..--r.-.s.mi..,. „ir ......1 ilm•--- an r..•, full".• --L--* g•-?•!- --._' ; .;r6PGArier..rf:AFAirimmat „=--"*—a. '''''''-" ---...,M; , AIIKAFA •..i•4,,_.•t•A..••• 11MilminimaimINdsommMillin drinownemamo...........~ ; ar,ory:ArArA n r.or..8•-a r A•71rAl/4••••a e im••••••••mine=•1111111all. -.1,AW.0. .m••IN,/II Air 11,11•A r AI er.AIAI MOM—1. 1110.1/101. 1... womihnitIOSP. • .,. , r i .....2,trar,„11..,,,...„.:FA.,,,,,.. A.0.4.,-A rar_.,...„ - -I-r____,__.__ __. .-, • ,,, ,:),,r,, ,,. ........,—..-..f.,,,,,...„.# •111;" „r„,—....j.A 6•11•1•11•MIMMINNIMI ..6. f ri•::E,f,t-4, p,I : -.- /sr IP:ArAirif 4.11, ....JAM ditrAwri Ill. ........... ........." 1715 / _ 4 t: -...4 F Y• ' ;- - ..-_-17,:,.1-,4,4.-crift,r dal =...r.,,=IF'It i:f..= _ 41" .ifor,r=== .............me !-!.. ,........„_.-7- •• -..,:r,..ord„........7./r.r.ir-Arcirir..i7A f.A ii...it iimm.sm iii it mz•°Z. ' •,...v -.. --,•:2,=.. arairm ' 7... • Y-=` .',,, ,.'"'. , • La k ./,40:ollieywn ..... ....,..,:...,._:,.....,...,.:. ...z.,. ..... • _ t..1.1 1: .,if I" ''-'•.-..r..r..01,01,•.. ......" .C......st Ad •••••• ir- .:•".. •1 mr-- . ., , • 4 t- -11,16,16,11•X#6•17.9. , Aii,a1,•.4.-, ',I MIIIIMANNION•• INEMIIMEN.i:. ' • ••- :,....--Orj / i, ,,,. . .......r.r. ,Ine, _....A edrA, , .1r41:;•••••••• • le,. - . .....IO.,,Ic .9:411,.p,11• 1r4FIP.io moo. ............... ..-, ...Som.. i,7: Wit 1.••- , . , ,••••••.............:--ari:e AfArar4=," - -,._____-----•,',:_r•...... ..."•___,. • _ -0 ,:ri:OAPPA%r•----• • • ' r - - ..=•=...114. 'IMP , .7-r...rimy.WM IMIMMINI OM, 'Cti ?$#PF 0050 7r 41 .": •Immr411.011101.IMMIIIIIImr., C d d4000.00400i0;, .: Orr ZOIIMMEN='11= zrj .,....=.. -2 VOradhlt0111150040is : ' '- '-' .',,- Al I r.AI Mb #05,02ribir F 00FA00AF;, •' ':• •.M.1111 mil ••••••••••-• fillier0e,100V 00.00100 - - . .L.,7:_.!4.= . ••=16.6,111 ., r 0 0 I•1. ...1.:•'4;1:, .....".•'',. .111...MI #11117141.C.:.';',1!;4$1111:1:1114:11001.1. 4pi:7' ,.... :16.16, • 1.1. 1121iny ,0•11.4•404,„,•„,,,„„,-,,,,, ,,_-„........,,,,,,N...„,..*,..k,„:„\\‘ ...0 ,,,,,,,,,.,„,t,2„,„„................ ...., ,.. ___ „,........... y 0 •irt,-.T.:,-.,::4 t,,t.,:,..1.-*i.1 p.;:"..w.r1r-e•-•,o-:.! . am& 01011411 " .-. •P_,:.t...::-.. ..-77•-,....sr.-•!'1....,:,,,,I1h. 0 PO t'-'.‘-' ' - ''' '''''...'"'"......- . '.'.'''..'"'-- .N\...'1% ": 2"..'r.""n• W.n n."1"471 kn%1%&..N'NNII\NIti N.4411:1%':.:4INIX44k1;hliSV4 Ni... Ix. •,... 1,-. •,,„,„,.... •-.......• ...swear...._: . ..tL....asserdwursneVii...........diriiii Iiiiiiiihrit. 1116. '141k,,,,.......AN.. -iiilmda Wanda '...Imilsilm,Id: MEMO 7.7'.....!. : man...............=.=:::::::::::::::" 11111,1••,=.,,... Nillk 'NV.X111114.. I ••••••••\1 . •••••••••= . • SIBS•••••••••IMM ••••66 a EV.66.......'IS.........V 6 ZS I.11C..........la liki.N. 11/4 ••••It. AN.O. 11 1\= --........elrirmtrirma•es•amsna-ssi NE PI KM....... X • x Nib, , ..._..... ...a k..0". .11•1111 .1 MOMS&'" :* . . : ..../1..SIMMS.•IIMMOMIHILIVIIIIILlan *"." . 1•X‘XX 16 Sk --...... ..,,,,,•...- ...........6.....6.......••••••6114/ZUG ArNSIONNIMIP111 IIII....adi Sh• 111 "."''"6".: _Z ... - .........ihNih\\\N\, Xsiii:ii, ati . =....1: , sii. Vmainds.mgd a•• morn dreamosigemewers..............am•••••k\N‘Va. --1\--- dilian"M: .__o....111•••••• 17...... .. . .....mim..11.- lil• ‘Nih7"..""14.k:'--...",: .`',..t.T.:7::_..,„::4:-...:;,-1- .....7 4,-..-.;:s.------:4:"7:•ItNiZX.v:IN.,H111111‘killi. .-...............s. ......,,::.''''''''''.1'''''''''''''''.1''''' N 'N ,,. 4.c,0 1,,,.---?..---• --a._-r::= • Nh. .11h• _.‘111,--1111111i s.-. •.4.,i-e,"4' — J491111111 /111!!:17*S241:e3F$Si g11111111 I P •-,-,...-...--,.. ---..„ -c7,....w - •.'. ' ' ' .- . - :";'''---..N.:•...,--,,-,,,N......"'.-;,,z:.:0..:,:.:77z,-,:v• F2/r.- •0 0 :.:.:: :-. . :.,_ . , :._ ,. ... .. .::_-_..._. i. 1.,._._,.;_-.-_.: i. .. .:_..: .::,-,:-..-4.:. .-t.„-z,„-.,..;.,4N%\.,„..,_:1:i...,-..- L a,i., 0/1 . - • • • _ .. . . ._ - . . . , . .. . . . .:„ po/ . . . 1 1 • ., . -, . (1111 I . ..'at! •- .• .. • ... ...-... .. ... . • ..:::. .. , .i .....,. . .., . ,. . . -, .. . .. .- . . . .. . . . ,.. . •,-...,..-A...., - • ....4.-.- SirIV.:41-4 _,.it...),:,,,,..•,....7:::.,.."{-. 44..2-..N.:NI...,..•Vt: Ai 444.21 0.;,--- -.. . -.--_- -. . . . --..- .:. . -_ — . . . , . o ......- . . ll11111°' - - - . - - . • .. . . . . .. • . . .. ,.. -: . 1 g ..-v. -,.:.,-,..:-...,...,,i_:-..,. . .---:. . .- .-... .-. .. .r.„..: . -.. r • • .. .... .,,.„:„...„, . ... •.:.,, ... .... . ,._.,. .:......:,....„.„:„......... .. ... ...,.... . ....,. • :,....: ,..„.„.„..„:„...,, ,,.•.•...„.„,...,,....,„:...;..:„.„......,..,..,..,......„-„....,„....„..,....„:„..,.. ' , , ..,.., „„:„..„,...,:„...4:.:.........:„ „,.:,.„.„..,_.,..„ ,,.,,..„.„..„.,..:2.,,. ,,........ ......_... ..; ,.. .,,,.„......„.,,,,,,„,„,..,.........„:„...:.„„., .- . .., ,...,..,,,..... ._.,'''"'N.01/401,‘, '-‘44•.7"0--* .'fiN••'..t.:*:,;.:•-'1,."'.- .-••••-7, Viit4z-rz4-4,st,V...-* v-------\ v.,..-,,,cs..*•,-• .,,,v -..• ....--,•:-4:::-..-.4. ,..6..••:-,,,,..,-....,••••,...,_ r.-s.:czg' _ IF I �► 1 ,�i "" i ll r. 1 ::4,ra' arta € f \ ) e "d {�r a ,610ATTACHMENT D • -- ,i'/, — ;:•' . ....... -„., 4--, i • 1 4 .-- i .,.. . _, T - \ „ .. c” Or Lyman blvd K.R.18) t I—? 1.. � `. �... �'. / I Qo /` ,:: I S.ada... Lake a f jtl.asats Riley :11 swots 1 O . � _ Q \ ..,t ,rte; � •...a;�a.rx..^..r... oC _ • ii E 11 c I / V < t" / / I 1 j �r p 1 / ` K'. • M6e Stet Eu�� �1. , 1 I ; coy,, �4 U� R. �I / -7- ' fl."' V \i Er i ZTail(Hw --/\.e. . ty 141 '`�+ ` -7...-- �/ � /�••�� � Elowgy E� z to r • • IL..� _ •� a( .. 'a�'' N�rH. p�� 9.4.1°. i ' ! ■ 91a3 OO t 211 - \ 7■•!!a••k••ltas• .` _ �` _ µ t 2:10•11e_lk!t.,:; a �•e� '. �\ ctiI � 7____:1„=___,:,. i Ear w_� C,d''., U�LanePe�CQ %_=. 4II n _ � . F--- �� . �Z11� NRice i '`' � _ -. Vall•y Ha[Soaa2�G� 9 Lake I --- `-^'��ti,��` r. __- � MildZifs Yefu •_ J � a�. . ,e1 i 1. ,/ - - ,..is.,_, .� Rah ir 7 4. -^;-.scµ -rn-,�r<.ae-aa-xc;u.csn+a,:nnrrr>s-".�ra�-�n.T�irJ!-::<::�.-.r_�->�»�itr..—.:-�a���i-a: CR,,��C�s _i� ' a, __ ', city of Sh•toP■• 17 r 1s.Ti•t Wildlife I ;---1 f I Management Area _ ; i.�-a r aQ �trrnli . ..,.,%.•;.,......,°, �es°‘ ky e o e e e o e .o o eean o eo oe o o •e e e e o nti c - o . H ee c en n .i .. ti - n '.i T e r N nI I I 1O I I 1 I 1 oI --- I _rEoida6el_»mm'_.m_rj)0__ __31_m_mm+evmdI_Due kmm._a-Is smsawm:m_ _m__uo minligNio_pastimid u.mum)_p ©„nuaW_imu H_-13&nom—,xpaddV .14 k_k . }, \ }! t \ \j� - u E | -: 2734 f ; }}/ 2}! r,{. • 4t- ¢ §.� } §\ \ _ ® 4.1 `{k }(� ,\k!$; I ¥ . 7 d . \ ., ¢ :!f )fa /7I�/}} /" I-a |l(g2Ei ! k}§ })}o.ƒ4\ & ! $ c \ !mss -11 . }}}-}}. { } (73. )% )\} ,� = } §ƒ k}-}}$%}f7 ( _ -. / : _ _ - !c ; ` �! ` §!s£i ; § ( !!;$ ! {}- / `-}}! Si711 -15. !741&1. {j - -= --., . !! « ;« i!\,%;! ; - I% t=: ! §kl -ilillE!! § :Z; ._=,,:$641 ! ,a ?„,„i„@ , ,;lri , \ , , ;_ , � .-_ � : 4 @, ,_ !_ » rf /)/ \ } ;\)/\ .:f kE /} \) {! , E! |!=_- - '1.l ,. . _ "'-' '- - . _ - ,_L.L. . z)!)\;e!lciao !}d!\}/ Pill ; ) , ; :.3_\ / ! !1. !{f! ; ! t! ;$= !2' !ac ` @§ |{ -f.)\$$\/ %k/ §} �\; meq-o.!■a ! } I }k . [ APPENDIX B CITY OF CHANHASSEN -BLUFF CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDOR WILDLIFE SPECIES LISTING FOR WETLAND COMMUNITIES SPECIES COMMONLY OBSERVED OR LIKELY TO BE PRESENT Mammals: Muskrat(Ondatra zibethicus) Masked shrew(Sorex cinereus) Common raccoon(Procyon lotor) Northern short-tailed shrew(Blarina brevicauda) Beaver(Castor canadensis) Meadow vole(Microtus pennsylvanicus) Mink(Mustela vison) Meadow jumping mouse(Zapus hudsonius) 111 Striped skunk(Mephitis mephitis) 4 Birds: Canada goose(Branta canadensis) Mallard(Anas platyrhynchos) Swamp sparrow(Melospiza georgiana) Red winged blackbird(Agelaigus phoeniceus) Sora(Porzana carolina) Least bittern(Ixobrychus exilis) O American coot(Fulica americana) Virginia rail(Rallus limicola) Marsh wren(Cistothorus palustris) Black tern(Chlidonias niger) Common yellow throat(Geothlypis triches) Yellow headed blackbird(X.xanthocephalus) American goldfinch(Carduelis tristis) II Amphibians/reptiles Tiger salamander(Ambystoma tigrinum) Green frog(Rana clamitans) 41 American toad(Bufo americanus) Northern Lepard frog(Rana pipiens) Spring peeper(Pseudacris crucifer) Painted turtle(Chrysemys pitta) Chorus frog(P.riseriata) Eastern garter snake(Thamnophis sirtalis) ENDANGERED,THREATENED OR SPECIAL CONCERN SPECIES THAT MIGHT OCCUR IN THE VICINITY OF BLUFF CREEK 111 Mammals: (None listed) I' BIrds: American bittern(Botaurus lentiginosus) Common moorhen(Gallinula chloropus) it . Amphibians/reptiles Blanding's turtle(Emydoidea blandingii) Snapping turtle(Chelydra serpentina) el Ili Bluff Creek Water5Gied Natural Re5oLIrce5 Management Flag . --- ,; 1 I . . 1 APPENDIX A I CITY OF CHANHASSEN-BLUFF CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDOR 111 WILDLIFE SPECIES LISTING FOR UPLAND FORESTED NATURAL COMMUNITIES ISPECIES COMMONLY OBSERVED OR LIKELY TO BE PRESENT Mammals:• White-tailed deer(Odocoileus virginianus) Eastern chipmunk(Tamius striatus) Gray fox(LI ricyon cineoargenteus) S.flying squirrel(Glaucomys volans) I Red fox(Vulpes vulpes) Common raccoon(Procyon lotor) Gray squirrel(Sciurus carolinensis) Masked shrew(Sores cinereus) Eastern cottontail(Sylvilagus floridrrnus) Eastern mole(Sca!opus aquaticus) Deer mouse(Odocoileus vrvgimmnus) N.short-tailed shrew(Blaring brevicauda) ICoyote(Canis latrans) 1 Birds: Black capped chickadee(Panus utricapillus) Eastern wood-pewee(Contopus wens) White breasted nuthatch(Sian carolinensis) Grt crested flycatcher (Myairchu scrinitus) Blue jay(Cyanocitta crisrata) Yellow-throated vireo(Vireo flavifrons) Downy woodpecker(Picoides pubescens) Red-eyed vireo(Vireo olivaceus) I Great horned owl(Bubo virginianus) Barred owl(Strix varia) Ovenbird(Seiurus aurocapillus) Scarlet tanager(Piranga olivacea) Least flycatcher(Empidonax minimus) Veery(Catharus fuscescens) I Wild turkey(Meleagris gallopavo) Wood thrush(Hylocichla mustelina) Red-tailed hawk(Buten jamaicensis) Yellow bellied sapsucker(S. varius) II Amphibians/reptiles: Blue-spotted salamander(A.laterale) Eastern gray treefrog(Hyla versicolor) American toad(Bufo americanus) E.garter snake(Thamnophis sirtalis) Spring peeper(Pseudacris crucifer) Wood frog(Rana sylvatica) I ENDANGERED,THREATENED OR SPECIAL CONCERN SPECIES IITHAT MIGHT OCCUR IN THE VICINITY OF BLUFF CREEK Mammals: Eastern spotted skunk(Spilogale putoris) U Birds: Red-shouldered hawk(Buten lineatus) ULouisiana waterthrush(Sciurus motacilla) II Amphibians/Reptiles: Fox snake(Elaphe vulpina) Bullsnake(Pituophis melanoleucus) Milk snake(Lampropeltis triangulum) • Blue racer(Coluber constrictor) I .. 131Liff CreedWater5ned rlattIra] Resources Management Plan - ->,-- -,1111-.:z4til . 132.21/913 13:45:16 612-937-5739-> 612 546 1113115 Pn��C 2 Appl I CQ-f rcr CCnj USC -tLii I f Qr)6 Si+ e Plan CITY OF CHANHASSEN 880 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 85317 (812)837.1000 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Jef1' Nelstrom C^ APPLICANT:?55 ` Chrl s Six ICY OWNER: SQltid e. ADDRESS: CIO PC►'MG Eircen Inc. ADDRESS: 62/1(fi SCar-dia koad W a conA y M N 553q9'7 - /� Jf4 j4'12'0137�/r TELEPHONE: TELEPHONE (Day time)C,�(P'4�"1 I Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ Temporary Sales Permit V Conditional Use Permit 4(+CO.66 — Vacation of ROW/Easements interim Use Permit ^ Vartance Non-conforming Use Pormit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development' _ Zoning Appeal Rezoning — Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permltn Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review' $ I X Esc • • Ing Fees/Attomey Cost" $60 CUPr:PRNACNAR.WAP/Motas sn• =ounds,$400 Minor SUB) Subdivision' TOTAL FEE$5GSQ•a A list of all property owners within 500 foot of tho boundaries of tho property must be Included with the applictltion. Building motorist samples must be submitted with alts plan reviews. 'Twenty-slx full size bided copies of the plane must bo submitted,including an 8'h"X 11"reduced copy of transparenoy for eeoh plan sheet, "Escrow will be required for other applications through tho development contract NOTE-When multiple applications aro processed,the appropriate fee shall be charged for osch application. OL/21/90 13:95:35 612-937-5739—> 612 546 9885 Paye 3 PROJECT NAME 0)041'n S Cr &e noir Itqvalement C?rI eV LOCATION 1-11 \VJCv 212E rCoJ- Mins 3eu1evCfcJ LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that pa(+ D the r'Ot'th 210.00 acrCC (B&P.!to Fk)01 KtIrth�1e5t Q 1('rrEry o The SaftheasI C)Xir+ e and the ta5+• 1--tat, of the SaWt4 5k- (3uo.rt.ft•a►t ctor% 35, TovnsKip lei, Ra , - Cnry 0 s+ t.dCrlt1- a • 1 014 S• er1 • ' scuts • a • • . , the • f -r N4. Htl3hwo 1,10. 2.12. An• to' rMerty the hask4 anti ShaKope . raa.Ot (1)16 also • Kary -moot µ141104V TOTAL ACREAGE ' .. 5 ` ,D. 5r) • W (ETLANDS PRESENT X YES NO PRESENT ZONING • Per 1 C()l tulro,A Pres etr teen REQUESTED ZONING M e PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION \�' 1ca.)(tuio I REQUGl ESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION ob Ff C.oirV e REASON FOR THIS REQUEST To Cc &ki UC a QpI ' i mproJ t,Aell z acre J driv('rg rarer This application must be completed In full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by ell Information end plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application,you should confer with the Planning Department to determine tho specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all Olty requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed In my name end I am the party whom the buy should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy or Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to rrjake this application and tho fee owner has also signed this application. I wli 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, otc. with an estimate prior to any euthorization to proceed with the study, The documents and Information I have submitted aro true and correct to the best of my.knowledge. • The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within CO days due to public hearing requirements and agency review, Therefore, the city Is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. _ 4").); 2-13-q8 Slg, s - •f Appllca t • Date• • r 3-131P si'!ire or Foe Owner / o.lk')c4 Date Application Received on Fee Pald 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 appllcartt'f address. ...Lilt,... Roger A. Anderson & Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 7415 Wayzata Boulevard,Suite 107 • Minneapolis,MN 55426 • (612)546-7035 • Fax(612)546-0885 April 3, 1998 City of Chanhassen Planning Department 690 City Center Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Director of Planning RE: RSS Golf Improvement Center Ms. Aanenson, Enclosed please find the submittal package for the above proposal, including the items as listed in your letter of March 20, 1998 to RSS (Mr. Bixler and Mr. Helstrom). The following comments are offered corresponding to the items listed in your letter: 1. The 100 year flood elevation of 723.0, as provided by City Staff, has been surveyed/located in the field and is shown on the enclosed plans. Requirements per Section 20-326 through 20-380 for conditional use and grading in a flood plain will be observed. Any necessary FEMA map amendments will be applied for concurrent with the City review process and upon the City's interpretation of the regional flood elevation (per Section 20-331, board of adjustment and appeals interpretation). 2. See attached letter from Mr. Helstrom. 3. Wetland reports are enclosed for your use. 4. See Sheet 2 of 4 of the enclosed plans. 5. A site plan review is requested concurrent with the conditional use application. The application and fee is enclosed with new plan sets. Please contact our office with any questions. Respectfully submitted, Roger A. Anderson &Associates, inc. 7/Z 6,1,0 Troy J. a le, P.E. enclosures cc: RSS/Perma Green Inc. Jeff Helstrom 8276 Scandia Road Waconia, MN 55387 April 3, 1998 Ms. Kathryn R. Aaneson Planning Director City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: RSS Golf Improvement Center Conditional Use Permit Application Dear Ms. Aanenson, We received your letter regarding the additional information required for our Conditional Use Permit application. Enclosed you will find the information you requested. With regards to City Code Section 20-265, Golf Driving Ranges, our operation will be in accordance with this code, however, we will require some leniency on two of these items. Item 2 of Section 20-265 states that hours of operation shall be from sunrise to sunset. In order to be competitive with all other winter operated golf establishments, we must use a nominal amount of downcast lighting. This lighting would allow us to be open until 9:00 p.m., and would only be required during a few months of the year. This lighting issue has been discussed with both the Department of Natural Resources and with Fish and Wildlife. They have no issues with the lighting system we proposed, in addition, they helped us to modify our net system to be more visible to wildlife. The Fish and Wildlife department is also working with us to recommend the best type of net to avoid trapping any wildlife. Item 5 of Section 20-265 states that buildings on the site may not exceed 800 square feet and must be painted earth tones. Our plan includes renovating the existing building which is 986 square feet. This building is sound and it seems sensible to use it. Earth tone paint is no problem. In addition, we have implemented an organic fertilizer program and all the State agencies were happy to hear that. Mr. Bixler and myself feel strongly about building a quality Golf Improvement Center that will reflect well on the City of Chanhassen. We need your understanding on these matters to achieve this goal. Please feel free to contact me at 534-6219 if you would like to discuss this project. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, eff Helstrom Golf Imeroveme t C_nter Project Narrative Please review the enclosed plans and development schedule for the construction of a Golf Improvement Center in Chanhassen, MN. The site is located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Trunk Highways 101 and 212. This location will provide the increasing number of golfers in the southwest suburbs easy access to a number of golfing options, as well as offer a picturesque golfing facility designed to harmonize with its natural surroundings. Our overall plans include the Golf Improvement Center, a nine hole chip and putt course, a miniature golf course made of natural grass, and a practice area consisting of a dugout-style heated teeing area and a netted ball retrieval system designed for year round use. Our intentions are to provide a high quality practice center and playing facility to the growing number of golfers in the southwest suburbs. The National Golf Foundation rates Minnesota as one of the top states in the nation for golfing enthusiasts. In addition, we have developed a new concept for winter practice ranges which will make this Center very unique. Most importantly, our facility will provide a friendly environment to golfers of all skill levels, from beginner to advanced, to improve upon their skills or simply play one of our short courses. The Center's physical characteristics include the following: a clubhouse and golf shop offering food and beverage service, a year round dugout-style teeing and instructional area with nets and ball retrieval system, a nine hole chip and putt course, and a huge putting green made of natural grass for a miniature golf course. In addition, golf professionals will be readily available for lessons and video swing analysis. Owners Jeff Helstrom and Chris Bixler are both avid golfers. Chris is a native to the southwest suburbs, he ran a family business in Excelsior for 12 years, and has spent the last two years working with Multifoods, Inc. Jeff and his family moved to Minnesota in 1978. He started a lawn and landscape company called Perma Green Inc., and recently constructed a new office/warehouse in Corcoran. Jeffs company constructs and maintains landscaping in the western suburbs with strong attention to detail, beauty and the environment. Chris's experience with owning and operating a business and background in the golf industry, coupled with Jeff's construction and landscaping experience make them an excellent team to create and operate the finest Golf Improvement Center in the upper midwest. p_. .s,, _. . _,-,4: ....z..1; • • _ ` .e- ,111k..tr —-.........- • rvs * l • " •' . Gp .t" Yd. 1 , s. k i — � J _ y1 o yc,7 • Proposed Deyelsament Schedule Golgi rovement Center and Playing Courses Step 1 June 1 , 1998 A. Complete site grading, tilling and installation of irrigation system. B. Seed all tee boxes, greens, and range. C. Renovate portion of house for temporary Pro Shop, build to code with handicapped access. Step 2 July 1 , 1998 A. Build gravel parking lot. to be paved in 2001. B. Begin renovation of home for Clubhouse and Retail Pro Shop. C. June 15, 1998, open Driving Range with hitting from mats initially. Step 3 August 1 , 1998 A. Begin construction of dugout-style teeing area, netting and ball retrieval system, and lighting. Step 4 September 4, 1998 A. Grand opening. Step 5 May 1 , 1999 A. Begin construction of Chip and Putt Course. B. July 1, 1999, grand opening of Chip and Putt Course. � ? __ . _ . 1 Ball Barrier _Zr ._, _ Netting h� �` f The #1 netting used by practice ranaes across the country, The most effective way to stop doff course" balls. ;4 h t WI K i orouo to introduce the I tc Iest in txrri r n*IGr)u IE•:::Iirmlogy. '1 All new cons?ructtor•makes Wi'tek's ' • 3cII 3crrier Nett rig re mos-ad aneed .; +`. k,,,. .� `. . Gamer net o_:c_::iot.)e In.xichy`. -! ,•'-44._ .I f /6.►, i 1,.... .• ` 1 /' f, y� ; .. , ,40 I ....... rC,• !r:•._t} c_s�!i► t 4 ♦ •1 .", 4,'• Ke i .P., o �... - `. .' Y - .� tj 3*--J •,a r .i, ;14'P;. , .; '-t t!N_. f .,-$.s - —- - •. . ,r • yrs,. ;•- ' : -. • TN,�. .,ift.1.i,.. ., 94-..-.--. .4..- t. - 4i`• -31 ref.•,,I ,.• ;i.J�` � 1 { f• -s�.8 / •. ••I rt�.7 •,.....�, .:-L • tt, y.t^ . . • �', _ may, ... .i. v\# d�.•. '1.- !. _10 • '%.V- , fir- _f• 'ti {: :tF e=.,..f• $;� f•., •r•.' • �rc3^�,.;T�'.+ ,r•+. r' ,.'�•,,..,ti� • ;_�y„�`,�• o • t •• - , etc_- -••`� £: ;t ••s'+Y•' . '••• r-: _,,ts:�••h-+rMG. „N� ..,. � •'f'�'^ {.Z MY�']►,J`f�.�•�. ^'SSR • 'Y..�� �71��Jf "' `�t �. - fir., t '� r]� 3.�{i.i• -i. :tinri i •t '%„-, ,�l,,4"-t •/ 7 V ' �. -lA;� ''' .-� W".� f.4,I.. �"-'�a,,.L ,<.e � S�•t�• t' t :'. i' p ;,a`JY � AActe'- n� •, s +. .'f4 �:r•, tom • "•rak '.�i."a'aWy4ti�ir L`�.•• 11.'r,1•„« •r to ,•y�W' •.t- . . .•+�.. yr . ..ry �y S•i.s•v�i.• _• .• . .. '•7L'l iSrt.• • •#.7-k''''.4"64‘' �.r3_.. ,b'.iF- � :..�r.1`� ?r_ �'? i:.-.Fe��3zrY "...dr. i 1 / a) ! 2.-. C) EL, .p ° -E- 0 h & (1- E c 2 c E -4- d , > —1 Qc o O �' C o a_ E -co 8 4 ri:.&( , � o f �� a -L— -IA- , 2 -2,-. I \ i-- At � T .T_},, , ♦ ♦ n ° 0 \ -7 1 i 1 I , ! ...... . '00000 a l y W 'g 1 0 -'. o 9 � 1 v Q S o 7 i 000 o }� n Uco 11 O 41,1 Y D. °' co �L `O p Li U � .� Qco 00 N :1 J cV O 0 1–k) 0 El � U i co >- t at r —, , U _______ 3U 2 f, C a) 2 ,L) C k . N 4 O 5 O E c a) co r E a Ll- D 7_ — .4- 1) U c7 0 0.1 4 00 Cl) p CC 0 5 / / �' In // \�\ L 1 I _I-4 i 0 L k_ Jr- 1"-r . .. ♦ ♦ 0'a 0 r___T -- - - - gF i J 0 ti r\.)1 i 1 — 0._i_... 11 1` li I , L 0 0 0 0 0 a `___, '_. a Vc1_+ I a ...t., T Q fl I �,___.1 O 1 .1/ cn 15 s v QJ U L . < aD N 'D 6) J N O U cc) r >' t r co t U o co U U 2 r U C_ ) up 1 C a) co E ,- ,�. 1 d c o moa cu Ljilt! wCn0J0� ,�, `tv 0 II I' `fir+�I ial.iiii\ ?rjr-, frilli i (.)/ 1 1 11: -7J ' �r� ' iiu „ ' - - 1 ,-' , , , '' , lo. 4 ( i :�7 lli 1 11 \ �•01111111 c 1 jCN �P 1 It � � 111. r -._, /7, JljIIhIIIF: IIIIIIIIIIIL - w e/ I I i )‘i ONr I zis l —'-- N :itii � • � I at t 0 -vf4' . U U ' i . Y Acorn Environmental Consultants, Inc. 0 Winter Wetland Delineation Report if ' RSS Golf Improvement Center Perma Green Inc. Part of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter, and the east half of the southeast quarter of Section 35,Township 116 N,Range 23 W. City of Chanhassen, Carver County,Minnesota April 2, 1998 Project Number 10009 Wetland Delineation Report Project#10009 April 2, 1998 Page 1 Executive Summary Acorn Environmental Consultants Inc., (Acorn)was retained by Mr. Jeff Helstrom of Perma Green, Inc. to delineate wetlands adjacent to the tilled land on the subject site. After review of the Carver County Soil Survey and the National Wetland Inventory map,Acorn conducted a winter wetland determination of one wetland on the site. The wetland that was delineated surrounds the site on the west, south and part of the east side. Assessment of wetland impacts was not within the scope of this project. If wetland impacts are proposed, the project sponsor or his consultants should meet with wetland regulatory agencies during the project planning phase. This wetland delineation was completed before the growing season,therefore, the wetland boundary should be verified during the growing season. Methods Acorn used the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(COE)routine wetland delineation method. Data for each wetland delineated was recorded on routine wetland determination data forms. Copies of the field data forms are attached in Appendix A. Site Characterization Size and Location The site was approximately 96.5 acres in size. It was described as part of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter and the east half of the southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 116 N, Range 23 W in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County,Minnesota. The site was bounded on the north by Highways 212 and 101, on the east by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuge property, on the south by Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)property, and on the west by private property through a large wetland complex. A general site location map is found in Figure 1. A copy of the USGS quad for the site is found in Figure 2. The National Wetland Inventory map for this site was reviewed to gather information on the presence and location of wetlands on the site(Figure 3). Land Use Land use on the subject site consisted primarily of agricultural land, wooded areas and wetlands. Three fields on the site appeared to have been plowed in 1997. One farmstead,consisting of a barn and a house,were observed near the northeast corner of the site. A wooded upland area west of the barn appeared to have been a windbreak. Other areas to the west and south on the site were identified as wetland. Watershed Hydrology/Surface Drainage The site was located in the Lower Minnesota River Watershed,number 33 (Figure 4). Drainage to this site was generally from the north. It exits from this site and enters the Minnesota River via overland flow. Groundwater was observed at the surface in portions of the wetlands on the site. Surface water flow, in a southerly direction,was observed in the western portion of the site in a wetland. Bluff Creek was shown on the Soil Survey east of the site along the east side of Wetland Delineation Report Project#10009 April 2, 1998 Page 2 Highway 101. This creek enters into Rice Lake. An unnamed, intermittent stream, was shown west of the site. This stream appeared to enter into the Minnesota River. Soils The Carver County Soil Survey shows that the site has the following soils: Symbol Name Slopes Hydric Yes/No Al Alluvial 0-4 % No* Ma Marsh 0-6 % slope(sl.) Yes Figure 5 is a soil map of the site. *Hydric inclusions consisting of very poorly drained soils may be present. Note: the Carver County Soil Survey is out of print. Use of this soil survey in formation has limitations. Vegetation Vegetation communities observed on the site consisted of pioneer weeds in the plowed fields, windbreak and a large wetland complex. The dominant plants in the plowed fields consisted of yellow foxtail (Setaria glauca), annual ragweed(Ambrosia artemisiifolia), cockle bur(Xanthiurn strumarium), smooth brome(Bromus inermis), quackgrass (Agropyron repens),and yellow nutsedge(Cyperus esculentus). The 1997 agricultural crop was unidentified. The wooded windbreak area west of the barn consisted mostly of box elder (Acer negundo) and a planted willow tree (Salix.sp.),bluegrass(Poa sp.), sweet clover(Melilotus sp.), and stinging nettles(Urtica dioica). In the wetland areas adjacent to the plowed fields the dominant vegetation consisted of reed canary grass(Phalaris arundinacea),prairie cord-grass(Spartina pectinata), red top(Agrostis alba), dogbane (Apocynum sp.), sandbar willow(Salix exigua),pussy willow(Salix discolor), black willow(Salix nigra),and slippery elm (Ulmus rubra). Vegetation across this entire site • .appeared to have been disturbed as a result of agricultural activity including cropping and . ..grazing. Plow lines were observed throughout portions of the wetlands. Findings One wetland was winter delineated on the site on March 7, 1998. This report presents the data obtained on the site. Wetland Identification Wetland Type Size Cowardin Circular 39 Wetland 10009 W-1 PEMA/B/C,PSS1 C 1/2/3/6 Greater than 100 acres Summary Wetland Description Wetland 10009 W-1 The location and boundaries staked in the field for this winter delineation are shown on Figure 6. Wetland Delineation Report Project#10009 April 2, 1998 Page 3 This wetland was located along the entire west and south sides and a portion of the east side of the site. It was a portion of the Minnesota River floodplain. The portion of the wetland located on the site consisted of numerous wetland types. Wetland types changed depending upon soils, hydrology,topography and land use. Floodplain forest,emergent wetland and scrub shrub wetlands make up the largest portions of this wetland complex. The wetland was greater than 100 acres in size. Hydrologic alterations such as ditching or drain tile were not observed during this assessment. Three transects were used as sampling areas for data collection. Transect T-1-1-U(an upland point) was taken near the eastern property boundary within the plowed field. Vegetation criteria was not met with the FAC neutral test. Hydrology was observed in saturated soil at a depth of 26 inches below grade. Soils were high chroma, well drained sandy and course sand/gravel soils over clay. The wetland sample point for this transect T-1-3-W, was approximately 59 feet from the upland sample point. This site was in an area that was not plowed in 1997. The vegetation criteria for a wetland was met. Reed canary grass(Phalaris arundinacea), status FACW, was the dominant plant species. Other dominant plant species included Carex sp., Cyperus esculentus,Apocynum sp. and Setaria glauca. Over 75%of the dominant plants were hydrophytic. Soils at this sample point were very poorly drained low chroma alluvial soils. Wetland hydrology(saturated soil)was observed within 9 inches below grade. The upland transect T-1-2-U sample point was nearly identical to T-1-1-U. The only difference was that water was observed at about 18 inches below grade. Its corresponding wetland sample point transect T-1-4-W was similar to T-1-3-W with the exception of smooth brome and saturation at 14 inches below grade. Transect T-2-2-U was located on the western portion of the wetland. Dominant vegetation was golden rod(Solidago sp.),red top(Agrostis alba),and annual ragweed(Ambrosia artemisiifolia). Saturated soils were observed at 16 inches below grade. Soils were low chroma. Two of the three wetland criteria were met. It was determined that this sampling point was now wetland. The corresponding wetland sample point T-2-1-W, located less than 20 feet away,had 80%hydrophytic vegetation,hydric soils and saturation within 11 inches below grade. A distinct vegetation change was observed between these two sample points. Other spot samples were taken to determine the wetland but were not recorded. Wetland Permit Overview Impacts to wetlands such as draining or filling require coordination and permits from several regulatory agencies at different levels. On the local level in Minnesota,wetland impacts often require a permit under provisions of the Wetland Conservation Act(WCA). Coordination under the WCA is through the local governmental unit(LGU)which may be a city, county,or watershed representative. On the state level,the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)administers protected waters permits. The DNR should be contacted if wetland impacts Wetland Delineation Report Project#10009 April 2, 1998 Page 4 are proposed to DNR protected waters. This includes streams, rivers, and Type 3,4, and 5 wetlands identified on the DNR's Protected Waters Inventory maps. Alteration to the course, current or cross-section below the ordinary high water mark(OHW)of a protected water, requires a DNR Protected Waters permit. On the federal level,the COE administers permits under Section 404 of the Clean Waters Act. The COE should be contacted for wetland impacts to waters of the United States. Nearly all wetlands are considered waters of the United States. Most projects proposing to impact wetlands in Minnesota will require a WCA and a Section 404 permit. Depending upon the wetland impacts proposed,the project sponsor should coordinate with these agency representatives during the planning process. Permits for wetland impacts frequently take from 30 to 120 days to obtain. Substantial penalties can be assessed for not complying with wetland regulations. Conclusions One large wetland complex was observed, winter delineated and staked on the site. The boundary of the staked wetland was surveyed by Roger Anderson&Associates, Inc. The winter wetland delineation should be checked during the growing season to verify the accuracy of the boundary. The land owner should not fill or drain wetlands without wetland permits from appropriate local, state and federal agencies. . . - - __J any .a -Goose island... Ntho Bay" Lay t i�.�� r,•. i t s,4j' Kmgspoi�tt -3'� o r innetonica''`•. ,, 7.70-,. 'j r * ,.,,I,L... . 4 r ted H'w Zimnrerr7rans ,,,Howard Point y� , ."0� „ ,,..4......„, } ••1 :u r, L `55 ■' ►Fr pndean Bay lelo ., r ` rir / ErSchanted lslarid \ r, f ,� '8 '.. 1 vnka Bay” } :�I r 'II t crane'sland�, pWawato ?Island t6 ., •Excelsi ;� ;T s ��� ' 7:v Gf� c. v Eagle Ist�D 4. �I;ahe Liryien c 'f,;„} .-3-t:- ..r•-• - '''..-'". -'-i. Chsii ir r :v1 �,1� - s:R� �aTerf . •• �'1* ..,.,1----%i■ \ Stone Lake .. '' . thtomghBat•p % `' `eft‘'x f 1.71- Sr- "G-+c, .` - j n :\t--1,1\-`• li _ � ,- v,akf ivfr i N =- -;_ fi r . +" �`t14-.. island- i t1 7--1:;;;I, c• Lake Zunrhra o y , °t t r ;�,. 1Kf' 491 !- "•••,.... r I-•i; . O' 4firmclashra -- x: Carvel_' '' 4.4"1 •, K. ` { \ 7 `.T;N l-n_- `� i �-,f - '�. f., ison Lake t ,•~ a y .rIi7��G,�'( 5 L c ` .77f L[Ce 1 S` n t' • r 2 - i� tue `•FES -( •—' .- i .: x.`_ Sc17{l leTon7a �= ;" Lake Ann .; 7 le t�. s,j _4 t '!may _-. :ter_ ■ \../....t--: -- j " StiegerLa ., Q j r * Q �r Vim" ►`. s, s Lake 4u•um A' • - Chanhassen , j '-s' --.1.,..U..... - ,./ •■G • •t ,' Ctonat� r - 7'•,. .4,------ i . i ' 1D 4 �, r _ ;- �-- �, 0 Q lAfitczel"• Eden Prairie• _ _.... ->, :r, t r 1 _ 0~ `~'e. r` 1 f'- I RiefMfarsh Lake ""ys • 1 Carl grey La 's � ' `•,r` K Ake Su •n, 14. -c. ■ .' _ `'`>- Ai% t "_ / 111 _ j�t ¢ri� .� 4,^.'-- r' i.` r . -x � t '� 'tom 1 i .41ccd ._`_ Ir' son •k yci, ;. YfassermannLaLr 1 :.m are 'nem — �`•f r F � ��g��,,.` ^` ff l L f t * _-a i=ce "••-f--.': -3 Zalx Riley r 212_ :` rk- ^e=�+ h y�r ,ons Lake �_ Haz6ftine>,. 1 y . ' i . 55347 -q,.. _4.-''-. .�;: 'cif:'.i 1 yam,/Lake x _ '. ? r- / ,i --J 1,.... "1,,: VrJu +_ -' -- 4. r ,fi- --.�s..-_ _1-,..�'` - 1 _ :f', ,-4i r_%_: C XI • Tmk • '�. `* ct7� i' —1'......‹---i ze 1 Grass Lake Z.,.....+, ,...., � f 'fls 1 s� t •.553 .rz ' ,a,..k1.1‘.-EP' Locstto'n i t` '��,-z` Augusta '•.. _ l'' '=ri; 717 -,! r �i __ _�, • T- >-! N44°48.449' t ._-L._ --=. ! k ,� Blue Lake i ''.#1.,c .. .•>y.- -- ' 1 „., •, W93°32.516' �: ....,. ; ,� .�. s _^_ /Fisher Lak r'''' t r E. _ ' ''-Sha ogee `~: -- •-- -.„.......1......1...--1.--,— .,-� ljvsensl ,«=1 ,bra. ,� � "-• _A ;arden 1 _ 1,j4, J •1 Dab•!rem . .• 169 US 66- •'A. {�.�•• i ,. 2 j Kaska Lake• 1 �• ns La r �' 3 '1... . (i ti . i I # i 7 - I °j • • . �`�•'Carver atxi• ,,,, i ` :•----•- 41 N.� _ r"--.......;� • sad-C� �' -I 'r' ``--____.----- it - , , aor Lake Indian Reservation _ `•\ i 553 9 _;. pike Laake I Alinere. to River i 1 ,. \-<--i--�------� } �_ .�. r ._..i�'�rr > +C� Q'pow d Lake i `1• ` 1��, c g:1,-,-t 1. . ,`. I I '., t _ y kT/role ;-�i s 1 Lower Prig Lake`?' j• S 3 'r• ..r_ -� -. I - 1__i_�.____, ,� 'Martinson Isf�nd•._. eed isl fid' ; I 1 t hneid{r 1 y ,_�i vR y�,- apids 1 I �Z I. "ti: 1 t'7 * -� Marystowr ! W.•��y4. �t i ..,�OM k \..---.... •east Union i 1 • 1 r. _4 Howard LZrke Jd.8U1(t. 1 -- , X5395 'irk` �: -ade� i I �, Upp^erFitiorlA•1 1 r�ior. ake='"-- -; 1 { r k- , Lone TrBe Island +; t fifrklevl a` e i I g } Campbell Le z-` �.j • ,, `n Lake r ''''''..r......'.." t - tl ; _- J FL7fl7dquzir Lace t f, - -/ i' ••c•f i _ ,-- --.._.._- Spring Lake �r tal •(rke ; r 0 1997 Lormc.srr /Was U$A'_Mudbad nes' ,,c„ ! I , I / `13 t. \ Clea/Lake Mag 12.00 Thu Apr 02 07:03 1998 """—' Local Road 0 Point of Interest 4:11i) Public Airport Scale 1:125,000(at center) — Major Connector 0 Small Town Cemetery 12 Miles ! 6.1,21051c/State Route V Geographic Feature County Boundary trairiat Primary State Route A Park/Reservation Land 2 KM I i WInterstate/LimitedAccess Exit/Lodging Water DUS Highway Locale River/Canal Figure 1 General Site Location City Intermittent River 44°49'10", 93033141" _ 44049110", 93030'24" 'I JR4*" �_� {r:• 11 • .1 �. ,a 1i .,.......:.....,\._ ' _♦ • t :� r 'i! l ti+ .� t,4•.: S!�j ..�: 11.•.. _.----..—..I„... + i- _ •'r • J l: r ./�. { -.. ,J• ,1� f • Y ••••),::.'...:-:1....4:4.'rte �''- • 1 ._ ��- `�. t,, if 1,:::.-1:„.-.-..--- ._ - ' s-r • �' • �.ri Site Location ic),. ;Y f. r _ J - • . �rti-�:;,� •• - : - 'i c am ; t .> -� ,� Y ,. _'� 'ti . C:CIT1 {,c 1 • r� tis/..".7,...-,-'s ,'. • ^ '.'' • iso. ' .`+,i• i ;.s�+�{ �� O Fa /- !311 . -:s7-,-�-r'�tis ' i ti et!, r - f. • :1x, - •,......; H, 4 ., 1t ; ` t.6 4 s _7es;:.:._ • . y , _ st Marks :1--,f-.1"`".::..:_ 1. 1t 1 44°4741",93°33'41" NAD83 44°47'41", 93°30'24" 0 • 1 /2 1 M ILE TN L t t• rtrl t. Z1/2o 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 FEET Printed from TOPO! ©1997 Wildflower Productions (www.topo.com) Figure 2 U.S.G.S. Quad Map e ‘I PEMCa ' •. rCM f fir.MIA. , - rhN t 7. rE►au 1 t•TA,- - M'. .MC ,PEW R4 �f 4y :1'- - r--c r PLMCe MAX.' t .�•••• Fl SAF• i -, rF iiM(._.4) 01 *EMU Y} - 'EMC ?) om,ffie4 mop .1101C, ti.'fZ • INS : ' PEMC "uC�d rEut1 "MK V'EMrU . IA PEMC ) 1•LMr.-4 PEM. k/ - N1 • NVA.4 .'o • UPEMC- 4 • YEMC r ' QC.' rSK \• -- R45EE• PEMCe 4-151)-11_mu ., 1 LRC d • � , PER10. �Ct`IA - -._M". ' PEM( pFMU yeOtA YU6(a 11 ` 1 EMC - 5;T2 - - .- s PEM6 I • •!.� ' P+oic.1 T rtmc , r F J �� 1 4. ✓. ►I ( PSS , FtWSF. ef AIL PE'MN.1 .,fes -......-- ` CM Y—C ', YSS91 fog s. rfOIC PLt.'' • PE c+ r' PN.. —^-� -���FEMC� - PfOK PEM<. �a. - .7 -. q Pf TO pi OK l�� PfOI h EM 1 ?LWL n1ec.. vC•fp, SSMC P s5,C. FEW.r / -1 FEW �j, PUBc,r rcac n5 w c - R4S6F ft! rfaC •. /I� P`..> .1-01P.....„7"- irc5 jill ' Fo1C PFo1CFEM( it 1rim • PE6tC ?VV�,!= PEMC • n�IC rSr�Y 1•5J( y PEMF ® _tA'-� • EM �I 7) K•18' _ 3 1•f..:. ?Talk /Puea, rJESF • rEMU-a o 0 rel.. • / t,MA PFOIA r .` • _ .'t-._.,1"-,:-. .. ` ` , .. .1e.-t1 .:et' ' --4.: :.':•.: 7. EM IC * PFO PF 'C IU C, jr y7! ' ' •y36.'4.% �iti 'EMAJ `.:i. 'fes'::'_1•-.' ., y 4 Put ...41-,,...a•at ,�. 4. . ."..r- •F -.Y- *+.� ff i"Y . ..tet; �.�.4 IFFA ttst ' / . • *Z-- • *;7•7S- ' l'rt.e. 41160 f it CS'‘ ..4„.4...A.41„."..„` • j(e y�M l / A .EMt. / i.•.�.f�'r- Figure 3 National Wetland Inventory Map L80 69 lilie 70 71 79 75 78 ' 62 76 59 AO 60 9 )114511F.8 .110 12 56 57 VII 0 It(54 :'36 20 244011` '38 81 tel4ppow .40 82 16 � 42 84 oak 30 AnkitLAN.ft-441 52 53 50 47 46 Figure 4 Watershed Map J `�aB2 it Ge Ha82Ge y HaC , _ I'V. �4 • LAKE RILEY la I pd. .4LC3•M�� .r '. '+i. Pc .:�. ��--- .HaB2 HaB2 Ha6` �:. t�11 �� HaB2 �,� A � ' i \�v� /ii .aj r Ha82 r� aCg HaC2;'r • ▪ -� :•.� Ge HeD3 rte' ` . tSi ��.saa �\ =i - -Cs�B\ HcD3 10 Te6`� /Ha6 �_�a82� -"a HaF•.@ HcD3 • Pc1 I HaC2 r` ��i TeB iaD t �� —t:Ts;:• aE2. Li C l HaB�` HaC? .1g-...,): welfiNk � S' HaB f C+ HaB 3D2 <' / �Ha62 . HaE2 :-.;:!:.:-...,,i,.., "�' HaC2 t p2 HaC2 WISP �•••C��F� / �•� •a• -• )4 ."-1= j Ha82 A� .: e �' w ./! HaC2 -'''d< HaB2 �' .Cs ii.ti i . , ,, �HaC1„ l HaB2 HaC2 u a .' �, _y. • Halla' \N. .72 `-. ''.g' 7.! itir„,;43-1•;.....1,7.•,,, .• gr: �' � ►iaa. r is _- .- •� , • ..i -..L. ,2*,. V;f -•., '�� .Z4 � ��s,�at ~f�•, Ha8r :! ' yiliC-7-A4.'-, ` s \. ,+ F-�, ' :F:i!� .V-J . =o '` •1:.044 2 ; �:•aidp � �` -`►i3�� ',, `, _t.'e+' f HaB2 tit • fr;L`a.• �" 4�11�� •� '� ' ;� Ge a • 4.....cid.is -� ?. _ - •- •- .1',, ..T. .(1‘ .i...,,...i. . -1. ..• *.i. •-.:4 • 4,-...-0-- _ A .. „, N.:-,,--- :,-„,:._ , , _ .,, ...:.. ,..,...„..0 ._ .tkIrts.,.•va '' .;e• - -.t.',, ', • '1.7,'•• •- . . HaC2 ''st:i f�..• 'b -'.. - 1111111111111b4*22:00.....TeC , ,A,.e..•,;,Iss, gropy7.4400001r..*. - -,..:... -„-N.i: #1 • Ch '/;oea ;'Z *' sniff_• �_C7eek r' /� �c RICE I I h. ..2.-Al -•, ; -..?•-• -M:-• { w ; .'01711:4,is �-.. R • ,•?` l• ', �. •1•`i/ • LAKE :.r.J �rt• y.++.-. :ie.. � ax'", •: Ma • ^P�s�,`: ,* I Z '! Az, lb.,.. - :T .i-▪ s• .;. = Z -: ... . ' • 4\415n- I 41..t.......... :•:▪:4?::!.... _�.• ti ` �� 4444 • ` S• ..• e 'f M'L�f.t� 1l S1 lal I (•cal NT 1 Figure 5 Soil Survey Map I 1 1 1 I �' ; 1 t 1 `.j 1 1 I i ! I 1 11 1 r I i WETLAND D i ; I' / 1 i 1 I ; ;. ; ;- - ;" 1 11 1 1 i ; ' 1 \ /1 1 ; i I l �IIINTER WETLAND DELIfA110N :I 1 ' II �4 \ 1 / ' ; 1 1 1 Al( it % f _\ f ` 1RANSECT Sq�APLE POINTS 1 1 �� I ! 1 1 \ f' ` I j ,•`:� 1 1 I ; o / ; oZ" o ; O _ ,� J� ti " WETLAND ! i ;� UPLAND I1 9-- ! r i 1 f c , / I 7 , ; do 11 i� , S i ; : \ O I `p • \' i MM��� J 1 -i did co I I I Figure 6 Survey Wetland Boundary Map Appendix A DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: To�/ Li�0l rt- � Z., Date: - ApplicanUOwr,er. Pe rens,- G-0 Investigator. >� County: Ca") 't��, ��13 EC 6 State: lei r Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes x No Community ID: • Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No 4C Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area (explain on back)? Yes No K Plot ID: VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species (Scientific Name) Common Name 1. Stratum %Cover Indicator nn G-a,,,.. v.,,"4I-AA-tom.. fit �r�r b u 2. i-1 OLyr\c SP cr....c,,w 7,,Q - �w1, "7_ 4- T.,10.--,•.ti .1,,,e,m',Y c",-.Y b � '�sG�c.co ooh. bye 0- . cc"(b Z-- . it 10 f 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC(excluding FAC-). 75�-› Remarks: V HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators(2 or more required): Aerial Photographs • Inundated Oxidized Root Channels(Upper 127 _ Other Saturated in Upper 12- Water-Stained Leaves No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Local Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Other(Explain in Remarks) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: 18 ' (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil:- I L4" (in.) Remarks: 7,cjk S -�--- Su _, AY o1ra67.1 W. i''. Kf r Cover class as a percentage: 6 =95-100%; 5=75-95%; 4= 50-75%; 3=25-50%; 2=5-25%; 1 =0-5% 21501-30/coewet Ti I-1 — Community ID: k.)t+)6^I' SOILS I ,/ Map Unit Name 4:1)10 1, ` Drainage Class: £J f1 °f I CI 7 (Series and Phase): Field Observations Taxonomy(Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes .. No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure,etc. 33/� l �j�(Q -A ,Syr f, G - 13 3 —t. S y Y 3/( -- r-- Co, - � -^ 3 - Z15 3 -14 Syr 4/I ?. $Y 'r -7/) , CCU( L- b. TL Zoe" _4_411 1 5ft.,.,,.t • Hydric Soil indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List — Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes —T-- No Hydric Soils Present? Yes k No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes y No , Remarks: (6p v -k-tda eta,.._ v ill 'ti rb 4 UQ'e- -"tdAi OX -j-- 1 -3-w yO' E cX-r- t -2- 4 • f rndi . Sfd • 3,/ 1 21501-30/coewet DATA FORM .. ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) ,, Project/Site: ____)n_ 2/2Z/C)/ l j Date: Y ew ApplicanUOwner. 2ErP.4,7A Gam" : County: C , Var.-- Investigator. /Qs-r) R r.{,, —F rtv5 fe, 4.,n,..,,,,, State: PA-6,/ r Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No _ Community ID: r�e a.,-S. Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes V No Transect ID: j — . Is the area a potential Problem Area (explain on back)? Yes ' No Plot ID: V F./ - L.....,D e •e. _ t -f ocx,A /4.,.; '''' P A) r VQ 4 VEGE ATION -16"" Dominant Plant Species (Scientific Name) Common Name Stratum - % Cover Indicator 1. s )pq��:�- �<<cw �fi��lAf'; J r 3 ' kite 2. �h4k;uv- 5 (-.1wiar.•ot,,., e o �,ur �cJv Z - r�uL 3. W1,ros:ci c iev►1,5;i'SG1 iON ( v1")YYjY' rd-(' .4 -co b 2.___ 'i'C�c-41 4. ' 5. 6. 7- 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. ' Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-). 70 Rarks:,em} T FAQ `5 ?6,,,..,„A_k fb& ALL, Ce.,--c\<_ , '6'J • HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators(2 or more required): Aerial Photographs Inundated Oxidized Root Channels(Upper 12') Other. _ Saturated in Upper 12' Water-Stained Leaves I No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Local Survey Data • — Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Field Observations: " _ Sediment Deposits Other(Explain in Remarks) I _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Surface Water. (in.) Depth to.Free Water in Pit: ",g" (in.) . Depth to Saturated Soil: 76 (in.) Remarks: 17tC1 i2 l d ry"44 kwQ.V.4 Y T.7 S rk-e_ :.,,, f c "7- _00°S. p\ 7 -1 NV ?-ice-S,r"\ Cover class as a percentage: 6 = 95-100%; 5=75-95%; 4=50-75%; 3 =25-50%; 2= 5-25%; 1 = 0-5% 21501-30/coewet 1 -7-1u. Community ID: (r P ta,d SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): 71(JIM.lL Drainage Class: Field Observations Taxonomy(Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes X No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle _ Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc. lo -2Z g 7S ._____- -1111I za r°_,4J rel 1/ • Hydric Soil Indicators: • Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions _ r Listed on National Hydric Soils List • Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) • Remarks: h o„t ‘,\y �< S v.1 a 4 WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 4 No • Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x - Hydric Soils Present? Yes No )e Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Scp, i S• cc-SS- to be v P � !. 'Q•�{ cc„<1 '14747 Aefi .Q.,r *eyS7, tea/ ,�, yd�a�� Y be f .Q ti-{-or rn A-Lt„ a y t y ff-C U� 4 cWu 4ea _ i-p„0 • 21501-30/coewet -� "`'`' • , DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: D Q 2/z— l of Date: _3".5/q 6 _ Applicant/Owrer.. , ' ret ici t-,,;,„...,,-, County: .r v42^.- Investigator. ` -1—,,...." 13,...,4 '+ State: M Ai Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes X, No Community ID: Illeoti Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No i Transect ID: —1---1 -3 Lk) Is the area a potential Problem Area (explain on back)? Yes No y Plot ID: -7--- / .r- VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species (Scientific Name) Common Name Stratum % Cover Indicator ' 1. 1 4 �n Gt.,. tha— n z.h —rc.,rt, ?:-c k 1 2. cr..r.ed u% Qscu lr?n r.S- �, 1 SG�^ va CG.c w • 3. � 4 ASS oL`r�� ('io-c_w041/-1-1, c zl t�I,E ---r; mo' 3 �`t, Cam�,��� ,j I` R"u� 5. A C ,n 0 w, � _ 6- 5,6,4,(•t. 5 1c4.4.5:6_-- _8C4//61.....1 -fc Y 4-cc-�`. —2—2_ L 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-). '5 -Vcu - /11,fet Remarks: !°cf4 ev,.., �Y.ck i Se-1.1)1 a. <.�.� 111-14.e.111-14.e. ft'td tic[ �� " tJ� do Yk flit ) - HYDROLOGY i Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators(2 or more required): _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundated Oxidized Root Channels(gpprer 12') _ Other - _ •K Saturated in Upper 12' Water-Stained Leaves '- No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Local Survey Data Drift Lines )< FAC-Neutral Test Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits' Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: 1 3 " (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: 7" (in.) Remarks: ._ ...,_, 3 , S. ! Q k $ - W "A. ...,_ co,f, L.�I,k�\cl,au y, .,. 3 31 _ - ion. - 1— —tk) COver class as a percentage: 6= 95-100%; 5=75-95%; 4=50-75%; 3 =25-50%; 2=5-25%; 1 = 0-5% iMce- I 21501-301coewet S"""•f �Q }I- —I 2, U �9 i/ /. /d l — 3 Community ID: 71/ 76.--p-1 SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): l4/L) Drainage Class:. . Uev y 9_ ...f 4 is-' 4' Field Observations Taxonomy(Subgroup): ' Confirm Mapped Type? Yes k No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure,etc. I I---- B ` 7,s•! ( i 7 ` 1 r LI f� . min S Coesa S. ,_-_,1-41 ell Hydric Soil Indicators: i i,- = Concretions +r Histosol Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils • Sulfidic Odor drganic Streaking in Sandy Soils :..,. -• - r Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List . Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) fll FC Remarks: Ai �ck S o•\ c(cv1 kr 0 r4vti7 41 1 c1 „ '` / [ .1/1.-.1d F WETLAND DETERMINATION ' Hydrophytic Vegetation Presznt? Yes }( No Wetland Hydrology Present? ” Yes X No Hydric Soils Present? Yes x ` No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No • Remarks:- IAL l,cSaca< - Qr,.� -bo ,n . SJa �Nxe-�.4- (1y el 11\I-T!is cJ.y�o b6,5-c..4 ^��� , t,,,.1 r51�1y a � ,�S (�,or,- ' h•D �Lu dye ', / 21501-30/coewet DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: /One' j I O I ,- 2.1'L / Date: 3. . T gApplicant/Owner.. rie.,�.v.� County: C/ '/i-tiv^ Investigator. 7'0 41,7 ii State: /'-' Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes >C No Community ID: 412/4,4,--..." Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No X Transect ID: – 2,, - a Is the area a potential Problem Area (explain on back)? Yes No k Plot ID: 14 –G,.---, 's r-�'t..- 1..✓ ...., 1 a, tom) r f s!1 f S VEGETATION • • Dominant Plant Species (Scientific Name) Common Name Stratum % Cover Indicator 1. botrX S rrab Got.d.A1 roz( civ' 3 d 3- wiioYo4 :. 0--v fir, 5: i-(jl;" l', 2” is req leef 175 v b ...? `(u L ri 4. Ci 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-). Sd`/), Remarks: –IL, S A, 1," la,,,a.u. Leto„Lk Sx.t./.e'.cQ Gcua c . HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators(2 or more required): Aerial Photographs _ Inundated Oxidized Root Channels(Upper 12') _ Other _ Saturated in Upper 12' Water-Stained Leaves No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Local Survey Data _ Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test — Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Other(Explain in Remarks) — — Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: 17 4 (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: / (in.) Remarks: ot_fee,..„, 1,,44 /S„ .� Cover class as a percentage: 6 =95-100%; 5=75-95%; 4= 50-75%; 3=25-50%; 2=5-25%; 1 = 0-5% 21501-30/coewet Community ID: (/fit SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): A f I dV, Drainage Class: P06 4 y dieze Field Observations Taxonomy(Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes )( No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Mois) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc. -�" /dvr 3 ?-- l5 " 6 _ /r> r 7 Sy c 2, .5/5 'CcIAJ .v,1 � .,� e"4-41 j Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ,1' Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes , No X Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: ,4 J 64--467 *'6 Ii 21501-30/coewet DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: /CS c:le:5 2 Date: / 7 � . Applicant/Owner.. County: Lr�/" 1./-0," Investigator: 1'-- ., t, 1-, j 3 ig State: ,/r 4 Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes k No Community ID: 1 . ✓ i G. Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No ^ Transect ID: -^•- 2 -- -- Is the area a potential Problem Area (explain on back)? Yes No J( Plot ID: .1-,,." , „/r • VEGETATION • • Dominant Plant Species(Scientific Name) Common Name Stratum %Cover Indicator 1. 60S 4 r ....49 ra -I 'e -Co'b 4 f��6 3- Sc !rd S lolac ,ra4 Z {�„.6U 4. "iT,4,, w I t eJ Sa+.,r�aE �' S I. - b 2 7a.t 0,..) 5 17/1414.41-<, A1141 t-t.CA.a". r 4.e C.ea-714-•-%)q, e eNi 'P G--'-. .f 2,.e.u? 6. 7. 8. • 5 10. 11_ . 12 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC(excluding FAC-). > • Remarks: ,., ' / HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake,or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators(2 or more required): Aerial Photographs _ Inundated Oxidized Root Channels(Upper 12') Other _ Saturated in Upper 12' Water-Stained Leaves No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Local Survey Data _ Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth to Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: )4k" (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: )1 (in.) Remarks: Cover class as a percentage: 6 =95-100%; 5=75-95%; 4= 50-75%; 3=25-50%; 2 =5-25%; 1 = 0-5% 21501-30/coewet 2_l �ti Community ID: SOILS L Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Drainage Class: Field Observations Taxonomy(Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No h Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc. o—g" 24iv/r 3/' -___ _i!7t h .....ref-A, __ -'•-- )-2,-'' 5 /1)I)il yii ./e)>/I 314 AAive7;prAkti I ei/ii,71 .4_0,7 .5-4 01" il el tt; Hydric Soil Indicators: V Histosol Concretions rr�i!. Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List ,x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: o4-4Le-6 `..,-sit 6-4,4 j.{. -4-......_, ' �„���'u l7 740 e G1Cr"1 WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes y No Wetland Hydrology Present? YesNo Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: 3 C 1• te<, Ali,Q l 21501-30/coewet n rerec. od m NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING a m Re. / 4111 frl------------. „a” -,PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, May 6, 1998 !:44/111161 T,,",` .4'� , at 7:00 p.m. di i City Hall Council Chambers 690 City Center Drive /Or '- \S'2.1 11111y P ,,,s, 9I SUBJECT: Request for a Conditional Use crdi, Permit and Site Plan Review for a 0 Golf Improvement Center/Driving Ran•e APPLICANT: RSS/Perma Green, Inc. A LOCATION: South of Great Plains Blvd. and Hwy. 212 NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, RSS/Perma Green, Inc., is requesting a conditional use permit and site plan review to allow a golf improvement center/driving range to be located south of the intersection of Great Plains Blvd. and T.H. 212, on property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate District, RSS Golf Improvement Center. 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 overview 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 and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Kate at 937-1900 ext. 118. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on April 23. 1998. ��� �I 1�1� A SKIP COOK PATRICK BLOOD 15506 VILLAGE WOODS DR NANCY LEE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347 P.O. BOX 94 SHAKOPEE. MN 55379 UBA PARTNERSHIP 7301 OHMS LN#345 EDINA, MN 55439 EMERALD PROPERTIES PO BOX 260 CHASKA, MN 55318 JOHN MALZAHN 10551 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA,MN 55318 MN DOT FIELD 1500 COUNTY ROAD B2 WEST ROSEVILLE. MN 55113 EMERALD PROPERTIES 6609 DAKOTA TRAIL EDINA, MN 55439 SEVERIN PETERSON,JR 15900 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 HAROLD F HESSE 1425 BLUFF CREEK DRIVE CHASKA,MN 55318 DAVID ZAMJAHN 7506 WEST 77TH STREET CHASKA,MN 55318 SKIP COOK 7625 LYNDALE AVE S RICHFIELD, MN 55423 10111 CITY OF CHANHASSEN MEMORANDUM 690 City Center Drive,PO Box 147 TO: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 S. Phone 612.937.1900 FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer • General Fax 612.937.5739 Engineering Fax 612.937.9152 DATE: April 30, 1998 Public Safety Fax 612.934.2524 WFebu•wz ct.chanhaseu.,,m.ts SUBJ: Review of Site Plan for RSS Golf Improvement Center Trunk Highways 212 and 101 File No. 98-12 LUR Upon review of the plans prepared by Roger Anderson &Associates dated March 13, 1998, I offer the following comments and recommendations: GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The site,for the most part, has been employed in agricultural use in the past. There are areas of trees and vegetation which will be impacted by the grading. Minimal grading is proposed to develop the parking lot, golf tees and greens. A landscape earth berm approximately two feet high is proposed along Trunk Highway 212. Most of the grading activities are proposed within the flood plain which is typically flooded in the spring. The fill proposed within the flood plain to develop the golf greens and tees is proposed to be mitigated on site. Approximately 6,500 cubic yards of material is proposed to be excavated and filled within the flood plain boundaries. Importing or exporting material for site development is not anticipated except for construction of the parking lot. The plan denotes a couple of trees proposed to be saved within or very close to the proposed parking lot facilities. This may be a little unrealistic without transplanting the trees first. The site generally sheet drains from the north to the south into the backwaters of the Minnesota River valley. Approximately 75% of the site is subject to annual flooding. Given the use, a high amount of chemical fertilizers may be used on the greens and driving tees. From water quality standpoint, all the runoff will eventually be directed into the Minnesota River valley/wetland. Two storm water ponds are proposed to pretreat most of the storm water runoff from the site. However, both ponds are proposed within the flood plain and therefore will be subject to flooding basically defeating the purpose of a water quality pond. The Kate Aanenson RSS Golf Improvement Center Site Plan Review April 28, 1998 Page 2 proposed storm water pond in the driving range area is merely a aesthetic value and will serve little or no water quality value. The alternatives would be to relocate the one storm water pond which is proposed to pretreat runoff from the parking lot to outside of the flood plain. This may result in redesigning or relocating part of the parking lot. Another alternative would be to limit or prohibit the use of fertilizers within the flood plain. This would result in the deletion of one of the ponds. The storm water pond proposed to pretreat runoff from the parking lot will need to be located outside of the flood boundary and constructed in accordance with NURP standards. Detailed drainage calculations to verify the pond size in accordance with NURP standards will be required. The outlet control structure proposed (baffle weir structure) will need to be replaced with an outlet control structure in accordance with the City's detail plate number 3109. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water service is not available to the site. According to the plans,the existing dwelling is on a septic system. The existing well on the site has not been identified on the plans and will need to be. The existing septic mound should be evaluated to see if it is functioning properly. An alternative mound site will also need to be located and preserved prior to any construction activities commencing. STREETS Access to the site is from Trunk Highway 212 at a signalized intersection. Currently there is a 24-foot wide bituminous driveway from Trunk Highway 212 servicing the existing dwelling. The plans propose a parking lot with future parking expansion capabilities. There are no landscape islands proposed to break up the sea of asphalt. Staff recommends adding some landscape islands. City Code 20-1118 typically requires establishments of this nature to have paved parking areas and drive aisles with concrete curb and gutter or bituminous curbs to •direct runoff into a storm water drainage collection system. However, given the " nature of the use, staff believes it would be appropriate to allow sheet drainage across the parking lot and only install curbing along the south side of the parking lot to direct stormwater runoff into an underground storm sewer system to convey the water to the pond, thus eliminating the potential erosion on the banks of the pond. Kate Aanenson RSS Golf Improvement Center Site Plan Review April 28, 1998 Page 3 MISCELLANEOUS The site is bordered by a wildlife refuge. The proposed fencing along the driving range may adversely affect wildlife and waterfowl migration in the area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, DNR and other agencies should be consulted regarding this use and it's impacts. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. 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. 2. 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. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will provide wetland buffer edge signs and charge the applicant $20 per sign. The applicant shall verify the location of these signs with the City's Water Resources Coordinator and shall install these signs before the utilities are accepted. • 3. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 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 4. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Kate Aanenson RSS Golf Improvement Center Site Plan Review April 28, 1998 Page 4 Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. 5. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within Trunk Highway 212 right- of-way. 6. The proposed stormwater ponds must have side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. 7. The use of chemical fertilizers shall be prohibited within the flood plain. 8. The stormwater pond for the parking lot shall be relocated outside the flood plain. The wood baffle weir structure shall be replaced with the City's outlet control structure detail plate number 3109. 9. The existing well shall be located and shown on the plans. 10. Raised concrete or bituminous curb shall be installed along the south side of the parking lot to direct stormwater runoff into an underground drainage system to the pond. c: Anita Benson, City Engineer g:'eng\dave\pc'rss golf.doc 1110 CITY OF CHANHASSEN MEMORANDUM 690 CioCeuterDrire,PO Box 147TO: Kathryn Aanenson,Planning Director Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 FROM: Steve A.Kirchman,Building Official >F; Phone 612.937.1900 General Fax 612.9375739 DATE: April 28, 1998 Engineering Fax 612.937.9152 PublicSafei Fax 612.934.2524 SUBJECT: 98-2 CUP and 98-8 SPR(RSS Golf Improvement Center,RSS/Perma Green, ll'eb nun:ci.chanhassen.nr.us Inc.) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped ^CITY OF CHANHASSEN, APR 0 3 19 9 8, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT." for the above referenced project. Background: The building designated as the office on the proposed plans is currently a dwelling.We have no records of the date it was constructed. A new Individual Sewage Treatment System(ISTS)was installed in 1995. It is a mound system designed for a three bedroom house. Analysis: ISTS sites. Chanhassen City Code, 18-40(2)g,requires two ISTS sites when property is subdivided. The intent is to have an alternate site for use in the event of the failure of the ISTS on the primary site. Although this property is not being subdivided,a change in use from residential to commercial is being proposed.It is important to have an alternate site for a number of reasons. 1. Estimating sewage flow for a dwelling is straightforward;estimates for commercial enterprises are more difficult.Failure of the ISIS due to overloading may render the existing ISTS site unusable. 2. Should the existing ISTS be too small,and alternate site may provide room for expansion. 3. Should the primary site be damaged during initial construction the alternate site will be available with minimal disruption. 4. Should the primary site be damaged later,a new ISTS can be installed with less disruption of the business. Sewage flow. As noted earlier,sewage flow determination for commercial establishments is a more difficult process than that for residences. The applicant should have a licensed site evaluator and designer submit system sizing requirements for the anticipated flows based on the requirements of Individual Sewage Treatment System Standards,Chapter 7080. The evaluation and design will be necessary before establishing final site plans in order to assure the availability of the area necessary for the ISTS sites. Building code requirements The occupancy classification of the existing dwelling will be changed from an R-3 occupancy to a B or M occupancy. The building code requires a building be brought up to code when a change in its use occurs. Likely areas where code deficiencies may Kathryn Aanenson,Planning Director April 28, 1998 Page 2 occur include,exiting,accessibility,access to other levels,and separations. Accessibility requirements may include site issues that should be addressed before site plans are finalized. Building issues can be resolved during the building code plan review process. The existing barn is proposed to be used as a maintenance building. Although the occupancy classification will not change,the character of the occupancy is changing. The building was built as an agricultural building and was not subject to any code requirements. As a maintenance building it is subject to code requirements. The building is dilapidated and in danger of failing. The building should be evaluated by a structural engineer who should determine repairs necessary to bring the building as close to code compliance as is feasible. Accessibility. The submitted plans do not indicate an accessible route from the parking lot to the accessible building entrance. Accessible parking is also shown incorrectly- An eight foot wide van access aisle and signage is required;Two accessible parking stalls are required;Accessible signage is required at the head of parking stalls and access aisles. Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval: 1. Submit the location of an alternate ISTS site from a licensed evaluator for review by Inspections Division staff. 2. Submit an analysis of sewage flow for the proposed facility from a licensed evaluator for review by Inspections Division staff 3. Revise the plans to provide and accessible route and parking. 4. Arrange a meeting with the developers and designers with the Inspections Division plan reviewer as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. 5. Arrange for an evaluation of the existing barn by a structural engineer. The evaluation should include proposals for remediation if necessary. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 15, 1998 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison Blackowiak, Matt Burton, Craig Peterson, LuAnn Sidney, Allyson Brooks, Ladd Conrad and Kevin Joyce STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: STEINER DEVELOPMENT IS REQUESTING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR TWO OFFICE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS UP TO 113,600 SQ. FT. LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CENTURY BOUELVARD AND COULTER BOULEVARD ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD, ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff from fellow commissioners. One clerical in nature. If you look at the...113,600 building that says it will be built on 9.16 acres and then you look at Lot 3 as being 8.98. Where's the difference coming from or is that just. Generous: It's moving through the line in the project. It's slightly north of halfway. Peterson: If there's no questions, I think the key thing I guess really seeing a better rendering of what the proposal is and...some of those changes are. The other item you talked about in the staff report, and I quote in the other paragraph it says, the staff will not support additional buildings that incorporate the same materials or design elements as the first two site plan proposals. You also inferred that it's similar to the first building and...falling into a gray area about similarity versus distinctly different. Do you see the first building on that site is developing, that the difference with the current...in front of us tonight, is that substantially different or are you talking abruptly different in it's dealing in architecture or is the difference that you see...for additional buildings in that development. Generous: I believe, what I'm looking for is when we have another building that might be similar,office warehouse type that they incorporate additional materials so that we don't have only tilt up concrete paneling in there. Maybe block face. Some I'm aware we're looking at for at least the highway frontages would probably be brick and steel and glass finishes. Peterson: Is it safe to assume then you're somewhat accepting this one being somewhat similar to the first one? Generous: Yes. Right. Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Peterson: Now you're drawing the line and you're saying no more like this after this one? Generous: That was my point, yes. Peterson: Okay. To that end, does the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission and if so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Fred Richter: I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development and I have with me tonight Steve Krapek of Smuckler Architects. He'll speak to the color renderings and the tile massing of the project. And also Peter Kordonowy our property manager for the first Steiner buildings in the Arboretum Business Park. Let me just give you a little insight into why we have two options in front of you. We're trying to develop the Arboretum Business Park for industrial and following the PUD, as you recall, there are certain sites that will front on Highway 5 and 41 and those will have, in some cases, different uses that's outlined in that PUD. We are owners and developers of multi-tenant office-warehouse projects. Our first building is fully leased up and we'll be finishing the final construction at the painting and landscaping right away starting next week and leaving through the month of May. Looking at trying to move the project along, the City, ourselves invested in Century Boulevard and we picked this site. It's already graded. It's ready to go and Century Boulevard will be blacktopped to the site. Looking at the square footage and the potential of this site as outlined in the PUD, it yields I think Bob said up to 117,000 square feet of floor area ratio. Looking at the market place, it's changed. We're in a more mature market now. There's getting to be quite a bit of vacancy, especially in the southwest. Shakopee and even in the east side of Chanhassen. So we're proposing two, because we want to get an anchor tenant before we start construction. So if we have a larger tenant, one of 50,000 square feet, it would trigger the larger building. If we get a smaller tenant, something in the neighborhood of a minimum of around 18-20,000 square feet, we would do the smaller building and then phase the second building. The object obviously is to, from our standpoint, not to overbuild the market and have a lot of vacancy. So that's why we're looking for the flexibility. Currently we're marketing both buildings and we have interest in both but until we have a signed tenant, we don't want to move forward so we appreciate your consideration on that flexibility. Other than that, I think I'll turn it over to Steve and he can run through the final color selections and I'll just preface one final statement. The staff comments we reviewed the issue of the protruding mass versus the recessed mass is fine with us. We've made that adjustment. Steve will show you the impact of pulling basically the area around the entrance out versus recessing. Steve Krapek: As Fred said, I'm Steve Krapek with Smuckler Architects. On the overhead, if you want to do it that way. You can see a perspective from the corner. The building that's shown in this perspective is the higher of the two proposals that we've shown and the longer one. As you can see in this area, this is the area that we discussed with Bob in terms of pulling all those entry forms open. If you look on the plan, it's probably easier to...forward but you can see that it runs between the entrance...I believe are three bays long. Giving sort of multiple opportunities for... The color schemes that we used tended to be those that we discussed with Bob. Also the colors that were sort of compatible with what we felt... On all the entry forms we tend to darken up the entry so that...scale of the building down. The relief that are in the recast 2 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 paneling aren't that...so we felt we needed to bring in some additional color to help bring those along. That's the color that's shown here and I believe...it doesn't show very well on that screen but all the colors, the two that are here are actual paint samples from the paint...sent to us. They give you fairly good indication of the direction that we're going. This lower band that goes below the windows is again still precast... As I mentioned before, the back of this building will have the...pre-cast concrete finish. The front of this is smooth... The diamonds that are shown here are... The parapet walls above the roof line is high enough so the mechanical equipment is screened. We also think that...and the treatment that we did along the top of that building in raising that panel up slightly higher tends to break that long facade a little different than you've seen traditionally in a lot of the other buildings around here. Some of them have made that gesture but they've done it with metal roof forms that are back from the building and they haven't actually changed this perimeter or the skin at all. And we've done that. This panel now is an inset panel that's just being painted a different color. It isn't recessed that was indicated probably by the shadowing when we did this rendering a couple days ago. But the entry glass is recessed some to give you some relief back... And again this band that's shown here is the one that's shown in this perspective...about an inch or two and they'll be painted in those stripes. Peterson: You speak of that reveal being an inch or two in depth. Walk through if you would, are they all...or are some of them greater in depth than others? Steve Krapek: Well I think if we look at this, and it's rather small. I'll pass this around so you can get a better feel for what this color is actually like. I think obviously there's an issue of exiting and life safety so each one of these bays will have an entry and I believe that this...it's sitting back and it probably will only happen if the primary entity... wouldn't you think? Peterson: That was my second question so you can answer them both. The depth of the entrance and the reveals, architectural reveals being the diamonds and the character around the entrance itself. Are they 2 inches also like your band or are they a foot? Steve Krapek: No, the walls themselves are only a foot thick...insulated panels. About 3 inches to 4 and then the insulation is integral in that...so those reveals will be on the order of an inch • and a half to 2 inches...the engineers and the problem of how much revealing we have and...but I would think that the diamonds could be deeper than the horizontal reveals and typically they're between an inch and an inch and a half. Peterson: Discuss the possibility if you would, going deeper... My sense is architecturally you'd get more character out of more depth but what are the alternatives, is that possible based upon the current building or not? I could be wrong. I'm just giving my opinion there. Steve Krapek: Well you could maybe go 2 inches. If I asked them, you know without that additional cost, you are limited by that first thickness of concrete because as I said, it's a very ingenious system that they came up with buildings insulated with styrofoam in-between those pours and they have...the thickness of that wall so in all of that that I've ever seen is 2 inches. 3 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Fred Richter: ...system is a very smooth finish with a...reveals and all those reveals then are complimented or articulated by the changing color. So you actually get the...through the change of color. Not necessarily the depth. The only way you would get articulation through depth would be shade and shadow and even if it were 2 inches, it would be very nominal so through the basically taking this smooth concrete which then becomes like a palette for painting and you can really then develop...very cost effective way compared to other industrial buildings where the options aren't...combining them with changes in paint colors. Steve Krapek: The other thing that I would add to that is that you know typically other buildings that are of this scale that aren't pre-cast, and they aren't masonry, tend to be that EFIS...system. The styrofoam that has the stucco...on top of it. Traditionally even in just for instance the Dayton's that's over at Southdale. Those reveals are no deeper than an inch, two inches. The difference hopefully in this one is that we have fairly wide reveals compared to some of those longer ones and you know we've done different things to try to break that mass down and color becomes a fairly important part of that process. The revealing and the diamonds and that tend to give a certain rhythm and flow to that building so that it just isn't this big blank sort of thing but obviously there's only so much you can do with a lot of blank wall and the color is really a fairly important part of that. Peterson: Is this building material essentially the same as the previous? It's just a different color. Fred Richter: It's the same structural concept, basic concept... Peterson: Other questions from fellow commissioners? Conrad: So the rendering is really not accurate? Steve Krapek: No, the rendering is fairly accurate. This one? Peterson: The one that we have. Conrad: The one that you just passed around. Steve Krapek: Accurate in what way? Conrad: The depth. Steve Krapek: Yes it is. The entry forms that are shown here previously as it was submitted, it was all one flat facade. There was no stepping out of these entry forms at all so. Conrad: This looks like 2 feet and you were just saying 2 inches so. Steve Krapek: No. I'm sorry. What we're talking about the is the depth of these reveals, like this red stripe, these diamonds. This panel sits back from the face of that panel. The other issue 4 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 that we were talking about is rather than have one long facade that was 300 feet long, we bumped those entry forms out 5 feet. Peterson: Other questions. Joyce: What's different with the west elevation as far as the treatment versus, is there any difference? Steve Krapek: The west elevation is different in the character of the skin of the building. The front of the building...are smooth, similar to the building that was... The back part, the west elevation and this band that's above this...reveal which would be here, is still the smooth finish. The back...are you familiar with what that looked like. Joyce: I saw that in the report. Steve Krapek: Essentially they take a... Fred Richter: The west elevation is all loading docks... Steve Krapek: And it's finish tends to create a lot more shadow lines than a smooth face would. I won't say that... Fred Richter: As Bob pointed out earlier, the good thing that the site plan is, our west elevations always face into a hill. So basically doing the west elevation is almost...for the most part the west elevations face into... Peterson: Move to the north elevation. Assuming that that is, at least for a period of time, the majority of your traffic is going to be coming down that road from the north. Your first impression is a pretty cold and blank wall of the small rendering that I'm looking at at least of the building. Steve Krapek: Well it's exactly this shot and it's a fairly deceiving elevation because if you look at this plan. Fred Richter: There's some confusion on that because in both cases, you're looking at this north elevation but that would be, that would be the elevation for a period of time but our intent is to do the next building, another 50,000 square foot building and that would become an internal elevation but it could be a year...where that would be the north elevation. The only difference is that we aren't... Peterson: Even on the larger building, the north elevation,the only difference seems to be six windows that are...on the rendering. Steve Krapek: No. The north elevation that's shown at the top of your sheet that would say EDO 5. In that instance the north elevation is down here at the long end of this property so that 5 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 would be the street frontage. And it's this elevation. The rendering elevation and what's a bit confusing in that drawing is that this element that you're seeing here in this rendering, it's at a 45 degree angle so it appears skewed and narrower on that building elevation than it is in actual fact. It's the same width as all the other ones. The north elevation that's shown on that same sheet that's down in the middle of, down here. That would be one of the internal facades when the second building was built and so it really isn't of much point,there's really no entry to... Peterson: And your primary people using that entrance are going to be truck traffic...back side of the building,correct? Steve Krapek: I don't believe that we'll bring trucks that way. I think the intent is to bring them down this road in the back. And also along the other one and not have trucks circulate through the center of that parking. That would be more for office and warehouse. Fred Richter: But hopefully all the truck traffic is... Peterson: But visually it would be limited to the users of the building primarily? Steve Krapek: And I think Fred made a good point. That until the...is filled,you are correct in assuming that... Peterson: Other questions? Joyce: I have no other questions. Regarding the pedestrian access. I don't see any sidewalks or link ups to the trails and I noticed that was on. Fred Richter: ...I think right now we just haven't detailed it but Bob,you can correct my memory, are we on the east side...? Generous: It was always proposed that on the east side of Century Boulevard, the trail system would be and then connecting to Coulter Boulevard going to the east. Which is on the north side of Coulter. Fred Richter: And it'd be the same thing going north. Aanenson: Correct. It loops around. Generous: Yeah, and then there's an internal trail and then a street trail that would connect to the north side of Highway 5. Fred Richter: I think a site plan detail,you'll give us some guidance,we will have some connection for the pedestrians to cross... Peterson: Other questions? 6 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Sidney: Yes. A question about the rationale behind two buildings versus one smaller building with the potential for expansion. I guess I'm wondering why you would select two separate buildings but not really when I see the rendering here, now it angle off all the corners that are visible to Century Boulevard. This looks like you took an eraser and kind of went down the middle of the building. Steve Krapek: The rationale of why the entries are where they are is because historically there's a certain tenant size that you can...and you're trying to be as accommodating as you can to all the tenants that you can have and so you essentially...structurally end up with an entry at every third bay. There really isn't any need from...because the entry that would go to this final tenant along that side is taken care of back... The difference in the two buildings is that again, the marketplace is very competitive and people have different needs and if a large anchor tenant came in, they may have different needs in terms of their storage type... Some people have high rack storage. Some have low rack storage. The predominant market at this moment, am I correct is that they don't need to have high rack storage. So they're trying to accommodating enough for a long term tenant that might need that. You look at that as a potential to give something that's not readily available in the marketplace but...overbuild high rack storage when it's not something that you actually need, it's really not either serving the marketplace and if the cost that the developer has to incur, that it really isn't going to be recovered. And so I think until it's settled out which they tenant they go and what the marketplace is saying that they demand, that's why the flexibility is there. But they're trying to be as accommodating as they can to all parties. Fred Richter: I think the building's flexibility is defined by the...and we design and own our buildings so we also look for... You see a lot of the tenant bays moving to Hopkins, Eden Prairie and moving out... At this point in time we're trying to do this site plan... Sidney: One more question about material. I'm wondering if it's possible to have a different type of texture in the entrance forms. Is that a possibility? Steve Krapek: It is a possibility. The material...tends to be the most attractive one I believe of all of them. The smooth finish is the one you pay the most premium for and it gives you the greatest facility to manipulate color. You know as you go into a form that has some sort of texture or surfacing about it, it tends to distort the paint. It tends to wear off quicker. It tends to put more of a premium on that finish and... Blackowiak: ...PUD standards and this is office industrial warehouse,am I correct? Do you have anybody you're looking at or is it still kind of up in the air? Fred Richter: ... Blackowiak: So with what you're looking at right now,would that be looking at the smaller building which you said was more manufacturing oriented? 7 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Fred Richter: ...what happens then is what people said and...so that's why we need to be in a position...try to have this coincide with the final plat. We've had preliminary plat approved so... Then that allows us to you know pull the permit... Peterson: Other questions from fellow commissioners? Thank you. Seeing none, may I have a motion to open this to a public hearing and a second please. Sidney moved, Burton seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please? Seeing none... Brooks moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Ladd. Can we have your comments on this one please. Conrad: I'm okay. I agree with the staff report. Peterson: Alyson. Brooks: I guess I don't have anything against it. I don't find the building itself particularly architecturally intriguing in any way...with the parking in front like any warehouse. It just detracts from the building and looks unpleasant but it is what it is. I'm not overwhelmed by it. I'm a little under whelmed. I don't see any reason to stop it either. Peterson: Recommendations to improve it or. Brooks: Not really off the top of my head. I think it would have been better if things were recessed...in front is flushed and I'm not sure, I don't know. It's a warehouse. You know I wish somehow we could move the parking or hide it. I don't think it ever helps when the parking's out in front. I think visually your eyes...and again it is what it is and I'm not sure there's much we can do. Peterson: Allison. Blackowiak: Yeah, I really don't have a lot to say. A couple comments I guess. If indeed they are looking for the smaller of the two buildings, the 50,000 square foot building, Phase I, I would ask if there could be something done, some type of landscaping or something on the second part. Could we do that now in conjunction with Phase I as opposed to have it just wait? Specifically along the back of the lot. I think that would be kind of west side. On the north side against the street. I think those would be some things that maybe could be added to improve the general appearance to the area yet not be disturbed by any future construction. Secondly, the north side, I kind of agree with the comments that the north side is visually not terribly appealing but if it is 8 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 1998 going to be covered up by a second building, I guess we can kind of live with that in the meantime. Finally, I had trouble because it talked about the building being similar in terms of the Heartland and I certainly hope that gets painted quickly because it's, I really wouldn't want it to be similar to Heartland right now. But really that's about it. Generally I think it's good. I would like to make sure that staff works with the applicant to carefully review pedestrian and bike access to the project because that's a very important part of this entire PUD so I would really want to make sure that that gets addressed as well. Peterson: Thank you. Matt? Burton: I pretty much agree with all the comments,particularly Alison's comments regarding landscaping because if it does take a while for the Phase II of the smaller building to be built, it would be nice to have some landscaping, especially on the west and north sides. The other item that I threw out there is the staff report brought up the concern about screening and the applicant did address that but I did notice that it's not part of the conditions and I would...consider a condition that the roof mounted equipment be screened and that shouldn't be a problem since they're planning on that. And I guess that's it. Peterson: Thank you. LuAnn. Sidney: Well I made a few comments and tipped my hand about my concerns and I guess kind of starting off, at first when I saw the original renderings I was concerned that we were getting too much of the same thing and I think the applicant has done a good job in improving the architectural features of the building. I am concerned however because I still have a feeling that the textures, lack of texture on both buildings is too much the same and I'd like to see other possibilities and I think maybe the entrance forms is an area where a different texture could be used to add some interest to the buildings. I'm concerned with the polish or the look to the building. I would like to reiterate, if I can say it, staff comments about not supporting additional buildings that incorporate the same materials or design as the first two site plan proposals and I feel very strongly about that. I think since these buildings are more in the center of the development, I feel a little more comfortable but I think we need some more variety next time • around. That's all I have for now. Peterson: Thank you. Kevin. Joyce: Mr. Chairman, I apologize for being late. I have one quick question for staff. Have we tossed about the idea of any commercial going in there? ..all allocated towards office and industrial warehouse. Generous: Well within the entire Arboretum Business Park there are 4 lots, or 4 parcels that are designated for. Joyce: ...the PUD, the entire PUD is going to have some commercial. I didn't understand it and I got a building square footage breakdown. It's just right now zero commercial. 9 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Generous: Correct. Joyce: But we will someday hopefully have,we're looking at some conference centers and some things like that. Generous: And convenience commercial... Joyce: I don't have much else to add. I'm not...by it. The building that's there right now look like any other office park,warehouse. It looks like a warehouse really is what it is and I had higher expectations for this PUD. I really thought we were going to try to do something more creative and so far it has not been. You know if we're just doing an office park like over here in the Chanhassen Business Center, that's one thing but I didn't get that understanding when we went through all the process. I agree with Allison. You've got the same parking out in front. I don't see any, it doesn't really look that pedestrian friendly. It looks like another office park. If that's what we're doing, then we've got a big office park out there. I mean I'm not going to, I'll vote for it but I'm not thrilled with it. ...development more in the future and get some more interesting things other than warehouses. I mean it's just a warehouse. Peterson: Well I too am a little frustrated. I look at the 113,000 square foot building and 1 see ten entrances being virtually equal distance apart. Identical in nature. I just see a lot of the same and that disquiets me to say the least, and I don't see creativity. I too, like Kevin,had higher expectations and I'm not at all comfortable with approving a large 113,000 square foot building only because it's just overwhelming and in a spot that I think can offer a lot more. And I guess under some duress I would approve two buildings only because it does separate and give it at least a little bit softer, a little bit more inviting than the one large building. Architecturally it is like everything else and again I think that now is the time for us to say let's do something creative and different and now I'm placing economics aside by saying that and whether that's an issue, but yet it doesn't prevent me from sharing those thoughts so to that end I'm not comfortable with the large building. I'm comfortable with the changes that have been made that could have been integrated into the two separate buildings. With that, may I have a motion and a second please. Burton: I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan 98-4 for a 50,400 square foot building. Peterson: Subject to the following conditions. Go ahead and make your motion and then I'll respond accordingly. Burton: Or a 113,600 sq. ft. building, site plans prepared by Smuckler Architects dated March 10, 1998, subject to the following conditions and it's 1 through 17 and I would add 18. That all roof mounted equipment shall be screened walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Peterson: We have a motion. Do we have a second. 10 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 1998 Brooks: I'll reluctantly second. Peterson: Any discussion? Conrad: Yeah,we don't have to give approval for the second large building. Joyce: That's what I... Conrad: I also think the motion should talk about staff making sure, present to the City Council that the connection,the trail connections,pedestrian connections, I think that's got to be real clear. It's a big building. Big site. Several employees so I think there should be a better demonstration of how it's connected. The large building is real repetitive and I think we all share the same concern. I think the proposal is okay but it's certainly probably not the great thing that we envisioned. I think the smaller building works. I think the message to the developer is, from here on out maybe we're going to have different expectations of what goes there but I'd just make those comments. The motion's there. Peterson: ... Conrad: I would make a friendly amendment to the motion that the staff presents, the staff and applicant presents to the City Council all the trail and pedestrian connections in the formal staff report. Burton: I think I'll, if I can, amend my motion to delete the reference to the 113,600 referenced building. Fred Richter: Can I speak to the issue of...? This PUD,this property was guided by the City for an industrial office park. The nature of office, industrial is large buildings. Our PUD grants us a certain floor area ratio...on land,the marketplace for us to do a successful, we need large buildings. I just want to say that that's, we went forward with the PUD. It's our understanding that we can have large buildings on this property. Large buildings by their nature are repetitive. ...go on record that we feel that it's our right... The City made a decision, they wanted this type of taxes on the property. They made a very concerted effort to define where the retail is. They made a very concerted effort to put parameters on property that abuts Highway 5 and 41 with design constraints. We're talking about an interior lot that is guided for these uses and these sizes. And that is you know...we made our investment in the property and so on. Brooks: Can I respond to that? Peterson: No. Actually,thank you for your comments. We've got a motion and a second on the table and we need to vote on it...after do that,we can come back... Aanenson: Was the motion going to be amended or? Peterson: Well, can he amend a motion after it's been seconded? 11 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Blackowiak: It hasn't been seconded. Peterson: Yes it was. Generous: I believe you have to act on the amendment first to the motion and then... Burton: ...offer a friendly amendment as part of the last... Conrad: We have to vote on the motion. Peterson: There's been a motion and a second. Burton moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #98-4 for a 50,400 sq. ft. building or a 113,600 sq. ft. building, site plan prepared by Smuckler Architects dated March 10, 1998, and subject to the 18 conditions presented in the staff report with one addition presented by Commissioner Burton. All the commissioners voted in opposition and the motion failed unanimously. Peterson: Is there another motion? Joyce: I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan#98-4 for a 50,400 square foot building, site plan prepared by Smuckler Architects dated March 10, 1998 subject to conditions 1 through, I believe we had 19. I'd have to do redo those conditions, wouldn't I? 18 being, make sure that the root top enclosures were screened with compatible materials. And number 19, that the applicant insure that the pedestrian access and access to trail system for this property. Peterson: Is there a second to this motion? Conrad: Second. Peterson: Discussion. Brooks: Well I just wanted to say that, I don't think the Planning Commission is against your large building. I think what we don't like is the architectural style of the building. I think we're becoming really weary of how Chanhassen is starting to look with all these warehouses. So... because I didn't get the feeling any of us were against the large building, or against what you're trying to do. It's just the look of it, and you've got to admit when you drive around Chanhassen, the warehouses are not a pretty site. And there's not a lot you can do but there's something you can do. Peterson: Any further discussion? 12 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Joyce moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #98-4 for a 50,400 square foot building, site plan prepared by Smuckler Architects dated March 10, 1998, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development must comply with the Development Design Standards for Arboretum Business Park. 2. The building entrances shall project out from the body of the building to provide significant visual relief in a manner and at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public streets. 3. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 4. The site plans shall be redesigned to reflect the proposed street and utility improvements proposed with Phase I of the City's public improvement project for Arboretum Business Park. 5. All driveway access points shall be constructed in accordance with the City's industrial driveway detail plate No. 5207. Drive aisle widths to the truck parking lot shall be increased to 30 feet wide and the turning radiuses onto Coulter Boulevard expanded to accommodate truck turning movements. 6. Erosion control fence shall be installed and maintained around the downstream side of the site until all disturbed areas have been revegetated and removal is authorized by the City. Storm sewer inlets shall be protected with silt fence, hay bales and/or rock filter dikes until the parking lot has been paved with a bituminous surface. 7. The City's boulevards must be restored with sod. The landscaping plan shall incorporate landscape material suitable for a 2:1 slope. 8. Site plan approval is contingent upon the City authorizing and awarding a project for Phase II public improvements for Arboretum Business Park and final plat approval for Arboretum Business Park 2nd Addition. 9. Detailed storm drainage calculations including drainage area maps for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 10. Commencement of construction for this development is contingent on the recording of a final plat for Arboretum Business Park 2nd Addition. 11. The applicant shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage on site. 12. The applicant shall work with staff to revise the landscape plan to meet minimum requirements for parking lot landscape,boulevard trees and buffer yard plantings as specified 13 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 in the staff report. Alternate 1 would require a minimum of 27 shade trees, 24 ornamental or conifer trees, and 36 shrubs. Alternate 2 would require a minimum of 63 shade trees, 48 ornamental or conifer trees, and 72 shrubs. The buffer yard on the west of the site shall incorporate native grasses and wildflower mix as ground cover. 13. Additional evergreens shall be added to the northern and southern landscape peninsulas at the corners of the building and at the southwest corner of the site to provide more screening of the loading areas from the street. 14. Each landscape peninsula must have one shade tree. Landscape peninsulas less than 10 feet in width must have aeration tubing installed. 15. The applicant shall install foundation plantings around the perimeter of the building as required by city ordinance. 16. On the utility plan, off the northwest corner of the Phase II part of the buildings, a hydrant is shown directly in the center of the driveway off Century Boulevard. Please provide a hydrant off of the northwest and the northeast corner of the phase 1 building. Please provide hydrant off the west side of the phase 2 building. Move the hydrant on the south side of the phase 2 building to the southwest corner of the building. 17. Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policies will need to be reviewed and followed during the course of the project." 18. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. 19. The applicant and staff present to the City Council a detailed presentation of all pedestrian and trail connections with this site. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: HKS ASSOCIATES IS REQUESTING A REPLAT OF A PORTION OF OUTLOTS D & E, VILLAGES ON THE PONDS INTO LOT 1, BLOCK 1, VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 3RD ADDITION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN 7,443 SQ. FT. HOULIHAN'S RESTAURANT ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD AND LOCATED SOUTH OF HWY 5 AND EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions for staff. Brooks: ...bar-be-que shack? 14 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Al-Jaff: No. On the other side. Aanenson: The pond is in the middle. ...hotel. Then you've got this project. Then you've got the wetlands and then we've got the other project we've approved. Right. And we've got the other project that we've approved that's got the glass silo, correct. Brooks: Ladd is very worried about this restaurant. His eating ability in Chanhassen. Burton: When we got here tonight there was an item here from the Milo Architecture Group and one of the concerns that they had was the location of the trash enclosure and the service doors and how that might affect traffic. Have you considered that or is this being considered...problem? Hempel: Chairman and Planning Commissioners. We assume trash pick-up will be in off hours. Morning hours. Typically when the trash is collected. We don't believe that would be an issue. Burton: They mentioned also that delivery in such a close location to the service enclosure to the driveway if not managed properly may cause inconveniences to the car traffic on the east/west driveway. Is that a concern at all? I just wanted to throw that out. Aanenson: ...typical of off peak hours. Peterson: We've got too much paper here. Other questions of staff? I've got one on the parking,just for more of clarification. If you look at the parking lot, there isn't a page number but...planting schedule but there seems to be U-shape inserts into the parking lot in more than one place. It doesn't seem to serve any purpose. I don't know whether it's separating the parking lot from the hotel. Move your finger up. Up. Up to the left. Well, other way excuse me. You're kind of in the middle. Up. To the right then. The left. The left... Basically I'm looking at, here's the building. Yeah. Al-Jaff: ...why they are being removed? Peterson: No, why are they there in the first place? I read them as being put in. There's one there and there's one to the right of the restaurant also. I'm trying to figure what they are basically. Al-Jaff: The ordinance,they're landscape islands. The ordinance requires landscape islands be provided every, I believe it's 2,000, 6,000 square feet. And it's only to meet ordinance requirements. This way you don't have a sea of asphalt. Peterson: This landscaping I'm looking at, that's probably why I raise the question. There's nothing planted on here. On the landscape plan I'm looking at. On those U shaped... Al-Jaff: Today there aren't. However, when weather permits and landscaping season. 15 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Again, I'm looking at the plan. There isn't anything on here to be planted on those islands. Aanenson: As a part of his project is your question, correct. That's correct. Peterson: Other questions of staff. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman I have just a quick one. On the plans I see 8,281 square feet. On the proposal, the staff report I see 7,443 square feet for the restaurant. Which is it? The 7,443? Okay. Al-Jaff: Correct. Blackowiak: So what is the change or loss from the plan that we see as 8,200 square feet? Al-Jaff: ...calculation. Blackowiak: Oh, okay. That's fine. Peterson: Other questions? Seeing none, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commissioners. Please come forward. Mark Clarey: Good evening. My name is Mark Clarey. I represent the Northcott Companies. If members of the commission don't mind,just to follow through we have our consultant team here. Alan Kretman with the civil engineering firm, HKS and Truman Howell with the architects. Alan will basically try to walk you through the site plan and the landscape plan and address any issues that you may have regarding that and then Truman Howell will show you the various building materials that we are proposing for the project, as well as the architectural rendering and the elevations. Basically these 8 x 11 books are just condensed versions for you to follow along a little more easily. ...restaurant in Eagan but you'll notice that the pictures in here are taken from and our two consultants will take you through the multitude of changes we've made to the exterior of this building to try to enhance the project and try to answer any of your questions. Thank you. Alan Kretman: Good evening Mr. Chairman, commissioners. My name is Alan Kretman. I'm with HKS Associates, the landscape architect and our firm has done the planning and landscape architecture on the civil engineering on the project. What I'd like to do is simply walk you through what we've done in terms of our approach on the project and answer any questions that you may have on the site design. And then Truman Howell with Truman Howell Architects will come behind me and discuss issues regarding the design and purpose of the building. As you can see from our site plan, what we've done is tried to take a logical extension of the parking lot for Americlnn and extending that to the east. At the same time one of the issues that we had was in the...building where we wanted to take advantage of the wetland complex that was created as a part of the overall Villages on the Ponds...orient this building in this direction to provide for as much of the view of that amenity as possible. Another major impact with positioning the 16 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 building was the front entrance. We wanted that to face the parking and leave all this parking out in front. ...with that,we also looked at the site furnishings and how we could compliment...detail of this site in front of the AmericInn we have brick pavers utilizing...as well as repeated that pattern with the restaurant. Within the Americlnn development we have two different types of land fixtures. Another detail...we repeated that along the street frontage here and... In addition, if you look in your pictures you'll find that within the pictures for the...pictures, you'll find those elements out in front here with...entry element and then... That design with the landscape proposed, which again an extension of what we've done over on the Americlnn site...and again in the staff report you'll see that we're about 116 feet short of... Keep in mind that BRW's master plan for the landscaping has illustrated landscaping off of the site, the wetland which enhances what we're trying to do and works with our site... By taking and emulating the pattern of brick that we utilized in Americlnn, we've taken that and added a connection for the restaurant... That combined with the variety of plant material that we've utilized in here,we show that we have a very attractive site. Very harmonious. Blends in well with the Americlnn project and mostly captures you know again,the flavor of the design elements from BRW's master landscape plan and brings this into a comprehensive, complete picture. ...we've also illustrated the location of the trail, the pedestrian trail that comes through and adjacent to the property. ...we've also got pedestrian connections between the hotel, the parking lot here with a sidewalk...again allow for people to flow through... Aside from that, again we've brought in and utilized plant material that reflect... Peterson: Questions? Truman Howell: Truman Howell, Truman Howell Architects. My office is in Wayzata. We've been here before but I don't know that I've been any more excited about a project than this particular one. I think what this project brings to the concept of Villages on the Ponds is a marquee building. And we probably should show you the rendering. I spent all night on it. I'd better show you. It doesn't show well does it? Anyway,the project I think is basically the character is like an Italian, southern Italian building with a very tall entry and it has the emphasis is obviously at the front where you come into the building. We have various color of brick and as you see on the front here, the articulations with the rustication on the very front of the tower there is in...and you'll see that wrapping also around the arches over the windows. The photograph that you see in this rendering here and I think one in your... Now the reason that that is in there ...and so what we did, instead of building that here,we actually put in windows for light in there, even in the one that goes in the bathroom, but we did blank those out...but instead of seeing this you'll see windows. And for example, on the other project,the earlier project, these were blanked off here and infilled with brick,which we felt gave a nice texture there but we have now those two with glass so that you literally can see... About the third photograph in your book shows the fourth side of the building,which is always a concern, especially here. And the reason that I wanted to leave that in the book for you to see was that we've done several things to change that so that it does not look...we've added brick. Actually added a window feature. We put columns back here. Also we've put a roof over the top...so that even when you're walking in that direction, it will appear as a... One of the concerns I know that everyone has is do we see the equipment on the roof. This building you won't see that. You can see all the photos that you're looking at there and in addition we enlarged the height of this particular 17 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 1998 coping another additional...probably from Highway 5. ...Highway 5 but someone might be tall enough... The character that you see in the outdoor base of the patio. The hand railing there is similar to what you see at the existing AmericInn. ...so that idea is carried through this building and... In terms of the building itself, inside, the entry will be through a vestibule...photos that you have and if you'll notice one of the photos in there, I think it's, I don't know what page it's on but it shows an interior with the glass, well I'll show you. This particular photograph, you'll see the glass, the etched glass in the background. If you'll notice this photo, this is of the Lone Oak tree in...and what we're proposing to do,as a matter of fact one of the brighter members of our team, Luke Fowler, suggested that we do the maple leaf for Chanhassen etched in that particular glass... If there are questions, or you want me to tell you move about this as the roof. This is a metal roof. This is the tile which goes on the top of the tower as you come in. We won't have these holes in there. This will be the finish that will be on the exterior. Samples of brick and then the mahogany that you see in the photograph in the interior. If there are questions I can answer, I'd be happy to. Peterson: Questions of Truman? Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Could you point out where the false windows are? Truman Howell: It's hard to tell. Blackowiak: It is. Truman Howell: We're dedicating these to Sharmin. She's got four of them on the Americlnn now. This one. No, that's real. The one at the back of the building. This one on the south elevation right here. This one...on the east and then along on the south...it is right here. No, here. But you don't know it. I don't know it. Blackowiak: There are two? Truman Howell: There are actually two. Blackowiak: Okay. Truman Howell: One of them...patio off to the right hand side where the restroom. Peterson: Other questions? Brooks: I have one. Can we see something with a... I actually like the building. The only thing I...is the big red Houlihan's sign. I think it really detracts from what you're trying to do architecturally. I mean you're going with like a southern Italian thing and then boom. This big red sign. 18 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Truman Howell: Well, what we were very careful to do was to be sure that we were within the requirements of the PUD and actually it's smaller than what is allowed in the PUD. Brooks: Maybe it's, when I look at this picture and it's like the Houlihan's sign is subdued... Somehow on this building it stands out so much. Truman Howell: You mean in this photo here? Brooks: I guess what worries me about Villages on the Pond is that we're really trying to do something special and different and the building works but then all of a sudden when I look at the Houlihan's part up front, it sort of begins to look like suburbia anywhere. Truman Howell: Really? We thought it was rather tastefully done. Brooks: The building is. I mean I'm not... Truman Howell: No, no. I'm talking about the sign too. Mark Clarey: One of the things you can do, I mean when you do sit off the highway obviously you want to attract people to the fact that you are a restaurant and let them know which restaurant you are so that you can get... Brooks: I get that part but I understand marketing but I know. It's just that since you guys are the architect, I'm not the architect, I just wanted to mention it in case you had any ideas of how you could possibly... Blackowiak: This is a lot darker. Brooks: Yeah, that's a good point. You know maybe it's a question of darkening the red or making it a brown so that you can see it. You know Alison that's a really good point. Maybe our problem is that the red contrasts so drastically with the building. That's what's bothering me. Maybe a dark red or a brown would... Blackowiak: This looks darker,just on the rendering. It just looks a little more brick red than fire engine red. Truman Howell: That's probably more reproduction issues than...it was meant to be. Blackowiak: Do you like this? Truman Howell: Well actually I do. I don't find it offensive. The other thing that I really like, and I don't know if you agree with me or not but the telephone booth sitting out in front is also... Brooks: But that's okay because a telephone booth is a period so that works. The Houlihan sign, I'm starting to agree with Alison. I think it may not even be that bad...but it's not glaring. 19 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Mark Clarey: ...on the sides of the letters? There's various ways with channel letter signs and these different retail people paint the returns the sides of the channel boxes... Sometimes they go with black or white or the color of the building to make them blend. These that you're looking at in the photograph here are painted the same color as the actual letters themselves. Peterson: Let me interrupt you for a second. Are we going for a sign, a separate sign permit later or are we going at the same time then? Al-Jaff: Same time. Peterson: I'm getting a sense that it is more taste than anything. Maybe we can hold off on the comments until later and talk more about the recommendations perhaps but...different opinion of the sign in this case perhaps. Other questions? Comments? Joyce: Yeah I have one. I might be working this through but the only concern I have about the building is the south elevation, which is right on, the interior street there. Mark Clarey: The south elevation? Joyce: Right. And I understand all you had to do to give me that building in there and stuff and I appreciate that. The only problem is that corner, that south elevation is right on the street. Right on the interior street. And I didn't, and now I've looked through this. Is there going to be landscaping there? Mark Clarey: Oh yes. Yes. Joyce: And we'll have additional landscaping. I know you're off...and I apologize for not asking before but if you could do something with that corner and with, I know that they've talked about the problem of the service area right there. Alan Kretman: What you'll find in the back facade of the building, that we've selected materials large enough that will be displayed against the structure so the landscaping becomes the design element of the south side. I know...fake window but we also wanted to respect that and keep our landscaping low and underneath that...but it all works together. We work in harmony in trying to work in the... Joyce: I'm looking here. it looks like there's some additional landscaping right in that corner there and plus there's, the building kind of juts in and there's some relief there too. You can't see that on the elevation so I guess I kind of answered my own question on that. Okay. That's it. Peterson: Okay. Other questions? Truman, I've just got a couple more. One question and then some general comments. I look at, if you could just describe the trash area. It says metal... Truman Howell: ...corrugated metal but a ribbed metal... 20 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Peterson: I empathize with your thoughts. I just look at that, and as Kevin says it's going to be very visual. Truman Howell: It will be again, landscaped... Peterson: A second is really more of a comment. As you look at...the north elevation and if you look at the left hand side you have a pitched awning. Truman Howell: That's actually a metal roof. Standing seam. Right here? Peterson: Yeah. As I move to the right hand side,and you have a straight, I guess my first impression is, it didn't fit. The far right hand. Truman Howell: Oh this one? Peterson: That. Truman Howell: Okay, that's the entry canopy. Peterson: Okay. Truman Howell: That really is very attractive. Peterson: So it is going to be the round curved, okay. That helps because the visual effect of that to me said... Mark Clarey: That's...cedar, tongue and groove cedar on the under side of that. Standing seam on top of it. There's valance lighting that's hidden inside of the valences over two sides and... Peterson: Other questions? Thank you. I have one more question for staff. On the lighting • section on page 15. You talked about the lighting in the parking lot being a shoebox fixture. And I'll correlate that to the current lighting throughout the development. Are we changing the street lighting? Al-Jaff: No. The PUD ordinance permits shoe box fixtures in parking lots and decorative light fixtures along sidewalks and along the building. Peterson: And I can't remember what's in the American Inn right now, in their parking lot. Is it shoebox? Al-Jaff: It's shoeboxes. Peterson: Okay. This item is open for a public hearing. May I have a motion to open to do the same and a second please. 21 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission,please come forward and state your name and address please. Conrad moved,Joyce seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Comments. Kevin, do you want to start this one out? Joyce: Sure. First off I'd like to compliment the group that just made the presentation. It was actually one of the most professional, wonderful presentations. It made it a lot easier when you have these kind of exhibits and that so good job. I think it's a very good project. I have nothing, good luck to you. I don't have anything else to say. I don't have a problem with the sign either but I can see how,I can see what Alyson's saying. I can see someone not liking it because it might be a little too garish. A little too loud for somebody. I don't have a problem with it. Peterson: LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah I think it's a wonderful plan. I really appreciate the variety in the architecture. Couldn't find any faults really in what was presented in the staff report. That was a good report and comprehensive and the plans look great. What can I say but let's eat. Peterson: Matt. Burton: Well when I first heard it was a Houlihan's, it made me think of a lot of the ones I've seen out East and I wasn't very excited about it at all because a lot of those are in the malls and don't look, I don't think they look good and have big green signs a lot of times. But I was really pleasantly surprised when I saw this. I think it's a really nice project and I had no problems with it at all. On the sign issue, I don't mind the red. I don't mind the sign that much at all. Perhaps the drawing we have, it looks like the sides of the lettering, there's a black color which I think reduces the red from the side and maybe that would be something that could address some concerns that have been raised but I don't really have a problem with it and I think it's a nice building. I think it's a good addition to this development. Peterson: Allison. Blackowiak: Yeah, I agree. I think the building looks good. I think Sharmin's windows look wonderful. I did not like the bricked in ones in the Eagan restaurant at all so this is certainly a much improved variation. The sign,again I don't know if I have anything new to add but I do like the rendering. It's not quite as red I guess. Maybe that's where I'm coming from. I like the materials I've seen tonight. I would like to suggest that, I don't know what you're thinking about for street planters,benches, that type of thing but to continue whatever is over at AmericInn or kind of like similar theme so we can kind of start uniting things a little bit. I'm really happy to 22 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 see an outdoor dining area because I just,that's one thing that we certainly lack in Chanhassen and I enjoy eating out for those few weeks that we're able to every summer. Other than that I think it looks very nice and yeah, good job. Peterson: Alyson. Brooks: I think it's a really good project overall. Absolutely, and I have...say this is really nicely done. I wish we saw more of this kind of presentation. I like the project. Like I said, the only thing I ask is that you just tone down the red just a little but that's obviously up to you but I also agree, it's going to be a nice addition to...very nice addition. Conrad: Nothing new to add. Good project. Good four walls. Very seldom do we see that. I'll stay out of the signage. I think you've got to do what you've got to do. Mark Clarey: I have to say your staff was extremely helpful and easy to work with. It was my first time. I'm new to the company and organization and...quite helpful. Peterson: I assume that the sign, that is your standard corporate logo. I had nothing but accolades also, both in the style in the architecture...of the Villages on the Ponds in many ways I look at the one...and they made some good recommendations...being certainly one of their finest presentations as it meets the standards that we set for a very high standard area...of that also. Hearing those comments, may I have a motion and a second please. Blackowiak: I will make a motion. Brooks: We have a correction... Al-Jaff: On page 24 of the staff report. Condition number 17. The condition should read, open cutting the street to extend sanitary sewer service from the existing manhole may be permitted. The street shall be restored in kind prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Joyce: Also, condition number 9 was blank. Al-Jaff: Yes. Blackowiak: So I will make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #98-5 for a 7,443 square foot Houlihan's Restaurant as shown on plans dated April 6, 1998, subject to the following conditions, 1 through 8. We realize that 9 is blank. 10 through 16 with 17 modified to permit open cutting to the street as Sharmin stated. And conditions 18 and 19. Joyce: I'll second that. Peterson: Discussion? 23 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Blackowiak moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #98-5 for a 7,443 square foot Houlihan's Restaurant as shown in the plans dated April 6, 1998, subject to the following conditions: 1. Should the need to construct the parking space (shown as proof of parking along the north portion of the site)present itself, the applicant will be responsible for realigning the existing trail. 2. The applicant shall increase the number of overstory trees, by at least two,planted near or in the parking lot to make up the difference between required minimum parking lot landscaping and proposed landscaping. 3. The applicant shall consider relocating Japanese tree lilacs to afford views of decorative element flower bed from both restaurant and boulevard. 4. Aeration tubes must be installed in islands and peninsulas less than 10 feet wide. The applicant must provide plans and insurance of success if alternatives are requested. 5. The comprehensive landscape plan shall be amended to reflect the shifting of the trees along the northeast lot line as shown on the landscape plan submitted by the applicant. 6. A separate sign permit must be submitted for all site signage, except for traffic control signage. The applicant shall submit detailed sign plans reflecting a individual backlit letters and method of lighting. 7. Site plan approval shall be conditioned upon the developer of The Villages on the Ponds recording the final plat and all pertinent documents for the PUD with Carver County. Financial guarantees must be submitted to the City to guarantee all public utility improvements and landscaping. Also, the applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the City and provide financial security pertaining to specific improvements on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds Third Addition. 8. No building permits will be issued until the final plat of Villages on the Ponds Third Addition has been recorded. 9. 10. Building Official conditions: a. Revise accessible parking to meet code requirements. b. Meet with the Inspections Division plan reviewer for a Commercial Building Permit Requirements Checklist as soon as possible after site plan approval 11. Fire Marshal Conditions: 24 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 a. Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policies which must be reviewed and followed during the course of the project. The Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policies (of which copies are attached to the staff report) include: Policy#01-1990. Policy#02-1990. Policy#04-1991. Policy#06-1991. Policy#07-1991. Policy#29-1992. Policy#34-1993. Policy#36-1994. Policy #40-1995. Policy#44-1997. 12. All roof top equipment must be screened in accordance with the PUD ordinance. 13. 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. 14. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water, and plumbing permits from the City's building Department. 13. Mylar as-built construction plans of the utility improvements will be required by the City upon completion of the site improvements. 14. The grading and drainage plan shall be revised as follows: a) The southerly parking lot shall be redesigned to drain to the existing storm manhole. b) The existing storm sewer along the easterly side of the building shall be relocated a minimum of 10 feet away from any portion of the building or deck. c) Show existing storm sewer on Pond Promenade. 25 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 15. The applicant shall supply detailed storm sewer calculations including a drainage area map for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to issuance of a building permit. 16. The final set of construction plans shall include a traffic signage plan for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to issuance of a building permit. 17. Open cutting the street to extend sanitary sewer service from the existing manhole may be permitted. The street shall be restored in kind prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 18. Responsibility for paving Pond Promenade shall be resolved prior to issuance of a building permit. 19. All parking stalls and drive aisles shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Code 20-1118. The plans shall include drive aisle widths." All voted in favor and the motion carried. Peterson: Then can I have a motion for the subdivision and a second please. Burton: I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision#98-5 to replat Outlot D and a portion of Outlot E into Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 3`d Addition as shown in plans dated April 6, 1998, subject to the conditions 1 through 8. Joyce: Second. Peterson: Any discussion? Burton moved,Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision #98-5 to replat Outlot D and a portion of Outlot E into Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 3rd Addition, as shown on the plans dated April 6, 1998, subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide cross access easements and maintenance agreements for utilities and parking facilities to be shared between the subject site and the AmericInn motel site. 2. The applicant shall enter into an addendum to the development contract/PUD agreement for Villages on the Ponds. 3. The applicant shall pay the City administration fees for review and recording of the final plat documents. 26 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 4. The proposed commercial development of 1.37 net developable acres is responsible for a water quantity fee of$5,974.00. This fee is due payable to the City prior to the City signing the final plat. 5. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees pursuant to City Code. 6. Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds Third Addition, is subject to full park and trail fees per city ordinance. One third of these fees will be paid prior to recording the final plat. The remaining two thirds shall be paid at the time the building permit is granted. 7. 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. 8. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer,water, and plumbing permits from the City's building Department. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: BLOOMBERG COMPANIES IS REQUESTING SITE PLAN REVIEW TO REMODEL A PORTION OF THE FRONTIER BUILDING,WHICH IS PART OF THE ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX, LOCATED JUST EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN CINEMA. Public Present: Name Address - .Herb Bloomberg Bloomberg Companies Clayton Johnson Bloomberg Companies Bob Davis Design One Bob Copeland Chanhassen Cinema Amy Roberts National Lodging Selvig Huseth Chanhassen Dinner Theater Debbie Lacer Frontier Building Britta Bloomberg Bloomberg Companies Maita Bloomberg Devine Bloomberg Companies Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. 27 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Peterson: Questions for staff. Sharmin, do you have a rendering of what we originally looked at when we first started looking at the entertainment complex and what was then, I hate to say a couple years now probably but can you give us a sense and do you have any renderings of that that you can share? Al-Jaff: This is what the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed...entertainment complex was proposed. It is intended to have an interfaced brick facade. There are two tones of...that would be used on the building. It doesn't spell out exactly which interfaced brick they would be using. However these are the three tones that have...presented at the previous meetings. Peterson: The whole front was to have been one of those three style bricks essentially. We didn't at the time, I don't recall any side elevations. Al-Jaff: No. It was to be...It was a condition of approval. Peterson: Other questions of staff. Seeing none,would the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? And if so, please come forward. State your name and address please. Clayton Johnson: Clayton Johnson. I'm Vice President of Bloomberg Companies here in Chanhassen and a little bit of introduction. We've been involved in the downtown development and redevelopment ever since 1986 and I realize now that it's been a while since we've had a project before you because I look up here and I don't recognize, Ladd's about the only one that I recognize. But I think by way of explanation, our role in the downtown development has been two fold. In many cases I would classify us as a passive,as an active partner. We've been a part of the hotel project. We've been a part of Market Square. In all of those projects our role was passive. In other words, we were a landowner. We were an investor and we had a certain amount of influence on the architecture but by all means we did not control. The project that you've referred to here and that Sharmin has presented was the one that you saw I think back in 1995 or 1996. We were not the applicant on that project. That project failed and the reason it failed was a number of things but primarily economic. So when we took over in 1996, Bob Copeland representing Copeland-Mithun and ourselves representing the Bloomberg Companies sat down with staff and we said, it appears this project is doomed. Is there any way that we can resurrect it and bring it back to you in stages or in phases. And as you recall that, a presentation has been made on the cinema project and the cinema project did go forward and our only involvement in the cinema project was one of very strong support. Obviously when we found that we had somebody that was willing to come in and invest a million, a million and a half in that corner and the way it looked,we thought anything was going to be an improvement and we backed that with a $100,000.00 investment. We at the Bloomberg Companies wrote a check for the construction of the parking lot. And the staff report refers to the support that's coming from the HRA and I think I'd like to take that separately. I really think that's an issue that should go to the Council and go to the HRA and obviously this project will not be built if we don't have their support but I don't think it's a Planning Commission item. We're really excited. We've been working at this, as you know, since 1995-1996. We have a plan and we have a plan we're very 28 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 excited about. It's a comprehensive plan. It deals with all,where this plan when it was submitted only dealt with the front elevation and there was some comment about obviously there had to be something done with the rest of it. Our plan is really comprehensive. It deals with all three sides of the building. It deals with what has become,I don't know if you've been there since the cinema's opened but all of a sudden it's a pedestrian walkway. People are going from the front to the back so our plan addresses that. We've got sidewalks planned and additional lighting planned and some interesting things on that alley. Our plan has two things that this plan did not have. It has tenants. It has financing. And it's a reality. And with that I'd like to introduce, since we're an active owner,we're going to own this property. Mr. Bloomberg has been 100% involved in it's design. He's going to own this and his family is going to own it for the next 50 years. They feel very strongly about the architecture that goes into this. So I'm going to ask Bob Davis from Design One to come up and present the architectural side of this and Bob's association with us is long term. He is, at one time was our employee. Is now an independent architect on his own and he and Herb go back a long ways. In fact back to the days of the historic renovation I believe of the St. James Hotel so I'm going to ask Bob to present the plan and then I'll be available to ask questions. And I think during the public hearing, you're going to hear from our neighbors. We've gone out and asked our neighbors what they think of this plan and I'd be disappointed if a bunch of them aren't here tonight to support us. Okay? Bob. Bob Davis: Thanks Clayton. My name is Bob Davis. I'm an architect representing Bloomberg Companies. As Clayton mentioned I go back with the company quite a ways. I first started working with the Bloomberg Companies in 1965. This building was in existence at that time. In fact it survived the tornado of 1965 which maybe, I don't know if anybody here remembers. I do. I was in the old Post Office building. But we need to get onto business here. I think as I read the staff report, Sharmin has said if you agree with this proposal there are some conditions. I'd like to move right onto those conditions and discuss those and review what we think and what we will change and what we think is perhaps inappropriate to change. So if I take a look at the recommendations on page 9, and there are 11. The first three address landscaping, and I will concede that the landscaping plan originally presented on your drawings was pretty brief and done quite quickly. We have gone to a registered landscape architect and asked him to review the comments, to review the plan and rework the landscaping. That is done. I have a plan here that I'd like to show. If the camera can pick this up. This addresses and does change and is in compliance with the first three items on the recommendation. Do we have anybody here with a good landscape background? I'd sure like to take that up if anybody on the Planning Commission is. Sharmin, could you comment on the changes? Look at these and. Aanenson: No. It's too short of notice for us to give any comment at this time. We haven't seen this since the 2nd and. Bob Davis: Well we talked to Sharmin about it. Aanenson: I'm the Planning Director and I would advise that at this point we think it's too short of notice to try to comment on that without,just seeing it on the spot. 29 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Why don't we just go through the rest of your comments. Bob Davis: Okay. Well I want to go back to that a minute though. I concede that we are changing the landscape to comply with the first three items on the recommendation. Peterson: So noted. Bob Davis: Number 4 speaks of the rooftop equipment. There is none. There will be none. This is a curved roof behind the facade. Equipment will be, if it's placed on the ground, will be screened in a mechanical area. So in my mind, item 4 is not an issue. We don't intend to have any rooftop equipment. Item 5 I think, we certainly intend to comply with the ordinance. I'd like to bring up one item on the sign relating to number 6. And specifically lowering the sign. Fred, you have a couple of photographs. I'd like to place before you some photographs of the High Timber Lodge signs and can we pick this up on, this one here. As I mentioned, I've worked with Herb Bloomberg since 1965 and this plan is an interpretation of his design ideas that go back to the origination of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, the Frontier Lumber Company, and those original buildings which had the frontier character. Specifically the shingle roofs. And this is, do I need to pass these around so you can see this a little better? Peterson: It's coming in clear on the TV here so. Bob Davis: Okay. So you can see this signage and how it relates to the sign. Let me put up another drawing here so you can get an idea, little better of what we are proposing on the building. The south elevation that's been referred to here. The roof is actually above the signs. The existing roof structure. There's a dotted curved line here and that is the roof. Peterson: The height above street level is approximately, the sign? I'm comparing the Timber Lodge. Bob Davis: Okay, so we're, I don't want to guess at this. 20 feet. Peterson: Significantly higher than, you've comparing it to a Timber, the Timber sign which would be significantly less in overall height than what you're offering here, correct? Just a couple questions. Bob Davis: I think we should look at the two this way and look at the proportion. There's been some discussion about the proportion of these. Can we do it this way? Peterson: Well again, the question is, would the signs on this be 10 feet, 20 feet higher than the one on the south? Bob Davis: 20 feet total height. Not very much higher. Probably 4 feet higher. Although I think rather than to guess, we should really have specific numbers and I think we can get a scale out of a briefcase. 30 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: It's not that important of a question. I'm just trying to get scope and scale of what you're trying to do. Bob Davis: Okay. Okay, I believe this is an appropriate adaptation of the back elevation reflecting what has been done on the High Timber Lodge, and we're taking that as a standard. These signs do exist across the front of the Frontier building as well. If we proceed on with these items, number 7 is not an issue with us. I think it's a documentation that has to be met and it's not, the applicant does not have any objection to number 7. Number 8 talks again about rooftop equipment and trash enclosures. There will be no rooftop equipment. Trash enclosures will be designed and will comply when the tenants are specifically in hand and we know whether the requirement is a simple little container or big dumpster and obviously it's an ordinance that has to be complied with. The applicant certainly has every intention of complying with the screening of trash enclosures as to whatever size they will be. Item 9 is documenting some ordinances again which have to be met. I don't think it's an issue we need to talk about. We certainly will comply. Item 10 has three items. It speaks of the corrugated metal, adding a color canopy or adding a color canopy and raising the brick on the building. If we look at the elevation here on the back,this is an extension of the rest of the architecture and design of the Dinner Theater, the furniture store, the front of the lumber building of using wood shingles and mansard shapes and I'm just saying to you, I don't believe we should add a canopy. I don't think it's appropriate. There isn't canopies on the front. We can go across the street and find some but why should we add a few canopies to this building? I think that whole concept should be dismissed and we say we look at these as the same material and the same form and a pitched roof shingles, same color. There was a note somewhere here adding color to this side. I think with the landscaping, the materials, the variation of color, the teal doors,the bronze windows, I think there certainly is color here. Raising the brick on this building,there was some note about using brick on some of these facades. The brick is shown to the window height. I think that's appropriate. I, as an architect stand before you and say this is my choice. This is Herb Bloomberg's interpretation of continuing 45 years of building in this community. The metal siding on the side, and this was discussed with the planning department,and is elaborated here. Can we get a close up of these three murals on the side of the building? Can you see that on your screens or do you want this up in front of you? Why don't you do that. Three dimensional figures on those murals... I should remind you that this elevation is an alley. This is not fronting the parking lot. This is not fronting a street. Yes, I think the applicant chooses to propose this solution. I think it's a good solution. As I say,this is an alley. This is not fronting a parking lot or the front street. So we're asking to drop number 10 from your items of recommendation. The other items, with the exception of lowering the sign on item 6,I think we're in concurrence and I'd like you to consider this proposal this evening as being a good addition to a building that needs a new life. Clayton, is there anything that I've missed in your understanding of what the owner. Clayton Johnson: No. Only that again I would urge you to take action tonight rather than table the issue. This is a project we've been working on for such a long period of time that we finally get to the point where the financing's in place and the tenants are anxious to occupy on or about August 1 and very honestly we're on a time schedule that has to move along and we still have to go through Council and HRA. 31 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Joyce: Can you convince me of the economic hardship of changing the corrugated metal... What are we talking about? Clayton Johnson: Well I don't look at it as an economic hardship. We look upon it as, we've looked at the possibility of putting siding on there. We think siding on that great big wall is ugly. Joyce: So in essence you want the corrugated metal? Clayton Johnson: We want it. Joyce: That's a look you want? Clayton Johnson: And painted, repainted and put the murals on there which will add some interest and the only other solution that's been recommended is to side it and very honestly, Mr. Bloomberg does not want to put siding on that big massive wall and Bob, I don't know do you. Bob Davis: Well it is a structural wall too. That is the wall. It's not your traditional metal building type of siding that you could take off and replace something else. That is a structural wall. It's heavy gauge steel. It's put together with impact bolts. It is the wall. Brooks: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Peterson: Go ahead. Brooks: I don't know the history of this building. Can you give me a little background? It was originally a lumber building? Bob Davis: It was a lumber yard. It was built in 1965. I started working for Mr. Bloomberg in 1965, January, and that building was being built then. Survived the tornado. It was a lumber building and a hardware store. Brooks: What I see here are so different from what's there now. Why aren't you just razing the building and then building something new? Clayton Johnson: Let me explain the HRA's participation in all of the downtown projects have always been limited to a pay as you go plan. In other words, the HRA has never come to us and said here's the, the building currently is valued at $800,000.00. The HRA has never come to us and said, tear that down and start over. They've always said, come to us with a plan that you provide the financing. We will be putting about$500,000.00 to $600,000.00 into the building. Right now the building pays taxes of$25,000.00. When we're done it pays $75,000.00. Okay. It's not economically feasible without any kind of assistance to redevelop that building and tear it down, and I describe it, Bob described it as a lumber yard. It's an airplane hangar. It's an airplane hangar. It's an ice arena. These buildings, these baleen buildings are what was used to 32 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 build ice arenas all over the midwest. It's an airplane hangar. That whole facade is a curtain wall. And by the way in the staff report they refer to the refurbishing of the material. No. That whole wall comes out. That's all new material. All natural materials of wood, and brick and stone. And I've got to tell you, you know I want to explain the passive versus active role. When we were a passive investor in this project that you saw 3 years ago,believe when I go back and look at that, and I look at the notation on the top, and it refers to plastic cornice. I would like you to go with me when I tell Mr. Bloomberg we're going to put vinyl siding on one of his buildings. It just would never fly. He is, in all of his architecture and all of his design, it's natural materials. It's stone, it's wood, it's glass and when he built my house he wouldn't even put vinyl underneath my washing machine. He put stone so. Peterson: This item is a public hearing. May I have a motion to open the same and a second please? Blackowiak moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address...name and address please. Bob Copeland: My name is Bob Copeland. I am one of the owners of the Chanhassen Cinema and I'd like to give you our thoughts on this project. First of all,we want to urge you to approve this project and we'd like you to approve it this evening. We think it's a good design. We like the design and we think it's just a tremendous improvement over what is there now. We also want to suggest to you that you not compare this design that you have now to what was approved 2 V2 years ago. What was approved 2 Y2 years ago is just not relevant anymore and it's just not an option. As far as the west side of the building goes, the corrugated metal that is in the alley between our two pieces of property,we think it's just fine. We're happy with that corrugated metal there and we don't see a need to do anything with it. Also I'd like to let you know that I, the bowling alley people, the owners of the bowling alley, wanted to come to the meeting this evening. They weren't able to come. They asked me to pass along to you that they concur with what I'm telling you and that they want to urge you to approve this this evening. Basically,I - think there are two options that you have before you. One is to disapprove this and the building will stay a warehouse. It will be a rundown warehouse and there will be plywood over the windows and the facility that you see there will be there indefinitely as a warehouse. The other option is to approve this facade as proposed to you this evening and we'll have, what will appear to be a new building here. So I would also urge you to not table this this evening. It needs to be dealt with and we might as well deal with it starting tonight. So if you have no questions, thank you. Peterson: Anyone else? Amy Roberts: My name Amy Roberts. I come here representing National Lodging. We're the owning entity in Country Suites and I've never done this. I'm very nervous. Bear with me. I think that everybody here wants to improve what the current situation is with that building and that's really all that needs to be done. We cannot let the situation go the way it is anymore. 33 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Everybody driving on TH 5 sees how bad it is. It's one of the first reflections of Chanhassen that you see. And something has to be done. There are many bits and pieces about this that I would see differently done but in the end we need to do something. And another point about this is that Herb Bloomberg did have a great deal to do with the design of County Suites at the time and with the Timber Lounge. And sometimes it doesn't always look that good or sound that good, but in the end when it comes together, it looks like the Timber Lounge. And I think we need to have a little faith. Maybe if you're really, really opposed to some things like the corrugated metal, that there's something that can be done down the road but I don't want this project not done over some of these issues. Thank you. Peterson: Anybody else? Selvig Huseth: My name is Selvig Huseth and I'm the Managing Director at the Chanhassen Dinner Theaters and have been an employee there for over 20 years and I would just like to say that the ambiance and the feeling that you get when you walk into the Dinner Theater and the hundreds of comments that we get every month from people personally and in letters, how warm the atmosphere and enjoyment that they have at the Dinner Theater is because of the vision and architecture that Mr. Bloomberg has designed. And we don't make a change in the Dinner Theater, even though he's not our owner anymore, without conferring with him about it. We don't change the carpet without asking his opinion on it because we totally trust his design ability and his architecture vision and I think that these ideas that are being proposed extend his whole idea of the whole complex and I totally trust what he has in his head and it's like she said. You know you might not understand when he's explaining. I don't because I'm not an architect. When he's explaining it directly to me but it always ends up looking fantastic. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Debbie Lacer: Hello. My name is Debbie Lacer and I'm one of the tenants in the Frontier Building. I've been there for 8 years. I guess I'd like to say a lot of what Selvig just said in that I think the ambiance over there is very warm and friendly. I know I've stayed there with my company, although there have been many other places that would probably be more convenience in terms of being high tech and easier to load and more storage and whatever, but the ambiance there is a wonderful small town feeling and I think that building brings that environment to our town and I think it's very important that we preserve some of that for Chanhassen. We're growing very fast here. I've been a resident in town for 11 years so I've literally seen the whole of downtown main street developed in that period of time and yet the Frontier building reminds me of some of the historical relevance of this city and I think it's very important that we keep that here. I also know from my business, I do a lot of traveling around the midwest, that we are literally on the map because of the Dinner Theater. I meet hundreds of customers when I'm out and about throughout the Midwest and it has continually surprised me how many people have visited our town because of that theater. And I think because of that I've come to really admire the Bloombergs and what they have brought to our city and I think it's very important, especially since Herb is able to continue to design for our buildings here, that we recognize that talent and we accept and honor the fact that he has done this for many, many years. He is an expert at it. he's built some lovely things for us here and I think it's really important that we maintain the 34 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 historical value that he brings to our city. I think to continue this building in the manner that he started it and trust the fact that he will finish it tastefully, is what we should look at because that's just as important as whether it's brick in our eyes or someone else's. He really contributes a lot. Thank you. Britta Bloomberg: My name is Britta Bloomberg. I'm a shareholder in Bloomberg Companies. Herb is my father. This has been our home for over 40 years. This has been the place that we've made our lives and have really set down our roots. I want to just make a couple observations about my father's design career. Here in Minnesota he has a statewide reputation for his fine quality of his design,the workmanship,and nationwide he's had a reputation, in particular through the baleen steel buildings of which the Frontier building is. That was a baleen steel constructed building for the lumber yard and hardware store. It also was constructed to be the headquarters of Bloomberg Companies. That's where we had our company offices for many, many years before we moved them to a smaller location. But I think that it's important to really bring some, put some confidence in the quality of the design that has come forward in this. Some of dad's other work that has really a particularly notable reputation in this area, the Old Log Theater, and then Hazeltine National Golf Club, the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. I would really urge you to approve this plan. And I also want to add that one of the reasons that I thought it was important that I come tonight is to let you know that we're in this for the long haul. My father is at a point in his career where he's ready to see us kids become a lot more involved and we really see this as our future. Bloomberg Companies is here to stay and we feel that it's really important to be able to move forward with the plans that are being made right now for how we can continue to conduct our business here in Chanhassen. I think my dad's brought incredible vision to this town over the last 40 some years and I would really urge you to approve this plan. Peterson: Thank you. Maita Bloomberg Devine: Hi. My name is Maita Bloomberg Devine and I'm also one of Herb's daughters as well as a shareholder in Bloomberg Companies and I look at this plan and I just see a continuation of the things that he has done for the Dinner Theater and the Frontier building. Bringing the building from the front around to the back and continuing that so it has a really nice look to the building. People can drive into the back from the other side of town,not from the main street and be invited into the town. I always admired my father's creativity and his design and over the years I've been in a lot of his homes, as well as his larger buildings that he has built and have always been amazed at the people coming to me and saying,being excited about discovering things in his building and being amazed that what has worked for him,they would have never thought of it. I think after all the years that he has done this in this city,that we need to have a little confidence that he does have that vision and that he can see it through. I think he sees things that a lot of us don't. I think the plan is fine as is. I was really pleased with it. I think it's really exciting. I think it would be a wonderful addition to this city. Like it was said earlier, it was built as a hardware and lumber building and it's taking that structure and transforming it into something that's very appealing to the public and it's going to work for retailers and it's going to make a nice addition to this city so I really hope that you will look at this and think it's a good idea and good plan and move forward. Thank you. 35 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Thank you. Anyone wishing to address the commission? Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz, long time member of the city of Chanhassen. I can remember when Herb moved out here. The village had a population, I've got the sign home in my garage, of 120 people. That was the village and that included the township and it took an awful lot of courage for a man to come out and put a complex up like he did here in Chanhassen and expect to make it work like he did. It really is a centerpiece of a suburban area as far as the Dinner Theater is concerned. When I was Mayor and I used to go to some of the Mayor's functions down at the city, people asked where I was from. I said I was from Chanhassen. Oh that's where the Dinner Theater is and I think Herb has been doing a real good job for Chanhassen and I can see that some of the things that you see on paper here probably don't look quite right to you now but I can assure you that if Herb has designed this thing, it will look good after a while. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, may I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Brooks moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. I assume that nobody wants to be the first one to comment on this one. But Ladd, if I could ask maybe for your comments. A historical perspective might add... Conrad: Yeah, yeah. Al's been here longer than I have so. This is a tough one. In a lot of cases I want to just beg the question, get out of it. The TIF money confuses me a little bit. I don't understand that. It's not our job but it does, it does confuse me a bit. I have one comment and you approached our meeting on a very negative slant tonight because I think obviously you and staff aren't getting along. You didn't address us. It's them. So whether you had good points or not, I couldn't tell. You were challenging their recommendations. I can't vote on this tonight because I think you might have some good ideas but you didn't tell me why. You went straight to the negatives and you didn't come in and say this is why we're doing this. This is how it fits. This is what our intent is. You went straight to the negatives so I can't react tonight. I think there's some things that you can work on with staff. There's some things that you have some definite differences on. There's some things that I can bend on a little bit. I think you have some points but you didn't make those points other than, you didn't make them to make me feel that I could make a rationale decision for the community of Chanhassen. You know we obviously respect Herb. We obviously respect the Dinner Theater. It's a cornerstone of the community. You know it really is. I don't even need to underline that yet tonight's presentation was not what I can say I can make a decision on. So you know, and some of these are real tough to figure out. Once you get into architectural things, it's really tough. I hate us getting involved in that. I really do because we're just individuals that are lay people but you're forcing us to get into that and boy, we make mistakes and to trust us is a tough one for a Planning Commission to do. So I'm going to shut up and basically say, I think you've got to come back. I think you've got to come back with the reasons why we should go with your plan and at interim I'd prefer that you try to iron out a couple of these things. For instance, for instance the alley way. I don't know what it's 36 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 used for. I don't know if there's going to be any pedestrians on there. We've talked, I've been here for a while so I know some of the things we've talked about. I don't know if we've got traffic going in or out. I don't know if that baby should be closed up or not. If it's closed up, if there's no, if it's just for vagrants out there, then I don't need pictures on the walls back there. But on the other hand, if it's going to be, if we're going to make this an active retail center, I expect something to happen. I don't know what your vision is and you didn't share it tonight so it's, I don't even want to get into the details because I can't make a good decision. I think we should get out of this and have the applicant come back and make a positive presentation in two weeks. Peterson: Kevin. Joyce: Ditto. That's it. I agree with everything he said. Peterson: LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah I agree. I guess I felt pressured to want to like this, the architecture and the ideas that were put forth. I guess I need to be sold on the project like Ladd said, and many of the points that are in the staff report I think are extremely valid. We're dealing with the design now that is so much different than the one that was presented 2 Y2 years ago I guess and I actually like the one that was the original site plan a lot better than what was presented here tonight. So I guess like Ladd, I don't really want to go on and on and on except that I just can't see this moving forward to Council. Peterson: Matt. Burton: I agree with all the comments so far. I think that we have a very good staff here and... respect their opinions and I think everybody up here does and I think it's important for the applicant to work with the staff and come back with a better proposal than this. Or at least address more of the issues that are out there. I don't like leaving open and saying that down the road something may happen. I want to address as much as we can right now and I don't we can do that with what's been presented to us. And I understand that the neighboring tenants want something going on there. I think we all do. But I think we want to go with more definition than we have now so I agree with my fellow council members that I would table this matter. Peterson: Alison. Blackowiak: I agree with what's been said. There have been substantial changes since the initial approval and I think that's a big issue for all us. But also we've got to look at the big picture. We have an entertainment complex. So I would like to know specifically where does the boardwalk go? How is that going to continue? What plans are there for the alley way, like Ladd said? Are there going to be pedestrians going through there? We have to look at that. What's going to happen to the remaining buildings down there? I mean I realize that that's not your issue specifically but these are some questions that I need to have answered before I would feel comfortable moving forward with any kind of approval. I don't doubt the ability of Mr. 37 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Bloomberg to do a plan that's going to be wonderful but I think that we're coming from two different points right now with...what was previously approved and what the vision is today and I think we need to find some common ground and we're not there yet. Peterson: Thank you. Allyson. Brooks: I agree with all of the comments. I do strongly feel something absolutely has to be done with that Frontier building. It is not a very pleasant, visual piece on the landscape. I think we all want something...done. I don't think anybody's against that whatsoever. I do agree with the presentation discussion very strongly. I think it's great that Herb Bloomberg has done these things for the community but I would really like the next presentation to focus on the issue. The building,because I was losing track of why we're here. The issue is fixing the building, which is something I think we all want...to happen. You know as long as we're giving testimonials, I think our planning staff is very good and has done a lot for the vision of Chanhassen... But I think you have some tenants that you want to make by August? I think coming back in two weeks shouldn't stop that deadline. It's just a matter of coming together and...if it can happen. Peterson: Thank you. I look at the entertainment complex and as it was originally envisioned and I thoroughly found that to really add a uniqueness and character to the city that I liked a lot. And we have started that entertainment complex by setting a standard with the theater. The cinema I should say, and I really see this building tying more closely to the cinema and farther west than I do tying it to the Dinner Theater that some people have spoke of this evening. Tying it to more of the rustic look and that so I really would, essentially what I'm rambling on here saying is,I really see this tying in much more closely to what the cinema is and what the rest of the entertainment complex is intended to be. And I know there's economics involved in that and sometimes you have to wait for things to happen but I think the intent and our approval back then is, that I feel as strongly today as... I don't see this fitting the design itself with the rest of the entertainment complex that I envision down the road. With that in mind, a motion please. Conrad: Your signal Mr. Chairman is that you saw, and my signal was I didn't get the applicant's good pitch. Your signal was,you saw it and you didn't care for it. I'm not interested in extending out the applicant's, I don't take any great pleasure in wasting two weeks of their time. Well, I'll float the motion. I think before I make it, if you don't like this, the intent for me to table this motion, I've got to tell you that it's to get a better presentation so I can understand the different elements and what they're trying to do. That's my problem. I don't think you should vote for my motion if you read it,you see it, you understand it, don't delay them. Brooks: But within the two week period there's some things. Conrad: Something could happen but they don't agree with staff. There's definitely, that's real clear. And we're,without that agreement,you know we're sort of in chaos here. We have a tough time with this one so again I'm going to make the motion. I can't call on your Clayton. But I would make the motion, and Mr. Chairman we should have some discussion after this. I would make the motion to table this item for two weeks to give the applicant time to review a few of the subjects with the ones that are palatable with the city staff,and reduce the number of 38 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 variances or the number of issues outstanding but to come back in that two week period and give us a proactive approach as to why we should be approving the building as presented. That'd be my motion and my rationale. Peterson: Is there a second to that motion? Brooks: I'd second it. Peterson: Discussion. Conrad: Then don't vote for it if you've got a clear shot because then that's just not fair to the applicant. Peterson: Whenever we table something, I think it's very important that we send the applicant away with the perspective of what we're looking for in return. Ladd has articulated certainly one perspective. I have tried to articulate that architecturally I don't feel as though it fits. I don't know whether the rest of the commissioners have a sense of where you're at in that continuum or you have a different vision and I think it's important for the applicant that you offer those this evening. That whether we do that after the motion or while we're in this discussion... Conrad: My motion should fail if you really want to provide some design recommendations to the applicant tonight. Anyway. Peterson: ...perspective. Joyce: I think Ladd hit it right on the head. That's why we want to discuss that for because I think cooler heads will prevail. I think in two weeks we can come together, I really believe this, and work this out. Peterson: How do you feel about the difference in architectural style to what the entertainment complex. Joyce: This architectural style, I think a lot of it has to do with taste. I think it's a 1960's style, because that's what the theater, when it was built. And you can pick that away if you want. I mean some people like the 1960's style. That's kind of what their stuff was so in one sense, that's what we've living with right now. That's the building. But on the other side, what I like about what Ladd said is, we have this corrugated wall. How is that going to function inside the development? You didn't tell me that. All you said is we want to keep the corrugated wall and that was that. So you know, is it an alley? Isn't it an alley? Do you want to shut that off? Fine. I mean if you sat down and thought this through, I mean and give us some positive feedback on what we're going to do there, I'd feel a lot better on just voting on it. My discussion is, I think two weeks of cooling off period and being creative and thinking this through is a lot better than just making a decision, a rash decision right now. Peterson: Design wise you're saying you're open? 39 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Joyce: I don't think,yeah I am open to the design. I'm not going to get into an argument over taste once again. I don't know how much authority we have to force certain aspects of the design down. I don't understand the TIF financing either or the HRA involvement. This isn't a PUD. I'd almost like to have two weeks just to digest this myself so I can figure out, I'm a little confused on that. How much authority we have to say...it's their building. If it was a PUD, I'd say no. If it was a PUD,I'd say I'd like to change this but it isn't. Peterson: LuAnn, your comments? Sidney: Well I think I fall in the area where you know I would like a design change and you know hearing Craig speak I agree with him in that I see this tying more into the cinema complex, that's in the cinema style. Not necessarily with the Dinner Theater style. And I'm trying to think,because you want to use the same materials as what's in the Chanhassen Dinner Theater area but I guess I have a problem with some of the design elements like big canopies reminds me of Menards in Fridley when I look at that and I'd like to see something different and I think you can modify that to make it a little bit more appealing. So you know there are things I think that you know if you're willing to give and take and work with staff, I think the application could work. But at this point I'm not comfortable with the design maybe as much as Ladd. Peterson: I won't go all the way around. Any other comments regarding that? Brooks: I have one. Peterson: Please. Brooks: Well I think we have to remember that we're remodeling a building and we're not ripping down a building. A question about razing versus remodeling and because we're remodeling I fall on the side of Ladd. Whoa. And there's only so much you can do. I mean anything is better than what we've got. I mean if this situation where Milo, the magic architect was coming in to give us something absolutely fabulous that he always did, I mean and it's over by the Dinner Theater and you know...I think well at least it's blending in with that. If we do something way too funky and we try to push them to do something funky and entertainment like, well then we have style conflicts with the rest of the buildings that are there. The other thing we talked about, Country Suites and Timber Lodge,and I don't find them an architectural beacon. I mean they're traditional,bland, suburban architecture. So I think...which is remodeling the building...better. Blackowiak: I don't like to settle. I mean I think we should go for the best possible design that we can get on this site. And now let's not just say well let's just settle for this because it's a remodel. You can do wonderful remodels. I know you can. I want to see the big picture. I want to see how it's going to fit in. I really think we need to look, I want to see where the boardwalk's going. I would like to see a rendering that might show the Chanhassen Cinema next to the proposed remodel of the Frontier. I mean how is it going to fit together? I need to know that before I can approve it. I want to know what's going to happen to the other buildings, and again I 40 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 said it's not your concern what's happening to those other buildings but if you're doing...and you've got these four little buildings down on the right there on the southeast corner, they're going to have to address that issue as well because if you're trying to make it pedestrian friendly, nice looking area, we've got some more work to do. I just am not comfortable but I don't want to settle. Again, it's remodel. That's fine but we can make it a nice one. I think we should strive to do that. Burton: I agree with the other comments. I don't like it the way it is now. I think it looks old and dated and I don't think it really fits in at all. I don't think it's right to use the Dinner Theater side as a comparison. First of all this is much higher structures than those are because it's on the back side of the hill. And it doesn't match with the neighboring neighbors. I'm not an architect. I know I don't like what I see. I think to get some more time here and consider the staff's comments and meet with the staff, I think you can come back in short order a different design and a different plan, or at least be able to explain why...and address the other concerns before tonight. Peterson: We have a motion, we have a second and I think we have plenty of direction. Conrad moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the Bloomberg Companies for a Site Plan Review for remodeling of the Frontier Building. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Herb Bloomberg: ...they had me build their home on the lake...Hazeltine possibility. I'm not much of a golfer at all hardly but Todd Heffelfinger...built a nice home for him and he told me ...invited me to design the build...and they knew that I had no experience. So we went ahead and did it. The interesting thing was, and the case I think did I mention it was Don...party and he said I wish I had a dollar for everybody who said they wanted to buy my house. In the meantime the same thing happened to Todd and Lucy Heffelfinger... They had me build their home overlooking the lake. About this time, about 1976 I was surprised by a magazine that came, this happens to be Business Week. ...magazine and there was my face. The Baleen Company had decided to do an advertising campaign, and this was in '76 when the Dinner Theater was kind of on shaky ground. We were really worried...hoping to survive and we did survive. ...pop up in Business Week, Sports Illustrated, Time magazine and so forth. Maybe more that I don't even know about. And what it said, and the comment was a picture of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. But the headline was, ...a Baleen builder builds trust. And that was the nicest compliment I ever had in my life. And some times it takes a little trust. I wish you could re-open your meeting and pass this for me tonight. What could you lose? Would you have that trust with me? I've only worked here for 42 years. I've never had any kind of a hint of a lawsuit or a problem with any customer. From coast to coast. Then if I say my hometown now that I've been in for 42 years wouldn't trust me enough to finish my own building? I can't believe that. Maybe I'll have to accept it. But I think you'd be better,you'd feel a lot better if you passed that tonight. I think you'd brag about it later on and I know I won't disappoint you. Thanks. Peterson: Thank you. 41 Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 1998 NEW BUSINESS: Peterson: New Business Kate. Aanenson: Just a reminder, on April 22"d,of the town meeting. I know LuAnn...try to get her neighborhood. We set that meeting from 7:00 to 9:00. The format is an open house style. Have got an article coming in on the Villager which I think will be helpful to understand that you don't have to come at a certain time to make sure you get all the information. It's really an open house. You can come,if you're interested on one issue,two issues, all issues,you can spend as much time or as little time as you want. We'll have the staff people in the different departments there and drafts of the comp plan...let people know where we are in the process and issues that have been formulated and then also provide them an opportunity to come and...with the findings or things that we may not have addressed. And that's kind of the kickoff,take that information and digest it and start the process in May. Probably the second meeting in May. I think a lot of that's predicated on the turnout at that meeting and any additional information that we need to have back. We do have the rough draft now...so that was one key component that we were missing. That's really all I had. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Blackowiak noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated April 1, 1998 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Aanenson: The Council will be reviewing the Old Town at their work session on Monday... a wetland alteration permit, there's a series of small segments that we need to get wetland alteration permits... Peterson: No changes to the approval of the trails though, right? Aanenson: No. The location's still fixed. It would just be the wetland alteration permit. Again, the old town,depending on the direction that we get from the Council on Monday night. OPEN DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR "OLD TOWN"NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: When you say it needs work. Al-Jaff: Right now it's an overall ordinance that really doesn't have all of the details worked out and that's what we need to finalize. Such as setbacks. Such as architectural details on buildings. Aanenson: This is what we're showing you is the framework but we still need to get some more... on that plan and that's what the attorney's office is...some of that detail. 42 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: And that was my simplistic comment, that this is extremely generic...can't argue anything about it one way or the other. Aanenson: Right...discussion you had last time of whether it would be an architectural, whether it would be an overlay ordinance and looking to the attorney's office to figure which was the best way to format that. What would be the best way to administer goals we were trying to accomplish and their recommendation was really more the... Peterson:... Brooks: Sharmin,I need you to define architecturally significant...defining what we use...that's not architecturally significant. Conrad: I missed two weeks ago so I'm trying to catch up. Kind of reading it in detail, I have a concern. It seems there are a lot of rules and regulations, to take something that I don't have a good sense for it's old or historic inventory and the meetings with the community seem really good. They're just great but it seems to me to be more administration right now for the value that we'll get and for the impact on the neighborhood. I personally am just not convinced of an overlay district. I am convinced of managing the blending or the transition between commercial and this area and to the residents. I'm interested in some of the sites, some of the, well we have control on the Pauly/Przymus property. There's certain cases. Things that I think we have to manage but I'm not convinced of the amount of,I'm really critical of where we're going. Not the intent of what we're trying to do but how we're trying to do it. So a challenge to staff is, well I guess I don't have a challenge. I'd like to accomplish some of the things that we're trying to do but without all the administrative things. You know I'm, as I've read through the Minutes, I can't tell where the neighbors are. It seems like they had a lot of concerns. It seemed like they were caught off guard and that really tells me they didn't net out to a positive, and I'm reading between the lines but I'm not sure where they netted out and I'm not, I have to go back to what I'd like to accomplish there and I only have a couple things. So it's probably beyond me right now. It's probably somebody else with a vision bigger than mine but at this point in time, this seems cumbersome to me and I guess I'm going to have a hard time filling in the blanks isn't going to help me. Peterson: ...somebody try to reflect a little bit some of the historical stuff and Kate and Sharmin can certainly augment this. I think that what in many ways I see what we're trying to do with this ordinance was take into consideration the zone and a lot of desires of the residents and that would be the driving force behind this ordinance is to ensure that that area develops within...desires of both the city staff and the residents. We thought that this was the most efficient and effective way to do that. Now I'll let the staff say if this is not, then I agree with Ladd but I assume that it is. From the alternatives that I've heard to date. Aanenson: Right. That's how this whole thing got started but some of the concerns, at the process evolved,yes. There has been some discussion on some of these issues and...that happens through the process. Not everybody's in concurrence on everything. The plan was 43 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 started to make sure that we mitigated some of the impacts that were happening because of the changes down there. What was happening to that neighborhood. And that's the purpose of the plan, to try to mitigate those. I think a good word that Ladd used, the blending. How do you do that blending? And we researched a lot of different ways to try to look at a tool to do that. This is the way we came back and Ladd's right. It may be too cumbersome. Conrad: I wouldn't want to own a home there. And because it just, well. Aanenson: ...burden that comes with the lot and a lot, it's an issue. I agree. Conrad: There are some really great things in what they're doing or saying and so make sure you hear me Kevin. There are some real, some up front issues. You find the name of the game is figuring out up front where we're going and that's what's being done very well. But it's cumbersome. If you wanted to build a nice modern home in that area, and I don't know what the neighbors are saying but I don't, you can't do it. I don't know if I know what I'm talking about but I have to hit so many, I wouldn't want to be a builder to go into that neighborhood and tear down something and put something up. I don't think you could build something that would, I don't think you'd find anybody that could build in there. That's just one minor thing. There's some transitions that are just great to resolve right now. Just great to get, but I wish I had better vision and better direction for the staff. I just, the overlay district for Highway 5 was very valid. Cumbersome I think for a lot of the developers but still pretty valid. This is a big deal. This is not as big as I think we're making it. Brooks: Let me add a point of debate here though. Suppose like Rottlund Homes comes in and decides well we want to turn the whole thing, we're going to buy...and turn the whole thing into just another Rottlund. I think the whole point of it is to try and keep a neighborhood and maybe... Conrad: But they could do that to my neighborhood too and they won't. They just absolutely won't so that's not a good example. Give me another example. Brooks: K-Mart? Conrad: Yeah, I'd buy that. Joyce: We got into this thing we wanted to protect the resource but maybe the resource will protect itself or something like that. I don't know. Conrad: A lot of it will Kevin, yeah. Brooks: ...we want to keep the flavor of a neighborhood. We don't want to burden anybody. Conrad: Okay. Brooks: I think the question is, how do you keep the flavor of a neighborhood. 44 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Conrad: Tell me what pitched roof I can put in there? Brooks: We're losing through...it's like we're losing everything. We're losing the farms. We're losing the town. It's a high priced zone. Conrad: The historic nature of farms is very valid. These houses in that neighborhood is not historic. There are a couple houses in there but so why are we doing that to them? I don't know. Brooks: I don't think we're trying to do anything to them. I think we're just trying a character. And maybe you're right. By an architectural board it's too cumbersome. Conrad: I have no need to do that. If they do, I'd like to hear them here. I guess I'd like them en masse to be in here demanding and I'd give them a district to protect or protect them. But don't let that influence the other zones or areas in here. There's some other things that are real valuable in terms of like transition from St. Hubert's to the neighborhood and other areas. I think those are good things to fix right now, or to forecast where we're going but I don't know. That's where I'm at. Peterson: Other comments? ...more of a general response? I don't want to re-open it tonight to residents. I know some of them are here. You'll have an opportunity later to certainly come to a public hearing but. Aanenson: I think what we'll do is kind of, when we come back with, depending again what happens at the Council, come back and kind of try to reframe the issue. Where we've been. What options were explored and...the ordinance some other alternatives. I mean Sharmin and I were talking about this. There's always the opportunity to stick with the core parcels. You don't want to spot zone but make it a core parcel and then put guidelines but you can put guidelines on some of the other areas, say residential. That's all they are. But we'll give you some of those options and again try to go back and see what areas...a transition zone. Where things could in those transition zones affect the...and what some of your options are. Hopefully that will be • helpful. You know we've heard from the neighbors. There are concerns. Peterson: And our intent certainly was that it was the benefit of the neighbors equally to the city itself so. Aanenson: When we have additional rules, it's not seen as a benefit. Peterson: Other comments? Enough direction? Al Klingelhutz: Mr. Chairman, I feel...through all these meetings...opinions of what should be done... Peterson: Kate, do you want to open it up tonight or do we have? 45 Planning Commission Meeting-April 15, 1998 Aanenson: We know, we certainly know what their comments are. Peterson: Did the citizens,have you voiced your concerns with the staff? I mean do you. Audience: I would say that we... Brooks: What was the direction you gave us? Audience: Look at the...looking at the whole area... Brooks: So it sounds like you're not against preserving the character, it's just the method of preserving the character. Audience: Well I think if we were a part of the decision making... Peterson: How do you feel about, one example being losing potentially the character of the style of homes that is next to you. A dome home going in next to you. Possibility. How do you address that issue? If you see it as an issue. Audience: Well I think that you know...at the last meeting when we brought, there were only probably four homeowners present and what started out as a broad...St. Hubert's property,the Schlenk property... When we saw this...we thought we were seeing what...we're talking about our own homes. Excuse me, I have pictures of what old town Chanhassen looked like and it's nothing... You've got a mish mash of homes. You've got littered yards. We need some ordinance to clean up the yards but we don't need any more ordinances about what's going on as far as what we're building. My issue has been,I don't want to see the light pollution in our area and I would...and the report comes back opposite of what I've been saying. And that's,that makes me uncomfortable because now all of a sudden...I don't think so. Peterson: Are you saying that lighting is essentially your only concern or what are the other concerns? Audience: ...I see a lot of light pollution in Chanhassen. The building I was told to look at,the CSM building on Dell Road and Highway 5...outside of the building. Now we're lighting buildings? You know...at the edge of where I live. So what I'm saying is, leave our... Peterson: Other than lighting then,you're saying kind of let it develop naturally and without a lot of rules and regulations is what I'm hearing you saying. Audience: We are already developed. I think we would like something to put on what's going to happen,we're going to lose the residential corridor when St. Hubert's sells to Chapel Hill. This was our opportunity to have a little say about... It's frustrating. We don't need to focus on ourselves right now. There's too much development... 46 Planning Commission Meeting- April 15, 1998 Peterson: Good comments. Other comments? Staff, I think you've got some additional feedback. Councilman Berquist: ...I've attended...one of them I was at for a short while so I've not been privy to all the discussion. But I want to say...what was perceived to be an asset of a remnant of the original town of Chanhassen. The whole thing started when the HRA chose to take out the old Pauly/Pony site for... The proposal came through for anybody to come in there and build something. At that point there was a flurry of activity from a variety of people with the idea that there should be some protection to that area... There was never any intent... So that's what originally instigated this whole thing. The purpose, like I said before was a method by which the purpose is achieved however may by necessity...be as messy. I think when it all shakes out... guidelines for the area. How the area redevelops. And I'm sorry that the neighbors and the property owners in the area and St. Hubert's feel as though the process has become burdensome. I understand that. It seems somewhat like that's... Peterson: Well said. I think the intentions have always been to the best interest of all parties. Audience: ...one additional comment to add... Peterson: Thank you. May I have a motion to adjourn. Conrad moved to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 47