The URL can be used to link to this page

06-5-96 Agenda and Packet FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY,JUNE 5, 1996, 7:00 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL,690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER OLD BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Wetland Alteration permit for a proposed project to fill a 0.037 acre Type 1/2 ag/urban wetlands and mitigate by creating 0.07 acre of Type 1/2 wetland. This work would be done as part of the proposed Knob Hill development along Yosemite, across from Creek Run Trail, Metro Area Properties, Inc. 2. Conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a medium density residential development on 7.03 acres located south of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD-R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 1 outlot, and associated right-of-way, site plan approval for 25 townhome units and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain,Townhomes at Creekside,Heritage Development. 3. Land use plan amendment for the northerly 22.6+ acres from office/industrial to residential medium density, conceptual and preliminary PUD approval for a mixed townhome and office-industrial development on 45.21 acres located at the northwest corner of Lyman and Galpin Blvd., rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development, site plan approval for 146 townhome units, a wetland alteration permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site,and preliminary plat approval creating 24 lots and associated right-of-way, Town& Country Homes First Addition,Town and Country Homes. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 4. Villages on the Ponds. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m.as outlined in official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If,however,this does not appear to be possible,the Chair person will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. ! , CITY OF t, ,,, v „ ,i1P-4„..i _.„-,-.- CHANIIASSEN ,,,, ,. .. ,' .46---: 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Phillip Elkin, Water Resource Coordinator DATE: May 24, 1996 SUBJ: Knob Hill Development Wetland Alteration Permit 96-3 BACKGROUND The subject wetland is located along Yosemite across from Creek Run Trail at the proposed Knob Hill single family residential development(see Figure 1). The wetland is required to be replaced on-site at a two to one ratio in accordance to the Wetland Conservation Act and the City's surface water management plan. This development has previously been approved by the Planning Commission in February 1996, but upon review for final plat approval,city staff recommended changes to the location of the storm water pond. The proposed pond was in Yosemite right-of-way and could present problems if street improvements were ever made. Moving the pond out of the right-of-way would require one of these options: a)losing a buildable lot to locate the storm pond; b)extending the pond directly behind Lots 5 and 6;or c)relocate the pond in the wetland. cam_ Option A is not economically feasible for the developer, but will be the only option if the Wetland Alteration Permit is not approved. Option B would not impact the wetland but would create several safety and maintenance concerns and is not favored by city staff. The developer initially presented Option C to the city, asking for an exemption under the 1996 revisions to the Wetland Conservation Act. City staff rejected this proposal because the city has not yet adapted the State's revisions in the city Ordinances and the interim rules of the revisions require the developer to withdraw the application for development and resubmit with the changes. City staff agreed to allow the final plat go to City Council provided that the developer apply for a Wetland Alteration Permit and work with staff on a plan that both the city and developer could agree on. Approval of this Wetland Alteration Permit is required for final plat approval. Knob Hill May 24, 1996 Page 2 WETLAND IMPACTS The wetland on this property has been identified as an Ag/urban type 1/2, seasonally flooded wetland. Figure 2 shows the impact area and replacement plan of the wetland. The plan shows that 1600 square feet of the existing wetland would be filled and that the mitigation would occur along the existing edges of the wetland. On April 12, 1996,the Governor of Minnesota signed into law amendments to the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. The new rules will be in effect for the next 60 days along with the existing laws. In a memo from the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources, we have received the following interpretation for this interim period: "Projects approved before April 12th can be completed as approved or if there is an advantage for the landowner to follow the new law they can choose to cancel previously obtained approvals and request new approvals based on the amended law if the project has not been completed." The new law increases the de minimis exemption(the amount of impact not regulated) from 400 square feet to 2,000 square feet. It is under these conditions that the developer has proposed to increase wetland impacts on the final plat. However,the applicant was not willing to withdraw his previously approved project. The City of Chanhassen ordinances are written to comply with the 1991 version of the Wetland Conservation Act. Because the City of Chanhassen has not adapted these changes to its ordinances and because the applicant is unwilling to cancel previously approved plans, city staff has worked with the developer and recommended final plat approval to the City Council providing that the applicant obtain a Wetland Alteration Permit(WAP). City Council approved the final plat on May 20, 1996 conditional to a wetland alteration permit,as recommended. The Wetland Alteration Permit will provide mitigation at a 2:1 ratio and shall also provide a buffer strip of 0 to 20 feet wide with an average width of 10 feet around this wetland. ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed this plan and has found that it meets the requirements of both the City's Surface Water Management Plan and the Wetland Conservation Act. The replacement of wetland loss will be provided at a ratio of 2:1. The wetland impacts will be necessary to construct a storm water treatment pond. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit 96-3 for the proposed Knob Hill development subject to the following conditions: Knob Hill May 24, 1996 Page 3 1. Wetland Conservation Act and the City of Chanhassen Surface Water Management Plan requirements. 2. General Permit 17 under the Army Corps of Engineers is applicable and should be completed by the applicant. 3. The Applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the existing wetlands." ATTACHMENT 1. Reduced plan. Fiuet t g _____,______________________________ --: ) E , , 8 U ' � ,,,14(: o 0 0 1' l I 'LOCATION N Q! CO • • ;;1,e i • I I LILAC LANE I ( I ( `./ Ux ,�■■ I!r,'�!1. .II .M '' ` CHR/ - I 1217111 "I.5; gi n■ VW MI. l4 ilTio'ltit at 7 4_41 I i ir eni1152:1Tele Mir apilli, LAKE ■ t, AN-tom- ■= y i ■� • :. •-��: CIRCLE •ON,'„' t ` !jI" 4i1aiit111111 ii ® t �� ,-' ... -•-r. .. � �� - pill Ire � e] a Adp a ma ;?.. # ip oaritau titlo in '1r 111111.)-.01,4111,41 p 71 te?.;��4, , PARK 4, t& L* p1N •1 * . `:4 44 1 � ,It-I gilirrell **411 :. -. 6.74,c.H ,, ■ E ' JVilCIRCLEDO1� i ulle .1.0A414 ' � ■ UI/O 11 ri ar� � ■Kra . M N �H* m ■ wAs �• e� e .: ). !.. rk LAY LUCY � NA _� . ► ll T...A r„„,,,,...„, Mitti;se.,.?.....A alit 4177.17stint -__ 741LATE Mr Pa r F: ;r•,,.,t- ammo o t o tli-1 J 0 ■b 1�IL RrlAa Sr • 1110 0 � .5 / , i t:7-121(1-.- ef ,ssl._43 - ::::-- --- `.v�ijl�\'''''Y,. 1% I F \\TWIT .ii' \\ \ \ '0 �`` i ..4 \ A - . Nir‘ . • ', 1 \ ji ‘1,41....4 .•----, - o3 i i7' OJ�t `I 1 l \ r. 1 I 1 ` `� ' - N N •� 1 1 + , 1 �` S. �� Hwy ••••.v.;,..: tt.�/ I.1J'�- 1 1 1 �, -�^ 1 ri 444 !��■ } 1 000 �j \ A ) ... ,..N .... i ,, to , , 4i + •..e. 4+ ,, .ui p p Is , , , „, i , i, -. ---;4--= ----=:--, ' 'kat'.1,1 i 4)1 *ftk. 46% i __ , , ,, ,_ , ,„ d ,1., th. H , . /—.... \I:2' ....r• R/, ' ....5) - , .....A,40i _/40-- " \-, \ Y Ilk v Q N i L., „,..-• kNe , • , 117,111‘h,. l M \\T\ - i AI at . o.,^ �- �� /til , 4 t_• 'j � \�,co^ O^ry� lie, _ `"17 ,��• ° 1 .L..4-';;<�'. \ t ‘ '-� ,.a wry, _ - �! "� h _i ,.a' O /..-__ / illkl4:, • •••\- ! 1 • . .1 `moi , _A--e-,---e,4b -, iir ..4r 61_ ••11414,, , , A,,, ._ i\q\ r a i/ - .: . •1 A ipPori,s. fi•?w-rr ` = O � ro ,'� 0 �; ` a - t+ `, oY - �e0Nrff � Ior�riyamt .titi) ) j ,b � 9 . il N/ `, y a ; iii AillkN\ 1" ••••--. .7:— -.. -Er- pri------......,:. 11:g ( 6. o i • \ '� \ Via, ' 40 r, „s4, %xi to. iimmim. ,.-4•al ---/-1 l• . . : : . : . :\\.\ ' )0ti. 2ja:1 P. 67\821- dirt IA> f'4.111riiiriltaro I - ....... o i , % • ig,...if-qi ..i viefilionar?, i ff 7.7 1 • • ... . • . • i 1 kg • 4r • �•. 3 Cu.:r - >i Iii i•9 ii +riffia,,,e_tetiF ,,i �$ r )� _ t•'_ =1 `rS ]/- :. .ritiT ,Alnip_1; •:)1.. . 7; • . 1 IJ i r % ,--- -- ��C �I ��d �.,� �� \ .I,, �r� r 0� '� � �Z• S / j 11."L----.111111111P i3)*. . g . . .) {�)4' `1 ��,` CQS•oQ _ � - - ••4•.••'�•:,- '�'me $001 1!I R. . .• • , ,. -__- __ -- a,=`�! --� ••• •� •��'j �. to f + (� } /� -\� - � _-�� ` - f��4 *__ jl_ �.)-f 111�t�,) !FIs. `��7`\� — ��=1�`'-�� ----=.71:-'-'.`"-- -. "_,-`ate- - :_ -- �_ � { + `� i i' `% ,/ :. �� >\.,.•\`--� - ,51;J� �� , \ 'tom- 2 T;-,r• te __ _.mss- , . �N1 ,33 _ _ ,�-! _ CITY 0 F PC DATE: 6/5/96 CHANHASSEN CC DATE: 6/24/96 CASE #: PUD 96-3, SP 96-6, CUP 96-1 By: Generous:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres,rezoning of property from A2,Agricultural Estate to PUD-R,preliminary plat of 26 lots, 1 outlot,and associated right-of-way, site plan Z approval for 25 townhome units,and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling Qwithin the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside. 0 --� LOCATION: South of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension LL n.. APPLICANT: Heritage Development of Minnesota Q 450 East County Road D St. Paul, MN 55117 (612)481-0017 PRESENT ZONING: A2,Agricultural Estate ACREAGE: gross: 28.97 net(less ROW and Outlot A): 5.79 DENSITY: 4.32 units/acre (gross/net) ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- A2, Coulter Blvd. S- RSF, Creekside Addition Q E- A2, Bluff Creek, east branch W- RR/A2,Timberwood Estates WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site 111 PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site is primarily an open field that slopes from an elevation of 942 it I--- the north to a low of 912 in the south. Steeper slopes exist adjacent to the east branch of bluff creek. Existing wooded areas are located adjacent to the east branch of bluff creek. A storm water basin, developed as part of the Creekside Addition, is located in the southern portion of the site. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential -Medium Density (Net Density Range 4.0 - 8.0 Units/Ac.) A lir i ' 44 cloti, !��_:� ��!�t! 71P. =.�f,i q Lake ; ' •*,, .Eck.:;r/R•■•1 I Ann 7 r.cc�. Iiili=1:6 Mil 3 1® • 1111/4• EMI I '* , ip., A „ .... ilk� 111111I . �. ca � r1 —v Om plINIFI„- ; ,I IV ameolltr le‘ t'.3... , . � 4.)",1111111111..- _ .• .AA ! l.: ,� � Aei l \.0a' ' L`k R ■n�I�oyj�:� ice With di lotir:114■11ii t• MI skimp Oki � 1'' } .itP I!!eilno•; .. � � ♦ �;.4St arD i�Pain/ Im eat0' -Pr ;. I • ♦ 1100 Q‘ ei ■ � rnv, t�S�� G ` 0__ : , QWW , 17 'ti k a'P .V `Lyman Bt�tsna�b • �►U� w �r„ . g • imp,. liml 1'4 ` !”lC;� E .4 V V.:.\ i !.or.:?t�9` I43441.11.:th8700 *4102 e 8800 ta+i'arlrreie eo oeo oeaoeo o el el n o n no VI VI 8900 �iwill t 1 1� ,�� yman Bhrd(GR. 8) 9100 9200 , :ITY OF 9300 fP. 9400 –...-.a-... �........�� .,....�,>..-�� - \ `� 9500 �� A•i, NHAS SE N .i 9600UV 3 < g -a.i . . -:% MAP hill 9700 V /--� i :I._ ,SE 'Mk's/ • j r011(Huy 141 -4�► 9800 _ / 1 ,,, 9900 i /% • I• , 9 10000 `- i_•---'' ISI l 4 t -n lobo / 'a 10200 —,.».... ,— ...e....w—, 1 1 i i I omit � ♦ 10300 PROPOSED R/W Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a medium density residential development on 7.03 acres located south of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension,rezoning of property from A2,Agricultural Estate to PUD-R,preliminary plat of 26 lots, 1 outlot,and associated right-of-way, site plan approval for 25 townhome units,and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain,Townhomes at Creekside,Heritage Development. The site is bounded on the east and south sides by bluff creek which constrains the potential development of the property. In this area,a 100 foot building setback of which the first 50 feet is a buffer area,has been used adjacent to bluff creek. A 50 foot building setback is required from Coulter Drive. These setbacks limited the number of units that can be incorporated in the development. The proposed development consists of 25 townhouse units. This units appear very attractive. Building material appears to be vinyl siding. However, no material schedules have been provided for review. Staff is recommending that the concept and preliminary PUD be tabled to permit the applicant to revise the plans and address concerns outlined in the report. Site Characteristics REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately seven acres from A2 to PUD-R, Planned Unit Development- Residential for a 25 unit, medium density townhome development. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility,the City has the expectation that Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 3 the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. FINDINGS It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria: 1. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. Finding. While the development does preserve the area of the east branch of bluff creek through the provision of a 100 foot building setback, the development, as proposed, does not result in significantly higher quality or more sensitive development than could be done under R8, Mixed Medium Density Residential District, zoning regulations. Addition protection of environmental features could have been achieved through the mixing of unit types, including the use of wider units that are not as long, or through stacked units. Additional design review should be done on the eastern side of the development. A truly environmentally sensitive design would not require the filling of floodplain to locate dwelling units. 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Finding. The proposed development,while efficiently using the land through the clustering of units, does not effectively utilize the site for development. Additional environmental features could have been enhanced through the mixing of unit types, including the use of wider units that are not as long. Additional design review should be done on the eastern side of the development. 3. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. The proposed development of medium density residential is an effective transition from the single-family residential to the south and southwest and the office/industrial to the north and east. 4. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 4 Finding. The proposed development is consistent with Medium Density Residential Land use. 5. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The proposed development does preserve a 100 foot wide corridor adjacent to bluff creek and additional open area is created in the area of the storm water pond. 6. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Finding. Housing in the development will be at market rate. 7. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. Energy conservation would be achieved due to the relaxation of city standards for lot layout and street standards. 8. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Finding. The development will provide all appropriate traffic control devices. Additionally, pedestrian facilities are being required on both sides of Stone Creek Drive. Summary of Rezoning to PUD Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility,but allows the city to request additional improvements and the site's unique features can be better protected. The flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for the flexibility, the city is receiving: Development that is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands,trees, and topographical features) More efficient use of land Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 5 GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed development consists of 25 townhouse units. This units appear very attractive and provide varied building elevations. Building material appears to be vinyl siding. However, no material schedules have been provided for review. SUBDIVISION REVIEW WETLANDS This development is proposing to impact 11,900 square feet of the Bluff Creek as part of the Stone Creek Drive extension. Since this project will be extending City utilities to areas along Coulter Boulevard,the City of Chanhassen has assumed responsibility of applying for the necessary permits and creating mitigation areas as required by the Wetland Conservation Act. These permits will be obtained as part of the City's Coulter Boulevard public improvement project(No. 93-26B). The applicant is, however,responsible for obtaining a wetland delineation report for the site. The applicant will also be responsible to notify the Army Corps of Engineers, DNR,Bluff Creek Watershed District and any other regulatory agencies who have jurisdiction on Bluff Creek about any proposed changes in the floodplain and or discharges into the creek. Bluff Creek-An east and west branch of Bluff Creek comes together at the southeast part of this proposed development and Bluff Creek continues to run north to south through the site. The creek discharges into the Lower Minnesota River approximately three and a half miles south of the site. The east branch and the main channel of Bluff Creek is a DNR protected water. The City is committed to the protection and restoration of the Bluff Creek corridor and is initiating a comprehensive watershed plan to protect the creek and the corridor associated with it. The City's shoreland ordinance requires that the lowest floor of a structure be placed at least two feet above the highest flood of record,the ordinary high water level,or the level of a technical evaluation conducted to determine the effects of flood stages of the proposed construction. If there is more than one approach used,the highest flood protection elevation determined shall be used for placing structures and other facilities. The watershed district,the City,and the applicant will have to meet to evaluate the methodologies used to determine flood elevations in order to establish a flood elevation for the creek based upon the best available information. Floodplain-The current grading plan shows building pads in the existing floodplain delineation. The grading plan also suggests that the flood plain will change with the Stone Creek Drive extension and construction of the building pads on the south end of the project. If the Bluff Creek flood plain is altered this will require approval from the Bluff Creek Watershed District. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 6 Any changes in the floodplain will also require the applicant to notify the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA). The Applicant will be responsible for providing FEMA the necessary documentation to have Federal floodplain maps changed to reflect developed conditions. Buffers and Setbacks-The City Wetland Ordinance requires buffer strips for the ag/urban wetlands located on the property. The buffer strip width required for natural wetlands is 10 to 30 feet with a minimum average width of 20 feet. The buffer strip width required for an ag/urban wetland is 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet. The principal structure setback for these wetlands is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant$20 per sign. Staff recommends that heavy-duty Type III erosion control fencing be installed and maintained along Bluff Creek/wetlands adjacent to where ponding areas are proposed. The erosion control fences shall be maintained until the entire site is fully revegetated and removal is authorized by the City. Staff also recommends that a drainage and utility easement be dedicated over the creek with a minimum width of 30 feet on each side centered along the creek. Bluff Creek is planned as a natural resource corridor from the headwaters to its discharge point at the Minnesota River. Staff has reviewed the upper part of Bluff Creek with the Design Center at the University of Minnesota and recommends a 100-foot buffer setback to maintain a natural resource corridor as well as a recreational and educational trail corridor. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP). The SWMP serves as a tool to protect,preserve,and enhance the City's water resources. The plan identifies the stormwater quantity and quality improvements from a regional perspective necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general,the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on projected future land use,and therefore,different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to deter- mine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The City requires storm water quantity calculations for pre and post developed conditions and water quality calculations from the applicant prior to final plat. After review of the calculations,the City Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 7 will make recommendations for approval of the stormwater plan and calculate SWMP fees in accordance with the SWMP. Water Ouality The SWMP has established an connection charge for water quality systems. The cash dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. The water quality charge has been calculated at$1,530/acre for a townhome with 3 to 8 units per acre. This development proposes a net density of 7.03 acres. This equates to a fee of$10,756 for water quantity. It appears the proposed storm water pond has been sized to accommodate runoff from this site;therefore,the storm water quality fee will be waived. Water Quantity The SWMP has established an connection charge for different land uses based on an average, city- wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes all proposed SWMP trunk systems, culverts, and open channels and stormwater ponding areas for temporary runoff storage. Medium density developments will have a connection charge of$2,975 per developable acre. The proposed development of 7.03 acres would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of$20,914. Credits, if any, will be applied after review of the final construction plans GRADING The majority of the site is proposed to be graded for house pads,storm water pond and streets. According to the plans,no grading activities will occur within 50 feet of the creek. A storm water pond was already created on the south side of the site in conjunction with the Creekside residential subdivision. The plans propose on expanding the pond to meet water quality requirements for the area. Upon a field visit to the site, it appears the storm water pond is actually closer to Bluff Creek than what is shown on the proposed plans. This may allow for additional space to shift the units southerly to allow for parking and/or realignment of Street A and soften the side slopes in the rear of the units to the pond. The applicant should field-verify the exact location of the existing pond and revise the plans accordingly. The field visit also raised concerns about the location of the wetland delineation. A large wetland complex exists directly west of this site. The plans propose on filling only a small portion at the creek crossing; however,the proposed street section does not provide the necessary boulevards adjacent the curbs and sidewalk. This will extend the fill limits further out into the wetlands. One alternative to resolve this issue would be to adjust the street alignment of Stone Creek Drive further Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 8 east to minimize the filling of the wetlands. Another alternative would be to adjust street grades so as to limit the amount of fill to be placed. The street realignment will have a direct effect on the plat layout. The plans proposed walkout-type units on Lots 13 through 25,Block 1. The distance from the walkouts to the pond is fairly tight combined with a 3:1 side slope raises some safety concerns. The pond may be able to be shifted southerly to resolve this issue depending on field verification. Berms are proposed adjacent to Coulter Boulevard. The proposed street grade along Coulter Boulevard will be approximately 5 to 12 feet higher than the first floor of the units on Lots 1 through 12, Block 1. The berms range in height from 8 to 10 feet high along Coulter Boulevard. Additional berming should be considered to extend through Lot 26 between Lots 10 and 11 to assist in buffering the units from future Coulter Boulevard. DRAINAGE A small storm drainage pond was created on this site in conjunction with the applicant's previous phase of development(Creekside Addition). The pond will need to be increased to accommodate storm water runoff from this development. The total drainage area contributing to the pond is approximately 11 acres. Storm sewers will convey runoff to the storm pond for pretreatment prior to discharging into wetlands. The storm sewer plan proposes two storm sewer outlets to discharge into the pond. One discharge point is from Stone Creek Drive(low point)and the other is between Lots 17 and 18, Block 1. These two pipe systems need to be combined into one location on Stone Creek Drive. In addition,the existing storm sewer in Stone Creek Drive will need to be extended to the same discharge point in Stone Creek Drive as well. To reduce the amount of storm sewer within the development, street grades on Street A could be adjusted to drain the street back to Stone Creek Drive or a storm sewer system extended along Street A to convey storm water runoff back to Stone Creek Drive. This should be further evaluated by the developer's engineer. The storm water quality pond shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Walker Pondnet model. Detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events along with ponding calculations shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. Individual storm sewer calculations between catch basin segments will also be required. The storm water pond will need to be designed and constructed with side slopes of either 4:1 overall or a 10:1 bench for the first 10 feet at normal water level and 3:1 slopes thereafter for safety purposes. It appears the plans have incorporated the 3:1 side slopes with a 10:1 bench at the normal water level. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 9 UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site from Stone Creek Drive. The plans propose on extending utilities along Stone Creek Drive to Coulter Boulevard and also into the site. A sanitary sewer line will also be extended through the development to the east edge of the plat for future extension to the adjacent parcel. The sanitary sewer along Stone Creek Drive is one of the City's trunk sewer lines(18-inch RCP). The plans propose on extending an 8-inch line. This will need to be increased to an 18-inch size to continue the trunk sewer system up to where the line heads westerly from Stone Creek Drive. The applicant has petitioned the City to have these utilities extended in conjunction with the Coulter Boulevard improvements. However,depending on the applicant's schedule it may be more advantageous to have the sewer and water lines installed with this development. The applicant would be credited against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the oversizing cost difference between and 8-inch lateral sewer line and the 18-inch trunk sewer line. Detailed construction plans and specifications of the utility and street improvements will need to be submitted in conjunction with the final plat approval for staff review and preparation of the development contract. The construction plans and specifications shall be prepared in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. The developer will also need to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee installation of public improvements. STREETS The plan proposes extending Stone Creek Drive up to Coulter Boulevard. In addition, a private street(Street A)is proposed to service the development. Street A is proposed to be constructed with a 22-foot wide pavement section and a 35-foot radius on the cul-de-sac. Both of these street widths are insufficient. The City's Fire Marshal requires a minimum 45-foot radius in the cul-de- sac to accommodate fire apparatus. Another option would be to sprinkler the units. The private street ordinance requires a minimum 26-foot wide drive aisle. Staff also questions why the private street is even being proposed with this submittal. Based on City ordinance,three findings must be met to consider a private street. The subdivision fails to meet two out of three requirements. Therefore,a public street should be constructed. This will dramatically affect setbacks and unit location throughout the development. At this time staff believes this item should be tabled or denied with the applicant to come back and work with City staff in revising the plans to meet City ordinances. City ordinance also requires a 300-foot intersection spacing between streets. The plans propose intersection spacing of 250 feet. Adjusting the street southerly another 50 feet will also impact the lot configuration. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 10 Stone Creek Drive is proposed to be constructed in accordance with City standards: 60 foot right- of-way with a 35-foot wide street section consistent with the existing street. A 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk is also proposed along the east side of Stone Creek Drive. PRIVATE STREET FINDINGS In order to permit private streets,the city must find that the following conditions exist: (1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a public street. In making this determination, the city may consider the location of existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands. (2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area,improve access, or to provide a street system consistent with the comprehensive plan. (3) The use of the private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. Finding: The prevailing development pattern does not makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a public street. The proposed private street serving the development is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties. The use of the private street does not enhance protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. A public street could, in fact, be accommodated within the proposed development. MISCELLANEOUS A remnant parcel is being created west of Stone Creek Drive. This parcel should be platted as an outlot. Street names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Structure information. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) must be Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 11 shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Setbacks. Exterior projections (at overhangs) and exterior walls (at porches) are regulated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) With building sizes and property lines as shown, porches will not be permitted as shown and overhangs will not be permitted in some cases. The property lines should be at least three feet from any overhangs. These requirements are found in UBC Table 5-A, 503.2.1 and 705. Since these issues involve property lines, they need to be resolved before preliminary plat approval. Building construction. Unit sizes as shown will require parapets (or compliance with UBC 709.4.1 exceptions 4 or 5)at walls less than three feet from the property line. The structures will be required to be designed by an architect. PARKS AND RECREATION The Parks and Recreation Commission met on May 21, 1996 to review this proposal. The Commission tabled this item for further review. TREE PRESERVATION AND LANDSCAPING The existing conditions in the development show minimal tree coverage occurring only along the northern branch of Bluff Creek. According to grading plans none of these trees will be disturbed by construction. However, since they essentially occur within a wetland area,the canopy coverage is not included for the site. Therefore,the applicant is required to increase coverage in the site in order to meet ordinance. For a medium density development with 19%or less coverage, the base line canopy coverage is 20%or 2 acres. This equates to 81 trees. Applicant has provided 86 trees in the landscaping plan including overstory, understory, and evergreen. According to the plan,the applicant has concentrated the evergreens on the north and east sides of the development and deciduous and shrubs in the central and southern areas. As far as energy conservation plantings and overall layout is concerned, the landscaping is appropriate and will provide adequate buffering from neighbors, streets,and trails in time. FINDINGS Subdivision, Section 18-39 (fl 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the zoning ordinance. The applicant has proposed a PUD which offers enhanced flexibility to develop a Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 12 site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility,the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. However, the development, as proposed, does not result in significantly higher quality or more sensitive development than could be done under R8, Mixed Medium Density Residential District, zoning regulations. The R8 district regulations require a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet with minimum frontage of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 150 feet with a minimum front setback of 25 feet. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision of the property for the residential component is inconsistent with the existing land use designation of the property which is office/industrial. Subject to the city amending the comprehensive plan from office/industrial to residential - medium density, the proposal would be consistent with the land use designation. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: While some of the site contains poor soil conditions for development (Cordova silty clay loam and Glencoe silty clay loam) on proposed building sites or roadway, it is possible through soil corrections to make the site suitable for development. As a condition of development, the applicant will be required to incorporate best management practices for erosion control and demonstrate all lots would be buildable. 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets,erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision attempts to minimize impacts to the environment. While some tree removal and wetland alterations are oftentimes Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 13 necessary to develop sites through tree preservation measures and the use of smaller right-of-way widths and front yard setbacks.,the applicant has reduced potential environmental damage. 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. However, a public street could be used to access the individual units. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission table this item to permit the applicant to address the following concerns and issues: 1. Addition protection of environmental features could have been achieved through the mixing of unit types, including the use of wider units that are not as long,or through stacked units. 2. Addition design review should be done on the eastern side of the development. 3. A truly environmentally sensitive design would not require the filling of floodplain to locate dwelling units. 4. The Applicant will be responsible for applying for and obtaining changes to the FEMA floodplain maps to reflect developed conditions. 5. The applicant shall notify and obtain a permit from the Bluff Creek Watershed district as needed for the activities of Altering a flood plain and discharging storm pond runoff into the Bluff Creek. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 14 6. The applicant shall supply the City with a wetland delineation report. Preliminary plat approvals shall be contingent upon the wetland's delineation not exceeding the boundaries as shown on the plans dated May 20, 1996. 7. All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant$20 per sign. 8. The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements over all utilities, wetlands and ponding areas outside the right-of way. Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance of the storm sewer lines as well as ponding areas and wetlands. 9. The proposed storm water ponds shall be designed with side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. The storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading. 10. Water quality fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the water quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived. Water quantity fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. Storm sewer trunk fees will be evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWMP design requirements. The fees will be determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans. 11. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 12. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. 13. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for storm water quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed predeveloped and post- developed storm water calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a 10-year storm event between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 15 14. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 15. The applicant shall apply for an obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers and MnDOT and comply with their conditions of approval. 16. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi-lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building permit for the lot. 17. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within right-of-way areas. 18. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of two (2) feet above the high water level calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines. 19. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 20. Type III erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to wetlands. Additional erosion control measures such as rock construction entrances may be incorporated on the final construction plans. 21. A buffer strip of 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet shall be maintained adjacent to ag/urban wetlands. The principal structure setback shall be 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. 22. A drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along both tributaries of Bluff Creek. The minimum width shall be 60 feet centered along the creeks. 23. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the center of Bluff Creek and its tributaries. 24. The applicant shall field verify the existing storm pond and adjust the plans accordingly. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 16 25. The applicant shall realign or adjust Stone Creek Drive to minimize filling of the wetlands. Stone Creek Drive shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City street standards, i.e. standard boulevards. 26. Berming should be added on Lot 26 between Lots 10 and 11,Block 1. 27. The storm sewer system shall be redesigned to limit discharge points to one on Stone Creek Drive. 28. The sanitary sewer in Stone Creek Drive shall be an 18-inch RCP up to where the line heads west. The applicant shall be compensated by means of credits against their Coulter Boulevard assessments for the cost difference between an 8-inch lateral line and the 18-inch trunk sewer line. 29. Street A shall be constructed as a public street with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 31-foot wide street section. In addition,the intersection shall be spaced 300 feet south of proposed Coulter Boulevard. 30. The final plat shall dedicate a 60-foot wide right-of-way for Stone Creek Drive and 40 feet for Coulter Boulevard. 31. The remnant parcel west of Stone Creek Drive shall be platted as an outlot. 32. The developers and designers should meet with the building official as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements 33. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 34. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 35. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections.Adjust property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches. This should be done before preliminary plat approval. 36. If parking on the street is desirable, the roadway must be widened to 28 feet. However, this will allow parking only on one side of the street. If the street width is to remain at 26 feet,"No Parking Fire Lane" signs must be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #06-1991. Townhomes at Creekside June 5, 1996 Page 17 37. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes,NSP,NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safety operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Townhomes at Creekside PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary Plan 3. Preliminary Site Plan 4. Building Elevations and Floor Plans 5. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 6. Memo from Steve A. Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 5/30/96 FROM :SCHOELL a. MADSON 612 546 9065 1996,05-01 07:59 #684 P.04/07 REDEiVED CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE MAY 0 9 REC'D CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1^00 CITY OF UhhivnAs)0EN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Her+i fve ve.(cpi .1 f-' OWNER: s14/n,E _. ADDRESS: •fJ S'� _ L n -7JJ D. ADDRESS: Lf - c rDweact. /hr)• s,s--// 7- TELEPHONE (Day time) 14.;/- Op/ 7 TELEPHONE:_ Comprehensive Pion Amendment Temporary Sales Permit /Conditional Use Permit — Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit _. Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development- Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review _ X Notification Sign CP,— 'C'`DDr Ivo ."-- OILppSi - Site Plan Review' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" `-71'- (S50 CUP/SPRNACNARIWAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) Subdivision` TOTAL FEE $ ,1`��j A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. `Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W'X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. "* Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE-When multiple applications are processed. the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. FROM :SCHOELL & MPDSON 612 546 5065 1556,05-01 08:00 #684 P.05/07 PROJECT NAME .To«-..�n hue's -1) Greek J t Cie LOCATION /Pi v YF-h <-C 40 pie r rr'� d '[ u 424 . LEGAL DESCRIPTION ,S .F 7k c TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT YES NO PRESENT ZONING 7zsz REQUESTED ZONING PL) m PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION [ ,_ "— 1 r 411 REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION fGt -" ►?.( 7S• REASON FOR THIS REQUEST ODhmc,: .� OT d� PO co ht•qu. - •st�S • This application must be completed in full end be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by ail information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review_ Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are a••rov-• by the ay= '.,nt. h)‘' Signature o •plica - Date Signature of Fee Owner Date 21CApplication Received on //LFee Paid _ _ Receipt No. J 1 The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. if not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAN PREPARED FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA May, 1996 Submitted by: Heritage Development 450 East County Road D St. Paul, MN 55117 (612) 481-0017 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEVELOPMENT TEAM II. INTRODUCTION III, GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location B. Legal Description C, Zoning D. Project E. P.U.D. Criteria F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan/Density 2. Site Utility Availability and Service 3 Traffic Access and Circulation IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULING V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT AND FLOOD PLAIN MITIGATION VIII. TREE PRESERVATION IX. COVENANTS X. CONCLUSION 1. DEVELOPMENT TEAM The developer of this property is Heritage Development, a Minnesota business located in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Heritage tradition has been synonymous with quality neighborhoods throughout the Metropolitan Area for 10 years. The Development Team is coordinated by John Dobbs, Vice President of Heritage Development and Project Manager of this development. Consultants Planner: The site plan design by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Engineer: The plat and public facilities engineering by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Surveyor: Site surveying by Schoell & Madson, Inc. Wetland Biological Regulated wetland permits, delineation and monitoring by Analysis: Svoboda Ecological Resources of Shorewood, MN Landscape Architecture: Landscape design by Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. II. INTRODUCTION Purpose of Presentation The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council details of the proposed Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and to obtain the necessary concept plan, preliminary plan and preliminary plat approval with a wetland alteration permit. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 2 Ill. GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location This proposed Residential Planned Unit Development by Heritage is located in Chanhassen in Section 15, Township 116, Range 23. The 5.79-acre site will be served by Stone Creek Drive to the west, which will connect with Coulter Boulevard. Property to both the north and east remains undeveloped, and has been guided for office/industrial usage by the City's guide plan. To the west is Timberwood Estates single family development, and to the south is Creekside Addition single family residential. B. Legal Description Parts of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 west of the 5th Meridian. C. Zoning The project consists of land owned by Heritage Development. The property is currently zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate. The Developer proposes to rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development. D. The Project The project consists of 25 residential townhome units with 2 to 4 units per building that will be developed on lots ranging from 25.5' to 31.0' in width with lot depths of 92.5'. Each lot will accommodate a pre-designed townhome structure. Each home will have a two car garage with a driveway. Twelve of the units will be slab-on-grade with the remainder of the units having walkout basements where topography allows. This site plan was developed in an attempt to maximize the preservation of the natural topography along the creek. Access will be provided by a private cul-de-sac street. The project includes extension of Stone Creek Drive from the Creekside Addition across Bluff Creek and connecting to Coulter Boulevard. Proposed Building Setbacks: 25' Curb Setback Typical along Street "A" 30' Side yard Setback (minimum) along Stone Creek Drive 50' Side and Rear Yard Setback (minimum) along Coulter Boulevard Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 3 25' Minimum Combined Between Buildings 100' Setback from Center of Creek (minimum) Large wetlands, existing ponding, flood plain, slopes and the natural topography of Bluff Creek create a variety of constraints to development, requiring unique approaches and mitigative efforts aimed at providing quality homesites while maintaining the integrity of the site topography. Measures such as reduced setbacks, road design, and restrictive covenants all contribute to this and will be discussed later. Townhomes will be available in 2, 3, and 4-unit buildings. The range of topography and building mixture provides an opportunity to accommodate different home styles. Besides offering the advantage of a quality streetscape, the mixture of home plans and lot sizes can help the City achieve affordable housing goals while maintaining density which is in conformance with R-8 requirements. With the difficult constraints on the site, the mitigative measures that we propose, such as preservation of wetlands and Bluff Creek topography with additional ponding, creates a development that is aesthetically pleasing and environmentally responsible. These mitigation measures speak to the purpose of the P.U.D. and successfully create the ultimate condition that the P.U.D. was designed to affect. Development Summary Total Acreage 28.97 ac. R.O.W. Dedication (Stone Creek Drive) 0.97 ac. R_O.W. Dedication (Coulter Boulevard) 1.22 ac. Outlot A 20.99 ac. Net Developable - Residential (Block 1) 5.79 Number of Units 25 Net Density - Residential Area 4.32 units/acre (25 _ 5.79) E. P.U.D. Criteria The Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance (May, 1992) outlines three expected attributes of Planned Unit Developments. Those expected attributes and the Developer's findings are outlined below: Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 4 1 . Attribute: The City should be offered enhanced environmental sensitivity beyond normal ordinance requirements. Finding: The overall concept is oriented around the development of an individual neighborhood defined by the road system and the integrated open space system as well as preservation of existing site topography. This community was designed to accommodate moderately-priced townhomes while providing generous amounts of open space. The plentiful open space shown affords the visual amenity provided by ponds, wetlands, berms and creek and combines them with the landscape elements such as grass, flowers, shrubbery and trees. Over and above this, open space provides the means to preserve and enhance existing natural amenities, thus preserving wildlife habitat and groups of existing mature trees. Open space can beneficially influence the micro climate by improving heat radiation and by providing channels for air drainage and favorable air flows. The system operates as more than just open space; it provides a readily accessible place for informal recreation. The Developer has used this process that embraces the delicate balancing act of locating roads and home sites where it has the least effect on the wetland and other topography to create a development that is innovative and harmoniously sensitive to the environment. 2. Attribute: The City should be offered sensitive development in transitional areas between different land uses. Lot sizes should be mixed to reflect the sites' environmental limitations and opportunities and to offer a range of housing pricing options Finding: The proposed plan offers a development which provides sensible transition between land uses. Properties to the south and west contain R-1 single family residential developments, while the properties to the north and east contain industrial/warehouse use facilities or are guided for future office industrial development. This project, utilizing medium density residential concepts, provides transitional land usage between these uniquely different parcels. 3. Attribute: Quality of development in: landscaping, construction quality, provision of public/private open and recreational space. a. Landscaping - By design, the landscape amenities identify the point of arrival to the individual neighborhood. The entrance features will include extensive landscaping and an entry Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 5 monument. The cul-de-sac allows development of rolling hills and creates a smaller, more private neighborhood. All areas of landscaping will be maintained by a homeowner's association as well as covenants on the land that must be adhered to by owners. b. Construction Quality - Heritage Development invests a great deal of time and money periodically upgrading its entire home product line keeping current with design trends that are the most in demand and efficient. The latest innovative construction techniques are implemented upon their introduction to the building industry. Heritage has been developing residential developments and building quality homes for 10 years. c. Public and Private Open Space - The amount of open space together with the preservation of the creek and the existing ponding within the development are a direct result of the flexibility allowed under a P.U.D. d. Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes and other minimum requirements and performance standards associated with traditional zoning, Planned Unit Developments can maximize the development potential of the developable land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan/Density The property is currently guided for Medium Density Residential by the City's Land Use Guide Plan. The Heritage property development plan proposes 25 residential townhome units. 2. Site Utility Availability and Service The site is within the MUSA. Sanitary sewer and watermain were stubbed into the property during utility extension to serve Creekside Addition. 12" PVC sanitary runs south on Stone Creek Drive and Sanitary sewer and watermain would be extended north to serve this site as well as sites to the north, west and east. The storm drainage system on the site consists of storm sewers in streets which will discharge into an existing storm water treatment pond. This pond outlets into Bluff Creek. In general, the site drainage pattern is from the north portion of the site to the large pond and creek Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 6 in the south and east portion. The drainage facilities will be constructed in connection with the other site improvements. It is the intent of the Developer to maintain private streets. However, sewer and water utilities will be publicly maintained and will be covered by perpetual utility and drainage easements. 3. Traffic and Access Circulation The road system proposed would be privately owned and maintained, and has been developed to best facilitate the movement of traffic safely and conveniently, while at the same time providing a unique neighborhood community consistent with Chanhassen's high standards. Primary access to the development will be off of Stone Creek Drive, which will travel north to Coulter Boulevard. IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULE The Developer intends to develop the project in one phase and will build as the market demands dictate. Obviously, economic conditions may affect the actual time frame and special areas of development. The industrial lots will be sold for future development by others. V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY As the optionee, Heritage intends to develop the property once they receive every governmental approval necessary for development to occur. Heritage is a principal developer in the Twin Cities and has never failed to meet is obligations throughout its history. VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS The topography is generally rolling terrain with the highest elevation being 940 feet and the lowest elevation being 912 feet. There exists 0.71 acres of protected wetlands on the site with both the Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Chanhassen having jurisdiction. The 5.79-acre site is a mix of open space and, along the creek, wetlands with miscellaneous vegetation and some wooded areas. It is bounded to the south and west by Bluff Creek and to the east by the northeast branch of Bluff Creek. The Developer has taken these features into consideration in the planning of this neighborhood community. The area to be graded for development is an open field. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 7 In addition to these natural features, the development will include enhancement of existing wetlands, and along with additional landscape elements proposed by the Developer, we believe the result will be an overall development that is attractive and enduring. VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT The project contains a total of 0.71 acres of wetlands along the creek. Generally, the wetland basins on the project area have been heavily affected by past drainage activities. In some cases, drainage activity has been effective enough to eliminate wetland hydrology, and in others it has rendered historic wetlands so marginal that they serve few, if any, functional wetland values. After extensive analysis and a conscious effort to minimize the development impact on the site, approximately 0.32 acres of wetland were found unavoidable and are proposed to be filled. In general, the impacts are associated with the extension of Stone Creek Drive across Bluff Creek.. All of the impacts associated with the project will affect wetlands classified by the City as Ag Urban. Because of the extensive distribution of wetlands present, it is clear that some wetland impacts cannot be avoided. The sedimentation pond will intercept and collect storm water runoff prior to discharging it into the wetlands. The Developer's intent is that upon its completion the site should have equal or greater wetland acreage with overall higher quality than existed prior to development. This should provide an improved variety of plant types and a better habitat for more species of wildlife. Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses shall occur in the form of wetland creation projects adjacent to the wetland in the southwest corner of Outlot A lying approximately 900' south of the residential area and east of Bluff Creek. We have tentatively identified 0.86 acres of potential wetland creation. This site would provide 1:1 acre for acre replacement of wetlands to be affected by the project, including wetland previously disturbed by development, that wetland being altered for the extension of Stone Creek Drive and wetland alteration in Outlot A to accommodate future development. The acreage encompassed by this site is exclusive of storm water storage/treatment ponds to be constructed for this and future projects which are utilized to compensate for the other half of a 2.1 total mitigation package. The wetland would be contiguous to and become part of the existing basin. This basin would be excavated to a depth sufficient to create wet meadow or shallow marsh conditions. In general, the wetland type to be created will provide substantially higher wetland functional value than the degraded wetlands affected by the project. Bottom substrates for the created wetland will consist of organic material excavated from existing wetlands to be affected by the project. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 8 A conservation easement will be established around each wetland. The design of this easement shall show a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the easement shall be 10'. This easement, combined with a usable backyard of 40', should provide setbacks to the wetland of 50' minimum. The primary purpose of the conservation easement is to provide nesting habitat and wildlife cover peripheral to the wetland. In addition, the easement, combined with the proposed sedimentation ponds, will work together to improve and maintain the character of the wetlands. Many species of wildlife reside in wetlands and depend, in part, on the presence of a fringe of upland habitat. The design of this easement shall depict a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the conservation easement shall vary depending on the classification of the wetland. In addition to wetland impacts, the Developer anticipates that approximately 13.01 acre feet of flood plain will be unavoidably altered. Mitigation for this flood plain loss will occur in the same location as wetland alteration. VIII. TREE PRESERVATION The vast majority of the existing trees along the creek will be subject to minimal or no impact by any home or road construction. There will be little tree loss occasioned by this development, and it is the expressed intention of the Developer to keep tree loss to a minimum. IX. COVENANTS Protective covenants shall be established and recorded to protect the investment of each homeowner and the wetland conservation easements. In addition, maintenance and protective measures will be addressed by the homeowner's association. X. CONCLUSION Heritage Development feels that the proposed preliminary plan for development of this property enhances the quality goals and objectives of the City of Chanhassen. It is our pleasure to respectfully submit to you our proposal and request your acceptance. 0 Q _ \ / 1 O aZ; 0 Z --.1 O rIA 40 W 2_ l>N r�WN - zazZ1 W v=i W W ` z •J LI y N < - _�- m W d a 0< O O r i 3 O - - t f W s Ooso apf1m� Uo� ,n _` , Y,� Z o iii ci.U W W W uLi < < Z <0 0 Z - - w i i Z Z - : lJ f N O O U2 Vf3r W _ `= cc W ��)- a Y L_=I=-- u ill iI Z < J W J �. Y N Z< J '7;7.'1;7-"'::-.1 F Si z 3 =�a W U ,[]Cj �c_,- - ��Q t r VI O Z L W Z - -�n.,n o-n _W t = h 3 OOa _:.. -i�. = b tp3I z CNV 4H� / / / a vi — —\ ��` / / /ii a / \ J crag wil_- - -r N. \ / // _ \ ' —, \ -• / / // aj —/ 4I / / / \ T / - r i / 2. i / ilii ftri . - / is >° i O YI .a II OMR" z1 ' ( / W f. I imam& 4,,,,, rifill„-,'"'"'i'04„,ip 4 ,,„ , , Ir .!, 'N ' I a . /4 1 4, i 51 .....L•••• f , ;MinIll i IK ,, -,iV. _� r r v! _ a • — — —=.' / � _, / �Rg's fs i I- 1 1 .1!!i �-,-:,/ I G Q t- ....,. 3, I i ..,%.41-.0.' y„�` / J i it i .+ i * sail 1 .; :---=,' ‘ A nm�av^ S��S _.(., ��`\\� 4 ?ij� y- 34 Z =. - _ Z. sI - = -== ai '• S 9 i`=-zs -== i i r-. �•. is c• ,_.7. ! rr .A, ,.,:a.. . 7 ., ., 2, . J_i : '......,„';::::.:.:, .. I�_ 1 I imi -‘—d----- Vi..1 1. ...v uunit ® i• • i, ,II 000 / , ,..... ., ,. ,.___:: 1 . , ° ' ]00a ,, ,..7...a. •. •• :.,� IR,, ] , —I-, �aa -.9,.. z /,,, i, ,; !.. ,i,..,.:tte...A17,,, •,,,,.. 0 '' .4--= ill HU011 (._ I ' pl.':..., 1:04!/..,,I.4k, i if.Xi..II , . 11 Ill[I n /1/74:1 :1 ill i m6:: ) 1.711,"-- ,Eol ::k. .a.,,,, ,:;ii.,‘..), 7,,...;;11 , „,. ,,, ,' , ;1 X111100 Lc ;; ' •�5, ��- �r�-,� Li 1\nn Z ::11. 'i :17±7...: ' Ill EMiltjj W . 7: lil I ft_--moi a Ed, .. ,:...„....,...,,....„....1.., 0 /7..1r-7:7:( / iirt[T- cc u. •. .—--A• —1r �:. • ]iT1 �..r...t_,.1,-:-o;_ �: � ,-t: . limn �}�`1�L0 `�ar,ti ,:t•.,• IBJ' ///, — / \ J/ rP. � .:.h \ ! IJE. r. tri O _L. If #.: c Ej • e1 b ,: (` d • ,t t li !I : I -. , � � , W t ., • LI Iii ± III IL,..:1 N I " H inn err -,›--.N_.s....i.,. ,..a , : .y.s ff' 1.: .:. 3 r ,.r1'r~,v: 7111 - IV 04 z a W 0 0 a o o Mil a RI 41t t LI a m 1 _ r ;—J II`'� c 1 11 R1 �I� I . �i 1111 1 lif, -- lc —1 5 — Ut II 0 W Q Q ' 3 z — :J O — / � o N a P 1 2 z a n II cc b Y -� O b P. 2 I W N 7 W t }—''�� m Z Q W I1–_ - o i li1111-15F ..._ .. y :1101 Z I ` � z IEEEI\o, � / N._frrif I Tr,„„ a 2W • Z > a ° i o IIm . ■ a W C U co ....1-.A.-7...‘,...z-s--..:....,..:-'--,--4-=.......l..-----ttr,•1:-..1.U.":,:-..4.t.r.:;...- --....,...J... :-.1;-". a. .....,: ;,-.2..r.42-:..Z.:-......,.:A--.....--.-..:.%-.:,.*:?:k1:::Vit:e2::-Zs...:-..1-..1 -2-6-V.J.:-.S....4...U:4ZW:Y,..t...4n.2e.t1; . ...... ;- _ .. 'Imill 4.13 L I ., O 14 I— 2 - 2 .• 8 . g S is, \ , •---- .. ,-- =.\_21 1 11111111 o Si ._ _ 1 .2 i z 2 r i _ t, . II ,,,,,, . Cl.0 O CC . 41 IN," I— i Z asp al \ // ---- CO 0 0 b SZ i 1 .J . LL L- W 4 rial > ;-- 1§5 ...I Ce al m W ---IL. 1 la. I -,=.:.1-1 5 1 ti.0 1 I 1 i . \ .11N § c-, /1il 6 .,j .ri ...... ail CO NOM& 1 --„, I CC 9, 1 •7-, ,„ .. I . < ... _F- . _ Arm Tra I Aar ki.__iwiui MEETING `V Wednesday, JUNE 5, 1996 i . "'" Le CA 9 iviip ,, at 7:00 p.m. j �.c.... ` ��'� WIRIfirAiratW ,„-0,4 City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive G 86'�IP �i`ii beet.�q. .fir ,7-41,-wingr.,Iti 4 ii 101111111111t4= Project: ::Z : e elo er: H1 - ...„...„..„6-.L...."1.1,24.,, IiiP p wit,-,..40,00e` 0 ��os:Rig it-1.% c 11-'� �`t4 =iei .:►areru.��< <'.� V rs �s. v w • �s '- Location: So. of Coulter Blvd. and east of jf�p1� ,•; .W ►,. an : .pis tuar• ,7�'��,� �w s Raw vt a ol.3'g the Stone Creek Drive extension �'e� -!I rsr- •,s;,�'4 �; '. 7 Iratt-- AltA, illn .• :.= tz .`��:;�c Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is proposing conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a medium density residential development on 7.03 acres located south of Coulter Blvd. and east of the Stone Creek Drive extension, rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD-R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 1 outlot, and associated right-of-way, site plan approval for 25 townhome units and a conditional use permit for excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments:If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on May 23, 1996.. ,I 60:731" C \ 5 i cp Z±5 City of Chanhassen Hi-Way 5 Partnership James C. Avis do City Treasurer c/o Dennis Dirlam 8190 Galpin Lake Blvd. 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 15241 Creekside Ct. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Eden Prarie, MN 55344 Bluff Creek Partners Chan-Land Partners McGlynn Bakeries 123 N 3rd St. 200 Hwy 13 W. c/o Grand Met Tax Dept Minneapolis, MN 55401 Burnsville, MN 55337 200 S 6th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Shamrock Property Partners Mark J. Foster& Kaern S. Olsson Richard D. & Mary A. Frasch 7350 Commerce Ln. 8020 Acorn Ln. 8000 Acorn Ln. Fridley, MN 55432 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 James I. & Vicky L. Finley 8001 Acorn Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 CITY OF 0r,,,..„ 131% f‘' CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 .. _ __ (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official a i, .. DATE: May 30, 1996 SUBJECT: 96-3 PUD, 96-6 SPR, 96-1 REZ and 96-1 CUP (Townhomes at Creekside, Heritage Development) I was asked to review the proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, MAY 06, 1996, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. Analysis: Street names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names,public and private,must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Structure information. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R. SE, SEWO, TU, WO) must be shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Setbacks. Exterior projections (at overhangs) and exterior walls (at porches)are regulated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) With building sizes and property lines as shown, porches will not be permitted as shown and overhangs will not be permitted in some cases. The property lines should be at least three feet from any overhangs. These requirements are found in UBC Table 5-A, 503.2.1 and 705. Since these issues involve property lines,they need to be resolved before preliminary plat approval. Building construction. Unit sizes as shown will require parapets (or compliance with UBC 709.4.1 exceptions 4 or 5) at walls less than three feet from the property line. The structures will be required to be designed by an architect. Bob Generous May 30, 1996 Page 2 I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval. 1. Submit street names to the Public Slfety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 2. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 3. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches. This should be done before preliminary plat approval. enclosure: January 29, 1993 memorandum :%saferylsak4nemoslplanlcrksde I CITY 4F CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P:O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMO' • i UM TO: Inspections, Planning, & Engineering Staff FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official DATE: January 29, 1993 SUBJ: Dwelling Type Designation We have been requesting on site plan reviews that the developer designate the type of dwelling that is acceptable on each proposed lot in a new development. I thought perhaps it might be helpful to staff to explain and diagram these designations and the reasoning behind the requirements. FLO or RIA Designates Front Lookout or Rear Lookout This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to approximately 4' above the basement floor level. R Designates Rambler. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. This would include two story's and many 4 level dwellings SE Designates Split Entry. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. SEWO Designates Split Entry Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to lowest floor level. TU Designates Tuck Under. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the front of the dwelling. WO Designates Wa&Ont This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the rear of the dwelling. 1 TU SE SEWO WO FLO �RLO Inspections staff uses these designations when reviewing plans which are then passed to the engineering staff for further review. Approved grading plans are compared to proposed building plans to insure compliance to approved conditions. The same designation must be used on all documents in order to avoid confusion and incorrect plan reviews. tgot PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C I TY 0 F C DATE: 6/5/96 \\1 CHANHASSEN C DATE: 6/24/96 ' ASE #: 96-2 PUD, 96-5 SPR, 95-lb LUP, and 95-2b WAP Aretwor STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Mixed medium density residential and industrial office development on 45.21 acres, a land use plan amendment for the northerly 22.6 ± acres from office/industrial to residential medium density, conceptual and preliminary PUD approval for a mixed townhome and office-industrial development, rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development, site plan approval for 146 Z townhome units, a wetland alteration permit, and preliminary plat approval creating 24 lots and associated right-of-way,Town&Country Homes First Addition. U LOCATION: The northwest corner of Lyman and Galpin Blvd. a.. APPLICANT: Town and Country Homes 6800 France Avenue South, Suite 170 Edina, MN 55435 (612)925-3899 PRESENT ZONING: A2, Agricultural Estate District ACREAGE: gross: 45.21 acres net(less wetlands,3.7 ac., and ROW, 8.96 ac.): 32.55 acres DENSITY: 7.1 units/acre(gross), 8.17 units/acres (net) ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-PUD,Trotters Ridge, single-family homes S- A2, Lyman Boulevard and Holasek's nursery E-RSF, Galpin Blvd. and Stone Creek Add, single-family W-Industrial Park in Chaska 44k1 . WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. a PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The property has farming uses on the northern and eastern portions of the site; W mining and excavating operation on the western and southwest portions of the property; and landscaping f.-' operation is located on the central portion of the property. A house is located in the southeast corner of the property. Three large wetland areas are located in the east central, northwest, and southwest of the property. The site is significantly wooded in the north central area. The property has a high point of approximately 980 feet in the north central and low point of 940 feet in the southwest corner of the property. The property is bounded by Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial • \ CJ ��8° J OM n1111111/x vt %1 l�Illllllh 1.-- 1 j�,_ lite; L4 111, :. _ AA -, i - II -- - - ST \ HIGHWAY . _ br4111 `�`E \ �_ d':•- •' BOOL , o+ 1 \ V ��1. 1�� 4. iiiik 7..0, ► ,I —i. .:10 sr4c1Y (2.9 11!!!111.4 VP LW 10 _ _\\\'''..----'.-"::------\,--\ N-----------...— , � v Pqq^� 7- is, , �SUM jf/ y ':3� ` v ,.,,,,‘ .....411 i , ,____- ,...:;:::: .:: LOCATION : :v; ii. szt iiI Ij A ` 9900 I ,! /Mt 4 o I - �; H 90C� • (7) OmA •,N.:7:-. ,, LYM CITY OF 9100 tNHASSEN 9200 '• • -- — BASE MAP 9500 ) 1 / a1 Ks 9400 ¢1 - 9500 = i Y 9500- n r—_ ..4> 9800. t'' <'/ j c. J /: �fyQ % QO PO 9900 Q �: 10000 —7-- 1 1o100 0200 - - - SSEN ENGINEERING DEPT. ` ro-° 10300- . , b.. `• REVISED JAN, 1995 •,`'''':\\.,` ,_ ..r.• 10400— .j1 10500 Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant, Town& Country Homes, is requesting conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development, PUD, approval for a mixed office/industrial and townhome development on 45.21 acres of land. The applicant is requesting a land use plan amendment for the northerly 22.6+acres from office/industrial to residential-medium density,rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD,Planned Unit Development,site plan approval for 146 townhome units,a wetland alteration permit to fill and excavate and mitigate wetlands on site,and preliminary plat approval creating 24 lots and associated right-of-way. The proposed development is called Town&Country Homes First Addition. The office/industrial component of the development consists of two lots of 6.29 and 9.4 acres. Separate site plan approvals will be required for each of the two lots subject to the development parameters contained herein. Staff estimates the office/industrial development will be between 100,000 and 150,000 square feet which represents a F.A.R. of 0.14-0.22. The square footage could be increased if the development were to incorporate two or three story buildings. The proposed townhouse units are proposed as condominium type units in eleven 6-unit and ten 8- unit structures. The townhomes will be developed on lots ranging from 125 to 146 feet in width with lot depths of 72 feet. Each lot will accommodate 6 or 8-unit structures. Each home will have a minimum of a one car garage. The majority of units will be slab on grade with some lookout and walkout units depending on topography. The estimated price for units will range from$85,000 to $115,000 which would meet the criteria established by the Metropolitan Council for housing affordability. The net developable acreage for the residential portion of the development is approximately 17.8 acres. This acreage permits a total number of units of 142 to comply with the medium density land use being requested which permits a maximum net density of 8.0 units per acre. Staff is recommending that two units be removed from each of streets B and C in the area of the cul-de-sac to meet the density requirement. Staff is recommending that the land use plan amendment, the concept and preliminary PUD,the site plan, and the wetland alteration be approved with the modifications to the plan and the conditions of approval contained in this report. Development design standards are being established for the future development of the site as well as for the review of the current application for the residential component. BACKGROUND In the summer of 1995, Scherber Partnership Properties, requested a land use map amendment from Office/Industrial to Residential -Low Density, a rezoning to Single Family Residential, Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 3 RSF, and preliminary plat approval to permit 59 single-family lots. City staff recommended denial of the land use map amendment and consequently the rezoning and subdivision. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the development, and the City Council tabled the item, with the consent of the applicant,to permit staff and the applicant to work out a compromise for the development of the parcel. However, in February, 1996, the applicant formally withdrew the development application. As part of the discussion of the proposed single-family development, City Council directed that the following issues be looked at: • The possibility of buffering the existing single-family developments to the north and east of the site through the inclusion of higher density residential or a mixed use development with residential to the north and industrial to the south. • Tree preservation, wetland protection, and minimization of the site grading. • Tax and expenditure consequences of the change from office/industrial to residential as well as the overall balance and viability of the community. On February 13, 1987, the City Council approved CUP#87-1 for a landscape contractor's yard and a wholesale nursery and a variance to permit a contractor's yard within one mile of an existing contractor's yard(on the same property) subject to the following conditions: 1. The hours of operation shall be from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Saturday and work on Sundays or holidays is not permitted. 2. All truck traffic leaving the site must be southbound on County Road 117 and truck traffic entering the site must be northbound on County Road 117. 3. Outdoor lighting and speakers are not permitted. 4. Berming and landscaping shall be provided as shown on the site plan dated January 22, 1987. 5. Any expansion of the operation shall require a conditional use permit. On November 19, 1984,the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit(CUP), #84-13, to permit a contractor's yard for R& W Sanitation on the southeasterly 32 acres of the site. Such approval included the storage and repair of garbage trucks. The CUP was subject to the condition that "Any expansion of the operation such as construction of additional buildings or an Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 4 increase in the number of vehicles beyond what is represented in request#84-13 must be approved by a conditional use permit." The property was zoned R-1 A, Agricultural Residence District. On November 19, 1984,the City Council also approved CUP#84-14 for a contractor's yard for Mr. Volk to include the storage and repair of construction equipment for Volk Trucking and Excavating. The permit was issued subject to the following conditions: 1. All equipment must be stored within the confines of the yard area as identified on the submitted site plan and must be kept out of site(sic) from adjacent properties. 2. Any enlargement of the operation such as construction of additional buildings or an increase in the number of vehicles beyond what has been submitted in this application must be approved by a conditional use permit. 3. Unlicensed,junk vehicles must be placed in an enclosed building or removed from the premises. 4. Installation of evergreens along and on top of the berm on the south side of the yard. In April, 1982, the property owner, Volk, applied for a building permit to reconstruct a pole barn which had collapsed due to heavy snow. The building permit was denied because the storage and repair of excavating equipment in the pole barn was not a permitted use in the R-1A district at that time. Mr. Volk petitioned the Council on May 17, 1982 to issue the building permit. The City Council approved the issuance of the building permit subject to Mr. Volk applying for a rezoning request from R-1A to I-1. Mr. Volk made an application for the rezoning and a comprehensive land use plan amendment. On June 25, 1982,the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. However,the Planning Commission recommended that the applicant have the option of returning to the Planning Commission with a CUP request. The City Council considered the request on October 4, 1982. The Council tabled the item until staff completed a survey of all contractors' yards as well as other non-conforming uses in the city. The City Council amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow contractor's yards as CUPs in the R- 1 A zone on August 20, 1984. On November 12, 1980, a rezoning request from R-1A to I-1 on the parcel was considered by the Planning Commission. At that meeting,the request was revised to an ordinance amendment to permit contractors' businesses and storage yards as conditional uses in the R-1A district. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council subsequently denied the request on January 5, 1981. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 5 SITE CHARACTERISTICS The property has abandoned farming uses on the northern and eastern portions of the site; abandoned mining and excavating operation on the western and southwest portions of the property; and a landscaping operation is located on the central portion of the property. A house is located in the southeast corner of the property. Three large wetland areas are located in the east central, northwest, and southwest of the property. The site is significantly wooded in the north central area. The property has a high point of approximately 980 feet in the north central and low point of 940 feet in the southwest corner of the property. The property is bounded by Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. REZONING/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The applicant is requesting a comprehensive plan amendment for the northerly 22.6 acres of the property from Office/Industrial to Residential - Medium Density. This property was one of four areas that was designated for Office/Industrial use as part of the 1991 comprehensive plan update. At that time, there was a remaining supply of 95 acres of vacant industrial land in Chanhassen. For the continued well being of the community and in the interest of promoting a balance of land uses, Chanhassen established a plan that would accommodate a reasonable amount of industrial office development in the future. With that goal in mind, the city assessed where it would be reasonable to allow this development to occur. In undertaking the analysis, the location of existing industrial office development in Chaska was reviewed, existing and proposed roads and highways necessary to provide high levels of access were assessed, and the need to provide the buffering of existing residential neighborhoods were examined in detail. The result of the analysis was to add additional office/industrial land totaling 638 acres for a total industrial land use area of 1,099 acres representing 8.2 percent of the city's total land area of 13,327 acres. The proposed amendment would eliminate 22.6 acres of office/industrial land from the city. This represents approximately two percent of the office/industrial land in the city or 0.2 percent of the city's total land area. In 1992, the American Planning Association undertook a study of land use ratios in 66 municipalities. The summary of this survey was published in the American Planning Association,PAS Memo of August 1992. Industrial land use ratios for communities under 100,000 averaged seven percent with a range of 0 to 25 percent. Included in the study was a summary of a land use study by Eisner and Associates of land use ratios compiled between 1939 and 1985. The Eisner study showed a range of industrial land uses between 10 and 11 percent. It is illustrative to look specifically at two communities: Columbia, Maryland, a 1960s planned community, and Oak Creek, Wisconsin, an upper midwest community comparable in population to Chanhassen. Columbia's residential land use components is 43 percent of its land area. Its Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 6 commercial and industrial land uses represent 20 percent of the land area. It is assumed that the uses are evenly distributed between commercial and industrial. Oak Creek's land uses are distributed as follows: residential - 37 percent, commercial - 8 percent, and industrial - 12 percent. Chanhassen's land use ratios are as follows: residential -42.2 percent, commercial -2.1 percent, and industrial - 8.2 percent. As can be seen, Chanhassen's industrial and commercial components are smaller than either of these communities, while its residential component is proportionate to both of the communities. These ratios will also be considered when we examine future land use of properties currently outside of the Metropolitan Urban Services Area(MUSA). Staff believes that in this instance the proposed amendment is in the best interest of the community in terms of maintaining an appropriate balance of land uses, preserving an appropriate tax base mix,providing a range of employment opportunities, and providing for lifecycle and affordable housing opportunities. The applicant has proposed a development that is unique to the community and fills a niche in the housing needs for either current or future residents of the city. This subdivision attempts to maintain the natural features of the site, locating the residential development in a compact design in the more environmentally sensitive areas of the site and locating the office/industrial uses in the more open and currently impacted areas. The applicant has requested a Planned Unit Development locating multi-family that meets some of the affordable housing goals of the city. The applicant has proposed a development that includes both industrial and residential properties within the site,placing industrial lots on the southern portion of the site in areas that are less desirable for residential development adjacent to the expanding industrial property to the south and Lyman Boulevard and residential on the northern portion of the site adjacent to Trotters Ridge. This site was designated for office/industrial use partially because it was being used for non- residential and non-agricultural purposes and was adjacent to the industrial expansion coming from the south in Chaska. In addition,the site is adjacent to two collector roadways, providing high levels of access. The city's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance require extensive buffering between industrial uses and single-family residential. Financial Impact Staff has performed the tax revenue analysis of the proposed development by Town& County versus an entire industrial office development on the site. Since valuation of the property can only be estimated at this time, staff has provided a range for residential and industrial uses. For the Town& Country development, staff estimates residential property values at an average of $100,000 and office industrial square footages at 150,000,which represents a floor area ratio of 0.22. For an entire office/industrial development, staff estimates building square footages at 140,000 square and 338,000 square feet. These industrial square footages represent floor area ratios of 0.086 and 0.209, respectively. Based on gross acreage of the site (46.27 acres), these ratios are 0.069 and 0.168, respectively. As a comparison,the estimated floor area ratio for Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 7 Chanhassen Business Center is 0.149 (13.85 acres of building divided by 93.02 acres of land) for the gross site area. Town & Country Residential: Value: $100,000 One Percent of first$72,000 720 Two percent of balance 560 Subtotal $1,280 Tax Capacity 149 percent $1,907.2 Multiply by 142 units $270,822.40 City's share of taxes 20 percent $54,164.48 Office/Industrial: Building Square Footage 150,000 Valuation: $35 per square foot $5,250,000 Three percent of first$100,000 $3,000 4.6% of balance $236,900 Tax Capacity 137% $357,451 City's share of taxes 20 percent $71,490.20 City's share of taxes within TIF 50 percent $178,725.50 Total Tax Revenues: without TIF $125,654.68 with TIF $232,889.98 Office/Industrial Building Square Footage 140,000 338,000 Valuation: $35 per square foot $4,900,000 $11,830,000 Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 8 Three percent of first$100,000 3,000 3,000 4.6 percent of balance 220,800 539,580 Subtotal $223,800 $542,580 Tax Capacity 149 percent $33,462 $808,444.20 City's share of taxes 20 percent $66,692.40 $161,688.84 City's share of taxes within TIE 50 percent $166,731 $404,222.10 (In order to facilitate industrial development, the city may establish a TIF district. That is the reason for including the TIF tax share figure. These figures represent the impact of fiscal disparities on industrial office development because the city currently is a net beneficiary of fiscal disparities. It should also be pointed out that the majority of these tax dollars would be used to retire debt incurred within the district, rather than as an increase to the general fund. However,the use of a TIF district permits the city to perform infrastructure improvements, e.g., purchase of parks and the building of trails, roadways, stormwater facilities, or utility extensions, that would normally require the use of other funding sources.) Other potential revenues that are impacted are enterprise funds for water and sewer usage. Industrial developments are large users of these services and pay higher rates than residential developments. Nor does this analysis quantify the spillover benefits from industrial development. Nonresidential development, generally, brings in additional dollars in the community from employees and visitors. All industrial development creates an economic multiplier for the local economy which has the effect of magnifying the fiscal benefits of each dollar of wages that are put into the industry. Without industrial and commercial employment, local residential development would be unable to support the existing level of retail and service industries in the community, not to mention the additional commercial development that is being planned and development. At present, we are unable to determine the expenditure side of the fiscal impact equation in Chanhassen. However,based on a study in"Land Patterns," Winter 1996,residential development averaged$1.04 in expenditures for every $1.00 in revenues and commercial industrial developments averaged $0.39 for every $1.00 in revenue. This represents a net revenue of$41,442.45 for the Town& Country development and a net revenue of$40,682.36 to $98,630.20 for the office/industrial development only. Staff is recommending that the requested Land Use Map amendment be approved. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 9 REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 45 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate, to PUD, Planned Unit Development. There are two components to the PUD: industrial/office and medium density residential. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfer of density,construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. FINDINGS It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria: 1. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees,creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. Finding. The proposed development is preserving and enhancing the major wetlands on site. Significant areas of woodland are being preserved along Galpin Boulevard,to the west of the easterly wetland, and between the office/industrial and residential area in the center of the project. The development utilizes topographic changes by stepping buildings up the slopes. 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Finding. The proposed development effectively mixes residential and office/industrial land uses, incorporating topographic and vegetative areas to transition the uses. Large areas will remained undisturbed in their natural states. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 10 3. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. The proposed development incorporates topographic and vegetative areas to transition the uses. In addition,the low density residential development to the north transitions to medium density residential then office/industrial uses. The proposed development is sensitive in the treatment of the site,preserving large areas of undisturbed natural areas and minimizing the grading of the site by matching to a large extent the existing topography of the site. 4. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The office/industrial portion of the site is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The applicant is requesting a land use map amendment for the residential portion of the development. The proposed residential development complies with many elements of the comprehensive plan including community development, land use,housing, and transportation goals and policies. 5. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. While no public park space is being provided in the development, the applicant is creating large areas of open space on site as well as trail connections and sidewalks to the city's trail system along Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. 6. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Finding. The estimated price for units will range from$85,000 to $115,000 which would meet the criteria established by the Metropolitan Council for housing affordability. 7. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. The proposed development conserves energy through the mixture of land uses in a compact area. Site design preserves topography and existing woodlands to provide natural shading and wind blocks for winter. 8. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 11 Finding. The proposed development incorporates a commercial cross section for street A and a local cross section for streets B and C. Pedestrian trails and sidewalk will be provided in the development to separate motorized and non-motorized traffic. Appropriate traffic control signage shall be installed in the development. Summary of Rezoning to PUD Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility, but allows the city to request additional improvements. The site's unique features can be better protected through the use of narrower street right-of-way and reduced front yard setbacks. The flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for the flexibility,the city is receiving: Development that is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Preservation of desirable site characteristics(wetlands,trees, and topographical features) Sensitive development in transitional areas More efficient use of land GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The applicant, Town& Country Homes, is proposing a Planned Unit Development, PUD, for a mixed office/industrial and townhome development on 45.21 acres of land. The applicant is requesting a land use plan amendment for the northerly 22.6+acres from office/industrial to residential -medium density,rezoning from A2,Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development, site plan approval for 146 townhome units,a wetland alteration permit to fill and excavate and mitigate wetlands on site,and preliminary plat approval creating 24 lots and associated right-of-way. The proposed development is called Town&Country Homes First Addition. The office/industrial component of the development consists of two lots of 6.29 and 9.4 acres. Separate site plan approvals will be required for each of the two lots subject to the development parameters contained herein. The proposed townhouse units are proposed as condominium type units in eleven 6-unit and ten 8- unit structures. The majority of units being proposed are rambler type units. However,where existing site elevations permit, lookout and walkout type units will be included. End units in structures contain two-car garages with central units containing single-car garages. The end units of each structure are two story units with interior units being stacked, single-level units. Front Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 12 elevations consist of face brick on the lower levels with vinyl siding. The applicant has proposed using five different exterior color packages for the structures(attached)with an entire structure incorporating one package. Roof lines are varied and differentiated in orientation. Structures can be shifted horizontally along slopes with changes in finished floor elevations varied up to three feet within an individual structure. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RESIDENTIAL a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD medium density residential. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to 142 townhouse units and a private or public park area. c. Setbacks In the PUD standards,there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Building Galpin Blvd.: Buffer yard& Setback C, 50' Street A: Buffer yard& Setback B, 25' Street B: Buffer yard& Setback B, 20' Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 13 Street C: Buffer yard& Setback B, 20' Perimeter Lot Line(adjacent to industrial) C, 50' Perimeter Lot Line(adjacent to residential): B, 50' Buffer yard& setback No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 30%for medium density residential uses. The maximum building height shall be three(3) stories and forty (40) feet e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone,glass, stucco,vinyl siding,decorative block,or approved equivalent as determined by the city. 3. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 4. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building or with landscaping. 5. Variation in building facade shall be provided through architectural detailing including the use of half round and square window treatments, circular, half round, and square or rectangular attic vents, and the vertical breaking of structures. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. The buffer yard plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 14 2. All open spaces and non-impervious surfaces shall be landscaped, rockscaped, covered with plantings and/or lawn material, or left in natural condition. 3. Storage of material outdoors must be screened with wood or masonry fences and/or landscaping to 100 percent opacity from property outside the plat. g. Signage 1. One project identification sign shall be permitted for the development which shall not exceed twenty-four(24) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five (5) feet in height and shall be located on Galpin Boulevard. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. h. Lighting 1. Lighting should be consistent throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. The City requires the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps)with an ornamental, natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to light industrial,warehousing, and office as defined below. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition,the City Council shall make that interpretation. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 15 1. Light Industrial. The manufacturing,compounding,processing, assembling,packaging,or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure, with no outside storage. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise,vibration, smoke,dust or pollutants. 2. Warehousing. Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property entirely within an enclosed structure. 3. Office. Professional and business office, non-retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. c. Setbacks In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Building Parking 1 Galpin Blvd.: Buffer yard& Setback C, 50' 50' Lyman Blvd.: Buffer yard& Setback C, 50' 50' Street A: Buffer yard & Setback B, 30' 30' Interior Side Lot Line (adjacent to industrial): B, 30' 20 Buffer yard& setback Interior Side Lot Line (adjacent to residential): D, 50' 50' Buffer yard& setback No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height 1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. 2. More than one(1) principal structure may be placed on one(1)platted lot. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 16 3. The maximum building height shall be four(4) stories and fifty(50) feet e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone,glass, stucco,architecturally treated concrete,cast in place panels, decorative block, or approved equivalent as determined by the city. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. 3. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted,or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder")blocks shall be prohibited. 4. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or,as trim or as HVAC screen. 5. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 6. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery,tanks,etc.,are to be fully screened by compatible materials. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. 7. The use of large unadorned,prestressed concrete panels and concrete block,or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. 8. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal or accessory structures. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping being required ahead of individual site plan approvals,but we believe the buffer yard and Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 17 plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process. 2. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces shall be landscaped,rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. 3. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited. 4. Undulating or angular berms 3'to 5'in height, south of Street A and along Galpin and Lyman Boulevards shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of grading and utility construction. The required buffer landscaping may be installed incrementally,but it shall be required where it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage 1. All freestanding signs be limited to monument signs. One Industrial Office Park identification sign shall be permitted for the development which shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight(8) feet in height and shall be located on Lyman Boulevard. Each lot is permitted one low profile ground business sign. Such sign shall not exceed 64 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight(8)feet in height. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. The applicant should submit a sign package for staff review. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. 3. Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous industrial Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 18 parks/roadways,the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture(high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with an ornamental, natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3 Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. SUBDIVISION REVIEW WETLANDS There appears to be five wetland basins on site. Staff requires a wetlands report documenting the character, locations,types of wetlands,and alternatives to the plan to try to avoid impacts. The applicant has hired a delineator to prepare a report and will be required to provide the City a copy of the delineation report prior to final plat approval. Figure 1 shows the approximate locations of the wetlands as they appear on the grading plan. The wetlands on site can be broken into five separate basins that are described as follows: Wetland A-is located in the northwest corner of the site. The northern part of this wetland is located on the Trotter's Ridge development. It is an ag/urban wetland and does not appear to be directly impacted by the proposed plan. The applicant will be required to maintain a 0 to 20 foot wide buffer with an average buffer width of 10 feet around the basin. Wetlands B and C-are located on the east side of the property and are aligned north to south along Galpin Boulevard. These basins are classified as ag/urban. They have been heavily grazed and cropped over the years and have previously been identified as a candidate for a wetland restoration project. It appears that these basins B and C were connected at one time. Wetland B has been identified to act as a utilized wetland in the City's Surface Water Runoff Plan(SWMP). Wetland C will be filled as a result of the proposed project. Mitigation is proposed on the south west corner of Wetland B. The applicant will be required to maintain a 0 to 20 foot wide buffer with an average buffer width of 10 feet around the existing and created basins. Wetland D-is located in the southwest corner of the property. It is an ag/urban wetland that will not be directly impacted as a result of the proposed plan,however,the current earthwork operation which has occurred in the past has impacted this wetland and needs to be restored. The applicant Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 19 will be required to maintain a 0 to 20 foot wide buffer with an average buffer width of 10 feet around the basin. This area has also been proposed to act as a nutrient trap in the City's SWMP recommendations. However, staff is requiring a pretreatment pond which the applicant has shown on the plans. Wetland E - is located in the west central part of the site in an area that is heavily wooded. This wetland has not been given a classification,and will be evaluated after the city receives the wetland report. If it is classified as a natural wetland,a buffer strip of 10 to 30 feet wide with an average buffer width of 20 feet around the basin is required. Approximately 3/4 of the wetland(4,498 square feet) is proposed to be filled to meet building setbacks. If this wetland is classified a natural wetland, staff would like to see alternatives to this presumed avoidable impact. Mitigation On April 12, 1996, the Governor of Minnesota signed into law amendments to the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. The new rules will be in effect for the next 60 days along with the existing laws. The new law increases the de minimis exemption(the amount of impact not regulated) from 400 square feet to 2,000 square feet. The City of Chanhassen ordinances are written to comply with the 1991 version of the Wetland Conservation Act. Because the City of Chanhassen has not adapted these changes to its ordinances, nor have they carefully discussed the impacts such an exemption would have, City staff has decided to take a discretionary approach to approving this exemption, on a project to project basis. Because the City has been a leader in the state in the field of wetland and surface water management, we feel it may defeat the purpose of previous work to approve such an exemption before studying its impacts on the City's Surface Water Management Plan. The applicant has proposed the following mitigation plan for the 0.11 acre of fill to Wetland C and Wetland E: Of the 5,012 square feet of wetlands that are proposed to be filled,the applicant is requesting 2,000 square feet be exempt under new WCA rules. Mitigation would then be completed at a 2:1 ratio of the remaining 3,012 square feet. This would create 6,024 square feet of new wetlands that would be added on to the existing Wetland B. Since the mitigation area will expand Wetland B, City staff would like to see restoration of the existing wetland as a condition of approval. Buffers and Setbacks- The City Wetland Ordinance requires buffer strips for the ag/urban wetlands located on the property. The buffer strip width required for natural wetlands is 10 to 30 feet with a minimum average width of 20 feet. The buffer strip width required for an ag/urban wetland is 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet. The principal structure setback for these wetlands is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 20 Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant$20 per sign. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP). The SWMP serves as a tool to protect,preserve,and enhance the City's water resources. The plan identifies the stormwater quantity and quality improvements from a regional perspective necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general,the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on projected future land use,and therefore,different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to deter- mine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The City requires storm water quantity calculations for pre and post developed conditions and water quality calculations from the applicant prior to final plat. After review of the calculations,the City will make recommendations for approval of the stormwater plan in accordance with the SWMP. Water Quality The SWMP has established an connection charge for water quality systems. The cash dedication will be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. The water quality charge has been calculated at$ $1,530/acre for a townhome with 3 to 8 units. Credits will be given if the applicant provides water quality treatment according to the City's SWMP standards. The total fee will be determined at the time of final platting. Water Quantity The SWMP has established an connection charge for different land uses based on an average,city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes all proposed SWMP trunk systems,culverts,and open channels and stormwater ponding areas for temporary runoff storage. Medium density developments will have a connection charge of$2,975 per developable acre. The connection charges will be calculated after review of the final construction plans and will be due at the time of final plat recording. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 21 GRADING The developer and staff have been working together in designing a development plan which minimizes impacts to the site characteristics, i.e. trees, wetlands, and site grades. The grading plan submitted incorporates design elements as a part of our meetings. Staff believes the grading plan minimizes the site grading over the residential component as much as possible. This area has been designed to take advantage of the site's characteristics by proposing a number of different building unit styles, i.e. walkouts, lookouts, and rambler-type dwellings to conform with existing grades thus minimizing grading. Staff is in support of the preliminary grading plan as shown. The commercial/industrial component(Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3) will be mass graded with the exception of vegetative areas in the easterly portion of Lot 1, Block 2. This portion of the site is fairly void of vegetation and grading is necessary to prepare site for commercial/industrial use. These lots may be subject to further alteration when individual site plans actually are submitted for review and approval. A berm is proposed to be located adjacent to Lyman Boulevard on the south side of Lot 1, Block 3. On Lot 2, Block 1,the site is proposed to be leveled off by taking the average grade of the lot which is proposed to be 11 feet lower then the residential component to the north and east. This grade separation will provide added buffer between the residential and industrial use. DRAINAGE The plans propose a series of catch basins to convey stormwater runoff to three stormwater quality treatment ponds prior to discharging into the wetlands. Given the grade differences on the property, the three ponds are warranted. Storm sewers are proposed to "link"the wetlands together to maintain water levels throughout the development. The City of Chaska has also requested that some site improvements be incorporated into the development to alleviate current drainage problems along the west side of the site. Based on the drainage plans it appears the applicant has attempted to address Chaska's concerns by installing the storm sewer system along the westerly property line. This should be worked out with the City of Chaska prior to final plat approval. The stormwater ponds will need to be designed and constructed with side slopes of either 4:1 overall or a 10:1 bench for the first 10 feet at the normal water level and 3:1 slopes thereafter for safety purposes. It appears the plans have incorporated the 3:1 side slopes with a 10:1 bench at the normal water level. Detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events along with ponding calculations based on Walker's PondNet methodology shall be submitted to Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 22 staff for review and approval. Outlet control structures for water quality and emergency overflow may be required for the wetlands. At the time of final plat submittal, staff will be reviewing final construction drawings which may require minor changes to the storm drainage system. One such change could be to relocate the storm sewer outlet between Lots 20 and 21 to the easterly side of Lot 21 for ease of maintenance and access. Drainage and utility easements will be required over all utilities outside the street right-of-way. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. Access to the ponding areas for maintenance have been addressed. EROSION CONTROL The preliminary grading and drainage plan does propose erosion control measures throughout the development. Type III erosion control will be required adjacent to the wetlands and steep slope areas. Additional erosion control measures shall be incorporated on the final grading plan submittal for example between the berm proposed on Lot 1, Block 3 and Street A. All disturbed areas as a result of construction will need to be reseeded and mulched within two weeks after site grading is completed. The entire site must be graded prior to issuance of building permits with the exception of one model home permitted adjacent to a hard surfaced street. UTILITIES Municipal sanitary sewer and water services is available to the site from Galpin Boulevard. In addition, a 12-inch water line has been extended southerly from Trotters Ridge in the northeast corner of the development assuming commercial development. Even though the land use has changed,the applicant should propose to extend this watermain to loop the watermain in Street C and modify the watermain diameter to an 8-inch water line in C Street. Upon completion of the utilities in this development,they will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. Detailed construction plans and specifications of the utility and street improvements should be submitted in conjunction with final plat approval for staff review. The construction plans and specifications shall be prepared in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The developer will also need to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. The site has existing wells and septic systems which will need to be abandoned in accordance with local and state health guidelines. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 23 STREETS The site is proposed to be serviced with a looped street system for the commercial/industrial area and two cul-de-sacs in the residential component. Staff has met with the applicant and agreed to compromise the 60-foot right-of-way width down to 50 feet in the residential area(Streets B and C)to minimize impacts to the environmental features of the site. Street A right-of-way will be 60-feet in accordance with City ordinance. The street widths on Streets B and C, however, will remain the City's standard width of 31 feet. Street A is proposed to be constructed in accordance with the City's commercial/industrial standards which is 36-feet wide, face-to-face concrete curb and gutter and to a 9-ton street design. Staff has reviewed the street layout and finds the alignments acceptable. Staff will further review the street, utility and drainage plans with the final construction plan submittal in conjunction with final plat review. Decorative landscaped islands are proposed in both cul-de-sacs. The island radiuses may not exceed 12 feet in order to maintain turning radiuses for the fire apparatuses. Also, the cul-de- sacs will have to be posted for no parking to ensure free traffic lanes. TREE PRESERVATION AND LANDSCAPING Applicant has submitted plans for tree removal and landscaping for the residential and industrial/commercial areas of the development. Since tree preservation requirements are different between the two uses, canopy coverage calculations have been done for each of the land use areas rather than the development as a whole. Staff has made the following calculations: Residential Industrial/Commercial Total Land Area 19.86 ac. 16.59 ac. (Area+ROW-wetland) Existing Cover 9.47 ac. 3.25 ac. (%coverage) (48%) (20%) Required Minimum Cover 6.17 ac. 2.3 ac. (%coverage) (30%) (14%) Proposed Removal 5.87 ac. 2.36 ac. Remaining Coverage 3.6 ac. 0.89 ac. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 24 (%coverage) (18%) (5%) Replacement Requirement 3.1 ac. (124 trees) 1.7 ac.(68 trees) (Required - Remaining)x 1.2 As can be seen,the applicant is removing in excess of the required minimum coverage and is therefore required to reforest at a rate of 1.2 times the difference between the required and remaining coverages. Applicant is required to plant 124 trees within the residential area, however in the proposed landscaping plan, 361 overstory, understory and evergreen trees area scheduled to be planted. Since the residential area of this development borders many different uses, such as industrial/commercial, county road, and low density residential, special attention should be paid to providing appropriate landscape near the uses. It is approximately 720 feet from the corner of the first townhome in the northeast corner to the edge of the wetland in the northwest along which there are the townhomes to the south and the Trotter's Ridge development to the north. The width of this area is narrowest at the eastern end with 50 feet; each succeeding townhome is further from the property line with the last one before the wetland approximately 120 feet from the property line. Using the city's buffer yard ordinance No. 250,the required plantings for this area is 7 canopy trees, 14 understory trees and 14 shrubs of which the developer is only responsible for 75%of the totals. On the landscaping plan submitted, the applicant is proposing groups of evergreen and deciduous plantings totaling 28 trees, but no shrubs. There are potentially 5 existing trees in that area scheduled for preservation. The western and southern sides of the residential area abut industrial use. the townhomes on the southern edge are across the street from the industrial building and their garages front the street. Each home is being provided with one tree near the driveway. On the industrial lot,41 evergreens and 9 deciduous trees are scheduled to be planted by"others." On the eastern sides where it is homes not garages facing the industrial buildings,a berm, 67 evergreens, 3 oaks,43 understory trees, and 25 shrubs are scheduled. According to ordinance, the developer is required to provide 75%of the following 30 foot buffer yard: 22 canopy trees, 54 understory trees, 54 shrubs, and a structure. The western edge of the development borders Galpin Blvd., a principal arterial. The buffer requirements along this road are 7 canopy trees, 14 understory trees and 14 shrubs. There are existing trees that will be preserved along the road which more than meets the requirements. However, staff feels it is necessary to provide increased landscaping at the entrance off Galpin to help screen traffic and headlights from the first townhome unit. For the same reasons, a couple of trees should be added to the landscaping at the townhome on the northwest corner of street A and street B. Since the existing trees in the development are mature and valuable oaks, staff recommends that the applicant inventory all trees, including those to be saved or removed. Any trees scheduled to Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 25 be saved lost due to construction will be replaced at a rate of two times the diameter by the developer. The same would apply to the industrial development as well. PARKS AND RECREATION The Park and Recreation Commission met on May 21, 1996 to review this proposal. The Commission voted to recommend that full park and trail fees be paid pursuant to city ordinance in lieu of park land dedication. The Commission recommended that a private trail connection be made from the end of street C to the trail on Galpin Boulevard and a five foot sidewalk shall be incorporated along the north side of street A from Galpin to Lyman Boulevards. In addition,the Commission requested that the applicant look at providing a tot lot area within Lot 22, Block 1. MISCELLANEOUS Street names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names,public and private,must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Structure information. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason,proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations(FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO,TU, WO)must be shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Demolition. Existing structures on the property which will be demolished will require demolition permits. Proof of well abandonment must be furnished to the City and a permit for septic system abandonment must be obtained and the septic system abandoned prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Setbacks. Exterior walls(at bays and optional bays)and projections(at overhangs and decks)are regulated by the Uniform Building Code(UBC) With building sizes and property lines as shown, decks will not be permitted as shown,overhangs will not be permitted in some cases and exterior walls must be of one-hour fire-resistive construction in some cases. Openings shown in some walls will not be permitted with the building and property lines as shown. To avoid opening protection and one-hour fire-resistive wall construction,the property lines should be at least four feet from any wall of the building where a twelve inch overhang is planned. Decks may not be built within three Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 26 feet of the property line. These requirements are found in UBC Table 5-A, 503.2.1 and 705. Since these issues involve property lines,they need to be resolved before preliminary plat approval. Soils. The Carver County Soil Survey indicates the site may contain some glencoe soils. Glencoe soils are given a building site group 10 rating,which indicates they are unsuitable for building. A geotechnical evaluation,which includes an FHANA lot by lot tabulation for land development with controlled earthwork, should be submitted to the Inspections Division for review. The report should also include a copy of the grading and drainage plan. The developers and designers my desire to meet with the Building Official as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. One project identification sign shall be permitted for the residential development. Such sign shall be located on Galpin Boulevard only and shall comply with the City's sign ordinance. FINDINGS Subdivision, Section 18-39 (f) 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance. The applicant has worked extensively with staff to develop a proposal and site design that addresses many of the concerns of the city. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision of the property for the residential component is inconsistent with the existing land use designation of the property which is office/industrial. Subject to the city amending the comprehensive plan from office/industrial to residential -medium density, the proposal would be consistent with the land use designation. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: While some of the site contains poor soil conditions for development (Cordova silty clay loam and Glencoe silty clay loam)on proposed building sites or roadway, it is possible through soil corrections to make the site suitable for Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 27 development. As a condition of development,the applicant will be required to incorporate best management practices for erosion control and demonstrate all lots would be buildable. 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision attempts to minimize impacts to the environment. While some tree removal and wetland alterations are oftentimes necessary to develop sites through tree preservation measures and the use of smaller right-of-way widths and front yard setbacks., the applicant has reduced potential environmental damage. 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT Wetland Alteration Permit(Section 20-407) When approving a wetland alteration permit,the following principals shall be adhered to: Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 29 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Land Use Map Amendment #96-lb from Office/Industrial to Residential Medium Density for the northerly 22.6 acres, conceptual and preliminary approval of PUD#96-2, preliminary plat approval for 24 lots and associated right-of-way, Site Plan Review#96-5 approval for 142 townhouse units, and Wetland Alteration Permit#95-2b subject to the following conditions: 1. The development shall comply with Development Standards established within this report, incorporated herein by reference. 2. The developer shall ensure a minimum of 50%of the units meet the Metropolitan Council's definition of Affordable Housing. 3. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division and Fire Marshal,for review and approval prior to final plat approval. 4. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads,using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 5. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 6. Adjust property lines to permit openings in exterior walls or revise plans to remove openings. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit decks or revise plans to remove decks. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 7. Provide a geotechnical evaluation report to the Inspections Division. This should be done before any permits are issued. 8. Eliminate center islands in both cul-de-sacs. Exception: Submit drawings for City Engineer's and Fire Marshal's review and approval to accommodate the turning around of the Fire Department's largest apparatus. This would have to take into account parking in the cul-de-sac. 9. No burning permits for trees removed will be issued. Any downed trees will have to be chipped on site or hauled off site. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 30 10. Additional fire hydrants will be required. City Engineer and Fire Marshal will review plans and make appropriate changes. (Note: Maximum hydrant spacing is 300 feet.) 11. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes,NSP,NW Bell, cable television,transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 12. A separate sign permit shall be required for all development signage. 13. One project identification sign shall be permitted for the residential development. Such sign shall be located on Galpin Boulevard only and shall comply with the City's sign ordinance. 14. Full park and trail fees shall be paid pursuant to city ordinance in lieu of park land dedication. A private trail connection shall be made from the end of street C to the trail on Galpin Boulevard and a five foot sidewalk shall be incorporated along the north side of street A from Galpin to Lyman Boulevards. In addition, the applicant should look at providing a tot lot area within Lot 22, Block 1. 15. Tree preservation fencing must be installed prior to any grading. 16. Any tree(s) scheduled to be saved that is lost due to construction practices shall be replaced by the developer at a rate of two times the diameter. 17. A tree inventory shall be submitted to the city prior to the final approval of the development. 18. Increase landscaping at two locations: The north side of the entrance off Galpin Blvd. and the northwest corner of Street A and Street B to screen homes from traffic and headlights. 19. Developer shall guarantee plant material installed for two growing seasons. 20. Type III erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to wetlands. Additional erosion control measures may be incorporated on the final grading plan submittal. 21. The applicant shall "loop"the watermain in Street C with the existing 12-inch watermain in the northeast corner of the site. 22. All wells and septic systems shall be abandoned in accordance with local and state health codes. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 31 23. The cul-de-sac island radius shall not exceed 12 feet. Parking in the cul-de-sacs shall be prohibited and posted accordingly. 24. Street A shall be construction 36 feet wide face to face and to a 9-ton street design within a 60-foot wide right-of-way. Streets B and C shall be constructed to the City's urban residential standard with a right-of-way of 50 feet versus 60 feet. 25. All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant$20 per sign. 26. The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements for access and maintenance of the storm sewer lines as well as ponding areas and wetlands. 27. The proposed storm water ponds shall be designed with side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. The storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading. 28. Water quality fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the water quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived. Water quantity fees will be based in accordance with the City's SWMP. Storm sewer trunk fees will be evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWMP design requirements. The fees will be determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans. 29. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 30. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. 31. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for storm water quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed predeveloped and post- developed storm water calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a 10-year storm event between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 32 32. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 33. The applicant shall apply for an obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers and MnDOT and comply with their conditions of approval. 34. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi-lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building permit for the lot. 35. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within right-of-way areas. 36. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings should be a minimum of two(2) feet above the high water level calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines. 37. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 38. Preliminary Plat approval is contingent upon the applicant preparing a wetland delineation report of the site. In addition to a wetland inventory the applicant is responsible for receiving the necessary permits and approval from the governmental agencies such as DNR,Army Corps of Engineers and Watershed District. 39. On wetlands A,B, C and D the applicant will be required to maintain a 0 to 20 foot wide buffer with an average buffer width of 10 feet around the basin. On Wetland E the applicant will be required to maintain a buffer of 10 to 30 feet with an average width of 20 feet. ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Planned Unit Development(PUD) Concept Plan and Preliminary Plan narrative 3. Building Elevations and Floor Plans,reductions 4. Site Plan, reduction 5. Town& Country Homes 1st Addition Exterior Color Packages dated 5/29/96 6. Letter from Kenneth Adolf to Bob Generous dated 5/29/96 Town and Country Homes June 5, 1996 Page 33 7. Letter from Al Block to Bob Generous dated 5/24/96 8. Letter from Jim Hirz to Bob Generous dated 5/16/96 9. Letter from Charles D. Folch to Bill Weckman dated 5/15/96 10. Memo from Steve A. Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 5/24/96 11. "Land Patterns," Winter 1996,Vol. 1,No.1,page 6 12. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List 13. Wetland locations FROM :SCHOELL & MADSON 612 546 9065 1996,05-01 12:33 11694 P.02/06 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT_ ,O9�4E(' \Id c75 41_ ADDRESS: Fiir rQ�.� DRESS: Pi( 70 /Rio § xiA)0,5?) TELEPHONE(Day time)____9_2„„5_ ,,„"– _ / TELEPHONE: 470 - 508 )) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 4r3 00 Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit _ Variance Non-conforming Use Permit a( Wetland Alteration Perm G .275 Planned Unit Develcpment'y_ l�o Zoning Appeal Rezoning7 Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review A Notification Sign SD.^ P _ i� Site Plan Review' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost' pff 110 ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAWWAP/Metes -- - 8•— and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) x Subdivision* ) •r r.7‘ 0• TOTAL FEE$ 3/ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be Included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews, 'Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8'/:"X 11"reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE-When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. FROM :SCHOELL & MRDSON 612 546 9065 1996.05-01 12:33 #694 P.03/05 PROJECT NAME Town & Country Homes First Addition LOCATION N.W. Corner of Galpin and Lymar LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached legal description TOTAL ACREAGE 45.2 WETLANDS PRESENT X YES NO PRESENT ZONING A-2 REQUESTED ZONING Planned Unit Development PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Office/Industrial REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION Mixed Use Office/Industrial and Mid—Density Residential REASON FOR THIS REQUEST To sub—divide the land to provide a townhome community and office/ industrial space for future development. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This Is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees. feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. Town & Country Hom , Inc./Industrial Equities Inc. 2 _ ,A.--„ „; and/or SA Land Partners -5 % igy o Ap. i . Date • :i;nature of Fee•wwuirJohn R. Fisher / Dat- Application Received on I;11 rf' Fee Paid , �-• ° pp Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. tf not contacted,a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES FIRST ADDITION JOHN FISHER PROPERTY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAN PREPARED FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA May, 1996 Submitted by: Town & Country Homes, Inc. 6800 France Avenue South, Suite 170 Edina, Minnesota 55435 (612) 935-3899 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEVELOPMENT TEAM II. INTRODUCTION III. GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location B. Legal Description C. Zoning D. Project E. P.U.D. Criteria F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1 . Land Use Guide Plan/Density 2. Site Utility Availability and Service 3. Traffic Access and Circulation IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULING V. FINANCIAL CAPABILITY VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT VIII. TREE PRESERVATION IX. COVENANTS X. CONCLUSION 1. DEVELOPMENT TEAM The developer of the Fisher property is Town & Country Homes, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation located in Edina, Minnesota. The Town & Country tradition has been synonymous with quality neighborhoods throughout various Metropolitan Areas for 38 years. The Development Team is coordinated by Allan J. Block, President of the Minnesota Division and Project Manager of this development Consultants Planner: The site plan design by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Engineer: The plat and public facilities engineering by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Minnetonka, MN Surveyor: Site surveying by Schoell & Madson, Inc Wetland Biological Regulated wetland permits, delineation and monitoring by Analysis: Svoboda Ecological Resources of Shorewood, MN Landscape Architecture: Landscape design by Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. 11. INTRODUCTION Purpose of Presentation The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council details of the proposed Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and to obtain the necessary concept plan, preliminary plan and preliminary plat approval with a wetland alteration permit. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 2 III. GENERAL STATEMENT OF CONCEPT A. Location This proposed mixed use Planned Unit Development by Town & Country is located in Chanhassen in Section 16, Township 116, Range 23. The 45-acre site is served by County Road 19 (Galphin Boulevard) to the east and Country Road 18 (Lyman Boulevard) to the south. North of the Fisher property is Trotter's Ridge residential development. East of County Road 117 is Stone Creek residential development. The development plans have been carefully designed to provide adequate spacing and buffer areas adjoining these areas. The property is adjoined on the south and west by industrial/warehouse usage. Additionally, the south and west boundaries also represent the city limits adjoining the City of Chaska. B. Legal Description That part of the East Half (E 1/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4), Section 16, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, which lies South of the North 1065.41 feet, westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 19, and North of the South 100.00 feet; ALSO That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, lying westerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 19 and northerly of the centerline of County State Aid Highway No. 18. Said property being subject to easement for roadway purposes for County State Aid Highway 19 and County State Aid Highway 18. C. Zoning The project consists of land owned by John Fisher. The property is currently zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate. The Developer proposes to rezone the property to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development. D. The Project The project consists of 146 residential townhome units that will be developed on lots ranging from 125' to 146' in width with lot depths of 72'. Each lot will accommodate a 6- or 8-unit pre-designed townhome structure. Each home will have a one car garage with a driveway. A majority of the units will be slab-on- grade; however, the Developer will attempt to incorporate lookout or walkout basements where topography allows. This site plan was developed in an attempt to maximize the preservation of trees and natural terrain. In addition, two office/industrial lots will be platted for future development by others. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 3 Proposed Building Setbacks: 25' Front Yard Setback Typical along Street "A" 20' Front yard Setback (minimum) along Streets "B" and "C" 50' Side and Rear Yard Setback (minimum) along Exterior Boundaries 25' Minimum Combined Between Buildings 40' Rear Yard Wetland Setback (minimum) Large wetlands and groups of mature existing trees create a variety of constraints to development, requiring unique approaches and mitigative efforts aimed at providing quality homesites while maintaining the integrity of the site topography. Measures such as reduced setbacks, road design, and restrictive covenants all contribute to this and will be discussed later. As previously noted, townhomes will be available in 6- and 8-unit buildings. The range of topography and building mixture provides an opportunity to accommodate different home styles. Besides offering the advantage of a quality streetscape, the mixture of home plans and lot sizes can help the City achieve affordable housing goals while maintaining density which is in conformance with R-8 requirements. With the difficult constraints on the site, the mitigative measures that we propose, such as preservation of wetlands and large trees with additional ponding, creates a development that is aesthetically pleasing and environmentally responsible. These mitigation measures speak to the purpose of the P.U.D. and successfully create the ultimate condition that the P.U.D. was designed to affect Development Summary Total Acreage R.O.W. Dedication (CSAH 19) 45.21 ac. R.O.W. Dedication (CSAH 18) 4.27 ac. R.O.W. Dedication (Interior Streets) 3.90 ac. Lot 1 , Block 2 (Industrial Lot) 6.29 ac. Lot 1, Block 3 (Industrial Lot) 9.40 ac. Net Developable - Residential 20.56 ac. Number of Units 146 Net Density - Residential Area 7.10 units/acre (146 _ 20.56) Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 4 E. P.U.D. Criteria The Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance (May, 1992) outlines four expected attributes of Planned Unit Developments. Those expected attributes and the Developer's findings are outlined below: 1 . Attribute: The City should be offered enhanced environmental sensitivity beyond normal ordinance requirements. Finding: The overall concept is oriented around the development of an individual neighborhood defined by the road system and the integrated open space system as well as preservation of existing site topography. This community was designed to accommodate moderately-priced townhomes while providing generous amounts of open space. The plentiful open space shown affords the visual amenity provided by ponds, wetlands, berms and depressions and combines them with the landscape elements such as grass, flowers, shrubbery and trees. Over and above this, open space provides the means to preserve and enhance existing natural amenities, thus preserving wildlife habitat and groups of existing mature trees. Open space can beneficially influence the micro climate by improving heat radiation and by providing channels for air drainage and favorable air flows. The system operates as more than just open space; it provides a readily accessible place for informal recreation. The Developer has used this process that embraces the delicate balancing act of locating roads and home sites where it has the least effect on the wetland and trees to create a development that is innovative and harmoniously sensitive to the environment. 2. Attribute: The City should be offered sensitive development in transitional areas between different land uses. Lot sizes should be mixed to reflect the sites' environmental limitations and opportunities and to offer a range of housing pricing options Finding: The proposed plan offers a development which provides sensible transition between land uses. Properties to the north and east contain R-1 single family residential developments, while the properties to the south and west contain industrial/warehouse use facilities. This project, utilizing medium density residential concepts, provides transitional land usage between these uniquely different parcels. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 5 3. Attribute: The City should be offered the provision of housing affordable to all income groups. Finding: The proposed plan provides for 146 units, ranging in estimated price from $85,000 to $115,000. These units will fall into the City's defined affordable housing guidelines. 4. Attribute: Quality of development in: landscaping, construction quality, provision of public/private open and recreational space. a. Landscaping - By design, the road system locates entrances which identify points of arrival to individual neighborhoods. The entrance features will include extensive landscaping. The cul-de- sacs, while allowing development of rolling hills and creating niches for smaller more private neighborhoods, also affords the opportunity for landscaped islands, another feature of this development. These areas will be maintained by a homeowner's association as well as covenants on the land that must be adhered to by owners. b. Construction Quality - Town & Country invests a great deal of time and money periodically upgrading its entire home product line keeping current with design trends that are the most in demand and efficient. The latest innovative construction techniques are implemented upon their introduction to the building industry. Town & Country has been developing residential developments and building quality homes for 38 years. c Public and Private Open Space - The amount of open space together with the neighborhood trails and the numerous ponds created within the development are a direct result of the flexibility allowed under a P.U.D. Additionally, because of reduced setback requirements, the Developer is able to provide reduced natural topographical disturbance. d. Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard ares, lot sizes and other minimum requirements and performance standards associated with traditional zoning, Planned Unit Developments can maximize the development potential of the developable land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 6 F. Comprehensive Plan Acceptability 1. Land Use Guide Plan/Density The property is currently guided for Industrial Office Park Development by the City's Land Use Guide Plan. The Fisher property development plan proposes 146 residential townhome units and two industrial/office sites for future development in accordance with the Guide Plan. 2. Site Utility Availability and Service The site is within the MUSA. Sanitary sewer and watermain were stubbed into the property during utility extension to serve Trotter's Ridge. 12" PVC sanitary runs south on CSAH 19 and east through Stone Creek. Sanitary and water laterals would be extended off of these stubs. The storm drainage system on the site consists of storm sewers in streets which will discharge into storm water treatment ponds. These ponds will outlet into existing wetlands. Storm sewer outlets are also provided from all of the existing wetlands to allow controlling the water levels. In general, the site drainage pattern is from the north portion of the site to the large wetland in the southwest portion. The drainage facilities will be constructed in connection with the other site improvements. 3. Traffic and Access Circulation The road system, open space system and trails have been developed to best facilitate the movement of traffic safely and conveniently in accordance with the City's designated road system, while at the same time providing a unique neighborhood community consistent with Chanhassen's high standards. Primary access to the development will be off of an east-west collector connecting CSAH 19 and CSAH 18. The road system is designed to identify a hierarchy of traffic with cul-de-sacs running into this collector. IV. TENTATIVE STAGING AND SEQUENCE SCHEDULE The Developer intends to develop the project in one phase and will build as the market demands dictate. Obviously, economic conditions may affect the actual time frame and special areas of development. The industrial lots will be graded in conjunction with this project and will be provided utility service stubs. They will be sold for future development by others. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 7 V, FINANCIAL CAPABILITY As the optionee, Town & Country intends to develop the Fisher property once they receive every governmental approval necessary for development to occur. Town & Country is a principal developer in many cities and has never failed to meet is obligations throughout its history. VI. NATURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS The topography is generally rolling terrain with the highest elevation being 982 feet and the lowest elevation being 940 feet. There exists four acres of five separate protected wetlands on the site with both the Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Chanhassen having jurisdiction: The 45-acre site is a mix of open space, wetlands, areas with miscellaneous vegetation and some significant wooded areas. The Developer has taken these features into consideration in the planning of this neighborhood community. In addition to these natural features, the development will include significant ponding and enhancement of existing wetlands, and along with additional landscape elements proposed by the Developer, we believe the result will be an overall development that is attractive and enduring VII. WETLAND MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT The project contains a total of 4 acres of wetlands of various types. Generally, the wetland basins on the project area have been heavily affected by past drainage activities. Virtually all of the wetlands on site have been subjected either to ditching or subsurface tile line installation. In some cases, this drainage activity has been effective enough to eliminate wetland hydrology, and in others it has rendered historic wetlands so marginal that they serve few, if any, functional wetland values. After extensive analysis and a conscious effort to minimize the development impact on the site, approximately 0.12 acres of wetland were found unavoidable and are proposed to be filled In general, the impacts would be incurred by the smallest and most degraded wetlands on the site. All of the impacts associated with the project will affect wetlands classified by the City as Ag Urban. Because of the extensive distribution of wetlands present, it is clear that some wetland impacts cannot be avoided. Sedimentation ponds will intercept and collect storm water runoff prior to discharging it into the wetlands. The Developer's intent is that upon its completion the site should have equal or greater wetland acreage with overall higher quality than existed prior to development. This should provide an improved variety of plant types and a better Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 8 habitat for more species of wildlife. Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses shall occur in the form of wetland creation projects adjacent to the easterly wetland. We have tentatively identified 0.14 acres of potential wetland creation. This site would provide 1:1 acre for acre replacement of wetlands to be affected by the project. The acreage encompassed by this site is exclusive of storm water storage/treatment ponds to be constructed for the project which are utilized to compensate for the other half of a 2.1 total mitigation package. The wetland would be contiguous to and become part of the existing east basin. This basin would be excavated to a depth sufficient to create wet meadow or shallow marsh conditions. In general, the wetland type to be created will provide substantially higher wetland functional value than the degraded wetlands affected by the project. Bottom substrates for the created wetland will consist of organic material excavated from existing wetlands to be affected by the project. A conservation easement will be established around each wetland. The design of this easement shall show a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the easement shall vary. This easement, combined with a usable backyard of 40', should provide setbacks to the wetland of 40' minimum. The primary purpose of the conservation easement is to provide nesting habitat and wildlife cover peripheral to the wetland. In addition, the easement, combined with the proposed sedimentation ponds, will work together to improve and maintain the character of the wetlands. Many species of wildlife reside in wetlands and depend, in part, on the presence of a fringe of upland habitat. The design of this easement shall depict a natural perimeter that meanders around the edge of the wetland. The depth of the conservation easement shall vary depending on the classification of the wetland. In addition to the aforementioned wetland alteration the Developer anticipates some alteration of the utilized wetland located in the southwest corner of the parcel. Because of the classification and condition of this wetland, it is anticipated that no mitigation will be required beyond normal NURP basin construction. VIII. TREE PRESERVATION The vast majority of the existing trees along the east and north boundaries will be subject to minimal impact by any home or road construction. In addition, a large grove of trees will be preserved as a buffer between Lot 1, Block 2 and the residential areas. The design attempted to locate other large stands of vegetation in rear yards to preserve them and also provide a screen to adjacent lots. Planned Unit Development Concept & Preliminary Plan 9 There will be tree loss occasioned by this development, but it is the expressed intention of the Developer to keep tree loss to a minimum. IX. COVENANTS Protective covenants shall be established and recorded to protect the investment of each homeowner and the wetland conservation easements. In addition, maintenance and protective measures will be addressed by the homeowner's association. X. CONCLUSION Town & Country feels that the proposed preliminary plan for development of the John Fisher property enhances the quality goals and objectives of the City of Chanhassen. It is our pleasure to respectfully submit to you our proposal and request your acceptance. J I - ' I la f,II NEE F■■■ - :. _ • -!...:,.t.....• -, ..4 1011 I v b "••+ FL mil. r .,...„,,.,440.-.. ; ._ .....;;-._!,,,...t.4.0, . , 1i7 ■ ? T- � '"' r) ' i 7 t • 4. 71,!1....i...4 -- 9k44 ` . . a. • • .� T / .a4L '' � In � ' ti: ~ h ' ` t . i .` L `M ,` '� 3 ' IQ., _ •■Its ' some • i■C ' _ 4 .:t 'sI! « atyz , 111,4 J; sT 3;;Xc4 .. j74 > _ 0 -V. ..c r __I St. , y - ,Y t' y :.f. f '.r r`_ NUL • �• i ! M • I.1 • • 1L ■■ ■ i Num ? L� ■■■ . a-.. topF Vis: `--, - '-• '�i a, . •.'2 _• jam, - + 4i'-7- - - ^.s :--.CSS`v i_.'blizt:�-*.• - 1; h'�''4.y..I.ti: ��,,,'. .*. Y -A .`- _i = -mit.- '`-.arm. F1:\: ` C.: _ yam_ -• ;. hTf` te- A iir,NMI ' • ` j ff J -.. s ; `, rI'..KI. .. III -11.. ' II • I ii •m �+ »M ` �� go rpt y 174. Li 1-` !' ' l , ;pr Am —� f API MI rl 3 I 'k. •/ i . - ,,1=3 ri z II I I= i f :L Dian L. 1 �,� ___ 1 1 11 _ 11:° itII11 ;. ry giailiLi1 1 13 I mm ,1 if 41 ' i ' t , 1 t 1 1L Q11Iii!i! 1 Z11~11 Iv 1i t �y a cal 11;1: 7:7_, ma i 1 zzz3 �k n4, - 1 i \I i c w' ` , , I] 7 , 111110E I o ell zaaa e ��' "117°11PIT.mlg-mk- '',," 1 j� i a Imki. � .!� >i :...a• O 1 ' 1 C:3 i 1 1 4 ; ,., I ! kominim _ .. .11' lasl i 4 I { o: + ° i • lit 1 $ f-Tn I I NI R, Al IRO 1.1 o I I 00/0111111401m• +4Qlws, � �� A AlIt° o I I A n a . •--. ASI ;; :1 11 _... 1 ,... ii a ., ,1 11,. c.1144vm; , , ° ;1 i�") II a _2: 1 .. ! = ! Z.= :1,1.iii __Lj . =., .E. , . .,_.4..i. --•_,. I 1 6 9 aI gg DO :Itif: 01:1112, tr §2▪1 '2 if r1-3 1 0 5 :, Ir. IE i I 11 {{a N € 1111 ... I' ( i - II 1111 ' 1111 ' �"' w. �: 1111 .... ! s■ III S. r LJ o III" . . �' n 1111 vil =u, I 111 111111 Ii. ii M. I -- - Sen i■ial i ill II iii 11 A i O t.� 1111 \•° lig I _ 1111 —S'� MEII -L�, ^ 'Ie q! ON (I i' O a. VIII III ■ qf 1nL ; —1 �i ; Mai " �, - v. o �� 1111 _ \/\ ii . ' HEE'.; - ) . , i 1111 �: 1111 ��' t 11 -. 1111 ll : h1 r wow-- _ tali!i is E i I ,i i : :i y, z . iisIIi. ' - I j. o . a i IE f will pmz! 1 g{I 1iii sd �� 2g E 6 �Ox yl __--I 1` f �� ° i i it It I li dii . III 11 �•li _=' II i tib `-- ;y .1 ii I; 1 77' .•• , ,:j'illl , II 1 •I —12 t !1I IX .2 i 1I1II fLQIII 1��ti�l11 r S -1. . , n I i ; =_ fir ie,�.� »r 3 - .. , , • 1.__. ,___:_., .' •- - - - • . I : \ ihilll I1 II „ - iii,_,__ 7 N,. ! AIM --.J si T$ 1 iE ' { ; r � � I■►�d e! n.1 •� I •� y I I I i7 ='� I a �1 x I a % ' •± II . R .. I: ' -- — -- ,��i---- ; 1 iylll■ I,, ii I; II - _yy� I d `� 1 Ll h Id • • .` I I `; 1 a , i r__ i allk. i,,, Np 1 1 7. I Pill;ill r1 r .. 1 I I I I �. O P ill - Ra-- . T r 11 '1 ` II S7II II 1. �fj�, o I s ',:f1111 -'=.= --=----,, 7-7 .%; : 'i k ' ; - -1 j T\l . r —, . il II ' I f ;-::-:at 1 1::::„;,,, . 1..d: I 1 a 1 I ii 1 L TTO� �i v � !J !! !JPC/11-1 oi) ,ii ,i xoy aX I � � i OCOi IE yr IM7rZ 'I •• M 0 �m . yz — 1 El IA • !it N,N,t \, i + III T. ! I O ii I „ 1*1 Ib -�04 v�'j 9 o ��1 a ;' _%rim- 1 e I O M, 1 ,� L-J I —o , t��www� — El 1 • '*a • Ls--1-6 I( �� II a aki a a r _ ��r 4 ':_ P1: ! IIIIIIIIIIIIIa11,...'A 11101,./X , ; I= 1 t 14# i i I Rili -I A I M .,,: ni ;11 _.. L 1 �_ Jo- >, rJLIL 4. ii.„, , 1. = . , .... = =, . ,„. , -v .,,....,........1 -=--; I , k .4 : A .z.00 , . a 1 13 ..40iiir li L __ ° J o aI. °fil 1i t ....fil ) I 1 I=I t Lam- is 30 l gl �l'ill o��l ail iii if a/ gg rr- a -� Ma �i LJ — OM r; • II N' SI •i• ntt • �, L� 1111 EEE �I 1111 , _ nhh �• t ri' 1111u� r _. nu 11_711. _ul r cm 1111 .... MO. ii ui ..11 ;iII> i p.• ■a D --' -. I- -..), • _� � ®� ' - • Irs LJIrIII �,v 11u N e, i IE �Ei it • :: -- i ill?! it_u L• .., !a1 1111 II II n =n 1111 11 r =v LJ ! =u N .� • 1' .. H : DIF e.i [_. MI MI Illof iiDD III I • iVIII II _ , 11111 n r� 1111n r, D n 7 r, ° 11111 j in II �.J•-uII W. LJ " I(• ul LJ �1., Y if- - _ - I 44 1.1 1111 !"' � It2-111_ui r rui II=u. u ;; 1111 -•- • r,• ` ii 1111 • i ii M Si, LJ N N L, ! 11!1 r .. I� LJ LJ 1I-_ -- __ ... ----- Ir ulii • 1.11 1 1j 'I"!; .t ,..11 i • H�i ! U iii it i I 1 1:1 ; ' I i fl LEN il 1 j ...1 i all, I !J !! max4) .1 IEc,. ,,,,,. zi,,,.._. -41 3' O �i ( -"NikN Z E. r, O YYYYYYY W Q z x Y N .n w o ,.TIZ ...:.. s rnM,n < fxUcc'^ mr-Lc) Sl-.. ..CC 0 - MN.. p Wza'ln 0 in 1.!!! A'2ds'.Z33 <t G ;ia Wy,� CLZ z O=i; W OQ W_it< 54 WN A I 41_J i lc1 • rr '- - . _� C= $ zl.l< 'z ZOoz 2�<a b Ili F. ± . ;ii19I - V= Z /�, ! \ ` - ;.2. I I ltlJ ' A„.(.2- — Et n a.• I AVO•-rI de -... f' W -- L l- - �! ! O .y' iI� i I C �� ` it. I mtrmtrmrrmTrmtrmrrn F- . -- - -- - ---- 1 _':.'------• - I I1 Is i 1„11...1.1.I.1..Ill.....i. IVI1 ! FFHiFFHiffHi1FHifFH-H 1 a _ 1 r• Y F le V;•-•, '� i lll$ w11w1uwuwuulLLu;' x i z : 1) o • �f. ' f I �� i f 1I. I I ` 1 — / E 1- fa ' 13 i '� y - s n it .' ( i 7( I I �� L • \ I 1 I; C 4 ' u �� _ .rte 'iPiiiiE.i...r... e ' 1 • ii diii.ii.i lI IY } * .\ _ 1111 >�Miit_ �'•..... .- _- \ ii f it I z a - 1 ” i 7 '..e. NI Ong 1 1 t, .. \-\ - I . IA _ • cz .1 / . lea NW • '-• • Pi 0 oi Irl o .1; II Yn • 3 r ill • I 1 .` \\\. I. m ��.�% . Y - , ,�, - . - . ( I �� j r ) I \ • il rnttrmrrmtrn.rmirrmrrmrrn / '�• _ .... . ��} I . I ill I 1LW1LW11U11L1L1LU11LU11LU. I• ' i / 1`. I ` p1r it 1.'` , - .. '1 ,1 8,a 1'i111 i 1 ` _ ► I :.11! 1 ` .,.1 :I `, C; i.t.u,_7/' -N, -• . I tii II a� 11 eirler. •• Ei ‘ ...,s 11 •"-•••••••••.....:........1 1. \ : - 1 NI.)11c 1(1\.- I I.\111 11 AMv.�•. I X1(.1:..1.`1\- • I 1 TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES 1ST ADDITION CHANHASSEN EXTERIOR COLOR PACKAGES PKG BRICK ROOF. SIDING SOF141T, ACCENT (Wunder Klein) (Owens Corning (Rolex Vinyl) FACIA, TRIM COLOR * Supreme) & GARAGE DOOR A Spaulding Tudor Driftwood Clay Cottage White Burgundy B Winyah Bay Estate Gray Sandcastle Shell Forest Green C Briar Cliff Barnwood Mist Heather Federal Brown D Valleywood Weathered Wood Shell Sandcastle Wedgewood Blue E Wellington Chapel Gray Cobblestone Frost Tuxedo Grey * Accent color is for entry door and shutters May 29, 1996 Schoell & Madson , Inc . Engineer's • Surveyors • Planners Soil Testing • Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 Minnetonka, MN 55305-1525 Office 612-546-7601 Fax 612-54f-uEED May 29, 1996 MAY 3 0 RECD CITY OF CHANHASSEN City of Chanhassen c/o Mr. Bob Generous, Sr. Planner P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317-0147 Subject. Town & Country Homes First Addition Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter is intended to clarify that the site plan and related information for the two industrial lots shown on the preliminary plans is intended to be conceptual only as noted on the plan. The owner wishes to retain the full flexibility offered by City codes for the future site planning and development of these lots Detailed site plans will be submitted for City review in the future. The grading plan shows a significant earth berm on the industrial lot south of A Street. However, the berm includes a note that the height of the berm may be adjusted based on availability of soils We have since prepared an earthwork analysis and found that there is a shortage of soil to grade the site as shown. It will be necessary to reduce the berm height to four to six feet above the street elevation. The storm water basins shown on the industrial lots are also conceptual. If possible, the owner intends to eliminate the pond on lot 1 block 3 and to convey the storm runoff to the pond on lot 1 block 2. The site plan and related information for the townhouse portion of the project illustrates the actual project proposed to be developed by Town & Country Homes after all approvals are obtained. The intent of the preliminary plan submittal for Town & Country Homes First Addition is to obtain these approvals. Please contact us if you have any questions or require additional information. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. °Z411/- Kenneth Adolf KEA/cj cc: Al Block, Town & Country Homes John Allen, Industrial Equities LLP Ron Bastyr /936 (geid2eakny; 40. g/ a .; ali Creielitee 1996 Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer TOWN & ARY HOMES Minnesota Division May 24, 1996 City of Chanhassen C\O Bob Generous- Senior Planner 690 Coulter Dr Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Neighborhood Information Meeting Dear Mr. Generous, Town& Country Homes cordially invites you to attend an informal neighborhood meeting for our proposed townhome development at the northwest corner of Lyman Blvd and Galpin Blvd. The meeting will be held at Bluff Creek Elementary School in the Recreation Center meeting room, located at the rear of the school. The day and time of the meeting will be Thursday, May 30, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. We wish to present our proposal to you as a neighborhood, in an informal question and answer format. At this meeting we can also hear your concerns and comments and respond to them. This meeting is scheduled for approximately one week before the city planning commission hearing. The site is a 45-acre parcel and presently has a comprehensive guide plan designation of industrial. We are proposing 142 owner-occupied townhomes on 20.5 acres. The remaining land will have 2 industrial lots,with approximately 9 acres of wetland and many exisiting trees being retained. We look forward to talking with you Thursday. If you have any questions concerning this project,please contact Mr. Bob Smith or myself at 925-3899. Cordially, Al Block President/Minnesota Division RECERIFD MAY 2 8 1996 CITY OF CHHIVHASSEN 6800 France Avenue South • Suite 170 • Edina,MN 55435 (612) 925-3899 MN Builder License#9137 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineer's • Surveyor's • Planners Soil Testing • Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 Minnetonka, MN 55305-1525 Office 612-546-7601 Fax 612-546-9065 May 16, 1996 Mr. Bob Generous City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Bob, As you requested, I am herein providing calculations for tree canopy loss on Town & Country Homes First Addition. These calculations are based upon existing site topography as located by Loucks & Associates and provided by Ron Bastyr. Residential Area Industrial Area Total Area Total Tree Canopy 377,928 S.F./8.68 AC. 115,760 S.F./2.66 AC. 493,688 S.F./11.34 AC. Total Canopy Loss 245,379 S.F./5.63 AC. 83,206 S.F./1.91 AC. 328,585 S.F./7.54 AC. Percent Loss 65% 72% 67% If you have any questions regarding this information or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, (2i7, im Hirz Senior Engineering Technician RECEIVED CC: Al Block, Town & Country Homes MAY 171996 Ron Bastyr CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1956 cge1e�i�tiny 40 L <�Y� r •'� c,l ?lf(? 1996 Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer C I TY OF ,„ d � C IIANHASSEN G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 0. (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 May 15, 1996 Bill Weckman Carver County 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, MN 55318 Re: Galpin Boulevard Reconstruction Project from Lyman Boulevard to Timberwood Drive SAP No. 10-619-04, City File No. PW026E Dear Bill: There were a couple of items which were brought up and discussed at a recent department head staff meeting regarding the Galpin Boulevard Reconstruction Project from Lyman Boulevard south to Timberwood Drive. The first item involves the elimination of the north access to the proposed Southern Oaks development (Fisher property) located at Station 61+34. Thus, this curbcut and the associated southbound right turnlane can be eliminated. This development is proposed to be served via one access off of Galpin Boulevard which is to be located immediately across from Stone Creek Drive at approximately Station 10+00. Item No. 2 involves confirming the City's desire to see a trail also extended along the west side of Galpin Boulevard from Timberwood Drive south to Lyman Boulevard (this is shown on the plan). This trail is in addition to the trail to be constructed along the east side of Galpin Boulevard to the Stone Creek Development as shown on the plans. Again, this point is merely made to confirm the City's intent to have complete trails constructed on both sides of Galpin Boulevard from Timberwood Drive south to Lyman Boulevard. The final item involves the issue of the Pioneer Cemetery. As we have discussed, it is the City's intent to have the driveway entrance and main drive aisle into the Pioneer Cemetery paved with a bituminous surface. City Maintenance staff will conduct the grading and rock base placement activities prior to the placement of bituminous by the road paving contractor. The Maintenance staff have asked for approximately a two-week advance notice of when the paving might occur so that they would have ample time to conduct the necessary preparatory work. As we get closer to the paving operations, please let me know of the schedule so I may forward this information on. Mr. Bill Weckman May 15, 1996 Page 2 If you have any questions or further comments on any of these of any other issues related to the project, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN tef4 Charles D. Folch, P.E. Director of Public Works CDF:jms c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer Kate Aanenson, Planning Director Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director Karen Engelhardt,Office Manager g:'eag'charles\cners'galpm.ltr CITY QF . . , ,.. Ai .., s. 0 CHANHASSEN .4,,w. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ..t (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official 4_c'\ya DATE: May 24, 1996 SUBJECT: 96-2 PUD, 96-5 SPR, 95-1b LUP and 95-2b WAP (Town & Country Homes, First Addition; Town and Country Homes) I was asked to review the proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, MAY 0 6, 19 9 6, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. Analysis: Street names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Structure information. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) must be shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Demolition. Existing structures on the property which will be demolished will require demolition permits. Proof of well abandonment must be furnished to the City and a permit for septic system abandonment must be obtained and the septic system abandoned prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Setbacks. Exterior walls(at bays and optional bays)and projections(at overhangs and decks)are regulated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) With building sizes and property lines as shown, decks will not be permitted as shown, overhangs will not be permitted in some cases and exterior walls must be of one-hour Bob Generous May 24, 1996 Page 2 fire-resistive construction in some cases. Openings shown in some walls will not be permitted with the building and property lines as shown. To avoid opening protection and one-hour fire-resistive wall construction, the property lines should be at least four feet from any wall of the building where a twelve inch overhang is planned. Decks may not be built within three feet of the property line. These requirements are found in UBC Table 5-A, 503.2.1 and 705. Since these issues involve property lines, they need to be resolved before preliminary plat approval. Soils. The Carver County Soil Survey indicates the site may contain some glencoe soils. Glencoe soils are given a building site group 10 rating, which indicates they are unsuitable for building. A geotechnical evaluation, which includes an FHA/VA lot by lot tabulation for land development with controlled earthwork, should be submitted to the Inspections Division for review. The report should also include a copy of the grading and drainage plan. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval. I. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat approval. 2. Revise the preiminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads,using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 3. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 4. Adjust property lines to permit openings in exterior walls or revise plans to remove openings. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust property lines to permit decks or revise plans to remove decks. This should be done before preliminary plat approval. 5. Provide a geotechnical evaluation report to the Inspections Division. This should be done before any permits are issued. enclosure: January 29, 1993 memorandum g.,safetylsak1memos\planking:crty I CITY OF .' r \'' ' CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • PD. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORAN i UM TO: Inspections, Planning, & Engineering Staff FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official )ct: DATE: January 29, 1993 SUBJ: Dwelling Type Designation We have been requesting on site plan reviews that the developer designate the type of dwelling that is acceptable on each proposed lot in a new development. I thought perhaps it might he helpful to staff to explain and diagram these designations and the reasoning behind the requirements. f LO or RLO Designates Front Lookout or Rear Lookout This includes dwellings with tiie basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to approximately 4' above the basement floor level. R Designates Rambler. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. This would include two story's and many 4 level dwellings. SE Designates Split Entry. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. SEWO Designates Split Entry Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to lowest floor level. TU Designates Tuck Under. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the front of the dwelling. WO Designates Walk Out. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the rear of the dwelling. gE R WO F� F -- — , — — — — -- of RLO Inspections staff uses these designations when reviewing plans which are then passed to the engineering staff for further review. Approved grading plans are compared to proposed building plans to insure compliance to approved conditions. The same designation must be used on all documents in order to avoid confusion and incorrect plan reviews. ��«►• PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1.._,,,.,. 6 ?,r, ern 5. , i Residential Taxes aren't Farmland's 1d3;��er laq� Most Valuable Harvest IV LEE RONNING U(,)' 1 , A-1)- 1 Arguments for saving fertile farmland from being destroyed Perhaps the most ironic(finding of this study is the f ct that 1 by sett an sprawl often center on the environmental and sprawling residential developments rests result in fns funding for social impacts of rampant development patterns.But for better schools.In Minnesota,stare aid Is used to hold down property or worse,it's the financial bottom-line that carries real weight taxes.Because this aid is usually distributed based on population with decision-makers.As a result,the environmental and social or school enrollment,it increases the share of education havoc wreaked by urban sprawl is often justified on grounds that funding attributable to the residential sector.Minnesota's new development increases the tax base,thus improving schools school aid is dependent on the total property valuation of a and other community services. school district,as well as being a function of enrollment,thus school districts receive less state aid per student as growth occurs and property tax bases expand. i Normally,the expanded tax base would offset any loss of stare aid.But if residential development is the source of the expanded REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BY LAND USE CATEGORY IN THE development,then the increased cost of servicing that develop. CITIES OF FARMINGTON,LAKE ELMO AND INDEPENDENCE mens could actually lead to the need for higher property taxes to fund schools,the study found.It's clear Minnesota's tax Revenues Expenditures Balance Ratio structure makes it very difficult to determine who is paying the FARMINGTON true costs of sprawling residential development. Residential 11,641,596 11,860,275 (218,679) 1:1.02 Commercial Si Industrial 1,227,644 966.588 261.056 1:0.79 And our research finds that farmland protection may be Farmland 80,940 62.008 18,932 1-0.77 financially beneficial not only because of its contribution to the Grand Total 12,950,180 12,888,871 61,309 tax base.but also because it holds down property rax valuation. Lower property tax valuation leads to more state aid,which reduces the share of local government costs paid for by local LAKE ELMO residents and property ow-nets. Residential 7,492,273 7.996.164 (503,891) 1:1.07 Commercial Si.Indusmal 717,942 143,861 574,081 1:0.20 T he tax revenue-to cost of services ratios this analysis Farmland 95,240 26,025 69.215 1:0.27 1 reported arc similar to those found in eight studies of Grand Total 8,305,455 8,166,050 139,405 farmland development in Connecticut,Massachusetts,New York and Ohio.Those studies found that any apparent gain in tax revenue from residential development was lost when the INDEPENDENCE cost of delivering necessary public services—from roads,sewers Residential 4.656,443 4.817.233 (160,790) 1:1.03 and parking lots to education and public safety—was consid- Commercal Si Industrial 218,266 41,304 176,962 1-0.19 ered.A study released last year by Utah State University's Farmland 197.913 93.513 104,400 1:0.47 economics department found that for every SI in revenue Grand Total 5,072,622 4,952.050 120,572 collected by residential property taxes in one of that states counties,51.27 in services was being provided. These studies come at a time when sprawling growth is destroy. mg the states farmland at an alarming rare.The 20-county However,recent financial analyses of the costs of urban sprawl growth corridor from St.Cloud to the Twin Cities to Rochester are knocking the legs out from under the economic justifica- is the fastest growing metropolitan area from the northern tions for uncontrolled urban sprawl.Simply put,sprawling plains to the eastern seaboard.The seven-county Twin Cities residential developments often cost communities more than metropolitan arca has lost 235 square miles of agricultural land they contribute to tax coffers. to urbaniation since 1970.Since 1980,most of that growth has Perhaps the most occurred in second-ring suburbs.The Twin Cities area is the That was the conclusion of a study recently conducted by the third least densely populated metropolitan region in the ironic finding of this Land Stewardship Project and the American Farmland Trust in country,but one of the fastest growing geographically.The three metro-area communities:Farmington.Lake Elmo and amount of metro-area land devoted to urban land uses has study is the fact that Independence.Farm/and and the Tax Bill:The Cost of Comma- increased by 42 percent since 1970,almost double the 22 miry Services in Three Minnesota Cities.traces the flow of rev percent population growth rate during this same period. sprawling residential enues and expenditures generated by specific land uses in the three towns.On average,farmland adds twice as much to local These trends are accelerated by an all too common attitude developments can tax bases as it demands back in services•according to the study. that farmland is property that is"vacant"or"wasted,"until result in Jess (-sing data gathered from the Minnesota Department of it sprouts subdivisions.But ag acres fuel a powerful economic Revenue.Office of Mate Auditor and the Minnesota Depart- engine in the region.Despite the rapid urbanisation of the ment of Education,the analysis found that in those three region,metro-area agricultural activity produced more than funding for schools. communities,for every SI in tax revenue generated by residen- 5503 million worth of farm output and generated 7,000 jobs til development.on average 51.04 was spent co provide in 1990.Nationally.56 percent of agricultural production services.According to a study conducted in Wright County by comes trom counties on the edge of cities. the Minnesota Department of Agriculture,the further away from existing infrastructure development is located,the more Farmland and the Tax Bill concludes that Minnesota and metro. costly it is to provide services. area communities should continue to support existing farmland Protection activities,such as the Metro Ag Preserves and the We conducted the three-community study in hopes of state's Green Acres programs.For economic and environmental providing localised,bottom-line information that has reasons,the study recommends explonng other techniques to already been well-documented in other stares.We hope this retain this valuable resource base•such as purchase of conserva- data will help city officials better evaluate the Impact of land non easements. use decisions un municipal and school distnct finances. The statistics reported in this study will justify such measures. The three communities studied were chosen because they Perhaps even more importantly,they will help put to rest the represent cities undergoing various stages of development fallacy that the most valuable crop farmland can produce is within 25 miles of the Minneapolis-St.Paul downtown area. residential taxes.7- Independence Independence a just beginning to grow slowly,while Lake Elmo is experiencing moderate growth and Farmington is being developed rapidly. is Winter I90(, 1 11 �JA40LEJI 1 V� I 01 ` !. v lie NOTICE OF PUBLIC I = —VON h = '. .01 HEARING �� ..sk of: PLANNING COMMISSION ,_�'/r�_• 'mow, r MEETING ►$18712! tea:3► !1�� T_ a� . � Wednesday, JUNE 5, 1996 ; �`�'��- ,oi'/! at 7:00 p.m. gf:>. ' N' ii" ,0• City Hall Council Chambers :>. r,t's. 0�,,.;., �_41( 690 Coulter Drive Ow. �7 "t-'....again .�1i •.gyme Project: Town and CountryHomes I ' },"�' ,k Argil° • J �' ARF - :? �I = .. Y. First Addition _ rte 4 : . . ►. • Developer: Town and Country Homes ��`' ey ' lair h1- w N ill Location: NW corner of Lyman and 900J CM Galpin Blvd. �o I i Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant, Town and Country Homes, is proposing a mixed medium density residential and industrial office development on 45.21 acres located at the northwest corner of Lyman and Galpin Blvd. The applicant is requesting a land use plan amendment for the northerly 22.6+ acres from office/industrial to residential medium density, conceptual and preliminary PUD approval for a mixed townhome and office-industrial development, rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development, site plan approval for 146 townhome units, a wetland alteration permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site, and preliminary plat approval creating 24 lots and associated right-of-way,Town& Country Homes First Addition. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting,the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments:If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on May 23, 1996. Gerald&Lois Gustafson Roger& Gayleen Schmidt Earl Holasek 8341 Galpin Blvd. 8301 Galpin Blvd. 8610 Galpin Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Rene&Lisa Schroeder John& K. Sumners Joel H. Lehrke 2337 Boulder Road 2333 Boulder Road 2329 Boulder Road Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Kelly Morlock Chad J. Gniffke Douglas& S. Hipskind 2325 Boulder Road 2321 Boulder Road 2317 Boulder Road Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Hans Hagen Homes& Merle&Jane Volk Gregory K. Ziton Don& Ann Esping Suite 300 2334 Boulder Road 2330 Boulder Road 941 Hillwind Rd. NE Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Fridley,MN 55432 Douglas& Christine Johnson Jeffrey& Karla Althoff James&J. Larranaga 2322 Boulder Road 2326 Boulder Road 2318 Boulder Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Donald&Cathy Borgman Scott& A. Weldon Lisa Kilpatrick 2308 Boulder Road 2292 Boulder Road 2360 Stone Creek Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Timothy& Vicki Dempsey Lewis Engineering Co. Rory& Amy Lea 2301 Lukewood Dr. 4201 Norex Drive 2313 Boulder Road Chanhassen, MN 55317-9414 Chaska, MN 55318-3046 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerhard&Helene Schock Stephen& Melinda Pittorf Jeffrey Palm& Cheri Swiertz 2309 Boulder Road 2305 Boulder Road 2301 Boulder Road Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Rudolph&Jean Larson John& Kym Staples Merle &Jane Volk 2291 Boulder Road 2374 Stone Creek Dr. 16925 Co. Rd. 40 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Carver, MN 55315-9635 John&L. Sullivan Peter& M. Cunningham Stephen&N. Dragos 2346 Stone Creek Drive 2332 Stone Creek Drive 2318 Stone Creek Drive Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 William&M.Nason John Moran Trotters Ridge of Chanhassen 2361 Stone Creek Drive 2150 Boulder Road 2765 Casco Point Road Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Wayzata, MN 55391 Jeffrey&Lindsey Finch Steven&Blanche Neuwoehner Brian& Sally Snabb 2304 Stone Creek Drive 2375 Stone Creek Drive 2333 Stone Creek Lane W. Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 David&Yael Rubin William& Lorraine Rodriguez Kevin& Cathleen Dilorenzo 2345 Stone Creek Lane W. 2357 Stone Creek Lane W. 4013 Montery Ave. S. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Edina, MN 55416 William Jr.& Pamela Franzen Kip & Diane Hanson Neil & Beverly Butchart 2370 Stone Creek Lane W. 2356 Stone Creek Lane W. 2342 Stone Creek Lane W. Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Curt&Hope Enerson Mark& Christine Fischer Rodney & Janice Melton 2403 Bridle Creek Trail 2407 Bridle Creek Trail 2413 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Michael&Mary Minear Moberg Homes, Inc. Steven&Nancy Cavanaugh 2421 Bridle Creek Trail P.O. Box 57 2441 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Daniel&Dona Lee James& Mary Stasson Craig&Nina Waiiestad 2451 Bridle Creek Trail 2461 Bridle Creek Trail 6566 France Ave. S., #1001 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Edina, MN 55435 Arvey&Marlene Leg Michael Voigt& Deborah Skubai Thomas&Marcia Kiauek 2479 Bridle Creek Trail 2483 Bridle Creek Trail 2491 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen,MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 New Creations industries, inc. Steven& Deborah watts Hearth Homes 708 Main Street 2563 Bridle Creek Trail 10025 James Road Elk River,MN 55330 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Bloomington, MN 55431 Dennis&Carol Medo Edwin Susi Ken& M. Hoiirah 2420 Bridle Creek Trail 2430 Bridle Creek Trail 2450 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen,MN Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Westenberg Homes, Inc. Willard& Rebecca Bury David& Monica Kilber 7150 Willow View Curve 2460 Bridle Creek Trail 2470 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ronald&Jeanne Lindberg Bruce&Julianne Diehl Boyd& Debra Aarestad 2480 Bridle Creek Trail 2490 Bridle Creek Trail 2510 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Jeffrey& Cynthia Olson Dream Builders, Inc. William& Donna Hartwig 2520 Bridle Creek Trail 10420 49th Ave.N. 2536 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Plymouth, MN 55442 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Todd & Ann Mack James& Kathryn Liddell Conopco, Inc. 2542 Bridle Creek Trail 2550 Bridle Creek Trail c/o Van Den Bergh Foods Co. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 2200 Cabot Drive Lisle, IL 60532 The Nordick Group, Inc. Williad Morton Chaska Watertower Mini Storage 701 12th Ave. N. 4035 Norex Drive 149 Jonathan Blvd. N. West Fargo,ND 58078 Chaska, MN 55318-3043 Chaska, MN 55318-2342 Richard Riegert c/o Rieker Enterprises 27110 62nd St. W. Excelsior, MN 55331 - -..\ 1 N Z • o N yyO 0 0 - t< G ~1- - IC M N J1 -= 8 <°0z Z I W=2 0 H W dl .. CO sc 0:0 cl S+ J !-_Al p= m VV AI 31 ' - 1 \ \ i x 1- <`) i i , ii `C7� �c � Y �� t i ` \ -_ _ -. --µ ' IC • �" �•*yki) ��I rnTminmrrm*rmtrmrm I h- . -- - -- - ---- , , - -:---------- - _} q ' i-H I I w `�Y _j ) FFH4}FH4 H111Hi}Hill f I V I1 I -�-nnuuuu'n'nrnnnnll ' I a n ;4 u_W�uwuluuuJiw, _ b'r 1 311 1,t..� - I 1 ..J' -- E i- ti I ` is ri CI I E _ i N A is, : —t---1 I s i!* 11 ifi �, .t -__tel, �L.�_, . I I 1 aI� 1� \ ��- Vi S\� --• •_ -�'-- `\ :4 h- 1 ir , � ��, /10 MN S �,�.�! �,� l: I s x ( r- 1114 on\ - -- - - 1I 0 Irl o r U.I 7,... i i -••-• 4 c° k v ... N.,....„...... .., , I 1 i %/I --- --- - � • l) � \ rmrrmttmrmrrmirrmrrmrm�/ � _ -- 1'71L' i•. ' — — — - \ . i / I11111.1.1.1111.111/L1.111.1-1.1LW ILV.L.� . l M� 1116 1 1 ‘'\ ,� 1 1 1 for e �-- �� r lit ii -----------' �t2 I III :' `�; I :hi a : 1 s 16 • 1`111I I(1(I\• t I`III I I A:I.% I `11.';.1`1\ \ • ... I , � CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 15, 1996 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Peterson, Ladd Conrad, Kevin Joyce, Nancy Mancino, Bob Skubic, Jeff Farmakes, and Don Mehl STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOT 51, PLEASANT VIEW AND A PORTION OF VACATE ROOK PLACE RIGHT-OF-WAY (1.08 ACRES) INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS OF 19,478 SQ. FT. AND 27,659 SQ. FT. AND A VARIANCE TO THE RIGHT-OF- WAY WIDTH REQUIREMENT ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND LOCATED AT 6630 HORSESHOE CURVE, ROOK PLACE, MICHAEL LYNCH. Mancino: I just have a couple questions. Can you put that back up please? The existing garage is being used right now. Al-Jaff: Correct. Mancino: In use. And the applicant is proposing to add onto the house and put in a new garage. Al-Jaff: True. Mancino: Correct. And is there some way so that the existing garage can stay there during the construction of the new garage? I mean if it's in use and they need something. If the applicant needs to put their cars in the garage. When I saw it, you know there were other things in the garage besides cars. Is the applicant, is there some way that they can keep that edifice up and use it while they're building the new one and then once the new one is built, then take it down? Al-Jaff: It becomes a non-conforming situation once they record the plat so. Mancino: Can it stay non-conforming for a period of time? If you put a time limit on it. Al-Jaff: You could make that a condition. You could put a deadline. What we have one in the past, is we've put a deadline when a structure has to be removed but at the same time we've required that the applicant put up an escrow to guarantee that the structure be removed by a certain time. If they didn't remove it, the city can go in and perform the work. 1 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mancino: Okay. Aanenson: The reason that is, the only leverage now to make sure we get compliance is that before the subdivision is recorded. I think if that's your preference, I'm not sure what the applicant wants but certainly that could be an alternative. If they want to keep the garage, if they're going to put up some security to make sure that it does get removed so it's not non- conforming, we'd be willing to look at that condition. Mancino: Okay. My other question is, upgrading Horseshoe Curve. I mean you know for those of us who have been there. I don't know if everyone went to the site and you look at Horseshoe Curve and you go, if you upgrade it, which you know I don't know what the word upgrade. To me it means that maybe it needs to be resurfaced. That's upgrading. I don't know how you upgrade it to make it wider because of the existing way that area has been built. Meaning that there are many garages which are just right off Horseshoe Curve. There is topography change. There is, I mean there are structures right there. So when I hear you say upgrade, I'm interpreting that to mean that that means keeping the width the same and maybe having to resurface the road when it's in bad shape. And if you're going to do that, do you need to take more right-of-way than what's already there is my question. Aanenson: It may be necessary for utility easements. Storm water easements and that sort of thing. That doesn't necessarily mean the asphalt width is going to change but it provides opportunity for other utility easements on either side. Mancino: Now don't we already have, isn't that, aren't there already sewer and water and everything there? Aanenson: I don't believe there's storm sewer out in that area. Conrad: No, there's no storm sewer. Aanenson: There's no storm sewer. Mancino: Okay. Aanenson: So that's why the 40 foot came. There's 30 right now and that's why the engineering department had recommended just the 10 foot additional just to get it to 40, which would provide the additional easement. Mancino: So if they got 10 additional feet, they would be able to put in storm sewer? 2 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Aanenson: We're just looking long term. What other things could we be looking at? Storm sewer would be one issue. Conrad: Is that possible? Aanenson: Well it's one of the areas we've identified as far as water quality issues, you know for Lotus Lake. Conrad: So that's not a blue sky type deal? It's possible? Aanenson: Sure. Sure. Mancino: And does that change, going from 30 feet to 40 feet, does that change what the applicant can do to that lot as far as where the building can go? Does it make a difference or not? Does it still give the applicant enough area to put the building pad where common sense should go? Al-Jaff: Yes, and actually the more staff looked at this. Originally when I had met with the applicant I said we would need a 30 foot setback but in reality all they needed was a 10 foot because this is sort of like a corner lot. It sort of has that double frontage so they could actually get an additional 20 feet of buildable area. So they could set that home back another 20 feet and get a larger pad than what they are proposing right now. Mancino: Okay. Okay. Good. Al-Jaff: Very workable. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions? Mehl: I have one question on that right-of-way. Where is the, where does the 30 foot dimension start? Or where is it, from where to where? Al-Jaff: Center of the street. Mehl: Center of the street onto the property. Al-Jaff: And then 15 foot on each side from the center of the street. Mehl: Okay. So you're asking for an additional 10 to be dedicated by the applicant? 3 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Al-Jaff: Correct. Mancino: Just on that one side. Mehl: On the one side. Now when the street is eventually upgraded, are you going to then increase the right-of-way the entire length of the street? By an additional 10 feet. Al-Jaff: What will happen is right-of-way will be acquired potentially for a total of 50 foot right-of-way potentially. That's what the engineering department would like to see. So it would be 25 feet from the center of the street. The width of the right-of-way I do not believe. I mean the paved section. I don't believe that will change. But the total right-of- way would eventually come up to 50 feet. Mehl: Okay. Can there be structures such as garages and so on within that right-of-way? Al-Jaff: No. Mehl: Okay. So if you go an additional 10 feet on each side of the road then, if there are structures, are they going to be required to be taken down? Al-Jaff: Or moved. Or maybe at that portion we'd just have reduced right-of-way. Mancino: Because they're relatively new buildings within 5 feet of the street, it looks like. I mean I didn't measure. Mehl: So it's possible you could have an inconsistent right-of-way meandering from lot to lot then through the whole length of the street? Aanenson: The only way we can address that, there's unfortunately someone from engineering not here, it's always the city's opportunity when somebody subdivides to try to get future easement if we believe that the opportunity exists to provide any necessary improvements such as storm sewer, which may be in the future. Can we anticipate what's going to happen all the way down and the timing of that? No, but we know that there may be a possibility of possibly doing some storm water projects in the near future so engineering always makes the recommendation that if we have a substandard right-of-way width, to try to at the time of subdivision, to gain the necessary easements at that time. Mehl: Okay, thank you. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mancino: Any other questions for staff at this point? Thank you. Does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission? Mike Lynch: Yes. ...many people had a chance to go through it. Mancino: Could you please give us your name and address? Mike Lynch: Mike Lynch, 6630 Horseshoe Curve. We've been there about 25 years now. Actually the part of the property that I'm going to subdivide, or want to subdivide was the neighborhood dumping grounds for the '64-'65 tornado. The way it's been used all...we moved in. This is color keyed and even though I understand that there may be sometime, somewhere, somehow, some potential for widening this road. If you've been down through there and seen the structures that are there existing now, that's what I'd like to run through and see if you think it's viable. I really don't. There is some selfish interest on my part because if you saw it, that is a triangular lot and the less width across the triangle I have, the further into the corner the house has to go. The topography of the lot is even more pronounced than what you see on the screen. This is a definite flat spot. Right exactly where my hand is, and this is quite a steep grade and a steep grade there. That's the parting line was drawn there. My property's about, my present house is about 30 feet over, backwards. It's a straight down drop off and it drops off here to this house. Drops off there to that house. The next house here must be 250 to 300 feet in that direction. The next house here is located about, well you can see a corner of it there. Probably would be 200 and some odd feet away. But there's a definite two layer shot. The street, again on that lot or at the same level. Originally that was a Swedish Covenant Church Camp and in the 1890's it was sold. Sold out past that time and then most of our houses are little cabins is where it all started. As this would actually be south. My property right here. Garages. You see in the squares, measured from the edge of the road, the number of feet from the road. 5 feet, 10 feet, 8 feet, 8 feet. These are new structures within the last 5 or 6 years. 20 feet. 20 feet. 15 feet. This is my old garage. It's...feet. 15 feet. I believe this is your property Ladd right here. And nothing else around here. Now as you look at some of the other structures, what you have here is, what I call a 20 year hedge. In fact the city comes around every once in a while and cuts our hedge back with some sort of a Toro thing because it grows into the road. So that's the green stripes. These are mature lilac that's just kind of basically been there since before I moved there. 20 feet tall. Most of the privacy in the neighborhood is generated by those hedges. The road noise, the level of traffic we get, it does cut it out. I think all of us that live there, those hedges are quite important. The red lines are steep grades. Now we're talking 30% plus right off the edge of the road. So this is down. That's up. This is up. That's down. The purple are existing new quality retaining walls that are...structures but new ones that have been put in somewhat recently. I've done an informal survey of the neighborhood and everybody would be...against any kind of change in the road pattern. All the utilities 5 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 presently run right down the center of the road. The gas and the sewer and the water. It's rough terrain, if you've been there. This is a very steep hill right here. A long hill there and the road surface is in good condition now...adding new or different underlay on it. I think that's it. What you see right here and what you have seen on the map there is the old road that was platted and since divided by my neighbor and I into...the original plat. Now I don't plan to build on the lot myself. I simply will be selling the lot to an individual or developer so there are quite a few things that I have hoping addressing staff, I marked up some of them. I don't know what to do with this. For instance, I was interested in when I got to take my existing garage down because I have a number of cars and lawn mowers and both of my sons worldly possessions. They...so that's a massive storage which with the new garage would take the place of it but I don't know what I'd do with the stuff in the meantime. Tree preservation, fencing and there's another note about revising grading plans to show proposed paths and levels of the house. Without a house plan, how am I to know? The one, item number 6. Tree preservation, reforestation. If the house really goes where it should go on the lot, from an aesthetic viewpoint, a practical viewpoint, it should be right in the middle of that, where I put my hand. And due to, well Sharmin's given me a change today that I hadn't heard before. The fact that I could get it closer to this lot line. So the more easement I give up and the further away I am from that lot line, obviously it pushes me to this corner and I have six walnut trees back there that I planted 25 years ago. A nice maple. Then this entire area is open. And if you notice on the, I think it's right in here, or aren't I focusing with my bifocals here. There's a mature and dying white birch tree that's about 50 feet tall and that's really about the only tree that should have to come out. There's a small western pine here that might but otherwise there's plenty of room in there to get a massive house in. Lots of other trees on the lot and somebody...I'm sure with those existing trees, there's probably closer to 50% coverage on the lot right now. It's heavily wooded. I lost quite a few elms out of there originally. Before I couldn't grow grass. So that's the program. I'm not really, I really don't have any problem with any of the other suggestions by staff. My old garden house needs to come out. That infringes on my neighbor's lot line probably by 6 inches in that corner and that's a plan to take out anyway when the new garage goes in so that's certainly not a problem. So I guess 1, 2, 3. I really don't want to give that easement away here and of course I have to give it away on this side as well. I would rather not give the easement away because the more easements that occur in the neighborhood, the more chance that someday, someone may feel that we have to do something with it and due to our plantings and the other large trees that have to come out in that 10 feet, I'd be really upset. And I would like to be able to get enough room in here to move that house down. Other than that, that's...my feelings at this time. Could I answer anybody's questions? Mancino: Any questions from the commissioners? Mike, what are your plans about the garage? Are you going to be starting the new garage soon? Or are you waiting? 6 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mike Lynch: I'd like to sell the property. Get the money and then start with that...process. Mancino: And you're hoping to put the lot up for sale right away? Mike Lynch: I'd like to this summer, yeah. Mancino: Any other questions? Thank you. Mike Lynch: Thank you. Mancino: We'd like to open this for a public hearing. Do I have a motion please and a second to open this for a public hearing please. Fannakes moved, Conrad seconded to open the public hearing. The public heating was opened. Mancino: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on this issue, please do so now. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please. Conrad moved, Farmakes seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Commissioners. Craig. Peterson: Question for staff. The talk about the easement seems to be probably the primary issues. I'm a little confused and need some clarification. If all the other homes in the area, the existing ones are at 15 feet, and this is kind of in the center and doesn't have, a well established neighborhood. Even though our current standards are at 60, we're considering lowering it down to 35 I believe. Is that even logical? If everybody else is at 15, I mean I don't want to have 15 feet and then all of a sudden 30-35. You can't do anything with it anyway. Are we, should we go back to 15 I guess is my, I'm looking for logic in going higher than 15 if everybody else is at 15. Al-Jaff: We have an opportunity at this time to take the right-of-way. That's why the engineers are asking for it. Peterson: But I'm asking. Al-Jaff: Is it logical? 7 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Peterson: What's the probability? I'll put it that way. What's the probability of ever using. Aanenson: I don't think it's the desire to go in and widen that whole street. I don't think that's the program. The only reason you get additional easement is if there's an opportunity for some other utilities or like that that you don't have to acquire additional easements. I don't think it's on the city's plan to go in and put a 50 foot street in there. That's certainly not the city's intention. Peterson: My reaction is I think that the staff has done a fine job in looking at and maintaining what the city needs to do. I look at the neighborhood and the feel of the neighborhood and try to prognosticate what will happen down the road and I just don't see us needing that, that much of an easement and I think because it will affect the placement of the house, so I would approve everything with the exception of the easement. That would be consistent with the rest of the neighborhood and recommend that it be maintained at 15 feet. Aanenson: Do you have any comments on the garage once this is, how to work that? Peterson: Well, I empathize with the need to have A before B happen. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with supporting the applicant's position of prior to the actual build out of the property, that he has the opportunity to sell the property and build out. If we can integrate that into some kind of reasonable motion. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: Yeah, I think the issues are 1 and 7 in here. Obviously I'm a neighbor of Mike's. I think you've done a good job. I don't have really any issues. I'm probably a little bit biased in the neighborhood. I don't mind right-of-way for good purposes and I do like storm water systems. I'll always vote for anything that says we can improve the water quality. In this case it's just tough for me to believe we've ever going to do it. I just can't imagine it will ever be done in my life time so it's I guess all I can say. I just, if you've been through the neighborhood, it would be a terrificly expensive project to go in there and put a storm water system in, as much as maybe it's needed. But it'd be huge. So I have a tough time dealing with the additional right-of-way and I think I'd like to somehow word number 7 so that the garage can stand until there's some sort of construction or before construction on the second lot that Mike's splitting off. Those are my only comments. Mancino: Thank you. Kevin. Joyce: Basically the same thing. I think staff did a good job. I think they're looking forward here. I can totally understand where they're coming from but it's a beautiful neighborhood. 8 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 I'd just as soon leave it the way it is and I think it would have an affect on the way that house is placed and I worry about those trees. All I looked at were trees. Those beautiful trees and any way we can save one tree, let's do it. And I'd like to accommodate the property owner if possible. I think an escrow account is a good idea Kate so let's try to do it that way and work it in. Mancino: Thank you. Bob. Skubic: Yeah I share the sentiments of the other commissioners. I visited the site and it's hard for me to envision how it would be beneficial to increase the right-of-way given the proximity of the dwellings in that area and I'll favor escrowing... Mancino: Thank you. Jeff. Farmakes: No further comments to make. Mancino: Don. Mehl: Yeah I agree with what's been said here also. I agree with Ladd, it would be very expensive, and I might add that I think it could be very disruptive to the whole area if we put in a storm water system. It very likely would change the character of the street and so I really have nothing more. Mancino: I have no other comments either. I agree with what the other Planning Commissioners have said. Is there a motion please? Peterson: I would make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat for Rook Place Subdivision #96-9 as shown on the plans dated April 13, 1995, subject to the conditions 1 through 8 with the changes to 1 being that the right-of-way would be maintained as the rest of the neighborhood, 15 feet. And that item number 7 would be changed so that the existing garage does not need to be removed prior to construction beginning on the lot being created by the additional subdivision. Mancino: Is there a second? Joyce: I'll second it. Mancino: Thank you. Any discussion? Is that clear Sharmin with number 7? Al-Jaff: So you just hold building permits? We basically won't issue building permits. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Conrad: I believe that would be a good way. Mancino: That would be a really good way to do that. Aanenson: We'd have to check with the attorney's office because we're creating a non- conforming situation so we'll just, we understand your intent. We'll just make sure that we can do that and send that onto Council. Mancino: Pass it onto Council with our intent. Thank you. Peterson moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat for Rook Place Subdivision #96-9, as shown on the plans dated April 13, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1. The right-of-way for Horseshoe Curve shall conform with the neighborhood. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plan will be required for Lot 1, Block 1 at the time of building permit application. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for Surface Water Management Fees accordingly to local ordinances. Currently the single family rate is $2,780.00 per acre. These fees are due at time of final plat recording. 4. Full park and trail fees be paid in accordance with city ordinances. 5. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of all grading limits near trees before grading can begin. Applicant will submit to the city proposed tree fencing locations. 6. The applicant must submit tree preservation plans or new canopy coverage calculations taking into account the additional loss of at least six trees. Reforestation may be required. 7. The existing garage does not have to be removed until after construction of the new garage. The shed setbacks must also be brought into compliance prior to recording of the plat. 8. Building official conditions: 10 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 a. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and indicate the lowest level floor, entry level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. b. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading or construction on the property. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, RICE LAKE MANOR INTO TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, AND LOCATED AT 8591 TIGUA CIRCLE, RICE LAKE MANOR ESTATES, BARRY MCKEE. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff at this point? Peterson: The only question I would have is, do you have any sense of Parcel A that is reserved for future development, how many lots can go on there actually? Al-Jaff: Our ordinance requires 15,000 square feet per lot. There is an issue of frontage. How do you serve those properties? And you have a limit of four homes off of a private driveway. Now in this case we already have two homes that are served from that driveway. This entire subdivision there are a total of 8 lots and they're steep, wooded. They back up to a lake. Really the only way you see those parcels served, as they split, is probably private. This is a perfect case when a private driveway would be used. Mancino: Any other questions for staff? Is the applicant here? Do they wish to make a presentation? Kevin Thompson: My name is Kevin Thompson... Just a little background. Initially the conceptual plan for this division was actually a 4 or 5 lots to the existing home. After review and went over it with staff, we decided that for aesthetics reasons, in order to keeping with the character and the nature of the neighborhood, and also for economic reasons, that putting a public road in...probably would not be very advantageous. We decided to go with...simple lot split. Just divide it into a simple two lots. Into two very sizable pieces...sell that lot as a single family home....If this is approved... Basic lot split. There's a number of conditions. Quite a number of conditions...The only question...is on item number 11. The removal of the 11 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 fence or portion of fence that is non-complying with city code. That's the neighboring property and...We had a difficult time connecting with them prior to this meeting... I suspect that would be... Mancino: May I ask a question about that? Isn't that people who own the fence that's encroaching, isn't that house up for sale? So it would be new neighbors that move in there and a lot of times, this has personally happened that the new neighbors who move in think that that's their property line and they get used to it and in the future there, kind of sometimes down it would be a problem because they look at it as their own because it's in their fence. Kevin Thompson: ...showing their outline that it crosses the property line...they actually brought it up to see what we could do so I suspect we're not going to have any problems... Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? No. Thank you. May I please have a motion to open this for a public hearing, with a second. Conrad moved, Peterson seconded to open the public healing. The public healing was opened. Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on this preliminary plat, on this metes and bounds. Seeing none. Conrad moved, Peterson seconded to close the public healing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Comments from commissioners. Don. Mehl: Yeah, I agree with staff. The private drive is the only logical way. There's no other way to really access the property. It's kind of boxed in. I guess I really don't have anything else. I guess I personally wouldn't have a problem with saying he'll show, or the staff condition shall remove the fence. I think it could be changed or as an option to move it to a location that would be in compliance. Mancino: Move the property line? Mehl: Pardon? Mancino: It would be in compliance with? Mehl: With the codes. I assume that would be off of the property. 12 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mancino: Jeff. Farmakes: Pretty straight forward. No comments. Mancino: Okay. Bob. Skubic: I support it. Mancino: Kevin. Joyce: I'm fine. Conrad: Nothing new. Mancino: Craig? I have nothing new either. I do think that this is the opportune time to put the fence in the right place and at the property line because it can create in the future problems and I just think that it would be much easier to have it resolved for the applicant. I think it's clean, straight, and this is the best time to do it. So I do support the staff report and all the conditions. May I have a motion please? Conrad: Yeah, I'd like to motion Planning Commission recommends approval of the metes and bounds subdivision #96-8, Rice Lake Manor Estates as shown on the plans dated Received April 12, 1996, subject to the conditions 1 through 11 of the staff report. Mancino: Is there a second please? Joyce: I'll second that one, yeah. Mancino: Any discussion? Conrad moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Metes and Bounds Subdivision #96-8, Rice Lake Manor Estates, as shown on the plans dated Received April 12, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1. Tree preservation fencing must be installed around the perimeter of the building site, 20 feet from the proposed pad, before grading or excavation begins. No trees will be permitted to be removed except those within the building pad and 20 feet from the pad. Also one tree will be required in the front yard setback area. 13 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit on Tract A, a detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plan shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. 3. The applicant shall dedicate to the city drainage easements over all wetlands and drainage ditches. The drainage easements shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for Surface Water Management fees pursuant to city ordinance. 5. Extension of sewer and water service to the new lot will require a permit from the city's building department. 6. The new lot will be subject to sanitary sewer and water hook-up charges pursuant to city ordinance. 7. The private driveway should be upgraded to meet city ordinance. Cross-access easements shall be conveyed to benefitting properties. 8. Full park and trail fees be paid in accordance with city ordinance. 9. The applicant shall remove all structures that encroach onto the city property located east of the subject site. 10. The neighbor's fence located north of the subject property which encroaches onto Parcel A must be removed. 11. Building Official's conditions: a. Remove fence or portion of fence which is non-complying with city code. b. Determine construction period for structure at the northwest corner of the property and work with Inspections Division staff to obtain permits and inspections, if any are required. c. Remove the structure on the east side of the dwelling, or obtain a permit to alter the structure to meet building and zoning code requirements. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 14 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL FACILITY ON 1.06 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED AT 501 WEST 78TH STREET, HIWAY 5 CENTRE, ROMAN ROOS/MIKE RAMSEY. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions at this point? Mehl: That green space over there. I understand about the leasing of it to get additional area and reduce the hard surface but we aren't really gaining anything. The applicant really isn't gaining anything is he? Because to the bystander, the person driving down Highway 5 looking at it, nothing has changed. You've still got a certain hard surface area. We aren't reducing, really visually, the hard surface area by doing what's being proposed. You know in reality. Mancino: That's true. Aanenson: It is open space. You're correct in that matter except what we're recommending, that this proposal is that we actually landscape it and integrate it with the parcel because right now it's probably, it's open space. It's providing impervious surface. Water can run through the property but what we're saying is that it could be developed more intensely landscaped to provide more aesthetics value. That that would be intent of the city. More aesthetic value. Are you going to see physically, the utility wouldn't change except the aesthetic value would. What would be the negative side is in order to achieve the ratios, that they would have to reduce the size of the building. We believe that this is a high quality building and that based on the design, it may make sense because this parcel was originally a part of that and the HRA hasn't to date done much with it. That this is an opportunity to give more aesthetic value to the property. Also add enhancement to the project. Instead of trying to put the patio where they're showing it now, pushing it to the side makes it a better project. Mancino: It allows one not to eat on Highway 5. Aanenson: Right. They can eliminate the patio and still achieve it, sure. Mancino: ...now that doesn't mean you couldn't push the building a little closer to Highway 5 and have your patio on the 79th Street where it's a little quieter and at least it's not a four lane Highway 5 also. So there are other positions it could go. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Aanenson: Right. Farmakes: The issue of a shared sign. Refresh my memory on pylon signs. We're looking at 64 square feet or, is that split between four tenants? Al-Jaff: That is split between the four tenants, yes. Farmakes: Is there additional space for changeable type or specials of the week or whatever? ...that 64 square feet. Al-Jaff: I don't believe so. Farmakes: I'm thinking of a very similar pylon sign down...that just deals with the mall but it also has moveable type kind of thing. Aanenson: Are you talking about changeable copy or readable? Farmakes: Changeable. Aanenson: Change out is permitted. As opposed to a reader, electronic. Farmakes: The issue of three, is reduced to two, elevations for signage is, is that sort of a fielder's choice or are you recommending a direction? What I'm wondering is, once these buildings get in and they're there, I'm thinking of banners and temporary type signage and how that's going to be positioned against Highway 5. How do you intend to... I'm thinking current frontage now is in a parking lot that accesses the Inn. I think our current ordinances deal with the level of signage but it's on existing street frontage. City streets. Can you just explain? Al-Jaff: We've talked briefly to the applicant about this issue and there's going to be landscaping along Highway 5. But there will be a pylon sign along Highway 5. If there is temporary signage that they will need, they would have to meet ordinance requirements. It is permitted for a limited time throughout the year. And they would have to come in and apply for a permit for it. Signage should be limited to two elevations only. Farmakes: So temporary type signage on the property that extends out towards Highway 5 is a situation that, I'm trying to remember the ordinance. It's been a while since we've been involved with it. We're not going to be having push carts out there lit up with banners hung on trees and things of that nature. 16 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Al-Jaff: No. They would have to meet ordinance requirements in the ordinances. But rather than each tenant, the ordinance as far as temporary signage allows temporary signs three times a year for I believe it's 10 days at a time. Rather than each tenant in the building being allowed that privilege, it would be the entire building. So...tenants in the building will be allowed. Mancino: 30 days max. Farmakes: Of the four tenants, are we looking at the future subdivision, is that what we're looking at? Al-Jaff: Future subdivision of? Farmakes: Larger square footage. Al-Jaff: Correct. Aanenson: That's tentatively how they have laid it out with the lease, yes. Farmakes: Now is that their decision then? If they want to subdivide that again. Aanenson: Well ultimately we...if there's adequate parking, sure. But there's a threshold of how many square foot when you subdivide it_..probably the same square footage. So unless it becomes something of a higher use. Farmakes: But it allows them additional signage as well as some additional. Aanenson: Right now there's four tenants proposed. Mancino: So if they would subdivide it...two more, they couldn't have two more signs? Al-Jaff: The sign criteria that we have outlined here is really more restrictive than what the ordinance permits, and we've talked to the applicant in regards to this. It is restricted by square footage as well so they couldn't exceed the ordinance requirements. Farmakes: They have a square footage and percentage so...and they added two more stores. Aanenson: It'd get smaller, smaller and smaller, right. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Al-Jaff: And we're saying each letter may not exceed 2 feet in height so if there was one strip where, or one sign band where all the signage could go. Joyce: I'd just ask. I assume the patio's part of the development in itself and not a tenant? Al-Jaff: Correct. Joyce: Okay, so I'm sure you have a tenant picked out here originally but... Al-Jaff: Correct. Joyce: Thank you. Mancino: Is the applicant? Would you like to present to us please. Roman Roos: Good evening. My name is Roman Roos. I'm the developer for Mike Ramsey, the owner of the...I see one familiar face. A lot of change. What you see before you is an attempt to take a 47,000 square foot site...First of all I should clarify. The owner of this site is a different owner than the Prairie House Restaurant...and so it became an issue that could be addressed on this site plan approval process. At any rate, the building is a 10,000 square foot building that right now is 60 foot deep by the length giving it a 10,000 square foot dimension...the minimum width of that building gives you 1,500 square foot tenant space. ...spaces inbetween. Another space would be a sporting goods store. That would be...business in the city of Chanhassen... Next to that would be Dominoes Pizza. We have soft ice cream going in in this location. In the process of negotiating the deal with a bagel operation. That may or may not be the case in this space. Talk about an ideal world, that's the way we would like to have it but that is not a final approval at this point in time. As a fallback to that we...so it's quite a broad range then...so as time goes, negotiation...right now ideally we're going in that direction. The bagel operation that I had set up for that has elected not to go into that space. That would be a 3,000. This is a 4,000 square foot center with a coffee shop being 1,500 square foot and 2,500 being the bagel operation. At this point in time that is not real. There have been changes as of yesterday. So I'm back in the leasing mode on... Also individuals coming in for a soft ice cream or a coffee operation...cup of coffee. Whether that patio's here or here is really wide open. Ideally we'd set it down on this end again with the bagel operation in mind. Buy a bagel and have a cup of coffee and sit down...and take off. I'm hoping that will still become reality but regardless there will be a patio operation and we're in the process of working with staff to authorize that... The building, well first of all I should talk about the parking effect. When this piece of property was purchased out of bankruptcy there was quite a negotiation on a cross over easement...at this point in time so that the...and this lot would in essence become one parking operation. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mancino: So you would take out that median that is still... Roman Roos: Yeah, we'll do something with that little curb effect that you saw there and the grade elevations that you had the Prairie House will be coming down...elevation off of that. So that whole scene, which can be a very smooth transition. At the same time we've got a grading plan that... But that covers, we had 55 spots on this...enough parking for any building...so a cross over easement, I think we've addressed that issue. The green space, again the amount of hard surface, impervious surface that we have now is what we had before with the Prairie House...What we tried to do is enhance it somewhat. We had the idea of using this space to supplement it...and if the HRA sees fit to go that direction, and...aesthetic value of the site. Not necessarily a part of the site but...so we've yet to see what the HRA will do but... In looking at the elevation of the dropping and also the sight distance from the highway. What we've done basically is we've taken the...maybe go along with that same idea in mind. This is a standing seam roof going all the way around the unit and wrapping around the back side so when you look at the property from, going westbound on Highway 5, it's going to look like a finished building so you won't see the back of the building so to speak. By the same token, on the front side of course is the entry to the west side of the building. Again a sporting goods and of course these smaller tenants and... We're going to be using a rock face, pre-colored block. I have some samples. These are pre-colored rock faced blocks. Now we're using a banding effect in what we call a round face and a rock faced flat stone. It would be these two. Basically it's a double band in effect with the same...tied in to that. Mancino: How high up does this go? Roman Roos: That would be the full column. If you look at the texture, the rock faced would be the lighter color... Then the standing seam roof. The sign band's going to be what we call a synthetic stucco. It looks like stucco. It's really not a stucco but it's a sign band per se. There would be a lighter color again to accent the signage. The signage being...all around the building. This...the standing seam metal again on spire tops...east corner of the building. The line of sight from Highway 5 will end up, typically like most commercial buildings...with some HVAC on the roof. Everything around that of course with some kind of...but you can see the Highway 5 signage, or better screening from Highway 5, you can see that we should not see from the highway the roof top units but they will be screened regardless. We couldn't make our parapet any higher to make that so you couldn't see over this roof top portion... I'm open for questions I guess at this point. Mancino: Any questions at this point? Farmakes: What is the connection between the southern section of the parking lot and the patio...sporting goods? 19 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Roman Roos: The sporting goods is on the north end. Farmakes: Or excuse me, who's on the south end? Roman Roos: The south end would have been Bruegger's Bagels... Farmakes: Right. So is that your intent to still make that a consumable area? Roman Roos: Let me, if I can clarify. We have a Dominoes and a soft ice cream operation in there. And we've reviewed it for that approach. If I do put a bagel shop, bagel operation in there, that would be fantastic...but right now I do not have a bagel operation under lease for that building. It is my intent to go that direction. I don't have that done yet. What I'm saying to you basically...they would fit that patio quite well. Aanenson: I guess the staffs position on that was, we didn't really talk about it. When we saw it we were kind of excited about it because the applicant's indicated there is a bike path there. It's kind of got the aesthetic, kind of a warm kind of a look if the building is done right. We've talked about originally when we first saw this, was putting up a fence to make it more inviting, but visually from the highway that doesn't, you see the fence and not the building so we just thought it needed a warm kind of place. If you look, drive along the road, looked over there and saw a patio kind of thing. If it was done right landscaping wise, that it's not loud but it was next to the bike path so we thought it would be a nice enhancement. Farmakes: I think the intent is nice. The question I have though is it taking away a landscape area to shield them from the highway? Roman Roos: It's not a massive patio area. Aanenson: No, it's not very big. Roman Roos: Very small. Two tables. It's not a. Aanenson: I guess that's why we'd recommend pushing it to the side so you could still have the landscaping. Farmakes: In conjunction with that I'm looking at the road turn around. It goes off to the other side. Basically that development comes very close to the highway. Either it's... Roman Roos: Are you saying Highway 5 is...I missed your direction. 20 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Farmakes: Well, to the road area. Mancino: The parking? Roman Roos: The actual highway. Farmakes: Right. Mancino: Where the parking lot comes south towards Highway 5. How far away is that...? Aanenson: It's moving away from that property. Mancino: From Highway 5. Aanenson: Quite a ways. Mancino: How far away? Do you have an approximate distance? Farmakes: In looking at it, I mean as far as I know there's nothing there at this point in time. It's cut grass. Mancino: Right. You're correct. Farmakes: So my question that I'm wondering what is being served say with that road turn around. Let's say that that was landscaped...what is being served there? Aanenson: That road turn around. Mancino: Having this as a turn around right here. This area. Correct? Farmakes: I'm looking at this area and I'm looking at this area and I'm just wondering what is being served. If for instance this. Mancino: You can't have green space there. Farmakes: That's correct. Say for instance this is not a restaurant, what is being served here? Roman Roos: If that's the case, this portion, this...will disappear. If we move that around there to the right of there. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mancino: So this patio will come over here. Be relocated over to the east. This will become green space. And the other thing, is it possible to continue this green space all the way here. All the way here because you're not using parking, etc. and then to have this whole part green space which would also maybe pull the trail system away from Highway 5, because you'd have more surface area. Aanenson: That's a MnDot trail. We'd have to check on that. I think part of it is, that's where the service delivery is going to be. All that service delivery comes down that, in the front of the building. Mancino: Right here. Aanenson: Correct. Roman Roos: In regards to the...and you can go out this way or this way and we just didn't want to have any single entrance to the parking. Farmakes: But then that'd be still the case if we came down and turned through there. I'm just wondering, it goes into another parking lot. Mancino: Maybe eliminate a couple spaces or else use some from the motel. Can't they give them some multi-use for the motel parking? Aanenson: Sure. I don't think that's, I guess what my concern would be the circulation of the, when you've got deliveries being made in that area. Where you've got trucks blocking that entrance... Farmakes: No, continue down and just turn before you get to the tree. Roman Roos: Right there's a parking area? Aanenson: Landscape further in here and eliminate those stalls? Mancino: Yes. Al-Jaff: There's another issue that we need to point out. Currently the green space or the parking setback is 12 feet. The ordinance requires a 25 foot setback. The applicant should meet that setback, there's potential to lose some additional parking spaces. One of the alternatives that we talked to the applicant about was actually sliding the building further to the south. Closer to Highway 5 because you do have room to do so and meeting that, the 22 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 setback, green space requirement. But again, it will impact the parking. The number of parking spaces and that's why I'm raising this issue at this time. If we take any additional parking area and landscape here, to the south of the property and then do the same thing along the north property line, we might be short on parking. Right now we're right on. Mancino: I'd rather give up the... Farmakes: That's what I'm saying. Isn't our intent to shield from the highway? Either by a large berming or certainly more than one row of trees. Not to obscure the building but isn't it our intent to do creative landscaping along the front. Aanenson: Right. I guess that's what we're. Mancino: To keep this and allow this to be a variance or whatever. Aanenson: Right. You have to back up and understand that what we were saying is that, I'm not sure. What we're saying is, instead of looking at a wall of landscaping and not seeing the building, wouldn't it be nicer to have some soft landscaping with something people pleasing, a people place. And that's what we were trying to encourage. Okay now, just so you understand that. That was our perspective. I understand what you're saying. You'd rather see the wall landscaped but we were taking a different approach on that. That's what the recommendation is. Farmakes: As I understand it, you're intending to have a people place dependent on having a tenant who will do that. Aanenson: He's already got two people there that are going to use it. Roman Roos: ...I'm trying to get the right mixture of tenants. The patio... Aanenson: And the bike trails... Farmakes: Okay, but your current tenants for food consuming would be Dominoes, which is primarily take out. Roman Roos: Ice cream. Farmakes: And ice cream meaning Dairy Queen? Roman Roos: Correct. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Farmakes: Okay. So are these people, are these restaurant operations really something that you're going to walk down to the end of the building and consume the food? As I understand, this is a sporting goods, is this sporting goods or what? Mancino: Sporting goods. Farmakes: Sporting goods company. Certainly the retail of that area is going to come out. Roman Roos: I guess I'm losing what you're driving to Jeff. The idea of a patio was a service idea. If you're going to go over with the kids and have an ice cream cone, you'd go down to the patio and sit down and have an ice cream cone so I guess I'm losing your direction, okay. The intent of the, my intent on this project was for a small seating. Not a big...small seating area where at the original time Brueggers Bagels, a coffee shop and soft ice cream operation would use that seating area. It's going to be, it's only 10,000 square foot. It's not a very big building and the distance from either one of those stores...into that area is not very large. That was the intent. That intent is going to stay there. Mancino: But it certainly is a...pizza or you could take out. Roman Roos: It's a 15 minute operation. You go down and eat ice cream, you go and you leave...tracking here. Farmakes: What I'm looking at is I'm looking at the proposed use that's on the southern end of that exposure. Does it work with the benefit which is taking that additional area for landscaping. This is an issue that's been before here... Mancino: And which we can certainly do... Roman Roos: This is what I'm saying to you, we can move this around... Mancino: We'll move the patio here and you will get additional landscaping there. Aanenson: Right. Mancino: Now can you also, the question came up, can we also have a setback be what it is here and give a little more additional... Aanenson: Right. What the ordinance requires is that you put it be screened. Have the berm 5 feet to screen the cars. Right. 24 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Al-Jaffa If you do the reduced setback. Aanenson: If you do the reduced setback, right. So it can be accomplished. Mancino: So it could be accomplished and in fact this is, I mean we don't want to screen the building as much as we're concerned about the parking anyway. So that could work, okay. Aanenson: Yes. Mancino: Does that answer? Farmakes: Yeah. Mancino: Any other questions? Mehl: Is the sporting goods store going to sell live bait for fishing? Roman Roos: It's strictly universal sports. Mehl: Okay. Because sometimes the live, if you offer live bait you've got, suddenly you've got boat trailers in there. Could you turn that drawing over? Looking at the rooftop equipment, it would appear that that car is shown in the westbound lane immediately south of the building, which means that the car is as close to the building as it can get and your sight angle is quite large. In other words that angle going up to the rooftop is fairly steep. What happens when the vehicle is say eastbound and is 100 or 200 yards west of that location and you're actually looking toward the corner or the long side of the building, in which case the vehicle is much farther away from the building and that sight line is flatten out significantly. Roman Roos: Very simply put, there's no way that I can design a building where I'm going to hide all the rooftop's. It can't be done. Screening. That's what the screening ordinance is for in the city of Chanhassen. I helped design that ordinance. What I'm saying to you is we're trying to minimize the sight distance as much as we can but we still will require some screening. On any building along Highway 5 that's going to be required. You just can't build a parapet high enough and make it look pleasing to do that. So the intent, we took our sign banner, or our sign board and made it as high as we could. We understand we're not going to conceal those five rooftops...and will be screened. Screen something to reflect, whether that be 1 x 6 cedar or going to a standing seam metal. That's something we'll work out with staff but it's going to have to be screened because the ordinance says it has to be anyhow. But what we've got to do is minimize it Don the best we can. That's all I'm saying. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mehl: Okay. Mancino: But it can be the same colors as the parapet. Or the band around it. Roman Roos: It probably would be. Probably this color. What I'd called the... Joyce: I think you already asked this question. It's going to be retail sporting goods? There won't be any boats for sale? In the parking lot. Roman Roos: No boats. No bait. No worms. Joyce: Okay. Conrad: Roman, while you're up here, and maybe I'll ask staff to interact with this question. The pedestrian access is primarily through the trail and not through a sidewalk system. Aanenson: There is a sidewalk on there. Conrad: Is there? On the north side? Aanenson: It's on the other side. Conrad: On which side? Mancino: I didn't see it on 79th. Aanenson: Well it would be across to Applebee's. Then you go by our portion. Then that's, that's right. From Americana over to this property on the north side. So you could cross then. Mancino: So you're going to be able to go from Market all the way over to TH 101 on a sidewalk on the north side of 79th? Aanenson: Well it's not in front of the other building. Mancino: There isn't one in front of Cheers, in that area yet. Aanenson: No. No. Mancino: Is that going to happen? 26 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 • Al-Jaff: It continues here. Mancino: And there isn't one in front of the motel at this point. Aanenson: But the plans that we have show it on this side, but we'd have to double check on that. Peterson: While they're looking at that, I've got another question regarding signage. On the upper area, what's the plan for the type of signs? Roman Roos: They're going to be uniform. We're still selecting the color on the signs but they will be uniform. There was a question earlier about a pylon sign. Identification sign only...identification sign and not a, our special of the week is such and such. If you look at the other signage, I don't believe you have, the drawings did not have the pylon signs on it at the time but that's why I set this up when you were having the discussion. You can see that we're going within the sign ordinance. Less that 16 foot high. And these will be the identification... I can't think of a particular sign but it would be, for example if it were a Dairy Queen, it would be back lit with the Dairy Queen logo basically and that would be true for all these. Somebody also asked the question, how many more tenants can go into that space. The 2,500...is minimum space where it gets 60 foot deep and about 1,500 square foot. That's a small... Ideally it's going to be...worse case scenario. I can't imagine that...But again the two signs would be complimenting the building out of the same material that we're talking about. Banding, back lit. They're a fluorescent type. Little identification signs within. And this here would probably be lit also. The Hiway 5 Centre. We just had this... Mancino: Will we see it back again with the signage? Roman Roos: You will. The signs, yes you will. Conrad: Roman, tell me how you're integrating this parking lot with the motel parking lot. Roman Roos: Well if you remember the motel Ladd, it needs some work. There is a median. It's a curb of sorts. Okay. That curb will have to come out. Now we talked with Zamour about that. You run into a little problem Ladd with your cross over easement is...you will do this. You will do that. It doesn't work that way. So he wants, Larry Zamour who runs the motel and wants a smooth transition...also patrons of the motel. And so there's got to be some work done on that matter but I'm assuming the median's going, that concrete curb will disappear and we'll... 27 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Conrad: I've got more problems with their parking lot than I do here, because the real issue, you know, I don't know what. We're solving some smaller problems I think. What kind of leverage do we have as you negotiate getting rid of the curb, which I think is a good, and I like the cross easements but also I'd like to do, well. Is there any leverage at all? Roman Roos: You can't control something that...responsibility. I mean I can't go to them and say hey Larry, you will do... The soft shoe effect and maybe an idea of upgrading this parking lot. Maybe another wear course on it. I don't know. But I'm assuming all of that might be possible. But I can't imagine any... Conrad: There's no benefit to them? Roman Roos: As long as they don't get an ice cream cone... Conrad: It's too bad we can't break through his parking lot. What'd you find out about sidewalks? Aanenson: This plan shows it. I've got to believe there is a sidewalk...we did put it on the Americana and it' going across the city's property but I don't believe it goes across...There's a facade treatment. Conrad: That's really bad. Roman Roos: Ladd, you can't put... Aanenson: We'd have to take something out to put the sidewalk in. You'd have to either...or something to put a sidewalk in there. Mancino: Well then there's room between the motel and the... Aanenson: Right, what I'm saying is... Mancino: But it's not there but there is room. So I do think that we should keep land then so that the city at some point in the future...decides that, it thinks it's good for a sidewalk to go in on the south side of 79th... Anyway, so that we have the right-of-way here. Is there right-of-way at this point so if we do want a sidewalk, that we'd able to do it? Roman Roos: It's kind of like that previous... Mancino: Well first excuse me, I was asking staff. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Aanenson: There's always... Mancino: You'd lose some of the parking. Aanenson: Right. So I guess we'd have to look at what the joint parking situation is. Mancino: Okay. Peterson: ...trying to get cross traffic over to TH 5 so that the sidewalk is... Mancino: And as we keep building together, keep making it more dense, I would hope that... pedestrian traffic and sidewalks... Peterson: There's an Applebee's going in there where the hotel traffic could walk to there. Conrad: One last question. How did we get into this impervious surface problem? Historically I mean, and I don't want a real long spiel but. Aanenson: At one time the HRA wanted to buy it from Mr. Komowski...securing it and they did not...so they left it green. So there's an opportunity again to improve the aesthetic value... Conrad: It just makes sense then. Farmakes: So will that area be landscaped...? Aanenson: That would be our condition. Mancino: But it first has to be approved by HRA. Aanenson: It's all contingent upon basically what the HRA, that's correct. If not, then it will probably be back here. Mancino: Any other questions at this time? Did you get your answer Ladd? Conrad: Yeah. Mancino: I do have one more question. On my drawings, and I first will make the statement. I was concerned about the east elevation, and that is that this roof line goes all the way across the east. 29 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Roman Roos: ...this is what it looks like. Mancino: But you can see the east side from Highway 5. So this just looks like the back of a building. Roman Roos: We don't have any... Mancino: Okay. But that's what finishes off the building is that roof line. Roman Roos: ...it's the mechanical unit... Mancino: It's an aesthetic one for our community because we're going to be on Highway 5 and that's what we're going to see...you don't really have a back door. That's hard when you have that much frontage on Highway 5. Roman Roos: And if I located...I'd have a real problem...and in order to not have a back door, how do you face it? Well we try to... Mancino: Well I would like to see more of the aesthetics on the east side also because I do think that's very, very visible from Highway 5. Roman Roos: All I can tell you Nancy...and what I'm doing is I'm doing a trade-off... The only thing I can is...my history, my record in Chanhassen...there is an economic trade-off. I've been on both sides. I understand what you're saying... Mancino: Okay, thank you for answering that. Thank you. May I have a motion to open this for a public hearing please? Skubic moved, Conrad seconded to open the public healing. The public hearing was opened. Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone in the audience wishing to address the Planning Commission on this issue, please come forward. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing. Conrad moved, Farmakes seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Craig, comments. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Peterson: I'm confused. I like the building, in and of itself. I think the issue of the patio can be addressed. I don't really have a strong feeling of whether it's towards the south side or the east side. I think it's, you know preferential I guess it would be on the east side, giving more landscaping to the south. What I'm concerned about and what I don't know if I can have answered tonight by staff is that, the idea of a sidewalk I think needs to have our attention drawn to it, more than what we have presented here tonight. I think as I shared before, I think the idea is that we want to create a downtown that we want to integrate more of the areas within the city, specifically being Village on the Ponds across Highway 5. We've got an area now on 78th that's got sidewalk and part of it doesn't on the other part. I guess what I'd like to get a feel for is whether or not it is potentially feasible that we get sidewalk along that whole street. If it's not feasible, then I wouldn't recommend we delete those 10 parking spots and put a sidewalk even in there. So I guess what I'm formulating here is a question to staff that is it reasonable for us to have a sidewalk along that whole street sometime down the road. Aanenson: We can look at that... If that's going to be part of your recommendation to pass that onto the City Council to see how we can achieve that, sure. Peterson: With that in mind I would make a, I would move to approve with that exception, or that caveat. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: I like the site plan. I think it's nice. I don't have too many issues with it. The patio is neat. I like your involving people and buildings so I don't have the same concern with the screening. I think we should. It's an opportunity to screen but again I'd really like staffs direction on bringing patios and people into Chanhassen and into our buildings, which we don't do much of. I think what I see is good for screening. The parking lot, I just think everything's okay. The issues that I have, I agree with Craig. The public access. Pedestrian access is an issue on that whole street, so I don't get it right now so I think point number 17 or someplace, we have to direct staff to review that and advise us. I think taking parking spots away from the applicant will hurt the project. I don't know where that ends up. The integration, if I can say that. The integration of the parking lot again is another issue and I don't think we have any control over it but it seems like an opportunity to fix some problems there so that's, Madam Chair, those are my only comments. I think staff has summarized their points very well in the staff report. Mancino: Thank you. Kevin. 31 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Joyce: My biggest point was once again the sidewalk. Incorporating this project into 79th Street. I think that hasn't been looked at as much as all of this...be from Highway 5 but let's get 79th Street in there too. I think a sidewalk is really just major...work that in as Craig said, I think it's a great project. But let's get 79th Street, let's get that sidewalk in. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: Everything was basically said I think in reading through the staffs report and basically...I would like the sidewalk on the north side. I understand the...we have to be real careful... Mancino: Jeff. Farmakes: I'm more concerned about the south side because I guess because I have yet to see too many pedestrians in Chanhassen, even though we continue to build sidewalks. Through a pragmatic sense, I think when we look back through all the work we've done on Highway 5, this is an opportunity to continue that. I think a patio aesthetically would be much better to the southeast which could be surrounded by whatever the city does as far as landscaping goes. Also it affords more of a room opportunity to create more of a layered landscape. The parking spots that were talked about, these are short term retail stores. There's pizza type stuff that they're picking up and taking off again. There's adjacent parking lots right next to it. Certainly a couple of parking spots there with a south extension where that turn around is... There's an opportunity there to extend that landscaping up without really creating any additional loss. I think the city should look at that. Certainly if our tenant on the south end is a sporting goods store, there's certainly room there to extend that. I hope the city can hopefully work that out in the ordinance and look at that option. I think that would be in line with what we've asked other applicants to do. That's it. Oh excuse me. I have one more item on here. I think that your comment about extending the roof extension on the east side and perhaps looking at...windows is something to look at because of the nature of that, it's almost a peninsula going out into the highway. It has sight lines everywhere so, and it is I think a valid point. Mancino: Thank you. Don. Mehl: Yeah, I think bringing that patio around to the southeast or east side here would, maybe with some heavy landscaping or something around that east side and the patio would help to improve what I think is kind of a plain appearance on that east side. I think that could help a great deal. Aesthetically I think the building is pretty well done if you do something with the east side. Other than that I agree pretty much with the comments. I don't have anything additional. 32 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 Mancino: Thank you. I agree with the comments also made. Specifically I would like to see a sidewalk on the north side. If to me that means pulling down the building to the south a little bit, allowing for a sidewalk because I can see pedestrians or cyclists wanting to be on 79th Street cycling, not on Highway 5 right next to the highway. But it would be much safer, much more of a charming street to go down 79th Street than on Highway 5. So although I would like to keep the landscaping on Highway 5, the building come down a little bit, but make way for a 4 foot sidewalk on the north side. That seems to make sense to me. And also I do like the idea of the patio on the east side of the building. That's great. It's welcoming as you go down Highway 5 to that area. And I would also like to see the east side of the building, because it is a view. That side of the building is going to be viewed by all of us that go west on Highway 5, to see what architectural enhancements on that east side. Whether that be an extended roof line. Whether it be something done with that patio space. Whether it be something done with landscaping, but not landscaping that's going to look good in 10 or 20 years but right now. And so that it is attractive. That's our public space for Highway 5 and the views from that public space should be aesthetically pleasing because we're on it a lot. Those of us who commute all over the city. What else? It would just be wonderful if something could be worked out with the motel and the parking lot. Again making that, an incentive for the motel people to want to come over to this wonderful retail space and eat and carouse and whatever. If there's something that can be worked out there. I guess no other comments. We will see signage Sharmin. That will come back in front of us? Al-Jaff: I can bring it back. Aanenson: If you wanted to see it, sure. Mancino: Yeah. We would also like to see it, when it does comes back please, with the materials again so we can keep it top of the line with the materials being used on the building. May I have a motion? Conrad: Sure, I would make a motion Madam Chair. One question, and maybe help staff before I make a motion. It may help staff and the applicant figure this out. Would you give up impervious surface to get a sidewalk in? Probably. That's probably what we would do. So there's going to be a motion in here about reviewing the sidewalk but I guess the point is, that there's a plan. That there should be a sidewalk there. It's just sort of, I'm just amazed we don't have that planned. That a sidewalk goes down there. But there has to be a plan and if this fits that plan, then it should be, then we should make it happen and we probably as a commission would agree with an addition to the impervious surface ratio. Madam Chair, I make the following motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan review #96-4 as shown on the site plan dated April 12, 1996 subject to the conditions in 33 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 the staff report, 1 through 16 with the addition . Point number 17. That the staff is to review the impact and the merit of a sidewalk on the north side of the parcel and make it's recommendations to the City Council when this gets to the City Council. Number 18. That the applicant would review the architectural, would consider, would present architectural enhancements to the City Council and the planning staff for the east side of the building when this does reach the City Council in two weeks, I assume. Point number 18, which is an invalid point but it will, I'd like to make it anyway is to have staff and the applicant somehow figure out to make sure that when we integrate the parking lots with the motel, that we do the best job we can to do that integration and also to maybe soften the view of the parking lot at the motel. And I understand that we have no leverage whatsoever but I'd like to put that in there as a point. Mancino: I'd like to add a friendly amendment to item 19 and that is that the applicant supply the staff and City Council with a detailed landscape plan of the patio area. What that patio area is going to look like. The materials used. The landscape material used and how it will, what do I want to say, screen from Highway 5 and be aesthetically pleasing. Conrad: Yeah, I'd accept that. I'd add that to point number, condition number 15 in the staff report. Mancino: Is there a second? Joyce: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Conrad moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #96-4 as shown on the site plan dated Apiil 12, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1. The materials used to screen the trash enclosure shall be the same type of brick used on the building. 2. Signage criteria: a. All businesses shall share one monument sign. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. b. Wall signs are permitted on no more than 2 street frontages. The total of each wall mounted sign display areas shall not exceed 24 square feet. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 c. All signs require a separate permit. d. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials and heights. f. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. g. Individual letters may not exceed 2 feet in height. h. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. i. One pylon sign is permitted. The area of the sign may not exceed 64 square feet and a height of 16 feet. j. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. One stop sign must be posted on each driveway at the exit points of the site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a sign permit. 3. Applicant must provide one landscaped peninsula in the parking lot. Screening of the parking lot and the east elevation must be increased. Screening may include berms, ornamental, and evergreen trees. 4. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. 5. Fire Marshal conditions: a. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy No. 04-1991 (Fire Department Notes to be included on site plans), copy enclosed. b. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy No. 07-1991 (Pre- Fire plan), copy enclosed. c. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy No. 29-1992, (Premise Identification), copy enclosed. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 d. Comply with Inspection Division Installation Policy No. 34-1993, (Water service installation for commercial and industrial buildings), copy enclosed. e. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy No. 36-1994, (Combination domestic fire sprinkler supply line), copy enclosed. f. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy No. 40-1995, (Fire Sprinkler system), copy enclosed. g. Install and indicate on plan a post indicator valve (P.I.V.) on the water service line. Location must be approved by the Fire Marshal. 6. Concurrent with the building permit, a detailed lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 7. Relocate the two required accessible parking spaces along the center of the building. Relocate the accessible curb cut to one side of the planting area shown on the west side of the building as discussed in the attached Building Official memo. 8. All roof top equipment must be screened in accordance with city ordinances. 9. The applicant shall supply the city with detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10 year storm event. Depending on these calculations, additional storm sewers may be warranted. 10. The grading and utility plan shall incorporate erosion control measures throughout the site. 11. Utility installation will require permits through the city's building department. Gate valves will be required on the water line to isolate the motel from the proposed building. 12. Cross-access easements should be required for joint use of the parking lot/drive aisle. 13. Approval of this site plan is contingent upon the City HRA approving the lease of the land located east of the subject site. 14. The hard surface coverage of the site may not exceed 65%. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 15. The patio area may be moved to the east of the subject property and onto the city property pending approval of the HRA. The applicant shall supply the staff and City Council with a detailed landscape plan of the patio area. 16. The parking lot must maintain a 25 foot setback along the north and south. 17. The staff shall review the impact and the merit of a sidewalk on the north side of the parcel and make it's recommendations to the City Council. 18. The applicant review possible architectural enhancements and present to the City Council and the planning staff for the east side of the building. 19. The applicant shall try to integrate the Hiway 5 Centre parking lot with the motel parking lot. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: Aanenson: Just one reminder that the...Coalition, if any of you were interested in going on the 29th. It's on New Urbanism. It's only 2 hours over the lunch hour. It's downtown Minneapolis... Mancino: Who's speaking Kate at that? Do you remember? Aanenson: An architect on new urbanism from California. I can't remember his name. Mancino: Okay. Downtown Minneapolis, I'll go. Aanenson: Pardon me? He's downtown, yes. Okay, I'll put you down. Mancino: Downtown. Put me down. I'm downtown. Aanenson: That's all I had for new business. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Conrad moved, Skubic seconded to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 1, 1996 as presented. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - May 15, 1996 CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Aanenson: Thank you. Final plat approval was given for the Oak Ridge subdivision. That's the one on Minnewashta. Just north of the Harstad development. North of Kings Road, the one further. The Hallgren property. CSM. The one on the corner of Dell Road and TH 5 was given final plat approval. Technical Industrial Sales site plan approval in the Chan Business Park was given site plan approval and City Hall was also given site plan approval. Mancino: Okay, thank you. ONGOING ITEMS: Aanenson: The draft for Bluff Creek will be heading to the committee at their next meeting and hopefully back before you yet this summer. Probably in June. End of June, first part of July is set for public hearings. Mancino: And how will that be presented to us? Will we have some work sessions on that first? Aanenson: Yeah...we'll get you up to speed before you hold a public hearing. Mancino: Okay. And will that be presented to the Planning Commission, the work sessions from task force members? Aanenson: I think it'd be helpful to have the technical people that are working on it. Bonestroo and Diane...and some of the technical people, if you want them there. Mancino: I had requested some revisions on the By-laws for the Planning Commission. Aanenson: Sorry, I didn't know that. Mancino: Okay, well we can talk about that afterwards. It's just a concern that I had about the dismissal, etc. That there weren't any grounds for that. The Planning Commission adjourned the public portion of the meeting and held an informal open discussion on the Villages on the Ponds. This portion of the meeting was closed at 8:50 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 38 r. CITY OF :„ .z 0 CHANHASSEN it., _, ,,. '. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.Q. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: May 30, 1996 SUBJ: Villages on the Pond The purpose of this discussion on the Villages on the Ponds is to provide the Planning Commission with detailed information on the project in two work sessions. This project has evolved since the Planing Commission first gave conceptual approval in December of 1996. This project will be a mixed use development that requires a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, wetland alteration permit and an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The purpose of the work session is to ensure the Planning Commission understands the scope of the project before the a public hearing is held. This work session will focus on the subdivision components; utilities and streets, grading wetlands,trees, and storm water management. Attached is a outline of what will be discussed by Lotus Realty. The second work session on June 19, 1996, the architecture and proposed uses will be discussed. ISO g:\plan\ka\villages.pc May-30-96 01 : 39P Brad Johnson 612-934-5472 P . 02 LOTUS REALTY SERVICES May 30, 1996 TO Kate Aanenson FROM: Vernelle Clayton RE: Villages on the Ponds, June 5 Work Session As we have discussed, BRW will be doing most of the presenting for this meeting. The subject will deal with the engineering-type aspects of the development, whereas, the design issues will be covered in a subsequent session. The items BRW anticipates bringing are these: 1. Existing Conditions Drawings - showing topography, wetlands, vegetation and, to some extent, the adjacent properties. 2. A Physiography which will depict existing slope, etc 3, Site Constraints Chart - indicating shoreland set back requirements, etc 4, Chart showing existing canopy cover 5, Grading, Storm Water, Tree Preservation Plan, Wetlands, existing and as to be modified 6 Preliminary Utility Plan, limited to utilities at 101 and Lake Drive 7, Site Model (showing topography only--no buildings,yet) 8 Proposed Preliminary Plat Gc1 kit/ CT 7QTLJ CTIfIrCT- be Drw nnr—ni JA 1.11 I .-n_.. - - ON-GOING ISSUES June 1, 1996 ISSUE 1. Southern 1995 Study Area: BF District and remaining city land uses outside of the MUSA line. ▪ Staff is proposing to study the remaining land outside the MUSA. We will be studying property in conjunction with the Park and Recreation Commission open space study. We will also be recommending land use by the end of 1995. In early 1996, we will begin evaluating the timing for the Planning Commission hearing process and determine how much, if any, area should be brought into the city's MUSA area. 2. Revise PUD Ordinance. ▪ The standards of the PUD ordinance do not necessarily merit the increase in the flexibility it allows. Staff believes the PUD should be a process. Proposed changes were included in a code glitch update. The Planning Commission has requested that the staff review the PUD separate from the"glitch"amendment. 3. Bluff Creek Study. Task Force reviewing draft. Possible review by Planning Commission in July or August. Further ordinance amendments may be required. 4. Transition Zone/Buff Yard. -� Approved by Council in April. 5. Neighborhood Commercial Standards. Staff is working on. Possible review in August. 6. Environmental Commission. ▪ Commissioners selected,working on getting organized and establishing goals. 7. Private Driveways. Scheduled as issue paper on June 19 Planning Commission meeting. 8. New Wetland Law Amendment. Work through Environmental Commission and then Planning Commission in July. 9. Livable Communities Act. -� Council review of and implementation in June. Possible ordinance changes to review by Planning Commission in August. P A S Me m o ► \ `\ AM PLERICANANNING ASSOCIATION APRIL 1996 Site Planning for to finance local services, big box retailers are like manna from Large-Scale Retail Stores heaven.The critical question for these communities is,On what g terms should the big boxes be welcomed? By Christopher Duerksen On one end of the scale,communities that are unaware of their options or feel they have little leverage in negotiating with The meteoric rise of large-scale retail stores such as Wal-Mart these retailing giants,the results can be plain vanilla rectangular and Target has been one of the headline planning stories of the boxes of industrial quality construction coated with corporate 1990s. Commonly called big box retailers, these enterprises color schemes and surrounded by acres of asphalt with nary a typically occupy more than 50,000 square feet and derive their bush or tree in sight. On the other end, a growing number of profits from high sales volumes.They seem to be everywhere; no jurisdictions are requiring a higher level of architectural place, be it a rural town or urban neighborhood,can ignore the treatment and taking steps to ensure that the superstores relate profound planning impacts big box retail stores can have on the better to their environs and neighbors. In Fort Collins, character of a community. Colorado, the city council had this to say in adopting new Big box retailers vary greatly in size—some now have reached regulations for large-scale retail establishments: gargantuan proportions in excess of 150,000 square feet.Their These standards and guidelines are a response to dissatisfaction market niches also vary.There are the discounters like Wal- with corporate chain marketing strategy dictating design that is Mart, the warehouse clubs like Pace.category killers like Toys R indifferent to local identity and interests.The main goal is to Us and Best Buy(that offer a comprehensive selection of encourage development that contributes to Fort Collins as a unique place by reflecting its physical character and adding to it in merchandise in relatively narrow categories),and manufacturer's factory outlet stores. But they have some common appropriate ways. characteristics—large rectangular single-story buildings with Others also believe that quality begets quality.As John standardized facades, reliance on auto-borne shoppers who are Johnson,planning director in fast-growing Douglas County, accommodated by acres of parking,and no-frills site Colorado(south suburban Denver), pointed our in defending — development that often eschews any community or pedestrian his jurisdiction's new big box development standards,"It • amenities. wouldn't be wise to snub the rules. It's an investment that gives Some cities and towns,worried about the economic impact returns.When you maintain a lower image you're not going to of big-box retailers on existing downtown merchants or the be able to bring other quality businesses that will improve the sprawl-inducing impacts of such developments,are saying no to economy"(Rocky Mountain News,July 10, 1995). these leviathans. But for a variety of reasons, the vast majority of While there are indications that the tidal wave of big box communities have either rolled out the welcome mat or at least retail stores may have peaked in the mid-1990s just as shopping given grudging approval. Big box retailers do offer low prices malls did in the 1980s, it is clear that they will continue to pose and great convenience for an increasingly time-deprived society. challenges to communities well into the next century. Much of And for those local governments that rely on sales tax revenues the growth for some big box chains is coming as a result of forays Site plans for large retail stores in Fort Collins must now incorporate patios,seating areas, bus shelters, or other amenities to create an amenable pedestrian environment. di / lopi,..., __... —..-- ....0k illikikez.ii c;.....1) ...101.1. 101163,170. . • 118 111, p Iif6 5,11 TMralill a. reaVI.Wer_ 41111110 rte, aleter4Vr:IwAg....711pir IP.... /W, " 4,11igh ' /' IA riall* ....,.4 • < _ go _ ,t.' ,...am.. .2,.. Id ��. .y •, � OW 'phi» 1✓ 0` Of 11 . s/ "lir =hS isNV/ ,. 1,,... 11.Q".,11.1. 1 / /I / \—' 11ri' �,,; 1....,E 46k: into new markets, and this hunting will continue as retailers demonstrated that while controlling signage and requiring tree search for markets that were overlooked or bypassed or new ones planting can help soften the impact,they are only first steps in that are emerging because of growth in places like Douglas an effective program.Thus Fort Collins was ready to move County, Colorado, one of the fastest growing jurisdictions in the beyond standard approaches.The city also has a very strong nation. In more mature markets,chains will fight for market economic base and occupies an enviable central position in the share,opening new stores in hopes of heading off customers regional economy so that elected officials were not drooling over before they reach those of their competitors—a phenomenon the prospect of adding more superstores at any cost. Couple this known as cannibalization.The slowing and consolidation of the with strong,well-educated neighborhood groups(Fort Collins is big box market should also strike a cautionary note with poten- the home of Colorado State University)and a sophisticated planning staff with years of experience with the city's well- Resources known Land Development Guidance System and strong design credentials,and the stage was set for some innovative thinking. How Superstore Sprawl Can Harm Communities Importantly, because it operates under home rule in Colorado, and What Citizens Can Do About It, Constance Fort Collins has broad land-use regulatory authority. Beaumont,National Trust For Historic Facing a continuing influx of large-scale retail stores, Fort Preservation (Washington, D.C. 1994). Collins adopted a moratorium on superstores to allow the staff to study the community impacts and to formulate clear and Tree Conservation Ordinances,PAS Report 446, August 1993. enforceable policies to mitigate those impacts.The staff Preparing a Landscape Ordinance,PAS Report 431, December 1990. Architectural treatments at corners Coping mater Designing Urban Corridors,PAS Report 418, up large wall September 1989. a change in c The Aesthetics of Parking, PAS Report 411, • w =_ i-,,._, November 1988. ' .OI-'-N = '- Aesthetics and Land Use Controls, PAS Report 399, ti -0_: _ - December 1986. . � ---:-.... <-_-_=--,,. ..--=_:rv_ -.. --- ---- .M- ---------__ .,:.,------__ Anchor A tial host communities. How marketable will a standardized big SOUTH ELEVATION box shell and parking lot be when the store is closed. Will it be a Scale 1/8'=l'-0' long-term eyesore in the neighborhood? This PAS Memo offers tips and advice to the growing organized an informal advisory committee composed of number of communities that want to accommodate big box neighborhood representatives, real estate professionals, and retailers, but in a fashion that is sensitive to community interested citizens to assist the planning and zoning board in impacts and will help ensure that these superstores remain evaluating new approaches. Clarion Associates of Denver was community assets for years to come. It focuses on the recent brought in to provide advice on experience in other experience of Fort Collins, Colorado, which has adopted communities and to assist in drafting new standards. Early in some of the most comprehensive guidelines and standards to the process, the inquiry focused on the following key issues: shape the appearance and impact of large-scale retail establishments. • Architectural character of the building. Case Study: Fort Collins, Colorado • Color and material of the primary structure. In several important ways, Fort Collins was an ideal proving • Relationship to the surrounding community, including civic ground for new guidelines and standards for big box retail amenities. stores. It already had on the books detailed regulations • Pedestrian flows. addressing signage and landscaping, the typical first line of defense communities employ in dealing with the superstores. • Parking. Trouble is,experience across the United States has Drawing on its own experience with retail design standards and on a survey of innovative measures adopted in other Chris Duerksen is the managing editor of Clarion Associates LLC of communities such as Bozeman,Montana;Jackson,Wyoming; Denver. He is the author of Tree Conservation Ordinances (PAS and Rancho Cucamonga, California, the consultant presented a Report 446)and Aesthetics and Land Use Controls (PAS Report menu of potential guidelines and regulations to the city.After 399), among other books and reports. several months of deliberation, the planning commission and Initial research for this article was performed by former Clarion city council unanimously adopted a comprehensive set of Associates attorney Richard Paik and appeared in an article in standards based on recommendations of the advisory committee Planning Matters, a publication of the Colorado Chapter of the and city staff.These regulations apply to new"large" retail American Planning Association. The author would also like to establishments defined to mean a"retail establishment or any recognize the efforts of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado,planning combination of retail establishments in a single building, and legal staff especially Claudia Benedict, Ted Shepard, Clark occupying more than 25,000 gross square feet of lot area"or an Mapes, Tom Vosburg, and Paul Eckman, in shaping the concepts addition to an existing large retail establishment that would that are discussed here. increase the gross square feet of floor area by 50 percent. 2 Architectural Character. Probably the most frequently voiced Color and Materials. Building color and materials, as much objection to large-scale superstores is that they look like big, as architectural detail,can make or break a big box from an faceless boxes.With blank,windowless facades, flat roofs,lack aesthetic perspective. For some big box chains,especially the of architectural detail, and minuscule,hard-to-see entries, big warehouses and deep-discounters,concrete blocks or tilt-up box stores are boring at best and future eyesores at worst. Fort concrete panels seem to be the material of choice,ones that are Collins adopted a range of strong standards to encourage better more suitable for industrial parks. Others use bold color architectural design that goes beyond the prototypical off-the- schemes and neon tubing as attention-getters,so that the shelf corporate plans. The new regulations: buildings become one giant billboard to attract attention. Fort • Forbid"uninterrupted length of any facade" in excess of 100 Collins adopted several standards to encourage higher-quality horizontal feet. Facades greater than 100 feet in length must materials that would fit in better with existing commercial incorporate recesses and projections along at least 20 percent development and surrounding residential neighborhoods. of the length of the facade.Windows,awnings,and arcades • Predominant exterior building materials must be of high must total at least 60 percent of the facade length abutting a quality.These include brick,wood,sandstone,other native public street. stone,and tinted/textured concrete masonry units. Smooth- • Require that smaller retail stores that are part of a larger faced concrete block, tilt-up concrete panels,or pre- principal building have display windows and separate outside fabricated steel panels are prohibited as the predominant entrances.Such smaller stores are encouraged by the city. exterior building materials. columns'break —On-line retail shops to be smaller in scale than Anchor stores may use different features to distinguish s and allow for the anchor stores,use covered walkways,etc. themselves,such os the use of canopied windows,and materials different entrance treatments is. 41'1•71a, IMMENffigriciiittaiNtaiimix-17,2,—Avr :7--71resi .01 - :, iE�i� i;01111 :AIM:FM SM"ad■rb I itiLa: ` 12==F::liraJ:a .. x 1111iiii :_�: =.Ir - .a:: On-lile Retail Shops Anchor B Fort Collins now requires big box structures to incorporate awnings, windows, and other architectural features(above). "Big faceless boxes" (left)are what Fort Collins seeks °'SCO:" WAL•MART. to avoid. T., -JG.-r' ' _��fes VL':.—. _ - !< it �•—r e ,�► �i i' - -- _—. 7 • Facade colors must be of"low reflectance,subtle, neutral or :'M"---. earth tone colors.The use of high intensity colors, metallic colors, black or fluorescent colors is prohibited." '�_ r` • Building trim may feature brighter colors,but neon tubing is cr not allowed as an accent material. Relationship to Surrounding Community/Streets.An often- • Encourage greater architectural interest in the main structure ignored feature of superstores is how they relate and interact by directing the use of a repeating pattern of change in color, with the surrounding community and public streets.The texture, and material modules. "Ac least one of these standard approach at times seems to be to throw up a six-foot elements shall repeat horizontally.All elements shall repeat at high wooden fence between adjacent residential areas and to use intervals of no more than 30 feet,either horizontally or a chain link fence with slats to screen trash loading areas. vertically." Neighbors in Fort Collins demanded more.The new • Dictate variations in roof lines to reduce the massive scale of regulations require that: these structures and add visual interest. Roofs must have at • "All facades of a building that are visible from adjoining least two of the following features: parapets concealing flat properties and/or public streets should contribute to the roofs and rooftop equipment,overhanging eaves,slopes pleasing scale features of the building and encourage roofs,and three or more roof slope planes. community integration by featuring characteristics similar to • Require that each principal building have a clearly defined, a front facade."This policy is implemented by requiring highly visible customer entrance with features such as architectural treatment as discussed above. canopies or porticos,arcades, arches,wing walls, and integral • "All sides of a principal building that directly face an planters. abutting public street shall feature at least one customer 3 entrance.Where a principal building directly faces more than parking areas be broken up into modules separated by two abutting public streets, this requirement shall apply only landscaping and other features. The primary mandatory to two sides of the building. . ." standard is that "no more than 50 percent of the off-street parking area for the entire property shall be located between • The minimum setback of any building facade is 35 feet. the front facade of the principal building and the primary Where the facade faces adjacent residential uses,an earth abutting street." berm of at least six feet in height and planted with evergreen trees at intervals of 20 feet on center,or in clusters is Putting the New Standards to Work required. Fort Collins adopted its big box standards early in 1995. The a new guidelines and standards are integral parts of the city's Loading docks, trash collection, outdoor storage and similar facilities and functions"shall be incorporated into the overall Land Development Guidance System,a flexible approach to design of the building and the landscaping so that the visual development review that allows locational latitude for developments if they mitigate external impacts.The standards and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets." are applied by staff in the site plan review process working Use of screening materials "that are different from or inferior closely with project design consultants. to the principal materials of the building and landscape is Since adoption, two major developments have begun prohibited."No delivery,loading, trash removal,or similar winding their way through the development review process and the results, at least so far,are positive from the city's perspective. operations are permitted between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., except in special circumstances and where steps are According to staff, the proposals are of much higher quality than before the regulations were enacted.They feel the taken to reduce noise impacts. community's demand for responsive design provides a climate • Each retail establishment must"contribute to the in which competing objectives of community design and large establishment or enhancement of the community and public retailing can be addressed by planning professionals as proposals spaces"by providing at least two community amenities such are put together. as a patio/seating area,water feature,clock tower,and For the most parr,developers and big box retailers are paying pedestrian plaza with benches. attention and are making a good faith effort to meet the desires of the community. For example, the designers of a Wal-Mart Pedestrian Flows. Pedestrians are usually the forgotten waifs submitted plans that represented a marked improvement over of big box retailing until the customer actually walks in the the average company store. However, negotiations have slowed store.They are typically expected to dodge cars,wind-blown somewhat as national officials have become involved.A second shopping carts, and other obstacles to find their way into the major proposal is even more promising.The developer has store. Fort Collins adopted an array of requirements in an proposed an excellent plan that shows a great deal of creativity attempt to make the superstores more attractive and safer for in meeting the goals of the big box standards. Each facade of the pedestrians. building has interesting architectural features,parking is spread • Sidewalks"at least 8 feet in width shall be provided along all around the main structures instead of being stacked in front, sides of the lot that abut a public street,"and a continuous and loading areas are integrated into the building design and tucked discreetly away from view.Time will tell if this plan internal pedestrian walkway must be provided from the perimeter public sidewalk to the principal customer entrance. finds acceptance in the marketplace. This internal walkway must feature landscaping, benches, Conclusion and other such materials/facilities for no less than 50 percent Fort Collins's bold efforts to accommodate major retail of its length. establishments in a manner that respects community character • Sidewalks must be provided"along the full length of the and mitigates adverse impacts holds great promise. But as a building along any facade featuring a customer entrance and work in progress, it bears careful watching. Other communities along any facade abutting public parking areas. Such can benefit from the thinking that went into this effort,but sidewalks shall be located at least six feet from the facade of must be careful to tailor their approaches to their unique market the building to provide planting beds for foundation and political realities as well as the perceived local impacts of landscaping. . ." retail superstores. • Internal pedestrian walkways must provide a weather protection feature such as an awning within 30 feet of all • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • customer entrances. The PAS Memo is a monthly publication for subscribers to the Planning Advisory Service, a subscription research service of the American Planning Association:Frank S.So,Acting a The internal pedestrian walkways must be distinguished Executive Director;William R.Klein,Director of Research. from driving surfaces through the use of special pavers, The PAS Memo is produced by APA staff in Chicago.Research and writing by Research bricks,or scored concrete to enhance pedestrian safety and Department staff:Marys Morris,Editor.Production by Publications Department staff: the attractiveness of the walkways. Cynthia Cheski,Assistant Editor;Lisa Barton,Design Associate. Copyright©1996 by American Planning Association,122 S.Michigan Ave.,Suite 1600, Chicago,IL 60603.The American Planning Association has headquarters offices at 1776 Parking Lots. In addition to the requirements regarding Massachusetts Ave.,N.W.,Washington,DC 20036. walkways through parking lots, Fort Collins grappled with All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form the issue of the size and location of the hundreds and or by any means,electronic or mechanical,including photocopying,recording,or by any sometimes thousands of parking spaces that typically provide information storage and retrieval system,without permission in writing from the American Planning Association. the foreground for big box superstores. The ordinance Printed on recycled paper,including 50-70%recycled fiber IOW encourages structures to be located closer to streets and that and 10%postconsumer waste. 4