Loading...
PC 1994 01 05CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMM~SION REGULAR MF.~G JANUARY 5, 1994 Prior to the regular meeting, the Planning Commission held a work session on the Highway 5 Corridor. Acting Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 8:45 p.m. MEMBER~ PRF~ENT; Joe Scott, Diane Harberts, Ladd Conrad, Matt Ledvina, Nancy Mancino and Jeff Farmakes STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director PUSLI¢ mrAlUNa; CP. ASKA SCHOOL DZSTRICr AN-I) crrv 01~ .c~mA$$ZN PROPO$E TO Rr~ON~. APPRQXIMATELY 42, A{~_~ OF PROPERT~ ZONED A2, AGRICUL~ ESTATE TO OL OFFICE AND INDI, ISTRIAL DII/;TRICT AND {~N~AL PRELIMINARY PLAT AND ~ITE PLAN REV~I~V FQR A 107~690 8QI~ARE FQQT ELEMENTARY $Cr~OOL A~O Rr~3m~O~~ C~MPrr~ ANO ~ ~, ~mA~rq mr n , PROmt AT THE 0I Yl3tEA T )RNER Olr mGHWAY 5 AND 0ALPIN BOUL~WARD. Public Present: N~ne David Leschek Bob Rothman John Gockel Wallace & Maxine Otto Craig Harrington Patrick Minger lames Domholt Roger Schmidt Hammel-Gre~.-.Abrahamson Hammel-Green-Abrahamson Chaska School District #112 War, oMa 8140 M~p. lewood '.T-~ 8221 Galpin Blvd. 8251 West Lake Court 8301 Oalpin Blvd. Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Farmakos: Paul, can I ask you a question? Can you give me a quick synopsis? I d//in~t!.pick this up from the report. What is the positioning of this school-o~ in:~he 112.scimol system? Is this seen as a long term replacement with our elementary school over here? I know that's 30-40 years old now, isn't it? Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Krauss: It's not a replacement at all. It's supplemental to it. Farmakes: I realize that but rm talking maybe 20 years down the line. How is this positioned to serve for instance, is it an expan~on situation on the landscaping, what we're looking at now, is this something thafs envisioned? Does this solve current problomg and does it take into consideration future growth? These are tho type of things that I did not pick up in the report so. Krauss: Well, I'm working off of memory here because this goes back to this committee that we served on with the School District and they had Barbara Luckerman from...Motro Council...This should handle the growth, as I undemtand it, that they expect to be experiencing in this part of the school district. Ultimately they need another middle school in this area someplace but this should handle tho elementary level growth into the foreseeable future. Now when they did their projection, we gave them what we felt to be the ultimate development of Chanhagsen and there in fact parts of southern Chanhassen they may still use tho Chaska Elementary School because they may be closer. Farmakes: That's the figure in about the low 30's somewhere? Krauss: Which one? Farmakes: That's the figure in the Iow 30's somewhere that you're talking about the ultimate development? Krauss: Right. Right. Long term the school district may well need another school out in Victoria~ Victoria would prefer that this school be built in their community anyway but as long as they can project, ifs my understanding, this would satis~ their elementary needs. Harberts: What is elementary? Grades wharf K thru 5? Krauss: It's up to 5. Harberts: Middle school is 6 thru 8? Krauss: Yeah, except for kindergarten. Scott: Yeah, ECC. Yeah, 1 thru 5. With the City of Chanhassen getting involved in basically getting another school sited in our community, do you see the' same process happening obviously if the middle school is needed? Have we gone through the same process and saying, well here's a good spot for a middle school and continue this process for that? Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Krauss: Well, as I said earlier, initially we thought that this was going to be the middle school because that was what they thought they needed at the time. We later found out that in the State of Minnesota, it gets pretty bizarre. If you're going to locate a middle school, you almost need 70 acres became it takes so many football fields and baseball fields to accommodate it that we just couldn't fit it in here if we wanted to. They still have a long term need for a middle school site. We've shown thom, they~,,o sat down with us a couple of times to see what exactly is available but the words available and land in Chanh~ don~t go together anymore and I'm not at all convinced that they're going to fred a place for it in this community. We haven't identified one. Scott: Okay. Any other questions for Paul? Harberts: I have one. I don~t know if this is to you or the applicant or the architects or whoever. How do they see the public transit buses integrating into this plan given the high degree of rides that are provided each and every day to the school site currently? Krauss: Well, maybe I can let them answer that. There are separate bus pull offs for this. Ifs a pretty ideal type of a site. I'd leave it up to Southwest Metro to figure whether or not we need a separate bus loading area~ I-Iarberts: I don't know if we're asking about separate. Pm asking really was that a factor into the decision making process that it's an element that's there. Krauss: I don't know. To the extent that you're working with the school district now, I've .-" -, got to believe it was because... H_arberts: Okay. Maybe the applicant can address that. Scott: Yep. Any other questions? I'd like to hear from the applicants if we could. Just for your notes. I know Paul mentioned that you folks would be talking about more specifically about the building design. Roof unit detail and inform~on on grading. So if you can just cover those as briefly as you can and then we'H fire some questions at you~ David Leschek: Good evening. Is this working okay? My name is David Leschek and I'm an architect with Hammel-Green-Abrahamson. With me tonight is Bob Rothman, also with HGA and John Gockel who is a representative for the School District #112. Paul has covered fairly well the background information for the project as well as significant portions of the site. This plan that you have in front of you, as we refer to it in our submission to the Planning Commission, is a master plan for this site. Much as is the building at this time. We are at the design development portion in the phase of the project and we have just received Plataning Commission Meeting - Sanuary 5, 1994 back our first design development level estimate. And as we receive that estimate, we then go back, what we do to go back and value engineer portions of the building or site, whether it be vegetation or some of the building materials or the amount of case work that's in the building so that that budget then is eventually in line with the original project budgeL What we have done here is taken an educational concept from tho District #112 as well as a recreational program from the city of Chanhassen and developed those programs to their full potential and as we get into tho design development and we begin to get the estimates back, we begin to value engineer those programs if you will, keeping the spirit as well as the intent of those programs intact but maybe in a smaller. Mancino: The execution might be different?. David Leschek: Not different. The concept is there. For insrtance an example would be the plantings that we have indicated on our drawings were of a 4 inch caliper which is in oxcegs of what the minimum standards would be for the city of Chanhassen which would only require 2 1/2 inch. So at that point then we would go back to a 2 1/2 inch for instance rather than a 4 inch, which would still be in keeping with the requirements of the city but yet less than what we have originally shown on our documents. As Paul mentioned, we have a bus drop to the south of the site. Staff parking as well as a service entrance off of Cralpin to the west of the building. We have provided for, and this may answer part of your question Diane. We have provided for a looped drive at the front of the ISD portion of the building as well as a drop off area, for whether it be cars or buses. Harberts: Oh good. David Leschek: Whether it be for the youngsters or even the physically handicapped. As Bob gets up here and goes through the portion of the building, you will note that the Early Childhood Family Education portion of the building is located in close proximity to this drop off on the west side of the building. Harberts: Can you tell what the distance that is? From the drop off for the children as well as you said from an accessible perspective. And is this covered7 David Leschek: I'll get that scale and then I'll answer your question. To the south of the building we have this bus drop off which we envision is the bus drop that will receive the vast majority of the students. The individual houses which contain all of the classrooms are oriented to the south and off of that bus drop. So you will have students basically entering the building from the south. Staff from the west and you will have a commnnity entrance back on the east side. We wanted to obtain that separation for security reasons as well as that was a requirement of the educational program established by District #112. This is about, Planning Commission Meeting - ~Iunuary 5, 1994 well excuse me. This is about 90 feet from this drop off point here to the front doors. Closest to the. Harberts: The main entrance? David Leschek: Yes, thafs correcL And we have approximately 180 feet from the bus drop up to the student entrances at the houses. One of the reasons for ~ was that as a part of the educational program for this building, exterior spaces wanted to be included in the educational program for the building. So for instance in this portion, this lightly colored area here that you can see has concrete lines extending into it, this is an area of prairie grasses which would be incorporated into the site plan and used as a teaching station for instance. Where a science class could go out, you know see the prairie grasses and develop some educational curriculum that would accent this space and incorporate it into that curriculum. Again, back on the east side of the building is tho major entrance for the community portion of tho building and again the separation was desirable from all clients, or parties involved in the project Again another drop off area to access not only the commnnity entrance to the building but also just to allow parents and what not to drop off maybe their children who are participating in activities that are going on and allowing them to drop them off. Get them going and then going to park their vehicle. Either side of the building contains, at this point we have developed again some exterior educational type classrooms, or courtyards.. And again I remind you that what we have here is our master plan for this portion of tho project. A cafeteria located on the north side of the building. Again, a playground area that can both service not only the park but also services ISD//112. This is the ISD//112 athletic fields. As Paul has mentioned, their need for athletic fields is not nearly as great at an elementary school as it would be for instance at a middle school and that's how the city has become involved in developing additional soccer, softball fields. An ice rink in this area. Two ice rinks in this area and four additional tennis courts. Harberts: Could you just go through that lump again with regard to the public transit. I see where it would enter in. David Leschek: It would enter in at this point here. There's a, you can see how it was sort of recessed back at this point indicating the drop are~. And then you would loop back out Harberts: Whafs the radius turn on that loop? David Leschek: I can't be certain at this time Diane. You know, I'm sure that our civil engineers have sized that not for a full sized school bus for instance but maybe one that would. Planning Commission Meeting - January $, 1994 I-Iarberts: 30 feet? 30 to 40 feet? That's what we're looicing at. David Leschek: I do not think that it would be 30 or 40 feet. Harberts: Then it's not a public transit access point. So someone may want to talk to us or we talk to you about that. The only other thing is, is there the opportunity of using that turn around loop? David Leschek: There is the opportunity of using it which allows you to gain access. But again this turn around loop here has the same purpose as this one, because after hours when we require the vast majority of the recreational facilities being used, this staff parking lot would then become available to the community to USO tho park. Or to drop off their children and allow them access into the recreational area. Harberts: Okay. I'd like just to raise that as something to look at and to have fm~er discussion with Southwest Metro. Thank yotr David Leschek: Thank you. Any additional questions? Anything that I've missed? I do believe that we have also cut two sections. This one starting here will be up on that ridge that Paul spoke of by Timberwood E.~tes. The grade be~nu to drop down and you have that large buffer of existing trees. The boulevard area that you will see in this location, the bus drop off, our area of prairie restoration, which is this area in front of the plan. I-Iarberts: Excuse me, where's the access boulevard? David Leschek: The access boulevard, well the access boulevard is actually here. Farmakes: Is this is an east/w~ angle that we're looking at the building? David Leschek: This is a north/south. Farmakes: North/south? David Leschek: That's correct. Scott: No, no. It's cut north/south but we're looking west David Leschek: Yes, you're looking west That's correct The prairie restoration area. The building itself, we refer to it as a diamond terrace but that is this portion just off of the cafeteria for the building and the playground which is off to the north side. And then the Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 athletic fields, and then eventually Highway 5. Farmakes: Can I ask you a question about the prairie grass? My only familiarity with using this and the treatment that you're using down below has been with corporate, and to be honest, over a period, a short period of time they converted it to, they got rid of it essentially. Is there precedent for this where this has been used successfully for this type of use? Intensive children and so on. David Leschek: We have an ongoing project with IBM at Rochester. Farmakes: I'm familiar with the building. David Leschek: A corporate client and they have asked us to develop this sort of prairie restoration at their facility and we have found that it works quite well for them and see no reason why it would not work very well for the school as an educational tool. Farmakes: Is that location in front of the building? Or it would be facing Highway 53 then? That you're talking about IBM. David Leschek: I believe it faces Highway 53 as well as, you~l probably forgive me. I'm not that familiar with the project, although I do know that we are involved in it. I believe it is that portion that faces Highway 53 as well as I believe some of their courtyards are now being done. Farmakes: To the north? David Leschek: Right, exactly. Farmakes: Has it been used again in a school situation with elementary children ~g a point? David Leschek: I can't tell you that we have done that, no. Farmakes: Okay. Does this have to be burned every so many years? David Leschek: It would have to be burned every so many years. I beheve it's every 3 years and we have in fact discussed that with the buildings and grounds people with the District and they see no adverse affect doing that as far as from a facilities standpoinL Planning Commission Meeting - 2anuary 5, 1994 Farmakes: How does that affect the other trees? Just curious, being that trees aren't normally in a prairie situation? David Leschek: Well I think what you find is that this lighted portion here is the prairie and we do have. Farmakes: I don't think we can see you over the podium there. David Leschek: I think the site section that you see here is a little misleading with the trees that I'm showing. You may be seeing, I believe you would be looking from this direction this way and you would be seeing this back drop of the trees but for the most part...sort of on the perimeter of those prairie grasses. Farmakes: Actually I was more concerned about the trees in the front, The primary one here is from the northwest and I'm just curious if you're going to torch that, how that would affect the other trees. We do have, I think a couple of cases. I think DataServ at one time when it was CPT did prairie grasses and burned it off. I'm not sure that that's still the purpose of DataServ but I think Eckankar also does a prairie grass. It's an attempt in the early stages of prairie grass restoration in front of their place. Mancino: Well there are red oaks right in the middle of the prairie grass. There are quite a few of them according to your enlarged plan of the bus drop off sheet That these all are red oaks in through the prairie grass so we'd have to make sure they're shielded. Farmakes: That was my concern. Because about once every 10 years we get very dry around here and just, I believe these types of maintenance issues have been problems in the past with other sites. And that's why I was asking if we have any precedence on this type of thing. John Gockel: We have not at an educational building. Farmakes: Okay. David Leschek: This concept has been developed along with the District at this point. That's as much as I can tell you. Any other questions? I want to get back to, I have one additional site section that takes us east and west through the site looking to the north. Galpin Boulevard in this area and we begin to slope down to the staff parking and drop off that we had discussed with Diane. The front entry more or less to the school. The school itself, the entrance to the community portion of the building and then the site begins to drop away to Bluff Creek. So we have tried to maintain that natural slope of the site as it goes and works Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 it's way east towards Bluff Creek. And you can see the background, Highway 5 remains above our site and the trees that we would, that were proposed in the master plan along Highway 5 in keeping with the development plan for the Highway 5 corridor and again this area back here is where Paul had mentioned he would eventually have access underneath Highway 5 along the corridor which would run north and south along Bluff Creek. Mancino: I have a question about the landscaping and that's, it looks like on my enlarged plan, between the, let's see it's facing the south access boulevard is mostly sugar maples, David Leschek: Yes. Mancino: They are very sensitive to salty soils so whafs going to happen in a few years when there's a lot of salt that's been snowplowed up into that area? This is a University piece that I have about the salt injury to landscape plants and the one that they list as very sen~tive is the sugar maple and also the red maple, which you have on Galpin. David Leschek: I am not able to speak for the landscape architects that have developed our landscaping plan, other than to say that I'm sure they've taken that into consideration. I can address that to Paul along with addressing Diane's concerns. In letter form. Any additional questions? If not, I'll turn the presentation over to Bob Rothman of our office who will take you through the building as well as the elevations. Bob Rothman: Thank you. As Dave mentioned, there are three primary entrances to the building. For the school district, for the students and for the community. Itl1 briefly nm you through the building. The school is designed for 625 students and that is 125 students per family cluster. Family cluster is first grade through fifth grade in an integrated program so they would be mixed within their cluster. So that occurs down south in proximity to the bus drop off. Because the feeling is the students spend a majority of their day down in that area of the building. In the central portion of the building,/hat be the INC which is the media center which, when I was growing up was the library. Across the corridor from that is the art and music. We've designed this, we felt that the art, music, is all kind of brought together in this one common area with some display cases and an open library so it's open and accessible to all students. Behind that, with close proximity to the front entry is the administration for obvious reasons. For general supervision of the school. Who's coming and going and that sort of thing. Also by the front entry we've located the ECFE, which is the Early Childhood and Family Education which is a 7 day a week, morning, night time sort of program. So again that desires to be close to the main entry. Also behind that we have some of the back of the house. The boiler room. The electrical room. Smaller seating are~ And located onto the main access of the building is the cafeteria with, as Dave described, playground and fields Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 to the north of that which the students, you know gobble down their sandwiches end get out and hit the playground. To the east of that we~ve got the gymnasium which is a shared gymnasium. Half of it is during the day, half of it, the southern most ~ would be used by the school district with the northerly most half being used by the commtmity of Chanhassen. Also in this area we've got a series of four meeting rooms which are expendable into, can be paired or used singularly or as one large m~g room. We also have a fitness room end aerobics room and corresponding locker rooms end some storage areas for both meetings areas and the gymnasium. One of the challenges of this building was, due to the educational program, we were left with what seemed to be the best opportunity to be a one story building. As I said, one of the challenges is with tho large building of this 112,000 square foot facility, is trying to break it up in mass and form. To give it some interest so it doesn't feel quite frankly like a pencake. And so how we've chosen to do that, this is the south elevation. We're looking at developing each cluster as it's own mass who each has it's own identity so there's the four, or the five rather are all fine and it gives us a nice sense of rythym and shade end shadow as well as using these spaces for defining the entries to each of those houses. The primary material of the building is kind of a molded brick which is very traditional in feel. If you're familiar with Jonathen Elementary, this is tho brick thafs used on that. It was the District's desire, as well as our's, to try and provide a family of buildings within the District. This is also brick that we're looking at using on the new Chaska High School so that it cen be identified as a community building. Primarily we%e got a flat roof. I can turn the model here. Primarily we've got basically a flat roof building but a few areas where we've chosen, would it be better if I. Scott: Apparently if the stand, I don't know if our camera can get down low enough. Can you, should ho put it on the easel? Bob Rothmen: This is primarily a fiat roof building. Where we,re chosen at the family cluster centers to raise that. Mancino: Where are we supposed to be looking? Scott: It doesn't work in the monitor so I guess the folks at home are going to have to pass Bob Rothmen: So mainly we~ve got each of the clusters defined by a half vaulted room form, which will help give it a little bit of mass end a little bit of rythym. Farmakes: And we're seeing it from the view now where we would be on Highway 5. 10 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Bob Rothman: Right. You're coming off of Highway 5. And keep in mind that Highway 5 is about the same elevation. It's slightly higher at Galpin and then you'd be dropping down to actually below the floor level. Or below tho floor level of the building as it's coming up. Some of tho other roof form~. Tho ~mn~n__~i.m is just an extruded form with of course a higher building mass. Cafeteria again, because of the larger volume of the room, wdve brought the roof up slightly. Within the INC, again we're going to use some bow...trusses in there and make it kind of a nice, interesting space as again one of the harder programs being the INC. And Paul mentioned the. Mancino: Is that a glass dome? Bob Rothman: No, it's not. It'd be a metal roof. Farmakes: You're showing lighter colors there. What would that. Bob Rothman: It would be a metal roof with some clear story lighting. Farmakes: Okay. The tan areas that you're showing next to the brick, what would that material be? Bob Rothman: Those are the circulation areas. That would be a burnish masonry material. Again, to help define the circulation. Farmakes: Like Target? That's the description of tha~ Krauss: The burnish block? Farmakes: Yeah. Krauss: There is some burnish block. Bob Rothman: I'm not sure what Target is. We have got some samples. Some samples here. And again, that's keeping in the concept of the site with defining these lines. We've carried that through conceptually within the building also. Paul addressed the issue of these penthouses. We're looking at trying to bring those down. Those would be developed in probably a synthetic stucco material. These two and some of these other ones and this will be brick. Mancino: What's a synthetic stucco? 11 Planning Commission Meeting - Sanuary 5, 1994 Bob Rothman: It's called ethos. It's a plastic material. Maneino: You put it outside and it's impregnated with color or something? Bob Rothman: Right. So actually from where, you wouldn't see that much of it anyway but where you would, it would probably appear to be brick. Mancino: Okay. But from what I see right here, this elevation. I mean it's almost as tall, proportionally as tall as your one level. Bob Rothman: The one thing that's a little bit misleading about elevations is the fact that you're never going to see the building in that angle. Again, you're seeing everything straight on. As you approach the building from this way, you're going to be down and plus, unless you're 16 feet tall, you don~ really see those things straight on. So they'll be recessed back in the background. And again we are looking, working with our mechanical en~neers to bring that down. Are there any other questions? Farmakes: With the elevation of this building, to TH 5, you actually even with trees in there filled out, you will be able to see down into that a bit. Krauss: Highway 5 is pretty much at the building elevation. It's not too different~.. Bob Rothman: You can see right here. David Leschek: As the site goes to the east, it begins to drop below Highway 5. Bob Rothman: You see Highway 5 is approximately the same elevation of the. David Leschek: The building elevation itself is at 958 and I believe that Highway 5 at the west end of the site is approximately 960. So it's approximately only 2 feet higher than the main floor elevation of the building. But then as the site begins to go towards Bluff Creek, it begins to drop. It begins actually to step and we terraced the athletic fields to be in keeping with the Lake Ann complex which has been developed by the city of Chanhassen and that concept there was to try to get a little additional interest in the landform by terracing the land that the fields sit on. So we have done that same thing as something that the Parks Department wants to make as their signature, if you will, of their parks. To accomplish a terraced feel to that. Mancino: What about from Galpin? Galpin is lower? 12 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 David Leschek: No. Galpin is actually higher. I think if you refer back to the site section here, you will see that Galpin is actually right here and it is actually higher. As the road. Bob Rothman: It starts to come down at this point. Again, as Paul mentioned, this being the high point of the site and it starts to drop down at that point. Mancino: Where that southwest wall is? Bob Rothman: Right. Correct. So when you're down here, directly south of the building, you're actually what, a good 8 feet below. David Leschek: Well you're about 6 to 8 feet below the building. Bob Rothman: First floor elevation. Mancino: So when you stand by McGlynn's Bakery, you're going to be looking down onto the top of this building? Krauss: I don't recall...McGlynn's Bakery... Mancino: I'm just trying to get perspective. David Leschek: One of the concerns that Paul listed in his staff report was the idea of the rooftop mechanical equipment and one of the reasons why we're now having to go back and adjust some of our mechanical penthouses is because we have put all of the mechanical equipment into these penthouses. So the roof is devoid of any sort of equipment that's up there. It is all self contained within the penthouses of the building. Mancino: Equipment in a penthouse. Scott: Peanut butter and jelly on the dining terrace. One of the things that, I know that a number of the buildings in the school district is currently studying is the concept of what's called multi-age grouping. And what I wanted to hear from you is how the potential of that concept being used at the elementary level, district wide, was utilized to design this particular building. $ohn Gockel: What it is is that the houses consist of 5 classrooms. What we have here is. Bob Rothman: Grades 1 thru 5 are all in each of the dusters. 13 Planning Commission Mooting - January 5, 199z~ Scott: So you have five groups or 1 thru 57 Bob Rothman: Exactly. So instead of one of these clusters being out here as here's one all grade 2, they're all integrated with each and the school district will then develop their programs on using that notion. David Leschek: I have to apologize for not having a larger scaled plan. However if I could lay this here, and again we'll let the folk.~ at home use their imagination. You asked the question about the multi-age groupings that this facility could occur, or could occur in this facility. This is an enlarged plan of two of the houses within the building and the houses themselves consist of 5 classrooms with a teacher planning area and one larger classroom in this location here which is designed to be, or could function as a idndergarten classroom in the future if they were to ever have Idndergarten here at this facility. This building is currently proposed to handle only 1 thru 5. Mancino: Where does kindergarten go? David Leschek: They use the Early Childhood Center in Chaska currently. Which you know they've just done an addition to which houses first graders now but may in the future eventually contain additional kindergartners. In the center of the house then is a team center, as we refer to it, which is used by any one or all five of the classrooms. The classrooms for instance, I mean they're grouped in five because you have 1 thru 5 grades here. So when you're talking multi-age, you could have a house could consist of 1 thru 5 or it could consist of five groups of 3rd graders or they may actually mix or match 1st, 2nd grades and 3-4 someplace else. The flexibility has been designed into each house, whether it be through the number of classrooms or the types of spaces. Whether they be larger spaces, such as this, or the smaller spaces so that they can accommodate large as well as small and function for grades 1 thru 5 or all fifth grade or a multi-age grouping of 2nd and 3rd graders. Scott: Also, another modeling you're probably familiar with is the inclusion model for unique learners. Where are the, and this is great but usually there's an area, and I think most people are familiar with special education. Where is that particular area located? I thinl~ I may have missed that. David Leschek: That particular area is located throughout the facility. So when we talk about for instance teacher planning areas, this is where the teachers are for this particular house and included in that staff, if you will for this house, could very well be a special education teacher. So that what they want to develop here is this interaction between not only the teachers of that particular school but also that special ed person who may be responsible for that person so they can better coordinate that curriculnm for that person. 14 Planning Commission Meeting - JanUary 5, 1994 Scott: Okay. David Leschek: Any additional questions? Scott: If there are no additional que~ons. Mancino: I have a couple more. Was there some stone detailing on the building? Did I read that somewhere in the staff report? Bob Rothman: Yeah. Again, going back to the, as Dave had mentioned. As we get our budgets in, one of the things we listed was stone as with a~..alternating. So we're looking at these. Originally we had hoped that these would be stone and now we're looking at burnish masonry but we are looking at some stone accents. For instance window sills might be a Mankato stone or something of that nature. Mancino: Chaska stone. Bob Rothman: Or Chaska stone. Mancino: Yeah, that would be really nice to pull that in. Okay. And what's the green that I saw on the. Bob Rothman: That's a metal roof. A standing seam metal roof. Mancino: Do you happen to have a sample of the color of green? Bob Rothman: No, I'm sorry I don~t have one. Mancino: Is it a dark? Light? Medium? Bob Rothman: Probably looking at a dark, kind of a forest type green. Any other questions? Thank you very much. Scott: Good, thank you~ This is a public hearing and members of the general public are encouraged to ask questions, express opinions. These are the applicant, the representatives of city staff, Planning Commission members. Are there any members in the audience tonight who would like to address the Planning Commission or any of these other parties? Let the record show that there are no members of the public who wish to speak. Can I have a motion please to close public heating? 15 Planning Commission Meeting - Sanuaty 5, 1994 Farmabes moved, Mancino seconded t~ close the public heming. All voted in favor and lhe motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Fannakes: I'll go back to the landscaping, to begin with. Fm concerned, as you brought up some points here on some of the trees that are adjacent to road salt areas of the, I believe it's Galpin and the entryway for the buses to the south to the structure. And I think that that should be looked at. The Arboretum here, the report that she has here and I went to the same conference she did. There are established trees that are tolerant to salt and I realize that you're not here to talk about that tonight or you don't have representatives of that, but we did have several landscape people there and the Arborgtnm of course is a well known authority with that kind of stuff. And you may want to look at the survivability of those trees. The other issue, the prairie grass area. I _think that that sounds good. The teaching things also may sound good on paper. I'm wondering how transl~le that is to practicality and I would advis~ the school to look closely at th~ It is, it has been used and it is being used in some locations here in Chanhassen. They haven't been terribly successful as of yet. As I understand it, and the prairie grass area that I visited in Illinois. They have a park there that they're trying to redo prairie in Illinois where they had bison and ifs a lot more rolling acres and so on. As I understood the educational part of that, for prairie grass to truly be prairie grass, there is a lot of different species and there is a total ecosystem that goes with that. Failing that, there is a lot of artificial maintenance that has to be done to maintain it and Pm wondering if the educational value of that may be better served with a wetland or a pond. Or something of that nature that's more indicative of what's here. I also understand that for true prairie grass to thfive, it needs little human contact and as I understand it, all of the kids will be dropped off right in front of the prairie grass so there are some practical aspects to that that you may want to review. The second issue, and the city report touched on this a little bit, is how the movement of people translates to some of the park areas adjacent to the creek. Bluff Creek. And how that works up into some of the recreational facilities on the school property. And I'm not sure that I'm seeing anything there but did the Park Commission look at this? Krauss: Oh, yes. Farmakes: So they looked at this closely and they're satisfied that what they see is integrated well? Farmakes: Okay. These fields, these are K thru Little League? Is that the type of fields that they're going to be? 16 Planning Commission Meeting - Janaary 5, 1994 Krauss: The ballfields are, you're right. They're not adult size. Farmakes: They're 60 footers for baseball. The one thing that I was concerned about is the view of the facility from Highway 5. I like the view that they've done from what would be the front of the building facing south and from the east Or excuse me, from the west. And I like what they*ve done with the different forms. Making up for some nice shadowing and things that you oi~en don*t see on schools. Basically they're, particularly it seems like all the ones in the suburbs here built in the 60*s, are these big blocks. Mancino: And that's what you see from TH 5. Farmakes: Well, this happens to be what was being built back then. I like this much better. Maybe 50 years from now they'll be complaining about it. I am somewhat concerned loo~ng at it from the north and from the east, as you come. When you look at it there's sort of fiat expanse on the roof line and when you look at it from the north, it looks like the back of the school. And if there is something that possibly could be done behind the gym area where those windows are to take that facade and break it up a little bit. That would be on this side. Mancino: Now, isn't there a planting there though? Farmakes: Well there's several plantings inbetween it. David Leschek: And a vine of sorts too. To sort of help break up. Farmakes: A veining situation coming up the side of the school, yeah. David Leschek: Yes. And you realize too that that space being a gymnasium space requires that mass. So we tried to address that. Farmakes: Even if it was something to break up the roof line. The tangent line that runs across that large scale box. I know that from the stuff they did at the U of M works nice to that effect. The other issues I think I'll leave for some of the stuff that you talked about and I'd just be repeating it and I don't want to take it all. So I'll let you take over. Mancino: Oh thanks. I just wanted to add one more tree for you to check please on the salt sensitivity. And that would be the red oaks are very sensitive to aerial salt spray and you have the red oaks on the, let's see east side of Cralpin in that northeastern area~ So if you could check with your architect about that. Paul, a couple questions for you. How does this process work? I mean has the School Board of District #112 approved this site plan? I mean as it comes to City Council. City Council. Does it go to the School Board? 17 Planning Commission Mooting- January :5, 1994 Krauss: It's not a sequential process. It's not very neaL $ohn Gockel: The School Board is not, they've approved the schematic design. What you're looking at now is about 90% of design development. That will go before the School Board approximately the end of Sanuary. Mancino: And what if we have things, if the City Council has suggestions that they want changed in what they see, does the School Board recognize those changes? I mean what happens? John Gockel: The School Board recognizes that it's an ongoing process. One of the things to be aware of is that the, what you're looking at is two separate ownerships also. There's District ownership and there is the city ownership. For example, the gymnasium form that you were talking about is not the District's property. It would be the city's property so there's a blending here. In order for the school to be open in the fall of '95, it has to be under construction this spring so we're going down several parallel paths at the same time. One with the District. One with the City. One with the Planning Commission and various other bodies. Another parallel path that we're going down is the purchase of the lancL That should take place by the end of January. The joint use agreement and joint powers agreement and development agreement, all these things are taking place simultaneously. Mancino: Now when the City sells the land to the School District, is it obligatory of the School District to build an elementary school there by 1995, and that's the only use it can uso it for~ Is the whole contract and the whole...prodicated on that? And if it doesn't happen, if there's not a school being built on it, it's null and void? John Gockel: The District is purchasing the land. Th~s an agreement. The City and the District will have a joint developers agreement to develop the site. To put buildings out there and ballfields and roads and so forth. That's a second agreement. Not dependent upon the first. The third agreement would be the long, the agreement with a long life and that is how the two governmental entities jointly use the property. Maintain it. Mow the grass. Plow the snow and so forth. Krauss: You're raising an interesting point. I don~t know exactly how that will be...I%,e got enough to deal with...but you raise an interesting point. From what I understand about the process, there's relatively little chance of that happ~ing...I mean there's a $45 million bond issue that was approved...What I'd be a little more concerned about, and I'm not even too concerned about that is, what if the School Board comes back and says gee, this is much too expensive. We've got to go cinder block. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Mancino: Yep. Krauss: At that point, I mean the School Board is a free agent, same as a developer is. I mean you can come up with conditions that you impose on a developer and they can decide to walk. If the School Board, you're approving a project here. It's like any other project you approve. If radical changes come about, for whatever reason, between now and the time it's built, then we have to make a call whether or not this is consistent with what you approved and if it's not, it's got to come back. I think that's always tho bottom line and nobody's really talking radical changes. I mean it's a massive project. There's going to be a lot of fine tuning. But if something really went out of kilter, you still have the site plan approval. It still has to be consistent with that. It's being zoned office institutional so there's not a whole lot else that can go here, which is why we picked that district. Farmakes: Well if there's joint ownership, isn't also the City part of this applicant process fight now? Krauss: Exactly and we will continue to own 20 acres of it. Farmakes: But also structure as well, correcO Krauss: A portion of the structure. Mancino: I can't remember, I lost it. Thanks. Oh I know what it is. If we do rezone to IO, it limits that to schools, public buildings, offices and related uses. What are the.related uses? Krauss: Whatever we construe them to be. It's the ordinance gives me the authority to make some interpretations. Failing agreement on that, my call can be expanded by the City Council. It's never been a question. I mean it's a pretty restrictive district. Mancino: I just want to know worst case. Krauss: Well I suppose worst case would be an office building. I mean if you had an office building go on this site, you could say that a daycare center is...It wouldn't be a truck transfer Mancino: Going to wetlands. On the grading sheet here, there were some wetlands designated and I assume that those wetlands that were put on the grading sheet are those that are drained. They're not operational. But they are on here and I just wanted to make sure. 19 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Krauss: Yeah, it's kind of confusing. They really don't belong on there and that's what we've done over the last two months, three months of clarifying. Ifs a very co~g subject. It's, by State law you're supposed to use the 1989 Army Corps Handbook. I've been told by people...that they can go into your back yard and find there's a wetland using that Handbook. So you've got everybody and their mother out there selling services now. There's long standing firms that have been in the we~dand identification business and now every surveyor, every engineer is all of a sudden a wetland export and you're getting a lot of conflicting information. We went the extra mile on this and sent our experts out. We went back and consulted Frank Svoboda who helped us write our ordinance. Wdve bounced it off the Army Corps and obviously they're comfortable with what we're doing. Conrad: But these were not mapped on our official wetland map? Krauss: We had notes, survey notes of the thing. Of at least one of them on our map and we identified it as a drained wetland. And when we went back in there, the State log, the historical definition of how long had it been drainexC The State law is worded so that there's a disincentive for example for authority to drain a wetland and turn around a year later and sell it as developable. But these have been drained as long as anybody can recall. We even checked the Soil Conservation Service and they said, they',re been supporting farm measures on this for decades. Mancino: The south, let's see. The widening of Galpin. When I read your report it said that Galpin was going to be, there°s four lanes from the south accegs boulevard up to Highway 5. When I read the Barton-Aschman report that we got, it's fxom Timberline Drive up to Galpin. Krauss: I think what's happening is the road, you don~t just go to 4 lanes. You've got to taper it. And the taper does start about that point. Mancino: Okay. I didn't see anywhere in that Barton-Aschman roport..I didn't soo anything in the discussion for berming and landscaping. Krauss: There isn't and that was a point that was raised by...City Engineer and it's going to be taken care of. Mancino: Okay. The other, I thought I read it in the Barton-Aschman was that there was no mitigation wetlands for that south access boulevard where in your report there is a 5/10 of a mitigation that needs to happen where it crosses the creek. Krauss: Yeah...there may be some and the jury's, we don't have a final...grading plan. How much is going to be impacted. You know, as I say, we've been trying to figure out...exacfly 2O Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 where the wetlands are. By and large the wetlands cease to exist at the property line between Timberwood and the farm fields...So the road may in fact not. What, the road does not cross any standing any wetlands but it does cross Bluff Creek and Bluff Creek at that point ceases to be a very channelized creek as far as...what is a wetland_ So I think there is some and we'll clarify that. Mancino: And it will be a 2 to 1 mitigation, starting in '947 Krauss: We've got to figure out. Ifs supposed to be as of last Friday or whatever. Yeah, January 1. This is a project that's been in the hopper for 6 months. We~ve heard of a lot of communities that willy nilly kind of pr~approved all kinds of project before the deadline. We haven*t done that. But in this case we're comfortable with the fact that we,re worked... It was a project that was submitted to us in October. For a number of reasons we pushed it back and we'll have to see. Mancino: Well I'd like to compliment staff on two concerns that I had that you brought up and were very well written in the report about the penthouses and how big they are. I would like to see those scaled down also. And also the reclamation of the corridor creek. I think that's wonderful and I hope we do it north of Highway 5 also. That if there is going to be development, that we do have that 100 foot buffer of get it back to the ori~nal native whatever that is. So I commend you on th~ My last thing has to do with bees. I don~t know where the bees came up but I don~t know. That was very interesting. I looked at some of the trees and said, you know crab apples, yeah. They have flowers and they're going to- have bees. Lindens. American lindens have flowers. They're flowering. Washington hawthorns are. Clover. I mean we're going to have bees around this area. I don't know. It just doesn't seem to me to be that important. So I like the crab apples and I like the lindens and I like the hawthorns. I like the use of them. I wouldn't want anybody who's allergic to get stung. There's no question about th~ But I don~t have a big problem with the flowering plants and the trees. And that's it Scott: Alfight. Ladd. Conrad: Not too many questions. I like what I see. The parking seems to be a long way away from ballfields and stuff like that. I assume we've checked it out for ambulance access and it's there. It can get, we just don't have a problem. Okay. Picldng up on the last point in the staff report, or just the point we just covered. Restoring Bluff Creek. Paul, your staff report says, in the recommendations it says per the staff report but basically you are saying per DNR standards. Or whatever DNR says. So that's really what we're saying is talk to the DNR. Restore. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Krauss: Right. If I knew the answer to that ahead of _time, we would be more specific. We don't but we*re working with people who I think will tell us. Conrad: Okay. I thir~k that's a neat piece. The only other thing I've got is Bluff Creek access. I'm not a real, I really don't understand the whole corridor but I know you need access to utilize it. For real people to get there and, is this going to me? Scott: News flash. Conrad: Ifs a news flash. I can't talk and read at the same time. But anyway, here we have an education site that connects to Bluff Creek which is, in my mind, just a perfect place for a real access to Bluff Creek. Now maybe there are other accesses with parking lots and what have you so you can really utilize the corridor. Maybe there are. I don't know that but here we have one. It connects. Ifs at a school. It should really be integrated into Bluff Creek. Right here. So again, I love what I see. My only comment is, if we want to make use of, if we really believe in Bluff Creek and you want to put a lot of attention to it and restoring, let's make sure people have a way of getting there and a place to park their car. This looks like to me the place to do it. That's all I have. Scott: Good. Matt. Ledvimc Sust a couple more things to add. I think, I'm very concerned with the construction of this south access boulevard as it relates to the trees along the south property boundary. Now as I read the engineering plans, there's more than a 10 foot fill in the lowest spot where.' that quasi wetland area is. And if the roadway is going fight up within the dirt line of the trees and you've got a 10 foot fill, that's not going to work. So without damaging those trees and I don't know the extent of that tree line and what significance that would have to the folks associated with Timbercreek but I guess what I want, and I know that's not at issue here today and I know that that will all be revisited but again, I just want to raise my concern as it relates to the grade of that road and potentially the ali,~nment. I know perhaps it could be shifted just slightly to the north to accommodate retaining walls or fill slopes or whatever is necessary there. But again. Krauss: The City Engineer and I have looked at that and we had the same question and we're pretty certain that if need be, and we need to get the details on that, that the road could be routed 15-20 feet north in most places and not really compromise anything on the school site and just going to provide that separation in the roof lines. Ledvina: There's also some grade changes that can be done to reduce that fill down. I don't know how much but you know maybe 2, 4 feet Every little bit helps when you're in that 22 Planning Commission Meeting - Sanuary 5, 1994 situation. Let's see. I guess the only other thing I have to add, and we've touched on this as it relates to Bluff Creek and I see the plan calls for grading within 20 fOOt Of the center line and I wouldn't want to see the plan move forward. The grading plan in this fashion. I think that may be too close to the center line and if we are looking at essentially an aH dirt drainageway here, we are trying to restore it, well then that has merit and there would bo grading fight, all the way into the center line if that's the case. But when I looked at this, these plans I assumed that the channel was in it's natural condition and maybe that's not the case so, through filling, you know erosion and sedimentation of the agricultural areas here. I could see that. I would definitely support the restoration to the original conditions for the corridor. Scott: Diane. Harborts: I guess I look at it from a public safe~ perspective. I know schools are very in tune to the whole public safety liability. Has our Public Safety Department, committee taken a look at this? Do they need to? Krauss: I don't know if the Public Safety Committee has. We~'e circulated copies of the plans to the Public Safety Department. Harberts: That might be redundant because I'm certainly aware of how much it's scrutiniTed by school districts or schools. The only other comment I made earlier was that I'd like to see a recommendation number 8 added with regard to working with Southwest Metro in the . designing of the drop-off/pick-up turn around elements for public transit because it is so - ..-., ... heavily used by the elementary kids. Scott: What's the status of the trail system? And I'm thinking from the.standpoint of having kids from adjacent neighborhoods who will be walking or will any child in this, you might now know this right now but will every child who goes to that elementary be taking the bus? Krauss: I think basically, well I don't know...In terms of the trails, with the upgrading of Galpin...the County does their piece and the County by the way is using ciw money...Tum back of TIF dollars so we can finance the upgrade of Galpin...If that happens, weql have a trail down Galpin. Basically from Highway 5 to Lyman Blvd. We~,e already had Hans Hagen build a portion of it. With the east/west collector, which is also .... by the _time the school opens, we could well have the trail I hope basically over to Audubon. There's a chance, or shortly thereafter when the school opens. And with what's happening on the Centex property and the Opus property, we may have it over to TH 41 on the other side. What we won't have in the near term is a way to get across Highway 5. But you will have a signalized intersection at Galpin. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 I-Iarberts: I have a question for Paul. Or maybe John. You know I've been working with some of the school districts with regard to the shortings that they have in school bus funds and when you put a location like this out in the sticks a little bit, has the school looked at the access by kids walking? By kids riding their bikes. You know have they looked at it from how practical will that be? Is there a safety issue that they have to address with thaff Has that been part of the discussion in terms of the design like this? You know what's the current track? Is it to have the kids ride bikes or whatever, and if we're going to have community facilities like this, you know what's that element like too in terms of that kind of access because with what we're seeing for growth, with what we're seeing you know earlier tonight in terms of land use. You know some single family, multi-family even adjacent to that. What's the trail system going to be like to like I said, make that more pedestrian friendly access like that? Has that been integrated into the discussion at all? John Gockel: Yes. One of the attractive aspects of this particular site was it's proximity to anticipated trail systems. As far as, you know obviously safety is very important to the district. We, I think we almost came to blows over who was more concerned about caring for the kids and the school. Whether it was the parks commission or the principal. They both claimed to be the end all of being concerned about that. You know as far as kids riding bicycles to schools like many of us probably did. We don't live in those kinds of communities any more. We're all out in the suburbs with people spread all over the place and roads separating. So most of the kids will come by bus. Like I said, one of the attractive aspects of this site was it's proximity to tho trail systems. Many sites didn't even offer that potential. So this building, this facility is not in the sticks...as some of the sites we looked at. Harberts: Are there going to be bike racks put into this facility? $ohn Gockel: There will be some bike racks. Harberts: But it's not the feeling that there's going to be a lot of access, at least for school class time by bike but maybe Paul by, for the community or the city rec. Krauss: Oh yeah. I think when you look, when this place opens up, by the way, we may also have the link completed if this Chan Corporate Center develops and comes in, we might have the link down to Bluff Creek railway crossing which would mean that..and all the industrial, the people working there will be able to hop on that trail and go up to the ballfields and yeah. That kind of thing will occur... Harberts: You know recalling my younger days which weren't so long ago, right? You know with that pedestrian bridge that's going over on Highway 5, I can see people from the north side of town, central city here, crossing over and riding, walking, Rollerbladinp~ or whatever 24 Planning Commission Meeting - Sanuary $, 1994 even down to that location. Ifs not really that far if you're out on a Sunday afternoon or whatever. And if there's activities like that in the summer, that's the kind of thing and thafs why I see that pedestrian bridge being real key too in terms of that kind of trail system. I mean thafs not that much of a hike. Ifs probably going to be a nice walk or however they want to use it. So I guess that's, and I guess part of that public safety, you know like I said, I'm very well aware of it and how well school distriWs scrutinize that but it's just a question. That's it. Scott: Okay. Can I have a motion? Harberts: I'll make a motion. Scott: Okay. Harberts: Let me look at my page 13. I'll recommend that the Planning Commission approve Site Plan Review #93-6, Rezoning from A2 to OI and Pre 'hminary Plat for the School District #112/City of Chanhassen Recreational Complex, subject to the following conditions. Number 2 we would add letter (e). To revise the landscaping plan as follows. To address the salt spray with some of the landscaping elements suggested in earlier commentS. Number 8. That the applicant work with Southwest Metro in tho designing of the drop off, pick-up, turn around element that will 8,cc~mmodate public trfnsit. I just have one question for Matt before I close. Did you want to have anything with regard to supporting that it's restored to the original conditions of the corridor that you talked about? Ledvina; Sure. Mancino: Isn't that in here? Harberts: I'm not sure if that's fully covered. Scott: Well number 4 doesn't quite address, because it just says stay out of the flood plain but that has nothing to do with the restoration. Ledvimc No, that'd be appropriate. Harberts: Yep, and how would you like to see that worded? Ledvina: I would think that. Harberts: This would be added to number 4. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - Sanuary $, 1994 Ledvina: I would think that we could state that the applicant shall investigate the feasibility of restoring the Bluff Creek corridor to it's original alignment and. Ktauss: I'm sorry but does 2(b) get to that? Harberts: It's h~d to say. Ledvina: Provide plans that respond to the goal, I would think so. I'm sorry. I didn't see that. Harberts: Okay, so you're comfortable. Mancino: You could put it on page 7. Harberts: Okay, as described in the staff report on page Ledvina: Sure. Scott: Is that strong enough? Okay. Harberts: Okay. So basically we want to amend 2Co) to add that in the staff report as outlined in page 7. And I'll move that recommendation. Scott: Okay. Is there a second7 Mancino: Second. Scott: It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Farmakes: What about the roof line on that gym? Harberts: On the west side? No, it wasn't on the west side. Farmakes: It'd be on the northeast comer. The gym and the city portion of the building. Harberts: Yeah, is that covered in number 1 or not? I wasn't sure. Farmakes: I'm not sure it does. Mancino: ... a little bit better specifically? 26 Planning Commission Mooting - January 5, 1994 Farmakes: We could maybe word it, the city should look at alternatives to dealing with the tangent massing roof line created by the gym and the support areas. I-Iarberts: Considered as number 9. Farmakes: We could add it as a separate motion. Scott: We'll skip the friendly amendment stuff. I think you're. I-Iarberts: That would be added nomber 9. What Jeff had just stated. Scott: Are we all comfortable voting on that motion? Do we all understand what the intent is and so forth? Farmakes: The reason I bring it up as an intent is I'm wondering from that particular corner of the building, based on what we've been reviewing with other applicants, whether or not we would approve that. I look at it as say Target. I don~t think we would approve that and why is the city any different? Harberts: Are you clarifying the intent of number 1 then? Or are we. Farrnakes: Well I didn't see that as, I saw that as more towards the issue of penthouse but if you want to interrupt massiveness. Krauss: You're spanning the scope of 1. I think the...came up with and just tack it on to. Farmakes: Tack it on? Harberts: Okay, as number 9? Krauss: Or rather as expand 1... Harberts: Oh, just expand 1, okay. I understand that intent Scott: Okay, so basically expand item number 1 to include reviewing the external treatment of the gymnasium section so that it appears. Farmakes: Break up the roof line. Scott: Break up the roof line. 27 Planning Commission Meeting - Sanuary $, 1994 Farmakes: Alternatives for breaking up the roof line. Scott: Okay. We've moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? I think we just had discussion. Harbem moved, Mancino seconded flint fl~e Pimning Commhsion ~ecomm~-nd that/he City Council approve Si~e Han Review//93-6, Rezoning from A2 to Ol and ~ Plat for /he School District #112/City of C]mflmssen Rec~/onal Complex, subject to the following conditions: o Revise architectural plans to verify that all rooftop HVAC equipment is concealed from Highway $ and other views by enclosed penthouses, respond to sta~s proposals for minimizing the massiveness of the penthouses and make provisions for a concealed trash enclosure as outlined in the staff report Also, that ~e ~iitmt look ~t altenmfive~ to external ~re~m~ent of the gymnasium section to mlnlmi.e it's massiveness. 2. Revise the landscaping plan as follows: , . a~ Provide reforestation for the knoll located in the southwest comer of the site. b. Provide plans that respond to the goal of resto~g Bluff Creek Corridor as described in the staff report on l~ge 7. c. Provide a chain link safety fence between the roadways and ballfielcls. d. Revise parking lot landscaping as required to meet current ordinance requirements for tree species and green space. e. To add. ss some of the lsmlsesping concerns as rela/ed to tolermce to sslt spray. Provide a trail connection between tho terminus of the creek trail at soccer field//2 and extend it to tho access boulevard. Provide a sign indicating tho presence of a temporary dead end for the trail component running north from soccer field//2. Provide final grading, utility, erosion and pending plans for City approval. No building or grading is to occur until final plans have been-provided. Grading plans, are to be revised to protect the Bluff Creek Corridor and stay out of the flood plain. 5. Project approval by the Riley/Purgatory/Bluff Creek Watershed District. , Revise the plat to describe the right-of-way for Galpin, the access boulevard, to the outlet and the future right-of-way needed for Highway 5 wid~ing. Revise plans as necessary to stay clear of the future Highway 5 right-of-way and Galpin Boulevard right-of-way and maintain a minimum 35 foot setback from Galpin Boulevard. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5. 1994 7. Relocate the staff parking lot as required to maintain 50 foot setback. 8. Work with Souflnvest Metro Trm~it in designing the drop-off, pick-up and mm around elements to accommodfl~ public ti3iELgit. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Scott: And this will be going to the City Council? Krauss: On January 24th. APPROVAL OF MINU'I~; Farmakes moved, Mancino seconded to approve the Minutes of tho Planning Commission meetings dated December 1, 1993 and December 4, 1993 as presenteck All voted in favor and tho motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE APPRQVAI~. Mancino: You know this packet, the two letters you wrote to Brad and to Mr. Hiscox~ You're talking about our schedule for the next two months or, my life is planned now. On February 2nd my question is Paul, we're going to look at a Chanhassen Corporate Center concept PUD. Will that have some conflict of again Highway :5? And having the Highway 5 draft approved and everything? Krauss: Well it puts you in the same ballpark that you were in when you reviewed Opus and you reviewed Centex. That you're being asked to do something an&..a concept and anything you do would be contingent upon adoption... Mancino: Okay. Just so close to Highway 5, I was wondering if we'd want to wait and do anything on Highway 5 until after City Council is done. Okay. Scott: Okay. Any other administrative approvals or open discussion? Ledvina: I had a question on the Industrial Performance Standards. Why was this review initiated7 Krauss: ...regarding documents that neecL..We read a book...so I asked Bob to check it against our standards to see if we were still current. 29 Planning Commission M~fing - Sanuary 5, 1994 Ledvina~ Okay, so this was regulating city planning type Krauss: Yeah... Farmakes: Are we still in open discussion? Scott: Yes. Open discussion. Farmakes: I have a question of Paul. At the end of our meeting here, or work session, we saw a couple of developments. I'm surprised we haven't seen something from the Mill's property. Has there been any further bringing forward of what their development would be or are we expecting to see several possible developments from the future either taking into regard the work that was done on TH 5 or totally disregarding it? Is that the, is there anything else out there in the closet? Krauss: Nothing that I've been made aware of. You know I think I reported to you that... where they thought the road should be with MnDot and...talk to us. Farmakes: Interesting. Well we'll get a very disjointed mad I think by the time we're done. It will be quite a patchwork. I was I guess surprised by the developments that were brought forward. I don't know if anyone else was expecting to see a golf course. I had heard rumors about that. I'm just wondering if we're looking, it hasn't been altered as I understand for the last couple of years. Mancino: It was never brought in front of the Highway 5 Task Force. Farmakes: Well he said it was a possibilivy I believe. He did get up and mention it...or st least as we know it. Scott: Well, and like I kind of shared with some of the other people. I'm the first one to say that I'm not a golf course designer but I do play a fair amount of golf and I'm very familiar with what the USGA specifies as far as tee to green minimums and maximums for different par lengths and just from what I know as a golfer, that golf course layout would not, he would not be able to get that approved by the USGA. And it looked like it was pretty maxed out as far as tee to greens but. Krauss: Well also when you look at that, I mean Mike needed, he has 11 homes on a private driveway. I mean he's got an existing driveway curb cut now for his home and he's entitled to have one access to the highway but nobody's going to be very desirous of having him expand that so that you serve a golf course, club house and family homes. Then he had a 30 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 multi family senior building with another driveway. The fact is, you need a road to serve that someplace. Farmakes: The park commission, once I saw that drawing, is the park commission, a little bell went off in my head. Have they looked into the long term connectiveness of that leg to Lake Ann, going around to the trail system that the city already has? Krauss: I know that they have. I know they've talked about it...and I believe it's in their current comprehensive plan update. But in the past, you know there were some iink.~ in there, it's been showed...links that got knocked out around the north side of Prince where there's kind of the isthmus between the two lakes. Farmakes: I'm very familiar with that property. Krauss: ...and I think that was knocked out 5-6 years ago. Farmakes: Well, there's no reason to knock it out. There are current trails there following, even before Prince was there. There is a natural trail already that foUows the lake and goes out to right in front of his, in fact it connects with the existing park and beach. And none of that area is developed and it goes all the way around to the creek on the north side that divides Prince's property from the park that the city owns. And there is a natural trail there. In fact there is a natural trail that goes around Lake Lucy also and connects on the other side. I assume that these were deer trails at one time and they're probably expanded by the previous owners and I know. Mancino: Horses. Farmakes: Well Larson owned the property before Prince. I believe he hired a caretaker couple and their job in the winter time was to cut out the dead fall and keep those trails open. And it is, it's an enormous asset and I know that a future asset but I know that by the topography of the land, and the setbacks that the State currently requires, much of that land would be difficult to develop. And if we do have some leeway-with trails, I know that there's some difficulty putting trails in the back of people's homes. But based on what we've already invested in Lake Ann, it would seem to me that at least in the long term scope, that maybe they should start thinking about that a little more seriously. Krauss: I'll raise it again to Todd. I know it's something he's discussing... Farmakes: Because Prince owns the majority of, owns ali of that property around the lake and I don't know what any pieces missing would be. 31 Planning Commission Me~ting - January 5, 1994 Krauss: Yeah interestin~y we~,e, I think I mentioned this, wdve had some fairly serious sounding interest in developing Prince's property. I mean beyond somebody just making a wild call and saying, what would you let me do on this property. It sounded like some people... Farmakes: But the division between Lake Lucy and Lake Ann, the strip that goes up there and then as it gets to the west there's sort of a rise of the land and down on each side there's quite a slope that comes out. If you take the setbacks required and any roads that would have to access that property, it's undevelopable. You cannot develop it. And if you put a road plus the setbacks, that's all you're going to get because there isn't going to be any room for a house. And at least that's really, if you take that into consideration, you%e got 3/4 of the lake there already. And except for that west side that connects and that little bit of the south where, I don't believe he's developed a beach area there. Ifs essentially wild. Krauss: If you go on our beach and walk to the end of our... Farmakes: Right. And there is a little trail there because I've walked it many times over the years and it goes back through there. Connects back to Prince's property and then you go up a hill and then you go down and basically there's an existing trail that people have driven cars on. That goes around the lake. So it is a, ifd be a real future resource I think when something like Lake Harriet comes to mind. Scott: Yep. Yeah. Yeah. I concur with that 100%. Ledvina: I have a question regarding Highway 5. Now to kind of change the subject but we talked about an ordinance that is going to be ready for us to review. What's the schedule on that? Krauss: Well basically the standards are in the back of the plan. Ledvina: They're in Chapter 7, is that correct? Krauss: Yeah. Ledvina: Okay. So that's going to provide the framework for the ordinance? Krauss: Right. We're having the attorney just take that and put it into ordinance form so that he can review that... Ledvina: So that's two meetings... 32 Planning Commission Meeting- January 5, 1994 Harberts: Do you think the public hearing will go two meetings? Krauss: I hope not. Harberts: That's full meetings. Or one full meeting. Ledvina: The reason that I ask is we didn't even scratch that in terms of. Krauss: Oh well the next work session next Wednesday, is devoted to that. Mancino: And nothing else? Krauss: Well, we,re got to finish up a couple of these land use things. Scott: I've got a quick question too on a work session. My personal opinion is that a work session is for the Planning Commission and staff to work things out and it's nice to have people talk but personally I don~t think there's any place to have outside input, unless it's something that we ask somebody to do ahead of time. But I'm not familiar with what we can and can't do at a work session. But my guess is. Conrad: We have control. Scott: Yeah. Then I would rather not see any of that ldnd of stuff unless it's been requested by city staff. Krauss: ...when Mike Gorra says he's been talking about this for 2 years. I don't want to argue with him but two years ago the city was talking about a golf course and I believe he met with Don and said well, I might like to do that someday. Scott: Weren't they talking aborn potentially buying Bluff Creek Golf Course? Krauss: Yeah. Right, and Mike...said you can't do that because I'm going to plan a..golf course and every time we said, well you know if you're really serious, show us...I didn't think you could squeeze one in on 140 acres. I talked to Fred Hoisington and he said you could but you've got to use up all the land. Well, he's taking l0 acres of it for those houses and then he's got that senior so I don~t know. Scott: I have a feeling we're going to see a big residential development on that property and not a golf course. 33 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Krauss: Yeah, well it's... I-Iarberts: Do we have a time on that meet/ng next Wednesday? Is that at 6:00? Krauss: Was it on the schedule for 6:00? Harberts: Yeah. Would you like send out a reminder or something or have someone call us. Conrad: When do we elect a new Chairman? Scott: When do we adjourn? Krauss: You can do that right now actually if you feel like it, before you adjourn. Conrad: Brian's gone? Brian's gone. Krauss: We did not send Brian a packet, I'm assuming that he's formally off and Brian wasn~ planning on coming I gather. Conrad: Oh I thought he was. Mancino: I thought we were going to wait until we got the new person to elect... Farmakes: Well the seat's been taken so I don~ think that Brian's going to show up anyway. Scott: I think we should wait to do anything formal until we have our new person on board. Or do you care? Conrad: No. That doesn't mean anything. Scott: Okay. I just figured out courtesy. Conrad: No. We don't care. They don't know how to vote. They'll be invalid to vote. Scott: That's kind of like when the 3 of us were voting. Krauss: Whatever you want to do... Harberts: Let's just do it. I nominate Joe for Chair. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - January 5, 1994 Ledvina: I second that nomination. Harbem moved, Ledvina seconded to appoint Joe Scott as Cizairman of the Planning Commission for 1994. All voted in favor and the motion carded. Conrad: For Vice Chairman, Chairperson, I nominate Nancy. Scott: I'll second that. Conrad moved, Scott seconded to appoint Nancy Man~ as Vice Chairm__an of the Plannln.o Commission for 1994. All voted in favor and the motion carded. Mancino moved, Farmntms seconded to adjourn the meeting. AH voted in favor and the motion carded, The meeting was adjourned at 10'.38 ixnL Submitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 35