Loading...
12-2-92 Agenda and Packet AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSI( WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1992, 7:30 . FILE CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER CALL TO ORDER OLD BUSINESS 1. Beisner, Ltd. proposes the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station: a. Replat of Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into 3 lots. b. Conditional use permit to locate an auto service related use in the BH, Business Highway District. c. Site plan review for a 5,397 square foot Goodyear Tire building and a 6,494 square foot Abra facility. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code, Section 18-37, Exemptions concerning subdivisions. 3. Wetland Alteration Permit for a sedimentation basin adjacent to a Class B wetland and modification of an existing sedimentation pond for the Oak Ponds/Oak Hill project located north of West 78th Street, between Kerber and Powers Boulevard, Lotus Realty. 4. Planned Unit Development Amendment to amend the PUD for Chanhassen Business Center. This amendment would allow a church as a permitted use in this planned unit development. The property is located south of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad and east of Audubon Road, Chanhassen Business Center, Ryan Development. 5. Conceptual Planned Unit Development proposal for approval to rezone 178 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development located at the SE quadrant of Hwys. 5 and 41 and NW quadrant of West 82nd Street and Hwy. 41, Gateway West Business Park, Opus Corporation. NEW BUSINESS 6. Modification No. 12 to the Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing Plan. APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN 590 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I DATE: November 23, 1992 SUBJ: Beisner Ltd./Chanhassen Holding Company; Property Located South of Hwy. 5, North of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and East of Emission Control Testing Station: 1) Site Plan Review 92-3 for Goodyear, 5,397 Square Feet and Abra Auto Service Center, 6,494 Square Feet 2) Preliminary Plat 90-71 to Subdivide 3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres 3) Conditional Use Permit 92-2 to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH District. On November 18, 1992, the Planning Commission reviewed the site plan and conditional use permit requests for the development of an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The Planning Commission tabled action on the proposal as there were a number of issues related to architectural design raised by the Planning Commission and residents of Chanhassen Estates Subdivision that needed to be resolved before a vote could be taken. The applicant was directed to meet with staff and Planning Commissioner Jeff Farrnakes to resolve those issues of concern. Issue: Architectural standards had to be revised because it is located on Highway 5 and is the entrance into Chanhassen. Also the design had to be sensitive to the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood. is t«: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 _ Page 2 Solution: On November 23, 1992, staff and Commissioner Jeff Farmakes met with the applicants, the developer, and their architect. Commissioner Farmakes prepared three sketches, one _ of Abra and two of Goodyear (Attachment#1). The intent of these sketches were to give the applicants some guidance and show them how the roof elements could be revised to achieve higher architectural standards. Staff wanted to review the revised plans prior to writing the staff report update and sending it to the Planning Commission, however, this would have meant waiting until the January 6, 1993, meeting. The applicants are facing deadlines on the purchase of the property and the development of the facilities. They requested that staff provide the report update for Planning Commission review prior to seeing the revised plans and they will hand deliver them on Friday, November 27, 1992, to all the Planning Commissioners. Staff agreed to this arrangement with the condition that if the revised plans were not satisfactory, the item will be pulled off the December 2, 1992, agenda. On November 24, 1992, staff met with the applicant's architect to review some revisions made to the buildings elevations. Staff informed the architect that — there was a significant improvement in the design. Work will continue on the design over the next few days. The proposed Goodyear design should incorporate dormers in its roof line. Other features were discussed such as shifting the roof line as shown in the rendering submitted by Commissioner Farmakes. — The proposed Abra design should include a roof system that would incorporate pitched roof sections and screen all the roof top equipment. — Issue: Noise level from the facilities and how they would affect the residential neighborhood to the south of the proposed facilities. Solution: The following condition has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions of approval "Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements." State noise guidelines shall be met at property line. Doors will be kept closed or no more than a 12" opening as outlined by Abra representative. Issue: — Additional landscaping as requested in the staff report. Solution: Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 Page 3 The following condition has been incorporated into the Site Plan Review conditions of approval, "The applicant shall provide an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with four additional evergreens." Issue: Outdoor storage of tires and cars on both sites. Solution: The following conditions has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions of approval, "No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight on the Goodyear and Abra sites" and "No outdoor storage shall be permitted at either site." Issue: Pollution level from both sites. Solution: The following condition has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions of approval, "Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency." STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon the forgoing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the site plan dated September 21, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall prepare revised architectural plans incorporating the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and staff and be more reflective of high quality design of the site location on Highway 5 and adjacent Central Business District and residential uses found in the area. Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 Page 4 2. The applicant must revise plans to include trash screening for the Abra site with a gate facing east and a second for Goodyear with a gate facing west. Plans must be submitted for staff review prior to City Council meeting. 3. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped lot. 4. The applicant shall provide an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with — four additional evergreens. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 6. The applicant shall provide a flammable waste separator as required by Building Code. 7. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. 8. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal memorandum dated October 8, 1992. 9. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100-foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580 into the Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream of the site. 12. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision #90-17 and Conditional Use Permit #92-2." Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 Page 5 II. SUBDIVISION "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision#90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition as shown on plat dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements: a. A standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. 4. A driveway or cross-access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze-up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 — Page 6 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with the storm water study. 12. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review#92-3 and Conditional Use — Permit #92-2." III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit#92-2 subject to the following conditions: -- 1. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review#92-3 and Subdivision#90- 17. — 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes,drive aisles, access drives or public rights- of-way. 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight on the Goodyear and Abra sites. 5. No outdoor storage shall be permitted at either site. 6. Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements or Minnesota Pollution Control agency guidelines at the property line. 7. Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency." — ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 18, 1992. — 2. Staff report dated November 18, 1992. 3. Elevations prepared by Commissioner Jeff Farmakes. Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 3 Erhart moved , Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat #91-1 as shown on the plans dated October 19 , 1992 with the following conditions: 1 . Lot 4 , Block 1 shall be platted as Outlot A . 2 . Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the northerly 60 ' and over the westerly 10 ' of the northerly 65 .89 ' of Lot 3 , Block 1 . 3 . Cash in lieu of parkland dedication shall be required at the time of building permit issuance . 4 . The plat name of Gateway First Additional shall be changed . All voted in favor and the motion carried . PUBLIC HEARING: BEISSNER , LTD . PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF GOODYEAR TIRE AND ABRA FACILITIES ON PROPERTY ZONED BH . HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5 , NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST AND EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN EMISSION CONTROL STATION: Public Present: Name Address Al Beissner 6100 Summit Dr , Brooklyn Center 55430 Randy MacPherson Abra Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne Avenue Gerard & Lindsay Amedeo 8007 Cheyenne Avenue Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this time . Chairman Batzli called the public hearing to order . Al Beissner : I 'm Al Beissner and I 'm the applicant and real estate developer . We have entered into a purchase agreement to buy the 2 acres of land and develop the Abra and Goodyear site as outlined . We 've worked probably 4 or 5 months with the city through maybe several site plans to develop what we thought was compatible . This presented a little more of a challenge than we initially thought because we 're actually facing 2 front doors . Highway 5 is a front door and Lake Drive is a front door . And it was difficult to determine which should be the front so in essence what you see on the plans that we 've submitted , are basically we have metal facia on Highway 5 and we have metal facia on Lake Drive . And we 've tried to treat one as the other one because we didn 't know which would be the front door . If it 's a neighborhood , they think Lake Drive is a front door . If it 's the City of Chanhassen , they think Highway 5 is a front door so we were very conscience of our development of that . A couple of things that I 'd like to point out about the efforts that we put forth here is that , the two buildings as they are proposed , really is a lot less building coverage for the land than what it is zoned for . That is Goodyear wanted double the parking requirements and that required more Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 4 land obviously . More green area so we have about 11 ,000 square foot of building on 86 ,000 square feet of land . If we were to develop it to it 'L. max , it would have had much more coverage . We 've also been sensitive . Your ordinance requires some guidelines for landscaping . Minimum dollar amounts . We have , our bids have come in and our landscaping cost will b. more than double what your standards are for the property so we 've taken that effort . We haven 't completed the complete development of the pond — yet but we will be landscaping that . We don 't have a plan for that . Generally speaking we are in agreement with the staff report and can comply without objection to most everything in it with a couple _ exceptions . The dormers that were requested by staff . Goodyear hasn 't approved dormers yet on their gabled roof and they don 't have it in thei plans . In dealing with Goodyear , they have like 8 sets of standard plans that they think meet all the standards and we have sent to Akron for a request for the dormers to sort of offset the gabled roof that we have o it and we have not heard back yet from them . Akron , Ohio and corporate Goodyear is apparently substantial so it may be a while before we hear on_ that . When we developed the rooflines , and this seemed to be a very sensitive issue , we had the Abra standard roof plan , and Randy MacPherson , president of Abra is here and would like to address you also . Abra had their standard building that they 've developed kind of like Goodyear had to develop their standard building . Fortunately for us I guess , Goodyear has a gabled roof on this particular building and not a flat roof . The standard Abra roofline and standard Abra building did no`-- meet with the staff 's acceptance when we walked in the door . We 've work through I think 4 or 5 different plans and elevations for it . And in fact we 've probably added a good 4% or 5% more to the cost with the two front_ doors if you will . By putting awnings on both Lake Drive and on Highway 5 . There was a strong sentiment about having a pitched roof or a gabled roof or something other than a flat roof on the Abra store and we thought we came to a reasonable compromise . The President of Abra would like to address it . They 're trying to develop their own standard roof line and this design that we came up with doesn 't meet quite their standards yet and we 're still talking to them about it . Otherwise I think everything Ln the staff report is acceptable and fine with us . We 've spent a lot of effort and time trying to meet all of the requirements and we think we 'vt done a good job of it and we were sensitive to the landscaping . We were _ sensitive to the coverage . We were sensitive to the two front doors and we hope that we can continue on . There will be , we will be putting in substantially more trees than what we ever anticipated and that 's satisfactory with us . So I don 't , different Planning Commissions functifi differently . I don 't know what you want for a report or want me to say but that 's kind of what we went through . And I think the staff report adequately reflects the number of meetings we have had and the changes that we have gone through on trying to meet your requirements . Batzli : We may have questions for you later . What I think we needed a sense of was whether you had seen the staff report and agreed with those conditions . So you 've answered that . Al Beissner : Right . The only other thing in the staff report , we were -- originally scheduled I think for October 14th and then we didn 't have a quorum . Then we were scheduled for 2 weeks later and that didn 't work and so the condition number 11 is a condition that wasn 't in the October 14th Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 5 one . And what that is , it 's an $8 ,700 .00 charge for water retention downstream . When Schoell-Madsen , our engineers designed this , they though that the water retention downstream was free and so they designed it that way . The sellers of the land aren 't so sure that they wouldn 't rather store it all on the site as opposed to downstream and we would like to meet again with staff to determine whether or not we can deepen the pond and berm it more so we don 't have to pay for downstream retention or if they would rather pay for it and keep the pond as it is . So that 's the only condition that we are up in the air on . At the October 14th meeting we didn 't have a number . Didn 't know what it was coming out . Would this be the appropriate time for? Batzli : Yes . Al Beissner : Okay . I have brought , not good plans but plans . The first plan we had for the Abra store . The second one . The third one and the one we wanted and then the one we ended up with so I 'll let Randy MacPherson address you . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Randy MacPherson: Thank you Mr . Chairman , Commission members . My name is Randy MacPherson . I 'm the President of Abra Auto Body and Glass . First of all I want to assure you that we share your same concerns about the appearance and the quality of our operation . This facility will be one of our national prototypes . It will be our national role model . We have people flying in from as far away as Europe to view our facilities so the apperance of this facility we share your same concerns . And one of the _ things we want to do is make sure that we present ourselves in a very professional manner and that we become a very good neighbor in the community . I think you have one picture which is actually a facility that we did several years ago but we have done another facility similar to that and I wanted to show you the difference . I think you have this picture here and it shows a . . .on the roof and we have since , I 'd like to give you another picture which actually shows a different , we extended a rolled masard up on the roof as well . And one of my concerns with this pinnacle and I ' ll pass this out to you , is that actually having this false roof we think actually attracts more attention to it . And it 's maybe a matter of taste but we have worked very hard and diligently to try to create something that 's not obtrusive or not going to stick out or not going to draw attention to it . And so what we would like to propose , we are happy with the city and with the conditions . We 're just asking that you would allow us to build a building that 's more consistent with the appearance and with the quality of image that we 're trying to accomplish . So if you can pass that picture around and I didn 't bring more . I probably should _ have but anyway , we share the same concern and we 're just asking . This is national role model for us . A national prototype . Minneapolis is our headquarters and we 're expanding all over the country now and it 's very important that we have a uniformity consistency . It 's something that every city will be happy with so we share you concerns and want to be willing partners with you in creating a facility that everyone will be happy with . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 6 Batzli : Very good , thank you . This is a public hearing . I 'd like to open it up to the public . If anyone would like to address the Commission , I ask that they step up. to the microphone and give their name and addres— for the record prior to addressing the Commission . Tom Kotsonas: My name is Tom Kotsonas and I live at 8001 Cheyenne in _ Chanhassen Estates . I also have some pictures to pass around . The pictures that I 'm presenting are of current establishments around the western suburbs and all of these , after looking at these , I have some 'grave concerns , at least what exists at the present time with Goodyear a—d Abra facilities . Questions such as what happens to the automobiles . As you can see in the pictures , when they circulate the storage of automobiles on the outside , a rather unsightly view in all those cases . - Most of those pictures were taken this weekend early in the morning so those cars are there and they 're not stored away at night . They 're there . There are a number of concerns besides that that I have on this _ development . To go through them in a sort of a manner here . One , is th increased traffic that this site is going to bring to our neighborhood . Or line our neighborhood . Noise . These types of businesses bring a great deal of noise with them . Air and the auto pollution was already talked — about . The trash and all of these businesses except one had outdoor tra n sitting front and back . Storage overnight . And these would be something that we 're worried about . Obviously loss of privacy in addition to what_ we already have . The general destruction of the trees in that neighborhood that are there . Which is something in a natural environmen.. which we 'd much prefer to stay . That negative impact on the mini-park . To have those businesses right there . The amount of traffic going by . — can 't imagine many couples or many people wanting their kids to go down . Young children to be playing there when that traffic , that increased traffic is there . There are some pictures of the entryway into Chanhassen and I don 't see how this is going to enhance the entryway into Chanhasse on the east side . That I read in the paper and it seems like the City Council and the Chamber and this group and others are very concerned with . Nothing seems to be being done about it . There 's a lot of talk but everytime something goes in , it doesn 't seem to be something to help out in that nature . And the other things we 're worried about of course are outdoor signs . Flags . All of these places have banners flying . Sale -- signs . All these types of things that again , make it very difficult and make it very unsightly for our neighborhood . And the other things that I would like you to consider is , how is this business compatible to the neighborhood . I think we as residents and long term residents . Myself I 've been there over 10 years , and some of the other people in that neighborhood have been there as many as 20 . We feel that we deserve also to be considered in this . It seems that every time a business comes alo g they have the top spot or top billing or however you want to say it and then we get sympathy and then after the sympathy , the vote is taken and a couple trees are put up and away we go . And also the feeling in the — neighborhood is that there 's a big push to develop this and whatever comes , let 's get it in there . Let 's get this plot of land developed and then we 'll be done with it and we 'll be onto something else . We feel that we 're entitled to be recognized and entitled to be considered in what go s in and what kind of businesses . Automobile repair facilities do make noise . They are unsightly , and with the other things that go with them . Thank you very much . -- Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 7 Batzli : Thank you . Is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission? Lindsay Amedeo: I 'm Lindsay Amedeo , 8007 Cheyenne . Chanhassen Estates also . Of course , anything in the automotive industry is not the business of choice to back up a residential neighborhood but I also understand that the zoning for that area allows for this type of business and we understand that the city needs the funds . And so the remaining question _ for me is , like Tom said , what will be done to reduce the visual and the audio disturbance that is brought by this type of a business? They are unsightly . This type of a business is extremely noisey and that 's my primary concern . Although to also repeat what Tom said , the natural visual barrier of the evergreens that are behind , inbetween my property and the proposed site , is dying out and there is no visual obstruction there right now . So I 'm real curious to know what the plans are to decrease the visual and sound problems that this type of business will bring . Batzli : Thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? I apologize , we took some of your pictures apart and there was glue on them . Tom Yotsonas: That 's okay . . . Randy MacPherson: Mr . Chairman , Commission members , I don 't know what pictures are being circulated but we share the same concerns as the residents do . In fact many of our good customers live very close to us . We have 16 locations in the metropolitan area . Many of these are by , some of them right next to restaurants . In Coon Rapids we have residential homes in less than 200 feet . We 're in West Bloomington , we have residential housing with less than 200 feet . We have 16 locations and have never had , we 've never had one complaint to any city about our activities . We operate our businesses and we 've had OSHA out to test noise levels and everything and I can assure you that we will not be a disturbance and you can check our facilities . And you can check also other cities that we have been in and find that to my knowledge we 've _ never had one complaint . And we just opened up a new facility in West Bloomington and it 's always an issue and I can understand . Especially in auto body . You mention the word auto body and it sends shivers through many residents and also Planning and City Commissions because of the concern . Because the industry . The image of the industry . Frankly the reason why we have prospered and done so well in this industry is because of what we 've done . We 've raised it to a new level . We have brought the body shop business from back street to main street , USA . So the noise level , the sounds , the odors , we have to abide by very strict government regulations . We 've just had OSHA through again checking to make sure that we 're doing everything appropriately . And we have not , this concern has been raised before and after we come into the community , it 's never become an issue . So we share the concern and again , we want to be a good neighbor in the community and we certainly don 't want to offend some of — the people close by who could be potential customers of ours and so we share that . _ Batzli : Have you had any meetings with the local residents? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 8 Randy MacPherson: In going before the City of Eagan , we went back and resurveyed people in the West Bloomington market and none of them had a complaint . I didn 't do this . It was hired by the people representing us in Eagan . Batzli : But in this particular development , you haven 't had a neighborhood meeting to explain the development? Randy MacPherson: We have not personally had one , no . Emmings : Do you have any need to store anything outside? Other than yo - trash perhaps . Randy MacPherson: Well I 'm as sensitive to that as anyone . We have a - general philosophy of not having outside storage and once in a while someone will drop off a customer , a customer will drop off a car after hours and leave the key in the key drop but we do not want wrecked cars - stored outside . Emmings: How about anything that , anything that you use in your operations? Do you need to store anything outside? Randy MacPherson: Nothing . We don 't want anything outside . Emmings : So if there were a condition that nothing could be stored outside , that would not be a problem to you? Randy MacPherson : That would not be a problem . Krauss: Commissioner Emmings , we do have a condition that says no damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight . Emmings: I 'm talking about anything . We 've got trash and we ' ll get the trash enclosed . There will probably be some vehicles outside but I just- wondered if there would be , I don 't see any reason . He doesn 't have any need to have anything else stored outside so we can put a condition on that nothing else will be stored outside . Randy MacPherson : I don 't want anything stored outside . I 'm just as concerned about that as anyone . Farmakes : Where is a damaged car stored? When I bring it in . Randy MacPherson: We keep it inside . - Farmakes : So when a wrecking car , you don 't have like a central area somewhere else where you store these? They bring in a wrecked car off of a wrecking truck and it brings inside and it spends it 's entire time inside? Randy MacPherson: There may be a short period of time during the day wh _, it 's dropped off and then it 's , they ' ll tow a vehicle . Sometimes an inoperable vehicle will be towed to us and it may be outside for a short period but it 's brought in by night . And we work very hard to schedule - Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 9 appropriately . The other thing that I want to point out about Abra , I can 't speak for Goodyear but we , most of our facilities do not , their average traffic , I mean the amount of cars we produce a week is not much more than about 20 cars . We are not doing a lot of small , you know we 're not doing tune-ups or anything like that . We do a lot less volume of repair and so , and we do not , especially in a location like this , we do not specialize in heavy collision . We 're not doing the heavy , really severely damaged . Most of it is , if we have a vehicle that 's damaged like that , we ' ll bring it to one of our larger facilities where we have more storage , including Eden Prairie . We have a larger facility with storage and it 's tucked down behind where we can store some vehicles down there . Farmakes: How do you deal with the damaged automobiles as far as leakage of oil or battery acid or any of these other types of things that are stored on site? Randy MacPherson: We have an EPA license . We have storage containers which are removed and we have to keep track of all potential , we are considered a small quantity generator . We 're not a large quantity generator , but even so , we are very regulated by the government on anything . So we have the appropriate , if the oil spills , we have the appropriate product to clean up that and the proper way of disposing of it . Batzli : When you 're doing minor repair work , maybe pounding out dents and things like that , during the summer months do you typically have the doors open to your facility? The bays open . Randy MacPherson: We tell our people that they cannot have the door open more than 12 inches . And there are some facilities where we have , I think our Eden Prairie facility , I don 't know if you 've been by it . Batzli : I 'm looking at pictures of it . Randy MacPherson: Okay . See that 's tucked , you can 't even see that from the road . That is tucked behind . I don 't know if you 're familiar - with the Modern Tire building . Batzli : Yeah . Randy MacPherson: But it 's back behind that . And that 's a different location . That 's more of an industrial facility . And that 's where I said we will do more of our heavy collision and repair . Batzli : Thank you . We may have more questions . This is a public hearing . Does anyone else wish to address the Commission? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Emmings moved , Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Eatzli : Jeff , we ' ll start with you here . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 10 Farmakes: Paul , can you talk a little bit more about three of the gener, . issues . Standards . To be designed to construct . . .so it will be compatible in the appearance with the existing and intended character of _ the general vicinity . We 've had a lot of problems with that area in the past , being that it 's so close to a single family residential area . Som__ of the intents of the things that we 're working on with the Highway 5 - development . What concerns me a bit I guess is now that the highway is completed , there sort of will be a general development I think is kind o- indicative to some of the stuff that we 're seeing and these types of buildings appearance generally take on a light industrial look . With the- block and the comments that have been made in the past by some of the other applicants for these types of buildings . Valvoline for instance . Putting the money into the building is not probably consistent with good _ business practice with these types of operations . The problem with thes types of buildings is that they 're positioned of course into a very sensitive area and I 'm sure you 're familiar with the fact that that 's the entrance to our city and so on . How does this relate to the intent of - what we 're doing with Highway 5? I read your paragraph there but it really doesn 't address sort of the work that 's been working on for a year and a half . - Krauss: Well , Commissioner Farmakes , I 'm sure as you 're aware , we 've ha" a lot of intent in the last year to do a better job of development along_ Highway 5 . It has yet to pay dividends in terms of having a new ordinan with some specific guidelines . Now we went through an exercise with Target that you 're all familiar with where I think we did employ a lot of the concepts that will become a part of the Highway 5 project . But agai--, Target it was in the HRA district . There were financial considerations . It was done as a PUD . It was a modern day project . In a lot of respects , I think I indicated this at our last Highway 5 meeting , this site is something of a throwback in terms of the way it was handled . I mean thi: has been a platted , commercial site since McDonald 's went in . The site ' been appropriately zoned for this type of use . Lake Drive is a frontage road through there , is completed . We do have concerns with the way thes- buildings look . We 'd much prefer that they take on an appearance:siore consistent with the development standards that we 've had in downtown Chanhassen . We think the PUD standard provided some latitude to do that - Probably not as much as we would have at it if the Highway 5 project was completed . I 'd note that , I recall when the emission control station came before you , you were told that they had a prototype that they built 11 of and their contract with the State said this is all they built . And in that case we would have preferred a pitched roof again but we settled fo. a mansard condition on there and we settled for considerably more landscaping than they put in elsewhere and I think if you look at other - emission control stations around the Twin Cities , it 's probably one of t better looking ones . What it all boils down to is , I think the fact that this is a CUP and that there are conditions like this in a CUP , gives you._ some latitude to demand better than average . But since we don 't have th Highway 5 program yet up and running , I 'm not sure exactly where the gra, area is of how far we should push that . We 've worked , given the fact that this is somewhat traditional site planning , we 've worked with Beissner o and off as he indicated , for many months you know , trying to get a handl on where Highway 5 is going . Trying to do the best job we can within the existing ordinances . Again , we wish that we had a little bit different - Planning Commission Meeting Ncvember 18 , 1992 - Page 11 architectural style but beyond that , we 'd like to hear your comments on where you think we should take it . I 'm relunctant to , ah . I guess I 've said enough on that . Farmakes: I wanted to know what you could do in regards to the architectural standards . And I guess I 'm going to have to rely on your expertise with that because it is interpretative at that point . I think it 's unfortunate that one , you have to ask an applicant to do something that 's far more costly and the type of building that maybe in general •terms in servicing is , from their standpoint , a waste of money . From our standpoint I think it 's one of aesthetics in the community that we live in . We keep on bumping up against this problem and particularly in the car care industry . I really don 't mean to single that out but I 'm sure that this isn 't the first time that you 've heard that . The type of architecture that we 're getting is corporate led franchise type architecture . It is basically bare bones type of architecture that is meant to put up a workable facility for the least amount of money possible . And unfortunately , when such facilities are taken out of the light industrial area and they 're put into a commercial area that , for instance car care where they want to be next to the highway . They want to have a visibility that a light industrial area is not going to provide them . We get into a situation where we 're getting the bright plastic and the graphics and the cinder block type buildings . I think that that 's unfortunate in this particular area . This is an incredibly sensitive area I think because of the zoning mistake that was made . . .past that we 're all familiar with that in this room . I don 't really know again getting back to that gray area , what we can do there but I would really like to see more done with the style of the architecture in trying to take it away from the light industrial look . I realize that you 've done work on that and the applicant has been working with you on that to try and stick with that . I don 't know if there could be any additional work done to clarify detail , perhaps what that could be . We 've had problems in the past with architectural standards . If you have any ideas with that , I 'd like to hear them . I think for sure at least that there 's further work that could be done in softening the roof line . I am concerned about the storage on site . People driving into our community . I certainly hope that they 're not going to see a line of smashed cars as they drive into Chanhassen . But I guess I 'd also like to say to us in general , as a warning , that we _ need to get this overlayment district done . And do it well but do it as a priority because these types of developments are going to follow this highway completion very , very fast and I kind of see us in a position where we may be putting up things that we don 't want to live with long term . If we can get any additional type of negotiation position for the types of properties that are going to be developed here , we 're going to need more than what we have . Batzli : Jeff , help me out a minute here . On the roof , you 're suggesting that we should do what with it? Farmakes : Well I 'm not an architect but basically it looks like an airplane hangar . The comment Goodyear made I believe about corporate directive , there are thousands of different Goodyear operations and architectural styles throughout the country and I know in Ipswitch , a small town in New England . Massachussetts , it 's in a historical zone . It Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 12 looks like a historic building . They basically had to conform an auto body section care area to like a salt box type operation . These types of things can be done if there 's a community that wants to have them done a-d have the type of ordinances that support that type of development . And again , I 'm going to have to defer to you because we get into a gray area in negotiation and I 'm not sitting there at the table . But I think that_ in the area of the Abra facility , actually the stone work there is fairl nice . I think the problem there is the roof line and sort of the contemporary , you have a box industrial look with a flat roof and again , 'these types of structures , even though we put a lot of trees around them- still wind up looking like light industrial type buildings . And without changing that and putting them close to a single family zone , and in the primary entrance into our community , we 're going to wind up with car care_ area that extends down the highway which is what we did not want working on our general corridor . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Steve . Oh , sorry . Krauss: Commissioner Farmakes . It would be useful you know if the Planning Commission had some specific recommendations on this and I don 't- say this because we couldn 't come up with them but we had a series of meetings with them over a period of months getting small incremental changes here and there and you sometimes lose the forest through the _ trees . We went through a similar process on the Americana Bank as I recall . You gave quite an astute dressing down of the architecture of that building . I think it resulted in some modifications . I believe that You clearly have some latitude . Some degree of latitude and again I don-t know where to tell you to stop but in terms of this being a conditional use . It 's clear that Chanhassen is developing a set of standards and expectations that are somewhat beyond Bismark or Mandan . You know simply because there 's franchise architecture doesn 't mean you have to take it . For years we 've been telling people like Hardee 's that orange buildings don 't fly in Chanhassen and you do have a right to do that . So don 't shoot too low either . Farmakes: Well I , of couse when we deal with some of these things , when we sit up here and we start saying , well why don 't you move that over he-a and why don 't you bring that up here . We 're up here for an hour . Arbitrarily when we look at these things , we of course go over them but they 're small schmatic type illustrations . Some of the things that we ar.e suggesting or have to be responsible about , they 're obviously costing someone thousand , tens of thousands or many thousands of dollars . I war_ to make sure that perhaps maybe we can sit down later and talk in more specific terms of architecture . In terms of general ideas , I find that - it , when we sit up here and we say , no we want four gables up there or something like that . It doesn 't serve a lot of purpose and sometimes confuses the issue . Perhaps maybe we can discuss this later in regards changing the architecture but I wanted to be on record as thinking or making the statement that we could improve this type of structure so it does not have a light industrial appearance as we drive into Chanhassen . _ Batzli : Okay . Steve . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 13 Emmings: In general I agree with what Jeff has said. It 's frustrating to sit and look at these buildings on the one hand and think now we 're going to have McDonald 's and the test station and this building and this building and it is the entrance to Chanhassen from the east and it doesn't _ seem to be going very well . But I don 't know how to change it . I don 't know now , you know these kinds of businesses are businesses we all use and it 's not the kind of situation where you want to say , well they can be in somebody else 's community or something . And there ought to be a solution in it but I don 't know what it is . The way the land is zoned now , it 's an appropriate use I think for the area . So in general I just think it 's kind of frustrating to look at this . But a couple of things that were brought up . The pictures raise a point . The one Goodyear facility had a huge stack of tires outside of it and is that addressed here somewhere? There just will not be any outside storage . Krauss: It 's addressed but it 's not addressed as well detailed as it could be . Emmings: I think it should probably be under the conditional use permit portion . Krauss : Yes , exactly . Emmings: And we may . . .broader condition that just says , there will be no outdoor storage . Now they 've got trash , that will be enclosed right? Krauss: Yes . Emmings: Trash containers , that will be enclosed . There shouldn 't be any outdoor storage of anything on these sites . We can leave the condition that there 's no damage or inoperable vehicles stored, even though that 's kind of mushy . I 'm not sure exactly what that means . But I can see that they would sometimes have to park cars outside if it 's not a lot and they're not in terrible condition , if they 're not all smashed up , I guess that can be all I 've got . The other , somebody raised , one of the people who spoke , raised the question about having banners and sale signs . 'hat does seem to be kind of something that you associate with a business of this kind . Is that regulated under our sign ordinance? Al-Jaff: Yes it is . Emmings: Okay , what can they do? Al-Jeff : They can have streamers . They can have banners as a temporary sign 3 times a year , 10 days at a time for a total of 30 days per year . Per site . Emmings: And do they have to come in and tell you when they 're doing it? Al-Jeff : Yes . Farmakes: That 's being modified somewhat . Emmings: What will the new one say? Planning Commission Meeting — November 18 , 1992 - Page 14 Farmakes: Well , we haven 't met in quite a while but essentially it limi some of that to a new opening . And modifies it somewhat . Emmings: But it 's limited anyway so it 's not . . . - Farmakes: It deals pretty much with the banner and the amount of what goes in the window . It would say temporary , the Valvoline would change . _ Would temper that down somewhat . That type of useage . Al-Jaff : Does that cover the streamers as well? Farmakes : Ah , I would be , I don 't feel comfortable quoting that because it 's been a while since I 've worked on that particular thing . Maybe 4 or 5 months . I don 't want to quote that off the top of my head . _. Emmings: I don 't really have any other specific comments on this . Batzli : Thank you Steve . Matt . Ledvina : Well generally I would say that I believe the site does fit into the land use that 's in the vicinity of the project . I would also agree - with Jeff 's sentiments as it relates to the Highway 5 overlay and I thin we should also try to expedite our development of an overlay to more adequately deal with these types of buildings that are going in . I 'd support the efforts , continued efforts to improve the roof lines of certainly the Goodyear with the use of the dormers where we can and also staff 's recommendations regarding Abra . One of the residents mentioned the situation with the traffic and I think that these types of uses real-y won 't provide a tremendous intensification of the traffic and so I don 't know that there will be that much more substantial traffic or pollution resulting from this . Being that you have the emission control center ju -t. next door and hundreds of cars go through that line so . I wanted to ask about one of the elements in the staff report and find out whether maybe we wanted to add a condition as it relates to the Highway 5 task force _ providing some input on the site plan review . And I don 't know ,- Paul yo were suggesting that that might be appropriate? Krauss : Well in fact we had a meeting last week and we talked about the- proposed Opus project and we did briefly talk about this one . The conce n that I have is , some of the Highway 5 issues may be out of the legal context of the current ordinance . I mean I think you should push the _ envelope within the current ordinance because you have a standing to do that but the Highway 5 Task Force is looking down the road towards a new set of guiding principles that don 't quite exist yet . We 'd be happy to take it to them . I think we have a meeting in early December . We could _ do that but they 're likely , it 's likely to be an exercise in frustration because they may come up with desires that can 't be met . Ledvina : So maybe they really can 't provide additional input beyond wha we 're doing right here . Krauss: I don 't know , Commissioner Emmings serves on that . I mean we 'd be happy to bring it up . And Jeff . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 15 Eatzli : Paul , by way of example , give me a desire that can 't be met . Krauss : If there 's a statement that , you know we initially would have had a preference for both these buildings to be identically designed . I 've seen both uses done very attractively in auto malls that have consistent architecture where the door 's already entered into a central courtyard and they share a common parking where they do have pitched roofs . Metal standing seam roofs . Where all the signage is coordinated . That would be MY preference . If that 's the recommendation of the Highway 5 Task Force , my guess is if , I don 't want to speak for the City Attorney but if it was rejected on the principle that that 's what you wanted to do , you may have pushed the envelope a little too far . In terms of what you can demand based upon the current ordinances . — Batzli : I don 't think we would be pushing it too far necessarily to have design themes that would tend to have you look at one building and another and say , they resemble one another . Or at least there are design elements that are consistent . Do you think right now that we have that? Krauss: I don 't know . I mean that was our initial preference that we discussed with the applicant . I think clearly that 's the most appropriate way of doing it . If we get , and again , we 're dealing with an ordinance that doesn 't exist and we 're not sure what you 're reaction or City Council 's reaction 's going to be on any of these things so it 's kind of , we 've got a series of unknowns . If we get a strong indication from you as to what your desire is , we 'll pursue it . ?atzli : Ladd . Conrad: Three issues which everybody 's talked about . Noise . The architecture . The roof design and landscaping . Noise , the applicant has talked about a little bit . I guess I 'm not comfortable there yet because I do^ 't know what kind of noise is generated from Abra . That bothers me . I need somebody to comfort me somehow on the noise level for the neighborhood . The pitched roofs and the architecture , I think is just real important . It 's the entrance to Chanhassen and I 'm not overly protective of that visual but I am somewhat . I don 't want this to be the typical and I 'd like to stay away from architectural standards as much as I can but in this case , this is the entrance and there 's just no doubt we have to make it work . I 'm not sure that I need to have the two buildings looking alike . But I do need to make it look like what we 've been trying to make that area look like and that 's a little bit of fitting into the neighborhood . Even though it 's on a highway . I want to feel comfortable that there 's some architectural soundness and that 's typically with the roofline . I think the building materials look fine . Batzli : Let me ask this , if I can interrupt you , and I already have so I will . Rather than look like a hodge podge of fast food/franchise type buildings , doesn 't it make more sense to at least make several of them look like they belong together? Conrad: That 'd be nice . I don 't know if it counts . Really we already have two that , we 've got McDonald 's so we should make them all look like McDonald 's . Planning Commission Meeting - November 18 , 1992 - Page 16 Satz is Not identical but at least so one architect is looking at the other plan . Architects know how to do that . I don 't . Farmakes : The intent though is , I can 't speak for the applicant but in - general a franchise directive usually follows that you have to be seen a d they 're very concerned about that and of course they seek this type of confirmation with structure and signage to try and reinforce that this is_ a Goodyear or this is an Abra . And they do put a lot of money into it . It 's part of that marketing direction and Ladd , I 'm sure you know that y.._J can dillute that . Conrad: If I were the applicant , I wouldn 't want to . I 'd want to keep the image constant . Yet on the other hand , what we 're seeing is that that image is a variety of images out there right now . If you 're a franchisee-, we have an opportunity to make a new standard for architecture that othe s try to match . The ones that I 've seen in the pictures , and those are olu , they 're today but they 're still , there 's certainly nothing , there 's not a standard there that I want to follow . I think the applicant has present d some visuals that are okay but I think we have to improve upon them and think it really , a lot goes back to that roofline . And it also goes back to you 're part of the entrance to Chanhassen , and that 's real significan'-. Beim part of that good image means you 're going to increase your busine and so I think there 's a compromise here to keep the Goodyear and Abra and give them their identity if they want but I think also Chanhassen has to_ demand what fits in that area . And the neighbors have never been happy with that section and I think I want to , it 's not an intensive use . It fits this area I think . My concern is just to make sure it fits visually . And again , part of that is noise . Part of my concern is noise . The oth-r part is landscaping , and I don 't have any idea what we 're talking about . None . It 's just like , I want to see how it fits and that 's real important . And again we 're talking , I 've looked at the plans and I don '}- have a clue and I think staff has asked for more landscaping and I think that 's real appropriate . I do want to , in looking at many little plans here and I don 't know what that is , but that 's a big deal to me . I want_ to feel comfortable that both facilities have good highway exposure because that 's what they 're buying . They 're buying exposure to the Highway 5 , and I want that to happen . Yet on the other hand , I don 't want to pollute visually in terms of the cars that are going to be there and - have to plan for the worst possible scenario and I have to plan for the fact that there are going to be some vehicles out there that don 't look so good and . . .for a while so I just guess I 'm not real comfortable yet with- what we 're doing to that site and I need more information . And I think it 's something simple . I think it 's something that , I just need to see what 's going on and right now I don 't . Batzli : So how do you see? What do you need to see? Conrad : A plan . Batzli : You need big plans? Conrad: No . I guess I 'm kind of interested in , when we talk about trees Yeah . I need something bigger than this and I guess I need something tha_ incorporates what staff 's vision is in it and I need to know how Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 17 automobiles are blocked both ways and maybe we 're talking about elevation so I can see berming and how the berming hides the cars . Cars from the neighborhood and maybe , I need to feel comfortable that Highway 5 , our vision on Highway 5 or our view on Highway 5 is acceptable . So you know , it mcg' be an elevation that shows me berming and how cars are . I 'm just kind of nervous that cars are going to be stored there and then again , I want to plan for the worst scenario and see how we take care of it . So noise , roof line , and landscaping and there are probably solutions that are on the table right now . I just can 't visualize them with what I 've been getting . Batzli : Okay , Tim . Erhart : I 'll shock everybody and make it short . I can 't figure out anything from these drawings . About once a year we see a set of drawings like this to represent a plan . I think we all should have the same response . — Krauss: We did distribute full sized drawings for this but it was done the meeting that was cancelled because we didn 't have a quorum . Erhart : And we were supposed to bring them? Krauss : Yes . Erhart : Then I apologize but I can 't figure out what the landscaping or the parking , or actually the traffic is . So I guess I 'd like to see an opportunity to see a full set of plans . I agree with pretty much everything on the architecture . I 'm not sure what the architecture is . What it is on this . I don 't think it even comes close to the auto emission which I think came out okay . After we worked on those guys for a _ little bit . So I think we 've got to work on these guys a little bit and see if something can be done , better appearance than this . I 'd like to see them look a little bit like there was some thought to put them together . It doesn 't have to be the same . Some consistency . I have one thing that I ' ll speak up on on behalf of the developer . Item number 11 under the site plan review where we 're asking them to pay a $7 ,580 .00 Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream . If I read that right , that is asking for something that the first time any citizen group even reviewed tonight for the first time , unless I misunderstand this . Krauss : No . This is . Erhart : Or is this the off site? Krauss: This is the off site and it 's similar to what we did with Hans Hagen Homes . Erhart : This is not the storm water hook-up charge? Krauss: No , no , no , no . No . This is because the pond that 's sized on that third site is not large enough I think to accommodate the volume and it 's not large enough to accommodate the water quality standards . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 18 Erhart : We 're talking about this pond . Is there going to be a pond her ? Krauss : Yes . Erhart : Is that big enough? Krauss: No . And Mr . Beissner indicated tonight that they may look to - increasing the size of the pond and that 's fine and that would decrease the dollar but at some point there 's a law of diminishing returns because .the lot loses it 's utility . - Erhart : Yeah , that would be a surprise if that couldn 't be made big enough . Krauss: Well keep in mind , this pond also has to serve the emission control site . That 's all supposed to drain through this one . Erhart : Okay . Well if that 's what that is that 's okay . Then again , I guess we can point out for you Paul is that item 11 on the subdivision , now which , if we go forward here and add this engineer to handle this _ storm water work , we should be incorporating the cost of this into our development fee structure as opposed . That 's my opinion . Krauss : Okay . To raise the fees to cover it . . . Erhart: Whatever . Yeah , I don 't think it 's right in the long run that we go to developers and ask them to agree to an open ended thing like this . - At some point we have to make it part of the fee structure so they know what it 's going to be . That 's a comment internally here . And also the conditional use permit . Make sure that we don 't have outdoor storage and I agree . I think it 's an appropriate use for the area . I think we just have to work , we 've got to work this architecture out better . Again , I '. not going to waste your time . No double parking . I thought some of those photos they were double parking . We want to make sure we don 't have tha`. I don 't think it 's on here although in one spot it looked like it could B but it 's hard to tell . So my feeling is , other than the subdivision motion , I think it should come back . _ Batzli : Thank you . It 's difficult for me to look at this and I know than we have a condition in here that there 's not going to be any damaged or _ inoperable cars and again I don 't know what that means but clearly there-s going to be cars parked outside these buildings . And I don 't think that 's a problem but I don 't know that that 's what , that there 's a meeting of the minds on this condition as to what this means and what they 're - going to do from the standpoint of , I can 't believe that Abra is going t be able to get all the cars inside every night and do that . And some of them will be "damaged" . It 's beyond my comprehension that they 're going_ to actually do that . I don 't know that they 're envisioning not parking one or more vehicles at some point in time out of doors and be at least _ n technical violation of the conditional use permit . Krauss : If they cannot , I would ask them to consider another site . You know I worked with a Goodyear dealer who was moving from Hopkins many years ago who had an operation where they had a wrecker and a field full - Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 19 of junked cars . It really was in the entrance to downtown Hopkins . It was a hideous thing to look at . I don 't think Abra has in mind doing anything like that . They 've said tonight that they 're willing to comply with it . I 'd be real leery of opening the door to having crunched cars sitting out on Highway 5 . Batzli : Well that 's not what I 'm suggesting . I 'm just suggesting that for example Goodyear I think had 32 parking spots and if we assume for a minute that there 's maybe , I don 't know how many people will be working there but let 's assume about 12 . 15 . There 's about 17 more parking spots . Probably 2/3 of those will be people who are leaving their cars there that are going to be worked on that day . Some I 'm sure will be left overnight from time to time . Some of them may be "damaged" . That 's probably why they 're there and I don 't think they 're going to pull them into their bays either . And I don 't know what , you know I don 't want to try and kid ourselves that there won 't be "damaged" cars sitting outside and there will be storage of , I can 't envision that places that deal with damaged cars at some point won 't leave one outside . And if this is an intent to minimize those things , or you know put in place some vehicle . Vehicle , no pun intended . Method of trying to get them to put them inside every night , that 's fine but I can 't see it happening . And by looking at these pictures , every one of them has cars outside . Now granted most of them are probably employees in the back . You know I take these photos with a grain of salt because I don 't know . I wasn 't there to look at the cars and see what they were . Whether they were employees ' cars that are being driven back and forth or whether these are the cars that are being worked on . But I have a tough time because once again , from our room concept that we were initially shown in our grand Highway 5 corridor plan , _ clearly this is one of the first things when people are coming into Chanhassen and while I don 't mind a couple of cars being left out , I don 't want it to get out of control . And what I really don 't want to have happen is to 4 years later finally get tired of it and go back to this conditional use permit and have them say well yeah but , you know you let us go for 4 years and you knew that we had to park some things outside and our attorney says , well yeah . Boy , you kind of sat on it for a long time . I don 't know if you can get rid of them now . I would like this condition , whatever it is to reflect reality because this is such , I believe a crucial site coming into Chanhassen . I 'd love to believe everybody but I _ can 't believe that if I was the applicant standing up there , you know I 'd probably say well yeah we 're going to try our best . But I don 't know that I would have made the statement we will never do that . They will do it . I can 't imagine they can 't do it . I mean , do you want to respond? Randy MacPherson: I 'd love to . I think I said that there will be times that people will drop off cars but we do not store cars outside , and I _ think there 's a difference . I think that 's what it 's called , is storing cars outside . And we share the same concerns . I mean I 've got people coming from all over the country and even Europe looking at our concept . And we do not allow our managers to store outside . Now I can 't ever tell you that I never have a manager who does not not follow our procedures but we have people on staff that go around to all of our facilities and visibly inspect them and do a grading and a report . And one of the things we evaluate is to make sure that there 's nothing unsightly outside . So that 's very important and we have several cities that we have this Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 20 stipulation that there will be no outside storage of vehicles and have lived by it and abided by it . Another thing is we do have Goodyear next door . Well typically the Goodyear customers come and go the same day and many times there are empty stalls in their facilities at night and we ha a worked out reciprocal arrangements where if we have too many , which is infrequent , to get inside , we simply work out an arrangement with them to pull the car inside over there over night . And since we a lot of times o some reciprocal business back and forth , we try to get along real well s it 's worked very well on those occasions when someone did over schedule . So I 'm not here to try to mislead or trying to lie to anybody . We 're ve—y concerned about that and are prepared to look to that agreement . And if we have any of our , if anyone from the staff would call me from any city and say hey , your storing cars , I can guarantee you we 'd address it - immediately . So I can never say that an employee would never do it but can tell you we 're living under this agreement and our cities have been happy with us . And they share your concern so . The other thing I want to point out is that our buildings are not cheap . They 're very expensive . - The buildings look more like an office complex than , they do have some garage doors on the sides of them but they are very expensive buildings to build and the question with architecture is not really to us a cost factgr because to put that particular peak up , whatever is not any more money than what we 're proposing . That 's not any additional money . Our problem is that we consider it actually more intrusive and it actually attracts more attention to our roofline and we don 't want it to be , we don 't want to attract attention to that roofline . That 's our opinion . That 's our view . The other thing is , you 'll never have McDonald 's wanting to look like Hardee 's . I mean it just , I think you said it very well . We want to have identity in the community . And of course we want that identify to e very positive so anyway , we are prepared to live by this ordinance . And while I 'm up here , if I may address the noise issue . Our buildings are _ insulated and our garage doors are kept closed except for a foot . Now once in a while we do run into a store where somebody has left the door open . When our people see that , we make sure that they close that door . Most of our repairs are simply replacement of damaged sheet metal . It 's— just take a fender off and you put a fender on . Batzli : Do you use air? - Randy MacPherson: They call them air ratchets which , you know you would not , I 've never had one noise problem ever . And I drove by the site tonight and I saw the distance to the residential area and it 'd be virtually I think impossible for someone to hear our activities going on _ And so I 'm very comfortable personally with the noise issue and we 've purposely driven ourselves by the locations . Most of the air ratchets don 't make that much noise . There 's a lot newer ones that are a lot mor quiet and we 're not beating out fenders and those kinds of things because frankly you can 't repair fenders nowadays . You have to replace them . The sheet metal is so thin , if you lean on them you put a dent in them . So anyway that , the noise issue has come up many times but after we 've gone into the community , has never come up as an issue . And we have our , it 's enclosed and it 's in insulated buildings and has never been an issue . Batzli : You 've been very helpful , thank you . I have one more question . And that is , since this is going to be a showcase , if you will , for peop' e Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 21 coming in and looking at your concept and franchise , I imagine that you don 't want to tie it too closely into the Goodyear store . Is that a true statement? Randy MacPherson: I don 't , you know we want to work with you people . We 're not saying it has to be any particular way . We 're just saying that we 'd like to have you recognize that our desire to have our own individual look , for it to be a professional look , that will represent the community well . In this picture here , which is the one you got earlier , that blue roof there is a Panekoeken restaurant . And that 's on University Avenue . And so we 're right next to restaurants on main retail thoroughfares and I think that 's an attractive looking facility . I mean and I could be wrong . You know my wife sometimes has to tell me if this shirt goes with this tie and those kind of things so maybe I 'm the best judge of that but so anyway , we would like to have . We are in auto malls that have , everyone — has the same architecture . But this is a free standing building and it 's not incorporated within a building and so we 're just asking for you to allow us to , if we can , to represent ourselves and we are trying to get consistent . And I ' ll admit , that we do not have all 16 of our metro areas nor our outside metro areas all the same but we 're trying to get more consistent with our appearance and our professionalism . Batzli : Well as a trademark attorney , you don 't have to convince me that you want to maintain a somewhat consistent image , so thank you . Randy MacPherson : The other issue that I want to make sure too on , you talked about landscaping . And I appreciate your comments . I don 't want people to see cars either and I don 't mind berming . I just want to make _ sure that we have people know when they drive by Highway 5 that there is an Abra facility there . Conrad: That 's real important . Batzli : Thank you . Emmings : I have a question for Paul . Batzli : Okay , go ahead Steve . Emmings: Paul , the condition that says no damaged or inoperable vehicles will be stored overnight on the Abra site . Why? Krauss: It should apply to both . Emmings: Okay . Batzli : Go ahead . You 've been waiting very patiently . Al Beissner : I 'd like to go through a couple of the issues that I now hear that are brought out that can maybe you can appreciate what we 've been through and what we 're trying to do . Would you put that site plan back up . What we tried to do and that 's our site plan blown up and you should have had . We delivered 27 full sets of plans to the City in September . Whenever we had to so I 'm sorry that you didn 't get yours Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 22 then . But this is the site plan and a couple things that we tried to do that , to make it different and better . First of all our setback from the freeway or Highway 5 , a good distance . As far as we could go . With one _ major exposure out there , everybody wants to build on Highway 5 so when you 're coming from the east , then you can see the building right there . We set the building back as far as we could . We turned the buildings also so that you see just the short ends of the buildings and the garage door - are facing each other so that if you don 't like the looks of garage door , you don 't like Abra 's garage door and Goodyear doesn 't like Abra 's garage door and Abra doesn 't like Goodyear 's garage door but we did that so - there 's no visibility from the freeway or from the residential area for the garage doors . We offset the buildings so not to make them look like kind of a row house . I mean that 's the reason they were pushed back and_ forth and we pushed the Abra one closer here because they had a small do, on that end of the building that we didn 't want exposed . We also , this site plan doesn 't show it but the emission control site is probably 5 feet higher in elevation than our site and part of what we 're doing is cuttin- off the road here and going down . Why that site got built up and is kin of a beacon up there , we don 't know but our 's is lower by 5 feet than what their site is . So we won 't be sticking up and looking that direction . The third thing is , we do have 3 foot berms along the freeway and so when th cars are parked , you won 't see any hood and grills or whatever from any normal car . And if there 's any foreign cars or smaller cars there , you won 't see them as they 're parked anywhere along in here . You will not s_ the cars parked from the west elevation because again , this site pad is or 5 feet lower than the emission control site plan . So basically , and there 's very little parking of this view from the eastern elevation . So - we were , you know it is your front door . We did work hard , a long time . I think we originally entered into the purchase agreement in May and we 've been back and forth and when you were talking , I think our frustrating part and your frustrating part , rooflines . I didn 't even put on this board the first roofline that we had because it was when we walked in , w_ walked out quickly because they said that will never work and we got the hint right away . So we struggled with the roofline thing and we don 't - know , when you say what is right . I mean what is right? Is blue suit a blue tie or is it brown suit and brown tie? We don 't know and we went through an exercise where we designed the Abra building with the same - mansard roof that the emission control building has . That didn 't fly ve well because it still looks like a flat roof . One of the problems that we ran into early on in so you know why we struggled with it and why they _ can 't have a roof like a Goodyear . The rooftop whatever it is that 's ov - your paint booth , has to be on top of the roof . Goodyear doesn 't have t rooftop units that they need for ventilation . And the problem lies with , if you have our building plan and floorplan out there , is that on this line right here , this is where one of the , that 's where that big rooftop unit is . The other rooftop units are on this side of the building . And what really throws the thing out of whack is that you want to screen the _ elevation that you have . We have a 4 foot screen from the east and the west so you can 't see it from the east or the west but then to make it have any kind of balance in a peak , we had to go up so high and that 's why it looked really bad . When Randy saw it he said, you know it doesn 't lo < right . That 's not our first choice . We did do these and we have one . Also signage . When we first came to town and I know when developers come to town and they 're always , we are the bad guys wearing the black hats a - Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 23 we looked at the ordinance and we thought we were under the Highway Business zone and the Highway Business zone allows you to do so many different things . I think about 45 days into our development work the City of Chanhassen found out that we , there was a technical loophole or something that we found that we now are under a conditional use and not Highway Business . In Highway Business there 's a whole lot more that one can do and the City and the staff you know has to I guess abide by the ordinances in what we can do . Because it 's a conditional use permit , we changed a whole lot of thought process . The sign that you will see on the freeway is from this site that has 60 square feet of signage which is less , or is it 80 feet? 60 square feet or 80 square feet which is less than what we are allowed . If we would have had Highway Business , we could have each of the sites had their own pylon sign . We have one sign here out on the freeway there and it will be done with the Goodyear logo , the Abra and then the third user which will be this guy down here . And the sign will be coordinated , color coordinated probably with the Goodyear building or the Abra building . So we 're very sensitive to that . And those are the kinds of things that we have negotiated back and forth and come up with and we are happy with and arrived at . This is the same Abra building with a mansard roof just like the emission control one . You put a mansard all the way around it and that 's how that looks . This is a modification of their building where we don 't have a mansard all the way around but we have screened on the roof the rooftop units . And we struggled with that . We came up with what we thought was a better plan and that was closer to what Abra does or what Abra wanted and this is , this is all the rooftop . These rooftop units are screened . I think if you were to superimpose the elevations that we 've drawn on say the end of , the roofline comes up something like that . We have much more roof or facade than we really need to screen it but to put it in balance and make it have some interest , you had to . That 's what happened here . One of the rooftop units is here and the other one is over there and that 's why we had to start so far out and to give it any kind of balance . We struggled with this probably 5 different times to come out with the right balance in it and so when you 're talking , where do we go with the architecture , we 'd like to know where to go with the architecture . It 's not something that , not that cost isn 't a factor again but we all estimate how much our typical architect fees are going to be . Engineering fees are going to be , etc , etc , etc . If you send it back to us and say okay , let 's do it again and let 's try something architecturally different . Who is going to determine what 's right architecturally? That 's our biggest concern because I think , I mean we struggled with this a lot and I 'm not sure that there 's a right solution and that 's what the problem is . So we did do a lot more with the site and I wanted to point these things out to you so that we did take all this into consideration by moving the buildings back . Setting then differently . We 're lower so it 's not going to be something big and intrusive sticking out there . And we thought we did a good job with it . It 's taken a little longer than we wanted to take but we understand that . So if you have suggestions as to which style of architecture to use , that 's great . But what I 'm afraid of is that we 'll go to a committee over here and the committee will try to guess again as to what is the right look . That 's our biggest problem is that we don 't know and there aren 't any guidelines saying they all have to be gabled . They all have to be mansard . They all have to be flat . It 's kind of the individual choice . I just wanted to point that out but that 's kind of Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 24 what we have gone through and this one we thought was attractive . That was choice , that was go around number 4 I think or 5 but that still has some flat roof look and I really don 't know what to do . This one isn 't — balance . We put an accent stripe around the entire building too so it 's not like one solid wall so it won 't be straight brick . It will have accept stripes in it . And the architecture here , we tend to carry the _ same accent through the front and sides . We have struggled with it . I will say this , it 's not gone without um . Batzli : What happened to the roof units when you put the pitched roof - on? Where did they disappear under the pitch? What happened to them? T1 last one they showed us . Al Beissner : This one? Batzli : Yeah . Where are the rooftop units in there? Al Beissner : One is over here and one is here . From the side this is . . Batzli : That part is pitched? Straight up and down . -- Al Beissner : This panel is pitched up . You can see how it 's . . . If we didn 't have . . .side elevation looking from east and west . The metal that _ is complimentary to the exactly what is the other metal facade is and it > slanted the roof , tipped slightly rather than . . .and the unit sits facing here and over here and that 's why it had to be spread out so far . That 's why it kept getting so high . If it didn 't , then we 'd go with this . It - would have to be lower . . . I wish there were some way that we could do i architecturally with , that 's where our problem comes in because we just couldn 't put the same roof on it that Goodyear has . - Batzli : Okay , thank you . Emmings: Do you have any idea what 's going to happen on the other lot there? Al Beissner : No I don 't . Emmings : Okay . Al Beissner : We tried to do them all three at once and we didn 't find a third user . Emmings : Do you expect it to be some auto related something or , not necessarily? Al Beissner : Yes . I would think so . The people that we 've talked to have been like Champion Auto Store , Rossi Big Wheel or something like that . We understand that you kind of want all the automotive stuff in one area as opposed to sprinkled throughout the community and it seemed like , as long as the emission control was there , and if we can do Goodyear and Abra there , you should make that the auto center if you will and have th_ : use there . But we have talked to Rossi Big Wheel and Champion Auto . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 25 Emmings: Would you go back to your site plan? You 've kind of detailed the landscaping on the north , east and west sides and what about from the view from the south where the neighbors? Al Beissner : We aren 't doing anything down here . The trees that are _ there will still be there and until this site gets developed , those poplars and dogwoods and elms will stay there . We are doing landscaping around the pond that we have to put in . Emmings : On the . Al Beissner : Both sides . Emmings: Okay , what 's going to be on the south side of the pond? Krauss : Nothing . Just a line of trees . Al Beissner : Yeah . . . .as you can kind of tell , we 've gone through maybe 4 or 5 different sign designs too that would make it right and compatible and kind of make it so it 's as well as you can make an auto architecturally compatible with an area . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Let me ask you a hypothetical question Ladd . Now that we just saw what we saw , if we were to say table this for tonight so that we could see final landscaping . Maybe there 's still an issue about noise or something that you haven 't been satisfied with . What would you want to see in relation to the roofline/architecture of the building now that we 've kind of at least gotten a flavor of the history of what 's been done on the Abra . What do you think the applicant could do or staff could do with the applicant to , I mean what guidance can we give them? Conrad: Well I think staff 's always done a pretty good job of working _ with applicants . We 're not designers up here . I get real nervous when we talk about architecture . And when we see something and we 're all speaking , there 's some consensus I think amongst those of us who are here that the roofline is still not comfortable . I think the history is good to see where Mr . Beissner has taken it but I 'm still not comfortable with the roofline period . The Abra roofline is kind of artificial looking to me . It just doesn 't feel right . And I think staff has asked for some things with Goodyear that might make sense but again , I 'd guess I 'd just like to see a final , and I know what Mr . Beissner 's talking about . What bogey are we shooting for . What is it? What 's the standard? Typically staff has given pretty good direction . I guess when I take a look at , other than maybe there 's a couple cases where I might wonder but I think generally they 've come back with something . We can 't get a consensus here on architecture . There 's just no way 6 of us are going to do that and I think staff has at least is one voice . So I guess as long as staff is going to tell me that the noise is not a problem , I guess I 'm not waiting for the applicant to tell me . I think the staff is saying noise is not a problem and that 's one of the , the reason this is a conditional use is because you 're obviously backed up to a neighborhood and a neighborhood that 's been there for a long time and a real important neighborhood and we want things to fit in . I need the security of somebody saying , hey . We don 't have jack hammers operating in an Abra thing all day long . That Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 26 would be obviously . . .and I 'm naivee on what noise goes on in a place lik that . Second thing . I guess I 'm looking for a roofline that , I 'm not trying to bundle costs . I guess I just see some rooflines in the Abra _ thing that I don 't like . And it seems that there 's got to be a solution to that . And third , I 'm looking for some elevations that can show me fr n the highway . You know a 3 foot berm is , they typically sink and I guess I need some security that we have done our job out on Highway 5 to make th--s look good . And I guess , if 3 foot are standard , is that the maximum berming height that we can , our ordinance allows? Krauss : 3 foot 's fairly typical . To go higher than that you almost hav to drop a wall behind it otherwise the grade gets . Conrad : And I 'm not trying to hide your identity . I guarantee you that- I think it 's critical that companies who buy the property have that highway identity . On the other hand , it 's critical that we kind of bury some of the stuff that is a little bit offensive to the eyes as flashing- by at 45 mph and that 's some cars that might be there . I guess I need some really crude sketches to show me that we 've done our job out there . I think when you take a look at these , it 's a little bit better than what I was looking at before . Batzli : But the staff has asked them for things in addition to what . Conrad : That 's my impression . That this , you 've asked for more beyond this . I 'd like to see that and then just get a sense that we 've done what we 're trying to do and that is to visually take care of cars that are - there and I 'm not looking for standards that we haven 't applied to the emission control folks . But you know it 's funny , my impression of that emission control is pretty good . I think we did a good job of designing_ that thing so whether that tells you our taste is terrible or whatever . I feel that fits some of what we 're looking for . Batzli : Does your wife have to tell you what tie to wear with which sui`-? Conrad: Absolutely . No , she waits until I make a mistake and then she gets me . Batzli : Does anyone else , before Paul asks his really important questio.. , have any other guidance for what they 're looking for in the roof? Erhart: Yeah , I like the mansard roof and what I don 't like about the t o roofs that we 're looking at is the square ends . Conrad: Yeah . I 'd reinforce that . Mansard is acceptable to me . The square . The wall that . See the wall is a face on a TH 5 and from the angle that most people , you don 't follow and look directly 90 degrees at it . So typically what you 're seeing is a view that it 's not real . It 's like a fake . Batzli : A set . It 's a set . Conrad: You 're going to create a fake roof no matter what but still , yeah you 're right . It is a set . So anyway , it doesn 't . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 27 Randy MacPherson: We don 't like that wall either . I liked the rolled — mansard . That 's what I 'm trying to get is the rolled mansard look . My problem is with that fake wall . It just looks like a saloon . Batzli : Right , exactly . I think that 's our problem with it too and what we 're struggling with is , by committee we 're having a tough time saying to you well this is what we want . I actually , I think some of your previous designs were better efforts , at least closer . Something like that bothers me less than what the one , second one down , bothers me a lot less than the fake saloony kind of walls that no one 's going to look at from 90 degrees . _ Farmakes : . . .but if I can volunteer this . If the staff wants to meet later on this , I think we could come up with a couple of quick sketches that maybe would give a directional point for the client and maybe the city . But I feel real uncomfortable when we start playing with the architectural drawings in the space of 20 minutes here for something that 's going to be here for 20 years . Batzli : I agree . Al Beissner : Could I leave these drawings with you then? So that you can have them to mill around with . Batzli : What I would suggest is , I 'm getting the sense that we 'd like to table this and get some additional information . I know Jeff for one would — be more than happy to meet with staff and yourself and the architects to maybe noddle around and kick around some ideas . I 'm volunteering you but I think that . Farmakes: . . .just trying to help . Batzli : Okay . I guess I 'd appreciate a motion at this point from my fellow , one or more of my fellow commissioners . Oh yeah , your really important question . I 'm sorry . Krauss : Well yeah , the noise question . Noise is a tough animal to regulate . There are state noise guidelines . I think the residential standard is 65 dba daytime and 55 nighttime . We can put a condition on there that this site not exceed those levels of noise at the property line . I like the Abra idea of keeping the doors largely shut . That could be applied to Goodyear . I 'll bet you though that whatever noise guidelines we establish , the highway 's going to drown it out anyway . Conrad: Well that 's an interesting parallel or contrast , yeah . Krauss : But we can still make them operate to an acceptable level on site . Batzli : Two things that , before our motion , I would like to see those things that you just suggested but two other things . And they were comments by the public here that maybe weren 't brought up again . One I think , I 'm sorry I have just your first name written down . Tom , was it? - You spoke about a mini-park . I 'm unfamiliar with the location of that . Where is that in relation to this? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 28 Krauss : It 's almost directly across the street . Batzli : To the south? - Krauss : To the south . Batzli : Okay . Is there uncomfort on staff 's part at all with these typ s of , there 's a lot of traffic on that road from DataSery and whatever els Krauss: Well and to be honest , I think we pointed this out when emissio- control came up , because the same question came up . There 's going to be 3 lot more traffic on it . It 's a collector street that passes through an office/industrial area . Most of that area 's undeveloped right now . Now_ since the emission control station came through , we have Dell Road is no constructed and the signal is operating and I 'm not sure if that 's inducing a lot more traffic to come in from that side but that 's the goal . Batzli : Yeah I 'd like , I 'm going to take another visit to that site because I didn 't really see where that mini-park was in relation to that . The other thing was , our second person from the public . Lindsay , was th-t the name? She mentioned something about the screening and we 've heard from the applicant . There basically isn 't going to be any . Right now we 're going to rely on natural screening until the site to the south _ develops . Is there any reason to require , obviously you don 't want to have them put up screening temporarily which is all going to all be grad_d down or cut down . But assume for a moment that this other site doesn 't develop for a number of years , which it very well could . Is there adequate screening for the neighbors to the south right now? Al-Jaff: There is a large number of elm and poplars on the site . - Batzli : But elevation wise , are they going to be able to . Al-Jaff : You won 't be able to see them from the neighborhood . You won ' be able to see the two buildings from the neighborhood . Batzli : Okay . You 're comfortable with that right now? Okay . Is there-3 motion? Conrad: I would move that we , well I want to make sure . Let 's see we 've got the conditional use permit . You 've got the site plan . Erhart : I move that the Planning Commission table the approval of the site plan review . Batzli : Is there a second? Farmakes : Second . Batzli : Discussion . Conrad : Well yeah , what 's your intent? Erhart: To come back . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 29 Conrad : Well what are you thinking about for the other aspects? Erhart : Well I ' ll get to that when I get there . Conrad: So you have a strategy . What 's your strategy? Erhart : I 'm going to ask these guys if they want to do the subdivision tonight of if you want to table all of it? For sure with the site plan review we want it . Conrad : Right . — Emmings: Well and the conditional use . Batzli : We 're asking the applicant to sum in here , do you understand the question? Al Beissner : Yes , I understand and I don 't think there 's any reason to go through the other two . . .do all three at the same time . Erhart : Okay , well then I 'll move that we table all site plan review , subdivision and conditional use until we get to review the architectural and cover some of the other issues that are still in question . Batzli : Okay , who seconded that motion? Conrad: It was me . Oh , it was Jeff? Farmakes: I seconded it . Batzli : Okay . Al Beissner : Mr . Chairman , I have a question . Are there any things in the other two that could pose a problem . . .? _ Emmings: The only other one that we talked about at some length was outside storage . Al Beissner : If we 're going to table the site plan review but the subdivision agreement and the other two that you 're going to act on tonight , are there any problems with those two that we should address the Council at the next meeting? Batzli : We were really talking about all three of them tonight . And I think you heard all of the problem areas . Do you accept this friendly amendment to his motion? I think you seconded it . Farmakes : All three . I was assuming it was all three . Batzli : Okay . Is there any other discussion? One moment while we vote on this . Paul , is it clear to you from our Minutes what we want to see next time when it comes back? Krauss : Clear as it usually is . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 30 Batzli : Well then we 're golden . Is there any other discussion? Erhart moved , Farmakes seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the Goodyear Tire and Abra site plan , subdivision and conditional use- permit application for further review. All voted in favor and the motio carried . Batzli : We did have one more question from the public . I 'm sorry sir , your name? Gerard Amedeo: Gerard Amedeo . It 's not really a question . It 's just a- comment after listening to the discussion . It has to do with . . . One ha to do with the traffic that . . .and the gentleman brought up that he didn 't think the traffic was going to be much of a problem . I 'm sure that these_ two gentlemen hope that he is wrong . That traffic is going to hopefully be substantial . I think it will be . Conrad: Just responding . When we take a look at the site , and the uses- compared to a McDonald 's or compared to the emission control , it 's not even close . So the validity of challenging that is can that area sustain additional traffic . That 's where you could challenge it . I looked at - that in terms of what we had planned for and nothing seemed to me on the surface to say we 're stressing the site out . Obviously there 's more trips per day . There 's just no doubt but when we did traffic studies before , we knew that that was going to happen . So again , if you know some more things , I think it 's valid to come back at the next meeting and share th _ m with us but at this point , it didn 't look that way . Gerard Amedeo: My second comment is that , it seems to me that the flavo of what I 'm hearing all of these gentlemen say is that you 're not quite sure what the image should be . You want it to be something that 's _ Positive for the city but you 're not really quite sure what that is . It seems to me we 're a little late in the ballgame to be deciding what that image should be when you 've got applicants coming to the city with plans and drawings . This is what we want it to be and you 're still not quite - sure . Batzli : We have a citizens group looking at that issue . Yeah , I mean - we 're talking about Highway 5 from one end of the city to the other . It a massive undertaking and we really weren 't in a position to do that until the Highway was upgraded and we had our comprehensive plan done which was_ done about a year and a half ago . So we 're working on it as fast as we can and I agree , we 'd rather be proactive than reactive and unfortunatel, on a couple of these early applications that come in , as they just finish this stretch of highway , we are being reactive and we 're trying to be as - cautious as we can on it . But we appreciate that . So this will be back hopefully next time . Krauss: Well we 're trying to work around the holidays but we should hopefully be able to get it on the next meeting . We will send out another notice to the residents just so they 're sure which meeting it 's on . Batzli : Thank you very much everyone for coming in . P.C. DATE: 11-18-92 CITY 0 F C.C. DATE: 12-14-92 CASE: 92-3 Site Plan CII� ��SS�N 92-2 CUP 90-17 Subdivision BY: Al-Jaff STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for Goodyear, 5,397 Square Feet and Abra Auto Service Center, 6,494 Square Feet 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres z 3) Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH Q District LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and east of Emission Control Testing Station a_ APPLICANT : Beisner Ltd. Chanhassen Holding Company Q 6100 Summit Drive 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN 55436 PRESENT ZONING: Highway Business ACREAGE: 3.1634 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Hwy. 5 S - RSF; Chan Estates and Lake Drive East E - IOP; DataSery W - BH; Emission Control Station QSEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. W SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with mature poplar and elm trees. 2000 LAND USE: Commercial • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 2 — PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing to construct an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The site is located between Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5 adjacent to the Emission Control Testing Station. The area of the Abra site is 33,918 square feet and the Goodyear site is 40,908 square feet. Both sites are located in a Highway Business District. The site is visible directly from Highway 5 and has access from Lake Drive East via a private drive. In an accompanying subdivision request, the site is being divided into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building, the second will contain the Abra building, and the third will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that high intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would _ result in dedication of all required easements. The site plan is reasonably well developed. Staff has been working with the applicant for the past three months on the site plan and building architecture. The design has improved considerably and the applicant has been quite cooperative with staff. The Goodyear building is a split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish structure that will have a series of service bays and a pitched roof. The Abra building has decorative integral color concrete block. The north and south elevations have a pitched element to them. All services for both facilities will take place inside the buildings. Staff would have preferred to have the buildings utilize a coordinated architectural theme. However, the underlying zoning and lack of HRA involvement does not provide a great deal of leverage. Minor architectural revisions are being proposed to further improve both building designs. Parking for vehicles is located on the north and west side of both structures away from Lake Drive. This location is ideal since it places these areas further away from residences south of Lake Drive. The Goodyear site will be operated from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays. The Abra site will be operated from 7:30 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. on Saturdays to — provide estimates on work required on a vehicle. Body work will take place from 8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Both sites will be closed on Sundays. There will be no outdoor storage or outdoor servicing of vehicles. Staff is further requiring that there be no outside storage of damaged or inoperable vehicles. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. Additional landscaping is being requested on the north side of the site along Highway 5, and along the parameters of the retention pond located to the south of Lot 3. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All of the trees on both Lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 3 valuable quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. Their loss is unfortunate but is unavoidable if the land it to be developed. When the Emission Control Site was reviewed, site access was a major concern of staff's throughout the design of the proposal. Our original thinking was that a public cul-de-sac should be required running north from Lake Drive since there may ultimately be 4 sites accessing Lake Drive via that connection. However, staff was concerned that the need to create a cul-de-sac at the end of the street would result in a hazardous traffic situation, whereby traffic entering and leaving the sites would be cutting across the cul-de-sac in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, we recommended that the plans be revised to utilize a commonly owned and maintained private driveway system that will avoid the traffic conflicts outlined above. The private driveway was built to city standards which required the full 32' pavement width and a 9 ton design and curb and gutter. The current access provisions are acceptable, however, plans to provide the driveway's long term maintenance by the land owners should be clarified. Staff regards the project as a reasonable if unexceptional use of the land. It is unfortunate that the Hwy. 5 Study could not have been completed earlier since it will likely result in development standards that are more sensitive to the corridor's image. The Planning Commission may want to consider referring the request to the Hwy. 5 Task Force to gain their input. However, the city's ability to leverage substantial changes to what is otherwise a reasonable request, based upon current ordinances, may be limited. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site plan, without variances, conditional use permit and subdivision requests for this proposal. BACKGROUND On January 28, 1991, the City Council approved final plat #90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. The subdivision resulted in dividing 5.59 acres into 2 lots with an area of 1.9 acres for Lot 1 and 3.0 acres for Lot 2. Lot 1 became the site for the Emission Control Testing Station which was approved as a conditional use permit concurrently with the subdivision. Lot 2 was reserved for future development and is being proposed for subdivision into three lots with this application. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The building is situated parallel to Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5. Access is gained off of a private driveway which connects to Lake Drive East. Parking is located to the north and west of the proposed buildings. The nearest home is located 350 feet away from the south edge of the actively used portion of the site. Direct views of the service bays will be screened by berming and landscaping from both Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 4 The Goodyear site is located 75 feet from the north, 30 feet from the east, 75 from the south, and 75 from the west property line. The Abra site is located 105 feet from the north, 10 feet from the east, 45 feet from the south, and 55 feet from the west property line. Materials used on the Goodyear building will be split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish. The Abra building will be constructed of integral color concrete block with a pre-finished galvanized steel canopy accent. Pre-finished metal overhead doors will be used on the east and west elevations of the Goodyear structure and on the north, south and west elevations of the Abra building. The buildings' architecture meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. The Goodyear building will have a pitched roof that is a 100 feet in length. Staff is recommending the introduction of dormers along the roof line to break it up and reflect what has become typical Chanhassen CBD design. The north and south elevations of the Abra building have a pitched element to them, however, the north elevation looks bare. Staff is recommending the pre-finished galvanized steel canopy be extended along the north elevation. Auto services at both facilities will take place inside the buildings. The roof system is being used to screen roof mounted equipment. The applicant is showing the trash enclosures screened by a split face concrete block to match the Goodyear building materials. The gate to the trash enclosure is shown facing east on the elevations plan, and facing north on the site plan. Staff recommends the gate face to the west to minimize views from Hwy. 5. The Abra site plan shows a trash enclosure located at the northwest edge of the building; however, the applicant has failed to show the trash enclosure on the elevation plan. It is recommended that the trash enclosure gate face east. The gates to the trash enclosure will be constructed of chain link fencing. PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The City's parking ordinance for vehicle service stations requires 4 parking stalls per service stall. The Goodyear site will require 16 stalls. The applicant is providing 32 stalls. The Abra site will require 24 stalls. The applicant is providing 25 stalls. Berming and landscaping is proposed along the north side, adjacent to Highway 5. This will provide screening of cars parked in the lot. ACCESS Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS). Similarly, this development does not propose any public right-of-way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross-access easement should be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. There should also be a joint maintenance agreement, acceptable to the city, filed against each parcel. We do not wish to see the city petitioned to accept the street at some point in the future. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 5 The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20 feet wide to provide adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. The plans propose extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini-mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan is very well conceived. Staff worked closely with the applicant to design the landscaping plan. Benning is proposed along the north and south side of the site. The vehicles that will park along the north edge of the site must be totally screened by the berms and landscaping. Additional landscaping is being requested on the north side of the site along Highway 5. The trees shown on the landscaping plan are 16 feet in diameter. It is likely that they will reach this size in 10 or 15 years, but until then additional landscaping will be required. Staff is recommending that 8 spruce or Black Hills evergreens be added to each site. Also, along the south lot line of Lot 3, the applicant is proposing a retention pond. This pond will have a depth exceeding 8 feet with an average of one foot standing water. Staff is recommending that the pond parameter be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site is also lacking in trees. Four additional evergreens are required. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All the trees on both lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. The applicant is attempting to replace some of these trees with a better quality. LIGHTING Lighting locations have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than 1/2 foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. An acceptable lighting plan should be submitted when building permits are requested. • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 6 SIGNAGE The applicant has submitted a signage plan. One monument identification sign is proposed at the north edge of the site facing Highway 5. Staff proposed that if the Goodyear and the Abra signs were combined into one free standing sign, the third parcel located to the south would be permitted to have signage facing Highway 5 too. This third sign would be part of the Abra and Goodyear free standing sign. The applicant has been working on a design for the free standing sign; however, we believe additional refinement is required. The area of the sign is proposed to be 60 square feet. The ordinance allows 64 square feet in area and a maximum height of 8 feet for monument signs. The sign is designed as a monument and not a pylon due to the height of the sign board above the ground. The applicant is requesting a height of 12 feet. Considering the fact that the applicant could place a pylon sign with an area of 80 square feet and a height of 20 feet, staff is in favor of granting a 4 foot variance for the height of the monument sign. It is a clear benefit to have one coordinated sign instead of two individual pylon signs. Both buildings have two wall mounted signs along the north and west elevations. The ordinance requires that no wall mounted sign exceed 80 square feet of display area or 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the sign is mounted. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the sign on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of both sites. A sign plan acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927' contour line. This will also provide a 2- foot freeboard around the pond basin. The pond is not designed to meet NURP standards as is the city's current policy. To do so would require additional wet area which would severely compromise the utility of the remaining lots. Staff believes that this problem can be addressed downstream at a city owned pond. The developer should be required to pay an equivalent fee into the Surface Water Management Program fund to accomplish these improvements downstream. The charge is currently being computed by the city's consultant and will be made available at the Planning Commission meeting. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 7 The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the city's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the city to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. PUBLIC UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain are available to the site. The plans propose on extending the existing 6-inch watermain and looping to the existing 10-inch watermain located just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance with the latest edition of the city's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the city _ will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The city will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm sewer line. All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be charged at the time of building permit issuance. MISCELLANEOUS As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the city, at some future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right-of- way. However, as proposed the city would have no reason to accept the street. We do not want to see the outlot go tax forfeit nor do we want to see the driveway's maintenance be avoided by the property owners. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the city. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 8 COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Abra Goodyear Building Height 2 stories 1 story 1 story Building Setback N-20' E-10' N-105'E-10' N-75'E-30' S-25' W-10' S-45'W-55' S-75'W-75' Parking stalls 24/16 stalls 25 stalls 32 stalls Parking Setback N-25' E-10' N-60'E-10' N-27'E-15' S-25' W-10' S-45' W-15' S-35' W-26' Hard surface 65% 62% 64.6% Coverage Lot Area 20,000 s.f. 34,163 s.f. 42,410 s.f. Variances Required - none PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are paid at the time building permits are requested. These fees are currently assessed at a rate of $2,500 per acre and $833 per acre for park and trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614. SUBDIVISION The subdivision proposal is a relatively simple request that will serve to divide the site (3.136 acres) into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building (40.904 square feet), the second will contain the Abra building (33,918 square feet), and the third (62,969 square feet) will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that higher intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be acquired: 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeters of all lots. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 9 2. Drainage and conservation easement located over the pond on lot 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Auto Service Facilities are permitted in the BH District as a conditional use. The following constitutes our review of this proposal against conditional use permit standards and with conditional use permit standards provided in the draft ordinance revision pertaining to emission control testing stations. GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or city. FINDING - The site is zoned BH. The proposed uses will not create any significant or unexpected impacts from this use and, in fact, in many respects impacts generated by this use are less by a significant factor then would have occurred or could have occurred if more intensive uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance were to be developed on the site. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. FINDING - The proposed use would be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. The Hwy. 5 Corridor Plan is not yet completed or incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. FINDING - The site is located adjacent to a major highway and a collector road. It is in the Chanhassen commercial district and as such a commercial building is fully consistent with this site. Staff has worked with the applicant in an attempt to achieve design compatibility with the Chanhassen CBD and Hwy. 5 design efforts. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. FINDING - There will be no measurable impacts to the existing or planned neighboring uses. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 10 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services,including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. FINDING - Full city services are available to this site. Roads serving the site have recently been upgraded and are fully capable of handling the access needs of this proposal. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. FINDING - There are no projected needs for public facilities and services beyond those which are already provided in this area. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise,smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. FINDING - This site will not create adverse impacts to persons, property or the general welfare of the area. Hours of operation, orientation of the bays away from residence, and lighting standards will comply with city ordinances. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. FINDING - The site is visible from a major highway and is accessible from that highway by 2 signalized intersections and a collector street designed to commercial standards. There will be no direct traffic impacts to any area residential neighborhood. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. FINDING - The development of this site will result in the loss of a large number of poplar and elm trees. These trees currently act as a buffer between the highway and area residential properties. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. In order to develop the site, the majority of the trees will have to be removed. Extensive landscaping is being required in part to make up for this loss. • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 11 There are a large number of mature evergreens located along the south side of Lake Drive East that still provide the required buffering. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. FINDING - The site plan is well designed to provide adequate landscaping and buffering from adjoining properties. The buildings are to be built of brick and decorative concrete block. Site operations are designed to maximize off-site screening as much as possible. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. FINDING - The site is being used for a commercial type of operation which is consistent with its designation. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. FINDING - The following is our review of conditions of approval and appropriate findings: a. No unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises except in appropriately designed and screened storage areas. FINDING - All operations will be conducted inside the buildings. b. All repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance of vehicles shall occur within closed building except minor maintenance including, but not limited to, tire inflation, adding oil and wiper replacement. FINDING - There will be no repairs performed outdoors. Staff is further restricting outdoor parking of damaged or inoperable vehicles. c. No public address system shall be audible from any residential parcel. FINDING - The buildings will be at a distance that exceeds 300 feet from any residence and will be screened by landscaping. d. Stacking areas deemed to be appropriate by the City shall meet parking setback requirements. FLNDING - There are no drive through facilitates being proposed. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 12 e. No sales, storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles, snowmobiles, or all-terrain vehicles. FINDING - Both operations specialize in repair of vehicles, not sales. f. Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations. Facilities for the collection of waste oil must be provided. FINDING - A condition is being added requiring proper disposal of waste oil. g. Gas pumps and/or storage tank vent pipes shall not be located within one hundred feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. FINDING - Not applicable. h. A minimum separation two hundred fifty feet is required between the nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a conditional use permit is begin requested. FINDING - Not applicable. Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be approved with appropriate conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the site plan dated September 21, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must revise plans to include trash screening for the Abra site with a gate facing east and a second for Goodyear with a gate facing west. Plans must be submitted for staff review prior to City Council meeting. 2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 13 use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped lot. 3. The applicant shall provide an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with four additional evergreens. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 4. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 5. The applicant shall provide flammable waste separator as required by building code. 6. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. 7. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal Memo. . 8. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100-foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 9. The applicant shall introduce dormers along the east and west roof line of the Goodyear building to break it up. The pre-finished galvanized steel canopy shall be extended along the north elevation of the Abra building. 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580 the Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream of the site." H. SUBDIVISION "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision#90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition as shown on plat dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements: Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 14 a. A standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. _ c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. 4. A driveway or cross-access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze-up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with the storm water study." III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit#92-2 subject to the — following conditions: 1. Compliance with conditions of site plan and plat approval. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 15 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights- of-way. 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored over night on the Abra site." ATTACHMENTS 1. Revised monument sign plans. 2. Example photocopies of the proposed buildings. 3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated October 14, 1992. 4. Memo from Mark Littfin dated October 8, 1992. 5. Memo from Todd Hoffman dated October 12, 1992. 6. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District. 7. Memo from the DNR dated October 2, 1992. 8. Letter from MnDOT dated October 29, 1992. 9. Site plan dated September 21, 1992. PQ t-Itt'"brayed fax transmittal memo 7E01 •of Poll•" ► f SC3O C $1 SOV 4— f 2641 ,T... drBLDG LOt i • a AtaNY -D l 11111. r � C.IF $1t1 Cf ' 3b' I IAS t t.n toms .s ._---~- __ _- .- - . - ' __ .^,'' .L...'~ , '-~ "r � --_ --- . _ --_ --_--_ -- --- • r bOOOjYE DAIWA Air%Air \ _ .11111 I Irk rc ?` raj M r i...... „7,..„.....:,•_y.is - - -. i it,: rte: ' "'= .rS I - : i e ?_ _ ,;,.�.7 ' I t om . —+' . . ... Z. r, . .4.-_.7"-.-r----„- E •ai�c . 400111.- % `_i t �i�x_ ► s r..ice R 48-134-8R �+_ ''r _ -r` •i • • %y =�- .. - GOBOjYEA • ".... *ff .' ''..'. ".. ...n r 4-.. • ____ ...._.____ ____, _ ___ • _ ,.... ,,,...___.„____.. . _ ,..._ ..._ . ,... Lri%..--‘••• „---, .._.___.... ,_...„. 7 r..:--. ..-.. .. -__.. - ,. .1.1.1 L. . ----ii-,....--'mi- . - Aliii.14 - >. _ _ DT 52-114-8R ; '� i!. ter. ,*++w.,' - - .- . _ _ rte-- ..•-• t -... • ;',;:- .P....."',maj I '3 , - GOODon E4R -- - `OOD•''1'EAR Gin E - -.1.:_;.. �_ I lir " f.'`I � - ���_ 7 - sa K - r 091 91-8 ..:.-_- . . • • - ,4.-••:. -,,,,.- - . ... - • i.•- T...• 6 - •- 1. 11 • _ _-„01......„. . -" ••- • -• - .,. ... : . . ...,_. , ...,....."rat....-• ..::•..-. .- • - w..„ ,p.•••• -• . • .•t.., • ,,.• . • ..7..- ,' . • . '4 * .-to .. ... , ..' ' ' ,;=..41.4'`..;'.".• ,::'-.." •' ., i1•4- ;I.., /10:. - ''r 1..4 4:... . . .,...-.F. 1 - - -.------..---, .% ---4---1---4,-,- ---i-::, •-• . ....:,..: ., ..&i‘t.. - •IF 4 -- ••--..1.10,,,(-4..-V":7:„;:....r..' .4.t.. .' .)).1...- ....oe....,..•`..„...,•- ,. . :. ':.•;... ':•1. t". ..•.... -.. -•.....1, .. :)kil.'.'rY. . .•--:.-:. - L'It...4.. '...":-.'--'.... -•-.... 3'-&-:_ir,14...-:--.-.---.; --..--/-1, _ - • . . '.• -.:,,7„ '4.-.-10^.#7.1e-b-"„-4,, .."."- --- , 4....... ..1.• ... - .. :.4•.si:j....ji,•-itt:-....-'•-• .-• "r;•:.•• . .. - A • - -----,x4_,...„,- i - --44-- -. 1,•,,,. .. , • .... . ..4,94.-S•F• .- .... ';-;• h.•1..s-.).-•-"let-t:-.•••• '-.' --'7- T, • • • 4 ., ":?:tfc -* i •:,?, VA--,-• - " -•." '... ••• -'`-i,..,..:• • "1' ..... :••••-•• ' 4.-.- . -.'t' ;',."•-_- "4""•--.,-.i",e---1- i•-• Ae-, .• - - 1 li• • a - ••.e .:-.-1 MI -4. • •'...i..,-,q---' . • ;."-*-.1••-li^..;-.-.rs'-',-S;Z•ft•n-,..•-•-... ,•:, 1 'I'. .. . • • -•- -•,‘--•: .1....-:• -e-=•---.. ••..- •--.. , . .* .IL • ..-471,„1:4- -,#,Iktt":.='•:- -•--'•:-e i.'---;:-•-,'-.4:::-AN?" 7..•• ''''•- ' ( ' i • i.". .. • ..•••:fr'41( _.At>.‘''' --:--'../.. - •.. 1-:/"..:.:7; y.,...!„*s:... _-7.... ••„.• ., . . . - ' ' '..7•7-4!•• - ., •• ‘i::.:-t...":;...,Z-y.... "-'.'-. "-...";.,• : - - I -• ...., ."•"; . - -45.; -. ‘• ...0•-rkY,1.: ifs,Z.zi 4"...; • , 111!, 1\.. I . • _-. - .„ .......... ,,,,...,. -:-. _.‘-:1:•'-.5.5,11.`t?74..-. 4--r..!:: :: ', • -: - ?. '',---:-•".-i.- •• s,•:.- 1. ,.•:-• 3 • '-A. `•:.:.;,...;_V...-:"...„.A.;:it.7,r,1.--;:rArr.,,Z7t:.. .11-41 6- .74." 4.• - • s -••ctr.-..---... 143'. :•rt.-.2::3'1-1.1::...;‘,.•:-....-..‘,•1;•;', J a . I II •. • 3 .. 4-ft- -*. -%::i. '-':...- „.; ... ,:4,..7•tli' 4,..:1R. ,..-e::1.z.,,L. va z. _ -or :: .. .•„-z -..- .., ,. . .., 4" -.... T. -.. 11 '-1Z-•. ; TA; ,t..:t --ir,c%--. • la -. .., .-..J..-- 1, . 14;4 .••-CI, '•...I Tntf."••i.•• -r•e••4„'-4. 11 .."...er, 4- ' •• .;.1'''t•".4) . ....;i 44-.37.,, :-.7i4 ae7-OS. 1r '' • -.. J :t.• -''.. .... -,fr. .1... "... ! ..4' 2.„or..4:1W:sa••----1,Li. ....f.i,A, ... .- . gl ;' . •-.1:......7,..•u:A„it'..c. :t.. .',74./.7-`! ..- , II- . .•\ LI . --. "'"e .-7..-mf"-4.....•-j& • .....,,v 4-* . .... r...„.-,,.. ...,.-... .t•,. , .- . 4 --- .,... %•i.,.....,.. , 4,zt:.•,..-t- • .4. 1 • ..- , o:_,,,,,,_„,:,. .,. a.-4•-, A - 1 -- t -._ I I •i' i....... -L,•.- , .. ,-.11:!1,44, . I ..g._Ase•c,s --* , .ss...1- ,. s•Iii-.- th.o,,,....,, .- - ,.••AIL-- ' . . ce ;_i . . :1, xi!,4-;,f, ,.°•1-•- ...-.1.4..-.-.-. .. .•• .2.14,0.- ,i,_. ;_fli.r.e.,1, ;£-__.-4., • ••-•t•. 4•• .--.e • "Q`i,t:!:•.'"7.0.i.'•4••••• :1""i7t• .i"iff!••-.att.:: : -,' t.... r I 0 i -- , --,.....-....ti ... Ak...%,...-. -1_04_-.L..„--- :: . . ,., .,,),,:. -.... ......4.. -. , j •••ta••-- -- -•- Z./ -"X- 44, • t-..--$. A: s• -_- . ,. vd• i.,...... t... _. . - --. s 4-4:-.s,11.1'..•:.•(.4 . kq..-../+..„we= ., :":1,.. I- ...... . s-1 i: .471'514-Ai-411.,4;cV: ' "*--1.;‘-'• '.:%-.4;t7i- .. 1- 1 11 I s g -- ' -1C...%,ri f.;- .„.-As.,,t-z-.....:, ,e: ..., ...5 ...4---• $.'•' - g,-- --A 4.!a-t T .:•$"-.7•",,NT,---4...7- r -Ft.:--7-4 r -"?• ,j ;3,--- : •-•"‘„f--;•:,.r 4.; r---...4--.31. ief..'‘Ff:4 c-'4 : 1:.-• ' e. . .,.:.. r.- 1::::„•ii:At ,Kv., : lb.i. t-4,,. :-to 44 i ,... t.: m•-.0•:-.„EF:...,;---:_fewii. 71"... -rizt.....g ;-... .!:-.5• v I •-. - . •-04;i:s'i.r.r -Ixt.,,,7zis- 7- .•..A.%,--"-•-riA i • ;• -tt ... 4 ....:-.- 0,-.-• - --. v4,‘-•-f• .-,- .-,-.. 4- -..-1 •rts• .. • • .. • ••.;•-•.-.%.11.-0"., ..0* -,*-..--t-::. .... . 4.0(4;*.. t ••c 4' •-•"''"'" •-`- "P.% .. . .4s.otefle :••-..• ......• • -"-• : .-•-..le "-•'''" ;i• --Xt..-1-- 4... - ' s.4.Z. .-3 , • -- • • . A.--/V(144:**•-•eLv-4.-.6.,..., . I 1,-- . , . -iip. ..• " 1 • -•-.4:*-2.-3' •44,- - - %---% tc,.4r.t.s. , -.0.t.-::: 1 •••. 1 . A.- eft-43..i.:.:. ...17-7:-..1?Vir.,W -..%-ki.r,..T•-st.4 ,z .k....ou-_.„..1•::• '- , - ... .;` ;•••••= . i• .-- •".....*.:•--.- ._ .. • - .--4.-.4,-.---_ ,_-frs.. -1 21,.7p,;•74,3,ar,ii;•;,4.. - ••• .---- get -- •••-- .. ..- -s...S.".;.ark- ...-,cr,f.‘„-.-ti,"•_ a.-.2..,2 witi....- ..n, .... 1. .-. :.. •r.,' 'or.f&t...fik46:4:4.4.4A;(4ttr. 7., ,‘..... . ..7 ii . .i. - II 1 - • --, -- . .,- ... ..-1T.'..-?%-likt'•• ....• *11....V..4...... ,...X4.- , ...Z. : .'d • ... . . t„,.. R. .... .. • . '.. ..S.2....-.e. *.,,L. .V ......-• .6-.x. ,-; te lib, .. : 1, •'.!..4_- fitt....-"J"- in..1•61•:itet.4..r .4P-..-41/* 1.•:: .s. 1; •''. *.t. " . ---1.•-.t 4..„?.• ,...., ... 7,1;1;:r.4/ 4..;;Wilttfir•i..:--ii. .4.:•-• .'f::14 8. . . :. t . 4. g i - 41--.1-i, -- . -..-- .----VCI-4.-- ••••I• '''''.'4•-• . r•'-.Z• 7:_f-• ) •1-%. 4. jr. -1 -•oie-4 V•1:4-4,1k.„3,7vtr4-7:.‘,..f--'• k••4`;‘ .-4 t‘i - - . • a .. _ . ' 4-'-:••• i- -'--r• it:r .!Ili ,-;"-' ..., -../1"tia.-S It. 1,...,1.- -..-.11 ..,..x. ..,..• .., . ----0-4-10..._,c_f:?..:47rr_..---V-Z.:.'L-t6-1,.•&.'- .,.- ..."; 1 • 'ti• I •' - ..... • or :'. - • ' - - -••,..i.---;:, - 7-01Z., '7 --s•r: . . • '• ' il.z...q...i.....v..;:tte..,•-•s:j..-A N.-*40..: •-•-' .-`-- -; !-..,: .......-7 -4......,za-. •- -7:-. --t• : • . -. lei.' " - - -N.• .e.- 4.-r.--.--4.11.....-,‘,....1 ii., t,--f- -,..., • . : 4 •--.."1101......sPA €.11.! .0"-1.4..:.--„,'•-••-• •..iry- -. -) i • __. " .,.•„1:1.•_-_,,,,......-,,.,1..t.z ....;-,...i.,-,•:,;-... ci,--,,..1:::.. , . li -..: 4-rt•ti::-‘- e- v--- '"" ' '" -- -• -....ti-ear.1,44.....,,,..-., ./..;;._.e-te.'r...N... .'••••. _,-. • ••,.. .-... . ",..'t..:I:: ,.-*..s:s•'- .'% - -.4}.--1. te. '-.--3"'2•-.14".1.“1.:iiii?' '41.'4:7 • -A-1rtle.y-7 ,7'.' ...t:f el‘4•71!•••1.1.',2-* '..::-1.5.I 1;:..'1, .4. . -:4- , 1 -4 .. .. ....--..-;." .„.'-,,..4 -•;-4./.....: , . ...it.....4.--i&no..- - -i..„...!..-0e......A-41.:4•7“...,:-..-47..fri...,,,,:,41k-• ..,---;"5:"--...„.„,i..4,-;.‘. i I „.= s•• - . - . _Cort....04,!..4-,.•••••741. '•-,,,i,„•15.,;:‘,..ii,11..il..,1$ _-,,, „.f,..,,,4- r . s ..= 111112Le ' ."••• --s-Ili* ...:=1--:-., ..''.•Ve., .--4.) .-4,--. -;-,_fiir.A',7-_,,, -- < • + -7a 03 - -.3•••E.f4:- . + - •*-,44- . 1 44:••.:-.;',.,••--4Ailw• '44.-•- -;.i.• :•,..r. ii:•:*1.:-:2---,1 . iii I a' .,•-- - -----'-'4C)'- iik..--. ._-!.. •ihrt.f.r:- „,,..-ik-*?"r,_414---,0-`,-7.4% el.:..:k'I . - ''M ...7.41414,•,••••sr*-s-,•;- s------..-...,...*'me:• .--:-..--;--.;': . •...;" --.c.. Vis -7sz -or-li-,k- .. •,1:.,,.":.:ks-Arkties7..1. -,#- •.•-•• .--. -• - -- 3,1%.44,4,.._-.4`..tg-s7.,•:-..,..„...- ---e_•.-: -W..: . :-:-..*-.-V--ttr,lf-_,..--'0';,--4. --.:-.4* - :....3) ?... ••-• ; '--. ' -s 11 • •-...1-•ety •••••107;----••"... 1•,.....4--s-.11-%.4-#•-• - -,- • , - .....,,,..• ...r...* .4..4.4..4.,..1-;;•.se-.:;it.-..••_...... -.,_„. : . ... , 'r-.0`1,1.- -de.e7.r.A. .0,1-,---...--.4 :N•Nti•-• -- ,• , f-•%,•;•-•--41-.X.),"-e... -.--•,--L.- ..4,1•,-•-•1 -c-.,.-- . .- ..,._...."'....,c_.4-J"-.6,..,, '..I7..:- ..,4-.0.0--;:f..,.....774-1,,, -2.1.•••.!‘e/t3.• 1.••••• -.14.-_-....-- ...,-.,•-;;•••4:-..-. --- .- t ,-T•2 1.... ',..... inkg.1„... . - '''';..1"-...-.7'---.," ..;•t•-..2i0k.41;-•'`''L- . -f.}...'.4.17 f;0".t-, :A."1.e...f:.;r: 1:-i--r•i••••*7x-.4'*--F..-.•-'• ' • .. • -..1. -.-,•." ve -.44 •,:..-....,,,••-.•----1...- -,--,•-•••: ,-1:- •; -----‘ - . . - .• .....,,,,-...1. ...-..•:.„: .-.-,.. •.• : •:..- . - •---:.-_,F, 7.„1-.....-....- .r . -- -••-• t C r"1,''''".;- .-.r" . .••-e-* Ilk....4rk--.,_,I.-74:::_Nr-•' . 1 !.2•4.--!:::... c." .t:.1 4 t-1.?••;LI -E?_:;,. • I; i f. ••••••••.07 gifi‘---wor,S..Vvea." .2-4-'-'• '‘..1"--- •-- •.- ' •:?7:",-;."..rti--.,..s.re•.. - ..-',..-;• •:,.,4!,:••.'”,;., , , •••.:•-t- - -. '.... ..•-•:."..41Y.,4: , ,„ ••••- - ,• .- ---#14'"- - - 7/ *.-- - ---r-- -•%-• _•kes:• .....,_ '' - -... 'r - -.' • ; c ••••-7 -..r• - • '1 e"-c-• .:--"'.--.. 1 1 - • -. •' c-•=11 -L.."-!"r" 47 ,.....,"' -.SW •-• 'Cr •:";-;-- •• : 1••'.: r '-...."' ' ...-- .: =..,- -' ' . • -, •:. 4• 1 . . •t"." .._- 4., .,..-ift '-'- . .. ' . •!•-• , - V" • '... r .o. ' it!) k . - • 1.. . --- . • -,-.4, - . L - H _.: . t, '.-... ., -7.t.,:.-e.;.‘.1p.;:,.• . .f- •-.. .; " . - • - - - . .- • i! , 1_ f Jr. ...,-..._ -. • _.. .,„„, „tt.,-1.....-, ..i..... . _,•.2. . • - -z• -a • T!.. •_....... 1:-„, ,....*- - - - ..- . - --.4' g-14---:::'::%:.,t ' - - _. • ._ _:.-f.:1Z7:--r.'1.:,-'-:':"'", -. .. ... . s• -. ' . * "-• • -...2. .:.• .....-, --- Ir • • • • -- . -- 1" ,•: .• .- • ••• • • . . , I . . . .• .. - . - • „•. • CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 _ (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician 6l, _ DATE: October 14, 1992 SUBJ: Review of Replat - Lot 2, Block 1 Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition; Site Plan Review for Goodyear and ABRA Auto Service Center Project No. 92-16 and LUR 92-17 Upon review of the preliminary plat for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition, I offer the following comments and recommendations: ACCESS Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS). Similarly, this development does not propose any public right-of-way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross-access easement should be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of _ the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20-foot wide to provide adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. n _ ;i«1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Sharmin Al-Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 2 UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain is available to the site. The plans propose on extending the existing 6-inch watermain and looping to the existing 10-inch watermain located just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend a sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance with the latest edition of the City's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the City will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The City will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm sewer line. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927 contour line. This will also provide a 2-foot freeboard around the pond basin. The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the City's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the City to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. Sharmin Al-Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 3 MISCELLANEOUS As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the City, at some future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right-of-way. However, as proposed the City would have no reason to accept the street. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the City. Our concerns are that the outlot could be left to go tax forfeit. SITE PLAN REVIEW - GOODYEAR/ABRA Upon review of the plans prepared by Blumentals Architecture, Inc. dated September 21, 1992, I offer the following comments and recommendations: SI IE ACCESS The plans propose on extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini-mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). UTILITIES All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be charged at the time of building permit issuance. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Preliminary Plat Approval 1. The final plat shall dedicate a drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 2. A driveway or cross-access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. Sharmin Al-Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 4 3. A standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 4. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 5. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze-up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 6. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0 contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. Site Plan Approval 1. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Signs shall be placed at 100-foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. jms/ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer • CITY OF 410: 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 - (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM ' TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Fire Prevention Bureau DATE: October 8 , 1992 SUBJ: Site Plan Review for Goodyear & Abra Auto Service Center Planning Case 90-17 SUB, 92-2 CUP & 92-3 SPR The Chanhassen Fire Marshal reviewed the proposed site plan and has the following requirements: 1 . Ten (10) foot clear space around fire hydrants, i.e. NSP, telephone, trees, shrubs, etc. City Ordinance. 2 . Fire Department Policy #04-1991 (included) . 3 . Fire Department Policy #06-1991 (included) . Placement to be determined prior to issuance of CO. 4 . Fire Department Policy #07-1991 (included) . 5. Fire Department Policy #29-1992 (included) . Is t� PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER • CITY OF CHANHASSEN 6wh r"�,► 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.Q. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE 1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18" . NO 2 . Red on white is preferred. PARKING FIRE 3 . 3M or equal engineer's grade LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. 7\ 4 . Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE 5. Signs shall be posted at each end pf the fire lane and at least at 7 ' 0" j75 foot intervals along the I f ire lane. 6. All signs shall be double sided facing- the direction of travel. 7 . Post shall be set back a minimum of 12" but not more than 36" from_ the curb. - 8 . A fire Vane shall be required in (NOT TO GRADE front of fire dept. connections SCALE) extending 5 feet on each side and =-- -' along -all areas designated by the •moire Chief. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL .3E-SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, . FOR APPROVAL BY THE 'TIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE -_ EPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING .THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991 Date: 1/15/91 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director _ Page 1 of 1 ILO PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .. C I TY 0 F -1 . CHANHASSEN ,i‘ver _ .. ___ d0,, },,,,, ,,L, . i-.--tit..0,.,..,,,, , . . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS All the following required inspections shall be scheduled 24 hours in advance with the Fire Marshal: 1. Witnessing the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per NFPA 13-8-2 . 1. 2 . Hydrostatic test of sprinkler system and 24 hour air test for dry systems. 3 . Testing of all smoke detection, manual pull stations, and _ fire suppression systems. 4 . Installation of fire extinguishers 2A-40BC rated minimum. Install one by each exit door and as designated by Fire Inspector. ;' 5 . Extinguishers shall be provided before final approval. 6 . A final inspection by to Fire Inspector before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at construction sites. Details are available. t Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided and in operating condition during all phases of construction. E The use of liquefied petroleum qas 'shall be in conformance with NFPA Standard 58 and the Minnesota Uniform _Fire Code.. A list of these requirements is available. ;4 All fire detection and fire suppression systems shall be monitored by an approved UL central station with --a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final occupancy is issued. V:, Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: - Page 1 of 2 Ow t41, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER An x 11" mylar As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use. '- The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. The domestic supply from a combination domestic and fire protection line shall not exceed one fourth (1/4) the total pipe size at the line. High-piled combustible storage shall comply with the reouirements of Article #81 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15 ' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12 ' in height. For certain special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal . (see policy #06-1991) . Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G, Exception #5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (see policy #05-1991) . Chanhassen Fire Department /17 Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Nr, Date: 11/22/91 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 2 of 2 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 - ,�;� (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director, Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address numbers are posted. Other Requirements-General 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from the background. 2. Numbers shall not be In script 3. If a structure Is not visible from the street,additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size and location must be approved. 4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4". However,requirement *3 must stilt be met 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers H deemed necessary. Residential Requirements(2 or less dwelling unit) 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1/4". 2. Building permits will not be flnaled unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Commercial Requirements 1. Minimum height shall be 12". 2. Strip Malls a. Mufti tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. If address numbers are located on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the buildings main entrance. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992 - / Date: 06/15/92 Revised: Approved - Public Safty Director Page 1 of 1 to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER A CITY 4i4Ved OF 7,5.4,- Ic . . CHANEAssrx . , ,,,,„„ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REGARDING PRE-PLAN Prior to issuing the C.O. the Fire Department for a The pre-plan, site to shown on the PProval. eplan shall be submitted plan. following items shall be 1) Size 11" x 17" (maximum) 2) Building footprint and building dimensions 3) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes 4) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped 5) Fire hydrant locations P or deadend 6) P. I.V. - Fire Department connection 7) Gas meter (shut-off) , NSP (shut off) 8) Lock box location 9) Fire walls, if applicable . 10) Roof vents, if applicable 11) Interior walls 12) Exterior doors 13) Location of fire alarm 14) Sprinkler riser panel 15) Exterior L.P. location storage, if applicable 16) Haz . Mat, storage 17) Underground storage tanks�f applicable >. 18) Type of construction walls/roof ions, if applicable 19) Standpipes s Y`ar W 1 '^ ..4 i Chanhassen Fire Department Fire- Prevention Policy #07-1991 IrDate: 01/16/91 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 r Z0 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPFR CITYOF 101 r . CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 - (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner One FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator — DATE: October 12, 1992 SUBJ: Goodyear and Abra Service Center The above mentioned site plan review will be formally addressed by the Park and Recreation Commission on October 27, 1992. To meet the plan review schedule of October 12, I am forwarding this preliminary report. Situated in the Highway and Business Service District of the city, this development is subject to commercial/industrial park and trail fees. These fees are currently assessed at a rate of $2,500 per acre and $833 per acre for park and trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614. If you have questions in this regard, please see me. pc: Park and Recreation Commission, October 27, 1992, Packet Is tPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ufew..fe ' ..f�f.oif Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District 0+.SSfw , Engineering Advisor: Barr Engineering Co. 8300 Norman Center Drive - +kft �f0[• . .f 111lllllllll Suite 300 ` Q3, Minneapolis,MN 55437 832-2600 Legal Advisor: Popham,Haik,Schnobrich&Kaufman 3300 Piper!affray Tower 222 South Ninth Street Minneapolis,MN 55402 333-4800 October 9, 1992 Mrs. Joanne Olson Senior City Planner City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mrs . Olson: The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley - Purgatory - Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary information as submitted to the District for the Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition in Chanhassen. The following policies and criteria of the District are applicable for this project: 1. In accordance with Section E (2) of the District's revised Rules and Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit will be required from the District for this project. Accompanying the permit application, a grading plan showing both existing and proposed contours must be submitted to the District for review. 2 . A detailed erosion control plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. 3 . A stormwater management plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this project at an early date. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please call us at 832-2857 . cerely Ro•ert .C. Obermeyer B-rr Engineering CompAny Engineers for the District RCO/kmh c: Mr. Ray Haik Mr. Fritz Rahr 23\27\053\JO1 .LTR STATE OF A. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 551°F ENO. 772-7910 .,�E�t �. � P `U RE�r October 2 , 1992 — OCT - F 1992 Ms. Sharmin Al-Jaff Planning Department CITY Ur L.,1--r, City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: GOODYEAR AND ABRA AUTO SERVICE CENTER, CHAN HAVEN 3RD ADDITION, CASE 90-17 SUB/92-2 CUP/92-3 SPR, CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY Dear Ms. Al-Jaff: We have reviewed the site plans dated 9/21/92 (received September 24 , 1992) for the above-referenced project (NE 1/4 , NE 1/4 , S. 13 , T. 116N, R. 22W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. The project site does not contain or appear to involve any public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR protected waters permit is required. 2 . No floodplain or shoreland concerns were noted. 3 . Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. 4 . If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10, 000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is required. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, 0_4 -e)-- L,A7 Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: Bob Obermeyer, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WSD Wayne Barstad, Ecological Services AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 • (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLJCATION APPLJCANT: Beisner Ltd. OWNER: Chanhassen Holding Company ADDRESS: 6100 Summit Drive ADDRESS: 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Brooklyn Center , MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN. 55436 TELEPHONE (Day time) 560-0246 TELEPHONE: 935-3486 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. X Subdivision 2. X Conditional Use Permit 12. Vacation of ROW/Easements '3. Grading/Excavation Permit 13. Variance 4. Interim Use Permit 14. Wetland Alteration Permit 5. Notification Signs 15. Zoning Appeal 6. Planned Unit Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - F 7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees/Attorney Cost - (Collected after approval of item) 8. Sign Permits 18. Consultant Fees 9. X Sign Plan Review 10. X Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $ 930. 00 • A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81/2' X 11' Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. • PROJECT NAME Good Year & ABRA Sales and service stores LOCATION Lake Drive & State Highway 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 2 , Block 1 , Chan Haven Plaza , 3rd Addition PRESENT ZONING Business Highway REQUESTED ZONING same PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Busniess Highway REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION same • REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly printed and must be accompanied by all informatior and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof o 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 furthe 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. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the ori ' docu ent returned to City Hall Records. September 19 ,1992 ignatur of Applicant Date r� Q / s -�i • j� Si(nature of Fee Owner Date sC Application Received on 6/-,21 L/--)---" Fee Paid 3' — Receipt No. 3I3 This application will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on C, �� ll!!�- � ,-� _iti 1.z.,061 441 'Ir.- '1 _"_;,r1rn4-Zr..2"-c.-1 dip,--6°' . 1 116*I '71 J®pt MINI is_ �I�l .1. ,NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ISIOw" so PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING t^ .r nips*. '�— -ti dm 2' ~ti • MIAIires MYM AIRF Wednesday, October 21, 1992 '.A . , ..,f . ..„0.0,!;-:_,,,.--..- o 7:30 P. M. E `' ' f• „`' -+a fi}t. City Hall Council Chambers = •;;;.47- '"� 5 4. 690 Coulter Drive :Tr °—sz� \% 0,40.,..:„ . MAR9Y. o •_J LAKE now Project: Goodyear Tires/Abra .ARK - <,. susAN � I .�.. _-- e�4,,, �� top.:(_, R/6E Ar A,SN LAKE Developer: Beisner Ltd. f s : - -_- _ .. r f-, 0 0 Location: Lake Drive East - South of _�T;, 2 Hwy. 5 and East of the �) •: ----- , R°° Emission Control Station � _ � Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Beisner, Ltd. proposes to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into 3 lots. A conditional use permit and site plan review are also required for the — construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station. 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 Planning 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 Sharmin at 937-1900. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning 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 October 8, 1992. Chanhassen Holding Co. McDonalds Corp. (22-146) Systems Control, Inc. 14201 Excelsior Blvd. AMF O'Hare 755 Mary Avenue No. Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. O. Box 66207 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Chicago, IL 60666 Thomas & K. Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner Michael & Cynthia Koenig 8001 Cheyenne Trail 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Alice L. Sieren 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 8009 Cheyenne Avenue 8011 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners 550 East South Temple 8013 Cheyenne Circle c/o Builders Development P. O. Box 30825 Chanhassen, MN 55317 P. O. Box 637 Salt Lake City, UT 84130 Wayzata, MN 55391 Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond 78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 II ";FA. INIIMP .17: WI A. I _6(1 ...../ � ::. T ' " ,=g0.-- elial:A(7-,6.0'--•,;.,„ ' !WI 1 2 ;E NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Primirdc–rig. "r: s PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING __ !' � * � Wednesday, November 18, 1992 �!!��''1: 7"4116, ��► 7:30 P. M. f. 4. /4 City Hall Council Chambers ., _ 4 = 690 Coulter Drive - L•:: 1_ a j _r.._ \!/ ctoi:r� .w►sr+. Project: Goodyear Tires/Abra ""'/ �\'°' 440'o'\\ -/ 1 INCE M KSI? LAKE Developer: Beisner, Ltd. tf! fir/ �� , ;- _ .. Location: Lake Drive East - South of r: -- --�'°° r Hwy. 5 and East of the f ), 11 )11 Ts .,. Emission Control Station r �f ' ..00 - Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Beisner, Ltd. proposes to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd - Addition into 3 lots. A conditional use permit and site plan review are also required for the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission - Control Station. – 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 Planning 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 Sharmin at 937-1900. If you — choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning 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 November 12, 1992. RAYMOND & K KNIGHT LEE & PATRICIA JENSEN WALTER & K SCHOLLMAN 8007 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8009 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8011 DAKOTA CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RAYMOND & M JEZIERSKI GARY & M FANDEL DENNIS & S UNZE 8013 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8015 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8017 DAKOTA CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL WILLIAM FARRELL 8024 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHAS S EN I££SS AD I 2IOIS1DOx 017 X08 Gu 2I3}334111 NVIvi 6Z£0£ VD V1MV LLV LI£SS NW N3SSVHNVHJ S '&J ?RIVd 3ALLf1Dax3 6S LI£SS NIAI N3SSVHNVHD 069 XOH 02 OZI 3..LIf1S 1332LLS H.LSL M 0SLM 3AfIG maul?) 09' d2IOD 3INr1Nl1S DLII SS32Id HH.L DM1 ?IaLAVM Chanhassen Holding Co. McDonalds Corp. (22-146) Systems Control, Inc. 14201 Excelsior Blvd. AMF O'Hare 755 Mary Avenue No. Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. O. Box 66207 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Chicago, IL 60666 Thomas & K. Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner Michael & Cynthia Koenig 8001 Cheyenne Trail ; 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Alice L. Sieren 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 8009 Cheyenne Avenue 8011 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners 550 East South Temple 8013 Cheyenne Circle c/o Builders Development P. O. Box 30825 Chanhassen, MN 55317 P. O. Box 637 Salt Lake City, UT 84130 Wayzata, MN 55391 Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond DONREED PROPERTIES 78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. 337 WATER STREET Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street EXCELSIOR MN 55331 Chanhassen, MN 55317 ALITA LOWNSBURY JEROME & RENEE GRIEP GERALD & M WASSINK 8000 DAKOTA AVE 8002 DAKOTA AVE 8004 DAKOTA AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BARRY & M GREGERSON ROBERT & P PETERSON PAULINE M CALDWELL 8006 DAKOTA AVE 8008 DAKOTA AVE S 8010 DAKOTA AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD & AMY DVORAK P. Hegstrom i - 8003 DAKOTA AVE 8005 Dakota Ave CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Chanhassen MN 55317 i r,' .. • :�__ • . M , a7 1 - 1 =Y • ROBERT & B ARMBRUST DOUGLAS & K BAGLEY GEORGE & A JENNINGS 8022 CHEYENNE AVE 8105 81ST STREET 8018 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 VICTORIA MN 55386 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 N EINAR & V SWEDBORG DANIEL & L ROBINSON MITCHELL LOBENS & 8016 CHEYENNE AVE 8014 CHEYENNE AVE MICHELLE RIEHM CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8012 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RICHARD & B FRASCH WILLIAM &E KRAUS CURRENT RESIDENT 8010 CHEYENNE AVE p008 CHEYENNE AVE 8003 CHEYENNE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 - Mike and Cindy Koenig CURRENT RESIDENT STEPHEN & J MACDONALD 8005 Cheyenne Ave 8007 CHEYENNE AVE 8017 CHEYENNE SPUR Chanhassen MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JON, SR & D WILSON GLENN & B HAGEMAN THOMAS & JOY EASTMAN 8019 CHEYENNE SPUR 8021 CHEYENNE SPUR 8023 CHEYENNE SPUR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CURRENT RESIDENT ALOIS & M STUMPFL GEORGE & T THOMAS 8025 CHEYENNE 8027 CHEYENNE TRAIL 8029 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PHIL & CONNIE CHAN ROBB LUND RALPH LYTLE 8031 CHEYENNE AVE 8023 ERIE AVE MARY ANN ROSSUM CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8021 ERIE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS & S KOEPPEN CLAYTON & M SODETANI TERRANCE & S THOMPSON 8009 ERIE AVE 8005 ERIE AVE 8000-8002 ERIE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 VENCIL & C PREWITT JEFFREY PAPKE VERNON & B HUSEMOEN 8004 ERIE AVE 6180 CARDINAL DRIVE 8015 CHEYENNE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SOO LINE RAILROAD PER MAG CORP FRANK JR & M BEDDOR SOO LINE BUILDING GO MAG CORP - R FELLOWS 649 5TH AVE S PO BOX 530 14956 MARTIN DRIVE NAPLES FL 33940 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 #‘""ESO '''nneaota Department of Transport(01-1§. "n Metropolitan District Transportation Building _ St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 Reply to 593-8753 Telephone No. October 29, 1992 , Mr. Paul Krauss Planning Director City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 In Reply refer to: TH 5 C.S. 1002 Chan Haven Plaza, 4th Addition TH 5 Near Lake Drive East Chanhassen Dear Mr. Krauss: We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find this plat acceptable for development with consideration of the following comment: • A permit will be required from the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 593-8753. Sincerely, `r Tim Henkel Planning Supervisor cc: Mary Anderson, Metropolitan Council Roger Gustafson, Carver Co. Engineer John Freemyer, Carver Co. Surveyor RECEIVED OCT 301992 CITY Ur L,np,,,,. MINNESOTA 1990 An Equal Opportunity Employer • 1 I I , IT I Q 11, N ti; 3 - •a �) �o - = S • S aet9.7-_-- Fre 1 ii I ; �S - I"- Y;" Y LuX i- ,....�� : Ifs s ail _ i + z r , I1 �1 a�' �'h •t 3'° i= i al:. 1; ss j ; Cbz' _ a X,\;\ \ _�:- vei is Tia=z - ie 2g :: t? 01 (# LIJ z j �' �; <. ;�►:.. - G S: I I :_ :di I:1_ i :_ Z sass a= _ 1.�� 0 �i a\ ris we < •Oil a Z , i)-- 111} +..•,, �'►� -t::a L W . C i .t4 Om lilt.. • :iq > g s i_.1.:�r AI --;1:1"i0+ry�L• .� O t t • [ f •_< iss.4 7 na s� <DI t u N S[lt 4144, .10 tii. -7, • .,. -,- , 4 _ I: I a I ; \ : � _ 11 Y I rI �. _ LI S i I I. {� .....p .•. l } a.. I,, 3 I I�� r '-i '• 111, i.I _ _— - - I • ' `•j ~I < _ '` �IiI,. ;i: . f I � • it " r . Ie I; a I'w >s` w •PI SII I . s -F - , a t S. 1 v`'- { I;� %;Is 1 1– 14:4.1!"' . 'u•, —.- ..ti. „, .> W • ° Ilex1. . . ,i ,. . • I°0 11J R ` N # IZ,1. Itl + 'yu 1I - x. iYi i',1 I W:iT ' I i fl IL1i,t II .. d ,�„ I II ISI '�'I'1 E — I — l ° s,: II I II • 1 1x4 i s i, i 11 ,..\.• =�1'I.i�_ L t O l [1.1'.1`1, I _ULUi. . " 1,,•` -z 1 i ''_• ,. I I . , I I— 1 j' 1Ills II • 1,i � • "j'`.- 1' ..\,.. j sI,I� 1� , .`•° . .-444 -•[ 4.1 `... .1'...,0 i If • I_ 1 I f . I ''.i • _ 1:3 •Z•`s - Si ; fr I L. c:j '§' l'i FAH =p c : •: is SE _ ; s;:s•: mi, :i is: I z - -i if h-- l: .; ti. ;; - C- s : i i : ! N !.�_'� •t ":=i?I ccrt I I "s's a_ r : _ " - i s i s W 0=;-i' r'- -1 i i_F'. :f rs . L g i . i I i z :=i} iri�E' 1 i_._sivEisg - _r' i - g ii eI ! i - O a s f: i :: :£":2I r 3 L=_ s.F eti < _ _ . . < Y :. m t I• F: ;I - y- ii Ii': Ic:s` _ " _ I- 3- s SY p I — t: ilii_ WI ' i ii!!!f iia int r i fi ii ii § ! 1 I - 1111 • se i e i• :i.�as .r_ Y #�j e Jn�1 , Ot i 7� i co Tii : L _: Elf • a 24 W Y W 'E '�:-':e- E W W p.E-i : ii-Pa:l< [ w .i .2 if' 't • -i- Y6 a�•7da9� W i+r - • q e�f�. S Piz!! ! Q "s's z 11 "!: ji:.;'_='ee :Yo cc.lag?, 41t I"mi. = i} i '9 if i :.:..vis. -vi i g C 31 'b+ lii1 i . - - .._i0. m s tii i.rQ.�. Q V • _. i . t�\ li i iltr' , - I a _.:. .... ‘. 1 . I'll I 1 ... ' - —4,4---1-----, 4.-- -1 . 1 .,'i ::,:,• rt,,,_„..,--.,,.•;-.•,-„v..- i •---.. -....,--: - i • " , , .,,\ ;\ E , 1 1 i i i = I i II I .� x js4 I'� �l '' i i s �ei 0I ,��� 1 Z• ....: s--sis i II /14 1 I. lI . r • R I i j it I 1 ' - � .1 i ti. •I •C ;� 11 ya� i1 1_ ; t' •(1) ! ' (- '9' II k. IIY, • '� I� {� � 1\ L$ It i;1 `' .., - -__- a •.: ' 'I J •:. ot 11 . 1, 1 — i 1)114 Ia Alt,. 7 .!:J -'�,F...• r -Yz4, _. .„._*3 ,.....,::1,. ��{ 'f t . 1V., �. :. la I 1. ,1'11 1,;f ty 0 .. I -- .•%. 'c,.. .. • ` . ti ., wr' ;....... .., I I FS I .I I ., 1 I ---_--- --- - ------- - 1 .1--- ..j 91 A. 2fSNO[1.4Aalt I opocrune (.4. (N1 .1i .0,041,11 mom. LIVRAGOO '''3 4 1 ! a * Z A5 1 0 1 : . s De xi: kg; ...3 00 rs 1 ..r.• h. .i' i 4 re rn ,. .. ....?„. . .., . P i 0 tr) Z z 9 ... 0 ill U I .... 11 I I I .$ 1 I ii A .• - _ ._ hi 1 — ' I> \ ii i t- 5 11 rairj, 1111 1 E , -- .-:.!,. I :... 'A _ . i i lilt a - • - • \ —.. 1-1—",f--- I 1 - ..--. 1111 " .i. .. MI 111 z' 9. Int -- 1 . j il' . Hilmilumi V' 1 n di i hi f.ii nrinnnri r , ir .. . / I . .. . . - - 1 thi iili i h 5 _ . .. /it t. ., ! % . t 4 3 I • _ " I L. is - ' - _ , 63 I;i,il;1111 IR T 1- . ....10, I \ i. , .... 1 , 0 g_ I • / ,04 I 1! III II 2 , 63 e I,'if,111.1 • k if i i i e 1 f..t4; 1 ii J\ I -... I 1 ,- : g d . i .. . 1 EA X .•• ..., r .1 ••••• lifij.iU AO' 1 ., .-- — rant' I 1 , —. .,— ''' 11 \I - 1- .....! - 41 75 fil . ....-.:,,,t ve . i -... 1 - -.... , -... ,:a 12 ! L S { V` N Q W 1- + Z W w o C1z 41w — f =y 's !hi U °° 10 hi l �� CO i is t to i — �I 'k t`9)c.i'fiE - 1m - • /ifri z . I: m I I .If' 1 i- _I 1! F I I > 1t i W . W � ;i i ;1 f!� f ; I J 1 J• '.,I'! F I I. .I1i li:I I I i. Ir y .til fi; ?. 7 I;Ii 1 ¢. S ` 2 F'. i .yy 5 �; y * 1 7yi g i}t!ay3 r- \'. II i t 1 '1 � ''' r ,, i I 1 I ,\ 11 1 i1 \..i _= s 1 AO . 0 (___ I o I m 411 a a ._. .. I 4 J 11 w W J :f W i _ "�'. f�1; .1._. W r �7 ft r�, i.I. 3: \ll—. W (...- .-.. II 1- 0 "- 11:CX\I , . u, en u)zx 6 a 07 • — 1..! , • :. ›- Li j 0 i; :•".. fi 1111 0 - CE > 0 .. — ...1.. 2 i . i , .-.": ir 1..! 4 1 :.-:.:. x; fr : ' -J = , g : ili " i!. I IT -4.ii rill : i < ' s' ir l• -.' i - . -, 1 a•ii" : b I"i f i I * le _- ..... . .. .. al, IL I: --, •• 1.. \ *.' 'IA % \j,▪ a ?:'..• • r -,-..P-' \ - 4N: . 77- _ 'C • • • i' .1 - . • 5 C — .-- ---- • •- fa: •‘ -. - —ilit:-. . \ _ f _ :..,. v : 1 V.4,- :•-•\! 7,t-, :;••••• ! 1 • , •••. i . 1 •T., .. ::'...'• ilg), ' I :;.-••••••••••-.., _....,..p • . - • `, ,'-'. .A if It• ' :-.••••••••••-u'a...kw i I. ','• '". 7 ";" 6 i e Iii 'IA cv 1 1 . ,• .i: 1". : I ';I , .. ..,-.--,,..j../',---C, :. .1 ;\V. t' LI' ' I I 14 . / '• I 1 rk 'i II: h.-.- 7- I ..... i. 1 .,,1• II 11 li .J1 C., _ Z ..1 I ..14-; 1 , ii .J .".• ii ,i);":";7 • • 1.. ; I , lir' I! .- 1 Il A. s . I 1 , .. Ili ...- ._ LIZ r--.PHi 3 6, . I It j: l!f,•I I • i 6:1 il t..- ')', M .11 1'r EL ; IL .3 ,:, i i F• (P. :, .q;1 •r , ; . ... I 1 . E • . J i TA _ ! :1 Ifi, •• . „ I :4, 0;:* ikt,%.:. ill ililt ilit:111.it.;.7'1. ;'ilii: 211g Ii6:?:" I 1. i W -A .2 ;. - • ' 11.• ; • .' ...,' 1 r ,,, . i V) 7 • r.' i , , I ta.1 1 ..* I. -t ' • , ' ; F, - -- I I I, 1 */ `n !I (-3 J J ti1 t.'1 i•J! i I i ' , ' _. . 2. 8 1' •3:1'6 I ' • i SI ''' N , \ ,m.. :,,,,..r„.....,..,• 1. I-,---:•:\,.. w .--;...---, ",:.-•---.\ 1 L I I I) • 1 ' "...,) . ), - . 57--• .. . ,-, , t,l; •' 1 2 • )(' !. i ' - .,' -‘' .-' !-- --1- ' '.1. tt. 1 i.• ! Li • '?. 1 t. . 1 % ., '*• 1,: I i•;:. - I; I „ 4",.. ...Z.S . _ • I 0 0 , c. •C .. •1i '.. i, . ..:r ..- III%.:;/.. 'IC.:-'41... -.... -. A \ I I 1 •• ;.1 1 L_ -.. -1 • .,„...- . -\\,,,1 -..-_..._-- s J• •../ I i f f I/ ' ' 1 \ // .! : ' i '. ) ) ,,......'-'•-•" ..... -- *.... vr,:r di. '74 2. "...::: ••,N. ; 7 x ..". r 7• --'. ‘. ‘....* •,.' ..1/4. , I .Alti,_1 /1 / ' '4'1; s4t. •'''..----- "7- / -) 1. , - J% '-. ?- -Tr 011,1 1 1 . 1 % I , o , ft:- • •......, g i ;. 1 Z.4 . — , - • ; i J i , ) • 9 f I .II- —. , r . ` - W t E W o_ I Yil ; s ` . 2 Fo el ii , e a a. I g o ii i ' i p: ZI- € I- ` ••ff`i i $ ()W MIli W 1.1 1 < S• W= is =t I iii O E •J..•YC 5 - Z ill. , h 1 .I.ili C i111 tN / r.r A Sun '�InP�� i, i W ;In0 W n ti-t- c d CO G I 1 ° 2 U II W Imo i to 3 i II E •; •- i•G.\�1 w S " \ I f r — --- —�_ _.�— t -I• I ` '1 T"' ---- - . \ ;1 ' ,•f " 'Ii .1 I lI �` .1'1 j 111111 Il 111 , i�. Imo c ;1 Is I °1 I I��� _ '-�_T—� 1��` ' i .. ' 1�1i1b.-��111`I tj i �+Z '' I I • ,— 1 I�ijj1 11",�i f I II,, 3 tj\ t' .=„�„_ J— — •;� 1 tq iH !i i ... c���� \ a.c�-�* 11I , b'0 i II St=I .L.s# "I it • ,�' � . II �• _ a zi 1 , 1� n i► —ti . j 1 Wt i i ;\, h: i i °, s;e II I g , :..., 'i 1 ,, j'• Il; • ! 1 i ,. 1 f s` W. I I H .. 1• I II �i'- ori i., hllillil I f l \,,j,1 _ ff-+� f■ gi -t , I �•\ I�IIfl1 I�Ors ; YISI II• jI I,1'. i— . 1 '. t•"-- c.p... I i °� '4;t 11IIIII.-fl I�I11 " IJ^� s1'.jilt .,,� 'i•s.•,-1 ',i!p \ t �y�i 1t 9, 1 ``. i �ti 1�fflll-1 III I1 1 lir', II I 1' i \ l1 -\ 4-,t _ III ,��II1I i l ,', 1':;I 11 i 1 do i i.J._I_ `�, . -K.:-.—'._ `r x}1 1" I If111! }�J'�I' r • ` 1 Imo I _ 1 :s L 1 _ g, e I 1 ery 668111 11 i! I 8.t.. •• Z aar II au . 2 E ' , ii e •1 i I 1 1 i - 8 ... i , iii: 1 E i 1-4 4 t - I liiii i ' a • z. . L ••;;-i f I- so to N 1 . ,.;i t• 1 2.- i I i , • 51 : --1 % i oi L .0• z ,g—•_+.•• s z liqi:a ... n ! fuci isl 0 , t°2z1 1 ini!li ! 110- •: M; i 1 51 _•... ,., 2 i.',.gi . .. I .- • 0 11 1 I: •1 % 1 i ii ,.. % ‘ . Ti -........‘ I' • 1 ...... 1 I a • ' g.11 i• c‘ A. 1.N. ' 11 i I s • . 4.....,'" \ • -1-- - . .........„>,,0"-- — 7 7 ,____________. _____ _ :.-. ,E ..ag.A.g....: _ •, 1, i -------------T--u,-:.--.-ic--.i...,,r' ,..- r.,.„. --,,,,--J,-:-...:-3.4-st , ' -• ) • _...,_ ___ - .... g 1 - ' .-. i \'-• - : ., 4 I 4 ii :I , ii : - - , a 1 lh •r7r,....'(....,...0 P 1 , . .. 11 .: J B E Iii4 . ' ----;-. " 1 11111 ! ,...., / /"- " •:• • .."--A.‘..\, • .‘" o' . 1 ; I • ,r) ,, , ,. •t r i ••I..r..41;tro.•- ..• - A I i•,......-- -:- - • , . . 1\ c.: 1 •••••,4 I ‘,p,1/ ! ., t a I s,1 . I. 1 t 1 LU ri I I I-. ig' -i MI. - . .,.: I -.1 • _. -r. 0 , i 1 i - 1 ,:. ,.— t 1 ."..,....... fii,- I- '.. . ... 1,,k,..-, „,.,,,,.....r4 rft "A 1 4 NS, 1 1 " C .. . ..,:. •,...........„. Illi• J I N4', ,.. • .- • t.:lit , g00% .•1 0 ... g '1,:t ,‘ . .,.... ,..I. 1 10 ) ..5- '.' ' •,11' 11. r / • ._ 1 P. rei 8 1% rto i• F., s , i . I .; 'i I.! 1 1 •i I • ' -•?; III I I• •••••4 ll -t1 ; 4. s . , 6 • • • ' 4 I jt, —I ...... - k'I—, la 1 IC ) 1 - .4 .z \ , ,•'' : 1 J.; .1." I :1' II • !. I I I -4.1i:u4.1.1JJJ_11,..: .:, I- .' :- -.---' :.. . • r . , .. • , :I 1 t t, i .• i i ,.,? - • ••••• .... ........, . -...„. ,• .S 4 f.....:, -i:• ..4 ; II 1 •'.. 1:i VI:, i iN L :'•. .. . •••• --- _ ... ....-- ...21 l ..•• ,s4.V .' ' c-4 ,.., ••%!•.• .. • i I ' 1 " .f..::..r.,22.71:....-"..-.....7.'....... n. .--,../ .....—."' i j'''••,.N.s.s.s*,:2... . ''.:•, t • 16 ; ",.. .,-• . '1,:sh L. „ •osAt • I% . , 1 :•\,'‘L,1 ,A,1 it - ,,,. i c.'''..4.-'•—'.... 4....>.,.... --... .4.,.. I. I . ' t: " I • " Ni,... "X...;:\.,•••• •1-,446 • ., •••: - . ;••• - 1 . --4'41—i------ •:.'.N...411...... . ........ ..,:‘,... - ••.5..' fa i 11 I ,.... . . / L____ __ _ _ .__..._.. ..__._____ __ _ 1 , vt•I':::1.t:.iii! i it _ i 11 t /1,:.; 1 E i . 0E11•Ifil z---®— E ii I .:. ... . Iiii:.7 ! : a EI:Iti § - .4 I i. .11 .,. .11 8 • ii• 1 il _ - it, ti e :: .. s 11., tiliti 1 . . • II llI 1� Iili I ! -� .u 'I i Nil ,... ,44-...,.., , , , .. . • . • -it" .4••• , , ,..i.__...._......,......1 ,-,-. ••,,- , ,..-_, , ,,,, .. 4 1 _ ' 1 L1 !'I' I / 1ii Zr _ I LI! i Hi_ ,-1 LI Ill. - . _ L 'r I— L `41` C .kt• ' 1-1. ULT .. ':' . 1 I 14n r' -1:7j,-. �- L • ...',::-: : .•• .: -{1 11', I .I'11� 's. L . - I 1- - ! 1 :— f — 6 p c: '; L;;_ I-z. , I fllt L ;' ' ; :"_1' - 1-L j' ' •i; : f-r -r- it L_I C . ':!•. t• 1�-,-' : -I ' . -. L ....,,. ..• � L'LLJE 1.1 ' Z. - ,c' , [..., 1 . ii,1: ,._...,:ti.:. 74.% . . __ .... 1:_:.:.„..,.....,..1._ . 1......__...7.77,..=.41_ 1. .,: i.,,_-t _it : ;-: fl, - 1-- 'r�fI -,ii_i A . i - -- i •! f✓ i1I! 1-i- 1 1s1 t1. �.) ~_� 1 _[..., � 1crx i . • 1 � ) - • j_.i ' 1 ; �rIt : 1..1 1 I111�'ir�_ 1 - n • 1 <<a._ ! • 1 I � ! L -'^14'F .1i ��1I�`1-t ,7,•(►�� . ''S rrL1 !y -,11I-11_l1_II.I I_ 1 • t , Ik4 -, I i . 1 1�,.i::_ - 6. . L - - CITY OF CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner 4fit DATE: November 23, 1992 SUBJ: Subdivision Ordinance Amendment Recently, the Planning Commission and City Council have reviewed and approved subdivision of properties by metes and bound descriptions rather than by platting. Technically, these subdivisions did not meet the exemptions from platting as provided in the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff has directed the City Attorney to draft a subdivision ordinance amendment which would broaden the exemptions from platting. The reason for this is that there are cases when new streets are not being created, only a few lots are being subdivided and the cost of platting can be excessive. The proposed amendment limits the subdivision to no more than four lots, requires the resulting lots to conform to all zoning requirements and that new streets are not needed to access the lots. If new streets are needed, then it is important to have the property platted so that right-of-way can be dedicated. Subdivisions exempt from platting shall follow the same process as a preliminary plat, except there is no final plat approval and a survey signed by a registered land surveyor is submitted in place of a preliminary plat. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the attached subdivision ordinance amendment. ATTACHMENT 1. Subdivision ordinance amendment. Is t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CONCERNING SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 18-37 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: Sec. 18-37 . Exemptions and Minor Subdivisions. (a) The City Clerk shall certify that dividing a parcel to add a part of that parcel to an abutting parcel is exempt from the requirements of this Chapter if both parcels, after the subdi- vision, will meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance for a buildable lot. (b) A subdivision is exempt from platting if each of the following criteria are met: (1) The subdivision contains no more than four lots ; and (2) The resulting parcels conform to all applicable zoning requirements for buildable lots; and (3) New streets are not needed to access the lots. (c) Subdivisions exempt from platting shall be processed in the same manner as a preliminary plat in which the preliminary and final plat review is combined, exempt that in lieu of a plat a survey signed by a registered land surveyor shall be provided. Section 2 . This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 19 , by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen. ATTEST: Don Ashworth, Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 19 ) - 946 r11/18/92 PC DATE: 12/2/92 C I TY O F CHANHASSEN CC DATE: 12/14/92 CASE #: 92-11 WAP By: Aanenson:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Wetland Alteration Permit for a Sedimentation Pond adjacent to a Class B Wetland zLOCATION: North of West 78th Street between Kerber and Powers Boulevard z a V APPLICANT: Brad Johnson Lotus realty Drive P.O. Box 235 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Q PRESENT ZONING: R12, High Density Residential ACREAGE: 2.25 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - RSF; Residential Single Family S - BG General Business QE - PUD, Planned Unit Development Residential and OI, Office Institutional QW -R12, High Density Residential WATER AND SEWER: Not applicable F" PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site is a ravine that was altered to create two sedimentation ( ) ponds with the development of the Saddlebrook subdivision. This is a Class B wetland and has an Ag/Urban and Natural classification under the city proposed wetland ordinance. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: High Density Residential Oak Ponds/Oak Hill WAP December 2, 1992 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The Oak Ponds/Oak Hill development is a 217 unit multi-family housing project on a 27 acre site located between Powers and Kerber Boulevard. This project received preliminary, site plan and PUD approval by the Planning Commission on November 4, 1992. One of the conditions of approval was that this project receive a wetland alteration permit. ANALYSIS The applicant has contracted with Bonestroo,Rosene, Anderlik and Associates to perform a storm — water and water quality review for the proposed "Oaks" development. There is an existing Class B wetland that is located in the northern portion of the proposed Oak Ponds Development. This wetland was altered in 1987 with the development of the Saddlebrook Subdivision. With the — development of the Saddlebrook Subdivision, two storm water retention ponds were created. These ponds straddle the proposed Oak Ponds and the Saddlebrook development. Although this area is one basin, there are two distinct areas of wetland; one is the Class B wetland along Powers Boulevard and the other area includes the two pretreatment ponds along Kerber Boulevard. This site was inspected as part of the wetland inventory the city undertook as a part of the Surface Water Management Program. The most westerly pond, the Class B wetland, was noted on the inventory as a possible Natural Wetland and the two ponds to the east along Kerber Boulevard were noted as Ag\Urban ponds. The direction the city is heading is that Ag\Urban wetlands may be allowed to be modified but not those classified as Natural. The DNR and the _ Army Corps of Engineers have stated that they have no jurisdiction in this wetland. The drainage plan for this project is divided into 11 areas, A to H area A-1, B-1 south and B-1 east. While drainage areas C, D, E, and G drain directly to the wetland, area A. A-1, B and B-1 drain to the east pond and F and H drain to the existing west pond. Ismael Martinez, from Bonestroo is recommending the following improvements for storm water management: • Enhance the quality of the existing Class B wetland. • Modification of the two existing ponds to better accommodate runoff generated by the proposed development. • Modification of the internal drainage to keep runoff within the proposed development. • Provide a sediment trap to the proposed storm water before discharging in the existing wetland. • Define the Normal Water Level (NWL) for the wetland and provide the proper outlet. Oak Ponds/Oak Hill WAP December 2, 1992 Page 3 • Develop an off-site NURP basin with a developer's contribution to the Surface Water Management Program Fund. Specifically the proposed storm water management consists of the following: Eastern Storm Water Pond Construction of a 20 foot long, broad crested weir at elevation 955.0 to provide protection against overtopping. The outlet structure should consist of a 12 inch diameter pipe discharging into the west pond partially submerged to avoid erosion. Westerly Storm Water Pond Construction of a 20 foot long, broad crested weir at elevation 949.0. This weir, which will help define the overflow, will need a 20 foot wide energy dissipator with its bottom 10 inches below the wetland ground elevation and designed to maintain sheet flow for at least 10 feet (riprap protection). The outlet structure should consist of a 15 inch diameter pipe discharging into the energy dissipator. The benefit of this weir will aid in reducing the flooding potential of the ponds. Ismael Martinez states that both weirs can be built by cutting a well defined section in the existing berms. The side slopes for the weirs are recommended at a 5:1 for maintenance purposes. Both weirs, their discharge section and the energy dissipator should be protected with riprap. The soil removed to build the weir section can be spread on top of the corresponding berm which would add free boards to the pond for protection against overtopping. The final parameters would then be: East Pond West Pond Normal Water Level (NWL) 953.9 948.1 High Water Level (1-IWL) 956.0 950.0 Discharge cfs 52.0 73.0 Storage Volume AF 1.2 1.1 Outlets: 20' crest weir elevation 955.0 949.0 12" Pipe 953.9 15" 948.1 Oak Ponds/Oak Hill WAP December 2, 1992 Page 4 The storm sewer for areas C, D and E should not discharge directly into the existing culvert under Powers Boulevard. Instead Ismael is recommending that a sediment trap be created before discharging into the wetland. A sediment trap with a sedimentation capacity of 3000 cubic feet and a minimum depth of three feet is recommended. This trap should provide sediment removal without significantly impacting the surroundings. The sedimentation trap shall be located outside of the wetland boundary, and east of the proposed bike trail along Powers Boulevard. Ismael has stated that the Class B wetland shows signs of erosion in the middle of it. Runoff has eroded a small meandering channel in the middle of the wetland. With this new development the amount of runoff will be increased and with it the amount of erosion. He is recommending defining a Normal Water Level (NWL) and High Water Level (HWL) for the wetland and provide a proper outlet structure to control storm runoff. In addition, he is recommending the city consider a cash contribution from the developer to enhance this wetland and other downstream wetlands. The Natural wetland is a part of the overall drainage system and will meet 100 year storm design criteria. A pond to meet NURP standards can not be developed on this site because of the constraints of the natural topography and the steep slopes. This is an instance where the city should require a contribution to the storm water management program. This contribution would aid in the acquisition or improvement of ponding facilities. In this instance, the downstream pond on the Eckankar property will be designed to NURP standards. The Surface Water Management Program Task Force will have to review the formula being used to determine this cash contribution. Currently, this contribution is being based on land value. SUMMARY The proposed construction of the sedimentation pond will be adjacent to the Class B wetland - along Powers Boulevard. No activity will occur within the wetland boundaries. Currently, the city's wetland ordinance allows a sediment basin within 200 feet of a Class B wetland without a Wetland Alteration Permit. The other two retention ponds will be modified only. This — modification is the construction of a long crested weir and modification of the outlet structure. The modifications to the existing storm water ponds will result in enhancement of the Class B wetland. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission approves Wetland Alteration Permit #92-11 with the following — conditions: Oak Ponds/Oak Hill WAP December 2, 1992 Page 5 1. The limits of the sedimentation trap shall be limited to the 944.0 contour adjacent to the Class B wetland. 2. The existing two storm water ponds shall be limited to modifications as proposed including the weir and outlet structures. 3. Type III erosion control be in place around the construction boundaries of the wetland. 4. A cash contribution to the Surface Water Management Program Fund." ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from Ismael Martinez dated November 18, 1992. 2. City of Chanhassen Wetland Observation Records, dated May 13, 1992. 3. Letter from DNR dated October 2, 1992. 4. Letter from the Army Corps of Engineers dated October 30, 1992. 5. Storm water drainage plan dated October 7, 1992. Otta G.sbne>floo.PE. Mdwero A.Seifert PP. MirAaei P Rau.PE. Mats I Jensen,PF Bonestroo W Rowe.PE' Kenn A.GOlon ►F Apes 1.1 Rho AIC L Proap Grow la,PE . epi C.Ande^.ut.PE Robert R RIM,! PE. Tomas W PE trypn,PE Kw L.Warw.PE Rosene MarWS L.Sonata.P.E RCN LI W Faster,PE. Msyaai C Lyes.PE. Gary A K' t2,PE kKra2 F T Xa,er..P.E. Da IC O losl¢ PE. James R.Malard.►E F.lime Pore, PIr Anderllk & C Thomas E hk7yes IF Jerry AARO uLte.P.E Kent4th P AMNpt►E Shawl D CcaLeson.PE Robert G Schuri,tm.►E Mirk A.Maroon,IL Mart R.la RE Cec,ry Owner PE Associates Susan M EMnin.C PA. mete T Raubrynn.PE. Mark A.Selo PE Glees A Gtkson 'knio. Consutant 'k0 K titl0.PJ; Gary W.Mpner;►F. Lao M PaaeyirY Engineers & Architects Thames IL Andersen A.A Daunt J.!Owersort PE. Herten M Drsee QDeneb C.slap%PE Ortryi K Klrscnehmart IL Ariel F Enpertarot Thomas E Angus.P.! PPOO J Casweu.PF. Irma Menu PE Mart 0 WjM.P.6, MEMORANDUM TO: Kathryn Aanenson, City of Chanhassen Fax No. 937-5739 FROM: Ismael MartinezZ DATE: November 18, 1992 RE: Oaks Community Plat Review FILE NO.: 393Gen Hi Kate } INTRODUCTION We have performed a stormwater and water quality review of the proposed development, Oaks Community Development. Our review was based on the proposed development characteristics shown in the Plat plans dated October 6 and received by the City October 7, 1992. As a result of our review we recommend the following improvements: - Modification of the two existing ponds to better accommodate runoff generated by the proposed development. - Modification of the internal drainage to keep runoff within the proposed development. - Provide a sediment trap to the proposed stormsewer servicing areas C, D & B, before discharging into the existing wetland. Define the Normal Water Level NWL for the wetland and provide the proper outlet structure. OBSERVATIONS The proposed development is located East of Powers Blvd and North of Arboretum Blvd, in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 11, T 116 N, It 23 W, in the City of Chanhassen. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul,Minnesota 55113 • 612436-4600 20'd '3GGV 2 00a123N09 TI£I 929 2T9 9b:PT 2665-8T-TI The proposed development drains naturally to two existing man-made ponds and a natural B wetland. For the purpose of this review the two ponds will be called East and West accordingly, The wetland is classified as a Palustrine, with Emergent Vegetation and Seasonally Flooded waterbody in the National Wetland Inventory. The drainage system shown in sheet 3 follows the natural topography and has been divided into 11 drainage areas, A to H including areas A-1, B- 1 south and B-1 east. While drainage areas C,D,B and G drain directly to the wetland, areas A, A1, B and B1 drain to the east pond and area F & H drain to the existing west pond. The two existing ponds were originally designed to control runoff from Saddlebrook development located north of the Oaks. The proposed development site has a very well defined natural topography and steep slopes near the existing ponds. RESULTS We reviewed the capacity of the existing ponds to control runoff generated by the proposed development. The ponds will have to be either enlarged or their outlets would have to be modified. If ponding would be required to treat and control runoff generated by the proposed development, the east and west ponds would have to be expanded .5 and .2 acres respectively. Potential areas to expand the existing ponds are heavily wooded and are characterized by steep slopes, We evaluate the alternative of not increasing the pond capacities and its impact to downstream waterbodies. We recommend the modification of the two existing ponds to better accommodate runoff generated by the proposed development. The modification will consist of: East Pond * Construction of a 20' long, broad crested weir at elevation 955.0 to provide protection against overtopping. * Outlet structure should consist of a 12 inch pipe discharging into the west pond partially submerged to avoid erosion. West Pon * Construction of a 20' long, broad crested weir at elevation 949.0. The weir will need a 20' wide energy dissipator with its bottom 10" below the wetland ground elevation designed to maintain sheet flow for at least 10 feet (riprap protection). * Outlet structure should consist of a .ipe discharging into the energy dissipator. � Both weirs can be built by cutting a well define section in the existing berms. The side slopes for the weirs are recommended at 5:1 for maintenance purposes. Both weirs, their discharge section and the energy dissipator should be protected with riprap. The soil removed to build de £0'd 'OSSti '2 00b1S3N06 TT2T 929 2i9 Lb:bi E661-81-TT weir section can be spread on top of the corresponding berm which would add free board to the pond for protection against overtopping. The final parameters for both ponds are as follows: East Pond West Pond Normal Water Level (NWL) 953.9 948.1 High Water Level (HWL) 956.0 950.0 Discharge cfs 52.0 73.0 Storage Volume AF 1.2 1.1 Outlets: 20' crest weir elevation 955.0 949.0 12" Pipe 953.9 15" Pipe 948.1 The proposed storm sewer servicing areas C, D, & B should not discharge directly into the existing culvert under Powers Blvd. We recommend the provision of a sediment trap before discharging into the existing wetland. A sediment trap with a sedimentation capacity of 3000 cubic feet and a minimum depth of three feet is recommended. This trap should provide sediment removal without impacting the surroundings significantly. The sediment trap should be located outside the wetland boundary.It is our understanding that a trail will be built between Powers Blvd. and the existing wetland. The trap will have to be located taking this into consideration. The attached sketch shows a possible location for the trap. This sketch is only for the purpose of illustrating a possible location outside the wetland boundary where it is easy to conform with the natural topography. RECONLYIENDATIONS/CONDIENTS Runoff resulting from storm events exceeding the 10 year design capacity of the development stormsewers will flow outside the development into important collector streets (Kebler Blvd. and Powers Blvd.). We recommend the modification of the internal drainage to keep runoff within the proposed development. The wetland shows signs of erosion in the middle of it. Runoff has eroded a small meandering channel in the middle of the wetland. With this new development the amount of runoff will be increased and with it the amount of erosion. We recommend to define the Normal Water Level NWL for the wetland and provide the proper outlet structure. The City can consider some cash contribution from the developer to enhance the wetland and other downstream wetlands. This cash contribution can be equal to the cost of the land and the excavation to build proper ponding minus the cost of the actual improvements. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know at ext. 253. Have a nice day! b:'d 'OSSti 8 002:1159N06 TT£T 9£9 2T9 Zb:bT 266T-9T-TT ` ` 1 1.. 1 4 ETA 1/E� ,'ti 4 'ki.,, 1• l' �� `' `, ` \N. ' 'INNt„ la i . ittpt_to,ILIFIV iii . `\ ` 4.1 \ 1 � t \. �.. a. \ �\ , :i.!..'. .. f .207.„ ,,,, ,."... .::.b.,. ,.4111 .4 ; 11--B . : \ ‘')\\I‘\\\ ,1 4,7,1411, 1"" . ... 7....: • ;...1,1,e• i .... -:.:. i\-. . ' . . AIX ' . \%\ \\ " •-11.- -i.. .).-_,.. .--.4... ...,i--1, A ' . .--4.--.4 ‘,. •4.4g+t�F�aw .,S si, ,,,,:‘Alk, i•- Nlig:.- . 4 -,.. . , ...1! . ', . . i... . . .. . . : „lit i,, ,,_1; .... . .04._ .7, , . , ,...... ..„ .10....„ T its- ; 10 \ \ , , ,,.. ie �� \VI) XY f i 8 l' ' lIfili‘ / i ' ' . . 1 ):\ ;\ . ' ifit / ,r.e' •''''',4•:‘\/: 4 , • I ..'a. .,.• ' . . \' 'r ••'i.' . . • .; • . ,,t,\\7 11 itt. r I ,i i‘1,c r.. s . .. ...,, • \illi . \ a 9 . • \ \ \ \,,., ‘ \, .fict\ih,. t. �� \\\ r r' iota.A.r� :. ,\, \\\. .v,, .. ,,,,,c. \% \\.„:„..\\:-.\„.„..4.., ti z O `btt.iG' ti\ ;\. T\ t t. ptifit, , `, � \'. ‘\, �` \d„\, ,..„..--,,, ,,\‘,\.\\\,: y.:, ,,... ..' \.. \ • .\\,....‘,,,.(1‘ ....'.-....), 1 . ) I ; , ,\\A-4V‘k.‘1, \ %. k '• '• L 1. , i i . i / ••• ••• ‘• •• . 1 , . : :,h" ' k i'. 1 i . - '"‘IklikkiN.'''"47'.' .._ .. . °� t I filliI ti. 1 t a• ,If'� f }'Y: .%tl. �� j ii f 1 t ! ; 1 i �1�; f . ' \ ' t. : I . %itlit, ' ,i 1 , ik \ . " 0 . \ \\ N _. , ; i LE,.... , ,,,v „ , . , k : '. • •05,-/ie • . • ' et J • 61 1 1 10 . .:. iii,31 , 'itiolits,„ • . . , , :. . .. lws.li . :: A ., i / .. ... .---.4‹, .4-15ft t ; . t 1;: R. HIGH W -r ER --.,. .:” \\ • • .!')) )/1/: ' / i • r / , / / , - ' .• \ •• .• •• t. ., i I I i, • \ \ \ .., \\ . wat \ ; '•,, I, I V :, I ... \s, \ \ , �1 ' i • l `, / ? i ► 1 x • "r 90'd 'OSSV 2 00211S3V09 STET 9£9 2i9 6b:bZ 2661-8Z-Ii ' I ' till + t r ' / 1 / I 1 1 1ilI I I /I' / / J 11 111 I ' " --- / , . 1 I / ri 111/ / .� I { I' / / • l - t /1/ ! i \ / . 1 i / / i 1 / -1--- / - I 1 1I1 / / / , a° / 17-77.; • • 1 / / / ;es:* ' / .r 1 I ! 1 1 I 1/t 13 I/of / / r / / / 1/- / • •' • - �� " I ! 1 ! ill i 1111 / yA / / // / ; • 7 , - „ -: ., J 6 / / / / , . .. . _, I 1 1 r11 1 ! 1 rl1V / .711 // // // / / / / / , / ` 1 II 1 ill ! ill , 6cI 4 I / / / / / / / / / /,f..4 I iiI 1111 1111 I /Z,I ! / / / / / / / / / / / / , ,, c� / ! 1 / / / / 11 1 1 I r /ri jill ' iuil ?` '10 I 1 I / / / 1 i / 1 1I11 ! 1 II If ! / .' • 1 If 1 '. • Jiti1 . n, �y i i r1 11111 11• rii l +l s CA 1 1 / -d I I1 t 111 111/ 1111 44 . a1 1 1 1 i 1 1 r I ! i ! / • 1 1 1 l Ill/ll / 1 ,•\ 1; 1 I 1 I I 1 i I 1 1 1 r I II 1 ! f '1 / 1 f 1 1 1 ! I 1 �- 1 1 r !/ , I I I I 1 1 ' / 1r Ir / 1 1 1 i I 1 i III J / ) r 1 111 iiitf 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1r i 1 I / " / , 1 1 1 II /� , • / I J ! 1 1 r I ! I I ` 1 11/ / / / l J /r / / , J .�. l ` 1. Illy fr� / / / / /, 1 r / , f i / ' 1 ` ' I / 4 / / / ' / / / / / / r ' //r ' / I / Il 11 u mal / / / / / / • / //1 /// ///// / ; / _/ I k / / 1 1 4 / / / / ( � 1 1 . MP1 ,‘ / / / / / I1 ! / . (I r. /� � / / 4/11/i li � 11 , If rIIa% + / / / / / 111 I I 1 / / I / / / / 1 1 i / r illft", / / / � / / 111 11 1 .• t / I —/ •/ / / / 1 , I / / l / l � I f 1 .- / 1 I : / 1 1 Ktr.v.g,_ i .t.f. # - /Zi i // / / 'i 1 / , y 1 / /1 11 , ',v ' -- % City of Chanhassen Wetland Observation Records Wetland Na: I (Field Review): A I-f 2C3) (Official Map) Location 1 l4►J T; 'R; I ; Section On USGS NWI: Y ✓ N Observer Initials: FK- Date Visited: F. /a. / q Picture Number(s)/Roll #: 25 /E(.2_ Picture Nos.: I (Se�2- ) Classification Wetland Type: Po w P (Cowardin); 5 (Circular 39) Wetland Location: Lakeside Streamside Headwaters ✓ Isolated (upland) Edge of Wetland Contour ;varies City Class: (P)ristine ; (N)atural ; (A)g/Urban ✓ ; (U)tilized Watershed Characteristics Wetland Size: acres Direct drainage area: acres Total drainage area: acres Open water area: acres Vegetation Dominant Plant Species: Reed canary grass A Cattail (cwe.� iJ ' Purple Loosestrife: (D)ominant; (A)bundant; (S)ome;(I)ndividuals;() •ne Plant Diversity: No. Species Dominant 02; 3-5; 7 Percent open water: q't_ % Land Use Influences Surrounding Land Use (Percent): 1 o°/r, Resident.em,D,Rur. Commercial/Industrial — Agricultural — Open Water 35% Wooded Institutional Vacant Field - p°iQ (describe below) 4t-Cryl 44, Hydrology Water Source: Natural; ✓ Stormwater, Unknown Inflow Stream; Ditch; ✓ Stormsewer, Surface Outflow: Natural; Ditch; ✓ Culvert; None Sedimentation/Siltation: Y ✓ N Flooded -dead or dying trees: Y ✓N Drains to . 4-0 ' _ 5 (f) ; (Direction;Wetland No.) (C)ontinuously;(S) asonally; (I)ntermittently; (R)arely - Soil Classification Soil Type Abby.: Soil Name: Other Wildlife Observations: -I ), ,( General Notes/Comments: rNssidn,) 'i5 • C. r, I t•- r� Section No. 1 l Wetland Sketch;Photo Locations 1 ,4 �)``7`'X u \ 'r S 8 r‘- ?Cli-it • w+�� "© 9 12 ///y- 16 i;,� ,►.,t�?- 13 16 � , �� 11" PO4 r, Not to Scale va, Lam% City of Chanhassen Wetland Observation Records Wetland No.: 2- (Field Review):A 11-12 (2)(Official Map) Location ,J T; Z? - R; I Section On USGS NWI: Y N Observer Initials: E Date Visited: / / Q? Picture Number(s)/Roll #:24 ,d-z Picture Nos.: I (Se.., -) Classification Wetland Type: ?i— (54,„ w¢t i (Cowardin); ti (Circular 39) Wetland Location: Lakeside Streamside Headwaters ✓ Isolated (upland) Edge of Wetland Contour ;varies City Class: (P)ristine ; (N)atural ; (A)g/Urban ✓ ; (U)tilized - Watershed Characteristics Wetland Size: acres Direct drainage area: acres Total drainage area: acres Open water area: acres Vegetation Dominant Plant Species: '. Reed canary grass 5 Cattail ( a ) - i.•. � ,„ ark_ Purple Loosestrife: (D)ominant; (A)bundant; (S)ome; (I)ndividuals;�one Plant Diversity: No. Species Dominant g 2; 3-5; 7 Percent open water: ct?°r,2 Land Use Influences Surrounding Land Use (Percent): Residentia ,D,Rur. Commercial/Industrial Agricultural Open Water %, Wooded Institutional Vacant Field 4piil (describe below) Hydrology Water Source: Natural; ✓ Stormwater, Unknown z* Inflow: Stream; Ditch; ✓ Stormsewer, Surface PJG Outflow: Natural; Ditch; ✓ Culvert; None Sedimentation/Siltation: Y ✓ N Flooded •dead or dying trees: Y N Drains to 411I - !..( 1) ; (Direction;Wetland No.) (C)ontinuously;easonally; (I)ntermittently; (R)arely Soil Classification Soil'Type Abbv.: Soil Name: Other Wildlife Observations: rn_,,a General Notes/Comments: Ki f) a,.. . 1 1 t ' II -Ar. C+ Section No. I Wetland Sketch;Photo Locations 1 4 Ktr acs-..<,a.�, � irly* . ,/ S 8 J ik)Dka 9 12 Il 13 16 4 Not to Scale 40� City of Chanhassen Wetland Observation Records Wetland Na: 3 (Field Review): F,'I -/ZC (Official MaP) Location i r.l T; r v,' R; I 1 Section On USGS NWI: ✓ Y N Observer Initials: l Date Visited: 5 /yam / 4Z Picture Number(s)/Roll #: 2-2'/EK2. Picture Nos.: 1-7_ (srz... r-te Classification Wetland Type: %11).r, (Cowardin); ?_ (Circular 39) Wetland Location: Lakeside Streamside Headwaters f Isolated (upland) Edge of Wetland Contour cam,o varies City Class: (P)ristine ; (N)atural ✓ ; (A)g/Urban ; (U)tilized Watershed Characteristics Wetland Size: acres Direct drainage area: acres Total drainage area: _ acres Open water area: acres Vegetation Dominant Plant Species: Reed canary grass `5 Cattail Vi', tam 3 5-re A• t-w° Purple Loosestrife: (D)ominant; (A)bundant; (S)ome; (I)ndividuals;®one Plant Diversity: No. Species Dominant Q 2; 3-5; 7 Percent open water: °i, • Land Use Influences Surrounding Land Use (Percent): Residential M,D,Rur. Commercial/Industrial ---- Agricultural Open Water ZD 'i� Wooded • - Institutional Vacant Field , -bn% (describe below) Hydrology -Water Source: Natural; ✓ Stormwater Unknown Inflow: Stream; Ditch; ✓ Stormsewer, Surface Outflow: Natural; Ditch; ✓ Culvert; None Sedimentation/Siltation: Y N Flooded -dead or dying trees: Y ✓ N Drains to 4. z!Z' ,, c - ;(Direction;Wetland No.) (C)ontinuously; S) nally; (I)ntermittently; (R)arely Soil Classification Soil Type Abby.: Soil Name: Other Wildlife Observations: Qxi ,), ' General Notes/Comments: Uj j�, cr, aQ,:�,, •4 L_ G. . J LY0;/ I)-Dmk, 1�V y ��y�. �•7 6 /.,)^ art ,) 1- • /ft:plc, ric..a c, t ;' c► ..-d p.-,+ r,( ofO,L9 '. Gr.i�1� L,..i . r„1�., �►j Section No. r I Wetland Sketch;Photo Locations 1 4 1.1 5 8 ,‘ �,ut O 9 12 -t1 r �Cld1� Not to Scale STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE No. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 554)&0 772-7910 • LfL-C► .tfi! October 2 , 1992 OCT - 1992 Kathryn Aanenson, Senior Planner City of Chanhassen CITY OF L-;.,,,,,,�`v`�� 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: OAK PONDS/OAK HILL, CITY #92-3PUD, CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY Dear Ms. Aanenson: We have reviewed the site plans (received July 23 , 1992) for above- referenced project (SE 1/4 , SE 1/4, S. 11, T. 116N, R. 23W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. The project site does not contain any public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR protected waters permit is required. 2 . No DNR shoreland or floodplain concerns were noted. 3 . It appears that there are wetlands on the site that are not under DNR jurisdiction. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be consulted regarding pertinent federal regulations for activities in wetlands. In addition, impacts to these wetlands should be evaluated by the city in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. 4 . There should be some type of dedicated easement, covenant or deed restriction for the properties adjacent to the wetland areas. This would help to ensure that property owners are aware that various agencies (including the city, watershed district and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers) have jurisdiction over the areas and that the wetlands cannot be altered without appropriate permits. 5. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. 6. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10, 000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is required. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Ms . Kathryn Aanenson (Oak Ponds/Oak Hill) October 2 , 1992 Page 2 Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Ct,j Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: Lisa Sammon, Glaser Financial Group Gary Elftmann, USCOE Bob Obermeyer, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WSD Carver SWCD Wayne Barstad, Ecological Services siof . .j o�� DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ' 1 ST.PAUL DISTRICT.CORPS OF ENGINEERS N 180 E KELLOGG BLVD..ROOM 1421 `7 .�I�N,,•/ ST PAUL.MINNESOTA 55101-1479 October 30, 1992 ,,.0.- REPLY' TO ATT EHTiON OF Construction-Operations Regulatory (93-00103-NP-GAE) Mr. Brad Johnson Lotus Realty P.O. Box 235 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Mr. Johnson: We have reviewed the information provided us about a project proposed by Lotus Realty to grade and landscape an upland area to facilitate residential development (Oak Ponds) at a site located in the SE 1/4 Section 11, T. 116 N. , R. 23 W. , of Carver County, in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The work proposed at the location stated is not within the regulatory jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers. No work will be done in a navigable water of the United States, and no dredged or fill material will be placed in any water of the United States, including wetlands. Therefore, a Department of the Army permit is not required to do this work. This letter is valid only for the project referenced above. If any change in design, location, or purpose is contemplated, contact this office to avoid doing work that may be in violation of Federal law. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS CONFIRMATION LETTER DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR STATE, LOCAL, OR = OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS, SUCH AS THOSE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OR COUNTY. If you have any questions, please call Gary Elftmann of this office at (612) 220-0355. Sincerel , Ben Wopat , Chief, Regulator Branch Construction-Operations Division Copy furnished: Mr. William Dolan Meadowood Engineering, Inc. Ms. Lisa Sammon Glaser Financial Group Ms. Kathryn Aanenson /City of Chanhassen _ , CITY OF \ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM • TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner DATE: November 16, 1992 SUBJ: Chanhassen Business Center PUD Amendment BACKGROUND On January 13, 1992, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for the Chanhassen Business Center as shown on the attached site plan. Since this date, no further action has occurred with the project and it has not received final plat approval. The developers of the property, Ryan Construction, is requesting an amendment to the PUD zone to allow for a church as a permitted use. The Jehovah Witness Church is proposing to build a church on Lot 1 of the Chanhassen Business Center. The Chanhassen Business Center is an industrial/office park, 93.7 acres in size and consists of 12 lots and 2 outlots. The ultimate development for this proposal is 700,000 square feet of buildings with a mix of 20% office, 25% industrial and 55% warehousing. ANALYSIS The proposed amendment affects the PUD for the Chanhassen Business Park in two ways. First, the uses permitted in the business center and secondly, the overall lot configuration of the proposed subdivision. Use The uses recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council were limited to a mix of 25% light industrial, 55% warehousing and 20% office. A church was not listed as a permitted use. While it may not be a land use issue, one concern of the staff is that allowing a church would take property that was approved for business use off of the tax rolls. In addition, the assessments for the Upper Bluff Creek Improvements were based on this area being industrial or related uses. Planning staff is not prepared to make any recommendations is t«: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Planning Commission November 18, 1992 Page 2 — based on these issues. We are simply pointing them out for City Council consideration if warranted. _ While the use itself is not typical of a industrial/office park, there is a church elsewhere in the city that is in an industrial area. This church is the Lutheran Church of the Living Christ, and is located at 800 Lake Drive. Staff could support one church in this PUD especially at the location shown. Lot 1 is separated from the rest of the park by the fact that it has access only from Audubon Road. The church may provide a buffer from the industrial uses to the neighbors to the east. The church would have a lower profile and less massing than the proposed office use at this location. Staff could support the proposal, but not more than one church for this entire development. The materials approved for this PUD are to be of high quality and durable. Masonry materials shall be used. In addition, any buildings in this park shall be required to meet all of the development standards of this PUD zone. These standards include site landscaping and screening, signage and lighting (see original staff report). The representatives of the Jehovah _ Witness have stated that they can and will meet all the standards of the PUD District. Attached is a typical building design for their church. Subdivision Modification The lot proposed for the church site is Lot 1 of the PLTD. The original subdivision layout had shown this lot as a 6 acre site. This lot has been reduced down to 2 acres. This is the lot size which was requested by the church. The adjacent lots, Lots 2 and 3 have increased in size. Lot 2 was 3.3 acres and is now 6.3 acres and Lot 3 was 4 acres and is now 4.8 acres. - One of the concerns addressed by the staff during the preliminary plat was access to Lot 1. This lot was proposed to have an office use. The traffic element of the EAW (Environmental Assessment Worksheet) suggested that most of the turn movements would be to the north, thus reducing the conflicts with the main entrance to the south. Based on this analysis, staff recommended that the drive from Lot 1 could be allowed but it must tie into the Stockdale's driveway to the west. Since the use of a church would have significantly different traffic patterns and peak hours than an office use, staff could support direct access from Lot 1 onto Audubon. The revised platting shows an access from Lot 1 and Lot 3 onto Audubon Road. This is unacceptable to the staff. Lot 3 has access from the proposed extension of Lake Drive West and does not need direct access onto Audubon. The proposed Lot 1 shows an access onto Audubon. Staff is recommending that the drive approach be perpendicular and tie directly into Stockdale's driveway. Modifications to the parcel size or configuration may be necessary. The proposed church calls for a 3,850 square foot building with a parking lot for 71 cars. As with any other use in this PUD, any proposed development is required to go through site plan Planning Commission November 18, 1992 Page 3 review, and comply with all the standards of this PUD zone. A 50 foot landscape buffer was required as a part of the Comprehensive Plan for the perimeter of this development. The buffer area along Audubon is proposed to be consistent with the standards of the rest of the PUD. The Jehovah Witness Church will be requesting site plan review after the first of the year. At this time, they are seeking an amendment to the PUD zone to see if the use would be allowed. The staff has outlined the development standards for this district with the anticipation of the National Weather Service Building and other industrial uses. Although staff has an idea of the type of uses that will be within the PUD, no specific site plans have been submitted to date. The Jehovah Witness Church is following this same process of getting the use approved first and then proceeding at a later date with the site plan review. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed PUD amendment allowing for the Jehovah Church on Lot 1 of the Chanhassen Business Park as shown on the proposed plan amendment to the Chanhassen Business Center PUD dated November 4, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. The driveway to Lot 1 shall be perpendicular to Audubon Road and shall be located to tie directly into the Stockdale's driveway to the east. 2. Lot 3 shall not have direct access onto Audubon but rather from the extension of Lake Drive West. 3. Submittal of an acceptable site plan in compliance with the development — standards/guidelines established for this PUD. Attachments 1. Preliminary CBC Plat. 2. Applicant's Submittal. 3. Typical plans for a Jehovah Witness Church and photographs. 4. Staff Report to the Planning Commission and City Council dated January 13, 1992. E e . I \.__: 1 i . , ai ..\. -I a, , ...., sz-------\ >l / ` Oyu k\ -- OBn°Or wz liy N F s.g_ Q% -- 'y�r: \ el..I O:11- ,.....--7--..r."------------------------ -------------7-1-, IUdo B\ i::I-..74Hi.:4 N Ts..:-:- •If € iL 2 \\........„..- . -- W \, N •rte j' �.. J I F < ' ErilI _E o < / - N - O\ 471 ' t/" • 140 4;liitw \-4 a O4 N. : i \ \N,Nt, s+ \.\\ .....), rn'il ibd •> .�`, - ,% 1 1 ) 1 cog ' Vs . ,, ,,,. ." '!` sesr\\\* ; o f O A'' '\IDS' .L^ -1 1 L r .;. 0, \\,\ / M $ .., . I 1 01 o i J $ ,a. ami.. € a — 1 � i — CC 5C W O en▪ in Ch 1 Q Q Q `• < , • Z �"' fn Q Q Q i C W ►� R I�` i .I LVCn W Z co .� J1 �... ali it 2Car) UJ ft Q 1 q 0 cc be < 14 cf) a ILI IC 4( \: CC Ct CA —a AI ss. N is-Lg./HI.: i (i) CS, Z W 1- x g_g g_g.il g 4_1g 1 i. i - .. ., .. . dl W w w IN y h N N H z) N co u)j W 12 N Vl yyj �y I - N C Q C W W W W W W W ly ¢ G Q G N U U U U U U SU CZj UU CU¢ U V • 0 O n o r. h 0 0 ID Q in m m 0 A_ �Hta J IG 17 a VI Pj Oi CO N N 19 ri IAD $ A O N O `t • < m J rEt¢j( I11 t � N17O � � N 000 O J YL y • R .f ID A COm CoD] I= 0I 0000000000001§ 88 § 0 5 'o5555t5b555il J J J J J FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1e.3w. 1992 11 : F. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (812) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPUCATION APPLICANT Chanhassen Congregation of Jehovahs OWNER; Audubon 92 Partnership Witness ADDRESS: 13001 Highway 7 ADDRESS: P.O. Box 158 Minnetonka, MN _ Chaska, MN TELEPHONE (Day time) 471-8195 TELEPHONE: 1. Oomprehenstve Plan Amendment 11. Subdtvislon 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Vacation of ROW/Easements 3. Grading/Excavation Permit 13. Variance 4. ir{tetim Use Permit 14. Wetland Alteration Permit 6. 'Notification Signs 16, Zoning Appeal 8. X Punned Untt Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment .4 honJ.;on t to a PLi, Land Use L 7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees/Attorney Cost * (Collected after approval of Item) 8. Sign Permits 18, Consultant Fees 9, Sign Pian Review 10, Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $ 750.00 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8Y:" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE • When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. . FE'7M CITY OF CHPNHN_SEN 19. 36. 1992 11 : 18 F. 3 _ PROJECT NAME Chanhassen Business Center LOCATION _ Audubon Road and Twin Cities & Western Railroad Tracks LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached PRESENT ZONING Approved PUD REQUESTED ZONING No Change PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Agricultural REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION Office industrial PUD REASON FOR THIS REQUEST To add the land uco of a church tri the approved l i ct of land uses and to reconfigure Lots 1 , 2, and 3 with Lot 1 being a 2-acre parcel having direct access off. of Audubon Road. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions, Before filing this application, you should confer with the — Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This Is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the Cfty 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 authorizationto proceed with the study. The documents and Information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records. SI•nature of •plicant Date p,„4„4",Signature of l:ee Owner Dat Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. This application will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on NARRATIVE CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER - PUD AMENDMENT November 3, 1992 The Audubon 92 Partnership owners of the Chanhassen Business Center (CBC) property have received a request by the Chanhassen Congregation of the Jehovah's Witnesses to purchase a two-acre parcel at the northeast corner of the CBC in order to develop a church on the site. In order for this two-acre parcel to be developed, the approved "Chanhassen Business Center" PUD will have to be amended. Specifically, the preliminary plat for Lots 1, 2 and 3 will have , to be reconfigured in addition to adding the land use of a church to the approved list of land uses and review of the preliminary site plan is being requested in this PUD amendment application. Current Application The application being submitted at this time contains the following: • Completed application form • Fee of $750.00 _ • Narrative of Amendment to the CBC PUD • Figure 1 existing CBC site plan for Lots 1, 2 and 3 • Figure 2 proposed CBC site plan of Lots 1, 2 and 3 • Preliminary site plan at 30 scale of Lot 1, two-acre church site Note: A new property owners list has not been submitted. With City staff's concurrence, it was agreed the property owner list which was utilized for the CBC public hearing in 1991 would suffice for this amendment to the PUD. History The CBC received City Council approval on January 13, 1992 subject to the conditions outlined in the January 17, 1992 City Memorandum. To date, there has not been any progress on the CBC subsequent to January 13, 1992. It is the Audubon 92 Partnership's intent to file the final plat prior to the expiration of the one year deadline or request an extension. Description of Requested Amendment The modifications to the existing PUD are as follows: 1. Land Use Request the land use Church be added to the list of approved uses within the light industrial, warehousing and offices uses as defined in the PUD ordinance and in the November 18, 1991 staff report. 2. Lot Configuration The requested reconfiguration of Lot 1 results in a parcel of 2.0 acres and proposes to _ accommodate a church land use. Figure 1 identifies the approved PUD lot layout from the October 22, 1991 plan sheets. Figure 2 identifies the proposed configuration and change in lot acreage between Lots 1, 2, and 3. The resulting overall acreage of the CBC shall remain consistent. The chart below identifies the change proposed in the lot acreage. 10/22/91 11/3/92 _ Approved Plan Submittal Plan Net Change Lot 1 6.0+ 2.0 minus 4.0 Lot 2 3.3 6.3 2.8 Lot 3 4.0 4.8 .7 20' of additional right-of-way on — Lake Drive West N.A. .21 + .21 Total Acreage of Lots 1, 2 and 3 13.3± 13.3± No Change 3. Access - The proposed access to Lot 1 will be directly off of Audubon road, as shown on Figure 2. The driveway access aligns closely with the Stockdale driveway on the east side of Audubon Road. In addition, the January 17, 1992 staff report identifies a condition on page 6, item no. 9 which stated: 9. The entrance drive to Lot 1 be moved to the north approximately 300 to 500 feet north of Lake Drive West, so that it aligns with the existing drive to the east of the Stockdale property. The proposed location of the 24' wide driveway aligns closely with the Stockdale property and conforms to the approved PUD ordinance. Secondly, it should be noted the peak traffic demand for a church will be outside of the typical peak traffic demand of an office/industrial land use, thus reducing the potential conflicts of this northern access to the CBC PUD. Generally, the peak traffic volumes will occur in the evening and weekend hours. — Access is still being requested to Lot 3 directly from Audubon Road in the location which is identified on both figures 1 and 2. It is understood the final location of the access drive to Lot 3 will have to be coordinated with the City of Chanhassen Engineering Division. At the time a final site plan is developed for Lot 3, the specific location and turning movements, access/deceleration lanes will be delineated. Site Plan Figure 3 identifies the preliminary site plan for the proposed two-acre, Lot 1 parcel. The plan identifies a 3,850 sq. ft. building and with a 71 car parking lot. The landscape buffer area is identified along Audubon Road and will be developed consistent with the approved landscape — standards of the PUD. The plan will incorporate a 2-3 berm screening the parking lot from Audubon Road, sodding of the berm and canopy trees at a 60' spacing integrated into the landscaped area. In addition, there will be evergreen trees planted at the northeast corner of the site. Building materials shall be consistent with the PUD guidelines and the building size is in direct conformance with the guidelines which states it should be have an "office" appearance and not a large unadorned wall facing Audubon Road. Building materials and designs shall be: a. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block. b. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. c. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. d. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or pre-cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured or coated. e. 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. f. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. g. 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. h. Large unadorned walls shall be prohibited. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. i. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures for all developments in the Business Center. The final plan will incorporate the required setbacks and additional right of way along Audubon Road which was approved in the January 13, 1992 PUD agreement. Specifically, an additional 17 feet of additional right of way along Audubon Road. LOT 1 2.0 AC; 7\ ii mo .47::a t /; .i -;1. j n i . i 4--R c SOMALI( • �7 . O ' v Q m LOT 2 .7 0 ., ‘ 6.3 ac. \ \ ,' \"„--...,,( C LOT 3 a.s Act __.] ,_ --- - \ , �- 1 • LOT 5 ,ti, ' 3.5 ACt \ e.,4 / egy441 ' 1111111111111111111111... #((" 0 50'1' 200' 400• N.7/ // I" 922 M tree` FIGURE 2 11/4/92 ROLA Napkins.Mn. `''' PROPOSED SITE PLAN AMENDMENT (6121 933-0972 TO THE CBC PUD LOTS 1,2,3 �aSSOC1ATES LTD;" tax:(612)933-1153 — I r V I I GAS EASEMENT ,,�' - j 1 r cot c.so¢w*uc : LOT 1 - 7 I 1 RAILROAD R.O.W. - •• /• - 1 \ i 6.0 AC.± = c I 1 I _ . 4111 1-:' = I LOT 2 r ' — \ 11. " ` 3.3 AC.± i c I /' Iper--6-CONC.SIDEWALK/ M - / / - — _ : 1 LOT 3 I 1 4.0 AC. I , ± -- DEVELOPMENT ' i. D. SIGN Vii' .. _ .. ///"1-----;------------ i OT 5 I I _ ( / 3.5 AC. •j= Gxi/ I me 1111111111111111111•1111 0 50' 100' 200' 400' ;\�� OPO r_rr.saEruuc'i0 /l /It — ' , 922 Mai t FIGURE 1 11/4/92.Mn. 55343 APPROVED SITE PLAN — „,,,ASSOCIATES LTD tar�672j 933-0972 33 CBC PUD LOTS 1,2,3 ill. . elINJlN 5,1-1VAOFaif 40i 1 P I-4 WOODNIN m SNr-isa a1ina-x3lno...._ co m SNOI1VA313 aNV NVId i 0 ,;,11,,,!c ,i / ,..._ •r{ I. ' Z - �i ~� 13,4 r 4�Y�Sa�yyL x� ,.I`f�4t • ' • a •' � '�fs�' yj ;Ai7, i . ' 3e11i ,l j Z S • .III 7 U �i 1 -•r H I ,4 I I' • II' . 4 Y e._Y .... Z = "—:-a- Z I; + .IIII 0 E .. - 0 4,=y�: YP Q :L • )�,. d 3:aac JfCY • J �iaf:a -- II11 y l:l ' � _ . 1. • LU 1i i Ism- • !", .. — • • —. 1 .t I 1 J J _ 4a It { i • ~ -1 ! ...I.:...7.41:c ' r C r - 1S;t 1 1 N I. 1L ' a n . 7 %%%%%c .csg-%%%0 J•t : Xa .1, i i•. 11.1:',,, t u a L i:-....:4 4 i 44 x g 1=1: l= = ::: =1 ::It, di ' ' I =_.. .1,-1:6i., -III •i� it, i ' _ _ _ .111 I o �I I -lIl� 11 i! f't. z _ — _ H 1 I I +�,l [7 C ^ Li... C Cf LLci .1_,_yi i.../y§y#1.4?ii,R,tg4g 0 1____ Q IIT .111.411,. -,�� W 6 q : C ITY O F PC DATE: 12/4/91 CHANHASSE CC DATE: 1/13/92 CASE # : 91-4 PUD By: Aanenson/Krauss/ka STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary and Final Plat Approval for Rezoning of Property from A-2 , Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development-Industrial for the Chanhassen Business Center Z QLOCATION: Located south of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and VPacific Railroad and west of Audubon Road - APPLICANT: Ryan Construction Company 700 International Center Q900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 PRESENT ZONING: A-2 , Agricultural Estate ACREAGE: 93 .7 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - A-2 ; vacant S - A-2 ; large lot residential Q E - PUD-R; Lake Susan Hills 3rd Addition W - A-2 & IOP; Timberwood Estates/vacant `Q WATER AND SEWER: Water is available for entire site, sewer is available for Phase I . A feasibility study W may need to be completed before approval of Phases II and III. PHYSICAL CHARACTER. : The site is currently being farmed and contains a soybean field. There is a Class B wetland on the site protected by the City and Army Corps of Engineers. Bluff Creek runs through the western portion of the property. 2000 LAND 'Tor- FLP.1U vi, villUe 1nuu5LLla1 Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction - December 4 , 1991 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Ryan Construction Company, the applicant, is proposing to develop an industrial park south of Highway 5 and adjacent to Audubon Road. This site is a triangular parcel which is approximately 94 acres in size. The proposal consists of a combined preliminary and final plat for rezoning from A-2 to PUD. Preliminary plat approval is also being requested as is approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for submittal to the Environmental Quality Board. Conceptual approval was given by the Planning Commission on September 4 , 1991, and by the City Council on September 23 , 1991. Ryan Construction will be the owner and developer of the Business Center. The site is triangular in shape bounded on the north by the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, Pacific Railroad, on the east by Audubon Road, and on the south by a farm that is currently zoned A- 2 but is guided for Low Density Residential uses. Lake Susan Hills 3rd Addition is located to the east of Audubon Road and is zoned PUD-R, to the west Timberwood Estates Subdivision zoned RR, and to the north of the subject site the property is zoned A-2 . The preliminary proposal calls for ultimate development of 700, 000 square feet of building. The uses include 20% office, 25% - industrial, and 55% warehouse. The project will be called Chanhassen Business Center (CBC) . All of the lots will be accessed from Lake Drive except for Lot 1, which is proposed to have direct access on to Audubon. Access to this site is from an internal cul- de-sac off of Audubon Road. The project includes 12 lots for development and two outlots. The CBC will be developed in two phases over a period of several years. Staff had directed the applicant to prepared an EAW, including a traffic study. The EAW and traffic study are discuss( ' in greater detail at the end of the Proposal Summary section. The traffic element of the EAW states that with the first phase of development a traffic signal will be warranted at T.H. 5 and Audubon Road. In the EAW, one of the major areas of concern will be the development of the retention pound and the realignment of the flood plain in Outlot A. After the Planning Commission has made their recommendation on the preliminary site plan, staff will publish in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor publication, a notice of the 30 day comment period. The intent of a PUD is to develop flexible zoning while creating a higher standard of development. Part of the PUD process is to establish development standards by which site plans will be required to adhere to. This PUD will be governed by a final development plan and, as stated in the PUD Ordinance, minor Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 3 extensions, alterations or modification of existing buildings or structures may by approved by the Planning Director. Any major amendments to an approved development plan may be made only by approval of the City Council after review by the Planning Commission. Each lot will have to proceed through a site plan review before any development can occur. The overall preliminary site plan appears to be in order; however, there are still a few areas of concern. These are generally of a more minor nature and are described in the staff report. The plan meets the intent of the PUD zoning including setbacks, landscaping, hard surface coverage, and parking. The intended use of this park is office, light industrial, and warehousing. These uses should not create noise or generate odor. The Public Safety Commission has reviewed concerns raised by the residents about trucks parking on Audubon Road. The City Council, on December 9, 1991, will be give consideration to posting no parking for trucks on Audubon Road. The applicant is proposing to grade this site in two phases. There is no proposed retention pond for Phase I. Staff recommends the applicant utilize the linear retention area located in the northwesterly section of the site parallel along the railroad tracks for this purpose. This would serve as a temporary retention pond until the permanent retention pond is constructed within Phase II . The temporary retention pond could then be eliminated in the future with Phase II development. This area is inside the MUSA line which recently was expanded by the Metropolitan Council. This area will be serviced by a trunk sewer that will have to be constructed from the south along Lyman Boulevard. This will require a lift station and forcemain system to pump back up Audubon Road to discharge into the sanitary sewer line at Lake Drive West and Audubon Road. The sanitary sewer in Audubon Road will also have to be extended easterly along future Lake Drive West to the Lake Ann Interceptor. The applicant will be petitioning the City Council on December 9, 1991, for a feasibility study so that work may proceed immediately on the financing arrangements. For Phase I, which includes 7 lots, the applicants are proposing to extend the sanitary swer from the intersection of Heron Drive and Audubon Road northerly along the west side of Audubon Road. Staff is recommending that this be done on a temporary basis with the condition that the applicants ensure there is sufficient capacity in the Lake Susan Hills system with the inclusion of the residential build out area. If there is sufficient capacity, each connection should be considered on a lot by lot basis. In addition, when Phase II sanitary sewer is Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 4 constructed that if economically feasible Phase I should be redirected to flow into Phase II. Based on the traffic study prepared by RLK Associates, Ltd. , on behalf of the developers, Ryan Construction, capacity analyses for the intersection of T.H. 5 at Audubon Road, suggests that the city work with MnDOT to request a traffic signal be installed to coincide with the completion of Phase I construction. Staff is recommending that the applicant pay a portion of that cost using a formula of traffic being generated by this project. Staff believes the proposal to be a well designed project and have worked extensively with the applicant over a period of months. The site is large and the project is a substantial one that will be developed over a period of years. However, through the PUD ordinance it is comprehensively planned and will offer a consistently higher standard of development than would have occurred if the parcel were to be developed in the usual manner. Utility issues are fairly complex, but we find this to be consistent with the fact that this is the first project requested in the new MUSA area. Staff finds the proposed PUD, plat and EAW to be acceptable and recommending approval of the preliminary and final stage of the PUD plan, preliminary plat and EAW subject to proposed conditions. BACKGROUND o The U. S. Weather Service has announced its plans to relocate from the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport to Chanhassen by 1991/1994 . o They have selected a site in the southeast corner of the property along Audubon Road as their preferred location and have been working with staff and the developer to prepare appropriate plans. On September 4 , 1991, the Planning Commission and on September 23 , 1991, the City Council reviewed and approved the concept plans for the Chanhassen Business Center PUD. In addition, the City Council is proposing to enlarge the economic/Tax Increment Financing District to include this area. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL STAGE PUD PLAN APPROVAL General Site Plan/Architecture The site is used agriculturally and currently, soybean fields cover most of the site. The farmed area consists of 67. 6 acres of the 93 . 7 acres of developable area. The 12 lots proposed are located Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 5 in this farmed area. There are two lots being created where development will not occur; Outlot A, which will be approximately 14 . 3 acres and Outlot B which will be approximately 7. 8 acres. A storm water retention pond is being proposed on a portion of Outlot A. The balance of the parcel will be used to protect Bluff Creek, s associated flood plain and the only significant stand of trees found on the site. Outlot B, located farther to the west, is physically separated from the main portion of the site by Outlot A. Outlot B is currently being farmed. It is not feasible to access this parcel from Audubon Road without causing significant environmental damage. There are no plans to develop Outlot B at this time. It is envisioned that this would be combined with other parcels guided for industrial use and accessed from Galpin Boulevard. The project will be developed in two phases. The first phase is the easterly one-half of the site. The Phase I development is proposed to connect into the Lake Susan Hills sanitary sewer. Staff is recommending that this may be done on a temporary basis with the condition that there is verification of excess capacity. It was previously believed by staff that there may have been a wetland on the proposed Lot 6. We requested a site visit and according to the Army Corps of Engineers this area is not a wetland. Based upon this finding, no mitigative measures are required. Based on the topography a majority of the site slopes westerly down from Audubon Road and the railroad track towards Bluff Creek to the west. Access is proposed to be provided by a long cul-de-sac extension from Audubon Road. Staff would have normally preferred to provide a loop street connection but this is not possible for this site without impacting environmental features or surrounding residential neighborhoods. Eleven of the 12 development sites are accessed along the proposed cul-de-sac or off a secondary cul-de- sac running north from the main road. Lot 1 is located in the northeast corner of the property. It is difficult to access Lot 1 internally due to the layout of the site plan and the elevation of Lot 1 . Internal access is not impossible, however, and generally - preferred by staff. However, it appears that access from Lot 1 directly onto Audubon can safely be accommodated with street improvements and may be acceptable. The site plans reflects a required 50 foot landscaping buffer strip along Audubon Road and a 100 foot landscaping buffer along the southern property line. The higher profile, more office-oriented buildings will be oriented toward Audubon Road. Near the central portions of the site and the western edge, higher density development is shown. Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 6 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The applicant has proposed the following development standards in their PUD plan. Staff has reviewed these proposals, made comments or findings and then given the staff proposal for language to be incorporated into the final PUD plan document. a. Intent Applicant ' s Proposal . 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. Finding. b. Permitted Uses Applicant ' s Proposal . The applicant is requesting that all building sites within the affected property shall be used solely for office, commercial process, research, servicing light industrial, light manufacturing, warehousing, and distribution purposes and services ancillary to such uses, subject to the conditions set forth below, and subject to all applicable ordinances. In the event that a use is permitted by declaration but is not permitted by applicable ordinances, such use shall be permitted by this declaration only if an appropriate variance under such ordinance is first obtained. Finding. The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the City Council shall make that interpretation. 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. Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 7 3 . Office. Professional and business office, non-retail activity. A "variance" as mentioned by the applicant is not the appropriate procedure for deviating from these standards. A revised PUD plan would need to be sought and is not likely to be acceptable. , Furthermore, we are proposing that truck terminals be prohibited from this project due to on and off-site impacts. Lastly, the applicant has made representations to the city that parcels located along Audubon Road be devoted primarily to office uses due to their high visibility. We agree with this statement and also believe that higher quality office use structures are more appropriate near residential parcels and public right-of-ways. Therefore, we are recommending that a condition be added to the effect that all parcels located along Audubon Road contain at least 50% of their - total floor area in office space and that the office components of the building be oriented towards the exterior of the PUD. c. Setbacks Applicant' s Proposal . The applicant is proposing a building setback of 50 feet from the required buffer yards, public right-of-ways, front, and rear property lines and 10 feet from all internal side lot lines. For parking setbacks, the proposal is for a 20 foot setback from the buffer yards, 10 feet from internal lot lines and 25 feet from Lake Drive. Finding. In the PUD standards there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The landscape buffer on Audubon Road is 50 feet and 100 feet along the southern property line. The PUD zone requires a building to be setback 50 feet from the required landscape buffer and public right-of-ways. There is no minimum requirement for setbacks on interior lot lines. Staff is recommending the following setbacks. Building Parking Audubon Road Buffer & Setback 50 ' plus 50 ' 50 ' plus 10 ' South Property Line & Setback 100 ' plus 50 ' 100 ' plus 10 ' Front & Rear ROW on Lake Drive 50 ' 25 ' Interior Side Lot Line 10 ' 10 ' Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 8 d. Development Standards Tabulation Box Building Site Lot # Lot Size Building Size Coverage Impervious Acre Square Foot Density Density 1 6. 0 59 , 000 23% 55% 2 3 . 3 39 , 000 27% 70% 3 4 . 0 48 , 000 28% 70% 4 3 . 7 46, 000 29% 70% 5 3 . 5 41, 000 27% 65% 6 9 . 5 134 , 000 33% 75% 7 8 . 0 118 , 000 34% 75% 8 5. 6 51, 000 21% 64% 9 5 . 3 47 , 000 20% 70% 10 4 . 5 57 , 000 29% 60% 11 4 . 0 44 , 000 29% 60% 12 10. 0 16, 000 4% 9% Road 4 . 2 60% Subtotal 71. 6 700, 000 avg. 25% avg. 26% The average hard surface coverage does not include Outlots A and B. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. The proposed development meets this standard with and average of 26% hard surface coverage. USE PERCENT SQUARE FOOTAGE Office 20 % 140, 000 Manufacturing 25 % 175, 000 Warehouse 55 % 385, 000 TOTAL 100 % 700, 000 Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 9 e. Building Materials and Design Applicant ' s Proposal . The developer is proposing masonry or concrete, poured in place, tilt-up or precast, finished in- stone, textured or coated smooth or with a rock face. Finding. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. 1. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block. 2 . Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 3 . Stone shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 4 . Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or precast, and shall be finished in stone, textured or coated. 5. 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. 6. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 7 . 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. 8 . Large unadorned walls shall be prohibited. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. 9. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures for all developments in the Business Center. f. Site Landscaping and Screening Applicant' s Proposal . The applicant is requesting to install the required buffer landscaping incrementally or as each lot Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 10 developments. They propose the Landscaping Plan act as a design guide for the Business Center. Finding. Staff is recommending that all buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I area to 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 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. 1. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces shall be landscaped, rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. 2 . Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with masonry fences and landscaping. 3 . The master landscape plan for the CBC PUD shall be the design guide for all of the specific site landscape developments. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 4 . Landscape materials proposed along the internal public roadways and southerly property line to and along Audubon Road shall be installed at the conclusion of Phase I utility construction. 5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of- ways. Wing wall may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage Applicant ' s Proposal. The applicant is proposing each lot to have a building mounted sign and one free standing sign. In addition, they are proposing one entrance sign for the Business Center. Finding. Staff is proposing that all freestanding signs be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. The sign treatment is an element of Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 11 the architecture and thus should reflect with the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. The applicant should submit a sign package for staff review. 1. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign located near the driveway into the private site. 2 . All signs require a separate permit. 3 . The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 4 . Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. h. Lighting Applicant' s Proposal . The applicants are proposing a shoebox fixture with high pressure sodium lamps. The plans did not provide for street lighting. Finding. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The applicant's proposal is consistent with the lighting standards for the PUD ordinance. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous industrial parks/roadways, the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. The street lights should be designed consistent with the existing lighting along Audubon Road. 1. A decorative, shoebox fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 2 . Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 3 . All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level should be no more than 1 candle at the property line. Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 - Page 12 STREET/ACCESS The main access to this site is off of Audubon Road. Audubon is classified as a Class I collector street according to the Carver County Comprehensive Transportation Planning Study, dated October, 1990 . With full development of the CBC, 100 feet of right-of-way on Audubon Road will be required and eventually a 44 foot wide urban street will be required. Currently a 33-foot right-of-way exists along the west side of Audubon Road. Staff is recommending that with the final plat, an additional 17 feet of right-of-way is required to achieve a 50 foot dimension from the centerline. Proposed Lake Drive is shown as a 60 right-of-way. This is consistent with other industrial parks in the city. Staff is recommending that the right-of-way be 80 feet from the intersection at Audubon to the short cul-de-sac off of Lake Drive. This portion of the street should be designed with 2 exit lanes, one for left turns, and the other for through traffic and right turn movements. In addition, the radius on the curbs at all intersections should be changed to 30 feet. The street construction plans should also incorporate the southbound acceleration and deceleration lanes along Audubon Road and the future alignment of Lake Drive. The development proposes a separate entrance from Lot 1 onto Audubon. As discussed in the traffic element of the EAW, this access is not favored by the staff. However, due to the layout of the industrial/office park in this area, it may be the best way to get access to Lot 1. The proposed deceleration lane should aid in right turns into Lot 1. According to the traffic report, most of the traffic movements from Lot 1 will travel north, reducing conflict with the traffic exiting from Lake Drive West, who will also be traveling north. Staff would recommend that the entrance drive to Lot 1 be moved to the north (approximately 500 feet north of Lake Drive West) so that it aligns with the existing drive to the east of the property (Stockdales) . The total estimated Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated from the site is expected in the range of 4 , 300 to 5, 000. The parking provided for the site is 900 stalls, plus loading docks for all proposed developments. Based on the city's parking standards, the parking plan includes 560 stalls provided for the office use and 340 stalls for the warehouse/manufacturing. Based on the traffic study prepared by RLI( Associates, LTD. on behalf of the developers, Ryan Construction, dated October 25, 1991, the capacity analysis for the intersection of T.H. 5 at Audubon Road suggests that the city work with MnDOT and request that a traffic signal be installed to coincide with the completion of Phase I of construction. Using a methodology for the assessment Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 13 of the traffic signal at T.H. 5 and Audubon Road, 80% of the traffic from this development (5000 ADT) divided by the total anticipated ADT for Audubon Road in the year 2010 (11, 000) yields a 36% share of the signal system cost. As development pressure dictates, turn lanes and traffic control devices such as a signalized intersection at T.H. 5 and Audubon and possibly Lake Drive West may be required. The applicant shall be required to participate in the acquisition of the traffic signal. The city proposes that the developer participate in the cost of the traffic signal based on the traffic generated from this development. Landscaping/Tree Preservation The PUD landscape plan identifies plant material locations along the entire perimeter of the CBC, the proposed Lake Drive roadway and two "typical" planting plans for the individual lots. Phase I planting shall occur upon completion of the utility construction for Phase I . The landscaping as required in the PUD ordinance shall act as a buffer screen to adjoining properties. As currently planned, the City will take title to Outlot A and permanently protect and maintain this area. There is a large stand of mature trees approximately 6 acres in size. The applicants are planning to preserve the existing mature stand of trees which include oak, ash, basswood and ironwood, ranging in size from new growth to 30 ' caliper. There are no other significant stands of trees found on the property. Grading/Drainage The development will be graded in two phases. The first phase is the easterly one-half of the site. The overall grading plan proposes grading the entire site and constructing a storm retention _ pond for storm runoff generated from this development. The retention pond will encroach into the flood plain and require mitigation. As a result, the applicant proposed increasing the depth of the flood plain to offset the area lost with the proposed retention pond. The applicant met with the DNR on November 27 , 1991, to address their concerns about grading in the flood plain (see attached letter) . The grading plan has been revised to reflect no grading through the bottom of Bluff Creek along the banks. The slopes proposed with the retention pond will be a maximum slope of 3 : 1. Staff recommends that the north, east, and south slopes be a maximum of 4 : 1 in order to facilitate access for maintenance equipment to the bottom of the ponding areas as well as safety measures. Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 - Page 14 The project proposes to construct a series of storm sewers to convey runoff from each individual lot to the proposed retention pond. Storm sewer calculations for a 10-year storm event should be submitted to the City Engineering Department for review. All retention ponds shall be built to NURP standards and provide nutrient removal calculations. As a part of Phase I grading, the plans do not provide for any retention pond for runoff generated over the easterly half of the site. The plans propose draining the first phase of the development towards the railroad tracks with eventually draining southwesterly parallel to the railroad tracks into the flood plain. The applicant must receive permission from the railroad authority for this work. Staff recommends that this low area adjacent to the tracks be constructed into a secondary ponding area for interim use or possibly permanent ponding uses. As with most retention ponding areas maintenance responsibility are transferred to the City. The applicant shall dedicate and provide a maintenance access drive to these areas for future maintenance considerations. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be conveyed over these areas with the final plat approval. Erosion Control With the construction of Phase I the plan purpose constructing a temporary access at Audubon Road and Lake Drive West. The plans also propose a silt fence along the westerly retention pond as well as the down stream side of the site grading. Due to the magnitude of the parcel being graded, it is recommended that Type III erosion control be installed. It is also recommended with Phase I construction that erosion control (Type III) be installed along the westerly grading limits for erosion control measures as well as marking the limits of construction. Staff also recommends that a Type I silt fence be placed along Audubon Road between the curb and the proposed berm lying north of the future Lake Drive West. The plans call for all areas being altered due to construction and be restored with seed and disc mulched, sod, wood-fiber blanket or be hard surfaced within two weeks after construction. Staff would like to change this condition to read that all turf restoration shall be completed within two weeks after the site is graded. Utilities The MUSA lines have recently been expanded and this site now is included within this district. Phase I waste water will flow to the east and connected into an existing 8" sanitary line, flowing through the Lake Susan Hills West 3rd Subdivision. Phase II waste Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 15 water is projected to flow to the west, cross Bluff Creek and be tied into a proposed sanitary sewer trunk line (Bluff Creek) . A feasibility study is currently being performed by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates for the proposed Bluff Creek sanitary sewer trunk line. Under the recently approved Comprehensive Plan, the MWCC approved the placement of a lift station in the vicinity of Lyman Boulevard into which the entire area could drain by gravity, utilize forcemains to pump the sewage back up Audubon Road into the future Lake Drive West to the Lake Ann Interceptor. The city' s engineering consultant, is exploring appropriate methods of how to serve this area. The development plan for Phase I is proposing extending an 8" sewer line from Heron Drive north along the west side of Audubon Road to provide service to Lots 1, 2 , 3 , 4, 5, 10, and 11, Block 1. Staff is recommending that this may be done on a temporary basis with the following conditions. Each site will have to be evaluated individually to ensure that there is sufficient capacity in the Lake Susan Hills System. Staff is requesting a copy of the applicants calculations for capacity to verify inclusion of the residential build out the remainder of the Lake Susan Hills area. Staff will also require that the Developers Contract and the Chain of Title restrict the flow on each lot so as not to exceed the capacity of the system. Staff also recommends with the implementation of Phase II sanitary sewer improvements, if feasible, the sanitary sewer line proposed in Phase I should be switched to flow into the new sanitary trunk sewer system. In order to provide sanitary sewer to Phase II of the CBC a trunk sewer will have to be constructed from the south along Lyman Blvd, which will require a lift station and forcemain system to pump back up Audubon Road to discharge into the sanitary sewer line at Lake Drive West and Audubon Road. In addition, a sanitary sewer line previously proposed with Lake Drive West lying east of Audubon Road will also have to be constructed. The Lake Ann Interceptor is located approximately one-third mile east of Audubon Road (see Attachment) . As with any improvement project, the applicant is responsible for petitioning the city for extension of sanitary sewer service to Phase II and paying for the initial feasibility report study. Should the project be authorized, the applicant will be entitled to a refund of the security provided for the initial feasibility report study. Staff would like to point out that this parcel of land had not been assessed for sanitary trunk sewer yet. Even if the easterly half of the site is able to utilize the existing sanitary sewer at Heron Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 16 Drive the entire tract of land should pay its fair share of the trunk sewer system to be built for Phase II . Utility and drainage easements should be conveyed with the final plat over those areas where the sanitary sewer line extends out beyond the street ROW. In addition the applicant shall dedicate to the City an easement for the future trunk extension through Outlot B. The drainage and utility easements shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. In an effort to provide access for maintenance it is suggested that a gravel access road or possibly a combination trail be built along the sanitary sewer route through Lots 7 , 8, Outlot A and Outlot B. Municipal water service is available to the site from Audubon Road. The plans call for extending a 10 inch water main through the site and looping back south to Audubon Road by continuing to the south and east back out to Audubon Road to complete the loop. Staff recommends that the watermain loop be extended southerly to within 10 feet of the south property line and then proceed easterly to Audubon Road to provide for possible future extension and looping to the adjacent parcel to the south. In the areas of the development where the watermain is extended outside of the street right-of-way, the final plat should convey a 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement over these areas. Detailed utility construction plans have been submitted, however no specifications were provided. Staff will be preparing a report or the construction plans and specifications with the final plat. Park and Recreation A looped trail system is being proposed for the north side of Lake Drive. This trail system will tie into the proposed trails for Heron Drive, Lake Drive West and access under the railroad tracks. The applicant will be required to pay the park dedication fee ($3 , 500. 00/acre) and trail fees ($833 . 00/acre) in the development contract. No development shall occur on Outlot A it shall be preserved as a open space. Because the project will be developed in phases, staff is recommending that the trail system for a loop even if it is on a temporary basis. It may be several years before the development is completed and the trail system will be more functional if it loops or ties into the existing system. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET The proposed project as outlined in the EAW includes 93 .7 acres of property intended to be developed into 700, 000 square feet of Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction ' December 4, 1991 Page 17 buildings. Uses include 20% office, 55% warehousing, and 25% light industrial . The current land use on the eastern 71. 6 acres is a combination of farmed soybean and cornfields, sparsely wooded edge condition, and moderate slopes and native vegetation. The proposed development is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and is located on a designated collector route, Audubon Road. The amount of existing crop land will be reduced to 38.9 acres of impervious surface and 28 . 3 acres of landscaping. The amount of wooded/brush/grassland will be approximately the same amount before and after development, 21. 5 acres before and 24 . 7 acres after. Two 2 to 8 class wetlands will increase from . 75 acres to 1. 56 acres after development. Outlot A contains an "ecologically sensitive" site. This site is a 5+ acre of hardwood forest which has evolved, and is a valuable natural resource and will be preserved. This area of Outlot A contains the upper portion of the Bluff Creek drainage basin and if not protected, impacts will be felt downstream. Outlot A also contains a flood retention pond that will be built into the flood plain of Bluff Creek. The alteration of the flood plain will need the approval of the DNR. Approximately 78 acres will be graded which involves 480, 000 cubic yards of excavation. All grading will be on site with no material being removed. The project will be graded in two phases. During construction Type III erosion control will be required. As a part of the erosion control measures, the applicant should be required to remove any materials that manage to get into Bluff Creek and to clean Audubon Road as often as necessary if mud, etc. , is tracked out onto the right-of-way. Under the recently approved Comprehensive Plan, the MWCC approved the placement of a lift station in the vicinity of Lyman Boulevard into which the entire area could drain by gravity, utilize forcemains to pump the sewage back up the hill into the Lake Ann Interceptor. The city' s engineering consultant, is exploring appropriate methods of how to serve this area. The proposed development plan for Phase I is connect into the Lake Susan Hills sanitary sewer. The plans propose to extend an 8" sewer line from Heron Drive north along the west side of Audubon Road to provide service to Lots 1, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5, 10, and 11, Block 1. Staff is recommending that this may be done on a temporary basis with the conditions that each site will have to be evaluated individually to ensure that there is sufficient capacity in the Lake Susan Hills system. Staff is requesting a copy of the Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 18 applicant' s calculations for capacity to verify inclusion of the residential build out in the remaining Lake Susan Hills area. Staff will also require that a Development Contract be executed and placed in the Chain of Title to restrict the flow on each lot so as not to exceed the capacity of the system. Staff also recommends with implementation of Phase II sanitary sewer improvements to the development, if feasible, the sanitary sewer proposed in Phase I should be switched to flow into the new sanitary sewer trunk - system. After review and recommendation of the preliminary site plan by the _ Planning Commission there will be a 30 day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Traffic Element The traffic element of the EAW addresses the proposed traffic impacts due to the development of the subject site. The site has been divided into potential uses for the purpose of forecasting trip generation. The proposed level of full development includes the potential of 700, 000 gross feet of general office building, warehousing, and manufacturing. The traffic reports were reviewed for their relevance in addressing the demographic and road needs for the next twenty years. The two reports include: T.H. 212 Traffic forecasts, I 494 to Norwood/Young America, prepared for Mn/Dot, 1985 Eastern Carver County Comprehensive Transportation Planning Study, prepared for Eastern Carver County Technical Committee, 1990 Current Average Traffic Volumes (ADT) were received by Mn/DOT and the City. In addition RLX Associates took 24 hour machine counts on T.H. 5 and Audubon Road. The analysis looked at the impacts of traffic generated by Chanhassen Business Center for the years 1992 and 1996. Anticipated traffic entering and exiting the site is distributed with 3472 ADT (80%) north and southbound on the Audubon Road. North of the site 868 ADT (20%) north and southbound from the site. Of the site traffic on Audubon Road northerly of the site entrances 2083 ADT (60%) is going to and from the east and T.H. 5 and 1389 ADT (40%) is going to and from the west on T.H. 5. The report predicts when T.H. 212 is built traffic patterns on Audubon Road will increase 20% to the south and decrease 20% to the north. Capacity analyses were completed for the intersection of T.H. 5 at Audubon Road for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours in 1991, including Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 19 traffic generated with Phase I development of the CBC. With the full development traffic added to the 1996 base conditions, it is anticipated the existing unsignalized intersection would operate at unacceptable levels of service during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In the report it is recommended that the city contact MnDOT to request that a traffic signal be installed to coincide with the competition of Phase I of construction. The proposed driveway access onto Audubon Road from Lot 1 is not favored by the staff. However, due to the layout of the industrial/office park it may be best way to get access to Lot 1. The traffic study shows that most of the turn movements into the site will be coming from southbound onto Audubon. A deceleration lane has been designed to accommodate right turns into Lot 1 and also Lake Drive West. Again according to the traffic report most of the traffic movements from Lot 1 will travel north, reducing conflict with the traffic exiting Lake Drive West, who will also be traveling north. Staff would recommend that the entrance drive to Lot 1 be moved to the north (approximately 500 feet north of Lake Drive West) so that it offsets into the existing drive to the east of the property (Stockdales) . Staff is concerned that when Audubon and Lake Drive West become a full blown intersection with channelization that there will not be enough stacking room between the entrance drive on Lot 1 and the intersection of Lake Drive West. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 94 acres from A-2 Agricultural Estate District to PUD-OI , Planned Unit Development Office Industrial. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit development 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. It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City' s expectations are to realized as evaluated against the following criteria: Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4, 1991 Page 20 Planned unit developments are to encourage the following: 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. In this proposed development the applicant intends to save the existing stand of mature trees along Bluff Creek, located on Outlot A. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map identifies the creek corridor as Park/Open Space. 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 subject property is triangular in shape, bounded by the creek, railroad tracks and Audubon Road. The shape of _ the property prohibits design flexibility that one could find with a flat square piece of property. The advantage in the PUD proposal is that the city is gaining a totally planned concept. If this were to develop separately as individual parcels, many of these design considerations would not be included. These design elements include an approved sign package, uniform street and parking lot lighting, compatible or cohesive architecture and building materials. The coordination of site development will also improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of public improvements. For example, the project is large enough to help facilitate a solution to providing sewer service to the new MUSA area. Also, the development of a single, comprehensive drainage system will maximize the effectiveness of nutrient removal - efforts while reducing the city ' s long term maintenance costs. 3 . High quality design and design compatibility with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community. Finding. The applicants are proposing to submit individual building plans for each development lot. The city will utilize its normal site plan review procedure for each. The approved PUD documents will establish firm guidelines to ensure that the site is developed in a consistent and well planned manner. Higher quality development will result. Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 21 4 . Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. This site is bounded on the east by Audubon Road. The Comprehensive Land Use Map calls for a 50 foot buffer yard for additional buffering for the subdivision to the east. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan calls for a 100 foot buffer yard along the southern property line. This area will eventually be developed with single family homes consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Concept plans call for establishing an acceptable landscape buffer in the appropriate areas. Site topography and tree cover will also place much of the site beyond the view of adjacent residential areas. In addition, the location of the U. S. Weather Service site along Audubon Road will improve buffering. Most of this site will remain permanent open space. 5. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The Comprehensive Land Use Map identifies the subject area as the potential land use of Office/Industrial . The Land Use Map also identifies a Park/Open Space corridor, 300 to 400 hundred feet in width, running the entire length of the property. This area is located in proposed Outlot A area on the site plan. The Comprehensive Plan also identifies a buffer strip 50 to 100 feet in width along Audubon Road and along the southern side of the property line. The intent of this buffer line is to help preserve and establish vegetation to help mitigate the impacts of development to surrounding properties. The proposal is fully consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 6. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The site plan shows a loop trail around the perimeter of the site, terminating at the northern and southern property line along Audubon Road. The applicants may propose to develop only the south half of this loop, with a connection then being made through the railroad tunnel and onto the property to the north which is also controlled by Ryan Construction. In addition, the Park/Open Space corridor along Bluff Creek, including the mature stand of trees, will be preserved. The Park and Recreation Commission will be reviewing this proposal in September. Chanhassen Business Center Ryan Construction December 4 , 1991 Page 22 7 . Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Finding. This provision of the PUD district is not applicable to this proposal . 8 . Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. Ryan Construction intends to pursue the use of railroad spur lines for Lots 2 , 4, 6 and 7 during the preliminary design stage. The applicants are proposing energy conservation for the buildings in two ways. First, earth mounding will help shield the buildings from the seasonal weather extremes. Secondly, architectural treatment of the building will attempt to capture the most efficient and effective design related to energy conservation. The lighting fixtures selected for use in the parking lot areas and on the public streets will be outfitted with an energy saving type of lamp. Additionally, they will include photo electric cells to turn them on/off automatically. 9. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Finding. The main access to the site is off of Audubon Road. Designated as a collector street by the City Comprehensive Plan, it was upgraded last year. Traffic improvements such as turn lanes that may be warranted to support the project will be recommended as a condition of approval . This road is a Carver County Collector. All access for the lots will be from the proposed extension of Lake Drive West. The applicants are requesting to have access onto Audubon from Lot 1. The traffic study will also review this proposal . STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the PUD Preliminary Plan for the Chanhassen Business Center be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Final PUD plan approval be subject to the 30 day comment period after public notice of publication of the EAW in the EQB Monitor and a finding by the City Council that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. 2 . The applicant will be required to pay park dedication ($3 , 500. 00/acre) and trail fees ($833 . 00/acre) in the development contract. No development shall occur on Outlot A as it shall be preserved as open space. The trail system shall be required to loop even if it is on a temporary basis. 3 . The development standards as proposed by staff shall be incorporated into the PUD development guide for the Business Center. 4 . Site plan approval from the city will need to be obtained for each lot as development is proposed. 5. Provide an additional 17 feet of right-of-way along the westerly side of Audubon Road throughout the plat. Provide the 20 foot wide drainage and utility easements over the proposed sewer and water lines outside the road right-of-way. - Provide a 20 foot drainage and utility easement for the sanitary sewer proposed along the west side of Audubon Road lying south of the proposed main entrance. 6. The main entrance street shall be named Lake Drive West consistent with the future extension of Lake Drive West east of Audubon Road. If a curb cut is allowed for Lot 1 on to Audubon Road, it shall be located a minimum of 500 feet north of the proposed main entrance (Lake Drive) and provide for a deceleration lane. 7 . Provide the City Engineering Department with storm sewer calculations designed for a 10-year storm event and ponding calculations to show that the ponds will retain a 100-year storm event and will discharge at the predeveloped runoff rate. Data shall be provided on nutrient removal capacity of all ponds for review and approval by the City. A secondary retention pond should be constructed for the northerly 15 acres of the site which drain to and parallel of the railroad tracks (Lots 4 and 6) . 8 . The applicant shall petition the City and provide a $12 , 000 escrow for preparation of a feasibility report for the extension of a trunk sewer line to service Phase II of the site which will be refunded upon project approval and authorization by the City Council. 9 . If only Phase I of the site is graded, silt fence shall be incorporated along the perimeter of the construction limits and if the entire site is graded, Type III erosion control shall be installed and maintained along the westerly perimeter of the construction limits. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulched, sod or wood-fiber blanket within two weeks of site grading or before November 15, 1992 , except in areas where utilities and streets will be constructed yet that year. Areas altered with a slope of 3 : 1 or greater must be restored Kate Aanenson November 18, 1991 Page 24 with sod or wood-fiber blanket. As a part of the erosion control measures, the applicant shall be required to remove any materials that enter into Bluff Creek. 10. The watermain loop between Lots 8 and 9 shall be extended to within 10 feet of the southerly property line and then proceed east and parallel to the south property line back to Audubon Road. 11. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with the calculations estimating the capacity of the sanitary sewer line through Lake Susan Hills West development and the predicted flows each lot will generate. A covenant regulating the amount of discharge from Phase I shall be placed in the title of each parcel as well as in the development contract to ensure that flows will not exceed capacity limitations downstream. If feasible, the sanitary sewer lines in Phase I should be switched to flow into the trunk sanitary sewer system proposed for Phase II. 12 . Inside slopes of the retention ponds shall be reduced to a minimum of 4 : 1. 13 . As a condition of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee construction of the improvements. 14 . The developer shall construct the utility and street improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the city' s standard specifications and shall prepare final plans and specifications and submit for city approval . Project specifications shall incorporate the city's standard specifications. The developer shall acquire utility construction permits from the PCA and Minnesota Department of Health. 15. The developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Watershed District, DNR and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with all conditions of the permits. Drainage plans shall be revised as outlined in the approved staff report and shall be resubmitted to City staff for approval. The applicant shall obtain permission/permit from the railroad authority for all grading activities within the railroad property. 16. The developer shall incorporate street lights into the street construction plans. The street lights should be installed at 150 to 200 foot intervals. The street lights shall be designed consistent with existing lighting on Audubon Road. A 250-watt contemporary low-profile rectilinear-rectangular style lighting fixture with pressure lamps mounted on a 25- foot high corten steel pole (see Attachment #2) . Kate Aanenson November 18, 1991 Page 25 18 . The entire tract of land development shall be assessed for the future trunk sewer system to be built for Phase II (Lots 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12) . 19. The Developer shall be responsible for 36% of the costs for traffic signals at Audubon and T.H. 5. 20. The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and offices as defined in the PUD ordinance. 21. Truck transfer terminals shall be prohibited from this project. 22 . All parcels located along Audubon Road contain at least 50% of their total floor area in office space and that the office components of the building be oriented towards the exterior of the PUD. 23 . Building materials and designs shall be: a. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block. b. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. c. Stone shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. d. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or precast, and shall be finished in stone, textured or coated. e. 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. f. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. g. 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. Kate Aanenson November 18 , 1991 Page 26 h. Large unadorned walls shall be prohibited. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. i. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures for all developments in the Business Center. 24 . All freestanding signs be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. a. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign located near the driveway into the private site. b. All signs require a separate permit. c. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. d. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. 25 . The street lights should be designed consistent with the existing lighting along Audubon Road. a. A decorative, shoebox fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. b. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. c. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level should be no more than candle at the property line. 26. An additional 17 feet of right-of-way on Audubon Road is required. Lake Drive West shall have a 60 foot right-of-way. The right-of-way shall be 80 feet from the intersection of Audubon Road to the short cul-de-sac off of Lake Drive West. The radius on the curbs at Audubon Road shall be 30 feet. 27 . The entrance drive to Lot 1 be moved to the north (approximately 500 feet north of Lake Drive West so that it aligns with the existing drive to the east of the Stockdale property) . Kate Aanenson November 18, 1991 Page 27 28 . The city shall work with MnDOT to request that a traffic signal be installed to coincide with the completion of Phase I of construction. ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo from Dave Hempel. 2 . Memo from Todd Hoffman. 3 . Letter from DNR. 4 . EAW. 5. Narrative document. 6. Traffic report. PC DATE: 11/2/92 `" ciTY 0f CHANHASSEN CC DATE: 1/11/93 r CASE #: 92-6 PUD By: Aanenson/vc STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conceptual Development Plan for Rezoning 178 Acres of Property from A-2, Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development for Gateway West Business Park Z Q LOCATION: SE quadrant of Hwys. 5 and 41 and NW quadrant of West 82nd Street and Hwy. 41, Gateway West Business Park. CL APPLICANT: Opus Corporation Q 800 Opus Center 9900 Bren Road East Minnetonka, MN 55343 PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estate ACREAGE: 178 acres DENSITY: Not Applicable ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - A-2; vacant S - A-2; vacant QE - A-2; vacant W - A-2; Minnesota Landscape Arboretum WATER AND SEWER: Water and sewer will be available with Phase II of Upper w Bluff Creek Trunk Improvement Project. I' PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: This site has varied topography, including 22 acres of wetland and 10 acres of upland wooded vegetation. There are 3 existing homes on the subject site. One will be removed and the other 2 homes are shown as exemptions. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: OI, Office Industrial Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY This item appeared before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1992, for conceptual review. At that time the Planning Commission recommended tabling this item until issues raised in the — staff report and the public hearing could be addressed. One of the major issues of concern was the use west on Highway 41 and adjacent to the Arboretum. The applicants have made modifications to the concept plan as well as further articulated the uses proposed for the rest of the property including Lot 1, the 29 acre parcel. The proposal was also reviewed by the Highway 5 Task Force and their input was gained. Gateway Partners Limited Partnership, Opus Corporation, is proposing to develop a 178 acre office/light industrial park. The subject site is located south of Highway 5 along Highway 41, south to the Chaska border, and west to the Arboretum. The applicants are requesting conceptual PUD approval at this time. This proposal includes 22 lots with approximately 963,000 square feet of building square footage. There is also a 29 acre lot located at the intersection of Hwys. 5 and 41 for which 4 alternatives have been proposed. This property is currently zoned A-2. Staff is recommending a PUD zoning for the site. Because this project is located on one of the major gateways to the city, the design and layout of this proposal is of utmost importance to the image of the City of Chanhassen. Concern about community image is part of undertaking the Highway 5 Corridor Plan. The Highway 5 Task — Force has been meeting to develop the plan. The purpose of this plan is to review the uses allowed in the highway corridor, site design standards, location and design of Hwy. 5 and proposed frontage roads, trails and gateway treatments. Staff recommended that the applicant _ meet with the Highway 5 Task Force for their review of this proposal. This meeting took place on November 12, 1992. The applicant reviewed the proposal and addressed the questions and issues that were raised. Again, the uses proposed for Lot 1 and the uses adjacent to the — Arboretum were of paramount concern. There were concerns about visual and noise pollution, land use and traffic generation. Lot 1 of this proposal, which is 29 acres in size, is being proposed with four alternatives. This lot is located on the southeast corner of Highways 5 and 41. The applicants have not proposed any definite uses for the corner at this time. Due to their belief that this is a major corner, they — wish to reserve their options until some point in the future when the most optimal use can be determined. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for light industrial and office uses. Staff is uncomfortable with some of the uses proposed, in particular, a major shopping center. We would like to keep the door open for innovative uses of this site. It is probably the premier location in the corridor and could support a corporate headquarters or some other campus type of use. Staff is recommending that this 29-acre lot be platted as a part of this office/industrial park. This will include showing how this area will be accessed by internal roads. Of the four alternatives proposed, office/industrial headquarters, hotel/apartments, retail and institutional, it Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 3 appears that only the office/industrial headquarters is a probable use at this time. We are recommending that the retail option be deleted. The site plan shows approximately 8.8 acres of support commercial. In the PUD Ordinance, it states that the "PUD shall be used for the use or uses for which the site is designated in the comprehensive plan, except that the city may permit up to twenty-five (25%) percent of the gross . floor area of all buildings in a PUD to be used for land uses for which the site is not designated in the comprehensive plan, if the City Council finds that such uses are in the best interest of the city and is consistent with the requirements of this section." Staff feels that support commercial may be appropriate, but on a limited scale. A restaurant or convenience store may be a permitted support commercial use; but a 50,000 square foot building for retail commercial would not be. The applicants have proposed three uses for the commercial lots. These uses include a financial institution for Lot 7; day care, restaurant or business service for Lot 21; and a service station for Lot 22. Staff is recommending that the support commercial be limited to a line that follows the westerly extension of the wetland in Lot 21. There are 22 acres of wetland and 10 acres of upland vegetation. A wetland alteration permit will be required. The majority of the wetland and wooded areas are found on Lots 17 and 18, which are being proposed for park dedication. The revised concept as proposed still does not meet the recommendations of the Park and Recreation Commission. An additional 1.5 acres of property is requested along the westerly portion of Lot 14. Because this project exceeds 750,000 gross square feet of new office/industrial development, an Environmental Impact Statement is mandatory. The city will be the Responsible Governmental Unit. The EIS will provide an opportunity to develop detailed information about the project and potential impacts. The proposal shows a water tower located on the easterly portion of the Wrase's property. The applicants have made an offer to buy the Wrase's property but they have not come to terms on the value of the property. Staff has proposed that the city buy the Wrase's property allowing them to live on the site and thus allowing the water tower to be placed on the rear portion of the property. The Wrase's are uncertain if this proposal is acceptable to them at this time. The other option would be to move the water tower to another site and leave the Wrase's property alone. In speaking with the Wrase's, they would like to remain living in their house. With the city owning the entire 3 plus acre lot they could remain living in their home. The applicants will have to work with the Engineering Department to ensure the appropriate location for this water tower as well as acceptance and purchase of the Wrase's property (if they are agreeable to this location). The city would buy the Wrase property only if this project is a TIF (Tax Increment Financing) project. Staff is recommending that this property be developed as a PUD. While this site warrants a PUD zoning for reasons such as traffic management,comprehensive storm water management, wetland protection, architectural control, etc., this plan as proposed needs to be further developed before staff can make a recommendation on the proposed design. The site size, prominence and Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 4 — potential for coordinated development are major opportunities to create a high quality, sensitively designed corporate environment. This proposal and the review process will allow for the incorporation of numerous refinements. Thus, we view the concept as the beginning of the design process, not its end. Staff is recommending that the PUD concept be approved. We have provided a list of concerns in the report and expect the applicant to respond to them along with those raised by the Planning Commission/City Council, Hwy. 5 Task Force, and through the EIS procedure. Since the first concept plan, the proposal has been further defined with a better narrative. At this time, conceptual approval is required to allow for additional standards, traffic, wetlands, etc. to be developed. These studies will guide staff as to what other issues need to be addressed. — Site Characteristics The property is approximately 178 acres in size located south of Highway 5. Highway 41 splits the property into two parcels. The westerly parcel is 28 acres and the easterly parcel is 150 acres. The property is currently cultivated with one farm homestead along Highway 5. This home will be removed from the site. There are two other adjacent properties being exempted from this project. There is a farm homestead along Highway 41, owned by the Wrase's, that is 3.15 acres in size. The other residence is owned by the Paulson's and is 10 acres in size. Staff — is recommending that these exemptions be included in the proposed layout of this project. Future street and utility access to these sites need to be assured. If possible, they should be acquired. The applicants have proposed moving the water tower to the Wrase's property on Lot 7. More than likely a total condemnation of the site would be necessary, if this is not acceptable, staff would recommend moving the site to another location and leaving the Wrase site as an exemption for this proposal. This site has varied topography with rolling hills, wetlands and wooded areas. There are 22 acres — of wetlands. They are mostly found in the eastern edge of the property. A large wetland, 6.5 acres in size, is located west of Highway 41. Ten acres of upland woods consisting of maple, basswood and oak is located in the southeast corner of the 150-acre parcel. The plan proposes to include the largest wetland and wooded area (Lots 17 and 18) into a 29 acre park. This property is currently zoned A-2 (Agricultural Estate). The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for a future land use of office/industrial. The proposed land uses, office/industrial, includes those properties exempted from this proposal. The University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is the adjacent property use to the west of this proposal and it is zoned A-2. Property to the north of this site it is zoned A-2 and this area is currently cultivated; to the east it is also zoned A-2 and is a cultivated field. The property to the south is bordered by 82nd Street and the Chaska city limits. The property in Chaska has been developed as an industrial park. — Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 5 Overview The city is currently in the process of developing a Corridor Plan for Highway 5. Barton Aschman is the consulting firm hired by the city to spearhead this planning process. The Highway 5 Task Force has been meeting to assist in the development of this plan. Some of the goals and objectives of the Highway 5 Corridor Plan are: - consider amendments to the Comprehensive Plan (future zoning), if necessary; site design criteria including landscaping, parcel access, building orientation, preservation of natural terrain and vegetation, parking lot placement and configuration, placement and screening of loading facilities, and pedestrian amenities; location and design of proposed frontage roads; - bicycle trails and pedestrian crossings; gateway treatments; - work with MnDOT on final refining the design of the highway extension. One of the major issues of the Highway 5 Corridor Plan is to develop the frontage/parkway roads that will run on either side of the highway. The location of the southern frontage road directly impacts the design of this project. The proposal shows a full access onto Highway 5 approximately 1600 feet east of the intersection of Highway 5 and Highway 41. The applicants presented their proposal to the Highway 5 Task Force. The issues discussed by the Task Force were whether or not there should be any commercial at 82nd Street and Highway 41, the uses adjacent to the Arboretum and the proposal for Lot 1. The Task Force felt that of the uses proposed for Lot 1, the office/industrial headquarters is the only probable one at this time, the retail commercial was definitely unacceptable. There was concern voiced by the Task Force about the uses adjacent to the Arboretum. This proposal calls for an industrial use that would have limited night and weekend hours. Access to the Paulson property was relocated with this site plan. Staff is recommending that if the future use of the Paulson property is anything but residential, the access should be relocated to where the current easement is. At this time, staff is recommending the Highway 5 Task Force further visit the issue of commercial zoning on the western portion of the Highway 5 Corridor. At the November 12th meeting of the Task Force, there was a discussion that neighborhood commercial zoning may be warranted in this area. The Task Force needs to determine whether neighborhood commercial should be located at the corner of Highways 5 and 41 or 82nd and Highway 41. This project will require a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The mandatory requirement applies when there is new construction of 750,000 square feet of gross floor area. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 6 This project proposes a total of 911,100 square feet, excluding the 29 acres for future development. The city will be the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). As a part of the EIS, staff is recommending a study of the traffic issues for this area be completed. Staff also recommends that the applicant reimburse the city for the cost of this study. _ The sewer for this area will be serviced by Phase II of the Upper Bluff Creek trunk sanitary sewer and water improvements. The southwest portion of this site will be serviced via gravity sewer line from Chaska. This past year, the city took a proactive role in a joint Chanhassen/Chaska Water and Sanitary Sewer Agreement. This agreement provides for an area in Chanhassen to have water and sewer service provided through the Chaska utility system. This — service area, on the southern portion of the site, will be the area the applicants are proposing to develop first. The Comprehensive Plan shows a buffer around the Paulson's home because it is a residential use adjacent to an office/industrial use. Because the Paulson property is guided for office/ industrial, a buffer may not be necessary. Staff would recommend that the use and timing of the — development of Lot 20 be considered before the buffer is required. The original narrative prepared by the applicant addressed, to staff's satisfaction, the issue of — adjacent westerly neighbor, the Arboretum. The applicants have stated in their narrative that "the development adjacent to the Arboretum has been designed to provide minimal amount of development by locating both a multiple family development and an office/industrial development in the areas close to the Arboretum. The designs of the facilities would locate any parking away from the Arboretum. Loading and other activities would be carefully screened from the Arboretum by the building itself." The applicants have also stated that the noise from adjacent development would come from Highway 41 and that various on-site noise from the development would have a minimal effect on the Arboretum. They further suggested that lowering Highway 41 will help minimize the noise impact that exists today. Staff is recommending that the Highway 5 Task Force review the proposed future uses. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone 178.3 acres from A2, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit 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 Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 7 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. It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are realized as evaluated against the following criteria: Planned unit developments are to encourage the following: 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. There are 10 acres of upland wooded vegetation including box elder, willows and green ash on the eastern portion of this site. This wooded area is adjacent to a wetland that will be preserved through dedication of 29 acres to the city. In addition, there will be a 30 plus acre site with the vast majority of the site left in it natural state. 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Finding. This is a large area of property, and when it is approved for subdivision, it will have a master transportation plan, and a sewer, water and storm water management plan. If each of these parcels were to develop separately, they would not have the comprehensive utility and traffic plans. It will also provide a cohesive and unified design theme at one of the major entrances to the city. 3. High quality design and design compatibility with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community. Finding. The applicants are proposing to submit individual building plans for each development lot. The city will utilize its normal site plan review procedure for each. The approved PUD documents will establish firm guidelines to ensure that the site is developed in a consistent and well-planned manner so that a higher quality of development will result. Note - plans need refinement to reflect highway exposure and Arboretum issues. 4. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 8 — Finding. The Comprehensive Plan shows a required landscaping buffer with the residential property to the east. The majority of this property is a wetland. Therefore, staff feels that the existing topography meets the buffering requirement. The Comprehensive Plan shows a buffer along the Paulson property located west of Hwy. 41. Because the Comprehensive Plan guides this property for office/industrial, staff would recommend that buffering be considered at the time this lot is developed. The plan was revised to show multi-family on Lot 19. The uses proposed need to be further defined with the guidance of the Highway 5 Task Force. 5. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for office and light industrial use. The applicants are proposing a business park. They are requesting a mixed use area that may _ be commercial, educational, office or industrial. Staff is recommending that support commercial may be approved if recommended by the Planning Commission and City Council as defined in the PUD Ordinance. The location and uses proposed adjacent to _ the Arboretum should be consistent with the goals of the Highway 5 Task Force. Of the four proposals for Lot 1, the retail commercial is unacceptable at this time and should be eliminated. 6. Parks and Open Space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that a community park be — developed on the site. This park would require dedication in excess of the 29 acres, which includes Lots 17 and 18 as proposed by the applicants. The revised site plan does not reflect the desires of the Park and Recreation Commission. Additional acreage is — requested from the easterly portion of Lot 14. 7. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. — Finding. Not applicable to this proposal. 8. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. The conservation element will evolve as the wetlands, roads and building orientation are established as part of the standards for this PUD zone that staff will be developing. Provisions for ultimate service of the site by Southwest Metro Transit should be incorporated into the plan. _ Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 9 9. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Finding. Staff is recommending a traffic study be completed for this site. The applicants shall reimburse the city the cost for this study. 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 flexible standards allow the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for modifying the standards, the city will receive the following (after outlined plan modifications have been incorporated): • Consistency with Comprehensive Plan; • Screening of undesirable views of loading and parking areas; • Corridor sensitivity on Highways 5 and 41, including building orientation; • Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands and trees); • Improved architectural standards including, uniform signage and architecture; • Traffic management and design techniques to reduce potential for traffic conflicts; • Improved pretreatment of storm water; • Gateway treatments; • Design modifications to protect the integrity of the Arboretum. CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL General Site Plan/Architecture The applicant has stated that the standards for this development are critical to the quality of the business park. Opus has developed many such parks in the past, and proposes to use similar standards and development techniques for the Gateway Business Park. The applicant proposes that this business park will be identified at its major entrances with monuments and enhanced landscaping. In addition, to the entrances on Highway 5, Highway 41 and West 82nd Street, special attention will be given to the perimeter along the highways. The applicants have stated that they will be careful that the development of parking and loading areas will be screened with landscaping. Each site will have to proceed through site plan review. The applicants have stated in their narrative that they anticipate that typical buildings within the business park will average approximately 15-20 percent office and 80-85 percent industrial/manufacturing warehousing. Staff is proposing that those buildings that have Highway 5 or Highway 41 frontage shall have greeted design standards. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 — Page 10 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS a. Intent The applicants are proposing to develop 178 acres into 22 lots that would form a business park. Staff envisions this area as a well-conceived, cohesive light industrial office park. This area has " a varied topography, wetlands and upland woods. It is bordered by two major collectors, Highway 5 and 41. The applicants are proposing that 50% of the highway frontage will be open space. It is adjacent to the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. All of these features should be designed to make this site an assent to the community. — Some of the site design issues include buildings of brick or better material on visible sites, screening of parking lots and loading areas, orientation of buildings along Highways 5 and 41, and the natural terrain and vegetation should be preserved. Staff feels that a PUD zone is the appropriate zoning for this area to ensure a higher quality of — design and a more sensitive development. The plan as proposed needs to be further developed to reflect these concerns. b. Permitted Uses The proposal calls for office, warehouse, manufacturing, and some support commercial. The plan has a 29 acre lot (Lot 1) which shows four alternatives. The comprehensive plan guides this area for light industrial and office use. Staff is recommending that some support commercial be approved as part of the permitted uses for the zone. They should be limited in scope to support — and not free-standing retail commercial. Of the four alternatives for Lot 1, it appears that the office/industrial headquarters is the only probable one at this time. The industrial uses shall be limited to those uses that do not emit smoke, have no outdoor storage, result in excessive truck. traffic, and do not emit excessive noise and vibrations. Office uses should be the primary use against Highways 5 and 41. c. Setbacks The plan, as proposed at this time, is too conceptual to review the setbacks, although staff will be working with the Highway 5 Task Force to develop appropriate setbacks for Highways 5 and 41. The applicants are proposing a 50 foot setback from Hwys. 5 and 41. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box Not able to review at the time of conceptual approval. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 11 e. Building Materials and Design Because this will be a large business park, there may be many types of building materials being used. One of the major concerns that staff will be addressing is building orientation along the highways. Lot 16, as proposed, shows a 30-foot front setback along Highway 5. Staff feels this is too close to the highway. Staff will also be looking at which uses, office/industrial, should be adjacent to the highways. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be used. The block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted or broken face. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or pre-cast, and shall be finished in stone textured or coated. Metal standing seam siding may be used as support materials, curtain wall on office components, or as a roofing material. All roof top equipment shall be screened, however, wood screen fences are prohibited. f. Site landscaping Screening Again, because this is a large business park, the landscaping will be a significant unifying element. An overall landscaping plan needs to be developed. This plan shall take into consideration the adjacency of the Arboretum, views from Highways 5 and 41, and gateway treatments. All lots with in the PUD will be required to submit a landscaping plan consistent with an overall landscaping theme. The applicants are proposing a European round landscaping feature at the intersection of Hwys. 5 and 41. The city needs to be proactive in this area. A design competition or the city should retain a consultant to work with the Hwy. 5 Task Force to help in defining this design feature. All outdoor storage shall be prohibited. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of- ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage The PUD shall develop a cohesive sign theme consistent with the building architecture. The signs shall be limited to one monument or ground sign only on each lot. In addition, wall signs shall be permitted to no more than two per street frontage. There shall be no freestanding/pylon signs permitted, especially along Highways 5 and 41. h. Lighting Lighting again should be consistent throughout the business park. This would include street lighting and building lighting. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 12 Compliance Table Acres Uses Bldg. S.F. Parking Lot 1 29.8 Office/Industrial Institutional Hotel/Apart's Retail Comm Lot 2 6.8 Industrial 90,000 209 Lot 3 5.6 Industrial 45,000 150 Lot 4 1.3 Water Tower Lot 5 7.4 Industrial 80,000 254 Lot 6 5.3 Industrial 63,000 180 Lot 7 5.6 Industrial 60,000 197 Lot 8 2.0 Support Comm 10,000 37 Lot 9 4.9 Industrial 62,000 179 Lot 10 5.6 Industrial 85,000 232 Lot 11 6.4 Industrial 48,000 139 Lot 12 7.0 Industrial 70,000 200 Lot 13 5.1 Industrial 42,000 121 Lot 14 6.7 Industrial 63,000 185 Lot 15 3.7 Industrial 30,000 86 Lot 16 7.8 Industrial 80,000 232 Lot 17 5.9 Park Lot 18 24 Park Lot 19 9.05 Industrial 90,000 290 Lot 20 2.2 Support Comm 9,000 103 Lot 21 1.6 Support Comm 4,000 41 Lot 22 13.4 Industrial 50,000 165 Total 963,000 S.F.* 3,000 stalls '` TotaI excludes any development on Lot 1 which they are proposing as mixed use. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 13 Streets /Access The proposed street layout is fairly consistent with the City's comprehensive roadway system. The access points to Trunk Highways 41 and 5 are subject to MnDOT approval, which apparently the applicant has been in contact with. There is a home on 10 acres, the Paulson's, located west of Hwy. 41. This home has access off 82nd Street via an easement. This easement is shown as a 60 foot right-of-way. Staff is recommending that this easement (shown as a cul- de-sac) be used as the public street to serve Lots 19, 20, and 21. A concept plan of the future roadway alignment would be compatible with the topography on the adjacent parcel. The revised concept plan shows access to the Paulson property along the Arboretum, this is acceptable only if the Paulson property is to remain residential. Another roadway alignment concern is between Lots 10 and 11 where the proposed road connects to existing 82nd Street. The proposed roadway is skewed and should be redesigned to be perpendicular with 82nd Street. The concept proposes a number of median islands with landscaping. It is recommended that these islands be eliminated except those necessary for traffic delineation. The applicant should explore the use of an entry-type monument on one of the corner lots at the two main entrance points of the trunk highways, and not on any internal streets. This will also reduce the amount of landscape maintenance required by the City as the corner monument will most likely be maintained by the property owner. A traffic study should be prepared either by the applicant or by the City, with the applicant responsible for all costs to define traffic warrants for signalization, turn lanes, etc. The concept plan does not indicate the right-of-way width. The roadway should be constructed in accordance with the City's designs for industrial/commercial type use. The road right-of-way should be a minimum of 80 feet wide with a 36 to 52-foot wide pavement section. Typically, this collector- type roadway system would include a sidewalk or trail system adjacent to the street within the right-of-way. With this type of use, it would be prudent to include a sidewalk or trail system to promote pedestrian traffic through and around the park system. The traffic study should also look at where the location of the major entrance off of Hwy. 41 should be. A light should be considered at 82nd and Hwy. 41 and whether the other access should be right-in/out only. The applicants have stated that they have worked with MNDOT to secure approval of the proposed access points. The proposal also calls for the lowering of Highway 41 at the crest before the intersection of Highways 5 and 41. They are proposing that the lowering of the road take place in conjunction with the building of the water tower. Landscaping and Tree Preservation The eastern portion of property is covered with vegetation consisting of mainly box elder, willow and green ash. This area will not be altered as it falls into lots with wetlands which are being proposed for park dedication. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 14 Landscaping, especially the treatment along Highways 5 and 41, should be given special — consideration. The landscape design needs to include consideration of the adjacent Arboretum. Again, the Highway 5 Corridor Plan will be addressing this area as the plan develops. This is another issue the Highway 5 Task Force should review. — Wetlands There are 22 acres of wetlands located on the project site. The wetlands are found primarily on the eastern edge of the property, adjacent to a larger wetland to the east that the DNR has jurisdiction over. These wetlands are proposed to be preserved with the preservation of the adjacent upland hardwood. A portion of the wetland in Lot 17 in the northeast corner of the site needs to be filled for roadway purposes. This road is the proposed east/west collector frontage road that needs to cross the wetland area. Also, a small wetland between Lots 10 and 11 is proposed to be filled for a roadway. The mitigation for filling these wetlands is a proposed wetland and pond to be established _ directly adjacent to the wetland on Lot 18. The mitigation will be at least 2:1. The wetland in Lot 1 will be left, but may be required for Hwy. 5 dedication. The wetland found in Lot 22 runs north and south through the entire lot. The applicants feel it is a marginal wetland, and proposes to fill the southern portion of it and create an enhanced wetland on the remainder. A portion of this wetland was filled in the past with the construction of West 82nd Street. The City is currently reviewing amendments to the Wetland Protection Ordinance. These amendments were initiated due to the new state regulation and new information on treatment and protection of wetlands. The applicants will have to provide further detail on the type of wetland and alterations proposed. This process will require a wetland alteration permit. Grading and Drainage — The concept plan does not provide any preliminary grades for the site. It is assumed, due to the topography, that extensive grading will be necessary. Appropriate erosion control measures — should be employed in accordance with the Best Management Practices Handbook. The concept plan, again, does not provide data in regards to storm runoff from the development. It is assumed that the wetlands or pond area will be utilized for storm water retention. The applicant — should be aware of the City's water quality standards and 100-year flood volume storage requirements in accordance with the subdivision codes. Pretreatment and retention ponds may result in reduced size of lots or potential elimination of a lot. Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 15 Utilities Sanitary sewer and water service will be available to the site from Phase H of the Upper Bluff Creek trunk sanitary sewer and water improvements. The southwest portion of this site may be serviced via a gravity sewer line from Chaska. This site contains a very high knoll adjacent to Trunk Highway 41. The City has programmed into its comprehensive water study to construct a future 2 million gallon elevated storage reservoir in this knoll. The applicant is proposing Lot 4 for the City's future water tower, although the location proposed is not in accordance with the City's comprehensive water plan. The water tower should be located at the highest elevation, preferably 500 feet southwest of its current proposed location on the concept plan. Although there has been some discussion with regard to lowering State Trunk Highway 41 to improve the grade for truck traffic, this may result in grading this site which, in turn, would lower the highest point elevation. The applicant should be aware that the City is intending to utilize the highest point on the site to install a future water reservoir tank to service this quadrant of the City. Park and Recreation The applicants have proposed dedicating two lots (Lots 17 and 18) which includes 29 acres for park dedication. The Park and Recreation Commission met on September 22, 1992, to review this proposal. The Commission recommended that the applicant provide a community park site. This site should be sufficient is size and suitable character and topography to include a natural vista, sufficient area for viewing and picnicking, a designated 8 foot wide bituminous trail loop with multiple access points connecting the wooded and upland portions of the site, with picnicking and viewing areas, and the street plan and sidewalks. The park should be sufficient in area for the possible construction of two ballfields with 300 foot fences, a basketball court, a double tennis court, and sufficient upland areas to buffer these amenities. This would require the designation of considerable more park property than called out on the sketch plan. However, it is desirable that all park and components be contiguous. This park shall also maintain considerable road frontage to afford visible impact as well as allowing for sufficient ingress/egress. The revised site plan does not reflect the additional usable acreage the Park and Recreation Commission is requesting. The Commission would like additional property on the easterly portion of Lot 14. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission grant conceptual approval to Gateway West Business Park PUD #92-6 as shown in site plans dated September 8, 1992, subject to the following conditions: Gateway West Business Park October 7, 1992 Page 16 1. The Highway 5 Task Force shall further define the uses permitted adjacent to the Arboretum. 2. A future roadway alignment should be explored through the parcel east of the proposed development to see if the proposed roadway is compatible with adjacent topography. 3. The applicant should be aware of the City's water quality standard and 100-year flood volume storage requirements in accordance with the City's subdivision code. 4. The applicant should coordinate with the City's engineering consultant, Bonestroo, for location of the water tower site. 5. Completion of an Environmental Impact Statement. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the cost of a traffic study for the project. 6. The applicant shall secure a Wetland Alteration Permit. 7. Dedication of park land as requested by the Park and Recreation Commission. 8. Delete shopping center option from Lot 1. 9. Work to incorporate two exemptions (Wrase and Paulson properties) to the site. 10. Highway 5 Task Force give appropriate recommendations for uses west of Hwy. 41. 11. The City Council should consider gaining input on the design of Hwy. 5 and 41 intersection area. " ATTACHMENTS 1. Narrative from Opus dated November 23, 1992. 2. Memo from Dave Hempel dated September 24, 1992. 3. Memo from Todd Hoffman dated November 25, 1992. 4. Planning Commission minutes dated October 7, 1992. 5. Site Plan dated November 4, 1992. r No L' DEVELOPMENT NARRATIVE CITY ot. GATEWAY WEST BUSINESS PARK CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA PUD CONCEPT PLAN November 1992 Property Description The total property consists of approximately 178 acres, of which 150 acres are south of Highway 5 and east of State Highway 41. The westerly parcel is 28 acres located directly west of Highway 41 and north of 82nd Street. The property is under cultivation with one farm homestead along Highway 5. Approximately 22 acres of the land has been mapped as wetlands by the City of Chanhassen. Ten acres of upland woods consisting of maple, basswood, and oak are located in the southeast corner of the 150-acre parcel. The property has about 1/2 mile of frontage along Highway 5, 3/4 mile of frontage along Highway 41, and approximately 1/2 mile of frontage along 82nd Street. Wetlands Twenty-two acres of wetlands have been mapped on the property and are shown on the Existing Conditions map. The wetlands are as follows: a-16-4(2) 4.7 acres a-16-7(1) 7.2 acres a-16-7(2) .2 acres a-16-7(3) 2.5 acres a-16-7(4) .4 acres a-16-6(1) .2 acres a-16-1(2) 6.5 acres a-16-2(1) .4 acres The wetlands are found primarily on the eastern edge of the property, adjacent to the larger wetland and drainage system that continues to the east. The area to the east is also covered with vegetation consisting of primarily boxelder, willow and green ash. These wetlands are proposed to be preserved with the preservation of the adjacent upland hardwoods. The unique character of this area forms a natural preserve suitable for public park purposes. A portion of A-16-4(2) wetland in the northeast corner of the site needs to be filled for roadway purposes. The road is the proposed east-west collector frontage road that needs to traverse the wetland area to the east to complete the City's comprehensive transportation plan. Approximately, an acre would be filled depending on final plans. Also, a small wetland A-16-6(1) on the southern edge of the property also needs to be filled for the alignment of the collector. To mitigate the filling of these wetlands, we are proposing a wetland and pond to be established directly adjacent to A-16-7(1) wetland and to be part of the proposed park system along the eastern edge of the property. The mitigation is proposed at 2:1. Wetland A-16-2(1), which is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Highways 41 and 5, is proposed to remain the same. It is quite possible that the Highway Department may need to amend this wetland as future highway improvements are made. F1 le Copy Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 2 Wetland A-16-1(2) runs north and south through the property west of Highway 41. This has been described by the City's wetland specialists as very marginal and would need enhancement to bring it back to a wetland condition. We propose to fill the southern portion of the wetland and create an enhanced wetland on the remainder. A portion of this wetland was filled in the past with the construction of 82nd Street in preparation for development to the south. The design of the eventual storm sewer system will include ponding for the purposes of catching water before it enters the wetland systems. Specific wetland mitigation details will accompany the preliminary grading plan and the preliminary plat. Existing Land Use All of the property is presently used for agricultural purposes —the residential home site on Highway 41 is an exception. The Gateway Partners are presently negotiating with the owner to include this property in the overall development. The University of Minnesota's Landscape Arboretum is located to the west of the property. To the south is the City of Chaska and primarily Industrial land uses. The boundary between the two cities is 82nd Street. At the southwest corner of 82nd Street, several single family homes located in Chaska are separated from the Nordic Track Site by public open space. — A large wetland complex running north-south from Highway 5 and drained by a rural drainage ditch is located to the east. County Road 117 is located east of that wetland. Undeveloped Agricultural land is located to the north of the property across Highway 5. Our concept plan shows that the proposed intersection with Highway 5 would serve the property to the north. The entrance to the north considers the location of the existing woods. The City of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as Industrial. The land use designation is consistent with the surrounding land uses and road system. The business park is located in a prominent area, important to both the City of Chanhassen and the City of Chaska. At the intersection of Highway 41 and 5, the City of Chanhassen has expressed concern about community image as a gateway to the City. We agree that careful consideration should be made as to the overall image of the proposed business park. Transportation Plan The City's Comprehensive Plan proposes an east-west collector road connecting 82nd Street east from Highway 41 to County Road 117 south of Highway 5. The plan also shows a north-south connector between 82nd Street and Highway 5. Our road circulation plan includes all of those connections and routes as indicated in the City's plan. 82nd Street serves development in Chanhassen as well as Chaska and curves to the south serving additional industrial land within the City of Chaska. It will directly serve the southern border of the proposed business park. Access to the interior road system includes one access onto Highway 5 and one access onto Highway 41. We have worked with MnDOT to confirm points of access. The access points have been determined to be appropriate distances from the intersection of Highways 5 and 41 to handle future traffic concerns. We are also anticipating a future safety improvement project on Highway 41 that would help eliminate the steep grade coming off of the Highways 5 and 41 intersection. MnDOT indicated that the steep grade slows truck traffic through the intersection, and a lowering of that grade would also improve overall capacity. The lowering of Highway 41 through the area would improve overall circulation and would better match the grades of future development in the business park. This work can be done in conjunction with the City's Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 3 future watermain and water tower project that are planned along the Highway 41 corridor. Arboretum Area The arboretum generally lies to the west of Highway 41 and abuts the proposed development in two areas. Most of the adjourning land to the arboretum is a 10 acre, single family homesite that has been built in Chanhassen on land to the north and west of the proposed development. This homesite also has the option, according to Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan, of developing with industrial uses. If the future development is to be industrial, we will then continue with the existing road easement between Lots 20 and 21. But, should the owner want to perpetuate the single family use, we would continue our proposal of building a new entrance driveway in a more secluded area along the western edge of the proposed development. This driveway would then form a wide buffered area to the Arboretum and the single family homes to the south in Chaska. This area would be landscaped and the proposed development on Lot 20 would be setback to accommodate this relocated driveway. The development adjacent to the Arboretum has been designed to provide minimal amount of development impact by locating both a multiple family residential development and an office/industrial development in the areas closest to the Arboretum. The designs of the facilities would locate parking away from the Arboretum. Loading and other activities would be fully screened from the Arboretum by the building itself. This open space setback with landscaping and the arrangement of the building and parking, will protect the quietude and the aesthetics as much as possible considering development will take place on adjacent property. The Arboretum also wishes to maintain the option of a future entrance off of Highway 41, halfway between 82nd street and Trunk Highway 5. This corresponds with our proposed entrances and we will provide necessary joint easements so that future option can take place. The Arboretum not only is concerned about aesthetics but also noise from development in the area. In our review of noise conditions, it is actually noise from State Highway 41 that will penetrate into the Arboretum the most. Various on-site noises from area development will have a minimal effect on the Arboretum. All development will adhere to City and State noise standards. In fact, the proposed rebuilding of Highway 41 through this area to minimize the steep grade on the Highway, will actually depress the Highway further from the natural lay of the land found in the Arboretum. This depression of the highway system will help minimize the noise impact that exists there today. The main land feature that connects the Arboretum with the proposed development is a wetland that will be largely preserved. This wetland provides the naturalized setting for the proposed multiple residential development on Lot 19. Proposed Land Use The Concept Plan illustrates the road system contemplated in the City's Comprehensive Plan facilitating the development of industrial lots along the collector road while preserving the eastern edge for park and natural area. The road system is developed to create T intersections, which form safe intersections for traffic. The _ T-intersections also focus business park visitors toward the amenities and future developed lots. This entrance experience is an important part of the image of the park and is incorporated in the design of the circulation system. Part of the road entrance design includes landscape islands to define traffic movements and create an enhanced image for the Business Park at critical points. Primary entrance points will be off of Highway 5 and 41 with a secondary entrance off 82nd Street. These Landscaped Islands will be maintained by the developer for 5 years and then turned over to the City, much like Downtown Chanhassen. The plan has developed into 22 lots, including Lots 17 and 18 for public park purposes. The park area is proposed to be approximately 33 acres in size. Lots 8, 21, and 22 are proposed to be the initial phase of Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 4 support-commercial for the industrial area. These uses may include a bank, service station, restaurant, daycare, or business service. Approximately 29 acres are in Lot 1, which is proposed as mixed use to be determined at a future time when the business park matures. This location is very prominent in the City of Chanhassen and should be held for the best use possible. Often the temptation is to develop the best sites first, however, we believe that it is to both the developer's and the City's advantage to hold onto this site for a mixed use development that could include office, specialized medical clinic, research center, educational facility, commercial, retail and other uses complementary to the business park and the City of Chanhassen. Four scenarios have been explored without a market dictating what the future may bring. These scenarios express only a few of the development possibilities for the site. Along Highway 41, Lot 7 is proposed to be the site for the City of Chanhassen's water tower. We will — work with the city to finalize the water tower location in anticipation that its design will be of high quality and a recognizable landmark. Overall, we anticipate the develop will consist of approximately 911,100 square feet of office/industrial and associated uses. A majority of the site will develop within the next 10 years, with the first phase of development beginning along 82nd Street on the southern edge of the property. The road system will be built as development moves northerly and to the east. The phasing works in unison with the installation of — utilities. It is anticipated that the southern portions of the site can be served through the City of Chaska, with the remainder of the site being served with a future extension of sewer from the southeast. Amenities Amenities and the standards for development are critical to the quality of the business park. Opus has — developed many such parks in the past and proposes to use similar standards and development techniques for the Gateway West Business Park. In order to integrate the business park into the natural surroundings and adjacent land uses to the east, the development plan indicates a 32.9 acre public park to include wetland and wooded areas for the purpose of public enjoyment and long-term preservation. The park area would extend from the wetlands and woods along Highway 5 to 82nd Street. As land is developed to the east, the City can add additional land to this planned park preserve system. The business park will be identified at its major entrances with monuments and enhanced landscaping. — These areas will be designed in conjunction with the traffic islands to create a prominent entrance and identifiable image for the area. Details of the amenity designs will accompany the preliminary plat for each phase of development. In addition to the entrances on Highway 5, Highway 41, and 82nd Street, special attention will be given to the perimeter along the highways. The perimeter plan includes plantings stretched out in a linear fashion, which is the typical street treatment. The use of tree clusters at key points will enhance the road character and still provide visibility to the attractive buildings within the park area. Also, care will be given to the development of parking and loading areas so that ample screening is provided to minimize the visual expanse of large parking areas lots. The perimeter plans will be completed as each area develops and based on the eventual design and reconstruction of adjacent highways. Each individual industrial site will develop according to specific site development standards that will be included in the development controls for the business park. These standards will include the design and location of entry drives and parking, buildings, signage, lighting, and site grading. The landscape treatment of each site will include boulevard plantings in public streets 6 feet from the curb, with emphasis on winter Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 5 attractiveness, spring blooming, and fall colors around the building and parking lots. Perennial plantings will be encouraged in highly visible locations to add more summer beauty throughout the park. Where appropriate, native grasses may be used as part of the landscape treatment. Architectural standards for buildings will be developed to cover building materials, utilities, screening, lighting, architectural design, loading and signage. These standards will discourage the use of outside storage, metal buildings, and other less desirable components of industrial development. Development Standards The standards we've developed at this Concept Plan Stage are general in nature but indicate the key areas that we believe are of concern to the city. Most important among these design standards will be the treatment of the perimeter of the property as viewed from Highway 5 and Highway 41. In addition to the expanded right-of-way that is being requested by MnDot, we propose a 50 foot open space corridor which will be the setback for buildings and parking lots along the State Highways. This corridor will be landscaped with trees and coordinated with an overall landscape approach that can include a special feature at the intersections of Highway 5 and 41. Our Master Plan suggests that the Arboretum participate in this development of coordinated feature as they control two of the corners of that intersection. Landscaping augmented with a land form that replicates an European Round, which has been used in the past for intersecting streets, will bring a focus to that intersection as a gateway into the Arboretum or the City of Chanhassen, depending on which direction one is traveling. This crossroads and gateway type feature can set the tone for the cooperative interaction and assistance by the City and the Arboretum on implementing special design features within areas of private development. Just as the City of Chanhassen has developed special identity features for their downtown area, this crossroads could also accommodate similar city built features. — Typical lot development standards will be as follows: 1. minimum lot size - one acre 2. minimum lot frontage - 150 feet 3. minimum lot depth - 200 feet 4. minimum setback/parking - 25 feet 5. maximum building height - 50 feet 6. minimum interior front yard setback - 30 feet 7. minimum Highway 5 and 41 frontage setback - 50 feet 8. sideyard setback - 15 feet 9. rearyard setback - 30 feet 10. perimeter Highway frontage, 50% building or open space The proposed industrial office park will comply with the many City Standards controlling site development and building construction. Each individual site plan will be brought before the City through the PUD process for review, including the landscaping, lighting and signage. We anticipate that typical buildings within the business park will average approximately 15-20 percent office and 80-85 percent industrial/manufacturing warehouse. No outside storage is being contemplated. Architectural standards will control each one of the buildings in order to provide individual identity and promote quality design, especially for those buildings visible from the perimeter of the development. The developer will have an Architectural Review Committee that will review each design so that overall quality is met. The Architectural Review will include the development of character entry facades for the orientation of the office space for each industrial building. The Review Committee will also look at the exterior finishes to assure that the variety of finishes will be complimentary to the overall design and be of durable materials. Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 6 Quality pre-cast concrete, rough cut block, stone, decorative metal, brick, glass, porcelain panels, stucco and a limited amount of wood or plastic are all suitable for the types of buildings we anticipate. These standards and method of control will be consistent with other industrial parks developed by OPUS _ Corporation. The lighting design within the development will follow standard lighting details as required by the City with adequate lighting along roads and in parking lots for security and safe traffic movement. A light standard will be chosen to provide uniformity. Architectural accent lighting will be used on special facade treatments of the buildings and landscape where business owners desire image enhancements. The lighting will be screened and controlled to meet the City standards for light spillage. Monument and building signs will be used on each of the developed lots and conform to an overall standard that has not yet been specified. We anticipate that the monument signage and the overall building signage program will be similar to that developed by OPUS for other industrial parks. The main entrances to the development will have business park entry monuments constructed of decorative block, stone, or brick with an illuminated signface. All signage will meet the City's Ordinance. Landscape treatment of the industrial park will be coordinated with a special emphasis on the perimeter landscaping within the highway corridor open-space setback. Primarily the treatment within the industrial park will consist of street trees located along the edge of road and state highway right-of-ways. Within parking lots, ornamental trees will be added to define parking patterns and identify building entrances. Landscaped islands within the public streets will include ornamental trees with ground covers designed to be low maintenance. Evergreen material will be encouraged around corners of buildings as well as loading and utility areas to provide dense screening and year round attractiveness. Additional screening, where necessary, will be applied to perimeters of parking lots and loading areas to minimize the view of large expansion of parking lots. This will be accomplished in such a way as not to hide buildings or the normal traffic circulation visible from the road. The screening of parking lots will be done with a natural character to minimize the appearance of artificial screening. Utilities and loading areas will also be screened through wall extensions or landscaped buffer strips. Screening will be designed to minimize the view of loading from the public street. Site plans will be created for each individual lot as the proposed user develops plans for their building construction. These individual lot plans will be brought to the City for review. This process is already incorporated in the City's Ordinances and will be adhered to throughout the course of the development of the Gateway West Business Park. Although we anticipate many different kinds of building configurations on different lots, we will pay special attention to those lots that face unto Highway 5 or 41. We propose that the perimeter street have 50 percent of that frontage occupied by either building or open space. Most of the lots that will have frontage on the highways are also corner lots with access to a local road. These buildings will have multiple frontages with the entrance facing the parking lots. Care will be taken to create an overall architectural design that creates a strong identity for the industrial park and an attractive public appearance. Lot Summary Lot 1 is 29.8 acres designated as a reserve site for future mixed use project. The site is being reserved for the best use possible. Since the site occupies a major part of the highway corridor, scenarios were developed with different possibilities. Those scenarios are illustrative to give a general idea of how buildings may be arranged on the site. Access to the site will be gained from both entrance roads from Highway 5 and 41. Lot 2 is set behind the development of Lot 1 and anticipated development is office/industrial use. Lot 3 is anticipated to develop as office/industrial use. Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 7 Lot 4 has frontage on Highway 41 where the building facade will be exposed to the Highway. Loading will be developed away from the highway view with parking facing onto the entrance road. We anticipate the site to be an office/industrial use. Lot 5,6 9, and 10 are all office/industrial uses which may consolidate into larger lots. This flexibility is necessary to attract a variety of users which may require a large site. Lot 7 is located in the exception parcel and represents one of many possible locations for the City's Water Tower. Access to the exception is through Lot 7 extending down to 82nd Street. This would give access to the water tower and the existing single family exception. Lot 8 is at the corner of Highway 41 and 82nd Street and is proposed to be commercial and at this time we are anticipating a bank or other financial business. This location will be able to serve the overall business area which does include the area south on Highway 41 in Chaska. Lots 11, 12, 13 and 14 back onto the proposed park land in the southeast portion of the property. All of these lots will have office/industrial type uses which will vary depending on individual needs of each business. Lot 15 will be office/industrial use. Lot 16 fronts on Highway 5 and will have a facade that will be visible from the highway. We anticipate an office/industrial use or corporate office at this location. We expect this building design to help create the identity for the office industrial park. Fifty percent of this site that fronts on Highway 5 will be building and open space. Lot 17 and 18 is the proposed park area which comprises 32.9 acres. We will work with the City in developing an appropriate acquisition plan for the proposed park. Possible park expansion plans are shown on the adjacent property to help the city with its recreational planning. Lot 19 is adjacent to the Arboretum and the single family exception on the west side of Highway 41. An apartment building is proposed with access to 41 that can also serve as an entrance to the Arboretum at some future time when the Arboretum feels an additional entrance is necessary. We will provide appropriate joint easements to accommodate that type of flexibility to the Arboretum. Lot 19 also maintains a wetland and its enhancement will be part of the overall mitigation package for other wetland alterations. Lot 20 is adjacent to the Arboretum as well as across the road from a single family residence on 82nd Street. Lot 20 is proposed for office/industrial use in which the building will be oriented to show an attractive facade toward 82nd Street. Intense use of this building will be limited in evening hours and on weekends to provide a quiet setting. Lot 20 also will have a larger setback to the Arboretum to accommodate a private drive and open space at the 90 degree curve on 82nd Street. The parking and loading will be located away from the residential uses. Future expansion to the north depends on the future land use of the 10 acres adjacent to Lot 19 and 20. The intention on Lot 20 is to provide an office/industrial type development in a way that is reasonably compatible with the adjacent land uses. The goal will be to provide an attractive facade along 82nd Street with buffering type landscaping and the orientation of parking and loading away from the Arboretum. Lot 21 faces on 82nd Street and is designated to be support commercial. Commercial activity could be a day-care, business service, a restaurant, etc. Lot 21 fronts directly on the Nordic Track Site on the south side of 82nd Street. Past plans have shown the parking lot, loading, and multiple entrances across from this area on 82nd Street. Gateway West Business Park Narrative 20 November 1992 Page 8 Lot 22 is at the corner of 82nd Street and Highway 41 and is designated to be a service station possibly with convenience goods and car wash. Lot 22 will also provide screening to the north, in particular, to minimize the views from the proposed apartment building. The gas station is in an appropriate location to serve business employees and residents of the general area as well as the motorists on Highway 41. The intersection of Highway 41 and 82nd Street will be signalized to facilitate the various traffic movements. Eighty Second Street connects with the frontage road in the Gateway West Business Park and continues to the east. The frontage road system uses the 82nd Street/Highway 41 intersection as its beginning point. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 590 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician DATE: September 24, 1992 SUBJ: Review of Concept Plan for Gateway West Business Park Southeast Corner of Trunk Highway 5 and Trunk Highway 41 File No. 92-15 LUR Upon review of the concept plan dated September 4, 1992, I offer the following comments: STREETS The proposed street layout is fairly consistent with the City's comprehensive roadway system. The access points to Trunk Highways 41 and 5 are subject to MnDOT approval which apparently the applicant has been in contact with. The dead-end street to the east side of the plat remains somewhat of a concern due to the direction the roadway alignment is intended to proceed after the site. A concept plan of the future roadway alignment through the adjacent parcel to the east should be explored to see if this alignment would be compatible with topography on the adjacent parcel. Another roadway alignment concern is between Lots 10 and 11 where the proposed road connects to existing 82nd Street. The proposed roadway is skewed and should be redesigned to be perpendicular with 82nd Street. The concept proposes a number of median islands with landscaping. It is recommended that these islands be eliminated except those necessary for traffic delineation. The applicant should explore the use of an entry type monument on one of the corner lots at the two main entrance points of the trunk highways and not on any internal streets. This will also reduce the amount of landscape maintenance required by the City as the corner monument will most likely be maintained by the property owner. A traffic study should be prepared either by the applicant or by the City with the applicant responsible for all costs to define traffic warrants for signalization, turn lanes, etc. The concept plan does not indicate the right-of-way width. The roadway should be constructed 011 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Kate Aanenson September 24, 1992 Page 2 in accordance with the Cky's designs for industrial/commercial type use. The road right-of- way should be a minimum of 80 feet wide with a 36 to 52-foot wide pavement section. Typically, this collector-type roadway system would include a sidewalk or trail system adjacent to the street within the right-of-way. With this type of use, it would be prudent to include a sidewalk or trail system to promote pedestrian traffic through and around the park system. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The concept plan does not provide any preliminary grades for the site. It is assumed due to the topography that extensive grading will be necessary. Appropriate erosion control measures should be employed in accordance with the Best Management Practices Handbook. The concept plan, again, does not provide data with regards to storm runoff from the development. It is assumed that the wetlands or pond area will be utilized for storm water retention. The applicant should be aware of the City's water quality standards and 100-year flood volume storage requirements in accordance with the subdivision codes. Pretreatment and retention ponds may result in reduced size of lots or potential elimination of a lot. UTILITIES As mentioned in the narrative, sanitary sewer and water service will be available to the site from Phase II of the Upper Bluff Creek trunk sanitary sewer and water improvements. The southwest portion of this site may be serviced via a gravity sewer line from Chaska. This site contains a very high knoll adjacent to Trunk Highway 41. The City has programmed into its comprehensive water study to construct a future 2 million gallon elevated storage reservoir in this knoll. The applicant is proposing Lot 4 for the City's future water tower, although the location proposed is not in accordance with the City's comprehensive water plan. The water tower should be located at the highest elevation, preferably 500 feet southwest of its current proposed location on the concept plan. Although there has been some discussion with regards to lowering State Trunk Highway 41 to improve the grade for truck traffic, this may result in grading this site which, in turn, would lower the highest point elevation. The applicant should be aware that the City is intending on utilizing the highest point on the site to install a future water reservoir tank to service this quadrant of the City. Kate Aanenson September 24, 1992 Page 3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1. A future roadway alignment should be explored through the parcel east of the proposed development to see if the proposed roadway is compatible with adjacent topography. 2. The southerly road extension which connects to existing 82nd Street should be redesigned to be perpendicular with 82nd Street. 3. The median islands should be eliminated except for those necessary for traffic delineation. 4. The applicant should explore placement of an entry type monument on one of the corner lots off the trunk highways in lieu of landscaping medians. _ 5. A traffic study should be prepared to determine traffic warrants for signalization, turn lanes, street widths, etc. _ 6. The street should be constructed in accordance with the City's design for industrial/commercial uses. 7. The roadway improvement should include a sidewalk or trail system located within the street right-of-way. 8. The applicant should be aware of the City's water quality standard and 100-year flood volume storage requirements in accordance with the City's subdivision code. 9. The applicant should coordinate with the City's engineering consultant, Bonestroo, for location of the water tower site. ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer CITYOF _ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM • TO: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator T I � DATE: November 25, 1992 SUBJ: Park and Recreation Commission Action of November 24, 1992, Concerning Gateway West Business Park The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the above mentioned project on November 24, 1992. Commissioners Lash, Koubsky, Andrews and Chairman Schroers were present for the meeting. Ms. Michelle Foster from Opus Corporation and Mr. Howard Dahlgren were present — on behalf of the applicant. The staff report presented that evening has previously been forwarded to you. In short, the report stated that in an attempt to reach a compromise position in regard to park dedication, a modification to the boundaries of Lot 18 (an outlot) and Lot 14 (an industrial site) would be necessary. This position was presented by staff with the ensuing discussion finding the commission feeling this proposal had not gone far enough, and Mr. Dahlgren refusing to even go that far. Much discussion centered on the potential future acquisition of additional park property to the east when and if that parcel develops. It was uncontested that this is a viable option and should be pursued. The point of real contention is the applicant's attitude that property zoned industrial should not be consumed for park purposes. Mr. Dahlgren stated that if you wish to develop ballfields and other active park components, do so on land which is "flat and cheap." This premise may be a good starting point in regard to park development; however, many times in communities with the topography and character of land found in Chanhassen, does not apply. Additionally, two of the city's finest community parks, Lake Susan and Lake Ann, demonstrate the city's foresight in going against this type of _ philosophy. The conclusion of discussion that evening found Ms. Foster pledging the applicant's commitment to listen to the community's desires and incorporate those ideas in their concept. Staff and the commission found this statement ironic in that the commission's original request of September 22 had not been respected in the new concept plan, and even though a compromise position was _ being considered by the commission, Mr. Dahlgren stood before them in an uncompromising position. is * •«rPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Ms. Kate Aanenson November 25, 1992 Page 2 Action Taken In finding the applicant unwilling to modify the current sketch plan to include a portion of Lot 14 as park and open space, the commission rejected this plan. Following this rejection, the commission, in a motion by Commissioner Lash and seconded by Chairman Schroers, acted to uphold their motion of September 22 requesting the applicant provide, as a part of their proposal, a community park site. The site is to include sufficient land of suitable character and topography to include natural vistas, affording sufficient area for viewing and picnicking, a designated 8-ft. wide bituminous trail loop with multiple access points connecting the wooded and upland portions of the site with picnicking and viewing areas, and the street plan and sidewalks; sufficient area for the possible construction of two ballfields with 300-ft. fences; a basketball court; a double tennis court; and sufficient upland area to buffer these amenities. This will require the designation of considerable more park property than called out in the original sketch plan; however, it is desirable for all parkland components to be contiguous. This park shall also maintain considerable road frontage to afford visible impact as well as allowing for sufficient ingress and egress to the park site. It should also be noted that the commission does not feel obliged to accept Lot 17 and 18 as park property, that they do not consider the dedication of 18± acres scattered "high" ground as meeting the city's park dedication requirements as a part of this proposal, and if so inclined, they will use their discretion in requesting a parcel of property be dedicated which consists of 18 acres of uniform developable land. Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 43 PUBLIC HEARING: CONCEPT APPROVAL TO REZONE 178 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2 , AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD , PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATED AT THE SE QUADRANT OF HIGHWAYS 5 AND 41 AND NW QUADRANT OF WEST 82ND STREET AND HIGHWAY 41 , GATEWAY WEST BUSINESS PARK , OPUS CORPORATION . Public Present: Name Address Bruce Buxton 401 Golf Course Drive , Baxter , MN Thomas W . Green Box 5055 , Brainerd , MN Jay Dolejsi 6961 Chaparral Lane John Uban Dahlgren , Shardlow and Uban , Inc . Ken Adolf Schoell & Madson , Inc . Ron Peterson 7101 York Avenue So , Edina Harry Adams 115 West 82nd Street , Chaska David K . Dungey 105 West 82nd Street , Chaska Peter Olin Minnesota Landscape Arboretum Michele Foster Opus Corporation Bruce Perkins 125 West 82nd Street Paul Paulson 3160 West 82nd Street Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Batzli called the public hearing to order . Commissioner Erhart left during discussion of this item and was not present for voting on the motion . Michele Foster : My name is Michele Foster . I 'm Director of Real Estate Development for Opus Corporation and I 'd just like to make a few brief comments . We were pleased to be able to spend a great deal of time with — city staff on Monday afternoon so we won 't need to spend a lot of time tonight trying to clarify the staff report since you 've been through that process once this evening . Opus is very pleased to be part of this project . We are not the land owners but we have been selected as the developer for Gateway West Business Park . We understand the importance is the prominence of this site in Chanhassen and to the city and that 's partly what attracted us to the site . Both it 's location and access . It 's visibility . It 's natural amenities and it 's our intent to develop this park as a high quality mixed use business park similar to many other business parks that Opus has developed throughout the Twin Cities . I think Opus is recognized for the quality that we aspire to in our busineE parks and we expect to perform and implement the same kind of standards : •1 Gateway West . As Kate mentioned , there are a number of issues and we 're embarking on a very complicated process for this property and time consuming process . We , by no means have resolved many of the issues . Basically our goal through this part of the process is to identify what those issues are and work with the city and the city staff as cooperatively as we can to come up with a development concept that works both for us , t ,e landowners and the city of Chanhassen . John Uban , who you saw a few minutes ago wearing one hat is also the group that we are working with as_ the planning consultants for the project and John would like to make a brief presentation . Basically giving you our perspective on the development concept that we have presented for the property . Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 44 John Uban: Thank you Michele . I 'll show you a few overhead transparencieE and I 'll leave a number of them out because maybe staff has really reviewec a number of the issues , the comprehensive plan and so forth . What I 'd like to show is just generally how we have viewed the site . How we have organized it really to work in a way that we think addresses the many needE that we see the property being used for . There are future goals or future policies of the city that we cannot address at this time because they have not been completed . This obviously will take more work with the various task force and so forth . But what we 're trying to do is develop a park that has a very individual identity within itself , yet works well with the surrounding properties . Adheres to good , responsible environmental _ standards and provides wonderful opportunities , not only for employment but also for recreation . And what we 're looking at is an overall perspective . One that takes the cooperation of both the landowner , the developer and the city to really make a project that everyone is proud of . One of the elements in this is saving what I think everyone recognizes is the most visible , the most prime corner of the site and saying , let 's do that last . Let 's wait for the best use possible to come forward and it 's one of those things I think that everyone can get excited about . Get involved with and the city and the developer can really work together to make something very nice happen there . We have two cities that are very interested . Chanhassen _ and Chaska in how the area looks and it 's going to be difficult for us to adhere to every one , each individual 's concerns about aesthetics and so forth . But we are committed to developing the best possible set of standards that will work with development and at the same time meet public standards for aesthetics . If I could show you then . Basically outlined it the different colors . In yellow are the wetlands and in green are the woods . And you can see most of the environmental features are on the eastern edge . So when we looked at this particular part of the site , we said let 's make this the area for park . It has very nice woods in it . It attaches into the industrial that is developed to the south in Chaska , and we 're hoping that a park can really develop out of these natural features . And then allowing those edges that are all along the highway , State Highwa> 41 and 5 to then develop with normal industrial/commercial type development . On the edge over next to the Arboretum we do have another wetland which we either see as being used partially for development or for . . .but we have tried to work it into our development plan so it does create a nice edge for the adjacent uses . Basically as shown in the comprehensive plan we have indicated from TH 41 and 5 connecting road pattern . This pattern . . .to conform with what is in the comprehensive plan . Again and connect a frontage road system on the south side and then to connect at the appropriate places to Highway 5 and to Highway 41 . These highway connections have been reviewed many times with MnDot and we have been working with them in detail to coordinate how to enter the property . At what point and how to grade and so forth . The actual development plan , well the other thing that we 've looked at , I know there are some concerns about how the right-of-way will be handled along the south side of Highway 5 . This is the plan we just received a few days ago from MnDot that has _ been completed by their consultant Barton-Aschman . And this conforms to what we always have understood to be the right-of-way for Highway 5 , except for the small dip in this area which is for slope easement . But primarily we 're still working with MnDot to coordinate their needs for right-of-way , both on TH 41 and on TH 5 , grade considerations and access and we 'll continue to do that . The actual plan that we have developed shows our Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 45 collector street , frontage road that will access the properties to the east . The property to the east is mixed . There are large wetlands and there are areas that are out of the wetland and there are lots of woods . This is a transitional piece of property . Transitional in the sense that-- it is heading towards more residential uses as you get to Galpin and 117 This frontage road system then will connect to 117 and service those developable pieces as it goes through that area . What we 're proposing tk�r is all along the eastern edge as shown in this green area . To have this area be park . The dark green are the trees and the wetlands are in there . We proposing a pond . It doesn 't have to be there but we thought parks likE to have water and this was our presentation that we also made to the Par s Commission . We 've been before them and we have a number of issues I thi.._c to really work out with them on what is the direction the City wants to take with parks and we have some ideas . I ' ll show you a sketch of it later . Also , within this development we 're showing , right at the corner this area that we want to hold for a very good development . For a very good piece of improvement that can really be a landmark for the city . And we will work with the city staff and develop some scenarios to see what works and what works best . Obviously we 're going through the PUD process to get some flexibility . To get some of the things that have been addressed in your PUD ordinance and we 're looking for that mixed use type of development where we really can 't pull in a variety of uses into an area . And we 're looking at the potential of institutional , commercial , industrial , office , corporate office , whatever works there the best . An(-11- we 're niwe 're willing to wait for that . Obviously getting utilities to this are. is the critical part of the whole structure because utilities really are sort of the end of the extension as planned by Chanhassen at this point . _ There is this opportunity to get some utilities through the city of Chas and that would allow us then to start development on the southern edge , directly adjacent to the industrial that 's there today . And we have been working with the exception along Highway 41 and we 'll continue to do tha -. To work out a reasonable way or incorporating their property and this development or attaching and selling to them a parcel that would then give them full access to 82nd so they could develop their parcels independentL . So we would include then in our planning so that the whole area is consistent with access and other treatments . Water tower site . Things liKE this we will obviously continue to work with the city . Overall , we 're _ trying to prepare a concept here . It isn 't really the buildings or the parking that we 're illustrating on this . It 's basically the land uses . The road alignment . The park and open space and how we 're generally going to treat and work with this property . And the details we 'll work out city staff and we ' ll be back obviously with a preliminary PUD with a lot more information . Our scoping EAW . Traffic studies and so forth as we proceed on . We ' ll have a lot more detail about the kinds of building standards and so forth that are typical for an Opus park . Just to help illustrate some of the things that we 're trying to do that we want to ha�� be part of the focus of the park . This is an aerial photo . This is the exception along Highway 41 . And part of the buildings are not actually - along the exception of the out buildings but the two homes are . It 's a single parcel that happens to have two houses on it . Then this is 82nd Street and this goes down . This is down into Chaska . These are the wood; that are really nice upland woods that we 're proposing then to be a foca. point as you come in on 82nd and then this park area would extend on to tnE east . How this works , if I can get these to line up . Our proposed road Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 46 would come off 82nd Street , start looping through the land to the east and this area is the area of park that we 're proposing . . . With the park , at the present time we 're proposing approximately 10% of the land as park and that is without the , we have 56 acres of upland out of the whole 178 acres . 22 of the acres are wetlands and so when we subtract those things out , our net land , if we take 10% of that , it gives us about 15 1/2 acres and we have about 16 acres here of upland park that we 're creating in the park atmosphere . The wetlands of course we 're not counting . The parks department is considering acquiring or additional land for other activities . We think that it may not be wise to take land that with an 'industrial base that creates a fairly high tax value and employment for the city , to consume a great deal of that for park purposes . We don 't know if the city wants to head in that direction and that 's why we want to look at some other ways the park area may really be expanded without taking too much more of the industrial property . So what we 've shown on this graphic is the extension of the collector road all the way through to Galpin and here , this area , there are wetlands through here . This is a DNR wetland or the south side . Here 's the wetland up on the north side . This is developable and this area in here is not wetland but it 's marginal soils but it is very suitable for baseball fields and so forth . And what this does then , it combines all these woods together with a field and other activities and connects that all the way out to Galpin where you have a proposed school just on the other side and residents . And this system ther will also attach to Highway 5 so it preserves and gets parkland right up tc Highway 5 . It preserves the very large area of the woods and then it connects with these kinds of activities , both the residential areas and the industrial . We think this combination will really work out well and is the kind of planning and vision that we would like to work with the city to seE _ if this can take place . So it 's this combination of working together and looking at potential of adjacent properties to really make the whole industrial park , business park work for the community . We 'll be glad to answer any questions you might have . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . This is , did you have more? I 'm sorry . This is a public hearing . If there 's anyone else that would like to address the commission , please come to the microphone and give us your name and address for the record . Paul Paulson: My name is Paul Paulson . My address is 3160 West 82nd Street and my 10 acre parcel was indicated on the map earlier this evening . I have one question and several comments . First of all the question . On page 3 of the staff report . The first paragraph and the section labeled site characteristics . I 'll just read the last few sentences and then I ' ll ask the question . The other residence is owned by the Paulson 's and is 10 acres in size . Staff is recommending that these excemptions be included it the proposed layout of this project . Future street and utility access to these sites needs to be assured . If possible , they should be acquired . The question I have has to do with the last sentence . If possible , they should be acquired . It 's not clear to me what 's to be acquired here . Whether it 's the city and street access or our property . I guess I 'd like clarification on that . Aanenson: Well our first choice would be that they be all planned together and not separate because as we 're doing the PUD zoning , we 'd like them to Planning Commission Meeting _ October 7 , 1992 - Page 47 be uniform in architecture and control and that sort of thing . So that would be a first choice . That that be all part of the same development , understanding yours is a larger piece and you have separate access . But obviously the next thing that we are concerned about is that your piece b— not excluded from this as far as how that road is , how they have access into that off of West 82nd and the same with the Wrase 's . That they not ue excluded as far as access and those sort of issues . Paul Paulson : Speaking of access to the property , in looking at the concept plan , it appears that the southern portion of my current easement appears to be proposed to be a private drive . And I have a concern . Wei-1 I would prefer that to be a city street rather than a private drive . Batzli : Where 's he talking about? Aanenson : He 's talking about this . His property is right here . He 's an easement . 60 foot easement that comes out . . . Paul Paulson: Now the staff report indicates that the city would prefer that that be a city street . But it appears to be a private drive in the concept plan . On the map here . Aanenson : That 's one of the issues that when we look at the traffic stuay that these are some of the things that we 'll have to , we 're just raising these as issues . These are things we ' ll have to do further investigatioT on and see which is the best way to serve that property . As I mentioned before , that piece that 's adjacent to you , this piece right here . It 's a dififcult piece to be developed and we 'll have to go through the wetland -- alteration process to see even how much , because that 's a significant wetland there , how much buildable area and where that access is going to be coming to because they 're splitting the parking lots . It 's a tough piece` to develop . So we have to look at where their accesses need to be and sc Paul Paulson: One of my concerns is that the plan doesn 't seem to take into account the surrounding land use on Lot 19 , which is the lot direct:_' south of my property . To the north of my property is the Arboretum . My property has residential use . To the west of Lot 19 is the Arboretum . Anc also to the south of Lot 19 is also residential use . To the south of 82r Street is the city of Chaska and the City of Chaska comprehensive plan calls for property to the east of their ravine trail system , which you can see on this plan . It starts just at the sourthern most point of the easement and extends south . So the Chaska comprehensive plan shows commercial development to the east of that line and residential developmc.t to the west of that line . So Lot 19 has residential use both to the north and the south and the Arboretum to the west and it doesn 't seem that it f-. a consistent use with the surrounding property . So that 's a concern . Aanenson: Can I just clarify that . Your property is guided for commerci—1 industrial so if you were to come in tomorrow and propose something . I think what we stated in the staff report , we don 't know what their timing is on that and as things develop and we look at access , that we look at what type of use goes in there and how it 's laid out and the height and t .e impacts and those sort of things . We look at that more carefully . Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 48 Paul Paulson: It may be that it 's guided for commercial use but the fact of the matter is , it 's residential use . Aanenson: Certainly . And you may be there 20 years . Exactly . That 's what we 're saying . We ' ll look at that when they come in and as this develops . Krauss: But the concern is raised that the site plan or concept plan does not reflect the surroundings very well , we agree with . We 've said that in our report . That 's one of the things we want them to look at . Paul Paulson : Okay . So it sounds like you have maybe similar concerns but I just wanted to make it clear that I believe the plan that produces commercial use between two residential areas may be in conflict with the current use . In regards to Lot 19 . Also , I believe given that the comprehensive plan calls for my property to be guided towards commercial use , that even so the plan does not take into account my property and in fact I am to become a captive of the development . If I 'm landlocked without consideration for my property in the plan , my property has been severely depreciated for future use consistent with the City of Chanhassen 's comprehensive plan since my property will be precluded from visual access from 82nd Street , traffic coordination within the plan and also signage issues . And so this is a problem if in the future my property is to become part of commercial development in this area . Given that Lot 19 does not appear to be a consistent use with the surroundings , I believe that the plan has a natural stopping point along the eastern part of my property , including the easement . And my easement would make a natural western boundary for the development . This would be normal and consistent with the Arboretum property north of my property . My property , the Arboretum property west of Lot 19 and the residential area south of Lot 19 . Given the existing land use on the north , west and south sides of Lot 19 , Lot 19 I believe should not be included in the PUO but should rather be used as a natural or creative buffer or transition zone between the existing uses and the PUD . I am absolutely and vehemently opposed to any development west of my easement under any circumstances . Any consideratior of the PUD west of Highway 41 should be mixed use taking into consideratior possibly multi-family residential for appropriate blend and transition of use and higher commercial use along Highway 41 corridor and east of Highway 41 . I guess the problem I 'm having is partly a matter of transition . I believe that there should be a transition from the western edge of the project into the higher commercial uses of the east . I request the staff not to give concept approval to the portion of the plan west of Highway 41 since I believe some of the investigations underway and including wetlands review , site design and park areas are not sufficient at this time to justify approval of that part of the PUD west of Highway 41 . Also , two parties directly affected by the plan were not given notice of this meeting , namely the Landscape Arboretum and the City of Chaska . I request of the Commission continuation of this meeting and at this point I cannot be supportive of the PUD as it is in regards to that portion west of Highway 41 but am supportive of the overall concept of commercial and light industrial development in the general area . Specifically east of Highway 41 . In general I think it looks like a really nice project . I am impressed with some of the sentivity I 've seen to the quality of the project . How it fits in with the interest of the city of Chaska and Planning Commission Meeting _ October 7 , 1992 - Page 49 Chanhassen . But I do have problems with the western part of it . The we-: side of Highway 41 . Batzli : Your name was again , sir? - Paul Paulson: Paul Paulson . Batzli : Thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? Bruce Perkins: My name is Bruce Perkins and if I can use this for a second . I live at 125 West 82nd Street with my wife and again , I am als- addressing a problem with Lot 19 . On page 4 of the staff report it says West 82nd , everything south of West 82nd Street is a business park . That ': 3/4 true because from here over, it is designated as business park but thLs portion is Chaska city park and that runs down that whole ravine . And t iE portion of course is residential . So the staff report really didn 't cover or look at close to . . .82nd Street . Also , I guess I would like to ask whoever 's in charge of this , these two buildings were removed about 2 ye ago , yet they show on the drawing . And Paulson 's house , which is direct , effected by this , isn 't even on here . And it seems too easy to look at this property and say , well there 's nothing there . Not to worry about i-. I guess I would ask whoever 's doing these drawings to include the Paulso house and to remove the buildings that are no longer there . Batzli : Sir , do you know is your house and the house I guess directly t the north , in Chaska 's long range comprehensive plan , are you aware of their plan document and whether they have included you in their park? Their office industrial park . Or whether your long range zoning is that- does that stay residential? Resident : Yes it does . - Batzli : It does stay residential? Okay . Paul Paulson: Excuse me , I do have a coyp of the Chaska Comprehensive P-31" with me tonight if anybody wants to look at it . Batzli : Okay , thank you . - Bruce Perkins: In our residential , and I know this is growing and I don 't have a problem with that but currently we have 11 acres of property and _ during the summer it 's nice and secluded . In the wintertime we can see lE security lights on these properties across TH 41 and I 'm also concerned , if this were developed , it brings a lot of light all night into the residential area , which I think degrades the area . I can see we may hay,- some problem here but my concern really has to do with Lot 19 . I guess lE other recommendation I have is to include Paulson 's house there and remove the 2 buildings that aren 't there . - Batzli : Thank you . Would anyone else like to address this Commission? Peter Olin: My name is Peter Olin . I 'm Director of the Arboretum . I would like to make , if possible , some general statements and then some specific concerns . First of all I was real pleased to find that Opus was Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 60 to be developing this because they have a record of quality development anc we 're obviously very concerned about what happens on those corners . The Arboretum is a major state and regional resource . We have visitorship now of 200 ,000 people and that 's on an upward trend . It 's qualities are it 's unique plants , research in trees , shurbs , fruits and vegetables . It 's diverse native sites . It 's spectacular beauty and it 's prominence as a place of human refuge and respite for visitors are it 's qualities . The Arboretum is concerned about any and all development which comes to it 's borders and the impact of that development on the Arboretum 's qualities . The potential impacts from any of the developments is in general , the goal of the Arboretum is to preserve it 's integrity and that 's the integrity of the site by ameliorating any negative impacts of adjacent development . Anc in particular our concerns are visual impact , and that 's with any commercial development , especially fast foods , gas station type development . Or whatever commercial might go in there . It 's also a concern I think as a gateway to the Arboretum and as well as the gateway tc Chanhassen . We 're concerned about air and perhaps water pollution impact from the concentration of cars on that site and on Highways 5 and 41 . Certainly the air quality will be effected and it will effect our research and it could effect our collections of plants . The water we 're not sure because we don 't know exactly how that 's going to work . We haven 't seen any grading . Noise and possibly light pollution impact . Greatly increasec noise , especially from the commercial areas . Come and go traffic will wort to destroy the restorative aspects and the solitude of the Arboretum 's character , especially when it 's right up on it 's borders . Commercial development , parking lots , and the like will denegrate the edges of the Arboretum which will essentially begin penetrating in both a visual and physical sense further into the Arboretum . The edge of the development if not treated carefully , both at the land use scale , this conceptual scale , as well as the detail design scale , will be detrimental . And it 's going tc be detrimental to both the Arboretum and the gateway to Chanhassen . There could be some adverse impact on the current and proposed apple and other — tree research along Highway 41 . By the roadway cuts that are probably going to go in there , parking lots and building construction . Further and lastly the pressure to sell off our corners of TH 41 and TH 5 becomes all the greater as these high intense uses occur on the other corners . There 's already pressure to do that . We have some specific concerns about this plan . On the west side of Highway 41 , I 'll just reiterate some of the ones that were said but there 's a visual impact of development on the Arboretum . Of the buildings and the parking lots , especially Lot 19 . But also Lots 1S and 20 and 22 is an intrusion into the residential development along the Arboretum 's boundary . The impact of grading these sites on the Arboretum property and the potential runoff impact again we don 't know , because we haven 't seen it but that could be quite dramatic given the condition of that particular site with a depression in there . The impact of parking lots , as I mentioned right on the property line . We find that to be without any consideration of buffering . Then the lack of buffering considerations throughout the site . The impact of commercial development proposed for Lots 20 and 21 on the Arboretum is they are obviously not - serviced to the major portion of the industrial development as it 's stated , because if they were , they 'd be in the center of the development . We recommend that again there 's no conceptual approval of anything on the west side of Highway 41 because even conceptually there 's simply too many questions which have not been answered . On the east side of Highway 41 , we Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 61 - are very concerned about the city 's proposed water tower which will be _ visible from most of the Arboretum . And that 's a major visual impact anc it is our concern . Maybe that can 't be helped but it 's certainly somethi .�� that was news to me when I received this package . I did get it yesterday afternoon . The factthat the parking lots are all in front of the buildings , which they could creatively be clustered behind the buildings , again at a conceptual level but nonetheless an indication that this is sort of a development as usual . The location of the proposed entry to Highway- 41 , which we had talked about perhaps lining up with some future entrance to the Arboretum , is actually in a location which makes it very , very difficult to make a reasonable entrance into the Arboretum there . So we _ probably would not consider that in the future if that were to be the location . Again , if the commercial development 's to support the industr: .2 development , it 's not located to suggest that . It should be more central . What it suggests to me are fast food chains that 's right there on the highway . Which brings me to the lack of , it 's already been mentioned , t E lack of any indication of what happens on the corner of Highways 5 and 41 , which it says in there is going to be , in their letter , institutional _ educational office/industrial or commercial which to me means it could bE nice big commercial development . Strip development or anything else because that 's going to pay a lot of money for it . I 'm glad that the city is asking that that be some indication of what happens . The proposed pat`. . which I think is admirable , and it is preserving the wetlands and the woc I lot , and again when John showed this expanding into the next property it 's not really what might happen there because it 's someone else 's land . It - does make sense and it makes my comment perhaps not as valid but it doesT t have much of an opening to this particular development . It 's sort of a back lot and not much of a park or a focus to the area . I think if it 's _ considered in a broader context , it does make a lot more sense as a park There was a comment from the staff about removing the treed islands and I guess I would object . I think the more trees we can get , especially in wide expanses of paving , can only help to ameliorate some of the negativE— effects of all that paving . Do you have a little campaign on with that? In the concept , I think in general really could be reworked to reflect the kinds of quality development that Opus does and hopefully in the details _WE get that but I think even at the conceptual level it 's important . I gueE just to summarize , the Arboretum is a unique and regional resource . It happens to be located in Chanhassen , Chaska and Victoria . In order for it_ to continue as a valuable and unique resource for research , education , beauty and a place of refuge and respite , it must be guarded by not only the University of Minnesota and the Landscape Arboretum but by the cities in which it lies . The Arboretum must , I can 't read my writing here , continue to be a large tract of land and it has to be defended visually well as buffered from noise and air pollution . If it 's not , we ' ll soon lose this valuable resource and I think it 's something that absolutely haz to have a lot of consideration . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . Is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission? David Dungey : May I just briefly? Batzli : Yes . Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 62 David Dungey: My name is David Dungey and I live at 105 West 82nd Street which is , may I? Batzli : Yes . David Dungey: I 'm this guy here . As you may have already guessed , I have a concern with a large parking lot being perhaps directly across from my home where my wife and I moved 18 1/2 years ago because of the Arboretum and the agricultural nature of the area . I agree with Dr . Olin and the rest of my neighborhood . . .more eloquently than I ever could express their concerns that Lot 19 I think is thrust into an area inconsistent with the _ intent of serving Chaska , which I 'm sure you may not have any concern about at all but . I don 't know how you guys get along with Chaska but . I just think it would be real difficult to remain living next to a light manufacturing plant say with perhaps round the clock shifts . Cars coming and going . A driveway that empties onto a gravel road that is intended to remain gravel for quite some time . The area to the west of the ravine system again is going to stay residential . It just seems like you 've got a finger of industry pushed into rurality just because you can so I ask that you consider . . .concerns too . Thanks a lot . Batzli : Thank you . Harry Adams: I 'm the last one . My name is Harry Adams . I live on 115 West 82nd Street with my wife and youngster . I live between David Dungey and Bruce Perkins and it sounds like we met before this meeting . All of 5 started considering this plan today , or yesterday . I would just move to second the good recommendations of the earlier speakers for the neighborhood use and I would hope that , I would second the good things saic about the Opus people and I would hope that your staff and the Opus people would keep us in the loop and I think things would go a lot better if you could do that . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . Paul , are the people in Chaska on our list to be notified of the various meetings? Aanenson: Some of them are . Krauss : Some of them are but we can certainly expand the list to make sure . Batzli : If any of you did not receive notice , please give your name and address to Paul before you leave tonight so that you do get notices . Is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Emmings moved, Ahrens seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Batzli : Matt , we 're going to start with you . Ledvina : Okay . Well I think that this site lends itself to a PUD and I agree with that approach . I really don 't know what would constitute an acceptable concept plan for us to approve tonight . I don 't have a good Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 63 — feel for that . I understand that we 'll be seeing this a number of — different times as it goes through the preliminary plat and the other stE s but I am uncomfortable with some of the things that have been discussed by the residents in the vicinity of this project and primarily the concerns as it relates to the development west of TH 41 . I think that the transitior is a very important one to me and there may be a way of doing that in thi area but there 's going to have to be some well thought out plans to really reduce the impact of the proximity of residential and light industrial — office , if it can be done at all . So let 's see . I had some comments abc t just generally , I was a little bit confused as to what the direction or what staff really thought about the proposal . They indicate I guess in the proposal summary , one of the last paragraphs indicated that the proposal r we do not believe that the City 's many goals have been met by the concept plan and then three sentences later it says staff is recommending the PUD concept be approved . So I 'm confused there . Aanenson : Well the purpose of the concept is to try to outline all the issues that need to be addressed . You need to have a starting point and -c this is a beginning and we reflect , as Michele mentioned , we sat down wit them Monday for a couple of hours and we said okay , before this can go forward this kind of causes the rest of the things to happen . We 've outlined all the other issues . All the ones you just heard tonight . The EIS . The traffic study . How this is going to be serviced by the sewer . All those issues are the next step and it won 't come back . It may be 6 months . It may be 9 months before you see this back but they needed a - direction to know what needs to be addressed to go foward so they come foward with a concept plan and ask for some direction . The comments you 've heard tonight are some of the same concerns that the staff has and they 'r- aware of that and they need to know what direction to go to proceed . That 's why it 's a concept . Ledvina : Okay . I have a concern about the location of the water tower . I know it was discussed in the report regarding the engineering considerations of locating it in the highest elevation . That 's fine but I also have concerns as it relates to the visual impact of that . We 're - attempting to focus this as a gateway . . .so to speak and I look at the situation with the water tower at , by Ridgedale and you see that water tower on 394 as you go by Plymouth Road there and it dominants the whole _ landscape there . And I think that the water tower should be located in another site . Well , it could be in this area but just off the road a bit . It can 't be right on the road here so I would very much like to see an alternate location there . I guess in general , I feel that this does represent a good concept overall and I think it 's great that we take a large piece of property and not be afraid to put it together as a comprehensive type of development , which this very much is but at the samr time I 'm very concerned about the residents ' opinions and also the Landscape Arboretum 's opinion and I guess at this point I don 't think I would support approval of the concept plan . Batzli : Okay . Steve . Emmings: Let 's see , where to start . This should be a PUD . There 's no question about that . I frankly would probably be almost be happier if tr s was blank because what 's on here is very difficult for me to accept even Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 64 though I know it 's a concept stage . There 's some things I like about it but it 's scarey when you know the most valuable piece of the property has - nothing on it . That 's just , I have to know more about the corner before I could even approve a concept plan . So while I think they 've done some things that are nice things . I like the park area . It makes some sense . I like the road that comes down from 41 and you come into a T and you see out into that whole park area you know . That 's kind of a nice thing . But I 'm not voting for a concept plan on this piece of property without seeing more about what 's in that corner . I think it should be tabled and it should - come back . Just as an example . If we look at Lot 7 , there 's a building drawn on there and a parking lot and there 's 7 , what do you call the little lines that show grade? John Uban: Contours . Emmings: Contours . There 's 19 of them in that building and it 's not even that big a building which means , I don 't know , does that mean there 's a lot of grading going on there? I thought one of our goals for this piece of property when we went on the bus tour for the Highway 5 study area and everything else . One of the big goals was to not do too much with that topography . Really somehow , and I don 't know if it 's possible to do anything there without doing a lot of grading . I don 't know but when I see that , that seems to fly right in the face of the kinds of things that we were looking at that time . I 've also seen a plan for this piece of property that was done by , as part of the Highway 5 study that had the buildings arranged more in a , it was almost in tiers that was all oriented back to the wetland area which made a lot of sense to me . That plan I think did go out of it 's way not to , to leave the topography that 's there in place and orient itself more inward than outward which made some sense to me . And I don 't know if Opus has those plans or is aware of those plans . Michele , were you aware of the fact of the presentation that we hac from the Arboretum where they were proposing an entrance to the Arboretum out there? Okay . That 's an opportunity that ought to be pursued exhaustively . It seems like a tremendous opportunity again from the standpoint of having this system of roads that would go around Highway for local trips and to have the Arboretum on the end of that with an entrance is an opportunity that shouldn 't be lost . I agree that that piece of property that 's on TH 41 , that 's an exception now has to have internal access on this thing . At least to 82nd Street , if nowhere else . Lot 19 iE incredibly inappropriate . There is no way that that should be sticking out there like that . Everything west of TH 41 looks kind of inappropriate but especially is 19 and close on it 's heels is Lot 22 . That building is jammed in there in a way that just looks ridiculous to me . I don 't know what you can do there but that looks just awful to me . Peter Olin mentioned the parking lots all in front of the buildings and again , I know this is a concept plan and I assume this stuff is just thrown in there but it does feel like just more unpleasant development without much thought and I don 't like that . The way the whole thing is laid out , the fact that it should be a PUD , I have no quarrel with whatsoever . Batzli : Are you on the Highway 5 Task Force? Emmings : Yeah but I haven 't been getting notices of meetings . Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 65 Farmakes : Neither have I . Emmings : And I didn 't get notice of , the last one they held I never got notice . Farmakes: Or if I did , I didn 't see it . Emmings : I found out after that it had been held . Krauss: Well we haven 't had any since then . We 're in the process of finalizing the Phase II contract and we expect to have another meeting end of October , early November . We 're going to set the date in the next coin= e days . Emmings : Please . That 's something I 'm real interested in . Krauss: And one of the concerns we had was that we very much wanted to include the Highway 5 Task Force , get them involved in a project of this magnitude . You can 't ask people to sit and give their evenings to plan '`hr the corridor and then take one of the most important pieces out of that context . So in essence though , I think it 's got to be recognized , we 're asking Opus and their planners to do something that 's very difficult . We 're asking them to design to a plan that doesn 't exist yet , to a set of policies and standards that we haven 't agreed on yet . Emmings : But . Krauss: But there are some general concepts . Emmings : You bet there are . There 's a lot out there and as a matter of fact , like I say . Tell me the name of guy from the University . Aanenson : Bill Morrish . Krauss : Yes , they 've been given Bill 's . Aanenson: Yeah , they 've seen that . Emmings : If they 're talking to him , then they 're talking to us because Bill 's been a real significant leader in that regard and so if you 're talking to him , I think you 're talking to the right person . And he is the one who drew that initial plan which may not suit their purposes and I understand that but well , I 've said my piece I guess . Batzli : Thanks . Jeff . Farmakes: I 'd just be repeating myself . Most of the items were just touched on that I have listed on my little page here . But again I ' ll just say that that corner of that highway to the north and south is certainly _ just fundamental to all the work that 's been done up until that point . 1 e Highway 5 corridor plan . It 's an extremely important piece of property . Just overall for the aesthetics of the city and I couldn 't agree more that where our thinking is and the work that 's been done up until that point , don 't know how it applies commercially , which is also an important point . Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 66 I don 't want to beat up Opus because I think that they 're really a fine developer . I 'm glad they 're out here working on this piece of property but a lot of the design considerations took in what I thought were the sensitivities to the Arboretum and to the adjacent area to the west of TH 41 which is definitely a concern . And again , I 'd just be repeating myself to call out these lots or repeating Commissioner Emmings here . But I too think that actually the direction that he had was more focused on the drive that came in from the east and for some reason the parking or , I don 't know if it was developed where it was realistic commercially but the way that that was structured was much more pleasant and much more in line with an overall effect of taking into consideration of the adjacent property and uses than just maximizing the property at hand . That particular piece of property . It seems kind of almost punitive to take the position to punish the existing landowner of that particular piece because it happens to be there but it is an enormously important piece to the city . And the Arboretum and I 'm sure Chaska , if they were here tonight . But going back to the effect of I think we should table this also but I agree that this should be a PUD , if that 's any headway at all for anyone . Batzli : Is that it? Farmakes : One more comment . When they bring in a concept plan , it would be appreciative if , particularly because of the sensitivity of the area to the west , if ,we could move the chart over a little farther and see more of what 's actually to the west . The comment that one of the individuals made _ here , I think that that 's a necessity to see more specifically of what 's happening in the surrounding areas if we 're going to develop the property to the west of TH 41 . Batzli : Okay , Joan . Ahrens : I too agree with just about everything that everyone has said so far . Including the comments Matt made about the water tower . I remember going on that bus trip with Bill Morrish a long time ago and looking at the site from the bus and he had this vision . One of those vision things . Emmings: Our guru . Ahrens : For that corner and this isn 't exactly it . And I don 't even know what it was but I think talking to him would clarify what we 're trying to say to you tonight . I don 't like any of the stuff west of TH 41 . It kind of reminds of the controversy that 's going on now around Yellowstone Park . The ranchers who want to . . .to the border of the park and they 're saying you can 't do that because the health of the park doesn 't stop at the borders . You have to be sensitive to everything that 's going on around the park and I know that unless we go in and buy this land or the Arboretum buys it , maybe they should do that . Emmings : Just ask the Legislature for it . Ahrens: But you know , realistically it 's tough to dictate that someone should leave their land vacant because we just want them to do it because _ it 's the right thing to do . Although I do think it is the right thing to do . I think that that area should be preserved . I think this has to go Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 67 back to the drawing board . There 's some things that I like . I do like t_be park areas but they seem a little isolated over there . I don 't understaT I what this looks like . T don 't understand the buildings and , it looks like a lot of stuff is real close together in here with a lot of pavement . And so this has to go back to the drawing board . That 's it . Batzli : Thank you Joan . I think one of the , well I mean there 's obviously several issues that have been touched on . Not the least of which is some* of the treatment of the development west of TH 41 . Issue of the gateway Potential gateway into the Arboretum . Whether this jives with our corridor , Highway 5 corridor study vision . Some access issues into some _ accepted lots . And I think maybe one of my biggest problems , the Lot 1 which is kind of vacant and nebulous . And I know that , I don 't know that the recommendations that are there right now give us comfort that these things will be changed and I don 't know that we can draft them right now - For example Kate , I know you made , you discussed at great length and ver; nicely that they would have to give us some more concrete thought . Aanenson: What we asked them to do was plat it . Show how the road can > through there and maybe be lot in 5-10 acre lots like they show on the relit of it . If they do want to leave it out for a bigger use , they come back _ and tell us specifically so we can run that past you . What specific use: they 're looking at . We feel the same uncomfort level and we need to knot what 's going to be there . What we 're asking them to do is tell us more specifically , or lot it out so we can bring that back to you . - Batzli : But where is that in the conditions? Aanenson: It 's in the report . Emmings: There 's a lot of stuff in the report that isn 't in the conditionE and we do that a lot of times on concept reviews . We tell them these art- our concerns and they 're not necessarily in the conditions . So I don 't think that that 's unusual really . Batzli : But in this case that 's half the development . Emmings : Yeah . Aanenson: It should be , right . Batzli : The other thing I think is just the overall sensitivity to the - site and maybe that wouldn 't normally be in a condition but here I think t has to be . Steve pointed out Lot 7 which looks like it has about a 30 or 40 foot drop over the length of the building . That 's serious grading . - There 's parking lots over similar contours and I doubt they 're going to have a parking lot with that kind of a substantial hill in it . And these things concern me from the standpoint that conceptually PUD makes sense . Some of the alignments may make sense other than the fact that they don 'i- do what we want it to do with respect to the Arboretum . So maybe it doesn 't make any sense at all . And I 'm wondering I guess what concept I would be approving if I voted for this tonight because clearly the overa Y. concept doesn 't mesh with what we 've thought of for this site . Yet the PUD , the park , the general types of uses do make sense . I 'm kind of Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 68 wondering if this is salvagable tonight or if the applicant doesn 't want tc table it and come back , I get the sense that the Planning Commission would recommend that the City Council not approve conceptual approval . So I 'm at a loss here as far as would the applicant like to kind of take a second shot at it or , because I get the feeling that the Commission isn 't going tc be in favor of approving it . We 've had several people say that they would move to table it or would like to see it come back . Michele Foster : I 'd like to respond directly to that . And if the feeling of the Commission is that they cannot support the plan this evening , then we will certainly agree to continue the item until we can come back and better address some of the issues that have been raised this evening . I dc want to make a couple of comments , one of which is that the property is guided for industrial and office use and I was not part of the discussions that the city went through at the time that this property was considered for that designation . I do think that it 's only fair to say that yes , there is going to be some significant grading that needs to occur on this site regardless if an industrial and office park is going to occur here . Now I understand we may not have addressed that very well . We 're also not at that stage of the development process to be able to show you grades and grading plans so we have a little chicken and egg problem here of trying tc come up with something that clearly you need to feel comfortable with at a — stage where we don 't have a lot of very clear direction which is why we 're going through this process . And I understand that there are a number of visionary things that the City would like to see happen here but I 'd also like to say that there is some boundaries in which an office and industrial park can function . And it does probably mean that the property can 't stay in it 's current state and there are going to have to be some significant modifications to what you see there today . But I also understand that obviously we need to go further in addressing some of the concerns that we 've heard this evening and putting as much detail to that as we can and we would be , not pleased but if the Commission so chooses to postpone any action on this until we come back , that 's acceptable to us . Batzli : As a general conceptual thing , and I don 't mean to tie your hands on this . Are you dead opposed to putting some sort of buffer where Lot 19 is? I mean are you opposed to doing some of the things you 've heard from us tonight? Michele Foster : No , and in fact that 's partly why we sat down with the staff on Monday . We sat down with representatives from almost all the city departments to try to understand those issues . I think we 'd probably be the first to admit that the property on the west side is very challenging given the numerous objectives that we need to try to accomplish there regarding buffering and the Arboretum and access and wetlands and we probably don 't have the perfect solution there . So no , we understand the issues that are raised in the staff report and that 's why we 've not objected to any of those . We understand that this is a starting place from which we have to go to the next level of detail and try to incorporate — those kinds of concerns . That 's what we thought the process was about . Not that we were trying to get some kind of approval that tied your hands in terms of getting the kind of development that you want to see there . _ This to us is a starting point and the kinds of comments that we 've gotten , while challenging at least tell us where we need to head and what we need Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 69 - to deal with . But like I said , there are some boundaries around which ev r the most creative among us and I 'm a developer , not a planner or a desigi r but we are dealing with a number of very complex and sometimes conflictii,g goals that we 're just going to have to try to sort out as we go through this and balance them as best we can . Farmakes : As you understand the Highway 5 study that was done earlier frog the city , do you feel that the marketplace would keep the city from , and - Opus , from producing something that is special there? Something that 's different . Michele Foster : I ' ll be honest with you . I can 't , I mean I have not myself spent a great deal of time analyzing what was in that document so really can 't address that . We will go back and do that and look at it and be in a better position to respond to that question the next time we come- to see you but I 'm not really prepared to answer that very well tonight . Farmakes : Perhaps there 's something we can do to , are you comfortable Pau] that they 've taken in the information? Krauss: . . . I 'm sure Bill would be willing to come down and kick some things around . Again , we laid these things on the table . We weren 't - exactly sure which way to go . We do view this as the start of the proce° and we 'd just like to get as many opinions at this point on the process as we can do that when they do go through and make changes , they 're the rig1 changes . Farmakes : It would certainly seem to me from that plan that the whole cru> of this thing would be where that road would enter from , coming from the east . Krauss : But see there 's responsibilities on several sides of several of these issues . If a road 's going to be aligned to provide a new entrance into the Arboretum , which is a fine idea , there needs to be a commitment from the Arboretum to build their side of the road . And again , we wanted to get these things on the table so that people can start looking at the need to make these decisions . Farmakes : And for that to really , sort of the back bone of what his des: ir for that concept area was , that if something like that was altered too much , you 'd lose a lot of gas out of it . There 'd be , you 'd lose a lot of the effect . Like you said but it 's the egg and the chicken . It would se -R to me that if we could keep getting a type of communication , maybe even more human communication involved it 's their understanding of what we 've come up with . Where we 're thinking so that there 's . . . Aanenson : I guess where the staff was coming from too , we can 't really lock into a design until we 've looked at some of these other issues . I mean we need to look at the traffic . We need to do the EIS . We need to look at the wetlands before we know what some of these buildable lots ar( and some of the topography issues so they kind of , all these issues need tc kind of run parallel . - Planning Commission Meeting October 7 , 1992 - Page 70 Farmakes : My concern would be the valuation of what the realities of the marketplace would be comparatively to what aesthetically we would like to do . Because I don 't know if we 're terribly familiar . Michele Foster : We 'll make sure that you hear that so I don 't think you need to worry . Farmakes : It 's sort of a two way communication thing . Batzli : But I agree . I think with Chaska 's planning comments in a broad sense and apparently that 's all really , give the opportunity to look at it in kind of a broad things to look at it . Consider it and I think those arE some of the same things we 're looking at for better or worse . I hate to agree with them but he 's right . No , I 'm just kidding . We like Chaska . Sc I would , as long as the applicant doesn 't mind , I guess I 'd like them to gc back and review it a little bit more with staff . Is there a motion to table? Emmings : So moved . Ahrens: Second . • Emmings moved , Ahrens seconded that the Planning Commission table the Concept PUD for Gateway West Business Park for further review. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION SITE EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS . Public Present: Name Address Bruce Buxton 401 Golf Course Dr , Baxter , MN Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Batzli called the public hearing to order . Bruce Buxton: Can I get a copy of the schedule? Batzli : You can if you want one . Emmings: I don 't know why you 'd want to do that to yourself . Ahrens : You can have my copy . Emmings : And mine . Bruce Buxton: The reason I ask is because I 'm an engineer and . . . Emmings : I don 't think that will help . .y I CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager TG I DATE: November 24, 1992 SUBJ: Consider Approval of Modification No. 12 to the Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan Attached for your consideration is Modification No. 12 to the Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project. Under state law, the Planning Commission must find that the proposed modifications are consistent with the overall development plan for the City of Chanhassen as a whole. Listed below is a summary of the proposed modification to this plan: 1. Target Store: The HRA intends to purchase approximately 16 acres for development of a Target Store and the creation of several outlots. The project will be located north of Highway 5 and south of West 78th Street. A portion of West 78th Street will be vacated to accommodate the project. Target will occupy a site of slightly more than 10 acres. 2. Taco Shop/Apple Valley Red-E-Mix: These properties on Highway 5 will be redeveloped with more attractive and appropriate land uses. Plans call for use of portions of these sites for highway-related amenities, including a rest stop or open space. Other portions will be developed for highway-oriented commercial uses. 3. Conference Center/Recreational Center: The HRA intends to acquire property north of the Soo Line Railroad in the vicinity of the Chanhassen Dinner Theatre, including the FMG Warehouse, Chanhassen Bowling Center and Frontier Building. Plans call for development of a multipurpose conference center/recreation center/bowling facility. Retail uses, including a cinema or restaurant, and a library may also be included. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Planning Commission November 24, 1992 Page 2 "The Planning Commission approves the attached resolution finding Modification No. 12 to the Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project consistent with the plans for development of the City of Chanhassen." ATTACHMENTS 1. Map 2. Redevelopment Plan Modification No. 12 3. Resolution City of Chanhassen Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota Planning Commission DATE: RESOLUTION NO: MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: RESOLUTION FINDING MODIFICATION NO. 12 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN WHEREAS, the Chanhassen City Council has authorized preparation of Modification No. 12 to the Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan for tthe Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project and has submitted Modification No. 12 to the Planning Commission for comment and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made a thorough review of Modification No. 12 and has compared it with the plans for development of the City as a whole. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota as follows: 1. That Modification No. 12 to the Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan is found to be consistent with the plan for development of the City of Chanhassen as a whole. 2. It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Chanhassen hold a public hearing required by law and adopt Modification No. 12. Passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen this day of , 1992. ATTEST: Secretary Chairperson RBB29487 CB130-5 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN REDEVELOPMENT AREA CITY OF CHANHASSEN MODIFICATION NO. 12 December 14, 1992 Prepared By: HOLMES & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Redevelopment Plan 1 A. Definitions 1 B . Project Area. 2 C. Project Area Redevelopment Objectives. 2 D. Proposed Project Area Redevelopment Activities. 3 E. Project Area Plan 4 F. Project Area Financing 5 II. Tax Increment Financing Plan 6 A. Statutory Authority 6 B. Statement of Objectives 6 C. Statement of Public Purpose 6 D. Relation to Redevelopment Plan 7 E. Boundaries of TIF District 7 F. Description of Downtown Redevelopment Area 7 G. Development and Other Agreements 7 H. History and Classification of TIF District 8 I. Modification of TIF Plan 8 J. Use of Tax Increment 8 K. Excess Tax Increment 8 L. Duration and Modification of the TIF District 9 M. Relocation 9 N. Properties to be Acquired Within the TIF District 9 O. Public Improvements Plans 9 P. Estimate of Project Costs 9 Q. Original Tax Capacity. 10 R. Estimate of Captured Tax Capacity and Tax Increment 11 S. Estimate of Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions 10 T. Annual Report Regarding TIF 11 (i) I. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN A. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of the Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan, the following terms shall have the meanings specified below, unless the context otherwise requires: "City" means the City of Chanhassen, a municipal corporation under the laws of the state of Minnesota; "Comprehensive Plan" means the City's Comprehensive Plan, including the objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for all lands and water within the City; "City Council" or "Council" means the Chanhassen City Council; "County" means Carver County, Minnesota; "HRA Act" means Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 through 469.047, as amended; "Housing and Redevelopment Authority" or "HRA" means the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, created pursuant to the HRA Act; "Redevelopment Plan" means the plan for redevelopment of the Project, originally adopted by the City on December 19, 1977, and as subsequently modified; "Redevelopment Project" or "Project" means the redevelopment project established by the City on December 19, 1977, in downtown Chanhassen and expanded on December 18, 1978, to include the Chanhassen Lakes business park south of T.H. 5, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 through 469.047; "State" means the State of Minnesota; MIMS "Tax Increment Bonds" means any general obligation or revenue tax increment bonds issued by the City to finance the public costs associated with the Project as stated in the Redevelopment Plan and in the TIF Plan, or any obligations issued to refund the Tax Increment Bonds; "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act" means Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 through 469.179, as amended; and "Tax Increment Financing District" means the tax increment financing district established within the downtown redevelopment area and the Chanhassen Lakes business park area; "Tax Increment Financing Plan" or "TIF Plan" means the plan by which the HRA intends to assist development within the Project, which Plan was originally adopted on December 19, 1977, and as subsequently modified. This marks the twelfth formal modification of the TIF Plan. RH826558 CH130-5 1 B. PROJECT AREA. The Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Area contains approximately 630 acres of land. One hundred seventy-five acres are located north of STH 5 and comprise what is generally recognized as downtown Chanhassen. The remainder of the Project Area is south of STH 5 in the Chanhassen Lakes business park. Together these areas comprise the Project Area. The Project Area is generally described as being bounded by Audubon Road on the west; STH 101 on the east; the north shore of Lake Susan as extended westward to Audubon Road on the south and STH 5 and West 78th Street on the north, but also includes lands north of West 78th Street that are presently zoned for business and multi-family housing uses. The Project Area officially includes all lands shown in Figure 1 of Modification No. 11, dated April 17, 1992, and described in Exhibit A of City Council Resolution No. 77-72, dated December 19, 1977, Exhibit B of City Council Resolution No. 78-73, dated December 18, 1978, and in Subsection A Project Area of Modification No. 9, adopted in November, 1989. No property is being added to the Project Area as a result of this modification. C. PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES. The HRA through this Redevelopment Plan seeks to achieve the following objectives: 1. Diversify the tax base of the City by encouraging commercial and industrial development which in turn will enhance employment opportunities, create stability in the tax base and increase and protect property values; 2. Encourage redevelopment of commercial and service-oriented businesses to better serve the consumer needs of the community; 3. Remove structurally substandard buildings which cannot be rehabilitated; 4. Acquire and remove buildings that are economically or functionally obsolete or underutilized and acquire land that is vacant or underutilized to facilitate redevelopment; 5. Eliminate blighting influences which impede potential development in the area; 6. Provide redevelopment sites of the size and character necessary to assure development of the area and strengthen the overall economy and improve the sources of public revenue; 7. Promote industrial development, provide increased employment opportunities and supplement the financial base of the community; RHH26558 CH130-5 2 8. Provide land for publicly assisted housing; 9. Provide land for needed expansion of existing businesses in the area; 10. Provide adequate street, utility and other public improvements and facilities to enhance the area for both new and existing development; 11 . Achieve rehabilitation of buildings when economically feasible; .� 12. Accomplish the applicable goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 13. Provide maximum opportunity, consistent with sound needs of the City as a whole, for redevelopment by private enterprise; 14. Provide general design guidance in conjunction with suitable development controls in order to enhance the physical environment of the area; 15. Encourage and facilitate involvement of the community in resolving neighborhood problems related to business, physical structures and land use; and 16. Provide financial incentives as appropriate to stimulate growth and private sector redevelopment efforts within the Project Area. D. PROPOSED PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. The stated objectives of the Redevelopment Plan are intended to be accomplished through the following actions of the HRA: 1 . Clearance and redevelopment; 2. Relocation of buildings and the inhabitants of buildings; 3. The provision of building sites for new and expanding' businesses; 4. Vacation of rights-of-way; 5. Dedication of new rights-of-way; 6. Land acquisition and leasing; 7. Soils corrections and land preparation; 8. A Special Assessment Reduction Program designed to stimulate development within the Project Area; 9. New construction, or improvement of public streets and parking lots; RH8265$8 CH130-5 3 10. Installation or replacement of public facilities and utilities; 11 . Financial subsidies to induce businesses to locate within the Project Area; and 12. Landscaping and streetscape improvements. E. PROJECT AREA PLAN. Figure 2 of Modification No. 11, dated April 17, 1992 portrays the overall plans for the Project Area. Plan highlights include the following: 1. The Chanhassen Lakes business park comprising 450 acres, fully served by sewer, water and landscaped streets; 2. The downtown redevelopment area which is intended to be redeveloped for a multiplicity of uses including convenience and specialty retail, services, entertainment, recreational, cultural, office, institutional and multi-family residential and including public parking to adequately serve new developments; 3. A linear open space system within the business park and including parks on Lake Susan and in downtown Chanhassen; 4. The relocation of STH 101 to intersect with STH 5 at Dakota Avenue and remove traffic from the downtown area by routing it directly to STH 5 and new Market Boulevard; 5. The extension of Lake Drive from County Road 17 to STH 101 to accommodate local traffic demands; 6. The realignment of West 78th Street at County Road 17 to provide adequate stacking distance between West 78th Street and STH 5; 7. The widening of County Road 17 from Lake Drive to the northerly line of the tax increment financing district and the creation of an urban section in this Project Area; 8. The construction or reconstruction of public utilities within the downtown redevelopment area to accommodate new development including the acquisition and construction of a major ponding area with over a million cubic feet of storage to serve all of the downtown area; _ 9. The construction of Market Boulevard from West 78th Street to the southerly line of the tax increment financing district; 10. The construction of Lake Drive from Audubon to existing TH 101 and the upgrading of Audubon within the tax increment financing district; and 11. Redevelopment of the area north of STH 5 extending from Great Plains Boulevard easterly to realigned TH 101; R 26558 CH130-5 4 12. The development of a new park and the expansion of an existing park; 13. Heritage preservation enhancements; 14. The meeting of public facility needs; and 15. Aesthetic improvements to Highway 5 to enhance the downtown area's image and identity. F. PROJECT AREA FINANCING. The HRA has undertaken and intends to continue to develop plans for public improvements and to make land available for redevelopment by private parties within the Project Area. Previous Redevelopment Plans have contained descriptions of new projects. New proposals proposed by the HRA at this time are detailed in Subsection G of the accompanying modified Tax Increment Financing Plan. The HRA intends to finance both public improvements and redevelopment activities through a combination of special assessments and tax increment financing. Special assessments levied within the Project Area may be eligible for reimbursement through the HRA's Special Assessment Reduction Program which is described in more detail in Subsection P of the accompanying Tax Increment Financing Plan. Tax increment paid to the HRA is pledged through a written agreement with the City for repayment of bonds issued by the City to pay for public costs in the Project Area. RR826558 cB13o-5 5 II. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY. Pursuant to the HRA Act, the City on December 19, 1977 created the Project in the downtown portion of Chanhassen north of Highway 5 and established the area as a tax increment financing district. On December 18, 1978, the Project was expanded to include an additional 416 acres south of Highway 5 and that area was also included as part of the TIF District. At the time of the creation of the Project, the Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the HRA and the City. The Redevelopment Plan contained details of the Project, and included a brief discussion regarding the use of TIF. This constituted the "statement of the method proposed for financing" the Project required at that time by the HRA Act. Due to changed circumstances and new development opportunities, the HRA and City have chosen from time to time to amend the TIF Plan. The HRA and the City now wish to adopt another modified TIF Plan which accurately reflects the current financial plan for the Project, with particular emphasis on downtown Chanhassen. This constitutes the twelfth modified TIF Plan. However, adoption of this modified TIF Plan does not constitute an election on the part of the City or HRA to proceed with the Project under the TIF Act, except to the extent required by section 469.179. The HRA and City intend to continue to administer the Project as a TIF District created and certified prior to August 1, 1979, to the extent permitted by law. B . STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES. The HRA and City seek to achieve the following objectives through the modified TIF Plan: 1 . Provide employment opportunities within the City; 2. Improve the tax base of the City and the general economy of the City and State; 3. Encourage redevelopment of the Project Area which is an area of Chanhassen which has not been utilized to its full potential; 4. Implement relevant portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 5. Assist in the acquisition of certain properties for the purpose of constructing needed public improvements and promoting redevelopment; and 6. Implement a program of special assessment reductions for properties within the Project Area whose market values have increased due to new construction since the creation of the TIF District. C. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSE. In adopting the modified TIF Plan and administering the Project, the HRA and City have made the following findings: RH825558 CH130-5 6 1. Redevelopment of the Project would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of TIF is deemed necessary; 2. The Redevelopment and TIF Plans will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for development of the Project by private enterprise; and 3. The Redevelopment and TIF Plans conform to general plans for the development of the City as a whole. D. RELATION TO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The City authorized the Project on December 19, 1977, and modified its boundaries on December 18, 1978. Additional land was included within the Project Area in connection with the adoption of Modification No. 7 to the TIF Plan in 1987 and with Modification No. 11, dated April 17, 1992. This Modification No. 12 does not add any property to the Project Area. E. BOUNDARIES OF TIF DISTRICT. Boundaries of the TIF District area are shown on Figure 1 of Modification No. 11. The TIF District includes property in both the downtown and Chanhassen Lakes business park areas. Legal descriptions of the boundaries of the TIF District were included as exhibits to Resolution Nos. 77-72 and 78-73, adopted by City Council on December 19, 1977 and December 18, 1978, respectively. The boundary of the TIF District will not be changed as a result of this Modification No. 12. F. DESCRIPTION OF DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AREA. The downtown redevelopment area is the portion of the Project originally created by the City in 1977. It consists of approximately 175 of the Project's total of 630 acres. The downtown redevelopment area is located north of Highway 5 and a majority of it is west of Highway 101 (Great Plains Boulevard) . The area contains the retail and commercial core of the City, including the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. Although the infrastructure and public facilities have been improved significantly in recent years, the downtown redevelopment area is still characterized by the underutilization of land. G. DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER AGREEMENTS. The HRA has negotiated numerous agreements with developers in the past seeking to develop land within the downtown redevelopment area. Many of these projects have been outlined and discussed in previous modifications. In addition to those matters, the following projects are the subject of current or upcoming negotiation: 1. Target Store. The HRA intends to purchase approximately 16 acres for development of a Target Store and the creation of several outlots. The project will be located north of Highway 5 and south of West 78th Street. A portion of West 78th street will RHH25558 CH130-5 7 be vacated to accommodate the project. Target will occupy a site of slightly more than 10 acres. 2. Taco Shop/Apple Valley Redimix. These properties on Highway 5 will be redeveloped with more attractive and appropriate land uses. Plans call for use of portions of these sites for highway- related amenities, including a rest stop or open space. Other portions will be developed for highway-oriented commercial uses. 3. Conference Center/Recreational Center. The HRA intends to acquire property north of the Soo Line railroad in the vicinity of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, including the FMG Warehouse, Chanhassen Bowling Center and Frontier Building. Plans call for development of a multipurpose conference center/recreation center/bowling facility. Retail uses, including a cinema or restaurant, and a library may also be included. H. HISTORY AND CLASSIFICATION OF TIF DISTRICT. The TIF District was established by the HRA and City in late 1977 and contained approximately 175 acres centered on what is now known as the downtown redevelopment area. The TIF District was expanded the following year with the inclusion of approximately 455 acres in the area south of Highway 5 known as the Chanhassen Lakes business park. For purposes of classification, the TIF District is a pre-1979 TIF District and the HRA and City intend to retain that designation except as required by section 469.179 of the TIF Act. I. MODIFICATION OF TIF PLAN. This modification marks the twelfth formal modification of the TIF Plan. The TIF Plan may be modified again in the future by the HRA and City as changing conditions warrant. J. USE OF TAX INCREMENT. All revenues derived from the TIF District shall be used in accordance with the current modified TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance or. otherwise pay the capital and administrative costs of development activities within the Project Area as identified in the TIF Plan. Tax increment paid to the HRA is pledged through a written agreement with the City for repayment of bonds issued by the City to pay for public costs in the Project Area. K. EXCESS TAX INCREMENT. In any year in which the increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the TIF Plan, the HRA shall use the excess amount to do any of the following, in the order determined by the HRA: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment therefore; 88826558 08130-5 8 3. Pay into an escrow account to the county auditor who shall distribute the excess amount to the City, the County and the school district in direct proportion to their respective tax capacity rates. In addition, the HRA and City may choose to modify the TIF Plan again in order to provide for public improvements or other development costs within the Project. L. DURATION AND MODIFICATION OF THE TIF DISTRICT. The geographic area of the TIF District may be reduced but it cannot be enlarged after August 1, 1984. As a TIF District established prior to August 1, 1979, the TIF District will expire on August 1, 2009, except as the provisions of section 469.176, subdivision 1(e) of the TIF Act may require otherwise. M. RELOCATION. The HRA accepts as binding its obligations under Minnesota Statutes, sections 117.50 through 117.56 for relocation and will administer relocation services for families, individuals and businesses displaced by public action. N. PROPERTIES TO BE ACQUIRED WITHIN THE TIF DISTRICT. Figure 3 of Modification No. 11 shows all properties which have been or will be acquired within the Project Area as a result of actions described or authorized by the TIF Plan. No additional property is scheduled for acquisition as a result of this Modification No. 12. O. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLANS. Substantial public improvements have been undertaken during the last several years within the Project Area. Additional improvements are contemplated at the present time or in the near future. P. ESTIMATE OF PROJECT COSTS. Since the downtown redevelopment area is within an existing TIF District, increment is currently being generated and administered by the HRA. Increment generated by the TIF District has been collected by the HRA since shortly after the creation and expansion of the TIF District and Project in the late 1970s. Funds generated through tax increment have been used for a variety of purposes, including land acquisition, relocation and public improvements. The HRA commits itself to expend the portion of the increment generated by the TIF District which is necessary to pay the outlined costs. The HRA has also initiated a special assessment reduction program for properties throughout the Project. Under the program, benefitted properties are eligible for reductions in assessments if there has been an increase in the assessed value of the properties due to new construction. Properties assessed at a rate of less than $30,000 per acre qualify for a reduction equal to seven percent of the value added to the property through new construction. R®26558 CE130-5 9 • Properties assessed at a rate of $30,000 per acre or more qualify for a reduction equal to 12 percent of the added value. The amount of the reduction for which a property owner is eligible is equal to the tax increment from the parcel (as determined by the auditor and adjusted for fiscal disparities contributions) for a three year period following construction and commencing with the year in which the HRA receives the first full year's increment, or such other three year period as may be agreed to by the HRA and owner. However, the maximum reduction may not exceed the total special assessments levied and outstanding against the parcel for qualifying public improvement projects. Owners wishing to participate must enter into a special assessment reduction agreement with the HRA. In addition to project costs outlined in previous modifications, the following are costs anticipated for upcoming projects: Land Acquisition Taco Shop $ 313,000 Apple Valley Redimix 1,000,000 James Property 490,000 Burdick Property 2,736,000 Bowling Center 850,000 Bloomberg Property 1,200,000 Subtotal 6,589,000 Administration 300,000 TOTAL $ 6,889,000 The HRA is committed to certain additional expenditures which will be of mutual benefit to the HRA, Carver County and I.S.D. No. 112. The HRA intends to expend $500,000 per year during the period 1996 through 2000 on county highway projects within the Project Area. During the same period the HRA is committed to redistributing a similar amount through a voluntary agreement with I.S.D. No. 112 regarding increment produced as a result of school referenda adopted after the date of certification of the tax increment financing district. Under current state law, the HRA's activities within the Project Area will be substantially curtailed beginning on April 1, 2001. The HRA intends to seek adjustment of those restrictions from the Minnesota legislature and will seek the support of Carver County and I.S.D. No. 112 in its efforts to secure special legislation for this purpose. If the HRA is successful in these efforts, the HRA will initiate a discussion with the county and school district regarding sharing increment during the period following April 1, 2001. Q Q. ORIGINAL TAX CAPACITY. The Tax Increment Financing District has been highly successful in meeting the goals and objectives outlined in this Plan. With the completion of all projects currently anticipated, over three million square feet of commercial and industrial space will have been constructed. The current total tax RHB 26558 C3130-5 10 capacity of the Tax Increment District is $3,579,891 with a base tax capacity of $150,972. R. ESTIMATE OF CAPTURED TAX CAPACITY AND TAX INCREMENT. The estimated tax capacity of the Target store and adjacent outlots discussed in Section G of this Modification No. 12 will be $429,700 after completion. The original tax capacity for the property involved is $9,900. The estimated captured tax capacity is $419,800. Based upon current tax capacity rates, the above captured tax capacity should produce a yearly increment of approximately $480,000 after completion of the Target store. S. ESTIMATE OF IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS. The composite tax capacity rate for the property is currently 114.349 percent. Applying the percentage of the total tax capacity rate attributable to each taxing jurisdiction to the annual increment of $480,000 reveals the annual "loss" of tax dollars by each jurisdiction if the Target project would have occurred without TIF. Although the City and HRA believe the actual impact on other taxing jurisdictions is zero because development would not have occurred within the reasonably foreseeable future without public intervention, the assumed amount of tax dollars foregone by each jurisdiction is Listed below: ESTIMATED TAX INCREMENT ATTRIBUTABLE TO VARIOUS TAXING JURISDICTIONS TAX ESTIMATED TAXING CAPACITY TAX LOSS JURISDICTION RATE ($) City of Chanhassen 24.1 $ 101,164 Carver County 35.23 147,884 Independent School District No. 112 51.604 216,617 Others 3.415 14,335 TOTAL 114.349 $ 480,000 T. ANNUAL REPORT REGARDING TIF. Pursuant to section 469.175, subd. 6a of the TIF Act, the HRA must report annually by March 1 to the Minnesota commissioner of revenue the following amounts for the entire municipality: 1. the total principal amount of nondefeased tax increment financing bonds that are outstanding at the end of the previous calendar year; and RR826558 CH130-5 11 2. the total annual amount of principal and interest payments that are due for the current calendar year on (i) general obligation tax increment financing bonds, and (ii) other tax increment financing bonds. The HRA must also annually report to the commissioner of revenue the following amounts for the TIF district. 1. the type of district, whether economic development, redevelopment, housing, soils condition, mined underground space, or hazardous substance site; 2. the date on which the district is required to be decertified; 3. the captured net tax capacity of the district, by property class as specified by the commissioner of revenue, for taxes payable in the current calendar year; 4. the tax increment revenues for taxes payable in the current calendar year; 5. whether the tax increment plan or other governing document permits increment revenues to be expended (i) to pay bonds, the proceeds of which were or may be expended on activities located outside of the district, (ii) for deposit into a common fund from which money may be expended on activities located outside of the district, or (iii) to otherwise finance activities located outside of the tax increment district; and 6. any additional information that the commissioner of revenue may require. RH826558 CH130-5 12 I' rn --- - -- . \\ \ \: \ ; , , _ _. \ .ii 1TI.4I - < • )1 -) . ., , \,___,\ -\ ,\) -c\7 . -- 4:'---) .t .1) 4u, \i\ ,i ! . . .%.s:1' , / i ji - , r \\ c- (____ • , . : ( ,,,.,____,, -,F,L.,...._ ,,,. i - ii \\,_____ / , 1 i 1 , . , ,, i , ,IP / * . I 1 . I I :-- \ (// I 1 �I g I i i ) 11-7 111 i! j I 1 i 1 1 g i / itii I • '• i1,„1 Ra.c. .a% 1 s lifil i.ryt_i /// 1' j' Ed i (i );c_FirlI , .> .;____--7--__:-:._-, F1:2\ , ,Ert ,;,. .1ThE 1 • L_._ L-Yl . . 'N \ki\ � Il flil 1g il ‘_ ' .ikt.,.- . '1.2' I-z • l fl 1 1 ......, .4 41 . s, Mat i'm CRit 1 : ig. 1-1-7- ri -' 4. e Amo \I \_ i-Etri [ 1 E:-. 1 . • _, .MI �, ; � __ ,' ' \ 7 7.. • 6-E: ----- , :...,.= m4 ' - Imo• \ != w!: ri N _ _; l! oe . Lr f 111 1 1 1 1 \�\ � ' C; 11 ' R 1. /fie.! am?i \\ /)h air itp. i ilq: i \\\\ \\ ...../ CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 18, 1992 Chairman Batzli called the meeting to order at 7 :35 p .m . . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad , Matt Ledvina , Steve Emmings , Brian Batzli and Jeff Farmakes MEMBERS ABSENT: Joan Ahrens STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen , Senior Planner ; Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner I ; and Dave Hempel , Sr . Engineering Technician PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT TO PLAT FOUR LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5 , SOUTH OF THE CHICAGO , MILWAUKEE , ST . PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 101 ON 79TH STREET , GATEWAY FIRST ADDITION , LOTUS REALTY . Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . Chairman Batzli called the public hearing to order . Conrad moved, Erhart seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Batzli : Tim , why don 't we start at your end here . Do you have any comments? Questions? Erhart : Other than this cash in lieu of parkland dedication . That wasn 't done in the previous action . A duplication? Olsen: No . Erhart : I guess I don 't really have anything on it . It 's pretty straight forward . Batzli : Ladd? Matt? Ledvina : Yeah , I had just a general question . Why are we doing this at this time? Or what 's the advantage to the City? For the developer? What 's the purpose of this? Olsen: Well it was a condition of the approval from when the Valvoline site was created . And the benefit is because right now there 's metes and bounds descriptions . This makes it a lot cleaner . We are able to get right-of-way that is required for access to Lot 4 . It 's getting rid of two outlots . Two remnant pieces that are unbuildable so now it 's combining them with adjacent properties . That 's the main reason that we . Ledvina : It 's mostly to clean up the title and straighten out the right-of-way? Olsen: Exactly . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 2 Ledvina : Could this be done at the time the Red-E-Mix parcel is purchas d and developed or is that not? Olsen: It 'd really be hard to tie that in with this . At this time the owners of these properties knew that they did have to go through the platting procedure so otherwise it 'd be hard to bring them all back in once Red-E-Mix is under our ownership . At this time they 're all willing_ and cooperative . Ledvina : That 's all , thank you . Emmings: I don 't have anything . Batzli : Okay , you 're going to wait for me to ask the question . Okay , — Jeff . Farmakes : No comment . _. Batzli : I have one question for Dave . The right-of-way description . H_w did we come up with that description of the additional right-of-way that you needed? Did our attorneys prepare that? — Hempel : As far as the condition number 2? Batzli : Yes . Hempel : On the plat there , the right-of-way on the cul-de-sac . Right now there 's no boulevard space to speak of with the existing cul-de-sac that s out there . What we wanted to do is get an additional 10 feet east of tf t cul-de-sac to give us a boulevard consistent with other typical cul-de-sacs in the city . The description of it was prepared by myself — upon review of the plat . Batzli : Okay , I am not a real property attorney but we should make sure_ that this accurately describes what you 're trying to get . I note the intent of the parties and everyone 's agreeing but this didn 't make- sense to me . Hempel : Okay . With the final plat we 'll make sure that the additional right-of-way is being granted or conveyed with that final plat document . Batzli : Okay , that 's fine . Those are the only questions I had . Is the e a motion? Erhart : I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat #91-1 as shown on the plans dated October 19 , 1992 with the 4 conditions as shown in the staff report . Batzli : Is there a second? Conrad: Second . - Batzli : It 's been moved and seconded . Is there any discussion? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 3 Erhart moved , Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat #91-1 as shown on the plans dated October 19 , 1992 with the following' conditions: 1 . Lot 4 , Block 1 shall be platted as Outlot A . 2 . Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the northerly 60 ' and over the westerly 10 ' of the northerly 65 .89 ' of Lot 3 , Block 1 . -3 . Cash in lieu of parkland dedication shall be required at the time of building permit issuance . 4 . The plat name of Gateway First Additional shall be changed . All voted in favor and the motion carried . PUBLIC HEARING: BEISSNER , LTD . PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF GOODYEAR TIRE AND ABRA FACILITIES ON PROPERTY ZONED BH , HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5 , NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST AND EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN EMISSION CONTROL STATION: Public Present: Name Address Al Beissner 6100 Summit Dr , Brooklyn Center 55430 Randy MacPherson Abra Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne Avenue Gerard & Lindsay Amedeo 8007 Cheyenne Avenue Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this time . Chairman Batzli called the public hearing to order . Al Beissner : I 'm Al Beissner and I 'm the applicant and real estate developer . We have entered into a purchase agreement to buy the 2 acres of land and develop the Abra and Goodyear site as outlined . We 've worked probably 4 or 5 months with the city through maybe several site plans to develop what we thought was compatible . This presented a little more of a challenge than we initially thought because we 're actually facing 2 front doors . Highway 5 is a front door and Lake Drive is a front door . And it was difficult to determine which should be the front so in essence what you see on the plans that we 've submitted , are basically we have metal facia on Highway 5 and we have metal facia on Lake Drive . And we 've tried to treat one as the other one because we didn 't know which would be the front door . If it 's a neighborhood , they think Lake Drive is a front door _ If it 's the City of Chanhassen , they think Highway 5 is a front door so we were very conscience of our development of that . A couple of things that I 'd like to point out about the efforts that we put forth here is that , the two buildings as they are proposed , really is a lot less building coverage for the land than what it is zoned for . That is Goodyear wanted double the parking requirements and that required more Planning Commission Meeting — November 18 , 1992 - Page 4 land obviously . More green area so we have about 11 ,000 square foot of building on 86 ,000 square feet of land . If we were to develop it to max , it would have had much more coverage . We 've also been sensitive . Your ordinance requires some guidelines for landscaping . Minimum dollar - amounts . We have , our bids have come in and our landscaping cost will b more than double what your standards are for the property so we 've taken that effort . We haven 't completed the complete development of the pond _ yet but we will be landscaping that . We don 't have a plan for that . Generally speaking we are in agreement with the staff report and can comply without objection to most everything in it with a couple exceptions . The dormers that were requested by staff . Goodyear hasn 't - approved dormers yet on their gabled roof and they don 't have it in thei plans . In dealing with Goodyear , they have like 8 sets of standard plans that they think meet all the standards and we have sent to Akron for a - request for the dormers to sort of offset the gabled roof that we have o it and we have not heard back yet from them . Akron , Ohio and corporate Goodyear is apparently substantial so it may be a while before we hear on that . When we developed the rooflines , and this seemed to be a very sensitive issue , we had the Abra standard roof plan , and Randy MacPherson , president of Abra is here and would like to address you also . Abra had their standard building that they 've developed kind of like Goodyear had to develop their standard building . Fortunately for us I guess , Goodyear has a gabled roof on this particular building and not a flat roof . The standard Abra roofline and standard Abra building did not_ meet with the staff 's acceptance when we walked in the door . We 've work i through I think 4 or 5 different plans and elevations for it . And in fa,,t we 've probably added a good 4% or 5% more to the cost with the two front doors if you will . By putting awnings on both Lake Drive and on Highway- 5 . There was a strong sentiment about having a pitched roof or a gabled roof or something other than a flat roof on the Abra store and we thought we came to a reasonable compromise . The President of Abra would like to- address it . They 're trying to develop their own standard roof line and this design that we came up with doesn 't meet quite their standards yet and we 're still talking to them about it . Otherwise I think everything Ln the staff report is acceptable and fine with us . We 've spent a lot of effort and time trying to meet all of the requirements and we think we 'v_ done a good job of it and we were sensitive to the landscaping . We were sensitive to the coverage . We were sensitive to the two front doors and- we nd-we hope that we can continue on . There will be , we will be putting in substantially more trees than what we ever anticipated and that 's satisfactory with us . So I don 't , different Planning Commissions functioN-n differently . I don 't know what you want for a report or want me to say but that 's kind of what we went through . And I think the staff report adequately reflects the number of meetings we have had and the changes that we have gone through on trying to meet your requirements . Batzli : We may have questions for you later . What I think we needed a sense of was whether you had seen the staff report and agreed with those- conditions . hose-conditions . So you 've answered that . Al Beissner : Right . The only other thing in the staff report , we were _ originally scheduled I think for October 14th and then we didn 't have a quorum . Then we were scheduled for 2 weeks later and that didn 't work a..d so the condition number 11 is a condition that wasn 't in the October 14th Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 5 one . And what that is , it 's an $8 ,700 .00 charge for water retention downstream . When Schoell-Madsen , our engineers designed this , they though that the water retention downstream was free and so they designed it that way . The sellers of the land aren 't so sure that they wouldn 't rather store it all on the site as opposed to downstream and we would like to meet again with staff to determine whether or not we can deepen the pond and berm it more so we don 't have to pay for downstream retention or if they would rather pay for it and keep the pond as it is . So that 's the only condition that we are up in the air on . At the October 14th meeting we didn 't have a number . Didn 't know what it was coming out . Would this be the appropriate time for? Batzli : Yes . Al Beissner : Okay . I have brought , not good plans but plans . The first plan we had for the Abra store . The second one . The third one and the one we wanted and then the one we ended up with so I 'll let Randy MacPherson address you . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Randy MacPherson: Thank you Mr . Chairman , Commission members . My name is Randy MacPherson . I 'm the President of Abra Auto Body and Glass . First of all I want to assure you that we share your same concerns about the appearance and the quality of our operation . This facility will be one of our national prototypes . It will be our national role model . We have people flying in from as far away as Europe to view our facilities so the apperance of this facility we share your same concerns . And one of the things we want to do is make sure that we present ourselves in a very professional manner and that we become a very good neighbor in the community . I think you have one picture which is actually a facility that we did several years ago but we have done another facility similar to that and I wanted to show you the difference . I think you have this picture here and it shows a . . .on the roof and we have since , I 'd like to give you another picture which actually shows a different , we extended a rolled masard up on the roof as well . And one of my concerns with this pinnacle and I ' ll pass this out to you , is that actually having this false roof we think actually attracts more attention to it . And it 's maybe a matter of taste but we have worked very hard and diligently to try to create something that 's not obtrusive or not going to stick out or not going to draw attention to it . And so what we would like to propose , we are happy with the city and with the conditions . We 're just asking that you would allow us to build a building that 's more consistent with the appearance and with the quality of image that we 're trying to accomplish . So if you can pass that picture around and I didn 't bring more . I probably should have but anyway , we share the same concern and we 're just asking . This is national role model for us . A national prototype . Minneapolis is our headquarters and we 're expanding all over the country now and it 's very important that we have a uniformity consistency . It 's something that every city will be happy with so we share you concerns and want to be willing partners with you in creating a facility that everyone will be happy with . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 6 Batzli : Very good , thank you . This is a public hearing . I 'd like to open it up to the public . If anyone would like to address the Commissio , I ask that they step up to the microphone and give their name and address for the record prior to addressing the Commission . — Tom Kotsonas: My name is Tom Kotsonas and I live at 8001 Cheyenne in Chanhassen Estates . I also have some pictures to pass around . The pictures that I 'm presenting are of current establishments around the western suburbs and all of these , after looking at these , I have some grave concerns , at least what exists at the present time with Goodyear and Abra facilities . Questions such as what happens to the automobiles . As— you can see in the pictures , when they circulate the storage of automobiles on the outside , a rather unsightly view in all those cases . Most of those pictures were taken this weekend early in the morning so — those cars are there and they 're not stored away at night . They 're ther . There are a number of concerns besides that that I have on this development . To go through them in a sort of a manner here . One , is the increased traffic that this site is going to bring to our neighborhood . Or line our neighborhood . Noise . These types of businesses bring a gre t deal of noise with them . Air and the auto pollution was already talked about . The trash and all of these businesses except one had outdoor tra—h sitting front and back . Storage overnight . And these would be somethir that we 're worried about . Obviously loss of privacy in addition to what we already have . The general destruction of the trees in that _ neighborhood that are there . Which is something in a natural environmen which we 'd much prefer to stay . That negative impact on the mini-park . To have those businesses right there . The amount of traffic going by . I can 't imagine many couples or many people wanting their kids to go down .- Young children to be playing there when that traffic , that increased traffic is there . There are some pictures of the entryway into Chanhassen and I don 't see how this is going to enhance the entryway into Chanhassen on the east side . That I read in the paper and it seems like the City Council and the Chamber and this group and others are very concerned witn . Nothing seems to be being done about it . There 's a lot of talk but everytime something goes in , it doesn 't seem to be something to ,help out in that nature . And the other things we 're worried about of course are outdoor signs . Flags . All of these places have banners flying . Sale signs . All these types of things that again , make it very difficult and make it very unsightly for our neighborhood . And the other things that would like you to consider is , how is this business compatible to the neighborhood . I think we as residents and long term residents . Myself — I 've been there over 10 years , and some of the other people in that neighborhood have been there as many as 20 . We feel that we deserve alsL, to be considered in this . It seems that every time a business comes along they have the top spot or top billing or however you want to say it and then we get sympathy and then after the sympathy , the vote is taken and couple trees are put up and away we go . And also the feeling in the neighborhood is that there 's a big push to develop this and whatever comes , let 's get it in there . Let 's get this plot of land developed and then we ' ll be done with it and we 'll be onto something else . We feel that we 're entitled to be recognized and entitled to be considered in what goes in and what kind of businesses . Automobile repair facilities do make noise . They are unsightly , and with the other things that go with them . Thank you very much . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 7 Batzli : Thank you . Is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission? Lindsay Amedeo: I 'm Lindsay Amedeo , 8007 Cheyenne . Chanhassen Estates also . Of course , anything in the automotive industry is not the business _ of choice to back up a residential neighborhood but I also understand that the zoning for that area allows for this type of business and we understand that the city needs the funds . And so the remaining question for me is , like Tom said , what will be done to reduce the visual and the audio disturbance that is brought by this type of a business? They are unsightly . This type of a business is extremely noisey and that 's my primary concern . Although to also repeat what Tom said , the natural _ visual barrier of the evergreens that are behind , inbetween my property and the proposed site , is dying out and there is no visual obstruction there right now . So I 'm real curious to know what the plans are to decrease the visual and sound problems that this type of business will bring . Batzli : Thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? I apologize , we took some of your pictures apart and there was glue on them . Tom Kotsonas: That 's okay . . . Randy MacPherson: Mr . Chairman , Commission members , I don 't know what pictures are being circulated but we share the same concerns as the residents do . In fact many of our good customers live very close to us . We have 16 locations in the metropolitan area . Many of these are by , some of them right next to restaurants . In Coon Rapids we have residential homes in less than 200 feet . We 're in West Bloomington , we have residential housing with less than 200 feet . We have 16 locations and have never had , we 've never had one complaint to any city about our activities . We operate our businesses and we 've had OSHA out to test noise levels and everything and I can assure you that we will not be a disturbance and you can check our facilities . And you can check also other cities that we have been in and find that to my knowledge we 've never had one complaint . And we just opened up a new facility i'r 'West Bloomington and it 's always an issue and I can understand . Especially in auto body . You mention the word auto body and it sends shivers through many residents and also Planning and City Commissions because of the concern . Because the industry . The image of the industry . Frankly the reason why we have prospered and done so well in this industry is because of what we 've done . We 've raised it to a new level . We have brought the body shop business from back street to main street , USA . So the noise — level , the sounds , the odors , we have to abide by very strict government regulations . We 've just had OSHA through again checking to make sure that we 're doing everything appropriately . And we have not , this concern has been raised before and after we come into the community , it 's never become an issue . So we share the concern and again , we want to be a good neighbor in the community and we certainly don 't want to offend some of the people close by who could be potential customers of ours and so we share that . Batzli : Have you had any meetings with the local residents? Planning Commission Meeting - November 18 , 1992 - Page 8 Randy MacPherson: In going before the City of Eagan , we went back and resurveyed people in the West Bloomington market and none of them had a complaint . I didn 't do this . It was hired by the people representing us in Eagan . Batzli : But in this particular development , you haven 't had a neighborhood meeting to explain the development? - Randy MacPherson: We have not personally had one , no . Emmings : Do you have any need to store anything outside? Other than yon-- trash perhaps . Randy MacPherson: Well I 'm as sensitive to that as anyone . We have a - general philosophy of not having outside storage and once in a while someone will drop off a customer , a customer will drop off a car after hours and leave the key in the key drop but we do not want wrecked cars stored outside . Emmings: How about anything that , anything that you use in your operations? Do you need to store anything outside? Randy MacPherson: Nothing . We don 't want anything outside . Emmings : So if there were a condition that nothing could be stored outside , that would not be a problem to you? Randy MacPherson: That would not be a problem . Krauss: Commissioner Emmings , we do have a condition that says no damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight . - Emmings: I 'm talking about anything . We 've got trash and we 'll get the trash enclosed . There will probably be some vehicles outside but I just _ wondered if there would be , I don 't see any reason . He doesn 't have any need to have anything else stored outside so we can put a condition on that nothing else will be stored outside . Randy MacPherson: I don 't want anything stored outside . I 'm just as concerned about that as anyone . Farmakes : Where is a damaged car stored? When I bring it in . Randy MacPherson: We keep it inside . Farmakes: So when a wrecking car , you don 't have like a central area somewhere else where you store these? They bring in a wrecked car off of a wrecking truck and it brings inside and it spends it 's entire time inside? Randy MacPherson: There may be a short period of time during the day when it 's dropped off and then it 's , they 'll tow a vehicle . Sometimes an inoperable vehicle will be towed to us and it may be outside for a short period but it 's brought in by night . And we work very hard to schedule Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 9 appropriately . The other thing that I want to point out about Abra , I can 't speak for Goodyear but we , most of our facilities do not , their average traffic , I mean the amount of cars we produce a week is not much more than about 20 cars : We are not doing a lot of small , you know we 're not doing tune-ups or anything like that . We do a lot less volume of repair and so , and we do not , especially in a location like this , we do not specialize in heavy collision . We 're not doing the heavy , really severely damaged . Most of it is , if we have a vehicle that 's damaged like that , we ' ll bring it to one of our larger facilities where we have more storage , ircluding Eden Prairie . We have a larger facility with storage and it 's tucked down behind where we can store some vehicles down there . Farmakes : How do you deal with the damaged automobiles as far as leakage of oil or battery acid or any of these other types of things that are stored on site? Randy MacPherson: We have an EPA license . We have storage containers which are removed and we have to keep track of all potential , we are considered a small quantity generator . We 're not a large quantity generator , but even so , we are very regulated by the government on anything . So we have the appropriate , if the oil spills , we have the appropriate product to clean up that and the proper way of disposing of it . Batzli : When you 're doing minor repair work , maybe pounding out dents and things like that , during the summer months do you typically have the doors open to your facility? The bays open . Randy MacPherson : We tell our people that they cannot have the door open more than 12 inches . And there are some facilities where we have , I think our Eden Prairie facility , I don 't know if you 've been by it . Batzli : I 'm looking at pictures of it . Randy MacPherson: Okay . See that 's tucked , you can 't even see that from the road . That is tucked behind . I don 't know if you 're familiar with the Modern Tire building . Batzli : Yeah . Randy MacPherson: But it 's back behind that . And that 's a different location . That 's more of an industrial facility . And that 's where I said we will do more of our heavy collision and repair . Batzli : Thank you . We may have more questions . This is a public hearing . Does anyone else wish to address the Commission? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Emmings moved , Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Eatzli : Jeff , we ' ll start with you here . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 10 Farmakes: Paul , can you talk a little bit more about three of the gener 1 issues . Standards . To, be designed to construct . . .so it will be compatible in the appearance with the existing and intended character of the general vicinity . We 've had a lot of problems with that area in the past , being that it 's so close to a single family residential area . Som of the intents of the things that we 're working on with the Highway 5 development . What concerns me a bit I guess is now that the highway is - completed , there sort of will be a general development I think is kind o indicative to some of the stuff that we 're seeing and these types of buildings appearance generally take on a light industrial look . With tha block and the comments that have been made in the past by some of the other applicants for these types of buildings . Valvoline for instance . Putting the money into the building is not probably consistent with good business practice with these types of operations . The problem with thes- types of buildings is that they 're positioned of course into a very sensitive area and I 'm sure you 're familiar with the fact that that 's the entrance to our city and so on . How does this relate to the intent of what we 're doing with Highway 5? I read your paragraph there but it really doesn 't address sort of the work that 's been working on for a year and a half . Krauss: Well , Commissioner Farmakes , I 'm sure as you 're aware , we 've ha a lot of intent in the last year to do a better job of development along Highway 5 . It has yet to pay dividends in terms of having a new ordinan-e with some specific guidelines . Now we went through an exercise with Target that you 're all familiar with where I think we did employ a lot of the concepts that will become a part of the Highway 5 project . But again, Target it was in the HRA district . There were financial considerations . It was done as a PUD . It was a modern day project . In a lot of respect , I think I indicated this at our last Highway 5 meeting , this site is _ something of a throwback in terms of the way it was handled . I mean thi has been a platted , commercial site since McDonald 's went in . The site ' been appropriately zoned for this type of use . Lake Drive is a frontage road through there , is completed . We do have concerns with the way thes- buildings look . We 'd much prefer that they take on an appearance more consistent with the development standards that we 've had in downtown Chanhassen . We think the PUD standard provided some latitude to do that Probably not as much as we would have at it if the Highway 5 project was completed . I 'd note that , I recall when the emission control station ca,,.s before you , you were told that they had a prototype that they built 11 of and their contract with the State said this is all they built . And in - that case we would have preferred a pitched roof again but we settled fo a mansard condition on there and we settled for considerably more landscaping than they put in elsewhere and I think if you look at other - emission control stations around the Twin Cities , it 's probably one of t a better looking ones . What it all boils down to is , I think the fact that this is a CUP and that there are conditions like this in a CUP , gives you some latitude to demand better than average . But since we don 't have th Highway 5 program yet up and running , I 'm not sure exactly where the gra area is of how far we should push that . We 've worked , given the fact that this is somewhat traditional site planning , we 've worked with Beissner n- and off as he indicated , for many months you know , trying to get a handl on where Highway 5 is going . Trying to do the best job we can within the existing ordinances . Again , we wish that we had a little bit different Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 11 architectural style but beyond that , we 'd like to hear your comments on where you think we should take it . I 'm relunctant to , ah . I guess I 've said enough on that . Farmakes : I wanted to know what you could do in regards to the architectural standards . And I guess I 'm going to have to rely on your expertise with that because it is interpretative at that point . I think it 's unfortunate that one , you have to ask an applicant to do something - that 's far more costly and the type of building that maybe in general terms in servicing is , from their standpoint , a waste of money . From our standpoint I think it 's one of aesthetics in the community that we live in . We keep on bumping up against this problem and particularly in the car care industry . I really don 't mean to single that out but I 'm sure that this isn 't the first time that you 've heard that . The type of architecture that we 're getting is corporate led franchise type architecture . It is basically bare bones type of architecture that is meant to put up a workable facility for the least amount of money possible . And unfortunately , when such facilities are taken out of the light industrial area and they 're put into a commercial area that , for instance car care where they want to be next to the highway . They want to have a visibility that a light industrial area is not going to provide them . We get into a situation where we 're getting the bright plastic and the graphics and the cinder block type buildings . I think that that 's unfortunate in this particular area . This is an incredibly sensitive area I think because of the zoning mistake that was made . . .past that we 're all familiar with that in this room . I don 't really know again getting back to that gray area , what we can do there but I would really like to see more done with the style of the architecture in trying to take it away from the light industrial look . I realize that you 've done work on that and the applicant has been working with you on that to try and stick with that . I don 't know if there could be any additional work done to clarify detail , perhaps what that could be . We 've had problems in the past with architectural standards . If you have any ideas with that , I 'd like to hear them . I think for sure at least that there 's further work that could be done in softening the roof line . I am concerned about the storage on site . People driving into our community . I certainly hope that they 're not going to see a line of smashed cars as they drive into Chanhassen . But I guess I 'd also like to say to us in general , as a warning , that we _ need to get this overlayment district done . And do it well but do it as a priority because these types of developments are going to follow this highway completion very , very fast and I kind of see us in a position where we may be putting up things that we don 't want to live with long term . If we can get any additional type of negotiation position for the types of properties that are going to be developed here , we 're going to need more than what we have . Batzli : Jeff , help me out a minute here . On the roof , you 're suggesting that we should do what with it? Farmakes: Well I 'm not an architect but basically it looks like an airplane hangar . The comment Goodyear made I believe about corporate directive , there are thousands of different Goodyear operations and architectural styles throughout the country and I know in Ipswitch , a small town in New England . Massachussetts , it 's in a historical zone . It Planning Commission Meeting — November 18 , 1992 - Page 12 looks like a historic building . They basically had to conform an auto body section care area to like a salt box type operation . These types o things can be done if there 's a community that wants to have them done and have the type of ordinances that support that type of development . And again , I 'm going to have to defer to you because we get into a gray area in negotiation and I 'm not sitting there at the table . But I think that in the area of the Abra facility , actually the stone work there is fairl . nice . I think the problem there is the roof line and sort of the contemporary , you have a box industrial look with a flat roof and again , these types of structures , even though we put a lot of trees around them . still wind up looking like light industrial type buildings . And without changing that and putting them close to a single family zone , and in the primary entrance into our community , we 're going to wind up with car care area that extends down the highway which is what we did not want working on our general corridor . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Steve . Oh , sorry . — Krauss: Commissioner Farmakes . It would be useful you know if the Planning Commission had some specific recommendations on this and I don 't say this because we couldn 't come up with them but we had a series of meetings with them over a period of months getting small incremental changes here and there and you sometimes lose the forest through the trees . We went through a similar process on the Americana Bank as I — recall . You gave quite an astute dressing down of the architecture of that building . I think it resulted in some modifications . I believe th=t you clearly have some latitude . Some degree of latitude and again I don 't know where to tell you to stop but in terms of this being a conditional use . It 's clear that Chanhassen is developing a set of standards and expectations that are somewhat beyond Bismark or Mandan . You know simply because there 's franchise architecture doesn 't mean you have to take it .— For years we 've been telling people like Hardee 's that orange buildings don 't fly in Chanhassen and you do have a right to do that . So don 't shoot too low either . — Farmakes: Well I , of couse when we deal with some of these things, when we sit up here and we start saying , well why don 't you move that over here and why don 't you bring that up here . We 're up here for an hour . Arbitrarily when we look at these things , we of course go over them but they 're small schmatic type illustrations . Some of the things that we are suggesting or have to be responsible about , they 're obviously costing someone thousand , tens of thousands or many thousands of dollars . I wan to make sure that perhaps maybe we can sit down later and talk in more specific terms of architecture . In terms of general ideas , I find that _ it , when we sit up here and we say , no we want four gables up there or something like that . It doesn 't serve a lot of purpose and sometimes confuses the issue . Perhaps maybe we can discuss this later in regards to changing the architecture but I wanted to be on record as thinking or — making the statement that we could improve this type of structure so it does not have a light industrial appearance as we drive into Chanhassen . Batzli : Okay . Steve . Planning Commission Meeting — November 18 , 1992 - Page 13 Emmings : In general I agree with what Jeff has said . It 's frustrating to sit and look at these buildings on the one hand and think now we 're going to have McDonald 's and the test station and this building and this building and it is the entrance to Chanhassen from the east and it doesn 't seem to be going very well . But I don 't know how to change it . I don 't know now , you know these kinds of businesses are businesses we all use and it 's not the kind of situation where you want to say , well they can be in somebody else 's community or something . And there ought to be a solution in it but I don 't know what it is . The way the land is zoned now , it 's an appropriate use I think for the area . So in general I just think it 's kind of frustrating to look at this . But a couple of things that were brought up . The pictures raise a point . The one Goodyear facility had a huge stack of tires outside of it and is that addressed here somewhere? There just will not be any outside storage . Krauss: It 's addressed but it 's not addressed as well detailed as it could be . Emmings: I think it should probably be under the conditional use permit portion . — Krauss: Yes , exactly . Emmings: And we may . . .broader condition that just says , there will be no outdoor storage . Now they 've got trash , that will be enclosed right? Krauss : Yes . — Emmings: Trash containers , that will be enclosed . There shouldn 't be any outdoor storage of anything on these sites . We can leave the condition that there 's no damage or inoperable vehicles stored , even though that 's — kind of mushy . I 'm not sure exactly what that means . But I can see that they would sometimes have to park cars outside if it 's not a lot and they 're not in terrible condition , if they 're not all smashed up , I guess _ that can be all I 've got . The other , somebody raised , one of the people who spoke , raised the question about having banners and sale signs . That does seem to be kind of something that you associate with a business of this kind . Is that regulated under our sign ordinance? Al-Jaff : Yes it is . Emmings : Okay , what can they do? Al-Jaff : They can have streamers . They can have banners as a temporary sign 3 times a year , 10 days at a time for a total of 30 days per year . Per site . Emmings: And do they have to come in and tell you when they 're doing it? Al-Jaff : Yes . _ Farmakes: That 's being modified somewhat . Emmings : What will the new one say? Planning Commission Meeting _ November 18 , 1992 - Page 14 Farmakes: Well , we haven 't met in quite a while but essentially it limi`'s some of that to a new opening . And modifies it somewhat . Emmings: But it 's limited anyway so it 's not . . . Farmakes: It deals pretty much with the banner and the amount of what goes in the window . It would say temporary , the Valvoline would change . Would temper that down somewhat . That type of useage . — Al-Jeff : Does that cover the streamers as well? Farmakes: Ah , I would be , I don 't feel comfortable quoting that because it 's been a while since I 've worked on that particular thing . Maybe 4 or 5 mo-iths . I don 't want to quote that off the top of my head . Emmings: I don 't really have any other specific comments on this . Batzli : Thank you Steve . Matt . Ledvina: Well generally I would say that I believe the site does fit into the la-,d use that 's in the vicinity of the project . I would also agree with Jeff 's sentiments as it relates to the Highway 5 overlay and I thin we should also try to expedite our development of an overlay to more adequately deal with these types of buildings that are going in . I 'd _ support the efforts , continued efforts to improve the roof lines of certainly the Goodyear with the use of the dormers where we can and also staff 's recommendations regarding Abra . One of the residents mentioned the situation with the traffic and I think that these types of uses real'-y won 't provide a tremendous intensification of the traffic and so I don 't know that there will be that much more substantial traffic or pollution resulting from this . Being that you have the emission control center juat next door and hundreds of cars go through that line so . I wanted to ask about one of the elements in the staff report and find out whether maybe we wanted to add a condition as it relates to the Highway 5 task force providing some input on the site plan review . And I don 't know , Paul yo were suggesting that that might be appropriate? Krauss : Well in fact we had a meeting last week and we talked about the— proposed Opus project and we did briefly talk about this one . The conce i that I have is , some of the Highway 5 issues may be out of the legal context of the current ordinance . I mean I think you should push the envelope within the current ordinance because you have a standing to do that but the Highway 5 Task Force is looking down the road towards a new set of guiding principles that don 't quite exist yet . We 'd be happy to take it to them . I think we have a meeting in early December . We could- do that but they 're likely , it 's likely to be an exercise in frustration because they may come up with desires that can 't be met . Ledvina : So maybe they really can 't provide additional input beyond wha we 're doing right here . Krauss: I don 't know , Commissioner Emmings serves on that . I mean we 'd be happy to bring it up . And Jeff . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 15 Batzli : Paul , by way of example , give me a desire that can 't be met . Krauss : If there 's a statement that , you know we initially would have had a preference for both these buildings to be identically designed . I 've seen both uses done very attractively in auto malls that have consistent architecture where the door 's already entered into a central courtyard and they share a common parking where they do have pitched roofs . Metal standing seam roofs . Where all the signage is coordinated . That would be my preference . If that 's the recommendation of the Highway 5 Task Force , 'my guess is if , I don 't want to speak for the City Attorney but if it was rejected on the principle that that 's what you wanted to do , you may have pushed the envelope a little too far . In terms of what you can demand based upon the current ordinances . Batzli : I don 't think we would be pushing it too far necessarily to have design themes that would tend to have you look at one building and another and say , they resemble one another . Or at least there are design elements that are consistent . Do you think right now that we have that? Krauss : I don 't know . I mean that was our initial preference that we discussed with the applicant . I think clearly that 's the most appropriate way of doing it . If we get , and again , we 're dealing with an ordinance that doesn 't exist and we 're not sure what you 're reaction or City Council 's reaction 's going to be on any of these things so it 's kind of , we 've got a series of unknowns . If we get a strong indication from you as to what your desire is , we 'll pursue it . Batzli : Ladd . Conrad: Three issues which everybody 's talked about . Noise . The architecture . The roof design and landscaping . Noise , the applicant has — talked about a little bit . I guess I 'm not comfortable there yet because I don 't know what kind of noise is generated from Abra . That bothers me . I need somebody to comfort me somehow on the noise level for the neighborhood . The pitched roofs and the architecture , I think is. just real important . It 's the entrance to Chanhassen and I 'm not overly protective of that visual but I am somewhat . I don 't want this to be the typical and I 'd like to stay away from architectural standards as much as I can but in this case , this is the entrance and there 's just no doubt we have to make it work . I 'm not sure that I need to have the two buildings looking alike . But I do need to make it look like what we 've been trying to make that area look like and that 's a little bit of fitting into the neighborhood . Even though it 's on a highway . I want to feel comfortable that there 's some architectural soundness and that 's typically with the roofline . I think the building materials look fine . Batzli : Let me ask this , if I can interrupt you , and I already have so I will . Rather than look like a hodge podge of fast food/franchise type buildings , doesn 't it make more sense to at least make several of them look like they belong together? Conrad: That 'd be nice . I don 't know if it counts . Really we already have two that , we 've got McDonald 's so we should make them all look like McDonald 's . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 16 Batzli : Not identical but at least so one architect is looking at the other plan . Architects know how to do that . I don 't . Farmakes: The intent though is , I can 't speak for the applicant but in general a franchise directive usually follows that you have to be seen a d they 're very concerned about that and of course they seek this type of confirmation with structure and signage to try and reinforce that this i- a Goodyear or this is an Abra . And they do put a lot of money into it . It 's part of that marketing direction and Ladd , I 'm sure you know that you can dillute that . Conrad: If I were the applicant , I wouldn 't want to . I 'd want to keep the image constant . Yet on the other hand , what we 're seeing is that that image is a variety of images out there right now . If you 're a franchise- , we have an opportunity to make a new standard for architecture that othe s try to match . The ones that I 've seen in the pictures , and those are old , they 're today but they 're still , there 's certainly nothing , there 's not -a- standard standard there that I want to follow . I think the applicant has present d some visuals that are okay but I think we have to improve upon them and .. think it really , a lot goes back to that roofline . And it also goes back to you 're part of the entrance to Chanhassen , and that 's real significar . Beim part of that good image means you 're going to increase your busine _ s and so I think there 's a compromise here to keep the Goodyear and Abra and sive them their identity if they want but I think also Chanhassen has tc demand what fits in that area . And the neighbors have never been happy with that section and I think I want to , it 's not an intensive use . It fits this area I think . My concern is just to make sure it fits visuall. . And again , part of that is noise . Part of my concern is noise . The oth r part is landscaping , and I don 't have any idea what we 're talking about . None . It 's just like , I want to see how it fits and that 's real _ important . And again we 're talking , I 've looked at the plans and I don ' have a clue and I think staff has asked for more landscaping and I think that 's real appropriate . I do want to , in looking at many little plans here and I don 't know what that is , but that 's a big deal to me . I want- to feel comfortable that both facilities have good highway exposut.e because that 's what they 're buying . They 're buying exposure to the Highway 5 , and I want that to happen . Yet on the other hand , I don 't want to pollute visually in terms of the cars that are going to be there and have to plan for the worst possible scenario and I have to plan for the fact that there are going to be some vehicles out there that don 't look so good and . . .for a while so I just guess I 'm not real comfortable yet with- what we 're doing to that site and I need more information . And I think it 's something simple . I think it 's something that , I just need to see what 's going on and right now I don 't . - Batzli : So how do you see? What do you need to see? Conrad : A plan . Batzli : You need big plans? Conrad : No . I guess I 'm kind of interested in , when we talk about trees Yeah , I need something bigger than this and I guess I need something that incorporates what staff 's vision is in it and I need to know how Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 17 automobiles are blocked both ways and maybe we 're talking about elevation so I can see berming and how the berming hides the cars . Cars from the neighborhood and maybe , I need to feel comfortable that Highway 5 , our vision on Highway 5 or our view on Highway 5 is acceptable . So you know , it may be an elevation that shows me berming and how cars are . I 'm just kind of nervous that cars are going to be stored there and then again , I want to plan for the worst scenario and see how we take care of it . So noise , roof line , and landscaping and there are probably solutions that are on the table right now . I just can 't visualize them with what I 've teen getting . Satzli : Okay , Tim . Erhart : I 'll shock everybody and make it short . I can 't figure out anything from these drawings . About once a year we see a set of drawings like this to represent a plan . I think we all should have the same response . Krauss: We did distribute full sized drawings for this but it was done the meting that was cancelled because we didn 't have a quorum . Erhart : And we were supposed to bring them? Krauss : Yes . Erhart : Then I apologize but I can 't figure out what the landscaping or the parking , or actually the traffic is . So I guess I 'd like to see an opportunity to see a full set of plans . I agree with pretty much everything on the architecture . I 'm not sure what the architecture is . What it is on this . I don 't think it even comes close to the auto emission which I think came out okay . After we worked on those guys for a little bit . So I think we 've got to work on these guys a little bit and see if something can be done , better appearance than this . I 'd like to see them look a little bit like there was some thought to put them together . It doesn 't have to be the same . Some consistency . . I have one thing that I 'll speak up on on behalf of the developer . Item number 11 under the site plan review where we 're asking them to pay a $7 ,580 .00 Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream . If I read that right , that is asking for something that the first time any citizen group even reviewed tonight for the first time , unless I misunderstand this . Krauss : No . This is . Erhart : Or is this the off site? Krauss: This is the off site and it 's similar to what we did with Hans Hagen Homes . Erhart : This is not the storm water hook-up charge? Krauss: No , no , no , no . No . This is because the pond that 's sized on that third site is not large enough I think to accommodate the volume and it 's not large enough to accommodate the water quality standards . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 18 Erhart : We 're talking about this pond . Is there going to be a pond her ? Krauss : Yes . Erhart : Is that big enough? Krauss : No . And Mr . Beissner indicated tonight that they may look to increasing the size of the pond and that 's fine and that would decrease the dollar but at some point there 's a law of diminishing returns because the lot loses it 's utility . Erhart : Yeah , that would be a surprise if that couldn 't be made big enough . Krauss: Well keep in mind , this pond also has to serve the emission control site . That 's all supposed to drain through this one . Erhart : Okay . Well if that 's what that is that 's okay . Then again , I guess we can point out for you Paul is that item 11 on the subdivision , now which , if we go forward here and add this engineer to handle this - storm water work , we should be incorporating the cost of this into our development fee structure as opposed . That 's my opinion . Krauss: Okay . To raise the fees to cover it . . . Erhart : Whatever . Yeah , I don 't think it 's right in the long run that we go to developers and ask them to agree to an open ended thing like this . - At some point we have to make it part of the fee structure so they know what it 's going to be . That 's a comment internally here . And also the conditional use permit . Make sure that we don 't have outdoor storage ant I agree . I think it 's an appropriate use for the area . I think we just have to work , we 've got to work this architecture out better . Again , I '. not going to waste your time . No double parking . I thought some of those photos they were double parking . We want to make sure we don't have tha . I don 't think it 's on here although in one spot it looked like it could e but it 's hard to tell . So my feeling is , other than the subdivision motion , I think it should come back . Batzli : Thank you . It 's difficult for me to look at this and I know that we have a condition in here that there 's not going to be any damaged or inoperable cars and again I don 't know what that means but clearly there s going to be cars parked outside these buildings . And I don 't think that 's a problem but I don 't know that that 's what , that there 's a meeting of the minds on this condition as to what this means and what they 're going to do from the standpoint of , I can 't believe that Abra is going t be able to get all the cars inside every night and do that . And some of them will be "damaged" . It 's beyond my comprehension that they 're going to actually do that . I don 't know that they 're envisioning not parking one or more vehicles at some point in time out of doors and be at least J.n technical violation of the conditional use permit . Krauss: If they cannot , I would ask them to consider another site . You know I worked with a Goodyear dealer who was moving from Hopkins many years ago who had an operation where they had a wrecker and a field full- Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 19 of junked cars . It really was in the entrance to downtown Hopkins . It was a hideous thing to look at . I don 't think Abra has in mind doing anything like that . They 've said tonight that they 're willing to comply with it . I 'd be real leery of opening the door to having crunched cars sitting out on Highway 5 . Batzli : Well that 's not what I 'm suggesting . I 'm just suggesting that for example Goodyear I think had 32 parking spots and if we assume for a minute that there 's maybe , I don 't know how many people will be working there but let 's assume about 12 . 15 . There 's about 17 more parking spots . Probably 2/3 of those will be people who are leaving their cars there that are going to be worked on that day . Some I 'm sure will be left overnight from time to time . Some of them may be "damaged" . That 's probably why they 're there and I don 't think they 're going to pull them into their bays either . And I don 't know what , you know I don 't want to try and kid ourselves that there won 't be "damaged" cars sitting outside and there will be storage of , I can 't envision that places that deal with damaged cars at some point won 't leave one outside . And if this is an intent to minimize those things , or you know put in place some vehicle . Vehicle , no pun intended . Method of trying to get them to put them inside every night , that 's fine but I can 't see it happening . And by looking at - these pictures , every one of them has cars outside . Now granted most of them are probably employees in the back . You know I take these photos with a grain of salt because I don 't know . I wasn 't there to look at the cars and see what they were . Whether they were employees ' cars that are being driven back and forth or whether these are the cars that are being worked on . But I have a tough time because once again , from our room concept that we were initially shown in our grand Highway 5 corridor plan , clearly this is one of the first things when people are coming into Chanhassen and while I don 't mind a couple of cars being left out , I don 't want it to get out of control . And what I really don 't want to have happen is to 4 years later finally get tired of it and go back to this conditional use permit and have them say well yeah but , you know you let us go for 4 years and you knew that we had to park some things outside and _ our attorney says , well yeah . Boy , you kind of sat on it for a long time . I don 't know if you can get rid of them now . I would like this condition , whatever it is to reflect reality because this is such , I believe a crucial site coming into Chanhassen . I 'd love to believe everybody but I can 't believe that if I was the applicant standing up there , you know I 'd probably say well yeah we 're going to try our best . But I don 't know that I would have made the statement we will never do that . They will do it . I can 't imagine they can 't do it . I mean , do you want to respond? Randy MacPherson: I 'd love to . I think I said that there will be times that people will drop off cars but we do not store cars outside , and I think there 's a difference . I think that 's what it 's called , is storing cars outside . And we share the same concerns . I mean I 've got people coming from all over the country and even Europe looking at our concept . And we do not allow our managers to store outside . Now I can 't ever tell you that I never have a manager who does not not follow our procedures but we have people on staff that go around to all of our facilities and visibly inspect them and do a grading and a report . And one of the things we evaluate is to make sure that there 's nothing unsightly outside . So that 's very important and we have several cities that we have this Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 20 stipulation that there will be no outside storage of vehicles and have lived by it and abided by it . Another thing is we do have Goodyear next door . Well typically the Goodyear customers come and go the same day and many times there are empty stalls in their facilities at night and we ha•_ worked out reciprocal arrangements where if we have too many , which is infrequent , to get inside , we simply work out an arrangement with them to pull the car inside over there over night . And since we a lot of times c-1--) some reciprocal business back and forth , we try to get along real well s, it 's worked very well on those occasions when someone did over schedule . So I 'm not here to try to mislead or trying to lie to anybody . We 're very concerned about that and are prepared to look to that agreement . And if we have any of our , if anyone from the staff would call me from any city and say hey , your storing cars , I can guarantee you we 'd address it immediately . So I can never say that an employee would never do it but - can tell you we 're living under this agreement and our cities have been happy with us . And they share your concern so . The other thing I want to point out is that our buildings are not cheap . They 're very expensive . - The buildings look more like an office complex than , they do have some garage doors on the sides of them but they are very expensive buildings ..o build and the question with architecture is not really to us a cost factor because to put that particular peak up , whatever is not any more money than what we 're proposing . That 's not any additional money . Our problei is that we consider it actually more intrusive and it actually attracts more attention to our roofline and we don 't want it to be , we don 't want to attract attention to that roofline . That 's our opinion . That 's our view . The other thing is , you 'll never have McDonald 's wanting to look like Hardee 's . I mean it just , I think you said it very well . We want to have identity in the community . And of course we want that identify to very positive so anyway , we are prepared to live by this ordinance . And while I 'm up here , if I may address the noise issue . Our buildings are insulated and our garage doors are kept closed except for a foot . Now once in a while we do run into a store where somebody has left the door open . When our people see that , we make sure that they close that door . Most of our repairs are simply replacement of damaged sheet metal . It 's— just take a fender off and you put a fender on . Batzli : Do you use air? Randy MacPherson: They call them air ratchets which , you know you would not , I 've never had one noise problem ever . And I drove by the site tonight and I saw the distance to the residential area and it 'd be - virtually I think impossible for someone to hear our activities going on And so I 'm very comfortable personally with the noise issue and we 've purposely driven ourselves by the locations . Most of the air ratchets - don 't make that much noise . There 's a lot newer ones that are a lot mor quiet and we 're not beating out fenders and those kinds of things because frankly you can 't repair fenders nowadays . You have to replace them . The sheet metal is so thin , if you lean on them you put a dent in them . So anyway that , the noise issue has come up many times but after we 've gone into the community , has never come up as an issue . And we have our , it 's enclosed and it 's in insulated buildings and has never been an issue . Batzli : You 've been very helpful , thank you . I have one more question . And that is , since this is going to be a showcase , if you will , for people Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 21 coming in and looking at your concept and franchise , I imagine that you don 't want to tie it too closely into the Goodyear store . Is that a true statement? _ Randy MacPherson: I don 't , you know we want to work with you people . We 're not saying it has to be any particular way . We 're just saying that we 'd like to have you recognize that our desire to have our own individual look , for it to be a professional look , that will represent the community well . In this picture here , which is the one you got earlier , that blue roof there is a Panekoeken restaurant . And that 's on University Avenue . And so we 're right next to restaurants on main retail thoroughfares and I think that 's an attractive looking facility . I mean and I could be wrong . You know my wife sometimes has to tell me if this shirt goes with this tie and those kind of things so maybe I 'm the best judge of that but so anyway , we would like to have . We are in auto malls that have , everyone has the same architecture . But this is a free standing building and it 's not incorporated within a building and so we 're just asking for you to allow us to , if we can , to represent ourselves and we are trying to get consistent . And I ' ll admit , that we do not have all 16 of our metro areas nor our outside metro areas all the same but we 're trying to get more consistent with our appearance and our professionalism . Batzli : Well as a trademark attorney , you don 't have to convince me that you want to maintain a somewhat consistent image , so thank you . Randy MacPherson: The other issue that I want to make sure too on , you talked about landscaping . And I appreciate your comments . I don 't want people to see cars either and I don 't mind berming . I just want to make sure that we have people know when they drive by Highway 5 that there is an Abra facility there . Conrad : That 's real important . Batzli : Thank you . Emmings: I have a question for Paul . Batzli : Okay , go ahead Steve . Emmings: Paul , the condition that says no damaged or inoperable vehicles will be stored overnight on the Abra site . Why? Krauss: It should apply to both . Emmings : Okay . Batzli : Go ahead . You 've been waiting very patiently . Al Beissner : I 'd like to go through a couple of the issues that I now hear that are brought out that can maybe you can appreciate what we 've been through and what we 're trying to do . Would you put that site plan back up . What we tried to do and that 's our site plan blown up and you should have had . We delivered 27 full sets of plans to the City in September . Whenever we had to so I 'm sorry that you didn 't get yours Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 22 then . But this is the site plan and a couple things that we tried to do that , to make it different and better . First of all our setback from the freeway or Highway 5 , a good distance . As far as we could go . With one_ major exposure out there , everybody wants to build on Highway 5 so when you 're coming from the east , then you can see the building right there . We set the building back as far as we could . We turned the buildings also so that you see just the short ends of the buildings and the garage door - are facing each other so that if you don 't like the looks of garage door , you don 't like Abra 's garage door and Goodyear doesn 't like Abra 's garage door and Abra doesn 't like Goodyear 's garage door but we did that so _. there 's no visibility from the freeway or from the residential area for the garage doors . We offset the buildings so not to make them look like kind of a row house . I mean that 's the reason they were pushed back and forth and we pushed the Abra one closer here because they had a small do-r on that end of the building that we didn 't want exposed . We also , this site plan doesn 't show it but the emission control site is probably 5 feet higher in elevation than our site and part of what we 're doing is cutting off the road here and going down . Why that site got built up and is kin of a beacon up there , we don 't know but our 's is lower by 5 feet than whet their site is . So we won 't be sticking up and looking that direction . The third thing is , we do have 3 foot berms along the freeway and so when th cars are parked , you won 't see any hood and grills or whatever from any normal car . And if there 's any foreign cars or smaller cars there , you won 't see them as they 're parked anywhere along in here . You will not s-e the cars parked from the west elevation because again , this site pad is or 5 feet lower than the emission control site plan . So basically , and there 's very little parking of this view from the eastern elevation . So__ we were , you know it is your front door . We did work hard , a long time . I think we originally entered into the purchase agreement in May and we ' ve been back and forth and when you were talking , I think our frustrating part and your frustrating part , rooflines . I didn 't even put on this board the first roofline that we had because it was when we walked in , w walked out quickly because they said that will never work and we got the hint right away . So we struggled with the roofline thing and we don 't - know , when you say what is right . I mean what is right? Is blue suit a d blue tie or is it brown suit and brown tie? We don 't know and we went through an exercise where we designed the Abra building with the same _ mansard roof that the emission control building has . That didn 't fly ve y well because it still looks like a flat roof . One of the problems that ..e ran into early on in so you know why we struggled with it and why they can 't have a roof like a Goodyear . The rooftop whatever it is that 's ov = r your paint booth , has to be on top of the roof . Goodyear doesn 't have t e rooftop units that they need for ventilation . And the problem lies with , if you have our building plan and floorplan out there , is that on this - line right here , this is where one of the , that 's where that big rooftop unit is . The other rooftop units are on this side of the building . And what really throws the thing out of whack is that you want to screen the elevation that you have . We have a 4 foot screen from the east and the west so you can 't see it from the east or the west but then to make it have any kind of balance in a peak , we had to go up so high and that 's why it looked really bad . When Randy saw it he said , you know it doesn 't to=k right . That 's not our first choice . We did do these and we have one . Also signage . When we first came to town and I know when developers come to town and they 're always , we are the bad guys wearing the black hats and Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 23 we looked at the ordinance and we thought we were under the Highway Business zone and the Highway Business zone allows you to do so many different things . I think about 45 days into our development work the City of Chanhassen found out that we , there was a technical loophole or something that we found that we now are under a conditional use and not Highway Business . In Highway Business there 's a whole lot more that one can do and the City and the staff you know has to I guess abide by the ordinances in what we can do . Because it 's a conditional use permit , we _ changed a whole lot of thought process . The sign that you will see on the freeway is from this site that has 60 square feet of signage which is less , or is it 80 feet? 60 square feet or 80 square feet which is less than what we are allowed . If we would have had Highway Business , we could have each of the sites had their own pylon sign . We have one sign here out on the freeway there and it will be done with the Goodyear logo , the Abra and then the third user which will be this guy down here . And the sign will be coordinated , color coordinated probably with the Goodyear building or the Abra building . So we 're very sensitive to that . And those are the kinds of things that we have negotiated back and forth and come up with and we are happy with and arrived at . This is the same Abra building with a mansard roof just like the emission control one . You put a mansard all the way around it and that 's how that looks . This is a modification of their building where we don 't have a mansard all the way around but we have screened on the roof the rooftop units . And we struggled with that . We came up with what we thought was a better plan and that was closer to what Abra does or what Abra wanted and this is , this is all the rooftop . These rooftop units are screened . I think if you were to superimpose the elevations that we 've drawn on say the end of , the roofline comes up something like that . We have much more roof or facade than we really need to screen it but to put it in balance and make it have some interest , you had to . That 's what happened here . One of the rooftop units is here and the other one is over there and that 's why we had to start so far out and to give it any kind of balance . We struggled with this probably 5 different times to come out with the right balance in it and so when you 're talking , where do we go with the architecture , we 'd like to know where to go with the architecture . It 's not something that , not that cost isn 't a factor again but we all estimate how much our typical architect fees are going to be . Engineering fees are going to be , etc , etc , etc . If you send it back to us and say okay , let 's do it again and let 's try something architecturally different . Who is going to _ determine what 's right architecturally? That 's our biggest concern because I think , I mean we struggled with this a lot and I 'm not sure that there 's a right solution and that 's what the problem is . So we did do a lot more with the site and I wanted to point these things out to you so that we did take all this into consideration by moving the buildings back . Setting then differently . We 're lower so it 's not going to be something big and intrusive sticking out there . And we thought we did a good job with it . It 's taken a little longer than we wanted to take but we understand that . So if you have suggestions as to which style of architecture to use , that 's great . But what I 'm afraid of is that we 'll go to a committee over here and the committee will try to guess again as to what is the right look . That 's our biggest problem is that we don 't know and there aren 't any guidelines saying they all have to be gabled . They all have to be mansard . They all have to be flat . It 's kind of the individual choice . I just wanted to point that out but that 's kind of Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 24 what we have gone through and this one we thought was attractive . That was choice , that was go around number 4 I think or 5 but that still has some flat roof look and I really don 't know what to do . This one isn 't balance . We put an accent stripe around the entire building too so it 's not like one solid wall so it won 't be straight brick . It will have accept stripes in it . And the architecture here , we tend to carry the same accent through the front and sides . We have struggled with it . I -" will say this , it 's not gone without um . Qatzli : What happened to the roof units when you put the pitched roof - on? Where did they disappear under the pitch? What happened to them? T last one they showed us . Al Beissner : This one? Batzli : Yeah . Where are the rooftop units in there? Al Beissner : One is over here and one is here . From the side this is . . Batzli : That part is pitched? Straight up and down . Al Beissner : This panel is pitched up . You can see how it 's . . . If we didn 't have . . .side elevation looking from east and west . The metal that is complimentary to the exactly what is the other metal facade is and it slanted the roof , tipped slightly rather than . . .and the unit sits facing here and over here and that 's why it had to be spread out so far . That 's why it kept getting so high . If it didn 't , then we 'd go with this . It - would have to be lower . . . I wish there were some way that we could do i architecturally with , that 's where our problem comes in because we just couldn 't put the same roof on it that Goodyear has . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Emmings : Do you have any idea what 's going to happen on the other lot - there? = . Al Beissner : No I don 't . Emmings : Okay . Al Beissner : We tried to do them all three at once and we didn 't find a third user . Emmings : Do you expect it to be some auto related something or , not necessarily? Al Beissner : Yes . I would think so . The people that we 've talked to _ have been like Champion Auto Store , Rossi Big Wheel or something like that . We understand that you kind of want all the automotive stuff in o..s area as opposed to sprinkled throughout the community and it seemed like , as long as the emission control was there , and if we can do Goodyear and Abra there , you should make that the auto center if you will and have th, use there . But we have talked to Rossi Big Wheel and Champion Auto . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 25 Emmings: Would you go back to your site plan? You 've kind of detailed the landscaping on the north , east and west sides and what about from the view from the south where the neighbors? Al Beissner : We aren 't doing anything down here . The trees that are there will still be there and until this site gets developed , those poplars and dogwoods and elms will stay there . We are doing landscaping around the pond that we have to put in . Emmings : On the . Al Beissner : Both sides . Emmings : Okay , what 's going to be on the south side of the pond? Krauss : Nothing . Just a line of trees . Al Beissner : Yeah . . . .as you can kind of tell , we 've gone through maybe 4 or 5 different sign designs too that would make it right and compatible and kind of make it so it 's as well as you can make an auto architecturally compatible with an area . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Let me ask you a hypothetical question Ladd . Now that we just saw what we saw , if we were to say table this for tonight so that we could see final landscaping . Maybe there 's still an issue about noise or something that you haven 't been satisfied with . What would you want to see in relation to the roofline/architecture of the building now that we 've kind of at least gotten a flavor of the history of what 's been done on the Abra . What do you think the applicant could do or staff - could do with the applicant to , I mean what guidance can we give them? Conrad: Well I think staff 's always done a pretty good job of working with applicants . We 're not designers up here . I get real nervous when we talk about architecture . And when we see something and we 're all speaking , there 's some consensus I think amongst those of us who are here that the roofline is still not comfortable . I think the history is good to see where Mr . Beissner has taken it but I 'm still not comfortable with the roofline period . The Abra roofline is kind of artificial looking to me . It just doesn 't feel right . And I think staff has asked for some things with Goodyear that might make sense but again , I 'd guess I 'd just like to see a final , and I know what Mr . Beissner 's talking about . What bogey are we shooting for . What is it? What 's the standard? Typically staff has given pretty good direction . I guess when I take a look at , other than maybe there 's a couple cases where I might wonder but I think generally they 've come back with something . We can 't get a consensus here on architecture . There 's just no way 6 of us are going to do that and I think staff has at least is one voice . So I guess as long as staff is going to tell me that the noise is not a problem , I guess I 'm not waiting for the applicant to tell me . I think the staff is saying noise is not a problem and that 's one of the , the reason this is a conditional use is because you 're obviously backed up to a neighborhood and a neighborhood that 's been there for a long time and a real important neighborhood and we want things to fit in . I need the security of somebody saying , hey . We don 't have jack hammers operating in an Abra thing all day long . That Planning Commission Meeting - November 18 , 1992 - Page 26 would be obviously . . .and I 'm naivee on what noise goes on in a place lik- that . Second thing . I guess I 'm looking for a roofline that , I 'm not trying to bundle costs . I guess I just see some rooflines in the Abra thing that I don 't like . And it seems that there 's got to be a solution- to that . And third , I 'm looking for some elevations that can show me fr m the highway . You know a 3 foot berm is , they typically sink and I guess I need some security that we have done our job out on Highway 5 to make this look good . And I guess , if 3 foot are standard , is that the maximum berming height that we can , our ordinance allows? Krauss: 3 foot 's fairly typical . To go higher than that you almost hay to drop a wall behind it otherwise the grade gets . Conrad: And I 'm not trying to hide your identity . I guarantee you that- I think it 's critical that companies who buy the property have that highway identity . On the other hand , it 's critical that we kind of bury some of the stuff that is a little bit offensive to the eyes as flashing_ by at 45 mph and that 's some cars that might be there . I guess I need some really crude sketches to show me that we 've done our job out there . I think when you take a look at these , it 's a little bit better than what I was looking at before . Batzli : But the staff has asked them for things in addition to what . Conrad: That 's my impression . That this , you 've asked for more beyond this . I 'd like to see that and then just get a sense that we 've done what we 're trying to do and that is to visually take care of cars that are _ there and I 'm not looking for standards that we haven 't applied to the emission control folks . But you know it 's funny , my impression of that emission control is pretty good . I think we did a good job of designing that thing so whether that tells you our taste is terrible or whatever . - I feel that fits some of what we 're looking for . Batzli : Does your wife have to tell you what tie to wear with which suit? Conrad: Absolutely . No , she waits until I make a mistake and then she gets me . Batzli : Does anyone else , before Paul asks his really important questio , have any other guidance for what they 're looking for in the roof? Erhart: Yeah , I like the mansard roof and what I don 't like about the ti roofs that we 're looking at is the square ends . Conrad: Yeah . I 'd reinforce that . Mansard is acceptable to me . The square . The wall that . See the wall is a face on a TH 5 and from the angle that most people , you don 't follow and look directly 90 degrees at it . So typically what you 're seeing is a view that it 's not real . It 's like a fake . Batzli : A set . It 's a set . - Conrad: You 're going to create a fake roof no matter what but still , yeati you 're right . It is a set . So anyway , it doesn 't . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 27 Randy MacPherson: We don 't like that wall either . I liked the rolled mansard . That 's what I 'm trying to get is the rolled mansard look . My problem is with that fake wall . It just looks like a saloon . Batzli : Right , exactly . I think that 's our problem with it too and what we 're struggling with is , by committee we 're having a tough time saying to you well this is what we want . I actually , I think some of your previous designs were better efforts , at least closer . Something like that bothers me less than what the one , second one down , bothers me a lot less than the -fake saloony kind of walls that no one 's going to look at from 90 degrees . Farmakes: . . .but if I can volunteer this . If the staff wants to meet later on this , I think we could come up with a couple of quick sketches that maybe would give a directional point for the client and maybe the _ city . But I feel real uncomfortable when we start playing with the architectural drawings in the space of 20 minutes here for something that 's going to be here for 20 years . Batzli : I agree . Al Beissner : Could I leave these drawings with you then? So that you can have them to mill around with . Batzli : What I would suggest is , I 'm getting the sense that we 'd like to table this and get some additional information . I know Jeff for one would be more than happy to meet with staff and yourself and the architects to maybe noddle around and kick around some ideas . I 'm volunteering you but I think that . Farmakes : . . .just trying to help . Batzli : Okay . I guess I 'd appreciate a motion at this point from my fellow , one or more of my fellow commissioners . Oh yeah , your really important question . I 'm sorry . Krauss: Well yeah , the noise question . Noise is a tough animal to regulate . There are state noise guidelines . I think the residential standard is 65 dba daytime and 55 nighttime . We can put a condition on there that this site not exceed those levels of noise at the property line . I like the Abra idea of keeping the doors largely shut . That could be applied to Goodyear . I 'll bet you though that whatever noise guidelines we establish , the highway 's going to drown it out anyway . Conrad: Well that 's an interesting parallel or contrast , yeah . Krauss : But we can still make them operate to an acceptable level on site . Batzli : Two things that , before our motion , I would like to see those things that you just suggested but two other things . And they were comments by the public here that maybe weren 't brought up again . One I think , I 'm sorry I have just your first name written down . Tom , was it? You spoke about a mini-park . I 'm unfamiliar with the location of that . Where is that in relation to this? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 28 Krauss : It 's almost directly across the street . Batzli : To the south? ' Krauss: To the south . Batzli : Okay . Is there uncomfort on staff 's part at all with these typ .s of , there 's a lot of traffic on that road from DataSery and whatever els . Krauss : Well and to be honest , I think we pointed this out when emission control came up , because the same question came up . There 's going to be a lot more traffic on it . It 's a collector street that passes through an office/industrial area . Most of that area 's undeveloped right now . Now since the emission control station came through , we have Dell Road is no- constructed and the signal is operating and I 'm not sure if that 's inducing a lot more traffic to come in from that side but that 's the goal . Batzli : Yeah I 'd like , I 'm going to take another visit to that site because I didn 't really see where that mini-park was in relation to that . The other thing was , our second person from the public . Lindsay , was that the name? She mentioned something about the screening and we 've heard from the applicant . There basically isn 't going to be any . Right now we 're going to rely on natural screening until the site to the south develops . Is there any reason to require , obviously you don 't want to - have them put up screening temporarily which is all going to all be grad d down or cut down . But assume for a moment that this other site doesn 't develop for a number of years , which it very well could . Is there adequate screening for the neighbors to the south right now? Al-Jaff : There is a large number of elm and poplars on the site . Batzli : But elevation wise , are they going to be able to . Al-Jaff : You won 't be able to see them from the neighborhood . You won 't be able to see the two buildings from the neighborhood . Batzli : Okay . You 're comfortable with that right now? Okay . Is there .a motion? Conrad: I would move that we , well I want to make sure . Let 's see we 've got the conditional use permit . You 've got the site plan . Erhart : I move that the Planning Commission table the approval of the site plan review . Batzli : Is there a second? Farmakes : Second . Batzli : Discussion . Conrad : Well yeah , what 's your intent? Erhart : To come back . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 29 Conrad : Well what are you thinking about for the other aspects? Erhart: Well I 'll get to that when I get there . Conrad : So you have a strategy . What 's your strategy? Erhart : I 'm going to ask these guys if they want to do the subdivision tonight of if you want to table all of it? For sure with the site plan review we want it . Conrad : Right . Emmings: Well and the conditional use . Batzli : We 're asking the applicant to sum in here , do you understand the question? Al Beissner : Yes , I understand and I don 't think there 's any reason to go through the other two . . .do all three at the same time . Erhart: Okay , well then I 'll move that we table all site plan review , subdivision and conditional use until we get to review the architectural — and cover some of the other issues that are still in question . Batzli : Okay , who seconded that motion? Conrad: It was me . Oh , it was Jeff? Farmakes : I seconded it . Batzli : Okay . Al Beissner : Mr . Chairman , I have a question . Are there any things in the other two that could pose a problem . . .? _ Emmings : The only other one that we talked about at some length was outside storage . Al Beissner : If we 're going to table the site plan review but the — subdivision agreement and the other two that you 're going to act on tonight , are there any problems with those two that we should address the Council at the next meeting? Batzli : We were really talking about all three of them tonight . And I think you heard all of the problem areas . Do you accept this friendly amendment to his motion? I think you seconded it . Farmakes: All three . I was assuming it was all three . Batzli : Okay . Is there any other discussion? One moment while we vote on this . Paul , is it clear to you from our Minutes what we want to see next time when it comes back? Krauss: Clear as it usually is . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 30 Batzli : Well then we 're golden . Is there any other discussion? Erhart moved , Farmakes seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the Goodyear Tire and Abra site plan, subdivision and conditional use, permit application for further review. All voted in favor and the motic carried . Batzli : We did have one more question from the public . I 'm sorry sir , your name? Gerard Amedeo: Gerard Amedeo . It 's not really a question . It 's just a- comment after listening to the discussion . It has to do with . . . One ha to do with the traffic that . . .and the gentleman brought up that he didn 't think the traffic was going to be much of a problem . I 'm sure that thesA two gentlemen hope that he is wrong . That traffic is going to hopefully be substantial . I think it will be . Conrad: Just responding . When we take a look at the site , and the uses compared to a McDonald 's or compared to the emission control , it 's not even close . So the validity of challenging that is can that area sustain additional traffic . That 's where you could challenge it . I looked at that in terms of what we had planned for and nothing seemed to me on the surface to say we 're stressing the site out . Obviously there 's more trips per day . There 's just no doubt but when we did traffic studies before , we- knew eknew that that was going to happen . So again , if you know some more things , I think it 's valid to come back at the next meeting and share therm with us but at this point , it didn 't look that way . Gerard Amedeo : My second comment is that , it seems to me that the flavo of what I 'm hearing all of these gentlemen say is that you 're not quite sure what the image should be . You want it to be something that 's positive for the city but you 're not really quite sure what that is . It seems to me we 're a little late in the ballgame to be deciding what that image should be when you 've got applicants coming to the city with plans_ and drawings . This is what we want it to be and you 're still not quite sure . Batzli : We have a citizens group looking at that issue . Yeah , I mean -" we 're talking about Highway 5 from one end of the city to the other . It s a massive undertaking and we really weren 't in a position to do that until the Highway was upgraded and we had our comprehensive plan done which wac done about a year and a half ago . So we 're working on it as fast as we can and I agree , we 'd rather be proactive than reactive and unfortunately on a couple of these early applications that come in , as they just finish this stretch of highway , we are being reactive and we 're trying to be as cautious as we can on it . But we appreciate that . So this will be back hopefully next time . Krauss : Well we 're trying to work around the holidays but we should hopefully be able to get it on the next meeting . We will send out another notice to the residents just so they 're sure which meeting it 's on . Batzli : Thank you very much everyone for coming in . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 31 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Batzli noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 4 , 1992 as presented . ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS: Batzli : Any administrative approvals Paul? Krauss: We only had one . There was a chemical tank of some sort that was installed out by McGlynn 's . On the south side of the building . They couldn 't physically screen it so we had it landscaped . OPEN DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION OF TREE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. Batzli : Paul , why don 't you give us about a 30 second highlight of the tree conservation easement and then I 'd like to have Tim present his case as for why we don 't want to do this . Or at least why we should be more careful . Krauss: I wrote this quite a while ago and Tim and I have had several conversations about it . What we 've used these tree conservation easements to accomplish needs to be clarified . We have not used them to save individual trees on individual lots . What we have done is where the City has made accommodations . Large scale accommodations in terms of massaging developments around . Occasionally giving variances . Occasionally going PUD 's . Where we 've done that , because we have wanted to save a stand of trees , we 've wanted to make sure that stand of trees is in fact safe . And we 've gone with the tool of providing conservation easements to guarantee that for all that the city 's doing , for all that we 're giving up , that we can guarantee that that natural amenity , that natural environmental feature is going to be saved . We went this route large because the standard way of doing it for many years was to have a condition that said , when you come in for your single family building permit , come in with a tree preservation plan. All we ever got was a lot of grief because every time you went out there you had to do another one . And all we ever got was , I 've got to cut down these trees because this is the house plan I have and that 's just the way it is . And we never had any grounds to really change anything . Batzli : Paul , let me interrupt . These two gentlemen are here for the Minnewashta Manor Homeowners Association beachlot . Did you get notices of this for tonight? Oh , you just got that? That was the last meeting . When is this going to be back because this was tabled and I apologize that you sat here tonight . Krauss: There are some discussions going on with Kate and the Homeowners Association . We were going to renotify everybody when it comes back on . Batzli : What I think would be best is if you can write your name and addresses on the back of a piece of paper and give them to Paul and he 'll make sure you get notice of it for the correct date . Thanks . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 32 Krauss: Anyway , I think the purpose and the intent is quite good . I think it actually gives more latitude to the individual homeowner because we 've gotten away from trying to save individual trees in a backyard or on a property line or whatever and just saving the tree massings that ar real important from a visual standpoint over a large area . Now , we 've been requiring these things for the better part of 2 years now I think . Emmings: Which? Krauss: The conservation easements . And it wasn 't until Tim raised the... question that I got a copy of what Roger had drafted up as the tree conservation easement and I found frankly that I was somewhat uncomfortable with some of the language that 's in here . I think the intent is good but some of these things , constructing and installing and maintaining anything made by man , which includes clothesline poles and playground equipment which is really sort of irrelevant . I mean if a kid can 't play in the woods , what good is the woods . I think to some extent--- this goes a little bit too far . Tim and I also discussed , is this a permanent requirement? I guess I have a preference for it being permanently recorded against the property because then it 's a legitimate has legal standing . Everybody who buys the property henceforth knows about it . However , once the development 's put in , once the homes are pu _ in clear of this area , it 's highly unlikely that anybody is going to come in and cut them down . It 's just too dumb a thing to do . So it 's quite - possible that we could accomplish the same goals by putting on a conservation easement with some revised language but have it expire 5 years after the date that the last house is put in or something like that . That would probably accomplish the same goal and if the concern i long term being onerous of the property owner , maybe that would eliminate some of those concerns . But again , you do make significant concessions in terms of moving roads . In terms of paving roads to a narrow width . I terms of adjusting setback lines . In terms of adjusting lot areas . All those things to accommodate tree preservation . If we can 't guarantee we 're going to save the trees , then why do it in the first place . Batzli : What do you think of it Tim? Rebuttal . Erhart : Well it 's a complex issue . There 's a number of aspects the way I 've looked at this . Let me start out with the last one you just referred to . I 'm not sure it makes sense to go and make a development all misconfigured for the sole purpose of saving 1 or 2 trees and every - development 's different so you can 't make a rule . But I think we 've gotten tree nuts and what I 'm trying to do is get some balance to this thing . You know I obviously want to save every old oak tree we can but think it 's also important that we don 't go in and through these developments to make them unliveable . I mean these are for people number one and their safety and their welfare . Trees are part of that safety and welfare but it is for people . Trees , as I say , most of these developments , most of the land is open space . When people get in there , they do plant trees and in 50 years you 're going to have , it 's going to be an urban forest . And so I don 't think the importance that we put on trees here , if you want to use the last couple years is fine . I think we 've gone a little bit overboard on it . We 've forgotten the fact that most of the trees we have in 30 years are planted after the area is Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 33 developed . The second thing is that , and the number one issue was this 30 foot setback . Trying to convert it to 20 but I see in here a summary of the PUD ordinance , the City Council I think had the good sense to go back and say , look it . 30 foot setback is the right thing because I really don 't think , as I stated in my letter , that 20 foot setbacks make any sense at all under any conditions . Particularly for , I don 't think trees would justify that . So number one is the construing of these developments in an attempt to somehow the trees have become more important than the people that live there . I think the trees are there to serve the people that live there and keep that in mind . Two is that , you know the idea that we have this thing hanging on forever . You 've seen a homeowners found guilty and this perpetual banishment from the forest but in fact really that 's what we 're doing . I don 't think there 's any reason for it and if it 's the developer and the guy who comes in and builds the homes that isn 't going to live there later , the home builder , that 's our problem . Let 's deal with him and we have brilliant lawyers on our commission here and Paul and somehow we could come up with some way to get a handle . Get control of this home builder who isn 't going to live in this house . Who doesn 't care about the trees and get control of him yet at the same time , the guy who owns the house and is going to make the payments for 30 years , is going to plant the trees and want to put swing sets and swimming pools or whatever , you know he 's got the American way . He 's got his , that 's his turf and by golly if he wants to put a tennis court and 2 oak trees got to go , well geez , that 's too bad but I think that 's the American way . I think it 's worked well over the hundreds of years that we 've had . I mean America 's the only place in the world that has individual homeownership . It 's what makes us America and I don 't like the idea of intruding on that with these easements where I don 't think we 've got a sound basis or experience says that we ought to be doing , I 'm not going to say communism . I just don 't think we 've had , there 's nothing that says , save that . If I use your terms in your letter about the way you 're being treated by the State in the wetlands thing . You say that we 're concerned about the State 's going to treat us as second class citizens . We 're not to be trusted and I think that 's kind of what we 're doing here . We 're treating these homeowners as second class citizens not to be trusted and I don 't think the . . .has come to that conclusion . So I 'd suggest that we come up with a way to control the subdivider or the guy who puts in the streets as well as the guy who 's building the homes for spec houses , which I think is where your problem is , is it not? Krauss : Well I 'd say building the house period . Once the house is up , you can almost let it . Keep in mind too , there are some community values that we 've ascribed to trees and wetlands and views that we 've generally agreed warrant some kind of protection . Also keep in mind that you know , as Brian so often points out , we have some obligation , I mean let the buyer beware is fine but we have a lot of people who have expectations of the city as guaranteeing some things to them . Maybe one of the guarantees is that that oak forest is largely going to remain intact . You know it 's taken , if you look at Post World War II development , it 's taken at least the first 40 years , or 30 years of Post World War II era to stop development from doing what it always used to do which is bring out the bulldozers . Plow it flat . Put in a grid street system and pop in houses and yeah , you come back to Levittown today and it 's full of Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 34 trees . I mean 30-40 years later it probably looks halfway reasonable . But we have developers who don 't want to do that anymore . We generally , I would feel very uncomfortable going back to that style of development . It 's really I think a question of being able to provide guarantees . I 'v- got , maybe there 's a better way of doing it but if there is , I 'm not sur what it is because I 'm in contact with other communities that have tried other things . We haven 't carried this to the extent that Eden Prairie is notorious you know . You 've got to count every tree and you 've got to replace every tree , even for single family housing . We 've never done that . We never would want to do that . Erhart: Paul , I 'm not suggesting that we allow developers to do clear cutting . I mean and we haven 't had any of that since we changed the subdivision ordinance after the one we had up here . I just don 't think - we 've had that . What we 're talking about now I think is your response to , you feel that people place homes on lots . You feel , I don 't know who this is , if it 's the developer or whatever , your feeling is that they 're_. taking out some trees unnecessarily . Krauss: I think that if you have a feature that you want to save , you 've got to highlight that feature . You 've got to plan around that feature and you 've got to make sure that the streets and the lots don 't result i that feature being destroyed . And it 's like we have , we 're fully familiar with having a lot of lots that border on wetlands . But because of inappropriate consideration during design , there 's no way t..o put a house on it or a deck without impacting the wetland . Well what we 're saying is , take that feature . Protect that feature . Design around that and then after the thing 's developed , yeah . I think then we can fully - back away because I don 't think you 're going to find many people cutting down 30 oak trees in their backyard to put in a shuffleboard court or whatever . If they do , it 's probably their choice but I don 't think many people are going to do that . Erhart : I guess to end it , I guess what I would request is number one , we try to figure out a way we don 't end up with a permanent easement on this property . I don 't care what we do with the developer and the homeowner . You 've got come up with some process that we restrict him , that 's fine but not to end up with a permanent easement . And two , be a little bit more understanding . A little bit more consideration of what the street layout , the usefulness of it and so forth and we not quite put so much emphasis on these trees in laying out the neighborhood and I think the 30 foot setback will solve a lot of it in my mind . And I don ' think you can equate trees to wetlands because people can 't plant wetlands . People plant trees so after the development 's in , the tree situation does improve . You 're never going to improve wetlands so I don ' think it 's exactly comparable . The last thing I want to say , I think there are some places where permanent tree conservation easements are appropriate and that is , if you have a pseudo public area you know . Let ' say you have a PUD and a guy designates this area sort of as an area where people can walk in and kind of enjoy the forest . Have that , kind of semi-public access to it . Although in that case you still should havei. some trails . There 's an area . Or around a wetland or something that is special . Or another area would be if you have severe erosion problems i , you have trees removed . I think those are the two areas where it makes Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 35 sense to have a permanent conservation easement . I guess I 'd like to see this non-permanent thing on people 's lots being removed at sometime . Batzli : From a philosophical standpoint , let 's use a recent development that we 're probably still familiar with . The Lundgren one on that Ersbo property . There was I believe a tree conservation easement at the entryway when you drove in on the right hand side of the road . Krauss: Actually on both sides of the road . Batzli : On both sides of the road . Do you think that was an improper place to put one? Erhart: Who owns the property when it 's all said and done? Krauss : They 're all private lots . Erhart : Okay , and you 're saying that , would those people ever use that area? Krauss: As I recall , those lots got kind of long and skinny at that point so the probably is they wouldn 't . But it did wrap around some of them . In fact it came behind some of the lots next to the wetland . Erhart : If it could be said that those are pseudo public , okay . That they represent an entrance monument or something , then I 'd be fine with it but you 've got to remember also in that development there was tons of other trees that put these tree easements around that were essentially in people 's backyards . Emmings : That wasn 't all trees . That was a conservation easement for whatever existed . Right? Just to leave it alone . It wasn 't just a tree easement . Krauss: Well there were both . There was buffer yards around a wetland . That was the first one we ever did . Buffer yard zone . Emmings: I thought we called it a conservation easement . Batzli : Yeah we did . Krauss: You did . Erhart : On the what? Batzli : But we didn 't have individual tree easements . We told them that they had to save them but we didn 't put easements around the individual trees on that one . Erhart : In the tree groups we did . Batzli : The big ones . There were some individual ones we wanted to save as I recall . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 36 Krauss: Well , there were some individual ones we would prefer to have saved but we concluded that it really wasn 't encumbant upon us ever buying the lot to figure out what they could save at that point . As long as they kept the home out of the large mass of trees , it was their call . Because we didn 't go in and pick individual ones . Erhart : Individual trees? Krauss: Yeah . We did not do that . Erhart : No , but we had masses of trees that we put tree easements aroun that ended up in people 's backyards . Krauss : Yes they did . Erhart : And I 'm just saying , I just don 't see that it makes any sense . Batzli : So you don 't think there 'd be , let me put words in your mouth . Erhart : Unless there was an erosion problem . Batzli : You don 't see there would ever be a need for a big clump of trees to have an easement in someone 's backyard? Erhart: Not unless it 's a pseudo public area or if there 's a potential erosion problem as a result of cutting trees . I don 't think , I think those people want to evolve that forest . They 're going to plant trees . They want to go and trim some of those trees . They 're going to want to cut out the box elders and the junk to allow light to come in so that th oaks and the sugar maples can grow and they can shape those trees . That 's what people are going to do . They 're not going to go down there - and cut them all out . Batzli : Well but look at the type of development that that is . See my -- fundamental difference with you on this Tim is that what you 're suggesting is that we have a well manicured , attended , we 're going to select what things grow as opposed to natural . I 'm a biologist . This is a natural setting . Let the chipmunks run around and the bunnies you kno build their nests in the scrub . And what I 'm suggesting is that that particular development was billed , and built hopefully , as a natural setting and what you 're suggesting is , is that we will destroy the natural character that currently exists on that site to suburbanize it . And that 's okay if that 's the vision we want for each and every development in the city . Erhart: I think there 's a continum there . I 'm not suggesting that he 's going to go and make a park out of it . But for example box elder is not a native tree . We brought those in . Batzli : Well they 're here now . Emmings: When you 're saying natural , you 're only talking about a point in time . You 're saying that what 's there now is the natural circumstance of the land . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 37 Erhart : I 'm saying 30 years . Emmings: Maybe it is and maybe it isn 't . Batzli : But if you don 't do anything , it will be natural . Emmings : Yeah , but maybe a mess . Erhart: I think it will be less than optimum . No matter where you look on that spectrum , it will be less than optimal if you don 't do anything . Batzli : I guess my slant on this comes from , ( a ) just wanting to present the polar extreme to raise some discussion . But also , I have several biologists in my family who have chosen to let their entire yards go "natural " . Meaning they don 't do anything to them . Well this immediately raises some consternation with the neighbors over stuff blowing into their yards and they end up having to build fences around their yards which you could argue certainly isn 't natural . It 's an interesting perspective to take that they want their yard . They want to encourage whatever will grow to grow and they go out and they literally poke around . You know gee , here 's the mouse trails and they think it 's the most wonderful thing ever . Now that 's a real polar extreme from your person who 's going to go out there and shape his oak trees to get them to grow but . Erhart: You know what prickly ash is right? Batzli : Yeah . My point in raising all this is that , from my perspective a person moving in . Now I argued long and hard that we needed larger lots in PUD 's and I finally backed down because everybody hammered me . But the interesting thing is , in this case , moving in , these people have every bit of foreknowledge moving into that lot , that they 've got a permanent easement in their backyard as people do moving into a PUD . That they 're moving into a small lot . And I say , if they want to shape their trees , then they can move in to a different location where they can . Not every subdivision we do has tree easements in it and if you want a place where you can go out and chainsaw every damn tree on your lot , go move next door to Mr . T or in the Lake Susan Hills subdivision and don 't move into one with it . Erhart : You know to counter that , some people aren 't going to know that easement 's there . Batzli : Well that fell on deaf ears with the PUD . You can raise it but blah . . .go ahead . Erhart : The second guy that buys the house won 't even know it 's there and he 's going to go and he 's going to start trimming and it 's going to be . Emmings: Well what he wants to do on his lot may change over this lifetime . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 38 Krauss: I don 't want to get hung up on the exact language that 's in her- because I know Steve , you 've represented that when you moved into your house you couldn 't enjoy the lake because there was so many trees down there . Emmings: I just took down 3 huge oaks on my property in the last couple weeks . _ Krauss: And I think that maybe there needs to be something in here for thinning and again , I wouldn 't mind if it was temporary but the idea that forests are a transient phenomenon and if you want 30 years you 'll get a- new one . While it 's true , since most people don 't live in a house more than 5 years nationally anyway , it 's not going to do them a darn bit of good . And I 'm not willing to , and I don 't want to be flippant but I don 't want to be seeing us write off these resources , be they inherently natural , which virtually nothing is in this town because it 's all been farmed , but it 's still an important and pristine resource . Erhart : But the point is , people don 't mow them down . We 're concerned about something that doesn 't , a problem that doesn 't exist . Krauss : People don 't mow them down after their house is up . People wil mow them down for their house . Erhart : Okay , well let 's stop them then but then after that . Emmings: But that 's not , Tim said the same thing . You 're not saying something different than Tim did . I think , first of all you 've got some protections built in it seems to me . I took down 3 big oaks on my property . It cost me $500 .00 a tree just to drop them and I had to deal with the brush and the wood laying there and I 'm going to have to split - it . That 's a significant disincentive to take down trees . The other thing is , most people like them and they 're not going to take them down . I would be really distressed to own you know a house that I 'm busting my_ butt to pay the mortgage on and have somebody tell me if 10 years in I can 't cut down the trees to put in a tennis court . I can 't cut down trees to put in a swimming pool or any other damn thing I want to do on my property . That would be real offensive to me . I guess though , for m- I could see having a tree conservation easement ordinance . I think it should be used very sparingly . I think an example of places where you might want to have it would be , you know the back side of this slope where they want to put up all these multiple houses on top of the hill u here . The back side of that slope and going down . But there it isn 't just the trees . You want to just leave that as kind of a natural area . So I could see putting it there . I could see having it out along the river bluff where there are steep slopes . The creek . Bluff Creek . It might be another tool to preserve things in some particular places . The one place we used it in the development that went in south of Timberwood was it? Krauss : On Hans Hagen . Emmings: Yeah . The spot we used it there . I didn 't mind that one . That was an okay place to do it as far as I was concerned because that Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 39 was a big , long standing significant stand of trees and I wouldn't mind applying it sparingly to a few places like that . I don 't know when you 're going to decide to do it or how you 're going to write it in but I really think it ought to be used very sparingly for unique situations . Farmakes: Doesn 't the DNR say that only 5% of Chanhassen is wooded . Emmings: Well what does that mean though? What does wooded mean? Farmakes: Well that would at least mean that it would be applied pretty sparingly . Emmings: Oh! Oh fine . Farmakes : When you 're talking total square footage of the city , I mean I didn 't do the study . Emmings: And I assume we 're not going to go back and put tree easements on existing lots . This is something . Krauss: We don 't have the right to do that . Emmings : Right . Krauss: We 're not going to buy easements . Emmings: So given that , it doesn 't bother me very much as another tool in the arsenal to preserve some good things . = Krauss: Well let me give you some other examples too . On the Highway 5 corridor , I mean the rooms that Morrish refers to are defined by stands of trees generally . And those trees in particular need to be permanently protected frankly because you know , I don 't want somebody coming back 5 years from now on the Opus site saying , well I 'm going to chop down this bunch of trees . Emmings: But you 're not talking about , that 's not a residential site . Krauss : But it applies there too . Emmings: Yeah but I don't think . Krauss : But there are residential sites along the Highway 5 corridor where you have the trees up along the creek system or something else . I mean again , we 're very willing to examine the context in which we use it . We 're very willing to ask Roger to redefine this thing so these are temporary easements generally that would expire and to be somewhat more liberal in what you can do with it in the meantime in terms of thinning to get utilization of the lot or improve the growth or whatever . But I 'm still , I 'm very relunctant to back away from the preservation of something that I think is very worthy . Batzli : See I agree . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 40 Emmings: I don 't disagree . Batzli : And I say to the people who want to do with their lot what they_ will is , it 's either buyer beware or it isn 't . And I have a little bit of difficulty with the well , on this case we 're going to say that he can do with it what he will and on other cases it 's well , tough luck . You bought the lot . Move if you want a bigger lot . I really think that in - the instance of a Lundgren or some sort of developer that is developing the entire development in a way which suggests that it is a preserve and it is natural features and everyone is going into it with that understanding , that it is very appropriate . And if it 's in someone 's backyard , all they have to do is look around and listen to the sales pitches and understand that this is the type of development they 're moving into . And I do not want to water down the resulting ordinance or something else that some one person in that development can go out and thin to the extent that everybody around them says , you know what the hell are you doing? This is supposed to be a natural area . Erhart : Take the development up on Lake Lucy Road that Sathre-Berquist did . That 's the first one I remember where we did this tree conservation and there we just drew a ring around some trees and say , okay you can 't ever touch those and they were in the back of people 's yards . What was the reason for that? Batzli : I don 't know . I think we 're becoming more sophisticated and part of it is this discussion tonight . Because I don 't know that we 've applied it in a way that , in a manner that would suggest that we have a coherent guiding principal as to why we 're doing it . But I think that 's hopefully we 'll at least start to be you know folmented out of this discussion tonight . But I have a fundamental disagreement I think Tim and that is , I think there are instances where it 's very appropriate , given the subdivision that we 're doing . And including corporate sites which in my mind , those are the ones you probably do have to put it in there because they can afford to take them all down . Erhart : Right , commercial I don 't care . They 're fine in there . I 'm only talking about people 's backyards . I don 't know . We should hear from some others . Batzli : Yeah , what do you think? What do you think Ladd? Conrad: . . .flush out the issues . Erhart : But what 's your opinion? . . .We 're trying to develop a consensu and give Paul a steer of where we 're trying to , what we think . So we need your opinion . Conrad: Rooflines? I think the issues are real valid . I share your concern with taking away rights and then Brian 's representing obviously the other extreme in terms of preserving what we want to preserve . And the bottom line is how we apply it . I think the goals are lofty and I really don 't have a need to prohibit somebody from cutting down a tree . I 'm real concerned about Steve cutting down 3 . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 41 Batzli : Oak trees . Conrad: You know that 's real stressful . Emmings : For the taxes I pay I should be able to see the lake I live on . Conrad: . . .But when you have a conservation easement , that we 're talking about , it should be because it 's significant . It has a bearing for the community . If the community is more important and so , you know somehow it 's the standard of how we apply this easement that I 'm concerned with . Right now I think we 're fairly good in some of the stuff we 're doing . But I also share Tim 's concern about , and Steve 's . I don 't think I would want to have , I don 't think I need to be in somebody 's back pocket concerning what they do to their property . I don 't want to be there . But if there 's an easement there , it 's for a reason and as long as we have valid reasons to protect that stand of trees . Batzli : But how do we get to those reasons? I mean do we have a little _ subcommittee get together and say , these would be maybe valid reasons and this is the type of analysis you look at . These are the factors you look at or is it I know it when I see it kind of thing . Emmings: Why do we want to call it tree preservation easement . Conrad: I think conservation . Emmings : Or do we just want to call it , I don't know why we don 't just call it a conservation easement . Batzli : I thought we called it a tree conservation easement . Erhart : Wilderness easement so when we agree as a group to apply this thing , we clearly understand what we 're doing . Is that we 're making that area wilderness . Because that means you 're going to have prickley ash and nobody 's going to go in and touch it . We 're not going to mow it . We 're not doing that so when we apply it we call it a wilderness easement so it 's clear in everybody 's mind what we 're doing . Because that is what we 're doing . Krauss : No , I don 't think it is though . I mean when you 're talking about that site up on the hill , I had the two bus tours going up and down the highway and both times , coming and going people saw , there 's a stand of 5 or 6 real signature oak trees right at the top of the hill . And it 's not that massing that you 're talking about on north face . I mean these are just massive trees that stand up in the middle of the site . And everybody on those buses , both times said we 've got to save those trees . It 's the first high ground you see when you 're approaching the city from the west . And we 're making the developer pick those up . I mean he 's created a large island around it . We 'd like to make sure that those trees are protected permanently . Now I don 't know if you feel more comfortable about it because it 's a multi-family development and not a single family development . But really it shouldn 't make any difference I don 't think . I mean these are owner occupied dwellings . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 42 Ledvina : So why isn 't that wilderness? Krauss : Because it 's clustered around a totlot and a swimming pool that they have . Ledvina: But that specific area that you 've designated as an easement is left alone . Krauss: Well they may mow around it . Ledvina : Okay . Erhart: . . .tree easement around it? There you just set it out on the plan that says you can 't touch these trees . Isn 't that what you did? Krauss: Yeah but again , in that case frankly , we don 't want the Homeowners Association to decide that one tennis court isn 't enough . They want three more and it 's right where those trees are . Erhart : We actually might put a tree conservation easement on those trees? Krauss : Well yeah they could . Emmings: That 's a PUD and they can 't have things in there . Krauss: Well yeah , I mean theoretically we can tie them to that plan but 8 years down the road , 12 years down the road , I think you might be hard pressed to walk into a courtroom and say that Judge , those 6 trees were on that site plan 12 years ago and they just chopped them down . Emmings: Eventually they 're going to die for . . . Krauss : Sure . Batzli : Well how do we get off the dime on this? What do we have to do Paul? Krauss : Well I think that I can certainly work with Roger . We can come back with different language . We may also want to talk to Roger and see if we can come up with a way of putting this into ordinance with an intent statement . Emmings: It seems to me we 're talking about two different kinds of intent here . One is , sometimes there are individual trees in places tha we want preserved because they 're special or unique . And other times there 's full stands of trees or whole areas , whether they 're trees or not , that we want to preserve in their natural state . We don 't want People addressing nature to any advantage . We want them just left alone Erhart : That 's what I would call the wilderness easement . Emmings: So that 's two different ideas there really . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 43 Krauss : But the wilderness bit implies that there is no utilization on that lot which implies it 's going to be owned by the public or privately held in common . That 's not going to happen on somebody 's lot . Emmings: The kids are always going to play in the woods and that 's fine . Batzli : Conservation or , I mean we can come up with a word for it . Krauss: And again , I don 't have a problem in most cases if these things expire in residential situations . So I think we can address it two ways . Coming up with an intent statement . An ordinance and revising the easement language so it 's a lot less onerous . Batzli : Yeah , this is onerous . I mean I think you 've got to at least be able to walk through the area that 's protected and this would maybe not even allow you to do that in a lot of instances . Erhart : Well we should give Paul a direction on what we want to do . Whether we want them to terminate after a time or not . Emmings: I would think you 'd want to do that on a case by case basis . Farmakes : If we come up with something that has enough bite to it , it still has the potential to be misused . I mean isn 't that part of what you 're saying? That it can be interpretted too , beyond common sense . So what worries me though is that if the city , on so many of these things , takes a negotiation position that they 're not negotiating with something to back them up . We dilute it too much that basically the cards are played before they ever sit down at the table . Erhart : Maybe what we 're hearing is , we 're looking for some selective tools . One would be forever perpetual wilderness easement or whatever . Another one is making sure that the developer and builders don 't touch certain trees but that we could apply that in cases where we don 't want it to be perpetual and then the other one would be where we could select specific trees . And staff would essentially apply that on a case by case basis and we would approve it . So I guess I think we 're looking for some tools that we want to apply selectively . Batzli : Does that make any sense Paul? Krauss : I think so . Batzli : Do you have enough direction to go try something? Okay . Conrad: The direction is , we 're still keeping some constraints on the developer . Emmings: That 's the main thing . Conrad: And for sure we 're talking about applying this in the commercial areas in terms of maintaining . We 're really talking , the concern becomes in residential . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 44 Batzli : Well it 's going to be a balancing of , I think it has to still b case by case but there are times when your concerned about the developer and once the house is built , you let the homeowner do with it what they will . Conrad: Let me give you . There 's a tree that 's 8 feet in diameter . Emmings : And 3 feet high . Conrad: It 's a bonsai that survived the winter . Is that a case? Would we protect a tree like that? Krauss: Maybe . One of the things we asked the DNR forester to do and when the thing 's completed , is to fine , I mean they 're like pristine wetlands . There are signature trees that are just , I mean 300 year old tree or something like that . A particularly magnificent specimen that 's worthy of some protection but those are pretty rare . By on large you 're- talking about massing and you might have a bunch of 3 foot trees you kno that are . Conrad: If there was a transitionary area between neighborhoods , talk about Timberwood . Emmings: Or between commercial and residential . Conrad: Right . There 's another case where we 'd want that stand to be . Emmings: Those are buffer yards . Erhart: Then who owns those buffer yards? Emmings: Whoever owns the property . Batzli : It could be a homeowner . Conrad: It could be and so there 's an absolute . We 're protecting . We are buffering . There 's a transition . It stays . Batzli : But see those could be some , I mean we could almost list some factors in the ordinance for , is it a buffer yard . Is it a particular natural feature of the area? I mean these could be factors that you determine when you apply the ordinance . Emmings: Well it would help you decide if it 's going to be temporary or permanent . So if it 's , or like slopes or bluffs you know . Conrad: That 's real important . And then there 's some other areas that I just call character type of things . That might be the top of property where if you take them down . Even though they regrow Tim , I 'll challeng. you on this one . **for 30 or 40 years you don 't have the same situation so there 's cases where you can 't . A tree here and tree there , who cares But I think we do have to protect those spaces where you can put some apartment buildings in . If you level everything , you 've taken the character out of Chanhassen and we can 't allow that to happen . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 45 Emmings : Let me give you an example of what maybe runs contrary a little bit . You know I bought a lot that was next door to another house and the guy , I don 't know who planted the trees but most the people that live on the lake , they put their trees lined up kind of the outsides of the lot so they have a view down the center toward the lake . Well , the lot I bought was next door to this guy 's house and it was just chalk full of trees . I took down as few as I had to to build my house but from my house , when you 're on the lake you can 't see my house from the lake and from my house you can , anytime you want to see anything on the lake you 're doing this and it finally got to me after 10 years so I went out and now I 've taken down 3 trees that have really . One of them was threatening my house . One of them the top fell off of it and the other one was just plain in my way . But I 've planted , I don 't know maybe 100 bushes and this year 4 trees . Four evergreens on my property and I think I ought to be able to do that . You know , I don 't think I 'm doing anything that 's hurting the character of Chanhassen , although I might have neighbors , I don 't know who say , what 's that **fool doing cutting down those big beautiful trees . But they 're not in their yards . Conrad: I agree with your right to do what you did . I don 't want to live next to you but . Emmings: I don 't want to live next to you either for a lot of reasons . Batzli : Okay , well let 's take a look at what Paul comes back with on that . Do people want to talk about cul-de-sacs tonight or philosophy of meetings and reports? Conrad: You 've got 5 minutes . Emmings : What about the roofline preservation easement? Batzli : Why don 't we , can we have 10 minutes on each one of these? Erhart : Let 's do it . CUL-DE-SAC LENGTHS_ Batzli : Paul , Cul-de-sac 's . We know your arguments . Okay . Krauss : Yeah , you know the issues and I gave you the other communities . Emmings: I agree . 500 feet . Erhart : Hang on a second . I agree too but . Given the last 6-7 years , we 've seen , we 've allowed a lot of what? 1 ,000 foot cul-de-sacs and 800 or what 's the character been of the last 6-7 years of the cul-de-sacs that we 've allowed? Krauss: It 's been all across the board . Farmakes: When was the ordinance dropped for 500? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 46 Krauss: It was before my time here . I 've got to believe it was 6 or 7 years ago . Ledvina : Do you know why it was dropped? Krauss : I think a developer objected to it . Batzli : Well I think it 's an issue of character of a community in part . And I think a lot of people within this community want cul-de-sacs . They feel that they can, it 's more difficult for people to cruise a neighborhood looking for burglary sites , whatever . They feel there 's less traffic . Every time we do a development the big concern is kids are going to play in the street and they 're all going to get run over and there will be blood everywhere and clearly in a more upscale , if you will , area you 're going to find more cul-de-sacs . More windy roads . More a lot of this stuff and I think it 's a community issue of perception and the developers are telling us , typically we try to listen to them . - What it is that 's selling and what it is people want and I think we should at least pay some attention to that . I 've found for example in my neighborhood that the cul-de-sacs are very popular . I don 't know if I __ could go in and say that they were selling for more money but we actuall have a big loop but yet it 's sort of an isolated exit through the North Lotus Lake Park . And the loop is nice because everybody walks around it_ and you get a good sense of neighborhood , which is one of Paul 's points . I don 't necessarily want to restrict us this discussion to safety . What I 'd like to do is talk a little bit about planning and neighborhoods and things like that because I think that 's what some of the issues we shoul- raise because everytime we talk about this , you know planning staff gets up on their chair and salutes the flag and says , you know fire trucks ana snow plows . Well I don 't care about that so much because we hear that _ everytime and it 's a valid concern but let 's talk about some of the othe things . Emming : Well nobody 's saying we shouldn 't them right? Batzli : No but you know , what 's wrong with the longer one? If a 500 foot one is good , is a 1 ,000 foot one better? Why is it that we 're getting them? Is it because of access is limited to the area? Is it because it 's tough? Farmakes : It 's easier to lay out a longer cul-de-sac . Batzli : You can get more lots in there with cul-de-sacs because you 've got less roads? Is that the deal? Is that why developer 's like them? Farmakes: Well if you 're selling to a bunker mentality , which is the majority of people who move out here , that 's what you 're offering . You 're_ offering them a private road . Batzli : Okay . But if we go with the theme that we let people cut down whatever trees they want . If it 's , let 's cater to what the people want . Why don 't we give them long cul-de-sacs? Why do we care? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 47 Farmakes: Well I think you can still offer cul-de-sacs for the consumer and still design it , for the most part , that it 's a reasonable length . In other words , we set up a parking lot where we say , this is a reasonable distance that a consumer will get out of their car and walk to Festival Foods . And if they limit that to 400 feet , that 's a reasonable distance . And a person who 's planning that , that 's the criteria that they use to design that . If you get beyond 500 feet or so , I don 't think you 're going to get little Jimmy walking down the street to get on a bus . He 's going to have his parents drop him off in a car or it 's going to create a distance problem where you 're probably not going to walk to access that pick-up point on the thru street . So what you wind up with is a lot more functional design if you deal with 500-600 , somewhere in there . Batzli : Let me ask a question . When other people read this list of cities , and maybe this will point me out as the snob that I am . When you read this list of cities , do any one of you read this and say , but we 're not Eagan . We 're not Burnsville . We don 't care what they do . We 're something else . Or do you look at this . Something else from the standpoint of , different area . Different type of community . There is a different type of person who is moving to those areas and do we care what Eagan , Burnsville , Plymouth , Brooklyn Park , Bloomington . Those things to me are , those areas in the development have , well Bloomington maybe . West Bloomington 's a little bit different but I look at these and I say , I don 't give a rip what those communities are doing . I want to know , maybe some different lifestyles . Different kinds of people are being attracted — to those areas . I don 't know . That 's my feeling when I look at this list . Farmakes: Well is your argument though , cul-de-sacs or not cul-de-sacs or are you talking about the length? Is that what your argument is? Batzli : I 'm talking about why are we limiting the length . If it 's only because , if we 're not looking at the type of neighborhoods that these promote or land use or anything else . If we 're just going to do it for safety , let 's just say we 're just going to do it for safety and be . done with I guess is kind of my sentiment . Emmings: That 's why I 'd do it . I know that , I ' ll tell you why I come down on this . When I was first on the Planning Commission I didn 't want any cul-de-sacs . I didn 't like them . I 've become convinced over time that people like to live on them . I wouldn 't want to and we have a lot of developers that told us that people want cul-de-sacs . So fine . I can accept that . So then my next position is , they ought to be kept short . We had a lot of discussions here about long ones and the difficulties it presents for city vehicles . Emergency vehicles . Better to have two accesses than one . I buy that . I think it 's real and so I think they ought to be kept short . The Lundgren one was a good example where , real clear to me that ought to be tied together . I even thought , and Lundgren , the option should have been left open to tie that development to development that would come to the east of that . There were some problems with that . But I think things ought to be tied together because I think if you 're going to have cul-de-sacs they ought to be kept reasonably short . 500-600 feet , I don 't have any trouble with that . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 48 Batzli : How many lots under our current ordinance can go in on 600 feet How many are you talking about down and back? About 6? 100 foot . Krauss: Well you 're talking , you 're probably going to get about 15 on both sides of the street and around the bubble . Lundgren 's proposal wound up with 44 homes . Now there 's some fallacies about cul-de-sacs too . I mean cul-de-sacs are supposed to offer a nice environment . I _ live on a cul-de-sac . I understand why . I mean my kids play in it and all that but when you 've got 43 other homes coming out in front of your home , which is nominally on a cul-de-sac and you 're on the corner , I 'd rather be a on a loop street with 20 homes you know . You 're getting a lot less impact . Erhart : I think that 's a strong argument to sitting here trying to figure out balance between what people want and arguing cul-de-sacs versus the safety issues . And I think the real swing argument here for limiting it to the 600 feet or whatever , is that if a developer wants to sell cul-de-sacs , he can make more cul-de-sacs . He just makes them 600 feet because you can go in and set up your street pattern to make lots o 600 foot , if that 's what he really wants to sell , he can do that and meet both criteria . Batzli : I 've got no burning desire for long cul-de-sacs . I just wanted to see if I could get an argument . So if we 're all in agreement . Erhart: We 're onto you . Batzli : Okay , 600 foot cul-de-sacs . Let 's do it . Let 's talk about islands in the middle , because we 've got to get out of here . Conrad: Before you talk , I like long cul-de-sacs . Batzli : Oh you like them? And you didn 't speak up . Conrad: I don 't know where to take that though . I wasn 't here for the Lundgren deal . I thought you guys made a major mistake when you tied that together . Batzli : I didn 't . I voted against it . I was the only one . Conrad: You use cul-de-sacs when you can preserve stuff . To tie a thing together for artificial reasons doesn 't make sense . Batzli : No , I think it gives a better sense of community and neighborhoods . Conrad: Cul-de-sacs are so community oriented . Emmings : I think tying the town together and not making isolated neighborhoods is communited oriented so I don 't agree with you . Conrad: So the cars can go speeding through . Emmings: Do you go speeding through? Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 49 Conrad: Sure . Emmings: Well I don 't , and I don 't think you do either . Conrad : I like the little neighborhoods that they create . I think you lose a sense of community when you have all these grid streets . Emmings : Well what are you defining as a community? Our community is _ made up with 759 communities which are cul-de-sacs? I mean that can 't happen . Conrad: But my point is , I think you 've got to balance the emergency needs and I think there 's some validity except . Batzli : Dick , on a good day how far can you back up the fire truck? Richard Wing : You know what kind of troubles we here as a Fire Chief , I have trouble finding those **cul-de-sacs . I don 't have any trouble finding a long street . I get up into near Timberwood up there where there 's 15 ,000 little side streets , you can 't find . . . Emmings : That 's enough for me . Batzli : Well but that could be a lot of short cul-de-sacs . Emmings: Then let 's get rid of them . Conrad : I don 't even need to talk about this when I think we 've got an ordinance that keeps cul-de-sacs to the 600 feet or 500 or whatever . Batzli : That 's what we 're trying to do . Erhart: We don 't . We don 't have any ordinance . Krauss: Well it doesn't have any constriction at all now . Conrad: I thought . Krauss : No , it 's wide open . Emmings: City Council was where it happened . Erhart: Like they always do . Krauss: Brian when you 're talking about other communities , I note that Plymouth has the most expensive average house value in the Twin Cities . And Minnetonka , if I remember right , Minnetonka was 600 feet or 700 feet . You could go longer if environmentally it was the only reasonable way to serve an area . Farmakes: Timberwood 's kind of a bad example . That 's 2 1/2 acres . That 's not a typical development . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 50 Batzli : I 'm familiar with the less prestigious parts of Plymouth apparently . Erhart : So what 's the consensus here? Batzli : The consensus is , let 's go with the 600 or 700 foot . 600 foot? Can we go with 600? Farmakes: 5 was the old ordinance . Batzli : Yeah but we 've got a lot of 600 footers in here too. Is 600 foot a reasonable compromise there? And that 's basically 2 extra homes on the cul-de-sac . Conrad: The key to this ordinance is talking about when it should be , I don 't care if it 's 400 or 500 but when you actually can improve the surroundings , improve the neighborhood , that means environmental type considerations . So if we 've got those built in . But I get worried abou some words when there 's absolutely no other way to make this happen . Krauss: There 's no question . It would be waived . It wouldn 't even be - variance . Erhart: He 's going to put language in there . LANDSCAPED ISLANDS AND PARKWAYS . Batzli : If we can briefly talk about landscape islands and parkways . We 'll postpone the philosophy . Krauss: I 'm sorry Dave left but you know , engineering was going to prepare some report for the Council and you guys on that and they haven' done it yet . I think we 've generally concluded in house that everybody , Planning Commission , City Council and many staff members , want to go with these things . And that the engineering staff ought to figure out an acceptable way that they can design it . Batzli : Okay . So we want to postpone that . Do we want to discuss philosophy at all? Krauss: I don 't . PHILOSOPHY OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND REPORTS. . . Batzli : Well , the reason this came up , from a philosophy standpoint , just so everybody can think about it , was when we were talking with the people . Which one was it on? It was a PUD . Krauss : It was Lundgren . Batzli : It was Lundgren over at TH 5 and TH 41 . Is that the one? Krauss: Yep . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 51 Batzli : And we ended up negotiating element by element and the comment that came out were that this should all have been taken care of before and yet I remember often times sentiment that staff had negotiated it already and it was a canned deal by the time we saw it . Now granted , maybe we would have liked a happy medium but the issue was broader and that was , in a PUD , obviously I think the issue there was that the applicant probably hadn 't gotten the staff report early enough in the game so that they had a chance to see it and discuss it with the staff . But the broader issue that came out of the Planning Commission was that in the past we kind of wanted maybe more of a say in what we got in a PUD and we had an opportunity and we whined about it . And my question was whether we really wanted to be whinning or whether we wanted to take the bull by the horns and tell the guys what we wanted in that PUD . Erhart : There 's got to be a balance . That one was too much . Farmakes : I don 't think that was the situation with that particular one at all . And I think that one was more along the lines of what happened on Oaks here where there was a breakdown of communication . Whether it was time or notification and some of these items that were already covered under ordinances , were not hashed out . If they 're already covered under other ordinances , they weren 't that they had pressing needs to change them . I believe that in the case of the Oaks , they hadn 't researched whether or not there were ordinances that covered that . It 's a matter of talking to city staff . Batzli : Okay but let 's look at the broader issue . I mean I brought that up by way of example . What do you think our role should be in that process? Should we have a rubber stamp role of looking at the report and saying yes , we like it . We don 't like it . And I 've had several comments from commissioners that we sit here and listen to a lot of things and we talk a lot and then we approve it after 3 hours changing one condition out of 50 . You know that makes for a long evening of a lot of talk and no action and the issue is , what is our role . Should we be up here being proactive in making suggestions? Does that mean that we need -to -gq through the reports better? Does that mean we need to talk to Paul better? I mean what should we be doing on these things to make us feel like ( a ) we 're actually doing something . Tim . Erhart : Our goal ought to be to spend more time establishing policy and guidelines and if we could get it to the perfection is that we simply pass yes or no as they come in here . If we did the perfect job on establishing guidelines and policy , we 'd have 5 minute reviews . Now you can 't be perfect . Batzli : Well we could but the public would want to ask a lot of questions . Erhart : Well you 're going to want some , that 's right but I think what we have a tendency to do here is that we spend so much time on these reviews chewing on these things and we ended up not making any changes . We never get any time like we get tonight . Thank goodness . This has been great because we sit down and we establish for staff some guidelines . I think there 's where we have failed in the last couple years is we don 't have Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 52 enough time to do that and that 's what happens when you get into these long things . Unfortunately what happens here in this community is we 're growing . That the guidelines have to be dynamic . They 're constantly changing . And you just can 't set an ordinance out there and then live _ with it because we have to maintain time to do that . For example , one thing I think , we could cut these discussions short if we simply would pass an ordinance that you can 't have a flat roof in the commercial district . I tell you what , that would have cut that discussion in half - tonight . Given staff leverage to make these guys come in with something better than what we had and give them some idea where we want to go on these things because quite frankly we don 't ever want to see another flat roof in our commercial district . Unless it 's something , an unusual flat roof . Batzli : Okay , Paul . Put together an ordinance on that . He 's not writing this down . I 'm serious . Emmings : I don 't know if I agree with that . Erhart: Let 's find our minimum level and let 's communicate it to staff what our minimum level is so they don 't have to come in here and discuss _ with an applicant what 's the minimum level . Batzli : Well I think part of it is , you know a dynamic process between the applicant saying to him or herself , I can 't give up everything to Paul because I 've got to go in front of the Planning Commission and then I 've got to go in front of the Council and if they ask me for more , I 've already given it up . They want to almost kind of hold something here and then be able to go , oh I 'll give you the couple more trees . And you know , I get a sense at times from some of the developers that they 're doing that . So I don 't think it could be a perfect yes or no situation . Emmings: I don 't know if I agree with that because what I hear developers saying is , just tell me what the damn rules are and I 'll make - my plan conform but don 't make me guess . Batzli : Oh see , I didn 't get that from Target at all . Emmings: Well Target , that 's different . Batzli : Well no they 're not different . I mean we 've seen people come in , look at the Opus . They came in . They gave us this plan and they knew it was going to be terrible and we were going to hammer on them but they weren 't giving staff anything . Emmings : I think developers mainly want to know what rules . Tell me the rules of the game . That 's what I hear them saying . Krauss : You 're saying Target 's different and Richard and I met with their Landscape Architect who was , I don 't know if he was whinny but he was kind of , he was whinny . But going on about you know , he felt like a ping pong ball but I know the folks on Target side . They were congratulatory . . .Now it 's a hell of a lot better than the average Target . Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 53 But at least everybody knew the ground rules going into it . It drove everybody crazy in that 4 months period but Target works for 8-9 months on other sites and then gets rejected . It 's well worth their time to come across and compromise on a few things . And if you look at it , the basic principals were not being argued . The idea that we wanted a better than average building . Well yeah it took some beating to get the kind of building but the basic concept was agreed to . The basic orientation of the store was agreed to . The idea of protecting the trees . All those things up front . They knew that ahead of time . Farmakes : But the thing I was talking about on those buildings for instance is that it gets back to architectural standards . We 're talking _ the intent of those people putting up that building despite what the gentleman from Abra said , is to put up a structure that services their needs for the least amount of money possible . That 's what their goal is . Krauss: And maintains their identity . That argument was the same argument that McDonald 's came up with when they said every building has to have golden arches . Well McDonald 's doesn 't do that anymore and apparently Abra hasn 't matured to that level but there 's no reason why you have to accept it . Farmakes: Well hopefully we 're providing a different perspective that gives you checks and balances but the point is well taken . If they don 't have a guide , which is difficult to do because that would be to say , in this case both applicants were building the same building with the same intent and the same use . To some extent I guess that 's true but you had two different building proposals here . And it seems to me they were both beating the same goals . Certainly the question whether or not they paint the cinder brick gray versus tan is kind of a moot point it seems to me . Batzli : As one final issue here before , are people comfortable now with the increased number of conditions we 're seeing in all these reports or do they want to go back to the good old days where there 's about 3 in there and everything else is pursuant to the plans as shown or that we received? Ledvina : Well obviously it 's better to have fewer conditions with the most up to date site plan but that 's not possible to do . Staff is _ working hard to get as many positive modifications as possible and that 's good . But it 's nice like what we saw today with the Goodyear/Abra . You know we had plans that didn 't , the landscaping plan for example didn 't reflect what was actually agreed to and those type of things you know should try to be resolved if we can . Erhart : When they come in , you have an agreement how many weeks this is going to go to Planning? Krauss: Yeah . From the day they drop it on my desk we get it to you , it comes up 4 weeks later . Erhart : Whether it 's a small project or a big project . I think what would make sense is to have a graduated scale based on the size of the project so that bigger projects , they have to come in earlier on bigger Planning Commission Meeting - November 18 , 1992 - Page 54 projects to get a certain date . That allows you to finish these negotiations because I sense many times this stuff is coming in here and quite frankly you just ran out of time . Krauss: Well , that can happen . I like to think we don 't do it too ofte but you know , I like having you around . I mean there 's a good cop/bad cop kind of thing going on . Beissner and his group , I mean Sharmin and _ I have been telling him this for 6 months . Americana Bank , we told them that for 5 months and they go okay , well I ' ll add an awning . Well okay , I ' ll put up a dormer . Okay , I 'll do this and after 6 months you go , I don 't know . Let 's just throw it at the Planning Commission . And - if you come up and say , this thing is lousy and jump all over it or this thing is good , I think it puts it all into perspective . And I know in the case of Americana Bank , I mean you had the bank President here kind of reared up and said , geez I guess what staff was saying is probably true and I don 't want to come into the community if you don 't really wanL. me to do it that way . I 'll go redesign it and I think the building that we 're getting now is a pretty good one because of that process . So don ' take yourselves out of the role . We need you to be there . We can only take it so far . Emmings: The problem there is Paul , like tonight on the Goodyear/Abra thing . My sense was that we were going a good cop/bad cop thing but I wasn 't sure and I wasn 't sure if you were saying that under the zoning that we pushed them as far as we could . Lots of times I have a sense of what you 've been telling them and kind of what you 're looking to us for and I didn 't have it on that one tonight . So good cop/bad cop works but only if I know what you 've been telling them . - Krauss: And that 's my fault too . You know Sharmin wrote the report and I didn 't , usually I add some language that tries to get across the essence . But I 'll be honest , I mean there were some things I 'd rather not say or commit to on camera if I 'm going to be hauled into Court to defend the City 's position on something . Batzli : I think one of the things we can do is clearly , I mean obvious', there 's going to be chances , opportunities for us to play this good cop/bad cop role but there may be something to a much larger development - Four weeks not being enough time to do the job you want to do with it an if we are having a problem with this , maybe we want to look at changing those rules . That may be one thing we could do . The other thing we could do is to make sure that the agendas don 't get too long . A large reason , in my opinion , that we suddenly have 3 people drop off the Commission , o, about to , is because the meetings last too long . One is because of my pansy way of running the meetings that I let everybody sit up there and talk for hours and of course that didn't happen when Steve was running the meetings . But another reason is surely the size of the agendas that we 've had . And I don 't know how we move things along while at the same - time shortening the agenda but we need to work on that so that the peopl who are on the commission feel like they can stay on the commission and not worry about getting up for work the next day . Krauss: It 's tough and you know we 've had more packed agendas in the past . We 've actually had a fairly lenient couple years in terms of new Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 55 development . Batzli : Yeah but we 've had a lot of cases where a lot of people came in and they all wanted to talk and they all had good points . And the issue is , didn 't they have neighborhood meetings . What 's happening on some of these things? Is it just because development is approaching some of these old neighborhoods? I don 't know. Krauss: Well I think you 're also finding , the City 's growing larger . People are moving out from Bloomington and Edina and are used to being active and know how to make the system work for them . And I think there 's been a series of projects that you 've seen recently where we 've gotten the developer to make some very significant accommodations but you 'd never know it hearing the residents talk because I mean they have their agenda and here 's this phone book of their agenda . Farmakes : Are you talking about the last meeting? Krauss : Yeah . Batzli : Well I don 't know . It seems we certainly have to work on because I agree with Tim that it 's more fun to talk up here and be proactive than to sit there and , I don 't mind listening to the residents but on some of these they get extremely long and tedious and you start looking at the clock and you 're thinking less about what 's being said than I 've got to get up at 6:00 tomorrow morning and I 've got to do this and that before I go to bed . We can 't do that . Conrad: I 've talked to people about it and I can 't do that . It just doesn 't work . Batzli : Right now is a perfect time to quit and we 're going to and this is what it should be like every week when we meet . Krauss : Some communities do limit agendas . We haven 't done that . If you 'd like us to do that . Batzli : Well I have the authority under the By-laws to call the meeting at 10: 30 and I 've felt like it at some times . Is it 11 :00? Whatever it is . I mean it 's in there , the power to do it but you typically , it 's when there 's still 50 people in the room and I feel pretty silly telling them , sorry . It 's time to go home . Krauss: See I know , one of the things that the Mayor in Minnetonka was pretty good at doing is looking at his watch , and they had an 11 :00 deadline . At 10:00 and saying , look it folks . I don 't think we 're going to get to your item . You 're welcome to hang around and see if you want to . Otherwise we can get it off the agenda now and make you first on the agenda next time and you can go home and catch the 10:00 news . But it 's your choice . Batzli : But usually , and this is partly , in large part communication between whoever 's chairing and you is to figure out what are the hot ones and why are all these people here and trying to figure out how to juggle Planning Commission Meeting November 18 , 1992 - Page 56 that . And maybe I can help a little bit on that too but you should have_ advanced inkling of which ones are hot , or hopefully you do . Krauss: You know I used to be able to tell you that we always knew . There 's something that bothers me a little bit lately and it 's that sometimes we don 't know . That some residents have felt that the more appropriate way to respond is to get the petition . Get everybody all riled up before they ask any questions and hopfully become enlightened . - And they 're kind of by-passing us which worries me . Conrad: One comment on my part . And this is probably self critical more_ than anything else but I think it 's real important . We drag out issues . In the last couple months it 's been real clear . Brian you use one of th_ examples where we beat something up for 3 hours here and we made one , and we were very negative and we made one lousy change to what the staff - report said and I tell you , I think we 're real good at disecting stuff . We really are and we typically come up with some things that I think are pretty good that we send up to City Council but there have been some cases recently where we 'll spend an inordinate amount of time and not know where we 're going . And some of it 's process . If you talk about something sooner or later maybe you come up with a solution but we hadn 't in many cases , and that 's gotten real frustrating . Sometimes I don 't know where I want to go on an issue so it 's good to hear people talk . S I 'm going to speak out of both sides of my mouth . Yet on the other hand , there 's some cases where geez , we 're just saying nothing and I don 't think we 're taking the issue any further . But unfortunately , I 'll make that comment and there 's no solution . Tonight on the only hot issue , I knew what the issues I had and I tried to be brief , and typically I 'm _ not but I tried to be and say here 's where I 'm at and hand it off to somebody else . Rather than just make . Erhart: Limit the number of commissioners at a meeting to 5 . Batzli : One final thing before we adjourn here and I don 't know if we accomplished a lot but maybe we at least got some things off our chest - and we can think about it more and work on it . I appreciate at least tw of the people , I know with holidays coming up and everything else , it 's sometimes I don 't even know if we 'll have 2 meetings in December , is to thank Commissioners Erhart and Emmings , ( and Ahrens ) , for their service on the Commission . They will be missed and I hope that City Council doe something nice for them . Emmings: What do you like? I like cars . Conrad: I think maybe they deserve some kind of thing for cutting down - trees . Emmings moved , Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Submitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director - Prepared by Nann Opheim