The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-20_WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH (2)CITY OF CHANHASSEN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1160 FAX (952) 227-1170 TO: Campbell Knutson, PA 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 WE ARE SENDING YOU El Shop drawings 11 Copy of letter LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE JOB NO. 9/16/04 104-14 ArrENTIOR Sue Nelson RE: Westwood Church Expansion Z Attached El Under separate cover via the following items: Prints El Plans El Samples E] Specifications El Change Order El Pay Request F� - 00—PIES DATE NO. DESCRIP71ON Approved as submitted 9/13/04 Executed Temporary Easement For your use 8/31/04 Executed Public Roadway, Drainage, & Utility Easement El Submit copies for distribution 8/31/04 Executed Public Drainage & Utility Easement [I 8/3/04 Executed Public Drainage & Utility Easement 0 8/3/04 Executed Access Easement El FORBIDS DUE C1 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: El For approval El Approved as submitted El Resubmit copies for approval El For your use El Approved as noted El Submit copies for distribution El As requested [I Returned for corrections El Return corrected prints 0 For review and comment Z For Review& recording El FORBIDS DUE C1 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS Please have these five easements recorded for the Westwood Church project. If you have any questions or need anything else, feel free to give me a call. Thanks. COPY TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner Dan Remer, Eng. Tech III SIGNED: Matt Saam,1(952) 227-1164 If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. (11Y - 2-0 19FJuly 20, 2004 CITY OF Mr. Dan Russ Fax: 952.227.1110 c/o Welsh Development WNSEN 7807 Creekridge Circle wwwachanhassen.ron.us Nlinneapolis, MN 55439-2609 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Westwood Community Church Administration Dear Dan: Phone: 952,227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 On July 12, 2004, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Building Inspection Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952,227.1190 Planning Case 04-20 Site Plan Review for a 166 -space parking lot expansion, extension of temporary drive and extension of West 78ub Street, plans prepared by Engineering Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 1 . The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and Finance provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration Phone: 952.227.1140 and landscaping. Fax: 952-227.1110 Park & Recreation 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around all existing landscaping Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 at the edge of grading limits. Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard 3. Any existing landscaping that is removed must be replaced when the Phone: 952.227.1400 parking lot construction is completed. Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & 4. The landscape islands shall include mulch rings around the trees and be Natural Resources seeded or sodded elsewhere. Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 5. Overstory trees are required along West 78th St.; one every 30 feet. Public Worbs 1591 Park Road 6. Three accessible parking spaces must be added to the existing accessible Phone: 952,227.1300 parking area. Fax: 952.227,1310 Senior Center 7. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Mnnesota Flaw. 952.227.1125 Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the Fax: 952.227.1110 City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact Web Site occurring. wwwachanhassen.ron.us 8. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands (wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet). Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. The City of Chanhassen - A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks, A tpeal place to live, work, and play. Mr. Dan Russ Westwood Community Church Planning Case No. 04-20 July 20, 2004 9. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 10. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 11. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided overall existing wetlands, wetland initigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frarnes: jym of SIgN Time (Maximurn time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3: 1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. 13. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 14. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnchaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Nfinnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 15. All final plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer. 16. Use the latest version (2004) of the City's Standard Detail Plates. 17. The twin storm sewer culverts under West 78th Street must be RCP Class 5. 18. The existing driveway from ffighway 41 to the existing homes in the northwest comer of the West 78th Street intersection must be removed and seeded or sodded - 19. The new painted median for the eastbound West 78th Street traffic on the east side of I-lighway 41 must be a raised concrete median with pedestrian ramps. Mr. Dan Russ Westwood Community Church Planning Case No. 04-20 July 20, 2004 20. Install a temporary turnaround with barricades and a sign stating "This street to be extended" at the west end of new West 78th Street. 21. Provide a pedestrian ramp at the northeast comer of the new West 78th Street/Highway 41 intersection for connection to the future city trail. 22. Incorporate the conditions of the MnDOT review letter dated June 1, 2004 into the plans. 23. Show all of the proposed grades for the new driveway to the existing home in the southeast comer of the site. 24. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. 25. Off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. 26. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. 27. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. 28. A MnDOT drainage permit will be required. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district permit will be required for the project grading. 29. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. 30. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type R silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of 6'or more. 31. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. 32. Bituminous curb and gutter must be added to the temporary driveway. 33. Prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78th Street must be brought up to current standards Mr. Dan Russ Westwood Community Church Planning Case No. 04-20 July 20, 2004 in effect at the time. 34. The raised median on West 780' Street on the east side of TH 41, which is proposed to be removed, shall be replaced in the correct alignment with the westward extension of West 78'b. 35. A sidewalk shall be extended along the main driveway from the main entrance of the church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends and sidewalks shall be extended to the east through the landscape islands of the new parking lot. 36. Additional landscaping along the north side on Tanadoona Drive. 37. The church shall continue to use a public safety officer to monitor and direct traffic from the church for three months following the completion of West 78'h Street. After three months of observation, traffic operations shall be re-evaluated and the use of public safety officer may be required by the city." and, Planning Case 04-20 Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required 2:1 replacement without employing credits constructed during the first phase. 2. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetiand impact occurring. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 3. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands. (Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet.) Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wedand ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 4. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 5. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. Mr. Dan Russ Westwood Community Church Planning Case No. 04-20 July 20, 2004 6. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. 7. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: TYM of SIPW Time Steeper than 3:1 7 days 10:1 to 3:1 14 days Flatter than 10: 1 21 days (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area is not actively being worked.) 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. 8. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. Enclosed is a site plan agreement that must be executed by Westwood Community Church. Return the agreement to me for city execution and recording at Carver County within 120 days of the approval (by November 9, 2004). The required security specified in the site plan agreement shall be submitted prior to the city issuing a building permit. A copy of the executed agreement will be returned for your files. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) 227-113 1. Sincerely, Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner Eric. c: Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer Steve Torell, Building Official gAPlaU\2004 planning �\04-20 - westwood �unity chumh spr & wap\appwYal lettff.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT 04-20 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated July 12, 2004, by and between the CfTY OF CHANHASSEN, a M[innesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and Westwood Community Church (the "Developer"). I . Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for a 166 -space parking lot expansion, extension of temporary drive and extension of West 78th Street (referred to in this Permit as the "project"). The land is legally described in the attached Schedule A - Legal Description. 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enter into this Permit and fumish the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: * Plan A --Site Plan dated May 14, 2004, prepared by Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 0 Plan B—Grading, Drainage, and Utility Plan dated May 14, 2004, prepared by Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 1 0 Plan C—Landscaping Plan dated May 14,2004, prepared by Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required screening and landscaping by June 30, 2005. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, or cash escrow, in the amount of $706,189.00 ($296,821 – grading/restoration; $9,715 – watermain; $114,949 – storm sewer; $282,204 – streets; and $2,500 – erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the Developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to ensure the installation of said landscaping. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand -delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following address: Westwood Community Church 3121 Westwood Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand -delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 7. Other Special Conditions. Approved Site Plan #04-20 as shown on the plans dated May 14, 2004 and subject to the following conditions: FA a. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. b. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around all existing landscaping at the edge of grading limits. c. Any existing landscaping that is removed must be replaced when the parking lot construction is completed. d. The landscape islands shall include mulch rings around the trees and be seeded or sodded elsewhere. e. Overstory trees are required along West 78th St.; one every 30 feet. f. Three accessible parking spaces must be added to the existing accessible parking area. g. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The apphcant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. h. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands (wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet). Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. i. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. j. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. k. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. 1. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of SIM Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10: 1 to 3:1 14 days Flatter than 10: 1 21 days 3 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. m. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. n. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Nlinnehaha Creek Watershed District, Mnnesota Pollution Control Agency, Mnnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. o. All final plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer. p. Use the latest version (2004) of the City's Standard Detail Plates. q. The twin storm sewer culverts under West 78th Street must be RCP Class 5. r. The existing driveway from I-Eghway4l to the existing homes in the northwest comer of the West 78th Street intersection must be removed and seeded or sodded. s. The new painted median for the eastbound West 78th Street traffic on the east side of Highway 41 must be a raised concrete median with pedestrian ramps. t. Install a temporary turnaround with barricades and a sign stating "This street to be extended" at the west end of new West 78th Street. U. Provide a pedestrian ramp at the northeast comer of the new West 78th Street/Ilighway 41 intersection for connection to the future city trail. v. Incorporate the conditions of the MnDOT review letter dated June 1, 2004 into the plans. w. Show all of the proposed grades for the new driveway to the existing home in the southeast comer of the site. x. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. Y. Off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. z. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported 4 to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. aa. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. bb. A MnDOT drainage perintit will be required. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district pennit will be required for the project grading. cc. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. dd. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type 11 silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of 6' or more. ee. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. ff. Bituminous curb and gutter must be added to the temporary driveway. gg. Prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78th Street must be brought up to current standards in effect at the time. hh. The raised median on West 78tb Street on the cast side of TH 41, which is proposed to be removed, shall be replaced in the correct alignment with the westward extension of West 78'h. ii. A sidewalk shall be extended along the main driveway from the main entrance of the church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends and sidewalks shall be extended to the east through the landscape islands of the new parking lot. jj. Additional landscaping along the north side on Tanadoona Drive. kk. The church shall continue to use a public safety officer to monitor and direct traffic from the church for three months following the completion of West 780'Street. After three months of observation, traffic operations shall be re-evaluated and the use of public safety officer may be required by the city." 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 6" (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF CARVER Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1 2004, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. 10 Wri D1 IN) 9 91 1396 its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF NOTARY PUBLIC The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this — day of 2004 by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 rl NOTARY PUBLIC CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this — day of 2004 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this — day of 2004, by DRAFrMBY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 7 NOTARY PUBLIC CrrY OF CHANHASSEN SrI`E PLAN PERMrr E)UlIBIT "A" GENERAL CONDrrlQN 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the property to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties L� recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. ne Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including materials that have blown, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be wan -anted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit from a bank or cash escrow with the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 7. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attomeys'fees. X B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attomeys'fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's DefaulL In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 9. Nbseellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be 10 grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupanc . Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recording. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. J. Construction Hours. The normal construction hours and maintenance of equipment I I under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. If Soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the site plan, the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1 . City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for 12 construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. 0. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning neither the nature of suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. 13 CHICAGO TnLE INSURANCE COMPANY Schedule A Legal Description Continued File No.: CA 16562 CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that Part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, all in Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 638.58 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South I degree 58 minutes 09 seconds East a distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 368.57 feet; thence South 41 degrees 10 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 410.76 feet; thence South 7 degrees 50 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 350.24 feet; thence South 13 degrees 35 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 397.22 feet; thence South 8 degrees 05 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 38.84 feet; thence North 89 degrees 43 minutes 07 seconds West about 385 feet, to the shoreline of Lake Minnewashta; thence Southerly, along said shoreline, to the south line of said Government Lot 8; thence North 89 degrees 40 minutes 46 seconds East, along said south tine of Government Lot 8 about 1756 feet to the southeast corner of said Government Lot 8; thence South 89 degrees 32 minutes 26 seconds East, along the south line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 1054.74 feet, to a point 248.27 feet westerly from the southeast corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North 0 degre6s 34 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 281.21 feet; thence South 89 degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 225.90 feet; thence North 0 degrees 23 minutes 47 seconds West a distance of 17.74 feet; thence North 89 degrees 05 minutes 22 seconds East a distance of 20.56 feet, to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 54 minutes 38 seconds West; along last said east tine, a distance of 1046.12 feet to said point of beginning. EXCEPT: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter Of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 486.30 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 451.81 feet; thence North 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 486.30 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 451.81 feet to the point of beginning. CONTMUED ON NEXT PAGE CMCAGO TTrLE INSURANCE COMPANY Schedule A Legal Description Continued File No.: CA 16562 ALSO EXCEPT: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, all in Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the Sth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes L5 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00 feet, to a point hereinafter referred to as "Point A"; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 283.39 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 115.18 feet, to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 1-5.96 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 451.81 feet; thence North 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 1-31.14 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 40.62 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 355.20 feet, to a point distant 638,58 feet northwesterly from the above referenced "Point A"; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South 1 degree 58 minutes 09 seconds East a distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 303.66 feet; thence South 63 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of1266.35 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 26 degrees 28 minutes 40 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 26 degrees 28 minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 390.62 feet to the point of beginning, ALSO EXCEPT: All of ZIMMERMAN FARM IST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, including Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and the roads dedicated to the public in said plat. ALSO EXCEPT: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section Nine (9), Township One Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Range Twenty-three (23) West of the 5th Principal Meridian, descr ibed as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds west a distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 617.44 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 451.81 feet to the point of beginnin of the land to be described; thence continuing North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 56.31 feet; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, a distance of 131.82 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 60.84 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning. CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE CHICAGO T= INSURANCE COMPANY Schedule A Legal Description Continued File No.: CA 16562 A.LSO EXCEPT: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section Nine (9), Township One Hundred Sbdeen (116) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West of the Sth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West (based on a bearing of North 00 degrees 35 minutes 15 seconds West for a straight line between the northwest corner and the southwest comer of said Section 9) a distance of 750.15 feet to the point of beginnin ofthe land to be described; thence continue North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 228.35 feet; thence South 36 degrees G6 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet to the northerly comer of the easterly end of Field Lane, dedicated in SUNSET TULL ON I -ARE MINNEWASHTA, according to the found monumentation of the recorded plat thereof; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, along said easterly end of Field Lane, a distance of 40.00 feet to the southerly corner of said easterly end of land as monumented; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, along the southerly tine of said Field Lane as monumented; a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 40.62 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 486.30 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 60.84 feet to said point of beginning. (TORRENS) T700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952,227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 95Z227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 web site www.ci.chanhassennitus May 5, 2004 Mr. Dan Russ Welsh Development 7807 Creekridge Circle Minneapolis, MN 55439-2609 Re: Westwood Community Church Dear Mr. Russ: This letter is to inform you that the site plan review and wetland alteration pen -nit application for Westwood Community Church submitted on April 30, 2004 is incomplete. Unless additional information and plans are submitted to the city by'llmrsday, May 6, 2004, we can not schedule the proposal for Planning Commission review on June 1, 2004. The following must be submitted: 1) Grading, Drainage, & Erosion Control Plan showing existing & proposed topography 2) Utility plan showing all existing & proposed utilities 3) Drainage calculations for all ponding improvements including pre- & post -development 10- & I 00 -year runoff rates. 4) Boundary survey showing all existing easements lot lines of the property 5) 50 -scale drawings for the Utility & grading plans. 6) Landscaping plan around the new parking lot. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) 227-1131. Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer Doug Stahl, P.E., Pioneer Engineering The City of Chan h ass en -A growing community with clean lakes, qualry schools, a craning downtown, thriving businesses, winding trai Is, and beautiful parks. A great place to I ive, work and play. 0 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager CHMSENFROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner T700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 DATE: July 12, 2004 Chanhassen, MIN 55317 SIUBJ: Westwood Community Church, Planning Case #04-20 Administration Phone 952.227.1100 Fax 952.227.1110 After the staff report was sent to City Council, staff met with representatives from Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Westwood Community Church to review the conditions of approval. Based on Fax: 952.227.1190 that meeting, staff is recommending the following changes be made to the conditions of approval: Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Condition 4 shall be modified: The landscape islands shall be filled xvith AA.'AAd ehips include mulch rings around the trees and be seeded or sodded Finance elsewhere. Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 *The plans state that these areas be filled with mulch or rock. Staff Park & Recreation opposes the exclusive use of rock which increases the ambient air Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax. 952.227.1110 temperature of the parking lot area. The applicant does not want to use Recreation Center mulch exclusively since it tends to wash out with rain. 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Condition 19 shall be deleted: IngjudA r.0firresp, dFiveway apf�aas and pedestfifin Fax: 952.227.1404 Famps fer beth pf:opesed dFiN,eways off of nev., West 78th Stifeet. Planning & Natural Resources *These driveways will be temporary so a permanent concrete apron is not Phone: 952.227.1130 necessary at this time. The driveways will be constructed to match the Fax: 952.227.1110 grade of the trail. Public Works 1591 Park Road Condition 36 shall be modified: A sidewalk shall be extended along the main Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227,1310 driveway from the main entrance of the church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends and twe diagonal walkways Senior Center similai: to the nefthwest paEking lot sidewalks shall be extended to the east Phone: 952,227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 through the landscape islands at the south end of the new parking lot Web She *The applicant supports the change. The diagonals within the existing www ci.chanhassen.mn.us parking lot are not extensively used. Additionally, anyone who parks beyond the diagonal does not backtrack to access these sidewalks. The proposed alignment would provide a convenient opportunity for people to access the sidewalk. Additionally, the use of diagonals eliminates six to eight parking stalls per landscape island, which would significantly reduce the number of new parking stalls. Th a C fly of C he n hassen - A g rowing commu n ity with clean lakes, qual ity schools, a charm i ng downtown, th riving husi nesses, wind i ng Irai Is, and theautifur I parks . A great p lace to I ive, work, and p lay. Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 July 12,2004 Page 2 Condition 38 shall be amended: Require publie safety effieer to eantinue wed6ii the o.va intafse-etiens as difeeted by publie safety. The church shall continue to use a public safety officer to monitor and direct traffic from the church for three months following the completion of West 78th Street. After three months of observations, traffic operations shall be re-evaluated and the use of public safety officer shall be required as needed. *The church requested that this condition not be as open ended as drafted. It is in the church's best interest to have safe traffic operation. It was felt that a three-month period would permit traffic operations to be observed, get parishioners used to the new access opportunity to the site and allow the church and the public safety officers to evaluate traffic. The three months would include the holiday season, which is generally the busiest time of the year for the church. gApIan\2004 planning cascs\04-20 - westwood corarnwity church spr & wap\annend conditions for cc.doc 0 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager CHMNSEN T700 Market Boulevard FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 DATE: July 12, 2004 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 SUBJ: Westwood Community Church, Planning Case #04-20 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax 952.227 1190 The applicant is proposing the expansion of the I arking lot by 166 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78 Street extension, construction of Engineering Phone: 952,227.1160 the West 78d' Street extension, and a Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill Fax: 952.227.1170 wetlands on site for the West 780' Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 ACTION REQUIRED Park & Becrimillon Phone: 952.227.1120 City Council approval requires a simple majority for the site plan and wetland Fax: 952.227. 1110 alteration approval. Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY Phone: 952227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 15, 2004 to review the Planning proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 4 to 1 to approve the Natural Resources project (site plan and wetland alteration permit), adding the following conditions to Phone. 952.227.1130 Faxi 952.227.1110 the site plan conditions of approval: Public Worth 35. The raised median on West 78h Street on the east side of TH 41, 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 which is proposed to be removed, shall be replaced in the correct Fax: 952.227.1310 alignment with the westward extension of West 78th. Senior Center Phone: 952 227,1125 36. A sidewalk shall be extended along the main driveway from the main Fax: 952 227 1110 entrance of the church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends and two diagonal walkways Web She www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us similar to the northwest parking lot 37. Additional landscaping along the north side on Tanadoona Drive. 38. Require public safety officer to continue working the two intersections as directed by public safety. One Planning Commissioner felt that the West 78th Street extension project was premature without the traffic study being completed and that the city should not The City of Chanhassen - 4 growing community with clean lakes, quali� schools, a channining downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work and play. Mr. Todd Gerhardt Westwood Community Church July 12, 2004 Page 2 deviate backwards by not re -installing concrete median on West 7 8th Street cast of TH 41. The summary and verbatim rninutes are attached. Since the June 15, 2004 Planning Commission (PC) meeting, a traffic study has been completed for this development. While the project did receive approval from the PC on June 15, 2004, there were concerns raised at the meeting over traffic. The two major issues are outlined below: Operational Impacts of TH 41/W. 78th Street Intersection The traffic study analyzed the operational impacts of adding a fourth leg to the existing TH 41/W. 78d' Street intersection. The study looked at projected traffic for both 2005 and 2010 during the AM and PM weekday rush times along with the Sunday service times for the church. The study rated the level of service (LOS) for each of the ten possible vehicular movements at the intersection. LOS is a method used to grade the overall traffic flow and vehicle operation on roadways. LOS grades range from a high grade of (A) to a low grade of (F). (Unlike education grade scales, an (E) grade level of service does exist.) Of the ten possible vehicular movements at the intersection, only the two left turns from W. 78th Street to TH 41 are expected to operate at a poor LOS of E or F. As the traffic study states, it is not uncommon for this type of intersection to have poor LOS for left turn movements. Also, due to the very low traffic volumes attempting to make the left turn movement, the poor LOS will impact very few motorists. Conversely, the highest volume movements are all expected to operate at acceptable levels of service. The traffic study does concur with the PC recommendation to have a public safety officer monitor the new intersection during peak travel periods on Sundays. Staff would recommend that this condition remain in effect for a minimum of six (6) months after the intersection is installed. The intersection can then be re-evaluated at that time. Signalization and Median Improvements at Intersection The traffic study concurred with the previous NInDOT analysis which stated that the traffic volume at the intersection did not warrant the installation of a traffic signal. At the June 15, 2004 PC meeting, the PC added a condition to reinstall the W. 78th Street concrete median on the east side of TH 41. Staff has again checked with MnDOT on the need for a median in this area. As the attached email states, Mr. Todd Gerhardt Westwood Community Church July 12, 2004 Page 3 the head Metro Design Engineer at MnDOT reviewed the intersection and does not feel there is a need for reinstalling the median on W. 780' Street. The traffic study also concurs with this opinion. Since the median replacement is not warranted by the traffic volumes or recommended by the traffic experts, staff does not feel the median needs to be replaced by the applicant. TREE PRESERVATION A concern was raised at the June 15, 2004 Planning Commission meeting regarding the lack of data on tree removal and preservation. The information was not required for the application because it is not a subdivision. Parking lots and road construction have specific tree planting requirements associated with them according to ordinance. Specifically, parking lots require screening and shade plantings while roads must comply with the requirement of a boulevard tree every thirty feet. These items are reflected in the landscape plan submitted by the applicant and the conditions of approval for the application. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the motions approving the site plan and wetland alteration permit as specified in the staff report dated June 15, 2004, as amended. Staff is recommending that condition 35, which was added by the Planning Commission, be deleted. (Staff has struck through this condition for City Council.) ATTACHMENTS 1. Memorandum from Edward F. Terhaar and David C. May to Matt Saam dated 7/7/04 2. Email from Lynn Clarkowski to Matt Saam dated dated 7/l/04 3. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated June 15, 2004. 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated June 15, 2004. gAplan\2004 pinnning �\04-20 WmtwoDd Co=uaity Chmh SPR & WAP\cx=fiYe summary.dm 1WBENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO/ HOPKINS, MN 55343 / (952) 238-1667/ FAX (952) 238-1671 July 7, 2004 Refer to File: 04-42 MEMORANDUM TO: Matt Saam, P.E., City of Chanhassen FROM: Edward F. Terhaar and David C. May RE: Results of Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Westwood Community Church Access Modification and Future Expansion in Chanhassen, MN PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to present the results of our traffic impact study for the proposed extension of West 781h Street to the west of Minnesota Trunk Highway 41 (TH 41) in Chanhassen, Minnesota. Of particular concern are the potential impacts to the intersection of TH 41 and West 78th Street by a proposed driveway access to the Westwood Community Church (located northwest of the subject intersection). This memorandum is intended to act as a supplement to the original traffic study for the church dated July 6, 200 1. A map of the study area is shown in Figure 1. INFORMATION Westwood Community Church Characteristics Westwood Community Church is currently accessed via Tanadoona Drive off of TH 41. Tanadoona Drive intersects TH 41 approximately 1,300 feet north of West 78th Street, and approximately 2,900 feet north of TH 5. Minnesota State Patrol officers provide traffic control assistance during the Sunday morning peak hours at the intersection of TH 41 and Tanadoona Drive. At the time of the original study, the church assumed that 1,000 people would attend the 9:30 AM service, and that 1,500 people would attend the 11:00 AM service. Current information from the church reveals that both services have approximately 1,000 attendees. It should be noted that the attendance figures for the church include adults, children, and teens. The original study also determined that the 2010 attendance would be 1,700 people for the 9:30 service, and 2,300 people for the 11:00 service. For the Mr. Matt Saam -2- July 7, 2004 purposes of this study, the 9:30 attendance figure is still deemed valid, however, both services are now assumed to have equal attendance of 1,700 people. Other Future Nearby Develormient The City of Chanhassen has estimated that 40 new single-family residential homes could be built west of TH 41 at 78th Street. In addition, 16 new residential townhouses are to be built that will access West 78h Street on the east side of TH 41. Projected volumes from these two developments need to be included in any subsequent traffic analysis. Existina Roadway Characteristics TH 41 (Hazletine Boulevard) is a two-lane, north -south roadway, with paved shoulders on both sides. It is classified as an A -minor arterial (expander) within the study area. The posted speed limit on TH 41 is 55 mph. Field observations reveal that prevailing vehicle speeds are at or near the posted speed limit, except in incidences where the southbound queue for the TH 5 signalized intersection extend near the West 78h Street intersection. At the West 78th Street intersection, a dedicated right -tum lane exists for northbound traffic and a dedicated left -turn lane exists for southbound traffic. West 78th Street is a recently constructed residential street connecting TE 41 to Century Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard (Carver County Road 117) to the east. The roadway is divided approaching TH 4 1. The westbound approach is 28 feet wide (curb face to curb face) and marked with dedicated right- and left -turn lanes at TH 4 1. The eastbound departure from TH 41 is 20 feet wide (curb face to curb face). Existing Traffic Volumes In order to better understand the existing traffic conditions, traffic volume data was collected on TH 41 at both West 78h Street and Tanadoona Drive. Data was collected from Thursday, June 17, 2004 to Sunday, June 20, 2004. The collected data is presented later in this report. Observations at the intersection during the weekday AM & PM peak periods indicate that the southbound TH 41 queue at the TH 5 signalized intersection extended back to West 78'h Street on multiple occasions, even extending beyond West 78th Street at times. This condition definitely hinders traffic operations at the TH 41[West 78 th Street intersection. Proposed W. 70 Street Geometrics As described earlier, W. 78h Street will be extended west of T.H. 41. After the extension is complete, both the eastbound and westbound approaches of W. 78 th Street will consist of an exclusive left turn lane and a shared through/right turn lane. The current plan does not include a raised median on W. 78th Street. The northbound and southbound approaches on T.H. 41 will consist of a left turn lane, a through lane, and a right turn lane. Mr. Matt Saam -3- July 7, 2004 CITY OF CHANHASSEN TRAFFIC STUDY FOR FIGURE I WESTWOOD I COMMUNITY CHURCH STUDY INTERSECTION IWBENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TMNSPORTATION MGINEERSMO �NNERS Mr. Matt Saarn 4- July 7, 2004 TRAFFIC FORECASTS Trip Generation For purposes of this study, 2005 church traffic volumes were assumed to be the same as the existing Sunday traffic volumes at the intersection of TH 41 and Tanadoona Drive. Based on the projected future church service attendance in 2010 (1,700 attendees for each of two services), the existing traffic volumes were multiplied by a factor of 1.7. Three "peak" hours were determined for Sunday traffic volumes, in order to evaluate the following scenarios: Traffic entering the church for the early service Traffic leaving the church from the early service and traffic entering the church for the later service e Traffic leaving the church from the later service For the proposed residential developments, trip generation was based on the expected number of dwelling units for each development, based on guidelines established in the 7 th Edition of Trip Generation published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The total number of trips generated are shown in Table I below. Table 1 Expected Trip Generation for West 78'h Street Residential Developments Trip Distribution Since it can be assumed that virtually all of the Sunday morning traffic turning at the intersection of TH 41 and Tanadoona Drive is church traffic, church trip distribution was based on the existing Sunday turning movements. In addition, after the new West 78th Street access has been completed, it was estimated that 75% of vehicles approaching from the north on TH 41 would continue to use the Tanadoona Drive access, while 75% Weekday Peak Hour Weekday P Peak Hour Land Use In Out In Out 40 Single-family houses 10 28 30 17 (West side of TH 4 1) 16 Townhouses 2 10 9 5 (East side of TH 41) Sunday Sunday Sunday Land Use 8:45 — 9:45 10:30 — 11:30 12:00 — 1:00 In out In Out In Out 40 Single-family houses 12 11 22 20 23 21 (West side of TH 4 1) 16 Townhouses 2 2 4 4 4 4 (East side of TH 4 1) Trip Distribution Since it can be assumed that virtually all of the Sunday morning traffic turning at the intersection of TH 41 and Tanadoona Drive is church traffic, church trip distribution was based on the existing Sunday turning movements. In addition, after the new West 78th Street access has been completed, it was estimated that 75% of vehicles approaching from the north on TH 41 would continue to use the Tanadoona Drive access, while 75% Mr. Matt Saam -5- July 7, 2004 of vehicles approaching from the other directions would use the new West 78h Street access. Residential trip distribution was based on existing travel patterns at the intersection of TH 41 and West 78h Street. The trip distributions used for the residential developments are as follows: 0 5% to and from the west via the West 7e Street extension 0 15% to and from the south via TH 41 a 40% to and from the north via TH 41 0 40% to and from the east via either TH 41 and TH 5 (if traffic originated from the west), or via West 78h Street (if traffic originated from West 78th Street) Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes were developed for the intersection of TH 41 and West 78th Street for the following scenarios: 1) 2005 (estimated completion of the new residential developments) and 2) 2010 (estimated completion of the church development). All of the forecasted volumes are based on the existing counts recorded at the intersection. A growth factor of 5% per year was added to the existing weekday volumes to arrive at 2005 and 2010 baseline volumes. An additional adjustment factor of 0.84 was added to the weekday volumes to correct for month and day -of -week factors. The expected post -development traffic was then added to the baseline, resulting in 2005 and 2010 post -development traffic volumes. The resultant volumes are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Mr. Matt Saam -6- July 7, 2004 2005 VOLUMES U)m co v W. 78TH S-1 38/27 <-- 2/2 �-- 10/13 �Tr— CD m It 'N' to A.M. PEAK (7:15-8:15) RM. PEAK (4:45-5:45) 2010VOLUMES 1 0' 4/9- 2/2 --3 20/12 N t NOT TO SCALE Lo Co N Lo $Q W. 78TH ST. 48/36 1/3 14116 CITY OF CHANHASSEN TRAFFIC STU7DYFOR FIGURE 2 F WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCHI'WEEKDAYA.M./P.M. WBENSHOOF &ASSOCIATES. INC. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES MNSPORTATION MINEERS AND PLANNE 1164 00 Mr. Matt Saam -7- July 7, 2004 t NOT TO SCALE 2005 VOLUMES 4/8/8 612021219 W. 78TH ST 18/15/16 15/9/2 7/17/13 Ff �F- xxrkm 2010 VOLUMES m c%1 mm J4.j 5/10111 -J 1/18/20 30 8/338/367 I W. 78TH ST. 9/10/17 26/15/3 7/17/13 41 T r — mm- 1� i'a F SUNDAY 8:45-9:45 A -M. SUNDAY 10:3G-1 1:30 A -M. SUNDAY 12 NOON -1:00 PM. IF mmmm*411 CITY OF CHAN:HASSEN TRAFFIC STUI)DY FOR FIGURE 3 I WESTWOOD �OC� COMMUNITY CHURCH14SUN DAY VOLUMES BENSHOOF & ASWCATES, JINC. Ik WTRANSPORTATION MOINEERSMO �NNERS Mr. Man Saam -8- July 7, 2004 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Level of Service The intersection of Tli 41 and West 78th Street was analyzed to determine the impacts of traffic generated by construction of the proposed developments. Capacity analyses were performed using Mghway Capacity Software (HCS) for all of the background traffic levels. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which range from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation, with excessive delay. The existing lane geometrics and intersection control at the intersection of TH 41 and West 78h Street was used for the initial analysis, with modifications added to simulate appropriate traffic conditions after West 78th Street is extended to the west. The lane geometrics used for the analysis are as follows: • Southbound approach on TH 41: one dedicated left -tum lane, one through lane, and one dedicated right -turn lane. • Northbound approach on TH 4 1: one dedicated left -turn lane, one through lane, and one dedicated right -turn lane (free -right at the intersection). • Westbound approach on West 780' Street: one dedicated left -tum lane and one shared through/right-tum lane. The median is to be removed in order to realign the approach with the proposed extension. • Eastbound approach on West 78"' Street: one dedicated left -tum lane and one shared through/right-turn lane. Table 5 on the following page presents the level of service analysis for the weekday AM and PM peak hours, and three Sunday peak periods: Mr. Matt Saam -9- July 7, 2004 Table 2 Intersection Level of Service Results at the Intersection of TH 41 and West 78'h Street As shown in Table 2, the westbound and eastbound left turns from West 786' Street experience poor levels of service during multiple time periods. The poor LOS for these movements at an unsignalized intersection is not desired, but it is also not uncommon. As shown in Figures 2 and 3, these movements consist of very low volumes. Therefore, in this situation, the poor LOS impacts very few motorists. As also shown in Table 2, the highest volume movements all operate at acceptable levels of service. Traffic Signal Considerations When determining the appropriate intersection control, it is accepted practice that only weekday volumes are considered during traffic signal warrant analysis. The projected traffic volumes during the weekday AM and PM peak hours reveal that the peak hour volume warrant established under the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) has not been met. This concurs with an April 2004 signal warrant analysis performed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, which found that none of five volume related warrants were met at this intersection. However, the projected Sunday traffic volumes at the intersection reveal that the peak hour volume warrant would be met. As noted earlier, only weekday volumes are used when determining if an intersection meets the signal wan -ant requirements. We �ound Eastbound Northbound Southbound L TR L TR L T R L T R Wee ay M Pea (7:15 8:15) 2005 C B D B A A A A A A 2010 E B E B A A A A A A Weekday PM Peak (4:45 — 5:45) 2005 E 12 B A A A A A A 2010 F C#E C A A A A A A Sunday 8:45 — 9:45 2005 F C E C A A A A A:#A 2010 F D E C A A A A A: A Sunday 10:30 — 11:30 2005 F C E C A A A A A A 2010 F D E C A A A A A A Sunday 12700 — 1:00 2005 F B D C A A A A A A 2010 F B C C A A A A A A As shown in Table 2, the westbound and eastbound left turns from West 786' Street experience poor levels of service during multiple time periods. The poor LOS for these movements at an unsignalized intersection is not desired, but it is also not uncommon. As shown in Figures 2 and 3, these movements consist of very low volumes. Therefore, in this situation, the poor LOS impacts very few motorists. As also shown in Table 2, the highest volume movements all operate at acceptable levels of service. Traffic Signal Considerations When determining the appropriate intersection control, it is accepted practice that only weekday volumes are considered during traffic signal warrant analysis. The projected traffic volumes during the weekday AM and PM peak hours reveal that the peak hour volume warrant established under the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) has not been met. This concurs with an April 2004 signal warrant analysis performed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, which found that none of five volume related warrants were met at this intersection. However, the projected Sunday traffic volumes at the intersection reveal that the peak hour volume warrant would be met. As noted earlier, only weekday volumes are used when determining if an intersection meets the signal wan -ant requirements. Mr. Matt Saam -10- July 7, 2004 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the analyses presented in this report, we have developed the following conclusions: The westbound and eastbound left turns from West 78th Street onto T.H. 41 are expected to experience poor levels of service during multiple time periods. The poor LOS for these movements at an unsignalized intersection is not desired, but it is also not uncommon. As shown in Figures 2 and 3, these movements consist of very low volumes. TIterefore, in this situation, the poor LOS impacts very few motorists. The highest volume movements all operate at acceptable levels of service. The intersection of T14 41 and West 78th Street should be closely monitored after the new church access is opened. If a safety issue (i.e., high crash rate) arises at the intersection, additional intersection control measures can then be considered. Currently, a Minnesota State Patrol officer assists with the direction of traffic at the intersection of TH 41 and Tanadoona Drive. With the relocation of church traffic to the intersection of TH 41 and West 78th Street, it may be necessary to employ another officer at this intersection during peak travel periods on Sundays. The current plan for W. 78th Street does not include a raised median. Mn/DOT staff have reviewed the plan and indicated they would not require a median. Based on the low volumes projected for W. 78th Street, we concur that a median is not needed at this location. Saarn, Matt From: Lynn Clarkowski [Lynn.Clarkowski@dot.state.mn.usI Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 1:53 PM To: Saarn, Matt Cc: Lars Impola Subject: Re: TH 41/W. 78th St. intersection Hi Matt - Lars from our traffic office here in Metro reviewed this issue again and also talked with our head design engineer here in Metro and we do not feel there is a need for reinstalling the median on W. 78th St, just east of TH 41. As a check, we will contact the original designer to find out why it was installed originally. I'll let you know what we find out. Lynn Clarkowski, P.E. Mn/DOT Metro South Area Engineer 651/634-2103 >>> "Saam, Matt" <MSaam@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> 06/30/04 07:54AM >>> Lynn, The City recently had a Planning Commission meeting that took a look at the proposed revisions to this intersection as it relates to the extension of W. 78th St. to the west. One of the planning commissioners was concerned that Mn/DOT didn't see a need to put back in the exist. median on the east side of TH 41 at this intersection. I just want to make sure that Mn/DOT doesn't want to have a median back in at the intersection of TH 41/W. 78th St. Your review letter on the improvements to Westwood church didn't say anything about putting the median back in and when we met back in may, Lars didn't think we'd need one. I just want to make sure, though. Thanks, Matt Saam, P.E. Asst. City Engineer - Chanhassen, MN 1 * CITY OF CHANHASSEN .0� STAFF REPORT PC DATE: June 15,2004 CC DATE: July 12, 2004 REVIEW DEADLINE: July 13,2004 CASE#: 04-20 BY: REG, LH, ML, JS, MS, ST PROPOSAL: Request for Site Plan Approval to expand the parking lot (44-3 166 spaces) and the extension of West 78d' Street, and a Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, Westwood Community Church. LOCATION: 3121 Westwood Drive (west of TH 41 at Tanadoona Drive) APPLICANT: Dan Russ c/o, Welsh Development 7807 Creekridge Circle Nlinneapolis, MN 55439-2609 (952) 897-7745 Westwood Community Church 3121 Westwood Drive Excelsior, NIN 55331 PRESENT ZONING: Office and Institutional District, 01 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Public/Senti-Public ACREAGE: 58.61 acres DENSITY: N/A SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the expansion of the parking lot by 44-3 166 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 781h Street extension and construction of the West 78h Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. LEVEL OF CITY IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets those standards, the City must then approves the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 2 PRQPOSAUSUMI�URY The site was previously developed with the first phase of an ultimate project that will create a campus for Westwood Community Church. The applicant is proposing the ex 9 ansion of the parking lot by 443 166 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78 Street extension and construction of the West 78d'Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. It should be noted that the extension of West 78th Street will be a public/private partnership. Westwood Church is only required to build a 26 -foot wide driveway with curb and gutter to serve their development. Tbrough negotiations with the City, Westwood has agreed to upgrade their proposed access to a 31 -foot public street with the City paying for the cost difference for oversizing of the road. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan for the parking expansion, driveway connection and West 78h Street extension and the wetland alteration permit. BACKGROUND On September 27, 200 1, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Land use amendment from Residential — Low Density to Public/Serni-Public based on the findings in the staff report and contingent upon Metropolitan Council review and approval. Rezoning of the property from Rural Residential, RR, to Office and Institutional, 01 based on the findings in the staff report. Site Plan #2001-10, plans prepared by Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc., dated July 6, 2001, with a one-story variance from the Office and Institutional district regulations and a 2.5 -foot variance from the 40 -foot building height Highway Corridor District regulations. Welland Alteration Permit to alter and fill 34,900 square feet (0.8 acres) of wetlands. However, only part of the wetland alteration occurred for the extension of the sewer and construction of the storm water pond. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetlands Chapter 20, Article XXI, "Or'Office and Institutional District Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 3 GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCI-HTECTURE The applicant is proposing the ex ansion of the parking lot by 443 166 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 789 Street extension and construction of the West 78h Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. LANDSCAPING The applicant is proposing parking lot landscaping consistent with the existing lots. The center island landscaping uses crabapples in a mass, organized planting. Plantings along the entryway drive are the same species as the existing lot creating a uniform view into the site. Required Proposed Vehicular use landscape area 5,952 sq. ft. >5,952 sq. ft. Trees/ parking lot 24 overstory 12 overstory 12 islands/peninsulas 60 understory 2 islands/peni sulas Proposed landscaping meets minimum ordinance requirements. The applicant is consistent with the parking lot landscaping previously approved for the existing lots. As before, the applicant is installing trees that are smaller than ordinance requirements, but planting more than are required. The smaller sizes are acceptable to staff because the applicant is meeting the minimum requirements for caliper inches rather than quantities of materials. For example, there are 24 overstory trees required for the parking lot. At the required size of 2 I/T' diameter, a total of 60 inches is required. The applicant is proposing 72 trees measuring I" - 1 1/2" diameter for a total of 85 diameter inches. Staff supports this approach for two reasons. Firstly, it has been documented that planting smaller sized materials often results in healthier, less stressed plants due to the reduction in root loss and transplant stress. Secondly, the site ultimately gets nearly twice the number of plants as it would have had the applicant proposed the standard required size of materials. Ordinance requires boulevard trees along all collector roads. The extension of West 78h Street will require an overstory tree every 30 feet. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands There are two aglurban wetlands present on-site. Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) delineated the wetlands in May 1997 and reexamined the site on May 9, 2001. Wetland 1 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property, just south of the existing building. The northern part of the wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, while the southern part of the wetland supports forest vegetation, such as box elder. The applicant is proposing wetland fill for a road in order to provide circular vehicular movement around the Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15,2004 Page 4 campus. This road is proposed to cross Weiland 1 just north of the southern property line. The width and height of the road have been minimized in order to reduce the amount of welland impact required- The total proposed impact to Wetland I is 30,033 square feet (0.70 acres). Weiland 2 is a Type I wetland located at the far west end of the parcel. It is dominated by American elm and green ash with an understory of greater straw sedge. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland Replacement The applicant is proposing the construction of 31,650 square feet (0.73 acres) of new wetland credit (NWC) adjacent to Weiland 1. The applicant has proposed employing storm water ponds constructed with this phase (14,500 square feet) as public value credit (PVC) for a portion of the required 2:1 replacement ratio. The applicant has also proposed using 13,916 square feet of PVC that was created with the first phase of this project. Minnesota Rule 8420.0740 Subp. I (F) states that "In cases where excess wetland acreage is expected to result from a specific replacement plan..., the owner must indicate on the replacement plan that the excess acreage is to be considered available for wetland banking or lose the opportunity to use the excess credits for future projects." Since this was not done with the initial wetland alteration permit, these public value credits are not available. The applicant should develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required 2:1 replacement (provide the additional required 13,916 square feet) without employing credits constructed during the first phase. Weiland replacement must occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant must receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. The applicant should provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wedand. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) must be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands. (Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet.) Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant will install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. All structures must maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. GRADMG, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The grading for this site can be broken into two separate operations: one is for the additional parking lot on the north side of the site and the other is for the extension of West 78'h Street at the south end of the site. The additional parking area was previously rough graded with the original Westwood Church project. The applicant is now proposing to finish grade the area for paving. At the south end of the site, the entire south property line will be graded for the extension of West 78th Street from Highway 41. In addition, two driveways will be graded to the Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 5 north of West 78h Street for access to the new road. The applicant will also be grading for the construction of a new pond and wetland mitigation area. To avoid significant grading into the Landscape Arboretum's property at the southeast comer of the site, a retaining wall, ranging in height from 4' to 9', is proposed. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. Even with the wall, there is a small amount of grading that is proposed on the northeast comer of the Arboretum's property. This off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. Drainage from the new parking lot will be conveyed via storm sewer to an existing public pond off the northeast comer of the site. This existing pond has been previously sized for the additional impervious drainage so no further improvements are required. A new pond at the south end of the site is proposed to treat a large majority of the drainage from the new public street, private driveways and future parking lots on the church property. The pond will discharge the treated stormwater to the existing wetland just east of the pond. This wetland then drains south into the Arboretum's property. The outlet rate from this wetland is required to be the same or less than the existing flow rate of stormwater onto the Arboretum's property. The eastern 300 feet of new West 78th Street is proposed to drain to the Highway 41 ditch at the northwest comer of the intersection. This will require a MnDOT drainage permit. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district permit will be required for the project grading. Drainage calculations for the existing and proposed conditions including the 10- and 100 -year runoff rates along with storm sewer sizing data has been submitted for staff review. Staff has reviewed the calculations and found that only minor modifications are needed. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type H silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of 6' or more. Storm Water Management According to July 18, 2001 correspondence from Peter Olin with regard to the previous phase, the Arboretum has reviewed the plans for the Westwood Church Development. The Arboretum is concerned that the culverts under the West 78th Street extension will affect the volume and Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 6 rate of runoff from the site and that this, in turn, will affect the research plots on the Arboretum property. The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoff rates. Staff will review the storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may want to work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. Easements Drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland rnitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Erosion control blanket should be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas must have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets should include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. Surface Water Management Fees Since the proposed project does not require the subdivision of property, it is not subject to water quality and water quantity connection charges. Other Agencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 7 UTILITEES With no building expansion being proposed at this time, no utility improvements are proposed except for a short watermain extension under new West 78d' Street at the southeast comer of the site. This watermain is meant for future development purposes. STREETS/ACCESS As a condition of approval for the development of the original Westwood Church project, a second driveway access at the intersection of West 78b Street was required to be constructed prior to any further development of the site. As such, Westwood Church is now proposing to construct a secondary access to the site with the expansion of their parking area. To accomplish this, Westwood Church has acquired the two properties at the southeast comer of their site. As previously mentioned, City staff and Westwood have come to an agreement to upgrade the proposed access from a 26 -foot wide driveway to a 31 -foot wide public street. The City is in favor of having a public street for a few reasons: it will provide an alternate access for church traffic to exit the site, it will provide a future access for the development of the property (Carlson/Brandt) west of the church's site, and it will provide a secondary access for the Dogwood Road residents in the future. The extension of West 78h Street is proposed as a 3 1 -foot wide public street with concrete curb and gutter. The street has been shown within an 80 -foot easement. A 10 -foot wide bituminous trail is also included to provide pedestrian/bike access from future development to the west. The proposed trail will connect with the existing trail system on the east side of Highway 41. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. In 2001, when staff was previously considering the extension of West 78th Street, the Landscape Arboretum expressed no interest in the project or of having the road on their property. Because of this, the entire length of the proposed West 78h Street extension has been shown on the Church's property. This also necessitates the re -alignment of the existing West 78th StreetIffighway 41 intersection on the east side of the highway. The existing intersection does not line up with the proposed extension of West 78b Street. All of the necessary intersection and turn lane improvements will be completed with this project. The City has retained the services of a traffic engineer to look at the proposed intersection layout and ensure that it will operate effectively based on the ultimate development of the area. Staff hopes to have the results of this traffic study in time for the June 15, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. As previously mentioned, Westwood Church is required to construct a 26 -foot wide driveway with concrete curb and gutter, per City Code. The proposed access driveway to the existing church site from West 78h Street is labeled as a "Temporary Parking Drive" that is 24 feet wide with no curb and gutter. It is staffs understanding that the church intends to expand within the next five years but that there are no specific plans for future building locations and/or elevations. As such, staff would recommend that bituminous curb and gutter be added to the temporary driveway. Additionally, a condition should be included with this approval that prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78d' Street will be brought up to current standards in effect at the time. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 8 Staff and the Planning Corarnission recommend that the Planning GeFffinis Chanhassen City Council adopt the following motions (A & 13): A. "The Planning GoffHnissien Feeenunends appfeval e Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Case 04-20 Site Plan Review for a 44 -3166 -space parking lot expansion, extension of temporary drive and extension of West 78th Strret, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around all existing landscaping at the edge of grading limits. 3. Any existing landscaping that is removed must be replaced when the parking lot construction is completed. 4. The landscape islands shall be filled with wood chips. 5. Overstory trees are required along West 78th St.; one every 30 feet. 6. Three accessible parking spaces must be added to the existing accessible parking area. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Nfinnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. 8. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands (wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet). Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 9. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetiand buffer. 10. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 11. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided overall existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 9 12. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Ty[n of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3: 1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. 13. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 14. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 15. All final plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer. 16. Use the latest version (2004) of the City's Standard Detail Plates. 17. The twin storm sewer culverts under West 78th Street must be RCP Class 5. 18. The existing driveway from Oghway 41 to the existing homes in the northwest comer of the West 78th Street intersection must be removed and seeded or sodded. 19. Include concrete driveway aprons and pedestrian ramps for both proposed driveways off of new West 78th Street. 20. The new painted median for the eastbound West 78th Street traffic on the east side of Highway 41 must be a raised concrete median with pedestrian ramps. 21. Install a temporary turnaround with barricades and a sign stating "This street to be extended" at the west end of new West 78th Street. 22. Provide a pedestrian ramp at the northeast comer of the new West 78th Street/1-lighway 41 intersection for connection to the future city trail. 23. Incorporate the conditions of the MnDOT review letter dated June 1, 2004 into the plans. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 10 24. Show all of the proposed grades for the new driveway to the existing home in the southeast comer of the site. 25. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. 26. Off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. 27. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. 28. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. 29. A MnDOT drainage permit will be required. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district permit will be required for the project grading. 30. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. 31. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type U silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of Cor more. 32. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. 33. Bituminous curb and gutter must be added to the temporary driveway. 34 Prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78th Street must be brought up to current standards in effect at the time. 35. The Falsed nieffian an- IAVeQt7e_ StFeet an the P—nqt side of TH 44, whieh is proposed to be Femoved, shall be Feplaeed in the eor-r-eet alignment with the westmovar-d- extension 6UWVst_W._ 36. A sidewalk shall be extended along the main driveway from the main entrance of the church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends and two diagonal walkways similar to the northwest parking IoL Planning Conunission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 11 37. Additional landscaping along the north side on Tanadoona Drive. 38. Require public safety oMcer to continue working the two intersections as directed by public safety." B. "The Planning Geamnissi on reeefamends approval of Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Case 04-20 Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required 2:1 replacement without employing credits constructed during the first phase. 2. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 3. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands. (Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet.) Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 4. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 5. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 6. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: TyN of Slopp Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days Flatter than 10: 1 21 days These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 12 exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, stonn sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 8. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval." ATTACHMENTS I . Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Reduced Copy Site Survey 4. Reduced Copy Site Plan 5. Reduced Copy Parking Lot Construction 6. Reduced Copy Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan G-1 7. Reduced Copy Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan G-2 8. Reduced Copy Landscape Plan 9. Letter from Juanita Voigt, MnDOT, to Kate Aanenson dated June 1, 2004 10. Public Hearing Notice & Affidavit of Mailing gApian\2004 planning mes\04-20 - westwood continunity chmh spr & wap\staff report westwood-doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION 11 ZW= Application of Westwood Community Church for Site Plan Review and a Wetland Alteration Permit. On June 15, 2004, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of Westwood Community Church for a site plan review to expand the parking lot, drive aisle and extension of West 78th Street for the property located at 3121 Westwood Drive (west of TH 41 at Tanadoona Drive) with a Wetland Alteration Permit for the extension of West 78th Street. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed site plan was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Office and Institutional District, OL 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Public/Serni-Public. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see attached Exhibit A) 4. Section 20-110: (1) The proposed parking lot expansion is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; 1 (2) The proposed parking lot expansion is consistent with the site plan review requirements; (3) The proposed parking lot expansion is in a location previously impacted by the development of the site. The extension of West 78flStreet creates an unavoidable wetland impact which necessitates a wetland alteration permit. (4) The proposed parking lot expansion creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) The proposed parking lot expansion creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; C. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. Access to the site will be greatly enhanced with the addition of West 78'h Street. (6) The proposed parking lot expansion protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. 5. The planning report #04-20 dated June 15, 2004, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the site plan and wetland alteration permit for Westwood Community Church. ADOPTEI) by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 15th day of June, 2004. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION R" Its Chairman APPLICANT: Z)wg Auss Alwe /.rh ADDRESS7 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 0q--c;k0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED APR 3 0 2004 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT OWNER:– akr('A ADDRESS: Wf>�Wsol D#-;�e 7g,o7 6'&A-ri 6.f Clec;o� Conditional Use Permit I�A X939,�fflj &C,64� )V,14 55331 TELEPHONE (Day Time) Non -conforming Use Permit TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non -conforming Use Permit X Wetiand Alteration Permit "Z-7 5 Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Sign Permits — Sign Plan Review Notification Sign trl 7. Site Plan Review- J�-00 X Escrow for Filing Fees/Aftomey Cost** 0/00 - $50 CUP/SPRNACNARMAP/Metes & Bounds - $400 Minor SUB Subdivision* TOTAL FEE $ 40.�__Q Mailing labels of all property owners within at least 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application -OR- the City can provide this list (Carver County properties only) for an additional fee to be invoiced to the applicant. If you would like the City to provide mailing labels, check this box rVI inj Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11 " reduced copy for each plan sheet. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: '3j Z) Pri Yee LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Qa, 6 rl TOTALACREAGE: A WETLANDS PRESENT: X YES NO PRESENTZONING: Q. -r REQUESTED ZONING: Oer PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: V0 8L I C. IS -0h IPU 6" C - REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: P09LAU.:�6714l)-gubk46 REASON FOR REQUEST: 4 tAnIPSS. 7� This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certif icate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that H development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review, the city requires an automatic 60 -day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. /L IUC/� �/— Signature of Applicant Date L �06c-T3r T�( ��cXQI 0 Signature of Fee Owner OW�KC-41� Date Application Received on Ctl3o 6 q Fee Paid k I 9!� Receipt No. L —IOS6 The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. GAplanVorms0evelopment Review Application.DOC 0 0 ARBORETUM VLILAGE S 0 0 w I 113pill it I 1111plil 'JalQuillilliq Ig !i1folill v! I jigipillplill 1-41il '0 '1 ;;]!,[I g "Oil Willi! N!N1 1 11 1., nRll 4 151TOM I 1i 11 .. ..... 4 it 0,14 q$j I 4 li T. -Ii POW il ()Hicial COPY Cornrnunity Developrnent Dept. U) 0 m Cf) 0 0 �D C) 0 c z C) T C: X C) T C, 10 fli 4 I . A I ,,,,H S�EET V SIM PLAN ZSTWOOD COMMUNITY CHUR1>1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED APR 3 0 2004 CHANHASSEN PI-ANNING DEPT 6612 C�NCR� D Dn ZMMU�WAMMAL O'M �M ;2: A.. . .. TN IN N, �-1 T -T:71 —:77= �,�O" CCMMUNI� CHURCH PARKIN G LOT CONSMUCMM �S�OD CWMUNI� CHURCT M 7 j- CWRT & 'A' �URCH U� .T M=W .11 T 1. .T �y POUWS 'El A— Il �T .1 1.1 111 D -NO M GRADING LEGEND D SIC- Vlff P�x M 7 j- CWRT & 'A' �URCH U� .T M=W .11 T 1. .T �y POUWS 'El A— Il �T .1 1.1 111 D -NO M GRADING LEGEND D Vlff P�x ewe-, Ilk, ----------- M 7 j- CWRT & 'A' �URCH U� .T M=W .11 T 1. .T �y POUWS 'El A— Il �T .1 1.1 111 D -NO M GRADING LEGEND D W� ----------- w �,IT uK P. .. -� -T -1. -ol G-1 of 3 — I MV��L E ---mom < zo 00 4r, Ot, Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 June 1, 2004 Ms. Kate Aaneson Community Development Director City of Chanhassen P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317-1447 SUBJECT: Westwood Community Church Mn/DOT Review # SO4-042 NW Quad of TH 41 & proposed 786' Street Chanhassen, Carver County Control Section: 25 10 Dear Ms. Aaneson: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the above referenced site plan. Before any further development, please address the following issues: The plat does not adequately identify Trunk Highway 41 right of way. The final Plat should identify the right of way by reference to the appropriate plat(s) and in place monuments. The distances from the center line of TH 41 to the edge of the plat should also be identified. Please show the "Existing Mn/DOT R/W" with a three dash line symbology. Also, Mn/DOT's access control needs to be shown along TH 41. Please direct questions concerning these issues to John Isackson (651-582-1273) in Mn/DOT's Right of Way section. The driveway for the existing house will need to move its opening onto West 78d' Street at least 325 feet from TH 41, as measured from centerline of TH 41 to centerline of access opening. Turning movement templates should be shown with the appropriate design vehicle. Refer to Mn/DOT Road Design Manual — section 5-2.04.01. Please direct questions concerning these issues to Richard Scarrow (651-582-1333) of Mn/DOT's Design Section. The 12 foot width of the lanes on TH 41 is correct, however, the turn lanes must be revised to 300 feet long with a 180 foot taper (15:1 taper). The TH 41 center median on the south side of the intersection should be restriped as a Northbound Left Turn Lane (NBLTL). The City should work with the developer in requiring the major improvements that are needed at the TH41/78h Street intersection and new driveway location, which are development driven. Any improvements will be the financial responsibility of the City, developer, or both. If you have any questions regarding these requirements please contact Lars Irnpola in our Traffic Studies section at (651) 634-2379. A Mn/DOT Access Permit will be required. They need to apply for a new access permit. With this permit they need to provide a signing plan (showing existing and proposed signing, removals, new, etc) and the striping plan (showing existing, andMMED JUN 0 2 2004 CITY OF CHANHASSEN An equal opportunity employer removals, new etc.). The Permit application must include plans showing the required right turn lane. If you have any questions regarding these requirements please contact Keith Van Wagner in our Permits section at (651) 582-1443. The proposed development will need to maintain existing drainage rates. The City or project developer will need to submit before/after hydraulic computations for both 10 and 100 year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage patterns and systems affecting N4n1DOT right of way will be perpetuated. Stormwater ponds adjacent to Mn/DOT right- of-way shall be designed to a 100 -year -24-hour storm event with 2 feet of freeboard. Please direct questions concerning these issues to Richard Cady (651-634-2075) of Mn/DOT's Water Resources section. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and site plans to: Development Review Coordinator Mn/DOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 Nin/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay N1n/DOT's 30 -day review and response process to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. If you have any questions, please feel free to call myself at 651-634-2083, or Tod Sherman at 651-582-1548. Sincerely, 4 1� '00e - Transportation Plarmer Intermediate Copy: Doug Stahl, Pioneer Engineering Dave Drealan, Carver County Planning Department John Freemyer, Carver County Roger Gustafson, Carver County Sandy Olson, Westwood Community Church CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) 1, Todd Gerhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that he is and was on June 3, 2004, the duly qualified and acting City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date he caused to be mafled a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for Westwood Community Church — Planning Case No. 04-20 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by sending a notice addressed to such owner, and depositing the notices 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. Subscribed and sworn to before me this -14*� day of 7FLA V,t ,2004. M ITA �� Ac- J -At Todd Gerhardt, City Manager 9 9=LFjj sajidq uopwwo Avj UN6660AHVO 107kAt. E10SOU44 - 010 N3SSIMn3' ld ARION V4 'I V41)4 99 �' g:\plan\.2004 planning cases\04-20 - wwwood con:wnunity ch=h spr & wap\04-20 affidavit.doc Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for Site Plan Approval to expand the parking lot (143 Proposal: spaces) and the extension of West 78th Street, and a Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site on property zoned Office and Institutional District, 01 Planning File: 04-20 Applicant: Westwood Community Church Property 3121 Westwood Drive 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 Bob Generous at 952-227-1131 or Comments: e-mail bcienerous@ci.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, Welland Alterations, Razonings, 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 party 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 commercialfindustral. • 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 complerrity may take several months to complete, Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check win the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative 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 persoms), • 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 viish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. _J mars! - 'A r. J�� 8� M gaz . , .5 - . 8 Ep M11111al-2— R'�WN —40-1 g�W�% @g,95- -ra 05 9 z 1R--JHsJFJ3- 4 sF t; 3 IASI az Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet) Westwood Community Church 3121 Westwood Drive City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-20 Lake Minnewashta Subject Property 7' f,v'r oretum Boulevard State Hvvy 5 Arb.rtul We.. T-- d ALAN H & KAREN L DIRKS ALAYNA N SAZENSKi ALLAN D FISCHER 7431 DOGWOOD 2992 VILLAGE LN 7641 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8013 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 ALLEN K JR & JENNIFER R LARSON ALLEN K LARSON JR ALLISON BALLOU 7647 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN ALLEN K LARSON SR 2972 VILLAGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 7647 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 AMY WATERS & KEITH R & CYNTHIA B WATERS ANTONIO T REYES BARBARA ANN MILLER 2950 VILLAGE CIR 2966 VILLAGE CT 7661 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4427 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4427 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 BRANDON B WAGNER BRENDA C BROWN BRUCE A & YVONNE M GESKE 7659 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN 7634 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CT 7325 HAZELTINE BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4422 EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8038 BYRON A & MARY M OLSON CARLSON CUSTOM HOMES INC CASSANDRA S CRNECKI 7331 HAZELTINE BLVD 2906 BUTTERNUT DR 2971 VILLAGE CT EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8038 CHASKA MN 55318-1111 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 CATHERINE A HOLTE CHARLES & JENNIFER NEWELL DANIEL J STARKS 7630 ARBORETUM VILLAG CIR 7550 DOGWOOD RD TRUSTEE OF GIBSON TRUST CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4421 EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8053 3301 TANADOONA DR EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8048 DAVID A & MARK D WILLIAMS DAVID L BUSS & PEGGY BULLICK ERIN KAY STEINKE DEBBRA C HILL 2988 VILLAGE LN 7638 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL 7640 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 DEREK J & JULIE M FRITZE GETSCH CORP GETSCH CORP 2967 VILLAGE CT C/O DAVID GETSCH C/O JOHN GETSCH CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 10202 BERKSHIRE RD 5404 GLENGARRY PKY BLOOMINGTON MN 55438-2265 EDINA MN 55436-2006 GETSCH CORP HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT OF MN C/O MARJORIE GETSCH GUILLERMO E & JAMIE A ARIAS INC 7530 DOGWOOD RD 7633 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CT 422 EAST CO RD D EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8053 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4422 ST PAUL MN 55117-1218 JANET M QUIST ETAL JANINE B FLING JASON D GAASVIG & 7331 DOGWOOD 2985 VILLAGE LN TARA M DAILY 2962 VILLAGE CT EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8015 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 JEFFRY KARL RUSSELL JENNIFER A VONESCHEN JOHN & JOYCE FOLEY 7632 ARBORETUM VILLAG CIR C/O RICHARD J FOLEY 7643 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL 4804 DUNBERRY LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4421 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55435-1537 JOHN F ALTENBEFIND KARIN S MOORE KATE EBLOM 7639 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL 2991 VILLAGE LN 2963 VILLAGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 KATHRYN ELLEN GRIEGER KATIE L JORGENSON KEVIN P THOMAS ETAL 2923 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CRV 2964 VILLAGE CT 2975 VILLAGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4423 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 L MARTIN & DONNA R JONES TRUSTEES OF TRUST LAURA A BRAHEE LAWRENCE B MARTINEZ 7321 DOGWOOD 2989 VILLAGE LN 2969 VILLAGE CT EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8015 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 MATTHEW J NARDO MATTHEW N STRAND MATTHEW VAVRICHEK & 7650 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL 2961 VILLAGE CT STEVEN M & KAREN S VAVRICHEK 2955 VILLAGE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4427 MICHAEL A KISOR MICHAEL B HERMAN MICHAEL C BURROWS 2982 VILLAGE LN 2921 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CRV 2974 VILLAGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4423 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 MICHAEL D & AMY L ARMBRUST MICHAEL D & JANICE M CHOCKLAN MINNESOTA ST HORTICULTURAL 7630 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CT 7651 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL RM 1 HORTICULTURE BLDG CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4422 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 ST PAUL MN 55108- MPLS COUNCIL OF CAMPFIRE MPLS COUNCIL OF CAMPFIRE GIRLS GIRLS PATRICIA L HEIEN 640 GRANT ST E 2610 UNIVERSITY AVE W 2986 VILLAGE LN MINNEAPOLIS MN 55404-1431 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55114-2007 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 PATRICK I VANSLYKE PETER T & DEANNA 0 BRANDT PETERSON REVOCABLE TRUST 2984 VILLAGE LN 7570 DOGWOOD RD C/O GRETCHEN STARKS 3301 TANADOONA DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8053 EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8048 PULTE HOMES OF MINNESOTA REGENTS OF UNIV OF MINNESOTA CORP REBECCA L POLKOW C/O REAL ESTATE OFFICE 815 NORTHWEST PKY 2947 VILLAGE CIR 319 15TH AVE SE SUITE 140 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4427 424 DON HOWE BLDG EAGAN MN 55121-1580 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55455-0118 RICHARD C LUNDELL ROBERT A JOHNSON ROGER W OAS 7341 DOGWOOD 2949 VILLAGE CIR 7301 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8015 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4427 EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8015 SCOTT A VERGIN SHANE R CROWE SHANNON M HOGAN 7311 DOGWOOD 2993 VILLAGE LN 7651 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8015 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 SHAWN R KERRIGAN SHERRY A BERGS STACEY L GORRES 7648 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL 2994 VILLAGE LN 2980 VILLAGE LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 STEVEN G & CATHLEEN E BUSSLER SUMIKA CHAI SUSAN MCALLISTER 2995 VILLAGE LN 7649 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN 2930 78TH ST W CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4501 SUZANNE M ZADRA SUZETTE FAHEY TARA L KROEGER 2943 VILLAGE CIR 2965 VILLAGE CT 2981 VILLAGE LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4427 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4428 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 THERESA A LINN THOMAS J SYLVESTER TRACY J DOHENY 7635 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CT 7632 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CT 7634 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4422 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4422 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4421 VANESSA T SCHMIDT VINH 0 DO NGUYEN WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH 2983 VILLAGE LN 7657 ARBORETUM VILLAGE LN 3121 WESTWOOD DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4429 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4425 EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8044 WILLIAM A & IRENE V HINES WILLIAM E HART RICH SLAGLE 7631 ARBORETUM VILLAGE CT 7653 ARBORETUM VILLAGE PL 7411 FAWN HILL ROAD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4422 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4424 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GAplAN\2004 Planning Cases\04-20 - Westwood Community Church SPR & WAP\04-20 PH Notice Labels.doc CRANHASSEN PLANNING COAE�HSSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 15,2004 Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Dan Keefe, Rich Slagle, Steve Lillehaug and Bethany Tjornhom MEMEBERS ABSENT: Craig Claybaugh and Kurt Papke STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Shartneen AI-Jaff, Senior Planner; and Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: SECONDARY ACCESS TO MGHWAY 41, AND A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO ALTER AND FILL WETLANDS ON SITE ON PROPERTY ZONED OFTICE AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT, 01, LOCATED AT 3121 Public Present: Name Address Dan Russ James Haugen Mark Ekb Maren Christopher Bruce Carlson Peter Brandt 51 Choctaw Circle 7800 Bavaria Road, Victoria 3360 Bavaria Road, Chaska 7311 Dogwood Road 1440 Bavaria Road 7570 Dogwood Road Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Thank you Bob. Questions from staff. Any? You want to jump in Steve? Start with Rich? Slagle: No, no, Steve can go ahead. Ullehaug: Bob, you indicated that this will possibly be extended to Dogwood Road in the future, out to the west. Will it also be, will that be connected to Crimson Bay Road and then onto Trunk Rghway 5 or will that remain separate? Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Generous: That would be staff s recommendation that we make that connection eventually, as those properties develop. Ullehaug: So then really in essence this frontage road in the future will most likely, possibly connect back up with Trunk lEghway 5? Generous: Yes. That's what our comp plan would like to see is that connection. 1-illehaug: Okay. I'm not too sure where to begin here. We don't have current traffic volumes proposed or anything from MnDot, was that correct Matt? Saam: That's correct. Ullchaug: Okay. Saam: For West 78tb Street. Lillehaug: For the west leg, right. Saam: Yes. Ullebaug: I posed a couple of these questions earlier to staff and I want to hit on one that's most important I guess in my mind, and the question would be, is the median that we're removing on West 78h Street. We just put that median, I mean that's a brand new frontage road and we have medians, I mean they're brand new medians. I've got a huge line of justification why we would need a median there. It appears that staff and the developer plan on taking that median out. Why do we want to go to a lesser standard? In this case. I mean it seems like we're going the wrong direction. We're not, to me it's not the time we should be retrofitting an intersection in here. I mean this is a brand new frontage road. It appears it's going to connect back all the way to the west to Trunk Ifighway 5. 1 mean there's possibly going to be through movements through that intersection in the future that may have some higher levels than some of the other intersections that have medians on it. I guess my concerns and questions is, are we sure we want to get rid of that median in there? And I know MnDot's reviewed this but maybe not the right people at MnDot have reviewed this at this time. So can staff comment on that? Saam: Sure. Staff, as you said met with MnDot along with the developer's engineer. We also sent this plan over to their review agency as we do with all developments that are proposed along state highways. And both of them came back with basically the same response that removal of the median is fine with them. They don't see issues with delineation and channelization of traffic. Going east to west there. One thing I guess I'd like to point out is when you go west of Highway 41, we as staff have always kind of thought that's more a lower volume type road. You've got two residential cul-de-sacs and the lake. It's not like traffic from Victoria's going to be coming through there. At least in our mind, and if we would connect up with Crimson Bay, we've always 2 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 envisioned that the Ifighway 5, the existing Highway 5 access for Crimson Bay would be a right-inhight-out then. So it's not like we'll, in our eyes be getting the truck traffic through this intersection. It will just be another way out for the Dogwood Crimson Bay folks, and then of course Westwood Church on Sundays and whatever other days they have activities. So we're sure willing to look at it again and push MnDot a little harder on you know, do we see any need for a median with upgrades of 41 in the future or anything like that, but at this point they said they don't see the need for it. We've reviewed it at staff, both the City Engineer and I have and really the only condition that we've come up with is what I've added in there is the free right for the traffic going north on 41 onto eastbound West 78th. They have a painted island. We'd like to see that raised concrete island so. Lillehaug: You hit on another question I guess I had is the reconstruction of 41. Have we or are there plans that we can look at to coordinate this intersection? I mean because I want to make a comment on it. I think this frontage road is maybe a couple years old. We, taxpayers, city, state just paid to put a median in there. Now we're taking it back out and we're not planning on replacing it. I want to try to help and make sure everyone's aware that 41 is being reconstructed and hopefully we're looking at those plans and coordinating this intersection with those plans. Saam: I'll defer to Bob on the 41 improvements but it's been my understanding, maybe I jumped the gun. Really that's not in the MnDot 20 year plan yet. There are you know talk of future 41 upgrade and river crossing and all that but, I think Bob's on a committee and it's 20 plus years out so. Generous: It doesn't show up yet. Lillehaug: Okay. Well that answers that. Now let me try to hunry along here. I think that's all the questions I have for right now. Thanks. Oh, one more if I can. On page 7 of the staff report, you indicate the city has retained the services of a traffic engineer to look at the proposed intersection and layout. We have a plan in front of us with the proposed section. With the proposed intersection and layout. Are we saying we're having a traffic engineer look at this after we already have the plans for this intersection? Saam: Yep, we've hired the services of a traffic engineer to make sure that based on future traffic and church anticipated traffic, that what we're doing at that intersection, as you alluded to, is right and that that intersection's going to work and function with the expected traffic. Lillehaug: Okay, thanks. Sacchet: Alright, you can ask more questions if you have more later. Anybody else want to jump in? Slagle: I've got a few. 3 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: Bob or Matt, the comments that were just brought up by Commissioner Lillehaug on that median. Do you have a ballpark figure as to what it cost to build that median and what it will cost to remove that median? Just ballpark. Saam: No, but possibly the applicant. I know they're doing cost estimates on that. They may have a figure on the removal of it. But I don't off the top of my head. Sacchet: The applicant pays for the removal. Sa-am: Yes. Yeah, and our reasoning there is that even, whether it's a driveway or a public street, we want those accesses to line up so those intersection improvements would need to be done. Regardless. Slagle: Okay. Bob, this might be a question for you. Traffic flow of the additional parking lot. One ways, both ways, do you know? Generous: Both ways. Slagle: Both ways, okay. And then question of sidewalks to what I will call the east and now the proposed northeast or north parking lot. I don't see any sidewalks similar to the one that is directly northwest of the church. Do we have any of those? I mean I'm just trying to think if you're parking you know in that northern lot. Is there a sidewalk that folks can walk along to get to the church? Do we know? Generous: Not for any ... length, no. Slagle: Okay, so hypothetically if you're up on the northeast comer of that new parking lot you arc walking through a parking lot. Generous: Through a parking lot. Slagle: Okay. I think that's it for now. Thanks. Keefe: I have a couple. Landscaping on the Tanadoona Drive side. What are we doing in regards to that or what are we requiring? Generous: There's very minimal landscaping on that Tanadoona. Drive itself. The primary landscaping are those island areas that they have in there, which is uniform with the rest of the project. Jill reviewed this. She didn't have, bring up any issues on it. Keefe: And how far from the, just from Tanadoona does that parking lot start? 60? 70? Generous: Yeah, 65 feet. H Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Keefe: Ahight. And at the entrance where 41 connects with West 78th, there's a fair grade change from 41 to, up onto the West 78 1h and then there's a number of trees that line that road, you know 41 along there. Is it proposed that a lot of those trees would come out or I'm just curious. Generous: Within the roadway I'm sure they'll come out. Saam: Yes, and then even a few. They're proposing right now, we mentioned in the staff report a few trees on the northeast comer of the Arboretum property would be required to come out, and that's just for tying back in with the grading and the sloping, and to avoid like a wall out in the right-of-way which I'm sure MnDot wouldn't allow. Keefe: And then the proposed sign that goes in there. It's similar to the other one on Tanadoona, is that right? The proposed signage for Westwood. Generous: I don't know that. Saam: Maybe the applicant, you can ask him. Keefe: Alright, that's it. Sacchet: Any questions Bethany? Tjomhom: MnDot advised moving an existing driveway for this project. Does that driveway, is that a private driveway or does that driveway belong to the church? Generous: It's the houses that the church purchased for the access. Tjomhom: Okay, so there's no other party involved in? Generous: No. Tjomhom: And then did they work out their easement they needed with the Arboretum? Generous: I don't know that they have yet. Saam: That's probably an applicant question. Tjornhom: Okay. Sacchet: I've got a few questions too. First of all, staff report page 4 talks about how the wetland credits work, and it says the applicant cannot draw on what was done previously because they didn't declare it as such. Is that accurate? Generous: Yes. 5 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: So they basically have to do a little more wetland mitigation to the tune of 13,000-14,000 square feet. Do we know where they would do that? Would they just make the one that they're doing a little bigger? Generous: Yes, they'd make the ones on site larger. Sacchet: And they're okay with that? Well I guess I can ask them themselves about that. Trees. It was interesting. You brought up trees here. I don't see any tree inventory or indication where there are trees. Are we not touching any of the existing trees? Are there no trees in the way? Generous: Not on the parking lot portion. As part of the West 78d' Street I'm sure there are trees. Sacchet: Well yeah, there's a canopy part and we don't know how much gets cut there. It doesn't seem to be very much, is that why it's not looked at? S -gam: I'm not sure why Jill didn't comment on that. I guess I never asked her really if she had issue with the trees that were coming out on West 78d' Street, so that's something good we might follow up on. Sacchet: Well it's hard to preserve a tree in the middle of the roadway but it'd still be nice to know what we're actually cutting down. There's a very sizable retaining wall just south of the new road towards 41. That's where it is, right? Is that okay? I mean it says up to 9 feet. It's pretty close to the roadway. Will there be a fence or? Saam: You know it's on the side opposite the trail. I guess that's something we could add in as a condition to add that fence. Sacchet: Safety wise we wouldn't probably, I mean actually even more so if cars go over that edge, it wouldn't be very funny. Saam: Yeah, I know adjacent to trails they require that. I'm not sure as a standard the building, it's governed by the building department. They permit it. I'm not sure if as a standard they require a fence. Sacchet: Okay. Well if the trail would be there it might be fenced but since it's next to a road, it might be a guardrail. Saam: No, yeah. A guardrail, something of that nature would be, yeah I agree. Sacchet: Okay. So that's something we need to look at. Just temporary parking drive. That's an interesting phenomena there. Temporary road. It's my understanding from the staff report that staff thinks it should be done with curb and gutter. The applicant proposes to do it without curb or gutter with their justification that it's temporary. 2 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Saam: Yeah, technically if you follow the letter of the code, all driveways such as the West 78d' Street one, if it was a public, has to be curb and gutter. Pavement to this use. But in talking with the developer, with the church, they plan on doing other parking expansions. They're not sure if the exact alignment of the driveway is going to stay the same so they'd like to not have to invest the money in concrete curb and gutter right now. They have agreed to put in bituminous curb and gutter, which I know we've done in the other certain areas as a temporary measure. And then we also said we'd add a condition, if and when you develop west of the existing church, then at that point you'll have to bring up that driveway to current standards, which would be the permanent. Sacchet: And you're fine with the tar curb at this point. Saam: I guess yeah. We felt that was. Sacchet: That's a good balance yeah. You touched on the driveway for the house. Another condition that MnDot brought into the picture is that the turning lanes on 41, the right turn lanes I guess that is, must be longer and more tapered and all there's enough space for all that? Saam: Yes. In my mind there is. The developer might not be that happy to do it but yeah there is. And I know they want to have discussions with MnDot on seeing if they can do it... Sacchet: And that is all the developer's financial responsibility? Saam: Yes, and that's a standard MnDot the 300 feet with the taper. Sacchet: In terms of the financial responsibility for this road, basically the developer does everything except the city pays the difference from smaller roads to the bigger road. Is that? Saam: That's basically it, yeah. Oversizing from a 26. Sacchet: The developer is taking care of all the fixing of the intersection and all these turn lanes and islands and what have you. Okay. I just want to be very clear about that. That's all my questions. Slagle: I've gotjust a couple more. Sacchet: Yeah, go ahead. Slagle: I apologize for not asking about the trail. As I'm looking at the plans here I guess Matt it runs on the north side of West 78d' Street, on the west of 41. It will go all the way to the new development to the west, correct? And probably connect to Crimson Bay and Dogwood perhaps. 7 Planning Commission Meeting —June 15, 2004 Saam: When we upgrade those, the plan is that sidewalk and/or trail at that time. Slagle: Okay. And if we go back to the development across 41, Plowshares. If I'm not mistaken we had a trail coming out of the development on the north end of West 78 1b to 41 and then going noith on the east side of 41 connecting with Longacres and what not. My question is, is how are people to connect to the trail on the other side of 41? Is it going to be marked as a crossing? Because I don't think we have lights and I think stop signs are only on West 78h. Right? So is it going to be sort of like a Powers Boulevard where people look both ways and hope there's a gap and. Saam: For the interim and, unless a light would be warranted in the future, yeah. That's what it would have to be at this point. Slagle: Okay. And then my last question raised by the Chair on the intersection and the bearing of the cost. If I go back 2 years ago when there was discussions of potential development to the west of this property. There was some discussion as to sharing of costs and so forth. I guess my question is, are the future developers to the west, can I ask why they're not incurring some costs for this. Saam: We're, we as the city are looking at ways to share that cost. The city's portion. To see who benefits basically from the extension of the public road. The property immediately to the west, which is I think the one you're referring to, that's about the only one that could benefit. So we're exploring those options. Right now but that's really not this applicant's issue. It's you know city and Westwood are doing this and then it's kind of on our shoulders as a city to see if, can we assess our cost then to other benefiting properties. Slagle: So I guess in hearing that, I'm going to make an assumption that I trust will be fair to all parties, that if there is some benefit realized or gained, that that will be appropriated if you will or requested from them. Saam: Yes, definitely and then we won't, I mean we're bound by the law you know we can't. Slagle: I understand. Saam: Assess any more than we can show true benefit for so. Slagle: Okay. Sacchet: Steve. Lillehaug: I've got one more. The west end of 78 1h Street. I don't see anywhere where there's a turn around plan for that, i.e. temporary cul-de-sac or something like that. Do we have something in the mix for that or am I just not seeing it? P Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Saam: I know it was mentioned. It may not, I'll look to see if it didn't make the conditions. We intend to put that in with a sign. I could have swore we had that, with the temporary barricade sign saying this street to be extended in the future. Sacchet: ... turn around I believe. Saam: It doesn't? Sacchet: I'm not sure. I don't recall. Generous: Condition 21. On page 9. Lillehaug: Okay. Sacchet: So it is in there? Saam: We miss a couple but not all of them. Slagle: You do a great job Keefe: I've got one more question in relation to, on the bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 you talk about the runoff rates for the culverts, and apparently the Arboretum has a concern about the culverts running. Can you clarify, it says in the last sentence that the applicant may want to work with them. I'm not clear on what all that means. Saam: Ut me just give you a little background. These comments under storm water management come from our Water Resource Coordinator. Her comments a lot of times are similar to mine. Basically this applicant, like every developer is required to meet the runoff rates for storm water leaving it's property to match the existing conditions for the post development so they're required to meet the existing runoff rates, whether, I mean they want to work with the Arboretum or not, we're going to make sure that they meet what's going towards the Arboretum now. Keefe: Right, so if the Arboretum has a concern, as long as they meet the same as they currently are, then there's really no change correct? Saam: Exactly. Exactly. And usually it gets better, meaning less water being dumped on a neighbor so to speak. Sacchet: Okay? Is that for questions from staff. Alright. With that I'd like to invite the applicant to come forward to see if you have anything more to add. Give us a little overview if you'd like. And if you want to state your name and address for the record please. Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: Sure. My name's Dan Russ. I'm on the construction and committee for the Westwood, Westwood Community Church. I live at 51 Choctaw Circle in Chanhassen. I'm a resident of Chan. I think there were a number of questions brought up that I think Matt had addressed. I think there was three that we want to kind of help you out with. First was on the landscaping on the, what would be the north end of the parking lot between there and Tanadoona. There is existing landscaping that was required during the first site plan so there is already a buffer of trees, shrubs that were required under the original construction so we're not going to disturb any of that and we're adding additional on the end of the parking lot. And then the landscaping is going to be consistent with the existing landscaping that's in there with the grove of cherry trees that are in the islands now so that will continue forward. The median cut that was talked about. That's not driven by the church. You know we're paying for it but that's not drive by us. I mean our preference would be to leave that intersection alone but city staff's requiring us to make an alignment of that based on where our property lines are and what we're dealing with with the Arboretum, we don't have any additional property to the south to make that median and intersection line line up so we've got to turn the other intersection. I think that's what's driving that cost. We'd love nothing better than to leave that alone and not have to pay for that but I think the traffic people are telling us what's the best for that intersection. We'll go by what they say. And the easement, I believe there was a question of the easement with the Arboretum. We presently own the two houses on the comer. The driveway easement is there so we control that easement through the ownership of that property so we don't anticipate an easement issue with the Arboretum other than potentially grading when we're doing some construction there in the comer so there's a construction grading easement that is probably needed. Other than that I don't have really much other to add then the church is growing. Oh, the turn around. I'm sorry. There was a question on turn around. I think our proposal, or one of our conversations earlier with the city staff was that we would merely terminate the road at the driveway point so the turn around could be used as our driveway. There is no reason for anybody to drive up that road. The church is looking into that as a safety issue for parking at night or partying or whatever might happen on a dead end road. It would be lit with, per city standards but we just as soon not have any traffic up there as well so we'd just as soon have it terminate at our property. That would be the, our resolution to that. Sacchet: Does staff have a comment about that? Because I wonder, I mean when that road needs to be further extended, how that would be handled. Saam: And I think maybe we're not talking about the same thing. It sounds like Mr. Russ is talking about a turn around up in the development. We're talking about a temporary turn around at your property line. It's pretty standard for us. Dan Russ: Like a harnmer head or a cul-de-sac? Saam: Yeah, temporary cul-de-sac, yep. 10 Plannin.- Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: Whatever. I mean one of the proposals that we talked about at one point I thought was, we would terminate the road... Sacchet: I'm trying to ask whether that is from a city viewpoint whether that's a viable option but you understand what he's saying? Dan Russ: Yeah. Sacchet: End the road where the driveway goes off. You have like a hammer head turn around. Saam: Yeah, for public accesses where you'rr going to be maintaining it, and I guess our standard is to have a cul-de-sac type. Sacchet: Have it all the way because then it becomes an issue when we need the connection, how it gets built and how the costs get shared and all that. Saam: And that would be part of the city's cost... Sacchet: Cost to go past their driveway? WM�NIM3 Sacchet: Okay, but we would want to do it now? I mean if the city costs anyhow, it could be questioned whether that's even smart. Saam: Excuse me? Sacchet: If the city pays for extending that road from their driveway to the end of the property line, which basically goes nowhere, why would we want to do it now and not wait until it actually goes somewhere? Saam: You're saying basically wait until the development to the west comes in and then build the public street. Sacchet: Nobody's going to use that road at this point. Saam: We could look at it, yeah. We could definitely look at that. It's something we haven't thought of Sacchet: Because if it's city cost ... but if it's city cost anyhow, then it would be for the benefit of the adjoining property and when they need it, they would have an interest and they'll pay you for it. And nobody's going to use it now, logically it would make more sense that way. Then that would actually accommodate what you're saying. 11 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: Correct. I mean our need is for the road, the church at this point. We had looked at an earlier option where we would bring our driveway in on the eastern half of the property to accommodate future buildings that are going to come up here and future parking lots. This is the logical point for us to get to at some point and as long as we're doing it, crossing the, doing the mitigation, all the things we're doing, we might as well do it. Sacchet: You're envisioning that the access would be pretty much in that, staying in that place then. Dan Russ: Within 10 or 15 feet of where we're at there based on our future sanctuary and we have a parking lot, correct. Sacchet: Anyhow, are there more questions of the applicant? Slagle: I've got one. Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: Dan, if we can touch upon the, what I'll call the sidewalks. That parking lot directly to the north of the main entrance, where you've got the diagonal cross overs if you will for people to walk, I know the one to the east we don't have that but I know we have the sidewalk coming from the side of the building but do you feel by adding that northern parking lot and not having any type of what I'm going to call safe passage. Dan Russ: Pedestrian walkway. Slagle: Yeah. Is that a concern? Dan Russ: You know we haven't thought about it in that light and we probably should. If I remember right... You know the way those driveways, or the parking lots were designed, there were collectors down at this point and the sidewalks either into the lower level church or up to the upper level. Slagle: If I can make a suggestion. Where that sidewalk terminates, the one that comes out of the main entrance and goes northeast. If there was a way to carry that on along that island if you will, or the east side of the driveway northward. Yep, going up there. And that's where we typically have guards, and then you would carry it up again, and then possibly have one or two, you know one in, centered of the islands. Yep, so people can make their way, yep. I mean I just know with two little kids, it makes it easier when you're on a sidewalk. Dan Russ: Well we want to do what's right, that's safe so. Slagle: So you guys would be open to that? 12 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: I think so. I think we should do that. Slagle; Okay. Is staff okay with that? Dan Russ: I would say we'd follow that lead. Good point. Slagle: Okay. That's it. Lillehaug: I do have a question. Sacchet: Go ahead Steve. I-illehaug: I'm really having problems, not with anything that you're doing on your site. It really has to do with this frontage road and intersection, so could you help me here and explain why are we putting this road in. I think you hit on it a little bit that you need a, you want a second outlet for safety reasons. Is it generating more because the, how do you say it, the Tanadoona intersection is very inadequate? Can you comment a little on that please. Dan Russ: Sure. The original site plan that was approved in '02 1 believe, allowed us to have the amount of parking that we have in Phase L for the first building with access on Tanadoona with an upgrade on Tanadoona. The traffic study that we did indicated I think at that point that if we built any more building or added more square footage, increased people on there, we were going to need a secondary access. So the master site plan, correct me if I'm wrong, was approved with one access point. Any additional buildings would require a second access point. At this point we need additional parking to handle what we've are going to find the increase in our worship services in worshippers during the Sunday service so that's why we're adding another 140 spots to allow us to add another service for the holidays. That's typically when it ramps up. And with that, we're going to need that secondary street. It's certainly going to have to come when we come back for our gymnasium, recreational building. That is next on our list. Hopefully we're back here in the next 6 months to a year talking about that project, and that would drive West 78th Street need as well, so we're looking for a multiple purpose here. One is to get a little bit ahead of the curve. Two is to add a secondary access for the people that are there, which will allow us easier flow in and out of there and we won't have to have the county and the state, the highway patrol people on 41 in the rain, in the dark dodging cars, trying to get people to turn in and out of there. Works fine in the daylight but our evening services are getting difficult for public safety so we'd like to run them in a different entrance that's a little more safe and little more controlled. Lillehaug: Okay. One more question. Are you saying right now that your parking is inadequate for just your services and building alone as it stands? Dan Russ: I wouldn't use the word inadequate. Lillehaug: Well use another term. 13 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: We now operate some shuttle buses to and from, offer rural parking that allows us to schedule our service times a little closer together to accommodate worship and Sunday school classes as such. And with more parking it will ease that burden. It's difficult to accommodate 2,500 to 3,000 people on a Sunday morning when you need facilities and staff and teachers that come and park, and then their cars don't move for 3 hours when you have regular worshippers conting in and out so the parking gets tight. During the week there isn't, you know we're grossly over parked during the week for our normal church operations, but the Sunday services gets tight. So the additional parking is a definitely will help us in our existing facility and will allow us to move forward into the next phase. Lillehaug: Okay, thank you. Keefe: I've got kind of a follow on question to that. In regards to, I've been personal witness to the traffic person out there and we're adding a second entrance to this now. At least in your look at this intersection as proposed, I mean do you still think there's going to be a need for some sort of traffic control on Sunday mornings even with the addition of this? Dan Russ: That I can't tell you. I'm not qualified to make that call, although I can tell you that MnDot is requiring us to put a 300 some odd foot right hand decel turning lane and 150 foot acceleration lane, which we don't have at Tanadoona now. So you're able to slow down, pull over, take a right hand turn to come in. Keefe: So that's someone coming down from the north, right. Dan Russ: From the north on 41. Keefe: Right. Dan Russ: The width of the intersection I think allows for a turning I ane in the center of 41, or not. Saam: Yeah, left. Dan Russ: A left hand turn land so coming north... Keefe: So there's actually two lanes going north on 41. Is that correct, at the new. Saam: There will be a dedicated left and then one lane for going. Keefe: Bypass, okay. �Mrr1jMW1111 14 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: And with MnDot, you know MnDot's reviewed it. They said that based on our traffic counts and the needs, it doesn't require a light at this point. There isn't enough traffic on that intersection. On either intersection to require a light. Keefe: I guess kind of a one point time, 9:00-10:00 or whenever. Dan Russ: Yeah, from 9:300 to noon it gets a little tough and hopefully with two access points it's going to cut it half. So I don't know the answer to that, whether or not we'll need some assistance with state or county. Public safety. Slagle: Can I just dovetail on that if I may. And Dan, I appreciate your honesty because obviously none of us know for sure what the need will be from a safety standpoint, but I'm thinking, and staff help me here. When we're looking at an intersection that's going to have two stop lights, or excuse me, two stop signs, obviously the majority of the traffic would be coming from the east trying to cross 41 to go to the service to the new entrance. You have cars coming from the south on 41 taking a left going straight. You have them coming from the north, you know going south and maybe some taking a right probably. Although if they're coming from the north they might be doing the Tanadoona. Dan Russ: That would be my guess. Is people from the north would stay in the Tanadoona. Drive because that's the first drive they get to, and people coming from the south hearing north are going to go here because that's the first drive they get to. Slagle: And so I raise just this thought for consideration and that is if it was a light you wouldn't hear the question raised because to me that gives all directions 30 seconds to go through. To think that at the peak times that people are going to want to try and shoot across 41 with no police officers stopping traffic, you know for again those small amount of times albeit a few hours on a Sunday I think is really asking for a potential situation, so I'm going to throw out, it's a question but it's also a comment. That maybe we consider having public safety and I'll ask staff to look into it, for some time. You know in other words, let's try this for 2 months. See what happens. Get people's feedback and if they don't think we need it, great. But I would hate to think that we're going to start without elevating it to the safest level and then work our way down. Dan Russ: I think it's the church's position that we would definitely want to control safety. If there was an issue there, we would not hesitate to have... Slagle: I understand. Dan Russ: The last think we want is an accident there with injuries of any kind, whether it's our church people or neighbors or anyone else moving on that road system. Keefe: And believe it or not, I think at least when I drove by there on a Sunday morning, I think the traffic volume was heavy enough, and I don't know for sure but it didn't, they were waiting to get in this new entrance. Then they stack all the way back to 41 to 5. There maybe that many cars coming up that way. I just don't know for sure. 15 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Dan Russ: I don't know. I mean our traffic people have told us that that's not the case. Slagle: See this dovetails on the question earlier about the traffic study that we don't have in front of us, and I understand that it's just not here. And I'm not suggesting this is premature without that, but boy I'm hoping staff, you're going to shake your heads yes that we'll just do everything we can to make sure these are safe and work our way down. Dan Russ: Now MnDot looked at the intersection and they didn't, they didn't warrant a traffic study, is that right? Saam: Correct. Yeah, they took traffic counts out there and. Dan Russ: They waived it, so I'm not sure what they were looking at or when. They were looking at the roadways but. Sacchet: Traffic study's expected to be in place before it goes to council. Saam: Correct. Yeah. Sacchet: Because that's very important. Okay. Any more questions of the applicant? I've got a few questions too. In terms of the wetland mitigation, you guys are fine with what the situation is? This is kind of a bummer that it wasn't declared when you had some credits and now you're being told that you can't draw on them because you didn't declare them. When I read that I thought whoa. Dan Russ: It's difficult but it is what it is and we're going to have to abide by it and we appreciate the city's. Sacchet: You just make the thing a little bigger. There's plenty of room and all? Dan Russ: Well, we have land. We're losing more land than we anticipated which will impact the church's ability to expand on that parcel. But we are where we are and we'll have to do what... Sacchet: Do you know where you're going to expand? Like you make what part you're expanding out a little bit further to the west or something like that? Dan Russ: Well the expansion as we anticipate our next phase would be our multi purpose building what we'll call it. Sacchet: I mean the wetland expansion. Dan Russ: Oh, the wetland expansion. Yeah, we're okay with what's happening there... It expanded into usable ground. V Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: Just go around the edge a little further, is that the idea? Dan Russ: Right. Just have to make it bigger. Sacchet: Alright. And with the trees, there are not any significant trees that are coming out because of the road or do you know? Dan Russ: Well people have different opinions of trees and quality of trees. To me they're in the lower wetland type trees. They're not as permanent, beautiful hardwoods that we have along the corridor, along here and the church's position has always been preservation of anything that we can and we've done our best to mitigate removal of trees but there are some trees down there in that lower wetland area. Those beautiful cottonwood that snow in July. There's some of those that down there that we're going to lose but we'll get over that. Sacchet: And you understand, you found a balance about the temporary road with making it bituminous curb and gutter. Dan Russ: Yes. Sacchet: That's not an issue anymore. I think that's all my questions. Dan Russ: And we're working with the city on the cost associated with it and I think we're finding a nice balance there. We have met with the Carlson and the Brandt people to the west of us. Bruce is here and he has involvement in our development is instrumental. We're trying to facilitate him for future use of utilities, water and sewer through the water and sewer that we have connected to the property. And the roadway I think meets with his standards and what he wants and it will line up with his piece right SO. Sacchet: Is there water and sewer going through that roadway? Snam: Not at this time but that is a possibility as the church and Mr. Carlson continue to talk. Sacchet: That it will go through that land. Saam: Possibly. And it would come down the whole length, it'd probably come down from the middle of the site. Maybe in the temporary road, something like that. Dan Russ: We've got sewer service to our facility that will accommodate our three buildings but we've got a system in which we can increase the capacity and as good stewards of the community we'd let him hook onto our system if you will, which then hooks on up in Tanadoona to service his future development so we're in agreement with that. 17 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: Excellent. Thank you very much Dan Russ: You're welcome. Now this is a public hearing. Or are there more applicant comments? I don't know, you had several applicant people right? Sacchet: Alright. This is a public hearing so anybody wants to come forward and comment to this application, this project, this is your turn. Seeing nobody, yes. Please come forward if you want to say something. State your name and address for the record and let us hear what you have to say please. Maren Christopher: My name is Maren Christopher and I live on 7311 Dogwood Road. And so my concern is hearing that West 78h could possibly connect to Dogwood, and I don't know if this is a premature concern because they're talking about a temporary roadway now. We aren't talking about extending it but I did hear that tonight. And I heard extending to Crimson Bay Road, which then I'm assuming Crimson Bay would connect to Dogwood and have the 78 Street connection. So I wanted to voice my concerns. I'm wondering where to go with this. Sacchet: Well actually, I don't know whether all of us were here when this came before and we heard very pronounced opposition from the residents to anything connecting in that area. On the other hand it's my understanding that the comprehensive plan has envisioned there being a connection all along, so we have kind of a clash of two visions here. So is it premature? Well, in one hand it's probably too late you could say because the comprehensive plan was done what, 10, 15 years ago when that was envisioned. On the other hand, it isn't there and it seems like the residents don't want it. I don't know, any comments from engineering viewpoint on that Matt please. Saam: Sure. I guess before anything like that would happen, there'd be a public process just for that. Again while this may set in motion something that could ultimately connect them, this isn't connecting them. So again that would be a separate project and public hearings and everything on it at some time in the future so I guess that's what I would offer up. Just like any, the Carlson development, if that were to go. There'd be, he'd come in. We'd see the sewer and water plans at that time so they are separate but aligned- Maren Christopher: At that time are you considering sewer and water for Dogwood? Saam: We would, I mean we'd love to see that yeah because of the septic issues out there but again at this time that's not on the table as of yet. Maren Christopher: Okay, sojust wait? Saam: Yeah. ff.] Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Slagle: If I can comment, just as a citizen. I wouldn't just wait. Get involved. You know certainly contact some of your neighbors and voice your thoughts to whether it'd be staff. Maren Christopher: I would say we're probably mostly all in agreement. I don't know, there's only 2 of us here and Peter is involved in, he's one of the developers of this property. So I don't know if he has a conflict of interest. And I don't know why none of our other neighbors are here. Usually we all turn out en masse so I'm just amazed. Sacchet: Well this is not an aspect that's really connected, as was pointed out. I mean we're not looking at connecting at this point. Does it make a connection that brings it a little close? Yes, it's halfway there but. Maren Christopher: I know. It's getting closer and I don't want to not speak out. Slagle: Stay involved. Sacchet: Alright, well I appreciate, and it's important that you express that because we all work together. Thank you. Appreciate it. Any other comments? If not, I will close the public hearing. Bring it back to commissioners for comments and discussion. Who wants to start? Should we do the ladies first? Tjornhom: You know I don't have a comment to lead. Lillehaug: I'll start it if I can. Sacchet: Go ahead Steve. Lillehaug: I guess I just want to get this out there. Commissioner Slagle said he didn't want to throw out there that this is premature but I think it is. I have so many notes here. Unanswered questions so I'm just going to start big picture items. I think this is being built because of the inadequacies of Tanadoona. That's my first comment. It's definitely important to have another connector though with that parking lot for safety. I definitely agree with that. But do we put this road in now and build a full intersection? I mean we don't have a traffic study done. I think we hugely have the cart before the horse here. I think my opinion is I would rather see this road temporary all the way out to Trunk ffighway 41 right now. The only purpose of this road right now is to serve the parking lot and possibly help preserve right-of-way in the future for a local road to connect up with the west. I think it's premature. We were sitting up here trying to analyze the traffic and MnDot doesn't have traffic numbers. City doesn't have traffic numbers. We don't have any traffic numbers for this intersection and the geometrics are being set right in front of us already. That's not, in my mind that's not how you build this intersection. For that one reason it's premature. Where else do I go? And I hate talking negative about this. I mean the developer's doing everything possible he can so somehow I want to help this out but I don't think a permanent intersection in the roadway is the answer right now. MnDot has reviewed this but they're not concerned with costs for the future. 19 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 They know the city is going to bury these costs when we go into this intersection again and remove, add median, whatever we have to do there when this road connects up to the west. They're not looking at the cost of what it will take the city to retrofit this intersection again. I mean we just looked at it 2 years ago, whatever it was when we put, when that intersection was made. We put a median in there. Now we're taking it out. We're going to go back and forth here because we don't know what's going on to the west yet and I think I could point out other areas in the city where we tried doing the same thing, up Powers and over there in the Kerber development where this little area was reserved right-of-way and 20 years later we had problems with it and we just dealt with that. This probably wouldn't be that extensive of a case that we would have to deal with but you know, cart before the horse. We saw that first hand. What else here? I have to put my page back. The traffic study. It should just simply be done before we're at this level here. I don't support moving forward without that. Removing that existing median, no way. And then I want to. Slagle: If I can just ask a question. Sorry to interrupt but to you and because of your position outside of this commission, and then also direct to staff. I mean is there a reason this wasn't done? Saam: You mean the traffic study? Slagle: Yeah. Saam: Logistically we need the layouts before the traffic engineer can review it. And then it's just the timing issue. And this was the first time and we were doing the new, doing it the new way I'll call it where the city is getting in escrow from the, I mean all that takes time to get the proposal. To get a consultant on board and get him going and so I guess we as staff didn't want to hold up the developer at this point when they submit because of that. When they're willing to fund it and get everything for us. Work with us on the public street and everything like that so. Sacchet: Is that all Steve? Lillehaug: Sure, I'll try to shorten this up. Again I disagree with removing the median. The median exists on this frontage road almost at every single intersection as it exists right now except for Powers on the west side. You know if you look at this intersection, the proper course of travel isn't immediately obvious without the help of channelization by these medians. It's not easy to follow. I think continuity is in question when you go, when you flow around that intersection and all the different turning movements due to the approach alignments of 78h. 78h Street, there's a slight skew. There is non -symmetry of that intersection and if you look at the radii coming up to that intersection, you know they're not two tangent sections coming up to that intersection. And it will be a fairly wide intersection and a safer design would be one with a median. Obviously if there's a median there right now. 20 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: If I can jump in. Matt, there's no room for a median or I mean I understand it needs to be lined up with the road on the other side so we have to take out the median because it's aiming the wrong way but isn't there room to add a median back in? Saam: I don't think that's the issue. I think we could put one in there if there was a need for it. Sacchet: From your analysis there isn't a need? Saam: ... traffic numbers, there's some things that MnDot did take traffic counts at the intersection. Sacchet: So we're not totally without. Saam: ... 20 year ADT's for the intersection that was requested by Commissioner Lillehaug. We have taken traffic counts at the existing intersection within the last 2 months so they know that the traffic that's going in there. They're not just saying oh, we don't need a signal. It's based on data. We're also having the traffic study reviewed to make sure A, do we not need a signal there? Is this going to work out? Everything like that so if the study comes back by the time of council and says you know, it would be a good idea to have a median, we'll put it in. I don't think it's. Sacchet: So based on the information we have right now, it's not required. Saam: Exactly. Based on the people that we've had look at it, MnDot's traffic engineers, and they do have jurisdiction over this road right now. Even though West 78' Street will be turned back to the city, they have jurisdiction over it right now. Sacchet: Okay. Steve, I didn't mean to interTupt. Lillehaug: No, that's fine. I guess we do have traffic numbers for it now. I don't know. Sacchet: We don't have the study yet. Lillehaug: No. I think a median's important for proper channelization and that's the bottom line. I don't think we should be taking a step backwards on this brand new road. You know no matter who's paying the bill. Even if it's part of my portion, I'm willing to pay it. It's going to be a busier intersection. I see a flavor of this as a continuation of the frontage road out to Trunk 11ighway 5 and connecting up with this. The frontage road's not going to stop at 41. It's going to continue out in my mind and we need to do it right now. Again, I don't want to seem shoe homed in here. If you go up and down that frontage road, I mean I can already see some of it's ripped up already, and it's 2 years old you know. Let me go on here. Sorry here. Sacchet: That's ahight. Take your time. 21 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Lillehaug: The turn lanes on 41. We shouldn't deviate from the minimum required turn lane lengths that MnDot requires regardless if we don't think that traffic major route is going to be to the south and taking a right. It's a standard 300 foot left turn lane and that should be strictly adhered to. You've got 50 miles an hour out on 41 and that should be strictly enforced. Well, if this does go through I think we need a fence on top of that wall. There's a wall further down on the frontage road in front of. Sacchet: Retaining wall you're talking about? Lillehaug: Retaining wall. What did I say? But right to the east of Kwik Trip, it's a significant right on that retaining wall and there is a fence on top of that retaining wall. Sacchet: Are you saying a guard rail or a fence? Lillehaug: A fence. Sacchet: Because it's next to the roadway. You could say it needs a guardrail, not a fence. Lillebaug: Which way does this wall go? Sacchet: The wall is on the south side. Lillehaug: Okay, I'm thinking of, I didn't look at that intersection out there in the field. I looked at the plans so the grades are going down. Dan Russ: The ground is higher than the roadway. Lillehaug: Guardrail, there we go. Definitely a guardrail. Thank you. What else here? You look at the frontage road again to the east. We've got trees up and down that frontage road. We have, I realize there's existing trees out there but I think we should have trees along that frontage road out there to continue the look of the frontage road. It's a continuation of it. Again, a few trees on the north there. They're showing 3. 1 think there's some existing out there but I think it's important that we maintain the standards of screening and berming on the north of that parking lot from Tanadoona and I don't see why we would deviate here. Sacchet: Are we deviating? Ullehaug: Deviating from the standards as far as berming. Enough screening to screen the parking from Tanadoona. I think we're deviating from the standards... Sacchet: Is it possible to berm? I mean what are the grades? Lillehaug: There's 65 feet there. There's plenty of room, in my mind 22 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Keefe: ... for trees or vegetation. I mean there's grass out there. Sacchet: So there's room for planting and possibly berming. Is there room? Dan Russ: Well there certainly room to grade on Tanadoona and then ... so half the parking lot, the berm is material. The other half it would be ... I would think you would want a lower landscape berm... Sacchet: Landscape berm. Dan Russ: Pine trees versus dirt that doesn't do much. Sacchet: Got it. Lillehaug: So in summary I think this should be a temporary driveway connection all the way out to Trunk lEghway 41 at this time. That's what I support. Sacchet: Okay. Thanks for your comments Steve. Any other comments? Discussion? Slagle: I've got a few. Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: If I can ask another question of staff. Comment on Commissioner Lillehaug's last comment about the temporary call it street connecting to a temporary driveway. Why wouldn't we do that? Saam: In our mind now is the time to build it so we're going to have the developer go in there. The church put in curb and gutter, 26 feet wide and we're talking about what we're doing on the east side with ripping stuff out after a couple years. Now we're going to come back within probably 3 to 4 years and tear it out. Or at least along the edges and widen it. I mean to us at least it's a good point that Commissioner Sacchet made. Build it up to where they're proposing their driveway and then we end it, and then when Carlson or whoever comes in in the future, then put the public street on. I think that's a great point but I just think we're missing an opportunity. It's a good use of funds now to do it. We don't have to do it as a public project. The church is willing to take on the lead. And then we just work out a payment agreement. There's some cost savings there. You don't have to go through public bidding, that sort of thing so we just think right now is a good time to do it with the driveway coming in. Sacchet: In terms of safety, I mean is there a difference between the public or the temporary road? Saam: In terms of safety. Well if you talk about the intersection, as I said we're going to make sure that is safe whether it's private or public, and I believe the same improvements would have to be made. In terms of sight distance and that sort of thing. Lining up the 23 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 intersections. Whether we need the median or not. That will all have to be done now. Along the cost savings lines, just let me add, there's things like ponding. Setting up storm sewer. Wetland filling. The grading. I just think it makes total sense to do this now with the private, with the driveway going in. Ut's just make it a little wider. Get it done now. Build it up to their entrance and end it. Slagle: Okay. My comments are as follows. I think I support the project with some conditions added. And I won't add those now. They'll be part of a motion but they center around the median, sidewalk, and the sidewalk would be the crossing of 41 and then the sidewalk issues in the parking lot. In response to Commissioner Lillehaug's concern of premature, I'm almost there Steve but I'm just short of agreeing so that's where I stand right now. Sacchet: Okay. Bethany. Still no comments? Tjomhom: You're going to make me comment. You know I understand the need for an expansion of the parking lot for safety. I understand having a state patrolman out in the dark directing traffic in the rain and the snow and the hazards that that can cause. I too would like to not take away any of the turn lanes, having deviations from the turn lanes on 41. And as far as a traffic study goes, in my mind we do a traffic study now for this section. If you expand for another building, do we do another traffic study for that then? Saam: We're having the traffic study take into account their ultimate development, along with possible ultimate Crimson Bay and Dogwood lots accessing off this road so. Tjomhom: So then they won't have to go back for, and wait for another traffic study. Saam: Hopefully not. Tjomhom: Okay. Now was there a traffic study done in the beginning? Saam: Yes. Tjornhom: And did that traffic study, was it adequate for what we're talking about now? Saam: No, not what we're talking about now. It didn't look at the exact configuration of the future, of these intersection improvements. Of the secondary access. It just basically stated that with additional expansion due to traffic, the Tanadoona intersection isn't going to work on it's own and that second one will have to be added. Tjornhom: That's too bad because we wouldn't probably be having this discussion had the first traffic study been adequate I guess. But I too generally support the project. You have to take the good with the bad and unfortunately, or I mean fortunately or unfortunately I think we have to take the parking lots. 24 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Keefe: I've got a couple comments. Give me a sense on the cost savings. We're going to, the city will be picking up what? The additional 5 feet, is that what my understanding is? Saam: Correct. Keefe: And then the cost of the intersection as well. Saam: No. No, the intersection as previously stated would be required. Those improvements, whether it's private or public so that's why we're reasoning that that portion needs to be paid by the church. So we have done the street costs, some minor pond increasing for the additional street width. The storm water that's generated by the additional widening of the street. That sort of thing. There's additional grading costs. Those type of things. Keefe: You know it seems like this is, at least right now obviously the benefit of the church and public safe�, if indeed traffic will be split somewhat between the Tanadoona Drive and the West 78 Street. You know it's for a couple of hours on a Sunday. Boy, you know so the city's going to be picking up some costs associated with really what's going to benefit probably mostly the church and then people are going to be, there's going to be some people who are going to be driving down 41 at that particular time who hopefully it will be a safer situation because it's not stacking up as much on Tanadoona. Saam: Yeah, I see where you're going but keep in mind, I mean we as a city staff and planners, I'll include myself in that group, we all the time put in trunk or area wide type improvements that maybe aren't utilized to their maximum the minute they go in, but within 5 years they need to be there to further development along and I think that's what we're doing here. We're setting ourselves up. It's in the comp plan... Keefe: Let me ask a second piece to it. What is the timing on the future church development? Do we have any plan in regards to that? Saam: I think Mr. Russ just said to me, within 6 months they're going to be adding another building. They'll be doing more. I mean they have an ultimate plan that was looked at when this originally came in for what, 2-3 more buildings. More parking lots. A chapel out in the, so. You know multi phased development. At least probably 2-3 more improvement expansions. Keefe: 2 or 3 more over what? Any guess on timeframe? I mean you know, just what drive it is. Yeah okay, it's availability of funds. Okay. Dan Russ: ... if we had the funds today, we'd be in tomorrow and wanting to build a 4,500 seat sanctuary you know. Multi-purpose room, gathering room. Potentially a 300- 400 seat small chapel in the woods... 25 Plannin.- Commission Meeting —June 15,2004 Audience member: I think the other thing to consider is the developments to the west of here. We're considering that more in the short term, in the next year or two versus a longer term so. You know again, we can bring something in now but on a temporary basis it's going to be really temporary for all the purposes that we're talking about. Keefe: It's probably outside of the scope of this meeting but what is the timing? 2 years? Audience member: Oh, as soon as we possibly can. We've got to get to agreement with the church on sewer connections and water. Sacchet: And you came in before, as I remember, to look at some of that stuff so they've been here for a work session once to look at that stuff so it's not something new. Keefe: Right, okay. The other thing I guess my other comment, what I would like to see more landscaping on the north end on Tanadoona. I don't know, I would agree with Dan's comment that I think that at least driving by, I think if you were to berm it, I don't know that you'd get a lot of benefit from that but I definitely think it would increase in the vegetation would help some on that particular piece. Sacchet: Thanks Dan. Steve, you want to add something? Lillehaug: Yeah, just a little more. I don't think I'd be having such a big problem with this if the traffic study was done before everything was laid out. Traffic studies can be twisted once things are laid out and I know they get twisted, regardless if it's an independent consultant firm, developer driven, staff driven. That should have been done before now in my mind, and that's the big problem because simple questions, I mean the intersection is laid out and we don't have a clue and staff has indicated this to us. I mean I specifically asked, do we have any existing numbers or proposed numbers and they said there was none there. So how can you design an intersection without any traffic volumes, so that is my biggest problem right now is I can't support this without, what are we approving? We're approving the unknown right here and that's the bottom line. Off site from the developer So 17M done. Sacchet: Alright. Is it my turn? My turn I guess. Well I wish traffic studies would have ... but unfortunately from our experience here, they're most the time more fluff than substance I hate to say it but, in an ideal case it would have been nice to have it here but we don't have it so we have to live with that. Is it premature because of that? Or is it premature to make a public road? I mean the worst that can happen is that it's going to need a light at that intersection. I mean if that intersection's not going to function well, there's a very simple solution then. It's going to have to be signalized. I don't personally think that the lack of the traffic study is a reason to hold this up. Yes, it would be highly preferable and desirable to have it in front of us. I think it's mandatory that that will be in place for council, and that's already being assured that it will be in place for that. But I would be prepared to let this go to council with making that point very, very clear and adding some of the other concerns and addressing them like one of them is definitely the median. And I do agree with you Steve on that. The fact that currently we have a median 26 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 and we rip it out and we settle for something less. It doesn't sound quite right for me. Yes, it's an additional cost that is not attractive from that angle. But why should we go backward? Especially with an intersection that has some complexity to it with the turning movements and everything, in terms of safety. Does it absolutely need one? We're not the specialists on this but from what I'm seeing here, I think it would be a good thing to have. Whether we want to make it a firm condition or not, I don't know. I could go either way on that. It's certainly something that we would want to have looked at very carefully further. Especially before it goes to council. The concern about this becoming a frontage road, and we have at least one neighbor here that spoke up about that. I mean we had very vehement comments last time anything in this context came up that these people, they love their narrow, little road there, Dogwood. The reality is probably that there will be some changes. I mean it's going to be developed, that property west of the church. It's going to have to be accessed and I wonder where it ultimately is going to be. I would expect it's actually going to be to the benefit of that neighborhood to have another access. And it's not going to become a through road. Even if it connects to Crimson Bay, which it may never but I mean that goes through so many turns getting out onto 5, 1 would not consider that a frontage road in the sense of frontage road. I really would think it's going to remain an access road for the residents. Maybe with the addition that the church goers are going to start going that way west rather than come out on 41, but that's speculation. We don't need to delay for that excessively at this point. Should the road follow the standards? I would very much recommend that, but that's out of our hands. I mean that's a MnDot question and if they're willing to negotiate, they're willing to negotiate. That's not in our scope but only I think it's important that those standards be adhered to. Should it be a temporary road all the way to 41? 1 really disagree. Very fundamentally disagree. I think this is the time to make this a public road. This is the time to make this the full width. It goes across a wetland. There is this grading involved and there's a lot involved. Be silly to make it more narrow and then have to add it on. That does not compute and make it too where the driveway is because we don't need to go further at this point and there's no need for the city to bear the cost to go further to go nowhere. Do we need a guardrail above that retaining wall? I think that's mandatory. I think we have an agreement on that. The trees. I'm kind of a tree guy here on this little group, and it kind of irks me that there was no quantification of the trees that are being cut so if maybe that can be looked at a little bit before it goes to council, I think that would make sense. To make sure there is a decent buffer of the parking lot to the north to where it's going to do, and I think that's a very reasonable requirement to put in there in terms of integrating this as well as possible into the existing neighborhood. Sidewalks I think are very important. And I think that it was very well received by the developer to have something that goes across the islands. Kind of up in ... and at the same time adding a sidewalk all the way to the end of the parking lot so that people in a safe way can easily get to church, the service. They can push their strollers, what have you. Made sense and it looks like it received like that. The other aspect of traffic is the crossing of 41. 1 don't know what to do about that. I mean can we make, do we do striping so pedestrians go across? I mean is there a solution? 27 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Saam: Yes. I mean striping, signage, maybe even a push button thing. I doubt we'd get that but. Sacchet: Well once we get a light but we have no light at this point. Saam: Yeah. That's about all we can hope for at this point. Striping and signage. As Commissioner Slagle mentioned, as we have on Powers. Sacchet: Well, that's all my comments. Sorry for being a little lengthy. And I would like to have a motion, if somebody would want to venture a motion. Slagle: I'll make a motion. Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: Hold on one second. Sacchet: You know, while you're still scribbling. I'm actually glad this came through. I mean it's an important comment to make. When this came in front of us at first, at least some of us up here actually spoke up and said how's this going to work with just the Tanadoona. access, and everyone was talking about how this is going to be improved and it's going to be at a 90 degree angle and it is going to be all these wonderful things, but I haven't driven past it too many times when there was traffic but it's a real issue. I think it really, really needs that second access. It needs it where there's a major intersection type thing and I really welcome and want to commend you for bringing this in. Maybe a little before it absolutely is necessary. Totally necessary. I think it's necessary now and it's a good thing to do so I want to commend you for doing that. Are you ready Rich? Slagle: I'm jotting down some conditions but I'm sure there will be a few more. I recommend that the Planning Commission approve Planning Case number 04-20 Site Plan Review for a 143 space parking lot expansion, extension of temporary drive and extension of West 78h Street, , plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions. And I will right now we're at 34. And I'm going to add a few and, well actually do I add them now? I do don't I? Sacchet: Yes, you can add them with your motion. Slagle: My number 35 is a guardrail to be placed on top of the retaining wall on the southern end of the property. Number 36. The raised median on the east side of 41, placed on West 78th currently to be removed and a new one placed in correct alignment with the extension westward of West 78th. 37 would be a sidewalk to be extended along the main driveway from the main entrance of the church on the east side of the main driveway and I'll ask staff to help with the verbiage. But basically running to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends. And then there would be two diagonal walkways similar to the northwest parking lot, on that northern, across the alleys or island if you will. And that's what I have so far so if anybody wants. 19 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: We have a motion. Is there a second? Lillehaug: Point of clarification. This, I think what the applicant told me is wrong. The road is lower than the boulevard in this area. Sacchet: That's what they're saying, yes. Lillehaug: Then we don't need a guardrail. Slagle: Yeah, then we don't need a guardrail. Lillehaug: You don't need a guardrail. You need a fence above the retaining wall. Dan Russ: Correct. Correct. Sacchet: Now you confused me. We have the road and then the drop? Slagle: No. Sacchet: Oh, you have the road and then go up? Dan Russ: Yes. Sacchet: So then you don't need a guardrail. Slagle: No. Okay, no guardrail. Fence. Sacchet: Fence on top of the. Lillehaug: Fence on top of the wall. Keefe: If you have a retaining wall, why do you need a fence? Ullehaug: You don't want anyone... Maybe the Arboretum has a chain link fence out there already. Can staff comment on that? Saam: They do have a fence. Sacchet: If there's not people out there, they don't need a fence. IjIlehaug: Right. So if there's no people up there, the Arboretum already has a fence, then we're probably okay with it I guess. Slagle: Okay, I'll take it off. 29 Planning Commission Meeting —June 15, 2004 Sacchet: Good point. Thanks for clarifying that. I thought it was dropping, not raising. Slagle: Then number 35 is off, okay. Sacchet: Alright. We have a motion. Is there a second? Tjornhom: Second. Sacchet: Wehaveasecond. Are there friendly amendments? More. Saam: Mr. Chair? Sacchet: Yes. Saam: Did you add, just saw on my notes, buffering along Tanadoona. Did I hear that? Sacchet: Not yet. Do you want to add that? Keefe: Yeah, I would like to add. Sacchet: So that would be, since we skipped 35. Slagle: So it would be 37. Sacchet: 37 would be the berming, or the buffering. Landscape buffer. Slagle: Additional landscaping on northern side. Sacchct: On the north side towards Tanadoona. That's this one, okay. We did the median. We can't really require anything to cross 41. That's beyond this project, is it? Slagle: No, we can request. Saam: With the intersection improvements you can. Sacchet: Yeah, because I think we should do something. If we can only do striping, let's do striping. Did I actually mention that? Slagle: Require striping and signage, is that okay Matt? Saam: Yes. Sacchet: Striping, yeah it needs signs otherwise it's useless. Saam: For crosswalk. 01 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Sacchet: For crosswalk, yes. That's important. So that would be 38 Keefe: How about entrance signage? I notice on the plan they've got, are planning on putting in an entrance sign. Do we require anything to be consistent with their other one? Or to be consistent with, is there anything we would amend or do we kind of just let them. Do they have to come back for approval on that anyway? Sacchet: Well signage needs a permit. So they have to come back with their sign so we can let that be at this point. Did we discuss temporary road? Well the conditions require the public road all the way to where the temporary road, driveway comes in. How about, I remember we had some situation in the past where we made a stipulation that should a light be required, a signalized intersection, that there would be some sharing of costs or something to that effect. I don't know how we worded it in the past. I don't know whether we need to go as far as having an escrow or how we would handle that. Saam: Yeah, we've gotten letter of credit or financial security. I think we mentioned financial security will be required to guarantee installation of public improvements. I might offer up that when we get the traffic study by the time of council, if we find we do need a signal at that time we could require it. Sacchet: I think it was Lake Street. Somewhere in the Village of the Ponds we had a situation where we put something in like at Lake Drive, yeah. Saam: Pulte too across the street. We had them escrow funds but again there we had a development contract and everything and at that time we did believe there was going to need to be a signal there. This is before West 78th Street. Sacchet: So we don't need to make that condition, but we can make it comments for council to consider. Keefe: Do we put an amendment in on, for a condition in regards to the traffic study. Do we need to add something along... Sacchet: The traffic, we can make that a comment too. That the traffic study needs to be ready to do to council, and then the same with the light. We can make that comments rather than conditions because it's not something that's probably going to be conditional yet. Okay? Slagle: I don't think I can offer conditions at this point. Right? Is that correct? Sacchet: Yes you can. You can amend. Slagle: If I made the motion? Sacchet: You can friendly amend yourself. 31 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Slagle: Okay, friendly amend myself. Sacchet: But you also have to accept them. Slagle: Yeah. That'd be interesting if you offer one and don't accept it. But I want to have something about the public safety officer. And again I'm thinking for some time frame, and again I'd leave that up to the applicant and staff to work out but I don't think we can just start and then see what happens, and I know the applicant is, so I'm going to put condition number 39. Require public safety officer to continue working both Tanadoona and West 78ffi for 8 weeks. 4 weeks? Sacchet: I wouldn't quantify it Rich. Slagle: Okay. Sacchet: I would trust the operation, but that to state that they have to continue. I think that's fair. Slagle: Continue, okay. Keefe: Just continue for a period of time until they deem it's not necessary. Sacchet: I mean if that's a concern of your's... Slagle: It is. It is. Dan Russ: I would just kind of restate it that public safety. They're the ones that are on top of what needs to happen. We don't know if it's safe or not. We need public safety to tell us, we don't need somebody here or we need somebody here at this time and that time. Slagle: Does that go through you Matt? Saam: I can sure coordinate it. We can work with them because we do the traffic counts and what not so I would. Slagle: Okay, so require public safety officer to continue working intersections as directed by public safety. Okay. Perfect. Because there was no reference to it in here. Sacchet: Okay. Did you accept that amendment? Slagle: I accept that. Sacchet: Alright. We have a motion. We have a second. We have friendly amendments. 32 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 Slagle moved, Tjornhorn seconded that the Planning Conunission recommends approval of Planning Case 04-20 Site Plan Review for a 143 -space X arking lot expansion, extension of temporary drive and extension of West 78 Street, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around all existing landscaping at the edge of grading limits. 3. Any existing landscaping that is removed must be replaced when the parking lot construction is completed. 4. The landscape islands shall be filled with wood chips. 5. Overstory trees are required along West 78th St.; one every 30 feet. 6. Three accessible parking spaces must be added to the existing accessible parking area. 7. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. 8. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands (wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet). Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 9. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 10. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 11. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided overall existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: 33 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 TyRg of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. 13. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 14. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 15. All final plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer. 16. Use the latest version (2004) of the City's Standard Detail Plates. 17. The twin storm sewer culverts under West 78th Street must be RCP Class 5. 18. The existing driveway from Highway 41 to the existing homes in the northwest comer of the West 78th Street intersection must be removed and seeded or sodded. 19. Include concrete driveway aprons and pedestrian ramps for both proposed driveways off of new West 78th Street. 20. The new painted median for the eastbound West 78th Street traffic on the east side of Highway 41 must be a raised concrete median with pedestrian ramps. 21. Install a temporary turnaround with barricades and a sip stating "This street to be extended" at the west end of new West 78th Street. 22. Provide a pedestrian ramp at the northeast comer of the new West 78th Street/ffighway 41 intersection for connection to the future city trail. 23. Incorporate the conditions of the MnDOT review letter dated June 1, 2004 into the plans. 34 Planning Commission Meeting —June 15, 2004 24. Show all of the proposed grades for the new driveway to the existing home in the southeast comer of the site. 25. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. 26. Off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. 27. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork pennit from the City. 28. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. 29. A MnDOT drainage permit will be required. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district pen -nit will be required for the project grading. 30. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. 31. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type R silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of 6' or more. 32. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. 33. Bituminous curb and gutter must be added to the temporary driveway. 34. Prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78th Street must be brought up to current standards in effect at the time." 35. The raised median on the east side of 41, placed on West 7e currently to be removed and a new one placed in correct alignment with the extension westward of West 78th. 35 Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 36. A sidewalk be extended along the main driveway from the main entrance of the church on the east side to the northern end of the driveway where the new parking lot ends and two diagonal walkways similar to the northwest parking lot. 37. Additional landscaping along the north side on Tanadoona Drive. 38. Require public safety officer to continue working the two intersections as directed by public safety. All voted in favor, except Lfflehaug who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Sacchet: Steve, do you want to add, we already heard why you're opposing. Do you want to add summary wise in the vote? Lillehaug: Sure, and the council people want to see a summary because they don't, they requested that so in a quick summary. I think this is premature without the traffic study being completed. I don't think we should deviate backwards from not re -installing concrete median. Slagle: We are going to do that. Sacchet: We asked that to happen. Ullehaug: Good. I must have been asleep. Sacchet: We did listen to you some. Lillehaug: Well then I'm happy. No, no, no. I still feel it's premature. Sacchet: So that would not have changed your vote? Lillehaug: No. Sacchet: And you made that very clear in your comments so. Ullehaug: Even with median we need a traffic study. We just need it. Sacchet: Okay. Well let me summarize for council a little bit and you guys help me out. We all, I believe in some degrees welcome this secondary access. Slagle: Want to do this one first? Sacchet: Oh no, we do, well yeah. Let's do the second motion. 01 Planning Commission Meeting —June 15, 2004 Slagle: I would make a motion that we approve planning case 04-20 Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated May 14, 2004 subject to the following conditions, I through 9. Sacchet: We have a motion. Is there a second? Keefe: Second. Sacchet: Any comments? Additions? Friendly amendments? No? Slagle moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning Case 04-20 Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: I The applicant shall develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required 2:1 replacement without employing credits constructed during the first phase. 2. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 3. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands. (Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet.) Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 4. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 5. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 6. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. 7. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: OrA Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 T3W of SloK Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. 8. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain perrnits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval." All voted in favor, except Lillehaug who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Sacchet: It's still 4 to I as before. I assume for the same reasons. And summary for council. I believe we all welcome in some form the additional access capability there as it is accessing the church as well as the somewhat landlocked land on the west side there, which was brought in front of us before as a concern. We have concerns about the traffic study not having been completed. We definitely would like to see that completed before it goes to council. I think that's a requirement. We also have an issue about, what was the other one we wanted the council? Whether it needs a light. That's it, the light. That it needs to be looked at and it's connected to the traffic study. That there seems to be high probability that at some point this intersection will have to signalized. And that we wondered whether there might be stipulation in this that the applicant would have to help bear some of the costs of a traffic light. We've had cases like that before where we put in stipulations like that with developments, developers should that arise. I don't know whether we would go as far as putting... Want to add something Rich? Slagle: Directly on that subject, and I would just ask that the council, if that is discussed, that it be in the broad sense of applicants plural. Future applicants. That that is shared with all due respect. Sacchet: It would have to be in the context between the different applicants definitely so. There is the recurring comment that comes from the neighborhood to the west along the lake that they really don't want more roads going in there, which is somewhat in conflict with the comprehensive plan that was envisioning West 78h somewhat connecting into that area. We don't think that this will ever become a really major frontage road. We believe it's going to stay just a neighborhood access either way. We do think it's 79P Planning Commission Meeting — June 15, 2004 important for all the road alterations on 41 to follow the full standards of road construction from MnDot and so forth with the turning lanes and everything. We looked at safety and we had some concerns about crossing 41. We want to make sure there's sufficient sidewalks on either side accessing the new parking lot area. I think that was very well received with crosswalks across the islands and then walkway all the way to the end of the parking lot. Additional landscape buffering towards Tanadoona to integrate it more, and also a tree study was kind of absent from this in terms of what are we cutting down. I would think that'd be an element that could be addressed to some extent when it goes in front of council. I would encourage that. And I think that's about the comments. Anything else? Ullehaug: I had one rebuttal comment is, my opinion is that it will have a flavor of a frontage road once this is connected with Crimson Bay. Sacchet: Okay. If it gets connected. If. Lillehaug: If, there we go. Yep. Sacchet: Alrigbt. And I think that's it for this one. Thank you very much. Wish you luck with this project. Thanks for cooperating and everything. PUBLIC HEARING: LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF IHGHWAY 5 AND GALPIN Bob Generous presented the staff report on this itenL Sacchet: Thanks Bob. Questions from staff. Tjomhom: My question is regarding, and I don't know if I missed it in my reading because I could have missed it but the drive thru stipulation. Was there a whole part that showed the hours and you know noise, speakers, lighting, that kind of thing or wasn't there? Generous: There wasn't as part of the staff report, no. Tjomhom: Okay. And I mean, is that something we should talk about or is it okay? Generous: Well if it's a concern of your's, we can definitely request the applicant clarify what their hours of operation are. Tjomhom: We don't have any rules though about hours or anything like that? 39 * CITY OF CHANHASSEN STAFF REPORT PC DATE: June 15,2004 CC DATE: July 12, 2004 REVIEW DEADLINE: July 13,2004 CASE#: 04-20 BY: REG, LH, ML, JS, MS, ST PROPOSAL: Request for Site Plan Approval to expand the parking lot (143 spaces) and the extension of West 78dStreet, and a Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, Westwood Community Church. LOCATION: 3121 Westwood Drive (west of TH 41 at Tanadoona Drive) APPLICANT: Dan Russ c/o Welsh Development 7807 Creckridge Circle Minneapolis, MN 55439-2609 (952) 897-7745 % W If! Westwood Community Church 3121 Westwood Drive Excelsior. NfN 55331 PRESENT ZONING: Office and Institutional District, 01 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Public/Semi-Public ACREAGE: 58.61 acres DENSITY: N/A SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the expansion of the parking lot by 143 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78dStreet extension and construction of the West 78h Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets those standards, the City must then approves the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 2 PROPOSAUSUNMIARY The site was previously developed with the first phase of an ultimate project that will create a campus for Westwood Community Church. The applicant is proposing the expansion of the parking lot by 143 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78d' Street extension and construction of the West 78b Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. It should be noted that the extension of West 78th Street will be a public/private partnership. Westwood Church is only required to build a 26 -foot wide driveway with curb and gutter to serve their development. Tbrough negotiations with the City, Westwood has agreed to upgrade their proposed access to a 3 1 -foot public street with the City paying for the cost difference for oversizing of the road. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan for the parking expansion, driveway connection and West 78d' Street extension and the wetland alteration permit. BACKGROUND On September 27, 2001, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Land use amendment from Residential — Low Density to Public/Serni-Public based on the findings in the staff report and contingent upon Metropolitan Council review and approval. Rezoning of the property from Rural Residential, RR, to Office and Institutional, 01 based on the findings in the staff report. Site Plan #2001-10, plans prepared by Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc., dated July 6, 2001, with a onc-story variance from the Office and Institutional district regulations and a 2.5 -foot variance from the 40 -foot building height Highway Corridor District regulations. Wedand Alteration Permit to alter and fill 34,900 square feet (0.8 acres) of wetlands. However, only part of the wetland alteration occurred for the extension of the sewer and construction of the storm water pond. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article H, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetlands Chapter 20, Article X)U, -or, Office and Institutional District Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 3 GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The applicant is proposing the ex ansion of the parking lot by 143 spaces, extension of a driveway to the proposed West 78 9 Street extension and construction of the West 78h Street extension. No additional buildings are proposed as part of the current site plan. LANDSCAPING The applicant is proposing parking lot landscaping consistent with the existing lots. The center island landscaping uses crabapples in a mass, organized planting. Plantings along the entryway drive are the same species as the existing lot creating a uniform view into the site. Required Proposed Vehicular use landscape area 5,952 sq. ft. >5,952 sq. ft. Trees/ parking lot 24 overstory 12 overstory 12 islands/peninsulas 60 understory 2 islands/peni sulas Proposed landscaping meets minimum ordinance requirements. The apphcant is consistent with the parking lot landscaping previously approved for the existing lots. As before, the applicant is installing trees that are smaller than ordinance requirements, but planting more than are required. The smaller sizes are acceptable to staff because the applicant is meeting the minimum requirements for caliper inches rather than quantities of materials. For example, there are 24 overstory trees required for the parking lot. At the required size of 2 1/2" diameter, a total of 60 inches is required. The applicant is proposing 72 trees measuring I" - 1 1/2" diameter for a total of 85 diameter inches. Staff supports this approach for two reasons. Firstly, it has been documented that planting smaller sized materials often results in healthier, less stressed plants due to the reduction in root loss and transplant stress. Secondly, the site ultimately gets nearly twice the number of plants as it would have had the applicant proposed the standard required size of materials. Ordinance requires boulevard trees along all collector roads. The extension of West 78th Street will require an overstory tree every 30 feet. WETLANDS Eidsting Wetlands There are two agturban wetlands present on-site. Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) delineated the wetlands in May 1997 and reexamined the site on May 9, 2001. Wetland I is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property, just south of the existing building. The northern part of the wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, while the southern part of the wetland supports forest vegetation, such as box elder. The applicant is proposing wetland fill for a road in order to provide circular vehicular movement around the Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 4 campus. This road is proposed to cross Wetland I just north of the southern property line. The width and height of the road have been minirnized in order to reduce the amount of wetland impact required. The total proposed impact to Wetland I is 30,033 square feet (0.70 acres). Wetland 2 is a Type I wetland located at the far west end of the parcel. It is dominated by American elm and green ash with an understory of greater straw sedge. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland Replacement The applicant is proposing the construction of 31,650 square feet (0.73 acres) of new wetland credit (NWC) adjacent to Weiland 1. The applicant has proposed employing storm water ponds constructed with this phase (14,500 square feet) as public value credit (PVC) for a portion of the required 2:1 replacement ratio. The applicant has also proposed using 13,916 square feet of PVC that was created with the first phase of this project. Nfinnesota Rule 8420.0740 Subp. I (F) states that "In cases where excess wetland acreage is expected to result from a specific replacement plan.... the owner must indicate on the replacement plan that the excess acreage is to be considered available for wetland banking or lose the opportunity to use the excess credits for future projects." Since this was not done with the initial wetland alteration permit, these public value credits are not available. The applicant should develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required 2:1 replacement (provide the additional required 13,916 square feet) without employing credits constructed during the first phase. Wetland replacement must occur in a manner consistent with the Mnnesota Weiland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant must receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. The applicant should provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Weiland. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) must be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands. (Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet.) Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant will install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. All structures must maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wedand buffer. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The grading for this site can be broken into two separate operations: one is for the additional parking lot on the north side of the site and the other is for the extension of West 78,h Street at the south end of the site. The additional parking area was previously rough graded with the original Westwood Church project. The applicant is now proposing to finish grade the area for paving. At the south end of the site, the entire south property line will be graded for the extension of West 780'Street from ffighway 41. In addition, two driveways will be graded to the Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 5 north of West 78h Street for access to the new road. The applicant will also be grading for the construction of a new pond and wetland mitigation area. To avoid significant grading into the Landscape Arboretum's property at the southeast comer of the site, a retaining wall, ranging in height from 4'to 9', is proposed. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. Even with the wall, there is a small amount of grading that is proposed on the northeast comer of the Arboretum's property. This off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. Drainage from the new parking lot will be conveyed via storm sewer to an existing public pond off the northeast comer of the site. This existing pond has been previously sized for the additional impervious drainage so no further improvements are required. A new pond at the south end of the site is proposed to treat a large majority of the drainage from the new public street, private driveways and future parking lots on the church property. The pond will discharge the treated stormwater to the existing wetland just east of the pond. This wetland then drains south into the Arboretum's property. The outlet rate from this wetland is required to be the same or less than the existing flow rate of stormwater onto the Arboretum's property. The eastern 300 feet of new West 78th Street is proposed to drain to the Highway 41 ditch at the northwest comer of the intersection. This will require a MnDOT drainage pen -nit. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district permit will be required for the project grading. Drainage calculations for the existing and proposed conditions including the 10- and 100 -year runoff rates along with storm sewer sizing data has been submitted for staff review. Staff has reviewed the calculations and found that only minor modifications are needed. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPFI). Staff recommends that the City's Type Il silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of Gor more. Storm Water Management According to July 18, 2001 correspondence from Peter Olin with regard to the previous phase, the Arboretum has reviewed the plans for the Westwood Church Development. The Arboretum is concerned that the culverts under the West 78th Street extension will affect the volume and Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 6 rate of runoff from the site and that this, in turn, will affect the research plots on the Arboretum property. The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoff rates. Staff will review the storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may want to work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. Easements Drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Erosion control blanket should be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas must have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3:1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets should include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. Surface Water Management Fees Since the proposed project does not require the subdivision of property, it is not subject to water quality and water quantity connection charges. Other Agencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 7 UTILITIES With no building expansion being proposed at this time, no h utility improvements are proposed except for a short watermain extension under new West 78' Street at the southeast comer of the site. This watermain is meant for future development purposes. STREETS/ACCESS As a condition of approval for the development of the original Westwood Church project, a second driveway access at the intersection of West 78h Street was required to be constructed prior to any further development of the site. As such, Westwood Church is now proposing to construct a secondary access to the site with the expansion of their parking area. To accomplish this, Westwood Church has acquired the two properties at the southeast comer of their site. As previously mentioned, City staff and Westwood have come to an agreement to upgrade the proposed access from a 26 -foot wide driveway to a 31 -foot wide public street. The City is in favor of having a public street for a few reasons: it will provide an alternate access for church traffic to exit the site, it will provide a future access for the development of the property (Carlson/Brandt) west of the church's site, and it will provide a secondary access for the Dogwood Road residents in the future. The extension of West 78'h Street is proposed as a 3 I -foot wide public street with concrete curb and gutter. The street has been shown within an 80 -foot easement. A 10 -foot wide bituminous trail is also included to provide pedestrian/bike access from future development to the west. The proposed trail will connect with the existing trail system on the east side of Ffighway 41. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. In 2001, when staff was previously considering the extension of West 78h Street, the Landscape Arboretum expressed no interest in the project or of having the road on their property. Because of this, the entire length of the proposed West 78h Street extension has been shown on the Church's property. This also necessitates the re -alignment of the existing West 781h Street/lEghway 41 intersection on the east side of the highway. The existing intersection does not line up with the proposed extension of West 780'Street. All of the necessary intersection and turn lane improvements will be completed with this project. The City has retained the services of a traffic engineer to look at the proposed intersection layout and ensure that it will operate effectively based on the ultimate development of the area. Staff hopes to have the results of this traffic study in time for the June 15, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. As previously mentioned, Westwood Church is required to construct a 26 -foot wide driveway with concrete curb and gutter, per City Code. The proposed access driveway to the existing church site from West 78h Street is labeled as a "Temporary Parking Drive" that is 24 feet wide with no curb and gutter. It is staffs understanding that the church intends to expand within the next five years but that there are no specific plans for future building locations and/or elevations. As such, staff would recommend that bituminous curb and gutter be added to the temporary driveway. Additionally, a condition should be included with this approval that prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78'h Street will be brought up to current standards in effect at the time. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15,2004 Page 8 RECOMWNDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motions (A & 13): A. "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning Case 04-20 Site Plan Review for a 143 -space parking lot expansion, extension of temporary drive and extension of West 78'h Street, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: I The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around all existing landscaping at the edge of grading limits. 3. Any existing landscaping that is removed must be replaced when the parking lot construction is completed. 4. The landscape islands shall be filled with wood chips. 5. Overstory trees are required along West 78th St.; one every 30 feet. 6. Three accessible parking spaces must be added to the existing accessible parking area. Weiland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. 8. A welland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around all existing and proposed wetlands (wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet). Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 9. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 10. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 11. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided overall existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 9 12. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Typp of S12M Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3: 1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. 13. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 14. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 15. All final plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer. 16. Use the latest version (2004) of the City's Standard Detail Plates. 17. The twin storm sewer culverts under West 78th Street must be RCP Class 5. 18. The existing driveway from Highway 41 to the existing homes in the northwest comer of the West 78th Street intersection must be removed and seeded or sodded. 19. Include concrete driveway aprons and pedestrian ramps for both proposed driveways off of new West 78th Street. 20. The new painted median for the eastbound West 78th Street traffic on the east side of Highway 41 must be a raised concrete median with pedestrian ramps. 21. Install a temporary turnaround with barricades and a sign stating "This street to be extended" at the west end of new West 78th Street. 22. Provide a pedestrian ramp at the northeast comer of the new West 78th Street/ffighway 41 intersection for connection to the future city trail. 23. Incorporate the conditions of the MnDOT review letter dated June 1, 2004 into the plans. Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 10 24. Show all of the proposed grades for the new driveway to the existing home in the southeast comer of the site. 25. A permit for the proposed retaining wall is required to be obtained from the Building Department and the wall must be designed by a registered structural engineer. 26. Off-site grading will require a temporary easement or right -of -entry agreement from the Arboretum. 27. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. 28. All areas disturbed as a result of construction -related activity must be sodded and/or seeded and disc mulched within two weeks of disturbance. 29. A MnDOT drainage permit will be required. In addition, an NPDES permit and Watershed district permit will be required for the project grading. 30. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the wetland, pond, and the adjacent mitigation areas. An easement for access purposes will also be required for future maintenance of the wetlands. 31. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type H silt fence, which is a heavy duty fence, be used adjacent to all existing wetlands and ponds. In addition, erosion control blankets should be used on all slopes 3:1 or greater with heights of 6' or more. 32. A financial security will be required to guarantee installation of the public improvements. 33. Biturninous curb and gutter must be added to the temporary driveway. 34. Prior to any future building expansion to the west side of the existing church building, the temporary access driveway from West 78th Street must be brought up to current standards in effect at the time." B. 'The Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning Case 04-20 Wetland Alteration Permit to alter and fill wetlands on site, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 14, 2004, subject to the following conditions: Planning Commission Westwood Community Churrh Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page I I 1. The applicant shall develop an amendment to the wetland replacement plan to achieve the required 2:1 replacement without employing credits constructed during the first phase. 2. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). The applicant shall receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any wetland impact occurring. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 3. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained around 0 existing and proposed wetlands. (Wetland buffers proposed for PVC must maintain a width of 16.5 feet.) Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and will pay the City $20 per sign. 4. All structures shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 5. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to staff to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The applicant may work with the Arboretum to ensure their concerns are addressed. 6. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used for mitigation credit and storm water ponds. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: TyEn of SIgN Time (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area Steeper than 3: 1 7 days is not actively being worked.) 10:1 to 3:1 14 days 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. 8. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Planning Commission Westwood Community Church Case No. 04-20 June 15, 2004 Page 12 Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering) and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval." ATTACMdENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Reduced Copy Site Survey 4. Reduced Copy Site Plan 5. Reduced Copy Parking Lot Construction 6. Reduced Copy Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan G-1 7. Reduced Copy Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan G-2 8. Reduced Copy Landscape Plan 9. Letter from Juanita Voigt, MnDOT, to Kate Aanenson dated June 1, 2004 10. Public Hearing Notice & Affidavit of Mailing gAplan\2004 planning cases\04-20 - westwood corrununity chumh spr & wap\staff report westwood.doc