CAS-15_STONE CREEK TOWN OFFICES (3)CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
April 22, 2004, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing to replat Outlot B, Bluff Creek Corporate Center into 26 lots and 2 outlots and site
plan approval for the construction of 5 three -unit and two 5 -unit office buildings on property
zoned PUD -IOP with an area of 13.43 acres - Planning Case #04-15 to the persons named on
attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner,
and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage
fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such
by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate
records.
Kit n J. En el ardt, D uty Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this,lday of 1 n' 1 , 2004.
to �. c� ..
Notary Pub .� KIM T. MEUUWISSEN
Notary Public Minnesota
g:�plan52004 planning cases504-15 - stone creek town offices\04-15 affidavil.doc CARVER COUNTY
My Commis�on Expires 1131rM
6CANNEO
Notice of Public Hearing
Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting
Date & Time:
Tuesday, May 4, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
Location:
City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd.
Request to replat Outlot B, Bluff Creek Corporate Center into
Proposal:
26 lots and 2 outlots and site plan approval for the
Proposal:
construction of 5 three -unit and two 5 -unit office buildings on
property zoned PUD -IOP with an area of 13.43 acres
Planning File:
04-15 Stone Creek Town Offices
Applicant:
Eden Trace Corporation
Property
2070 Coulter Boulevard
Location:
A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice.
The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
1011
applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood
about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the
public hearing through the following steps:
What Happens
public hearing through the following steps:
at the Meeting:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
at the Meeting:
2. The applicant will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the
project.
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
Questions &
this project, please contact Sharmeen AI-Jaff at 952-227-1134
Comments:
or e-mail saliaff@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to
Comments:
submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the
department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide
copies to the Commission.
Ctt Revlaw Procedure:
isions, Planned Unit Developments, She Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations,
ings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the
Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the
application in writing. Any interested parry is invited to attend the meeting.
• Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation.
These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of
the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of
the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a
recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning
Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the
City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commerciaUndustrial.
• Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant
waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any
person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its
status and scheduling for the City Council meeting.
• A neighborhood spokespersontrepresentalive is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers
are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the
project with any interested person(s).
• Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and
any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have
something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Stall person named on the notification.
Notice of Public Hearing
Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting
Date & Time:
Tuesday, May 4, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
Location:
City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd.
Request to replat Outlot B, Bluff Creek Corporate Center into
Proposal:
26 lots and 2 outlots and site plan approval for the
construction of 5 three -unit and two 5 -unit office buildings on
property zoned PUD -IOP with an area of 13.43 acres
Planning File:
04-15 Stone Creek Town Offices
Applicant:
Eden Trace Corporation
Property
2070 Coulter Boulevard
Location:
A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice.
The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood
about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the
public hearing through the following steps:
What Happens
at the Meeting:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The applicant will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses
the project.
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
Questions &
this project, please contact Sharmeen AI-Jaff at 952-227-1134
Comments:
or e-mail saliafffti.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to
submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the
department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide
copies to the Commission.
City Review Procedure:
• Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations,
Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the
Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the
application in writing. Any interested parry is invited to attend the meeting.
• Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation.
These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of
the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of
the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a
recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning
Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the
City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commeroiaviindustrial.
• Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant
waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any
person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its
status and scheduling for the City Council meeting.
• A neighborhood spokespersontrepresenlative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers
are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the
project with any interested person(s).
• Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and
any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have
something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification.
0
Coulter Blvd.
This map is nadrer a legally recorded rr¢p nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is
a compilation 0( reocrtls, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and
other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City toes not
,arrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this mp are error hes, and the
City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose
requiring exacting measurement of distance ordirection or precision in Me depiction of geographic features.
0 errors or bxrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107, The preceding disdaimr is prorded
W rsuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and Me user of this map acknowledges that the
City shall not he liable for any damages, and mrpressly waives all claim, and agrees to defend, indemnify,
and hdtl harmless the Qty from any and all claim brought by User, Is errployees or agents, or third
parties ydnCh ease out of me users access or use of data provided.
Coulter Blvd.
This map is neither a legally recurtleB map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is
a compilation of records, infonrotion and data locaetl in vanous city, county, state and! federal offices and
other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only The City does not
warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the
City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracWng or any other purpose
requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in Me tlepction of geographic features.
If emars or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and Me user of this map acknowledges that the
City shall not he liable for any Barrages, and expressly waves all Baine, and agrees to defend, Indemnify,
and hdtl hanYess the Gty from any and all clams brought by User, its employees or agents, or tMrtl
parties which was out of the user's access or use of data provided.
Public Hea*g Notification Arec*500 feet)
Outlot B, Bluff Creek Corporate Center
2070 Coulter Boulevard
City of Chanhassen
Planning Case No. 04-15
2070 Coulter Blvd.
State
TAMRA S ADAMS
1973 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
HARRY & JULIE BENJAMIN
1929 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
0
WILLIAM R B ANDERSON &
KATHLEEN M B ANDERSON
1974 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
MARY C BERENDES
2015 BLUE SAGE LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344
BLUFF CREEK PARTNERS C/O LAND RICHARD & SUZANNE M BONIN
GROUP 1943 ANDREW CT
123 NORTH 3RD ST CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401-1657
TIM P BRZEZINSKI & DON HERMANN STEVE W & SALLY A CARROLL
1956 ANDREW CT 2051 BLUE SAGE LN W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8341
CREEK FIVE ASSOCIATES C/O LAND MONICA L DAVIES
GROUP INC
123 3RD STN 1952 ANDREW CT MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401-1407 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
THEODORE J & CORINNE Z DUDINE
1947 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
LYNNETTE M FICKBOHM
2023 BLUE SAGE LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344
ANNE M GEYER
7758 SNAPDRAGON DR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8345
LUTHER T HIPPE
2011 BLUE SAGE LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344
DARCILECKERMANN
1938 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
MARK J FOSTER & KAREN S
OLSSON
8020 ACORN LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9662
MICHAEL J GORRA
1680 78TH ST W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4503
MICHAEL J HJERMSTAD
2056 WATERLEAF LN W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8342
rl
HELEN L ATKINSON
2027 BLUE SAGE LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344
SUSAN K BLAIR
2030 WATERLEAF LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8343
SUSAN M BOYLAN
2010 WATERLEAF LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8343
CHRISTOPHER CHARLSON
2063 BLUE SAGE LN W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8341
ERIC B & MELANIE S DOWNUM
1976 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTH CHURCH
2020 COULTER BLVD
PO BOX 388
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-0388
RICHARD D & MARY A FRASCH
8000 ACORN LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9662
PAUL C HANSEN
2018 WATERLEAF LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8343
IND SCHOOL DIST 112 & CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
11 PEAVEY RD
CHASKA MN 55318-2321
TOM J & LISA LAPKA MARK HANLEY PAINE LEWIS ANTHONY R MALLAWAARATCHY
2014 WATERLEAF LN E 1967 ANDREW CT 1934 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8343 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
0
RICHARD N & JANINE E MCLELLAN DEBORAH R MILLER
1927 ANDREW CT 2022 WATERLEAF LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8343
CONNIE L MUNSON SHARI MUSOKE
2068 WATERLEAF LN W 1932 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8342 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
JAMES H & KATHLEEN PENSYL DOUGLAS J PETERSON
1972 ANDREW CT 1971 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
KATHY J ROBILLIARD ANN M RODNING
1978 ANDREW CT 2026 WATERLEAF LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8343
JANE SCHMITZ KATHY E SCHNEIDER
1944 ANDREW CT 1946 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
MARY S SMITH MICHAEL S SMITH
2019 BLUE SAGE LN E 1936 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
PRAMOD & SHILPA TANEJA
THE PILLSBURY COMPANY C/O
1969 ANDREW CT
GENERAL MILLS TAX DEPT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
PO BOX 1113
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440-1113
LAC H TRINH & MUOI T NGU VICTOR J ULLRICH & JEAN C
2050 WATERLEAF LN W WILCOX
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8342 1931 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
WALNUT GROVE HOMEOWNERS
LAWRENCE D & EMILY P WALDRON ASSN C/O GITTLEMAN MGMT CORP
2085 MAJESTIC WAY 1801 E 79TH ST
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9356 SUITE 21
BLOOMINGTON MN 55425-1230
FRANCES MAUREEN WISSEL LINDA J YOUNG
2031 BLUE SAGE LN E 2057 BLUE SAGE LN W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8341
0
SCOTT J & STACY D MISKA
2062 WATERLEAF LN W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8342
PAMELA L OLSEN
2012 BLUE SAGE LN E
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8344
MARK & DAWN POLLMAN
1954 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
MICHAEL A ROSE & DEBORAH
EVANS-ROSE
2069 BLUE SAGE LN W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8341
STEVEN & KATHERINE SCHRAMM
1949 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
JOAN M TAKATA
7757 BUTTERCUP CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8337
TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE ASSN
C/O PERSONAL TOUCH MGMT
PO BOX 5233
HOPKINS MN 55343-2233
MICHAEL WAINWRIGHT
1950 ANDREW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7409
WALNUT GROVE VILLAS ASSN C/O
GITTLEMAN MGMT CORP
1801 79TH ST E
SUITE 21
BLOOMINGTON MN 55425-1230
RICH SLAGLE
7411 FAWN HILL ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
Eden Trace Corporation/Stone Creek GAPLAN\2004 Planning Cases\04-15 -
5Group, LLC
816 Stone Creek Town Offices\04-15 PH
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mallory Court Notice Labels.doc
Cha
the Chanhassen Planning
Commission will hold a public
hearing on Tuesday, May 4, 2004, at
7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers in
Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market
Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is
to consider a request to replat Outlet
B, Bluff Creek Corporate Center into 26
10tsand2outlots andsiteplanapproval
for the construction of five 3 -unit and
two 5 -unit office buildings on property
zoned PUD -10P with an area of 13.43
acres, Stone Creek Town Offices.
Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation.
A plan showing the location of the
Proposal is available for public review
at City Hall during regular business
hours. All interested persons are
invited to attend this public hearing
andexpresstheiropinions withmspect
to this proposal.
Sharmeen Al-
Jaff, Senior Planner
Email:
ait amici hMil sen
Phone: 952-227.
(Published in the Chanhas1134
sen
Villager on Thursday, April 22,2004;
No. 4163)
Affidavit of Publication
Southwest Suburban Publishing
State of Minnesota)
)SS.
County of Carver )
Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly swum, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized
agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil-
lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows:
(A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as
amended.
(B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. 41/G 3 -
was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said
Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of
the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both
inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition
and publication of the Notice:
abcdefgWjklmnopgrsttuvwxyz
By
Laurie A. Hartmann
Subscribed and swom before me on
I
= 1
r - � z/ tt
r.
------------
GWEN M. RADUENZ
1Q)
NOTARYPUBI.IC MINNESOTA
My Canmission Expires Jan. 31,2005
RATE INFORMATION
Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $22.00 per column inch
Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ............................... $22.00 per column inch
Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $10.85 per column inch
te""M
0 0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING CASE NO. 04-15
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, May 4, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen
City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request to replat Oudot
B, Bluff Creek Corporate Center into 26 lots and 2 oudots and site plan approval for the
construction of five 3 -unit and two 5 -unit office buildings on property zoned PUD -IOP with an area
of 13.43 acres, Stone Creek Town Offices. Applicant: Eden Trace Corporation.
A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review at City Hall
during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and
express their opinions with respect to this proposal.
Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner
Email: saliaff@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
Phone: 952-227-1134
(Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on April 22, 2004)
se"KED
• 0 t3L4-is
City Council Summary — June 14, 2004
g. Walnut Grove 2°d Addition, Klingelhutz Development:*
1) Final Plan Approval
2) Approval of Plans & Specifications and Development Contract
h. Highways of Bluff Creek, Plowshares Development:
1) Final Plat Approval
2) Approval of Plans & Specifications and Development Contract
i. Stone Creek Town Offices, Eden Trace Corp/Stone Creek Office Group LLC:
1) Final Plat Approval
2) Approval of Plans & Specifications and Development Contract
j. Countryside, Lundgren Bros. Construction:
1) Final Plat Approval
2) Approval of Plans & Specifications and Development Contract
k. Burlwood 2°d Addition Final Plat Approval, McDonald Construction, Inc.
1. Resolution #2004-38: Consider Modification of 2004 CIP for Stormwater
Quality Improvements for the 2004 Residential Street Improvement Project 04-01
n. Resolution #2004-39: Approve Transfers to Close Capital Project Funds and
Debt Service Funds.
o. Resolution #200440: Approve Change Order No. 4 for City Hall Lower Level
Remodel, Gen -Con Construction.
*All voted in favor, except Mayor Furlong abstained on item g, and the motion
carried unanimously 4 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Tom Devine, 7640 South Shore Drive representing the South Lotus Lake Association,
stated he was not aware of the water treatment program unfolding in their neighborhood
until Friday night, but the association had prepared to do a brief overview of the South
Lotus Lake Association's concerns relative to the park/tennis court and boat landing
areas. He's had conversations with the Carver County Sheriff's Office, specifically Jim
Olson about what can be done with enforcement of parking at the boat ramp. He talked
about the history involved with planning and construction of the boat ramp, park and
neighborhood and the promises that were made at that time. He voiced his
disappointment in learning of the water treatment plant only last Friday night from Mayor
Furlong that there's a decision to build or do something there and the mechanics is really
what's on the table right now without getting the neighborhood involved. The last issue
was the political effort it took from the neighborhood to build the trail along Highway
101 and his hopes that there isn't a political backlash happening from that effort. Staff
2
SCANNED
City Council Summary fay 24, 2004 0 64-15
AWARD OF BIDS FOR 2004 MSA STREET IWROVEMENTS, PROJECT 04-
02.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table the award of bids
for 2004 MSA street improvements, Project 04-02. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Kate Aanenson provided background information and an update from the Planning
Commission meeting on this project. Councilman Labatt asked for clarification
regarding maintenance of the sidewalk system. Councilman Peterson asked about the
berming. Mark Undestad, the applicant stated the project is receiving a lot of interest
from local businesses who are ready to move from their homes and basements into this
project.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council
approve preliminary plat for Planning Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as
shown on the plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is
$64,268.
2. A park fee of $94,010 shall be paid for the 13.43 acres at the time of the replat.
3. Submit a private cross -access and cross -parking easement against all lots at time
of final plat recording. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses
must be obtained and recorded against all lots.
4. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1004,1005, 1006, 2001,
2101, 2103, 2201, 2204, 3101, 3102, 5201, 5203, 5207, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5300
and 5302.
Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the State of
Minnesota must sign all plans.
6. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff
review. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
City Council Summary tay 24, 2004 •
7. Staff recommends that Type 11 silt fence be used adjacent to the storm pond and
creek.
8. Any off site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner.
9. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections
through the City's Building Department.
10. The site has previously been assessed for utility and street improvements. The
remaining assessment due payable to the City is $103,521.12. This assessment
may be re -spread against the newly platted lots on a per area basis or paid at the
time of final platting. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will also be
applicable for the new lots. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for
sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The hookup charges are based
on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council for the new lots.
Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the
parcel at the time of building permit issuance.
11. All of the public utility improvements are required to be constructed in
accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail
Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the public utilities will be
turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is required
to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary
financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The
applicant must be aware that public utility improvements will require a pre -
construction meeting before building permit issuance. Installation of the private
utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's
Building Department. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be
obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, and the
Watershed District.
12. On the utility plan:
a. Show the existing and proposed utility easements.
b. Add a storm sewer schedule.
c. Revise the Sewer Note No. 1 to be, "All sanitary services shall be 6"PVC
SDR26.
d. Add a note "Any connection to existing structures must be core drilled."
e. Remove the existing 24 inch storm stub to the north and bulkhead the invert at
the manhole.
f. Delete the sanitary sewer connection at the southwest comer of the site and
utilize the existing sanitary stub in the cul-de-sac.
g. Revise the proposed storm sewer within the cul-de-sac from a 12 inch to a 15
inch pipe.
City Council Summary Itay 24, 2004 •
13. On the grading plan:
a. Show all existing and proposed easements.
b. Show the benchmark used for the site survey.
c. Show a minimum 75 foot rock construction entrance.
d. Revise the side slope to 3:1 maximum along the northeast side of the parking
lot and at the southeasterly corner of Lot 25.
14. The 8 inch water and sewer mains will be considered public utility lines since
they serve multiple lots. As such, minimum 30 foot wide public easements will
be required over the portion of the public utility lines that are outside of the right-
of-way.
15. The Stone Creek Drive cul-de-sac must be built with a 48 foot radius and B-618
concrete curb and gutter.
16. The private street must be built to a 9 ton design, paved to a 26 foot width, and
contained within a 40 foot private easement. The developer will be required to
submit certification reports from a soil testing company which show that the
private street was built to these standards.
17. Lot 26 may be used for parking purposes only.
18. The applicant shall execute a cross parking agreement with the Family of Christ
Lutheran Church which shall encompass the 60 parking spaces shown in
Attachment 7.
19. The applicant shall execute a cross parking agreement with the Family of Christ
Lutheran Church which shall encompass the 60 parking spaces shown in
Attachment 6.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council
approve Site Plan Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as shown on the plans
received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
1. Environmental Resources Specialist conditions:
a. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in buffer yards to meet minimum
requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final
approval.
b. Applicant shall plant a minimum of 36 overstory trees in the parking lot to
meet minimum requirements.
c. Norway maple shall be replaced by a more suitable tree selection.
0
City Council Summary — May 24, 2004
2. Building Official conditions:
a. Buildings (units) over 2,000 square feet in gross floor area are required to be
protected with automatic fire sprinklers.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the
State of Minnesota.
c. An accessible route must be provided from the accessible parking spaces to
the entrances of all units. The maximum slope of the accessible route is 1/20.
d. Separate water, sewer and fire protection services must be provided for each
piece of property.
e. Exterior walls less than ten (10) feet from property lines must be of fire
resistive rated construction in accordance with IBC Chapter 6 and terminate in
accordance with IBC Chapter 7.
f. Separate male and female restrooms must be provided in each unit with an
occupant load greater than 15, as determined by IBC Table 1003.2.2.2.
g. Detailed construction and occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed
until complete plans are submitted.
h. The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division
as soon as possible to begin the preliminary plan review process to discuss
permit procedures.
3. On the site plan:
a. Revise the scale from 1"=20' to 1"=40'.
b. Show the existing and proposed trail/sidewalk adjacent to the site.
c. Show all dimensions for the improvements, i.e. drive aisle width, cul-de-sac
radius, curb return radii, stall lengths and widths, etc.
4. No direct access to Highway 5 is allowed.
5. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
for the exposed soil areas year round, according to the following table of slopes
and time frames:
Tyne of Sloe Time (Maximum time an area can
Remain open when the area
Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being
10:1 to 3:1 14 days worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and
any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system,
such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent
drainage ditch, or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface
water.
bl
City Council Summary gay 24, 2004 •
6. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street
scraping and street sweeping as needed.
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies e.g. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for
dewatering), and comply with their conditions of approval.
8. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage.
9. The applicant shall provide a second trash enclosure area south of Lot 5 and
relocate the proposed trash enclosure to the south of Lot 18.
10. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street
lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer
boxes. This is to insure fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely
operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
b. Three additional fire hydrants will be required. Install one southwest of Lot
11 in the parking island. Install one southeast of Lot 6 in the parking island.
Install one in the island between Lots 20 and 21 on the south side of the
building. If necessary, please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for the
exact location. Fire Lane signs and yellow curbing will be required. Contact
the Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbs to be painted.
11. Extend the sidewalks and relocate accessible parking access aisle as shown in
Attachment 1.
12. The applicant to work with staff to provide a walk on the south end skirting the
parking lot and over to the cul-de-sac, then loop around the cul-de-sac to the north
to connect up with the existing trail system.
13. If entrances are granted on both sides of the southern buildings, there should be a
walk on the north side of the building
14. The applicant will work with staff and MnDot to provide additional screening and
berming along Highway 5.
15. Turning radiuses on the site shall accommodate fire fighting vehicles.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
ZONING.
City Council Meeting lay 24, 2004 •
Mayor Furlong: I said it, we close the public hearing. Is that sufficient?
Tom Scott: That's fine.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. So the public hearing has been closed earlier before our
comments. There's a motion to table. It's been seconded.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table the special
assessment hearing for 2004 MSA street improvements, Project 04-02. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
AWARD OF BIDS FOR 2004 MSA STREET IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT 04-
02.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a motion to table?
Councilman Labatt: Move to table.
Mayor Furlong: Is there a second?
Councilman Ayotte: Second.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table the award of bids
for 2004 MSA street improvements, Project 04-02. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you everyone. Appreciate your comments.
CORPORATION.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor. As you indicated there's two action items before
you tonight. One is the replat of a subdivision, and the other is a site plan review. The
site is located just south of Highway 5, north of Coulter as part of the Bluff Creek
Corporate Center. Family of Christ Church sits kitty corner, and then you have Bluff
Creek Elementary. This site right here went to the Planning Commission as Advance
Fitness and you will be seeing that site shortly. It's bounded on either side by a creek.
Again the applicant is requesting the replat of 13 acres into 26 lots and 2 outlots and
they'll be subdivided into 25, if you can back out of that just a pinch. 25 corporate office
buildings. Individual buildings. This original PUD was put together with design
standards and a shared parking requirement that I'll discuss in a minute in 1998. It does
require, as we reviewed the Highway 5 standards have now been woven into the overall
design standards for the city and also the PUD standards for the site, which it does meet.
36
City Council Meeting gay 24, 2004 •
Material proposed for the project is fiber cement siding with simulated stone wainscoting
on the lower level of the buildings. On the lower portions here. Pitched roofs. Again the
staff believes with the visibility, which it has high visibility from Highway 5, that it's
very well conceived and works well. There's also no loading docks with this based on
the fact that it's really more kind of incubator, small businesses. Again it works really
well with high visibility from Highway 5. They are slab on grade buildings and they'll
be two stories high. Again it fits well within that corridor. One of the issues that came
up with this PUD was the fact that there was some shared parking. When we put the
PUD together for the church. Similar to what we did on Villages on the Pond. When you
have a higher use on certain times and the offices are lower peak. The applicant, Mr.
Undestad has worked with the church to provide some shared parking on those peak
hours and that's shown on this site plan here. One of the issues that the Planning
Commission had as this project moved forward was the trails shown on this purple side is
the perimeter trails. The Planning Commission asked for additional trail along this side.
There is an existing cul-de-sac. That cul-de-sac will be moved further to the north. The
planning staff originally felt that access could be achieved going along this sidewalk and
just walking down. The Planning Commission felt that this would probably be a good
addition. The applicant has agreed to do that. The other concern was the view from
Highway 5 and berming. Again the staff s position was that the landscaping will provide
adequate berming. A parking lot, which is what we tried to screen is the parking lot, not
necessarily buildings. Certainly there's visibility and there will be signage along those
fronts of the buildings so I didn't bring those to you. The applicant is prepared to come
back at final, which you would see in a few weeks. Those plans have been made, making
the parking, or the landscaping area along here approximately 7 feet. Now it's closer to
15 feet. Quite a bit additional landscaping so again that would provide the screening for
the cars, which was the intent of the design standards. Not necessarily buildings, and that
was a concern that the Planning Commission had so we believe that that's been
adequately addressed. In your staff report there are the conditions of approval. Again the
Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on May 4`h and did recommend approval
of this application. There was a couple of, there's two motions again the preliminary plat
and the site plan. The Planning Commission originally thought that there may have been
some conditions missed, so I'd like to, if you want to turn to page 15 on the conditions of
approval. We did note that some of the conditions had been duplicated. So 13 and 14, so
if you want to re -number your conditions, there's actually only 15 conditions. The trash
containers have been moved already on the revised site plan. Again that was a concern of
where they're relocated, so with that, staff and the Planning Commission did recommend
approval and we believe it's a well conceived plan. I'd be happy to answer any questions
that you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you and just for clarification. Staff is saying to, from page 15 to
remove conditions 13 and 14.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Mayor Furlong: And renumber 15, 16 and 17. 13 through 15 appropriately.
37
City Council Meeting lay 24, 2004 •
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Kate, sidewalks was an issue brought
up by the Planning Commission. Can you help clarify what the issue was.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that was the one on this one. On this plan right here. Staff had
felt that in order to get over to the street, if you were at maybe parking, shared parking
with the church. A way to make that work and Mr. Undestad's already made that change.
Moving this handicap parking access so actually it provides a better walk through
between this parking, and going along this existing sidewalk and coming down onto the
cul-de-sac, if you were going to do the shared parking. The Planning Commission felt
it'd be better just to continue and have an additional trail along here. Both work. We're
always concerned about over duplicating. Just in the fact that it's a nice landscape area
too to create some of that buffer...
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Labatt: Has that been maintained in the winter time by the property owner?
Kate Aanenson: I believe it's called a trail but it's actually a side.
Councilman Labatt: Pardon?
Kate Aanenson: It's going to be a sidewalk.
Councilman Labatt: So that will be maintained by the property?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. It wouldn't be a city trail.
Councilman Labatt: It will not be a city trail?
Kate Aanenson: No.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: There is a trail that goes up. This is this trail right here that goes, ties
into the Bluff Creek Elementary School site and goes underneath Highway 5. There
would be access that way.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Councilman Peterson: Kate I missed, did you say that there was going to be a berm?
Kate Aanenson: No, the Planning Commission was concerned about the way they left it
was to work with the staff and MnDot. You're close to the MnDot right-of-way to
0
City Council Meeting 4ay 24, 2004 •
provide screening. The way our ordinance reads is that the screening should be for
parking lot. It wasn't our intent to screen the building. It's a very nice building.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah, that was my point. Let's not cover up good architecture.
Kate Aanenson: Right, and staff concurs with that. What's been done, Mr. Undestad's
already made the changes to that and there's additional planting area that's wider and
additional trees. Quite a significant amount of trees and you'll see that when it comes
back for final plat. We just got those changes today so we believe that meets the intent
which is to screen the parked cars.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions for staff at this time? I see Mr. Undestad is
here, the applicant. Would you like to address the council or? Here's your opportunity.
It's not a requirement but.
Councilman Peterson: He had a board. Bring your board with.
Mayor Furlong: You've got a nice board.
Mark Undestad: The board's kind of the same picture... Just a bigger picture. ...been
fun working on it and putting it together. It's getting a lot of interest from local
businesses. Who are ready to kind of move out of their basements and homes... 25 units
on there. I think by the time we get through our final plat it will probably be close to 50
percent full.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any questions? No? Thank you. I'll bring it back to council for
comments. Discussion.
Councilman Labatt: This is one of these developers who always brings in a quality
project and I can remember last year or two years ago when I asked the same question
tonight is why this just isn't on the consent agenda. This is going to be a great addition to
Chan. Thanks Mark.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah I agree with Steve. I think the interesting thing, and I try
not to compliment Mark more than I should perhaps but I just like the idea that you guys
put together a plan that's unique to the city and unique to the area, and I think that as, do
more stuff out of the box because I think regardless of how nice a project looks, it's a
nice project but it's a unique project that's going to bring potential different kinds of
businesses to the city so that I think is worthy of bringing it off the consent agenda to
make that comment.
Councilman Lundquist: You would have pulled it off anyway, is that what you're
saying?
Councilman Peterson: No I wouldn't.
39
City Council Meeting 4ay 24, 2004 •
Councilman Lundquist: I would have.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Lundquist: I would concur with the ones before too. As I was reading
through the packet I think it peaked my interest. Interesting and it fits really well with
what's going on there as well, especially right next to the church and everything too so
it's, I will be, I am excited to see it on here and it will be fun to see it come to life.
Mayor Furlong: So thank you. Councilman Ayotte.
Councilman Ayotte: Can't add to those comments. Thank you very much for all your
hard work. Appreciate it.
Mayor Furlong: Yep. As well. It's a neat product. It's going to benefit the city and we
appreciate that and all your work throughout the city and prior development. I concur
with other statements.
Councilman Ayotte: I wonder if this will pass.
Mayor Furlong: I don't know. We only need a simple majority, right. With that, the
motions begin on page 10. Since you know the page, go ahead.
Councilman Lundquist: I would move that the City Council approve preliminary plat for
Planning Case 0415 for Stone Creek Town Offices shown on the plans received April
13, `04 subject to conditions 1 through 19.
Mayor Furlong: Why don't you do the second one at the same time.
Councilman Lundquist: And that the City Council approve Site Plan Case 04-15 for
Stone Creek Town Offices shown on the plans received April 13, '04 subject to
conditions 1 through 15 as modified by staff.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Is there any discussion?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council
approve preliminary plat for Planning Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as
shown on the plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
1. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is
$64,268.
2. A park fee of $94,010 shall be paid for the 13.43 acres at the time of the replat.
40
City Council Meeting*ay 24, 2004 •
3. Submit a private cross -access and cross -parking easement against all lots at time
of final plat recording. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses
must be obtained and recorded against all lots.
4. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1004,1005, 1006, 2001,
2101, 2103, 2201, 2204, 3101, 3102, 5201, 5203, 5207, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5300
and 5302.
5. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the State of
Minnesota must sign all plans.
6. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff
review. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
7. Staff recommends that Type II silt fence be used adjacent to the stone pond and
creek.
8. Any off site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner.
9. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections
through the City's Building Department.
10. The site has previously been assessed for utility and street improvements. The
remaining assessment due payable to the City is $103,521.12. This assessment
may be re -spread against the newly platted lots on a per area basis or paid at the
time of final platting. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will also be
applicable for the new lots. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for
sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The hookup charges are based
on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council for the new lots.
Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the
parcel at the time of building permit issuance.
11. All of the public utility improvements are required to be constructed in
accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail
Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the public utilities will be
turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is required
to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary
financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The
applicant must be aware that public utility improvements will require a pre -
construction meeting before building permit issuance. Installation of the private
utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's
Building Department. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be
obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, and the
Watershed District.
41
City Council Meeting Qay 24, 2004 •
12. On the utility plan:
a. Show the existing and proposed utility easements.
b. Add a storm sewer schedule.
c. Revise the Sewer Note No. 1 to be, "All sanitary services shall be 6"PVC
SDR26.
d. Add a note "Any connection to existing structures must be core drilled."
e. Remove the existing 24 inch storm stub to the north and bulkhead the invert at
the manhole.
L Delete the sanitary sewer connection at the southwest corner of the site and
utilize the existing sanitary stub in the cul-de-sac.
g. Revise the proposed storm sewer within the cul-de-sac from a 12 inch to a 15
inch pipe.
13. On the grading plan:
a. Show all existing and proposed easements.
b. Show the benchmark used for the site survey.
c. Show a minimum 75 foot rock construction entrance.
d. Revise the side slope to 3:1 maximum along the northeast side of the parking
lot and at the southeasterly comer of Lot 25.
14. The 8 inch water and sewer mains will be considered public utility lines since
they serve multiple lots. As such, minimum 30 foot wide public easements will
be required over the portion of the public utility lines that are outside of the right-
of-way.
15. The Stone Creek Drive cul-de-sac must be built with a 48 foot radius and B-618
concrete curb and gutter.
16. The private street must be built to a 9 ton design, paved to a 26 foot width, and
contained within a 40 foot private easement. The developer will be required to
submit certification reports from a soil testing company which show that the
private street was built to these standards.
17. Lot 26 may be used for parking purposes only.
18. The applicant shall execute a cross parking agreement with the Family of Christ
Lutheran Church which shall encompass the 60 parking spaces shown in
Attachment 7.
19. The applicant shall execute a cross parking agreement with the Family of Christ
Lutheran Church which shall encompass the 60 parking spaces shown in
Attachment 6.
42
City Council Meeting Qay 24, 2004 •
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council
approve Site Plan Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as shown on the plans
received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
Environmental Resources Specialist conditions:
a. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in buffer yards to meet minimum
requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final
approval.
b. Applicant shall plant a minimum of 36 overstory trees in the parking lot to
meet minimum requirements.
c. Norway maple shall be replaced by a more suitable tree selection.
2. Building Official conditions:
a. Buildings (units) over 2,000 square feet in gross floor area are required to be
protected with automatic fire sprinklers.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the
State of Minnesota.
c. An accessible route must be provided from the accessible parking spaces to
the entrances of all units. The maximum slope of the accessible route is 1/20.
d. Separate water, sewer and fire protection services must be provided for each
piece of property.
e. Exterior walls less than ten (10) feet from property lines must be of fire
resistive rated construction in accordance with IBC Chapter 6 and terminate in
accordance with IBC Chapter 7.
f. Separate male and female restrooms must be provided in each unit with an
occupant load greater than 15, as determined by IBC Table 1003.2.2.2.
g. Detailed construction and occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed
until complete plans are submitted.
h. The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division
as soon as possible to begin the preliminary plan review process to discuss
permit procedures.
3. On the site plan:
a. Revise the scale from 1"=20' to 1"=40'.
b. Show the existing and proposed trail/sidewalk adjacent to the site.
c. Show all dimensions for the improvements, i.e. drive aisle width, cul-de-sac
radius, curb return radii, stall lengths and widths, etc.
4. No direct access to Highway 5 is allowed.
43
City Council Meeting 4ay 24, 2004 •
5. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
for the exposed soil areas year round, according to the following table of slopes
and time frames:
Type of Slone Time (Maximum time an area can
Remain open when the area
Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being
10:1 to 3:1 14 days worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and
any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system,
such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent
drainage ditch, or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface
water.
6. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street
scraping and street sweeping as needed.
7. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies e.g. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for
dewatering), and comply with their conditions of approval.
8. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage.
9. The applicant shall provide a second trash enclosure area south of Lot 5 and
relocate the proposed trash enclosure to the south of Lot 18.
10. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street
lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer
boxes. This is to insure fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely
operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
b. Three additional fire hydrants will be required. Install one southwest of Lot
11 in the parking island. Install one southeast of Lot 6 in the parking island.
Install one in the island between Lots 20 and 21 on the south side of the
building. If necessary, please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for the
exact location. Fire Lane signs and yellow curbing will be required. Contact
the Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbs to be painted.
11. Extend the sidewalks and relocate accessible parking access aisle as shown in
Attachment 1.
City Council Meeting tay 24, 2004 0
12. The applicant to work with staff to provide a walk on the south end skirting the
parking lot and over to the cul-de-sac, then loop around the cul-de-sac to the north
to connect up with the existing trail system.
13. If entrances are granted on both sides of the southern buildings, there should be a
walk on the north side of the building
14. The applicant will work with staff and MnDot to provide additional screening and
berming along Highway 5.
15. Turning radiuses on the site shall accommodate fire fighting vehicles.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CITY CODE AMENDMENTS: INCLUDING
SUMMARY ORDINANCES FOR PUBLICATION PURPOSES: CHAPTER 20,
ZONING.
Kate Aanenson: Again, as pointed out in your cover letter, the purpose of these code
amendments is to make it more user friendly. We provided in your report a summary of
the changes. The major changes. Again this is Chapter 20. The other one, minor one
that you'll be seeing 18. The Planning Commission did spend a lot of time going through
these changes. Asking us, challenging us. Looking at other cities. And how it works.
The problems and concerns. I can go through by section each of those but I guess I'll
leave it up to you and I think I'd like to start with maybe addressing some of the
questions that came up from the visitor presentation. The first one I believe was the
public hearing notification for lakeshore development. Again our ordinance supercedes
the state law requiring, you know the state law is 350 feet. We use 500 feet. When
you're on a lakeshore we certainly think it's important that we notify someone if there's a
conditional use or changes to the lakeshore. But we have applicants that are doing minor
modifications that have no impact to the lakeshore that have to notify 300-400 people on
a lake and we believe that's onerous when they're being charged per label. So we talked
to the Planning Commission about this. Certainly the people that spoke at visitor
presentation made this same appeal to the Planning Commission. And again, these aren't
developers. Certainly a development we would certainly would say would have an
impact on the change of character of the lake if they're adding additional homes. That
would be of significant impact and we would notify people but this is someone who's
doing an addition that may not increase the setback to the lake. May not increase the
impervious surface, so it's kind of a discernment decision to say you know really it's not
that big of an impact. You certainly, everyone within 500 feet would still get notified but
the Planning Commission concurred that they felt that notifying within 500 feet was
sufficient for those typically who, but something that would have an impact to the lake,
then we would notify everybody on the lake. Any questions on that?
45
11
• 0
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
MAY 4, 2004
Acting Chair Slagle called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
()4 -is
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rich Slagle, Steve Lillehaug, Dan Keefe, and Bethany
Tjornhom
MEMBERS ABSENT: Uli Sacchet, Craig Claybaugh, and Kurt Papke
STAFF PRESENT: Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; Bob Generous, Senior Planner;
Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer, and Nate Bouvet, Planning Intern
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Debbie Lloyd
7302 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST TO REPLAT OUTLOT B. BLUFF CREEK CORPORATE CENTER
INTO 26 LOTS AND 2 OUTLOTS AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF FIVE THREE UNIT TWO FIVE UNIT OFFICE
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Undestad
8800 Sunset Trail
Jim Sulerud
Family of Christ Lutheran Church
Ben Merriman
8156 Mallory Court
Jim Pensyl
1972 Andrews Court
Sharmeen Al-Jaff and Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner
Tjomhom asked for clarification on the sizing of the storm sewer and wording of the
conditions. Commissioner Keefe asked staff to clarify the view of the parking lot from
Highway 5, the layout of the buildings on the site, and light from the parking lot spilling
out onto Highway 5.. Commissioner Lillehaug asked for further clarification on the
parking setback from Highway 5, screening of the HVAC equipment, trash enclosure
location, and what qualities of the proposal consider it for a PUD. Commissioner Keefe
asked about signage on the building. Chair Slagle asked for clarification on the proposed
sidewalk circulation. Mark Undestad with Eden Trace spoke on behalf of the applicant
and addressed questions from the commission regarding wall signage, town office versus
Planning Commission -Arnary —May 4, 2004 •
traditional office buildings. Chair Slagle opened the public hearing. Jim Pensyl, 1972
Andrew Court had a question regarding access. He suggested an alternative extending
McGlynn Road out westbound and making that the access point or access from Highway
5. Jim Sulerud, 730 Vogelsberg Trail spoke on behalf of the Family of Christ Lutheran
Church stating their support for the project. Chair Slagle closed the public hearing.
After discussion, the following motions were made.
Lillehaug moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the preliminary plat for Planning Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town
Offices as shown on the plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is
$64,268.
2. A park fee of $94,010 shall be paid for the 13.43 acres at the time of the replat.
3. Submit a private cross -access and cross -parking easement against all lots at time
of final plat recording. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses
must be obtained and recorded against all lots.
4. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1004,1005, 1006, 2001,
2101, 2103, 2201, 2204, 3101, 3102, 5201, 5203, 5207, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5300
and 5302.
5. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the State of
Minnesota must sign all plans.
6. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff
review. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
7. Staff recommends that Type II silt fence be used adjacent to the storm pond and
creek.
8. Any off site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner.
9. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections
through the City's Building Department.
10. The site has previously been assessed for utility and street improvements. The
remaining assessment due payable to the City is $103,521.12. This assessment
may be re -spread against the newly platted lots on a per area basis or paid at the
time of final platting. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will also be
applicable for the new lots. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for
sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The hookup charges are based
07
Planning Commission Sumary —May 4, 2004 •
on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council for the new lots.
Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the
parcel at the time of building permit issuance.
11. All of the public utility improvements are required to be constructed in
accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail
Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the public utilities will be
turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is required
to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary
financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The
applicant must be aware that public utility improvements will require a pre -
construction meeting before building permit issuance. Installation of the private
utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's
Building Department. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be
obtained, including but not limited to the MPGA, Department of Health, and the
Watershed District.
12. On the utility plan:
a. Show the existing and proposed utility easements.
b. Add a stone sewer schedule.
c. Revise the Sewer Note No. 1 to be, "All sanitary services shall be 6"PVC
SDR26.
d. Add a note "Any connection to existing structures must be core drilled."
e. Remove the existing 24 inch storm stub to the north and bulkhead the invert at
the manhole.
f. Delete the sanitary sewer connection at the southwest corner of the site and
utilize the existing sanitary stub in the cul-de-sac.
g. Revise the proposed storm sewer within the cul-de-sac from a 12 inch to a 15
inch pipe.
13. On the grading plan:
a. Show all existing and proposed easements.
b. Show the benchmark used for the site survey.
c. Show a minimum 75 foot rock construction entrance.
d. Revise the side slope to 3:1 maximum along the northeast side of the parking
lot and at the southeasterly comer of Lot 25.
14. The 8 inch water and sewer mains will be considered public utility lines since
they serve multiple lots. As such, minimum 30 foot wide public easements will
be required over the portion of the public utility lines that are outside of the right-
of-way.
3
Planning Commission funary — May 4, 2004 •
15. The Stone Creek Drive cul-de-sac must be built with a 48 foot radius and B-618
concrete curb and gutter.
16. The private street must be built to a 9 ton design, paved to a 26 foot width, and
contained within a 40 foot private easement. The developer will be required to
submit certification reports from a soil testing company which show that the
private street was built to these standards.
17. Lot 26 may be used for parking purposes only.
18. The applicant shall execute a cross parking agreement with the Family of Christ
Lutheran Church which shall encompass the 60 parking spaces shown in
Attachment 7.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Lillehaug moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of Site Plan Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as shown on the
plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
1. Environmental Resources Specialist conditions:
a. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in buffer yards to meet minimum
requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final
approval.
b. Applicant shall plant a minimum of 36 overstory trees in the parking lot to
meet minimum requirements.
c. Norway maple shall be replaced by a more suitable tree selection.
2. Building Official conditions:
a. Buildings (units) over 2,000 square feet in gross floor area are required to be
protected with automatic fire sprinklers.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the
State of Minnesota.
c. An accessible route must be provided from the accessible parking spaces to
the entrances of all units. The maximum slope of the accessible route is 1/20.
d. Separate water, sewer and fire protection services must be provided for each
piece of property.
e. Exterior walls less than ten (10) feet from property lines must be of fire
resistive rated construction in accordance with IBC Chapter 6 and terntinate in
accordance with IBC Chapter 7.
f. Separate male and female restrooms must be provided in each unit with an
occupant load greater than 15, as determined by IBC Table 1003.2.2.2.
g. Detailed construction and occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed
until complete plans are submitted.
Planning Commission *mart' — May 4, 2004
•
h. The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division
as soon as possible to begin the preliminary plan review process to discuss
permit procedures.
3. On the site plan:
a. Revise the scale from 1"=20' to 1"=40'.
b. Show the existing and proposed trail/sidewalk adjacent to the site.
c. Show all dimensions for the improvements, i.e. drive aisle width, cul-de-sac
radius, curb return radii, stall lengths and widths shall be 9 feet by 18 feet.
4. No direct access to Highway 5 is allowed.
5. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
for the exposed soil areas year round, according to the following table of slopes
and time frames:
TyM of Slone Time (Maximum time an area can
Remain open when the area
Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being
10:1 to 3:1 14 days worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and
any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system,
such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent
drainage ditch, or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface
water.
6. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street
scraping and street sweeping as needed.
7. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies e.g. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for
dewatering), and comply with their conditions of approval.
8. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage.
9. The applicant shall provide a second trash enclosure area south of Lot 5.
10. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street
lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer
61
Planning Commission Mirnary — May 4, 2004
boxes. This is to insure fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely
operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
b. Three additional fire hydrants will be required. Install one southwest of Lot
11 in the parking island. Install one southeast of Lot 6 in the parking island.
Install one in the island between Lots 20 and 21 on the south side of the
building. If necessary, please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for the
exact location. Fire Lane signs and yellow curbing will be required. Contact
the Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbs to be painted.
11. Extend the sidewalks and relocate accessible parking access aisle as shown in
Attachment 1.
12. The applicant to work with staff to provide a walk on the south end skirting
the parking lot and over to the cul-de-sac, then loop around the cul-de-sac to
the north to connect up with the existing trail system.
13. Relocate the trash enclosure and add another one as indicated by staff.
14. Add bike racks on the plan.
15. If entrances are granted on both sides of the southern buildings, there should
be a walk on the north side of the building
16. The applicant will work with staff and MnDot to provide additional
screening and berming along Highway 5.
17. Turning radiuses on the site shall accommodate fire fighting vehicles.
Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO SECTION 20-59 TO ALLOW ADDITION OF A
MOTHER-IN-LAW SUITE, 8634 VALLEY VIEW COURT, PAUL & LAURA
GRAVES, PLANNING CASE NO. 04-16.
Public Present:
Name Address
Kent Ludford
Paul & Laura Graves
8615 Valley View Court
8634 Valley View Court
Nate Bouvet presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Tjornhom asked for
clarification on the number of entrances into the home. Commissioner Keefe asked staff
to walk through the sequence of events with this application. Commissioner Lillehaug
asked for further clarification on the exterior and interior entrances and asked if the
i • 04 -Is
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 4, 2004
Acting Chair Slagle called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rich Slagle, Steve Lillehaug, Dan Keefe, and Bethany
Tjomhom
MEMBERS ABSENT: Uli Sacchet, Craig Claybaugh, and Kurt Papke
STAFF PRESENT: Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; Bob Generous, Senior Planner;
Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer, and Nate Bouvet, Planning Intern
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Debbie Lloyd
ixitJ•ar1r.7-06
INTO 26 LOTS AND 2 OUTLOTS AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE
ACRES, STONE CREEK TOWN OFFICES, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION,
PLANNING CASE NO. 04-15.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Undestad
Jim Sulerud Family of Christ Lutheran Church
Ben Merriman 8156 Mallory Court
Jim Pensyl 1972 Andrews Court
Sharmeen Al-Jaff and Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item.
Slagle: Let's start, any questions for staff? Bethany?
Tjomhom: Alright, I'll go first I guess. And mine are silly questions anyway I guess.
When you were designing for the storm sewer, are you supposed to go with data that's 10
years or 100 years? Am I crazy thinking I had heard 100 year? Is it 10 years?
Saam: No, you're not crazy. The storm sewer pipe, the size of that is sized based on a 10
year storm but ponds are.
Planning Commission Oetina — May 4, 2004 •
Tjornhom: That's the 100 years?
Saam: Yes. Yes, we want those to hold 100 year storms so.
Tjomhom: Okay. That was just a question that I thought kind of, and another question I
have, and this is an easy one too is. In the report it says staff notes the proposal is
consistent with the comprehensive plan and generally consistent with the zoning
ordinance. Generally means, I mean is there something that isn't consistent or is that just
something that was put in there you know, am I being picky? I don't know.
Al -Jaffa Figure of speech.
Tjomhom: Figure of speech, okay.
AI -Jaffa That's how I used it.
Tjomhom: Okay, okay.
Al -Jaffa They aren't consistent with the conditions in the staff report.
Tjomhom: Oh. Then I guess that's all I have.
Slagle: Down this way.
Keefe: Alright, I'll go next. I'm curious about the parking and what this is going to look
like from Highway 5 and how close it is to Highway 5. Is it bermed out front or is there a
berming requirement or how close does the parking go to Highway 5?
Al-Jaff: There are a couple of things that we have been working on. One of them is the
ordinance allows 50 percent of the parking to face the highway. If you look at this
portion, as well as this portion, it would come up, or would add up to half the length
facing Highway 5. That's part of our design standard ordinance. As far as berming,
there is additional landscaping that is required along Highway 5 to screen some of the
parking lot.
Keefe: I mean I like the design of the building. I mean I think it looks nice but one of
my concerns is just visually when you look at it, you're going to see a lot of cars sitting
there. It's in a very visible, there isn't a lot of elevation change from Highway 5 to this
particular site.
Al -Jaffa That's correct. One of the things that we talked about at the time, mainly
dealing with the design of this site, we didn't want to hide the buildings, but at the same
time we did talk about screening of the parking lot. Under the landscape requirements on
page 5 of your staff report, third column. Highway 5, north property line buffer yard.
There are 17 canopy trees, 28 understory trees, 45 shrubs. All these are landscape
materials that will be required within this area.
`N
Planning Commission ating — May 4, 2004 •
Keefe: And I was confused, I was kind of leading to that. I mean the landscape along
Highway 5, it says proposed here, the one column and I'm not sure what the difference is
between proposed and the required.
Al-Jaff: The required is what the ordinance requires the applicant to provide. If we look
at the landscape plan and what the applicant is proposing, as you can see, for instance
under canopy trees the ordinance requires 17 trees. The applicant is showing 9 trees, so
they are deficient and they would need to increase the number of trees on the site.
Keefe: And then the buildings themselves in terms of the layout of the buildings, you
have parking on the Highway 5 side. Are those two, are the offices, are they sort of
double loaded offices?
Al-Jaff: Yes they are.
Keefe: They are? On that one that's there, and then the ones on the east and west ends
are single?
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Keefe: Okay, because they look like they're approximately the same size.
Al -Jaffa Access to them, access to the units can be provided from both sides.
Keefe: Right. And the question I had was really in relation to was it considered moving
the buildings more towards 5 if there's room to do that? I don't know whether the
setback would allow that or not, and putting more of the parking on the inside.
Especially in light of that you've got the agreement with the church that would allow you
to meet, potentially meet the ordinance. I didn't know whether you went down that, and
I'm really just thinking, I don't know exactly what it's going to look like from 5. Just my
thought was that it's going to look kind of like a sea of cars along there, assuming that
everything's leased up and particularly if we go down the road of you know we want to at
least have enough landscaping in there to.
A] -Jaffa I do believe that we will be able to provide, with the landscaping we will be able
to provide some screening. I don't want to say 100 percent because that will not be the
case, but we will be able to provide some screening of the parking.
Lillehaug: Could I add to your discussion here? The ordinance requires a 50 foot
setback from MnDot right-of-way for parking. Correct?
Generous: Not in this PUD.
Lillehaug: And that would be my question. On page 3, you do indicate where a PUD
was amended for a 10 foot parking setback but it doesn't look like any portion of what
3
Planning Commission ating —May 4, 2004 •
that was approved for ever happened. I mean it says the applicant never replatted the
outlot and does that 10 foot parking setback really apply to this?
Al -Jaffa That portion of the ordinance did get amended. The Trunk Highway 5 setback
for the parking lot should read 10 feet.
Lillehaug: I guess blindly, I mean I'm just blindly saying, taken that it's 10 feet, I don't
see a reason why it would be 10 feet here and what benefit really that, if it's ordinance,
it's ordinance. I mean if it's in the PUD but I guess does staff know why it's 10 feet
rather than 50 feet?
Generous: I do. Commissioner Lillehaug, as part of the, when they were actually doing
the PUD, the roadway acquisition was 40 feet out from where it was actually finally
taken. They took additional right-of-way after this project first went through the process.
When we established the 50 foot setback and they discovered that it just didn't work on
that north side so they amended the PUD design standards or the ordinance for this
development to give it a 10 foot setback.
Keefe: Well and I think in relation to that, I mean when I go to the lighting plan and I
look at the lighting plan, I mean if we're at a 10 foot setback and you get those, some of
these lights sitting right at the back of the parking lot and it looks like you're going to end
up with some light from the parking lot cast out on the Highway 5 if the parking lot is
that close. If I'm looking at this correctly. Does that cause any concern or not?
Slagle: Matt, is that a question for your group?
Saam: We don't, engineering doesn't typically look at the lighting plan.
Slagle: Okay. I tried Sharmeen.
Al -Jaffa Thank you. In looking at the photometrics that have been submitted to the city.
That would be on Sheet A-1.3. The ordinance we passed a foot candle at the property
line. Looking at that along Highway 5, there is nothing that, there is one point right here.
Nann, can you zoom in please? Thank you. One point right here that is .7.
Keefe: Right around that particular...
A]-Jaff:...nothing that exceeds the half foot candle.
Keefe: Okay, and then just one last question in relation to the parking. Is in regards to
that 10 foot setback, we don't really have a concern of the parking being that close to the
Highway 5 in regards to traffic, headlights and conflict of interest for driving on the
Highway 5 that close without any berming or protection. 10 feet meets what we need to
do?
4
Planning Commission feting — May 4, 2004 •
Saam: Commissioner Keefe, I'll just mention Highway 5, if you look at the grading plan
is approximately 6 to 8 feet higher in elevation than this parking lot's going to be, so with
that in mind, I wouldn't foresee any headlights from this site shining into the highway.
Or onto the highway.
Keefe: Okay, thanks. That's all I have.
Slagle: Okay.
Lillehaug: A lot of my questions have been answered so that's good. Parking staff.
What is the dimension just required by the city of parking stalls?
Al -Jaffa 8'/z.
Lillehaug: Let's get this out in the open right now huh.
Saam: By 18 I believe.
Al -Jaffa 8'/z by 18.
Generous: It will be revised to 9 by 18.
Lillehaug: So as part of this we can require 9 by 18, correct? It's a PUD, we can add to
this right? Correct? Matt. Okay. Let's see here. Easy one first here. HVAC
equipment, or roof equipment. Does staff know is that fully screened or is there even
roof equipment? I can ask that to the applicant. Why don't I hold off on that one. Trash
enclosure. Do we require a roof on the trash enclosure?
Al -Jaffa The representative from the church and the applicant had a meeting. One of the
concerns was the location of the trash enclosure. One of the decisions that both the
applicant and the church representative came to was relocating it, as well as adding a
second trash enclosure. The first location will be immediately past Building 5. And then
the second one will be located south of Building 18. Will it have roof? None proposed at
this time and.
Lillehaug: Do we require that?
Al-Jaff: We don't typically require it.
Lillehaug: Okay. I'll hold off on my screening question. Okay, this is my tough
question for the night. Page 3, under general site plan architecture. It says a PUD is
required to be developed to higher quality than other projects. I guess what is this
proposal showing that would be considered a higher quality one compared to other
projects?
5
Planning Commission Seting — May 4, 2004 •
Al -Jaffa I believe the materials that are used on the exterior of this building are extremely
attractive as well as durable. The simulated stone. The fact that each elevation has given
a level of detail. There aren't any loading docks. It's a quality.
Lillehaug: Boy, that's a loaded question isn't it?
Al-Jaff: In my opinion it's a quality development.
Lillehaug: That's fair.
Al -Jaffa I think they've done a wonderful job.
Lillehaug: So the buildings are very aesthetically pleasing. You know in generally, I
know sight has indicated that they would like to see a lot more plantings per code. Is
there anything other than plantings, you know other amenities? You know in other areas
I know we required benches, bicycle areas and maybe that's addressed...
Al -Jaffa That is definitely something that we can require.
Lillehaug: Is there anything, you know as part of the PUD that we're missing that we're
not really requiring? I guess when I see this I'm not seeing something really that a PUD
is even, you know would really bring this to a higher level.
Al -Jaffa Bike racks are required by the PUD and I haven't added that as a condition. I
really should.
Lillehaug: Okay.
Slagle: Anything else Steve?
Lillehaug: One more. Page 5. This is a quick one. I almost missed it. In your chart
there, it says 10, right in the middle there's a big block. It says 10 foot widths and less
required by ordinance that a structure be installed. I don't, I guess I don't understand
what that is. When we're talking trees. Did you follow me where I went there?
Al -Jaffa That means a median.
Lillehaug: Okay, and are we requiring that there be medians in areas and they're not
showing any?
Al-Jaff: They meet all requirements. Matt, I don't know, do you see a need for a median
anywhere other than?
Saam: If this is for the land, the islands? The parking lot islands, there are a couple there
that I'm scaling off that appear to be less than 10 feet. I think what the meaning of the
ordinance is is that we found things like sod are tough to keep alive in these little 2 and 3
0
Planning Commission Oeting — May 4, 2004 •
foot wide strips so we say if you're going to be under 10 feet, just pave or rock the entire
thing so.
Lillehaug: Okay. That's all I had, thank you.
Slagle: Go ahead.
Keefe: One more in relation to signage. I think somewhere in the plan when I was
looking at it there they could potentially put signage on the fronts of the buildings and I
think the fronts are facing Highway 5. What type of signage are we talking about there?
What are we limited to? Are there limits to that?
AI-Jaff: Yes. There is a criteria for signage. And those are the wall signs.
Keefe: They're not, I guess the question really is, is it like lighted signing or are we
talking.
Al-Jaff: Under the ordinance you can have lit signs. There is a band that the applicant is
showing above the entrance into each building.
Keefe: Right, and I couldn't tell what that was. Maybe I can ask that question of what
he's intending but I'm just curious to know.
Al-Jaff: Again under the ordinance it is permitted to have back lit signage.
Keefe: Good, thanks.
Slagle: Okay, go ahead Bethany.
Tjomhom: Regarding the signs. There's going to be 25 town offices, correct?
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Tjomhom: And so you could potentially have 25 different signs?
Al-Jaff: That's correct.
Tjomhom: And so they'll have to come to you to get a permit? That means you'll have
to approve every one to make sure they meet all the standards and.
Al-Jaff: That's correct.
Tjomhom: Okay. That was my only comment and question.
Slagle: And I just have a couple if I may. In looking at the addendum if you will that we
received on our desks here. I am showing sidewalks, or sidewalk if you will behind the
7
Planning Commission sting — May 4, 2004 •
eastern most row of offices adjacent to that creek, and yet when I look at the color
rendition I don't see those and I just want to make sure as we talk to the applicant about
extending, expanding the sidewalk or what I'll call trail system within this development,
that indeed they are thinking of and intending to run the sidewalks on the eastern edge to
the south, and I guess my question, there is a question in here. Is the sidewalk, if that is
indeed going to be there, staff what do you think of running that to the southern end of
the development as it heads southwest? Part of the property to the east. Go back to the
east. There you go. Now right along there in front of all those parking spots on the
southern side and you would take that and you connect down to the trail. You have any
thoughts on that?
Al-Jaff: We did talk about that and actually Bob and I discussed it.
Slagle: Okay so we being, not you and the applicant but.
Al -Jaffa No, just Bob and myself. And what we concluded was if we moved this
acceptable parking aisle, access aisle.
Slagle: Nann, can we get closer in? My eye sight's going. There you go, okay.
Al -Jaffa If we relocated this accessible parking access aisle to the north, you would be
able to basically continue to the west and then straight down connection to the trail.
Slagle: And I'm okay with that but then let me ask you this. Those spots to the south,
the southern most spots. I'm going to guess a dozen or so. Right along there.
Al -Jaffa You're talking about these?
Slagle: Yeah. I guess my question is, why wouldn't you want a sidewalk to the south of
there so they have to only cross and the folks on the east would only have to cross once
and that would be the cul-de-sac.
Al-Jaff: That's doable.
Slagle: Okay. I just wanted to see if that was something you guys were open to. The last
question I have regarding the canopy and the proposed required getting back to Dan's
question. The applicant is proposing 20 trees, is that correct? And we are saying that
they would need 36.
Al -Jaffa Correct.
Slagle: I'm just curious, I mean what is our plan? As I look in the conditions and I don't
think I saw a condition that they fulfill that? I might have overlooked it. I hope I did.
Lillehaug: It's in condition 1(a). Site plan.
Planning Commission feting — May 4, 2004
Slagle: Is that under the site plan?
Al -Jaffa Yes.
I.illehaug: Shall increase landscape plantings.
Al-Jaff: It's condition number 1 on page 12 of your site plan, A, B and C.
Slagle: And that will then come under their final, okay.
Al-Jaff: No, it didn't go under the subdivision and just remain with the site plan.
Slagle: Okay. Alright, well I think with that the applicant here and if you could come up
to the microphone. State your name and address, we'd like to hear from you.
Mark Undestad: My name is Mark Undestad. I'm with Eden Trace and live at 8800
Sunset Trail here in Chanhassen. Really don't have a lot to add to the staff report on
here.
Slagle: If you could actually move that mic, there you go. I hate to do that to you but.
Mark Undestad: Alright. Well again I didn't really have a lot to add to the staff report. I
think we've spent a lot of time up here trying to get this as kind of a nicer development
than what's been looked at there in the past but everything that we've gotten in the staff
report, again I think we're, we think it will be a real nice development when we're done
with it. Hopefully we're putting something in there that the city and the residents around
here are going to enjoy so.
Keefe: I've got a question in relation to the signage. What are you thinking in regards to
the signage?
Mark Undestad: We don't really have, we're going to have a sign company come up
with some design on there. Part of the reason why we're kind of keeping all the design of
the building in more the earth tones and so we don't want anything too loud, too
obnoxious out there and obviously we're not going to do that with the signs either. We'll
have our sign company come up with some design, bring that to the city and then have
them look at it. We hadn't really even talked about anything lit up or anything lie that so
more just a recognition there's a sign above the entry way in each unit. And there's only
8 that face Highway 5 up there and the rest of them are just going to be identity signage.
Keefe: Pretty much consistent in terms of.
Mark Undestad: Yeah, we're going to have them all kind of the same so you don't get a
lot of different colors and this and that. I mean people have logos for their companies
and they want to get a logo in there but as long as it's within our set areas I think we'll
probably, we should be able to make it look nice.
0
Planning Commission Otting —May 4, 2004 •
Slagle: Anything Bethany?
Tjornhom: My only question, because this is the first time I've seen this, was the town
office. Explain to me how a town office is different from an office building. And maybe
that then justifies the PUD because it's more of an upscale office type situation or you
know.
Mark Undestad: Well you know, I think when you, the question about you know what
type of development is it and is it upscale? Is it nice enough? We've been building
things around town and around other towns for many years. I mean there's quite a range
of, and I think when we spent a lot of time to get this so it looks nice, we feel it looks nice
in the neighborhood. The town offices are more, they've been coming around here
recently and basically what it is is the individual business owner owns their own unit.
They actually buy that unit, similar to a town home, so it's not so much that we're putting
them all up and then renting them out. Leasing. These actually business owners can own
their own little piece of real estate down there which is with interest rates and the way
things have been going, it's been real appealing. They've been going up in Eden Prairie
and Lakeville, Maple Grove, Plymouth. A lot of little developments and it's not like
we're trying to come out here and throw 150 of these things out. It's like each city is
different and you kind of look at a nice, smaller development package like this, 25 units
you know, we feel that's probably a good number for the city of Chanhassen. We've got
a lot of interest in here. A lot of local business professionals already been picking out
their sites so to speak on here so it's getting received well in Chanhassen.
Tjomhom: Okay, thank you.
Slagle: Anything more Dan?
Keefe: I don't think so.
Slagle: Okay, Steve. I just have a couple. Two were raised by your last comment with
this approach. What would an average, if I can ask, office go for. I mean what kind of,
just as far as.
Mark Undestad: As far as the cost of the place?
Slagle: Price, correct. Yeah.
Mark Undestad: We don't, right now we have a range and until, typically we don't go
into the construction documents until we go through planning committee and work with
staff here and all the bugs worked out. Then we'll go into the construction documents
and then we're able to fine tune and hard bid these numbers out and nail them down.
Right now, based on units in Eden Prairie and Plymouth, Maple Grove, areas around
here, they'll have a range anywhere, on a per square foot cost of anywhere from $135 on
up. Some people pay, we've seen some they've put fireplaces in these things and really
[to]
Planning Commission Oting — May 4, 2004 •
get fancy in there so some have sold as high as $200 a foot. Really it depends on what
you do inside you know.
Slagle: Okay. The second question I guess, with the thought that there will be multiple
owners then, in this development once it's finished.
Mark Undestad: Could be up to 25 separate owners in there, sure.
Slagle: What would, and more maybe to staff also but what would someone do, an
adjoining neighbor if there were issues? I mean whether it be trash, noise.
Mark Undestad: Like a townhome, there will be an association that handles...
Slagle: Okay, sure.
Mark Undestad: And if somebody has issues and they can't resolve them separately then
they go to the association.
Slagle: Okay. Question on the sidewalks, and the trash enclosure. Sidewalks, are you
okay with what you've heard so far and open to that?
Mark Undestad: Sure.
Slagle: Connecting to that. Was it your intent or is it your intent to run this out to the
eastern side of that eastern most row of offices? I assume the walkouts.
Mark Undestad: Again you're talking about...
Slagle: Yep.
Mark Undestad: We would certainly be agreeable to doing that. I would just want to
make sure we have enough room between the parking, the property owners and things to
get a sidewalk in there and again, you don't want to have those things right next to the,
backing up to the curb on the back side like having the cars park on that or pushing
beyond the sidewalks so. I would just want to make sure that we can get room back in
there.
Slagle: Okay, and was the trash enclosure as a condition? Okay.
Al -Jaffa Relocate it.
Slagle: Yeah.
Mark Undestad: And the picnic tables came up too. I think there's a couple of areas in
these, around the units that people already talking about doing a little extra gardening out
11
Planning Commission Oting — May 4, 2004 •
there and putting their little picnic tables and things out there so I think that's just going
to happen with the type of development that's out there.
Keefe: I'm just interested in how you market these. I mean do you put a for sale sign on
each unit or is it, how does it work?
Mark Undestad: That's the question we kind of asked before we started this whole thing
way back when, and it's amazing that it's mainly word of mouth. People just kind of
heard about it and.
Keefe: So you might have a road sign that says for sale but in terms of them turning over
or whatever, each unit, each individual unit is then responsible, if they're going to resale
it.
Mark Undestad: If they're going to resale it, sure. I mean they would put it up for sale
and their agent or themselves or whatever they want to do.
Keefe: Okay.
Slagle: Okay, I don't have anything else. Sharmeen, are you going to say anything?
Al -Jaffa I will add a condition requiring the applicant to relocate the trash enclosure.
Slagle: Okay, fair enough.
Al -Jaffa As well as bike racks.
Slagle: Okay. So whoever makes the motion remember that we have two additional.
Okay, and since this is a public hearing, thank you. I'm going to open this up for any
folks here that would like to speak on the subject so please come up to the microphone.
State your name and address and we'd like to hear from you.
Jim Pensyl: Hi, I'm Jim Pensyl. I live at 1972 Andrew Court, in the townhomes directly
south of Coulter, right across from the proposed development. First I have a question.
My understanding is that access is from, access to this development is on Coulter.
Mark Undestad: That is correct.
Jim Pensyl: Where I'd like to suggest, have a major concern about the traffic out there
already. The traffic and noise and people's failure generally to obey the speed limit.
Leading to a lot of traffic noise and hazardous conditions to all the people that now walk
around there. And I'd like to suggest an alternative extending McGlynn Road out
westbound and make that the access point or going off Highway 5. The interesting thing
about this whole area here on Coulter is that most people there are operating on a
schedule. They're going to General Mills or the church or Chan Rec Center and that
leads to hazardous conditions because they're usually running behind and therefore the
12
Planning Commission String — May 4, 2004 •
gas peddle goes down a little bit further. So I'd like to offer that as an alternative. And
then I'm curious about the development itself. How it'd be converned Section 515(b)
Minnesota Statute or 317(a) or both.
Mark Undestad: What's that?
Jim Pensyl: The appropriate sections that have been convemed. The office townhome
development. Is that Section 515(6) or 317(a)?
Slagle: I'm looking at staff now. Any idea?
Mark Undestad: Is that the legal side of, like the CIC plat kind of thing?
Jim Pensyl: Right, exactly.
Mark Undestad: The attorneys, they put all the CIC...
Jim Pensyl: I might be an interested buyer, that's why I ask that question. But anyway,
that's my concern. Or at least have a traffic study done. Look at maybe adding a couple
more 30 miles an hour signs there. Maybe some speed bumps or something, but the
traffic is horrendous out there now and I can personally attest that there are no traffic
officers present that I clocked Pillsbury, or General Mills employee going 75 miles an
hour there after getting off the 10:00 p.m. shift so. I would say the average speed is about
40, okay. Thanks.
Slagle: Thank you. Any other folks want to add some comments?
Lillehaug: Could we ask staff to address access to this site across Bluff Creek and also off
of Trunk Highway 5 to address the gentleman's questions?
Saam: Sure. Access, just to clarify, will come off Coulter but Stone Creek Drive is to
the north of Coulter. That's going to be extended off of Coulter so direct access will
come from Stone Creek Drive. First I think the resident mentioned coming from the east
from McGlynn Road. Well to do that, as Commissioner Lillehaug just mentioned, you'd
have to cross at least a branch of Bluff Creek so now we're talking about a bridge and
extension of a public street. I really don't think that's realistic for this site. And access
off of Highway 5, the state has contacted us to, they failed to get us written comments in
time for this meeting but they have contacted us and requested that access, direct access
onto Highway 5 not be granted and so we've added that condition. I don't think the
applicant was looking to come off of Highway 5 anyway so I will mention Coulter
Boulevard is a collector. An MSA road in our town. It's meant to carry more traffic than
a residential street. It's wider than a residential street. I don't doubt that the resident, I
believe he's correct and that, I'm sure people do go faster on there. Like I said, it's
wider. It's easier to put your foot down if you go out there. That's all I have.
Slagle: If I can add Matt. Because if you think about where that's located, the hill from
basically where General Mills is, that heads westward down to basically the ballfields. I
13
Planning Commission ting — May 4, 2004 •
can see where cars can pick up a lot of speed. Can we just ask a favor, if the staff can
maybe look at where the signage is located and.
Saam: Sure. Sure, we can definitely look at signage spacing. I can also look at our latest
traffic study out there to see what we have clocked for speed and that sort of thing. I'm
guessing that we haven't seen a lot of traffic out there quite frankly. There isn't a lot of
businesses out there yet. With this one coming in maybe something in the future along
the east side of Stone Creek. There's an office building going in now at Coulter and
Stone Creek. We might see a little more traffic but I myself have not seen a lot of traffic
up Coulter as compared with some other collectors in town.
Slagle: Okay. Okay. Alright. Any other folks? Ladies and gentlemen. State your name
and address please.
Jim Sulerud: Hi, I'm Jim Sulerud. 730 Vogelsberg Trail, Chanhassen but I'm here
representing the church that's adjoining and we're pleased with the development. We're
pleased with our relationship with the developer and we expect everything to move
forward smoothly and it's an improvement from the previous proposals that had us
looking on the back side of warehouse kind of, office warehouse kinds of projects so
we're pleased. Thanks.
Slagle: Thank you. Okay, I'm going to close the public hearing and bring it back to the
commission for comments. Anybody want to start?
Lillehaug: Can I ask a couple of questions before comments of staff?
Slagle: You may.
Lillehaug: Good. When we get to conditions, staff talked about increasing the radiuses
for, better accommodating the fire trucks. Does this preclude the discussion requiring
sprinkling of buildings then?
Saam: No. The Fire Marshal said they were all going to be sprinkled anyways so that
took care of his issue with the area lift truck and that sort of thing but he still wants to
make sure he can get his pumper, which is the smaller truck but still a bigger sized
vehicle in there.
Lillehaug: I see. Okay. I start out with comments I guess then.
Slagle: Yes, you may.
Lillehaug: Alright. Well the tougher one I'm going to start with and that'd be screening
on Trunk Highway 5. Simply because there's only a 10 foot easement there, I don't think
that really precludes the full screening from Highway 5. I think there's plenty of distance
in there to provide some form of berm. I realize that the site is much lower but somehow
I think the applicant needs to address better screening from 5. I agree, I think the
14
Planning Commission Sting — May 4, 2004 •
intentions of the comp plan and our codes are to lessen the view of the parking lot and I
think we'll be able to really see that parking lot. So I would propose to work with staff
and work with MnDot to actually provide a berm and better screening along 5 and I
realize that providing the additional landscaping and overstory trees will help
accommodate that, but I think it should be taken to an extent a little further. Working on
it as if there was a 50 foot setback because there is room there. So that is one comment.
I would like to add a condition to dimension of parking stalls to a 9 foot by 18 foot.
Other than that, I think that is it. Yep.
Slagle: Okay. Dan.
Keefe: The comment that I would have, I would second Steve's request from trying to
upgrade the berming or whatever we need to do along Highway 5. And then I think you
already addressed that we do have requirements for the additional landscaping so that's
taken care of. In regards to that, in terms of the location of those. I mean if we were to
upgrade along 5 and then how do we sort of allocate those? Is there a.
Al -Jaffa We will work very closely with the City Forester who will look at the health of
the tree at maturity and the species and the way they are clustered.
Keefe: Okay, good. That's it.
Slagle: Okay. I don't have any comments. So, anybody want to make a motion?
Lillehaug: I'll make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as shown on the
plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions 1 through 17. And I
think 3 and 7 are possibly the same. They certainly have the same intentions. Does staff
think we can combine them or are they different?
Slagle: Steve was your, point of clarification. Your conditions, you said 17 so you're
deleting 18, 19 and 20? That we're.
Lillehaug: Let's go up to 20. Where you getting 20 from?
Slagle: Well 19 was, or excuse me. Cross parking's already. Well cross parking.
Lillehaug: Let's go 1 through 19 and then I'll add more. Can we delete or combine
them, 3 and 7? Or are they different?
Al-Jaff: 3 and 17?
Lillehaug: 3 and number 7. They both deal with cross access agreements.
AI-Jaff: We can combine them.
15
Planning Commission Ating — May 4, 2004 •
Lillehaug: Okay. And then number 20. I'd like the applicant to work with staff to
provide a walk on the south end skirting the parking lot and then to go over to the cul-de-
sac and then loop around the cul-de-sac to the north to connect up with the existing trail
system. So that is number 20. Number 22. Relocate the trash enclosure as directed by
staff and also add another one as indicated by staff. Number 22.
Slagle: I think that was 21, right? Because you went from 20 to 22.
Lillehaug: Okay. 19 was added by staff. 20 was, I don't even remember now.
Slagle: Okay.
Al-Jaff: May I?
Slagle: Help him out there Sharmeen.
Al-Jaff: Can we add those conditions to the site plan? Approval.
Slagle: Actually good point.
Al-Jaff: I'd rather keep the subdivision and the site plan separate.
Slagle: Good point.
Lillehaug: Okay. I guess I'm done then with that motion.
Slagle: But we will combine 3 and 7, correct?
A]-Jaff: We will combine 3 and 7.
Lillehaug: So is it just 1 through 19? Is that what you guys are telling me?
Al-Jaff: 1 through 19. Well 18 now because we combined.
Lillehaug: 1 through 19 combining 3 and 7.
Al-Jaff: Yes.
Lillehaug: Okay. Done.
Slagle: Is there a second?
Keefe: Second.
Slagle: Any discussion?
16
Planning Commission ting—May 4, 2004 •
Lillehaug moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the preliminary plat for Planning Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town
Offices as shown on the plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is
$64,268.
2. A park fee of $94,010 shall be paid for the 13.43 acres at the time of the replat.
Submit a private cross -access and cross -parking easement against all lots at time
of final plat recording. Cross -access easements for the shared driveway accesses
must be obtained and recorded against all lots.
4. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1004,1005, 1006, 2001,
2101, 2103, 2201, 2204, 3101, 3102, 5201, 5203, 5207, 5214, 5215, 5216, 5300
and 5302.
5. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the State of
Minnesota must sign all plans.
6. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff
review. The stone sewer will have to be designed for a 10 year, 24 hour storm
event.
Staff recommends that Type II silt fence be used adjacent to the stone pond and
creek.
8. Any off site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner.
9. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections
through the City's Building Department.
10. The site has previously been assessed for utility and street improvements. The
remaining assessment due payable to the City is $103,521.12. This assessment
may be re -spread against the newly platted lots on a per area basis or paid at the
time of final platting. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will also be
applicable for the new lots. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for
sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The hookup charges are based
on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council for the new lots.
Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the
parcel at the time of building permit issuance.
11. All of the public utility improvements are required to be constructed in
accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail
Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the public utilities will be
17
Planning Commission Ating — May 4, 2004 •
turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is required
to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary
financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The
applicant must be aware that public utility improvements will require a pre -
construction meeting before building permit issuance. Installation of the private
utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's
Building Department. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be
obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, and the
Watershed District.
12. On the utility plan:
a. Show the existing and proposed utility easements.
b. Add a storm sewer schedule.
c. Revise the Sewer Note No. 1 to be, "All sanitary services shall be 6"PVC
SDR26.
d. Add a note "Any connection to existing structures must be core drilled."
e. Remove the existing 24 inch storm stub to the north and bulkhead the invert at
the manhole.
f. Delete the sanitary sewer connection at the southwest corner of the site and
utilize the existing sanitary stub in the cul-de-sac.
g. Revise the proposed storm sewer within the cul-de-sac from a 12 inch to a 15
inch pipe.
13. On the grading plan:
a. Show all existing and proposed easements.
b. Show the benchmark used for the site survey.
c. Show a minimum 75 foot rock construction entrance.
d. Revise the side slope to 3:1 maximum along the northeast side of the parking
lot and at the southeasterly comer of Lot 25.
14. The 8 inch water and sewer mains will be considered public utility lines since
they serve multiple lots. As such, minimum 30 foot wide public easements will
be required over the portion of the public utility lines that are outside of the right-
of-way.
15. The Stone Creek Drive cul-de-sac must be built with a 48 foot radius and B-618
concrete curb and gutter.
16. The private street must be built to a 9 ton design, paved to a 26 foot width, and
contained within a 40 foot private easement. The developer will be required to
submit certification reports from a soil testing company which show that the
private street was built to these standards.
IF
Planning Commission sting — May 4, 2004 •
17. Lot 26 may be used for parking purposes only.
18. The applicant shall execute a cross parking agreement with the Family of Christ
Lutheran Church which shall encompass the 60 parking spaces shown in
Attachment 7.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Slagle: Let's move onto the site plan. Do I have a motion for the site plan?
Lillehaug: I make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Site
Plan Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as shown on the plans received April 13,
2004, subject to the following conditions 1 through 11.
Slagle: Okay.
Lillehaug: And I would like to revise, give me a second here. Revise number 3(c) where
it says stall length and widths. I'd like that revised to stall length and width shall be 9
foot by 18 feet. And then number 12. Is this where I can add conditions?
Slagle: Yep.
Lillehaug: The one about the walk skirting the south end of the parking lot, around the
cul-de-sac up to the existing trail. And then number 13, relocate the trash enclosure and
add the trash enclosure as directed by staff. And number 14, add bike racks to the plan.
And forgot to discuss this but number 15, if entrance to the buildings that are located on
the south, if entrances are granted on both sides of that building, that there should be walk
on the north side of the building also. Was that 15? I think I'm done there.
Al-Jaff: One more? Work with staff and MnDot to provide additional screening and
berm.
Lillehaug: Oh thank you. Yep.
Saam: And the turning radiuses.
Lillehaug: And the turning radiuses would be 17. Anything else?
Slagle: Is there a second?
Keefe: Second.
Slagle: Okay, and there could have been amendments there. Steve, if I may offer
something, and maybe it's tied in with staffs idea of the screening but you mentioned the
PUD, what's unique. Obviously I think the site from aesthetic standpoint, from a
building standpoint looks good. I'm thinking maybe one of the things we might want to
LLQ
Planning Commission ting — May 4, 2004 0
consider, and I throw this out as an amendment, is maybe requiring more than the
required plantings because you have, I think you have an opportunity for a site that could
be, I mean first of all it's going to be beautiful but can we make it even more beautiful?
The path is there. The water's there. If on the east side of the creek, those what we've
seen before proposed, I mean it's sort of going to be a really natural area. So I'll throw
out a friendly amendment that we require kind of, staff help me out here. I mean what
could we require from a planting standpoint other than the minimum, because I can tell
you that 36 trees, that's a large area for just 36. I mean they're not going to make that
much of a difference. So I'm just wondering, is there any help you can give me staff?
Keefe: Particularly along Highway 5.
Slagle: Exactly.
Lillehaug: And are you trying to stay away from, you know in lieu of berming more trees
or?
Slagle: Actually both. I almost use the General Mills example that we had with Coulter
where we, to their credit they stood up and built a berm and added trees. I probably
would have liked to have seen a few more trees, but nonetheless I think they did a great
job so again, and maybe it's as simple as you guys just working with the applicant but I
want to have a sense that something's going to happen.
Al-Jaff: I would request that you allow us to work with the city forester and the
applicant...
Slagle: I know long time resident, I know.
Al -Jaffa Yes.
Slagle: Okay. Then I'll withdraw that attempted friendly amendment so.
Lillehaug: So I thin it's addressed in a round about way on condition I(b) of the site
plan. It says applicant shall plant a minimum of 36 or overstory trees, so I guess adding
to that a minimum and then work with staff a little more to maximize that.
Slagle: Fair enough. Okay, so we have a motion. We have a second. We have some
additional amendments. Any other comments? Well let's take a vote.
Lillehaug moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of Site Plan Case #04-15 for Stone Creek Town Offices as shown on the
plans received April 13, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
1. Environmental Resources Specialist conditions:
20
Planning Commission ting — May 4, 2004
LJ
a. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in buffer yards to meet minimum
requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final
approval.
b. Applicant shall plant a minimum of 36 overstory trees in the parking lot to
meet minimum requirements.
c. Norway maple shall be replaced by a more suitable tree selection.
2. Building Official conditions:
a. Buildings (units) over 2,000 square feet in gross floor area are required to be
protected with automatic fire sprinklers.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the
State of Minnesota.
c. An accessible route must be provided from the accessible parking spaces to
the entrances of all units. The maximum slope of the accessible route is 1/20.
d. Separate water, sewer and fire protection services must be provided for each
piece of property.
e. Exterior walls less than ten (10) feet from property lines must be of fire
resistive rated construction in accordance with IBC Chapter 6 and terminate in
accordance with IBC Chapter 7.
L Separate male and female restrooms must be provided in each unit with an
occupant load greater than 15, as determined by IBC Table 1003.2.2.2.
g. Detailed construction and occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed
until complete plans are submitted.
h. The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division
as soon as possible to begin the preliminary plan review process to discuss
permit procedures.
3. On the site plan:
a. Revise the scale from 1"=20' to 1"=40'.
b. Show the existing and proposed trail/sidewalk adjacent to the site.
c. Show all dimensions for the improvements, i.e. drive aisle width, cul-de-sac
radius, curb return radii, stall lengths and widths shall be 9 feet by 18 feet.
4. No direct access to Highway 5 is allowed.
5. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
for the exposed soil areas year round, according to the following table of slopes
and time frames:
Type of Slone Time (Maximum time an area can
Remain open when the area
Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being
10:1 to 3:1 14 days worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
21
Planning Commission ting — May 4, 2004 0
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and
any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system,
such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent
drainage ditch, or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface
water.
6. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street
scraping and street sweeping as needed.
7. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies e.g. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for
dewatering), and comply with their conditions of approval.
8. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage.
9. The applicant shall provide a second trash enclosure area south of Lot 5.
10. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street
lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and transformer
boxes. This is to insure fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely
operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
b. Three additional fire hydrants will be required. Install one southwest of Lot
11 in the parking island. Install one southeast of Lot 6 in the parking island.
Install one in the island between Lots 20 and 21 on the south side of the
building. If necessary, please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for the
exact location. Fire Lane signs and yellow curbing will be required. Contact
the Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbs to be painted.
11. Extend the sidewalks and relocate accessible parking access aisle as shown in
Attachment 1.
12. The applicant to work with staff to provide a walk on the south end skirting
the parking lot and over to the cul-de-sac, then loop around the cul-de-sac to
the north to connect up with the existing trail system.
13. Relocate the trash enclosure and add another one as indicated by staff.
14. Add bike racks on the plan.
15. If entrances are granted on both sides of the southern buildings, there should
be a walk on the north side of the building
22
Planning Commission Aing — May 4, 2004 0
16. The applicant will work with staff and MnDot to provide additional
screening and berming along Highway 5.
17. Turning radiuses on the site shall accommodate fire fighting vehicles.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Slagle: Thank you very much.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO SECTION 20-59 TO ALLOW ADDITION OF A
MOTHER-IN-LAW SUITE, 8634 VALLEY VIEW COURT, PAUL & LAURA
GRAVES, PLANNING CASE NO. 04-16.
Public Present:
Name Address
Kent Ludford 8615 Valley View Court
Paul & Laura Graves 8634 Valley View Court
Nate Bouvet presented the staff report on this item.
Slagle: Thank you very much. Let's begin with questions for staff. Anybody want to
start?
Tjomhom: I have one question, and in reading this, are there 3 entrances then to this?
Bouvet: Correct. There's existing right now one entrance from the garage. One main
entrance to the home, and then what they're proposing to do is have an additional, what
we consider a main entrance so we have a combined total of 2 from the garage.
Tjomhom: So there's 2 entrances from the garage.
Bouvet: And one main entrance in the front of the home.
Tjomhom: Okay. And so why are there 2 entrances from the garage?
Bouvet: That's probably a question to be asking the applicant. I honestly don't know
what the future intention of that would be, from how it's situated to under staff's
determination it's to be used as a separate entrance up into the suite above. The stairway
actually kind of makes a barrier between the two sides of the garages. One going right
into the laundry room and the entryway directly to the left of the existing opening, right
up through the mud room and up to the mother-in-law suite.
23