The URL can be used to link to this page

09-5-90 Agenda and PacketFile AGENDA CI{ANHASSEN PIANNING CO}0{ISSION WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1990, 7:30 P.l,{. CHANHASSEN CITY HAI.I., 690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Jerry Perkins of Pope Associates, property zoned IOp,Industrial. Office Park and Ipcated at the intersection of park Road and Park Place: Zoning Ordinance Anendment to allow and create standardsfor a vehicle inspection station; Preliminary Plat to replat lot 3, Block 1, ChanhassenLakes Business Park 5th Addition into two lots; c Site PIan Review for a 4,O42inspection station.square foot vehicle a b 2. 3. Site Plan Amendnent for expansion of the parking lot resuJ.tingin variances to the setback requirenents on property zonedIOP, Industrial Office Park and located at 18930 West 78thstreet, Redmond Products. * ITEI.{ DELETED* Zoninq ordinance Amendment by adding restrictions on placenentof proposed new standards for antenna towers and other radiodevices in the agricultural districts. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OT I{INUTES CITY COI'NCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITE}IS ADUINISTRATTVE APPROVAI,S OPEN DISCUSSION 4. Discussion of Southnest Uetro Transit - Consultant Report. ADJOI'RNIiTENT +CITY OF EHANHISSEI[ P.C. DlrE: 9/5/90 c.c. DAIE: 9/24/90 cegE: 90-9 site Plan BY ! AI-Jaf f,/v Fz C) =(LL ls lrJ ]- @ lletes and Bounds Subdivision to Create a 1.7 Acrefron a 3.953 Acre Parcel 3) Zoning ordinance .Amendnent to A1low vehicle Testing stations in the IoP .District as a Pennitted Use Intersection of Park Road and Park Place 2) e Testing Facility LOCATION: IPPLICAM:Jerry Perkins Pope Associates, Inc.Suite 300 1360 Energy Park DriveSt. Paul. , I{N 55108 systen control/ Stanley J. KrzyrrickiSuite 208 5275 Edina Industrial Edina, llN 55342 EXIsTING ZONING: ACREAGE: IoP, Industrial office Park 1.7 acres NDTACENT ZONING A}ID LAND I'AE :It-Wetland-vacant A - IOP, EUPAK E - IOP, vacant r - IoP, PHT Services are availabl.e to the site.SEWER AND IIAIER: aITE CEARICIERISAICA: The site generally drains to the east andnortheast into a wetland located to the north of thesite. Natural vegetation exists to the north of thesite although the naj ority of the site is covered.. r.rith f ield grasses. 2OOO IIAND USE:Industrial STAFF REPORT Owner: Pope Associates, Septenber 5, 1990 Page 2 Inc. BACXGROUND On October 4, 1989, the Planning Cornrnission reviewed an applicationfor Site Plan Review #89-8 for the Rone Office BuiLding. The saneapplication rras revierred by the City Council and was approved on October 9, 1989. The site plan that uas approved for Rome Officebuilding showed a future expansion to the site in the forn of afree-standing !7,000 square foot office/warehouse building tocatedto the west. The application being reviewed calls for a newstructure on the site of the proposed additionat buitding. Theprinary structure approved by the City in October has not been constructed. The application in front of the Connission today will change the approved proposal. for Rone Office Building dranatically. The proposed vehicle inspection station site will inval.idate the RoneOffice Building site plan by creating setback variances, parkingvariances, and also there Eight be inpervious surface coveragevariances. Therefore, to consider action of approval of thevehicle testing station is dependent upon cancellation of approvalfor the Rone Office Building site plan approval. Staff has metwith Ronan Roos, the owner of the site. Mr. Roos is fu11y aware ofthe situation. He anticipates requesting approval for a snallerbut sirnilar building on the original site. PROPOSAL,/ SI'MI.,IARY On July L, 1991, the Minnesota PolLution Control Agency (MPCA) lrillrequire a1I vehicle olrners to test the Level of hydrocarbon (HC)and carbon monoxide (co) that their vehicle produces. Theapplicant is working to establish lL sites within the seven countymetro area of which one is Chanhassen. The appticantrs firru iscontracted with the state to provide testing services for a 10 yearperiod. They will be the sole provider of reguired testingservices. The Chanhassen site is one of the required servicel areas under the state contract to adequately serve the metro area. The procedure starts by sending notices to all car owners to testtheir vehicles within 90 days of receiving that notice. A study was conducted by the applicant and it is predicted that 95t of thevehicles within 5 niles of the site t itt be using that location.The site will be built to acconmodate 15Bt of the car populationwithin the area. A car poputation forecast for the year 1998 wasused for that study and a net!,rork was built to suit that. Carswill be tested by being driven into the building and hooked intotest equipnent. Cars that fail the test are required to beserviced and retested for conpliance. Servicing will not beprovided on-site. Pope Associates, Inc. Septenber 5, 1990 Page 3 On site air quality studies uiII be conductedpollution does not exceed standards. Thesesubnitted to the I.IPCA on an annual basis. to ensure thatstudies wilI be The proposed building will be equipped with machines that willnonitor the level of CO and a supply fence which functions as afilter to get rid of CO. The proposed building will be locatednorth of Park Road of which access will be obtained. The area ofthe proposed building is 4,042 square feet. The parking area isproposed to occupy a portion north of the proposed building. Thesite. plan is well designed. Access, grading, drainage andutilities do not pose any problems. Sone ninor nodification to therralkrray that links the parking lot with the building has beenrequested by staff. Site Landscaping is generally of high quality,although staff is reguesting some changes on the plan uhere itabuts Park Road to screen vehicles entering the inspectionfacil itlz. The proposed zoninq ordinance anendment rri1l alLol, vehicte testingfacilities to exist in Industrial office park Districts as apenoitted use. At the present tine, the ordinance does notacconnodate this use since it did not exist at the tine it wasdrafted. The subdivision request is a metes and bounds subdivision. ThePlanning Conmission does not need to act on the subdivision requestas it is a netes and bounds request. Staff did include theinfornation so that the Planning Conmission would be aware of therequest. The lot split will result in creating a 74,16G squarefoot lot. There are no variances attached to either the site planor subdivision requests. Staff is recornrnending that the requestsbe approved subj ect to appropriate conditions. GENERAL SITE PI,AN/ARCHITECTURE The site is located north of Park Road. The building is situatedparallel to Park Road lrhere access is gained. Parking is locatedto the north of the proposed building. Materials used on thebuilding Lrill be 4m x 8n face brick accented by 4tr x 8rr accents. Prefinished metal overhead doors rrill be used on the rrest, east andnorth elevations. The majority of the site wilt be screened fromoff-site views by landscaping and a proposed berm to the south ofthe site. The building architecture meets the standards of thesite plan ordinance requirements. The appLicant is showing theroof top equipnent extending 33 feet above the roof leveI. Equipnent wiLL be screened with netat panels painted to rnatch thecolor of the overhead doors. Staff is reconmending that the equipnent be painted to natch the coLor of the building. picket fencing is not considered to be acceptable screening. It should bedesigned to be compatible with the buitding exterior. The Pope Associates, Inc. Septenber 5, L990 Page 4 applicant is showing the trash enclosure screened by a chain linkfence. Staff is requiring that 100* screening be provided for thetrash encLosure area. It should be constructed of' roasonryconpatible with the building. PARKING / INTERIOR CIRCUI,,ATION The cityrs parking ordinance does not address facilities such asthe proposed. The Dost sinilar operation is vehicle servicestations which requires 4 parking stalls per service stalls. Thi.s use will have 3 bays. The applicant has nanaged a large nunber oftesting facilities around the country. Staff believes that the number of parking spaces provided is adequate. The applicant isplanning to have 7 employees on site. Fourteen parking stalls areprovided and one handicap sta11. Staff does not anticipate seeingLarge numbers of cars parked in the area. Staff net with theapplicant and was infonned that the naxinuro time for a car to spendon site is two ninutes. The Engineering Departnent has requesteda ninor change to the parking area layout. It is recoDnended thata sidewalk or other designated walkway system be provided withhandicap ramps to establish a safe pedestrian travef way betweenthe parking lot and the building as shown on the attached sketch.This walkway plan would el,irninate one parking sta1I, hor./ever, thesubnitted site plan proposes 3 more than the rnininuur requi.renents. ACCES S I,ANDSCAPTNG The plans propose one 25t wide curb cut to enter the site fron park Road. The driveways are proposed to be built to city standards. The radius of curbing at the entrance should be a roininun of 201.The nunber of curb cuts on Park Road was an issue for staff duringthe approval of the Rone office Building. Staff argued against theplacement of 2 curb cuts to naintain traffic safety. Ultinately,the applicant rras allowed the two cuts but the uestern entrance wasintended to serve both buildings belng proposed. The lresternentrance is gener"lly located in the vicinity of the curb cut beingpresently proposed. Staff finds the current proposaL acceptableonly if the parcel renaining in Mr. Roosr contrbl;t the cor;er isallowed to have only 1 curb cut on park Road. ft Iri11 have asecondary access on Park Drive. An appropriate restriction shoul.dbe placed in the chain-of-title of that lot. The. Iandscaping plan is weLl concei.ved. Staff ls reguestingadditional landscaping on the south and west of the sitl. Twoberns are proposed to the south and the southwest corner of thesite. Those berms are proposed to be at a height of 2 and 3 feet.Staff is requesting that those berns be exten-ded and nade 4 feethigh so that they can provide better screening of vehicles waiting thei-r turn-foI inspection as they enter the inspection facility. The berns should be extended along the park Road exposure and alongthe west property line to help buffer the adjacent pMT site. Undeithe revised ordinance, financial guarantees for landscaping andother site inprovenents are required. LTGHTING Ij+ShtinS locations are illustrated on the plans. only shieldedfixtures are alroued and the applicant has denonstrated that thereis no nore than .5 foot candles of light at the property line whichmeets the ordinance requirements. Pope Associates, Inc. SepteDber 5, 1990 Page 5 S IGNAGE GRADING/DRATNAGE PUBLTC ILITIES Th. applicant has subnitted a signage p1an. One nonunentidentification sign is proposed at the- weJt of entrance to thesite. The area of nonument sign is 35 square feet and is 5 feet inheight. The ordinance a1lows an 80 squaie foot display area and analinurn height -of I feet. The applicant ruust obtaiir a-sign pernitprior to erecting the sign on site. one stop sign nust 6e fosteaon the driveway access to park Road. The site generally drains to the northeast and north into a wetlandlocated to the north of the site. A snall area of the southeastcorner drains to Park Road. The proposed grading plan maintains aconsistent drainage pattern wittr ttre prelent c-on-aition. s).opesalong the north and northwest portionl of the site appear to-beslightly greater than 3:1. This wiII require speciaf slopestabilization measures such as wood fiber blinkets ind Type IrIerosion control . A stom sehrer systen consisting of tw6- catchbasins is proposed to be constructed and connected to an existingtrunk storn serrer extending along the northern border of the sitelThe najority of the site is proposed to be graded. The applicantis proposing to use T)rpe I silt fence or elosion controi to thesoutheast and north portions of the site to minirnize erosion.Staff is recommending that qrpe III erosion controL be used. City sewer and rrater are avaiLable on park Road. Fire hydrants areavailable on the southerly side of park Road. The Fire ltarshalindicated that those fire hydrants nill be sufficient to servicethe proposed building. Pope Associates, Inc. Septenber 5, 1990 Page 6 Building Height Building setback Parking stalLs Parking setback COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT ordinance Proposed 4 stories 1 story N-10 I E-1Or N-157 r E-91r s-30i w-1or s-49r w-114 I 12 staIls 15 stalls N-30r E-10r N-61r E-441 s-N/A W-10r S- W-59 I 70t 492 1 acre 1-7 acres Lot Coverage Lot Area Variances Reguired - none PARK AND TRAIL DEDTCATION FEES The city is requiring that park and trails fees be subnitted inlieu of park land. Fees are paid at the tine building pennits arerequested. ft should be noted that a future sidewalk will most 1ike1y be constructed within the north boulevard of Park Drive. The applicant should be advised that no signs or other structureswill be pernitted within the city right-of-way. METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVTSION The applicant is requesting approval to subdivide 3.953 acres into two 1ots. The subject site will have an area of 1.7 acres. The applicant nust provide the typical utility easements of LO feet infront, 5 on the sides and 10 feet to the rear of the site as thereis an existing stono sewer line. The Planning Comrnission does not have to take action on the subdivision request as it is a metes and bounds subdivision and wiLL be acted on by the City Council. staff is proposing the following ordinance amendnent that wouldallow vehicle testing stations in the IoP District: Amendment to Article XXII, IOP, Industrial Office Park District.Section 20-812 pennitted uses. 13) Vehicle testing stations authorized to undertake eroissionsand/or safety rnonitoring required by the State of Uinnesotaprovided that: ZONING ORDTNANCE AHENDMENT Pope Associates, Septenber 5, 1990 Page 7 a) b) Inc . the operation is under contracted agreenent rrith thestate of Minnesota to provide these services i no repairs are perforroed on the site; and c) no gas or parts are sold on the site. STAFF RECOMMENDATTON Staff reconmends that the Pl.anning Connission adopt the foltowingmoti,on: I. AITE PI.,AN REVIEW rrThe Planning Comission reconmends approval of #90-9 as shown on the site plan dated August 10,the folLowing conditions: The applicant must provide roof top equipnent screening forapproval by staff. Screening nust be of materials conpatiblewith the building. The applicant must subnit revised screening for the masonrytrash_ enclosure conpatible tith the building exterior andadditional landscaping around the proposed dutnpsters. The applicant nust obtain a sign pernit prior to erecting anysignage on site. Site Plan Review 1990, subj ect to 1 2 5 6 The applicant nust revise the landscaping plans as reconmendedin the report to provide inproved screening. provide staffwith a detaited cost estinate of landscaping to be used incalculating the required financial guarantees. Theseguarantees nust be posted prior to building pennit issuance. The applicant sha1l obtain and conply with all conditions ofthe Watershed District. Type III erosion controL shall be used along park Road andadded to the north and east portion of the site. Slopessteeper than 3:1 will require hrood fiber blankets and qTre IIIerosion control . The applicantrs engineer shall subnit foyear ston0 flow calculations for the site. This rnay regulatethe location of the connection to the existing storm -sewer facility. A concrete industrial driveway apron t ith a nininum radius cutof 20 feet shall be constructed at the entrance off of park Road- rr 7 Pope Associates, Inc. Septenber 5, 1,990 Page 8 rI . ZONING ORDINAIICE AI,TENDUENT rrThe Planning Conmission reconmends approval of Zoning ordinance Amendnent allouing vehicle testing stations in the IOP District.'r III. IYITEDRAWAI, OF ORIGINAI,I,Y APPROVED AITE PI.AN ItThe Planning Connission reconmends the rrithdrar^raI of approval of Site PIan No. 89-8 for the Rome Office building, concurrently with the approval of Site Plan No. 90-9. The applicant should file the notice of withdrawal against the property at carver county.'r ATTACHMENTS Rorne office Building approval. llemo from charles Folch dated August 30, 1990. systens control operation overview.Site plan for inspection facility. 1 2 3 4 .City Cor:rril t€etit€ - Gl :t 23, 1989 instance that it's tstring o:t ell for the aPartnent people t rt I thlnk this is the tool that rE have rrsed for all of the pople to date ard it prorides sclle fon'r of Erchrark, evgr if tlere nay be so're holes in it. tla:rot Ctmiel:. en:, disctlssion? BiII? OrEilrndl Bq't: IEU I can see lour point. lt sowds to tr€ though like *nt tte City is =y5.rg ls E set our fees basd fi scFE forrula that reall:t has rDtning to alo rdth larket. ItrB just the fortnrla. lltris is interesting. I€'ve got atpraisals that IEopIe get that are urder tlE Cityts at certain tlmes ard aprai.sals t€ get *Er e're trldrg to hry tle pE-olErtlr t}lat are alrra:'s over tlleCity. I donrt kno, lEld tle appraisal. prc.ess rcrks brt I krup if I Fas a nillion dollars off ad I susE ect an)r of t}te rest of us, tlEt erd be ln lere doir€ ttE sare thirg so it's a legitiFEte procdure. It sourds Ilke staff is sa:'rng ,.E jrrst did it tle sare ray e alnts do lt. tf tlle Corrri I is trying to' be clnsi stent , I guess I vote to sulport that . Ibn Ashrcrth: f,!a:' I nake one qrrick addition cqirrlent ard that is, rr requi.re tlre apraisal frcn the Ounty Assessor ard that ccmes about as a IErt of the HRA activities ard r*Et E iEnt to do Utere is assure that tbere ls going to be a certain Fdnfuur vahe for tax trr:rposes that wi[ be used. So lf there is an:' fourr of an irrentive progra'r thatrs going to be cusidered, rtEt is the absoluteflmr. If :,ou look at that, all hers sayirg there is, bere ls tIE absolute rninin[r'r ya]ue that e rculd be assigning to this FoIErt]r. I rnl rDt Ba]rlng thattiat's lrhat Orlin is going to take ard have as a final. value. I.n just sa:'irg ny lnitial reeiew of this is this is the absolute minirnurr tiat Frl1d go m t]tat property. Itlor Gnriel : CrG:r. Gn I get a Fption? If tDt, I will nEke a lrotion t}at rE deny ttE regEst as so irdicated j,n tlr cover letter that E have. OwEil,trcnran Diriler: II11 secord that. l6yor Gnrlel prored, ourrilustran Dirrrler secorded to den:r the reqrEst for reinbrusaent of S4r527.gg to tEritage hrk AtErtsrats fi the basis that it rprrld violate tle intent of the State lhifou'r Bnlldirq Code valuatim tables used b:' the citl' of Granhassen ln detenlning brildirq valuation. A]'l voted in f,avor ard the notion carried. SrIE E.IN REYIBI FTR INT!(JSISIAVOiEICqI|IBNEIoUSE EhCILITY, TDRT'VEST @RNER CF P}RK RqD A}D PARK qJRT, RO'IE CORPORATION. paul xlauss3 lhe 4plicant's ;xoposing to build , 32.ggg square f@t ofti,e/ nrehorrse buildirg at ttE intersectim of Park'Rod ard Park PIac€. Ihe '*ritional b,riliting dlorn sr tJle plans corcep,tually tJst rDu1d be t rilt ln the future. rits ttDrEht it lEs a f.lrl!' EU ttestgnd prduct. easlcally ttey responded to Fpst of tjre issrres tjlat Ere raised [t staff. O''. only sorE€rnyith tlE proipsaL ms ln regarils to tlE eastem actess ol Park bad. Staff believe t}lat it represented an Elnecessary tlafflc hazard in t}lat the site could b basically adeguateU, serv€d b]' tlE tgD other curb cuts that hd already been proibsed. t€ iEnt to the Plannirg Ccrtnrlssion witjl this several reeks ago ard t}le Plaruring Cqq'rissim agreed t}tat tle general cotEeE t Es ! god otE. After 78 ' City Courc:L lbeting - -tober 23, 1989 exa'rining tle issrres with regard to tjre orrb ctrt tlough, tlEy r:ltjrrEtely, dbciiled that, tlEy reccl'nrerdd aProvaL of ttE site PIan h,ith that aditional curb cut. I?ry bel ieve that the t:affic hazard ms rDt as great as had been e(Pressed and ttE!, noted that tlE secord buildirg beirg proposd nittr rp aditional curb cuts. At t}|e sare tinre tlere ras a grading pemit tequested througtt the City &uncil that i{as acted m the Cons€nt }geBia recsltl}, PreIEr€d by the erg ineerirg dEErtsIent. the aEplicant rasnr t present to argrE it but tj|at grading prrrrit had in there a stigrlatim that tlE:, could leave that actess Point ttE:t rrere conc€rned about. Sirf€ the Planning Cqrnrission neeting uerve reassessed it. the Erg ineer irg depalts'Ent has sotE atEitional lnforration. Irb rgrrain correrned about that curb 6rt. ltp rcw infonration tlut e have is that tDt only is lt a hazard drre to it's prorinigr to Park Plac€ but it also lnter feres rith a coqrle curb 6rts located asr.-oss the street. So €'re contintring to recqtrrlad t}!at it be agprored but e ate norirg to rectrrrnerd that tlE...c1rlb cut be deletd. oouncibEn Boyt.: uight I ask, this is so sttalght foreard. If E could foctls ever:rthirg m the curb cut, lla:te re could get out of here m this lsstE Prett!' Erlckly. I'tark Johnson: frn lbrk Johnson frcnr Rutp EveloFt€nt. IilI just brlng tp a couple o! points if I can. tE rEre tryirq to be sensi tive to the access onto Erk Road rith t}e site. It is a { acre, slightly under thatr'IErcel of lard ard on that re have just ttD Points of actess to ttE site. IE rrere tr:,irg to be sensitive I sa!' in tlrat re had ti€ brildlng Pads proPosed for the parcel ani by dolrg the orE further to tlE Hest, re ircorporated the orle drive into tlE ttD sites. fhe proPert), l ine m Erk Road is 600 feet long. lts've got 300 feet of distarce between tlE trD drives' t'b are alpro(h|ater:t L3s'L4g feet frd'r tlE corner curb of Erk Plac€ ard Park Road so 1€ Ere trylng to be sensltive' t* think that drre to tte size of the ProFrty, that it is reasonable. l€ anticitrEte seeing the traffic IEttern on the site being sarris and dellvexy vans ard things uill enter the curb cut to tlE west. PuIl j'n behird the trc buildings ard then leave the ProEErt:, cnto tJ)e Park Plac€ road so thati s reall:' the naln reasdl r€ irant€d to have tle drive errtering Park Place ss for tte Ior€r arrolrrt of ranewer ing tlat tlese ssrds rould have to FEke. So drc to the distances betreen ild tle size of th€ Fo5Erties, e feel tjrat lt is reasotrable. I did not knc'r, of any confl lct thrt was across ttE street there. ltere hatrperrs to be another curb crt right tlEre? PauI tgauss: ltrere r s actrElllt a double ctub cut across tlp atreet. Itis lllrrstrated cn tle aeriaf PhotograFh... t{ark Johnson: Eb lrou have an:, guestions t}at I can anatEr? t{alor Gnriel: I grress basically tle rajor corEem that rE have, B11l nentloned tfiis is very straight forrrard atd in tjte staff recqsretriations t}te:t are asking that tlE:' ellninate that eastem cutb cut gt Park nod ard Plrce lt rlth a rranewer.ing area for use [r parked cars arri redeslgn tlE rgrainlrq 6rrb cr$6 as reguired to facllitlte trrrk turnirg mor6rents atd to rduce tXe grade o the rgrraininq Er-k bad orrb ant froq 10+t to less th.n 5t. I dotrr t lsiow lf t}latrs a real pioble'r nith 1ou in regards to that. If there lanrt, I thir* rr crnr besldes tlre other ccnditions contained cn t.tpre etd I'tt erre lourve had a c*larc€ to review those Rd.lan. D l,ou have an!, objections to tlr- elther? 79 gt:' Orrrcil teeting - G .er 23, 1989 Rstan bos: Yes lt. 1{al10r. ls t{ark elr.rJed to, the protrErtyrs about 60g feetalorg Par-k Road. In that.IErk, re ctrecked everythirg aiter-FBde the report thefirst tioe with the planning Co,nrissi on. fn tlrat pik there,s four nnjir 99Panies. tnited, victor:', e ard IE:& ard all or *rose g=ople bave-curb crrtsidenticar to nrire but even shorter dislance to tlE corrEr oi ti,. o.rve.Park Place is a ortde-sac. A ded cul{ssac. Gre intent ts ss,enlrat 'irueasorEble uhen 1ou have a plece of property thatrs 609 foot lor.9 tiat rEaingre cutb cut c\arir€ ir, .to *ryig" trc poterntiar bulrdirg pro5ec[s is justrrueasonabre. rs far as t}e traffic patt-rn, t can addresi -the-a'rount oftraffic lou have on park,Itcd goirg ttrrough ttE par-k east/Est rcuta le rpgreater than t},at *rich is ca'ring in the rrBin drlg cu'rlng'off of park pra6entridr is ths r,ain street- cdrdrg in off rlt 5. rf i ttpugfu tbere ryas "-t iiti"lEttern, r would say definltely rerdt change that ht as far as a hazard r do rptEee that. t€ envisior the nain traffic ttrat uart eludd to rDul.d be cqqlrg off .of ttsrk place dd off of the cq'nron drive betr=en tj|e tl.o uuiraings. -i* a.iu"closest to the east rorrld te strictl!' a gnall car entrarE for tE per-nne:. ryrking in tlre office &partrEnt in t}rat hrirding. r have a "oy-aiiil""rtyuit}r staff,s opinion tlrat tlere's a traffic probierr sr that sitei llark Johnson: Erticularl]' r,tEn t drove dohn park bad this evening beforecorirg here just to look at the otlrer drlves ard r rorrld say that tfo r'aiorityof t}te on c€ntered di.stances of the drives doun that-road, ih-;-G;e lie grltea.few, r,ere Lgg fet, r5o. feet a[Ert ard 1ou're rooking "i rgg-i*a-io.-i -si zeable. bul td J.ngs ard being a firlr uo rEet ofr or u6 tntersection-oi ir," troroads whj.d) are, th€ park plaoe rod is not a ver!, rrai or rod "i -tiris-point. t{iU rEt be add ing a lot of traff ic clunts to pilk Road. Gary wa.'en3 park placE frq'r the erg ineer irg perstr=ctive, r€ l@k also with ane!,e to tle future tEre. lhe closeness of tbat- ctllL art ii prt of oru - cor,cernhere. In fact as rec€nt as this nrorrrirg rerre td.kirg ri tir-i- p*i"qe dJivepservice ras inreresred in lot 6 rt the €nd of hrk price for .;;;i;: ri"; - -' -talXirg about esrablishirg a tardarr trait er route in tlre clty tf,.i;i -goirg t"be, if approved , roul.d cq'e into this area here. IEn trrEks a aa1, and I thlnktle activitv in that are. bas. got a lot of t otential for traffic iJ especlauyeittt the closeness of that crt to the cornei and ure fact -that-iti"-o#it" t-cuts idas our conceln. rou could_tnore that thing to tlE r€st rn our oiinian arolive with i.t or i.rdeed planning co'mission Eaid to further restrici iii *t" i"tle expansi.on. l* could tolerate a cut r think in tte ex1nnsior .o." 'tr-, *courd tolerate a cut at thls rocatlon. rrlt reailiry a+rri tut tt=i" ... oee. lna'ples of cuts that are close to corners but r don.t think that stpura-u ttejnstlfication r,ir1z re strould @ntimE to tolerate a uaa srtt:atGi-rn ryipinior.thatrs our rationale. R rEn Roos: I$en pu analyze it frarr a traffic point of view, nhat srlteria arrlriEt t:'pe of accident ate :rou talkirE about? e4, IElren: ItEt type of rtrat? RaEn Roos: Acciderit. 6r:, Ltsrren: I{e }Ere lookirg Et dlfrlcts. ltrrnlng Frn ehent confl icts frqrr thetrr drivevays ard it,s best shortrt I gn,ess ln tlE gr;phlc, tle aerial g.aphic,frqrr t}e cuts across the road ard arso frq'r h[nlng t'p,rs'Ents. the tirrdEm routetlut i's proposed for traffic is eurlrg off park price to tlE west aorn parr noaa sg . City Orucil lEetirg - ":tober 23, 1989 aId tnen l+, Aldubon so E se a lot of trN€nents going ort towardls the Audrrbon bad area. ttark Jolmson: I $Ess I think in nry rtrind about the distance utrether t}te drive is enterirg Park Rod directl:, across otE another or tlE:tr re 5g feet otE rEty or another bJt tlE closeness in pxoximlty to aII ttre dtives dortn Park Roail, they cannot be that fa! off that there's goirg to be that Fuch of a reduction of danger of c€ car prll ing orl, turni.ng one rrr:, atd 6€ frqr the optrnsite sides of the rod ard just continuirE to l@k at ttE distarEe betwe€n tte drlves here. n[tBn bos: Gary, $bat is tle widlt} of tlrose roads on Park noad? Ga4t tiuren: It stDuld b 36 I bel ieve. f&rrEn Roos: thatrs.t least a carud a half per slde. Ebr a passirg lane if scnebody's tt':,irE to trrm into it. I donr t care... Gar:, I€r-ren: vle talked earlier t}ls evening about havirg to divert aroEd h:ses ard things of this nature. I guess sure, it's rranageable. I?E questidl here I t}ink is, is the site adeguatel:, served with t}le trD ctts and I gtrss ln orrr opinim rE felt there rras adeq':ate servic€.sitho{t havirg to tolerate further c6ngestion at tlEt intersectim ani could indeed slPport a further cut to the esi in the a<pansicr if that rculil be a\ trade-off . RcnEn Roos: wi th the lot like it is, ltou have to, because of the odd shape of Park PlacE ard Park Road, ltts very difficult to take the bui ldlrg ard set it into t})ls area ard FEke it useable. oka:? Ihatrs one of tle reasons E backed it off so r* have a lot of visibility effect m ttE front of that bui lding cu're dohrn Erk noad. t'b've tried tlat buildirg at several different locations. Ihe site rras configured to Prrt trc building Pds dl it...ttE da!'l I bought. it but afte!. . . Ihe orE trme re had it orer here r*rich Es a straigtlt line into tjtis blpass area ard r,€ shi fteil it au tlE E:/ ot,e[ to this Point' rhatrs l0g Erd sie 4S foot over to that slrtEr. ttre's rp &ive ln tiat park that is tbat far fror tlE corner to the buildirg. 2g f@t is cq'mon. tFw Irn trt sa:'1n9 thatrs precedent. trn jrrst saylrB I just donrt see the justlfi+le :eason saldng 1ou cani t tEve a curb cut off of Park Rod. .Itis Jr irdustrial park. cor:rEilFEn Bo]tt: Itrs afso a clIlector. Itman tbos: Bil}, there is rr ordinanoes contoU ing that at all. If there ras an ordinare saltirg tltat !,ou can hlve 35 foot or {0 foot fror t}c corrg, rerd ctnEfly with that ordtinarse but therers tp ordiruEe. OurEllnan Bolt: I thought I lnard G4r raying trp\re it ftrrther to the rtst and te could live wlth it. Raqan Roos: rEll I did. I 6hi ftd it as far as I could Bill qr tbat site. &urcilFlan Bolt: If lrou shift it to tlE easE !,ou i re ttEl t@ cloe b tlE corner f gatlrer fro'r nttat staff is saldrE ad as f,ar as your ahi.fting lt to tlE rEst, I can see r*here it lays l+) by !,our bulldirg. It aE?ears to do tbet Prett:'niceilr. thforturEtely itrE right acroEs fror a coq>Ie otler e(istitlg -tlrfves. I think- staff is pretty consistent ncrran rtsl tlE:" re sa:'iE to rs, re dqr't like to have tiat rany aclesses in srch a tight !rea. 81 - Gar], I€rrerr: k'En, have 10u lmked at tllat c.rt beirE on t}!e east sr hrk placelnsted of m palk &ad? Rdi'an Ross Again, tie site, rfiat r tried to do is have tJre ac-cess into theprolErtl' fro,. tlE prirtrary rod al ttE site ard that is park Road. t€ nere not9oin9 to IEve a truck entrarc€ at all because Irnr going to have a cqranoneasg€nt for this buirdirg to e.ess this site but-tt ieod to ue tle bestlEthod b 9€t tnEk traffic in tlnre...in this front section so t}!.t Es a r*loresite to have truck traffic corring in an park plaae ard back orrt. rhis traffrchere is ca' traffic. rt is rpt trrck traffic. youire talking auoui Lnants,tlE tenants in that erd of .tle^buirdlrg, lourre probably iooxlrg .i-r;J Lybar|ryr! ry.-vte 20-25 individrrals havir{-drs par'kins i"'a.-oirice-o.p..L-,t ottlnt buildirg. rt is not truck traffi6. rtrai ts co',irg out -oi- u-;-tl*irEstern drivua-v. COtrrEilF n b)rt 3 f$at are :rour }rurs of operation? Rsrlan Roos: Tlpical office tpurs. gzgg to Srgg. courciln.n Bo:'t : so it r s goirg to ue atr'pins the cars about the EarE tifie theothers j.n that, is that erhat :(xr rrere sa:'irE Gar:'? Does lt naXe a aiffere.,cethat it's ca. trafflc? rrm si*e it rnrst-nele " aiff".-o". m.s-it-cdrq. p,,'opinior krordrg that it,s car traffic? er:'.isrren: I guess anlthing rculd help brrt -car traff ic is npre easiry nranagedI thi.nk at an acress like tlrat than truck traffic. *urcib'n.Bo:'t: So if no'En posted tlrat ,D truck entrarce or exit, coulct:roulive witlr it fro'r a staff stardpoint? er]' I{arrer: It rD'Ud irprove the situation. Counci lnlan Bolt: What a diplo'utic arlsrrer. l'lark Johnsm: r rik-. tie aristances dom to park rive *tich goes lp to rTl 5lni Ardubon Trail ard tle traffic aoirg rike this ard sprittini .i 6,ai-polnt toget onto rH 5. I€rre about dead aenter tlpre so t}le E;fflc 6u1d ue itut ^5[5.0 eadr ey for t]e buslnes-s alosr to ttE Estern tErt, uE, rculd co do$nAudubcn to rt| 5 ard tlE otlErs to tie east of us rculd- 9o io p"it ooi""'"ru t"x.that ey uruld be lqicaI. kun Roos: ...rt Es rever intended for treks ln the first plaoe becarrsetraffic that rDuld brm arounil slth a tnrk ia very difficrrlt.- V€ty diifiad.t. l{a1or ctrniel: r think errre lxobably di8cussed it erough back arrl forttr lcre. oN,'EtrF ar lbrl$En: r dori 't Eee a probls'. ard r huld think to rre ur rqlc lsto hrve it 'c'oss frcrr anot}er entrance htt r donrt *e it ls as a gobigrr brt rI "* it beirg kird of a void for rhis buildlrg if it i;'a-rhe.E -tlj-ii r," "fencre sitter. (brrcilru'ran Dfurler: r guess r alpreclate ltrff rs crnsideration lrre arrl rtlri'nk the:, have nore of rn o(pert oplnicr than r do. re dtid aprore-r[ cr tte Clty Oorrcil tbetirq - G. :er 23r 1989 82 City Gurci.I tEeting - ttobet 23t L9g9 @nsent agerda wittr tlp elimination of tle eastern curb 6rt so I $Ess I,d stickdth that. Ualor GlrieJ. : With? Corrrr i lrnqan DinOer : @nsent agerda. feep t}le curt cut eI irrinated like re approved in our lD:,or Ctrdel: d<aY. nqran noos: ...tlp reason for tlp gradirg perrrit ras initially rp rpre tr)ting to get this thirg grourd breakirg... lltEn it becare obrvious that orE tenant couldnr t get in the grourd that grick so F're going to 6ta1l it until spring so tle grading procress...Eo thatrs ttE prllrar1, reasor there ksnrt an:tbod:t Presentat t}lat tine. . . tlalor Grrriel: tbu about if re tere to just post tlat for cars onl!, atd rD trucks? Gar:, l€rren: I uas going to srggest , lt depenis on tlE tilrdrg of ktE l i s sitrution but if he's talki.rg about sPr irEtiFe custructlon, he llentiond sqrle other alternatives for the bri.ld lng site that he hail gone through ard I donrt know lf Plannlrg has looked at those ln the IEst but lrd be interested to look at tlrose also to better Ederstan! the restraints that te's talkirg abonE for other al ternate o:rb clrts here. It deperds on the tiJlrirg here but I rDuld suggest that nta]&e itis appropriate to table the itgq or alprove it wi th the urderstarding tlrat set 1,1 resol,ve this curb cut issue. llayor Gr,riel : I think I'd like to just as soon aFprove 1t nith resolverqent bet!€en tlE trc of you. Bet$e€tl staff ard :rourselves. br:rrcilrrrrran Dirrrler: A1right. Ibatrs fine rrith rre. Gunci}qan Bolt morred, ourcilru'ran Dirrfler seconaled t]Et Site Plan Evis, *89-8 for tlre Rq're office Bd ldirg be agproved without variarces Eubject to t]te f ollowirg c-ordi tidls : 1. Eovide trash storage enclosrues hrilt with rrErterlals ccFpatible slth the buildirg oL store all trasb lnt€rnal.I:r. 2. Roof Fpunted HvlC egJlFrsrt *tou1d be povlded sith a screen constnEted of B'raterials cqlpatible witlr the bul ldirg en<terior. Etails stpuld be prepred for staff approva!. prior to citlt oll'Ell. revler. 3. ItE developer sill mrk yltlt tlE CiQr Elg irer to reEolve ttE crl6 crrt iSSt'oS. Evise the landscaping plan to lllustrate Eeding or Eodding of tlE thase II buildirg area. fhls are ls to be kept in a rEintalnd corditim untll constructi on 6cuEs. 5. Project apprwal by t}te Riley Pulgatory Bluff Geek lihterahed Distrlct. 83 t. Cjty OrrEil lGeting - e ,er 23, 1989 6. tttiliz corErete srrb and gutter a'rd dbsign lt to conrEt to lItPtovqrEnts in Par*k Place that rrill b installd [t t]= Clty. Ad an aditlonal. cltch basin at the Park Plac-e club ort. AII stonrr ler€r leated in g:b}ic easa'Ent or R0{ shal1 be reintorcd corcrete plIE. Eosim control s are to be ln place prlor to start of rcrk on tie site rni naintalned until site restoratim ls corErlet€d. l& ttional crosiul controL rsy b regrired almg tle sortth protErty line by Btlff to lEevent erosionlnto Park Rod. 1 8. fdd a fire tldrant cr tie prkirg tot lslrrd leated off tlr rDrthr€st corner of tle brildirg. 9. Provide lighting ard signage detalla for *aff revlew. lll voteal 1n favor ard tle notict carrld. Ot'rilF|an Bo:E: 6uld I ask, coutd tr go right to 12(b)? &urrilrurran DiJriter: Ir11 s€csd that. l2(B) CINRY TAR,ls WEMAID ALTERATION, SENIOR P[T!6IER. Jo lrm OlEen: Ird tlrere rculd b rp declalons rrrrde tonlgtrt. Alrc, there lre rcsidents r.tD also do not Uke rhat ls hapenirg out U|ere ard rittr to 3ee tlE vegetation rgrain to. Jo lrt1 OIs€n: fhis uas btought ln front of ttc ourcll tonight becaue therers!:en so'e rctivity orrt in O*'r!'Enrrs rlhi ch Srylcally rcu1d iequirc tlnresidents to go througb a setlard alteratr.m per'rtt to rg'rorre *n vegetlti-tarowd the prding !r-eas. the $ole Ftrpose for this Bs ,lst to, I krDe, thlttley rer,e golrg to h cantact wlth tlE 6urci1, Bs Juit to Urirg tls'r rp to 9te T:Ut r,h"! -g happenirg -ard b dlow the resldents a ctErf.e- to qEa-k. tInor, ltrs_reall:, lat€ ard this couldl be r reall!, torg ltgr1 ro IrIl klrd of op'It E to for then brt cssentlally *ren orrry Eurtrs Elt tlrrough the rrrbdivlrion Process, tlE:, also rEnt through. Hetlrrd dtcratlql larrrlt ard there uere rsrelor class B Etllrd rleas tlEt ere dredged ard alfo.Ed to be &edgd anit lr3ed as pordirg rreas. ls IErt of tJEt, tlbse rreas hrve trken 'l qualitt€ of aEtlard. they ror have cattailt ard otler etlar.ril vegetatlon. flhere has beenrrp rs'|o\ral of that vegetatiar. Staff h!5 contrctd the tc5idents st tlrE thatthey muld have to 90 Uuough ! Etl.ld alteratlon Fudt tEoce$ for that- to betE!fitttd. tits urderstard tlrir reasonl,rB fc Enttrg b raove lt 13 to rl,toryler.s into tle pording areas or to allor tlEq to be used Etlvel!, ltke tn theytn&s.*trJ'r ard e aclopnledge tJl.t there nlgln 6 g ccll'prqtlie tttat E can GFEto rcrking cn but tlE:' do have to go throqh the Foaess bacauee rfilt 13 bafpenfrg rcn ls rct the corroct By.rd ltra rerrovlng a lbt of ttr v.get Uqlfd tlkitE .ifa:, tlE b.nefits of tlt arca. 8o ylur tllt I $Ess trll Lt tha,b€{rer lEr rant to do thle. tal& h.t e rc qnhe3Iter n. ltl,or Chiiet: trat rs r&!t lrd rcal.Iy lthr to &. Gn s have I lpotreTrrss6tc tiis? 8{ a C}NNHASSE{ CITT MilCIL REE'IAR I{EETIIG croBER 9, 1989 84 u- I t'5'- e. f. 9. h. rI1 l'la1or ctmiel cal ledl the leeting to order at 7:35 p.n.. ite neettng Es o[Endsith t]te Pledge to the Fl.ag. CqnEIL UE{B*S PRESEi+T: taa}ror Ct3iel, $rnrilnan Bo:rt, 6rrEi1fian l6rloan,Courcilnten Dirder ard olrEifnan gohnsan gnE.F PRESEM: lbn lshrprut, paul Nrauss, Jo Ann Olsen, Gry }hrren, IoriSietsgrrar ltdd Ehardt, Jirrr Chaffee ayd fve HaEtElrerr 'Ctqiettorrcy -- APPROyAL G AGmUA: 6urEi Lran Johnson roved, orrcilrr.an Diruler Eecorttedl to ipprove tle agerda ulth tlE followirg a&ittons: burcilnran Bolt Ented tod_:sgll:s ftsrtj.er lE{es, take.Iacry acsess, and pleasant view qelA ont.of ; uap.Gnriel rented to discuss Evid lEadla,s reslgnation frq,r the ifanntrrgCo'ntissioni and Corrrcilnnn Johnson rEnted to discuss ttre vacarrcl, on [hesouthi€st }Etro ltansit @rmission. bn AahrDrth had an Adrrinsirationkesentation, an rrrrate cn the Errlsr acqui.sition. A1r vpted in favor artt therrDtion carried. REICLING PRIZE mAWIIE: l{a},or Ctmiel drer, 5 nares for the recycl irg prize drawirg to split the S5SS.0S pot into $LSS.AS lnr each of tle rines. - - CII{SE{I AGE{DA: &rnlc i lr*r'ran Dirqler nnred r 6r.uri lrran l$rkman Becorded toal{)rove the. follorirg consent agenia ltars prrsuant to the Ciq, !{arEger, Breco'nerdations : Esolution t89-I08: 4,proval of Esolutlon for Joint clolErative p,rojectrith Rile:r-Bluff- Pugatory Geek lrhtershed Distrlct, t k; Rilet, Uainlen rrekograrl. Altr)rove Gading Ferrdt, Ere B:iJdirg Site, l{50 hrk bad. lpproral of BiUs. City Oorrsil [inutes dated Septarter 25, I9g9 Planning hmission t{inutes ttatd Septenrber 29. Lggg Park ard Ecreation Ccmissim ttinutes dated Septerber 12, I9g9 Esolution 18F199: Alfrrove Esolutiol lrrthorlzirg fcgul3itlqr of theBongard kopert:r. Set Brdget. llrrLsession, Gder lO, 1989, ?s3g tr&. at Ctty Brll. voted in favor ard tI= rrrotlo c.'rld. VISITOR PRESEI'IATION: CT.fiIJNIT:T GNTER TASK FoRcE. Lri sietsqrE: As stated ln the rrraterl!1. th.tra i.n lorrr pcket, tl: em.rniercenter - hsk Force is planning to take tneir firdirgJ art ihe research to thecoounity in _ camunlt:r nEetirgs in the rext corple of rnonths. lttrelr goal ls toget residential ingut an issues regardirg the cqrrnnit!, ceitter . Ihj.s itsrr ls 1 ! CITY OF cHINH[SStI\l STAFF REPORT .or.C. DATE: Oct. {, E;t C.C. DAIE: Oct. 23, 19g9 CASE NOs .89-8 Site plan Prepared by:rrauss,zv (dL- Fz C) =(LL E ldFa Site Plan Review for the Rorne Office Building X;;.iff;.ri:::", "r the rntersecrion of park Road PROPOSAIs LOCA?ION: APPLICANT:i?T6il;*"3:;,:". Rome corPoration Chanhassen, UN 553I7 PRESBNT ZONfNG8 ACREAGE: DENSITY: AD;IACENT ZONTNG AND LAND USE: roP, Industrial office park District 3.95 acres Aitlor !.; - . ^-__. N- s- E- w- IOP; vacant industrial IOPi.industrial IOPr industrial IOP,. lndustrial Available to the site b:::...--./1fu ll. '.: -*19./ r? /.rZ -. t-11ay'25 WATER AND SETIER: PHYSICAI, CE,ARAC. S 2000 LaND USE pLANs rndustrial iiii'iiil,i:Hs'il,_3:iu:: i"*T:i ;1"ff :.Park Place. The site contains no rretlandareas . Itu OU 2 z t G Y Y s, r OI -l I ( a I ! OI I _ -_---.--_-___ ._ ao LAKE SUSAII RD.i IC I LA'(E AIIII .RD txl4 \\ \.R12 € OJ F?E FOAD BUTTEF E BG ?D 'ToP$ -t h J @ 'I FD LAP ti PI.JD-R aa' = v ,i R1 aI R4 it I Rome Offiee Building October 4, 1989 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUUIUARY The applicant is requesting site plan approval to construct a 32,1100 square foot off icerlwarehouse building on a 3.9 acres siteIocated at the intersection of park Road anil park place. Aseconil 17,500 square foot building is conceptually illustratedfor development on the same site although approvals for it arenot being requested at this time. The site appears to have been graded previously and contains nonatural amenities worthy of preservation. The single storybuilding is attractively designed. Office areas aie orienieiltowards the streets with truck loading docks concealed in an aleaalong the less visible north elevation. Exterior materialsinclude brick and rock-faced block with a standing seam metalroofing used to highlight the rounded buitding coiners andentrances. Parking provisions exceed ordinance requirements.Staff is concerned with the proposal to have two crirb cuts onPark Road due to the traffic volumes that the roacl carries anilthe proximity of the eastern curb cut to park place. We arerecommending that the easCern entrance be deleted anil believethat the building is adequately serveil by the remaining twoentrances. An, extremely well developed landscaping plan has been provideo,public utilities are available and drainige provisions-arereasonably simple. There are no variances alsociated with theproposal . The-Planning Commission reviewed the proposal on October 4, 19g9.staff had recommended approval subjecl to appropriate conditionsincluding one in that the eastern curb cut on parf Drive bedeleted. The Commission generally concurred with the staffreporti however, they ultimately concluded that the curb cutshould be a11owed. Ihey ilid not believe that it constituted asignificant hazard and believed that the site plan was consistentwith staff's intent to liurit the total nunber of curb cuts sinceit illustrates serving the second building with no new entrances.The Commission recommeniled approval of the project whiJ.e deletingthe condition relating to the curb cut. Ueeting minutes areattached. gradl ing frourof the agenda, On IUonday, Octobe! 9, 1989, the City Council authorized apermit for the project on the consent agenda. The reportthe Engineering Department (attacheal) stipulated delelioncurb cut for safety reasons. Since it wai on the consentthe issue was not pursued by staff or the applicant. Staff is continuing to recommend approval of the project butreservations regarding the curb cut remain. An update nemoranclumfrom the Engineering Department (attached) inilicales their con-tinued opposition to the entrance and provides further documen- tation for the position based upon the location of existing curb cuts located across the street. Based upon the foregoing, staff is continuing to reconmend that the eastern curb cut be deleted. If the City Council ultinately determines that the curb cut is acceptable, condition *3 needs to be modified. The 3.95 acres site is located at the northvrest corner of the intersection of Park Road and Park Place. It appears to have been extensively graded in the past and contains no trees orwetlands. Natural drainage is into a low,/wet area located off-site to the north. The site slopes down from west to east with the high point of 946' found near the northwest corner of thesite anal the lov, of 923 r found along Park Place. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCH ITECTURE The site is retangular with the longer face oriented east to west along Park Drive. Park Place is the more minor street and is designed as a cul-ile-sac to serve several industrial lots. Boththe 32,400 square foot building currently being proposed and a 17,500 square foot builcling that is conceptually illustrated are oriented south along Park Dlive. Truck loading areas are placed along the north elevations where they will be concealed by the building with further screening provideil by the fact that the docks are recessed. The single story off icelwarehouse buililing is attractively designed. Exterior materials include brick skirting with rock- faced block above. The loofline is flat, however, interest is provideo by a variety of steps incorporteil into the building e1e- vations and standing se.rm metal roofing over builtling corners andentrances. Extensive glazing on alI visible elevations tenils to promote an office rather then intlustrial image. The architect has confirmed that the exterior treatment will be utilized on allbuilding elevations except inside the loatling dock areas. No details are provideil on trash storage facilities.trash storage areas should be provided with enclosuresmaterial compatible with the building. Alternatively, storage could be restricted to internal Iocations. Exter iorbuilt of trash No details are provided on HVAC equipment screening. The eguip- ment will be roof mounted. Staff would prefer to have the screen constructed from materials conpatible with the building exterior,by utilizing the standing seam metal for example, rather then employ a wood screen fence. Details acceptable to the City should be workeil out prior to City Council review. Rome Office Buililing October 4, 1989 Page 3 SITE CHARACTERISTICS PARK ING,/ INTERIOR CIRCULATION Parking provisions for this type of buiJ.cling are often dlifficultfor staff to determine accurately. The reason is that the inter- na1 ilivision of space is flexibLe since it is baseil upon thetennants needs. Office and manufacturing generate large parking demands while warehousing does not. Theiefore, it is 5ur-pre-ference to provide a "cushion', of aatilitional sta11s if posaible. The plans iLlust.rate the following: Use Office lilarehouse Use Off ice l{arehouse A rea Phase I E II Park ing Phase I Park i ng 3 stalls,/per 10001 stall/per 1000 s 10,500 39,400 s.f.s.f. 9 ,000 23,400 s.f..f. s.f.s.f. Based upon the analysis, we have concluded that parking provi-sions are acceptable since ordinance requirements are exleededa large margin. Required Total 5I sta11sPlovided 72 stalls by Intelnal circulation works well and no nodifications are proposed. ACCESS Three access points on Plark Place- Paran industrial collecserving the area tha hav KDtorri e been proposed, two on park Drive and onerive is a through street that functions as. Park Place is a short cul-de-sacs scheduled for upgrading. next spring. Staff is concerned that the eastern curb cut on park Roail couldcause traffic conflicts with palk place and nornally attempts toreduce the number of curb cuts on busy streets. we believE thatthe site can be adequately aerved by the rrestern curb cut on park Road and by the Park Place entrance and are recommending that theeastern curb cut be eliminated. In its place a paved area tofacilitate backing movements of parked cars should be provideil . Rome Office Building October 4, 1989 Page 4 Total 32 40 Required Total 72 stalls Provided 15rl staIls 3 stalls/per 1000 s.f.I stall/per 1000 s.f. TotaI 27 24 Area Rome Office Building October 4, L989 Page 5 In addition, we ale recornmending that the renaining tiro curb cuts be widened to facilitate truck turning movements. We are also concerned that the grade on the western curb cut exceeds 10t. While no official ordinance standard exists, we believe that thisis excessive and could pose a traffic hazard. The grading plan should be revised to reiluce the grade to less then 53. The area that is to contain the second phase addition will be graded during the initial construction. This area should be seeded or sodded and kept in a maintained condition until construction is proposed. L IGHT ING,/ S IGNAGE Lighting and signage details should be provided for staff review. GRAD ING,/DRAINAGE The site naturally drains towards the north and this flow will be perpetuated by the current proposal . The off-site ponding areathat h,iIl be utilized was sized to handle the water that will be gene!ated. Prelirninary plans are generally acceptable. Storm selrer locateal along Park Place should be designed to connect with improvementsthat will be installed by the City when that street is upgraded. To accor,rplish this an additional catch basin at the Park Place curb cut is required. The culvert under the driveway is to befor temporary use only since the roadside ditch wiLl be elimi- nated when the street is upgradetl All storm sevrer located in public easement or ROlf shoulil be builtwith reinforced concrete pipe. All parking Iot curbing should be concrete and designed to merge t ith the curb line in the Rolil. watershed District approval is required. Grading plans are generally acceptable. A large amount of workis required to Lower and flatten the site. Erosion control i6 proposed along the north construction .line. Additional measures are required along the south where water may flow into thestreet. PUBLIC UTILITIES Cityfire water and sewer are available in Park hydrant is needed to adequately serve Road. Anthe site.additionalIt should LANDSCAP ING A very high quality landscaping plan has been developed. ?he plan provides generous amounts of landscaping in setback areas, around the building foundation and on parking Iot islands. be located on the parking 1ot island found off the nolthwest corner of the building. PtsASE I COIIIPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE - IOP DISTRICT Ord ina nce P roposed Building Beight Building Setback 4 stories N-10 | E-25 | s-30, w-10 | ?2 N-10 | E-25 r s-30 r 9l-10 r 70r None Parking Park i ng S ta 11s Setback Provide trash storage enclosures builpatible with the building or store a1 Roof mounted EVAC equipment should beconstructed of materials compatible wiexterior. Details should be preapredprior to City Council review. 1 story N-90 i E-150 's-30 r w-250 | 103 N-10 ' E-25 's-30 r w-220 | 75r ith materials com-rash internalLy. provided with a screenth the buildingfor staff approval Lot Coverage 1 * First phase hard surface exceeds the permitted standard,however, no variance is needed since phase II currently remainsundeveloped. As currently proposed both phases will rLsult in71.51 lot coverage which also exceeds the ordinance standards. When the Phase II site plan is reviewed, it is expected that thisvariance can be eliminated by simply removing sevlral parkingsta1Is. Si.nce the nunber of stalls far exceeds the ordinancestandards this will not cause any problems. STAFF RECOIIIITTENDAT ION Staff recommenils that the Site plan Reviei, *89-8 for the RomeOffice Building be approved without variances subject to thefollowing conditions: tw1t 2 Eliminate the eastern curb cut on Park Road and replace itirith a maneuvering area for use by parked cars. Redesign theremaining curb cuts as required to facilitate truck turningmovements. Reiluce the grade on the remaining park Road curbcut from 10+t to less then 5t. 3. Rome Office Buildinq October 4, 1989 Page 5 Vari.ances Required: 4 Rone office Building October 4, 1989 Page 7 5 5. Utilize concrete curb and gutter and design it improvements in Park Place that will be installCity. Add an additional catch basin at the Parcut. All storm sewer located in public easemen be reinforced concrete pipe. Revise the landscaping plan to illustrate seeding or soddingof the Phase II building area. This area is to be kept in a maintained condition until construction occurs. Project approval by the Riley Purgatory Bluff creek watershedDistrict. to ed kt connect to by the Place curbor RO[{ shall 7 8 Erosion controls are to be in place prior to start of work on the site anil maintained until site restoration is completed. Additional erosion control may be required along the south property line by staff to prevent erosion into Park Road. Add a fire hydrant on the parking lot island located off the northh'est corner of the building. 9. Provide lighting and signage details for staff review. ATTACHT"IENTS 1. Irtemo from Dave Hempel dated September 27, 1989. 2. Itlemo f rom I'lark Littf in dated September 22, L989. 3. llemo from Ron Julkowski dated SePtenber 27 , L989. 4. Site plan details dated Septenrber 7, 1989 (sheets Al , Ll and CI). 5. october 4, !989 Planning Commission minutes. 6. Dave Hempel's Ietter to Ronan Roos dated October 18, 1989 7. Update merno frorn Dave Hempel dateil October 18, 1989. 8. Site plan dated September 8' 1989. THINHISSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 !{EUORANDUM TO: Paul Krauss, Planning Director FROM: Dave Eempel , Sr. Engineering Technician fu DATE: September 27, L989 SUBJ: Site Plan Review, Rome Office Building Upon review of the August 31, 1989, I recommendation: site planoffer the for Rome Office Building datedfollowing comments and Streets 1. Delete the most easterly driveway access onto park Drive.Since Park Road acts as a collector through the industrialpark, it is desirable to reduce the number of curb cutshaving direct access. 2 The applicant shoulil be matle aware that park place is pro-posed to be upgraded this spring. The plans should bemodified accordingly to reflect the proposed road improve-ments scheduletl. The proposed road will consist of 31" bitu-minous overJay 38 ft. wide face-to-face with B-6L8 concretecurb and gutter and 3t stopes on the boulevards. 3 4 The applicant sha1l verify that the radiuses are sufficientfor truck traffic. The applicant should enil the concrete access onto Park Place at the property enable the Cityrs contractor to matchPark Place is upgradetl. curbs for the clriveway1ine. Ihis wouldthe existing curbs when Sanitary Sewer and water City water and sanitary sewer is available from park Road. Gradinq anil Drainage p to the site fromproperty Iine. The The the lans indicate storm sewer being extendedityrs storm sewer system along the north CITY OF t{r. Paul Krauss September 27, 1989 Page 2 Erosion control The applicant proposes TyPe I erosion control along the perimeter of thL- east and north 1ot lines. It may also be necessary to extend the erosion control on the south bounilary for part of the site. Type I erosion control , i.e. silt fence, will be accep- table at-Lhis timei however, if the City feels that this is not sufficient in holding back the erosion, the City will monitor the site for erosion problens ancl if deemeil necessary, additional erosion control mly be required in the future. All catch basins shal1 be ringed wilh bales or silt fence until paving operations are completed. overall system was designeil to handle storm runoff generated from such tlevelopments. A11 storm sewer within the cityrs right-of- way or utility easements shall be reinforced concrete pipe (RcP). Th- plans propose a 15" storm sewer underneath the driveway access at Park Place. This culvert should be placeil for tem- porary purposes on1y. As Park Place is upgradeil the existing ditcn-ritt-be filleil in and the culvert will no longer be needed. when the future parking lot to the west is constructed, an addi- tional catch basin should be added in the noltheast corne! of the parking 1ot. The applicant shalL comply with any and all Watershed require- ments. CITY OF EHINHISSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 NEHORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planne! FROM: Mark Littfin, F!,re Inspector DATE: Septenber 22, L989 SUBJ: 89-8 Site Plan Reviev (RoDe Office Building) Comments and/ox r e c onne ndat i ons : 1) Add an additional Fire Hydrant as shoyn on Utility plan. EHINHISSEN 690 COULTER ORIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 UEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission FROM: Ron Julkorski, Building Official DATE: September 2?, L989 SUBJ: Rome Office Buililing The Building Department has reviei{ed the site plans for the Rone Office Building has has no comments. --ie CITY OF r L 'l -I -T tl TTtt .,] '1 -,1 l -t t--t_. l- t._-_l--- [::t---t::t--- T:: t---L:. --1t- -.1 ll -l lil) I I I I I I J I I I I I rl--- tl 5: 30a I I I I I I I I I ItrllI L-'1 aD =m !r z -1: t. I, i t'- I t-l-'l-t T r r-rrllllrll nl {t ! ,T !o o ipEeE i It :!iiii !lii!i lli ! !rl,il,t I I!I I t i -lTT-t-1!]lTilt r-t I Dtlr II iiiiiii r:i_ i;ri ii ', 'N ff[ilffiilfiffiE i:::i!iiir"!i tt! i:!i if ili[I illitit iiliill 'fIIIfl ilrififii "9!.9tt TE.E io ROME OFFICE BUILDING cxliltAtaEt. rrxil:3olaffi m at, m m Joz @,oa i oo =oz =! I I a ! ..\ ll o PO 8S.t Ia6 I tt E zI a I I it : I r I! iiiiiliit s I ii 7 I a I iialri ir !ill:lll ii'illl ti ii t! It:I' lr lril lt si rl !t .! l! rl lr i! rl ;t I I I I : t!i l!!rll Iii laa !I at Ir ii ! I I It I iltlli:l ii! ill! !ll! ;tIt H iit rl t: it li !l D ll D I I I flri Ir iI i I il li ? iiii!ir I I I I I I II 'it1lr !r I I N IiI I I i ! II t$ .t I i :l ii'I rihltll tlt II ril rl illi .l I II It t I I I tI II lr lri lti llrlr lr lir l't I I I ! ,7t I il I I tI I I II I T ritI I t I ii I \ I i)ci ia r: I, ! t! I rE T !I I+'€ !i l I I I zAo<o5!-E'Eri.XFrbrtzaz ;:li :!ll '!F ril !o zflDn lll:rt "tri I, (. I a l ffiEAJ I I II, I t j rtlL ROME OFFICE BUILDING GtaaittaatEll, rllu'tESor,l n.4-a r*z),ffi lt r' ,ti r,.rtl 'itll I ril! :!i,; 1't It II ii II I -<rr.-- - -;, .l il .I B: 3a -8 .cI P fi I ..t L:'l ]a€tL:i!i i! 1r i o €o I'l, \t I tl t: 1l _:l r l:li, 1 I 'I I tl:rr I q I \ 'l lrl illl'llir llrlii TI i! lr'l L I I I !ri : r' ". -; ---T- - ! ./ :L.-: J,F -...-t '-:- L_-- tr ti t;j\ I r;3 to PO gl! 9-o il I I I i I I I ii; i.t:l!1 I I I ! I I i"l "l o !:, -t,it-. I = I I ;I i :l.t .io, ri I I t )lLI ! ,a I 'i':,t, it;i!E *ti I 'rI iiiili 2a- --7rth!,z7z I' .I tirI r1' !I -1 t' 4 Bo :r:. rii :a|l"I t lf ,!i; l:?:: " -. - ;"' , I I r'1.l I I I tl tr_ { riIt , li I; 7 I 'pI 62 ROME OFFICE BUILDING clllr{i ssEt. ItxiES0ta ,,1 I :l I i t. !; Ii:,: t' t_ I I I II a !t it !E 1aii il !r F- ! i CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMH I SS ION REGULAR I{EET I NG ocToBER 4, L9g9 Chairman Conr atl MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Batzli and }IEHBERS ABSENT: called the nreeting to order at 7:35 p.m.. Tim Erhart, Steve Ennrings, Annette El1son, David Headla Jim vli ldermuth PauI Ktauss, Director of Planning and Jo AnnSTAFF PRESENT: Planner Ladd Conrad, _ OI sen, Sen i o, Conrad: I'rr going to start out l'ith just an itenr of interest. Did ever:tboal:, receive a cop:r of Dave Headla's note of resigning. He has sentthat to the City Corrncil and rryself . He said it was effective October:15th. I alwa!,s feel there's a loss rrben somebody resigns Dave because wbr !,ou've been around and lrou have sonre experience, I think it is a ]oss tothe coFurunity but :tou've tal,ked to rrre about reasons and I Eure know ph!, yourre doing jt. I thank you for the tinre. I don,t know whatrs the rightdate for your resignatlon. As you sai.d, there is sone flexlbility. IrIItalk to ]rou about that. Thanks for your time. You alwa:rs seeFl to bringdifferent perspectives and I donrt knot rrhat Jo Annrs going to do irittlout you around here. UD Parrl Kralrss presented the staff report. Conrad: rePort ? tirtre. Roman, do yorr rrant toIt iras prett:, clean. present your proposal or react to the We havenrt heard one this clean for a sta f ,- long Ronan Roos: Well a little history basically. The site, as paul. eluiled tcis a { acre site. Origi.nally was two lots but shen they put ln Park Place,rhich is a cul-de-sac to the north...theyr reconfigured that general area and nade that into one... Wbat Itn proposing to do lB rnuch Like I did onthe last building in Chanbassen that f did in 1985. The tot ie large enough to sustain two buildings. The seconit building about I?r500 and thereason I'm leading lrou into this is having to do rrith that curb cut. H:,option would be dosnstream to build a aecond building on that site. Atthat point in tj.rne I could bave put a curb crrt in just for that buililing soinstead I shlfted it to tnake it a common easenent Eor both lots at such-tlme as I rnight split that propert:, lnto tro. fhe building is a multi-tenanted building. Therefore the anount of parklng on the eastern side as :tou see... The distance fronl the corner to here is approxinratel:r G5 foot._I did want to sa:' ln terms of the lndustrial park, there are quite a feHcurb crrts. . . (Roman Roos stepped tape . ) awalt ftorn the microphone and rttas not piched up on the - SITE PLAN REVI EI.7 FOR AN INDUSTR IALIOFF ICE,/WAREHOUS E FACILITY ON 3.95 ACRE! OE' PROPERTY ZONED IOP AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARK ROAD AND PARK COURT, ROME CORPORAT I ON. Planning Connrission Meeting october {, 1989 - Page 2 Headla: Any particrrlar reasonapple trees.you chose those kind of dovrn at your end. apple trees? Crab Roman Roos: ...rrm not aware of any situation in the park now that hasthat tlrpe of situation that has created a hazard. The other thing inconsiderat1on worrlil be a cuI-dle_sac...The building rrilt bring probably :!9r.tt {S.new enplo:rees into Chanhassen. ...As fai as the stiti repoit,plcture that I have, the landscaping. We uent a little heavy on thelandscapi.ng with intent al.so -and t guess I.m prett:, open for'questions!'ou people rrri.ght have regarding tbe overall site pian-. Conrad: Good. Thanks Ronan. Anlrbodlr else have conments? Batzli: Do we have to close the public hearing? Conrad! Itrs not a public hearing. WerIl start Dave the that Ronan Roos' answer was not picked up on tape. Headla: The reason Iapple trees wi 11 keepon them. , and I.m going tothelr apples over dwell on lt a little bit, sone crabthe einter and the birds wiIt feeil Headla: lnd I should have been abre to tell yorr tbe name of those treesbut I can't but I'd like to see if :rou can do that. I think. that h,ouldhelp-.. Then the other one, yo, have junipers and red cedai. t{hen one,next to the other, r was hoping to get sortri lnforrnatlon on this toda:' ;uUasn't able to brrt rrhenevef :rou see apple treesr lou h€v€r see ted cedar lltgm f9ca,r.s3 You've got...from the tree and thai 6econes quiteobjectionabre. rf :rou go to the crab appre tree, r thi.nk-you need soneexpert advice on it. rf you can look aL it to see lf the 'Junipets couiaaffect t.hose apple trees. The other corutrent is, Jo ann dtid yoir talk tofire department aga in? Enunlngs: These do. Olsen: yes. Headla: How dobuilding? t I bv the they feel about that coming down on the eastern Eide of the Olsen: The:, had no objection to that. The)r had revlewedcornfortable *j.th it. They felt that the!' had the acceasatteets and thatrs rhat thelr needed and the circutation. lt and they werepoints on both Headlla! Oka:7. That.s all I had. Conrad r tlhat. sthat staff has.:tour The conment on the access? That.6 the bone of contention3 curb cuts versus 2. Any coFalents? Head1a: I think Iivecould be swayed awful got a ea s!r. 51t preference to see the access there. II think the 6taff has got some goodl arguments but the other cIose.Part:, has some good argrurents too and I think it's real BatzIi: Crlr-b crlts 2 curb clrts. I'm have thetq there. first. I actrrall:, think I Iike the plan betternot a traffic engineer though but it nakes sense r{l th th.tonel, Conrad: To have tuo? the two. WeIl the two on the south. Those tro. as it? Batzli: To have Ellson: Leave it Boman Roos: Thereis a storn sewer along the property line. Batz1i: But what Has the holdlng ponil or Bonething? Krauss: It was an area that was created or utilizedlpark and was designed to receive all the uater. Not,retland characteristics shich mayr have occurred overIocated entirely off si te. Batzli: So the:rrre not elthin 75 feetgoing to need that t:'pe of approval? requj.rement for a skimmer or anlrthing anytbing like that? with our industrial i t dloes have sorne the recent lrears. Itr- or rrhatever the heck? The:r're notIherera not going to be any kind ofelse draj.ning off of the blacktop or- Krauss: we didn't include that. It certainly could be andle they have to get Watershedl District approval as ne1l. the other point PIanni.ng Connrission l,teeting october 4, 1989 - Page 3 Batzli: ft nakes sense with the futrrre expansion and ever]rthing else to -have that access in there so :7ou donrt need another one for the frrtureexpansion. Otherwise we're going to get into a situation where we just pr.-it in on West 78th wbere the:, have to redo it so the!, can get the internalflow. Or else :tou're Ieaving youtself open because you're going to end utr-sith another one in the future expanded lot. I rroulil rather have itplanned at this point than doHn the strean having to force one in there. A corrpl.e of questions of Paul I think. I think just for clarit:' sake, donrFue normally include in the notion the plans dated stanped teceivedubatever? So whoever makes the notion tnal, want to include that as part otthe notion. Something that I'd Iike to see in I guess I brought up before- Whenever we see a frrture expansion on a site plan, potential future expansion, I would actual]y like to see it becorne a condition that werrenot approving the futrrre expansion and I donrt know hoi, the other conrmissioners feel about that .brrt Itd like to see it. I think the City fronr tinre to tine has na:rbe regretted that thelt were sonehow tacitedl:, approving futrr[e expansion nhen in fact nobodlr's rea).Iy looking at it thatbard but I think the applicant gets a false sense of security that thefutrrre expansion is, since nobody said anything bad about it, lt's a go ata later date. I'd like to hear sone conments on that. The only otberthing I had was the drainage to the north I think. Is that crrrrentl!' intoa uetland or nhere is that going to? Plann:ng Conmission Meeting October {, 1989 - Page 4 Batzri: Yorr knoH r donrt know. There uas no discrrssion of that in herebut it appeared that the:, weren'|t going to initiarry drain into tt. "io.n,aewer s:rsten. It looked.like it was going to be draini.ng into a holdingretention pond or sonething. Xrauss: No, it does go into the s:7sten. Whatrs tenpor.ar:, though is thelnprovenrent on Park place right now are onI!' ttlere tirrrporirillr. - fn"."l" nostorn serrer in park place. when you rebuild the streei next iprint,-it- "- sill have curb and gutter and stoim sewer -and weire asking tt"i trr6'systenrbe designed so wben we put in the final line, that the:, ait hooX toge'theianil run i.nto that retention area. Batzri: r guess rd rike engineering or uhoever to rook at just to nakeaure that thelrrre engineering it properll,. Thatr6 the only {uestions- -- I have. Ronan Roosr coFnents were not picked up on tape. Batzlis So itrs really not even being subdivided as an outlot? Ronan Roos: No. Absolutell, not... conrad: r kind of rike seeing- the thought of the direction and to ne itrsrlore persuasive in terns of all0wing the 2 curb cuts on park Road. Now rthink if Roman coftes back in and uhEn he subdivides and ,"r,t" .n additionalcurb cut, r think it.depends what we do here tonj.ght, ho* ..n1, rre arrow brrtr think on rx:' part, if we aLlow 3 now, thererd ue-a lerriei. ..oont ofresistance to add an additional one when he subdivides laier on so I rearl!,like seeing an overa}l plan Iike this. Batzri: r agree. M]' onl:, point nas that-we'ire not approving this buirdi.ngor that particular location or configuration. I mean 'tbe setbacks.Whatever hasnlt really been studiea by staff or.- us. Ellson: Right. Therers an assumption that night go along wittr it that ]roujust.want to protect yourserf against. r Like the plan. r like the reailoading and r like the landscaping. rt uas so refrishing io eee a lot oflandscaping for a change veraus alwalrs asking to add a tittte nore andthings Like that. r thlnk it'a a go-od use oi ttrat ..ea atrd like Laddsald, r like the idea of seeing th; idea -of the e*pinJlonl- one oi n!' petpeeves ls- just seeing the eordt outlot and lrou have no idlei what tte ih6te,you know here ue are pranners. we like to aee the rhole pran even thoughItrs not an approvar like that. r don.t really have a p.iur". with theextra curb cuts noH that r.ve heard the explanitl0n and-again the pl.an of*r"! I.:s_seeing in the future. r thlnk then itra naturai ttrat peipre fromthat brrildi.ng rourtl 90 in that ei:' .nd the people in this one ro-urd- go ln . that teay. rn that context it nakes sense eo r donrt thlnk r would hive aprobrera with altorring that there. rt sounded like there ,ould ue about lgadditional people that rould be in this caae now sprlttlng up these tuorhich erould prett:, much stagger hon busy lt vould -be. r 6an-.t inagine it,dbe_ too busy. But r rike it. Do you ha-ve tenants? you saiit thls 5ne'sgoing to be a multiple tenant. Planning Consnl ssion Meet i ng October 4, L989 - page 5 Iiwings: I'd like to ask on page 5. In that little table lrou,velot coverage. Just the line that 6ays 1ot coverage ordinance 79$,75t. I know therers that note under there. f wasnrt clear aboutli ne was telling rne. got under proposH lrha t thi : Krauss: What that was telling :rou is t,e took a look or I asked the developerr s alchitect to take a look at what the total site coverage woulcbe with both brrildj.ngs that theyrre shot ing on the concept and it exceededthe requirenent. Then we discussed how you could brlng that into conrpliance and itrs a relatively simple task since the site j.s so over Parked. There is no variance now since that entire concept frrture phase isgoing to be a vacant lot. Erurrings: But the actual lot coverage rrith lrhat is being proposed. Krauss: Is considerabl!' less. Erarings i Do we know erhat that number is? Krauss: No, I have not eorked that out. Erarings ! But 1t's certainl:' xell within? Frauss: It's probabll' {0t. Olsen: That was proper ty.on tfest 78th Street that se used nith Charlie Jatres' Enmings: ttrtllrlings' A1right. As far as tbe curb cuts are concerned. This looks lil-ra real reasonable and natural wa:, to have the curb cuts and I guess I likeit there. Yourre not getting too nuch support from us tonigbt on thisbut I tell :,ou one thlng Irn concerned about is when we talked about last-reek, the last time we met, about that lnfanous Lot A and the pUD for theEupernarket. r think r or sonebody askeil rrhat the regutations are in terrrsof how close grou can have a driveway to a corner and lhe number 3gg feet6tuck in nry rrrind. Didn, t I hear that? Olsen: Errmings: betoa So that doesnr t appll, to this situation? That ras a busier lntersectlon. Nov, is there a standard in thj.s area for hou close a drlveuay, f r ontage? No.Xrauss: can Roman Roos: tle have one tenant and werre working on the other. Ellson: What kind of conpany? Irn just kind of interested. Roman Roosr ansrrer could not be heardl on tape. Planning Connrission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 6 Conraal: Wh:, donrt :tou just sane qrrestions so I,l1 junp receptive to the 3 curb crrts Give us some nega tives. Etunings: And I likto see wttat people lot but I think itthere that ire I re no appears here anil th approvlng a plan thclear. Those are anice plan. I keephere, you'd certain wouldn I t see any reother access opporthaving the corner a talk to us about this. Iim going to ask thein here. It sounds like so iar we're prett:,so PauI tell us the other side of the coin. xrauss: The negatives fall into a couple categories. Basically you have,ever:/tine- lrou introatuce a new curb cut, you introduce turning novenentsbecause obvJ.ousry peopre are going to stop their cars and tuln out. Themore trrrnj.ng movements you have, the rnore-places :7ou have to look foronconring_cars as :/outre driving down the street. llore praces there are forpotentiar j.nteractlon betreen cars going in different directions. Th;;e;;-no firm rule about hoi, nan:' there sf,ould be or how far thel, shouid U"-ip.itfron one another tlrpicall:, except that the general rule of- thumb is lrou'uant to nrinimize them and r can,t argue thaE there arenrt a rot of curbcrrts on that road right now. There are and therers probabllr, is m1,oPin:.on, hore than aie r.rarranted given the level.s of-traffi3. Having 40enrployees or how ever nan:i emplo:raes sounds innocuous enough, except lrorrhave to realize itrs an industrial park and the:, all tend [o arrive aidleave at the same tine.- I !rn. not going to tell 1'ou that therers dtef iniiell,a traffic accldent in the naking here nith the lroposal the way it sitslight now. rtts rearr:' a rrrattei of norrrrarly aciepied practices and tulesof thturrb. Errrrings: The Red splendor crab is the one that hords it's apples. The Redsplender crab is the one that holds itrs apples alr winter. - ihat happensto be the one that hotds it longer I think Lhan an1, other one. Ellson: Did 1,ou just look that up or- !'ou knei, that? WelI good for you. e it. I agree with Brian,s notion and I agree it,s goodare planning to do in the future on the balance of tf,eis important that we have sorne kinil of a staterrlent int givlng any consideration to that even though itat therers to be no approval, implied or otherwise foratrs in front of. I think it,s;ice to nake that real.1l tbe cohnents I have. Otherrise I think itrs a realthinking thi8 Lot 2, If it didn.t have park place overIy have an access on each 6ide of your building and Iason to treat it differentty Just Lecause he his thatunit!,-wgy up Park Street. i lntnf ltre an advantage tond ltd leave the accesseE the ray the:r are. Erhart: r think 1tr6 a rear nice plan. r think tbe .dditional randscapingovercones nlr concern for the reputation of the developer. Ronan Rooss I love lrou too Tim. Erhart: rtrs a good p1an. Regarding the curb cuts. r understand theissue of the curb cuts close to the intersection. werre obvlousl]r, ourbusiness is-right across tbe street and down a blt. leah, 1,ou do-get eorrrepeople running into each other. t{e had one the other day. - Sorne gig,scraped a car a little blt. werre right ln the rnlddre oi tne Etreet ao rdonrt know how these things happen. rssentiar!.y ltrs a four lane road. r Planning Comnrission Heet ing October 4, 1989 - Page 7 nean it's wide enough so if someone makes a left turn, :rou can pass on the-tight. If someoners slowing dolrn to make a rigtrt turn, the), can pass onthe left. I guess n:' feeling is the nuisance factor of not having a curbcut outweighs the potential danger of it so f guess I eould tend to lean t^allow the curb cuts. I also agree nith Brian,E idea of addlng a lgthreconmendation so that I s it. Conrad: Irn persuaded to allov, that curb cut onl], because I see the futrrr-expansion. Property only having one and I would be real critlcal lf thenext srrbdivision came in andl had 2 so I rrould onl:, grant the 3 this tineif I felt real comfortable that the future expansion iras onl!' going to use-the one curb crrt. Other than that it looks like a good one. Good project I like it. An:rthing else? Is there a motlon? Erhart: IrIl lrlove that the Planning Conmission reconmenil approval to the Cit:r Conncil. of Site Plan Review 189-8 dated 9-6-89. Ell son 3 9-8. Eunings: Received 9-8. Erhart: Received 9-8-89 with all the staff reconnendations except for nunber 3. lve delete the first sentence and change the second sentence to6tart, redesign curb cuts as required as it remains. Add item 19. Siteplan approval does not inclrrale approval of the buildling designated on the Pl,ans as future expansion. Ellson: I t 1I second that. Conrad : Di scussion. Batzli: Do :'ou want to talk about the rust on the trees? Conrad: !l!, concern hasn't been incOrporated. Et[rlings! Oh, the future expansion. Erhart: You panted. .. Conrad: The only reason Ird vote for the 3 right notr le lf trrtl convincedlthat thatrs all uerre going to have on thls 4.cre property. Krluss3 Hr. Chairrrran, one of the reasona rh3r re encouraged Ronan tolnclude that develoFrent concept o.B for this verg, reaaon. So ee couldassess tbose sorts of itnpacts. At Buch tlme, lt isntt one parcel right no.-.ntl through the gubdivision proceaa, lf lt.s ever Eubdlvidted off in thefuture, ue can always ehip this concept out and sa:' thlB ls yhat relntended to do. Ell.son: Would that be typlcal to remember to do that or is that just automatlc to do that? Krauss: Itrs automatic to look at background anilwith the ProPert:' and that would be one of then. Conrad: See uerre kind of over-riding your staffdoing typicall:, on technical issues but I feel rre,think in the future. Xrauss: No,.Irt. saying it.s fine. Irm not disputing that point butconcern r think uas to ensure that there lsnit inother accels in theand I think rre can do that adequatel:, through the subdivision processby baving this concept and :/our hearing on ahls item tonight. Conrad: So Roman can cone back and sa:, I want to subdivide this 1.5off yithout a site plan. He could Ao Ehat couldnrt he? to actions assoc i a ted report which I don, tre getting sonething Likeor I :'our f rrture and acles Xrauss: He could subdivide it of f . At that tlrtre we rcorrldcross access easement to serve both prOperties be recorded Conrad: But r.rouldnr t he have the right toaccess to that?cone back in and have a second recoFEqend that aagainst it. Krausss Theoretically. Ronan Roos: Ladd, can I address that a Little blt? Conrad: Go ahead Roman Roos: Froh the day r conceived the project, the intent uas r wantedthe truck traffic behind both buirdings. ihal,s the reason for this curbcut here in oriler to service this buirding anil this buirding. Nog thePurpose of the second curb cut is exactly $hat lroutre elucling to. I [antedto not have a lot of curb cuts ln the fr6nt of ttre prop-riy 6n ttre uuiraintso rrith this servicing - the truck traffic, hoplng thE tiuck-traffic ."n 9- - back out that wa:r...this should be car traffic and j.t eras m:, intent, ""-ialread!, told 1,orr, to eventually probably Eplit that properti rlne. r haveno problenr with the green 6pace. I have no problem sittr...- Conrad: I hear uhat lTourre saylng. Roman Roos: so r did have intent froru day one. r donrt have a crystalball and r cantt tel1 you ehatra golng to happen 5 years dorrnstream or 2years downstrean but m:, intent at thls polnt in tinrE ls to do that suchthat this rould be a cross over easement. Thatia aII I can sa!, about lt. conrad: But lrourre also telling me, you sourd have a tough tltne getting asecond access in on the aubdlvided... Ronan Roos: r glress if at that point r needed a second access, it uouldhurt me on this building, the eidth of the bulJ.dlng. Oka:r, thatrs nurqberone. Nunber twor if r needed a second accesE, r uould pr6uabry have to6elr n:, sour to get both councll andl planning corrurrission to agiee to thatbut r think if that did, there uouLd be some logicar reasons 6ehind it anttprobabr:' eoulil not, shoulal not be denied based on every other type of... Planning Corunission Meeting October 4, L989 - page 8 Planning Connrission Heeting October {, 1989 - Page 9 and off i ce to do that. in the industrial park. !,t1, intent at this point in tirne is not- Conrad: I think I.m persuaded he canit do it ao I donrt need the language. Erhart noved, Ellson secondeil that tbe planning Connrissionapproval of Site Plan Revier,, 189-8 dated nReceived 9-8-89tOffice Building rithout variances Eubject to the following r ecommendfor the Romeatipulations: I. Provide trash storage enclosure the building or store all trash 2. built with materials internall]r. comPatible wi th Roof Eounted HVAC eqnlpnrent shorrld be provided rvith a scr-een constrrrcted of nraterials compatible with the building exterior.Details should be prepareil for staff approval prior to Cit!, Corrncil rev iew . 3 4 Reilesign the remaining curb cuts as required to facil.itate trrrning moveEents. Reduce the grade on the rernaining park curb cut fronr 10+t to less than 5t. truck Road anil Revise the landscaping plan to lllustrate seeding or sodding of the Phase II buiJ.ding area. This area is to be kept ln a naintainedcondition until consttuction occurs. Project approval b:, the Rile!, Purgator]' BIuff Creek Watershed District. 6. Utilize concrete curb and gutter and design it to connect to inrprovenents in Park Place that uill be j.nstalled b)r the City.additional catch basln at the Park place curb cut. All Btornlocated in public easement or Row EhalI be reinforced concrete ]-s.Site pJ.an approval doea not includeon the plans as future expansion. Aald ari sewer PiPe. 7. Erosion controls are to be in place prior to start of work on the site and prainta j.ned until site restoration is conpleted. Additional erosioacontrol nray be required along the south propert!, Iine by staff toprevent erosion into Park Road. 8. Add a fire h:rdrant on the Parking lot island locatedt off the northHest-corner of the building. 9. Providing lighting and signage detalts for staff rev iew. the buiLding designateoapproval of AIl voted in favor and the motion carrled. 5. CITY OF EHINHISSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 1.I7 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESoTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 October 18, 1989 U!. Roman Roos I0341 Heidi Lane Chaska, UN 55 318 Re: Grailing permit for Rome Building Site,File No. 89-8 crading permit Dear tlr. Roos: This letter is to confirm that on October 9Council approved your gracling permit for 14to the following conditions ! All erosion control neasures aha11operations begin.be in place before grading The applicant sha1l pay the City.E permit fees as requiredantl shall provide the City with a cish escrow or irr6vocableletter of credit from a bank in the amount of $21700 beforegrailing cotnmences. The letter of credit Bhal1 be for a termending October 1, 1990 or until such tine as a buildingpermit is issued. fhe applicant shaIl receive watershed District approval priorto connencenent of any grading. Elitninate the eastern curb cut on park Road andl replace itwith a maneuvering area for use by parked cars. 1450 Park Roail , 1989 the City 50 Park Road subject 1 2. 3 4 5 Reduce the grade on the ren.iniag park Road acceaa fron 108to around 5$. Upon receipt of astipulations of a cash escroe in ththe City will aut revieed grading plan reflecting thepproval , together with a letter of creilit ore amount specifieil and pernrit fee of S238.50,horize execution of the grading permit. lrlr . Roman Roos October 18, 198 9 Page 2 If you should have any queations, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN av id En D S c.gi HempeI neering Technician DCH:ktm Gary Wa!ren, City Engineer Ron Julkowski , Building official PauI Krauss, Planning Director I'IEI'IORANDUIU TO: FROII: DATE: SUBJ : 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 Paul Krauss, Planning Director CITY OF EHINHISSEN @Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician October 18, 1989 Update on Site Plan Review fo! Rome Office Building Site1450 Park RoadFile No. 89-8 Grading Pernit As you are aware, at the October 4, 1989 planning Commissionmeeting, the Commission agreed with staff.s recommendation forsite plan approval with the exception of the proposal to deletethe easterly curb cut on Park Road. They did recommend that theproject be approved with the proposed curb cuts as long as it wasclea! that no additional curb cuts rrould be permitted when the second phase builcling is proposed. On October 9, 1989, the City Council consider approval of agrading permit for this site to help expedite construction beforewinter set in. The Council agreed with staff,s recomnendationfor the approval of the permit. One of the conditions of appro-val was to delete the easterly curb cut on park Road. Thiscrealed a controversy between nhat the planning Commission hatlpreviously approved. The basis of Engineering's recolurendation to eliminate this curbcut is from a traffic safety standpoint. With the anticipaledhigh commercial/industrial traffic vol ume along park Road com-bined with the geoloetlic layout of the adjacent stleets and dri- veways ( see attached nap), it appears that this curb cut will aggravate the traffic flow situation in the area. Staff felt ifthe eastelIy curb cut along Park Road was deleted that the sitecould still be adequately servedl by the remaining two accesses. Based on these considerations, it is therefore recouurended thatthat easterly curb cut be elininated and replaced with amaneuvering area for use by parked cars. Attachments :Iuemo to cary Warren dated October 2, Driveway Layout Irlap. 1 2 1989. Galy 9iarren, City Enginee! CITY OF EHINH,lSSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 UE}TORAND UlI TO: FRO}I: DAIE: SUBJ: Gary Warren r City Engineer Dave Eempel, Sr. Engineering fectntclay@ October 2, L989 Approve Grading permit for Rone Building Site,1450 Park RoadFile No. 89-8 Grading perBit l:::"!:d is a grading and erosion conrlol plan dated August 31 ,19U9 prepared by Rehder-wenzel , rnc. on behalf of Roman Roos.!lr. Roos is on the october rt, 1999 pranning c"*ii"ion rg.na.for site plan review. The applicant has re{uestea a tiaaing p"._nit be issued in advance of ttre site plan approval to-cornpl6tethe site grading before ireather condiiions Lurn for the w6rse. Ihe 3.9 acre site is located at the northwest corner of theintersection of park Road and park piice. The site consista ofgrassy meadowlands sloping flom west to east. Ihe area naturallydrains toerards the norlh inil wilr be p-rpetuated by ttre pioposeapl.l . -ts off-sire-ponding area that iiff be utili-zed wai sizeaEo nand.re the runoff genelated frolI the site. Three access points are proposed,Park Place. park Drive is I throuindustrial collector. park place -scheduled for upgradiDg next aprinthrough street that functions is areconmended that the easterly acceappears that the site can stiU b€remaining trro accesses. i I n two on Park Drive and one ongh street that functions as ans a Bhort cul-de-sac rhich isSiDce Park Drive islndustrial collector,ss shoul.d be deleted. Iadequately eerved by th tisa ,'t e ?he plans propose. Tpe f erosion control aloDg the periaeter ofthe east and north lot lines. It nay atso be-nec."-"iiv-t"-"rt."athe erosion control on the south boundary for piii-"e-ini-"it..Tylre I erosion control ,. i.e..silt fence,-will -be-i.."ptiIf!-.t this time; however, if the city feels thar ttris-is-n"[-""iiicientin holding back the erosion, the City uitt requii. iaaiti""irerosion control in the future. Gary WarlenOctober 2, Page 2 1989 ?he grading plans ar iff ili':i :,i| : i i ;*li 'iri:*,;ai ii i;s;'L ii*:" i:r i r i: I ;;:- :ff T:;s, I';:" i::"':i: trg,:15:iii:]1i:.:::,:"::i :, a pa* or 1. Al.l erosion cont, "p.riiioiI"olii,il"'neasures shalr be in ptace before grading 2. il:. ;!:ii TI:,i!:'tn3"L tl.,iii," ""fffl ;::;iln':"ffi ::::" :'.T"4-Ed^ $ i':'#.ff :'3f i;, ;l;d;$:::" ;ff ,rs ?::,*.,,,*i,ifi+i"*il+f5tri;i];l;t$ 3:"":ff:i::::" ;n:i'J;"ii;:rx;1"'"hed Di strict approval pr ior '"itil':T:" :li" :ffi ; ":1.:T1,.;':..lr rill*li";..an d repla ce i r Reduce the grade onto around si.--- -" the rearaining Park Roaal access fron 10t 4 3 5 I 2 3 {ii*+i*[x;T]iii:"' 3,, rese Atta chmen t ,'::*,,_T.t; w. PROPOSED CURB CUTS t r-\ t, l iI I I t4 .. -ir- dh ?t1i i a 1 t i t!I't -a B p0 Igo itFI .;>1 A??.<( _- aa ?-\'.? $ I I ; , i{L,. {,*-i, Tp I iI t , tr I I I .t3 t .,1..7.1ri[{-5 i.s nF f tfr .Q i.I ti I CITY OF CH[NH[ESEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 O 611111.145SEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (512) 937-1900. FAX (512) 937_s739 IIIEMORANDUIU TO! Sharmin FROII: Charles DATE : SUBJ : A1-Jaff, Planner Folch, Ass i s tant I City Engineer August 28, 1990 Review of Lot Split of Lot 3, Block 1, Chanhassen LakesBusiness Park into 2 Lots and Site plan Review forIrlinnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (Systens Control, I ncorpo ra tedFile No. 90-24 Land Use Review GRAD ING/DRAINAGE The site primarily drains to the east and northeast. A smallarea of the southeast corner drains to park Road. The proposedgrading plan maintains a consistent drainage pattern rrith thepresent condition. Eowever, slopes along the Dorth and northwestportions of the site appear to be slightly greater than 3:I anclthus will require special slope stabilization neasures such aswood-fiber blankets and fype III erosion control. Being that thesite is larger than one acre, a fgatersheal permit will be required. A storm sewer system comprised of two catch basins is proposed tobe constructed and connected to an existing trunk storm set erextending ai.ong the northern border of the site. the proposedconnection point is located at a manhole adjacent to the north-east corner of the site. Bowever, design capacity limitationsfor the existing storm sewer nay dictate the actual location forthe connection. ?he applicant sha1l submit 10-year storm flowcalculations fo! the site prior to final site plan approval . .rw tot 3 of Block 1in Chanhassen Lakes Business park is currentlyan undeveloped palce1 vegetateal with field grasses. The proposedreplat would yield 2 lots with the westerly lot (approximltety1.7 acres ) ilesignat.ed for a vehicle inspection stalion. Sincethe westerly lot is the subject area for review, it will bereferred to in this repolt as the "site'. Upon completion of development, the site will change from atotally pervious site to one with a nearly equal mix of 51tpervious and 49t imperivous. Sharnin Al-Jaff August 28, 1990 Page 2 UIILITIES Sanitary sewer anil water service stubs southerly porperty line. Fire hydrantverified with the City Fire Uarshall. are availble requi remen ts at the shall be EASE!,1EN IS An existing 45-foot wide drainage and utility easement borders the northern property line of the site. No other special easenents are anticipated. However, the proper front, back and side 1ot line easements for both of the newly created lots shall be deilicated on the plat. CITY RIGHT.OF-WAY A future sidewalk boulevard of Park that no signs or installed within i11 likely be constructed withinrive. Thus, the applicant shallher structures wilI be permitted e City right-of-way. hl D ot th the north be advisedto be PARKING LOTIDRIVEWAY ACCESS The proposecl parking 1ot and driveway access have been designed to allow for the reguired turning movements of the various vehicles and trucks (including emergency vehicles) that will be using the facitity. A concrete industrial driveway apron with a minimum radius cut of 20 feet sha1l be constructed at the entrance to the facility flom Park Road. It is also lecommended that a sidewalk or other designated rralkway system be provided with handicap ramps to establish a safe pedestrian travelway between the parking lot and the building (see attached sketch). This watkway plan would eliminate one parking stal1 . However, the submitted site plan proposes five stalls more than the minimum requirements. Thus, sone flexibility may be possible. RECO}II{ENDED CONDITIONS 1. Slopes steeper than 3r1 will require wood-fiber blankets and Type II erosion control . 2. fhe applicantrs engineer sha1l submit l0-year storm flowcalculations for the site. This nay regulate the location ofthe connection to the existing storm sewer facility. The required lot line easements forlots shall be provided on the plat.both of the newly created3 4 A concrete industrial driveway apron with cut of 20 feet shall be constructed at the Park Road. a minimum entrance radius off of 5 Sharmin A1-Jaff August 28, I99 0 Page 2. ktn Attachment: Walkway Plan The applicant shall obtain and comply with all requirementsof the Watershed permit. € o I I 1 I 26'-o' q 01 9'. o.' 90 -o' 4 9 I, I I ?'- o'( 43 -o. | 5'- o' OISAq€D J P. 5' \ ,// it/ \o n,\ 't \I it l! ii :--..:::=:-:-ij a- 20. -ir a \ ll li rl I i I li ll :P i, IA I t' i, ri li tiIO SPA CES o: t8-3.26 ll r,i i, 9'- o' f -o' 5'iRi?t s b Ct.AT.J LIIKDt^,tps OSLEE 42'-3' I I II o (,-P'5.J o b P. tO' I :l ll il I ii2 6'- o. ;o l J) fr \o i^s PAAIT ,sffi.g ----a E ho E WALKWAY PLAN ATTACHMENT 1 : I i i I I I I i I I ! ! ! I I i I i I I I v I I :. f I I i I If ffi,8ffi11 o @ o T P.20. P SYSTEMS CONTROL OPERATIONS OVERVIEW we have over twen-ty year's experience in the automotive testing fretd as a leader in the development,- certification_, .and application of Federal and shdrt-cycle idle, two.speed idle and loaded-mode vehicle emission tests. SC has a proven track rccord aj the s_uccessful operator -of the large Inspection hograms in Illinois, Maryland and Washington state and -h?s_ successfully performed nearty 22 million inspecti6ns during the 1980's. As pan of SD-Scicon, one of the Top Ten-computer systerirs and services companies in rhe world, SC has successfully married advanced computer sysrems technology _with sophisticated vehicle inspection equipment and proceduris to of?er the most reliable, convenient and advanced technology vehicle emis-sion inspection service available today. Y"g" prora of our Inspection Program accomplishrnents. State program Managers of $9.I1s-pectio.n [ggrams w_e now operate, te[ rha SC story the best. Aicording tdBruce Diehl from the Maryland Inspectioh Program ,,lhe succiss o! the pmgram is-the result of...the conslant conideralion for service to lhc vehicle owner ... oir expericnce has been lhal you go thz extra mile...". Frank Sherman of Illinois had this to sav about SC_ "We.haye been very pleased al thc courleous and professional lreatmeni (motorist) receive Jrom your (SC) employees.,' Under. the Fograrn, e?ch vehicle_ will be re4uired to takc the test prior to rc-rcgistering their license plates. owners will uke their vehicle to the test facility and pul-directlj, into.a test. bay whe.re _qn irypccror will insen a probe in the vchicle-ailpill. tre teit results will automatically print out. The entire test will take on an average under two minutes. An information office with ample parking. ls provided ar each facility to providc personalizcd assistance for custornen requiring additional help. lrss than l0% of the vehicle owners will nccd to park to use the information office. Most vehicle owners will simply leave the facility aftEr receiving rhe vehicle test rcporl Systems Conggl (SC) is a private company conmcrcd by the State of Minnesota ro measurc vehicle emissions from existing vehicles regis-tercd in the state. These inspections, due.to begin July l, 1991, arc required by a-rccently passed Minnesota law mandaung a vehlcle rnspecuon program. OPERATIONS OVERVIE,W Page Two A clean computer equipped facility designed to measuE area resident's vehicle emissions using state of the an Echnology emission inspection system with electronic passlfail decision making. Average test taking less than two (2) minutes per vehicle. Minimal or no waiting (est faciliry network is designed to provide a peak period average daily working time of 3.2 minutes or less to all inspection facilities). Convenience of facilities are Iocated to service over 9OVo of the vehicle owners rcsiding within a five (5) mile radius. ADDITIONAL FACTS ON THE STATION MAKEUP AND OPERATION: Hours of Operation: Sunday and Monday: Tuesday and Thursday: Wednesday and Friday: Saturday: Staff: Closed 7:00am. - 7:30a-m. - 8:00a.m. - 7:O0p.m. 5:30p.m. 2$0p.m. Each facility will employ a staff of tcn to ffteen, with half that number on-duty at any one time. The breakdown of rhe employees consists of; two inspecors per lane, one station manager, and one MPCA waiver inspector. SC's Inspection Facilities design and operation approach has been developed utilizing this experience and expenise. SCs inspection facilities and equipment provide Minnesota with the following benefits: OPERATIONS OVERVIEW Parking: Page Three Ample parking supplying more than the following; one parking space for each employee on duty, onc additional parking space per each lane, one parking space for handicapped, and a space for ihe MPCA inspector. Vehicle Through Put: Each station is equipped with the numbr of inspection lanes required to perform inspections based on the local population served by the stadon. Vehicle Size: The vehicle.inspection business is SC's only business. We arc dedicated to providing the highest quality Inspection Progra.m to the Citizens of Minnesota. It will bi convenient, reliable and cost effective. It will be staffed with courteous and well trained service oriented penonnel. We loo-\ forward to working in close cooperation and partnership with communities and Itlte offrcials to develop and operate a noteworthy Inspection Prbgram. We believe that SC can make a substantial contribution to improving air quality in the Twin Cities area sand to maintaining the quality of life you have come to expect ind enjoy. Only gasoline vehicles with a gross vehicle weight less than 8500 pounds are required ro be tested. All heavy duty vehicles arc excluded from this program, and will not come to these facilities. CITY OF EHINHf,SSEN S'I/AFF REPORT P.C. DITE: 9/5/90 c.C. DAIEs 9/24/90 qagE: 85-1 site Plan BY! olsen/v Fz (J =(LL ko lIJFa site PIan Amendment for Expansion to the Rednond Parking IotPROPO8AI.,: 18930 West ?8th StreetIOCATION: APPLICETf,T :RedDond Products 18930 West 78th Street chanhassen, UN 55317 EXISTING ZONING: ICREAGE: AI}'ICENT ZONING I}ID IIIXD UAE ! AEWER AND TATER! x - chj.cago, llilwaukee, St. Paul, Pacific Railroad and Eden Prairie8-Hvy.5 E - Llman Lunberr/ABc f - Lotus Laun and Garden services are available to the site. AITE CIIARACTERTSTICE:The site is currently fully developed withe Redmond Products warehouse/office production. 2000 Lll{D IrsE 3 IoP, Industrial office Park 7 .47 acres Industrial 'vl L OTUS I ILJ \ LAKE -6800 6900 7000 __7tOO __72OO --730C Taoo t ( S HAOCw [i E Fi I -27 +V 2w8l-d .crs 7500 I -rtoo -770O 7800 7900 -8000 oo @I oI_8tOO - 6200 8iJDs NICE I '-:- I {U 3 toP AI(E RSF SH LAKE l 8300 I 0 ff- Redmond site Plan Amendment Septenber 5, 1990 Paqe 2 BACKGROT'ND On February 25, L985, the City Council approved a site plan for anoffice warehouse facility for Redmond products. the original siteplan uas for a 30,700 square foot warehouse and a g,2gO square footoffice area (AttachDent t1). on-April 20! L987. the city Council approved an expansion to theRednond. Facility. The expansion uas 63,180 square fLet of office,rnanufacturing and warehouse area. The second phase of site planapproval resulted in a total iropervious surface of just over sotand a total of 129 parking spaces provided. In 1988, the applicant received a building pernit for an accessorystructure (co1d storage warehouse) rocated it ttre rear of the sitelIn addition, the applicant added additional parking to the site for a_ total now of 175 parking spaces. The cold storage warehouse andthe .additional parking spaces alL met the Zoning Ordinancerequirenents and the total inpervious surface of the siie was stillbelow the 708 naxinum. The suall site plan provided as part ofthis packet illustrates the existing sit-" con-ditions for 'Redrnond site. On August 1, 1990, the Planning Cornrnission reviewed a proposal byRednond to construct an off-site parking 1ot on I.tui iawn anaGarden site. The appticant requeLted sLveraL variances to theordinance by proposing gravel versus bituminous, nass parXin!versus parking aisles and no curb and gutter. Staff agr6ed thecurb and gutter was unnecessary since the parking lot was ienpo..ryand rrould not be connected to the storn sewer. But stafe dia nolagree to recomending approval of the gravel surface and. massparking. The .planning Comnission approved the site plan t ithstaffrs conditions but during disculiion auggested that staffconsider allowing the parking lot actually -5e constructed as pToposeCl by the applicant to act as an rexperj.nentir (Attachnent t?. The proposal lras to be reviewed by the dity councii on august27., 1990, but the applicant requested it to be postponed untit theCity Council could review both applications at the sane tine ( Attachnent #3). PROPOSAL The applican-t is_ pr.oposing to add.an additional 104 parking spacesonto the Redmond site. The applicant is proposing-to toiati ttre _addit_ional parking.spaces into-the front soithirry 6ern aai iclnt towest 78th street, into the bern rocated at the southeast 6orner ofthe site and the whole southerly parking lot rrill uij" bereconfigured. The ]a5ser .site plan- illuitrates ttre eiistingparking lot configuration with thE dashed rine and trre pi-pose6 Redmond Site Plan Amendment Septenber 5, 1990 Page 3 parking lot configiuration with the solid Line. The proposed changes also include moving the easterly curb cut to the east whereit will be approxinatefy 30 feet froD an existing curb cut on the L)man Lunber site. The proposed reconfiguration of the parking rernoves a large landscaped island within the parking area and replaces it with two additional rous of parking aisles. The proposed improvernents to the Redmond site result in twovariances. The first is a variance to the maximun impervioussurface allowed in the Industrial Office Park District. The ordinance afLows a Daxiuum of 7OB of inpervious surface and the proposed changes to the site plan results in 79.3* iropervioussurface. The second variance Zoning ordinance requires a 30 buildings and vehicular areas. parking area varies fron 9 feet 15.4 foot variance to the 30 fo to the front yard setback. Theoot front yard setback for both he proposed setbacks for the newo 14.6 feet resulting in a 21 to setback. isf Tt ot The applicant is proposing to cut into the existing berns on the south and east side of the site for additional parking area and userailroad ties for a stepped retaining waI1. The applicant is proposingr to replant existing trees and shrubs so that the overallsite will not have itrs landscaping reduced. Cutting into the berns lrill result in more of the parking area being visible froro west 78th Street and Hwy. 5. Moving the easterly curb cut on West 78th Street to the east results in a dangerous traffic conflictsituation for car and truck traffic entering or leaving the Rednondsite and the adjacent Lyman Lumber site. Existing on-site Proposed on-site Total Proposed Off-site Total PARXING TABI,E 175 104 279 1A 357 SI'MMARY the existing conditions of the Redmond site neet a1I of therequirements of the Zoning ordinance and is one of the moreattractive industrial sites in the City. The building, parking andoverall site were designed to neet City standards and the size offacility/enployees as proposed. As was brought up during thereview of the off-site parking lot for Rednond products, theoverlapping of shifts and additional enployees are resulting in the Staff reconmends thenotion:Planning Cornnission adopt the following rrThe Planning commission recoDDends deniar of site plan AmendnentRequest #85-1 as ahown on the plans dated August 21, 1990.n should the Pranning coumission recoDmend approval, staff reconmendsthe following conditions: 1. The handicap stalls be. signed and posted as handicapped andonly used by persons with a handicap sticker. Redmond Site Plan Amendment Septenber 5, L990 Page 4 leed for parking over and above what is typically required on anindustrial site. The applicant is pursuing inpiovenents on andoff-site- parking to provide the parking necessary for theoverlappJ.ng of shifts and j.ncrease in euployees. Although rre do not want to appear unsupportive of a companyrssuccess, the proposed on site improvenents, result in signiiicintvariances -and .supports the prenise that the facility iay haveoutgrolrn the site. As an alternative, staff has recornnendld theapplicant pursue a 'rride sharer progran where enployees van/carpool to reduce the number of cars parked on site. if ttre applitantwishes to remain on the existing site, yet continue to expa-n-il, suchalternative neans of rrconnutingtr to work must be enptoyia. staff cannot recoinnend approval of the proposed site pran since theproposed changes on site result in a nen curb cut which is 1ocatedtoo close to an existing curb cut and will result in trafficconflicts, is exceeding rnaxinun inpervious surface allowed and iswj,thin required setbacks resulting in a roore visible parking area.The hardship is self created and would set a poor precedeit forother industrial development. We wish we could find -a way to workwith the applicant to acconmodate their needs and note tiat staffis supportive of some additional parking on the r.otus carden centersite. Houever, we feel that thil regutst is excessive. The applicant has stated they wish to renain on site until they aresure their success and expansion of business is proven not to betemporary before they relocate to a larger site. fhey have statedthat as vith the off-site parking irnprovenents they iill agree toreturn the site to bring it into conpl5.ance wittr the -zoning ordinance after they relocate. rf the planning commission and ciiiCouncil approve the site plan as proposed, slaff would reconmendapproval conditioned. upon the site being brought into conpliancevith the Zoning ordinance, however, we do n6t believe in, ,ro.support the idea of allowing tenporary variances. RECOI,II,TENDATION Rednond Site Plan Amendrnent Septenber 5, 1990 Page 5 3. 1. Site Plan original recording/exlransion approval conditions .2. Planning cornrnission minutes dated August 1, 1990.3. Letter fron Rednond dated August 27, L99O.4. staff report for off street parking 1ot.5. l,[eno fron charles Folch dated Augrust 30, 1990. 3. Existing conditions on Redmond site.4. site plan with proposed parking reconfig'uration. 2 The applicant agree to replace the beno on the south side of the site and bring the parking area back into confornance withthe 30 foot setback and the applicant will remove other inpervious surface, if necessary, to rnaintain a uaximum of 70* inpervious surface by october 31, 1993. The applicant shal1 receive any pernits, as necessary, from tiInDOT and the Watershed District. ATTACHT,TENTS and 5027590City of ChanhassenCarver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota In the matter of Chanhassen planning Case :85-1 Site Plan Berrieltr Owner: Ihcnas Re&rDnd Applicant:Develofrent Street Address: 18930 l€st 78th Street P.I.N.: Legal Description: ltrat part of tlre East 479.05 feet of ttte llEst 629.05 feet of that of the Soutln€st of Section 7,116 lqcrEh, Range 22 l,iestth Pr 1€r o r -fayi'jluaukee, SE. paul ard paciJic Railway. Purrcse:Site PIan Revisg f or Re&rDrd Products IlIc. Zoning District: ts3 Planned 6nm:rr itv-ts \t'he above entitled rnatter was heard before the on FebnEry 13 , 1gg5actronbetorethe Chanhci1 ordere assen City Council on Februar.r' 25 , 198s Ccnmission and up for fina d that a site anted based upon the doc umen ta t i o n conta ned in85-1 site Plan with the foI1orirrg ccnditions: 1. sutllission of a revised lardscape plan fuEorporating staff r s reccnnerdationsas contai-red in the staff report dated rebnrarT 13,-1995 prior to issuance ofthe buil.djng petardt.2. Corpliance with tlre recqnrerdations of ttle City DngfuEer in his ngncnndr.unclarcd februaqr 8, 1985.3. rnstarlati.on of oorErete cr:rbiag along ttre perineter of all paled aleas.4. $v :rc9ttcp rrachanical equiFEnt rust be sci.*,ea in a narvei cco,sist"rrtwith tlE legsai a l s of tlre prirrcipat tntildiJg.5. rf additional eplolees are retained beyord-lrhat has been replesented to thecity.irr this applicarion as irdicated ii: ttre 1etter "f rEb;;t-;;-Gas, th"applicant stralI insure that adequate parking areas are iJlstal1ae i" acon.a"tesaid increase if necessary. The City Coun {+}69) be gran Planning File State of Minnesota ) )ssCarver County ) I, Barbara Daq/doh ereby certify that Ioriginal record Lhereof, and true surmary thereof. 20th day of Ar:qust Planner_for the City of Chanhassen,conpared the foregoing with theave found the same to be a correct City have and h 9litness my hand antl official seal of Chanhassen Minnesot th is,lgg5 NOTE : .t it:r , ^ ,, .. ,- llli.! 'e}.'r*+j.!.'; *'iS. -t't",' '=- .-.r ,ri( I . =L' " i i"-t :: $-L .:, !- . -i if.r alo",-3,i-'*--:.:*i -;::;i.'i.?t ,+r"$ ;i,;;,;,1,,u,i{,'- anha sen c ty Planner *1 CITY OF EHINHISSEI{ 6e0 couLrER DRrvE . p.o. .?J,;ilr; ,"JIINHASSEN, MTNNESoTA ss317 Apri]- 22, 1987 llr. Bob Cordell, General lrianager Redmond Products 18930 l{est 78th Stleet Chanhassen, MN 55317 This is to confirm that the City Council at their April 20, I9g7,rneeting, approved the site plan for Redmond expansi6n as shown onthe plan dated Uarch 20, L987, rith the following conditions: 1. Submission of a revised landscaping plan incorporatingstaffrs recommend.ations prior to issuance of the buildingpermi t . Dear Mr. Cordell: A11 vehicular areas must be paved and have concretealong the perineter of the paved areas. curbing 3. All rooftop equipment must be screeneil in a manner consistentirith the materials of the principle buildling. to three side of the 10.207. 5 Fire Department connection will beguick access area. placeil in an unobstructeil 6. 2 An access roadway will be providedbuilding in accordance with the UFC I 7 9. Exits shal1 be provided along the north end of the buildingin accordance with the Unifoim Building Code. Installation of all fire protection systens and appliancesshall be in accordance with recognlzea standards.- Any expansion of the site shall receive site plan approval. The applicant shall be requireil to physically pipe the.roofdrainage from the proposed building-to the siolm-water deten-tion pond proposed for the northealt corner of the site. The excess 15 cubic yarils of fiII presently in the existingdetention basin be removed. 10. llr. Bob CordellApril 22, 1987 Page 2 11. Silt fence and othshall be utili zedthe requirements o Chanhassen. er appropriate erosion control measuresto control erosion the site consistent withf the Watershed District andl the City of 12. The applicant shall proviile a watermain connection betvreenthe existing J.0" watermain from the eest and the watermainservicing Redmond. s hydrants . looping of the watermain fron theexisting watermain servicing thee detailed expansion plans shoulde waternain irhich must be constructedould contact our City Engineer, Garyired information and to determine tlreshoulil also submit a revised landscapeaping around the docking and vehiculir Should you have any guestions, please fee] free to contact me. S incerely, -bl"Lut ADBL) JO: v Condition *12 reguiresnorthwest eratermain to Redmond fire hydranLs.include this looping ofto city standards. you lilarren, to obtain the rcost of the project. y plan with increased 1an a reas . the the Th rh sh equ ou dsc ,fo Ann OlsenAssistant City Planner Planning Commission t'leet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 31 Erhart: Conrad: Yeah, but ue've allowed boardr.ralks. I think they've Eone over 1OO feet haven't they? l.lhat r.re ought to do, if that's uhere oe'rc aoing, boardr.ral ks perhaps in our ordinance and suggest then ue ought t<-that t hat 's tJildermuth3 Haven't r.re alloued a...pathway at times? Conrad3 Not to my knouledge. tJhen it uas grandfathered in, we allowed iL.But to my knowledge Jim, ..re've ncver created one since thc ordinance has been in there. And ),/ou knou, it's one of those t'm more concerned on theprecedent than anything else because I really don't think, in thisparticular case we're talking about as ue've been saying. I don't thinkthat's a major impact on this- It's just that I don't know uhat theprecedent means. I think it r.rould really open us up for a lot of legal hassles on any future wetland alteration permit process. And therefore hre -wouldn't have an ordinance enymore and that's my biggest concern. That's one of those things where you say geez, I wish ue could interpret some of these things in different u,ays and unfortunately the ordinance is the ordinance in this one. This pill go to City Council August 27th. Thankyou for coming in. Thank you for attending. Erhart: r cfer e nce uhat . . . Jo Ann Olsen pr_esented the staff report on this itsm. herc and Hould like to make-Conrad: Okay, thanks Jo Ann. The applicant is some comments, L,e brould entcrtain that. Bob Cordell: I'm Bob CordeII from Redmond Products. I just uant to clear -up one slisht bit of confusion on it. I think both Jay and for ourpurposes we uould prefer the gravel. That's uhere lre crme from the beginning because it's a tcmporary situation. ft is less GxpGnsive for us!o put in in a temporlry situation and lt is the type of surface that Jay uould prefer. Going to a blacktop surface of course r.lould cost quitc a bit more to put in and then r.,e hav6 to incur thc additional cost of rsmovingthe blacktop to restore it back to thc situation that Jay would prefer tohave. He wants the property for plantlngs and not for .parking oo He feltthat in our original plan, that lf ue had an ldequate graveled surface,rolled gravel surface that lt gould suffice for our purposcs. Our shorttcrm purposes and llso provide a specc r.rhen lc left that lc adequate for Jay 's expansion. Conrad: Jo Ann, how does that? Olsen: tlell we understand you know why they oould prefer gravel but u,e have to look at it from the maintcnance point and we have to look at the long term. t,hat it does uiLh the u,etllnd nelrby. I guess I'II have SITE PLAN At'lENDl'tENT FOR EXPANSIoN OF THE PARKING AREA IIEST OF LOTUS GARDEN CENTER ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP AND LOCATED AT 18930 UEST TATH STREET, REDI{OND PRODUCTS. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 1, 1990 - Pege 32 Charles address the engineering conditions but as far as it beingmaintained, we're just not comfortable urith gravel. Conrad: Do you h,ant to addreps that if you can? Folch: ttell basically, any time you have a situation like this uherevou've got a fairly sizeable surface area that is not stabilized from ancrosion standpoint, you're going to Eet erosion. you're going to have adust problem. r can forcsee this p.rticul.r facility during ipring thaws,during various times during thc summer r.rhere you,re coins to tave ir.q"enirains, it's eoing to be, it can be a mud problcm. ti's iomething that,sdefinitely going to have to be, ther€,s going to have to be a maintenanceprogram to take care of these probrGms that you're eoing to have. snor.,plowing during the wintertime is of course going to-disperse the gravel .You'll have to dear uith that somehow and r guess one of the more importantissues is when you have a gravel surface llke this, you,re not able iostripe parking stalls in the parkinE lot and therefore ),,ou're not able toorganize an efficient parking scheme for the people using it. From thatstandpoint r don't see the advantage. r can understand ihe situation oftrving to keep the parking lot a temporary situation. Temporary facilityand r know in discussing this with Bob and Bob's engineer hrith some ofthese issues, thev have proposed even going as far is construcLing a 2 inchclear crushed rock mat over the top of the gravel surface to try and dampensome of the potential problems with dust and erosion so the muddiness thatthev would have but r guess looking at the difference in xhat it wourd costto put that clear crushed gravel surface over the lop versus paving andsome of the maintenance costs that are going to be involvcd overpotentiallv the next 3 ysars, t see as a siLuation that ure may be creatingmore problems by trying to solve a parkinE shortage problem. Conrad: Thanks. Yes sir. Randv Patzke: Mv name is Randv patzke. r'm uith the Engineering Arriance.The engineering firm that's working with Redhond producti and ve got somestatements that I'd like to make as reasons for you to consider appioval ofthe gravel parking surface and d also like to take some exceptions tosome of the remarks that are in the parcket and that were made tonight.The reasons for approving the gravel parklng surface. One, the parlingarea is a temporary lot. The surface is compatible rith Lotus, thelandowner 's projected use. Redmond is not in thc doxntoun businessdistrict. Thev are out of vour hiehway visible district which r have toadmit is improving over what I,ve scen in thc pest a few years ago. Theparking area's visibilltv uill bc blocked by thc berm and thc plintings onthe berm. The arignment of TH 1o1 is going to cluse a maJor amount oiconstruction and disruption to that lrea anyuray. TotaL cost per squarefoot is louer uith the gravcl. The owncr i: rllling to accspt thc'potential higher annual maintrnance cost. The rcstorltion costs are lower.clean fiII has no fines in it uhich will minimize the erosion to theh,etlands and the gravel will have ress runoff and the clean gravet uilr bestripeable because the fines arcn't there. Reasons for approval of massparking. The use is optionar to Redmond employces. tt's not the publicparking. I'tass parking is used in l,linneapolls near the Metrodome. Hassparking should be used by the first shift employces. Again. the annual cost per space are lower. The curb stops, one of the concerns uas drivinginto and exiting but the curb stops r,riII prevent that. Clarification from -the memo. Runof f is actually I or.rer r.rith a gravel surface than a paved surface. Erosion uith clean fill r.rill be less because of no fines and thegravel can be striped. Something else in the recommendat i ons , it refers torestoring to original. The original needs to be defined. Is that ascurrently or as compatible uith the owner's planned use. That ui11 need tc be defined a little bit better than it is. And another consideration is would the Planning Commission consider a variance to the front of the Redmond site seLback for permanent parking in the future. Conrad: Thank you. end. Any other comments? Okay. Tim, ue'l] 6tart at your Erhart: Did you say you could striPe gravel? Yeah.Randy Patz ke : Erharti Can you explain that one to me. paint and paint.Randy Patzke: Get a can of spray Randy Patzke: Depending on Heather conditions, the surface uill..,so it'sgoin9 to be a compacted surface. Erhart: LeL me understand u,hat's being proposed here. Is this one of the nehr temporary conditional use permits? Olsen: The way we're processing it is actually a sitc PIan amendment for Lotus Lawn and Garden for a parking area on the site uhich t^rill be used by Redmond. No, we're not doine it as a temporary use. Erhart: This is no different than if my company camc in and Put a gravel parking lot for my employees. Olsen: If you uanted to expand your Parkine Iot, yelh. No different. Erhart: I cannot imagine why re'd cven consider this sort of thine. I se€ no difference betlrcen this and lny othcr company that has parking for employees in this city. As far as Jay, I hope hc's thcre for 3 years from nor.r but I don't think you can base somcthiner like an cxception like this based on the assumption that Jay. lf Jry do€s ulell he'll movc to a bigger spot ahd so forth and thc idea of basinE on that is not to ne a valid argument because I don't think you kno!. that thaL's Eoing to be used forthat purpose 3 years from nou. I don't have a lot of questions- Yeah, I do have one more question. The 2 inch bituminous mat.s that you'reproposing, what's our standards for parking lots? Folch: That is a 2 inch mat. Planning Commission I'leet i n9 August 1, 1990 - Page 33 Erhart: How long does that last? PIa nni ng August 1 Commission l,leeC i ng 1990 - Page 34 Erhart: It is a 2 inch mat.thought that seemed Iess than That's why they our normal . always break up. Okay, I Folch: I believe that's correct. Erhart: That seems odd because I just put in a 1,/2 compressed. ft's 4 compressed lo 3 !/2. Iaverage or that uas typical for a private drlve. dr iveway rlas told and they put in 4that that uas Fo]ch: A lot of it will also depend on how much crushed rock you put in asa base too. It can vary. Erhart: l.lell anyuay, as long as I understand- That's the only question Ihad and as I poinled out, maybe some of the other questions can change mymind but I don't see it. Emmings: I'm uondering how Ne got into a situationbusiness in town that doesn't have adequate parking Olsen: Their site plan met the zoning ordinance.that they're overlapping shifts. have a employees. I think the problem is Emm5ngs: But isn't that something that our parking ordinance takes intoaccou nt ? Krauss: The wav the parking ordinance standard is uorded, but that's theway they wenL in there. The wording is kind-of, it's a tough one Loenforce. There's tr.ro uay of figuring it. you figure it on gross squarefootage or vou figure it on r think it's employees on a major shift. uhatr.,e've got nor.r because of their operational constraints and Bob Cordell, canexplain it better than I but they have equipment that they can,teffeetivelv turn off so they uind up having to overlap shifts uhich is likeChristmas at Southdale. I mean you,rc doubling your requirement uhen you dothat and no, it !,as never designed to accommodatc that. Emmings: That's something ue maybe bctter .look at if ue,re going tocontinue to build industrial and commercial. Ellson: They overlap for uhat, a half hour period of time? f mean if youcould have moved the cars and things likc that !.t could get done so naybeit could be solved another Hay or something likc that too. Emmings: l.lel I how? Ellson: Parking attendant that takes your keycomesr takes your spot or who knows uhat.and rhen the other person Emmings: l.,here do you put the car in the meantime? He drives around? EIlson: Like a parking attendant whcre thc thing is aII fiIled. where wefor it's Emmings: If we've got a hole in ourit because this could be a real mess ordinance, I think b,c ought to addressif it happens someplace uhere there's Planning Commission t,leet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 35 no land to expand to. Krauss: It coul.d. It's a very tough thing to addrcss thouEh because xe'rcnot talking about physical changes to the building that trip a buildinspermit. Ne're talking about operational changes that bre have no control over or effective knouledge of unless something like this crops up. Krauss: In fact r.re had problems like this with United Hailins. tlhereby they urere parking on the street and uere required to build additionalparking and people were told they'd be cited if something rrasn't resolved. So it has happened. It has been effectively dealt with. Erhart: Permanent par ki ng lot? Krauss: It a permanent parking lot, yeah. Olsen: And par k too . r.r8s then we do allow off site parking lots in the industrial office Emmings: Then you think that our parking ordinance ure're going to have these crop up from time to time r.re'l I have to deal with it uhen it does? is adequate and that and that 's okay or Emmi.ngs: Alright. l.le're talking about either what he's ProPosed' which I don't understand. Some kind of a rolled and comPacted gravel surface on the one hand and 2 inches of bituminous mat on thc other hand. Are thosealI the alternatives? Is it one or the other? Randy Palzke: There's one other alternative and that would be just a st.andard Class V which uould be comparable to sand and small fines. Emmings: That would be horrible I 9USSS. thc 2 inch mat nlth thc 2 inch clear filtRandy Pstzke: Right. That's uhy b,as proposed after . . .with Charlcs. Emmings: So the only alternatlvcs herc are the two that have b..n setbefore us? Randy Patzke: Corrcct. Emmings: well, if it comes down to that I guess from my point of view,it's an engineering issue. I don't knou hor.l to resolve it and I've got. to -go with the City Engineer. If they can't convince the engineer to 9o alon€r{ith them, they can't convinc€ me cither. Emmings: tlell uhat uould ue do for example if a business down in theindustrial park uith no land to expand to came in uith an operation Iikethis? tlhat uould be done? Krauss: tje'Il have to deal ulith them as they do. Planning Commission t,teet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 36 Ellson: The first thing I thought of is, is there another uay to solvethis parking problem and I'm not sure if Redmond,s looked at everything orif they were to come to us r.Jith not necessarily the variance idea. Thatr.rouldn't even actually probably come to us but r don't knoul . rt seems likea 45 minute thing every day, maybc at the max that you have this back upand if it's just shifts overlapping or something, or ere you saying thatyou really need this much parking alI day long? I picture that the firstshift goes in there. The second shift comes. They park in Lotus and Lhenthe first shift leaves and you've got half a plrking lot cmpty until thethird one comes and th€y, that,s uhat I'm picturing. ft seems u,eird that somehour these open spaces are going to be there. Maybe I'm wrong. Bob cordell: Mavbe r can help clarifv some of the thinking ue have done.tle have grown considerably since we,ve been hcre and we have done someredesign of the carking in the back to accommodate additional cars. t,telooked at this for 2 reasons. It b,,as a very temporary solution to theproblem. There's some things we can do in the. front that He also proposedbut not necessarilv for this manv because ue thought it'd be a further stepwhich would give us approximatelv 80 spaces ln the front of the buildingbut would require a variance inasmuch as Ee'd have to come in to that whatwe have in front of the plant. If ure did that however, it creates acertain period of time when there's total disruption of that rot so we feltthat going into the one on the Lotus property r.lould provide a place for at'least some of our cars to 9o. l.re currently have 9 spaces out there rightnotr and even with the dense parking next door, lre'd only get 76. But atleast to have that overflow shou.Id we elect to go to that next atep. Itisn't true that if 's just during this overlap, although that has become amajor problem with this. Shutting those machines.down and getting themstarted, and the time to come back up to speed is quite a bit more than 45minutes and gets quite expensive to do that. l.re are studyine as youprobably all know how t.o handle our gror.lth. lle're trying to stay here aslong as u:e possible can. There's some things that h,e can do urithin theplant that wiII increase our productivity and so forlh but one of the majorproblems is where do bre put our people. l.le've rooked at renting space fiomFilIy's NishLclub and trucking people back and forth. Of course in thewinter that's a prett), difficult situation and this being very close to us,seemed to be the rnost logical especially in eonsideration of eretting thisfacility and there l,ere som....benefits to both parties. I can foresee theplace ulhere parking may become the limiLing factor of our longevity at theplant. l.,e currently have about 18O spacss. tle havc 245 cmployces. If weextend the production facility, although thcrc,s going to be a trade-off inefficiency versus the number of pcople, i!'s still cxceeding the number ofspaces ue have. I uould foresee having to move lnto that front arca butrequiring that that area on the side as a temporary rrea to help us in theshort term and also to help us...remodellng of that front lrwn. Certainlyrhen xe do front lots and so forth, ue lould do a class Job. t,hat lrealways strive to do is firs! class company. Ellson: Okay, so I guess it is bigger than just a feu minutes everyday.Thank you. The other thing that f nas trying to picture ls how much moreis it? How much cheaper is the gravel per square foot than thebituminous? Everyone says it's cheaper. Is lt like Sx you're going to be Planning Commission Heet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 37 asked to pay or how much more cheaper is the one alternative versus the ot her ? Rendy Patzke: It appears that over this period of time it's approximately $20,ooo.oo . Ellson: For r.rhich? For upgrading because L,e not only have to put the blacktopRandy Patz ke: in. Randy Patzke: That's r isht . Ellson: I guess that does seem like an awful lot for something for 3years. oh boy, you're going to have a hard time getting your return investment there. I'm not in trying to make hardships. ElIson: There were some conflictlnE oplnlons on thlt concr€te orbetter for runoff and phen you l,are looking rt it charles you xGreat the type of €ravel that they ocrc doing? Folch: If I might interrupt and comment on that. Looking at it, just running some rough estimates on that. I estimate from their plan submittedthat the parking lot size is a little over 2,ooo square yards r,lhich will, rrrith a 2 inch bituminous mat approximate about 225 tons of blacktopmaterial. Estimatlng blacktop in place, estimated at !E25.oo a ton, it can run as much as $3o.oo a ton but s25.oo a ton uould run at about 35,5oo.oo -to put the 2 inch bituminous mat on that facility. Estimating this samefacility, putting down the 2 inch clear crushed rock' I cstimate that costto be about $1,OOO.OO. Randy Patzke: I'd sure like to get your estimates. Erhart: $5,600.oo to put the asphalt on that parking? Folch: !E25-oo a ton is pretty common. 325.00 to !E3o.oO a ton installed ispretty common. Randy Patzke: The prices that lre had from thc asphalt. -.to !E12,OOO.OO. Bob CordeII: 50 cents a square foot. I don't knou. I'n not a contractor. - Conrad: Any more comments Annettc? on gravel is looki ng Folch: You bet. In a sense He'rG not, rith cither method f gu€ss h,ithoutputting in curb and gutter and storm sewer !{e aren't controlling runoff ortrying to control the rate of runoff. tlhat r.re're trying to avoid is an erosion situation. I do have closc experience u,ith e parking lot at a recreational facility that I've used qulte e bit that has, urhat they did is insLalled clear crushed rock and I can tell you from. thcy're always in there constantly relevelinE it bccause without the fine material it doesn't Ellson: You'd have to pay an additional !32o,ooo.oo over the gravel? Planning Commission Meet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 38 stabilize real r^rel I. rt pushes apart rhen cars are driving on it and thereis no way you can stripe that and have that striping stay in place becauseof the rock material because it is clear is real mobile. EIlson: okay. l.lildermuth: I feel a strong sense of obligation on the part of thePlanning Commission and the City to uork ulith industry that has come tochanhassen but after reading throuEh this and listeninE to the discussion,I just feel that the staff report has to be supported. I think the factthat curb and gutter uJasn.t required, Etorm selrer uasnrt required,demonstrates good faith on the city's part to rork uith them and i tninkbituminous surface is certainly rcquircd. conred: r also am comfortable with the staff report and r think slippingthe curb and gutter requirements is something that we normally don't do indin a temporarv situation r think it's appropriate. r think r.re have "ripp.Jsome of the standards that ue would normally iirpose and do believe thatit's the requirement of the bituminous is appropriate. I have no othercomments on this. I would hope. I guess long run I think ue uere askedwould ule look at a variance. Actually and that,s a touEh one because welike Redmond in town for as long as L,e can keep Redmond herc and they havethat facility. I guess here's a situation urhere I urish we could solvetheir parking problem permanentlv. Not temporarily. rt Looks rike r wishenough parking was contiguous to the site that uas owned under the Redmondname. Tim? Erhart: Yeah, I have a question for staff here. I like Redmond too. Don'tget me urrong. r'm having a hard time understanding ulhy you,re recommendingto not require curbs in this application rhen r thought the argument fornot requiring curbs on the one on Ouattro Drive up here where ihe suystored automobiles, r thought the argument there held a lot more water thanthis one and r argued that r thought He ought to eliminate the curbs there.r mean there we had a precedent uhere the previous parking, cxistingcarking Iot in that industrial site uas flush trith the eriss and ue came inand basically as staff recommended, they had to go in and put the curb inthe neur section of the parking lot. Now how do iou treigh Lhis on" isiin"tthat one? other than vou buy this temporary thing. This isn't goin; to betemporary. Ellson: That's the biggest thing right thcre. Erhart: This isn't going to beye6rs. If they move, somebodyparking Iot. tcmPorar),. This ls going to go in here 3else, the next guy is going to use this Olsen: There's a speclfic condition. Bob CordeII: ft's in the contract... Our agrecment is that we'1I... olsen: rf at that tihe it becomcs permanent, they put curb and gutter inat that time. The other one, it uill be dirccted into.storm sewer. Thisone is not being directed into thc storm schrGr so that's one of the main PIanning Commission l.'f eet i n9 August 1, 1990 - Page 39 purposes for curb and gutter. Erhart: tjelI yeah, that's my next question. Olsen: t,hy not? Erhart: tJhy isn't it? I'm not saying it's not a good idea. I'm just saying how do ele, I lras trying to figure out urhy you. Olsen: Because ue Here tryinE to make it work. Krauss: tle are accepting the premise thet it's temporary. Olsen: And u,e've got a condition to guarantee that. ErharL: Somehour in my mind these thinss don't end uP temporary. That's the problem. Erhart: okay, that's my only comment. Thanks. conrad: rt seems to me that if it uas bituminous, the oil and gas urould,talk to me about bituminous excepting oiI and gas uhich it obviously doesn't would run off in a rain versus gravel ulould sink in. Is there any benefit one r^,ay or another? See I'm not sure. Oil sinking into the earth no matter r.rhat is not good. Folch: I think from the standpoint of you're looking at like oil that mav be dripping from engines and it's a fairly small spots of oil that vou r.rould get on either surface, you probably aren't going to get a uhole lot of runoff from that. If you're talking a much larger puddle of oiI of course, the blacktop is going to send it down off into the Pond of course uhereas the gravel may tend to hold it but eventually it Probably uouldpercolate and the water uould carry it into the Pond. But I don't thinkit's a problem that should raise any conc.rn Just from spots that maybe drop from cars and things like that. Conrad: okay, any othcr? I don't knou if, yeah they did ask rt one point in time if we r.rould consider a variancc in terms of tmpervious surface on the current site. Are there any comments on that? Emmings: How can ue comment on it without the staff lookine .t it? Krauss: tle did inltially explorc some of thosc options nith ltr,.CordelI and had problems with it. You Iose the, onc of the things that's nice about that buildine is the quality of landscaping that's in front of it. Chei.r into that setback, you lose a lot of that. YGS, you can make up someof the difference uiLh more lntenslve plantings but you not onl)z have setback variances, you had hard surface coverages and we expressed relunctance to proceed along that manner and expressed an lntercst in wor king with them in fact. on this tcmporary parking lot as an alternative. Krauss: But r.,e did recommend conditions that uould help to enforce that including the financial Euarantees. Plinning Commission i,leet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 40 Conrad: Yeah, I like the staff recommended solution. I hope it uorks forRedmond. Obviously it doesn't totally uork for them based on their comments but r urould hope that it uasn't that much pricier solution but rdo Iike staff comments. Anylhing else? Randy Patzke: Did you address the rnass parking,.. Conrad: Yeah,stacking. Any we really haven't opi nions? talked mass parking in terms of the l"l i ldermuth: If you cmPloyees, can make it uork, fine. ft's your parking lot. your Conrad: l.Jhy do tue, as a city, why do we care paul? Krauss: l.lell you care for several reasons. one of the issues that broush!this about uras there's problems h,ith cars parking in fire lanes on thesite. The mass parking scheme has only, r.rc've never used it in town. Theexamples uhere it has been used are fully manned parking lots inf''linneapolis or in st. Paul urhere people knou exactlv when they're going toleave and if not. the attendant can shuffle cars around. r don't inow howmany of you have visiled the l{etro Council but they have a parking lotuhere they will block you in. you might be 2 cars in but you tell theattendant urhich car you Hant and they shuffle the c.rs around and get youout. That's not the case here. once your car is stuck in the middle withthis proposal, it's there until the shift changes. Conrad: And why do we care? Krauss: t,thy do L,e care? l.te see people trying to jump medians to get outof there. If you had to Ieave in an emerEency, you'd find a uray to getout. l.le see problems uith cars shuffling. I mcan therc's goinE to bemanuevering is tough. I mean does everybody start their engines at thesame time? Hor.r do you coordinate this? Is there going to be a flag manthere saying, Iike at the Slate Fair eaying it,s your turn over heri. Ellson: You could. l.lildermuth: That becomes an employcc satisfaction issue though. r meantha! problem only has to come up 2 or 3 times and Redmond has got, themanagement and Human Resourcss people at Redmond have a problem on theirhands and they'v€ probablx havc to address Lt. Krauss: tlhen landscaping is trashed. l.lhen cars are cntering and rcavinguh€re they shouldn't. tlhen cars .rc stacking up in publlc right-of-waybecause the intcrnar circulation is Jumblcd up. ycah thcn it becomes ourproblem. If it sas all internal. f mean tf they had 4O acres and we'dnever see it. I don't think wc'd care. tlildermuth: I don't know. If they can make it r.rork, fine.they're 9oin9 to have to btripe the lot or put some concretethere for aisle guides or somethinE. If they can't, berms down Planning Commission l.leet i n9 Augusl 1, 1990 - Page 41 Emmings: Hoh, many spaces uith, if it's striped and theyparking there, hou many spaces do they get? 76? have ordi nary Olsen: I think it's 65. Emmings: But will Lhis give don 't use mass par ki n9 , r.r i I Igroblem that you've got? you what you need if it's striped? If youthis give you enough Bpaces to solve the Bob Cordefl: Not quite. If }/e add the 65 to the 18O Ne have here, thatdoesn't quite add up to the 246 people ue currently havc. [.,e're thinkinsin the long term we're going to have to do something in front of the bui Iding too . Emmi ngs: tJhy don 't ranP. that in th. rear of the building. It's notBob Cordell: t,e're an easy solution - Emmings: No, I wouldn't think so. Bob Cordell: And then we do that behind our building periodically wesit. . .and ue have a couple cars parked 2 oy 3 de€p. It's all r.rithin our ou, rL.facility so if somebody should have to move a car, ere only have' one ro!,,that uould be very, plus a couple up in front. Our people are right there and ue could keep the keys for the other cars at the fronL desk so I don'tthink it r^rould be an insurmountable problem. you build a consider i ng Krauss: I don't wish to be argumentative but f see itproblem than that. Look at the plan th6ro, ),ou've got that are bur ied - rs a more ser i ous4 rou,s. weII 3 rous - Emmings: tlhat plan? Oh, that one. Conred: Go back in and tel] ne how thisto jump the curb so u6 don't have curbs.but really the berms. affects the City? The)r're going to The)z're goi n9jump the berms Randy Patzke: You require a concrct? car 6to have a curb. And you do have a 2 to 4 fo.ot h PTigh nyHay so berm on docssential lythe other si you de. Olsen: It'd need a variance. I think I mentioned Lhat beforc ordinance requires these specifications so you have to receive ConradI To do uhat? because thee var irnce. Olsen: They have to rcccivc a variance to our parking strndards. Randy Patzke: It's 65.uith the regular'ind 7a, it's about a... Ellson: Haybe lre can have a trial period and cvrluate it aftcr x period oftime. I'm kind of uith Jim. It'd b. morc of thcir probl.m than ours. I'd -.Iike to see it tried and if it doesn't lrork. PIanni n9 August 1 Commission Heet i ng 1990 - Page 42 Krauss: lle have requirements forwould be in violation here. parking stall width and aisle width that ].li ldermuth: So regardless h,hatgravel surface.they uent for here, bituminous surface or Krauss: f can't tell you uith certainity that thisand that it's going to cause a horrcndous problem. know because I've never tried this and nobody I knor.r Chanhassen could be innovative and see. The problemit's the dickens to fix, is not going to work The fact is, I don't has ever tried this -is once i! 's there, Krauss: From an enforcement standpoint, there may be an issue. you courdattach a condition to the site plan but the site plan is effective to theextent thaL they build the parking lot the way you approved it and then asrong as thev do that, thev're consisten with it. This is not a conditionaluse permit. This is not something that you're adding conditions to thatperiodicallv vou Nere allowed to re-evaluate. Then if something is notcomplied with, withdraur your original approval. your sitc plan approvalbasically i.s permanent. Conrad: It's really a parking.It really specifies the parking structure. out something cooperetively uith them. It Bob Cordell: See if this didn,t eork...on our part and w6'd have to dosomething to accommodate it. If uc wouldn't, continuc to try to dosomething that h,e courdn't imploment, ue'd go back to e rclsonable plan. Lle feel h,e can do it, otherwise we uouldn't have suggested it but r agreeuith you that again, if we couldn,t gct it in hcre in this dcnsity and wehad to put another row in, uelr we'd rike to move lt and rre roould do that, Emmings: You know it r.rould sGGm to me that, l.t's Just sry ue did allowthe mass parking. t think Paul's rieht. I think it,s going to createproblems. That's just my sense of lt but tt's not golnE to createProblems, if it creates problcms to the cast the)r're on Redmond property.If it creates problcms to the, it's not going to creatc problems to the TH5 side I don't think because there'a trees and plantings in there so I,mcomfortable r.rith that. It's 9oin9 to, th. person it nitl cause problemsfor would probably be Jay. Krauss: t,le could probably nor kcould be difficult to enforce. Conrad: trell, is that true? In othcr uords, if ue gave them theopportunity to do this and it affected the City, is there . way to say novou can't do this anvmore? rn other r^rords, r don't care if they stack them20' r think it's a companv problem. r think it urould not be something thatI r.rould institute at my company but if that's the Hay thcy waDt to solvetheir parking probLem, that's their staffing issue. I wouldn't Hant to beon their human resources group but as rong as it doesn't affect chanhassen,then I guess I'm kind of comfortable urith it but paul you're saying itmight and that'.s what I 'm trying to get a senSe for . Of r"rhat would happen.Then the other thought ..,ould be, if oe let them try it and it didn,t wbit<,is there a uray to let them try it. Planning Commission l.leeti n9 August 1, 1990 - Page 43 ].li l der mut h: The par king lot . most immedilte thing is 9oin9 to be to hop into his Emmings: And so I suppose if people are trying to bust out of that parkinglot, they're going to 9o over his property. l{aybe he can, if he's not worried about it or feels like Redmond. Jay Kronick: I'II protect myself. Emmings: tJhat if we approve this with the striping that's on the plan, th.- u,ay the City has recommended doing it and then allow them to do an experiment with mass parking? Then if it doesn't work' uhat they're approved for is erhat's on here. They'd have to recoat it and restripe it -and do it the way bre told them they had to do in the first Place. Krauss: Bob has always worked uith us quite uell. I mean I would accePtletter from him basically stating concurrence with 6ome sort of agrecmentto that effect. Emmings: tJe agree not to enforce the, this particular condition pending their experiment to see grhether it works and that if it has any impact on the City or a neighboring property owners. Conrad! That sounds real , I like that. Randy Patzke: Some of the businesscs that you have herc... You've got Rosemount out here and l.tcGlynn Barkery. those are sone big buildings that -are already standing. They nay get into the situation too brhcrG they h,antto look at it' in the future. You'v. Eot a perfcct opportuni.ty sith Redmond on a small lot who is willing to try it and allow a learning cxperience for- the Planning Commission and Clty Council. Conrad: I'm not sure that that's thc rationalc I'd buy. I think just trying to be ameniable uith Rcdmond as a good ncighbor, I think that's Hhatre're trying to do herc. l.,e're ccrtainly not setting any, that'6 not uhatI uant Chanhassen to be a forerunnar in is creative parking. tJe do have asignificant amount of space. If r.lc uerc in dountown Hinneapolis maybe but -I liked what Steve said because it may glve us the Ieverage to go back to : secure plan but also possibly give the company r chance to try this. I likethat and I still, I'm just not persuaded that this is hurting Chanhassen. l-think it's up to Redmond and that's their busincss. Not ours. a Emmings: Have Jay patrolling his lot line with a shotgun you knou but, so naybe it's not a problem. Krauss: There's one last thing I'd ask you to consider though. If you do consider the mass parking, and ue'II of course abide by your decision uiththat. It should be understood that if it fails, there's not an impliedresponsibility on the part of the city to grant variances elseuhere on thesite to provide an equivalent number of stalls. If it fails, the experiment fails and you revert back to the original reconmendation. And -ultimately if it's impossible to park everybody on the site, r.rell maybe thr site 's overdeveloped. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 1, 1990 - Page 44 Erhart: tlhy do we have an ordinance then? Conrad: You're absolutely right. yeah, your ordinances should be there toguide. Here He're saying that r.le've got a temporary, ue've got a problemis what we've got here and the applicant... Erhart: t,ho's got a problem? conrad: Redmond does. And the appricant doesn't brant to buy anymore landso I think that's, ue could be real hardball about this and just said putin curb and gutter, buy some more land and take care of your needs. That,spossible Tim. Erhart: I '11 put my comments in after r.te take a vote. know how he 's voting.Emmi ngs: I guess we Erhart: I suggest you 9o ahead and vote on that. Krauss: r still remain unclear though on how we uould handle the varianceaspect of it. l.Je changed the ordinance so you guys do the recommendationson variances such as this and city councir has to approve it. A varianceis forever Emmings: No var iance . Ellson: !.Je're not. l.Je're approving the xay you sluys have erritten it uithan experimental period of time or uhatever. Olsen: t,hat they're doing, we uould actually have to, they're not doinguhat .^,as approved and they,rc not meeting the ordinance. Emmings: That's right. I don,t know uhy webasis to approve it this uay and decide on anallow them to conduct an experinent uith- can't decide on an informalinformal basis we're going to Ellsop: And then after 3 months or 2 months uheyou give them an official variance. fs that wha Hou do you let them do it year after year? ntIY hey come back and thenou're saying Jo Ann? Olsen: Or if it doesn't work, what do rle do then? t call them upit's not r.rorking or do they comc back and they can arguc in fron!Planning Commission and Counci I? Krauss: I think your intent is clcar. trhat I'd like to do, ifapprove it that Hay, 90 ahead and lct us consult uith thc City,Hhatever. and sayof the Conrad: Yeah. I think yes, if !J6 get compl.ints that it,s lmpacting thecitv and r think we shourd, the citv council has to decidc what those uouldbe. If one complaint is not a big deal, maybs 2 or 3 ovcr a shor! pcriodof time. If there are impacts, then I think then it's 9oin9 to be realclear that they have to 9o back to the 65 stalls or lhatever it is. you h,ant toretl Planning Commission Heeti n9 August 1, 1990 - Page 45 conrad: I think the experiment could ]ast for 3 years.. Emmings: Sure. As far as I'm concerned it could. Krauss: lJell that's where I'd like some' see that's. Krauss: I think if you're consider that var iance . really going to do that you really need to Olsen:Just to approve it. Put a condition lf it doesn't. Then I bron't go for it. \Emmi ngs : Kreuss: Because Ithe Code requires. other uay. don't K now think I really can in good consciencc know uhat r,,,hat you approved and then say okay r.re'll look the it. a Hay you don' Emmings: Are you German? Krruss: Half, ycah. Emmings: That's the problcm. So am f but I fight lgainstPaul. You can do anything you xant to do. Thcre's aluays something. Always. If you brant to- lf you don't xant to' to. tit dot eant Fieh to Ellson: I pictured it that it r.ras an cxperiment for x Period of time. If it came through that it was good, then they:d come through and ask for a variance and ue could have proven that it works and thercfore granted. Emmings: But see we're not going to say anything about it in the approval -and I think what should happen here is ure should, I think it should be approved the way the staff has recommended and then I think, and you can check with the City Attorney but I think there should simply be a letter of understanding beLween the City and that as long, that will allow them to conduct an experiment r.,ith mass parking on that lot if they Hant to. Butif it impects any neighboring property or if at the discretion of the City the city feels that it's got any negative impacts for the citv, aesthetic -or otherwise, eJe're going to jerk the rug out from under their fcet and they're going to have to 90, He're going to 9o back and cnforce. Ellson: But do you say the experiment is for x Period of time and then if - it flies you then recommend something different? Conrad: Yeah, you've got to talk to the right folks. And the Redmondfolks, they're taking a little bit of risk. I don't know if they're takinl- a risk. Anytime you deal uith the city, I gucss that's kind of a riskv deal. Ellson: I think it should have an ending. The experiment shoul'd have a start and an end and then if it proves to be something, then we do look at the possibitity of mass parking. Planning Commission l.1eet i n9 August 1, 1990 - Page 46 conrad: okay. Is there a hotion? Steve. Emmings: I'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval o Review Amendment *85-1 r,lith the conditions as contained in the srcpoYt. fS taf ite Planf Conrad: Any discussi on? Emmings moved, Ellson scconded that the planning Commission rccomnendaPProval of Site Plan Revicu Anendmcnt t85-1 rrith the folloxing conditions: 1. A revised site plan shal.I be submitted showing that the parking lotshall be paved uith a 2 inch bituminous mat. A revised grading and lanscaping plan shall be submi.tted providing therequired berming and Iandscaping. Tvpe rrr reinforced erosion control shall be installed at all rocationsshown on the plans prior to const.ruction and maintained for the life ofthe faciritv. A detail of Tvpe rrr reinforced crosion control shalt beshown on the plans. A concrete drivcway apron (city standard) shall be installed at theentrance to the parking lot. Conrad: And th6 reason for your oppositlon? 3 4 E. EIIson: And I'Il second it. 2. The parking lot uril] be permitted for thrce years (36 months) untiloctober 31 , 1993, and at r,rhich time the area must be restorcd to itsoriginal condition. If the use of the parking lot is cxtended beyondthree years curb and gutter must be provided around the parking lotperimeter and the site must connect to the storm sewer in Uest TgthStr eet . 6. The applicant shall provide the City with a ]etter of credit in anamount approved by the City Engineer to cover thc cost to romove aII ofthe proposed improvements and restorc the site back to it's oriEinal condi t ions . All votcd in favor cxcept Erhart xho opposed and thc notion carri.d rlth avote of 4 to 1. Erhart3 Numbar one, r think thirc must not have bcen enough on the agcndafor the Planning Commission tonight. EvGn to talk about thls thing, Ithink we worked hard to make, to aet down a document and standard ehatuould make our industrial parks neet a ccrtain standard. I think ue'vc now come up Hith another uay to tr.list it around by calling this a temporaryparking Iot and as a rcsult, if this l,erc to pass, quite frankly I thinkyou'd just make a shambles of the existing ordinancc. Thcre is no suchthing as a temporary parking lot. They'I] just come in 3 years and say!,cll, this buildins's not going to leavc in 3 years and there,s going to Planni ng August 1 Commission Heet i ng 1990 - Page 47 Erhart: Hass parking urasn't in this so is that going to be a discussionthat you're Iooking for comments? Conrad: No . Erhart: Okay, I r.ron't say anymore. Conrad: Steve, do terms of the test? City Council in Pass . Emmings: I guess all I would say is that if, the one ury I see or onepossibility r^rouId be Lo not enforce the condition that requires them tostripe it to city standards on en experimental basis to see if mass parkins-' would uork i.n their oun circumstances. I don't feel strongly about it one t.lay or the other. I just see it as an alternative if the City Council isinclined to try to allour them to do what they Hant to do, that that would -be a uay to do it. Conrad: Okay, thanks. you want to make a recommendation to the You passed. you made a motion which did have to be shifts there even j.f Redmond moves to a different building. I _just don't think He ought to be doing this just because r.re think thatsomething's going to change 3 years down the road. They're just going tosay, r.rell it's existing. lle've got people parking on it. Let's just extend it another year and it uill 90 on and on and I think it's a realiniustice to the other industries, the other companies in our industrial Park that have come in and paid the extra money to put the parking lot in.I think erhat you're talking about is saving Redmond either 5 grand. l.laybe -it's 20 grand and you're talkine about imparting a problem on the City thatcould be, in terms of time spent lnd nuisance. much higher than this.tJe're talking about an insignificant investment. l.rhen you're talking aboutthe kind of growth we're talking about, lre 're talking about employees. I'n-just reallv kind of stunned that h,e're cven considering it. I think we'vegot good ordinances and there better be good reasons that r.re don't followthem. Regarding the mass parking. Is this another subject that ue're 9oin9 to take up again or are you looking for comments on that too? Conr ad : tJe I I ue voted . Ellson: If it Hasn't something like this Paul, I h,as just t,ondering. Let's say one of our items uas just to look into nass parking. I mean the Cityput a commission together or something likc that. t"touldn't lre try to like -institute some sort of experiment to sce if it uould uork? Outslde of thisindividual situation. I mGan if you guys arc lrorried becausa it's an ordinance, could it be a trial basis based on us looklne at futurc parking -problems in the City of Chanhasscn and doing it, running a tcst for that PUr POSe Krauss: If you could Eork that out lccally, possibly yes but typically uhen you ask us to investigate things, ule just go out and find examplesthat already exist and bring them back to review. I keep being reminded here about this concept of...Iiabillty. tre're baing totd to do somethlng -that violates the Code but nobody's approved violating the Code. I gucss I Planning Commission l.teet i n9August 1, 1990 - Page 48 agree to a large extent uith commissioner Erhart th.t codes are codes and )zou don't want to be a bureaucrat but they,re there for a reason and Idon't have flexibility, nor do r want it, to violate codes unilateralry. Ellson: I'm thinking of it more like uhat you said. ore like a testthing. If we were to set the whole thing up as a tcst. In other uords.it's endorsed by the city and it,s got to panel that's overseeins ihl.-i".tand we're looking at it as. task forcc of some sort. Krauss: There's nothing is Statc plannlng leEislationenforce ordinances except uhen you have expcriments.a Eay that the CiLy Attorney can give us. that r.re're duty boundthc building, they met that let 's youI mean maybe there 's to gran! the EIlson: I urould think that that would be a leSitimate reason. tlildermuth: The other side of this coin isa variance then because when Redmond builtordinance in place at the time. Right? Emmings: No, I don't think so. Erhart: There's nothing that says that they are allowedpeople urorking in that building Jim. There is a limit. Emmings: Risht. That is self imposed. They've decidedshifts that uJay and they create a parking problem. tlildermuth: uhat,s your limit? parking? to have 10,OOO to run their Krauss: Yes - very much so. parkinE is one of the major determinants. tlildermuth: Geez. A company is successful. They hire more employees. conrad: l.Jell Paul , uhat h,e're'asking you to do is to look into that optionand advise the City Council in terms of uhelher that's an option. ft ioofsIike that it might be. This item r assume is going on the 2zth to cityCounciI. Anyway, thank ),ou for cominE in. (*Ladd Conrad left the meeting at Chairman of the meeting. ) thia point and appointcd Tim Erhart as APPR9VAL. OF IINUTES: Emmings moved, Ellson scconded to approve theof the Planning Commission meeting dated July 18, 1990 as presented.voted in favor and the motion c8rried unanimously l,li nutesAII CI T Y COUN'IL UPDATE: Any questions from the commissionerspresented by PauI? Er hart : that uas Emmings: Yeah. I liked your response. on the City Council updatc o REDMOilD PRODUCTS lNc City of Chanhassen AugusL 27, L990 To the Honorable Mayor of Chanhassen, and All City Councll Members : Redmond Products, Inc. has subnitted to the City of Chanhassen two proposals for parking slte modifications. The been reviewed by the Planning o our attentlon that thls ProPosalugust 2?th City council neeting. eduled to be reviewed by the the september 5th meeting. wey of Chanhassen, ln one seasion, n. After discussing our desire ur understanding that thls item ter the second proPosal 1s reviewed original proposal has comnission. It has cois on the agenda for t Our second proposal is Planning Commission du wish to present to the our comprehensive site with Jo Ann Olsen, itwill be postponed unti by the Planning CoNnission. condense discussion on this We appreciate the opportunity to issue to one meeting. met heA sch ringcitplais o 1 af S i ncerely, REDI.{OND PRODUCTS, INC. Sandra L. ReitsmaDirector of Human Resources c.c Paul Krauss, Planning Director Jo Ann olsen, senior Planner Don Ash$rorth, City Administrator '18930 Wesr TSlh St. . Chonhossen, MN 553'17 934-4868. 1.800,328-0159 r.>/-CITY OF CHANHISSEN STAFF REPORT Pc DATE: 8/t/9o cc DATE: 8/27/90 CASE #: 85-1 site PIan Olsen/v Fz o =(LL :<(o ldta Site PIan Review Amendrent for a Gravel Parking Lot Tbe Easterly Half of the Lotus Larm and carden property Adjacent to the Redmond Property. PROPOSAL: IOCATION: APPLICANT:RedrDond Products 18930 W. 78th Street Chanhassen, DIN 55317 Lotus Lawn & carden (owner) 78 West 78th Street Chanhassen, UN 55317 ,.- 1e ay art !,r:iii:ij::: ,-..-.-*.--Z @)K t\ PRESENT ZONING: ACRE.AGE: DENSITY: AI'ACENT ZONING AND IJAND USE: BH, Highrray Business 20r 000 square feet lb" . --- -- r..-J-l-2:3-o- i;::9.: ' ' ,.,e+*h N-s- E-w- Railroad TracksHry. 5. Redmond Products Lotus Lawn and Garden WATER AND SEWER: PHYSICAL CEARACTER.: Avai labIe A leve1 site with no improvements. 2OOO IAND USE PIJAN:Conmercial ".,;';:;:;;;a- -._?_:lt_q, RedDond Parking Expansion August 1, 1990 Page 2 PROPOSAL On Septenber 12, 1988, the City Council approved a conditional usepermit and site plan for the Lotus Lawn and carden. The proposed inproveroents to the site were located on the southwesterly half ofthe property, leaving the southeasterly portion of the property open for future expansion. The rear half of the property is aprotected wetland. Redmond Products is located directly to theeast of the property. Rednond Products has proposed to JayKronick, the ovner of I6tus Iawn and Garden, to lease thesoutheasterly portion of the Lotus Larrn and carden property to be used as a parking area for the Rednond eroployees. Redmond is in the process of reviewing the possibility ofrelocating to a ne!, site and expanding their facility until then Redmond is in need of additional parking for itrs enployees. Thetype of production that Redmond is involved in requires the overlapping of shifts so that the production is not stopped betrreenshifts. The parking provided on the Rednond site is not adeguateto a11ow for the overlapping of shifts and there has been parkingof cars in the fire lanes and in other inappropriate areas. To accon:nodate the additional parking required, Redmond is proposingto construct a gravel parking lot on the Iotus Laun and cardenproperty. The gravel parking lot uill be approxirnately 19,000 square feet in size and provide 78 parking spaces (Attachnent #1). The parking lot rill be serviced by a curb cut on the Rednond Products site entering the l6tus Larrn and carden site fron theeast. The curb cut shall have a concrete driveway apron. fherewill be no additional curb cuts on the frontage road, nor rril1 theparking be directed through the existing Lotus Lairn and cardenparking Iot. Redmond is proposing to lease the land for theparking 1ot for 3 years. The two issues uith the proposal is the use of a gravel surfacedparking lot and the nass parking design of the parking area. Theparking lot is being proposed gravel rather than the required pavedlot with curb and gutter to acconmodate Jay Kronickrs sish to usethe site for future nursery expansion. A gravel parking lotresults in high roaintenance, Lncreased runoff, eroslon controlproblens and parking stalls which cannot be striped. The applicantstated that they first proposed a paved parking lot but that the owner, Jay Kronick, preferred gravel so the property can be usedfor plant storage without the need for any restoration. Paving theparking 1ot will result in less maintenance, less erosion of thesite (which is inportant vith runoff directed tolrards the wetland),viII be in confornance with the ordinance and wiLl not be settinga precedent. Staff has agreed that the curb and gutter is not necessary but that barrier curb stops Eust be provided for a]Iperineter staLls. Therefore, the parking lot can still be easilyrestored for use by the Lotus Lawn and carden expansion. A Rednond Parking Expansion August 1, 1990 Page 3 condition of approval r,iII be for the area to be restored to itsoriginal state. Therefore, Lotus Lalrn and carden uiIl be able touse the site in the future. The original plan showed a parking lot with typicat parking staLlsand aisles (Attachnent #2). The new parking plan shows nassparking with stacking of up to 4 rows of parfing stalIs. Theapplicant is proposing this to acconmodate uore parking stalls. The original ptat provided 55 parking sta1ls. The parking lot villbe attended during shift changes to direct parking. this type ofparking does not conforn to the zoning ordinance iequirenenli andstaff believes there will be probleDs if an energenCy arises nhena car double parked will need to leave durlng the shlft. DriversDay be tenpted to puLl out to the vest onto the Lotus Iau andcarden site. The only vay such a parking lot uorks, as in downtownaround the lletro Done, is when there ls a fult tine attendant onsite with access to the car and car keys. We do, however, supportthe original parking proposal for 65 jtaI}s. Therefore, ' stai? isreconnending against the Dass parking proposal . SLouId thePlanning Conrnission and city council ipprove such a design, acondition of approval should be that a fu1l tine parking attendantbe provided during shifts that the parking lot Lri1l be-used. staff is recorornending that the applicant provide a letter of creditnhich would cover thl cost of re-storatioti for the parXing irea anawill also be reconmending that the parking Lot shali be r6stored atthe end of the. 3 year period to ensure its teDporary stalls. Theproposed parking 1ot neets the setback requirenents of the BHDistrict and is naintaining the zs foot setbick froD the rretrand. Dra inaoe The existing site drains to the north into the netland. Theproposed .drainage plan wiII naintain drainage directed to thenorth. Silt fence is proposed north of ttre paiXing lot to protectthe uetland. staff reconmends the erosion tontrol be a 1iipe IIIand be naintained while the parking lot exists. Landscaoincr The -appl-icant is.propos-ipg a { foot high bem along the frontageroad nith ten 2l inch caliper evergreen irees. curreitly, there isa 2 foot high berrn in front of the Lotus Iavn and Gardenl Staff isproposing that the bern have rolling features uith elevations fron2 Xo 4 foot in height to better blend in rrith the current bera infront of Lotus Lawn and Garden. Jay Kronlck has also requestedthat rather than evergr-e_en tre€s, the applicant provide shiubUeryon the bertn which would Batch the Lotus Lawn Lnd Garden sitelstaff feels that it is critical that the parking area be screenedand therefore, is reconnending that evergreens be used uhere the Redroond Parking Expansion August 1, 1990 Page 4 bern is 2 foot in height and that shrubbery could be used uhere thebem is higher than 2 feet. The evergreen trees Dust be a ninimumof 5 foot in height. An anended landscaping plan nust be providedto show the proposed ctranges in the landscaping. RECOI.IMENDATION Planning Connission adopt the folloring nThe PLanning Cornnlssion lecomnends approval of Site Plan Review Imendment #85-1 uith the followlng conditions: 1. A revised site plan shal1 be subnitted showing that theparking 1ot shalf be paved lrith a 2 inch bituuinous nat. 2.The parking lot will be pennitted for three year (35 nonths)until October 31, 1993, and at vhich tine the area must berestored to its original condition. ff the use of the parking1ot is extended beyond three years curb and gutter loust beprovided around the parking lot perineter and the site nust connect to the storn serrer in West 78th Street. 3.A revised grading and landscaping plan shall be subnittedproviding the required betming and landscaping. TlT)e ffI reinforced erosion control shall be installed at alllocations shown on the pLans prlor to construction andnaintained for the life of the facility. A detail of rype IIIreinforced erosion control shaLl be ahown on the plans. A concrete driveuay apron (city standard) sha1I be installedat the entrance to the parking lot. 4. The applicant sha1l provide the City rrith a letter of creditin an anount approved by the city Engineer to cover the costto renove all of the proposed improvements and restore thesite back to its original conditions. n PI,ANNTNG COM},'ISSION A TION 5 6 On August 1, 1990, the Planning Commission revieved the proposalfor a site plan anendment to the Iotus Iaun and Garden Centei forthe creation of a temporary parking lot for the use of RedmondProducts located directly to the east. Redmond products isproposing a parking lot with gravel aurface and Da6s parking ofcars versus the parking lot conflguratlon reguired by the ordinanceallowing for rninirnun drive lanes prohibiting stacking cars.Planning Etaff recoDEended that the parking lot conforn- to theordinance, that lt be required to be paved with a bituninous Staff recoumends theuotion: Rednond Parking Expans ion August 1, 1990 Page 5 surface and that the Dass parking not be pe:mitted. After nuchdebate, the Planning CoromiEsion discussed the possibility oftreating this proposal as an experinent and allow ttre applicant tohave a gravel surface on the parking lot and to also allow the nassparking. Yet at the saDe time, the planning Conmission recoumendedapproval of the site plan with staff conditions, which requiredpaving and did not allou the Eass parklng. During the discuision,staff stated that rre rrould be uncomfortable uith ipproving one setof conditions and then closing our eyes to whit rras -actually occurring on the site. We believed thit the ordinance should beenforced in a consistent manner throughout the connunity. Staffenphasized that if the planning Conrnilsion felt that thi parXinglot surface shoutd be gravel and ttrat the Dass parking sh3uld beperrnitted, that variances should be granted or th6 zonin! ordinancebe anended. Since it would be difficult to prove hardsf,ip and thePranning cornrlission did not feel that the zonlng ordinanie shouldbe arnended, the Planning cornnission, again stated that they wantedto recommend approva). uith staffrs co;ditions but to aflow theparking 1ot to be constructed as the applicant nas proposing. Redmond Products has already nade another application to addparking on their existing site which wirr also reiult in variances.staff does not support this proposal but note that itrs review nillbe scheduled before an upconing pl.anning connission neeting. rt isobvious that there is a parking^ shortage with Redmond expanting thenunber. of ernployeeF on their site and the fact nay be tiat Rednondhas outgrorrn the site. rt is dlfficult for staff to be directed toenfoice the City Code on paper but to al}ow an nexperinentr tooccur on the site vith_orrt being properly approved. therefore,staff is stirl reconmending to the crty councii ttrat the ordinancebe enforced and that the site plan be approved with staffrsconditions and that these conditions be wrrit is applied to theconstruction of the parking lot. fo clarify t-hit staff isreconmendi.ng against.the nass parking configuration being used, veare adding to Condition #1, the foJ.l-oning: f. i. . . and that the nass parkLng area proposed by the appLicantnot be pemitted. CITY COI'NCIL RECO}IIII{EIIIDATTON tThe City Councll approves of Slte plan Review Amendnent ;85-1 rriththe following conditions: 1. A revised site plan aha1l be subrnitted shorring that theparking lot shatl be paved with a 2 inch bitunin5us Dat andthat.the nass parking area proposed by the applicant not bepernitted. Redmond Parking Expansion Augrust 1, 1990 Page 6 2. The parking lot will be pernitted for three year (35 nonths)until october 31, 1993, and at which tine the area must berestored to its original condition. If the use of the parkinglot is extended beyond three years curb and gutter nust beprovided around the parking lot perineter and the site nust connect to the stora 6erer in l{est 78th Street. 3 A revised grading and landscaplng plan shall be subrnittedprovidlng the reguired berming and landscaping. I)pe III reinforced erosl.on control shall be installed at alllocations shovn on the plans prior to construction andnaintained for the life of the faclllty. A detail of Type IIIreinforced erosion control 6ha11 be shown on the plans. A concrete driveway apron (city standard) shall be installedat the entrance to the parking lot. 4 The applicant shall provide the City vith a letter of creditin an amount approved by the City Engineer to cover the costto renove all of the proposed inprovenents and restore thesite back to its original conditions. tr ATTACHI'IENTS Proposed parking 1ot p1an. Original parking lot pfan. Irleno froE Charles Folch dated July 24, 1990. llemo fron Van Sickle, Allen & Associates dated July 18, 1990. Appl ication fi-anning Connission minutes dated Augrust 1, 1990. 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 CITY OF CH[NH.lESEN UEI{ORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior planner FROM: Charles Folch, Assi8tant City Engineer DATE: July 24, 1990 SUBJ: Plan Review for Reilmonil Temporary parking Lot ExpansionFile No. 90-1.8 Land Use Review 690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 o 691111115SEN, MTNNESOTA 55317 (612) 937_1900. FAX (612) 937_s739 In order -to. improve - a 9arking facility shortage priurarilyoccurring iluring a work shift change, Redmonil prodluctsi Inc. ilproposing to lease some adjacent property to the west for aparking Io!. The parking lot irnprovemenC is proposed to be atemporary facility constructeal of crushett rock with no curb andgutter or storm sewer. The applicant has expressed a desire toconstruct the parking 1ot in this manner in order to facilitateremoval and restoration of the area rrhen the use is no longerneeded . The Ci_ty _typically requires a paved surface with curb and gutteras a fundamental design criteria for a parking lot. e iravelsurface is not desirable for a parking lot facility. thij typeof surface wiII be a constant source of erosion.' ouring iiespring thaw and at various times during the year, the 1ot wiII beyyldy "19 will require frequent naintlnance-. Snow plowing willlikeIy disturb anil disperse the gravel surface. A. masg parking scheme is proposed to naximize capacity. fhiswill force lurny cars to be 'double parked. and bloc-kect iln. Thisagain is not an ideal -condition, espeEially during an etnergencysituation. - Striping of parking stalls to maintain- organized aniloriler1yparkingj'8notfeasib1eonagrave18urface. PARI( ING DRAINAGE Ti:e existing land for this improvement drains to the north iDto aponiling basin. The grading plan for the propogecl improvement n9 Jo Ann OlsenJuly 24, 1990 Page 2 1 RECOI{.!IENDAT I ONS The applicant shall as a minimum pave a 2-inch bituminous nat over the entire parking lot antl provide barrier curb stoPsfor all perimeter parking stalls. exhibits a sheet drainage scheme to the north consistent with thepresent condition. Silt fence is shown on the plans to beinstalled north of the parking lot just south of the ponil. It is recommeniled that Iype III reinforced erosion control be installedprior to construction and maintained throughout the life of theparking lot. Existing curb will need to be removed for the entrance to the proposed parking Iot. It is recomrended that i concrete driveway apron be installed. It is my conclusion that the temporary parking lot should be paved at this time antl will not adversely affect the opportunityto levert the area back to its original condition. On JuIy 18, 1990 I conveyed the aforementioned concerns by phone to tur. Anthony Pini of van Sickle, A1len and Associates (engineer for' the applicant). Mr. Pini acknowledged ny concerns anil provided some suggestions to remedy these potential problens. lrr. Pini stressed that the applicant is arare that an ongoing naintenance progran will be necessary for the parking 1ot antlthat erosion control must be maintaineil for the life of the facility. The applicant is also proposing to install a 2-inch mat of nclearn crushed rock to control potential muddy spots. Being that the parking Iot is to be useil on a voluntary enployeeparticipation basis, the applicant does not anticipate any najor problems for egress of vehicles. Taking ttr. Pini's suggestions into consideration, I aar still concerned about a number of itens. First of all , the iaaue of emergency egress of one or more parkedl vehicles has not been adequately addressed. Subseguently, the idea of 'double" parking seems to be an inappropriate proposal . Stal1 striping is not a viable option on a gravel surface. 9{ithout stall striping it isdifficult to achieve organized and orderly parking on a regularbasis. Finally, the applicant acknowledges that an ongoing maintenance routine wouLd be necessary for a gravel Parkingsurface. However, the tine and material cost to uraintain this type of 1ot for a perioil of years rnay in fact approach or exceedthe initial cost of paving the parking 1ot. If a grave] surface is permitted, the applicant would have to enter into a maintenance agreement sith the City and providle the necessary securities. Jo Ann O1senJuly 24, 1990 Page 3 2 fype III reinforced erosion control shall be installed at alllocations shown on the plans prior to construction andmaintained for the life of the facility. A detail of 1lpeIII reinforced erosion control sha1l be shorrn on the plans. A concrete driveway apron (City standard) shalI be installedat the entrance to the parking 1ot. A maximum tiure limit of three years shall be defined for theparking 1ot. This will confirm its itemporaryi status. Ifits life is desired to be longer than thiee yLars, it shaI1be constructed with curb and gutter. The applicant sha11 proviile the City with a bond or letter ofcredit in an anount not less than the cost to remove all ofthe proposed inprovements and restore the site back to itsoriginal conditions. 3 4 CDF:ktm Gary Warren, City Engineer 5 vt'!Nt sstrtJossY i r3TrY ?DrJrS rry^llo.ilcrt.ri€r-ds II rl::II aI I I I : I itr!l I II I (9 z t oo o 14. I ,P, l!l \\ \ YJ,OSTNNI|I't13SSYHNVllC lN arcmoad oNonGS t_tt1_L- -J-- g + {d- I MASS PARKING PLAN I I( I I N il fiifiiltfiifi riIt !i rl i I i I -- .15'169 ll I I I lr B nam Il z EIlll!ilIllilil!tillt ATTACHMENT 'I1 I I t I i I I II ) tzt 16l t<t lo.l k)ttl h.,Jlt-l LOTUS (o + NEW CURB CUT RETENTION POND IrIII!arrIIIr It ***'rI Yo caFlrl UI 'o ***NEW GRA\,EL PARKING LOT 117'-O' TS,SETBACK $l+ft u o) r\.oro EXIST. ton s LOT $11+ ,tm w \..r-- ROAD t FRO NlAGE ORIGINAL PLAN PROPOS D ITE PLAN ATTACHMENT #2 SCALE: !=60 ii STATE HIGHIVAY NO. 5 I I I I I25'SETBACK VAN SICKLE, ALLEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4969 OLSON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 5S22 612/5,a1-980.. TELEPHONE CONVERSATION I{EMO m: DETE: JOB: VAA COMM. BETWEEN: NO.: Ur. Bob Cordcll iluiy 18, i990 Rednoad - Tenporary Parkiug Ipt 90.005.10 A.J. PiDi and Charles Folch, Chanhaesen Assi6taDt City Eagineer COPY TO:Richard vao Sickle cbarles Fo1ch Discussed the temporary parkiDg lot witb Folch. Thefollowing are his corunents /coocerna : 1. Folch did Dot feel that the platr as subrtritted was very desirable for the city or the owoer. 2. The city treeds to be very careful to Dot Bet the wroDg kinds of precedents . 3. The parkiog lot will be a constant aource of crogioo. 4. Tbe parking lot eurfacc sill bc muddy, uill rcquire constant roaitrteDaDce aod will be su8ceptiblc todisplacement by snow plowing. 5. Mass parking waE questiooed uitb respect to etoergeacy egress of 'blocked ia' vebicles. Consulting Engineers Civil Structural RECEIVED JUL 2 3 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1 2 3 Telephone Conversation lIemoJuIy 19, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Piui responded by suggesting that: Erosion cootrol be left ia place aad naiDtaiaed io goodconditioo perrnanently (ie. for the life of thefacility) We are propoeing a 2' thick surface of 'clear. crushedrock which will help to coatrol 'nuddy. apots. MairteDance is anticipated and will be provided by theocrner. It is certainly in the owoers interest toconduct, such raainterance. 1. A definite time limit for the u6e of the facility withan agreement to renove the lot after that time. 2. Requirenent for a bood to cover the cost of rcnoval ofthe facility. Pini thanked Folch for bis help and cooperation oD tbisnatter. I'NLESS NOTIFIED WIIIIIN 7 DAYS, AI..L ITEMS ABOVE ARE ASSI'UED TO BE CORRICT AJP /crrun v7 19phon 4. Mass parking is quite conmon and is Dot aoticipated tobe a.problem for the osner or enployees. Enployeeparticipatj.on is to be on a volultary basis. In a subsequent phone coDversation Folch iodicated tbat thecity would consider tbe propo6ed plan and nake a recornnendation to the planning Conrnission, but that therewould be certain provisions that they would recomnend beattached to the approval. These provisioog would includebut might Dot be limited to: ITXD DEVBIOEEIA APPI.ICT'rcUcrtr ol cEAraErssEr 690 Coultcr DrlveChrabacren, tllf i53t?(612) 937-1900 Redmond Products, Inc,Lotus Lawn & Garden (Ja y KroniAk) 18930 t,,. 7 8th StTeet TDDRESS 78 w. 78th St. IPPTICAI,IT: ADDRESS z P e 2) 934-48 68 19I;pEONE 949-0726 Chanhassen, [tlN 55317 zIELEPBoNE (DaytlDe) REQIIEST: x p (61 tonlng Dirtrlct CbrDEe tonlng lppcal Zoning Varilnce toning Text lDendlrnt trnil UBe Plan llleDalDeat Condlitional U3e perDlt Site Plan Rcvlce Plaaocdl Oatt Devclopncat _ Skctcb Plan_ Prcllnlnary plan _ liaal Plan Eubdlvirlon - Phttlng _ lretct rDd Bounds Etrcct./EaacD.Dt Vlcation ttctlrnar Pcrnld PROJEC? NAIiE Hedmond Products Leased Parkinq Area PRESENI I.AND OSE PIAN DESIGNAEION BH REOUESIED I,AND OSE PLA}I DESTGNASION PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING USES PROPOSED Parkinq SIZE OF PROPERIY tocAtIoN ximatel 20 000 s.F. nEASONS tOR SEIS nEOCSS Additi.onal Parking For Hedmond Ptoducts , Inc. tAcAL DESCRIpIION (Attacb lcgal ll Dce.ttrry, lil: S"t"ttPnent AsPllcltlon TIL IN G INSTR UCT IONS: TING IFT ON: SiEneat By Signeit By Drtc Applicetloa iecclyod Appltcatioa loc Delit City iccelpt tro. ?his applicatlon Eust bc conplotcd ln full lnd h. i,aar_rrr__cl.arly printed and ruii ilT:::::-:'j-:'i-1 urs Dc-tyPerrrttcn br !i it i,, inn ii.:i, il" :riii :.E,.itiltlirlii+j,*f ii$ittl: :. i;,*ixl$:.rft J;''iii:3'3iis:: :i!';:.::*,:F,!lu,liitu, iii:]!li:, !lit,i:!:iiit.ii:?3:.i*.i,::liitl"lii!0r,.!r,, f r carppltcablc City osdlDrncc!. . caD t er Drtc 7-rt '2o D!t. (-Jrl rrz<n rrn), . thlt App Board oflcat lng . ti$i::lJl:'.:i ffi:li:'$ g.*c Drraaras cinrrroa./ ?he undersigned hcreby_ ccrtl ficr . that thc lppllcant has.bacn:::::il$: to nake tlir-ippriliii#'ioi.,tbe propcrty bcrcln \ 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-s739 EH[I'IH[SSEN IqEUORANDUU TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner FROII: Charles Folch, Assistant City DATE: August 30, 199 0 SUBJ: Review of Site Plan AmeDdment Rednond Parking LotFile No. 90-18 LUR Engineer for Expansion of the CITY OF c(\H" Having reviewed the proposed site pJ.an amendnent I have a strongconcern with the relocation of the easterly entrance to theparking lot. The proposal would relocate this entranceapproximately d0 feet to the east leaving it approximately 30feet from the entrance to the adjacent pioperty- to the ealt.Although I am not aware of any specific requirements for spacingof parking 1ot or ilriveway entrances, good judgement wouldguestion the safety of allowing this situation. It should alsobe noteil that the frontage road., West ?8th Street, is locatedwithin the Trunk Highway 5 easement, thus a UnDOT access permit may need to be acguired to relocate the entrance in question. I would recommend ilenial of the easterly entrance relocation.Hovrever, if approved, I rrould also recomnend that IrtnDOT reviewanil a permit be acquired if necessary. ktm CHANHASSEN PLANNING COT,IT.,IISSION REGTJLAR }IEETING AUGiJST 15, 1990 Chairman Conrad called the meeting I,IEI.IBERS PRESENT:Ladd Conrad, TimJim tlildermuth and Joan Ahrens HEI.1BERS ABSENT:Brian BatzIi STAFF PRESENT: at 7:35 p.m Steve Emmings, Annette EI Ison, to order Erhart, Planner; and Dave Sharmi n Hempe I , Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, SeniorAI-Jaff, Planner One; Charles Folch, Asst. City Engineer;Enginner Technician Name Addr ess BiII MiIlerCraig HarringtonA. H. Hiche Is Bernie tJongJerry Gustafson David Hellerman Robert Davis Lloyd L. Oui nton James Frady Ed Hasek Hary Harr i ngton 8121 Pinewood, T i mberwood 8140 Maplehrood Terrace , Timberr"rood 247-3yd Avenue So. , I'linneapolis, t',tN 7128 Br istol Blvd . 8341 Galpin BIvd. 2112 tlinnehaha Ave, So., Hinneapolis 5512 Brookview Avenue, US West Neu,Vector2421-f6tst Avenue S.E., BeIlevue, ttA 6720 Southcrest, Edina, US l.lest Newvector 5570 Kir kdood Circle 8140 Haplewood Terrace, Timberurood Paul Krauss presented the hear i n9 to order. staff report. Ladd Conrad called the public BiIl Buehl: Mr. Chairman, my name is BilI Buehl . I'm with the planninsfirm of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban and we represenL US West Neb, VectorGroup which is the general partner of thp i.tinneapolis SHSA LimitedPartnership. I brought with me some slides that I ulould like to use in mypresentation. I think it r.ri]l make my presentation 9o faster instead oftrying to use these boards. tthat I'd Iike to do first is to review uhatcellular telephone service is because many of the technical aspects of thistelephone service impact on uhere He can Iocate this antenna so I'm goingthrough Lhis only to illustrate why we need to locate the antenna where ueare proposing to locate it nor.r. US Uest ulas created from the break up ofAT & T and I'll show you this just to shor., you the market area of the USl.lest Neu, Vector. This is a slide shor{ing the electromagnetic spectrum.I show you this because I understand there was some comment on the concetnsthat there might be interference urith this antenna u,ith other frequencyusers. As you can see on the slide, the ce]lular phone frequency is that PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERT,IIT FOR A CELLULAR TELEPHONE FACILTTY ( ANTENNA ToI.IER AND EAUIPT1ENT BUILOING) ON PROPERTY ZONED A2. AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATEO JUST EAST OF GALPIN BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF LYI.IAN BOULEVARD AND THE CHICAGO I,IILI.JAUKEE. ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD. iTINNEAPOLIS SI.ISA LII,IITED PARTNERSHIP. Zu b-l-,i,c- P r€-s.e,r! i. Planning Commission |,leeting August 15, 1990 - Page 2 Iittle green ban over on the left and that indicates that it's at a higherfrequency than alI the television and radio channels. tlhat this means fron an electromagnetic spectrum perspective is that cellular phones will notinterfere uith those users that in lor,ler frequency. However, it's possibl- sometimes that these l6wer frequency users will interfere with the ceIluIar phone so it's really our problem and we can solve that uith filters. I should also say that with me are many mernbers from US t^lest NeN Vector Grour so ue have construction engineerings and operations people with me and ifyou have detailed questions, I'd refer them to those people but I'm tryingto kind of give you a fly over of some of the technology. Cellular is very different than the conventional mobile telephone systems. This slide show:- a conventional system in a metropolitan area. The old t.tay was to find the hishest building you could find like the IDS buildins. Put your antenna on top and serve your users in a Iarge, cover the metropolitan area oith one -antenna. The drawback where you couldn't serve as very many users. The cel.Iular system geLs it's name from the creation of cells that are laid in a grid pattern across the metropolitan area. The reason that the cellular -system can handle more calls is not because of rhe cuality of radios but because of the magic of computers. Each one of these cells is created by an antenna in the middle of each ceII. Each cell can handle about 25 simultaneous calls. As you get inlo the interior of the metropolitan area,- aII you need to do is make your cells smaller. They still handle 25 simulLaneous calls and you can 9e! down to uhere your cells might only be 2 or 3 blocks in an area. t^,e're not at that point now. The Chanhassen site -is dealing with an area in Minneapolis out in this area. So that's t,,here the name comes from. The uay it works, maybe you already know this or you have a phone in your car or a hand held phone. tlhen you're withi.n range of- the antenna that's in the ceII, then you can talk to the system, The system then can talk to any phone in the world so you can be standing out in the field or in your tractor or in your car and talk to any other ]andline phone or any other cellular phone in the world as long as you're -near an antenna and have coverage. As you move from ceII to cell, the computers automatically switch you to the antenna that can give you the best reception. So this is the cellular phones from a series of cells across the metropolitan area. The importance of this is that the cellulargrid system gives a blueprint. There's a blueprint of the grid system ofthe metropolitan area. The importance of that grid system is that it allows us to build the least amount of antennaes and therefore have Lhe Ieast amount of land use impacts. If we cannot place a cell antenna where we need it, then !.re may have to go find two other sitss to cover the one coverage area that we could have done with one site if we have to move the -antenna. So that's the importance of thi ceII system. This shor,ls the system that's currently built by US ].,lest New Vector in the metropolitanarea. I don't think we're going to get much out of this graph but here'sSt. PauI . Here's Minneapolis. This is the area that US [.,est New Vector croup and Cell One, by Federal laur there have to be two carriers, areIicensed. In one aspect, these little red dots show existing antennaesthat are up in the Twin Cities area. US tlest Neu, Vector has about 33 at the present ti.me and the one important aspect of the license is that inorder to retain the Iicense, US tlest Neu Vector must fill out their coverage area so we're getting a lot of pressure to hold our license. ].le must fiII out our coverage area. So that's uhere the pressure is comingfrom. And this is a maturi system uhere we have antennaes in all your cells and you have complete coverage. In the Twin Cities we don't have Planning Commission l4eeting Ausust 15, 1990 - Page 3 complete coverage in every area. t^le have some coverage but not all thesecovered so ure are trying to fiII in some of this grid that we need to fiIIin in order to fill out our coverage area. And in order to locate the cellmany aspects are taken into account. Topography is very important.Existing towers. Especiall.y AM towers. t,e have to be aware of allfrequency and airuaves that are being used. Ue look at existing h,atertanks if we can. There's one very close in this search area. However cellone already had that Bater tourer and we could not locate it there becauseof the interference problems so many factors are taken into account andexactly what's in that cell, where tre're going to locate the touer. Inthis area here, a close up of that map I showed you earlier that youcouldn't read very welI. tle have existing antennaes in Shakopee, Shoret^rood, and out by Cologne. Now we have coverage problems in herebecause of the terrain, This is a topographic map. you can see that it isa very hillv area and you're well aware of that living here but we neededto locate a celI inbetween these tuo and drift this way a little bit andthis is the area that it was very clear that this was t.he place that thecell had to be located. This shours the search area. The more exact map ofwhere our engineers and where the compuLer indicated where we needed tolocate the antenna. This circle shows only where the antenna needs to belocated. The coverage area would be much larger of course so you can seethat it's centered right here in this agricultura.L area. The city ofchaska here. The city of chanhassen over here. Ne had another factor inthis in that we could not uork urith United relephone uho owns the land rinesvstem on lhis side of the solid black line. tJe had to stay in the us Uestservice area with our antenna. t^le need to hook up this system to a landlock svstem to transmit to all the landlock phones so again it shifted thesearch area right into this area and it's a very small area as almost aIIour search areas are. once the search area is decided and a specific siteis chosen, as in this case a specific site was chosen on the VoIk property,more tests need !o be done to get a more exact equipment proposals. Inthis case the height of the tower. The number of...type of antenna wereall factors that need to be finarized. For this application we were underthe impression that 125 feet was going to be taII enough to give useffective coverage. tle had to get our application in on by a deadline rbelieve August 7th but r.re could not have our final engineering runs done bythat time. Nor., we learned in just this past r.leek that our engineers aretelling us the most effective size would be 175 feet so I'm asking that wecan amend our application for a conditional use permit to go to the 175feet instead of 125 feet. The reason for that is r.re just couldn't getenough... So here is a picture of the coverage area. I'd like to get somenotes over here. I don't know if you've'driven by this area. This islooking basically northeast. Huch of the search area is shown by thisslide. You ean see it's agricultural in nature. There are some larger Iotdevelopments to the north. That's Ridgewood and to the east. Krauss: Timberuood. BilI Bueh}: f'm sorry, Timberwood and the one to the east ulas. Krauss: Sunridge Court. BilI Buehl: But the site does meetIt is in an agricultural district.alI The Iocal area of the oran9e zoning r equ iremenLs shor^,s the ag distr ici . PIanni ng Commission Meeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 4 The pink areas are in this case industrial districts. tle're in an agdistrict where this type of facility is permitted by conditional use as PauL told you. AIso, Section 20-919 requires that telephone equipmentbuildings be landscaped. Have a hard surfaced driveway and meet all setbacks which xe do urith this proposal . This is a site plan of ouy 2 7,/2acre site. These are existing trees which wiII stay. These are trees tha! we propose to plant in a landscaping plan. This is the building and this -is the tower right here. On this plan ure were still operating under theproposal of 125 foot tor.,er which easily meets the setbacks for tower heish.setbacks. The setbacks are supposed to be equal to the tower height by the ordinance unless it can be shown that the tower collapses in a progressive- manner and in this case, this is a self support tower, But if we go to th' 175 foot tower, we're stil], ue have a 33O x 33O x 33O parcel . l.le wouldonly be 10 feet over the line if it uere to fall in a straight line. Thes,- towers don't fall in a straight line. It's a self support tower and i!'s much stronger than a guide tower and if the touer ever would fail, if it would take a direct hit from a tornado or some other great catastrophic -even! such as that and even then if it failed, they're built to go over instead of falling over. One Link that's not quite as strong as the rest and the touer just crumples on itself. So still we could meet the setbackof the requirements even with the 175 foot tower on the parcel tha! we hav,-at this time. I need to go through the compliance and issuance ofstardards of a conditional use permit. I']I do this as quickly as I can.I'd like to show the distance away from the surrounding structures. This -is an aerial that 1 inch equals 2OO foot aerial photo. Our site is here. Can everybody see that? It's probably hard to see. The closest buildingis across in the industrial park. It is 1,O50 feet auray. This is the closest structure. The closest residence is 1.1OO feet away so we'refairly far away from any existing structure. The standard is that thefacility will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or.general uelfare of the neighborhood. Again this ir.a safe structure. It's a tourer that is one of Lhe safest built. It is aself supporting, I do have a letter from the manufacturer of the towerthat outlines the collapsing pattern. I sau, in our packet that r.le submitted that we had submitted a letter regarding a guide tor.,er. ThisIetter regards the self support tower and should be entered. The nextstandard, the cellular facility will be consistent with the objectives ofthe city's comprehensive plan. The only comprehensive plan in force atthis time i.s the 2ooo plan which still earmarks this as agricultural .That's the only guide that we could go by for this project so He are apermitted conditional use in an agricultural zone so again this is thecurrent plan. It's zoned agricultural and the comprehensive plan zones thi: as agricultural . Even if this was a residential zone, as Paul eluded to,it's my interpretation of the StaCqte that it's still a conditional use. -I'd Iike to pass Lhese out to all the members. Mr. Chair if f may. Thisis an abstract of your ordinance given telephone equipment buildinss.There's 3 parts of the ordinance that I'd like to address. First of all, Section 20 aL the top. 2o-9L9 provides a telephone equipment buildings arr- allowed in all zoning districts as a conditional use. That includesresidential, ag, industrial, every zone so in this case, this is a telephone equipment building. It has telephone switching and cellular -telephone radio that urill Qe in the buildins. This is uhat it looked Iike And also the next Section 20-915 allows antennaes sha]I be permitted as accessory uses uithin alI zoning districts so ure have a telephone equipmen! Planning Commission Meet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 5 building and then an antenna as an accessory use of that building, permitted in aII districts. Permitted under a conditional use permit so even if this uras a residential area, we uould still be here 9oin9 through this sameprocess which is an application for a conditional use permit. The nextstandard that I need to address is that the facility will be designed,constructed and operated and maintained so it uill be compatible with the appearance of existing intended character of the general vicinity. Againthis is this area. The essential character of this area is formulated bythe railroad tracks, the county highray, the a9 land and the manyindustrial uses across Lhe road. This tower will have a thin profile asyou can see here and many times after these towers are up, they aren'!noticed by people in the area. I think PauI eluded to that in theMinnelonka area, In fact I challerige you to when you go to work tomorrouror lcok around where you live. If you start looking up, you'Il sLartnoticing rnany antennaes you didn't knotl where there and we've had manypeopLe tell us about that experience. The top of the tower uill look morelike this. This is the antenna ray that we'II be using instead of the oneI showed earlier. This dish wiII not be there. This is a CeII One antennaat Baker Road and 494. This one is 160 feet right off 494. I'm sure manyof you drive by this as you drive into town to go to work or other uses.The facjlity, the next standard, the facility uill not be hazardous ordisturb exisling or planned neighborhood use. Cellular is a very lowpowered system. This graph shows the millowatts per square centimeter r^rhich is this por,rer density measure. This is the American Nationar Sciencernstitute standard of what's a safe level of exposure to these mi llowattsper square meter. It's just again a higher density m€iasurement. As you cansee, Cellul.ar has a very Iow powered sysLem. your cordless phone, the onesyou can use in your home right now with an antenna on inside your house,has more power density than Cellular phone. Hand held CB has more thantwice as much. You're in much more danger if you stand 2 feet from your microwave oven in your kitchen than you will experience from this ceLlular,The next standard is the cellular facility urill be served adequately bystreels, pol ice, fire prolection. Conrad: Bill, excuse me. A lot of these sLaff istelling us stuff that they've already agreed. in support so you're BilI Buehl: But they don't agree with some things. Conrad: And I thi nk agreement, you know. you should hit those but the ones where you're in BilI Buehl: Okay. t^lell I'd like to enter my presenLation into the recordbut I'II skip over those parts. Okay, I'II skip down to the surroundingproperty values. Is there any more questions on the site plan? I'tl skipover that part Mr. Chair if you desire. Conrad: The only thing that setbacks and you don't basedproposi ng - I'd suggest is you're saying that you meet theon the height of the tourer that you're now BiII BuehI:At 125 175 you or !75? don 't .Conradr At Planning Commission Heeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 5 BiII Buehl: can be shown NeIl that we would because your ordinance allows less setback if it-the tower collapses in a progressive manner. Conrad: And you didn't did you? BiII Buehl: Yes. This tower if it Conrad: I read that and I guess I it goes over . . .the Ietter. get that same feeling. to be expanded to 350 by 35o only 20 feet off.BiIl Buehl: or which the owner property simplywillins to do so the is fails, didn't needs we're Conrad: But that. PauI ? at this point in time, I guess I wasn't persuaded that you met Krauss: Hr. Chairman, clearly they're information in that regard could have been more Limely but I've worked with similar Lowers in the past and I've s,een fjlms that have shown tor",ers that have gone through tornadoes an<- they do snap in the middle and just fold over. In the past I've construed that to be consistent with that collapsing progressively designation. BilI Bueh] r I might also add that the greatest and massive part of this toter.js in the ground. There's very massive footings lhat 90 very deeP into the ground with tons and tons of cement that holds it in Place so I lhink we've met the requirement for the setback. Again, if needed hre can expand the amount of property so that it doesn't go, even in a straight Iine scenario, it r^rould be orr the property. Then I'd like to address the depreciation of surrounding properLy values. The sLaff rePort indicated that the proposed residential development around this site would be deterred by this touJer. I think there are many examples around the Twin Cities where people have built houses almost underneath taller antennaes. -This is an array of antennaes in Eagan. These houses were built after the antennaes were constructed and you can see they're very much in fulI view of the antennaes. In this case, this is a picture taken looking north toNards the residences. tJe tried to get as ]or,r as we could to show you what the view would be above these trees. This tree is about 112 feet so we're about half again higher than that tree. But sLill you can see that the closest residence is one in these trees, cannot see the tower. The closer you are if you have trees around it, of course you can't see the antenna, By the time you can start seeing the antenna, you're far enough aray where it would be just a very thin line on the horizon. Again the areas in the Twin Cities, okay this is t^thite Bear Township r.,here neul housing developments are going up right next to a tower much taller thanthe one we're proposing and very much uithin vieur. Also in our packet you included a letter from Peter Patchin that did a study for us on...tower an(- is very conclusive that the presence of antennaes does not depreciate the value of residential or industrial property. Again there's another picture showing houses that are very close to that tor.rer in Eagan which is a much -higher t.ower and transmitter facility and these are much netrer houses that were built there after lhe antenna was put up. Are there any questions? I'd like to reserve the right to respond to comments... conrad: Ne usually always Iet that happen, yes. Planning Commission f,leet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 7 BiII BuehI: Thank you . 8i11.Conrad: Thank you comme nts ? Bill HilIer: Most ofgoing to be very weII It is a public hearing. Are there any other these came up done in order conrad: tJhy don't you give us your name. BiIl HiIIer: My name is Bil.LHiIIer. I live at 8121 pinewood Circle inChanhassen. f guess I just have some questions. you said there was noeffect on television or radio reception. Is that trithin a certain distanceor absolutely none? You're not going to start seeing lines on yourtelevision or somelhing like that? Bill BuehI: Absolutely none. Hr. Chair, I,dto the engineers that are here from US l^,est.Operations Hanager in Hi nneapolis. while he uas speaking so they're notor anyLhing Iike that. Iike to defer that question This is Dave Hellerman, the Dave HeLlerman: As far as interference,of sites, we've never had any complaints.anyLhing like that. no. There is none.Interference with [.Je have atelevision lot or BiIl l.lilIer: Hor^r about cordless telephones? Dave HelLerman: No. They operate on more i mmu rre than television.a much Iower frequency. They're even Birl Miller: okav. I guess the next question is, how do you determine theheight? tJhy does it have to be 125, 17S and along that same line, whycan't it be 6,0? Are there alternatives where you could put a 40 foot towerup if it costs tr^rice as much? That type of thing. you can put a 5O foottouer on your roof but you can go out and buy a power antenna for your roofloo that's a Iot shorter . Dave Hellerman: Let me explain. The first order of magnitude for thetower is how large a circle we need to cover. Obviously the higher it getsthe larger the coverage circle you,ll get. In this case trre have someproblems because of the hilliness of the terrain uhich BiII mentioned. r'msure you're al.I aware of that. That's one of the things Lhat makes thisProperty residential area, and there are some holes that don't set filledvery wel]. Some low spots. That hilly terrain. It's beautiful . It'sdifficult to get radio waves across the perimeter so that when ue starteddoing a specific program that does estimates of the signals strength every 1OO feet. On a 1OO foot grid and it found too many holes at 125 feet toget the kind of thorough coverage that we need so people when they'redriving a1on9 in their cars up and down don,t lose our signal. We just found that we needed a Iitt]e more than we originally thought. The crudeestimates that He started uith. Bill lliller: Sortseveral 50 footersfoot site? I mean of going down the same line. Is the alternative to havethen? I mean are there alternatives to putting up a 175if you're in a city, ),,ou've got all these cel.ls getting Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 8 smaller and smaller aII the time. Dave Hellerman: Yes, we certainly could get of 50 foot towers. It uould be, I'd have to on the order of 8 to 10 short towers and then and ue have to multiply the equipment by 8 to gets . the same coverage with a ]ot see a map but it'd probably be_ we've got 8 to 10 facilities 10. The uhole thins just Bill Hiller: I understand. I just wondered is it possible. Dave Hellerman: In theory, yes. IL is possible. BiIl Miller: Okay, and then another guestion. If the pace of technology and ceLlular telephone seems to be changing pretty quickly in general and Idon't know a lot about it but I know a little bit about it and you know, -for the next question is, how about the timing of urhat you're doing. tJhy are r.re needing to do this right now? f knor.r you said ),ou had to fill outyour charter or r^Jhatever it was to fill out your area. tlhat is the exacttiming of when you have to fill that out? Is it next month? Is it ayear? Is it 1999? 2OL4? And uhy do you have to do it right notr? Bill Buehl: It's October , 1990. BiI]it's Hiller: So why did this come up so short, aII of a sudden then ifthat near ter m? BiII Buehl: tle u,ould have liked it. BilL Miller: So by october , 1990 ifcell you're going to Iose something? Bi]l Buehl: tJell we need to fiII out t',lary Harrington: tlhat happens if you Bill Buehl: Then the, I guess the FCCpretty much . . . Bill Mil.Ier: Nhat about all these you don't have something set in this our coverage . . . don 't? would review our license but ure're other areas that you shoned not being. Sha kopee .Bi I I Buehl : l,,te have some coverage . Bill Miller:Yeah, that's what I Right. There is. So if you didn't put was assuming. BiII BuehI: BiIl MilIer: anything? this up, you're not going to ]ose BilI Buehl: You'11 have poor coverage and no capacity. oave Hellerman: There's a percentage isn't the onLy thing we're doing. tJe that we're working on simultaneously. and I think you knotr, this know quite a few projectsjust one of them. criteria have you This is Planning Commission Meeting August 15, 1990 - Page 9 Bill Hiller: I'm just trying to see the criticality of this issue. I'mtrying to understand. Okay. Dave Hellerman: We've been Norking on this for quite a b,hile. It's not something that came up ),esterday that ure have to do tomorroul . Bill Miller: okay but when he said Oclober, it sounded like all of asudden. You know ue're August. That's only 2 months. That sounded pretty serious. tlhat is the area thaL's going to be served currently by thistower and how long is it goins to last before you need another one? Dave Hellerman: This tower will serve approximately a 3 mile radius.Again there's some terrain considerations but that's roughly speaking,abouta3mileradius. BiII t-,til ler: And how many concurrent users is it going to be capable of? BilI Buehl: You've got 25 simultaneous calIs. Bitl Hiller: fs that based on the equipment on the ground and then you canadd additional units on the ground wieh one tou,er? I mean is it going to 9o 25,50,75 or are you going to have to have more towers? Dave HeIlerman: tle can expand this up to the point u,here it would coverabout E,O calls roughly. t',taybe a little more than that. That of course depends on the technology. There is technology today on the horizon thatmight allou us to serve a lot more calls without any physical change in thestrudture . That's trhat we're hoping. Bill Mil]er: So how long is this, r.lhen are you going to reach the 50then? Uhat is your plan say? tlhen do you really need this facility righthere and when is it going to be filled up? Oave Hellermanr The rate of growth of our whole industry is beyond, thiswhole industry has existed about 6 years. The rate of growth is surprisingto aII of us at various times you know so roughly speaking, and againwithout knowing what the future holds, ue're doubling our capacity every 18months. Something Iike thht. I r.lish I could give you better estimates butit 's aI1... Bill Miller: I understand. So what do you do in 18 months? tJhat happensin 18 months? Dave Hellerman: tle]I we will be adding other cells. ]^thether the focuswill be out here as much as in the city is something that we have yeL todetermine. I'1I point out one other item that is important to us in thatit gives some exLra urgency to this particular project is the U.S. Opengolf tournament is being held down the road next spring and that adds alittle extra. That's certainly not the sole reason for putting ourbuilding in but it did put up the flags that we needed the capacity here. Those kinds of evenLs put a Iot of users on this Bill Buehl: BilI. I'd just like to say one thing about... I tried makinga calI right ue there by the HcGIynn's Bakery site and my phone didn't PIanning Commission MeeLing August 15, 1990 - Page 10 work. Couldn't get out of the area because we didn't have the BiIl MilIer: tleIl that happens nothing new. I know but that'snothins to do with Chanhassen. to me everytime I go to LA too.not some deficiency right here. capacity. That's That 's Dave Hellerman: ...we're not always perfect and bre do the best we can. BiII MiIIer: tlhy already that high some problem with not use the Chaska u,ater touer or somethingwith something smaller and less noticeable? that? ex isti n9 Is there BilI Buehl: Because Cell One is already on that toi.,er. That's their antenna right next to it. BiIl MilIer: Nhere? In Chaska? BiII Buehl: Yeah, the BilI Mi ller: How about somewhere don't ule? Is somebody on it a 1r eady? Chaska tourer - the one , do we something urrong have a u,rater tower r i ght upwith this one or does that her e ha ve Conrad: That's outside the area. BiIl Buehl: ft's outside the search area. BiIl Hiller: So that search area literally had to be that little square foot piece of land? l,Jhat if something was already there?that was already a big building? 1,OOO tJhat i f Mary Harrington: ...everybody's done back here, what wouLd you have done then? Ne'd have to go through the conditional use permit in that Bill Hiller: tlhat if there t.las one big plant there? Do you put one right -up in the middle of a plant? BiIl Buehl: oh yeah. [.Je have ma ny r ight sites the roof .- BiII MiIler: So you'd pop it antenna sites right on top of on top of somebody? currently in South HinneapolisBill Buehl: And ue al.so havevery tense residential area. Bill t'liller: You mentioned you couldn'twith US Telephone to move it otherurise. rn a ma ke t^l hat a deal or somethins ]ike that- was the problem there? BilI Buehl: I'm not sure of the details. I just knord that it nas out ofthe question. Mary Harrington: Based on your side or based on their side? Bill Bueh]: distr ict . Planni ng Commission l.,leeting August 15, 1990 - Page 11 Bill BiII Bi I I area Bi l1 BiII Buehl: Hil ler : Buehl: a nyuray . MiLler: Buehl: Bi l1 t1i)ler: choose to? I don't know the details. l.thy couldn't you get the. . . tlosL of our search area was in the US !.lest Telephone service Does that mean that you have the pot^ler to stop this if you dav I'm just trying to see why. These are good questions. I can understand your concern. BiII Hiller: f guess f have a question for someone up here. tlhat doesconditional use permit mean? rs that going to take too Iong to understand? Con)-ad: It just means t,e have conditions. Basically they can,t havesomething unless they meet the conditions. Conrad: If they don't meet the conditions. Bill Hiller: Okay. Are the conditions, the conditions that exist thethey appl.y f or it or can conditions be changed? I'm just r..rondering. Conrad: There's some vagueness in the conditions. Bill Miller: f have a couple more, Am I taking too much time? Conrad: Go ahead. BilI Hiller: I saw what the tower looked like. When you putpicture of that one I guess you said was near 494, How tall up u,,a s that that? BiIl Buehl: I believe, PauI you'd know. t6O? r{ith off of Eaker Road's 185 feet tall.Krauss: The one that I'm familiarIt sits down in kind of a gully. BiII Buehl: I don't really knou. Bil] Miller: I just want to make sure that we're looking at somethingthat's really r.lhat ule're going to see. you say there are no health affectsor safety affects and you're certain that that tower wouldn't hi! an extra10 feet and smash a car going down the road down that 10 foot side? Bill Buehl: I'd Iike to refer thepreity clear in there. Ietter that I submitted. I think it's Dave Hellerman: It takes a pretty severe naturalfaII over. If it were, and it's a long shot to go BiII Miller: WeIl I understand that butand things do happen on occasion. event. over . They don't just bridges do faII in once in a while PIanning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page !2 Dave Hellerman: It would be during a tornado or somethins like that which-you would...warning BilI Miller: Don't we have The area that's going to be around here sometimes? Just this you said uras 3 miles? tor nadoes served by kiddins- Dave Hel lerman: Roughly. BilI Hiller: So somebody in HinneapoJ.is isn't going to ever be using something Iike. It's not something that could be used for a distant or someone who's in a Shakopee cell trould never be tacked onto this one or somethi ng Iike that? Dave Hellernran: The idea of ce]Iular is to so you can reuse the previous...so our goal to. . . I imitis to the coverage of each Iimit it to r,rhere it ceIL has BiII Buehl: I'd like to add that the cell will service the local communit)- as much as users of TH 5 and the new planned IH 2L2. I believe they're very close to the coverage itself and ceLlular phones have become more and more potrular and they're becoming an imporlant factor that people consider -when they look for a place to live. ..,developments I've heard talked about in this area are the houses are...cellular phone. Haybe you use cellular phones yourself . BiII HiIIer: No I don't. BiIl Buehl: They're becoming more and more popular and they're going to br- used for much more than voice transmission and if you don't have the circuitry in place. There are many appliances that you can plug into this circuit and it's Iike saying that cellular phones are for voice lransm jssiorrs Iike that on the computer... llany, tuany uses coming down thr pi ke that, circuitry . , . Conrad: Anything else BiII? BiII Hiller: I think Oh, and one last one. 112 feet tall? I'm about done. I'm just The trees in that little checking my long list here. area. You said they uere - BiII Buehl: Yes. BilI Miller: That's not elevation of the trees there were 112 feeL tall? BiII Buehl: Risht. The poh,er posLs, that uhole string of high power lines, those vary. They're around 1OO. Some are a little bit taller, Some are a little bit shorter. They're between 95 and 11O. BiII Hiller: Okay. As far as a couple of other things I guess. The fact that they're not noticed. I guess I'd make a point obviously that if underthe comprehensive plan homes are built there, it's definitely going to be -noticed by someone that's much closer. Haybe if you're 2,OOO feet aHay yot don't notice it every minute. I don't notice the chaska water tower every day but people come visit us alulays ask us about it but if it were a block Planning Commission Meeting August 15, 1990 - Page 13 abrav, you 'd certainly notice it r would think. or half a block or 2 brocksor 3 bl-ocks. As far as decline of property values, I guess you can do allsorts of studies to prove numbers but I guess I'd just make the point thatit has some effects. I can tell you I probably wouldn,t buy a house thatwas right next to one which would certainly lotrer thd potential value ofthat house. r guess r uould agree with Paul's recommendation at least nowto deny it and at least give time to investigate some of these things whichr would like to investigate to make sure some of these things are accurate.I'm not denying that they are. I just want to ]ook into it and see and toconsider some of these other items and go vrithout validating some of thesethings. r don't think it's consistent with the land use h,e talked about atthe last comprehensive plan and it might also affect property values andtax values of whatever has to be pu! in there. That's aII. Thank you. Conrad: Thanks BiII. Are there other comments? l.lary Harrington: Hi, I'm Hary Harrington and I l j.ve up in Timberwood andI have the highest piece of properLy in Timberwood too and you bet yourbippv r could see it if they put it over there. r'm about a quarter milenorth of them. Of the 84 people ulho signed the petition for thesurrounding area to be included as single family residential, if you willrernbmber that month and a half ago, whenever it Has, the petition Baspresented tha! affected the area of that. Almos! 5oz of the folks r.Jere notfrom the Timberr,.rood area but of the ones that are from the Timberwood areaand the ones that are down on Galpin. I had a chance to speak to ltrs.Jerome carlson and the Gustafson's and a feu, other folks. some of thesefolks are on vacation at this moment, Oh, and some of them were verydisgruntled and frustrated but did not wish to show up. Gotten apathetichere r guess but Mrs. carlson said that if there's a petition out, that shewishes to sign it to the effect that we are not interested in having atower that at the time, you kno!4 12S feet. I own a 2 story house and soI said my 2 story house is 24 feeL tall so if I piled up 5 of my houses fr.lould be that height of that tower. Now I've got to pile up 7 of them andI said that's nothing that I h,ant in lhe surrounding area. I think it'snot consistent with the housing area. There is some conditional usegrandfathered in. rtems across the street from it urhich nobody wishes tosee 9o industrial in tha! little area either which is south of JeromeCarIson. The Gustafson's who are the closest property to this one, whenthey found out about it they did not get any notification on it and theydidn't read the paper, they were appalled at the thought. They did not r^rish to see it either because I mean ii's obviously visually going to benoticeable and it just doesn't seem compilible and the houses, I meanthere's no way you're going to sit and put Landscaping around this thingtand block it off. I mean it's just too tall and I'd like to see this putinto an area ulhere the existing area is industrial existing at the present.tlhere something like this should belong ConYad: Okay. Any comments? Jerry Gustafson: Can I speak from here? Conrad: Yeah. Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 14 Jerry Gustafson: Yeah. I would like to address i,lrs. Harrington and saythat the Gustafson's. Conrad: As long as you give us your name and address. Jerry Gustafson: Jerry Gustafson. Mary Harrington: I spoke to your wife. Jerry Gustafson: And that ue're not apathetic. Hary Harrj.ngton: Your wife was appalled. Jerry Gustafson: I have a couple of questions. Number one is, you know the tallest tor.:er in l,linneapolis years ago was the Foshay ToHer so it'sjust fu]I of anlennaes, t^lhy isn't there room for one more anLenna on the water tot.rer there in Chaska? fs one antenna, does that fill it up? BiIl Buehl: Yeah, in this case it's way over on the edge of the search area. I don't think that uJater tower is in the search area. It's also in the LJnited Telephone's district and I believe Cell one has the antenna right next to it and we r.rould interfere with one another on the same frequency ban. You can't be thac close. So u,e can't locate there because of frequency interference and telephone phone Iines. ..prohibition. tJe woull rnuch rather be on the water tohrer if ule can. tle uould rather not have to build a tower structure. Jerr> Gustafson: I r.rould think thaL urould be ideal for you on the urater tower. Bill Buehl; And we are on many water toh,ers. Jerry Gustafson: The other thing is, can call from like Hopkins to my home uhatever, l^!hy do we need a new tower Iittle small area that you've got. I have a hand and I have no right there? held telephone and I problem in r ecept i on You can get into that or BiII Buehl: I'm not sure what kind of Jerry Gustafson: Hotorola that I or anything. Just hold it. telephone hold. There's no antenna on the carjust BiII Buehl: I should maybe ]et Dave ansL,er that. Dave HeIlerman: There are some areas where ue have coverage problems inthe area here. f can 90 through them on the map... The other thing is, asthe system expands, ue need more and more cells t.o provide the same quality of coverage as there are more and more users because what happens is you have more and more users on the same frequency and unless we have antennaes close to the users in this area, they r.ron't be able to get the same interference free reception. That's kind of the grourth u,e were discussing.- [.re r.,,ere discussing grouth. So as we have more users, ure need more sites tc maintain lhe same cuality of service. Planning Commission Meeting August 15, 1990 - Page 15 Jerry Gustafson: It doesn't matter how many users you've got. The samesite will handle as many-.. Dave Hellerman: No. There's a limit on a site. Bettreen 30 and SOdepending on hour it's bden figured internally. The site b,on't support aninfinite number of users. Jerry Gustafson: So you,re counting on a number of more users usingtelephones tb call into that area and that's uhy you need the tou,er? Dave Hellerman: rt's users in that area who want to use their portab).e ormobile telephone rike yours. People can calI land rines in that area. rsthat urhat you're, or am I mi su nder standi ng you? Bill Buehl: Hr. Gustafson, do you have a cellular phone? This Hotorola,is that a celluLar? Jerry Gustafson: Yeah , Bill euehl: And you're saying that when you,re home you can cal]. Jerry Gustafson: No. Like when I,m in Hopkins where I r.lork, I can caII,urhen f leave, from inside my car and there's no antenna on the car oranything and f have no problem calling home. It's nice and clear. Dave Hellerman: That's going on the wires to your home. That,s on thetelephone urires into your home. I mean you're in Hopkins. Jerry Gustafson: No, no. I'm calling from inside my car. Dave Hellerman: Right. But the connecti.on into your home...that's onwires in this area. EIIson: The antenna's in Hopkins then? Dave Hellerman: The antenna is close to where he's calling. Ellson: tlhat you need is the antenna from uhere you,re placing the callfrom. Dave Hellerman: Rieht. From uhere vou'ye serving the cellular telephone,correct.. I apologize if I misunderstood.' Jerry Gustafson: Well the only other comment I guess I,d tike to make isI know people build houses next to objectionable sites and I don,tunderstand r^rhy they do that. put a TE2OO,OOO.OO home next to a sb,amp orsomething. r don't know but to put something there that is objectional andthen offer a residential area, you know put $2OO,OOO.OO homes on it, Idon't think would be, . . I just don,t think. . - Conrad: Good. Thanks for your comments. Other comments? Craig Harrington: I've just got a couple of quick questions. CraigHarrington. Maplewood Terrace in Timberr.rood Estates. A couple of Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 15 ques+-ions that I have that, my concern that, I don't have a cellular phone -but I'd probably Iike one and hope maybe someday to maybe get one and I se(the technology is something that's growing and needed but with that I have6 concern that 5 years from now and BiIl, some of the other uses that you -use for this Iike computers and things like this, are r.Je going down theline and I guess these are the concerns that I have and the hesitency thatf have saying that the City should endorse something Iike this. Are wegoing to be staring at a 2OO foot tower or a 3OO foot touer 5 years from now or multiple toh,ers on that site? And then perhaps increasing po!^rer or something like that or maybe other uses for towers that may be coming intoplay where interference could be a factor. The real concern I have there -was, f uas in a home one time that uras next to the ones on 35-t, in Bloornington. My goodness, I walked into that home and just urent dou:n intothe basernen!. I'm a real estate appraiser and walked through the basement -and the pipes riere literally singing country western music and it rea]Iy !.Jas a concern. I know that you approach this t^thole area Lhat this is not somethj ns that's going to interfere but I guess maybe right at this mcment it isn't but is it going to sometime in the future and I guess that's myconcern. I Con't think anybody can maybe guarantee unless you really have some technology of what's going to be happening in the future. Dave Hellerrran: I can tell you what we do know. First of all, I used to work at th6t station on 35-tJ a long time ago. That was before they liked country rrusic but in any case, the nice thing about cellular system from the :tend2oir:t of your concerns is that as the system grows, the sites becorne lourer and the pouer actually gets smaller because you want more and more snaller celIs. ThaL's how ue increase the capacity so uhen uJe started out buildj.ng this sytem, .^,e u,ere bui.lding tourers of 3OO !o 4OO feet. Now -in sorne of the peripheral areas we're still doing that where we're coverin(for miles. Cologne is 25O or 3OO? 485? Okay. But as u,e increase the density of our users, we're able to make the toh,ers smaller and Lhe toeers -lower becauee we don't r.,ant the cells to be bigger . l.Je want then to be srnallei' and that's the direction that we're going in, So that while it'spossible that this area's growth continues at, by this area I mean Chanhassen, Chaska. If grourLh continues Iike r.re've been seeing, we may need more towers, they will be smaller and Lower and eventually we'l] bedoins, we see a day when ue'II be on top of 60 foot telephone poles. Something like that Craig Harrington: t,iIl higher buildings obstruct that uhere they may have to go higher? Bill l{iller: f have a question. Have you ever... Dave Hellerrnan: t^le are doing that. Yeah, we are currently in the middle of a program to do that. tle actually are doing on in Arden Hil]s where ue'lI be putting on the shorter one within the r.ree k but ule do have planning Dave He]Ierman: No. What we're doing in areas that have a lot ofbuildings, we just end up going on the rooftops. Unfortunately there are no single buildings that...but at some point that might become a realistic - way to 9o but to answer you. t^le're not getting higher or bigger . [,le'regetting lor^rer and smaller as the system grows so I really don't see thepotential for uhat you're concerned utith. Planning Commission Meeting August 15, 1990 - Page 77 for the next year, there are severalto L or.rer thein down, yes. tJe're kindindustry but that is happening. that we are doing that. tle are goingof new at this too. ft's a new Conrad: Are there other comments?the public hear i n9? Anything? Is there a motion to close Conrad:start at Er hart : zoning. and north Ue'll go aroundyour end. the Planning Commission for comments. Tim, we'll Paul, on the map, the area to the, you're concerned aboutThe area directly to the u,est of that south site, south ofof the tracks. What's that going to be? future cR 18 Krauss: "lell this is based of course on the draft thatto pul,lic hearing. The way the draft is right nour. ue're going to ta ke Erhart: can you draw a line, uJhere,s industrial and commercial? Krauss: This area is all residential . The area that is proposed not to beand also this area is residential . The area that's proposed not to be arethese properties here, here, here and here. Erhart: Okay, those are bll industrial . Krauss: On the current draft, yeah. Erhart: And you're basing your denialthere, that penninsula is intended for on the fact that that point downresi dential? Krausg: Correct . Er har t:this . . . How do you weigh their inLerpretation of the ordinance alLor.rs Krauss: Those are some of the ambiguities of the ordinance that r eludedto earlier. I think possibly Jo Ann can expand on this but several years ago there was an attempt to deal with antennaes affecting, well ham radioantennaes and satellite dishes tha! lrere the current rage and the languagein there is not as explicit as ue woul.d like it and I think can bemisinterPretted and through a series of m is i nterpretat ions extended back inthe analogy that that's being used. I think it's a rea] stretch and theordinance also Provides that uhere there's conflicts trithin the ordinance,because ordinances are cumbersome anyh,ay and there ofter are conflicts, themost restrictive determination is Lhe one that shall apply and lastly,based on the advice of the City Attorney, I didn't get a chance to reviewthis last bit of information with him yet this afternoon but r wilr, but inspeaking to him previously, he advised us to clear up the ambiguities thatwe kneur about already in the ordinance, To clarify that and we have anintent to do so. Emmings moved, l.lirdermuth seconded to close the pubric hearing. Al.l votedin favor and Lhe molion carried. The public hearing nas closed- Planning Commission Meeting August 15, 1990 - Page 18 Erhart: Can you show me what line is the ambiguity? Krauss: A couple of things. equipment bu i ldi ngs . 20-979.upstairs and the intent there US tJest . NSP . First of all when you 90 to telephone The intent there, and ue've got the file b,as to deal with regulated utilities. Er hart r Isn't this regulated? Krauss3 No, it is not. It's under different IaH. That's where, andthere's a lot of mi sunder sta ndi ng about this. This is not an utility company. These are contracts that are up for bid in each metro area andthere's two bidders or two operaters that compete for competition in each area but their rates are not regulated. They're no! required to have nrandatory service. They're not required to do any of those things that aregulated telephone company is. Erhart: t^lell, I don't want to get into that whole thing. Let's move dounto Section 20-915. t,lhere's the ambiguity there? Krauss; Okay, the ambiguity and possibly Jo Ann can explain this a little-bit more. Th,- intent was that, this is an overlaying conditional use inthe residential district. that was supposed to account for ham radiooperaters. There is a sentence in there that says in aII residentialdistricts only one is permitted per ]ot, satellite dish, amateur radio eritenna toxer, which is fine as far as that goes and then ground mounted vertical ar1tenna. tJhat is that? t^le]I, unfortunately the definitions weren'L adopted r,rith the ordinance but the definitions and maybe Jo Ann carexplain this. This is referring to another style of ham radio antenn6tourer. It's not 175 foot cellular telephone tower. Now at this point, the ordinance is ambiguous and it's tough to explain tha! unless you go througl-the background but that eJas the intent. Erhart: Did you u,ant to get into it Jo Ann? Olsen: If you ulant me to I can. Erhart: No, I don't. I guess I take the same position as... I think after the last meeting hre are obligated now to... I think we have anordinance. I think the ordinance allows, no matter how you cut it, allowsa radio antenna in this area and for that reason alone, I disagree withyour recommendation not to allo!., it but I think there's another point heretoo that I'd Iike to make and I think quite frankly, for the same reason that r.re have future proposals for rezoning this area, I think this radioanlenna, considering the lou, surface area there and the high density of landscaping, it provides a really good buffer from a future residentialarea fron industrial so I think there's some assets. My opinion would beto, I r.rould recommend it's approval^ . Conrad: You said it acts as a buffer? Erhart: I think it actsvery visual at aIl.as a buffer, yeah. I don't think the thing is PIan:ring Commission Mee!ing August 15, 1990 - Page 19 Conrad: So the land iLself is a buffer? Erhart: Yeah. I think the land itself overrides the visual impact on thetouJer. You know I uould prefer to have it right in an industrial area. Soyou cou)d put it on the other side of the line, urould it change it thatmuch? Just putting it over 3OO feet? And combined urith the fact that Ithink the ordinance clearly allows it and plus we're talking about a futureordinarrce change that may take a year to set it changed. I just don'tthink that re have enough basis for denial. That's my comments. Conrad: Steve . Emmings: Paul, if we accept their arguments that our ordinance might allourthis, or does allow it, can we deny something based on a plan that's in thepro.e:.s cr that woul.d permit it when we knou that plan is probably going tochange? Have you talked to our City Attorney about that? Kral,s.e: Yeah, I did ask him about that and he frankly is concerned thatwhile he agrees that the intent is justifiable, that the language of theordinance is orre that a judge might rule against the City if it came up.You knorr I think that you're being asked to put blinders on in essence.You'.e sc,rt of boxed in where you,re saying you know that this area isgoing to ch€nge and you know that in all Iikelihood that it,s going tochange to residential but you're not supposed to look at it. Well,planning is an ongoing process and you've been involved in this process forquite s.orre time now and the result of tha! is on the immediate horizon. rgues3 r have a problem ignoring the fact lhat that exists, especially uhenthe existing land use p).an gives little or no definition as to what'sin"-enCei out there. It just drew a line and it's a great blank. Based onthe attorney's recommendation though, we are going to propose language torerned)' th6t. Now we really haven't talked about Iesally how should thecitv protect themselves on this. There is a possibil.ity of moratoriums ifwe neeC to do that and then on and on. Ue will discuss this at lengthtomorrow. He did read the report and he did raise that concern. Emmings: Okay. tJell that urould be a concern of mine but I really, I LhinkI was here when we r.rorked through some of these ordinances that theypresented and I'm really comforLable saying that I don't think that's erha!in our ordinance applies to this type of use urhatsoever. t.lhen we said atelephone equipment building, I know we had in mind things that areconnected by wires on both ends and here.we've got something now that,skind of, you know urhen is a telephone a iadio and when is it a tel.ephone?t,e've got something new that's kind of a hybrid and this is clearly not atelephone equipment building. At least as t.le contemplated that term underthe ordinance. Also I question whether or not that touJer is an accessoryuse to that building. I Lhink it's the principle use and that the buildingis accessory to the, actually I think they're both priDciple uses. Idon't, one is no good without the other so calling it, I don,t think, atIeast in my mind, that buys them nothing to call it an accessory use, ifthat's what they're doing. As far as the ground mounted vertical antenna,I was here when r.le drafted that ordinance too or put it in and I know thatthat did not deal r.rith or include a tower like we're talking about here but r.re !.rere talking specifically about, at that time,.we were talkingspecifically about, it came up because of a ham radio operater,s tower at Planni ng Commission t',leeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 20 his house and that u,as something thaL u,as, that term implied that andnoLhing else as I remember it. But anyway all Lhat aside, I think I,mgoing to vote for this thins and I'm going to tell you my reasons. Firstof al.L a tor^,er is going in there before any homes might be developed aroun,-there so that somebody coming in is going to be able to see it. It's notsomething we're going to impose on people who are real close to the site.Timberwood is fairLy close but I think it's far enough. AIl of thosepeopLe Lhat wiII be looking at the tower wiII be looking at it against abackground of an industrial area which takes au,ay a lot of it's impact tome. The only thing that I'd Iike to see as an added condition here. I _don't think they should be allowed to put any additional . I think we shoulr know exactly urhat they're going to hang on the tower. I don't think thetower urill be that obtrusive. It's more the stuff that's on top of it andI'd like to knou what's going to be on top of it exactly. you shoured usone picture and that didn't bother me but I think it should be restrictedto whatever, tJe should approve what's going up there. It should berestricteC to that and it shouldn't be changed unless they come back.Also, I do'''t think the tower should be allowed to be used for any otherpurpose. I don't know if they have any plan to do that but I don't thinkthe; s,hould r.rse it for any other. They shouldn't be subleasing it to scneone else who hJants to put something eJ.se up there unless we knox what -it's going on to. Kraussr : One thing you may Hant to consider, and ordinances I've drafted ir-th-3 p.,st have done this, is it basically takes the premise that if atourer's 9oin9 to go up someplace, you might as weII make the most efficientutilitization of it. You don't want penthouses and things up there thatb.lock out the sky but you may have a desire to encourage people tocc-locaLe so you do only have one instead of. Ellson: I think he's saying come through before you do that. Emrnings, : f 'rn nol saying ure wouldn't allou it. I'm saying wea chance to approve it before it gets hung up because ue mightBut other than that, I don't have any other comments, wa nt not to have LJ6 nt to - Conrad: Annette. Ellson: I believe that despite the height, that it isn't as objectionableas probably even telephone poles. I'm sure in the early days everybody wanted telephone but they didn't want those poles in their backyard. I -think urater toujers and satellite dishes iind things like that are a lot moreobtrusive than this and I've seen people building right next door to thatso there's no doubt in my mind people can build around it. I agree uithSteve that especially if was there before the people come and I agree withTim that t^re're right on the border of callins it industrial so I don't knou,that that much distance is going to make that thing. I'm not reallycon,.,inced houever that the alternatives that we suggested are totally outof the question. I have trouble believing that I don,t knox, that tu,o Phone ccmpanies don't work weII togeLher or somethins Iike that. I'm notconvinced lhat those other property ou,ners are saying absolutely no. Is iFjust a cost effective way. This uiII be cheaper so they don,t uant to doth6!. I'd like to see that pursued maybe a little bit more before it goesto Council that absolutely, positively, our other ideas are out of the Planning Commission l'leeting August 15, 1990 - Page 21 question and I'm not sure that I got that feeLing from it but I don'treally see a huge problem urith it and f agree'trilh Steve's idea as far as adding other uses but I don't know. I think if it's there before those houses go in there, it diminishes the property value from urhat? From r,Jhal-it is now? I really doubt that and if you're the one building on that lot,you're going in with your eyes open so I can't, I think the main reasonthat we were thinking of denying it was because of the property values andI dcin't necessarily agree that that's 9oin9 to come across that way so I would vote to approve it but f sure u,,ant them to convince City Council that those other alternatives are definiLely out of the question because they aLso were in that search site. Again, I'm not convinced that it's a def i nite no . Conrad: Joan. Does anybody know what the FAA requirements are for lighting on a Louer? Krauss: over 2Oo feet requires lighting. BilI BuehI:That's correct. There will be no lights on this tower. there. I'd hateAhrens: It seemsto have my house I i ke the planes f .1. y over ar.rf uI low out nearby if there's no lighting on that tower. Ahrens: 175 foot BilI Buehl: t"je filed an application to get a notice of no FAA before r,re build it as part of our required Process... hazard from the Ahrens: I'm going to recommend approval of this also. I drive by that one on Baker Road several tirnes a week and I never noticed it was there until today hihen I was specifically Iooking for it. I think it's pretty unobtrusive. I Lhink that this is a satisfactory area even to Put iL uP even though there's potential residential around it. The alternative sites are so close, as everyone has said. It doesn'! make any difference if it's t,lildermuth: Paul , I r.rant to congratulate you on an excellent report. t,jnf crlunetely I happen to disagree with it. I don't think we have a good k,asis c,n which to deny this conditional use permit. VirtuaIly everything s?(-rms LD be there. The one thing that I do think is missing on the part ofthe explanation given by the applicant is that I don't feel the alternate sites uiere explored very weII or explained very weII. The other concern that I have is that the proposed alternate site that we offered PauI , it w6s at about 1,OOO feet so, or 1,OOO yards so we're relatively close. It was a rnatLer of apparently not being able to get together with the property or.,ner. I think in support of the applicant's position, it is a Iow intensjty land use. Anybody going in to build on a site someuJhat adjacent to i: kncurs the to,":er 's there. I don't think it's going to be particularl.y desireable for a residential site in that little triangle because you're very close to some relatively high use railroad Lracks. The railroad noiseis p,robably going to be pretty objectionable. It looks like a reasonable Iand use oLher than the fact that we intended it to be something else in tl",E 2OCO C:omp Plan. So to be consistent, I did favor making the lot a part of thai- industrial. To be consistent I guess I have to accept the appl i cati on , Planning Commission Meet i ng Auguet 75, L990 - Page 22 a 1,O0O yards away. Peop]e can see i! anyhJay but people see all sorts ofthirrgs from their windotts. They see electrical towers. Those big huge monsters and water towers and those big satellite dishes so I think this isnot as bad as aII those things or any of those things. I agree with theother commissioners on most of their comments. Particularly Steve's insupport of this and I wil.L recommend approval . conrad: Thanks Joan. I'11 be brief. I think there are, f havepreferences for this not to be there. I think everybody said that here anuwe're finding reasons that L,e don't think we can refuse it but preference is not to have it there, Therefore I agree ulith the staff report in terms-of some of the conditions that it doesn't mee! and that r.rould be conditionr2,3 and 1O of the staff report. Incompatability r,riLh the zoning. tJhetherit be today or the future. fncompatability with the character andaestheiically. I guess the bisgest thing, and I think alI th.e comments onthe conrn';ission are very clear and I think I support or f understand whatthey're saying. I guess I haven't been convinced that the applicant hasreally tried alternatjve sites, If we have a chance to, f guess L,hen thisg.€s to City Council, I think it's real important that we understand thatthose have really been reviewed but I feel there's enough here to say no.f a]s:, feel Lhat it takes some residential land away that I'd rather keep -residential in the future so for those 5 reasons, I r.rould vote with theslaff report and against the proposal . Is lhere a moLion? Erhert: A question on a motion. rf you're looking for whai does the sLaff prefer? Do you Hant to go back andconCitions? Do you have some that you want to throur inare ure looking for a positive motion? a positive moLion, look at at this point or Con)'ad: It certain)y sounds Iike the Planning Commission to Lhror^: somethi nrErhart: If we go urith a positive out there and vote on it.motion, do you r^rant us Krauss: I could sugges! some conditions if you'd Iike to consider those.WelI you had Commissioner Emmings' concern Lhat if other antennaes are tobe insLalled, that it come back for revieu, under the CUP guidelines. Landscaping be installed as per their plan. No lights or signage be usedon this site. And that the to$rer be painted a flat ]ight color so that itblends in with the background. Erhart: Okay, with that I'll move that the Planning Commission recommendto the City Council Conditional Use Permit *9O-3 for SHSA Limited for acellular transmission tor.,er with the following conditions. That the staff _approve both the tower, the aesthetic design as u,elI as the building thatgoes with it. I state tha! because previously we always have theopportunity to review telephone equipment buildings and the aesthetics. Krauss: Cou]d ue touch on that for a moment. As I understand itbuilding is a fiberglass exterior, portable structure that wouldin and tied down to some footings. The illusLration that I saw,painted outside to emulate brick. I don't know if that's what yo looking for. beit u' this brought re Planning Commission l'4eeting August 15', 1990 - Page 23 Erhart: I would not vote for that. If that's what I thought it was, Itrouldn't vote for Lhat. It seems to me ure're voting on this because, I'mproposing this assuming that we're talking about a telephone building typestructure that you see dou,n on TH 1O1 that's made out of solid permanent material . If that's what we're looking at, then I aLmost... tlildermuth: But there again t.te have no ordinance. Erhart: Yeah I know but there's. Here's the ordinance. It says it shallbe architecturally consistent t,ith surrounding structures. t^Jilderrnuth: There are no surrounding structures. Trees. Erhart: To be honest with you, I'm going to withdraur my motion in favor ofha!,:r,g it corne back with some more information as opposed to just changingit. If somebody else wants to do it. Ccnrad: PLrt you've made a motion. Erh3rt: tJeII nobody seconded it so. Con:'6cl : Dc you xant to make another motion? Erhart: Okay, yeah. I'Il make a motion that we... Bill Buchl: Mr. Chairman, point of information. hle are willing toconsirucL ,,rhatever type of buildinS you, architecturally. . . tje've builtmany different types of buildings... Erhert: PauI , are you satisfied that you can take this from here? Krauss: It's whatever you're comfortable urith. I guess I'd like someEuidelines. I rnean do you expect a masonry brick building? Some of the rrei,.rer utility buildings ure're getting are reasonably attractive these days. Erhart: Okay, I'II proceed then and we can take a vote on it. That staffurill approve the tower aesthetic design as well as the buildine and thebuilding should be consistent r.lith other recently constructed public telephone and public utility buildings in the area. And due to the factthat the surrounding buildings will turn out to be residential. So number2 is slaff will apProve and document the..tourer shape and structure and thatit's construction uilI follow that approval. 3, that no other radio usesshould be approved without an addendum to the conditional. use permit whichr.rilI come in before Council and Planning Commission. And the otherconditions as staff has outlined. Landscaplng per a pLan. No Iights andsignage and that the tower ulill be painted a flat color. Conrad: Is there a second? Wi Idermuth: Second. Erhart moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommendapproval of Conditional Use Permit *9O-3 for Sl.lSA Limited for a cellulartransmissi.on touer with the follouing. conditions: I Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 24 t,l-e All voted vote of 5 they' f eur o Staff uill approve the aesthetic design of the tower and building andthe building should be consistent uith other recently constructedpublic telephone and public utility buildinss in the area. Staff wiII approve and document the tower shape and structure and thatit's construction will follow that approval . No other radio uses shall be approved u,iLhout an addendum to the Conditional Use Permit {9O-3 which ulill come in before the City Counci and PIanni ng Commission , If cther antennaes ere to be installed, they should come back for revieil under the CUP guidelines. N; l igt-,ts or signage be used on this site. flat light color so that it blends in ujtltower shall be painted a bac kgr ou nd . IN to favor except Conrad who opposed and the motion carried uith a 1. 3 4 C- 7 Conra i ncJu sunits 9epte and c they' d; My reason is stated previously as I reaLly ]ike these uses in trial areas. I don't see a need to make them out in stand alone . Absolutely do not see that need. This goes to City Council on mber lOth so there are a few things that I hope the aPPIicanL heard an present to the City Council. You heard our concerns here and re going to be, the Mayor's here tonight so he's listening. I thinkre gojng to follor our comments and you may want to pay attention to.-f those to make it easier. Sjll Puehl: !,Jhat sort of information would you Iike on alternatives? EI Ison; The thingsexample. t^,hen BiII much information at you LJA S the said you didn't have any information on for asking you about some of these and you didn't havetime. I think that trould be. Bill Buehl: I knoh, we Ner e with contacted by... tle will find that out. Conrad: And then uror k staff closely okay. Thanks Bill. PuLlje-l1.eserrri Name Addr ess Kevin P Dery] P McShaneFortier 180 South Shore Court 4OB Turnpi ke Roed 5. Larrclscaping be installed as per the landscaping plan, PUBLIC HEARING: PRELT}IINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE ONE PARCEL TNTO TT.IO LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONEO RSF AND LOCATED AT 1O1O PLEASANT VIEW ROAD. FORTIER AND ASSOCIATES. Planning Commission Heeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 25 Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staffcalled Lhe public hearing Lo order. Conrad: Daryl , do you r.,anL to make Daryl Fortier: I'II try !o make itwith the staff report. report on this item. Chairman Conrad any additions to the staff brief. I'm DaryI Fortier report? and we agree Conrad: Than ks . Emmi ngs: l.l i ce job . Conrad: Other comments. Anything? Kevin, anything? fs there a motion toclos{' the public hearing: Emmings moved, EIlson secondedfavor and the motion carried.to close the public hearing. All voted in The public hearing llas closed. ConT-ad: t]e ' I I Er hart: I have Emrni ngs: llone . start a! your no comments end agai n. on this one. El lsor, : I just have one comment only because of r.rhat uje hrent through lastweek. l{o;r is the tirne that we can throa something in there about theperson whc's on the ]ake and where their high uiater mark and where theiruretland starts and things like that? tJhereas before they alr.lays said IcjicJn't know I had that and He're saying now that maybe is the chance we cando something Iike that. I t^ras Lhinking of a condition Iike that. Ahr-ens: You can tell them Christmas Lake's at the end of their lot. EIIson: I am bul it's the same with the people on Lotus Lake. They put i!in so I was thinking maybe it should be written into the record right now when there are opportunity's here. That uras the only thing I was thinking Krauss: There is no uJetland on this property. It's pretty nice shoreline and beach so it's very well defined. I believe Lhere's a drainage easementrequired over that par! of the lake and if there's not, there witl-.. ElIson: So in general they're not like this Lotus Lake...? Al-Jaff: The other lhine, is, thisbuildable area on the site. is probably going to be th6 only Krauss: Yeah, the location of the home here, and Charles can explain it if need be, is someurhat Iimited by the need !o provide sewer connection which has a tendency of pushing the house uphill. So the hdme would be nowhere. , . Ellson: 0kay. Nothing further . Pla nni ng Ccmmission l,teeting August 15, 1990 - Page 26 ',^J i Idermuth: I support the staf f recommendat.ion . Ahrens i No comment , Conrad: I have nothing. Is Lhere a motion? Emmings moved, Ellson seconded that theapproval of Subdivision $90-12 as shownsubject to the following conditions: Planning Commission recomnend on the plat dated July 3, 1990 and_ I 6 c Easements: a . S,ta ndar d b dra i nage and Cross access easements 1, Beddor Addition and utility easements. over the dr iveurayLo! 5, Chr i stmas in favor of Lot 1 Acres Addition. BIock the engineering deparLmen'-Provide utility easements as required byfor seiler and water services. 3 Dedicate a roadtray easement measured 33 feet norLh of the center I i ne of f I ease nt Vi er,; Road . A fire hydranL is required to the utest of the property as sho,,ln in At t6c hrne rrt fl2. Park and trajl dedicalion fees will be required in lieu of ]anddedication. A tree preservation plan must be submitted prior to issuance of abuilding permit. The plan should illustrate how the driveway, homeplacement and construction wil,l minimize tree loss. The plan must beapproved by staff. Preservation areas shall be adequately marked by a snoru fence prior to construction to avoid damage. The private driveuay serving LoL 2, Block 1 must be built to a 7 tondesign and paved to a width of 20 feet utilizing a maximum grade of 1OZand provide a turn around area acceptable to the Fire Harshall basedupon guidelines provided by applicabie fire codes. plans should beprovided to city staff for approval prior to City Council review. Plans for water and serrler connections shaII be developed for approvalby the City prior to City Council review. The applicant shouldpetition the City to i nstall. pub).ic utility extensions or makeprovisions for self installation. 5 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. a Planning Commission Meet i n9 August 15, 199C - Page 27 Name John D. Rice Herb B I oomber 9Bruce Jeur i ssen Lor e;r Hebbeger Addr ess Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Chairman ConradcaLleC tha public hearing to order. Loren Hebbeger: Hy name is Loren Hebbeger. I'm a representative ofl,tangerin Jncorporated and I think the thing on this project, what we,retrving to do is take a parcel of land and improve it to it's highest andbest us,e. Since u:e shut doun on this project, uhich r^rouLd be probably inthe la:er part of May or first part of May, ue,ve hauled a 12O,OOO yardsout of chaska, Arbor Park. Leveled off an industrial site and they'restarting to build on it already. trrhat the purpose of this situation wasoriginallv, and the group of investors that are involved in this situationhiith uanllerin, are trying to take an agricultural site which is originallydesi<rnated for a 2 L/2 acye tract development situation from 1982. LeveLit off and put it to it's highest and best use which it is zoned forcurrentlv as a 2 L/2 acre tract for housing. The purpose of this situationis to jrnprove the land and still at the same time keep it as anagrictrltural situation until the land is improved to a developablesituation which r.rhen this hauling is done it uill still be an agricu.ltural.situ:tion that can be upgraded to a subdivision. So I guess urhat I'mlooking at, I'm in the development situation, I am looking at this parcelas an irnprovement to the existing situation. The zoning is there for a 2i,/2 acye tract. Hr, Jeurissen who will be participating in the projecthere is interested in upgrading the Iand and keeping it as an agriculturalsituation until a development occurs. I don't feel that we're going tohur! anything here whatsoever and u,e're going for 19O,OOO yards right nowbut within 90 days we moved 12O,OOO yards which from a standpoint of'traf f ic problems. tle went down Lyman Blyd. to TH 1O1 and went down,Pioneer Trail urhich is Hennepin County 1. Ue didn't have any problemuhatsoever as far as the haul. I guess I appreciate the staff makingrecommendation for approval and r guess b,hat h,e're here for is to just movethis thing along. Ue were hoping to put this in an orderly fashion andcontinue to haul here previous to this and get the job done. r appreciateyour oeoole's opi nion. Conrad: Thanks. Other comments.close the public hear i ng? Anything else? Is there a motion to Emmings moved, l.Jildermuth seconded to close the public hearing- All votedin favor and the motion carried. The public hearing xas closid. 5O5 No. Hwy 169 7OO8 Da kota 15OO Pioneer Trail , Chaskal.langerin I nc. PUBLIC HEARING: INTERIM USE PERI1IT FOR A GRADING PROJECT TO EXCAVATE IOO.OOO CUBIC YARDS OFI,IATERIAL AND LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 15OO PIONEER TRAIL. BRUCE JEURISSEN. P_gb I i_q_P_1_e_sent: Planning Conrmission Heeting August 15, 1990 - Page 28 Co.nrad: Joan, we'II start down uith you. Ahrens: I had a hard time initially being objective about this applicatiolgiven the apparent cavalier attitude of the applicant toward the City inthe past and a total disregard toward the City's instructions. But I didget through it. I'm not sure I understand it. I have no idea what 19O,OOFyards of material does to, removing that much does to a piece of property. l'1aybe you can explain Hhat this property's 9oin9 to look like. I mean isit goins to be flattened or what? Ahrens: But the grade r,lill be such you can't farm over it? Krauss: Essentially yeah. I don't know if that video would help explainthat. t.ie do have a movie of this narrated by our engineering staff but ifI cor:ld urork off of this for a moment. Right now the existing Jeurissenfarr,:,tead is over here wilh the house and the out buildings. The area tha'they uJere working Iast spring is in here. Nor4 this is basically an..- Here 's Bluff Creek. That's... The top of the hi)l is right hereBasicaIIy you're pretty much flattening this off to clean it out. There r:ou I d be a berm lef t r.lith some trees on it there and one might be here butbasically they'II flattened it dourn u,ith a slight grade down Lo the creek.- Noi^J we have asked to make sure there's a minimum cut level set there sothat no potential building sites get belou the flooded elevalion Lhere. ALleast 3 feet above it which is r.rhat our ordinance requires. I'd also liketo taLk about- the residential use on this property for a moment. This and- some other properties lJere conceptually reviewed as 2 7/2 acre lots prior +-a 7987. There rdere some time deadlines for them to submit preliminary andfinal plats,. Those t irne deadlines came and brent and Council extended it b,ecause of the delays in getting the final EIS for TH 212 done. TH 2l?passes thrcugh so close over there and the platting has been conceptually looked at but it doesn't Hork wiLh TH 2L2 and that's one of the concernsthat the Council has in working... It's not entirely c]ear...as to whe!he:-or not this grading is ideally suited for whatever is 9oin9 to happen inthe future. There's no plan backing it up. AII we have is the original concept and that doesn'L fit r^rith this entirely. Now uhat they're dcinghere, and this is going to be f suppose the more minor aspect of whatthey're doing, The other one. you've got on this side, on the north end ofthe property and it's quite normal terrain through here and uhat they're soins to do is basically knock it reasonably flat with a slight grade to it even to a hill and then you have a steeper grade going up at the north end. As ure understand it from the SoiI Conservation Service, that steep grade atthe extreme north end of this site is not going to be farmable and it's babed on their recommendaLion that bre said that that should be establishedin a ground cover that wil.l keep it from eroding. Ahrens: So, they're going to be removing earth from that northern erea butnot to i-mprove it for farming which is what the application said? Krauss: Uell, whaL they're doing is those black boxes are areas wherethey're going to stockpile the topsoil. They're going to pull the topsoiloff, take out the clay soils they uant, get t,he finish grade and then put the topsoil back. So yes, it would be utilizable for farming Pl anni ng Commission Meeting August 15, 1990 - Page 29 Kraussr No, what the grade on the bulk of the area will be lessened overwhat, it's guite rolling now and it's not going to be in the future. So tothe extent that l,1r, Jeurissen has a tough time working grades now, most ofthe area he's farming will be flat or reasonably flat. That steep grade is onLy going to occur at the north end of the property. Ahrens: Is there an intent to move more earth in the future? Is this it?I knou: this is it for like this application but. Loren Hebbeger: That's it. Ahrens: Or is everything going to just be flat after this? Loren Hebbeger: It will be flat enough for development from a housingsituation. The elevations wilI work with a housing development plan andthen ue're out of here. Ahrens: BuL itto flattened it s a nice out? ro]ling terrain right now right and you're going Loren Hebbeger: It will sti]l be rolling. It will be overlooking thecreek but at the same time Hhat you've got here is a high elevation. As amatter of fact, his soil conservation situation talks about that. Theywill not even give him a 1995 reneual on his soil situation because of theterrain. They don't consider it farmabLe, Loren Hebbeger: His family has had it. Bruce Jeurissen: It's been farmed for a Io! of years but the SoiIConservation people have just establ j.shed standards now,..plans oferosion and things like that by L992 to Iet you be part of Lhe farmin 1995. t^le have !o have plans in the process by f992. soi I Pr o9r am But that's not realIy relevant to what ue're talking about here isAhrens: it? Loren Hebbeger:with an interim year s . tlhat it is is a phasing process. Keep it agricultural use and develop it evenLually uithin a period of probably 3 Ahrens: So it sounds to me ]ike the farming issue is not reallyfor you at all.an Issue There's going to be more farmable acres after this is is quite e comprehensive report you've prepared here PauI.to go through everything even though I had questions as here on everything. I'm sure everyone wiII be glad to hear Ahr ens : I'm not I kie nt This going t hr ough Ahrens: Hour long has this area been farmed? Bruce Jeurissen: Hell it's all connected. Yes it is. Bruce Jeur issen: done . . . Planning Commission Meet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 30 that but. I just keep paging through this because it,s so, it's overwhelming to even understand what's being proposed here. To me to thinkthat we have this area oul there that's nice and rolling hil. Is and we,regoing to give somebody a permit to just bulldoze it over for whateverreason, whether it's to make money off the earth Lhat,s being moved to theEden Prairie }andfill or what the purpose is, it seems to me that, it'shard for me to believe that this is really an improvement for the City orthat it's going to give the City, that it's any benefit for the City andit's a Iarge area and to have 1O,OOO trucks, r,rhich seems amazing to me. _10,OOO trucks in 90 days. You anticipate that you can finish in 90 days? Loren Hebbeger: f'm not trying to argue about lhe situation. Ue alreadyhave moved probably 12O,OOO yards urhich is already done. There was noproblem whatsoever. tJe uJere hauling at TrOO in the morning until 5:OO inthe afternoon when rush hour's on. Sometimes 8:Oo to S:Oo and I guess thething on this project, ue're looking at developing the property and puttingit to it's highest and best use. ft's a taxable situation for the cornmunity of Chanhassen. You don't have to run utilities out lhere. It isin a situation right now where it's subdivided for 2 !/Z acre situation.AII ue're trying to do is improve it and develop it. t,e're not going inthere to cause a disruption. l.,le're just trying to work it in a phased situation and geL the job done. Ahrens: I think I have a pretty clear idea of what your intent is. Loren Hebbeger: It's in no ulay going to hurt the property because aninvestor is not going to buy a piece of property that he can't develop andthat's uhat u:e're doing. tle're puLtins it into a developable situationwith agricultural also included. l.lildermuth: I think I understand r.rhat you,re tryins to do here andregardless of what you're doing r,lith the clay, regardless of t,that you're doing with the topography, the fact that your ultimate goal is to developthe property, I'm reasonably assured that you aren't going to do terrible - damage to the topography of the area. 19O,OOO yards in the mining industr>is not very much. 19O,OOO yards going doun a County highway is quite abit. I think PauI you've done a very good job of putting conditions onthis request. I ]ike aII of the conditions and I think it reflects thecomprehensive grading permit and excavation permit that has been put inplace but I r.rould recommend that r.Je add tuo things. One is that ue impose _ Ahrens: tlelI at any rate, those are my feelings about this application.I think that the conditions that you put in here PauI are pretty specificand cover mos! of lhe items ue should be concerned with except maybe under -number 4 where it says no activity will be permitted during the U.S. OpenTournament. I think that this and Lhe subsequent applicaLion u,e get, thereshould be specific dates in there covering because I'm sure there wil.l betime before the tournament and maybe afterwards uhere you'Il u,ant to ceaseoperation. Haybe a day. I have a problem with the amount of, well thetraffic Lhat's going to 9o on, in and out of that properly- I have aproblem with a lot of the items in here.. trhy don't we move on Conrad: Jim, urhy don't you handle this. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 31 the road consumption fee that uas discussed in a letter to you, SecondlyI r,rould propose that we add a requirement for compensation for either aSheriff's deputy or a highway patrolmen to monitor the hauLage route. Krauss: If I could explain. tle got a memo from the County Engineer thatyou're discussing Commissioner tlildermuth, that indicated that there,s aquantifiable amount of damage that wiII occur to the road. IL's apparentlyan accepted engineering formula. I've talked to people about it that thelifespan of the road is diminished by having so nany Iarge, heavy ureightsplaced on it. I asked our City Attorney about the possibiLity ofestablishing basically an impact fee on that. He indicated to me that ithras not a course of action he would encourage us to pursue because Stateenabling Legislation to back that up is not in place. So he uras someh,ha!re.Iunctarrt t o do !h6t so we did not recommend approval of that . t^Jhal wedid do Lhough is we said we uanted a Ietter of credit. One of the lhingsthat letter of credit's going to be used for is to require the repair,maintenance and cleaning of road damage and debris and whatever iL'sdjrectly attributable to these people. If they haul on a muddy day, theymay have Lo suleep the Lhing 5 times during the day, t,e u,anted to inspectlhe road. Have our engineering department HaIk it r.rith the Countyengineering deparLment to sort of document Hhat's out there nour. rt's a neurroad. It's in pretty good shape, To the extent that it becomes damagedduring hauling, ure're going to probably try to make the assumption thatthey caused it and ask them to repair that, tlildermuth: From a Legal standpoint can you make that stick? Krauss: t^Jell yeah. See that's a direct impact. That's not taking moneyso that in the year 2OlO uhen the road needs Lo be replaced, instead of theyear 2015, we have an account to draw on. The concept is different andenabling legislation is different so ure've done the best I think !4e canwjthin the confines of the way State Statute reads nou. Secondly, theUniform Building Code does allow us to assess back our costs to inspecLthese things at a rate of $3O.OO an hour. It's quite explicit in that area,I certainly sarr no reason at all that lhe City should ask Lhe general taxpayers !o support us being staff going out there and spending a lot of ourtime Co monitor this thing. They should have to pay that for same as abuilder has to pay for us to come out and inspect his property and we fullyintend to do thaL. I've talked to our Public Safety peopl.e and they haveindicated that we could make arrangements for special patrols from theCounty Sher if f . Special weight checks . l.,lhatever we felt r.re needed and r.recould draur on this ability to subsidize that to defray some of their expense as uell. And that's basically uhat !{e felt ure can do and that's uJhat this recommendation does. t^lildermuth: Okay. That's fine. Under 2 then, I guess I'd just like to seea little rewording there to include either the services of a Sheriff'sdeputy or highuay patrol . l.,,here do you talk about inspecting for road damage and requiring compensation? tlhich item? Okay, 1. Krauss: And 9 deals with the need to clean up debris. Planning Commission tleet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 32 tlildermuth: Right. One of the other a.Iternatives is to construct aseparale hauling road uhich I'm sure uould make the project absolutelyunfeasible after having driven out there. Loren Hebbeger: Can I make a staLement at this poin!? tli ldermuth: Yeah . Loren Hebbeger; Going back to the original conversation here. [.Je'vealready hauled 12o,oo0 yards out of Chaska and the sherrif's department, I met with them. I met with the Chaska Police force. If we're in ueightrestricLions as far as weight load, there is no problem or impact on the road whatsoever, The other aspect of the point. BFI has sot a bonafide scale th,at is registered uilh the State of Hinnesota as far as a weigh situation and I welcome them to come in and weigh any truck that they want on the BFI scale because all of these loads are being tallied. And I gues- the thing h,hat I'm saying here, you can create more problems but going right back to the original point, ue've already hauled 12O,OOO yards down Lyman Blvd. with the county and City of Chaska involved and we haven't had- any problems. Nou, there was a speeding ticket issued which I don't blamethe parties invoLved. tlildermuth: The point is though that time they load a truck to monitor the you're not going to be there every ueight. Loren Hebbeger: I guess the thing is. Loren Hebbeger: Any development situation, and I feel this area in Chaska- and aII areas. As a matter of fact, t,lr. t,angerin did most of the uork along 494 for Naegele and you're going to have hauling out and hauling into develop propercy. I mean it's a definite situation but if you keep you- trucks within a load weight specification, and I mean here you've got an opportunity that they could come in at any Lime and spot check trucks and use a scal.e which was certified through the Highway Patrol . As a matter oLfact, the Highway Patrol did stop one of the trucks and took him into Chaska to Gbdney which is not a certified scale and it was brought out as -point a! that time that you're uelcorne to monitor as they come into the dump at any time. I don't think there's any problem here if ble just go about it the right way. tJildermuth: But I just think from a City standpoint. Loren Hebbeger: I agree uiLh your concern. Risht. Kraussi If I could add one thing. This evening I handed out a memo fromthe Acting Director of Public Safety urhere I uras alr,are of the fact that ure had received a number of complaints about truck traffic on these roads andhis merno indicates that yes we have. Nor,,l I mean it's a public road. PeoPl,-are entitled to use it but there is a concern over the impact that it has on people that live and drive along it each day. There's a concern fortraffic safety. The TH 1O1,/Pioneer Trail intersection is notoriously bad.- tlildermuih: You're not going to uJatch every driver, Planning Commission l.teet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 33 This site is just downstream from that. I think that that operation from Chaska generally has been conducted in a safe manner. I,m not auare of anyfatalities or anything like that but we have had complaints and we're justtrying to cognizant of that. L.|ildermuth: f agree. conrad: Anything else? Annette? Ellson: I'm trying to find good reason not to do it. I don't like it.don't think it's consistent with r,,hat ule have in our goals of our plan which is to maximize the natural features of Chanhassen. Instead we'retaking ar,:ay hills which are a natural feature and thinss Iike that andr kncr.r it also is not suppose to involve any kind of activities that wiIIbe detrimental to any persons or property and I think it,s already beenproven that it has been because of excess of noise and traffic so I thinktrased on those turo reasons I'd like to say that I,d want Lo deny it. Emmings: I have a lot of the same feelings that Annette does. This isn'tan improvernent to the property in my mind but nevertheless, on the otherhand, I order black dirt into my property and it comes from someplace.They use slravel and sand and dirt and aII kinds of things and aII kinds ofconstruction and it all comes from someplace so I guess there's some kindof a balance here. Somebody owns some Land here and they u,ant Lo selL off some of the ]and and I think they have a right to do that and I think thefact thaL we passed this ordinance underlines the fact that Lhey do indeedhave a right to do that if they b,ant to. They're not creating a pit or ahole or defacing something like the river bluff Iike ure had uith MoonVal]ey and so on so I guess I feel overall that they probably have a rightto do this. I guess what bothers me more than anything else is the pastbehavior of these applicants certainly doesn't engender any trust in me. Idon't know hor,r ue're going to know that they're only taking about 19O,OOOyards. I don't know how we're going to know what they're doing. I don'ttrust them to operate within uleight Iimits. I don,t trust them to drivethe speed limit. I don't trust them at all because they've got a bad trackrecord here so I guess if we're going to pass conditions, I urant to make damn sure that somebody's out there policing them because they need to bepoliced. 8ut other than that I guess I support. t^,hat? Erhart: In seeing the memo from Scott Harr, I kind of regret notcomplaining myself now because I certainly had thought about it many times.I feel slrongly that the truck traffic on Lyman Blvd., TH 1O1 and pioneer Trail route was I felt that it uas someHhat dangerous because I drive thatroute L,hich wilL probably surprise everybody but that is probably the onereason why I trould support the proposal here in that, in addressingeverybody's concerns about urell this is isn't helping Chanhassen at all butyou know, if ure don't allow them to take it here, then they're just 9o to I Loren Hebbeger: That's fine. Just go ahead. Emmings: Thank you. I guess I'd support the application. conrad: Tim? Planning Commission l.leet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 34 Chaska and then they'Il just drive through all of Chanhassen using some ofthe uorse routes uhich is what they did. I felt thaL r,Jas real detrimentalto everybody as a whole that drives that clay aII the uay through Chanhassen on those uinding roads. tlhen they removed this material out ofhere previously, again I thought I agree with Joan and Jim it sure doesn't seem right but you know when you consider Lhe alLernatives, it's beLter than that. So I guess I don't have an overall problem with it. If there':a problem urith it, it's the fact Lhat ther€'s a market in it. If somebody wants this material and for a reason which really, and everybody's tryingto address that. The fact is somebody's going to buy it. They're going t<-get it from someplace. I think this place, this particular location is th(least detrimental in lhe City of Chanhassen. Actually the best place is over on the river one. Krauss: l*,loon ValLey. Erhart: Yeah, Moon Valley because they don't touch Chanhassen but. Thequestion I have in my mind though is what does Eden Prairie, uhy doesn't Eden Prairie allow them to take clay from somplace closer? Do they have an ordinance against it compleLely or what? Krauss: any ulay, on TV, I landfill I really don't know. Eden Prairie slaff has never contacted us in shape or form about this and from uhat I see in the ner.rspapers and.don't believe Eden Prairie staff is on speaking terms with the at the moment anyulay. Erh6rt: Do you know why they've not looked at Eden Prairie as a site to get clay? Loren? Oon't they have hills? potential - Loren Hebbeger: r guess what the situation is, we have 3 other sites that -t^re'Il be *orking on and I guess basically, this material meets certain classifications. In lhe Eden Prairie area there just is not a clay that urould meet the specification so as a result ue're out in this area andwe'll be in Carver County also, tle've got several other sites that ure're 9oin9 to be vrorking on to develop. Krauss: t^lhere will that 90? t",hat route? Loren Hebbeger: That urill come down 212 probably. But I don't feel there's going to be a problem here as far as moving the material . It will -be done in an orderly fashion. It uiII 6e done in a phased situation. As a matter of fact, this site would have aLready been done if we could have extended our permits urhich the original permit goes back to 1987 urhich was a phased situation, tJel,l, ue ended up in a problem here and I guess maybe - a permit uras issued the wrong uay but I just can't, I'm not trying to argu€ with the people here. They were made aware at the time that we h,ere hauling the people that ue were dealing oith, the engineer, that uJe Heregoing to phase it. Erhart: Okay, thanks. on the other hand I egree with Steve in that this -thing should be controlled as tight as r.re legally can. Again, thaL doesn't leave us a lot to do because you get into an issue of road destruction and the fact is, if they don't take it here and they take it out of Chaska and Planning Commission l'leeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 35 they drive through the roads and we have no contro]. over that at all so Ithink there's minimally what we can do to compensate the road destruction.I think you've done that in your item 1. If you can find, I guess whatyou're saying here is if you can find specific damage that $,ould bespecificaLly attributed to this particular project, then bre can 9o back andcharge them. I question uhether t3O,OOO.OO is enough for a letter ofcredit. !E3o,ooo.oO doesn't do a lot for you. Krauss: t,eII it'to expand on that s covering a at aI l? tje Iot of things but I guess Oave, did take a look at this and try do to you ula ntget . Erhart: I don't uant to get into it. If you're satisfied that covers most of the road damage that you could envision. $30,ooo.oo Krauss: I'd Iike their reasonable number. first born son Loo but r.re tried to come up r,rith a Hempel: Basically what ue're Iooking at is restoring the site and getting the vegetation back on the slopes and if they leave it in an unmanageablesite like they have left it right now. It gives us the opportunity to 9o back. Kraussr Keep in mind too that this being approved on a phased basis and each phase is going to have to be tidied up before they go to the next one.If the City Engineer isn't satisfied that they're acting in compliance withth6t phasing program, r,re'Il shut it down so that will tend to limit the damage. Erhart: t,eII it doesn't take ]ong to spend $3O,OOO.OO... I have one otherthins is that I don't undersLand why this has to be allor,red on Saturdays. The reason I say that is I, you know this is a semi-residential ,agriculturaL area. People b,ant to go home to their homes on Salurday and have some peace and quiet and when they were working before on Saturday and Sundays, I could hear it from my house and I live farther away from thepeople lhan the people do in Pioneer Hills and it h,asn't bad but you knowif it was a major issue to geLting Chis Lhing done, I trould object to it. On the other hand, it seems to me in consideration of all the other issues,that ue could limit this thing to a normal work t^reek and not try to be intrusive on the neighbors as much as possible and I'd sure like to consider not allowing it to be done on Saturdays because it does make noise and you can hear it all day long. It's ii constant drone of earth movers and equipment so. Erhart: okay, well again just in summary. I think it's okay. I think it's something that we don't, the allernatives are worse and u,e ought !o go ahead and approve it. I'd like to see, I guess you reconsider the letter of credit. Really having enough monies to cover it in a u,orse case situation and restrict this to l,londay thru Friday operation. Krauss: The ordinance does establish those times but it allows you to be more restrictive if you think it's necessary to so it's really your call. Planning Commission l4eeting August 15, 1990 - Page 35 Conradr Paul, you've done a real nice job. In fact on a.Ll the staffreports tonight they're really thorough. It really helps. There are so many issues that you bring up with )zour analysis that may, well I real]yappreciate it but it gives me confidence that you knou what you're talking about and that the City has some control in what ure're doing here. In thisparticular case you're pulting on a lot of controls yet I don't see whatthey are. The words are we will have to control . tte will have to monitor - To be honest Lhe track record hasn'L been great as other people havepreviously said, f'm not going to hammer that in but that makes me nervous because of some past incidences and because vle're nervous about this in ourcommunity. I don't have, it tells me until they are proven that they accept our guidance or our control, iL tells me that ue need to overcontrol and as other commissioners have said, and especially Jim, that ovelcontrol has a cost on the City staff. Haybe you can help me Paul but iL'sthe case, we can charge for that control . I didn't see it specifically inLhis. Is there, I've gone through it several times right nour. I saw itfor the other one. I though! I saw it in the Halla. Is there a charge? :lhought I saw $3O.OO an hour type of. Krauss: Yes. It's in condition 2 which is pay the Uniform Building Codepermit fee, County and slaff and I think Commissioner tlildermuth addedSheriff's Department's time to monitor and inspect the operations to be charged to the applicant at a raLe of $3O.OO an hour. conrad: tJho is doing that? Krauss: t^lho wiIl actually be doing the monitoring? Conrad: Right. Krauss: I thirrk two of them are sitting at the table righ! here. It willbe our staff in conjunction and coordination with the counLy staff. Conrad: And how do you determine? I'm really concerned about enforcement - Absolutely like I'd urant you out there every day. I'm just not comfortabl<at this poin! in time. l think this should go through and Annette, as you said, Lhis doesn't seem like it's in character uriLh what ure've been trying -to do in Chanhassen. I kind of agree yet on the other hand I think as I Iooked at staff report, I think iL's permitLed. I think it can be done and I think if it's done right, we're not going to have any problems. But -again, I'm not convinced that it's going'to be done right and that's just urhere I'm at right noL,. That's a problem. Loren Hebbeger: Can I make a statement on this? Conrad: Sure, Loren Hebbeger: You know a developer comes to an area to improve things and try to put it to iL's highest and bestyou knou you talk abouL over monitoring things. This can too . come Inuse. Iget out andfeel thaLof hand - PIalni n9 Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 37 Conrad: tje prefer not to. tre rea]Iy try to keep government out of it as much as rJe can but that site has nol , you haven't given us any confidenceout at that site yet and you haven't been in the area and done someprojects that ule can say oh yeah. They're reputable. They'II trust us.They'll slop when we teII them to stop. They'lI fix the erosion controlbarrier uhen ue teII them !o stop. They wiII do it immediately. They'IIfix it jmmediately. I'm not convinced of that. Conrad: I hear what you're saying but here's something that's very differenL for this area. You're bringing in a lot of trucks. You're hauling some ]and, You're telling us you're improving it. it's hard for us to accept lhe fact Lhat you're improving the site by hauling out theclay. That's a tough one to accept. Loren Hebbeger: Let me give you an example. Conrad: Nhen we in this area are trying to keep those areas as natural aspossible. t,e're trying Lo make them very liveable so some of the thingsyou're saying is not in concert and it piobably shor.rs that you rea].Iy haven't been in Chanhassen t,orking u,iLh us as much as ule'd like to have you wor k with us. Lolen Hebbeger: I guess Don urhat I'm saying is this area is set up for 2 L/2 acye tracts. Oo you u,ant to put a house uP on toP of a hill thaL you can't even get to with an elevation from a roaduray standpoint? I don't know. Conrad: It's zoned agricultural isn't it? Loren Hebbeger: ft's ready Lo be developed as a 2 L/2 acre- Loren Hebbeger: I guess the thing that Lhis revolves risht back to Don,that a permit was issued originally here and I think it could have been ina real Iegality situation from a standpoin!. It u,as represented. Youpeople issued a permit as far as f'm concerned that we tried to ]ive with and it has cost us some money as a result to shuffle to other sites. Thissite wc,ul d have been hauleC out and been aII done already and ready for development if we t^rouldn't have had Lhese problems. f guess the thing is,Mr. Jeurissen is involved in the development of the property with the group and he is no! going to Iet his property be downgraded to a point where it'snot going to be developable. I guess you people can put a lot ofrestrictions on. In Chaska for an example, they had an inspector that looked at the elevations of wha! we lrere shooting as far as what we hauledout. There was no problem. If you're improving the properLy, granted you can be over cautious on things but if it's not going to hurt anything, your engineerins staff has got an elevation topo of uhat ue're going to do.tlhat's going to be done and as far as a bond, a bond will take care of thatsituation. I don't know uhat over restrictions, it's just going to make it rougher for a person to come in here. If you're going to do this with everybody rather than this situation and I feel this situation goes righ! back to Moon Valley because of their situation there. l.lot, as far as I'm concerned, [,,loon VaIley is not even. Planning Commission |1eet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 38 conrad: t,,hat I'm telling you is because yoql don,t have a good record intor^rn, re have to over control which is what we don't want to do. I reallyr.rould rather not have these people. Chanhassen,s not making that muchmonev off of this deal . rt's just not and we're saying Hell let's allocatea lot of our time to make sure that it happens right because it hasn'thappened maybe according to what we'd tike to have had done in the past.Our fault. Your fault. It just hasn't worked so noer you've got !o proveto us. Loren Hebbeger: It's part there that we feel that we of the developmentuant to get rid of situation. There's overages Conrad: But it's zoned agriculLural . Loren Hebbeger: At this point. At this point yeah Conrad: And that's, in many of our thinking, that,s not bad zoning and itt,ilL be developed for residential sooner or later but again, you've heardthe commissioners talk here. They're saying that yeah, you,re going to be-from our standpoint it looks like you can do it but you haven't. l.,hat thestaff is also telling us, they're uncomfortable urith a lot of things.Truck movement. Erosion control . A lot of, you're moving a lot of dirtand when you do that, you've got to .have some controls. Loren Hebbeger: I agree Hith your concerns. Loren Hebbeger: Alright but I guess what I'm saying to you right now, "r.-you doing this with every developer lhat comes in that's Eoing to move anymaterial in the future? I think. Conrad: You're the first one Lhat ue,ve looked at. Loren Hebbeger: Okay. This situation, we held back because of yourresolution that you were passing. conrad: I thought you continued after we told you to stop. Loren Hebbeger: tlell the thing is, it tras represented to start out withthe original engineer. There hras not litigation done on this thing. Itwas close to that point because it ulas represented from day one from anunderlving standpoint here and r don't know, what staff happened to staffbuL you can't blame somebody that issued a permit and.it r,{as represented tothem as such that we u,ere going to do this i.n a phase situation. All of a_sudden u,e get shut down because, ue feel'that ue got slighted because ofthe Hoon VaIIey situation. Now ue're going right back to that point and Idon't think it's fair because u,e,r€ puttins this thing Lo a housingdevelopment. r",e're not a mining permit as far as taking gravel oui anddigging a hole. Emmings: This is a clav mine. you're mining this property to take the clarand seII it to somebody else. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 39 Emmi ngs: And you to pay to dump it Loren Hebbeger: it. That's the made any difference. [.,e're going to move you . Conrad: Anyway Paul . t^,e've got a creek running through here and thatcreek, in terms of the impact of this development, hou do you assess howyou contro). any kind of pollution? Any kind of runoff into the creek. t^lhodevelops those plans. Is it the applicant? Is it the staff? How do wemonitor? tJho monitors? Krauss: The erosion control plans have been developed by the applicant.tle've asked for improved ones. t^le coordinate our efforts with thet,atershed District. There uras some temporary, when they closed up the sitein lhe spring there Nas temporary measures in place t,o minimize erosion.They've since blown out and there's substantial damage and impact to thecreek right now. The first thing we urant to have done on lhis site iscorrect that existing situation, would have gotten rid of it even if it meant that you had somep I ace? It wouldn't have situation. Than k how often uould r,re monitor someLhing Iike that. Once thosewould be a monitoring schedule to see that they're still inPlace. Conrad:get in,force or And what in Krauss: I guess with that than I I'd defer that to the engineers ulho have more experience Hempel: Ejther myself or another inspector would daily monitor the site.. Conrad: [,Jou I d you realIy? Hempe I : to ma ke tJe sure do that to all our improvementthe improvements are goin9 to DaiIy visit the siteto the plans. pr ojects , accordi ng conYad: Real ly? Erhart: l.Jhy don't you, if you've got erosion running into the creek rightLoday, urhy isn't it correcLed today? Hempe]: t^Je have made we've had no luck.attempts to get the applicant to do that but so far Erhar!: t",hat have you done on those attempts? t,hat kind of action? Hempel: tle've stated in letters. Certified leLters to the applicant torestore the site. HainLain erosion control throughout. Reseed it and it'sfailed to generate any action. Emmi ngs: So there you Conrad: And how long go has this happened or lasted? Hempel: Yes. Planning Commission l.leet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 40 Hempel 3 Since probablv the end of l'1ay, Since the project has Krauss: I'd also like to add, ue have no letter of credit at draw on. Had we had that, u,e uould have already drawn it. Emmings: Did they in fact set aside topsoil on the part that excavated so far ? Hempel: There is topsoil stockpiled on the stopped. this poi nt tr- they 've Erhart: Did some of that topsoil run doun Hempel: That site it Nas placed directly onbasically sheet drains in every direction so concentrated enough to flow into the ditch. site i nto toPir so not ir 9e! right now. the creek? of the knol Iprobably did Krauss: tJe tried to take a shot at u,hat r.ras a reasonable dollar amount. tle talked t,ith our engineering department about Lhat. The number is not a magic numher. There wasn't a formula that we used to derive it. t,ildermulh: tlell urhat we just heard about creek erosion problem isconsistent with everything that's gone on in the past hrith the applicant.I guess it's about time ue take some action. Erhart: Let's say you get a storm and you see clay and di.rt washinginto the stream, how fast can you respond if they bJon't? tlhat do you them 30 days to do it or 7 dey? downgive Hempel: t^le give Lhen 72 hours t,o resLore Che erosion conLrol or ure'II endup doing it and charging it back to the project. Erhart: 72 hours. tlhy so much time? Uildermuth: It's not easy to get a contractor r i ght? 24 hours but lesally there'sHempel: Yeah, most contracLors compty r,{ithin something we have to give Lhen 72 hours. t,i Idermuth : haven't gone ule have i.t, I don'tthe city contractor be smart but how hired contractor How can in with mean toor city come eJeet this conrad: I'm not sure, .Like Tim said, the !E3O,OOo.OO letter of credi! Ne've gct to trust, you're the professionals. It just doesn't seem, based on the magnitude of urhat's happened here and Tim you've got to help me because you have a better sense for some of this stuff but it just doesn't- seem like that can compensate for some of the things that can go on.tlhether it be the pollution or the road, it just seems ]ike it's a small amou nt !.lildermuth: Yeah, iust r.rhat we heard about the creek. It sounds like theCity's 9oin9 to have to 9o in there and make the correction if the applicant isn't 9oin9 to do it so we've got to probably double this bond sr we can afford. . .conLractor to go in there and get Lhe job done. Planning Commission l,,leet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 41 poi nE to correct Folch: I don't and do that. the stream? think we've had any uJay to recoup our costs if r.re did 9o in tJildermuth: Okay. So now you'd have some bond money to draw on. Erhart: I would Lhink as a minimum condition here lhat this should not beapproved until the site was brought up to the standards. Add anothercondition here, Contingent upon bringing it up to current standards forerosion control . I'd Like to have a response from Loren. Do you have to wor k on Satur days? Loren Hebbeger: I guess basically what we're looking at is to get thisproject done as quicklv as possible. That's our intenL. tle could probably have this thing done within a 50 to 90 day period. ]^le 90 in there andwe'll be out. As a matter of fact, it r.rou Id have been done already. Erhart: Al I phases? Loren Hebbeger: All phases. l^,e've got a volume that h,e can move fast andIike I said, we've already hauled 12O,OOO yards out of Chaska within just aIlttle over a month so I guess I'm not trying to push this thing along butwhat our interest is is to get this developed to an agricultural situation back for Mr. Jeurissen who wj.ll be participating in the development. tJejust want to get the job done is urhat it amounts to. The reason r^rhy thaterosion has heLped, as far as certified letters, we have not received anyLhing f rom the shut down and l,,lr. Jeurissen is the applicant and thisgoes back to, !.,rhen? Bruce Jeurissen: lliddle of May. Loren Hebbeger: The middle of l,lay. So as far as erosion control , we're 1OOZ for that but we have not even been made aware of anything. As a matter of fact, this permit was supposed to be issued within a short period of time. Of course ure had a lot of rain. Oon't get me urrong but ue'resorry if there was a problem there but we !.,ere not made aware of it. Emmings: Have you been out to the site? Loren Hebbeger : Yes . I have been. ],lr . 'Jeur issen Iives there. llay?Emmings: Yeah, have you been out to the site since Loren Hebbeger: on probably a weekly basis,yes. controls that you put up r.rereEmmings: Have you noticed that Lhe erosion no J.onger there or no longer functioning? Loren Hebbeger: I don't feel that there's anything really serious aboutthe situation. Emmings: You've ]ooked at them and they look okay to you? Planning Commission Meeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 42 Loren Hebbeger: Risht. This has occurred aIl over the metropolitan area. Loren Hebbeger: Soi I erosion problems. has trashed I mean it's. Erhart: Do you feel that dirt into the cree k? Erhart: I'm asking you. Do you feel that dirt has washed into the c)-eek? Loren Hebbeger: No. I don't feel thatmatter of fact, Bruce is the one that's there's anythins excess. As abasically on site every day. Loren Hebbeger: NoLhing of excess. It urent dotrn the hill into a swampyarea is.basically what it amounts to, you can talk to Hr. Jeurissen. Imean he's the one that's there. f'm not trying to argue here uith you.guess f don't feel that there's a big problem here. I Hempel: rf I could comment on that. A recent site inspection about a oeekago the culvert that uJas installed underneath this project, both sides of -the culvert did have rip rap on in the iniLial installation. Hourever, dueto lhe recent rains here over the summer, the rip rap is now downstream ofthe culvert. AIso, the erosion control was put up along the south side of-the site and along the east side and along the ditch. There was left anearth berm approximately 3 to 4 feet hish and that earLh berm has brokenthrough at a weak point and has been, the channelization and source of all-the erosion going directly into the ditch. Conrad: Okay. r.re're talking have staff giv because I see,just appears t urhole bunch ofis running it nothi ng happenEssential andother thing is hearing critic Erhart: Less than 1OO yards? Hempel: I would say approximately less Lhan 1OO yards, yes. that theyprefer tothat that, seems li ke tJell, I think we have to have staff review the amount thatabout in terms of a letter.of credit. I think we have toe us some kind of commitment in terms of the monitoring now that I found it, the $3O.OO per hour rate. you knoul , ito me ure need a lot of monitoring and ue need staff to pay a -attention Lo this unt.iI r^re're convinced that the applicantwithin the scope of this permit. I think Steve you said thats, Tim broughL that up? Okay. I think that,s important.you know that one thing I hear in Chanhasse more than anyLhe lack of enforcement. The Iack of monitoring. f'm notisms with some of the ordinances. I'm hearing fiom neighborst do anything about it. And geez, here,s a case where I,dd steff time a different t^lay. $3O.OO an hour, I'm not surerather use the slaff for something else to be honest. ThaLaste of time to go out and monitor this with something that'q- don' spe nI'd aw Erhart: tlhat's occurred? Erhart: HohJ many yards would you estimate went into lhe ditch? Hempel: There's not a sand delta built up where this point enLers theditch. Houever you can see remnants of it dounstream where the silt hasf ilLered out in the slor,ler uater. Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 43 in the future. Something that's a mining operation basically and reallydoesn't benefit the community a whole Iot at the current time. So Iguess I'm really, I guess I challenge the staff to figure out how thisdoesn't cost us time away from other projects to telL you the truth. yet on the other hand, where we monitor this thins, because I'm concerned. I'mflat out concerned and until they prove to us that they can uork acceptablywell here in the City and geez, I don't think h,e're that lough to workwich, I Lhink tre just have to be really concerned. Especially uith the factthat we're basically strip mining. [.Je've exposed stuff . tde've got drainage problems. tle've goL uind problems if it's a dry summer. l.,e'vegot traffic problems. There's a lot of considerations that bother me aboutthis and maybe that's just because f'm not familiar urith uhat it is. I r^rould hope that He could do it as quickly as possible. Just get it donewith and then we don't have aI1 this stuff. Then our monitoring can be shrunk too but . Loren Hebbeger: Let me just make a statement here. [^le've moved a ]ot ofmateriaL in different areas and basically if you've got a Ietter of creditor a bond, that basically ensures that all specs urill be met and if they're noL me!, you caII a letter of credit or Lhe bond. I don't think you needan inspector out there, which I can agree wiLh what you're saying is your people are more valuable Lo be on anoLher site and if Che thing is Lrashed, which I'm sure l4r. Jeurissen is going to let his site be trashed becausehe's involved with the development. I agree uith what you're saying buL aLthe same tjme, the bond or letter of credit uill cover any problems that ifit's not done according to specifications, you call it. That's thesituation. Conrad: You know we review a ]ot of development proposals here and many times ule feel r,re get burned because ue're nice guys. Loren Hebbeger: I admit you're concerned. Conrad: ...take care of it and ue've been burned on people clear cutLing. [.,|e've been burned on a lot of environmenta] things and it's one of the fewassets. It's one of Lhe assets ure try to preserve and that's theenvironment. I!'s whether it be the bluffs, the trees, the creeks, theu,ater. tlhen you say that you've been there since Hay and some of our erosion control vehicles are down and not working, I'd rather not have staff tell you. I'd rather have you figpre lhat out and you take care of it. I'd rather, you knour that's the poirit of your business is to make surethat you don't harm anyLhing else so just the nature of some of the things being brought up tonight makes me concerned. Makes us teII staff watch them and that's not fun to do. tle'd rather not do tha!. Loren Hebbeger: I can one bit.agree with your concerns and I can't argue urith you Emmings: I think an investment in monitoring this one is also justified by the fact that as more proposals come in, ule're going to have a betLer base of knowledge on how to deal with them. So I think it's important to iustto gain some knowledge and experience uriLh Lhese Lypes of projects. Planning Commission tleeL i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 44 Emmings: I'm going to move that, Iet's see. tjhat am I moving? I'm going_ to move that ule approve Interim Use Permit *9O-2 Lo excavaLe material fromthe Jeurissen farm subject to the conditions in the staff report with thefollowing changes. You have an introductory staLement there that violationof these conditions would resu.It in immediate suspension of operations, -Now is that, I'm wondering if that shouldn't be a condition as opposed tobeing in a Iittle preamble there. Krauss: That trould be fine. Emmings: Or is that what the. Krauss: That is provided in the ordinance in terms of revoking. Emmings: l.ie]l let's make it explicit so number 12 that sentence that's conLained opening paragraph. Then as number 13, ato issuance of this permit Lhe applicantcontrols and rernedy any problems causedcontrols to daLe to the satisfaction of4, we'd limit the hours of operations to Monday thru SaLurday. I guess LJhat I would do is add as-as the second sentence in that ner., one that would say that pr iorshall repair the existing erosion- by failure to maintain thoselhe City Engineer. AIso, in numbe. Honday thru Friday as opposed to t"tildermuth: t^lhy take Saturday off though? Emmi ngs: That's my motion. Erhart: I second it- Ahrens: Are we going to increase the letter of credit? Emmings: My understanding is that his direction to staff uras to revieu, th,- amounL in the Ietter for credit and make sure it's adequate between nou, an,the time it goes to the City Counci]. So f guess my motion is made takingthat into consideration that that urill be done. Krauss: Cou]d I possibly ask you to make sure that ele were going to biIIthat's in there but under subheadingbullet that says cover costs of site can use the letter of credit to draw modify that? You kno..J we wanted to back our time at $3O.OO an hour andor under condition 1 I'd like to add ;- monitoring so that it's clear that e,e agai nst . Emmings: AlrighL. I'd include that in my motion. Erhart: okay, I'11 second the motion. Conrad: Any discussion? t,lildermuth: Do you want to incJude monitoring of the haulage by thesheriff's department or the County patrol and compensation for Lhat? Conrad: Anything else? Is there a moLion? Emmings: l^Jhy don't you make a motion for an amendment. f guess I don'!understand. It seems to me, it's more important to me that the sLaff knouJswhat's going on out there than that the county sheriff's of f .ice. If thecounty sheriff has to go out there to check some things, I guess I don,!feel that. Wi ldermuth: Ithat i nte ns ive m concerned about the road and the safety aspect of it withhauling. Emmings: That's the County's job it seems to me. That's, weII of course we pay them to do that don't ue? Krauss: t^.iell I mean the County is out there patrolling alL the time interms of the Sheriff's department but we may want to ask them to do extramonitoring when they're hauling to make sure that loads are tarped. To make sure that they're t^rithin weight guidelines. To make sure nobody's speeding so we may be in a position of asking the County Sheriff to put onan extra patrol occasionally to back us up and r.re had anticipated beingable to reimburse their time as we]l. Erhart: You've thought that in your statement in ilem 1 included that? Krauss: lJel I item 2I think covers it but Commissioner tJildermuth would Ithink wanLed us to be more specific. tle just said County sLaff time tomonitor and he asked that the sheriff's deputy be added. Emmi ngs: Okay. I'd amend instead of City and County time and County Sheriff. the motion then Lo include that in number 2. Sostaff time it *ou1d say, City and County staff Krauss: Sur e . Wildermuth: t,hat's your thinking Steve on taking Saturday out of theoperating hours? Emmi ngs: I don't know.they have to be ripping Saturdays is off time. It just seems appropriate to me. I don'! up and down there when folks are at home I see why 9UeSS. Erhart: 8uL on the other hand, Uhat assurance do you have that they'regoing to try and get this thi.ng done as far as they can. There'sabsolutely noLhing on any piece of paper from this group thaL says it hasto be done in a year. In fact we gave them a permit what, how.many years ago and they uJent in and did it Iater so you're basing this on the assumption that lhey're going to go in and do it as fast as they can. tlildermuth: That's true but I'm assuming that Lhey want to get the project done because Mr. Jeurissen probably lrants to get back into the farming PIanni ng Commission l.1eet i ng August 15, 1990 - Pase 45 tlildermuth: But on the other hand, it seems like the sooner this projects gets compleled the Iess disruption. Emmings: Hake a motion to amend it. Planning Commission f'{eet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 46 business or they urant Lo develop it. Loren Hebbeger: He Hants to get certified. That's what we're basica)ly. -It's holding him up right nor.r. ThaL's one of the reasons ure Hant to be onthe Saturday. Get, the thing done and I think wi.thin a very short period ortime we can move the thing and get it done because the quanLities will movefast. l.le do need a Saturday. I just,6 days a week in an orderly. As a - matter of fact SaLurday's a better siluation because of the fact Lhatthere's not as much traffic and we can move the material. Chaska, we had no problem with that. t^lildermuth: Let's not restrict the applicant. Emmings: I'lake a motion to amend my motion. I,Jildermuth: I'II make a motion to amend the original motionstatement about restricting Saturday operations and allow theope)-ate6daysaweek. Conrad: Is there a second? The motion fails. tJildermuth: Okay, we've got a moti.on on the table. str i ki ng the appl icant to - Conrad: Any other discussion? Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval. of Interim Use Permit *9O-2 to excavate material from theJeurissen Farm subject to the follording conditions: 1 Submit a !630,OOO.OO letter of creditCity. The letter of credit will be format acceptable to theto ensure the fol lowi ng: in a used nrai ntenance of erosion conLrol; site restoration on a phase basis; preparation of 'as-buiIt' grading plans preparing demonstratingcompliance with approved pIans, on a phased basis; cover costs of site moniloring by City and County slaffs. Pay a Uniform Building Code grading permit fee of $7A7.56. City County staff time and County Sheriff time Lo monitor and inspec! and the 2 repair of haul roads due to damage caused by the operation asdetermined bv City and County stCff; removal of mud and debris from haul roads as frequently as requiredby City and County staff; control of dust and other nuisances; noise analysis and other testing if required; 4 ope!-ation is to be charged to the applicant at a rate of $3O,OO per hour. Noise levels stemming from Lhe operation are not to exceed MnPCA and EPA regulations. If the City determines that there is a problem u,,arranting such tests shal.l be paid for by the applicant. Hours of operation are limited Lo 7:OO a.m. Lo 6:00 p.m., Mondaythrough Friday and prohibited on National Holidays. If the City Engineer determines that traffic conflicls result due to rush housetraffic f Ior.ls, the hours of operation will be appropriately restricted. No activity t^rill be permitted during Lhe U.S. Open Golf Tournament. Provide a revised erosion control plan for st.aff approval. The revisedplan should provide full protection for the creek, ureLland and drainageareas. Erosion controls to be established and approved by the Cityprior to the start of excavation activiLy. Failure to maintain erosioncontrol will result in revocation of the permit. Under the first phase of Lhe operation, the applicant shall clean and restore the creek channel to the satisfaction of lhe City Engineer. 5 Submit a revised grading plan prepared by a professional indicating tha! no area r.,,il] be excavated below the 971 'ensure Ehat homes can be built above the 959' 1OO floodthe futur e engl neerelevation toelevation in 6 7 Oblain spprova). of the Ri]ey-Purgatory-Bluff Creek l.,latershed Distric! and mainLain the operaLion in fulI compliance urith Lheir requirements. Excavation to be phased in accordance with approved plans. As-builtgrading plans prepared by a professional engineer indicating finishedgrades shall be prepared by the applican! for each phase, for Cityapproval, to demonstrate compliance uith approved plans. Site restoration sha]I be completed on a phased basis before work isalloued to proceed on the following phase, Provide a revisedrestoration plan indicating depth of top soil and ground cover for cityapproval Slopes over 182 are Lo be permanently vegetated r,rith an acceptable ground cover. The applicant r.ri]I be held respnsibld for conlrolling dust and fumes from the site. A plan providing details of the method to be employedto c.Lean truck tires before they exit onto the public right-of-way isrequired for staff approval. It shall be installed prior !o the seartof work. It shall further be the applicant's responsibility to clean the public right-of-qay as often as required by staff. Pjoneer Trail is the only permissible haul road in Chanhassen. otherroutings uill require revieu and approval by the City Council. Appropriate "trucks hauling' signage shall be posted and kept in good condition. Prior !o the sLart of work, the condition of Lhe haul roadwiII be documented by the City and County staff and the applicant uill be held financially responsible for all damage that, in their opinion, I 9 Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 47 J 10. Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 48 is cuased by the operation. 11.The City will work with the CounLy Sheriff to coordinate speed andweight checks. If trucks are violating traffic laus, staff willrequire that the operation be shut down and will ask the City Councilto revoke Lhe permit. 72.Violation of these conditions will. result in the immediate suspensionof operalions by city staff urith the permit being brought back to LheCity Council for revieur and possible revocation- 13.Prior to issuance of this permit Lhe applicant shall repair theexisting erosion controls and remedy any problems caused by failure to-maintain Lhose controls to date to Lhe satisfacEion of the City E ngi neer AIl voted in favor except Annette ElIson who opposed and the motion carrie(with a vote of 5 to 1. E]Ison: f don't think it meets our permit standards that are listed inhere. Number 2 and number 7. Conrad: And 2 and 7 are urhat Annette? EIlson: 2 is that it's consistent uilh the City's comprehensive planjs that it's not going to involve activitjes that would be detrimentalpeople or properLy such as noise and traffic. and 7to - Conrad: okay, Lhanks Parll . Conrad: This item goes to City Council. September 1oth. Thank you Krauss: Mr. Chairman, could I clarify that? Eecause Lhere uas a desire t( wor k this through as quickly as possible, ure've been asked by severalpeople on the City Council to have this on lheir next meeting r.rhich isAugust 27th. INTERIM USE PERHIT FOR A GRADING PROJECT TO FILL lOO.OOO CUBIC YARDS OF I.IATERIAL TO SUPPORT AN EARTH DAI,I LOC TED AT 1OOO GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD. DON HALLA. This item was withdrawn by the applicant. PUBLTC HEARTNG: PRELII,IINARY PLAT AND SITE PLAN REVIET.' TO REPLAT 2 LOTS INTO ONE AND FOR A RETAIL t.tALL BUILDING OF 11.822 SOUARE FEET ON PROPERTY ZONED CBD AND CATED ON LOT OOHBERG ADDITIO RONTIER rL T BLOOI.IBERG COI.TPANIES . Public_Pr_eseng: Name Addr ess Kevin P. HcShane John D. Rice Herb Bloomberg Clayton Johnson Brad Johnson Fred Hoi si ngton conr ad: You can me Don or Ieast you Fred Hoisington:itisl be I ieve - anything you want to Fred. didn't leave toniEht like you did the last Oon, caIl Fred Hoisington:time I was here. AT Conrad: tJell I was going to make the comment, it's after 1O:3O. It must be time for Fred. Fred Hoisington: That's about right. I think it's always 1O:3O or after.Let me just sa), that ure would very much liked to have had an overall plan before we were to render an opinion on how the parking would r.ror k here.tle're confident houever that a plan can be developed that will in fact urorkbut what it's going to reguire is that we not face ever)rthing onto tlest 78th Street and lhat ure have to begin to internalize that block. Thedifficulty right now though, as most of you know, is that the parameters are very well established for this project. You can't change it. f meanyou can cut little pieces of it off and reduce it's size and so forth butthis is the kind of thing that as long as I've been involved here ue sranledto see happen here. A restaurant, shops and those kinds of things so it's important ure lhink Lhat it occur and I guess the botLom line is Lhat you have time to !,ork out or have them $,ork out a plan over time that will infact urork. tle're confidenL that that can happen. Nou, if a number of things happen simultaneousLy on this site, or in this area, there is a realpolenlial for a parking problem. That can happen anyplace in downtoun Chanhassen but here I think maybe the risks are ever a little higher. The Planni ng Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 49 18O South Shore Court 5O5 No. Hwy. 169 TOOB Dakota Bloomberg Compa ni es Lotus Rea I ty consu I ta nt Paul Krauss presented the staff report. Chairman Conrad called the public hear i n9 to order. Planning Commission l.leet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 50 Dihner Theatre is only operating at about 9OO seaL capacity today butthere's more capacity in the Dinner TheaLre than that, Now there are some -divisions here that would suggest that we perhaps ought not consider the Oinner Theatre but ue can't avoid that because if it is fuII, and thepotential exists for that to happen in November and December, then j.t r^rill _use literally all of the parking that's in front of the old Frontier Center urhich means that the 43 parking spaces that are available to this development alone can't begin to saLisfy it's ourn parking demands. Now, inthe short term, and the short term could really be a Iot longer than I can-visualize at this point. The centerpiece or the old Frontier Center overto the furniture store doesn't operate during that peak 6:OO to 9:OOperiod. OnIy the hardurare and the rental store do and they close at 7:3O.- The others c.lose at 5rOO. t.lhat that means is that even if the DinnerTheatre is operating at something approaching capacity, and the newFrontier Center is operating at something approaching capacity, you'reprobably in pretty good shape for quite a long period into the future. Nor- !.rhal we hope wi I I happen here is that this center r.rill be so successfulthat it wiII bring a lot more people into this area than we can everimagine and u:hen we were out there counting cars for the Dinner Theatre, I-Lhink it uras 2 ueeks ago, it uas depressing because there uere no carsthere at al). But r.,hat you see today is not what you're going to see i.nLhe future and if this has any chance of being successful, which I think it-has, I think we're going to see some things next door that will also besuccessful and the synergy of this uhole thing r.rill or does have Lhepotential. to create a parking problem but I don't think you're riskinganything in the short term in that case. Regarding the report itself,guess if you'd Iike to ask questions about any of the specifics there,be happy to ansHer them but I'm not sure unless you r.rant me to, to 9o iall those percentages and so forth in detail. Conrad: Unti] they move out. I.rd nto Conrad: I'm just curious Fred, urhat the parkins solution is. Fred Hoisington: t^,el1 Ladd, the parking solution is one that is anevolving one. IL's not one uhere you can necessarily solve it aII right nou because this whole piece is going to remain as it is. It's not 9oin9to change. Paul and I have been exploring or thinking about all the thingfthat could happen here and pe've been looking at this whole center area fota Iong time and trying to figure out grays to make that Hork. Short oftearing down this buildins and then internalizing things so that you infact have parking on lhe back side. You have plenty of room for parkingout here. The only problem is you have a grade change here and somehow yotr have to be able to step dourn that hiII so that you can make this parking work for that center and we think it can be designed to do that but the immediacy of doing that isn't''here because there isn't development yet forthis center. And it functions at less than urhat we pould expect it togenerate in the uay of parking because iL's not a real strong but thesolution Ladd will come...and the short term, I don't think you'll have aproblem. The short term is until something begins to happen here. Fred Hoisington: WelI, first of all the rental folks here are going to moveout and that's going to leave a rather peculiar space here tha! has !o be -used for someLhing but no. Until something changes here in the interim use, Erhart: In a different structure? Fred Hoisington: Possibly a different structure. I don't think thatstructure's going to Iend itself particularly a high generator of traffic.I just don't see it. For example, that rental store, you've got 6.OOOsguare feet of what they term retail. It has 3,4OO square feet I think ofstorage and yet just the dimensions and the way it works, I don't knour thatthe Hhole 6,OOO can be occupied for a retail use. It just doesn't lenditself to that so I think Tim you're right. l.Jhen the building changes.then I think r.re have some real serious problems. Fred Hoisington: Or opportunities, exactly. Erhart: The real problem today is that there's no convenient, there's noway to 9e! from lhe rear parking lot to the front where the retail isbJithout walking around some things. There's no thru uay to walk in. Fred Hoisington: t^le've thought about escalators, elevators, al.I thosethings back here to get people easily out of the corner of this buildingand down into the back side but you know ue can talk that all we want to. t^,,e stilL have some space that needs to be used for something other thanuarehouses, what this can be used for now, and this use we're treating thisis as a warehouse. The Hooked on classics portion of it because it reallyisn't a big generator except when they have shours. tthen they have shows ofcourse they don't conduct them there, they conduct them someplace else. conrad: okay, thanks Fred. Clayton, do you !.ant to talk to us? Clayton Johnson: Clayton Johnson representing the Bloomberg Companies.I've got a couPle other gentlemen r.liLh me here tonight. I,ve got JohnRice, our legal counsel and Herb Bl.oomberg our president and owner and I'dLike to invite them to participate r.rith me in this and maybe if you Hant tospeak up a little bit, Herb might have a hard time hearing you. tJhi]e youguys urere dealing u,iLh aII these oLher weighly issues, r.le walked over t,othe hotel tonight and ure're ready to open tomorrow night. l,Je,ve got teJofloors ready to occupy and Friday and Saturday night ule're going to be soldout. So that's kind of a fun problem and it's kind of exciting to go overthere and be a part of that. I thought that maybe a better use of our time r.rould be to adjourn and go over there because if you went over there you'd understand a lot better a lot of the things that we're 9oin9 to talk abouttonight. Paul , you fooled me. I'd never know that you recommended approval of this thing by reading your report. The conclusions, the factsunderlying the recommendatj. ons don't lead me to believe that you supportit. I uant to first of all deal uith the parking issue. Parking is a concern that's been expressed by Paul and by Fred and obviously as ownersof this property r.re're concerned about it. tle cereainly uouldn't urant tobuild a building that we couldn't rent to anybody because there h,asn't aplace to park. I do disagree though with some of Lhe conclusions. Fred'sreport basically to me supports the program and supports the project. Idon't know where Paul drew the conclusion that parking was a problem fromFred's report, l.rhen I read Fred's report and he says it isn't a problem. The Iong term concerns, somebody made the comment tonight that uhen Planning Commission Heeti ng August 15, 1990 - Page 51 Er hart: Or opportunities. Planning Commission t,leet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 52 hardware vacates we're going to have a more intense use there. I don't agree with that. The harduare is a very intense use. I don't believeyou're goin9 to find tenants that.will generate more visits than Kent doesin that Iocation. It happens that that building is not 5,ooo feet ofretail facing the front, it's 4,OOo. It's approximately 5-2O foot bays 5o-feet deep. The way e,e look at this project is as follous. tle think that over the years there's been aII this discussion about how we're going to connect Lhe hotel to the Dinner Theatre and how ue're going to have people -going back and supporting that retail. That's a lovely thought but it's not a fact. l.le have not been successful r.rith retail that lives off of the theatre trade. tlhat you have from the hotel to the furniture store is a -convenience center that is a mirror image of u,hat you have on Lhe other side of the street in Retai] l.Jest. And I did an analysis of that and theparking stalls in Lhat area are 164. You have 153 on Retail t^lest right across the street. No!., the comparisons are as follows. We wiII have, whe- this nei,: building is completed, we uill have 18,ooo square feet of retail. tle wi]I have 6,ooo square feet of restaurant. tle'J] have the neh, 5,OOO square foot restaurant and PauI's DeIi of 1,OOo. tle wiII have 5,ooo squar- feet of office which Retaj.l tJest does not have and we'II have 154 Parkingslalls to serve that area. So I mean parking is a concern of us before ue would ever. The other thing is this whole thing got sLarted on the u,rong -foot. I mean ue see this as the final piece in a big Puzzle that r^re've been working on foy 4 !/2 years which is called the redeveloPment of dou,ntohjn Chanhassen. Sure r^re're involved in eorking on the new retail shopping center but that's out in a raw Piece of ground. That's not redevelopment. This is the final piece in the redeveloPment Puzzle. tlhen we agreed to have our building demolished and we demolished 3o,ooo feet bv the uray of building to make uay for the hotel, we didn't ever consider that- it would be a problem to rebuild 12. l.Je looked at these Parking situation: Iong before u,e ever agreed to the demolition of our buildins. The other thing and some of the comments that were made that were not contained in the report but uere made tonight, the Dinner Theatre parking has changed. - I think it's a mistake to judge the Dinner Theatre Parking by what you remember. The Dinner Theatre parking as you remember it uras before ue had the neur road in front of the Dinner Theatre. Before we created aII the ner-parking over lhere and you probably recall as I do, t,hen r,re had vehicles par ked aII the way down in front of Frontier Center. I challenge that.That's changed. There's been provision for bus parking and there's asubstantial number of additional parking stalls up there on the theatreparking lot so that's a new situation. I Lhink it's going to be difficultfor us to come to some sort of a resolution tonight and I think that asI've been a part of these things in Lhe past, the process shouldn't beuhere the staff report comes in and we sit here and disagree uith everysingle recommendaLion. I mean iL puts you in a position tJhere these thi.ngsshould be uorked out ahead of time but I guess in fairness to everybody, urr had our submission ready on July 2nd. tre ulere on Lhe August 6Lh agenda. l.le were pulled off the August 6th agenda because the staff report wasn'tdone. I got Lhe staff report on Tuesday morning. Yesterday. I called PauI today to try to work some of these things out. tre haven't been ableto so I mean I woulour feelings on eacdifficult and it'sproject unl i ke the a375,OOO.OO to buil e happy to go through the laundry list and give you nd every one but I think it's going to be veryreat inconvenience Lo us. Our financing on thispping center, the financing is there. The he building's in the bank. The hotel people are dbhaag shodt Planning Commission Heeting August 15, 1990 - Page 53 obviously very anxious for us to get that ugly sprinkler pipe covered upbefore urintertime and get this building in place so time is of the essencebut I think it's going to be very difficult. So Ladd if you want me to, IwiII go through starting on page 2 and give you my comments. Conrad: Misht as bJell. Clayton Johnson: tle go to page 3 in regard to the provisions inLhis. Fermanent iross access and parking easements. Conrad: Just a second Clayton. grantj.ng Emmings: He should go to page 11 and 12. Clayton Johnson: Okay, lhey cover them aII?I haven't missed any other comments on their I just h,ant to make sure that comments but I can do that. Emmings: If vou 9o through the conditions, r think it would be easier forus to keep sLraight r,,rhat you're saying. Clayton Johnson: Okay. I 've got them al I mar ked up. AIr ight . Number 1 ,Herb's designed, built everything in downLown chanhassen. He doesn,t feerhe needs anv architectural help. Revising the architectural pl.ans to putbrick on, r Lhink Lhat's over reaching. Trash storage facilities, we don,thave anv problem with that and designing exterior trish storage withmasonry, that's not an issue. on item number 2. permanent cross accessand parking easements shall be filed over properties that comprise theFrontier Ce nter /B loomber g/D i nner Theatre/HoLel complex. The easement shaIIinvolve the City in chain of titl.e so that rights cannot be unilaterallyeliminated bv property oHners in the area. r've got John Rice with me.He'd be happy to comment on that. That's not acceptable, There are crossparking easements that currently exist betureen the hotel and our properEy.There are currently cross parking existing between this center and theoinner Theatre but ue are not going to be givirig cross parking easementsbetr,leen this and the Dinner Theatre parcel. And the issue to accomplish itin the chain of title. The financing's already in place on the hotel . rcan't go over. ue don't own the hotel , l.le have an interest in it. rcan'L go over and dictaLe to the hotel owners that they wiII grant aneasement and that it r.rill be recorded and that their lender will permit it.r mean that's outside of my conlrol. The same thing is true on the DinnerTheatre. The people that are operating the Dinner Theatre have an optionand in that option it's very specific that cross parking easements do occurbut r cannot go over there and dictate and their lenders that these wilr berecorded and be in the chain of title. It,s outside of our control.Parking for 40 automobiles. tre own the city building to the rear. There'sparking currently in place, hard surface parking to accommodate 3OO andsome cars that bre have the risht to park on. rf there's a concern that weprovide parking for our employees, r.re would be more than happy to have lheminstruct them to park in that area but we don't see any reason to construct40 new paved parking spots on an area next to Hooked on classics which iscurrently under ]ease and they have the right to park there, l.,e can't goin and teII Hooked on Classics ue're going to take 40 parking stalls infront of their door. Their rease currently protects them from that. No ner^r food establishments shalr be considered. Here again. ure don't have a Planning Commission Heeti n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 54 problem with restricting any new food establishments in our center. I cannot sit here and guarantee you that the hotel will not have any foodestablishments. I don't own the hotel . tle can't tell you that the Dinner Theatre can or cannot come in. To say in this development and to definethe development as the Frontier Center, everything that goes from the hoteto the Dinner Theatre, that's very reasonable. tle don't have a problem with that. At the time the neh, addition is granted, a certificate of occupancy or Kent's got to get his rental equipment out of there. tlell , r.rr- don't want the building so bad we're going to put Kent out of business. I' iL's a problem and if it becomes an issue at sorne poinL in time, but to say that Kent cannot operate his rental business there. Number one, he currently has a Iease. tle fully intend that he's going to be the neur shopping center but I don't know if he's going to be there or not and if h,, isn't, he's going to u,ant a s!ay. Kent's been in this tou,n for a number ofyears. Been very successful in business. I don't believe he r.rants to Ieave and I'm not going to teII him that he has !o leave. If the Parkingat the rental is causing some sort of a problem, if there's a Parking issue over there, that's not objectionable. The snow storage is not an issue. -.The next item's very, no new additions or modifications to the building or uses of any of the involved properties. tlell here again, that's a very broad statement. tJe fully support the concept of a PUo and we !,ant to come. with a PUD for the balance of lhe property. AII Lhe proPerty that faces south. That is exactly what we want to do, however not in the current timc frame. As you've been aware of some of the other PUD Processes goes on for months and very honestly that rear of our property is not readv to be developed. The current use uhere ule've got Fragrance Harketing in there and the warehouse function, that's the current use today. I can't rent it for anyLhing else. Hooked on Classics in Lhe Frontier Building, that's a -good use right nour. At some point in time we would ]ove to come urith a net plan and to do that in the form of a PUD is, at that time is not an issue but that is currently very restrictive. And again, you have to understand- that u,e do not own the hotel property. You can't give the broad brush on - all of these parcels. Truck deliveries, I don't know where that came from, That's certainly nothing to argue about. The driveway running betu,een the north and south parking lot shall be paved. It tlas Paved. It's currently- been torn up as a part of a city proiect. The sewer and ulater project. I think there uJhat you should do is get your engineering staff and ask them to restore the premises in the condition in which they urere prior to the time construction took place. I'm sure it's the responsibility of the contractor. There's one issue that wasn't covered in the staff report. I'r,, surprised that Public Safety didn't make an issue of it. l.,e're concerned about it. There's currenLly a spr i nkler.'system that serves the bourlingalley and our property and that sprinkler system does not currently have a shut off under the control of the bouling center. And somewhere the fire marshall is going to have to work with us and with the bouling center and -tell us what the provisions for that should be. I don't believe that we brant, I don't lhink any of the old property ouJners hlant to have a situation where their sprinkler system, the shut off for their sprinkler system is outside of their control. That's an issue that I think has to be resolved for our benefit as well as the bouling center. I do have to 9o back just on a couple of things steve because one of the issues here is, an assumption has been made that u,e u,ant to replat the property and we did not- intend to replat the property. John Rice is here and he's happy to addrest that but we don't feel that the current city ordinance uould require that. Planning Commission Meet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 55 Clayton Johnson: restaurant? I think it's 1 Johnson: 1 per per 50. 50 square feet? t,e tl''ink it's unnecessary at this point in time. !.le would. have theproperty aIl under common ownership but ue feel that there aren,t any otherlenders involved. ue feel that can be accomplished urithout going throughthe replatting process. you know Lhere's a comrnent in here in the staiireport about tearing down the Frontier Building. I don,t know where thatcomes from. r mean the Frontier Building is a building of some 30,ooo to4o'ooo square feet. r can't imagine. rt's never been our plans to tear itdown, rt's very valuable. rt produces a significant amount of rentalincome. r don't know why we ulould consider tearing it down. r don't knowuhere that came from. It certainly is, it,s a steil and concretestructure. It can be revised. tJhat,d I miss? Anything? Oh, yeah 3.Parking plans. That parking lot,s already in. Thae's a city projectthat's been under construction. r hope we don't have to tear it out. Thecomment there is that it be revietred but they're just blacktopping thatright nor.r. There was a comment in the engineer's report about the Naterservice. That's iLem 4. That's all been done. That,s completed so thaL,sokav. sign plan. signage is a problem. rn our submittal what we did iswe_took the current, there is a current, urhat do you caII one of those bigtall signs? Pylon. tlell, there's an existing pyio, sign and what wepropose to do in our submission is to move the pylon sign to the middle ofour property, The pylon sign currently sits right here and it was justrelocated there and ue plan on moving it here to define Frontier center.Frontier center being here to here. The pylon sign in our submission uasto be relocaLed urith entrv monuments on either ent. r don,t knour, paul doyou have an i.ssue with that or do you b,ant to reave it where it is? Krauss: t^lell, r guess d really like to review it. r mean that u,asn,tclear from the plans r had that there's entrance monuments as well. r'mconcerned abouL what,s on the signs so r.le,d like to revieh that. C.layton Johnson: Okay. Yeah, the entry monuments at both driverlays andthe pvlon sign would announce the center and lhen a message board on therefor the tenants. you know on the landscaping, gee I thou;ht thelandscaping is verv elaborate. you know r.re,re iaking advintage of all Lhegreen space there that exists between the hotel and the building and thatue're planning on the restaurant overrooking that area and the iandscaping,if vou've got a set of our plans, we thought that we made the best possibteuse that r.re could of that. ue stayed off the property line even more lhanL'e krere required to create that green space out there. one of the thingsyou shou!.d understand is we do not have a tenant to occupy thet restaur;nt.tle wiII be building the shell but we rdant to make sure in this submissionand approval that we have the permission..to 9o in with I s,ooo square foo!restaurant and it would be intended that the restaurant would be on thearea overlooking the green space there beteJeen the hoLel and the shoppingcenter. Conrad: Hor.J many parking stalls Clayton do you need for that restaurant? tle figured, Paul what's the City ordinance on a Krauss: C I ayton PIanni ng Commission ?'leet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 55 Krauss: Yeah, gross. Clayton Johnson: So 25. Conradr See this is your business and you've got to encourage somebody to- come in there. If you're going to put up a shell and encourage them in there and you feel that a restaurant would come in and not feel . If they need 5O stalls, right there that uould r.lorry me and I'm not getting intoyour business but seeing what I see there for a restaurant, you don't Nant people walking. If you've got to uralk more than 3OO feet, thev're not going to do that. Clayton Johnson: There's 43 right in front. For insLance at the there's 53 to Lhe east. The Riv's 5,ooo feet and thev have 53 Lo Now they haven't had the use of that for the last year and a half that's what you have. l^Je have 5,OOO feet and ue have 43 right in River iathe east. but fro nl . conrad: And you don't think any prospect is going to be concerned uith not having themselves right aL the doorsteP? That seems like a real negative. - Clayton Johnson: But one of the uses, you know I do pooh pooh the value of the Dinner Theatre/hotel in regard to the retail but in regard to the restaurant, that's a definite Plus. A good share, I mean a significantportin of the restaurant's traffic is going to come from Lhe hotel guests ' No doubt about it, And from PeoPle that are at either the theatre or the -hotel. Sure we're concerned. tle don't know hott tle can create any more Iand though. I do that mirror j.mage. I sav here's Retai] l^Jest right across the slreet. Same number of stalls. Same amount of square footage. Ne have 5,OoO square foot of office. I don't think the office is going to- conflict with lhe restaurant in terms of parking and ue mirror that right across the street. t^le've oPerated Retail t,lest, I mean we haven't oPerated it but you've seen it oPerate now. Retail tJest's been in existence for a -yeay a half and they've operated urithout the 53 stalls. Retail t^lest and the Riveria have been operating wiLh whatever they've got there. I don't know whal they've got there. I don'! knou what they've got. Ahrens: But their restaurant in there only has about 2 occuPied tables at any given time. Clayton Johnson: The River ia? Ahrens: No, the other restaurant. The Chinese one. Clayton Johnson: tleII it'd be similar Lo MilIie's OeIi. isn't even open in the evenings. They're closed at 4:OO occupying approximately Lhe same amount of footage. t-liIIie's OeIi and they 'I I be Ahrens: That's not similar to the restaurant you're proposing? Clayton Johnson: No, but the Riveria would be. The Riveria would be similar. our restaurant r.ril,l mirror the Riveria in size and I ..rould think Iess parking demand because it's next to Lhe hotel. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 57 Krauss: If I could clarify a couple things. These are arguments ordiscussions that e,e've batled around periodically on a number of meetings.I think Fred can possibly shed some Iight on this comparison between thettro shopping centers and also oe've had several meetings to try torationalize the sets of numbers that r^re're starting with. But therestaurant alone generates a parking requirement for 1OO staIIs. Clayton Johnson: At 5,OOO, yeah. Krauss: And there's 43 stalls on this property. generates the same need. They're l^lildermuth: 1OO stalLs instead of 50? Clayton Johnson: And they have 53. Krauss: At 50 square foot per stal] gross, yes. Clayton Johnson: tJell the Riveriaexactly the same square footage. Clayton Johnson: 8ut PauI isn'f it true thaL the CBD, thethe CBD is to accommodate, f mean what did we envision?envision ulhen we started this r^rhoIe process and tore downsquare f oc,t building? I'd ]ike you to ralk over there. Ihell of a lot betier today than it did Iast October. urhole purpose oftlhat di d r.rethat 30,OOO thi nk it looks a Krauss: Much of this 30,ooo square foot building is noul containing thehotel. I mean there's not a full trade off here. There's a Iot oi hisloryhere. I depend on the City Manager for the history. I asked him to reviewthis report. He has. He's comfortable t"tith it. Fred can expand on someof the details in terms of comparison. l.,e're pretty comfortabl.e uith whatwe're saying. It's really up to you to decide. I think it,s clear lhatthis is not something that we're going to be able to work out. I meanclavton called me up this morning and said urell uhat can we do to work thisout and I said well Clayton, you've got the report in your hand, That'sour recommendation. That's what r^re think it's going to take to make thisthing wor k. It puts the commission in a tough position. I mean you Emmings: Not really because I have to 9e home . liked to have worked this out startingClayton Johnson: tlelI we would haveJuIy 2nd, I mean we're here now. Clayton Johnson: knour . Krauss: If I could clarify that too. July 2nd, r.re met. Ue asked for andreceived assurances that we would receive an overall development plan r.rhich ure never got. tje got some of the materials and there uere a few materialsmissing. The item uas delayed once. I wil,I take part blame for that, Ithink Clayton was on vacation too lhe same time I uas and didn,t return mycall when I got back into toh,n so there's a fair amount of discussion as to how Lhe delay occurred. But be that as it may, here,s where it sits todayand do with it what you wi]J.. Planning Commission Heet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 58 conrad: Fred, are there other things that you can respond to basedhearing? I'm sure you've heard both sides or knou uhere everybody's on Fred Hoisington: ....Ladd that I never agree urith Clayton's numbers. His comparisons and so forlh. I think there are differences betureen the tu,o sides of the street but on the other hand I don't think that's worthy of arguing over. t^le've already done that between us. I think the morepertinent question at this point is whether these conditions that Paul. is recommending are necessary and oe've talked about that and ule think they are pretty necessary. I can appreciate that Clayton does have some Problemor might have some problems uith a couPle of them. I think he's disagreeing- on everything there but a couPle might be difficult to do but I think inost of them are pretty doable if we could just agree. Claytc,n Johnson: Do you ujant Kent to move out? Fred Hoisi ngton: No. clayton Johnson: uell, why'd you put it in? Krauss: ft's getting lale and People tend to get tesLy and I really don't -want to do that at this point. Nobody's asking, the rental equjPment you knoar you can continue to rent renLal eguiPment. You just don't have to Put it on main street for everybody to see and I think it's a ridiculous argument to say that somebody's trying to Lhrou, anybody out because that's -certainly not the case here. conrad: okay. t,telI, this is a public hearing. John Rice: f promise to be brief. Hr. Chairman, my name is John Rice. I'm counsel for Bloomberg Companies. I iust b,ant to resPond to a couPle of things. The tear down of the building. There was two Parts. There's the - 10,Ooo square foot parL and then Lhere's the other Part that stuck out. There was a study that the city commissioned by BRtl as to whether or not that second part of the building should be torn down completely or uhether -only the outer northern facade and wall and somewhat back into the east anc west wall should be torn doun. And then the rebuildins of that building. Go on from there to have the retail purposes adjacent to the hotel . Nor,, if- ure had lhe east and west r,lalls standing, would ue be having this converstaion? BRI^, recommended that the whole thing come down becauseyou'lI end up with a better end product but r.,e oouldn't be having this discussion if we had an east and L,est waII standing there. tlould we? t^lould you say , gee you've got to leave it because you don't have enoughparking to do r.rhat you i.rant to do ind throughout all of this, the plan has been exactly the plan Lhat's proposed here. A complimentary retail/arcade/- mall area that compliments and provides aD access and transition to and from the hotel. f uant to speak just to matters of title. Mr. Johnson has covered all the other things and so I bron't reiterate what he said. That doesn't mean I don't agree r,lith him buL just as far as litle. Bloomberg doesn't contro]. the hotel partnership. I can assure you of that. I u,as involved in that transaction. Bloonberg does not conLrol International Theatre Corporation. Mr. Scalon. I was involved in that transaction. I -can assure you that we don't control him. t,le cannot control uhat Lhese other entities do and have for legal rights to operate their business in Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 59 space that they either Lease or own. tle don't control those mortagees. t,edon't control our own mortagees. t^,e are more controlled by them and urecan't dictate cross easements. Easements that they consent to this. ThatLhey consent to an additional encumbrance on land. Just can't' be done.Another thing. Even if there is a cross easement, despite the recommendation that the City be in Lhe chain of title so that Lhe thingscannot be unilaterally changed, that is not acceptable to have the City bein the position uhere all of that' is controlled by the City and that nochange can be made or for each and every change in the transfer, change ortransfer in the ownership or mortgaging of the propert.y, that theaccommodations of the City must be sought and obtained. And that appliesto each and every one of the places uhere somelhing is going to come in inlhe chain of litle. cross easements. There is a cross easement with thehoLel property. 8et!,een the hotel and this piece of property so there isaccess to the hotel parking spaces for this property as does the hotel haveaccess to this property for overf loi.r parking. Each case it's for overflowparking. FinalIy, in regards to the question of plaLting. Hr. Krauss andI disagree about r.lheLher or not plalting is required. f have read theordinance and I think I have all of it, The subdivision ordinance.There's not a requirement tha! the property be replatted. It may beinconvenient to have two separate parcels in some circumstance forming oneparcel that is the property that ue,re acting on but uhat we're talkingabout taking is 21 feet in depth off of what is Lot 3 0f the chanhassenl.lall and it's basically in the cantilevered area north of the FragranceMarketing section. 2! feel. by approximately, I don't kno*, 50 feet. Not averv Iarge piece. rf you're going to replat, what chen has to be replattedis Lot 2, Block 1, Bloomberg Addition with it's rel.ated easements onto theother property and all of, not just the 21 feet dourn into Lot 3,chanhassen MaII but the entirety of chanhassen Hall and there are so manyencumbrances on chanhassen HalI by reason of the party ualls. That meansthat the City will have to sign the plat. That means that t1r. Dorrick overin the Bowling AIIey's going to have to sign the plat and you're talkingabout a, you're just talking about a tremendous additionaL burden. Ifr mav quote the chairman in good uilI, we heard before that you do not want.to interject the government unDecessarily into the affairs of the management of property and this is a case to require replatting u,here it,snot IegaIlv required bv the ordinance even though under some circumstancesit misht be beneficial . It is an unnecessary and unduly expensiveintrusion into how the property is handled and platted and described. AIIit takes is a simple variance approval by the Council of a meles and boundsdescription that is less than the required 5 acres or 2 !/Z acres under theordinance. That's all it takes and you attach iL Lo the existing Lot 2,Block 1, Bloomberg Addition and you've gdt your property and you've gotyour lot. Thank you. Krauss: Could I address at least two of those things. In terms of the .platting. Frankly, I mean I don't knotr if tlr. Rice u,ants to 9o into meles and bounds division, if we'II find that acceptable or not but at thepresent time you're being asked to accept, I mean the CBO has a O setback.This building has a negative 2l fooL setback. That's not permissible. Mr.Rice not only disagrees with me, he also disagrees uith the City AtLorneywho's opinion I sought on the need to reguire platting for this. He alsodisagrees urith the City Building official who says that the situation hereis in violation of building code. As to the possibility of having Planning Commission Heet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 60 easements that have the City in the chain of title that encumber property, Mr. Rice should be fully aware that that's fully legal. In fact he aas aparty to us doing that in the corridor area that separates this site from the hoLeL Clayton Johnson: Nobody said it h,as illegal Paul , it's just can you do iL? Krauss: Yes. Clayton Johnson: ...there's an opportunity to do it. There's not a negative 21 foo! selback. t,hen we get aII done, the ProPerty underlying the building is going to be one owner and it's all going to be on theproperty. To describe it as a negative 21 foot setback is intentionallv misl eadi ng. It 's nol the case. Krauss: I mean we can argue this in front I can offer. You know it's sort of like a because our realities are so different and you toni ght . of you. I don't know what elseTwilight Zone episode her eI don't knouJ what else Lo offer Clayton Johnson: tlell ue starLed on JuIy 2nd and ue have to have a format. f mean I'm willing to stay here tonight until ure get it resolved. I don't- knour r^,hat's going to hapPen if ure table it and 9o back. t^,e'Il do tlhatever we can do but tJe can't do what we can't do. If we can't accomPlish the terms and conditions, t^re simply don't do the project. tle just bury thepipe. That's it. But I don't know what's going to be gained bv Postponinr- it. conrad: Any other comments? Is there a motion to close the PubIic hear i ng? Emmings moved, Ellson seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried- The pubLic hearing uas closed- conradr It's 11:15. Joan, we']l start with you . to do on this tonight. I meanAhrens: tlelI I don't know uhat r.re're going are we going to attempt to vote on this? conrad: [,Je sure could . l.le can send it 6f f . You knoB we 've €pt 3 choices t^,e can table it and see if they can h,ork it out. Obviously the key issue is this parking. Reasons for the parking problem goes back in history and -the applicant hes some valid concerns in terms of some historic reasons fot that and surprising jusLification for wanting to 90 ahead right now. on the other hand. staff has some standards that we apply to everybody Ahrens: Is this something that staff can u,ork out with the applicant? Krauss: No. I think that ure've had a series of meetings over this. trhat -ue're basically confronLed triLh is a situation where we say ue have an issue and the answer is, uell there's nothing Ne can do about that so ule conrad: Okay. StiII a public hearing. Any other comments? Planning Commission l.'leet i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 61 won't. Llhst you have before you is the r.lay it sitslike Lo think that there uould be some progress but Ahrens: WeII, in make a decision. and I'm afraid, I wouldI uouldn't count on it. that event. I guess it's up to us to 9o through this and Conrad: I think so. I don't think thelook like there's something we can sendit can be worked out. I think thetherget it out of here. applicant wants it. It doesn't back for more information so thatit goes ahead pro or con, we should Ahrens: I think the parking is a problem. I don't know how it can beresolved. tle're dealing with a limiLed Iand space there and it,s justgoing to be a problem. A lot of small downtown areas are problems likethat. r think that Lhe report that uas sent out, r agree with it. r meanthe parking situation isn't, how it's attempting to bt resolved is notideal but it may work. I don't think that I totally disagree with Claytonthat the parking situation on the west side shopping area is similar to theretai I area in the Frontier Shopping t',ta I I . I think it,s completelydifferent. The types of stores. As r understand it the type of restaurantthat you're proposing would be very different from the Riveria. It urouldbe more of an ar] dav kind of restaurant with breakfast and lunch and thatkind of a situation urhich urould bring a lot more people in. Drae, a lotmore people from the community. r think it's very different. r don't knowwhat to do about Lhe parking problem. r think that we may have to live trithit the hJav it is temporarily. Get as many stalls as possible from whereverwe can. It is a problem, Brad Johnson: Excuse me. I kind of represent the restaurant. the public hearing Brad? something about parking and why the Conrad: Nhy did't you speak during Conrad: I'd really be interested because I think... Ahrens: tJhich resLaurant is it by the uay? Brad Johnson: rt's like an Applebee's. rt's that food Iine. There is,and this is urhy I've never, Fred and I a Iong time ago we talked aboutparking. If you look over in here. 99* of the time this is pretty nearvacant. There's certain peak times that.'lhis is used. riIIy's is activeafter 9:oo. The bor^rling arlev is going arr day Iong but aII day long theyhave a tremendous amount of parking in there and r.lhat Fred is saying anduhat all of you have said, is somehou ure've got to get people to be able toenLer through here. That urilr take time because uho knows if the bowlingalley's going to be there forever. That type of thing and who knows ifthis is going to be there forever but in our grand plan ure even had aparking ramp here because we kneu someday we might have a problem butcurrently in dor,rntown Chanhassen there is no parking problem and that'swhat Fred's saying. Fred is saying thet ule can work it out because you'vegot to r.lor k it out or these guys r.rill die but today there's an easementwhere we plan on having the entrance of the courtyard that runs from here Brad Johnson: Can I just point outrestaurant people are not concerned? to here and a new stairway to 90 over to the hotel coming out this door. Clayton Johnson: It t^rould be helpful if you could do that. Brad Johnson: There's just a nice stairway that leads to al.I this parking- and there's how many parking sPots there? Probably 12O at anv one time so we perceive that anybody knous or lives in chanhassen is going to go to that restaurant and knous they can't Park here, other than in Januarv ulhen nobody goes to the restaurant, you iust drive over here. tlalk uP this nicr- litLle thing to the courtyard and Park there and that's aII in. t'Je have tremendous amount of parking down here and it just turns out, I didn't know it uras going !o be there, there's a nice sLairway which also allows Lhe Hater to run out of that area' right out the backdoor. There can be, when that restaurant's designed, there r.rilI be a door Put right here ' There could also be another door Put right here so it's even closer and they can- just go into here. You've got parking. There's Plenty of parking in that area to handle it, Conrad: I think that's your Problem and not ouYs but f guess I just don't- if I were running a restauranL and I worked for several of them, I'd be real nervous about. The visibilty is on 78th and that's trhere PeoPIe go. Brad Johnson: But it's no different than in Calhoun Square. Ahrens: tJelI a little different than Calhoun Square. Brad Johnson: The parking ramP that, I've gone doeln about that far away. PeoPle just learn that you 9o the fronL. You can't ge! in off Lake Street. Ahrens: That's different. therein the and access is back instead of Conrad: Well Brad, it's not not going to tell you hott to Ahrens: I think that's what we talked about said that r.le had, the parking was sufficient our business. That's your business and we're do it but. Brad Johnson: I'm just saying as a temPorary solution until figures this all out, okay? Long t€rm. You've got Parking 75 feet of the back door of the restaurant. somebody that 's r,r i th i n and that's uhat the report short term and that's what we agreed in Lhe very beginning. conrad: Can I jump in or would you rather for me to be quiet? Ahrens: Go ahead Oon. conrad: tlho's problem is it to figure this out? tlho's going to Pay to figure this out is my question. Krauss: There's a fundamenlal issue here though with whether or not citieL have the right !o regulate parking standards to keeP PeoPIe so that, make sure that people park on their ob,n property or brhether or not we have the - right to regulate anything quite frankly. I mean I've heard ever)r issue Planni ng Commission Mee! i n9 August 15, 1990 - Page 62 Planning Commission Heet i ns August 15, 1990 - Page 63 contested tonight. ClearIy I mean the ordinance establishes parking standards for the uell being of the communiLy. Nor4 if ue uanted to take alaise affaire approach, then tell us to change the ordinance and throw outthose standards because right now Lhis proposal is not consistent HiLh whaLthe ordinance savs. r mean specificarly the ordi.nance says that parkinghas to be r.rithin 4oo feet of a building entrance. t,tell not u,e're talkingabout coming through a back door of a hotel, through a corridor. I meanFred did take a look at where parking uas available on this property and ituras concluded that there's a uhole lot of stalls inside the ring road. Theproblem is they're not where people are going to readily use them and we'vea.Itrays conceeded that. r mean everybody knows they're there and the issueis hour do you get them Lhere and I don,t think that,s been ansr,rered. Theordinance also requires that parking that you're utilizing parking either-be under the same ownership and merge inlo a single tax parcel as the siteserved under public ownership !.rhere the use of parking facilities shall beprolected by a recorded instrument accepLable to the City. you're beingasked to vary that standard as uell. cravton Johnson: t^le ulanted to change all the tax parcels paul but to dothat, you r^touldn't ]et us uJithout going through the City. I mean r^re don'tobject to this uhole PUo process. ue don't think the r.rorld should stopwhile that happens. This parcel wilr be under one ownership. Everythingthat we have considered in our parking lot. Conrad: So there's not enough parking Long term, l.lho's goingthat? Is the City going Lo undertrrite solving that problem orBloomberg Companies' to solve the long term problem? to is solve that Herb Bloomberg: That's Bloomberg companies' problem. The front is alreadydone. tle've got all the curbs all poured. There isn't one inch of thatwhole 78th street Lhat isn't developed today. ue hope it's blacktopped byFriday. Okay. I don't think we have any problems. I just wish we would'stop grape hanging on Lhis whole subject and if you'II bear r.rith me for arrinute. of course ve only been involved in this for 30-35 years. About20 years ago someone came to the city Lo apply to build a concrete blockbuilding next to the Hanus building. They were right across in the feedmiII property and here ue sat uith a rather new theaCre and I thought mygoodness, that's going to be a heck of a thing to look at and so I boughtLhat piece of property. The feed mill propert), in self defense. ue heldit all these years. Paid taxes. No income on it. t,e cut the grass. l.teLried to put a split rail fence. Even looking half decent and now uhattoday, uJe've got a beautiful devel opment..a long that whole north side of78th Street. John Rice and Clayton Johnson have trorked on every piece ofthat north side of the street. There perhaps isn't a law pertaining toproperty on the books that haven't been explored in all these differentparcels but berieve it. rt's all done. l.te've now got a beautiful clinicacross the street. There's a lot of parking spaces in there but the bestpart is, and we certainly agree with what Fred is saying that there's noshort term problem. The long term problems Lo me are very optimistic.We've got one plat there behind the Frontier Building and I can shor.r you a3Oo foot square, 9O,OOo square feet of space and ue could use it all forparking. At one time here a couple years ago we vbted down a civic center.The civic center was going to take advantage of the passageuay and use thepropertv ' doubre decking maybe and put a parking ramp behind Filly's on the Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 64 west side. And so that's still a possibj.lity. I think legally that could be done but mainly, right behind our properties there, see ure operaLed a - Iumber company right there, lumber oPeration for 25 years and it was a wonderful place because it r.las shielded from the northtlest uinds. The walk out space and you could bring in trucks you could load and you. could, this- was very convenient place. Now that's the back end uhere the Classic Cars nor^, comes out but my feeling is that the really' this certainly is going tr, come on the souLh side and it's been brought up a few comments here, either eLevators or escalators in some of this ProPerty. I would much rather comr- to a resLaurant and say I'm going to Park in there behind. In the lot behind and walk in and take the elevator uP and then I'm on 78th Street. This is the way, there's iust no question that that's the b,av that's going- to be developed. But as far as 78th Street today is concerend' it's done - It's completed. It's finished and I don't think ure have anv Problems unless we just imagine them but we do have to ' h,e can't. . . [^,e're not building a nel., town out in the Prairie uhere tle can 9o by aII the rules that Paul likes to speak of and you can have all the ordinances but if somebody wants to 9o out here at TH 41 and take 15O acres ' you can do all the ru]es, Do exactly according to the book but we'Ye in a dounto*n development. t^Je're working with the old town and I think we've done a beautif ul job, t^ie're the envy of every community in i'linnesota with our HRA performance. our Cax base is beautiful and it's geLting better every -day so we don't uiant to Pass the word that Chanhassen's hard to do businesr urieh because I don't think Chanhassen is. I think that !,e have so many beautiful places around here that are adding to our tax structure and we're- going to do subsLantially more things here in downtown Chanhassen but ue'rt righ! on the ragged end right now in that we'd like to wind this thing up. And Iike I've been saying, rre've got almost a half a mile of frontage from the railroad tracks to the end of the shopPing center area. l.re're now talking about the development of 95 f€et against about 2,600 feet and stil. we make a big problem out of it. I iust hoPe that somehow u,e can cut through the red tape here and simply Iet's try to do business. I've been -working here, I haven't had an argument with a single Person in Chanhassen in living here 32 years and I'm not going !o start nou but sometimes your patience gels kind of worn thin. I apPreciate a]l the Problems that voupeople are facing and living with every dav and it's tough. It's a great - public service that people are willing to sit Iike vou are every night herr urithout pay and try to do a good civic job but I think that sometimes we need to count our blessings. tle've had a lot of things to be thankful for -and it's, I think we have a town ue can be Proud of and I think it'sgetting better every day. Thanks. Fred Hoisington: Ladd, I think lhis staff report puts the burden to solve - that longer term problem on them so I think Herb is exactly risht. nY concern is, uhen t say there's no short term Problem, it's because this development depends on this Parking next door - It does not, it cannot survive on this parking alone. It has to have this parking to make it t"ror I and so at minimum we've got to have some assurance that that can use this area as lhis can use this area.' clayton Johnson: That's a given. That's not an issue. don't.Fred Hoisinston: well is it a given? That I Planni ng Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 65 Clayton Johnson: It's never been an issue but when you try to tell us thatule've got to go and record cross parking easements uriLh a property ounernext door that's not us, r.,e cah't do that. That's not a problem onFrontier 's side . Fred Hoisington: t,hat if that owner isn't you anymore? the owners of that parcel . know you are no!. why ue're uillins to give it and u,e are able tosomething I don't have. saying you can't give the hoLel and you can't give Clayton Johnson: 1^,e are Fred Hoisington: tJel I I Clayton Johnson: That'sgive it but I can't give Fred Hoisington: You'rethe Dinner Theatre? Clayton Johnson:parceL Lhat u:e'refashion that Paulthat. No. tJe already have it with the hotel between thistalking about and the holel but to record it in theis recommending in the staff report, f can't deliver Ahrens: Have you asked the Dinner Theatre? ClayLon Johnson: The Dinner Theatre's not an issue, it,is a lender in t^Jashington D,C. going to agree to record Ahrens: I do that kind of stuff everyday. It'sme. Mortagees don't put up a fight with that.people are perfectly willins to give Lhose kindsbig deal for mortagees to grant cross parking. s Lhe a ner^, hotel. tlhy easement? not a problem. Be I ieveI mean most of the timeof easements. It's not a Clayton Johnson: I wish you,d had my experience onf '11 never sign another easement as J.ong es I live.than happy to try and accomplish those things but toaccomplish them, ue cannot do that. the bus depot then.I mean we are moresay that ure ul i I I EIIson: You're saying you just r.,ant the attempt. Ahrens: Either that or we have to require somebody else to give them an easement butthrough the process to? them up front. tle can'tare lle requiring them to requrre go Ahrens: tlell you know, r think as far as t.he conditions 9o in the staffreport, the staff recommendation, the face brick, I don't. That's not anissue for me. If you think there,s a reason why you have to have that inthere' then rl go along with that. r don't know why that,s in there butthe parking easemenLs, Lhere is a problem as far as rm concerned requiringthem to heve that done. you heve to have that done. you have to haveconsent by the parties to an easement and if they can get it, great. Krauss: I'II just throw in my 2 cents. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 66 Krauss: On the one hand Clayton is saying that he has rights to utilizespaces. On the other hand he's saying he can't insure that he does havethe right to utilize those spaces. I can show you a supermar ket, a former Red Or.r I supermarket on the corner of Hopkins Crossroad and Excelsior BIvd.. The supermarket building was owned by Red Owl . The fellow who ourned the Red Owl . The Red Or,rl chain bought some additional parking for this guy when he expanded the buildins. They urere in tuo separate ounerships. tlhat you had uas when Red Oul went out of business, or shut doun their stores, the party that owned the parking sold the Parking Iot off to a l'lcDonald's. -They were Ehen left trith a building that had no Parking' I think if vou 9<past there today there's a sporting goods store and you'lI see that that's kind of left with one little strip of parking on the side of the building -and there's a HcDonald's sitting next door. That's the situation that the ordinance is designed to avoid. Ahrens: I think we realize what can haPPen when Parking isn'!, when there- isn'L an easement. I mean anything. They can change ownershiP and aII of a sudden you're stuck with somebody that's saving you can't park in our Iot. I mean that's tJhat can haPPen. I think an easement is a smart thing- to do. I think it's important- I think that those negotiations should start urith the theatre. C.Iayton Johnson: l.,le have the easements. It's just that we cannot assure you that they will be in the chain of title. [.,e can't assure vou that the City will be in the chain of title because they are currentlv not in that form. Ahrensr tJell, I think your ]awyer can r,.,or k on that. The next, let me see here. egain, the no new food establishments. I don't knou how you're going to do that. How are you going to tell them. I mean they have no control again over businesses that they don't ot,,n. Hotl can you tell them? Krauss: UeIl again as property owners I think they could be to a condition that's applied to them relative to. he ld subject Krauss: tJell, at that point we have some, Lhere's probably with that. I should tell you too that the Theatre's talked expanding their restaurant. some difficultyto us about Ahrens: Well, there is a condition in here that says that no neur food establishment shalI be considered over and above the current restaurant anywhere in the Frontier center complex. l'taybe you want to reword that somehow because they don't have conLrol over the entire Frontier Center comp.Lex correct? Krauss: uell actually, the Frontier Center in capitals, I believe they do The oLher, the hotel and Dinner Theatre they don't. Ahrens: okay , so do r.,e just want Theatr e? Krauss: Sure . to eliminate the hotel and Dinner Ahrens: But you're telling them that the Theatre can't oPen a restaurant. - Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 67 Clayton Johnson: Okay ma keknow. rillie's Deli.sure, r.re already have a restaurant in there you Krauss: No, acknowledging. This is just saying anything over and above. to leave that inAhrens: It says no additional. The driver.ray, do youhere? Is that the City's responsibility to fix that? wa nt Krauss: I told Clayton this morning, I don,t care uho builds it.can convince Don that the City's lieble to build it, that's fine.has to be built. IfIt he ju st Ahrens: ShouId that be left in as a condition? Krauss: I believe so. Ahrens: I have no other comments, Jim?Conrad: okay. l.,lildermuth: f guess my feel.ing is that the issue should be tabled and Ithink a number of Lhese differences should be urorked out. Based on urhatwe're looking at here tonight and the disagreement that is clearly evidenttonighL' I think we're just loo far apart to be able to make, the applicantand citv staff are too far apart for the commission to make an intelligentrecommenda!ion. Conrad: Anything else? Annette? Ellson: I lend to go against tabring it or uhatever. r think you do getto a point sometimes Nhere you've got to be honest and say that they'r! notgoing to solve them. That's t,Jhat we're here for is to break the tie, ifthere is such a thing, and there's also City Council beyond us that's goingto be overseeing it as weII. so r agree that d like them to at leasimake attempts to get it into the chain of title, The cross easements. rfthey've already got it, r.,hether it,s verbal or uhatever now, lhen aII we,reasking is to be all the more official and maybe they're already ready to dosomething like thaL since they already seem to hav€ some sort of easementsright now. John Rice: Excuse me, could .I speakthe public hear ing's closed. and put that issue to rest? I knor.r Conrad: Yeah, the hearing's closed. I don'ta conclusion on that cross easement deal. L€there. Go ahead Annette. k nor.r that ure're going to comeus continue to go through E]lson: ...remain the same. I agree with the rental equipment thing. Idon't think ule're putting them out of business. l.,e're just trylng to getback the parking stalls and stuff like that. rt was an interesting point about parking in the back. rs lhere going to be any signage that uiII telrsomebody from the back how you can get to the restaurant from the rear? Planning Commission Fleet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 68 Brad Johnson: It's a full open sidewalk. There is no door. It's just a corridor. It r4as aluays planned to be there. Brad Johnson: ft's no different than if thaL was a public Parking lot and you just walk up the stairs and you 9o uP into the restaurant. You don't 9o into the hotel Krauss: On a sidewal k . the plans for the hote] , that was shor.Jn as, it wasn't shourn as- It was shown as an emergency exi!. Brad Johnson: For the hotel . Kr auss : look at cIear. rf itit but s 9oin9 t hat uJas to function as something not the original i nte nt else too , rde can or if it Nas, it take a wasn 't Clayton conrad: Krauss: Johnson: I don't Not on I'd go Paul. nisht. I think we'd better take a walk. Lhink a dar k Erhart: Uell it's obvious that the t$,o Parties are not urorking Logether o this thing. I don't knou how you resolve it. It's not here. I think we can. I'd be happy to maybe make some commenLs on some of these things Somehot^r you guys have worked yourself into corners and either through additional parties or more time, aII these things are' on the face of everything, there's logical solutions to every item on here. They cerLainly aren't being discussed in a format. If I had this meeting going- on at my company, I'd stop the meeting right there and come back another day because iL's obvious a lot of emotion in it. I think also a lot of insensitivity to the point r.,here f think..some of the behavior is I think a- Iittle unprofessional. Oespite frustration' I don't think it's necessarv to say the kinds of things that give the kind of exPress.ions that I think I've seen here !onigh!. I think you've got to 9o back and r.lor k on it. If- it's gotten emotionil, bring some other people into it on both sides $Jho can look at it tJith a Iittle fresher Point of view and yod knour it's something we're going to do. This Project hre're going to do and it's going to be approved. It's got to be done and ue've iust got to bring reason to- this thing and get rid of the. emotions of it. Comments on some of the items are, I'Il just say again on the archiLectural. I don't knout how much we've been involved historically in the architectural review of the whole -thing. If it's something ue haven't done much in, this is probablv a Iittle bit late to get into et this time, although one of the things that Kraussr trell I don't knox. In fact I thought that that was a door that uas going to be Iocked and just be an emergency entrance or the key to the- hotel . Ellson: If you're parking in the back is it going to sav, 'To the Restaur ant " ? Ellson: No, I think ure should go ahead u,rith it as is tlith the recommendations and move it along. Go ahead Tim. Take it ar.rav. bothered me about the' whole thing is that the r^rhole hotel came in with Nhath,e saw was a cedar shake roof and all of a sudden ue're not getting a cedarshake roof. I thought that b,,as a pretty important part of that project r.rhen r looked at it. uell now Lhey're talking abouL a cedar shake ioof andIII tell vou r.lhat r believe, we're not going to see a cedar shake roof onthis building. I'm not looking for an anst,er but it seems like Lhey,reagain a lo! of, you wonder a ]ot. cross eesements, r can't make a judgmenton that. You know vou've got to look at uhat's reality. you've goi to gutRoger invo).ved in it and go. for it. rt's certainly nice. There'" , gr.itconcern about parking but wL've got to live trith ti're existing siLuatiin. Itmav not be possible to get those easements. rt may not ever be possible toassure 1OOZ that we're not going to end up uith a parking problem. I thinkmost, r think this is a project that's got to be done. 40 automobiles forparking in the rear for employees. Are you going to have employees thatare going to Nant to park in the rear who leave work at night or come intowork at night? r don't knotr about that one. rf there's an access outthrough the side through those doors, maybe that wiLl work with adequateIighting, Haybe a security camera or something and make employees use thebowling a.I]ey lot and mount a camera and monitored by somebody in the hotelor something. There's a security issue involved. The food establishment,r guess everyone's agreeing to that one. Again, the rental equipment, rreallv don't know u,hat to say on that one. r don't know if you can 90 overand, as much as r agree entireLy with paul's intent there, r think we oushtto forget Lhose parkins spots. r'm not sure that u,e can really draw theline there and sav r,re're going to do that. r dontt know if you r.,,ant to saythat okay you can't do this building or this projec! because you can,t dothat. rt's a very' very hard line that you're tiying to draw and again rthink we've got to get this hoLel and Dinner Theatre out of the oneprovision xhere it says no food establishment shall be considered. Thedrivewav r think He've got to find, ue should find out what is the dealwith the driveway. Is it the City's responsibility and if we're going tomake an emotional issue out of it, Iet's get the facts before u,e drau, thelines. That's mv comments. r think it's, r don't think thi.s is the placeto resolve these, what has become emotional issues. Conrad: tJhat do you u,ant to do? Erhart: I think r.re ought to tablewe're not qualified to. We don't make a recommendation. ir. have There 'sthe data a number of issues that and ule're not qualified to Planning Commission HeeL i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 69 Fred Hoisington: r guess rnv feeling is lhat it's urgent to keep this thingmoving along. I r.rou ld ba a little concerned about tabling it. f guesswhat you might hrant to do is approve it with conditions h,ith a coupleexceptions. one' iust leave a question mark as far as the chain of titlequestion. I don't know if any of us can ansurer that. paul and Johnobviously have different opinions... 8ut IeC those things be uorked outbetween now and Council by staff and the proponents and see if they can.tcome back with...something that srill be ulorkable. I'm afraid if ure delayit for 2 more weeks we may, I won't say we'l] Iose the project but hre'rerealIy pushing up against bad ueather conditions Lo get it done. Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 70 Conrad: Okay. tJell, I like this project. All we've said is negative stuff bu! I like it- There are some problems obviously and I'rn not surethat I agree with you Clayton on everything you've said. In fact 50-50. Disagree with half of uhat you said but I like the project. I think it'sneat. I think it's neat to see trest 78th almost complete and as you went -through the Iist Clayton, I didn't find, you know I think you said in mos! cases you didn't have disagreement. I think parking is the issue and I don't have a clue on some of these and typically r^rhen I don't have a clus I have to go with staff report. Yet in some of these cases, I guess I'vegot to question some things. On the cross easements' I don't know and to be honest, when you don't know on a technical issue, you almost have to go- along urith staff but I'm not comfortable yeL on the cross easement issue. The only thing I want to do is assure that we have Parking in the front fo' the restaurant that's connecLed u,ith the Frontier Center. That's what I want. I think that's easy. Paul wants some more things and those are the- things that I don't understand so I think what Clavton's saving is, for sure there's the cross easement u,,ith the Frontier Center. That's a Piece of cake. Can't guarantee some other things but those are Lhe things that -if we felt it Has important to guarantee, they've got to do it. Otherwise the project doesn't fly and I guess on one hand Clayton's saying maybe the> may not be able to get those guarantees or those cross easements from the other owners. I don't know. The parking in Lhe rear for 4O automobiles, - that one doesn't bother me. That's one that I guess, PauI is that an important one? That one doesn't make much sense Lo me in terms of being cr itical at this iuncture Krauss: Is it as critical as the others? No, it Probablv isn't and information tonight on that corridor in front of FiIIv's mav resolve of that. r.,,e'II look into that further. That's Probably something. the some Conrad: Yeah, I had a feeling that lhat uas Probably the case. I think that that requirement sure is debateable based on where Brad said PeoPIe' - his restaurant urants to park PeoPIe. I think the others, going down the roN. Cla),ton has said they're okay. I guess staff has a comment in here lhat's saying hey, r^re urant to see urhere this urhole complex is going and yotr know, I guess I r.rould leave that in here simply because u,e don't uant this to happen again uhere ue come up and butt heads and I think that that section should stay. In terms of the responsibility on reparing the driveuay, if it's Lhe City job then it should be the City's. That's another one that again we need some review on so again, I guess I don't uant !o see us sit here. I'd like to move it on. I think it's a neat, I like it in general. There are 3 or 4 greas, and as long as, and f'm convinced that it's not the City's problem to solve the parking. That is Bloomberg Companies' to solve the parking long term and as Iong as the City doesn't have any financial liabiliLy and as long as they don't affect hott -the City operates, I'm comfortable sending this. uhen I say the City operaLes. As long as lhere's not a spill over to tlest 78th street or across the street or whatever, then boy I tell you, that's their job to figure that out. Brad's job to figure out hor., resiaurant patrons are goin(- to park x number of feet auray from the front door of the restaurant. That's not our job but I'd Iike to see this go through with maybe a bulk of it, the way the staff talked about but in my mind I'd like to see some added revieu of, I r.rish they were numbered. The easement issue. Theparking for the 40 automobiles and the driveway betwean the north and south Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 7l parking lots. Those issues seem to be debateable in terms of the staffreport. tlhether ule send them through as needing more revieu, I guess whoever makes the motion has to clarify Nhat you Hant done but I think weshould get this ou! of here. r think staff can do some additional r.ror kr.lith clayton in the next couple of weeks. l'1aybe not come to resoLution butthey can get to City Council and they can deal uith some of these. I don,t knor^r that some of these are resolvable. I think it's going to be, it's notwhether they're 9oin9 to come back in agreement. I really don't believethat that's the case here. rt's a case where do you r.,ant a project or dovou uant to table or kill it and ue've been told by our consultants Lhatshort term, lde're probably not going to have a problem. The biggestproblem Lhat ure see is parking. tJe're not 9oin9 to have a probitm shortterm. so whoever makes the motion can consider my comments and make themotion before 12:OO because I,m not sticking around past then. Ahrens: tJe've got a whole lot left on the agenda. Conrad: C l ayto n? clayton Johnson: tJould it be proper for me to just run through all the...and crarifv some of the Lhings. r mean r think ue're in agreement on 9ozalthough there are some very key items that r woutd like to make sure getin the motion oLherwise there,s no point in moving along tonight. Can Ijust go through them real quick? Conrad: Okay. I'II stop you if I, yeah. Go ahead. I,m not sure urhatyou're going to tell us that we don't already know. clavton Johnson: tlelt for instance on the no new food esLablishments.That's not an issue if you confine it to Frontier Center. Ellson: Risht. Take out hotel and Dinner Theatre. Ule,ve got that. l.JiLderrnuth: can you start with number 1and just go down the h,hole list. clavton Johnson: Number 1 is the brick issue. Ue don't like it. r guessif you're going to start redesigning our building, that's not the end ofthe uorld but r don't like it. The cross easements, ure uill give you crosseasements on the Bloomberg parcel and we already have cross parking easements existing on the hotel but I cannot guarantee you that they,regoing to be in the chain of title as paul has laid out here. you r.,iII geteverything bre've got and everyLhing ue can give. The 4O automobiles,because we've aLready got it in another 3OO spots back there, I don'i knor^ruhv ure should build 4o more and we think it's in confrict r.lith our Ieasewith Hooked on Classics. The food establishments h,e talked about. Aslong as you confine it to Frontier Center, that,s okey. The occupancy ont^,est 78th street. on the renta] equipment, r have a hard time uith that. rmean I am 9oin9 to have a very difficult tirne going over and telling Kentthat he can't use that property the way he's used it and I don't know,you're kind of reaching. You're going over and you,r€ dealing u,iLh thisissue but I don't knou. f mean if you h,ant to say that, you've taken theburden off of me. No snouJ is no problem. The additions or modifications.I mean there again it'd be nice if ue knew r.lhat we were talking about. Idon't think u,e can infringe on the rights of other property ourners like the PIanning Commission t4eet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 72 hotel and the Dinner Theatre. I think you'd have to confine that to the Bloomberg parcel . Truck parking's not a problem. The dr iver.ray is 9oin9 tcrrbe resolved. It's going to either be, f mean ue had it all paved before and iL got tore up. EiLher us or them do it. Adequate turn radii, I urould Iike to see that. Is that a condition PauI? _t Krauss: Yes. l Clayton Johnson: l.lell, )uou guys just engineered and built the parking lot"'l Don't make me go in and tear it up. Oo you reall), mean that? Krauss: That Nas a concern raised by the Fire Harshall. -l Conrad : t^lhere 's that? clayton Johnson:. Number 3. They're iust Pouring the curbs nou, on it. clayton Johnson: They're done and I mean I don't like to think that we're- going to have to go back and tear them out. If they didn't look at them before, I don't know. 4 is done. 5 is done. 6, I told in our submission, PauI in his report speaks...in our submission on the signaEe, ule just plan on moving the pylon to the middle and Put two entrance signs. If you want - more detail, that's something ue may have to come back with. EI.lson: For the Council's approval? Krauss: Yeah, I would prefer that. otheruise the siEn plan's not going to come back to you Clayton Center - Johnson: tle'lI come back with signing on the whole Frontier Krauss: Sharmin has indicated that monument signs are not permitted in tht CBD distr ict. Clayton Johnson: They're already there. Ne already have them. ]^le're iusttalking about moving them. Krauss: No, monument signs clayton. xoi the pylon. ClayLon Johnson: The pylon ne have. Krauss: Right. I acknowledge that but new monument signs. are not permitted. Clayton Johnson: Entrance, monuments? tre've got that right Ellson: okay, can ule move on? Conrad: Yeah. llonument si gns nouJ . Planning Commission Heet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 73 tli ldermuth: t,lhat about number 8? Clayton Johnson: Wel.I we think that that.s something that Rice and Knutsoncan work out. Ue don't like to go through the platting process. Ue thinkit's unnecessary. t,re think we will have a piece of property under oneotrnership. The buildins uill be totally on that piece of properCy. JtL,on't have a negative setback. l.,e just don't think it's necessary to gothrough the uhole platting process. Erhart: A lot of people think that butabout a var iance olherulise.everybody does it. you,re taLking Krauss: unless this is something that can be brought under a metes andbounds division. And again frankry, r don't care hor r. move the lot linesas Iong as it 's done i n a leg j.timate bray. t^te do have author ity to revieulmetes and bounds at the City Council. It,s a simplier procedure. If theCity Attorney's comfortable r.rith it, that uould satisfy that. clayLon Johnson: rt's just a matter of time and expense, that,s aII. rdon't think the platting will accomplish it. That's it. Conrad: Yeah, I r.lish ue recorded what you said Claytondisagree with all the things you said. In fact, that'ssaying that. I agree t ith a lot of what you just said.motion and f don't know if anybody's getting lrepared tohere. It's almost to the point ulhere I'd like to reuordof the conditions. because I don 'te negative uay oftle could make a make a moti on almost every one EIlson: Or somethi n9 . you could say review and clarify before you get there or Conrad: So somebody could make the motion that, do you knour? Erhart: I'II give it a try. conrad: Let me give you an alternative that might hetp.motion to basically accept the sLaff report as drafted butstaff revieil these points because the planning Commissionit's entirety wilh the staff repor!. Erhart: I'm pretty much doing that. tle cou]d make ato have thedoesn't agree in Ellson: Rather than reulord them all. conrad: tJelL veah. r think rewording this, we can't do and I'm lookingfor an easy ulay of getting us out of here. Erhart: Let me summarize what rm going to do and unless somebody objects,II make the motion. trhat r uas going to do uras to essentielly do tiatfor evervthing except for the items relating to the 4o automobiies foremplovees. The one on the eguipment rental area, r uas just going to leaveout r4ith the parking area for employees. The 4O parking spots foremplovees. The one on the rentar agreement. To eliminate the rentalequipment thing. Planning Commission Heet ing August 15, 1990 - Page 74 Erhart: I just don't think that should be in here. I think it's somethinr ure ought to uror k u,i!h as a City t^,ith the renLal company . clayton Johnson: I think you've already got ordinances. Conrad: See there's an outside display ordinance and see I don't know how they can do u,hat they're doing right nou and I think as long as h,e're a nice liLLIe community, ue can let tha! happen but I don't believe it's legal and I haven't Fanted to say anything but I don't know that we need it in here because I think it's under our conLrol already and as long as no harm and nobody complaining, f'm comfortable but it's real tacky. Ahrens: I Iike it. Conrad: Do you? But that's not, boy if that's how they h,ant to do it' that's okay. Erhart: The other one I was going to leave out here was the new additions or modifications to buildings. Leave out the new additions or modifications of building or uses because, if thev want to do that, thev have to come in for a Permit anyway don't they? Krauss: Yes they do except that this thing keePs coming in incrementally -and there's never a line draun lhat says okay, figure out how it all uorks together and I guess that's what that was trying to get at. Conrad: It's whether Tim you another problem just like this and h,hat PauI is saying is hey, I don't ulant, right now, Paul doesn't want to, PauI would Ii draurn up so he has an easier job which makes s You 're making the motion. want, basically they can come back urith and they uron't but they Potentially couldat Ieast under their control ke to have a bigger plan ense. 8ut that's uP to you. Erhart: I can change it to uhat he's saying, involve Bloomberg ProPerties- Clayton Johnson: RishL. John Rice: ...The use is going to change because the Hardware store's soing !o move out. so uhat are ue suPPosed to do? Erhart: tlell h,e're going to change it tb Bloomberg ProPerties. John Rice: That is Bloomberg's ProPerty. Herb Bloomberg: It's still retail. Clayton Johnson: It's still retail new retail, the only time we have a restauranL. though . problem ASis long if we as ure come bac k ur i th come back with a Erhart: tlhat I'm trying to Iooking for is so the Counc i I you'reget to a motion to go to Council. can go back and add it back That 's uJhai ln or Conrad: So you don't mind it being out there? Planning Commission Hee! i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 75 change it but with that same excePt for a. I'l metres and bounds methodtitle of chain. Again, recommendation, , I'm going to leave pretty much everything else theI add in the contingency that if they can discover afor approving. Otherwise I'm going to leave in thewe aren't making a decision here. This is a Ellson: Or just something that we r^,ant to Erhart: ...if Che City Council says no, reviewed. you 've got it. give copies of the easements have the n Krauss: l.Jeto our City would sit down and ask tir. Rice toAttorney and see r.lhat he feels. Conrad: So have you done it? Have you made a motion? Erhart: I'm 9oin9 to make a motion, Conrad: You're going to do it right Erhart: Is there anything else Ladd?midnis,ht. Conrad: tJe don't have much time. Erhart: Unless somebody else uanls to. Conradr No, no. Go ahead, please go ahead. nouJ? Okay. You HanCed to get out of here by Erhart: okay, r move that the planning commission recommend to councilapproval of site plan Revieur #9o-7 and preliminary plat s9o-14 subject tothe following conditions. Before r got this far i was 9oin9 to ask onemore question. tJhat ras the argument for this architeciural control? Krauss: Oh taell, is it imperative? UeIl, your ordinances give you theright to review buildins architecture and you've done it in the past.You've been doing it more and more as time goes on. The idea is not to bemanipulative or to require changes. On the plan I noticcd that there was aIine of brick underneath the uindows lhat ended at one of the doors anJ-- - it's just like that's part of the buirdins and it just didn't finish it andaesthetically it didn't seem appropriate to me and that's where that, it'ssubjective. Erhart: Okay, continuingr with the srotion. Leave item 1as is. Item 2 asis wit.h the follouing changes. The first paragraph as is. The secondparegraph beginning with the parking area with room for 4o, derete thatParagraPh. Next ParagraPh starting wiLh no net.l food estabiishments, deletein the fi.rst senLence the words, the hotel and Dinner Theatre. Thefollowing paragraph beginning at the time the new addition, delete thatparagraph. The follouring paragraph beginning with the ownir wilr, reave asis. The ParagraPh starting urith no new additions or modifications shouldinclude the.e,,ord Bloomberg after the uord involved. the followingparagraph no change. The last paragraph, change LhaC something to theeffect that staff r^rill review that one and detirmine h,ho's iesponsibilityit is to do that. Item number 3. Leave as is. 4, S,6 and 7 as is. 8 as Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 76 is with the additional, if an acceptable means for approving this, approving the objectives stated here can be done with the metes and bounds method, that that h,ou1d be acceptable to the Planning Commission. Krauss: Clarify one point on the sign plan. There was some desire to see, do you r,rant that Lo be .resolved at the City Council or do you t,,ant that to -come back here? Because the way that's worded right now, it rill come bac to you . 1., i ldermuth: Al I Propose there t^las item 7. they're going to do is move the sign. What I was going o'-provide a revised sign plan for staff aPProval iust like Conrad: they 're Yeah. asking I see no reason that they have to for variances. They wouldn't come that this gets into an area where buildings should have a sign PIan come back here unless on a var iance . the ordinance says that and it 's not terriblyKrauss: Exceptmultiple tena nt explicit. EIlson:bring it Fine. t^le don't have a Problem bringing it back to us' so let's back to us. Krauss: You might u,an! to exercise some iudgment on this one. Ahrens: I 'I I second it . Conrad: Any discuss ion? Erhart moved, Ahrens seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site PIan RevieH *9O-7 and Preliminary PIat *90-14 subject to the following conditions: Revise architectural plans to carry face brick below the window line tr the urest end of the building. Demonstrate to staff thaL adequate trash storage facilities are being Provided in an accePtable Iocation. Exterior trash storage facilities shirll be screened by a masonry ualI designed to be compatible with the neb, construction. 1 b. OeleLed. Conrad: Good job. Ahrens: Yeah. Conrad: Okay. 2. Parking requirements: a. Permanent cross access and Parking easements shall' be filed over aII properties lhat comPrise of the Fronti€r CenLer/Bloomberg/ Dinner Theatre/Hotel comPlex. The easement shall involve the Citv in lhe chain of title so thaL rights cannot be unilaierallv eliminated by proPerty oLrners in the future. Planning Commission Meet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 77 d e f No new food eslablishments shall. be considered over and abovecurrent restaurant, anywhere in the Frontier C€neer complex.condition will be enforced until an overall development plan described below has been prepared and accepted by the City. No truck delivery parking wiII be allowed anywhere in theparking lot of the Frontier Center betr.leen 11:3O a.m. andon weekdays. DeIeted. The owner will ensure that no snor.l r^rill be stored in the par kinglot. As necessary, snor4 shall be removed from t.he effected area. No net., additions or modifications to buildinss or uses of any ofthe involved Bloomberg properties trill be considered unless Lheyare part of a coordinated development program that addresses thedesign, access and parking needs of the entire complex. the This north 1 :30 P.m g h Revise par king plans in urork with the City Fireprovided. Staff will review to determine who's responsibility it is to pavethe driveway running betueen Lhe north and south parking Iots. accordance Nith staff's recommendations andMarshall to ensure tha! adequate Lurn radii are 5 4. Revise utility plans as follous: A separate metered, privately ouned and maintained water serviceshalI be installed and connected to the existing 8 inch watermainunder the proposed parking lot (see attachment ). The proposedbuilding facility shall disconnect and remain permanently disconnected from the existing Hater service extending from thebui ldins to the east. Provide final site and building plans consistent with the recommendations of the City Fir€ HarshaII and BuildinS Official . Provide a revised sign plan for Planning Commission approval . Provide details of any proposed exterior liShCing for staff approval . Prior to issuance of any building permits, the site nust be given finalplat approval and the plat filed uith alI required easements unless theCity staff and City Council determine that metes and bounds are accepLab I e . 6 7 a All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously- 3. Planning Commission t4eet i ng August 15, 1990 - Page 78 APPROVAL MINUTES: l,l i nutes of Presented, car r ied . the Plannin All voted tlildermuth moved, Erhart seconded to aPProve 9 Commission meeting daled August 1' 1990 as in favor excePt Ahrens ulho abstained and the the mot i on call from the Metro- population Krauss: could you think about, xe'Il call )rou uP in the following week about september 26!h as a special meetin for the comPrehensive PIan. Kraussr tle will. I also should tell you that I got a Council last u,eek. Guess urho's got a Problem with our projections after having them for 6 months? Conrad: Rea I Iy? Ellson: Saying it's too high or too low? Krauss: tlell they don't know because thev're not going to do anv re-analysis until they have the census data in 2 years so they're assume that r.re 're ulrong . Ahrens: Kr auss ; Ahr ens : Too I ow? conrad: Cal l us up. No, pe're too high. tJe're projecting too high vou think? Submitted by PauI Krauss Planning Oirector Prepared by Nann oPheim goin9 to some Krauss: That's t,hat they claim. conrad: uell good job on all of the staff rePorts tonight. Probablv of Lhe best analysis f 've seen. Ahrens moved, Ellson seconded to adjourn the meeting- and the motion carried. The meeting Has adjourned at AII voted in favor 12:OS a.m.. CITY OF EH[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (512) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 TO: rROM: DATE: SU&T: 3 }{EI!IORANDt'I{ Planning Connission Paul Krauss, planning oirector (t. Augrust 29, L99o Report from Director The site plan for Redrnond products for anarea on the Lotus Garden Center site r,rasheard. The applicant pul1ed the request The request for an amended wetland alteration permit for theLotus Lake Betternent Association to construct a ualkwaythrough a Class A wettand to access a dock was reviewed by theCouncil on the Consent Agenda. Councilnan Johnson pu1Ied thisaction from the Consent Agenda noting that the ieconnendedaction rras for denial of the request ln favor of requiring anelevated boardwalk consistent vith past city policy. Heindicated that he putled the request since it wis L denial andsince the action on the Consent Agenda is to approve therequests and he did not wish there to be any confulion. Hemade a motion that the City Council deny the iequest rrhich rrasapproved. unanirnously. Staff will be working with theapplicant to obtain cornpliance with the approied wetlandalteration perroit and is also going to be proposing changes tothe wetland ordinance lrhich r,rould clearly stite tnat th; cityrequires elevated boardualks for accesses to be provided. At their neeting of August 27 , L99O, the City Council undertook thefollowing actions: 1. DeveLopnent contract for Dexter Magnetic lilaterials wasapproved. construction on this site nay have already begun bythe time the planning Comnission neeting is held. The prelininary and final plat to subdivide LO3,OOO squarefoot parcel into two residential lots located at 10l,o pleisantview Road for Beddor iras approved without comment on theConsent Agenda. 2 expanded parking scheduled to befron the agenda, 4. Report fron Director August 29, L99o Page 2 5. wishing that it be heard in conjunction with itrs follow up request to nodify it's existing parking lot. The request is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Cornmission at tonightts heeting. The city Council reviewed the PUD concept plan for st. Hubertts church expansion. This request has becone somewhat controversial within the church conmunity. However, at thecity council meeting, council members advised those present that there is a dividing line betlreen parish issues and City issues and that there was a range of questions that should be nore appropriately brought up at the church. The review ofthe itern was an interesting one and unlj.ke the Pl.anning Conmission rneeting, there was sone opposition expressed to the proposal . fi,ro area residents raised questions uith regard toIighting and visual ir0pacts and with the ability to park cars on Frontier Trait since it was a narrow street. The Council raised nany of the same questions that the Planning Commissiondid relative to parking and drainage issues. Ultinately, thecity council did vote to authorize concept plan approval .Staff uiII be working with the applicants and expects to havea fornal PUD plan before you in october contingent upon the applicantrs ability to develop the plans. Interin Use Penoit to remove 196,000 yards from the JeurissenFarn. In reviewing this request, the city Council expressed many of the sane concerns as the Planning Comnission did regarding the applicant's ability to comply with conditions ofapproval, given their poor perfomance in the past. Ultinrately, they did vote to approve the interin use pernit with several slight nodifications to the Planning conmission reconnendations. The City Council directed staff to reconpute the letter of credit requireurents with an eye torrards raisingit if need be. Staff has since reassessed this issue and discussed it with the Watershed District tho will be using a conmon letter of credit in conjunction with the city. The anount of the letter of credit is being raised fron S30,000 to $43,000 accordingly. The City Council authorized work onSaturdays but onl,y under linited conditions. Linitedconditions involve the ability of the City to have staffnonitor the site on Saturdays. If it is possible to arrangefor staff tine to monitor the site, inspection tine will bebilled at $45 an hour. In addition, the City Councilindicated that if any conplaints were received from arearesidents due to Saturday work, that the City rrill stop thepractice. Lastly, the city council added a conditionrequiring that an tras isr grading plan be provided to the cityto document what is out on.the site at the present time. 6 \ Report from Director Augiust 29 , ).99o Page 3 7. As the Planning Connission is aware, staff has been rrorkingwith the City Council on the possibility of the Cityt"adopting a Storm Water Utility Fund. The purpose of the fundis to provide a dedicated source of revenues for itorrn water uanagement, water quality, and rretland protection issues. Theuse of a utility fund is a relatively nelr concept allowedunder state law that has been adopted by several conmunities.Staff has been requesting funding for a Storm l{ater UanagenentPlan for sorne time. Thus far, it has not been possible tofund this out of general fund revenues. ft is a lubstantialwork effort and rrould be used to provide a courprehensive StornWater Uanagenent Systen for the cornmunity to replace thepieceneal efforts we currently have in p).ace. Stafi has alsoproposed that a sinilar revenue source be developed to planand inplenent a irater quality plan proposal that would addiessquality issues of our area lakes, streans and rivers.Evidence is nounting that water quality is sJ.owly beingdegraded. At the same tine as you are aware, we have beenattenpting to get funding to update our Wetland Ordinance andto develop an accurate official napping of area wetlands.Lastly, the fund would be used to undertake acquisition ofproperty, water quality management prograns such as purpleloosestrife renoval , street sweeping, weeding harvestin{, etc.In addition, the fund would be used to undertake capitaliuproveroalt proj ects needed to achieve storn water managenentand guality goals and could be used for purposes su_-ch asacquisition of wetlands in need of protection. The lastfactor is one of naintenance whereby the City would be in aposition to naintain inprovenents alieady on the ground or newones that are proposed. The idea of a storn water utility isthat storn uater Danagenent/rrrater quality issues represent asignificant cost outlay for the City ttrat could be bestmanaged as a utility. Initiat proj ections are that aI1residential parceLs in the City rrould be charged approxirnatelyS4.50 per guarter vith coumensurately larger -clharges foiconnerclal - properties and other proplrtieJ having- largeramounts of hard surface area. A nulber of questions have beenraised about equity of the fund which we can address in detailif you like. A copy of the outline of the program has beenattached to this report for your revieu. At. the City Councit ueeting, a nunber of individuals spokeraising concerns with the plan. Host of those individuaLsrepresented either farm or development interests in the Report August Page 4 fron Director29, L99O o community. The farners obj eeted to being assessed in the belief that they are not the problen or that the additional costs may put them at a disadvantage in the narketplace. Tothis, staff would only note that data supplied to us recently indicates that farn acreage provides greater nutrient loadingto area watererays then does developed single fanily areas. As for the developnent interests, they seened to believe that nel, developnent is being made to pay it's own way and that they should not be doubly assessed as they perceive to be the case under a ston0 water utifity. staff does not believe that this is the case and uould drar,, the analogTy that when a developer pays for lateral seser line extension, he or she is not paying for the Metropolitan Interceptor nor the sewage treatment pl.ants, nor the naj.ntenance of those systens that are to be built within the developnent after the developer has sold out and left. The stono Water Utility Fund would hopefully be used in an equitable manner to ensure that these tasks can be undertaken. Upon hearing these concerns, the city council voted to continue action on this proposal for potential rnodification and to get further input. The council raised some question as to whether or not these efforts were redundant with other agencies engaged in water managetnent and rrater quality efforts. staff will provide folIoL uP inforrna€ion on this. It is expected that the city Council will again visit this iteu at the end of sePtenber. edninistrativo Approvals. Staff has authorized two adninistrative site pLans in the recent past. The first concerns pollution control equipnent at the Instant Web site. ?he equipnent to be deployed at the site is conparable to what is currently under construction at The Press, under a previous adninistrative approval. The Instant web site presents a much more challenging environment to provide adequate screeni.ng since Hrry. 5 is elevated and rnotorists are looking do$n on the roof structure. Thus, there j.s no real effective way in which to screen roof top nounted piping and ducting. The best we felt that we could do was requiring that this ducting be painted the saroe color as the roof to ninirnize visual inpact. The burner unit itself will be located on the east side of the building adjacent to the loading dock area. Again, the siteis difficult to screen since the highway provides views dorminto this area. In working with the applicant, several screening methods were explored whereupon staff agreed that a heavy landscape screen of coniferous trees would be the most reasonable rray to screen this equiproent. In addition, staffis having a sinilar screen for an existing unscreened coolingunit ground mounted nearby. Report August Page 5 from Director29, t99O The second adninistrative approval concerns the Seven Forty- One shopping center. Staff received a request to locate a diycare center in this facility. The day cire center itself i-snot an issue but the required outdoor play area results in anodification to the site p1an. The proposal calLs forlocating the play area to the rear of the building on thesouthern eLevation. This wilt require a loss of approxinately 1,4 parking stalls. The site has sufficient stal1s to neelordinance requirenents in spite of the loss of staIls. Staffis willing to accept this proposal with the addition of four8 foot taII spruce trees to help screen this area and withother minor nodifications. The parking issue is one that naybe raised in the near future relative to a request for IconditionaL use pernit to locate a full service restaurant inthis shopping center. Financing Storm Water Projects Surface Water Management Utility --Final Report-- A Report to thq City of Chanhassen CityProject #pW2O7 August 3, lgg0 sEH F|LE NO.9o284.Ot ctil 0r c}iff{mssHi MEGEfl[EE] AUG :r9 i990 Et{0tli[inl,'{0 DEPI. ESSH SHORT ELUON HENDRICIGION INC. I i using a I I I EE!! a^ao,rtElliar.E!. Financing Storm Water Proiects using a Surface Water Management Utility -FINALREPORT- Report to the City of Chanhassm City Project Number PW207 August 3, 190 SEH File No. 9028./'07 NOTE: THIS REPORT INCLT'DES REVISIONS AS OF AUGUST241990 =1EHLiI'CIIJEERS ' APCHITE C75 I PTAITI'ER'3535 UAD|/r''TSCEN!ER D?NE 5t. AUL UtNNesg,rA 55110 612 4*2@ Dear Mayor, Councit Members and Staff: Please find endosed our final report for financing surface water projects using a utility oruser charge. The final report follows the concept plan dated'Mjy u, lfr and doesseveral things: August3, 190 Re: Chanhassen,Minnesota Surface Water Management Utility City hoiectNo.PW 207 SEH File:902&4.01 Honorable Mayor City Council and City Staff Cify of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 5531 7 o Defines what a utility is and how its implemented o Reviews financing alternatives o Estimates projected expenditures . Recommends related utility fees r Compares utility to other communities and b City tax revenues o Outlines A dminiscation procedures . hesents model ordinance r Summarizes public information prooess we recommend that this report be cb-risidered by council and staff, as well as legal and financial advisors. we are avaitable to provide further assistance at youri"dot. Sincerely, aa,k_ uar/r. Lobermeier, p.E. hoject Manager ,s SHOPr Etuon HENDPICIGON INC CHIPPEWA FALLS. wtKoNstN Sf AUL, MINNE5oIA Thble of Contents lctter of Transmiual Section 1 Summary F.rcecutive Summary Why Consider a Utility? Page 1 1 1 Section 2 lntroduction What is a Surface Water Management Utility? How will it Benefit the Community? The Financing Dilemma Selecting the Best Option Section 3 Fee Basis Philosophy Cause and Effect Revenue Equation HowMudrRainfall land Use Types Expenditures TpicalCharges C-ostComparison Exdusions Comparison of Current Taxing Status 3 3 3 4 6 7 7 7 7 8 9 10 t2 13 13 14 Financing Storm Waler Projecls - Final Repon Thble of Contents Section 4 Administration Section 5 Model Ordinance Section 6 Public lnformation program Education hoess Results o Public Information Meeting o Questionnaire Public Hearing Bibliography 15 16 22 22 22 22 22 E 26 Financing Storm Water Poects - Final Bepon Summary Erecutlve Summary Paying for storm water (drainage) projects has become more complex in recent years.Additionally, the costs related o water qudity management and wetland portection continue to rise. In the past, special assessments against benefiued properties financed most of the necessary improvements. However, special assessments are being drallenged in courts more often. Benefits are difficult to demonstrate for properties on high ground. Assessment hearings can create irreconcilable differences between neighbors. Conseguently, many cornmunities lack the proper funding to undertake water-related projecb. Traditional methods of financing storm lvater improvements through City general funds are becoming less viable. (Ref. 1) lnstead, user or utility charges, which have been implemented by communities to finance sanitary sewer and watermah programs are now being applied to storm water projects. (Ref. 2) The utility approach is gaining recognition as the most equitable way to finance storm water projects. (Ref. 3) This report is intended to provide guidance to community representatives and citizens for understanding and implementing a surface water management utility. The report defines what a utility is, how it benefits a community, and how it is implemented. Why conslder a utlllty? Gef.2) A. Fairness Charges are based on how mudr the property cpntributes to the problem. B. Dependability A utility produces consiStent funding and is easily projectable. C. Dedicated Funds These funds can only be used ofinance surfaoe water management related projects. D. Unrestricled Use Fun& can be used for any tlpe of administrative, planning, main- tenancE, consEuction or other uses associated with water quality, wetland protection and drainage system operation. Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Repon Page I Section l...Summary E, Legal Delensibility Special assessment proiects are being drallenged more often in courts. Benefits are diffictrlt to demorutrate for high ground properties whidr drain down- stream. The utility prevents legal challenges by not having to consider market value inaease of property. By implementing the utiliry, the need for public hearings and lenghy ass€ssment proceedingp can be avoided for many projects. Section 1...Summary F. Tax Levy Reduction Because municipalities are no longer funding these activitieswi0r tax-supported general funds, tax levies can be reduced or applied elsewhere. G. Simplicity and Ftexibitity Activities involved in forming a storm water utility (seorring City approval, developing a drarge system, explainhg the system to the public, and adding an extra line on utility bills) are not difficult. The fee system is adaptable to local situations. Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Report Page2 Section 2...lntroduction Introduction What ls e Surrace Watet Management UUlity? A utility is a service charge based on a proper!y's contribution of water to the drainage system. A surface water management utility G a method of financing water quantity and quality improvemenb. The utility is based on the premise "users pay." (Ref. 3) The "utilit/' or "user charge" is like sanitary sewer and water utilities operated by communities. A quarterly fee is typicdly charged agiinst dl developed parcels within the City. The fee is based on how much water is contributed. Where land is in an undeveloped, natural state, mudr of the rain soaks into the ground or is retained in small depressiors. However, where development has been prevalent, rooftops, driveways, and parking lots prevent rainfall from soaking in. The rain runs off into streets, ditches, ponds, and lakes. Operation and mahtenance of storm drainage facilities cons. titutes inoeasing expenditures of tax money. The utility provides The utility benefic the community by providing a dedicated fund for surface water management activities induding planning and inventories, capital expenditures, perrcnnel and eguipment and adminisration of the utility. The utility provides a cpntinuous source of revenue for Financing Storm Waler Projects - Final Repoil Page 3 the means to handle increasing costs by having the users of the facilities pay. Rooftops, driveways and parking lots on a property result in more runoff. Therefore, the property should inorr a greater ontribution toward the storm drainage cosB. This coruistent and dependable revenue souroe provides the means . to rnanage the storur drainage system without increasing property taxes or dsing contsoversial assessmenb.The user charge is not associated in any way with prope*y value or property taxes. All properties are subject to the utility charges, induding tax exempt parcels and Cityowned lands. How wlll lt benetlt the communlty? surfac€ water marnagement without competing with the general fund. In fact, with the utility in place, the tax levy whidr supports the general fund can be reduced or applied elsewhere. The benefits associated with surface water management indude the following elements: o Flood control The Flnanclng Dllemma Section 2... lntroduction . Improved lake water quality o Wetland protection o Erosion and sediment aontrol . Enhanoement of reoeational opportunities r Drainage system maintenance o Community education Paying for storm water management proFcB has becrme more complex in recent years. In the past, special assessments against benefited prope*ies financed most of the necessary improvements. However, with -recent legislation, the financial options have broadened corsiderably. The question is, whidr method best suits the needs of the City? The major categories of funding sources are (1) Ad Valorem Taxes; (2) Special Assessments; (3) Building permits, land Development Fees and Land Exaction; (4) User charges; and (5) Grants. Following is a desoiption and financing principles used with eadr of these financing mechanisms. Ad Valorem Tares A. General Taxes General taxation is the most ocmmon revenue sourct used to finance government servioes induding minor maintenance measures for drainage and water qudity facilities. Using property tax has the effect ofspreading the cost over the entire tax base of a community. B. SpecialTax District (M.S. 473.875 to 473.883) The tax district is similar b the administsative sE-ucture under general taxation except that all or part of the community may be placed in the tax district. The principle is to better correlate improvement costs to benefited or coneibuting properties. Financing Storm Water ProjEsls - Final Report Page 4 Speclal Assessment (M.S. 429) Municipalities are familiar with the use of special assessments to finance special services from maintenance of sidewalks to consEuction of capital improvements. The assessments are levied against properties benefiting from the special services. The philosophy of this method is that the benefited properties pay in relation to benefits received. In this case, the benefit is the increase in the market value of the properties. As land is developed or built upon, surface water runoff and pollution loading increases. AdminisEative and capital costs can be recovered at the time of building permit issuance or land development approval. A city can require dedication of land for ponding or drainage purposes. The land, however, must be from the parcel being developed. User Charges (M.S. t144.075) User charges, such as a storm water utility, are a medranism by which a City can generate funds through billings similar to water and sewer billings. The principle Section 2...lntroduction in this method is to drarge for services rendered to properties generating runoff, as well as the sendce b prope*ies beir,g protected from the effects of runoff without consideration to an inoease in market value of the prop€rty. Grants State gants are available for surface water management and non-point source pollution. It is generally not a good financid practice to rely on grants for a service program. This source of revenue is not dependable and requires constant speculation as to its availability. GranB are useful but should only be used to supplemmt a planned local revenue source. A. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) P.reviously the MPCA had Federal matching funds for preserving and protecting lakes and for enhancing their public use an enlcyment, undet the Federal Oean Iakes hogram. MPCA is optimistic that funding will continue b be available. Currmtly, MrcA is involved in the Stae Clean Waer Partnership (CWP) hogram. The CWP provides matchhg funds for lale improvement projects and non- Financing Storm Water Projecls - Final Reporl Page 5 Bullding Permlts, Land Development Fees and Land Exaction point source pollution rcduction. There is a great deal of competition for the available CWP dollars. B. Minnesota Departmenl o, Natural Resources (MDNB) The MDNR has available funding through its Ftood Hazard Mitigation Grant Assistanoe Program. The program provides financial support for planning and implementing sEuctural and non-structural llood damage reduction measures. The program indudes 50/50 matching funds through either a general fund or a bonded fund. C. Minnesota State Board of Water and Soil Besources (MSBWSR) MSBWSR has limited matdring funds available for erosion control projects. Most often these monies are administered through the county Soil and Water Conservation DisEict. Selectlng the Best Optlon In evaluating financing options, the comrnunity should coruider the following citeria: o Fairness . Dependabilig o Iegal Defensibility o Simplicity o Fledbilg The surfaoe water management utility or user drarge method best meets the oiteria. f€es are assessed agairut properties based on the properties contribution of runoff. The utility repres€nts a steady and reliable source of revenue. The utility prevents legal drallenges to assessments as was frequently the case when special assessments were levied against properties. The utility eliminates the need to demorstrate benefit or fair market increase for properties within a project area. Moreover, the simplicity of the utility makes this financing method attsactive. Gaining approval and public support is relatively easy. Adding an additional charge b existing utility billinp is a simple process. (Ref.3) The quarterly charge is an approach that meets with more public acceptance than a one-tiure durge.tastly, the utility method is flqible, naking it easier to administer proiects. Financing Storm Water Proj€cts - Final Report Page 6 Section 2...lntoduction Section 3...Fee Basis Fee Basis Phllosophy The general philosophy behind the storm water utility progam is simple - contributors'pay. Gef.2) To develop a fee basis, the City must make a determination of which properties pay what amounts. Cause and Et ect To remain fair to all properties, the utility is based on how much a partia.rlar parcel contributes to the drainage system needs. The amount of conribution should not be based solely oh the amount of rooftops and pavement on a parcel. The contribution should consider how much rain rurs off. Different amounB of rain will produce different amounts of runoff. However, the differcnce in runoff for a residential proFrty and a business area is not oonstant for all rainfall depths. Thereforg rainfall depth wed in the fee equation should result in the appropriate properties paylng an appropriate amounl Revenue Equatlon The revenue equation follows the Soil Conservation Service Methodology outlined in the SCS National Engineering Handbook Section 4 - Hydrolory. Gef. 4) The general runoff equation is: o (P- O.2S)2 P + 0.8S Q = Actual Runoff P = Potential Maximum Runoff S = Potential Marimum Rebntion and initial rainfall absEaction The',S" term can be ogressed in terrrs of the runoff index, or qrrve number (Ct{). For cpnvenient solutiory tables are easily developed. For use in the utility, P will remain constant and CN will be assigned b the land use types identified by Cig zoning. Financing Storm Watgr Projec{s - Final R€poil Page 7 S=(1000/CM-10 How much ralnfall? Almost 1/2 of the city is orrently zoned for agriculture. The malcrity of the developed part of the City is zoned RSF-single Family Residentil. Of Oe nonresidential land uses, Business,/lndusEial zoning prev:itc. The following table compares the percentage of total runon coneiuutioru of Residential (CI! 75) versus Business/Industrial (Cl.I 90) for different rainfall depths. RUNOFF RAIN DEPTH Business / Industrial Residential Ratior 0.32" 1.lv', 7.W', 2.92 3.88" 0.03" 038" 095 1.67', 2.U" 10.58 2.90 2.10 7.75 1.59 'Ratio equals Business/lndustrial runoff divided by Residential runoff. The comparison illustrates that as the rainfall inoeases, the difference in runoff between intersely developed properties versus residential developed properties becomes significantly less. Greater runoff-as well as greater pollutant load is generally associated with interuely developed properties ousiness/industrial). Therefore, using the basic premise of the utility (contributors pay), a rainfall amount that-will result in highly developed properties paying more than residential properties should be used. A 2" rainfall results in almost three times therunoff from a business/indusEial ase then from a residential aoe. Therefore, business,/industial properties would pay up to three times as much as a residential lot. Using a rainfall amount of 2", the runoff equation becomes: Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Report Page 8 Section 3...Fee Basis a= (16 - (1500/C!) + (4O,OOO/CN2)) ( (800/cN - 6) Land Use Types Existing land use is used to determine each propert/s oontribution to the utility. Existing land use was determined from 1989 aerial photc. (Ref 5) Zoning and sreet base maps were used to verify land uses. (Ref 6, 7) Residential land use types have overlapphg permitted uses. For example, R-4 indudes single family dwellings (RSD and two family dwellings sudr as duplexes. The R-8 zone allows two family dwellinp and higher density development, but is zoned with the intent of single family attached residential development at a maximum of eight dwelling units per acre. The highest deruity development allowed in any partictilar zone will be used for determining a developed propertfs contri- bution and related fee. Using this criteria, the following land use designatioru ilg slggested for use in the utility equation: RR Rural Residential (2 1/2 aae lots) RSF, Single Family Residential (1/3 acre lots) R-4,R€ TwoFamilyResidential (1/4 - 1/8 aoe los) R-1ZR-15 ApartmenS BN,BHfBD,BG,BF Commercial OI,IOP Industrial A2 Agriculture (zoned) Ua Undeveloped Section 3...Fee Basis INSTa Institutions (drurches, sdlools, government buildingp, hospitals) P Parks/GolfCourses/ Cemeteries,/Aboretum PLr Parkingloe a Not a zoning designation For these land uses, runoff indies (CNs) can be applied b determine t}re amount of runoff from an area resulting from a specified amount of ninfall. Gef 8) The coneibution bwards the storm water utility is equated to the percentage of the total runoff for eadr property type. Expendltures The following table illustrates anticipated Fyear expenditures to be financed with the surface water management utility. The expenditures consider both one' time costs and annual oots. Funding considers the malcr categories of Planning and Inventories, Surfaoe Water Management Utility, Capital Expenditures and Personnel and Equipment The utility will not eliminae confibutioru from new developments or future assessments. AII new plae will continue b pay towards water m.rnagement features . Similarly propcts will still be assessed, with the utility tunding the Ci!y's share of the cosB. Financing Storm Water Projocts - Final Roport Page 9 Section 3...Fee Basis Annual Total Cost (5 Year) $ 5s,000 ESNMATEO $YEAB EXPENDITURES Item Plannlng and lnventorles 1. Identify wetlands, prepare City wetland map and review wetland ordinance. 2. Storm Sewer Mapping o Initial Mapping . Updates 3. t^ocd Surface Water Management plan (509 Plan) 4. Local Surface Water Management plan Amendments 5. Water Quality Plan 5. Water Quality Monitoring and Improvements (Chemical Application, Weed Hawest, Etc) Subtotal 5,000 1,000 &000 5,000 Surlace Water Managemenl Utlllty 1. Utilitylmplementation 2. Billing and Collection System Modification Subtotal 135,000 25,M 72,N0 10,000 50.000 $35o,OOO 5,000 5.0@ 72,W Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Report $-- - Page 10 Section 3...Fee Basis 35,00o 775,W Item Annual $30,000 180,000 r0,000 Total Cost (5 Year) $150,000 400,000 50,m0 Personnel and Equlpment 1. City Administration, Development Reviews 2. Maintenance: i.e., Strreet Sweeping, Catch Basin Cleaning Ditch and Pond Maintenance, Iabor (Stseet and Utility Superintendents) 3. Semiannual Lake, Pond, and Wetland Inspections 4. Drainage/Utility Engineer 5. Ordinance Review 5. Utility - Customer Service and General 7. Automation Personnel Subtotal 10% Contingency 5,000 30,000 4,m0 20,000 2,000 5,000 5,m0 Subtotal Totat 5,000 20.000 800,000 80.000 $880,000 132.000 $1,012,000 3'(},000 150,000 20,000 1m,om 10,000 ?s,w 25.000 360,000 $1,734000 Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Repod Page 11 Capltal Expendltures 1. Backlog of Corutructionhojects Future Cons fuction ProF'cts 2. Engineering Discretionary Fund (Small hojects) 3. hoperty Acquisition 4. Automation . Software (GIS, Hydrolog'y, etc.) o Hardware 15% Engineering and Admin. Subtotal Typical Charges To determine typical drarges fordifferent properties, the estimated expenditures for a given period of time are apportioned according to the percentage of total runoff attributed to that property type. The drarge for agrioJtural and undeveloped property has been set at $0.50 per acre to keep the quarterly charges at an acceptable level. Tax exempt prop€rty contributioru have been estimated by relating the market value of tax exempt parcels to the ratio of market value for taxable properties to the taxable area on Section 3...Fee Basis Typical Charges Property Zoning RunoffCIV (Inches) Runoff Volunc (Aclrr) Ibhl Runofi. * Contsib. Arcr (Ases) QuarErly CostsTotd Pcr Aca Pe: Lot P.R. & RSF, 72R-l,n+ E2 R-128-16 EE BNBH,CBD, 92 BG,BF OIJOP tE A2 ,'. rL Inst. ' (1) Developed 8E Undeveloped - Parks' 65 TOTAL 0.06, 0.n 0.65 0.97 724 1297 2055 0 {5 n6 394 3E1{ TB 90 r6xl rE6 7E.67 6035{ 0 43.44 2D57 38030 3550 252JJ %&t 15.17 65.65 1.9 37/l 0 2:l 773 2?5 22 It o42Zt 32,A4 0 2333 r5,019 mA31 L9A7 r3s{ t325 15.7() 35.19 51A6 6fi 51.85 050 050 5r36 050 7% $8.14 5.18 o.n 0.01 0.01 0.97 0.01 0.I{ 3A 0.9 {.1 1m! 1,$7 t15 3577 385,70 ' Not 8 zoning designadon.' Runoff compurd on basis of 6rcd fec oqtal to SO5O acrr (l) Tar cxempt parcels (appoxinatc) Page 12 acres (Ref 9). This resulB in an estimated btal area, in aces, of tax exerxlpt property in the City. This area is ompared to known tax exempt parcels and listed under the 'lrrstitutioru" (INST) category with an appropriate CN value b estimate the runoff contribution. Planned Unit Develop @UD) zoning will be assessed at the rate most appropriate for eadl individual developmenL The following Table showsexample calorlations for determining typical drarges. The Table is based on a $1,734,000 five- year improvement program, or $85,700 per quarter. Financing Slorm Water Projects - Final Report Cost Comparlson As a comparison, Roseville's utility uses $4.35 per residential lot and $65 per acre for commercial/indusrial property. Mounds View is currently considering $3 per residential lot and $27 for commercial property. Bloomin$on uses $7 per residential lot and $15 for commercial / induscial. When crcmparing rates with other communities, it is important to recognize that the actual rates are dependent on the required quarterly revenue, and the established City policy regarding which property should pay what amoun6. Therefore, rates should be established whidr . are acceptable and whidt will result in the appropriate level of tunding. Credits Credits may be applied for whidt can reduce the utility fee for individual parcels. Credits are available where runoff is retained on a single parcel, when an individual has inadequate income to pay the fee, or where a qualified crcnservation program (agri odtual) is implemented. Credits ale not considered for wetlands or detention ponds. Section 3...Fee Basis Wetlands have been doctrmented as a benifit to surfae water and ground wat€r systems. However, wetlands can also release nukients from decaying vegetation. The fee equation factors wetlands in as non- developed ac€rage through the established runoff indicies (CM. Ttrerefore, no oedit is @nsidered. Storrr water detention may reduce the raE of peak flow from a development, but the volume of runoff is greater than the pre developed condition. Ihis inaeased volume must be handled downsEeam therefore no sedit is given for on-site rate control. All credits will be evaluated by a staff commitee. Council will hear all appeals of utility charges. Procedures for receiving <redie and appealing durges is established by City policy. Ercluslons Exdusions from the utility are few. Only sceet and highway right-of-way, and lakes are exduded under this forrrula. Future Highway 212 right-of-way will be exempt from the utility charges when the rightof-way is purchased but will be billed out according to ocisting landuse until constn rction ocruns. Undeveloped (vacant) land is charged a minimum amount, as is agriodtural land. Financing Slorm Water Projects - Final Repon Pags 13 Section 3...FeE Basis Comparison of Curent Taxing Status to Stonn Water Utility Fee Basis (Ref.l0 11) Residential Apartsnents Commercial Industrial Agricutturd Vacant Tax Exempt Parks %ot Total Tax Capacity 51.1 3.6 t7.6 23.7 3.4 %of Total utiliry 42.3 2.7 773 23.5 2.2 1.6 63 4.t 72 0 0 Financing Storm Water Projecls - Final Repott Page 14 Administration Administering the Surface Water Management Utility wiU require several phases. The fust phase involves drafting a final ordinance to provide the legal basis of implementation of the utility. The second step indudes establishing the individual property charges based on acreages, land use, and the rate as established by ordinance. Step tfuee involves modification of the current billing procedure. Step four creates an account to which utility funds would be paid into, and from whidr revenues can be made available for identified expenditures. The last step identifies the administrator of the Surface Water Management Utility. Implementation of the utility should dosely follow the ordinance and adoption of City policy regarding the utility. The utility would take affect fanuary 7,1997, with fees payable as part of the 6rst utility billing cyde. The major effort in administering the utility will be to o<pand the billing process to indude those properties which do not orrrently receive City water and sewer service. This task may be somewhat lessened by the fact that mailing labels were received from the County as part of the Public lnformation Prograrn. This information wil be available when thebillhg process is amended. Financing Storm Water Projects - Final R€port Page 15 Sectlon 4...Administration Section 5...Model Ordinance Model Ordinarc€ Rerr2) 00. Surlace Water Manaoement Utllltv 00.010. General Operation. Ttre City surface water system shall be operated as a public utility (hereinafter called the surface water management utility), pursuant b Minnesota Statub kion 444.O7S,trom which revenues will be derived subFct to the provisioru of this chapter and Minnesota Statutes. 00.020. Definitions. UtiJity Factor. The utility factor is defined as the ratio of runoff volume, in indres, for a partiorlar land use, to the runoff volume, in inches for a 7/3 acre residential lot, assuming a 2" rainrall and soil conservation service(SCS)'Type B" soil conditiors. rface W Mana The surface water management fee is defined as the annual drarge developed for each parcel of land. Surthee. W.ater Management .Budget The surfae water management budget is the estimated annual expenditure for planning and inveitories, capital expenditures, personnel and equipment and operation of the surface water utility, in accordance with establishea Ciity poticy. rhesurface water managemmt budget and resulting srriace '*rat , management fees shall be established for a period of time as set by City policy whidr shall be no less than three (3) years and no more than 6ve (5) years. 00.030. surfacE water Management Fees. The utility factors for various land uses are as follows: Classification Land Use Utility Factor 1 Rural Residential (2- l,/2 aoe lots) O.2l 2 Single Family Residential (U3 aae loe) t.OO 3 Mixed tow and Medium Deruity Residential L24 4 Apaffnents, Induseial Offie, 3.y Institutions (Churdres, Schools, Government Buildinp, Hospitals) 5 Business/Commercial 4.2g t Page 16Financing Storm Wat€r Projecls - Final Reporl Seciion 5...Model Ordinance Agriorlturd Undeveloped Parls, Crmeteries, Golf C-oursesAboretum Parking Lots 0.03 0.03 0.45 5.14 The Surface Water Management Fee shall be determined by nrst determining the percentage of total runoff in the City whidr is attribued to Single Family Residential property.The Fee per acre for Single Family Residential is computed by equating the runoff perc€ntage b an equal perc€ntage of the Quarterly Surface Water Management Revenue, divided by the estimated total acres of Shgle Family Residential land use in the City. The per acre Fee for all hdividual parcels shall be defined as the product of the Single Family Residential Fee, the appropriate utility factor and the total acreage of the parcel. Single Family Residential and Rural Residential parcels shall be assessed on a per lot basis using 1/3 acre for Single Family Residential and 2 1/2 aoes for Rural Residential. 00.050. Exemptions. The following land uses are exempt from the surface water management fee: (a) PubtcRight-of-way (b) Iakes 00.070. Appeal of Fee. If a property owner or person responsible for Financing Storm Water Projecls - Final Rsporl Page 17 6 7 8 9 00.0a0. @!jg. The Gouncil may adopt policies, by resolution, for adiustment of the surface water management fees. Information to justify a fee adjustsnent mustbe supplied by the property owner. Sudr adjusurents of fees shall not be reEoactive. Credits will be reviewed annualy by a staff committee. 00.050. Pavment of Fee. Surface waEr malragement fee shall be invoied every three (3) months on or about the _ day of the month. The fee shall be due and payable on or before the _ day of the month in whidr the statement is mailed. Any prepayment or overpa)rment of drarges shall be retained by the City and applied agairct subsequent fees. 00.080. Penaltv for Iate Payment. Eadr billing for surface water management fees not paid when due shall inorr a penalty charge of ten percent (10%) of the amount past due. 00.090. Certification of Past Due Fees on Taxes. If any two (2) quarters of surface water management fees have not been paid whm due, then a penalty as set forth on Section 00.080, shall be added to the amount due. Any su& past due fees may then be certified to the County Auditor for collection with real estate taxes on the following year pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Seaion 444.075, Subdivision 3. In addition, the City shall also have the right to bring a civil action or to take other legal remedies to collect unpaid fees. Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Report Page 18 Section 5...Model Ordinance payrng the surface water management fee believes that a partiorlar assigned fee is incorrect, such a person may request that the fee be recomputed. Appeals will be heard by Council once a year in accordance with the sdredule established for credit applicatiors, in established City poli.y. Section 5...Model Ordinance CHANHASSEN SURFACE WATER MANAGE MENT UTILITY Clty Policy Policy Statement All properties within the City of Chanhassen shall conEibute to the Surfaoe Water Management Utility in an amount proportional b the runoff contributed by eadr partiorlar parcel. Exemptiors (a) Aericultural Land - Agriodtual (tilled) land will be drarged a flat rate of $0.50 per acre p€r quarter. (b) Undeveloped lands - Undeveloped lands, or land in a natural, undisturbed condition will be charged the rate of $0.50 per acre per quarter. (c) Street and Highway Rieht-of-Way - SEeet and highway rightof-way shall be exempt from all drarges. (d) Iakes - bkes listed by the Minnesota Departsnent of Natural Resources as Natural Environment Waters, Recreational Development Waters or General Development Waters shall be exempt from all charges. Fee Basis (a) Land Use - knd use for determining surface water management fees shall be the existing land use at the date of enactnent of the Surface Water Management Ordinance. As land is developed, or redeveloped, the fees will be recomputed based on the revised land use. (b) Soils - Soil Conservation Servie (SCS) - Type B soils shall be assumed for determining the runoff index (ChI) in the revenue equation. (c) (d) Rainfall (P) - A 2" rainfall will be used on the revenue eguation. Runoff Indices (O.I) - The runoff indices for Ore property dassifications are as follows: ClassificaHon land Use 1 Rural Residential @-1l2 acre lot) 2 SingleFamily Residantial (t /3 acre lot) 3 Mixed low and Medium Density Residential (1 /8 to 1/4 acre lot) Runoff Index (CN) fi 72 Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Report 82 Page 19 Section 5...ModEl Ordinance Classification la4d Use Runoff Index (CN) 4 Apartments, Indusfial Of6ce and Institutioru (durches, schoob govern buildings, hospitals) 8S5 Business/Comurercial 926 Agdodtural NA7 Undeveloped NA8 Parls, Certteries, GoU Courses 659 Parking Iats 9g NA - Curve no. not applicable due to fee based on fixed ntes. (e)Re_venue Equation - The revenue equation for computing the runoffvolume (Q) shall be based on the runoff equation in Oe Soit Conservation Service (SCS) National Engineerinf Handbook Section 4 - Hydrology. The equation is as follows: Q=(P-0.2S)2 whereS=(10@/CtD-10 P+ 0.8S and p = 2,, Credits swface water management fees may be adjusted under the conditioru stated below. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to providejustification for the fee adjusunent.creaits musibe lppiied for by bctober 31st of the year preceeding the year in which the seaii is to be considered. (a) storm water Retention - If it can be demonstrated that an individual parcel retains all or a portion ofthe rainfall that it receives, the surface water manag€mmt fee will be reduced by a percentage equal to thatpercent of the parcel which produces -no'external=runoff. A fee reduction of 20% or greater must be demonsuated. (b) low Income - The surface water management fee will be waived for any property owner with income whidr is or below the established minimum income of _ for the year prior to issuance of any charges. This sedit must be applied for eictr yiar. (c) AEricqltural..gonservation _Prosram (Ref 13) - A fifty peroent teduction will be granted to the owner of agriorttural landsif tfie bndowner has a conservation prog.ram nta witfr the United States $parunent of Agriorlture Soil Conservation Service (SCS), orCoqlg Sojl and Water Coruervation Diseict. To qualify for'the ced-it, implementation of conservation prog.rams musf be ,irified by the SCS. Financing Storm Water Projscts - Final Report Page 20 Section 5...Model Odinance The surface water management fee will be reduced eighty perent if a oonservation program is implemented which will meet the soil tolerance levels as established by the SCS. The aedit rrust be applied for each year. Adiustrrent of Fees Surface water management fees will be adjusted under the following conditions. (a)Revision of Ouarterlv Surface Water Revenue -The estimated expenditures for the management of surface water shall be revised at a frequency specified in the ordinance. fhe fees will be adjr.rsted actordingly and will follow established City procedures for this adjustment of utility (water and sewer) rates. G) Application for Credit (c)Chanse in Deve oDe d Condition of Parcel.I Financing Storm Wator Projects - Final Report Page21 Sec{ion 6...Public lnlormation Program Public Information Program The- surface vyater management utility will sucoeed if it has complete public understanding and support. Additionally, the decision makers and the public must understand the benefiC to be derived from such a ProSram. Educalion Process The process of educating the community as to the benefits of the utility b"g* with the presentation of the utility concept at the April 30, 1990 special Council meeting and again at the May 74, 1990 regular Council meeting. (Ref 14) The second step on the public information program involved the use of newspaper artides, and an informational flyer and questionnaire mailed to eadr resident of the community. The artide, flyer and questionnaire follow the bibliography. The third step involved a public informational meeting held on Iune 21, 1990. This meeting induded an open house discussiory formal presentation and guestion and answer sessioru Resulls Questionnaire The City mailed out N2S questionnaires; only 169 or 42% were returned. Of those returned, 647o were in favor of the utility, 31% wete oppced and 2% were undecided. (Ref 16) Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Repon Page 22 Public InJorrration Meeting The Public lnformation Meeting was lightly attended. Following the presentation portion of the Program, a lively disorssion developed. Most of the disorssion was favorable; many issues raised were in regards to how the utility would work and what the funds should be asked for, Some opposition was voiced, especially in regards b agriodtural lands. Section 6...Public lnformation Program Many of the responses showed a lack of complete understanding of what the utility is and how it will function. In an effort to darify these issues, the following statements, from questionnates received and corresponding explanatory responses, are presented here. (Ref 15) oWhen will it (the fee) stop and be reduced - presently 0t is) $1.50, next year $3.00 and so ott-- The Ordinance establishes the surfac€ water management fees for a three to five year period. As the community develop,s, rates could desease since developed properties contribute signifi cant- ly more than undeveloped properties. -Aren't we already paying for this Genice) by the propefiy tares we pay to the watershed dishictsf Watershed Districts have broad responsibilities in surface water management. However, the Districts focns is on the watershed and not the individual communities. The DisEicts do not have the resources b address the specific issues identified h this report. The Districts and other agencies will be utilized to the greatest extent possible. However, it is recognized that the most effective management is done at the local (City) level. Programs funded by the utility will not be redundant to services provided by the watershed districts. Why should I pay tf I don't drain into a (drainage) system? I am being taxed by the City now for serices I do gq! receive!' There are two principles fundamental to the storm water management Program: l. AII real prcperty within a drainage basin will benefit from installation of an adeguate stonn drainage sysEm. 2. The oost of irstalling an adequate drainage system should be assessed against the developed property in a basin. Page 23Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Repon Sestion 6...Public lnformation Program 'Don't create a separate govemment agency! Why is the present engineering depattment not capable of handling this need?- A utility is defined as service charee bas€d on a properq/s contribution of vyater to a drainage system. The utility is a financing method, not an agency; the Director of Public Works will be the administrator of the program. The utility will be the primary responsibility of the engineering departsnent. Ic the utilify really necessary? Hooray! - now we get taxed because it rains - good idea - consider one for wind too! Or maybe eunshine!' Rainfdl causes the need for an adequate drainage system. Development inoeases the volumes of runoff and associated pollutant loads. To address water qulmtity (floodind and water quality issues, a utility or user chaage is necessary to finanoe the cost of the programs. Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Rspod Page24 These principles are not easy for property owners to understand at first, but they are key b thestorrn water managemmt concept. It is difficult for a prop€rty owner who lives on a hiU to understand how the construction of a storm drain in a low-lying area benefits him. But storm drainage indudes mudr more than just flood ontrol. Keeping streets open to emergency vehicles, maintaining ponds and open channel so they do not become health and safety hazards, and promoting use of drainage facilities for reoeation all contribute to enhancing the quality of life. It is important to recognize that development adds to existing drainage problems. The property owner on a hill has, by ocnverting the natural ground cover into sE€ets, conoete and rooftops, increased the stonn water runoff. This contributes tothe drainage problem of neighbors in low-lying areas. To some extent then, the proF*y owner should contribute to the cost of crcrrecting that problem. Seclion 6...Public lnlormation Program The need for the programs is demonstrated by these received commenB: . Algae is a problem! o Eliminate direct disdrarge of storm sewers into lakes . hotect marshes and wet- lands o Why live in a City with lakes unless we protect them . Control (Eurasian) Milfoil Public Hearing Page 25Financing Storm Water Projects - Final Repoil A public hearing has been scheduled for August 27, 1910. The utility will be corsidered for adoption at that time. Biblio ra h Works Clted 1. Krempel, Roger E. "Storm WaEr Management by Utility Approach.,, Proceedings of the 1988 National Conference, Hydraulic Engineering e&. Steven R Abt and Johannes Gessler, New york ASCE;lggg pi. 72yt-72?9. 2. Jouseau, Marchel. Sbrrr Water Management Financing tocal Storrr WaterJVlanagement,, Publication No. 1O-g&143, tr,teeopotitan C.ouncil of the Twin Cities Area, St. paul, MN, Oct. 19g3. 3. Hondrelt, Charlie V. "Creating a Stornr Drainag:e Utility.. APWA Reporter, fan. 1985: 1G11. 4. Mockus, Victor., 'SCS National Engineering Handbook, Section 4Hydrology," U.S. Departsnent of Agriorlture, Soil Conservation Service, 7969 pp 10.3 - 10.5a. 5. City of Chanhassen., Ortophotographic Topography Maps, April 15,1989 and May 9, 1989 Photography. 6. City of Chanhassen, Base Map, Revised |anu ary,1990. 7. City of Chanhassen, Zoning Map, Revised August 1 7, lggg. 8. Midje, Howard,'Tlydrology Guide for Minnesota,. U.S. Department of Agrioilture, Soil Conservation Servioes, 1975 9. Winter, Scoft, Carver C-ounty Ass€ssot s Offie, luly 31, 1990, telephone conversation. 10. Winter, Scott., Carver County Assesso/s Offioe, April ZS,lggO Telephone Convetsation. ll.Johansen, Larry,, Hennipen County Assessot s Offie, April Z3,lW Telephone Conversation. 12. City of Rosevillg MN, Storrr WaEr Utillty Ordinane. 13. Neumann, Paul., Carver County Soil and Water Conservation District, luly 26,190 telephone onversation 14. SEH, Inc. 'Tinancing Storrr Water Utilig/, May 14,1990. 15. city of chanhassen, Tabulated Questionnaire Results, Fax trarsmittal, IuIy 3,1s90. Financing Storm Water Projects - Final R€pon Page 26 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (61 2) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 CH[NH[ESEN 6p I,TEUORANDT'!,I TO: Planning Conmission FRO![: PauI Xrauss, Planning Director DATE: August 21, 1990 SUBf: Item #1 Staff Response to the Southlrest Metro Transit ComrnissionPark and Ride Land Use Study At our meeting on August 1, 1990, the park and Ride Land Use Studyprepared for the Southwest }letro Transit Cornrnission by Hoisingto;and Associates lras presented to the planning Commiision. Thereport represents a comprehensive attenpt to progran future busservices and rnost importantly, park and ride taciti.ties for thethree communities that participate in southwest lletro Transit. Thereport also has a component that deals vith Light Rail TransitPlanning, however, given the rather long tine fran6 involved beforethere rrrould be any facilities built in this area, staff does notviev this component as being particularly inrportant. The studyrsnajor goal is to help the connunities plrticipating in LtreSouthwest Metro Transit locate park and rlae facif itiis. Thereport also strongly promotes the use of rravel Demand Managementstrategies (TPll). .IDt! prograns are proposed to irnprove tiansitridership while niniroizing environien[al inpact and trafficcongestion. Staff has been asked to review the report to serve asa basis for providing comments back to Southwest Metro. Thisreport constitutes staff effort to conduct that review. Additionalconnents raised by the pranning conmission and city council vill beincorporated and also forwarded to the southrdeJt }retro Transitcommission- staffis comments are provided in a natter consistentrrith the layout of the report. staff supports the rntroduction and purpose stateDents provided forthe report in general; Chanhassen has been an active nlraber in thesouthwest ltletro Transit cornrnission and supports the continuedexpansion and growth of the system. Holrever, ue are concerned thatthis -lport is used as the nediura in which TD!,! strategies arestrongly recommended for inplenentation. Staff conclptualtysupports the goal of TDU strategies and has been active in ttreii ICITY OF on Page 9, the report describes the Chanhassen park and Ride Lotlocated at the Chanhassen Bowl on Market BouLevard. While final Planning Coromission Park and Ride Land Use Study Augnrst 2l , L99O utilization in other coEmunities. Vfe have also written MnDOT ontso occasions conmenting on the draft EIS for T.H. 212 advocating a greatly expanded rol.e for TDI{ strategies which appeared to have been overlooked in the initial drafts. However, TDM strategiesthat are described in detail in the report raise a nunber of issuesfor comrounities that need to be explored in a comprehensive nannerbefore they are adopted. TDll strategies range fron taking steps to ensure that developnent is nore rrtransit friendlyrt and working t ith Southwest Dletro to site parking lot facilities to nore activistroles of requiring industrial firns to inplenent ride sharingstrategies and requiring development to either charge for parking or develop an adequate number of parking sta11s for the project onthe assumption that transit use and/or ride sharing uould beincreased. We believe the issue is a very large one that involvesfuture development of suburban conmunities. It also involves anissue of eguity. In it's sinpLest sense, if Chanhassen were toadopt requirenents of TDM strategies to achieve hrhat are acknowledged to be valid goals, but at the same tine Chaska didnot, this would act as a significant disincentive for developing in Chanhassen. Staff has often indicated in the past that TDM is avalid concept and should be potentially required for all cornnunities but that this should be adninistered on a rnetro basis wherever possible. Uy own direct experience nith TDU strategies occurred during ny tiDe rrorking for the City of llinnetonka. That cornrnunity adopted a highly innovative TD![ program along the I 394corridor. While I support this sort of approach, I feel that itnust be stressed that l,[innetonka is in a unique position in ternsof having considerably nore developEent pressure than the citycould acconmodate. This put the city in a position where it acknowledged the equity issues associated rrith TDM strategies butsince developnent wanted to occur in Minnetonka anyway the Cityfelt that it did not need to take this into account. In sunnary,staff supports TDM as a concept and will work to encourage reasonable leve1s of iDplenentation of these prograns in the Cityof Chanhassen. However, we believe that the large scale progranoutlineg in the report, is possibly inappropriate as to tine franeand that the Southwest l,letro report is not the ideal forum for developing a comprehensive approach to iDpteDenting TDU strategies. Fig:ure 1 is a map of activity centers including najorintersections. I{e believe there is an onission on this nap and theB!ry. s,/Powers Boulevards intersection classifies as a Dajor one inthe city of Chanhassen and should be illustrated for futureconsideration. We note that Polrers Boulevard has a rather largeresidential conmunity and that it will be the najor rresternentrance into the chanhassen cBD. On Page 6 the report describes potential fundinq sources for newparking lot facilities in Chanhassen. The repoit indicates thattentative sites are located in the Cityrs tax lncrement districtsand that. the city has said it will consider using ?IF funds foracquisition and possibly developnent costs. The report should notethat while the City is in favor of working to get iurproved park andRide sites, that lguity must be preseried i-n tire allocation ofCity. funds to these irnproveroents. That is, that the City iswilling to consider such funding prograns so long as ChaskJ andEden Prairie are asked to consider supporting these inprovenents intheir cornmunities under sirnilar terns. On Page 28 the report discusses future park and Ride sites inchanhassen. Staff agrees that Site 7 at Hwy. 101 and 2L2interchange is a site of prinary inportance and hls already takenaction to pronote UnDOTrs on procuring it. Site 6 is tocited atHwy. 5 and DeIl Road intersection. Staff agrees t ith theconsultant that this is an ideal site for a park and ride faci).ityin terrns of location relative to population ind work trips for thecity of Chanhassen. However, the repbrt indicates that MnDOT Dayassist in acguisition and developnent and the City of Chanhassenshould be encouraged to assist rrith TIF. It should be made clearthat to the best of our knowledge, unDoT is not prepared to investin this site as a part of Hrry. 5 inprovenentl. Highway 5construction in this area is already designed and progranroed anddoes not include facilities for park and ride. Ralaaive to theCity of Chanhassen participating uith Tax Increment Financing, Irefer back to our earlier comments regarding financing in geneial.Southwest Metro should assume that they will have to bear sone Planning Commission Park and Ride Land Use Study Augarst 2L, L99O details have not yet been conpleted, it nay be useful for thereport to note that the City and Southwest ![etro are negotiatingthe relocation of the bus stop to a Dore pernanent location locatedon land currently owned by the Chanhassen IIRA on Borrling AIIeyDrive. This program has tentatively been revj.et ed by tha Chanhassen Housing and RedevelopDent Authority vhich indicated thatthey were generally in agreeuent with the proposal but wanted tosee finished pLans. On Page 14 the report talks about reverse conmute trips. Itindicates that there is a potential for extending reverse conmutetrips to enplo)ment centers as far as chanhassan. The City of Chanhassen rrould advocate reassessing this program in the very nearfuture with a goal of increasing reverse commute service {o thecomnunity. We believe that the enploynent base is significantlylarge at this point and concentrated in linited areas to nake thiiservice more realistic than it has been in the past. Largeconcentrati.ons of enrployees in singte structures such as theRosemount, lilcclynn, United l{aillng and other sites wouLd nake thiseven more practical . Planning Comnission Park and Ride Land Use Study Augnrst 21 , L99O burden in the cost of developing sites such as this. Page 36 is a point in the report at which Travel Denand t{anageEentis described in detail . We do not wish to repeat comments provided above, but continue to exlrress concern that this report is not theappropriate place to estabLish a detailed TDII program. f wouldalso note that there appears to be a conflj.ct with Southwest l,letro! s progranning since the reportrs intent is to prornote TDU measures in the connunities. For exanple, it is noted that the cornmunity shouLd advocate site planning that pronotes the use oftransit as an alternative to single car occupancy. The report even goes so far as to promote a fee schedule for new development andexisting developnent based on the nunber of parking spaces theyoffer with or without TDl,l nanagenent plans. At the sarne tirae we should note that Chanhassen has no direct service to our industrial concentrations and apparently none is contenplated in the inmediatefuture by the report. In a sirnilar natter, reverse conmute to Chanhassen enpl oynent centers does not appear to be a relativelystrong priority of the report. Thus, there is a basic conflictwith requiring that developnent be dependent on transit rrithout theavailability of transit. The conclusion section begins on Page 45 and provides a detailedlist of 25 conclusions for the report. Staff agrees with the listof conclusions and would put particular emphasis on #9 which statesItas developnent continues in Chanhassen, existing reverse conmute service nay be expected to be extended r.resterly to accomrnodate thisgrowing needrr. As a last iten, we would ask that Southwest Metro keep an open nind to routing service dorrn west 78th street in Chanhassen. This street does not land itself well to park and ridefacilities but is becorning a najor focus of comnercial andresidential activity in the conrnunity that nay ultinately warrantdirect service. ADIIINISTRATIVE SECTION Letter to Don Ha11a from JoAnn O1sen, dated August 20, 1990. Letter to Don Chmiel from Dennis Dirlam, dated August 7, L990. Letter to Ann Hurlburt from Paul Krauss, dateal AugusL 22, 1990. Article on MUSA Line in Eden Prairie. Letter to Kevin Kain from PauI Krauss, dated August 13, 1990. Letter to Harald Ericksen from Kevin Kain, dated July 26,1990. t'{\414 eu.no- wg^5 r.<5ract fr'r'' q"Pzh{ CITY OF EIIINH[ESEN 690 COULTER DR|VE. pO. BOX 147 o 6111111.115SEN, MTNNESOTA 55317 (612) 937.1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 CERTTFIED llr. Don Hal1a Hall.a Nursery 10000 creat plains goulevard Chaska, llN 55318 2. An erosion control fence an Dear !tr. Hal.1a: The city has received- your letter to the pranning counission clatedluSu:! 14, 1990,. uithit-iaui_ng-.your request for an i"t".ffur"'per:ait I?Lr991099 :y!i" yaras ot- ii11. on-ruly 1s, i-s;d;lii ifJ"i".a "rr.rr. ano graorng per it adninistratively for 1,OOO ;ubic yards offirI. The administrative pemit uas afproveit'nlth tut r'oiiowrngconditions : 1. Tree stunps, denolltion naterial, bl-t-unlnous and largeconcrete pieces ahalr not be used is firrl- c"""r"ii pi""".s,ar.ler than one foot rn diaueter nay b- """a -i-"ror-tf;" topthree feet of fill. drlor hay bales should be staked atthe toe ofslopes.slope until veEetatlon le establlehed on the 3 A secu_rity deposit of $2,OOO.OO ull] be requlred. tbls nIllbe.fully refunded upon Eatisfactory conpletion ot trre-uori-i!stipulated herein. All uork associated -uith thie cffi oi.i.tion under thisp:ITit, lncluding eeeding, uuct be cornpfttea tiE"pi'.ri."-ii]1990. : ;- -,_:-_ -.. .. .- The- City vl-I'f perfortu randou obserrrations of .the sltelncludlng a final inspectl.on to verl.fy coupttancJ. --- Hours of operatLon shal1 ie ?sOO a.!. tothrough Frlday and saturday froD 8!oO a.D. 6:0O D.!., t{ondayto 5:00 p.E. 4 E 6. 7 Seeding and fiber blanket shall be used on the slopes of alldisturbed areas upon conpretion of thJ operation ii iaartioniifllling pemits ire not -granted. August 20, 1990 llr. Don HaIIa August 20, L99O Page 2 8. The appl.icant 6ha11 clean daily, on and off-6ite, dirt anitdebris including all blonables fron Etreets and thesurrounding -areas that has resu}ted frou this operatlon by theapplicant, its agents or assigms. Even though you will Dot be contlnuing ulth the Interin Uae pelaitapplication, the conditlons of the idDini8trative approval luststilI be uet. Thls includes eeeding and fiber blinket on theslopes of all disturbed areas no later than SepteDber 15, 1990. Staff visited the Eite on Augrust 2 and Augrust 15, 1990. SinceAugust 2nd, there has been ailditlonal filliDg of the ravine andvidening of the loadrIay. ft al3o appeara that the 1,000 cubicyards. of fill approved has been plaeed along the road and uithinthe ravine. Any additional. fill uould be beyond rrhat uasa.rninistratively approved and uould be in violation of the CityCode. Therefore, a 6top rork order will be placed on ttre site. To sunmarize, the follorlng Duat be perfoned on the rite by SepteEber 15, 1990, to stabilize the site: Erosion control Deasures Ehal1 be uaintained until vegetationis established on all disturbed slopes. Seeding and uood fiber blankets shall be used on the slopes ofaI1 disturbed areas prior to SepteDber 15, 1990. 1 3.Installation of a trash gruard over the lnlet of the overflowpipe to prevent children fron entering the plpe by Augrust 31, 1990. Should you have any guestiona, pleaEe feel free to contact ue. S incerel Y, C^O/r,J o Senior Planner n:y' Dave HeDpel, Engineering Dept. Ann olEen fi,* 9*t 1fl" y'.t d'"1 August 7, 1990 t-I ,k The Honorable Don Chmiel City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter St. Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Mayor Chmiel: I am the developer of much of the land around the Kerber slough, north of Hwy. 5 and across the highway lrom Mitchell Lake. One of the linal pieces to be developed is on the east side of the slough backing up to Hwy. 5. We had recieved city approval for the subdivision, however, when it came time to sell lots to the builders we had g0 lots to in lhe last two years, they were not interested because of Hwy 5. We tried townhouse developers, they were not interested because of Hwy 5. I believe the only way that this site could be developed as residential is to reduce the price lower than anything else in Eden Prairie. This of ooursa would result in homes being built of comparable value. I urge you to visualize residential on this site and a well planned industrial park. I'm sure you will agree there ars many olher areas more I )r.:xxrs I). I)rrtt,.rlr .152:r Cre:is c: Ca,..j.: rl{l 1 \( lam one of the partners who owns the 137 acres on Highway 5 formerly owned by Mrs. Welter. As a developer of residential property in Eden Prairie since 1974, I have had experience trying to develope land next to Hwy. 5. lt is ditficult if not impossible given the present and proposed grade of Hwy 5 in relationship to the neighborhood. The residents of Chanhassen in years to come will be looking back at the decision this council makes in planning their city. Does it make sense to appease a tew neighbors many of whom would not even like a school on this site or does it make sens€ to look to what is best lor the community as a whole. I O P guide plan is appropriate for this site, residential is not. suitable for residential use in Chanhassen. Sincerely yours, Di cc: City Council P. CITY OF CH.[NH[EEEN 690 COULTEF DRIVE. PO. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 Auqust 22, L99O lls. Ann HurlburtDirector of Conprehensive Planningliletropolitan Council Mears Park centre 230 East sth streetSt. Paul , UN 55101 Dear Ann: Sincerely, auI Xnuss,CPDlrector of Plannlng PK:v f aE encloslng a copy of an article that was cut out of one of our 1oca1 papers regarding an Eden Pralrie proposal to add 312 acres intheir MUSA line. As you uil.l eee froD the underllned passage, CityEtaff uas quoted as eaying that t-be speclfic purpose of thiiaddition is so that Eden Prairie can reDain xcoup-titiverr rrithchanhassen ln the regional housing narket. I also uanted to take this opportunity to lnfora you that vhile weare naking considerable progreEs on our Couprehensive plan enendDent, we will be unable to conform to the SepteDber 1, 1990,extension rrhlch uas pravlously granted. . Ige are currently lookingat holding a publle hearing 9t the end of Septenber Lr eartyOctober yith City council revleu in October or NoveEber. fbi;schedule is, horever, contingent to soue extent upon the outcoDe ofa ueetl.ng beteeen the Clty and your staff next ueek. I vlll keepyou posted as to progreaa on the Plan and rylll of courEe continueto provide you Dith draftE of plan eleuente rB they arc corupleted. f Plannlng ConnisslonCity Council City proposes to add 3I7 rural acres to EP development area ]hid: gJts pcs sttiwcsr E&a hriric. Of rhat, 2,645 scs rre car- harkad for Esi&nrial &YcloooEnt tnd I,192 rrcs r: fq snnicrciat alvcloPrncnt. Abour 58 prccnt of Ur Gsidc ial Lod rilhin 3hc MUSA lim b dsvclopcd. . AssuminS Ihar thc &tulrd fa brgr parccls dcvclopeblc s hosin3 ,ouoYs rh. ratd ra in Ut lgCL" Ui city'r qrrEnt rupply of brgc rnds GoJld bc crlDust.d i! 196 a '9,li. city cstiElacs. A brlr rrcl ir Cgftd rs 25 rcres a giari;r. Aking Mcuo Councrll frmirri6 to &ld 317 rcrcs ro E taa Pnt- ric's p.!-2m'End Ert'b r q} 3i(lr!d by ciry offlcilb b t t Eiidlctod Etwccn picccnrsl ddidol,3{rd Ill. rddirim of rll 12}5 Erg :Approvd nccded'from Mctro C-ouncil By Mrrl Wcbcr Altnough rltc rllouot of lsnd rmaining for &Yclop(rtcor iD Edco Prairic L subantial; cily ofiicislsur su8,8csi!8 rhat llcrc ltrd $rn T,as carlicr thoughr rill bc E&d bcfor. Ulc ycar 2(m. Tbcrcforc Oc cily ls cxp.alcd !o rs* Ur McEopolitan Courii o oaa . tl) imaBiaary linc io rouths,csr Edco' Prairic - rbc Mcrr@lirlra'Urbrn Scrvit= Aree (MUSA, tin€ - rhich lhc Mct o corJDcil uias !o srtrol &wlop,mcut rnd suburb.o sawl. Thc Edci! Prliri. O.y Corncit ; cndors.d thc nqucsr ,uly 17. Mwing 0!c tur r.G.r uld slli rccordint to tb ciiy't Dlltl ?orld , arakc 3l) rcrc of'rtrc' rtmaininr , 13}6 runf sts h Edca PniriE dcv.lopblc Efcrc Z[). Tbc rcsulr: . Tbcre i,oglrt E ffi! Lrgc rl.rr ol FoFrry oFo lo &vrlc?Bcor" tDd ffi'3k'iffi:1Hg:f,H# lo8 to Dwid UDdahl of Ur Edco Prairic Pbonin8 Dtfruul.Tlr dju$rrDL if rppo{nt bry Urc MaD 6rocil, hrJld fo rrl prcpcny Erb of Cq'tnry Rcail I ut ]asr to UE O|,drlssao Hcr cob (kvcloprD€or Fra bZm il61 of Ur hDd ror.rrD d &J,ry nort I rrxl r'lsl of 6r ynda-rurEE tls3rvcd fa lur. Grneutlv llHc lrt lr cstirtrLd 3,&i7 rocf of tlDd ftrihblr fG ttvctoprncat witr'i'. lhc MUSA UB h southscn Eda! Prsiric. tlr. ? n8 cll ?o0htc[lll blts b.tr,.co city rrld McuoOurrilstarrc @rr b.for t,trlul ryptic.&n &. MUSA-IiEdjll3lroi ir or&. l.ryir dtE . Plopcal by tbc clly plerairu .EE- |lDissifi rtd cily or.trEil rilt rlso E I rciertulctl On& uc rmticnio h I,..f.tbG Mcuo &.rd& EciE r !sdr'yr!"i.i;;fr'tndrhl;4 ! TE lt,Lud,tiren Cirlrl ts rg Uc m:SA ti* rc conuol rroyrh D tlet intrsrucurc oct rofutrmyr 'tbubcorpararurdy:* I actcs i I ; i I ,. CITY OF EH[NH[SEEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (512) 937-5739 August 13, 1990 !lr. Kevin J. Kain Senior Planner Environmental AnaIYSis office Environmental suPPort Division t{innesota Pollution controf Agency 520 Lafayette RoadSt. Paul , lO{ 55155 Dear llr. Kain: I recently received a copy of your letter dated July 26, 1990, to Haratd Er-iksen at IINTB regarding the instaflation of new se!,er lines relative to the upgrade Project for Audubon Road south (Project #89-18, chanhassen, t{innesota) .- You indicated that an EAw woutl Ue required rrhen the sewer line is extended further to the west and potlntially a second EAw nay be required dePendent on the total number of housing units Planned for the area. You should be arrare that the city has been involved in the drafting of an updated conprehensive Plan for sone tine. one of the najor goals oi this prograra is to obtain.a significant enlargeDent- of the ftUSa 1ine sinte -ttre City is rapid).y running out of serviceable 1and. Future expansionJ of ths sewer lines to serve properties located to the wLst are going to be described in detail in the ionprehensive Plan Anendnent. we anti.ciPate holding - public heaiings on this document in the fall of this year sith a subnittal to the uetropolitan Council soDetime in october or Novenber' fn lrepiration 6t trri" docu'ent, ue have been uorking extensivel-y t'ith foetio council and uetro waste Control ConnissLon staff. At the lreient, there Ls no development plan for the expanded HUSA line irea ttrit would result in a -nanda€ory E[W. If thls occurs in the irtrrr., ve uould of course have the Project brought into coupliance with state statutes and have the EAw document prepared' In =*"ry, I believe that your inplieil potential for reguirils +wi"Uriiiif. is prenature and we expect that the docunentation trovide6 in the -Cornprehensive Plan Anendnent uill suffice, at least it tt" present tinL. should you uish to receive a coPy of the couprehe-nsive Plan when it is generated, please 1et me knos' In Qt [::-,, , llr. Kevin .7. Kain August 13, 1990 Page 2 addition, please contact ne if you desire further infornation onthis natter. s ly,b;s, AICP PK:v uI Kraus Director of Planning cary warren, city Engineer Don Pernien, UPCA, t{ater ControL Division Harald Eriksen, PE, Proj ect uanager, HlilTB Ann Hurlburt, Uetropolitan Council 520 Latayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 Telephone (612) 296-6300 6c,01'\g ?w** c'.%,r*UJuJ'y 26, 1990 Hr. IIaraId. P. Eriksen, P.E. Project l,lanager HNTB 6700 France Avenue South Sui te 2€,0 Hinneapolis, l[innesota 55435 Audubon Road South Upgrade Project No. 89-18 Chanhassen, Hinnesota Sincerely, 8[Y 0r c}lAll}ltssill JUL s7 1990 fltgllltilH0 0tPI. RE The installation of the eight-inch and ten-inch sever rlnes as verl as theinstallation of the l8-inch sever line under the highvay ean proeeed vithoutany additional environmental reviev. Bovever, vhen the clty ixtends the 1g-inchseve; line into the approximately 1,300 acre area to the veit, an Environnental Assessment vorksheet (EAv) vi).I need to be done on that sever extension. Thecity rnay also be required to do an EAII on the residentiar developnent vithin the1,300 acres depending on the total number of units planned for tire area. rf-you have any question concerning this or any other rssues, please give rne acall ar (672) 296-7432. K-rz. Kevin J. Rain Senior Planner Environnental Analysis 0ffice Environnental SuDDort Divislon KJK: bh Don Pervien, l{innesota pollution Control Agehcy, gater ouallty Division Gary 9arren, City of Chanhassen Regionat ottices: Equal Opponunity Employsr Duluth . Brainerd . Detoit Lakes . Marshall . Rochester Printed on Rccrcled papor Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Dear Hr. Eriksen: cc: CITY OF CH[NH[EEEN IIEUORANDT'IT To: Planning Conmission FROITI: Paul Krauss s planning Director DATE: August 30, 1990 SU&f: Conprehensive plan Update As you are aware, staff is working diligently to conplete the textof the Comprehensive pf.an so that ue may hold a publit hearing thisfall. To date, revised drafts of jeveral Jections have- beenconpleted although there is significant work rernaining on theTransportation Elenent. The Transportation Elernent -needs toilcorporate recent studies completed by the City in conjunctionwith the Eastern carver county tlanspo.rtation stucl-y and a nLw studyprovided by the Southr{rest Uetro TranLit Conrnissiori. Meetings havealso been held at a Etaff revel to develop the capitar rnproiernentsPlan that is a required part of the conprehensive plan.- The Pranning coromission shourd be nade aware that staff receivedsomething of a bombshell fron the lrletropolitan council in the fornof a neno frora their staff to me cornrnenting on prelirninary draftsections of the P1an. Although we had pioviala copies of ourpopulation projections to litetro council staff in late Decenber orearly January, rre only recently found out Last week that theycontinue to have the traditional l,letro councir probrerns witirrationalizing deficiencies in their Regional lrodei uith actuardevelopnent on the ground. In theif staff neno."rrdrrrr- tfr.ydeveloped an absurd anarysis that based on their calcurationi, trr"!,said the City needed 95 acres of land added to the I{USA. Stafftook great exception to their analysis contending that it sufferson numerous fronts. The planning cornmission should be aware thatthe Metro Council is still telling us that we should have 1O,5oOpeople and 4,5OO jobs in the year 2OOO. We have sent the Metrocouncil staff data indicating that our population is sonewherearound_ 12,000 today and by a recently conpleted survey, we haveapproxirnately 5,LOO fu11 tirne jobs and 8OO part €jn" jobs,Fortunately, we recently received the preliminary tensus counts forthe courmunity which back up- everytlring that we have been saying.They have said that the population is estinated to be 11,ZOO ;hi;h 690 COULTER DRIVE . PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-s739 Planning Cornrnission Aug:ust 30, 1990 Page 2 on a hopeful note, the Planning conmission should also be awarethat the lltetro council has approved tiro MUSA line anendnents that were initially opposed by Metro Council staff. I{aconia has recently gotten approval to expand their MUSA line. Perhaps even more important is the fact that the city of savage was just given a 2,4oo acre expansion to the MUSA. In discussions with AnneIlurlburt, she has indicated to me that the DIetro Council staff remains reluctant to forecast new trends into a Regional Modeluntil the census data conplete, but that they will very obviously have to make sigrnificant adjustments to recoqnize developnent thatis on the ground today. Staff rrilL keep the Planning Cornnission posted and hopefully viI1 have sorne nore inforrnation for you at the Planning coEEission neeting. The interaction with the l,Ietro Council does have the potential to delay the public hearing date,but we have no projected rescheduling for you at this time. rrorks out to the approxiroate 12,000 that staff has been indicating since we have had 119 building pernits this year as of July 1st.Staff took exception to many of the other analyses in their nemo. Our connents to l{etro council staff, background neterial, and their meno to us is attached for your review and discussion. The Planning Commission should be aware that I have discussed this matter with both the Mayor and Marcy waritz, who is the city'suetro Council representative. I have also had extensive discussions with Anne Hurlburt, who manages the conprehensive Planning section at the uetro council. The Planning commission should be aware that there may be a significant change in the uetro Councilrs position. Anne has called ne to telL rne that she has removed the staff person rrho prepared the Iiletro Council neDorandun and is assigning rrork on the chanhassen conprehensive Plan to a Senior Planner on her staff. This does not necessarily nean thatall of the issues are resolved, but I have great expectations that we will be in a position to do so. I intend to meet with this new planner as soon as possible and rrho is now attenptiirg to come up to speed by reading aII of the background naterial that has been subnitted to date. CITY OF EH[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE ' PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 9s7-5739 }TE!,IOR,ANDT'U To: Anne Hurlburt, Iletropotitan Council rROU: Paul Krauss, Planning Director DATE: August 22, l99O sURf: Response to the Uetropolitan Council Staffts hfornal Review of Chanhassen Draft Comprehensive Plan Elements As you are aware, the City of Chanhassen has been preparing a major Comprehensive Plan update since 1,988. The update has grown in size and conplexity due largely to the rapid pace of development in our cornmunity to the point where it represents a cornpletely newdocument. One of the najor goals of the effort is to obtain alarge scale and orderly expansion of the MUSA line since the cityis rapidly running out of serviceable land, particularly forindustrial growth and low density residential developDent. we aLsowish to bring other plan elements up-to-date with an emphasis ontransportation improvenents and environmental protection efforts.Lastly, the PIan is designated to satisfy the updating prolrram rciquired by the 1988 Systens statenents. staff has been supplying copies of the draft Plan sections for review by your staff and has been atternpting to coordinate the Plan with the I,IWCC as tell. The August L7, 1990, meno fron Uetropolitan Council staff covered connents on several plan elenents. !,[any of these deserve furtherdiscussion. However, the prinary purpose of this response is to address the growth projections and IIUSA line adjustuents outlinedby your staff in the meno. We obviously need to achieve sorne agreement on these critical factors since our plan aDendment is, inIarge part, based upon then. We have been anare fron the start ofthis process that our projections, and in fact our assessnent ofthe magnitude of developEent on the Eround today, differ widelyfron liletropolitan Council nunbers. It is for this reason that wesupplied our numbers to your staff in late 1989/ear1y 1990 forcomment. Frankly, I rras astonished at the conclusions that were drawn by your staff in the August 17th memo since they are sowiIdIy divergent with our draft plan and since they will have a trenendous inpact on the plan itself. l{s. Anne Hurlburt Augrust 22, L99O Page 2 1. POPUI.,ATTON,/E},TPLOY},IENT PROJECTIONS Chanhassen staff has been naintalning for years that the regionaLnodel maintained by the uetropolitan Council inadequatelyanticipated growth in our coumunity. council staff has acknorrledged this to be true to a certain extent, but the nagnitudeof the growth in our connunity continues to be under represented. Conparisons of data are provided belon for your revien. We notethat the nost recent systeD statenent from 1,988 utilizespopulation, enploynent and household data for 1990 thatsignificantly under represents what exists on the ground today, butnore iroportantly, the year 2000 projections are significantly exceeded by uhat is on the ground today. In discussions with council staff, llike Munson has indicated thathe understands that the regional nodel is out of synch in our comnunity as erelI as several others. He has indicated that he iswilling to accept the population proj ections contained in the Highlray 212 EIs for the interim, but is unwilling to rebuild theregional Dodel until the conplete census data is in. We haveproblens with this prenise for several reasons. The first beingthat rre think the Hwy. 212 EIs under-represents growth in our conrnunity. The second is a philosophical question. In 1987, theCity signed the Lake Ann Interceptor Agreenent which basicallystates that rre would only relocate our I,IUSA line if a major Conprehensive Plan Amendnent was undertaken. We have acted in goodfaith to do that only to find that there is reluctance to acconmodate our plans until sonetine after 1991 and 1992 rrhen theregional rnodel is redrafted. Had ne known in 1987 that theUetropolitan Council rrould not act on our plans for Lack of supportive data from the regional model, we nay have been reluctantto enter into the contract. More inportantly, is the fact that the Systems Statement continues to use incorrect regional nodel nunbers and has not been adjusted at all. We continue to be asked to bringour plans into conpliance with the Systems Statement and to do so,se would have to ship 2,700 people and alnost 2,000 jobs to SouthDakota. We obviously need to have this point clarified. Our datais outlined in the tables below. !ls. Anne Hurlburt Aug'ust 22 , L99O Page 3 Uetro Council Systems Statenent Hwy. 212 EIS Draft Conp. Plan 11,000 POPUIJATION EOI'EEEOI,DS EI.{PIJOYI,IENT 9,000 3 ,2OO N/A N/A * lletro Council Systens Statenent Year 2 000 Draft Conp. PIan Year 2000 Draft Comp. PIan Year 2OO5 11,700 2OOO/2OO5 BOPULATIOII 4,329 4 ,261 (212 Ers) EOI'AEEOIJDS * 5,079 FulItine 821 Parttine N/A 4,500 Not proj ected Not proj ected Based on City Survey updated 8/90 10, 000 17,500 77 ,783 23,244 3,7OO 6, 500 6,933 9,062 I think it is clear fron these nunbers that if anything we slightlyunderestinated development in the cornrnunity ana that our 1990numbers are virtually identical to the prelininary U.S. Censuscounts - our housing unit number nas originarly taken from recentcounts- from our -recycling prograrD to which 19to buircling pernitsrrere added. rt is also interesting to note that our conpieirensive 1990 3,50O N/A Prelininary U. S.census 8/9O Hwy. 212 ErS Year 2005 EI,IPLOYI.IENT 4,000 Us. Anne Hurlburt Aug"ust 22 , L99O Page 4 Plan assuEes that we will have an average of 2.65 peopte per unit.This nurnber is calculated so that it captures all housing units inthe city and is not divided out by unit type. Taking the currentU.S. Census prelininary counts, dividing population by total housing units, yields an average of 2.75 people per household. If we conputed the statistic on occupied housing units, the nunberrises to 2.92 people per unit. Thus, if we were to use theselarger nunbers in our proj ections for grolrth, ee would rrind up rritha greater total population projection than currently contained inthe report and the draft plan. LastLy, the enplolment data provided by the city is taken fron a census of our business coumunity and lre believe represents the most accurate number possible at this tine. As you can see our in-pIace enploynent is far in excess of Council estinates for 1990 andprojections for the Year 2ooo. Thus, in su mary, it is clear that as far 1990 is concerned, thatfor all intents and purposes the city is correct in the assumptionsthat have been used to develop the conprehensive P1an. Drarring conclusions to year 2000 and beyond projections is a nore difficultmatter. This is addressed later in this nemoi horrever, we muststress the importance of the nagnitude of difference between Uetropolitan Council data and real life development on the ground today in chanhassen. The U. s. census provides some interesting data. we have experienced an 83t grow-th rate in population and a 1o5t increase in households since 1980. Enplolaent has j.ncreased fron 1,300 jobs to 5,079 full time positions and 821 part tine for a 322* increase(part tine conputed at I fuI1 tine). You should also know that dueto the recession, virtually all of this gronth occurred betueen 1985 to 1990. 2. HOUSING VACANCTES Ur. Singhts connents on households versus housing units appear to be stressing the inportance of using vacancies to nake projections.It should be noted that in rnaking projections for the year 20OO and2005, the city assumed a 5* vacancy rate. This uas factored in when converting households to population. Of course it nust bestressed again that we used 2.55 people per household while theU.S. Census would inply that the current ratio is 2.75 peopLe perhousehold. It nust be stressed tbat Chanhassen is and viII largelyrenain a single fanily oriented cornmunity. I fail to see the inportance being placed on the definition of househoLds versus housing units in l,!r. Singhrs coDments. First ofaL1 it is clear that the population and househotd base that in theconnunity is supported by the U.S. Census. Secondly, Chanhassen is !Is. Anne Hurlburt August 22, L99O Page 5 a rapidly developing comnunity and has a fairly large nurber of hohes that nay be classified as vacant since they are still underconstruction. Thirdly, the nunber of vacancies is in most respectsan irrelevant statistic as far as 1oca1 government is conceined.The city still nust provide streets and utilities and servicessince touorrow the unit can and probably will be occupied. Theonly place this factors in is if there is a significant nunber ofvacant units that rrould hold dorrn future growth prospects and I donot see this to be the case with vacancy rates being experienced inChanhassen. 3. I,AND CONSTNIPTTON ANALYSIS I have no conprehension of how the projected land supply and demandcalcul.ations for Lgg|/year 2OOO that are containea in the t'letroCouncil staff tleBo were developed. First of all, they apparenttyare based on the Highuay 2L2 EIS which, as noted above, we thinki.nadequately represents growth ln the city. Secondly, we believethey are in no way based on reality which is fundinentally thepurpose of this whole exercise. Attached tabl.es provide data on the current assessnent of availableland .supply in the City of chanhassen. This represents aurodification fron data contained in the draft Land rise sectionwhich accounts for refinenent of the data and nore recentdevelopment. I{e have great difficulty in understanding your staffls allocationof vacant Ir{UsA land. -I{e conpletely disagree lrith the assunptionso1 yn{ch the analysis is based but also have philosophical pr-obt enswith its approach. There is absotutely no land given over for industrial growth, thichis one of the city's nost pressing needs. In additionl there seensto be an assumption that if the city has an acre of residentialland and deternines that it needs land for industrial grorrth, thatresidential can simply be converted to industrial . fhis isconpletely unrealistic. comprehensive plans seek to allocate landsupply to pronote a reasonable mix of developnent that achieves thecityrs goals and it is often tines who11y inappropriate to nixthese categories. I do not believe that the Uetropolitan Councilwants to be in. the position of telling a conuunity that they mustconvert land in a residential neighborhood to i cournercill orindustrial use sinply because the uarket has dictated that therewill be a higher demand for industrial or conmercial property thanthe demand for residential . This sort of a policy would undernineone of the fundarnental reasons for undertaking conprehensiveplanning in the first pJ.ace. Lastly, there i! obviousLy anassumption that the City has an anple supply of serviced 1and. Westrongly dispute this noting that tre onty have a l-3 year supply at Us. An August Page 6 Hurlburt ,1990 ne 22 real growth rates. But you also must consider that as the land supply diminishes, the Cityrs ability to attract new residents andbusinesses is dininished since their choice in home and siteselection is reduced. In addition, the land that is left vacant isoften the nost difficrilt and expensive to deveLop or nost likely isnot availabl.e for sale since it is part of a large landholding orestate, or is environmentally sensitive. In projecting future denand, the city attenpted to adopt the most reasonable course possible. we nade it clear fron the start that rre woul.d be fairly conservative in our growth projections and that furthernore ue uould anticipate a general slov down in developroentto rates below what was experienced by the co,nnunity during thelatter half of the 1980's. In so doing, rre are trying to replicatea process that the lletropolitan Council wiII undertake in a few years with the regional nodel update. I should note that the cityis fuI).y aware that econonic and denographic trends will tend todininish developnent pressure in the 1990's. Horrever, I would alsostress that development pressures are cyclical and that the decadeof the 1980's started out during a recession with little or nogrowth occurring until the nid part of the decade. The cityvirtually doubled in size between 1980 and 1990 in terns of popuLation and rrent fron having aLmost no enploynent to havingover 5,000 jobs today. Thus, lre do not want to be overlypessinistic in 1990 while we are in fact developing a plan that is designed to carry us until the year 2000 uith a 50t Dargin forerror consistent with ltetropolitan council policies. 4. ACTUAL I,AND CONSI'}.{PTION RATES This is the point at which I would ask you to interj ect realityinto your considerations. The reality of which I an speaking arethe actual growth rates that have been experienced by the city. The following table illustrates residential building pernits issuedby the city. The table covers years 1980 through 1990. Us. Anne Hurlburt August 22r L99O Page 7 yEAR Single FaniTy Tovnhome Duplex litulti- Fa,'iTy IilobiTe one TVTAL ' BITILDING PERttIlls 7980 7987 7982 7983 7981 7985 7986 7987 7988 7989 frts) 47 22 79 55 705 789 246 289 352 307 779 40 34 14 78 2 2 4 30 38 I 2 26 36 75 20 78 32 62 I 99 24 27 96 752 265 262 32 i 172 383 779 As you can see from the data, the number of city building pernits issued has ranged from a 1ow of 21 units per year during the heightof the recession in 1982 to 4L2 housing units in 1988. Obviouslythere is a good bit of fluctuation there, but we note that thisgrowth rate is significant and ue believe conpares favorably viththe approxinate growth rate of 250 housing units per year that isanticipated by the grolr'th rates contained in the City ConprehensivePlan projections. Having reviened a series of recent subdivisionsin Chanhassen, ve know that single fanily developnent, vhichconstitutes the overwhelning najority of our housing, cones in atan average rate of 1.7 units per acre. At this rate, to sustain agrowth rate of 250 housing units per year, rre would be taking down 153 acres per year. We certainly do not believe that this grorfthrate is excessive and that as the city grots, naintaining a growlhrate of 250 units per year represents a contj.nuously snallerpercentage increase for the city. Thus a total of 21295 acres ofland would be required to supply the 10 year plus 5 year overagedenand consistent with Metro Council Policies. The City isrequesting less then 1,000 acres for this category of use. In ouropihion, this constitutes a reasonable request that, if anything,is overly conservative. EDplolment grorrth is somewhat nore difficult to forecast, althoughyou rrould certainly have to adnit that the regionaL model and infact the Highway 2L2 Els cane no shere near to anticipating theexplosive growth that has been experienced in the City ofChanhassen. In reviewing this data, we have declined to makespecific enploynent projections for the year 2ooo and beyond. we Dade the attenpt of doing so by taking our existing acreage ofdeveloped industrial land and dividing it between the known numberof ernployees currently found on these sites to develop an ernployeeper acre ratio. However, rce believed that this statistic Day be lls. Anne Hurlburt August 22, l99O Page I nisleading since it is subject to side variance. The table belowprovides infornation on industrial land consumption in recentyears. As you can see fron the table, industrial acreage consumption has ranged fron a tow of 5 acres in 1982 to high of 112acres in 1988. For all intents and purposes, the city is virtuallyout of industrial land supply as evidenced by our land availabilitttable. The 95 acres currently vacant could be used up in less thana single year. we view the need to obtain further land forindustrial developnent as critical in the conrnunity. We are not ataII sure as to ho!, the Councilts staff developed their land deuandcalculations resulting in an offer of 95 total acres of additionalland. However, it is clear that the need for industrial officegrowth was conpletely overlooked since there is absolutely no acreage allocated to this use. INDUSTRIAL ICREAGE CONSINTPTION 1987 1989 1990 As of 8/90 37 llcclynn Bakery 2.59 Waytek 55.8 Rosenount4.5 Park Place 4.19 Lakeshore Equipnent 8.29 ver-sa-Til 12.6 EMPAK 3.95 Rone Office 51.5 RedDond Products 5.73 Roberts Autonatic2.4 Dexter Uagnetic 1. 7 l,tN I/I{ Program 1.5 Plfr (2nd Phase) > 4.98 > L12.37 > 68.15 > 11.33 TOTAI,196.83 1988 2. 01 coDponent 2,97 lle I'ls . Anne Hurlburt August 22, L99O Page 9 5. POLICY,/GOALS I believe that in undertaking the planning process we have to date,the City of Chanhassen has been responsible in terms of the rrorkeffort and scope of the product and that our expectations for thefuture are certainly within reason and nay, if anything, representan underestimation of what could occur. Our projections werespecifically designed to be reasonable. Whether or not rrhat has happened here to date and rrhat nay happen here in the future conforms to the guidelines of the regional Dodel, is franklyirrelevant. Allowing the conmunity to develop in a Dannerconsistent uith the cornrnunity I s goals is what is iroportant. Wefurther believe that this plan is consistent uith l,letro CouncilPolicies. It appears as though the lletro Council staff isproposing that the city live with a tuo to four year supply of acreage at the completion of this planning process. The MetroCouncil staff I'offerrr of 95 acres rrould leave the City's MUSA tinesituation essentially unchanged. This is conpletely unacceptableto the city and I believe is inconsistent rrith responsible planning and with the t[etropolitan councilts goals. our plan rras designedwith a ten year tine horizon plus a five year overage consistentwith your policies. we believe that the draft u.S. Census and ourenployDent survey confirm that our projections to date arere1iable, certainly to a Euch greater extent than the regional model and the Highway 212 EIS. To err on the conservative side isnot a crime, but to deny reality places the expectations of cornprehensive planning in j eopardy. We believe that the regional urodel is a predictive too1. After ten years of use since the last census, it is seriously flawed. At this point, forcing the city torely on outdated infornation provided by the model or by the flighway 212 EIS is equivalent to changing reality so that it conforms to the nodel . We do not believe that this is reasonableor consistent with the goals and policies of the l*{etropolitan Council and of the city of Chanhassen. I l I I I I tl I tttt 1990 DECENNIAL CENSUS POSTCENSUS LOCAL REVTEW These census counts are partial and preliminary in nature:them for official purpos-s (tor exaurfle, redig'trictinq-oi'counta are llkely to change upon completion of contlniingact lvi t ies. f PRELIMINARY HOUSING UNIT AND GROUP OUARTERS POPULATION COUNTS If an asteriek (*) appears- to the teft of the census brocr nunber, then thecensus count for rhat block is unavairabre at this rime. tt an aitiiiir-i;tappears to the left of the GU natne or census tract/block numberinq a..i n,111l...then the cen'ua count for that geographic area is in.orpri;;-;;-'i; e;;;;;*"Include cenBuB counts for censui biocls rith an;"4;;i;i-i;i. Final census counts rill.be issued to your jurisdiction through the censusBureaur s "Thank you America campaign" in eaity 199t. preaie 6arr youi negionarcensus Center if you have any further questio;s. you should oot usebudgctlng). Theec t icld and proceselng RCC: 26 oo 2699 sn I{ COUNTY:@VERIu/ENTAL tfi{n Chanhasson clty 426 r t6252 TOTAL IOUSI G U}'IIS: v CA|T loUStt{G UilITS I foRM o-r, l,,2ct10 U.E, OCPAhI E'{I O' COi'iTERCE IIJf,T U O' THC CCXEUS ToTAL POPULATToN I GROUP QI,IARIENS POPULATIOI : 7@'.. Llro usE - Iolfi. Itr llEls ItsE 5-fe-t! {rEt t-2a-r0l 0EvtL0PE0 LAXo YAC^r I tAtto I AtrR:T 519-2 5t0- I 510-3 540-l 540-rt 540-5 540-6 54t!-t 5r10.8 5{0-9 540- 10540-ll t40-12 540- l l 540-t4 540- r5 540 - tri 5'lt - L7 540- t8 540-19 540- e0 540-?r' 540 - 22 540-23 540-24 540-2s 540-26 541-l 54t-2 541-3 547-t 8tl8- I 852- I I(lIAL AXCA sr-T{I ll, t43 107 206 IF 38 Ptk(---T- l4 tl t0 49 PUB T53- rE { .] 24I l0 30 ytAE0ltx I 0 5F IIT coltH tro PlRt 2t IIIf,--TIT UilD€IEtOPAETE t 29t 881 t60t9, 31J 83 ?l 356 156 34 0 ?0d 226 4t5 209 548 139 5r0 12A5t, 3t2 211 319 2D2 54 r65 247 4I3 1{80 628 1141 ,81 t6 s0 I 25 l I 58 .3 -Tf6 t2 t6 r06 I15'r9 5 5 108ll2 2t8 t06 t?ll 199,tt2ltIl 8 144 l7 I'J l4 ll 58 t27 {5 lt {{ 6t 32 l0 28 l0o 4 l9 t0 2a J6lt l5 t0{ 9' 5 l6 a8 t2 l0 22 l5 2A a 5 20IIu1 198 t2 52 27 6I 20 26 t1l l5 l53' 5t 255 {l l9 70 120 t a2 l a9 102 225 l8 l?0 ta ll 30 12 34 B25 t2 9r(2, ur(ll,l 7aa 22t 216 25 t8 t!3 15 J?7 120 352 21 60 2 3 9 219 690 2l 29 l5 9 t02 58 25 18, 28 50 l0 25 J 46 20 59 t2 6 l5 {ll l9 TI TOTAL T'JO-ffi 8 9 tzg 5J9 109 L9 3Z 129 5 r00II0TE5: {I) tcKArx'AR (2,) PRtxCE (3} cARLS0r It l2 l8 9 5lt l 7 t6r 4 l9t lrtrrllllllllllllll I ttt I I rtt III1tIrtI Lrro usE - tlstoE ErrttoED rust tlEA usE 5- ]0 tEU E-?a-90 I 0tyEL0rt0 1lL0 --.i-- 20 l2 fACAII LAXDIAI534:I 539-2 540-l 5a0-2 540-3 5{0-4 540-5 540-6 540- 7 540-8 540-9 540-t0 540- 11 540- l2 540-13 540-t4 540 - 15 540-t6 540-1, 54 0- t8 540 - t.9 540-20 540-21 5AO-22 5{0-23 540-24 540-25 5+O-26 511-l 541-2 541-3 547-t 84A- l 852-I IOTAT AR EA t 49 8 sf If t-oEtt I tD Pttat( -a- - PU6 ttAJA 84 226 5r 89 J 4 548 25li t 342 at 9lt2 8a 5t 22I 5 144y 58 121 {5 70 120 t42 30 tt9 36 225 la 4a 6l 32 60 3 t5 6 5 99l 2a 3' J6 t0 I rr0 ,a ll 5{ (3) 9l(zl 5l l 12 I tll !2t t6 l8 58 1 IOTAL t00IaloIES: (ll ECrA[xAn (Z) pRtNCE (3) CARt-S0n UTOEVTLOPASTE t0 t6 Llro usE - oulstoE rlt IUSI Artt 3 5E 5-30-90 r tfr E-24-901 D[VELOPEO LATO ACAXI LATOI Al5:3:I 539-2 540- l 510-2 540-.l 540-4 IOIAL AREA 624 7)t 130 r 624tl4l ,81 HF CoHlt PAR( PUB - -5Tz 144 18{ SF1r 9 ti l)Y/A UIDEVELOPTBLE-----Tr- a9 -r 38 I r06 . 255 7J 540- 540- 540- 510 - 540- 540- 540- 540- 5,10 - 540- 540- 140- 5{0- 540- 5{0- 540- 540- 540- 5{0- 5{0- 5,10 - 540- 541- 54 t - 541- 5a'- 8{6- 852- 5 6 II 9 '10 li l2 t3 ta t5 l6 l7 l8 l9 20 ZI 22 23 24 25 25 I 3 I I I 2 164 86 lt 98 lt 319 320 352 4ll t9 9 2t9 690 l4l 223 246 ?5 198 l2 52 2t 40 l9l 20 TO TAL 5662 (11 l0 I f,8 l4 20 I JZZ 9 l/t4 {0 tit 2 551 rt €cxAirKAR {2) Pntxc6 (3) cARLS0r{ IIlttltlrI F()OIT,IOTES: II lttt II I IIIIIIttI I I I xust rtEl llsE 5-!a -9a ( 8El a-2{-t0lLIID USE -trtl0E tttsrlrc DETELOPEO LAXO ITID P PUB_T'ttA YACAII LATDs-r--Tr-rr6xi{=-TtE--7im-=Er--T7,---3-9- 5 t6 urDt Y E L0PA l! E @ N E PgrN o (r. I$ (n(n I N)o, TAI 5TE:I 539-? 540-t s40-2 540- l 540-4 5't0-5 5{0-6 540 -7 540-8 54!- 9 540-10 540- l1 540 - 12 540-r3 540-14 5a0-l5 540-t6 540-t7 540-t8 540-19 5a0-20 540-?i 't4D'2?540-23 540-2{ TOTAL ART A llr -i-3 ll 58 ll t2 t5 629 146 t60 197 343 83 1t 356 t56 3{0 124 -6-5t -t6I08 la3 187 206 308 I l? ?18 86 ARK ltt 30 I 5 6 I 25 3 24I 10 30 2L 20 26 I l9l0 21 36 6 rl3tl)2 l2 5 22 I 4 5 20 1l l0t <,1, o 60 2 3 II 9 81 2 114 3 39 105 r04 120 I Is 98 120 f,4 ta 3 I9l t9 l 4 elI 170 73 202 56 155 l0 9 46 2a 3{ 25 L1 3,5 26 I87 59 t? 8 66 l8 II 2E28 60 6 ?1 2L t5 L? 30 540-25 5{0-26 541-ls{l-a 54I-35{7-t 848- l 851-l 247lri s8 lll 29 55 t6 80 l5 3'2A 6 8 IO:AL a o 19 r00ILOTtS: (l) tCKAx[1ft (2) PttrCE (3) CARtS0r l0 a9 38 9 5 BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN OFFI CEl INDUSTR I ALl.Apple Val1ey Red -E- Mix 2.Autonated Builaling components 3.Autonotive UnI inited-Union ?5. 4 . Color Respons 5. Brenden Excavat ing 6. Component Engineer ing 7. D&L Hach i ne 8.Data Ser v 9.Dayco Conc! ete 10. Dexter Magnat icll.Enerson E!,rC 12 . Empak 13.Energy Contr o Is,Inc- l4.Fitness Master 15. Gedney, M. A. Co mpa ny 15. Heat i ng EC 1?. Hendr ickson Bros. Dryva 11 18. Ho l asek Greenhouses I nc.19.Industria1 I nfo. Controls 20.Innovative PIastics, I nc.2l.Irrstant lleb 22.J&R's Rad lator Repa i r 23.Lakeshore Equipment Co.24.teisure design 25. Lyman Lumber 26.Mackinnon Hone I mpr ovement2?.LSR ini Storage 28.Mar ine Fibelglass 29.Mcclynn Baker ies30.Merit HVAC 31.Hurphy Uach Ine32.Natural creen, Inc. 33.PHT Corporat l on 34.Pais1ey Par k35.Piper P).umbing 35.The Press, f nc. 3T.Progress Valley Storage 3S.Redmond Pr odlucts 432-1132 93?-9050 ,{74-9611 93?-5005 {7,{-0909 12 58 2 53 35 1 0 47{-7085 829-5000 47 4-5246 4 350 73 23 75 275 10 1 3 5 0 23,0{8 145,000 15,380 50r 000474-1116 47 4-5282 47 4-029 6 47 4-0992 4 48-2612 934-0414 934-3301 47 4-5659 4?4-8100 93{-r1956 tt74-0961 47 4-5258 934-2455 0 20 3 0 55,00035 150 1 l2 1 50 3 4 270 2 15 1 0 2 0 4 15,808 200,000 1r332 3 0 30,240 5{,391 175,000 25,000 125r 000 24,592 46,150 89,000 2r737 47 4-8744 934-05?6 {?4-51{5 13 5L 1 2 350 26 1 60 4?0-0855 47 4-520 4 931-2207 937-9754 448-5625 92 16 3 285 1 0 0 0 0 2I 2 10I 934-s308 Page 1 250 5 39,980 300,000 Telephone FuII tlme palt tlme Square ploposeat footage Expant l on 47, 500 77,690 150,000 934-2221 47 4-1 444 47 4-L7 25 4?4-0931 47 4-tL45 BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN 5039.Roberts Autonat i c 40.Rone Roos {l.Rosemount I nc. 39.Tonka Insulation/ Kurmchak Bui lders 40. Top Tur f 41.United Ma i 1i ng, I nc.42.Ver-Sa-Ti1 Ass.tl3.Victory Enve lope{{.VoIk Tlucking & Excvat i ng45.tlaytek Inc. 45.RPH Stud i o TOTAL1.Allstate I ns urance2.Anerican Legion Post 580 3.Anima1 Fair{.Anh-Le Restaurant 5. Arboretum 6.Attorneys of Chanhassen ? . Benson, S te phen,/Tester, David, DDS8.Big A Auto Parts9.Brook's Superette 10. Broun's Standard sta t i on 11. Camp Tanadoona 12. Chalet Pizza 13. Chanhassen Bait and Tack 1e 14 . Chanhassen Bank l5.Chanhassen Bov]/Fillyrs 16. Chanhassen Child Deve l.opment 17. Chanhassen Chir opract i c Center 18. Chanhassen Dinne! Thea te r,/CompI ex 19.Chanhassen Fatni ly}{edical CIinic 20. Chanhassen Hedlcal Cente! 21. Chanhassen Gr oome r s 22. Chanhassen Inn Hot e I 23. Chanhassen. Kitchen and Bath 24. Chanhassen Larrn anal Sports 25. Chanhassen Pha r ma cy 941-5550 47 4-7 857 93 4-1298 47 4 - 4t82 120 1000 2 200 1rl0 7 77 9 49-2400 47 4-326 4 4?4-5105 330,000 500,000 55 150,072 98,000 1{7,593 24,950 10000 949-0755 474-4704 934-0054 934-6577 934-0{44 949-1125 443-2450 934-7987 934-s133 9 49-2831 934-2155 47{-8085 93?-5007 934-0789 937 -2265 934-5503 934-4500 93{-1500 93rl-0570 93{-5688 934-?3?3 934-5705 934-5303 934-5258 1{5 1 t1 1 5 {0 2 1 3 50 4547 1 5 2 3 3 5 0 1 1 1 2 2 3 40 5 19 6 0 0 110 10 40 t2 140 4 1 12 0 2 3 Paqe 2 474-5338 2 345 45 1 5 3 9 1 26. Chanhassen Se creta r ial Services 27. Chanhassen Taco Shop 28 . Chanhassen Veterinary Cl inic 29.Chanhassen Video 30.Communications Ilor 1d 31. Country Clean Laundry & Cleaners 32.Country Su i tes 33.Crossroads National Bank 34. Custom QuickPrinting/Cleaner 35. Derhaag MotorSports, I nc . 35.Do1phin Construction 3T.Dominoes Pizza38.Fire System39.Frontier JeveLers 4 0 . Gardeneer, Inc. 4l.Glenrose Fl ora I 4 2. Greate Pr ints 43.Hair fo! Guys & Dol1s 44. Hol1ov Haven Farm {5. Holiday Stat i on Stores ,l5 . Hooked on Classics 47.Ivan I s Sinclair & Auto Repa i!48.Jevelry Out Ie t ll9.K & A Associates 50.The Karpet Kingdom 51.Kempfelt Sales and Harketing 52. Kennyrs Super Mark et 53. KI i nge thutz Realtors 54.Kiova Corp 55.Lakevay Cleaners56.LittIe ceasers Piza 57.Lotus Rea lty 5 8 . Mcl,l L i quor 59.Ma1ibu Tanning 50 . McDona 1d t s Restaurant 51. Her l inr s Hardvare Ha nk 52.Mi l1iers Deli BUS I NESSES 934-3903 937 -2424 9 49-9000 9 49 -233 4 448-1899 934-0472 IN CHANHASSEN 1 2 2 5 4 0 3 1 5 2 4 0 12 0 .L 0 15934-5878 9 37-0102 934-7115 93 q-22 44 934-3434 5 2 1 50 1 934-8515 934-5525 93?-1894 3 1 1 5 2 4 2 1 4 5 3 2 3 1 934-{170 934-1724 545-??41 934-1460 937 -2224 934-0{03 934-3530 934-0000 I 2 1 1 q 93{-8??8 1 934-4538 937-9300 934-0112 9 34-8530 4 3 9 t2 0 7 934-2301 Page 3 93 4-2211 934-8852 934-8402 934-087 2 934-3333 I 1 2 1 4 15949-9777 5 1 40 2 7 53.Minnetonka Des ign 64.Minnetonka Husic65. Moore Sign Co 55 , Nev Bounalary Des i gns 67.Nev Hor i zon Daycare 58.Nev Revo lut i on69.Northvest Home Care ?0.Pau1 'ysRestaurant ?1.Peterson, Steven-Attorney at LauT2.Positive Images?3.Prairie House Restaurant ?{.Professional I ns urance Marketing 75.Tota1 Mart 76. R&il Sani.tation TT.Riviera Restaurant & L o unge 7I . Rodenz, Darre 11, LPA 79.Rome Deve l opment,Inc. 80. Safet!onics, Inc. 81. Safar i Tanning Hut 82. Sa 1e nos S3.Schneider Insu!ance lgency 84. Scott I s Automotive Repa i r 85. Sophisti-cuts 85.Spark1ing Line 87. State Bank of Chanhassen 8 8 . Stree te! .LndrusRealty Tor Id 89 . Subyay 90.s,/A 91. s,/A (Hvy 7 / 4t)92.Timberg Travel 9 3. Vernco Maintenance, Inc.94.Video Explos i on95.Video Update 95.Vi1lager Net,spape! 9 7 .IIe ste rmann I s Art98.Your Ha jesty's Valet Cleane!s TOTAL BUSINESSES IN CHANHASSEN 934-7 440 4't 4-3277 A',t 4-9t!4 47 4-0924 949-9055 11 934-5500 470-1798 934-3030 9 1 5 5 0 5 2E 3 5 3I 1 24 5 1 '3 10 1 20 10 934-9323 47 4-5374 934-0441 5 2 934-8?73 4?4-1813 934-9340 3 0 33 474-1168 934-134? 47 4-2125 934-5979 934-5786 470-9100 934-8000 934-2994 47 4-7 553 554-5551 9 37 -2255 934-59?? 470-5373 445-1554 47 4-9 405 934-?8?1 93{-5000 934-5179 934-9502 3 1 ? 532 50 79 Page 4 1 E 2 1 3 1 ) 0 0 0 3 12 1 3 a 5 2 1 7 3 7 47 5?5 s21 3 3 TOTAL 1/ O/C METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ucon a* ccarc,230 hn Efih stact, s,. hut, MN. sst 6t2 2914359 November 13, 1989 Mr. Donald Ashworth Manager City ot Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Ashwonh: on April 10, 1989, the Councit sent you its annual daem€nt of changes ln th€ m€tropolitan systempolicy plans. The package you were sent explained rhe changes in the poticy plans iha afreachanhassen, and provided our most cunent informalion on tha areaeo inaripolitan systems localecl in or serving your community, ln 1988, the Couneil adopted new poliry plans ior wastewater treatment and handling (sewers) and tor transpondion. copies ot these two poliry plans were lormally transmined to you as pan d the systems informaion staement. The 1976 Metropoliran Land Ptanning Acr (Minn. Stat. 479.856) states: Within nine months atter receiving an amEndment to a mAropolitan system plan, each atfected local govemmental unit shall review its comprehensive plan...tir determine if an amendmer is necessary to ensure continued cor ormity with metropolitan system plans. I an amendmem is necessary, the govBrnmental unit...shall prepare the amendment and submit h to the council ior review... we are anticipating that many local govemments will need more time to complete thek plan amendments. The law provides a procedure tor granting extensions. a[ raqirests must be submined in the form of a resolution of the local gweming body. The reques muS be accompanied by a description of the activities previously undertaken to meet the requiremgnt, andthe reasons necessitating and iustifying the requ€st. The Metropolitan council may inen, a is discrelion, gJant extensions upon a tinding of 'excsplional circum$ances or undue hardship. Oinn,sra. sec. 473.869). Please leel {ree to call Anne Hurlburt, manager of our comprehensive planning division, at 291-6s01, if you have quostions cr nged f'JnhEr intc,.rndion. your requcsi for an cxcnslon, !, r.:asd€c!, may b€ directed to her ane ion. Sincerely, Sleve Keefe Chair Nov I ,i 1909 CITY OF CHANHASSEIT SKkp A 1988 Systems lnformat ion Statcncnt Chanhassen III. 'IETROPOLITAN DEVELOP'IENT AND INVEST'IENT FRAI1EWORK ('lDIF) Geoqraph ic Po I icy Arras The l{0 lt established policies for diffcrcnt geoEraphic .rcas }rithin thc metropolitan urban and rural servics areas. Thesc Aeographic policy areas arc thc sctting in which thc Council and locrl govcrnnents praparc and carry out thc ir plans. Part of Chanhas3.n is locat.d yithin thc lletropolit.n Urban Scrvicc Area (l,tUSA) rnd part of it is locatcd in a zural rcrvice !rca. Thc urban andrural servicr arcas in Chrnhasscn !r. separated by r IIUSA line. A rnap ofthe ,,IUSA in Chanhasscn is found in Scction 0. Chanhasscn should refcr to thc pol icics in thc ADIF for thc ,IUSA and for the Rural Servic. Araa a3 it prepares plan amendnents in responsr to this systemg s ta tement. The I{USA is defined as that part of thc rrEion in which urban-rcale dcvelopncnt and invastment should ba locat.d. lt is that arca whcre thc Council has madc a co,nnitmcnt to providing mctropolitsn systam scrvicc capacity, in accordancc with thc regional systcm pl!n3 and yith local conprehensive plans that arc nutuelly consirtent. B, Forcc sts of Po ulation Househo I d and Employnrenta The Council has prepared forccasts ol y.ar 2000 population, hourrholds and employment for crch county, city and township in the rcaion. The for.cast data for Chanha33cn is listcd on a data shect that is containcd in thispart of thc systcm information 3latemcnt. lt i3 important that you reviqw the yaar 2000 forccasts for Chanhassen, sincs thc local comprchcnsivc plan forccasts nccd to b! con3iitcnt yith Council forecart3. You 3hould cont.ct Council staff in thc Comprehcnsivc Planning Division if your com,nunitytg plan anticipates a highcr lcv.l of ycar 2000 population, houscholds or cmploymcnt than currcnt Council forccast!. The Counci I usca thc year 2000 forccest3 .3 an indication of wherc grouthis likely to occur, and thu3 whcra mctropolitan syrtcrn rcrvicel yill bc needed. Thc forlcasts arc al3o uscd Hhan thc Council rcviewr r comnunity'sr.qucst to change its ,iUSA boundary and axtand matropolitan 3erviccs to ncw areas of dave I op,ncnt. '| The 2000 forcc.3ts are rcvlcwrd uhcn local dcvalopncnt trcnd3 arG found to vary substantial ly from Counci I forec.st3, whan unantlcipatcd dcvcloF cntis proposed. or.s part of am.nding thc locrl comprchensivc ptrn. The Council rcvlrcs it3 local foracrat3 cvcry fivc yalrtr u3ing U.S. Ccn:urdata.s a basc. Thc next revision of the forecast3 will bc n.d. in 1992.At that timr, the forecast3 will be ertcndad to thc yGar 2010, end neyestinat.s of locrl land rupply lnd llnd dgn.nd r!t.tiv. to the ttUSA will bc prepared for cach comarunity and county in th. region. 0ata Shcct for Chanhassan 1988 Systefis lnformat ion Staten.nt Chanhassen Houscholds and Emp I oymcnt Househo I ds Emolo yment Forecasts of Popul at ion, Population l gSo 1990 2000 1",39 1980 l99o 2000 r 980 r 990 2000 ,ofl5 2rf 4 6ra Jg :18 acrcs -.:4gL acrcs l,3cD S trccts Allcys Parks -@- J.q- R.s i dcnt i.l dcns i ty . 4L dric I I ing units/ac?c rD,d@ *Note: The 2010 forccasts lrG uscd for 3y3tan sizing purposcs only. Es t imates of llUSA(a) !and 0emand 1980-1990 Lanci 0cmand:+ l99l -2000 Land 0anand: Land oenand rnd Land Supply, 1980-2000 Rcsidrntial Comm:rciel lndustr i e I Pub I ic 1,Q80- l gg0 r 99 r -2000 kpl105/PHEI{v4€5 0t.26.89 izc Tota I Tota I Total 1980-2000 Land Demand: g!2 ecrrs 1980-2000 Land ttanandwith fivc-ye8r overagc*: !fl/ aeres *The Council belicves thlt tha urban rervicc are! should contain at least afivc-year oversupply of urban land within cach connunity. (b) Land Suoo I v 1980-2000: 4..995 acrcs Current 3uppl y: &lrlgg.cr!3. The land rupply figurc rafl.ct3 the net dcvelopeblc .rG! In3ldG the locrl conprchensive plen/urben scrviee tinc--excluding Hatarr wetland3, badrock.floodplains and any covenantad .griculturel prerlrvo lrnds. The Counci I'rl.nd 3upply figure ineludca pl.tted but und:vctop.d lot3 tr of l!80. t 3 20lor. J@ 20 lort \_rr@_ 2010r Q, roo 1988 Systens lnforna! ion Stateraent Chanhassen A copy of the guid.l incs docurn.nt,I'lctrogol itan Counci I Guidel i nes for Revicwino Loc a I Co mor ehens ivc P I an Amandments , is attachcd as an appendix tothis systens statcment. Council staff in thc 0ivision of Comprch.nsivc Planning and Local Assistancc arc available to assirt you, if you hava any questions lbout thcprocess. Communitics arc encouragcd to discu3s plan tmendncnts with us beforc they are forrnal ly submittgd for Council rcview and co, rent. For purposcs of sizing metropolit.n systcn facilitiG3, thc Council lraspreparrd forscasts of local population, households and enploymeni for thcyear 2010. A prirnary rca3on for naking th.sc forccasts is thc long lcadtine involved for thc planning and invGstncnt dccisions that .rc rcquiredto cnsurc ayst.rn c.pacity to 3crva th. anticipltcd grolrth. C. 0ata Shcet for Ch!nh!3scn T.he data shcet is includcd on . 3cp.rate paEe. D. ,iUSA ltap A map for Chanhasscn i: Included on . 3.par.t. p.gc. E. P I an Amendmant Procass The Council has adoptcd guidelines for the plan arnendmcnt rcvicrl proccss. Thcse guidel ines and proccss apply to.ll local plan attrcndmcnts. t - 2 DAIEI TOt IBOM: EUBJDCTt ltc Couacil ruE h$ rcvle'rcd ttc clty of Caanhuecn phn drafl you 3rrc ur rnd.la|G tbc toU"-fol *"ar.ntr. A guestion tbe ilty.nccds to adCri:ss lr lf lhlr arrcntlmcnt rrlll bc r oornpletc uodrtc, -A complctc ptrd necdr to contiln the alcmcnts spcolflcd h thc Mctmpotltu bnd i'fnn*rf fct gifinn&u Statut s 4?3,859), If not rll clcienu of thr curcnt Chanhauco plrn- Jff * ilof..i at thl, time, tbop thst wiil remrin la etrcct thould be rpecifically oentioncd. At thir time,'thc kcy L,sucs lPPcat to bc domogrrphic fior€crsts, tnd hnd dcmrnd. Eoreirl (Ouble8 Elagh) Thc hirtoricat dara rcoortcd bry the chy of Chanhrsscn for the numbcr of houreholds fior the prr igAO .oa for the othci ycars iir tbeir propral do not natch wlth thc Mctropohra Council'r data rcrig. The citv of Ctaihasrco rso liouiing uniu inrtcad of hourcholdr to dcrtw thc forccrst6. (ileue rec Atiacbmcnt 1, 1980 Ccruus dati trblcl, labctlng hourln3 unlu u boucholdr iootuter the Srorth Uen& by ovcl 250 units in 190. Bclow b r oomParlion of rhc t*o drra rcrlcr 1980 rnd 1990, 1980 1990 Metrc Oounsil Hor.rrcbol& L075 4,074 Oty of Chaaharscn Hourcholds \?83 4,329 Tbc rue of borsing uniu as hourcholrk by tbe c,lty of Chanhassen rcsultr ln forecuu thrt !rc too lrsb A acw ret of forccart wu provided to tbc clty of Chrnha6scn ln Augrut, 198& Tt diEcrcacc Uct*ecn thosc forccartr foi ttgO rnd new pmporcd E3uro by thc clty L vcty rnrllr only l(x) or tcs thrt I perooDt ln population. T[c lfi] honschold ffuro ir, ar notcd rborc, lnconcctly detcrnlacd'. Wbcn ttib ioncctlon ls mrdc, lt vlll rcducc thc cuncnt ucnd rnd prclrurably Erult ln I loutr houchold (rnd thcrcforc poputafun) forccasr for_the ycar 2000. OonrcqYPtly' tte ditrcrcaoc bctwcco Cduncil end clty Egitcs udll bc trnallcr. Puriding r ncw rwbcd [brccst rt thir mint docr not 8DDsar warrentad, -lhir riturtton crn bc bcttcr rcrohrcd when thc 1990 rctual ccruiu count b rvrili5h. In r few months, thr ctty will tccclvc lcll revlctx oounb &on ttc ccnrue Ar moa u thc acturl countt from thc ccuur bocomc ]allrble, t Dctr, tct of bpc.tu wltl bc leodrtcd whlch will bc bucd on lccutltc borc yaar drtr, rod will poridc rlr bcttcr infonneiion to lnllyzc ptst tsco& lnd to devclop forocart. METROPOI,ITAI{ OOUNCIL Mrn !er* C.ltrq l3O Eril nnh Stlct, 5t. Peul, Mlnmrotr lll0l Autud U, 1990 'P.rl Kmurg Ptrmlq Dlrcctor tor Cbutrcrea Prsl Eelt drcn, Hadpd Rcvlcwcr hlorrrt Rcvlen ol Cbrnhilrca Conprrlculvc Pbl UPdrt (dlrym) 7 lfiilIE (Prul Brltzcnco, Tori Flood) 7hc Clty prgpotc. r trr3c urban aeMc. lddition bared on hiSher houschold. forccur rnd rn iacrcuid'de'nrnd for ;mncrchl rnd industrlal dcrrclopmcni. Thc Councll hu rgrced to tbe higher forccartr for Chanhaescn contrined lo thc Highwry 212 EIS. Ar mcntloncd In thc lorccart ridoa aborc, tbc forecutr darolopcd by the city rhould bc tdjutcd ro rclloct hotucholdr whlch b tower thrn hourin3 uniu. Thir rlro affcctr lrnd demand. Ao cctlmatc of thc rupply rnd demrnd to the ycu ifiO for va6nt, dcwlopablc land (all hnd urc catcgorle) ttlhS thc forccrrts rborr r Couacil gtiraatcd dcmaad of 1,10t.cEca (with a fivo ycar ovcmgc) rad r rupply of 1'010 r$ca, Tbc trble tbat folloun rborn thc brcatdown by land ucc clttSoly' Chrnhmrcn Sr{rpty and Dcmand for [and. 190 to 2000 - Vrcant. Dstlo9rble Aeret (uring forccuu found in Highway 212 EIS)' Mctropolitan Councll Estimotcs Dco.rnd Rctidcatld .552 Asret Comncrclrl - l0 AcrgPublic - S Acres6trcotr - tlO Acr.cllr[l :&3crlTotrl .137qnrlsr # lbtal w/cncngc . 1,105 SuppU Grrcnt, Yrcrat land - 1,010 acrce Addltloml MUSA Nccdcd .95 Acrer Tbc dilferencc betrrecn the Metropolitan Couocil rnd the city on additional urbln rcilicc lrtl Do.ded for the par 2000 ir hrye. The Council data rhoun thar dcmrnd acccdr rupply by 95 rcttr. Thc city forccaru r nccd for bctwccn 996 rnd 2"544 rcrcr for reldcntial denelopmcat to thc year 2000 and ! nocd from bcirco 242 snd 1,790 rcra of rdditionrl hnd wlthin lu MUS.{ One factor cootributiDg to thc diffcrcnce b thc land rupply. Thc clty conslden rcddcrtill hnd rupply of 751 acta oomparcd with the Counclll rupply for rll urcr of 1,105. Thc othet hcbr lr tbc bijher populrtioa and bourchold forerarls rscd by thc clty. The Council bu inecrrcd ltr forccactr which rre rcflectcd in thc Highway zt7 EIS, but will not be revising thcnr rgria uatll rftcr tf,c 1990 @nrul drta ir rrallrblc. Eqt;lqS (Audrcy Doufhcrtf) Whilo thc city hu dooc t prctty thorough iob of p,Eplrlng the Housing rcctlon o[ lu plan, rhcrp ue romc Edditiolll itcil thtt arc rcquircd as part of the Hourlog Plan Rcvlcr Ouldcltna thrt wtll provtdc r morc completc picturc of the cltlr t ldcatlllcatlon of thc vlriow rsntll cont nngcl' Numbcn rad tylc of publloly-urtrted houring unltr C\rrcnt tDd projected cmptoymcnt opponunitio Honrcholdr by lnoone l) 2) 3) 1) Tfrc clty hu done r 3ood job of aaalping ltl cuncnt.houring riturtion_rnd tbe-rultlbltlty of touini typ., nailrb-le foi pcnoru ai,ar-iour rtegcs ln tttc Ufc qrclc lt idcntiEcr. the cdrting urh of rciEcifrrt borl trer ud-the potcntial land rviilable for hourlng rnd hon' it Phil to utrlzl it' Scrcnty.nlne pergcat of thc city;r bousing rtock lr rtnglc famlly. Tlre Pla_n- lutf thlt of tbt rcmdainj doltoprbtc trn( 24-00 rin3te iaroily uniu rre propoccd cnd ltm ualr of jtcnrrtiw hil"g ,yp.i, firt propomi "ru6 [c1p to dddrcrr ttrc -nccO to hcrcsle altornative honslng tyf.r. Goals in the ptao rre dircctcd toward offering a bmad choisc of housing tyPcs to ncctthc Delds of rll regmeatr of the population, inctuding rpeclallzcd houslng necds tuoh u thc eldctty and lory' rnd nodlratc-lncome iloirseholds. Also lncluded arc cfforts to man88c Srowth' prwidc rdcquatc horriag, rnd rchsbllltttc dctcrlorrting rrear rnd/or structurer ln thc clly. Policias ioctude nrlntrlnlnS and inprovlng thc cxittinS houring, prariding adcquate hnd.for projectcd housiag growth, including provislon of oPPortunltics lol pcrsgg o.{ r rrnge ol lncomct' inri maHn3 an effon to providc rubsidlzed hourlng rs rtrte lnd fcdaal funding Pc.rml$. - In ldditioo, tfic dty witl codpcrate witb othcr Sovemneotal units to rtrermline, dmplify rnd aoordinrtr thc rcvlars rcqulrcd for rcsldcntial dcvctopment to aroid in0sting thc cost of bouring duc b uroo€.rary dclap ia tbc rcvlcw proccrs. Poticicr dcslgncd to lchlerrc housing diwnity includc promoting conitructio! of rcnior horsiry ln tocatioru ooivenlcnt b thoppiry and modicrl rcrvica if dcmand bccoma lPPrrcnt, prcqoling rDd dewlopmcDt of tlternatlvc hourlng qpcs, ruch rs patlo homcr, lorahourg and quadplcxc, Poticier tre lncluded to dircouragc ncw roidentirl dcvclopmcnt from cncroachlnS on Dltursl rcrourccr or phpical ferturcr thit perform csscnrisl protcalon functlonr ln thclr natural rtatc ood PUD'r, clurtdr icrrclopatcnb rnd iflnovstivc slt pla$ wlll be cnmuraged to hclp @nsctac cnergl and mloutcol urod for houlry, Polids !o cDcounse prcrcrvrtioa of horsln3 lncludc ptopcryy rnd code cnforccmcst to e00ou!r8c Etiotcotoog tsd lthlb of owncr lDd rcntcr houslry, Tbc city idcatifio r rpccifrc rcction for Horslng lrnplencrrtrtbn' holpglicr'lh€rc !rc Do^ tmptemcotrtloo policio or toob Ucutified. Carc rhould bc tatcn to Hcntify bar they plan to rcilncly punuo itptcmcntrtion of thck potlcicr, rnd rvhrt !$te lDd/or fcdcrrl programr thcy plan- 19 utidzi For cmhptc, ln thc prwirlon of ruhldtred bou!!n8. Docs tbc city currcntly tvdl ll&E of thc re1iccs of thi Metro HRlt ln providing houslng rub,rldlct? That kind of informatioa rhould bc ldcndgcd. &$[EqE!liQ[ (Ant BrrdeD) --- Thr trlnrportldon clsmcnt thtt wlu bc complctcd .nd rubmittod by thc ctty rhould rddr!$ thorc itcm, dca;db€d ln thc tranrponarioo checkliit of thc Council'r phn rmcndmcnl Suidclin$' Thc tsrruportatloa policia withiln thc draft lncludc onc lndicntcs city rupport of fcderlt' ltaf, ueoipolitrn riO local etforr to upgradc 169212, lltb roadway ir- in the-prccoull!"ioC upgrrdcd. Doc! thc poltcy rcfcr to rupPort for thc construetlon of ac,w Hiihwoy 2127 !$ltl!(SrsE! (C.tl schcok) Ooly a ponion of thc ra$et policy plan ir includcd ln rbc prellmlnary draft. Thc complel! Plan wlll-bc iubmittod hEr. DebfEoial submittsl thould addrcss thc Tlcr I rcqulrcmenu tadlortcd on pja 70-72 ia the warteuater policy plan lncluding *rstcvatcr llow projectlotu lor 2000 rnd 2010 (!otd rod for crcb Dctropotitln intetrePtor). Thc policy oa page 12 indicrta thc city rarcr plan wlll lndicatc rcccptrblc locatlonr, ordinlncc! rnd dcolgo rtrndards for on.ritc rptcms. Thc city rhould rcfer to the Ticr I rcquircmcnu for thc msna8cmcnt of gn-.ltc rptcms. The city'r controls rhould incorporate MPCA rcqulremcnr u ameodcd (MN 7080) for thc locrtion, dceign rnd installation of ryrtcnu. If thc cltyl rural uca dculty policy ir mnrhtcnt wlth thc Council'r 4 unlb pcr 40 policy, it b not aocc*rry fot thc clty to inctudc mandrtory maintcnancc rnd lnspcction elemcn$ as part of their contmtr. Thc clty mry wir! to do thir for i6 own rcasons, for carmplc to lnsurc thc ldequltE opcration of oldcr rystcrar itrrtdled prior to cuncot MPCA rcquiremcnrs or locatcd on gmall lotr. Al'o, thc city rhould locludc r policl rtatcmcnt ln l$ phn rtrtlnS t) that under no clrcunutlnc(:r will prlvrte wutelratcr Ecrtment plans bc acccprablc Ag thc conditions undcr which thae facilitier would bc prmitted. ftc conditionr for rllowing such frcllltles rhould lncludc oonrhtency with a Council.approved comprchcnsive plrn, protsction of gtoundwater md rurfacc watcr quelity, end ascuranrc of the ownert flnrnclgl rbility to conltrust and opcrrtc thc frcility u rc4uircd. Tbe policT rhould indicatc thc rerponslbility of the locrl Sovcrnmcnt for insurin8 thlt rll ooodltlonr rr. 6cL Watcr Oualitv (Grl Schcof) Th! city ir prcpocing r 2500-acrc MUSA cxpanrion $ prn of thc plln amcndmcnt. Bccaurc of thc rcrlc of thc dcrclopmcnt, thc impaot on the qudity of rurfacc runotf to rcaioaal tesrcltloo lrler ruch u late Riley and thc Minnesota Rivcr could bc rignl0cant. (In January of tbir par the EPA crtablirhcd r 3oal o rcducc nonpoinr pollutlon by aO% ld the Minnaou Rirrr by Juty 1, 1996.) Bccaure of thir mandatc tnd the Counclll on.3oing conccrnr rcgardlng thc lurplet of dadoptreat oD the quelity of rcjional wltcr r$ourccl, the Councll hu a rpcclrt onccra rqardlng thc city'r proporcd laud rrsc lnd rratcr qulllty..nanlgcmcnt pmtcction polici6. The clty lr to bc oommcndcd for rcvpral of thc proporcd goatr, policier lad otbcr ldeu contllDad ia thc draft plaa Tbac lncludc its willingnc$ !o coopcrate wlth othlr lgcncica h rddrcslog satcr guellry llucr, the rcaommcndltk n to detElop I stormw8ter plrn, rnd the proporcd rtudy/i mplenentrtior of r fuadin3 mcchanism !o .upport stormwatcr menlgemcnt rnd c6tcr quality protoction, Thoc lction in thc long.run will bc kcy clemcau to piotccr rcgiond resrcatioD lakcr and rcducc non.polnt pollutlon ln thc rlvq by 407o. Howcve4lt could rrke Jcrn tqacrgmpl-bh !!c._c tqkt, rnd ia thc interim devetopmcnt *,ill continuc to aflect watcr guality.(Itc city rhould abo bc rwarc thrt during rhls p*iod tn rerponsc to lcglslatloa pascC Uy thc a 3 2. 1990 brirlrturc (Mina Stat, 473.157), thc Councll wlll PrcPare a rcglonal wrtor qurll$ plrn which *iU r$,ry oaariemcnt objcctives ind urget Potlution loidl for all watcnhcdr I t . Mrniooliun Arc-r.) In tb; intaim ttre po-licids, plaru rnd land uce oontrolr whlch thc city rrlopts slll do'ternlnc whother rcgionat rccrerti,in taLer ind the Mlnaoota River rrc adcqurtcly pronac4 ltc folloring ch!n8c8 sDd rdditloru arc ruggested to rtrEngthen !l19.iry! plan rnd l19d * Controlr duriig tbc-lnterin pcriod. Ihe otsblLhmcat of clerr policicc for wrtcr qudity . lunagcmrnt fi thc ornprclcasivc ptan yiI BtDo niolmlzc C,ouncll oonocmr ln fututc rwicttr of lndMdud dawbpncntr. L Thc PttD lsdlcatca tblt thc clty ls unsurc of iu.mte iD watcr qyrlity plnnninj rad -protialon Thir rhoutd be clirificd. lhc clty hrs r ccntral rule in two rapcctr. Oag future dcvclopment rnd trnd use changer wi'll havc q maJor imprct on rhc guality of runofi to hk*, 3trerru aud the Minncsota Rirtr. Natlonal and Counsil rcrcarcb indicatos that aonpoint Pollutmt lordr in rgricultural and urban rulo{ arg llgnlEcanl. Bccaruc of thc city'r land urc plannlng and control suthority thc clty clcarly has r major role. Aro, rtate liw (Mino. Stat 473.iI?9) requira the city to prcprrc r local wrrcr lrtnsgcmcnt plan. The Pla! is to lnclude thc tolumes, rrtcs rnd path of runo$ artrr for rtotmiater rorage to mcct s,rtenhed ptan rtandardr, untcr gullity Proloction mcthods rdcquatc to naet thc rtandardr tn the watcrshcd plan; rnd an implementrtlon Program. Ia tbc lak$ rection (prgc 2) thcrc Ir r dircusslon of tha lmPast of nonpoint Poltutent! on lrke* and tbc Minnoota Rirrcr. (RcSional priority lakcc rhould be notcd ln thc plrn duc to tbcir rp€cial impottElc.,) lhe problcmr rre dificrent, lDd thc dbcutlion rhould dhtinguish bctweetr them. Thc plan should indicatc thst the impact on lrker ir duc to phosphorors toadings ln agricultural and urban runollwhich rffccu algal Er4h. -- Eiccssivc growth rill degrade the tesrcational 8nd aesthetlc ralucs of laker, Thc 40% rcductlon of nonpoiat poltutanr in the rivcr will invotve thc rcduction of organic loalinSl in urber rad agicutturit runoff ftom orgsnlc roils, animal vastc, vcgcutlvc dcbrlr, oll rnd grcese. 1lcrc lffect the dirsolvcd oxygcn lcvel in the dvcr. lhc ptan rhould point out that upgrartlng thc ueatmeBt lctrcls rt thc Blue Irkc and Scnecr (not Chlsk! !r ths rcxl rtatoi iutcratcr plaou wlll be vcry corily rnd rcsult ln llttlc or no improvcmcnl h wlt r quatity. Thc rcculrwill ngt bc aumcic to meet *ttcr quillty stsndlrds. A rcduction ln the autricat or orgenic lordingr io thc runoff rnd rributaries to thc rlvcr rvill bc aocc$ary to rchierr Drtio$l watcr quality gorle for thc Minnesota. The plan rhould inclu& r dircusslon of tbcse isucr and thcir inpact on thc city to providc thc buir for r rtrcng watcr qurllty mrnEgetlcDt policy rnd to guidc thc dcvolopmcnt of the city'r rtonnsltct plaa rnd lo tbe iatirim the cltyl land urc pollcicr sod sontsob. The ptan lnitioata thet the oity intcnrts to prcParr a stormwstcr ptan. ft9 conprehenrirrc plan ihould 3uide thc prcplrltioo of this plan by statln8 tbat thc plan will crnlutte thc polutsDt toaiting in ruooE o thc lake lncludlry phosphorour md to rhc Mioncrott Rtu lnctuding -organic and locorporate stormwrtcr and land urc planr, rtandardr, and ncrhodr rcnrltlvc to thc wrtq guality goalr for thcsc water rproutolr, Thc ptao ttltcs thrl neu dcvclopmcot wlll not bc allorrtd to lncreasc thc rrtc of runoE from-thc prcdcvclopment rste, - Thir policy will rssirt in minimizing cro*loq but it will nor 3. 4. 6 5. 6, llnlt phorphorour loading to lakcs, IJmltlng the incrcarc h thc rcluarc of n$off rnd thercforc thc rolume of phosphorous fron dcvctopment ir i6pe1q11 in protccting laker fron c*ccssiw algal growth, The plan should coniain s llrong policy limiting thc rolune of incrcarcd runoff and tr8n8ging the quality of runoff to mlnlriizc photphoioru loading! to !kor, This wlll providc a brsir for revising rhe city'r land use controli to rddrerl thii pollutaot. A copy 9f thc rcguirements of thc Ory of Eagan li artachod for yourilforaltlo! (Attrchocnr 2). Oq. pESs -s{.-!he plen iadicatcs tbe cfty will cncouragc the rue of 'biodegrodablc, non. polluting fcrtilizcn, paticidcr and lce irelring cherrlials.' AII fenilizcr ire blodcgradrblc, rnd by naturc thcy rrc polluting. Icc mcltln[ chemicals have the rarne cbarrctcrir-ticr. Thir rtrtemeut rhould bc rerbo'gbt, what ltratcg would the.city use ln inplcmcnting ruch a policy - a public informatlon pro3ram? Subdivision Rcgulatlonr, and Werland and Grarling/FillingMining Ordlaanoa The city roluntarlly rubmitted coples of lu cxistlng ordlnanrcs for rtaff ra*icw and oommcnt, Th. city indicater rhe wetland ordinEnic lr to bc rcvlrod, Thcrc arc a numbcr of rcqulrcmcntr which could cnabtc thc city to prorect wlter quallty, but thcy do not 919Uae plfnc guidance for developcrs oi citybtrctats tn rwie*ing acwtopmcntproposalr. lr appcar rhsr it ir lcft to rhc judgemenr of city otliciah-whethei a cevelopment proposal adequarery prorecr warcr quariry, For cxumplc, the ruMh'hlon rugulaflonl requjre rhe gubmittal.of dralnage, erosion und rcdiment-control planr with aproryed.plat. However, rhe-ordinance laiks epccitic pcrformrncc ttandardr orrpccilicltion for oalugtilg the plans and rnanaging the quality of runotf. Thc ordlnrncc rmrB thc ratc but not the volumc or the qualiry of runoff, sce previous dircussion in prra3raph {. The nttland ordinancc prohibiu thc altgration of wetlands untcsr thc city council ircuce analtcratlon permit Ttrc ordinancc rcu srandards to limir filling to minimil tu ross oi - 0ood rtoragc capacity and narurrr nutricnr rrripping capactty -or a wctland. ortrir -- rtandardr control rhc rorumc, rarc ano- qurrity -o? srlorm*arci runon oir"t irgcd-tL ::lli$ HTTer, mlny of rhc.candaids aic gencral and appcar ro rppty-oir! *thinu,Etl8nds or witbln a prcscntcd disrrncc (z0o fccl) from tnc witnna. ttri oruiiancepryl lo I:!tc.r rcries of prorccrcd irrands whirc "ignorrng' what gocl on arornd ib.mtn uplaoo trcu whcre msjor hnd urc changes rrc occuring. Thc g-rartin36llla3 ordinrnce requirer a city permir for this of eciivity. Howewr. Dloryinq :r grolrti cxgmgr- Thg rubmitrar of an erosion conrrot ptan rr requircd, bur'tiicrc aftrw.pocitrc rtlDdardr for the protcction of rurfnoe watcr quility. Thir-lr left to thcjud3rmcnt of city ofliclrlr. Thc clE rhould rcvierr rhc rcguircmcns of lrs ordinanc* rpccfficarty for thc purpo* ofHrcngthenlng lrr rbility to mrnagc thc warcr quarity ln regiinrt rak6 rnd thc'Mfirn*otal(lver, 'lbc ordin!nces rhould incorporatc clandards and rpccificatioru includinl bcatmrnsgcmcnt prsctlccs which addrcsr. rtormwrtcr quuliry liec icalry prroptrorot-oi lorganic losdlngr rnto thc takes and.rivcr-. In rddrlssinj uiir irrrJirr!.it'i;;td;;cloccly with thc appropriatc warcnhcd disrricrs. Ttrese-rcquiremcr; ,;i -fi;to b;- .l I nodl8gd gDe€ tbc city bu ompletcd lu ronnu,rter plan, but tbey *tll tctl,c ro prot€ct tbc lrlol rad riwt in thc intcrira E11ts (tunc Sa0crud) Tbc plan conccdy classifics reglonat rccrcatiooal opcn rprcc ia tbe city of Chaahurcn' Muaiclpal park rid open rpacc facllitlcs arc planned to oomplemcnt . not coapcte vith or dupticr-rc t[c rc3ionrirccreatlo! opcn rprcc facllities, Tbc uail phn (phrsc l) lllutrato a lial to O- proporod trail rylan io bkc Minncu,arhta Reglooal Parlr which b eonrirtcnt with tbc pul nuar plro The city rbould be conmcndod for uorking wlth lts neighborlag municipalhier rnd rbc locat rcbool dirtrlct on providiag perl sDd tccrcetlon rervicer in r coopcrattrrc manncr *hcn lt b c6clcnt 0o do rc. Ibc plnn'r anrlylir on rccroalion dcmand is well donc rnd thorough. Rccommcndrtlonr for lnproving thc muaiclprl park rystcm are based on s variety of sorrnd phnnlng princ-lpler' Unfortunatcly, thc phn does not inctude r crpital lmprovemenl Program (CIP) rtrting thc otimatcd coeu, fundin3 rourco and timing for implementing thc recommcndatlonr to lmprovc drd cxprnd thc municipal park rptcm, A OP for parb should bc dcrrclopcd and iacludcd ln thc tinal lEnlon ol thh plln, &liClEur Gaulsmith) Thcrc rrc gcncrrlly no problemr with the proposcd rcctlon on rolid was(c. It ! oombtcut wlth thc SCORE legisldtion ln that lt provldcs for curbsidc coll*tion lnd rcqulrca that oixod municipal rolld wuto haulcn will bc liceored. The plan contalns r goal for curb,ridc partlcipatlon, but lt irlght bc helpful to also havc tonnage or volume based goalr u well. On pagc 2, lt ls not clcer u to hotv tbc cit, will b€ fundiry iu progtlm. Overalt, thc city l, to bc commcnded for inc.orporating this cupportive rolid wulc elemcnt in itr comprehenrivc plan, although not ! rcquircment of the Wastc Management Act or S@RE hgblrtlon, CITY OF CH[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (512) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 Augiust 31, 1990 Us. Shirley Bruers connunity Developnent DirectorCity of chaska one city Hall Plaza chaska, IIN 55318 -1962 Dear Shirley: Thank you for the opportunity to revien and connent on the revisions to the chaska city PLan that has been forwarded to nyoffice. The naterial provided is either consistent hrith plans being developed by the city of Chanhassen or is not in conflictwith it. we note your concern over Metropolitan council Population, Household and Enployroent Forecasts and as you are aware, we have been working with then to resolve sirniLar issues for our own corn:nunity. your Transportation Elenent is fuIly consistentrfith the Eastern carver county study which both our conmunitiessupport. You should be aware that the City of chanhassen coDprehensive PIan is also being developed with sorne reliance onthis docunent. I rrould ask that in your plans and day to day citypractices that our conmunities work tosards creating a Dore cooperative effort on common roadway and trail issues. In Eany of our neighborhoods, streets and trails overlap conmunity lines andit is iurportant that these be dealt with in a comprehensive and consistent manner. I rrould be happy to speak with you and yourstaff directly on this issue so that ue Day begin a dialogue on it. I{e do have a concern with one aspect of your sehrer EleDent. our concern relates to matters that we have discussed previouslypertaining to potential use of the chaska Sewage Plant byproperties in the City of chanhassen and for our Dutual concern of being able to work with the !!wcc in their planning for either plant expansion or placement by a nev Detro interceptor. As you are arrare, the City of chanhassen is concerned that there may be portions of our connunity that could best be served by the chaska sewage Treatnent Plant. Although this is a regi.onal facility which has been expanded with regional funds, the City of Chanhassen has no direct access to this plant save for use of existing City of Chaska trunk 1ines. At a staff Ieve1, there appears to be a cooperati.ve posture to work out these situations and we rrould hope that this continues to be the case. The City of chanhassen would,however, be concerned if we are denied any access to that plant inthe future as need arises. The second related matter concErns thefuture of the plant. Again, as you are aware, we have spoken tothe UWCC regarding the ul.tinate plans for serving the southlrn halfof Chanhassen. Original l,Ietro plans called for a Bluff CreekInterceptor serving this area, but this no longer appears to be the 9?se: Any plans to expand or replace the Chaska Seuage TreatnentPlant should be developed in a Danner that takes the iuture needsof Chanhassen lnto account. lts. shirley Bruers August 31, 1990 Page 2 Again, thank you for the opportunity to cornnent. I look forvard tovorking uith you in the future on these and other natters. f an inthe process of forwarding copies of your plan revision to thePlanning Connission and city Councit for otficial conment. Ifadditional conments are received, I will fon{ard then to you. si ereIy, U**, Paul Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning Anne Hurlburt, l,fetropolitan Council Chanhassen Planning Connission Chanhassen City Council ,r/ Ghaska RECEIVED AUG 1 5 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN August 15, 1990 City of Chanhas sen Paul Krau s s Planning Di rector P.0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Paul: Attached Submi ss io along wit RE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE - CHASKA, MINNESOTA fornf ho your review and corment is the Information or Major Comprehensive Plan Anendments ur response to the 1988 Systems Statement. Although you have 45 <lays to suhnit your coments,.we would appreciate your review of this material at your ear'liest conven ience. If you have any questions, please call. Si ncerely, Shirley Bruers, Cormunity Oevelopment D i rector SB: j ai Enclosure City Of ChaSka Minnesota one City HaI ptaza 55318-1s62 Phone 612 448-2851 rNI UKMA'I'ION SUBIITISSION FOR II,TAIOR COMPREHENSM PIJ{ ^MET{DMEI{TS Tbis su-oaary rorlshcct Drst bc filtcd out aad rubmittcd to rtc Mcrropoliran Council wirh acopy of cacb ppp64 major coroprcbeasiw plaa encodmcnl A majoi comprchcmira planamendmcnt b dctincd rs: t. A complctc twision, up&tc or rervritc of rn cFrting coaprchcnsirc ptan in its intircry. L A najor Plan rcvbioq updatg rcrritc a1 rriifi6a to t ch'ptcr or ctcmcnt of an cxisringcomprchcriw plar 3. fui amendmcat triggcrcd_bry rproEscd derrctopmcnt that rcquircs eo Eryironmcntal Assssmcnr Worlshcct (EAW) or Enviroamcnral lmpacr Starcmcnt (EIS), s iclioed inMinncsota Rulcs 1989, Plns 4410,43fl).44fr), end b iacorsisrcnr *iri bJ'ctsting comprchcnsirrc plan; or 4. A changc (land tradc or addition) ia rhc urbaa rcwfuc arca inrotving 4() rcrcs or morc. Pleasc bc as spccilic as poss[lc; atrach addiriooal cxptaaaory narerials if ncccssary. tf r stalfrcpon was prcparcd for thc Planning cornmissioa or ciry counci[ plcasc rttach it'rs rctt I. GENEML INFORMATION A. Sponsoring govcrnmcntal unit Ctty of Chaska Namc of local contact Shi.r Bruers CoEounit Devel opoeat Directo_ Addrcss #Cltv Ha Zd,Chaska, UN Telepbone t 4 8-2 851 Name of Prcparcr (if dillcrcnt from cooract pcson) Datc of Prcparation July 13 1990 B.Namc of Aracadmcat Dcscription6unnary Res oase to 1988 systeos stateDeat Revlsed populatloD , househo EEP oyEent f recast.Revls d t ransEortatlcn ald s ever plans. send pLan a'end'ents t-o: John nutford, Refc*ars coordinatorlletropolitan Council, t{ears park Centri230 E. Fifth St., St. paul, t{N 5510:,-lG3{ Plcasc attach thc fotlowing: l. Ftvc copics of thc propoccd l[|codBc[L ? A city-wide map showing $: lydol of rbc proposcd chaogc.3. thc cuncnr plan map(s) indicating rbc arca(s) atrccred, if Oc amcndmenttriggers r map change. c. vl 4.Thc pmposed plan nap(s) indicaring arca(s) allcacd, if rhc rocndment triggen a aap changa What is tbc olEcial local statu of the plan ameadmcat? (Cbcck oac or Dorc as rppropriatc.) -;- Apptottcd June by gorcruiog body, cootingeat upoa Mctropolitan Councit rcnicq18, 1990 - considcred' but aot aPPrcvc4 by goaaing body oa - Othcr -Indicatc uhat adjaccat local gorcmmental uriu .Itcctcd by the clangc bavc bccn scat copics of thc plaa aareadocnt aad thc datc(s) copics wcrc rcat lo thctrL Notilicatioa of allcctcd ad accnt fo\rcrnmcnul unis h requircd lor rraior olan, Chan-hassen, Carver Couaty, Shakope€ D E Vlctorl Becausc of the comprchcnsivc naturc of mol major plan amcodmcnts, ! sumarary chccklilt is attachcd to hclp cosure that the amcadmcnt L complctc for Council rcvi6r, and io &tcrminc wherher rhc propos€d amendmcnt is corsistent wirh the metropolitao sptcms ptans or orher chapters of thc Metropolitan Devclopmeut Guidc. Pleasc indicatc q,hcther thc amcndrncnt allecs the following factors. Whcrc it docs, the materials submittcd Eust fully eddrcss the Lsuc(s). U. IMPACT ON REGIONAL SYSTEMS A Wastqflatcr Trcatmcnt 1. Gangc ia city's ycar 20fill2010 0or projecrioas _ NoNot Applicable. J- Yci What will bc the net change? Honr rrcre thcsc catcutared? See attached Community dischargcs to Erorc than oac metropoliun interccpor. x NoNot Applicablc. _ Ycs. lndicatc which intcrccptor ryill bc atrcctcd by thc aaendmcnt aad what will bc thc nct changcs ia 0on:? z vll _I- AEted upon by planaiag comnission (if rppticablc) on Jlrne 13. 1990 amcndmcnls B. Traasportadoa (see attached) t. Rclatiooship o Couocil policics rcgarding mctroPolitan highwap _ Ndl{ot Applicabla Ycs. L Graage ia typc ud iatcasity of land urcs .t intcrchangca rod otbei locations withia r qurrtcr-oilc of thc Ecttopoliua bighuny sptem? _ No/l{ot Applicablc. Ycs. 4.Capacity of road nctuork !o accommodatc planncd laad uc(s) (including mctropolitaa iatcrchangcs). _ NoNot Applicablc" Ycs 5. Irnpact oo trarsit aod parking sttarcgics. - No/t{ot Applicable. Ycs. 6.Docs thc proposcd amcndmcnt contain any changcs !o lhc functioaal classification of roadwap? (Thcsc changcs rcquirc Transporradon Advisory Board (TAB) raricw) -No_ Ycs. Dcscribc which roadways. C. Aviatioo 1. Iopact oa rcgionat airspaca I NoNot Applicablc. Ye Z Impaa oa airpon scarch rrea j NoNot Applicabla Ycs. vlll 3. Impect oa cxisting trip genctrrba. - Ndt{ot Appli,ceblc. _ Ycr 3. Coasirtency with guidcliacs for land usc compatibility wirh rircnfr noisc. x Ndl{ot Applicabla Ycs Coasisaocy with the bng.rcrn comprchcnsivc plra for ra rirpon in thc vicinity of thc conrludty or propccd darclop'nenr. 4. x Ndl{ot Applicablc- Ycr Rccrcatioa Opcn Spacc l. Inpact on sd.tiag or futurc fcdcra[ starc or rcgional rcqeational Ecilitics" _!- Xoatot Applicablc. Ycs. III. TMPACf, ON METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INI'ESIMEXT{T FRJTMEWORK A. I:nd Usc l. Dcscntc thc following as appropriate Sizc of affected arca in acrcs N/A Eristinglandusc(s+ Proposcd land usc(s Numbcr of rcsidcatial dwctling unirs and typcs inrohrcd Proposcd density Proposcd quarc footage of commcrciat, hdrstrid or publh buildinp B.Change in thc cityl populatiorl horschold or cmploymcnr forccass for 2fi)0, or any additional local suging contaiacd ia the origiaal plaa _ NoNot Applicablc. x Ycs. See ettached C. Chaoge in tbe urbaa scrvicc arca boundary of the coramunity. 4 Noi!.[ot fuplicablc. Ycs. D. Change in thc timiag and rtagrag of darclopment withia thc urbaa scwicc arca r Ncr/Not Applicablc. Yes D. a. b. c. d e. L tr w.IMPACT ON HOUSINC A" lopact oa $:tuppty T! $9f.?.liry of borsing ryF neccaiary !o !.rrEperroos rr dillercnr rugcs in rhc lifc clrcta B. c -[- NoNor Applicablc. Ycs. F:rr:l ffiT',ffi: rlfordabilitv of housiog t]?6 acc6s.rv to rcnt _! Xonot Applicabtc. Ycs" lmpact oo the communiry! nuryl.iol objecrivcs for brr- rnd arodcratc-incomc,modcsr{ct markct ratc, and middlc- -i upp.r-io-ii t-orsiag udrs. 3 NoNot Applicable - Ycs, WATER RESOURCES - Ycs.x No. B. Will rhc wctland bc prorcacd? _ Ycs. Dcscntc how. _ No. Explain why nou c - Ycs- No D Will the *,atcr body bc protccrcd? - Ycs Dcsdbc ho*,. _ No. Explaia why nor Docs _thc plan amcndmcnt a(Icct r Minncsou Dcpartacat of Natural Rcsourccsor US. Army Corp of Enn111_n1o_rccrca ..crraiai-tf yes, dcscribc typc ofwctland affcctcd and shon locatioa on r map, Will thc plan amcndmcat rcsulr. h runoll which affccs rtc quality of my surfaccwatcr body? If ycs, identi$ whic.h oncr I A vI. IMPLEMENTATIONPROGRAM $pfi371 A cbange in zoning, suMivision, oa-sitc sc*rr ordinarccs or othcr olEcial controls. -]- NoNot Applicabla - Ycs 0..1&90 !1 COMPREITENSI\IE PLA}iI T'PDATE CTIASKA, MINNESOTA RESPONSE TO 1988 SYSTEMS STATEMENT 1 Population, tlousehold, Ernployment forecasts 2. Land Use/Transportation components as regulred byMetropolitan Council 3 Sanitary Sewe! Component as reguired by Metropolitan Council JUIY 1990 I INIRODUCTION tn 1988, the t€tropolittn Councll adoptedl aer policy plana for1) transportatlon end 2) raste yater treatDent anal hanAling(res€r3 ). In 1989' lEtro Councll distrlbuted itg annual SysteDgInforartlon StrteDent rhlch describeat the changea leate ln 19E8 and hor they nay lnpact lnclivldual coDEunltlea. 'tlhe 1976 lrndPlanning Act requires Chaska and other lbtro clDnunitics torevier their Conprehena ive Plans and oake aoendrents ag Decessary to cnsure continued conforaity rlth tstropol itanphns.. The City of Chaska pa.rticipated rith Carver Couotli in the pre-paration of a transportation planning study rhich focuses on theeasterD, nore urbanizeal part of tbe County. The Eastern Carver County Transportation Study is belng prepared by the consultingfirn of Eoward Needles laenen t Bergendoff (EllTB). Its purposeis l) to reach agreenent and consistency betseen Carver County and affected eities and tornships on the nunber, locatioo andfunctional classification of ninor arteriala and collectora and 2 ) to deternine needed improvements on ninor arterials aDdcollectors in eastern Carver County. The reeults of this study have been used in updatiog Chaska's Comprehensive Plan. Ihe Daterial cootained in this subnittal to Uetro Council ia la res[ronse to the 1988 Uetropolitaa Systcos Inforoation StltcDent and rill becone pa.r t of the larger, rcre ertensive @ngreheasivcPlan up,ilate rtich is schedulcdl to be coDpleted in Fall 1990. Chaska has had a conprehensive plan sioce the early 1960's. lheplan uas substantially updlateA iD the early 1970rs and Drerecently in 1982. fhe target date of the exiltiog plan tg 1990.ln addition to updating the plan to Eet lletro Council require-Dents, the plan is also undergoiog a substantial up,alate iaorAer to provide rcre relevant directions for devclopnent and redevelopnent in the 1990's and ln the 21st Century. 2 Populatloo aDd houleholds lo tbe etro area bave lacrcased rcrethin cxpectcd duriaE the I980'r duc largcly to-a_ reversal of the nct out-ligrrtion tread of thc 1970rr aad to higher_birth ratesia the t9?6's eod l980rc. Shllarly, populatioa aad bougcholdsin Chask! have grora rcre thao forcc.tt by tbtro CouDcll. Ia fact, csth.tec of current pogulatioo,rtouscholda ln Cbaska already equal or e-ceed I'Etro @uncll forecacta for tlre year 2000. Current eEplolrDeat levele in Cbaska algo exceed Uetro @uDcil forecasts ior 1990 due prinarily to the Cityta initiatiYc la the uidt-I980's to eocourage ecoDolic developnent by offeriog various iacentives for busiaesses to locate or exPand in Ctraska. lotal eoplolment increasedt by about 90 perceot in the 1980r s.rtile population and households iacreaged about a5 Percent. rI. Populatioo, Eougehold aat! Egloyrent Forecarts ttetro Council riIl be revising lts forecasts ia 1992 after data frorn the 1990 ceasus is available. I'EAR CITY FORBCASI HEIRO CIT'NCII, FIORECAST POPUItTION 1980 1990 2000 2010 8r3a5 11 ,800 (est) ll ,670 17,154 t, 3a6 r0 ,200 10,800 1l ,200 fhe tabulation belou shors City of Chaska forecasts to the year 2010 in coupariaon rith curreat tletro Couneil forecasta. 3 YE,LR CIlY FORBCAST I'IETRO @UNCIL FORECAST EOUSEEOLDS 19 80 1990 2000 2010 YEAR 3r006 {r320 (est) 5r535 7,035 3,006 3,900 l, 300 5, 70o I{ETRO @SNCIL FORECASIFORECASI El,tPLOYl,{ENT 1980 1990 2000 2010 3,600 6rBl0 (actual ) I ,900 1l ,000 3 r600 5 ,500 6r50o 8, 000 The City forecasts a33ur a alordorrr Ia ncr housiag ltrrtt la the 199-0t a aa a result of lcas denand for atartcr horcs, t'ut iip..t" a returD to the 1980-1990 bousiog grg+lt rate (150,/ycar) after the year 2000, 83 a relult- of - locreaeed blrtb rrtcs iU"Uy Ufooi) in the l9?Or3 aod I980r8, and as. reault of thc ripeiiaine of r.E. 2L2 to freeuay standarde ln the letter 199013' CITY I III. t?l'FFIC ASSIGIIHENT ZONE (BAZ) IORECAS?S rctro @uncll tla! dlvldcd thc Clty of Charka loto tbrec treftlcArsignEot Zone3 (lAzrr) for uec la forccettiaE futurc trlpEcna!.tion r.tca lnd di.tributlDg thc trtp! to G.cb clcocnl ofthc rcElooal traolportatloo aetrcrt. lbc- t buhtloo blor thorrtbc-Clty of Ch..k!t! cstlEatcd diltributloo of gopuletloa, h6ugg-holds and GEIrloyECot by lAZ la tbr ycer 2010. tAzl POPUIIITON 800s880 EI{PIPYI{ENT s35 537 538 5r 200 5,250 5,000 2, 500 2, 115 2,120 1,800 7,000 2,200 !oTAL CrrY 17,a50 7r 035 11,000 lhese forecasts are consistent rith chalkar9 Lnd ole pran aodyere used in the EtsterD Carver @uaty lrrnsportatloa plannlngStudy for planninE Cbaskats arter ial,/col lcctor atreet lysten. rbc roadray functiooal clacrlficatlon !y!t.D dcvclopctt bv rcgroCouncil consists of four claccec of roedraye: prioiipel'.rtcrial3, uinor ertcrials, corlcctor rtrctts a;a locil rtraatr.rhc Eastern carecr couDty graDslrortatloa study brokc dova nlnoralterial3 and collcctor! iato tuo mrc cetcaoilcc r claei t eadClass If. (Scc trbulatloa acrt prgcr. Ihc etropolitan highuay rlrltcD le udc up of tbc prtaclgalarterials ln tb. ntro erci. tD cbrltl, i.g. ZfZ iaa thi pro_posed I.E. tl rivcr croetloE t! th. .rrt .dgc ot tfi Ciii ircregEenta of the Dtropolltra htghray ryrtcu. lletao couDcll rcgulrce citlc! .Dd countlc. to provldc eo edc-guate Einor artcrlal .yrtc! to accooDodatc lhoit, iJcaiiv-destined-tripa {lcer rhan flvc nilcet ttercUy-iiipfae-E[6rctrlps off the Dtropollton hlghvay ryrtc!. Il'. UTNOR ARTERIAI., ROADg'AY SYSSEX 5 IUIrcTIONA& CLASSI?ICATION CRTAERIA trlp focus: IDtcrstatc, lDtrastagc Speed: a5-55 PhIlip LDgtb: > 1.0 ni.Acccls: nrlly 'coDtrolled, ao direct land acccgs io urbanarcali liuitedl land accesg ia rural araas.Sp.ciags 5-10 ni. t{inor Arterial - Class I lrip Focus: Iotrastate, Intercounty Speed: 10-50 ph tripl€ngth: )6ni.Access! To alterials and collectorsi land accesg to uJortrip geDerators .Spacing: 2-a Ei Uinor Arterial - Class II Iaterc I ty,/touoshipTriP Focus: latracountry, Speed: 35-15 q>h Sripl€ngth: )lni. Accesss To arterials andcial , iodustrial , Spa.cing 1-2 Ei. colleetora; land access to co@er -farns, bigh dlan3ity rcsidcntial . Collector - Class t ?rip Foeu3B lDtcrcity,/torashipr fotcrDeigbboEbood Speed 35-{5 ryharipLDgth: >2ri.lccca!: lo arterirls and collcctoat, locel ltrcett; hod .cceaa to co@ercial , lnductrlel , ediul - bigbdlensity rcrideDtlal , farngr (cophaalg oa Ebtlltyt'a. tcccas r.spaciog: l-2 d. Collector - Clals ll Irip Focus: IDternciEhborbood, IntraBclghborhoodSpeed: 30-40 4lhlripl€ngtbr <2ni.Acces3: lo artcrials aad collectora, local ctrectrr laad access to conoerclal , lDdultritl, ftran, rccldcn-tlal (eEphalls oD rcccs! vr. rcblllty). silaciDg: l-2 Di . @! lrip originr and Destinatloar (Irip Focu!) Spced aod !.ngth of flp Acccls Cootrol Spaciag Principal Arterial 6 the groposed ertcrlal,/collcctor roaaray ryltc! la Chaeka end ca3ter! Cervcr Couaty is ehoYa by the t P oo the ocrt page.tbis classiflcatloa aad derigaatioD lyste! ia rccoDrended by the B.sterD Carver Couaty Trantportatioa Stutly aad ir cndorred bythc City of chash.. It rt[ be lncorporatcd io Cbaskarg Cooprcbeae lve Plaa Epdatc . w. t?Attsrr Stlmc is currently coaducciDg a study to provide rcre irafk-.nd-ride lots for the express route, rnd to coordioate tbe develop- oent of ruch lots uith Dajor tran3portatioa plannlnE for tbe southuest area guch ag l.E. 212. Rerults of thlr stuay rill beavailable ia Sumer 1990. Preseatlyr three otber forns of traDrit ccrvicc are algo io usein Chaska: 1) xinncsota Riderharc rhlch provider car ana ean t ool Dtchiag rervicee to iodividualr aod GEIrloITars, 2 ) tttroxobility rbich provides apeclal tr.D3port.tioa for elderly aadl dlisableal perloDa, aDd 3) Carvcr CouDtti Tr.as[rortatloa Serviccsrhicb provides apecial gervlccr. lhe City of Chaaka encouragea tbe coatiouation and iuproveucntof regular fixedl route tranait aervice la Chasta. Ithc City ltror},iDg closely rith Sf,!$C to develop ner parl rDd rlde lots. , The lbtropol i tan council andl Regional traa3it Eoaril (RfB) defioe translt as all forag of rldliag together. Thc [etropolitan Council ?ransportatloa Po1icy Plan aakes a ltroog co@itncat to encouraging iacreased transit usage ia the trriD Citica arca, and the City of Chaska supports this coonitlelt. Regular route tranait service is oEerated in Chaakq by the Southuest lGtro transit Connis3ioa (SmlfC ) rtrlch algo seryes Chanhassen and Edeo Prairie. Southu€st lletrors expreas routeservice through Chaska, Chanhassen and Edea Pralrie bas increased ridership alnost threefold in recent yeara from 8000trips per nonth io 1986 to over 201000 ta 1990. hrt a trlp fro! Chaska to dorntosn !{inneapolis takeo 1l houre rtrich is too longfor attracting signiftcant riderahip. , 212 @ r ,' ceero t a a ttaaalta a @ a- !l EASTERN CARVER COUNTY RECOMMENDED BASE ROADWAY SYSTEM F!GUHE 2r-t_t-l a A aE l... LEGEM) : IIII PRrtrcnAL ARIERTAL rtr l/I\|oe ARTEHAL{L SS t !.rrtrrtt. filloR ARIEHAL€L SS I --co.LEcroR-cLASS I -coJEcroR€LASS I @] srATE rn.hr( Frwy. COL}TY SIATE AO HWY. CA,{TY HU'Y. @o .!ra,arata Ittta --@/'-t+ f..r.1...,. aa a.=t a :_ -t.- 't)i ,., =--r '- I t t- .r1.. r I't n I 8 lhc Citti cootlnuer lt! .upport for tbc Etro bbllltti progrra end 1111 rcrk rlth tbe RcAioaal frrnllt Board to help toplanniog ioproved treosportatioo gervlcce for the transit dcpeo-il,ent population cuch aa eldcrly and dicablcal. lhe currcat 20 year plao for Llgbt Rail traaalt (t8t) does aotinclude scrvice to Ch.sltai borevcr, the City uill rcrk rith thcCrryer County ReEioDaI nailroad luthority oo planaiog for l.n,fcervice to the City. Chaska rill cocouraEe the rcdlrectioa ofbus llaes to coDnect to I8,l liacg ta otbcr citics rrhenavailable. the City ls counitteA to creatiag and DaiDtainiDg an eDvirooDeatrhich eacourages travel denand ranagerent, ride shariag aodother tranait usec. \II . SEIIER ELEIIENS: EIER f Hetro CouDcil aadl City grotth forccast,g and rceulteot aeuaEeflous are shoea lo the tlbulatloa belor. ln line rith its Pree-Standlog Grorrth CcDter classification, theCity of Chaska -has its osn raste yater treatEent plant althouEhIt is ovaed and operated by the tGtropolitan Hasti ControlConnission (I{WCC). :Ihe existiog average dally serage flor atthe Chaska plant ls 1.5 nillioo gallons per dty (trcD). As docu-Ented earl ier , l€tro Couocil t s year 2000 forecasts ofpopulatioa, households and eryrloynent hrve already been reachedor erceeded in 1990. lhe treatreot plant has a total capaclty of 1.66 ltriD rtrich rculdnot be reached uDtil the year 2010 according to ]letro @uDcilforecasts. In fact, this capacity rill be ieachedl prlor to theyear 1995 according to City of Cbasl gror.th forecasts. 9 I'TETROPOLTTAtl @T'TCI L PROJECTIONST Year Bs t lDAted seuered Populat ion Es t lratedl Es tiEatedl Aver.ge I Seuage ?loeIEoDes of hDI oyeeg (}GD) 1990 2000 2010 l0 r 2oo 12,000 1{,000 a, 000 4,800 5r 700 5r 500 6, 500 8, 000 TreatDent and.Taken fron l,letropolitan @uaci1 t s 1988 ltasteuaterEandling Policy Plan. Year 1990 1995 2000 2010 l. 50 1.85 2.28 2. 91 CITY PROJECTION srr EEt lDAted Seuered Popula t ion 11,800 13,235 1l ,670 17 ,150 Es t iEated Average Seuage Flor (T|GD) rr Based oa _t!e Cityra- 1990 cgtiuated pogulation and ulroD actualflovs recorded at chaskata treatrent rac-itlty. hrture estlDatcsarc baseA upon the City.s grorth proJectioas. Obviously, it la inperativc that tinely declslonc bc uaderegarding the expansion of the treatuent plant or proviaion of aninterceptor aerer oonnectioa to tbe Blue rrke negi6nal. rreateent?acility. 1.07 - 1.12 1.28 - 1.33 1.53 - 1.60