PC Staff Report 10-21-08
PC DATE: October 21,2008
CC DATE: November 10,2008
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
REVIEW DEADLINE: November 18,2008
CASE #: 08-16
BY: AF, RG, TJ, ML, JM, JS
PROPOSED MOTIONS:
A. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Rezoning
of Lot 1, Block 1, from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Office & Institutional District, 01."
B. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the
Conditional Use Permit with Variances to encroach into the primary zone and required buffer
for development in the Bluff Creek Corridor; subject to conditions 1 through 8 on page 33."
C. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the
Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating one lot, two outlots and dedication of public right-of-way,
plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated September 5, 2008, subject to
conditions 1 through 42 on pages 33-37."
D. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Site Plan
Review with Variances for building height, Bluff Creek Primary Zone setbacks and parking
setbacks for Planning Case #08-16, for a two-phase, three-story, 160,000 square-foot medical
center, and up to a 731-stall, five-level parking ramp on Lot 1, Block 1 of the development, plans
prepared by Pope Associates, Inc. and Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated September 19,
2008, subject to the conditions 1 through 26 on pages 37-39."
And,
E. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a sign size
Variance request to permit an eight (8) foot tall sign with up to 64 square feet of sign display area,
subject to conditions 1 through 4 on page 39."
The Planning Commission also adopts the attached findings of fact and recommendations.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: FAIRVIEW CHANHASSEN MEDICAL CENTER
The developer is requesting the following:
. Conditional Use Permit with Variances for development in the Bluff Creek Corridor;
. Rezoning from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Office & Institutional, 01;
. Subdivision into one lot, two outlots and dedication of public right-of-way;
. Site Plan Review with Variances for a two-phase, three-story, 160,000 square-foot medical
center, and a 731-stall, five-level parking ramp, and signage.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 2 of 40
LOCATION: Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Addition (southeast comer of Powers
Boulevard/CSAH 17, and Highway 212)
APPLICANT:
United Properties, LLC
3500 American Boulevard West
Minneapolis, MN 55431
(952) 837-8525
william.katter@uproperties.com
Timothy & Dawne Erhart
9611 Meadowlark Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office and Residential- Low Density (net density 1.2 - 4.0 units
per acre)
ACREAGE: 116.88 acres DENSITY: F.A.R.0.36
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings because the City is
acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning must be consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
The City's discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the
proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning
Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a
quasi judicial decision.
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 these standards, the
City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the
proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a
relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation
from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
The City has limited discretion in approving or denying conditional use permits, based on
whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning
Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the
permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
The City's discretion in approving or denying a wetland alteration permit is limited to whether or
not the proposal meets the standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these
standards, the City must approve the wetland alteration permit. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 3 of 40
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to build a medical center southeast of the intersection of Minnesota
Trunk Highway 212 and Powers Boulevard. The facility is intended to be constructed in two
phases and be a total of 160,000 finished square feet. The full build out is contingent upon a
turnback to the land owner of MnDOT right-of-way. In the event that this turnback does not
occur, the applicant has requested to build a four-story building totaling 112,000 square feet.
The site is located within the Bluff Creek Overlay District (District). This district was created in
1998 based upon the findings and recommendations of the 1996 Bluff Creek Watershed Natural
Resources and Management Plan. The district was intended to have several functions. The
primary function of the district is to protect the geomorphology and hydrology of Bluff Creek, a
303d listed impaired water, and to preserve the natural corridor from the Minnesota River Valley
to Lake Minnewashta Regional Park for aesthetic, recreational and wildlife benefits.
In reviewing the proposed project, there are two major issues that need to be reviewed:
· The background, vision and rules governing and the impact of the proposed development on
the Bluff Creek corridor, including the location of the building, the encroachment into the
primary zone, and any necessary or appropriate mitigation, which will be reviewed in the
conditional use permit discussion.
· The impacts of the development on infrastructure, especially traffic, which is reviewed as
part of the subdivision and site plan.
The applicant is requesting a subdivision of the
property and a site plan review to permit the
development of a medical clinic on the westerly
portion of the property and to provide access for
the future development of the eastern portion of
the property.
The property surrounding this site is zoned
Agricultural Estate District, A2, and is located in
the next area of urban services expansion
anticipated for the City. To the north is the
eastbound ramp to Highway 212, a passive park
area purchased by the City in the 1998, the
southern portions of the Wilson nursery property,
and two single-family homes on larger lots. To the east is Highway 101 across which is Bandimere
Community Park and single-family homes. To the south are single-family homes on large lots.
West across Powers Boulevard is a vacant farm field and wetlands that is guided for Office uses.
Water service was provided to the site in conjunction with the Highway 212 project. The water
extension was expedited to avoid the necessity of having to retrofit a water line under the new
highway and along Powers Boulevard. Sewer service is being provided in conjunction with City
Project #08-09, which is anticipated for approval in early 2009. This sewer project includes a lift
station located south of the local street connection to Powers Boulevard which will serve all the land
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 4 of 40
in the City south of Highway 212 currently not connected to City sewer, and a force main from the
lift station to Lyman Boulevard.
The portion of the site proposed for development is limited to the extreme western quarter ofthe
property. Portions of this area are part of the Bluff Creek corridor primary zone. A created wetland
and proposed wetland mitigation area are located in the eastern portion of the development area. A
ridge line, with a high elevation of approximately 924, divides the western development area from
the eastern development area. A wooded area runs from the northeast to the southwest across this
portion of the site. The site generally slopes from the north and east to the southwest with an
elevation of868. An existing stormwater pond is located in the west central portion of the site.
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development with modifications, subject to the
conditions contained within the staff report.
APPLICABLE REGUA TIONS
Chapter 18, Subdivisions
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review
Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 2, Conditional Use Permits
Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetland Protection
Chapter 20, Article XXI, "01" Office and Institutional District
Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 7, Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office-
Institutional Developments
Chapter 20, Article XXIV, Off-Street Parking and Loading
Chapter 20, Article XXV, Landscaping and Tree Removal
Chapter 20, Article XXVI, Signs
Chapter 20, Article XXXI, Bluff Creek Overlay District
BACKGROUND
As part ofthe City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan update, the
City proposed a Land Use amendment of the westerly 10
acres of the property from Residential-Low Density to
Office. This site also represents a significant gateway into
our community. As such, it is anticipated that the
development be a higher caliber and grander scale than
other development in the 01 district. This area is
topographically and vegetatively separated from the
remainder of the parcel to the east. It is anticipated that
the remainder of the site will develop with a mix of
housing types that maintain the 1.2 - 4.0 units per acre
density.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 5 of 40
On October 23,2006, the Chanhassen City Council approved Wetland Alteration Permit #06-32
for the construction of an access road and stormwater pond. The wetland mitigation for this is
located just east of the proposed Lot 1 and north of the large wetland complex.
In 2006, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) constructed an extension of
Powers Boulevard from Lyman Boulevard to Pioneer Trail in conjunction with the Trunk Highway
212 project. Future development within the City requires a lift station south of TH 212 and north of
Pioneer Trail along Powers Boulevard. In addition, the TH 212 project needed to provide access to
properties south ofTH 212, west and east of the Powers Boulevard extension. Due to Carver
County's requirements for separation of access points onto a county road, the curb cut to access the
Erhart property was located adjacent to an existing wetland. The applicant proposed the
construction of a 31- foot wide street to provide access to the western portion of the property, in
addition to the future City lift station. In conjunction with the access point and lift station location,
the property owner requested and received a wetland alteration permit (planning Case #06-32) in
2006. The wetland mitigation required of the permit has not been completed.
On July 10, 1995, the City Council approved the preliminary and final plat of Butternut Ridge
Addition, Subdivision #95-9, creating one lot and one outlot. This subdivision permitted the
property owner to sell the 2~-acre home site on the property and keep the balance of the site for
the owner's personal use and future development.
REZONING
While the development had originally been contemplated as a planned unit development (PUD),
staff felt that Office & Institutional (01) zoning with a variance request was more appropriate for
the site. The 01 district is a limited use district that permits health services/hospitals, offices and
cultural type uses, which will be more compatible with the existing and future residential
development to the east. The proposed zoning classification is consistent with the office land use
designation of the northwesterly comer of the property that was proposed as part of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan update. The balance of the property is guided residential-low density and
will maintain its Agricultural Estate District (A2) zoning until it is ready for development.
ARTICLE XXI. "01" OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-791. Intent.
The intent of the "01" District is to provide for public or quasi-public nonprofit uses and
professional business and administrative offices.
Sec. 20-792. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "01" District:
(1) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
(2) Community center.
(3) Churches.
(4) Fire station.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 6 of 40
(5) Funeral homes.
(6) Health services/hospitals.
(7) Library.
(8) Museum.
(9) Nursing homes.
(10)Offices.
(11 )Post office.
(12)Public parks/open space.
(13)Public recreational facilities.
(14)Schools.
(15)Utility services.
Sec. 20-793. Permitted accessory uses.
The following are permitted accessory uses in the "01" District:
(1) Parking lots.
(2) Signs.
(3) Temporary outdoor sales (subject to the requirements of section 20-312).
Sec. 20-794. Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in the "01" District:
(1) Adaptive reuse of vacant public or private school buildings for private business uses.
(2) Commercial towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
Sec. 20-795. Lot requirements and setbacks.
The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "01" District subject to additional
requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter:
(1) The minimum lot area is 15,000 square feet.
(2) The minimum lot frontage is 75 feet, except that lots fronting on a cul-de-sac shall have a
minimum lot frontage. of 60 feet.
(3) The minimum lot depth is 150 feet.
(4) The maximum lot coverage is 65 percent.
(5) Off-street parking shall comply with district setback requirements except:
a. There is no minimum setback when it abuts a railroad right-of-way, except as
provided in chapter 20, article XXV, division 3 pertaining to landscaping
requirements.
b. There is no minimum setback when it abuts, without being separated by a street,
another off-street parking area.
c. The minimum setback is 50 feet when it abuts a residential district without being
separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of-way.
d. The minimum setback is 25 feet for side street side yards.
(6) The maximum height is as follows:
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 7 of 40
a. For the principal structure, two stories.
b. For accessory structures, one story.
(7) Minimum setback requirements:
a. F or front yards, 35 feet.
b. For rear yards, 30 feet.
c. For side yards, 15 feet.
d. The minimum setback is 50 feet when it abuts a residential district without being
separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of-way.
Sec. 20-796. Interim uses.
The following are interim uses in the "01" District:
(I) Temporary classroom structures for use by public or private schools needed for
temporary use.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT
Fairview Medica I
Center
Bluff Creek
Over I ay District
.,.
.
~-
::.. ~:::
I =::-""-'
Development within the Bluff Creek corridor requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit. As
part of this specific development request, the applicant is requesting a variance from the primary
zone boundary to encroach into the primary zone for the development of the project, including
buildings, grading, parking and driveway, stormwater ponding and the proposed wetland
mitigation area. The Bluff Creek Primary Zone encompasses approximately the westerly 20
percent of the property.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21,2008
Page 8 of 40
Bluff Creek is entirely within the City of Chanhassen. It provides a unique blend of habitat,
vegetation and recreational opportunities through the center of the City. The corridor
encompasses all of the land which drains to Bluff Creek. In December 1996, the City of
Chanhassen adopted the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan
(BCWNRMP). The plan was the culmination of several years of study and planning focused on
protecting the natural and recreational resources provided by the Bluff Creek corridor. The
BCWNRMP recommended the establishment of a primary zone (the creek, riparian wetlands,
associated steep slopes, native vegetation) and a secondary zone (other undeveloped portions of
the watershed) as a tool to help protect the creek's natural resources. The primary and secondary
zones were mapped at that time using aerial photography to provide staff and the public with a
general idea of where the zones would lie.
The City of Chanhassen established the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) by ordinance in
1998. The BCOD was modified on this property to remove that portion impacted by grading
north of the pond and that portion impacted by the construction ofTH 212. Even with this
modification of the BCOD, a significant portion of the property remains encumbered by the
BCOD. The primary zone includes the forested area of the site and the wetlands contained
therein, which included the wetland that was filled as part of the approved wetland alteration
permit in 2006.
~\ ~
/'
..... .
"
IIttfoF
It
W
I-
Z
~ 0 J
J 0 <l
<l [J it
u OJ w
o C <l
w w OJ
L !!l 0
" > 0
" W N
~ a:
>
It
~
~
h~
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 9 of 40
As is pointed out in the developer's narrative, this will be the first variance of this type within the
Bluff Creek Overlay District in this area. Decisions made regarding this development will set a
precedent for future developments. The Bluff Creek Overlay District was intended to preserve
the natural corridor along Bluff Creek for aesthetic, recreational, wildlife and water quality
functions. As Section 20-1551 states, "significant natural features should impact development
rather than development impacting significant natural features."
Bluff Creek is a 303d-listed water with turbidity and fish IBI impairments. It is known to have
significant erosion and sediment issues resulting from the increase in surface water discharge
volumes to the creek. The Bluff Creek Overlay District was intended, in part, to guide
development to minimize the increases in hardscape that accompany development by creatively
designing site plans to reduce impervious surface and save significant natural resources.
Because of the need to define the underlying causes of the erosion within Bluff Creek, the Bluff
Creek Corridor Feasibility Study was undertaken. This study identified 22 severely eroded
gullies and escarpments just in the lower valley alone downstream of the proposed development.
Q......---.......
..--.-'-'"'
[:'. ::~='
<!J... :::''7..~'"
(:)
'.
i:
III !
O~[J!V'EW""'P
""'~c~~.;:-s.r...:.
c.--C<Iutt,.....
Figure 3. Bluff Creek erosion issues downstream of proposed development
Properties within the Bluff Creek Overlay District are subject to the following requirements:
1. A conditional use permit is required prior to all subdivisions, site plans, land alteration and
building within the BCOD.
2. Bluffs must be preserved as set forth in Article XXVIII of City Code.
3. Density transfers can be used to cluster development in areas where the location of the
primary zone makes portions of the site unsuitable for development.
4. Natural habitat areas within the primary zone must be preserved as open space.
5. The primary zone must be 100 percent open space.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 10 of40
6. All structures must be set back at least 40 feet from the primary zone.
7. The first 20 feet of the setback from the primary zone cannot be disturbed.
The area has experienced extensive land alteration in the last two years with the construction of
TH 212, the extension of Powers Boulevard and the placement of the access road onto the site.
The corridor, which was contiguous in 2006, has experience significant fragmentation, tree loss
and wetland loss.
~ ~ ~
~n
~ is .
1..0
~ 5 ~
!t
.. ~
2006 Existing Conditions 2008 Existing Conditions
Figure 4. Land use changes from 2006 to 2008
All of these land use changes lead to increased runoff to Bluff Creek and further degradation of
the creek. In addition, as loss of wetland and woodland diminishes the wildlife and aesthetic
value of the area, the function and value of the Bluff Creek corridor as a natural area is reduced.
Natural Habitat Preservation
Section 20-1561. Natural Habitat Preservation.
(a) Natural habitat areas within the primary zone shall be preserved as permanent open space.
Any development that occurs shall be directly related to the development of a continuous
greenway along the creek from the Minnesota River to Lake Minnewashta as outlined in the
Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan.
(b) Where possible, any disturbances of natural habitat areas within the secondary zone shall be
avoided. Any alterations to the natural habitat within the secondary zone shall adhere to the
practices delineated in the city's surface water management plan.
Land use changes on the property have already resulted in the loss of one Manage 1 wetland and
a significant area of woodland. The proposed development plan will remove nearly three
additional acres of trees. Further, the limits of tree removal and the placement of the road will
completely sever the southwestern portion of the site, as well as Bluff Creek and the adjoining
wetland from the remainder of the property.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21,2008
Page 11 of 40
Wetlands
Wetland A, as shown in Figure 4 above,
was filled to create an access road to the
site. This wetland was part of a drainage
system that flowed from northeast to
southwest across the site into the filled
wetland before discharging into the
riparian wetland adjacent to Bluff Creek.
Two other wetlands exist on or
immediately adjacent to the project site.
The first is located near the top of Figure
4 and was intended to be restored and
expanded to mitigate for the loss of
Wetland A. To date, this mitigation has
not been performed. The original
applicant has given a letter of credit to the
City ofChanhassen and has until June 1,
2009 to complete the restoration or be in
violation of the W AP and the Wetland
Conservation Act.
'.", ~ -
~~i ~..,
.::-!:.:"
.' .
L; .;;:.;;~ ~
:L. "-!,_':"-
. <
. .
> .
; <
u 0 "
~ ~ i
~ ~ ~
. ~ .
I "0
. < 0
W ~ N
;;: ~
. >
~ ~
Figure 5. RIM wetland showing 40-foot buffer (brown) and 40-foot
setback (purple) from the National Wetland Inventory shapetile.
The other wetland potentially affected by the proposed development is the largest basin located
just east of center in Figure 4. This wetland was restored and is under a perpetual Reinvest in
Minnesota (RIM) Reserve Program easement. The Natural Resource Conservation Service,
NRCS, is the holder of this easement and must approve any changes to the hydrology of this
wetland. No jurisdictional wetland boundary determination or delineation has been performed
on this wetland. The RIM easement exists up to the 901.5 foot elevation.
Based upon soils, hydrology, existing drainage patterns and topography, it is highly probable that
the wetland extends well beyond the water's edge. This is of importance when considering the
proposed road alignment which would be directed through this fringe wetland area south of the
wetland. The existing east-west trail visible in Figure 5 is the approximate centerline of the
proposed road. A wetland delineation will be needed to determine the extent of the wetland.
Depending upon the findings, any proposed impacts will require a Wetland Alteration Permit
showing that sequencing conditions are met and that they will be mitigated for at the required
ratio if allowed.
This wetland, although identified as a Manage 1 wetland, would actually be classified as a
Preserve wetland based upon the existence of the RIM easement which was unknown at the time
our wetland inventory was performed. This classification requires a 40-foot buffer and a 40-foot
setback of primary structures from the buffer. Although outside of the Bluff Creek Overlay
District, the road should be aligned to stay out of the buffer and setback.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 12 of 40
Woodlands
The filling of the wetland and subsequent construction of the pond resulted in removal of a
significant area of woodland. Further removal has taken place north of the new pond in an area
outside ofthe approved wetland mitigation plan (see Figure 2). The proposed plan would
remove approximately three additional acres of woodland. This removal would create additional
woodland edge which would be highly susceptible to colonization by European buckthorn, garlic
mustard and other invasive species. This removal would result in further fragmentation of the
natural corridor that exists currently. Finally, this removal would result in a decrease of
interception of rainfall and an increase in runoff, ultimately leading to further degradation of
Bluff Creek. The hydrologic model shows that runoff from the site increases from 50% to over
100% depending upon the rainfall event for the proposed plan.
Bluffs
There are no areas within the proposed grading area that meet the criteria of "bluff' as defined in
City Code. The Bluff Creek Overlay District has additional requirements for impervious
coverage based upon slopes.
Section 20-1556. Impervious Coverage and Slopes
Within the secondary zone of the BCO district, areas with average slopes exceeding 25 percent
shall be preserved in their natural states and maintained as permanent open space. Areas with
average slopes less than 25 percent but greater than ten percent shall not exceed an impervious
surface coverage of 25 percent.
Because no development is to occur within the primary zone, this language is only mentioned as
it pertains to the secondary zone. Most of the wooded area within the proposed grading limits
exceeds ten percent slopes.
Impervious Coverage
Calculations were not provided to show the breakdown of impervious coverage within the
primary zone or secondary zone. The following calculations are based upon planimetric
calculations with the plan set. A planimeter is a tool used to calculate areas from a two-
dimensional paper drawing. Some discrepancies are inherent when using this tool.
Based upon the planimetric calculations, 5.75 acres of Lot 1 is within the primary zone. This
does not include the proposed road and pond. The pond is entirely within the primary zone as is
most of the proposed road. It is estimated, based upon the figures obtained from the planimeter,
that 43.9% ofthat portion within Lot 1 will be impervious surface. Nearly 100% ofthe
secondary zone will be impervious surface.
Based upon the hydrologic calculations provided by the consulting engineer, runoff volumes for
a one-year event will more than double for the entire site and nearly triple at the discharge under
Powers Boulevard to Bluff Creek. This discharge point will experience a 57% increase in runoff
volume for a ten-year event while discharge from the entire site will increase by 51 % for the
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 13 of 40
same rain event. This condition will likely be mitigated for somewhat because it does not
discharge directly to Bluff Creek but instead into the adjacent wetland.
Mitigation
The project proposes construction of the building, an access drive, parking and retaining wall, as
well as a storm water pond and public street within a portion of the Bluff Creek Overlay District
primary zone. The encroachment into the primary zone and setback requires a variance. To
mitigate for the impacts to the primary corridor, the applicant should submit a plan for the
restoration of areas adjacent to the Bluff Creek Corridor with species consistent with the City's
Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. Additionally, the developer
should be required to meet green construction standards to mitigate the impacts in the primary
zone through the enhanced environmental benefits from the green construction.
The applicant is requesting a variance to encroach into the primary zone. This variance needs to
be the minimum necessary to accomplish the goals. A variety of practices and designs are
available and could potentially decrease the total impact to the primary zone. These should be
evaluated in an attempt to minimize these impacts. This includes, but is not limited to,
alternative stormwater design, disconnected pavement areas, pervious pavement and the
establishment of forested areas.
Various products are available to allow for storage and treatment of stormwater under the
parking lot. This would reduce or eliminate the need to place the pond in Outlot Band
subsequently remove those trees. Other options may be available to promote infiltration or
abstraction of rainfall and decrease the resulting runoff volumes. The applicant should evaluate
recognized low-impact development techniques as to their benefits, and incorporate these
techniques where practicable to do so, or clearly show why they are not practicable.
In the narrative provided by the developer, they discuss using a four-story building and a parking
ramp in the event that MnDOT does not turn back the right-of-way as anticipated. If the
applicant feels that the project would be viable without land available in the right-of-ways, it
seems to follow that the same design techniques could be used to minimize the impact to the
pnmary zone.
In conjunction with the development of the site and to mitigate some of the natural feature
impacts of the proposed development, the site developer should be required to meet standards
that would lead to, at a minimum, certification by Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED), Green Building Rating System by the u.S. Green Building Council, or comply
with the Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines (MSBG), administered by the University of
Minnesota Center for Sustainable Building Research.
The area east of Lot 1 within Outlot A and the primary corridor of Bluff Creek shall be covered
by a conservation easement, which shall be recorded with the first phase of the development.
This easement shall restrict activities within the area and prohibit any development. Due to the
fact that this area of Outlot A is undevelopable (the property cannot get access to the west
because of the 12 foot retaining wall, cannot be accessed to the public street because of the site
grades and the existing wetland and wetland setbacks required for any development would not
permit the siting of structures in this area) the land within the conservation easement could not be
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 14 of 40
used in future phases for density transfer purposes. The city shall have final approval of the
easement restrictions. Any wetland mitigation activities that are required within this area shall
have final approval by city staff. No additional activities shall be allowed within this area and
access to the mitigation site shall be the existing path.
The wooded areas of Lot 1 and Outlot B shall be covered by a conservation easement that
restricts specific activities and prohibits any further development within the area.
i\.JlJlroxiIn~lte ~~reH of C~onsel'v~ltion E,Hselnent
...N, 512 (~ J.:r
t\,..... ~,t;
I'.
~
~:"4 I t
-- __ -=~-=-:-, ~.J
:- _~. __ ..21-.- .iT
~1"1i -
':1t"
P
i
I,
A
V v,.;/ I
""-/'11
// II
\ V,-=:.t~~
'., "-
\ "-
'. \
" I
,II 0U77..0T
.I)
"..., * ........--, / /
...., .......~ (,J /
',' /
,'~ /
.."'/
/"/
- -~--~:.../
- - -
S>Ji'":;"'2rlt 2'n.~.s
,
IIU"...LMO"w............/
......,.... 41:1I'"
....u.' II
':''1':'1 _
$~lI.tj.J/,
">>./.
-'
.,'
.. ..-,.... ~~.
",_I t~1 i::.t....1'-'
c~ .J
.e~~~""\..
I
1
I l
I ... \
._'~
'\
'\
~",,,:O.1':l'}.,-r U1J.O!
. ,-
, I
} I
loJ I
The granting of the variance to encroach into the Bluff Creek primary zone is unavoidable due to
the configuration of Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17) and Highway 212 and the access to the site.
This site is intended as a gateway location of the City. As such, it requires a significant site
presence. The easterly driveway is proposed to provide a separation between client, employee
and surgical patient pickup traffic. Staff is recommending approval of the variance subject to the
development incorporating mitigation strategies outlined above.
Pairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 15 of 40
SUBDIVISION REVIEW
,
!
i
A-:lDJ
\i -. :
~.. I
~oGl' I
I
.
: ,
- / l~,~
q ! ~l i iT ! / l,
.-l..._l..._l___L-.L....J.__l_..._.~ / '_',
I -T~"'-T.l--I-.-r-rm
I . I I I : I I I
I . Sl1d~ I I : I I i I
IJ.:!'~~~I I I: I I I
:""'" ...: I I : I : I
1\11'. ,'6
11Gf. 2J
: ,.....
: I~
: Lt
: I _oI.OW
-.0$; '1'1 . I' - -. : r I
o I .\ I', Ii I
1 d ...-------- l~\ ~ " / ~ I
::1 r i-j I ''', '\'1!:~~" :
: ~--------#....--.~ ~ '~~ /~ ""... I
!I III ~~:f." \ '{" ... I
'. I _.1 t. l f '" ....i
e ...":'rtl .R.lI'.r.-:u
...~ /."'11
, ,/./ II
I -:/,\
~/; \,
,I..J~/~J __,~
1/ ,"/
/~; ;;/
/f ~._{/
(, '---- :.:.-;.~;..::'''''''
-.........
:.~...:r:-.
--=lO'
aIJ'.....
--------..,
..<,' i
.A "'::~--..,
~~ \
The developer, United Properties LLC, is proposing the creation of one lot and two outlots. Lot 1 is
proposed for the development of the Pairview Chanhassen Medical Center. Outlot A is reserved for
future development. Outlot B contains the stormwater pond and a lift station site for the City of
Chanhassen. The preliminary plat currently does not have a name. Staff recommends that the Plat
continue the name of Butternut Ridge.
GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL
\
\\
\\\
\\,~~
,\\ 0
\' \ 'i
\. '\'1\1
'I'll,
lil'lllil
1\\111'
H\ll'j\
\ 11\111 i"
1.1 Illl 1,\'
,\l~\llll
I l.'l 0'.1 I, \1
1,\ l)l,tl
~~I"
~
T
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 16 of 40
.,\,
./ ff:~
ri\ - -"""':.......
. 1:.----"1
1'/ I
,
--'---..~'
_::~
Existing drainage areas
Proposed drainage areas
A gravel driveway extends from the curb cut on Powers Boulevard and accesses the flat area the
north of the pond. The pond was constructed in 2006 when the access for the MnDOT
construction staging area was constructed. The trees south of the driveway have been cleared.
The remainder of the area proposed for development is treed.
The high point of area proposed for development is on the northeast comer of proposed Lot 1.
The ridge continues along the northern property line. A drainageway extends from the east and
discharges to the area proposed for development.
The developer has submitted drainage calculations. The following illustrates the existing and
proposed drainage areas.
A summary of the existing and proposed drainage is as follows:
To Highway 212 ROW
To Highway 212 ROW
To Powers Blvd pipe
To off-site wetland
0.71 ac 0.69 ac
3.70 ac 3.32 ac
7.42 ac 7.42 ac
11.01 ac 12.30 ac 5.2 9.0 23.7 46.0 4.7 8.2 22.9 45.6
n/a 0.24 ac
27.1 ac 27.1 ac
To Powers Blvd ditch
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 17 of 40
The drainage calculations indicate that the post-development peak discharge rates increase to the
Highway 212 right-of-way. A copy of the drainage calculations were forwarded to MnDOT for
their review and comment. Although City staff has
not received written comments, MnDOT staff has
indicated that the plans must be revised so that the
peak discharge rates to their system do not increase.
A drainage permit will be required from MnDOT.
The plans must also be modified so that the peak
discharge to the off-site wetland does not increase
under fully developed conditions.
The drainage area shown in blue contains a
drainageway. Under the proposed developed
conditions a retaining wall will be constructed across
the drainageway on the west side of the building. The
developer proposes to install storm sewer to convey runoff from the drainageway underneath the
retaining wall.
The pla.1s must be revised to provide either an overland emergency overflow or an additional
outlet cc.ntrol structure at a higher elevation. The developer must submit a letter from an
engineer stating that the retaining wall design can accommodate temporary ponding behind the
wall.
The runoff from the drainageway will not be treated in the proposed storm water pond since the
runoff is from an undeveloped area. The runoff will be conveyed to the Powers Boulevard
drainage ditch on the southwest comer of the site via storm sewer pipe. The alignment of the
storm sewer pipe must be redesigned to eliminate excess cover over the pipe.
The plan indicates that the storm sewer in the northwest comer of the parking lot will connect to
storm sewer installed with Highway 212. If MnDOT approves this connection, then the plans
must be revised to show the existing pipe.
Wetlands
One wetland exists on the property. This wetland is located north and east of the proposed
building site. A second wetland formerly existed on the site. This wetland was impacted under
Wetland Alteration Permit #2006-32. Under this W AP, the applicant was to replace the wetland
by creating new wetland adjacent to the formerly discussed wetland. This replacement, per the
approved W AP and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, was to be constructed prior to or
concurrent with the approved wetland impact. To date, in violation of the approved permit, this
mitigation area has not been constructed.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 18 of40
The applicant requested additional time so that
several oak trees could be spaded out of the area
and transplanted elsewhere on the site. Staff
agreed to this request but only after the applicant
produced an Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the
amount of $5,000 identifying the City of
Chanhassen as the beneficiary and the applicant
agreed to have the restoration complete no later
than June 1,2009. The applicant will need to
comply with all other conditions of the W AP. In
the event that the restoration is not completed, this
may constitute a violation of the Wetland
Conservation Act and could, by law, require
replacement at a ratio of as much as 4: 1 in
addition to other compensations.
, \
.,
~ I ,/"" ==r!
,:: l~/
1::;'_ _ ..
~~~~;f~
.. "1-7,-;.'I!_....f..~r.
\:~:----~
c-~ .
"
... ---
,y ~- ".:'.":'.
- ---
1------.---.-"-
-~._-
- --,....
. u..___
::~~!:.: -- ..
1= =1--
---
Figure 2. Approved Wetland Grading and Mitigation Plan
..;.,
~ ~
.0
~ ~ !
."
.0.
, . 0
..0
~ ~ Ii
, u
h
l. ~
"'-"-
....... ,...
.-.-
u_
........,.....- ....~_. .....
~v_ -.c _ Ill.' "._'
..__ _A_"",,,, _.......
- ~
........
D
D
D
R0I
-.............-.......,
...-------
-_..~-
OJ
....""..--....
"......."'....,,-
_"~''''''
-.... .- ..",.
.........---...
~t".=::'~~~:~..~. .....--
,....-.---..-----.-.. .
------..-----
. .._-----~_..
. z::..-~::..'".:.~.:.:"::"'_=~":'J.::.~
:::;;.~?=..~1!f.~:;:~~
.:::=~=-----
; ;r.;::..:;:..::r;~..~.:..~~,....-
...
'V
.
~-
:;.00.._......._
-- -,~:;~;:-::~~~:-~~..
_ rt..,_ _-1 ,;'i
T~~~rt
Erhart
Property
......... c.-..
-.
............
In addition to the previously identified wetland, at least one other wetland exists on or in
proximity to the subject property such that the likelihood of wetland impact is significant. This
wetland is a Preserve wetland which is in a Perpetual Reinvest In Minnesota Easement (RIM)
and a perpetual Flowage Easement. Both easements are held by the Minnesota Department of
Agriculture and are administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service and are
described as containing all land up to the 901.5.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 19 of 40
The proposed road alignment to the east appears to be outside of the RIM easement. However,
the jurisdictional wetland boundary was never determined and is not identified anywhere within
the plan set or in the Delineation Report prepared by Westwood Professional Services in August
of2006.
A Preserve wetland requires a 40-foot buffer and a 40-foot setback from the buffer of primary
structures. Secondary structures must be setback 20 feet from the buffer. A jurisdictional
wetland boundary determination and delineation will be needed to determine the extents of the
buffer and setbacks and the impact this will have on the road alignment.
Surface Water Drainage
The majority of the site drains to the Bluff Creek watershed. In the existing conditions, the
drainage from the proposed mitigation area flows from northeast to southwest through an
intermittent stream channel to what was formerly a Manage 1 wetland. This drainage currently
is conveyed through the same channel to the existing stormwater pond.
Because this water is "clean" it does not require treatment prior to discharge into the wetland
located west of Powers Boulevard adjacent to Bluff Creek. The applicant has been instructed to
direct this flow such that it bypasses the proposed stormwater pond, thus minimizing the pond
size necessary to accommodate this volume and still meet National Urban Runoff Program
(NURP) recommendations.
It is apparent that there is an area of depression upstream of the proposed building site. It is quite
conceivable that this area could be utilized to store runoff, thereby garnering extended detention
and rate control. This practice was identified in the Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management
Plan, the Draft Bluff Creek Corridor Feasibility Study and in the Second Generation Surface
Water Management Plan as one that would yield beneficial results in the limiting of erosion and
sediment deposition within Bluff Creek. It is recommended that the applicant evaluate and
utilize this practice as water will likely impound behind the proposed retaining wall in either
case. By moving the inundation further from the retaining wall, the potential hazards of having
water behind the wall will be minimized.
The applicant is also proposing to increase peak discharge rates to the MnDOT system
constructed for the TH 212 project. This practice is generally not accepted and MnDOT will
need to comment as to whether they would allow this increase in peak discharge. The applicant
is also requesting to berm a low area between the RIM wetland and the proposed mitigation area.
This is not indicated on the plan set but was requested through conversations with City staff.
The RIM wetland is not tributary to the Bluff Creek system and it does not appear that the
proposed activity would result in a redirection of surface water drainage from one watershed to
another. However, it will be incumbent upon the applicant to show that this is the case and to
show that the creation of this berm will not result in a change in hydrology or hydraulics and will
not have a deleterious impact on downstream properties and receiving water bodies.
Drainage is directed to the RIM wetland from the south through a relatively well-defined swale.
Under the proposed road alignment, this swell will be intersected by the road. Conveyance must
be maintained from this swale to the RIM wetland. An appropriately sized and designed culvert
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 20 of 40
needs to be installed under the proposed road to maintain this conveyance and prevent the
possibility of erosion and sediment deposition.
Erosion Control
The applicant has provided a Grading and Erosion Control Plan for Phase Two but has not
incorporated any of the changes requested by staff. Phase II is contingent upon MnDOT turning
back a portion ofthe right-of-way to the land owner. In the event that the MnDOT right-of-way
is not turned back to the applicant, this plan will not address erosion and sediment control issues
specific to site grading for Phase I only. If the applicant does not receive the turnback as
anticipated, or does not grade the entire area as shown on the plan for any reason, a new plan set
will be required specific to Phase I grading.
As indicated in City Code, grading should be phased, where practicable to do so, such that the
least amount of disturbed area is exposed at anyone time. That the plan is designed for two
separate phases indicates that it is practicable to do so. Staff recommends that a phasing plan be
included with the erosion control to indicate the timing of when areas will be open.
No Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) was provided with this plan. The
consulting engineer has stated that they will provide this as well as the additional erosion control
best management practices with the construction level drawings.
It has always been the practice of the City to require a full SWPPP and erosion control plans be
submitted as part ofthe review process. Article II Section 18-40 (4)g states that a soil and
erosion control plan are required as part of the submittal. Staff sees no compelling reason to
deviate from this practice. In addition, the Carver County Soil and Water Conservation District
will need to see these plans and comment on them. The development must comply with Carver
Soil and Water Conservation District comments. These comments have been made available to
the applicant and are incorporated by reference. In general, they require a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan be developed and submitted for review per the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permit.
In addition to landscaping requirements, plantings are a part of the erosion control best
management practices. The submittal does indicate landscaping trees and calls out a seed mix to
be used on disturbed areas. Those disturbed areas adjacent to the remaining wooded areas will
experience shaded conditions. The MnDOT 340 mix does not seem appropriate for these areas
and staff recommends that a modified BWSR U7 seed mix be used instead. Further, those
disturbed areas east of the proposed building and south of the proposed road which will not have
buildings, parking or other permanent surface structures should be reforested with native
deciduous tree species consistent with the existing species composition. Based upon the tree
survey, this would indicate that bur oak should be used.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP)
The following charges are based upon the 2008 SWMP fees for water quality and water quantity.
These fees are consistent with Minn. Stat. ~103B. The site is an Office and Institutional zoning
".
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 21 of 40
change. The acreage used to calculate the fees are based upon the assumption that the turnback
of MnDOT right-of-way will occur.
Developable Acreage Calculations
Area (ac) wlo Area (ac) wI
Turnback Turnback
Lot 1 8.26 10.31
Outlot A 103.03 103.03
Outlot B 1.74 2.53
ROW 1.18 1.18
Total 114.21 117.05
Water Quality Fees
The 2008 per acre water quality fees for commercial development is $6,820.00. Total
developable acreage for build out is 11.21 acres. Based upon these figures, total estimated water
quality fees for the development equals $76,452.20.
Water Quantity Fees
The 2008 per acre water quantity fees for commercial development is $17,400.00. Total
developable acreage equals 11.21 acres. Based upon these figures, total estimated water quantity
fee is $195,054.00.
SWMP Credits
The City of Chanhassen gives SWMP fee credits for on-site stormwater treatment. This credit is
equal to one-half of the water quantity fee per acre of development treated in a NURP basin.
According to the drainage calculations and figures provided by Westwood Professional Services,
Inc., 8.93 acres of the developed site will be treated in the proposed pond. This results in a
SWMP credit of $77,691.00. In addition, the pond outlet and the outlet for the bypass system
each warrant a credit of $2,500.00 for an additional $5,000.00 credit. This means the estimated
total SWMP credit is $82,691.00.
Based upon the above fees and credits, the estimated SWMP fee due at the time of final plat is
$271,506.20.
RETAINING WALLS
The developer proposes to construct two retaining walls:
Location
East of the building
East of the proposed pond
Len th
440 feet
230 feet
Maximum Dei t
12 feet
6 feet
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 22 of 40
Building permits are required for retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by
a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
UTILITIES
Lateral sanitary sewer and watermain to serve the proposed buildings will extend from the
existing trunk utilities in Powers Boulevard. The developer will be responsible for extending
lateral sanitary sewer and watermain to the east end of the access road; therefore, the sanitary
sewer and water connection charges will be waived.
A manhole must be installed at the terminus of the sanitary sewer.
All sanitary sewer and watermain within Lot 1, Block 1 shall be privately owned and maintained.
The storm sewer that will convey runoff from the drainageway to the east of the property shall
also be privately owned and maintained, including those portions that lie within public right-of-
way and the City owned outlot. The 20- foot wide drainage and utility easement shown on the
preliminary plat over this storm sewer must be deleted.
The plans include a 50-foot wide by 50-foot deep pad at the southeast comer ofthe Powers
Boulevard/access road intersection. This pad will be within the same outlot as the proposed
stormwater pond, which shall be deeded to the City. The City will construct a sanitary sewer lift
station and forcemain under a separate contract. Staff anticipates that the forcemain will be
directionally bored to minimize impacts.
The preliminary plat includes a 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement extending from the
lift station, east within the access road right-of-way, then northeast along the west side of an off-
site wetland. Due to the variability associated with the forcemain installation, the 20-foot wide
drainage and utility easement shall be replaced with a temporary blanket drainage and utility
easement. A permanent 20- foot wide easement will be required over the final forcemain
alignment.
Each new lot will be subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2008 trunk
hookup charges are $1, 769/SAC unit for sanitary sewer and $4,799/SAC unit for watermain.
These fees will be collected with the building permit, subject to the rates in effect at the time of
building permit, and shall be based on the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services' SAC
unit determination.
All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest
edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to enter into a
development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a
letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of
final plat approval.
All public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit
issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required, including the
MPCA, Department of Health, Carver County and Watershed District.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 23 of 40
Upon project completion, as-built drawings must be submitted for the private utilities.
STREETS/ACCESS
The developer proposes to construct a public street :from Powers Boulevard, approximately 600
feet south of the Highway 212 on ramp. A curb cut was constructed at this location when this
segment of Powers Boulevard was constructed. The traffic study completed for the site indicates
that a double left turn lane is required for southbound Powers Boulevard into the site. This turn
lane must be constructed with Phase I improvements. The developer must coordinate this work
with Carver County and provide additional right-of-way, if needed.
The traffic study also indicates that the intersection at Powers Boulevard wi11likely warrant a
traffic signal when the second building phase is constructed. The 2005 AUAR traffic analysis
did not include a traffic signal at this intersection because at that time a through street was not
proposed on the subject property because lower density development was projected. The traffic
study indicates that the full buildout of this property will warrant the traffic signal; therefore, the
developer must pay a cash fee with the final plat to cover the cost of the traffic signal. Staff will
determine the signal cost prior to final plat approval.
The public street will be 50 feet wide. The plans include turn lanes :from the access road into the
site. An 80-foot wide right-of-way will be platted to accommodate the access road, including the
turn lanes. A temporary roadway, drainage and utility easement must be provided over the cul-
de-sac at the east end of the access road.
This property is subject to the Arterial Collector Fee which is $3,600 per developable acre. The
acreage used in this calculation shall include the right-of-way turnback from both Highway 212
and Powers Boulevard. This fee shall be paid in cash with the final plat.
Submit proposed names for the street labeled "Access Road" on plans for approval.
TREE PRESERVATION
Tree canopy coverage and preservation calculation for the subdivision are as follows:
Total upland area (excluding wetlands and bluffs)
Total canopy area (excluding wetlands and bluffs)
Baseline canopy coverage
Minimum canopy coverage allowed
Proposed tree preservation
559,310 sq ft
221,675 sq ft
40%
20% or 111,862 sq ft
22% or 124,341 sq ft
The applicant meets minimum requirements for tree preservation.
All of the existing wooded areas within the proposed subdivision are within the Bluff Creek primary
and secondary corridors. Because of this, the applicant was asked to minimize grading and tree
removal in the development and revise the original grading plan. The revised grading does not
present any changes. The tree removal remains identical to the original proposal. The intent of the
primary corridor, to protect the watershed of Bluff Creek, has not been met by the proposed plan.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 24 of 40
To mitigate for the effects of development within the primary corridor, the developer should be
required to meet green construction standards for the whole site.
In wooded areas within the grading limits, staff recommends that all resulting openings be
reforested with native trees. There are multiple sites that can be reforested along the eastern
wooded area and along the east end of the access road. Tree planting sites are also available around
the proposed pond to the south. Tree species shall be selected from the Bluff Creek Management
Plan native species list.
Staffrecommends that the area east of Lot 1 within Outlot A and the primary corridor of Bluff
Creek be covered by a conservation easement. This easement shall restrict activities within the area
and prohibit any development. A legal description ofthe area is included in the report. The city
shall have final approval of the easement restrictions. Any wetland mitigation activities that are
required within this area shall have final approval by city staff No additional activities shall be
allowed within this area and access to the mitigation site shall be the existing path. Staff
recommends that the wooded areas of Lot 1 and Outlot B also be covered by a conservation
easement that restricts specific activities and prohibits any further development within the area.
The applicant is proposing to save several large oaks along the eastern grading limits. Staff
recommends that the following practices be required in order to insure the best chance of survival
for the oaks: understory trees near the oaks shall be preserved, roots at the grading limits shall be
cut cleanly with a trencher or vibratory plow, and tree preservation fencing shall be installed prior to
any grading. Preserving the existing grade as far out as possible from the base of the tree would be
very beneficial. The applicant could install a second retaining wall that would protect the existing
grade and reduce grading.
PARKS AND RECREATION
;7
Parks
?'
A primary component of the 1997 Park, Open
Space and Trail Referendum was the acquisition
of a large highly desirable parcel of open space.
The "Fox" woods located north and east of the
proposed Fairview Centre contains the largest
forested preserve in the city's park system.
Collection of a park dedication fee in lieu of
acquisition of additional open space as a
condition of approval for the Fairview project is
recommended.
~~y.~:,.O::;....l'-t'
~-*~~::~,J~.#~"-
~~,~'-
Park
This existing section of trail was installed
concurrent with the extension of Powers
r - - I
/ I
r - -
/
/.~
/"'.....
/:"lr.,.
. . . ./,e v"-"'"
(I"lte /
Sit,. ("
--.............--_--Jt...--.-
Access Road Trail
J
----J \
II
I'
11
~~~Jj
~,<~
Trails
Powers Boulevard Trail
'"""- Future Tro.s
""'-' EXisting Tmh
Fairview Trail Map
Orlrkt-H_:OOS
/
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 25 of 40
Boulevard. This trail transports people north and south between the proposed access road and
the on/off ramp at Highway 212.
Access Road Trail
Designation and construction of this 10- foot wide trail on the north side of the proposed access
road is consistent with the comprehensive plan and when extended east will serve as an
important east/west trail connection between Powers Boulevard and Highway 101.
North Trail
Construction of the 10- foot wide North Trail as a condition of approval of this subdivision will
satisfy an important pedestrian connection. The intersection of Powers Boulevard and the
Highway 212 on/off ramp will serve as a key trailhead location in the future. An extensive trail
system will be developed in the park preserve serving as a primary attractor to this area. In
addition, a second more regional future trail connection will extend from this intersection
northeast along a large wetland and running parallel with Highway 212. This particular section
of trail will extend to the intersection of Highway 101 and Lyman Boulevard serving as a
commuter bikeway in addition to a recreational trail.
The current design as shown in the plan set for the North Trail is not ideal. Assuming that the
MnDOT right-of-way at this location will remain fenced, the trail should be set back a minimum
of three feet from the fence to safely allow for winter plowing and snow storage. Similarly, a
minimum three-foot boulevard with six feet or more being preferred should be maintained
between the trail and the parking lot, again for winter maintenance and snow removal but, more
importantly, to create an aesthetically pleasing and inviting trail corridor and property boundary.
East Trail
Construction of a future trail east of the Fairview lot and paralleling an existing wetland will
connect the access road with the park preserve. Acquisition of a trail easement over this area to
accommodate this trail should occur at this time.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 26 of 40
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes
Code 15,000 75 150
Lot 1 359,689 488 737 8.26 ac. (10.31 ac. with
MnDOT land)
103.03 ac. Future
Outlot A 4,487,987 Development Area less the
area of the conservation
easement
1.74 ac. (2.53 ac. with
Outlot B 75,911 MnDOT land) Storm water
pond
ROW 51,623 1. 18 ac.
TOTAL 4,975,210 114.21 ac. (117.05 ac. with
MnDOT land)
MnDOT will be reconveying approximately 2.8 acres ofland back to the property owner. This land
represents excess right-of-way taken for the construction of Highway 212 and Powers Boulevard.
GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE
ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE
The developer is proposing a two-phase,
three-story, 160,000 square-foot medical
center, and up to a 731-stall, five-level
parking ramp. The full buildout is
predicated upon a tumback to the land
owner of MnDOT right-of-way. In the
event that this tumback does not occur, the
applicant has requested to build a four-story
building totaling 112,000 square feet. The
Office Institutional (01) District limits
building height to two stories. The proposed
number of stories for both the building and
parking ramp exceed the district regulations,
by one and four stories respectively. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from these
standards in conjunction with the site plan review. The applicant is requesting a variance from
the sign ordinance to permit a larger monument sign in conjunction with the project. Finally, the
applicant is requesting a variance from the setback requirements in the 01 district and Bluff
Creek corridor. While the development had originally been contemplated as a planned unit
development (PUD), staff felt that 01 zoning with a variance request was more appropriate for
the site since this project would be a single building and one accessory structure. The PUD
"
'}: ~:~~ "...'~.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 27 of 40
district is a better zoning district for mixed use or highly complex developments. The 01 district,
in this case, provides an adequate and limited range of development for the lot.
The need for the variances is due to the type and function of building. This site is intended as a
gateway location of the City. As such, it requires a significant site presence. To do this with a
one or two story structure would not provide the same impact as a taller building and would require
even greater encroachment into the Bluff Creek Primary zone. As part of staff's initial discussions
with the developer, staff had recommended that the building be pushed as close to Powers
Boulevard as possible. However, due to the need for the reconveyance ofthe excess right-of-way
back to the property owner, the uncertainty of timing for such turnback, and the site user's desire to
have the building overlooking the natural area east of the site, the developer has located the building
as far east on the property as was feasible given the requirements for setback and parking.
The first phase of the development consists of a three-story, 88,000 square-foot building,
comprising the south half and the main entrance area of the building. The second phase would
add the north half of the building and the parking ramp structure. The timing of the phasing is
indeterminate at this time, but shall rely on market conditions.
In order to mitigate some of the natural feature impacts of the proposed development, the site
developer should be required to meet standards that would lead to, at a minimum, certification by
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Green Building Rating System by the
U.S. Green Building Council, or comply with the Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines
(MSBG), administered by the University of Minnesota Center for Sustainable Building
Research.
LEED activities provide a point system for a project. The minimum scoring necessary for LEED
certification would be 26 points. The maximum scoring is 59 points, which provides a Platinum
certification. An example of a project with Platinum certification is the Great River Energy
Corporation in Maple Grove, Minnesota. Green design not only makes a positive impact on
public health and the environment, it also reduces operating costs, enhances building and
organizational marketability, potentially increases occupant productivity, and helps create a
sustainable community.
MSBG requires development to comply with four sustainable categories: performance
management, site and water, indoor environmental quality, and materials and waste. This system
functions on a base standard (Buildings, Benchmarks and Beyond, B3). Sustainable design is a
means to reduce energy expenditures, enhance the health, well-being and productivity ofthe
building occupants, and improve the quality of the natural environment.
The Minnesota Legislature required the Departments of Administration and Commerce, with the
assistance of other agencies, to develop sustainable building design guidelines for all new state
buildings funded by bond money after January 15, 2004. According to the legislation, the
guidelines must:
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 28 of 40
Exceed the energy code in effect in January 2004 by at least 30 percent
. Achieve lowest possible lifetime costs for new buildings
. Encourage continual energy conservation improvements in new buildings
. Ensure good indoor air quality
. Create and maintain a healthy environment
. Facilitate productivity improvements
. Specify ways to reduce material costs
Consider the long-term operating costs of the building including the use of renewable energy
sources and distributed electric energy generation that uses a renewable source of natural gas
or a fuel that is as clean or cleaner than natural gas.
Size Portion Placement
Due to site topography and proposed grading, the main entry to the building is located on the
west elevation of the building. The entry is highlighted by being recessed in the middle of the
ultimate building with a canopy covering the entrance and drive-up/drop-off. The entrance
consists of expanded storefront window treatments.
Material and Detail and Color
The developer is proposing the use of three colors of face brick (light iron spot (reddish-brown),
beige velour (tan), and limestone (white) as the primary building material. Accent bands and
columns use a cream stone. The end cap of the building consists of a bronze metal panel and
gray window curtain walls. The building fayade is articulated through the use of projecting
columns along the first floor elevation as well as projected segments incorporating vertical glass
panels spaced along the building front. The lower level consists of larger window openings than
the upper stories.
The parking garage continues the use of the face brick. However, it appears as if only one brick
color is proposed. Staff would recommend that the architecture of the primary structure be
continued on the garage through the use of the three brick colors as well as the use of stone and
metal.
Height and Roof Design
The project proposes a flat roof with raised towers for stairwells and elevators. The variety of
roof heights add architectural detail and articulation to the building. The highest roof/parapet
height is 55 feet. A one-story canopy is provided over the drop-off entry to the building.
Facade Transparency
Fifty percent of the first floor elevation that is viewed by the public shall include transparent
windows and/or doors. All other areas shall include landscaping material and architectural
detailing and articulation.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 29 of 40
Site Furnishing
Community features may include landscaping, lighting, benches, and tables. The developer shall
provide secure bicycle racks and/or storage (within 200 yards of a building entrance) for 5% or
more of all building users (measured at peak periods), and provide shower and changing
facilities in the building. The developer shall also provide benches throughout the site as well as
tables and chairs in the patio area.
Loading Areas, Refuse Area, etc.
Screening of service yards, refuse and waste removal, other unsightly areas and truck
parking/loading areas is accomplished through the location of this area on the east side of the
building.
Landscaping
Phase I
Minimum requirements for landscaping include 13,002 square feet oflandscaped area around the
parking lot, 52 trees for the parking lot, and bufferyard plantings along the north, south and west
property lines. The applicant's proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and
parking lot trees is shown in the following table.
Phase I Required Proposed
Vehicular use landscape area 13,002 sq. ft. > 13,002 sq. ft.
Trees/landscape area 52 canopy trees 23 canopy trees
Landscape islands/peninsulas 20 islands/peninsulas 15 islands/peninsulas
PHASE II
Vehicular use landscape area 12,065 sq. ft. > 12,065 sq. ft.
Trees/landscape area 48 canopy trees 35 canopy trees
Landscape islands/peninsulas 19 islands/peninsulas 16 islands/peninsulas
The applicant does not meet required landscape quantities for parking lot trees and
islands/peninsulas in both phases. The applicant must meet minimum requirements for parking
lot trees and landscape islands/peninsulas.
Required Proposed Phase I Proposed Phase II
North property line II canopy trees 8 canopy 10 canopy
bufferyard B - 570' 22 understory trees 15 understory 22 understory
34 shrubs o shrubs 36 shrubs
West property line. 14 canopy trees 2 canopy 14 canopy
bufferyard B -720' 28 understory trees 7 understory 26 understory
43 shrubs o shrubs 49 shrubs
South property line 11 overstory 12 overstory 12 overstory
Boulevard trees - 350'
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 30 of 40
Phase I: The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for either of the bufferyard areas.
The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to meet minimum requirements.
Phase II: The applicant is short one overstory tree in the north bufferyard. The applicant shall
increase the plantings to meet minimum requirements.
In the proposed plant schedule, the applicant must replace the Colorado spruce with other
approved species. All transplanted materials must be pre-approved by the city. If approved for
transplanting, the material must be warranted and replaced with nursery stock.
Lot Frontage and Parking Location
Parking is distributed on the west and north sides of the building. The applicant is proposing
proof of parking which includes adding additional levels of parking to the ramp in the future
should site parking become an issue. The City may allow reductions in the number of parking
spaces actually constructed as long as the applicant provides a proof of future parking plan. The
City may require the installation of the additional parking whenever the need arises.
---...
OUTLOT
~
The developer is also proposing parking closer to the property line than permitted in the 01
district. In all of the non-residential zoning districts, except the Central Business District which
has no required setback, the standards permit reduction of the parking setback to 10 feet provided
landscaping and berming are proposed. The development shall incorporate berming along
Powers Boulevard. The parking on the north side of the property, while 12 feet from the
property line, will be over 55 feet from the Highway 212 on ramp.
Pairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 31 of 40
LIGHTING/SIGNAGE
The developer is proposing the use of30-foot tall site lighting with shoebox type fixtures, which
complies with City Code. The plan specifies metal halide lamp type. City Code requires high-
pressure sodium lighting. The light fixtures shall be revised to high-pressure sodium lighting.
The applicant is requesting a 4-foot 8-inch height variance from the 5-foot sign height limitation
to permit a 9-foot 8-inch tall sign and a 22 square-foot sign area variance from the 24-square foot
sign display area limitation to permit 46 square feet of sign display area. A [sign] variance may
be granted from the requirements of this ordinance where it is shown that by reason of
topography or other conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of this ordinance would
cause a hardship; provided that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely
affect the spirit or intent of this ordinance. While staff believes that some type of sign relief is
necessary, the sign height request appears excessive, considering that the development will also
be able to install wall signage on their building.
The monument sign is proposed for the southwest comer of the site. This is a logical location for
the building monument sign. This area, with a base elevation of 886, is approximately 8 feet
higher than Powers Boulevard just north of the access road. However, the base height is 14 feet
lower than the grand elevation at the northwest comer of the site.
The 01 signage criteria are usually used for a single-tenant building. The fact that there will be
multiple tenants in the building leads to the need for additional area and size for the signage.
The site is permitted only one monument-type sign. Staff believes that a compromise solution
would be to permit the development to have signage consistent with the Industrial Office Park
signage regulations which permits monument signs up to 8 feet in height with sign display area
of 64 square feet. The "Pairview" in the monument sign shall be individual dimensioned letters
with a minimum ~-inch projection.
The applicant is also proposing directional signage on the property. Such signage may be up to 5
feet in height with a sign area of 4 square feet. The sign height for these signs shall be reduced
to 5 feet. The display area for sign #2 shall be reduced to 4 square feet.
Additionally, the developer is showing areas for wall signage on the building. It should be noted
that the logo is limited to 30 percent of the sign area. Staff will count the sign area of all the
signage on a building elevation against the permitted sign area. The logo(s) then would be a
percentage of this total sign area. The area of the wall signage must comply with the sign area
standards for the 01 district.
A separate sign permit shall be required for all monument and wall signs.
MISCELLANEOUS
The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system. The plans must be
prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. Accessible
routes must be provided between commercial building( s), parking facilities and public
transportation stops. Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a professional
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 32 of 40
engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. Detailed occupancy related
requirements will be addressed when complete building and site plans are submitted. All
parking areas, including parking structure, must be provided with accessible parking spaces.
The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
COMPLIANCE TABLE
01
Fairview (Buildout) Phase I
Building Height
2 stories
1 story
Clinic: 3 stories
Parking: 5 stories
3 stories
o stories
Building Setback
N - 35' E* - 40'
W - 35' S - 35'
N - 45' E - 0' @
W - 153' S - 78'
N - 455' E* - 0 @
W - 235' S - 78'
Parking stalls
Phase I: 499 stalls
Phase II: 940 stalls
413 stalls, plus 107 stalls proof of parking
761 stalls, plus 288 stalls proof of parking
(Clinic 1/150 sq. ft. of floor area)
01
Fairview (Buildout) Phase I
Parking Setback
N - 25' E* - 40'
W - 25' S - 35'
N - 12#' E - 0' @
W - 24#' S - 27'#
N-73' E-O'@
W - 87' S - 27" #
Hard surface
Coverage
65%
59%
Lot Area
0.34 acre
8.26 acres (l0.31acres with MnDOT land)
* Setback from the Bluff Creek Primary Zone.
@ The applicant is requesting a variance to encroach in to the primary zone.
# The applicant is requesting a variance for parking setbacks.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motions and adoption of
the attached findings of fact and recommendation:
A. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the
Rezoning of Lot 1, Block 1, from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Office & Institutional
District, 01."
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21,2008
Page 33 of 40
B. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the
Conditional Use Permit with Variances to encroach into the primary zone and required buffer
for development in the Bluff Creek Corridor; subject to the following conditions:
1. The property line may be revised to incorporate the reconveyed property from MnDOT to the
developer.
2. The developer shall meet design and construction standards that would lead to, at a
minimum, certification by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Green Building Rating System by the U.S. Green Building Council, or comply with the
Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines (MSBG).
3. Evaluate other site designs, stormwater management techniques and low-impact development
practices for their benefit in reducing impacts to the primary and secondary zones of the
Bluff Creek Overlay District.
4. Reforest those areas disturbed to grade the site but do not have structures on them. The
reforestation should be done with deciduous tree species representative of the existing
species composition. The forested areas are dominated by bur oak.
5. Maintain the natural drainage patterns.
6. The applicant must clearly illustrate how impacts to the primary zone are to be mitigated.
This mitigation must consider all benefits derived from the primary zone as described in
Article XXXI of the Chanhassen City Code.
7. The area east of Lot 1 within Outlot A and the primary corridor of Bluff Creek shall be
covered by a conservation easement. This easement shall restrict activities within the area
and prohibit any development. The city shall have final approval of the easement
restrictions. Any wetland mitigation activities that are required within this area shall have
final approval by city staff. No additional activities shall be allowed within this area and
access to the mitigation site shall be the existing path.
8. The wooded areas of Lot 1 and Outlot B shall be covered by a conservation easement that
restricts specific activities and prohibits any further development within the area."
C. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the
Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating one lot, two outlots and dedication of public right-of-
way, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated September 5, 2008, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The developer shall either dedicate/donate an outlot or record a conservation easement
containing the Bluff Creek Primary zone north of the road right-of-way in Outlot A. A
conservation easement shall be recorded over the Bluff Creek Primary zone located within
Lot 1. This easement shall restrict activities within the area and prohibit any development.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 34 of 40
The City shall have final approval of the easement restrictions. The easement shall be
recorded with the first phase of the development.
2. Submit proposed names for street labeled "Access Road" on plans for approval.
3. The drainage report and plans must be revised to address comments from MnDOT.
4. The applicant must obtain a MnDOT drainage permit.
5. The drainage report and plans must be modified so that the peak discharge rate to the off-site
wetland does not increase under fully developed conditions.
6. The plans must be revised to provide either an overland emergency overflow or an additional
outlet control structure at a higher elevation.
7. The developer must submit a letter from an engineer stating that the retaining wall east of the
building can accommodate temporary ponding behind the wall.
8. The alignment of the bypass storm sewer pipe must be redesigned to eliminate excess cover
over the pipe.
9. If MnDOT allows a connection to the Highway 212 storm pipe, then show the existing pipe
on the plan sheets.
10. Building permits are required for retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed
by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
11. A manhole must be installed at the terminus of the sanitary sewer.
12. All sanitary sewer and watermain within Lot 1, Block 1 shall be privately owned and
maintained.
13. The storm sewer that will convey runoff from the drainageway to the east of the property
shall also be privately owned and maintained, including those portions that lie within public
right-of-way and the City owned outlot.
14. The 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement shown on the preliminary plat over this storm
sewer must be deleted.
15. Delete the 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement for the future watermain.
16. Provide a temporary blanket drainage and utility easement over the proposed forcemain
corridor.
17. A permanent 20- foot wide easement will be required over the final forcemain alignment.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 35 of 40
18. Each new lot will be subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. These fees will
be collected with the building permit, subject to the rates in effect at the time of building
permit, and shall be based on the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services' SAC unit
determination.
19. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also required to
enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in
the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and
the conditions of final plat approval.
20. All public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit
issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required, including the
MPCA, Department of Health, Carver County and Watershed District.
21. Upon project completion as-built drawings must be submitted for the private utilities.
22. The double left turn lane on southbound Powers Boulevard must be constructed with Phase I
improvements.
23. The developer must coordinate the construction of the double left turn lane with Carver
County and provide additional right-of-way, if needed.
24. The developer must pay a cash fee with the final plat to cover the cost of the traffic signal.
25. A temporary roadway, drainage and utility easement must be provided over the cul-de-sac at
the east end of the access road.
26. This property is subject to the Arterial Collector Fee which is $3,600 per developable acre.
The acreage used in this calculation shall include the right-of-way turnback from both
Highway 212 and Powers Boulevard. This fee shall be paid in cash with the final plat
27. The RIM and Flowage Easements need to be indicated on the plat. This should include the
document number 10-05-87-1.
28. The mitigation area in Outlot A needs to be created. A Declaration of Restrictions and
Covenants needs to be executed and recorded with Carver County. This document number
needs to be included on the plat.
29. The remaining conditions of approval for W AP #2006-32 need to be met:
a. The plans shall be revised to show how M-l will be accessed. The access route shall be
stable, shall avoid damage to significant trees (greater than 10" DBH) and shall avoid
impacts to natural drainageways and any jurisdictional wetlands that may exist on site
that were not delineated by Westwood Professional Services in August 2006.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 36 of 40
b. A planting plan for M-1, including invasive vegetation management techniques, species
to be planted, proposed planting rates, and the approach to upland buffer restoration, shall
be submitted prior to final City Council approval.
c. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland
creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the
replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five
years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for
wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of
the wetland creation letter of credit.
d. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement
monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native
species, particularly hybrid cattail, purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans
shall show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant
shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for
Replacement Wetland.
30. The legal wetland boundary of the RIM wetland was not delineated in the Westwood
Wetland Delineation Report dated August of2006. This boundary must be delineated and
wetland impacts avoided where possible.
31. Because of the perpetual RIM and flowage easements the plans must be provided to the
Natural Resources Conservation Service for review and comment. Any comments from the
NRCS must be made available to the City.
32. Drainage to the RIM wetland from the south flows through a defined swale. The conveyance
of this flow must be maintained under the proposed road extension.
33. Erosion Control plan needs to be updated per the July comments:
a. Show a 75-foot rock construction entrance.
b. Show rounding of corners for proposed grades.
c. Erosion control blanket shall be shown on all slopes east of the proposed building and
adjacent to the pond.
d. An NPDES permit must be obtained prior to any site grading and a SWPPP must be
provided to the City for review and comment.
e. Replace MnDOT 340 mix with a modified BWSR U7 seed mix.
34. Estimated SWMP fees due at the time of final plat are $271,506.20.
35. The development must comply with Carver Soil and Water Conservation District comments.
36. All openings created in the wooded areas on the east and south sides of the development shall
be reforested with native tree species. Planting stock sizes may be variable. Species selected
must be from the Bluff Creek Management Plan native plant list. These areas shall not be
mowed or managed as turf areas.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 37 of 40
37. The following practices are required in order to insure the best chance of survival for the
highlighted oaks to be preserved along the east side of the development:
a. Understory trees near the oaks shall be preserved.
b. Roots at the grading limits shall be cut cleanly with a trencher or vibratory plow.
c. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed prior to any grading.
d. Trees shall be thoroughly watered during dry periods.
38. Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to any
construction. Fencing shall be in place and maintained until all construction is completed.
39. Any trees removed in excess of proposed tree preservation plans, dated 10/06/08, will be
replaced at a ratio of 2: 1 diameter inches.
40. All trees removed shall be chipped or hauled off site. No burning permits shall be issued.
41. The developer shall pay the full park dedication fee in force at the time of final plat approval
and prior to recording.
42. The developer shall construct the 10-foot wide bituminous Access Road trail and the North
Trail. The North trail plans being modified to allow for appropriate boulevard areas for
winter plowing, snow storage and aesthetics."
D. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Site
Plan Review with Variances for building height, Bluff Creek Primary Zone setbacks and
parking setbacks for Planning Case #08-16, for a two-phase, three-story, 160,000 square-foot
medical center, and up to a 731-stall, five-level parking ramp on Lot 1, Block 1 of the
development, plans prepared by Pope Associates, Inc. and Westwood Professional Services, Inc.,
dated September 19,2008, subject to the following conditions:
1. The final plat for the development shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
2. The full buildout is predicated upon a turnback to the land owner of MnDOT right-of-way.
In the event that this turnback does not occur, the applicant may build a four-story building
totaling 112,000 square feet.
3. The developer shall meet design and construction standards that would lead to, at a
minimum, certification by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Green Building Rating System by the U.S. Green Building Council, or comply with the
Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines, MSBG.
4. The developer shall continue the architectural detailing through the use of the three brick
colors as well as the use of stone and metal on the garage structure.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 38 of 40
5. The developer shall provide secure bicycle racks and/or storage (within 200 yards of a
building entrance) for 5% or more of all building users (measured at peak periods), and
provide shower and changing facilities in the building. The developer should also provide
benches throughout the site as well as tables and chairs in the patio area.
6. The light fixtures shall be revised to high-pressure sodium lighting.
7. The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system.
8. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
9. Accessible routes must be provided between commercial building(s), parking facilities and
public transportation stops.
10. All parking areas, including parking structure, must be provided with accessible parking.
11. Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a pe~it
must be obtained prior to construction.
12. All openings created in the wooded areas on the east and south sides ofthe development shall
be reforested with native tree species. Planting stock sizes may be variable. Species selected
must be from the Bluff Creek Management Plan native plant list. These areas shall not be
mowed or managed as turf areas.
13. The applicant shall install a second tier to the retaining wall at the north end of the east side
of the development to preserve the grade surrounding the oaks proposed to be saved.
14. The applicant does not meet required landscape quantities for parking lot trees and
islands/peninsulas in both phases. The applicant must meet minimum requirements for
parking lot trees and landscape islands/peninsulas.
15. Phase I: The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for either of the bufferyard
areas. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to meet minimum requirements.
16. Phase II: The applicant is short one overstory tree in the north bufferyard. Theapplicant
shall increase the plantings to meet minimum requirements.
17. The applicant must replace the Colorado spruce with other approved species in the plant
schedule. All transplanted materials must be pre-approved by the city. If approved for
transplanting, the material must be warranted and replaced with nursery stock if it fails.
18. Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to any
construction. Fencing shall be in place and maintained until all construction is completed.
19. Any trees removed in excess of proposed tree preservation plans, dated 10/06/08, will be
replaced at a ratio of 2: 1 diameter inches.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 39 of 40
20. All trees removed shall be chipped or hauled off site. No burning permits shall be issued.
21. The North Trail plans or parking lot design shall be modified to allow for appropriate
boulevard areas for winter plowing, snow storage and aesthetics.
22. A 3-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, and nothing shall be placed in
front of the hydrant outlets, connections, fire protection control valves that would interfere
with fire fighter operations. Section 508.5 MN. Fire Code and Sec. 508.5.4.
23. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must be
removed or chipped on site.
24. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations of "No Parking Fire Lane" signage, and
locations of curbing to be painted yellow. MN Fire Code Sec. 503.3.
25. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed.
Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. MSFC
see 501.4.
26. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of
fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. MSFC
Sec. 503.2.3."
and
E. "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a sign size
Variance request to permit an eight (8) foot tall sign with up to 64 square feet of sign display
area, subject to the following conditions:
1. Separate sign permits shall be required for each sign.
2. The "Fairview" in the monument sign shall be individual dimensioned letters with a
minimum 'i1-inch projection.
3. Only one monument sign shall be permitted for the Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center
site.
4. The sign height for the directional signs shall be reduced to five feet. The display area for
sign #2 shall be reduced to four square feet."
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case 2008-16
October 21, 2008
Page 40 of 40
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
2. Development Review Application.
3. United Properties Development Narrative.
4. Letter from Ryan M. Edstrom, Westwood Professional Services, Inc., to City of Chanhassen
Planning Department dated September 4, 2008.
5. Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center Site Traffic Analysis Prepared by Westwood
Professional Services, Inc. dated July 3, 2008.
6. Memo from Mike Spack, Spack Consulting to Alyson Fauske dated October 10, 2008.
7. Letter from Chip Hentges, Carver Soil & Water Conservation District, to Robert Generous
dated October 10, 2008.
8. Letter from Roger Gustafson, Carver County Public Works, to Robert Generous dated
August 14, 2008.
9. Letter from William Goff, MnDOT, to Sharmeen AI-Jaff dated August 14, 2008.
10. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List.
g:\plan\2008 planning eases\08-l6 fairview ehanhassen medical eenter\staffreport feme.doe
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE: Application of United Properties, LLC, and Timothy & Dawne Erhart for the following:
· Conditional Use Permit with Variances for development in the Bluff Creek Corridor;
. Rezoning from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Office & Institutional, 01;
. Subdivision into one lot, two outlots and dedication of public right-of-way;
. Site Plan Review with Variances for Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center, a two-
phase, three-story, 160,000 square-foot medical center, and a 731-stall, five-level parking
ramp, and signage.
On October 21,2008, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of United Properties, LLC, and Timothy & Dawne Erhart for
Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center - Planning Case 08-16. The Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on the proposed subdivision 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 Agricultural Estate District, A2.
2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential - Low Density uses.
3. The legal description of the property is Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Addition, Carver County,
Minnesota.
4. Rezoning:
a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive
Plan.
b. The proposed use is compatible with the present and future land uses of the area.
c. The proposed use conforms to all performance standards contained in the Zoning
Ordinance with the granting of a variance for the setbacks and building height.
d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed.
e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not
overburden the city's service capacity.
1
f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the
property, subject to the installation of the turn lanes and traffic signal.
5. Conditional Use Permits:
a. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort,
convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
b. The proposed use will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan
and the zoning ordinance.
c. The proposed use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be
compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and will not change the essential character of that area.
d. The proposed use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring
uses.
e. The proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services,
including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water
and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the
proposed use.
f. The proposed use will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services
and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
g. The proposed use will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors,
~
rodents, or trash.
h. The proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create
traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
1. The proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access,
natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
J. The proposed use will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
k. The proposed use will not depreciate surrounding property values.
6. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible
adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding
them are:
a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans
including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan;
c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water
drainage are suitable for the !proposed development;
d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this
chapter;
e. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
2
f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and
g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
1) Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
2) Lack of adequate roads.
3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
7. Site Plan:
a. The proposed development 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;
b. The proposed development is consistent with the site plan review requirements;
c. The proposed development preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable
by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with
the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing areas;
d. The proposed development 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;
e. The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and
site features, with special attention to the following:
1) 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;
2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design
concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures
and uses; and
4) 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.
f. 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.
8. Variances:
a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship
means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical
surroundings, shape or topography. Due to the topography of the site, the construction of
the storm water pond in the primary zone is a reasonable request. The need for the variances
is due to the type and function of building. This site is intended as a gateway location for
the City. As such, it requires a significant site presence. To do this with a one or two
3
story structure would not provide the same impact as a taller building and would require
even greater encroachment in to the Bluff Creek Primary zone.
b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to
other property within the same zoning classification because of the site location and
prominence as well as the topography of the property.
c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel of land, but to locate the storm water pond in a logical location on the
site, site location and prominence.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship, but is due to site
topography, site location and prominence.
e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located.
f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger
of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
9. The planning report #08-16, dated October 21,2008, prepared by Robert Generous, et aI, is
incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Conditional
Use Permit with Variances, Rezoning of Lot 1, Block 1, from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to
Office and Institutional District, 01, Preliminary Plat approval and Site Plan Approval with
Variances for the Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center project - Planning Case 08-16.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 21 st day of October, 2008.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
Its Chairman
4
t.
F\esulom\'ikd
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
;',
SEP 1 9 2008
CITY OF CHANHASSE~.
7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 1~NI-IASSENPLANNlNGDEPT
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100
Planning Case No.
o ~ -llJ
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED .
JUL 0 3 2008
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
CHANHASSEN PLANNJNGOiPf
PLEASE PRINT
Applicant Name and Address:
United Properties LLC
3500 American Boulevard West
Minneapolis, MN 55431
Contact: Bill Katter
Phone: 952.837.8525 Fax: 952.893.8206
Email: william.katter@uproperties.com
Owner Name and Address:
Timothy A. & Dawne M. Erhart
9611 Meadowlark Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Contact:
Phone:
Email:
Fax:
NOTE: Consultation with City staff is reauired prior to submittal, including review of development
plans
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
)
Temporary Sales Permit
x
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) L.\ ~E:
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
x
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC)
Variance (VAR) ~oo xq r~V
~I c\5 l-\ \- ! S-€ -\-bOo clcs. / j?r,"<y\o (, 2 GY'-e en c (0 CLC~ /YI..J I\.-\.
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) d./5
Non-conforming Use Permit
x
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
x
Rezoning
-00
'0 .
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
"'-x /Sfg'A-.P-el'm1ts'--"~
Y-- Notification Sign - ~iQQ')
(City to install and remove)
"..... x ...Sign-R@..!1Revlew---
Escrow..J.q.( ~ Fees/Atto~ost**
- ~~ACNAR~etes & Bounds __\50
-~inor SUB
TOTALFEE$~ cr.j1?;::,(jq;.)., t.1l,jQ;;'
x Site Plan Review (SPR)* 560 + \ \..tJ 1 ~ -=-
~\I:J
x
x Subdivision* 300
An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant
prior to the public hearing. (.., '-i @ -t3 .:;.' \ q'J-
*Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11"
reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a diaital COpy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format.
**Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for
each application.
SCANNED
~.
..
;,."...
PROJECT NAME: Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
LOCATION: Intersection of (new) Highway 212 and Powers Boulevard
LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PID: Outlot A Butternut Ridge Addition, PID# 251550020
TOTAL ACREAGE: 116.88
WETLANDS PRESENT:
x YES
NO
PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District
REQUESTED ZONING: Office and Institutional District
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: Residential Low Density
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: Office and Institutional
REASON FOR REQUEST: Improve land to include development of a medical center, access road, storm
pond, and allow for future development of a City lift station, sanitary sewer, and other
necessary infrastructure.
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees:
and new employees:
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 15 business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership
(either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person
to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Mf\11l\e~ \lO\"ft~O
~O'>l700g
Dat
u,c.--
Signature of Fee Owner
Date
G:\plan\forms\Development Review Application. DOC
Rev. 1/08
SCANNED
PROJECT NAME: Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
LOCATION: Intersection of (new) Highway 212 and Powe.:r;sH:soulevard
LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PID: Outlot A Butternut Ridge Addition, PIDt 251550020
TOTAL ACREAGE: 116_88
WETLANDS PRESENT:
x YES
NO
PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District
REQUESTED ZONING: Office and Institutional District
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: Residential Low Density
REQUeSTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: Office and Institutional
REASON FOR REQUEST: Improve land to include development of a medical center, access road, storm
pond, and allow for future development of a City lift station, sanitary sewer, and other
necessary infrastructure.
FOR SITE PlAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees:
and new employees:
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 detennination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
This is to certify that I am making application forthe described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership
(either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of TJtfe, Absfractof Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person
to make this appHcation 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 appIiCation~ I Mther
understand that additional fees may be charged for const.dling fees, feasibility studfes, etc: with an es~ rJfior to My
authortzation to proceed With the study. The documents and inforrnafion I have- subrnittt-'l1 are tn~! and coned to the tr....st of
my knowledge.
/
0:of~
,~~~
aft.ji ture of Fee er
Date
7/3 / {} ?;
Date
G:\plan\formsIDevelopment Review Application.DOC
Rev. 1/08
SCANNED
UNITED PROPERTIES
DEVELOPMENT NARRATIVE SUPPLEMENT FOR
FAIRVIEW CHANHASSEN MEDICAL CENTER
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
;". .
Submitted On
September 19, 2'008
r .
i....
~.,.. '.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
SEP 1 9 2008
CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT
"
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
September 19, 2008
'.
.
Introduction
On July 3, 2008, United Properties LLC, on behalf of Powers Crossing Medical LLC, a joint
venture between Dawne and Timothy Erhart and United Properties Investment LLC, submitted a
development application for a proposed medical office building located at the southeast corner
of (new) Highway 212 and Powers Boulevard in Chanhassen, Minnesota.
The building, as proposed, will be a two-phase, 160,000 sq. ft., destination medical center.
Fairview Health Services will be the anchor tenant. The first phase will be a three;.story, 72,000
sq. ft. building with a two-story, 16,000 sq. ft. link on the north end, providing a total building
area of 88,000 sq. ft: The link will eventually serve as the connection point to a matching three-
story, 72,000 sq. ft. building in the second phase. Because the second phase depends on right-
of-way along Highway 212 currently controlled by Mn/DOT, we request approval to transfer
density from the phase two building and add a fourth story to the phase one building if Mn/DOT
is unwilling to turn back this right-of-way. The end result would be a four-story, 112,000 sq. ft.
building with parking built to City code requirements.
On July 15:2008, the City sent a written response to United Properties requesting justification
for the variance requests contained in the original application. The three variances requested
pertain to the Bluff Creek Overlay District, building height, and signage. Below are the
justifications for each variance request addressing the criteria in Section 20-58 of the
Chanhassen City Code for the first two variances and Section 20-1253 for the signage variance.
Bluff Creek Overlav District
On-site, we request a variance to grade and construct a driveway-surface within the secondary
zone of the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD). Off-site, south of the access road, we request
a variance to construct a storm water detention pond and site for the City's lift station in the both
the Primary and Secondary Zone of the BCOD.
· Enforcement causes undue hardship. Because this is the first development of its
nature in this area, no comparable properties exist within 500 feet to meet the Code's
definition of "undue hardship." However, we believe this is a reasonable request
given the somewhat arbitrary nature of the BCOD boundary line. _
· Conditions don't generally apply to property with same zoning classification.
Throughout the City, properties with an Office and Institutional (01) zoning
classification which are not adjacent to the BCOD are not subject to the more
restrictive development requirements of the BCOD. Moreover, grading within the
primary and secondary BCOD zones will be necessary to complete the City's access
road, and our plans are similar to the City's grading needs.
· Variance is not driven by desire to increase value. We request this variance to
effectively balance the needs of the City, the landowner, the developer, and the
anchor tenant.
· Hardship is not self-created. We do not believe this hardship is self-created.
· Variance is not detrimental to public welfare. We believe the site studies submitted
- with our original application show that the variance requested will not be a detriment
to public welfare.
· Variance will not impair surrounding property. We believe the site studies submitted
with our original application show that the variance requested will not impair
surrounding property. Furthermore, the current landowner will retain ownership of
United Properties LLC
1
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
September 19, 2008
approximately 100 acres of undeveloped land. This landowner would not allow a
development on 12% of the land to impair the remaining 88% of the property.
BuildinQ Heiqht
The proposed phase one and phase two buildings (principle structures) are three stories high,
and the phase two parking garage is three stories high with one additional level for proof of
parking. As mentioned in the introduction above, we also request approval to transfer density
from the phase two building and add a fourth story to the phase one building if Mn/DOT is
unwilling to turn back this right-of-way. The end result would be a four-story, 112,000 sq. ft.
building with parking built to City code' requirements. .
The 01 District allows for a maximum height of two stories for principal structures and one story
for accessory structures. . Because Community Development Department staff recommended
rezoning the current site to the 01 District, we request a variance from the height requirements.
· Enforcement causes undue hardship. Because this is the first development of its
nature in this area, no comparable properties exist within 500 feet to meet the Code's
definition of "undue hardship." In fact, precisely because no properties exist within
500 feet, a height restriction could be seen as an undue hardship.
· Conditions don't generally apply to property with same zoning classification. Given
the parcel's fixed border created by Highway 212, Powers Boulevard, and the Bluff
Creek Overlay District, we cannot expand the site to reduce the height of the
buildings. Sites with the same zoning classification don't generally face a similar
inability to expand.
· Variance is not driven by desire to increase value. We request this variance to
create sufficient space for medical providers to meet the demand for medical
services from residents of Chanhassen and the surrounding area.
· Hardship is not self-created. We do not believe this hardship is self-created.
· Variance is not detrimental to public welfare. We believe the plans submitted with
our original application show that the variance requested will not be a detriment to
public welfare.
· Variance will not impair surrounding property. We believe the plans submitted with
our original application show that the variance requested will not impair surrounding
property. The hills and forests surrounding this property act as a natural buffer to
neighboring parcels.
. Sianaae
In lieu of providing two monument signs, one for each building, we request a variance for
consolidation to one monument sign with a combined area and height 95 percent larger than
currently allowed in the 01 District. As medical office buildings have signage needs more similar
to retail than traditional office, we feel this will provide for the signage needs of the tenants while
still holding to the spirit of City's signage requirements. The sign base will be constructed of
similar materials used on the building to compliment the architecture.
With the natural hills surrounding this. property as well as the man-made hills from the
construction of Highway 212, we believe the modest signage allowed by the City causes
hardship when viewed in a topographical context. Additionally, since we regard this variance
request as a consolidation of signage, rather than an upsizing, we believe our request does not
United Properties LLC
2
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
September 19, 2008
adversely affect the spirit or intent of the City's sign age ordinance. Finally, we believe the
requested variance creates the added benefits of reducing site clutter and enhancing public
welfare by improving visibility for the elderly and medical patients in stressful, emergency
situations
United Properties LLC
3
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
September 19, 2008
CONTACT INFORMATION
D veloper and Fee Owner Representative
United Properties LLC.
As agent for Powers Crossing Medical LLC
3500 American Boulevard West
Minneapolis, MN 55431
Attention: Bill Katter
952.837.85251 Phone
952.893.82061 Fax
william.katter@uproperties.com
Architect
Pope Associates, Inc.
1255 Energy Park Drive
St. Paul, MN 55108-5118
Attention: Paul Holmes
651.789.15821 Phone
651.642.1101 I Fax
pholmes@popearch.com
Civil En~ineer
Westwood Professional Services
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Attention: Dan Parks
952.906.74351 Phone
952.937.5822 I Fax
dan.parks@westwoodps.com
United Properties LLC
4
"..
Westwood
September 4, 2008
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
Westwood Profe..ional Services
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
SEP I 9 2008 .
MAIN 952-937-5150
FAX 952-937-5822
TOll FREE 1-888-937-5150
EMAll WPS@We5twoodps.com
www.westwoodps.com '
. . . CHANHASSEN PlANNlNG DEPT
CIty of Chanhassen Plannmg Department.
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
. PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re:
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center - Response to
City Comment Letter (Planning Case #08-16)
File. 20061094.01
Dear Planning Department:
Westwood staff has reviewed the city comment letter dated 07/15/08 for the above-
referenced project. Responses to each comment are provided below, and the
submittal documents have been revised to address the issues. We believe that the
plans and submittal materials are now complete and would appreciate your
consideration in scheduling this project for the earliest available City of Chanhassen
Planning Commission agenda.
VARIANCE
Variance requests require that the applicant provide, via narrative, a justification for
each variance request addressing the criteria of Section 20-58 of the Chanhassen
City Code. The variances include building height and encroachment into and setback
from the Bluff Creek primary zone. The sign variance request should address the
criteria in section 20;..1253 of the Chanhassen City Code.
A .narrative has been created by United Properties that addresses justification fot:. the
variances. This narrative is under a separate cover within the submittal package.
SITE PLAN
· The parking ramp must be set back at least 35 feet from the future ramp right-or
way. The buildings and traffic circulation need to be shifted to the south.
The parking structure has been shifted south to accommodate this request. Refer to
the architectural and civil plans for clarity.
· The site plan should incorporate an interim landscape buffer plan for the Phase 1
project perimeter.
A Phase 1 Landscape Plan has been created and inserted into the civil plan set to
address this comment.
t. S T p. B 1.1 ::- ~.: ~: l} ~ {.,; ~:;'~ 2
TWIN ClTIeSiMETRO
ST. CI.OUD
BRAINERD
"~
Westwood
September 4, 2008
Page 2
.. Eliminate the sidewalk to Powers Boulevard and. replace with sidewalks to the
access road and the trail adjacent to the Highway 312 ramp as part of Phase 2.
The sidewalk to Powers Boulevard has been eliminated and a sidewalk has been
extended to the access road. These changes are reflected in both the architectural
. ~lans and the civil plans.
· Trees on the landscape plan are shown down the middle of the trail near the off
ramp of Highway 312.
The landscape plan has been revised to show trees and plantirigs south of the trail
near Highway 312. .
· A swale of 2% is required west of the parking garage.
The grading plan has been revised to show a 2% swale.
· Show truck turning templatefor appropriate size delivery trucks.
Truck turning movement graphics have been created for city delivery trucks at the 4'
dock as well as movements for a WB-50 in c1ock- and counter-clock-wise directions
around the main building.
· Switch the location of the sanitary sewer with the water main.location on the east
side of the building, or move the sanitary to the west side of the building.
SWitching the water and sanitary locations create difficulties in maintaining a 10 foot
horizontal separation between Water and sanitary & storm sewers. The utility plan
was not revised to show this request. .
· Maintain 10 feet of separation between storm, sanitary, and water main.
A 10 foot separation has been accommodated between water aild storm and water and-
sanitary sewers. Sanitary and storm sewer may be closer than 10 feet in some
locations. .
· Proof of parking is shown on land not currently owned by the applicant. Provide
from MnDOTa time frame for the proposed turn back of the right-ol-way to be
incorporated in the project.
We have contacted Keith McMurray at MNDOT and discussed the time line of.
reconveyance on two separate occasions. MNDOT acknowledges that we have an
official request into them (#2007-0085) and that it is in their system. We understand
that the reconveyance review process has been started, but at this time is not
complete. Mr. McMurray stated that the reconveyance of property would not happen
until this fall or later. We will update the City of Chanhassen as we receive new
information from MNDOT.
f. S ': .~~ f; !.. i ~ I: r: C i N ~ a ":
planning;;> engineering> surveying
\\"
Westwopd
September 4, 2008
Page 3
-The building acreage and property access exhibit, sheet SKP06, does not provide
a permissible nor feasible access to the-area betweelJ Lot 1, Block 1 and the
wetland located to the east of the lot. The driveway shown to access the remnant
piece is unbuildable. Since there is no legitimate access, this area may not be
used in determination of fUture density.
Corinnent noted. The SKP06 exhibit has been removed from the submittal materials.
...
SUBDIVISION
· Chanhassen City Code requires that the primary zone be composed of 100
percent open space. The areas within the Bluff Creek Primary Zone shall be
incorporated within separate. outlots or be covered by a conservation easement.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 463.358, subd. 2a, the regulations shall
require that subdivisions be consistent with the municipality's official map if
one exists and it's zoning ordinance, and may require consistency with other
official controls and the comprehensive plan.
The property owner will work with the city in crafting a conservation easement over
the subject areas. . .
· The grading plan should be revised to reduce the impacts to trees and within the
Bluff Creek Primary Zone,
Grading has been -reduced in the storm pond area by providing a retaining wall. Refer
to the grading plan for details.
· A tree removal calculation shall be provided for the development contained with
this project.
Tree removal calculations are provided on the Phase 2 landscape plan. A shaded line
has been added to the plan to clarify the area used for calculating canopy coverage.
· Street profile should be shown on the same sheet as the sanitary sewer profile.
Also inclu.de horizontal curve information.
The access road profile is shown on the sanitary sewer profile graphic. Horizontal
curve information is provided.
· The roadway should be constructed to the east property line of the proposed
Fairview parcel and a temporary cul-de:"sac should be provided.
The plans have been revised to show a temporary cul-de-sac meeting the City's
design guidelines.
i:ST.\G!.!SH:::D IN -:;..:
planning> engineering> surveying
'"
Westwood.
September 4, 2008
Page 4
· Provide a minimum of a 4-foot median near the entrance to Powers Boulevard
along with a left turn lane. into the Fairview site.
The plans have been revised to show a 6.67 foot wide median at the intersection of
the acceSs road and Powers Boulevard.
· Narrow the roadway to a 36-foot maximum east of the second access into
Pairview. .
The plans have been revised to show a 36 foot road width east of the second access.
· Forcemain location must be shown north of the site.
The plans have been revised to show the sanitary forcemain running along the south
side of the access road to the east. The forcemain crosses the access road and then
heads north, adjacent to the.lakelpond.
· Lift station pad must line up with the existing sanitary line. Access shall be
provided off of Powers Boulevard.
.The plans have been revised to meet this request.
· Pond dead storage is insujjicient. The applicant should investigate directing the
drainagefrom north of the developed site in such a manner as to bypass the pond
thereby minimizing the need for additional dead storage.
The pond has been enlarged slightly to provide sufficient dead storage. The east
drainage is routed through the pond; a bypass is not necessary and is not included in
the design. Seethe attached Preliminary Storm Water Report for detailed analysis
and calculations.
· Maximum pond depth-is 10 feet.
The pond depth has been adjusted to reflect a 10 foot maximum depth.
· Provide fUll-size drainage maps showing entire drainage areas.
. .
Full-size drainage maps have been attached to the revised storm water report.
It Drainage maps do not match drainage calculations.
Drainage maps and calculations have been revised to match each other.
· Street grade within 30 feet of Powers Boulevard must be less than or equal to 3%.
Access road grade within 30 feet of Powers Boulevard has been adjusted to meet this
criterion.
r: ~: 0;" .~. ~~ L ! S H t D ; H 1 -; ! f.
planning> engineering> surveying
'"
. Westwood
September 4, 2008
Page 5 .
· . The subdivision cannot plat the property that is currently owned by MnDOT.
The preliminary plat has been revised to include only the property currently ownedby
the applicant.
· Show drainage and utility easements on the preliminary plat.
Drainage and utility easements have been provided on the preliminary plat.
· Provide snow storage for the trail along the Highway 312 off ramp and along the
access road.
Snow storage has been provided for the trail along the Highway 312 off ramp and
along the access road.
· A street light is needed at the intersection of Powers Boulevard and the access
road.
The lighting and photometric plan has been revised to show a street light at the
. intersection of the access road and Powers Boulevard,
· Applicant needs to maintain existing drainage patterns as shown on Overview
Map #3 prepared by MnDOTfor the TH 312 design/buildwhich was supplied by
the City to Westwood on July 1, 2008. Drainage previously/cwiently directed to
the west side of Powers Boulevard is shown to be directed down ditch on the east
side qfPowers Boulevard without any calculations showing the ability of the
receiving water to handle this discharge.
Existing drainage patterns, as currently in place; have been mamtained. Currently
drainage flows south along the east side of Powers Boulevard. Drainage then flows
beneath Powers, east to west, via a 24" RCP pipe. Proposed storm water discharges
from the Fairview are less than or equal to existing storm water runoff rates from the--
site.
· Applicant needs to show outlet for the water body south of the Highway 312 on
. ramp north of the subject property. ..
The Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan has been revised to show this
outlet.
· The applicant is strongly encouraged to employ storm water storage and
treatment. below the parking lot in order to minimize the necessary pond size,
thereby minimizing impacts within the primary zone. This water can be used for
irrigation purposes.
Comment noted and will be considered by the applicant.
· Provide adequate erosion/sediment controls consistent with the NPDES
Construction permit and the City of Chanhassen 's standards. This includes, but
F s: T r.. at.; 5 1-; ~. DiN ! ~f 7 .~
planning> engineering> surveying
'"
Westwood
. September 4, 2008
Page 6
is not limited to:
· Installation of silt fence down gradient of all disturbed soils.
· . Installation of a rock construction entrance with a minimum length of75 feet.
· Stabilization of all channels for at least the final 200 feet prior to discharge of
site or into the storm sewer infrastructure.
· Placement of ditch checks within the existing ditch in existing Drainage Area
2,
Erosion and sediment control measures will be outlined in a SWPPP that will be
included with construction level drawings.
. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan will be required.
A SWPPP will be included with construction level drawings.
TRAFFIC STUDY
Attached to this letter is a memo written by our traffic engineering staff that address
the following four comments in addition to comments from MNDOT and Carver
County.
· Update traffic counts to current county estimates. Get traffic model from Carver
County.
. Traffic report states that a traffic signal is required. Carver County spacing
guidelines are not met at this location. Discussions between MnDOT, Carver
County, and the City are needed to see if a traffic signal can be installed at this
location.
. Development will occur on the opposite side of this proposed access road. Has
this been taken into account in the traffic report? If so, what are your
assumptions?
. What happens to the intersection on the Highway 101 side in the year 2020 when
this area is fullY developed?
WETLANDS
Please refer to the previously Submitted and approved wetland delineation report
dated August 2006 for the subject property. This report addresses the wetland
comments below.
f :~ r 1\ h t j S H : ,I i i..; l? -; l
planning;> engineering> surveying
"T
Westwood
September 4, 2008
Page 7
. The applicant needs to clearly indicate all delineated wetland boundaries including
the date the delineation was completed and the entity performing the delineation. The
City reserves the right to verify the wetland boundari~s per Minnesota Rules 8420
and may request that a portion or all of the wetland boundaries are re-staked as
existing conditions may have been significantly altered since the original delineation
was performed.
. The applicant needs to clearly indicate all wetland buffers.
. The applicant needs to clearly indicate all wetland setbacks.
. The applicant needs to clearly indicate the wetland mitigation area.
Please contact me if you have any questions, would like to discuss any of the issues
above in further detail, and when this project has been scheduled for the next
available Planning Commission agenda.
Sincerely,
WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Ryan M. Edstrom, PE
Attachments
Cc:
File
Denton Mack - Pope Associates
Tim Erhart -Exlar
Bill Katter - United Properties
E5T.~Ht~,)H{: n i~~ 1 ::1"1 t-
planning> engineering> surveying
"~
Westwood
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 4,2008
Re: Cbanhas~en Medical Office Development Traffic Study.
File 20061094
To: City of Chanhassen Planning Department
From: Bruce Boje
Nicholas J. Erpelding, P.E., PTOE
. Westwood Professional Servi<es
7699 Anagram PriYe
Edeo Prailie, MN 55344
.....'Ii 952-937-5150
fAX 952.937-~2
Te,. fau 1-888.937.5150
~"'A" wpsOwestwotX!ps.com
www.westwoodps.<om
In response to your July 15th, 2008 comments regarding Westwood's July 3rd Traffic
Study, we offer the following responses.
Comment 1: Update traffic counts to current county estimates. Get traffic model from
Carver County. ADTs from MNDOT were used in the model.
Response: Westwood contacted Mr. Roger Gustafson with Carver County to request
the most recent estimates on Tuesday, July 29th. After following Mr. Gustafson's
direction to contact SRF Consulting Group, a response was received from SRF as
follows:
Please find the attached scan with forecast volumes from the Carver County
Transportation Plan. As you will see, only one volume is given on Powers in
your study area, and would apply to the entire segment between Lyman and
Pioneer.
The volumes shown here represent the preferred scenario for the County
plan, which is the "State + County Improvements". Other scenarios include
forecasts ranging from 18,000 to 21,000 vpd on Powers in this location.
Please note that these forecasts do not take into consideration two
significant land uses near this site: 1) the new high school being built on the
north side of Lyman just west of Audubon, and 2) a proposed shopping mall
near the intersection of Lyman and Powers. .
I.hope this information helps. Please let me know if anything else comes up.
Paul .
Paul Morris
Transportation Engineer
SRF ,Consulting Group, Inc.
Along with the following sketch:
:: ). 1 ;\ b t. :} ,.~ r~) ! N :...~."
ST. Cl.OUD
BRAINERD
TWIN CITIES/METRO
".
Westwood
September 4, 2008
Page 2
Comm. No.
Sheet I
By P.,.. J I'f.
Checked by
S$&J
of I
Date 71l!U() 8
Date
:.......... "l ~,,__..~......... .... ...,.....
> '. ~
. .
. .
i .
I
...~~. ....,.. .;....... .... ~r' -."0:...... . _....~ '....:. ....~ :-..'~ .~_. .;
~
.
)
. ~. .,
i
....
-,.,.
.
~""':" .' .... n'. ..~.. , .
.J. .;..---~..~-:., -t ..; ....;--.... ~.':
f
Li, ...-....;,,,.,, . i.... i..~.~..:, ..-~ ..";...,,
t ; .
"j
4..
.
...\
. n.~'hh.
..,;....~_....'...., :l.....; ..~..,:."'..,'<>., ~.;......--"i..".~.
j ..,~.
>
. -'". ~ .. .-
;
.~. .: ,.:.J,,~~..,"~~:..,..lH....~.,.J
.,:-S... "'{. .,'~......;..,., /~~....;....:...y.">.:.<........".; r. .
i t.
f .:.,..... >i.l'. J. . ,
~ ~ . ~ .. '. , . ~
. ". >' i .. :~. . . . .~.,.- 1.' . ',-' ',( . ......f
1~'>'>.~J. ,,>~..i i"'... .. 'S;(",,:~j.: ~t.... - -. .~;....,.. i,- ;::j
, ;' , .}....> :....~, .( ..... < .i
t ~. . },
r" 'f"-'~' ;"P':A"'~'." .:(.. 'J" "A"; ..t.....N ....~ .'M'" ... '\
I,': . ~ ..~. . >.. ;. . . . . ~. j.. .. .;. >
; i . . {i ~: ... ;.
.. ,.. "'.. ..- ~,..._.. ...;
, .
.,. "' . ... ..}.. .....1.,. ..,.
i . . i '.. .. ~.' .. ~.' .-
r"";; : . ''''1 r f'"
1;.......'.~:'.~.~';..'...-^.;.~....,.:.:'........<.I,............, ...,........:.........:" ~.....,:-..<........,.;,.'"'. ~ . t.......~'''.
. . .-.. -. _.- .-,. ~ ~:~:'~.-......r,: .:..~ ~~.w;A~'...~.l...~.$~ ....'.
~ ". . .....i > '...... ,.......~_.. ,~. ..':' '..... ..' ','., ..'- .. .. .. '" ....... .....-
J... :._: . ~-; , . ' : ! m" . . 'j-'~ . . .
:,ij...t:t~'-i:..'~'~-:~"-.r.-'~~~'>" .:r.'...7';-:,~~_+:~.J; ~;-:l+'S+.:,~~' "
1, - ' .. .;. . -.~ .. . .
f ' i
,
. ~. .- ~ . . .' ."f
.. ':r:!.':'~;._;...:.. .~
.,. ~. ~
....: .. ~. ..<.. ;,.. .. .~ - ~
....+._...~~ ."'....._""><;......"~+<o,;"~ ...."'+.... .L,,~._~.,",",~
. ","; .~.. i
.' _..~, ...,,~
,
.. ~
,
,. . ~
..\
..,.'. .".i
f
~.
~ ...,.~. t......:.... ;........ ~ t
I . .
'. .,
17. .7Oo! :''':'fb"L._.,-..~..~.
, '. .
'tlDp ,
< .
..'!-........."v-~.....,;.~.....f.....:
. ,.....-'.., ,
.,....:,.. "V""'''' ,<......" ....,,,,. ~
As noted by SRF, the ADT forecasts completed are general in nature, with only one
ADT forecast for the entire Powers Boulevard segment from Lyman Boulevard on the
north to Pioneer Trail on the south. (It should also be noted that these preliminary
~:sr~~.Htt).Hfn IN 1;17)
planning;> engineering> surveying
'"
Westwood
September 4,2008
Page 3
forecasts do not yet appear to have been formally published as part of the County's
Comprehensive Plan update.)
The SRF forecast of 19,600ADT'for this segment of Powers Boulevard in 2030
appears consistent with the Westwood's projected year 2020 APT range of 16,900 to
21,800 shown on Figure 8 of the report.
Comment 2: Traffic report states that a traffic signal is required. Carver County
spacing guidelines are not met at this location. Discussions between MnDOT, Carver
County, and the City are needed to see if a traffic signal can be installed at this
location.
Response: The 2003 Kimley-Hom Chanhassen AUAR includes no discussion ofthe
operations of this intersection. The report does indicate on Figure 11 that side street
stop control is proposed for the intersection, which was analyzed as a "T" intersection
(the 4th/east leg was not included).
ro .
Westwood's July 3 traffic report notes that based solely on level of service, a traffic
signal would be required concurrent with Phase 2 development in order to prevent the
exiting left turn movement from dropping to an unacceptable LOS.
Though the comment was made that a traffic signal would be "required," it was made
with the understanding that one would not be installed until it was fully warranted and
justified. In the metro area, it is common for a side street stop controlled intersection
to operate with failing side street movements during peak times. Such intersections
can and do remain side street stop controlled indefinitely. The appropriate courseJ>f
action is to. monitor the intersection as traffic volumes grow to deterIIiine if and when
changes in intersection control should be made.
To further assess when traffic volumes at the intersection might necessitate installation
of a traffic signal, additional analysis was undertaken. The turning movement volumes
forecasted in the report were compared with the traffic volume warrants for the
installation of a traffic signal identified in the current Minnesota Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD).
F.;I;"")d~~!SHtD iN. t971
planning> engineering> surveying
".
Wes,twood .
September 4, 2008
Page 4
W
Table 1
An I . S
arrant alYSIS ummarv
Warrant Hours Hours Met:
. Required: 2010 2010 2012 2020
No-Build Build Build Build
(]>hase 1) (phase 2) Phase 3a Phase 3b
1A 8 2 2 2 2 2
1B 8 7 7 7 7 7 .
Ie 8 I I 1 I 1
2 4 6 6 Q .. 6.. 6
3 I 4 5. . 5 5. 5 ..
.. . .'-
Assumptions:
1. Based on peak hour volumes in July 3, 2008 Traffic Analysis Report
2. Hourly variation assumed from MnDOT A TR 458 (2007 volumes).
3. Right turn volumes excluded.
4. 0.70 factor applied (located on high speed roadway - 40 MPH+).
5. 2+ approach lanes for both Powers Boulevard and Site Collector Roadway.
The results documented in Table I show that the amount oftraffic contributing toward
the fulfillment of signal warrants remains nearly constant as developmentofthe
subject site proceeds from vacant through full build. This is explained by the fact that
the primary generator of traffic contributing toward fulfillment of signal warrants is
development to the west of Powers Boulevard, not development on the subject site.
(As is noted in the response to comment 3, below, full development ofthe Chanhassen
AUAR site to the west of Powers Boulevard was assumed by 2010.)
To further assess what contribution traffic from the subject site has toward fulfillment
. of signal warrants, the analysis was updated with the assumption that the siteto the
west remains vacant. With this assumption, in contrast, the number of hours each
warrant is met increases as development proceeds. At full build out, the number of
hours for which warrants are met is just below that ofthe 2010 No-Build scenario in
Table 1. This confirms that traffic from the subject site is not the primary contributor
to the need for signalization. .
E'srAEL~S_Hf:~) l~ !S~.~J.
planning ;> engin~ring > surveying
September 4, 2008
Page 5
"
W
An I . S
Table 2
N d I
fP
B I
d
Westwood
arrant alysls umman - 0 eve opment west 0 owers.. . ou evar
Warrant Hours Required: I Hours Met:
2010 Build 2012 Build 2020 Build
(Phase 1) (Phase 2) Phase 3a Phase 3b
lA 8 0 0 2 0
1B 8 0 4 7 . 4
1C 8 0 0 0 0
2 4 0 2 6 3
3 1 0 1 4 2
Assumptions:
1. Based on peak hour volumes in. July 3, 2008 Traffic Analysis Report
2. Hourly variation assumed from MnDOT ATR 458 (2007 volumes).
3. Right turn volumes excluded.
4. 0.70 factor applied (located on high speed roadway - 40 MPH+).
5. 2+ approach lanes for both Powers Boulevard and Site Collector Roadway.
6. Assumes no adjacent development west of Powers Blvd.
It is further noted that in the metro area~ an intersection must typically meet more than
one warrant in order justify installation of a traffic signal. This is due to in part to
delay increasing for the mainline and the increased potential for mainline rear end.
collisions. Based on the analysis completed, traffic volumes at the intersection will be
close but may not fully justify installation of a traffic signal through full build out of
the site in 2020.
Noting that a signal was forecast to be necessary in terms of level of service concurrent
with Phase 2 in 2012, the intersection would be expected to operate at poor LOS ~
during peak times with good LOS the remainder (and majority) ofthe day.
Access Spacing
The intersection of Powers Boulevard and Site Collector Roadway does not meet the
. prescribed full access spacing of Y4 mile along Powers Boulevard, as identified on the
figure on page 4.39 in the most current version of the Carver County Comprehensive
Plan:. With approximately 820 feet of spacing provided, center-to-center, it falls 500
feet, or 38% short.
It is Westwood's understanding that the location ofthis intersection was selected
during design of the TH 212 project to best fit with the natural topography and wetland
constraints. While it is true that full Y4 mile spacing is hot met at the chosen location,
it represents a workable compromise location. Without having completed a formal
analysis of the corridor, but based on experience with similar situations, it is
f. S T p. 8 ~ ~ S"H t Q I N I q 7 J
planning> engineering:> surveying
".
Westwood
September 4, 2008
Page 6
anticipated that signal timing and phasing plans can be developed to accommodate the
selected intersection location without compromising the operational integrity of the
Powers Boulevard corridor.
Other noteworthy considerations include the fact that the Site Collector Roadway
intersection is the only intersection proposed in the roadway segment between the TH
212 south ramps and Pioneer Trail just under ~ mile to the south feet to the south.
Because this segment is less than ~ mile in length, no access location will be able to
provide the necessary full1f4 mile spacing required on both resulting segments.
Finally, a 4-lane roadway section with turn lanes such proposed for this stretch of
Powers Boulevard is typically capable of carrying over 40,000 ADT. 2030 volume
forecasts are in the 20,000 ADT range, meaning a substantial capacity cushion is likely
to exist.
Comment 3: Development will occur on the opposite side of this proposed access
road. Has this been taken into account in the traffic report? Jj so, what are your
assumptions?
Response: As noted on page 1 of the Westwood Traffic Report,
"The Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (AUAR)
prepared in 2003 for the CitY of Chanhassen by the consultant team of
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc., Kimley Horn and Associates, Peterson
Environmental Consulting, 106 Group and HDR was used in the
determination of background traffic volumes and traffic assignment process."
Full build ofthe Chanhassen AUAR area was assumed by 2010, as assumed in the.
. Chanhassen AUAR. The turning movement volume illustrations, Figures 5-8, reflect
this assumption.
Comment 4: What hqppens to the intersection on the Highway 101 side in the year
2020 when this area is fully developed?
Response: The traffic study completed is intended to provide .support for Phases I and
2 of the proposed development only. This includes the two medical office buildings .
located immediately adjacent to Powers Boulevard south of the TH 212 ramps:
Consideration of development of a Phase 3 was done only to gauge anticipated future
traffic conditions at intersections impacted by Phase I and 2 development, not to
provide a full analysis ofthe impacts of Phase 3 development.
~::;1i\B.i.l)Hf~J iN lY"..
planning> engineering> surveying
'. >
w
Westwood
September 4, 2008
Page 7
Due to the small magnitude of development proposed for Phases 1 and 2, a full
analysis of the impacts of the extension of the site collector roadway to CSAH 101 was
not undertaken. The report does note (in Figure 4) that only 5% of the site generated
traffic from the subject medical office site is forecast to use the extension to connect to
CSAH 101. This 5% would amount to fewer than 300 trips per day, well below the
often-used 1,000 ADT minimum threshold for de4tiled study.
It is anticipated that detailed sfudy of the Site Collector roadway extension to CSAH
101 will be completed at the time formal development plans for Phase 3 are put forth.
E5TABt.~SHF{) ~N 19.;;
planning> engineering> surveying
~
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
JUL 0 3 2008
CHANHASSEN PLANNiNG DEPT
Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center Site
Traffic Analysis
Chanhassen, Minnesota
July 3, 2008
Prepared by
"" Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
SCANNED
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this traffic analysis is to assess the traffic implications of the proposed
development on the F airview Medical Center site in what will be the southeast quadrant of the
Powers Boulevard / T.H. 312 intersection in the City of Chanhassen. The proposed site is
presently undeveloped, with Powers Blvd. to be extended south from Lyman Blvd. to Pioneer
Trail with construction of the new T.H. 312 ramps on Powers Blvd. The development location is
shown in Figure 1, along with the planned roadway network in the area.
The Chanhassen 2005 Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (AUAR) prepared in 2003 for the
City ofChanhassen by the consultant team of Hoisington Koegler Group Inc., Kimley Horn and
Associates, Peterson Environmental Consulting, 106 Group and HDR was used in the
determination of background traffic volumes and traffic assignment process.
The development is comprised of approximately 65 acres of proposed office and residential land
uses, summarized in Table 1 below. It will be built in three phases, the first two of which will
construct the medical office building. Two possible scenarios were considered for Phase 3: a
combination of general office and single-family residential or medium-density residential only.
A detailed site plan is shown in Figure 2.
Table 1
Land Use Characteristics
Phase - Scenario Land Use Size
Phase 1 Medical Office Building 88,000 SF
Phase 2 Medical Office Building 72,000 SF
Phase 3 - Scenario A General Office 250,000 SF
Single-Family Residential 35DU
OR Phase 3 - Scenario B Medium-Density Residential 390 DU
Traffic analyses were performed for projected year 20 I 0 volume conditions (one year after
completion of Phase 1),2012 (one year after completion of Phase 2) and 2020 (one year after full
build-out) for Phase 3 - Scenarios A and B.
Table 2
Traffic Analysis Scenarios
Year No-Build Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
2010 X X
2012 X X X
2020 X X X X
Page 1
Three intersections were analyzed:
. Powers Blvd. & the Site Collector road, analyzed for both unsignalized and signalized
intersection control and
. two unsignalized intersections on the Site Collector road that provide access to the
medical office building for Phases I and 2 of the development.
The proposed roadway geometry is shown in Figure 2.
The intersection of Powers Blvd. and the Site Collector will be the sole access to the
development for horizon years 2010 and 2012. (The AUAR assumes that a west leg will be
constructed opposite the site access but no east leg. The east side of the AUAR analysis area
ended at Powers Blvd.)
There are two site driveways off the Site Collector, the West Site Entrance allowing easy access
to the surface parking to the west of the medical building as well as to the parking ramp and the
East Site Entrance providing more direct access to the parking ramp. Along the south side of the
west driveway intersection with the Site Collector, the shoulder is planned to be wide enough to
allow eastbound through vehicles to by-pass one or two vehicles waiting for an opportunity to
turn left into the medical complex.
The internal East Site Entrance is planned to extend to connect with Highway 101 to the east
with construction of Phase 3 by 2020.
Page 2
Figure 1
Development Location
o ~1
g-
~-
0-
j k ~ ~A- ~
~ l/.."Ol
~ I ->
S\.n6el
RJdiJo Poir. = ~ J
-'"
r
.~
~
,~
-..---'
"
Lako
:Susan PlI;k
~
.
r'
(::.
/' If)
:1 "', 'I
I" PlillIIC ...
~r,~Pilrk
,Ii
-!n.1
~
/
II ..
~,/
--,__r
C
.J
-=.Il ....
r
<5
I ~ I
I~? .
L 1
ILill:e~Sus:an
I:illb W"l PlIrk
~.(Qe 7raJ N lo..<tc-
f .~
7 - J J
~
't
POWCf
HdI Pil/k
"
L )7nanBllld
II
"
i~1
ll,~
:)
~
0.,
~-
S
.
"~~~re~ lJj
..
,
PlQneer 7181
Bluff Creek,
,Golf Course
~
~C'Clt'L.. .
'-, '"';t.
t!~
'-= -,-..
\I
d~
~"
\"
\.
;)
~
~
~
I
Page 3
"
:-
-.... - CI-
-~ ;.
.., ~ II
\'
(ill)
'I
..../ "
, ~,
~
It
...
,
"Ri
L-
Lake Susan
./. -
W 85~ St
,
~
1
1'1
-,
, I,
~ is
~. Je~ ..f
,A S~
II
~
, --.:)
QIY
, J
I
~
Bandlmcro~
:Cornrmnty Pork
I
~
'-
;:'W 96th Sf::
I I
"'0
>
m
III
,
0:
r ,II:
./ '"
L., ~~
') 0'
p;ooee\
Hilla Grocn
Golf, Co~se r
x
I D
II
Figure 2
Site Plan
~ ~~+ ;l~~~
. ~ ~ ~.
! : 1 ~
. o.
"" ~ e
\
I
I
I
c::;:;?
--=~r::
= !.1.i
_ · u=1==1"':: ..
.=r:=: -+-
~-t~- --i-=
=t=:: --i--
=r::= --->--
--r--- =:::t~-=-
=i= ___4__
c5 :::j::::::
::! ~+ ~~N~
m JI ,.. ..
~; q.
~
Page 4
ANALYSIS OF FUTURE CONDITIONS
The future conditions with the development in place were analyzed using a traditional multi-step
traffic forecast and analysis process. The major steps in this process include:
. determining background traffic volumes,
. developing trip generation,
. deriving the direction of approach,
. assigning site generated traffic to the surrounding roadway network,
. analyzing development-related traffic impacts, and
. establishing mitigation strategies.
Analysis Scenarios
Traffic analyses were performed for three phases of construction, the third of which has two
potential land use scenarios:
. Phase I - initial construction of the medical office building
. Phase 2 - completion of medical office building construction
. Phase 3 - full build-out of the site with the addition of:
. Scenario A - 250,000 SF office space plus 35 single family detached dwelling units
. or Scenario B - 390 medium-density residential condominium / townhouse dwelling
units
Traffic Volumes
To obtain data for assessing operations for Powers Blvd. at the site entrance, background
volumes were first developed for the 3 analysis years based on data published in the Chanhassen
2005 AUAR. The AUAR included volume forecasts for the north, south and west legs ofthe
intersection. No forecasts of traffic were developed for the east leg. (See Appendix
Memorandum A-I for a description of the procedure used to develop the background volumes.)
The background volumes are shown for the years 2010, 2012 and 2020 on Figures 5, 6 and 7.
Trip Generation
The trip generation rates utilized in this study are those documented in the reference book Trip
Generation, 7th Edition, 2003, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).
Table 3 summarizes the weekday daily, A.M. peak hour and P.M. peak hour trip rates utilized for
this study.
Page 5
Table 3
Trip Generation Rates
I.T.E. Rates Distribution
Code Land Use Per Daily A.M. P.M. A.M. A.M. P.M. P.M.
%In % Out %In % Out
720 Medical Office KSF 36.13 2.48 3.72 79 21 27 73
Building
710 General Office KSF 11.01 1.55 1.49 88 12 17 83
Building
210 Single-Family DU 9.57 0.75 1.01 25 75 63 37
Detached Housing
230 Condominium / DU 5.86 0.44 0.52 17 83 67 33
Townhouse
Table 4 summarizes the overall gross trip generation. No reductions were taken for intemally-
captured, multi-purpose or pass-by trips for the proposed office and residential land uses.
Table 4
Gross Trip Generation
Approx. Trips
Phase Land Use Dev. A.M. A.M. A.M. P.M. P.M. P.M. Daily
Units In Out Total In Out Total Total
1
Medical 88 KSF 172 46 218 88 239 327 3,180
Office BldJ];.
2
.~;'f~~;'~~.~~~~......I......:.~.~~~.. ....~.:.~..... .....:..~..... ....~.:.:.... .....:.:.... .....~:.~.... .....:.~.~... ....~:~~:..
Total, Phases 1 & 2 313 84 397 160 435 595 5,782
3 Scenario A
General Office
Bldg.,......,:,=,?....~~,:.,'" 341 ~?...._ 388~,=......".. 310 373 ....,..,....,:,:,?~4
Single-Fa~ily 35 DU 7 19 26 22 13 35 336
..P.~~:..g~~~.~~g....... ............................. ...................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ........................
Total, Phases 1,2 & 3-A 661 150 811 245 758 1,003 8,872
Or Scenario B
.fT.~~;~;~~~...I....~.:.~.~~... ......~:..... ....~~:..... ....~.:.~..... ...~.~~.... ......~~.... ......~.~.~... ....~:~~~..
Total, Phases 1,2 & 3-B 342 226 568 296 502 798 8,068
Page 6
Trip Distribution
A large percentage of traffic generated from the development area will utilize T.H. 312 to the
east and west and Powers Blvd. to the north and south. With construction of Phase 3, traffic
generated here will also utilize the connection ofthe Site Collector road through to Highway 101
to the east.
This trip distribution, or direction of approach, for the development traffic is shown on Figure 3
for Phases 1 and 2 and on Figure 4 for the Phase 3 scenarios. This distribution is based on data
contained in the AUAR and traffic patterns expected in the area. The majority of Phase 3 traffic
is expected to be oriented towards Highway 101.
Trip Assignment and Traffic Analysis
In the trip assignment portion of the analysis, the new trips generated from the development area
were assigned to the roadway network using the routing patterns expected to be employed by the
future employees, visitors and residents. The organization and tabulation of the trip assignment
was facilitated by use of an Excel spreadsheet designed to carry out the traffic assignment
process across the study area network.
Total trips - background traffic plus site-generated trips - for each of the four analysis cases are
shown on Figures 5 through 8.
Timeframes for Traffic Assignment
Traffic analyses were performed for the A.M. and P.M. peak hours for 2010 (one year after
opening of the initial phase of construction of the medical office building), 2012 (one year after
opening of Phase 2 of the medical office building) and 2020 (one year after full build-out).
Page 7
Figure 3 1 & 2
. Phases
. DistributIOn
Trip
Ie
l.u
~
o
a..
,..,. ....~.
.. \ ....
...
$..,
JJ
Ill...l.... ':D l f
luke S~n \,
to. ~^'t..~t PiU1.
~ . _.t .
-~
.........
f~7
-. . nv.ltll\lO n 81-1
""'.........tl""'., ,g
f
.)
n
tJ
@
Bana..mc"c
I' p.
CO",m~'T\hY I
:;
~.
'li/ 96tn St
.~. of ...~
240/0
=Sm"-.Jtead lI)
P..oneer Tro.
"'0
:-
Qi
'"
-
;
~
~r...ll'~
...'N ,'.""
I"
Page 8
Figure 4
Trip Distribution - 2020 with Connection to Highway 101
~
~!
Ie
~
,.
o
-0.
'cr
dlk
La ~(' SllSan
~. .~ WC51 Park
"'~"-f, ;". ~,~ ~ '"",,;~!>:,,,,"illr.'~ . ...',~ ,..
. -Q'
s
~
J
'. it
It
730/0 I 230/0
220/0 I 7%
'~f'" "<A~
~IT":- .:read
HJIwI ."1.1(. .t.J)
'"
Ploneor Tre
','.. ,. ~ ~ "',
- ., .
tqAC~":Jt
Vi
(D
?
~~';';.-",,~~~~-, ' -.." ,,. . - .:';, ~..
, ""~) Ly-ltll.YOn 0.)".
..., ..g glY
h'
,I<j
f:
J)~O
'*'
'"
i'f
~
Bana.mcrc
Cornmlnlly Pi
~70%
\'tJ 96th S. -
Key:
Phases 1 & 2 I Phase 3
"'0
>
Qi
'"
-
i
:!\..
Page 9
Powers Blvd. and Site Collector
A series of AM. and P.M. peak hour traffic analyses were conducted for the three study
intersections using the planned roadway geometry and stop-sign intersection control for the four
analysis cases in 2010,2012 and 2020. (Volumes for each of the analysis cases are shown on
Figures 5, 6 and 8.)
Analyses were first performed for the AM. and P.M. peak hour No-Build conditions for the
Powers Blvd. / Site Collector intersection. These No-Build volumes are shown on Figures 5
through 8. Results are shown on Table 5 below, which shows the average seconds of delay per
vehicle along with the corresponding Level of Service (LOS) for the critical stopped movement
at the intersection. (Appendix Table A-I shows the LOS letter grades with their corresponding
levels of delay. Results for all intersections in all scenarios are shown by movement in
Appendix Tables A-2 - A-4.) In addition, analyses were performed for the four Build cases.
No-Build conditions resulted in LOS B or C for all three analysis years. With construction of
Phase 1, the eastbound left movement for traffic generated by the development to the west of
Powers Blvd. across from the Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center site is projected to
experience LOS "E" in the AM. peak hour and LOS "F" in the P.M. peak hour. For Phase 2,
LOS "E" is projected for both the eastbound and westbound left turns in the AM. peak hour,
while LOS "F" is projected in the P.M. peak hour. LOS "F" is projected for both left turn
movements for all subsequent phases with this intersection under stop sign control.
Based on the results of stop sign analysis of the forecasted traffic volumes, a traffic signal will be
required when traffic volumes reach Phase 2 levels in order to safely accommodate left turners
exiting the site.
Further analysis was conducted for this intersection with signal control in place. As shown in
Table 6, results are LOS "B" or borderline "B-C" for all scenarios under those conditions.
Page 1 0
TableS
Powers Blvd & Site Collector
Stop Sign Controlled Intersection Analysis
Critical Movement LOS (1)
West Leg East Leg
Analysis Scenario (Critical Movement: (Critical Movement:
Eastbound Left) Westbound Left)
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
2010 No-Build 15 I B-C (2) 21 I C N/A N/A
2010 Phase 1 48/E 101 IF 36/E 32/D
2012 No-Build 15 I B-C (2) 21 I C N/A N/A
2012 Phases 1 & 2 39/E (3) I F 46/E 136 I F
2020 No-Build 18 I C 23/C N/A N/A
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-A (3) I F (3) I F (3) I F (3) I F
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-B (3) I F (3) I F 138 IF (3) I F
Key: NN.N / X = Delay in Seconds per Vehicle / Level of Service
(1) Delay and LOS were determined by the SimTraffic analysis program; results are rounded to the nearest whole number
(2) Delay value as rounded to the nearest whole number falls at the threshold between 2 LOS ratings
(3) SimTraffic does not calculate realistic delay when intersection is highly overloaded
Table 6
Powers Blvd & Site Collector
Signalized Intersection Anal~sis
Overall Intersection LOS 1)
Analysis Scenario A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
2010 Phase 1 11/B 15/B
2012 Phases 1 & 2 14/B 17/B
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-A 16/B 20 I B-C (2)
2020 Phases 1, 2 & 3- B 14/B 18/B
Key: NN.N / X = Delay in Seconds per Vehicle / Level of Service
(I) Delay and LOS were determined by the Synchro analysis program;
results are rounded to the nearest whole number
(2) Delay value as rounded to the nearest whole number falls at the threshold
between 2 LOS ratings
Internal Site Driveways
Analyses conducted for the internal site driveways show that they will be able to function well
under all scenarios. LOS results, shown in Tables 7 and 8 below, are primarily "A" and "B" in
both peak hours, with a borderline "B-C" in the P.M. peak hour for the West Site Access under
Phase 3 - Scenario A conditions.
Page 11
Table 7
Site Collector & West Site Access
Stop Sign Controlled Intersection Analysis
Critical Movement LOS (1)
Analysis Scenario Critical A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Movement Hour Hour
2010 No-Build N/A N/A
2010 Phase 1 SBR 21 A 31 A
2012 No-Build N/A N/A
2012 Phases 1 & 2 SBR 21 A 41 A
2020 No-Build N/A N/A
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-A SBL 15 I B-C ~.t) ll/B
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-B SBL 61 A 81 A
Key: NN.N / X = Delay in Seconds per Vehicle / Level of Service
(I) Delay and LOS were determined by the SimTraffic analysis program; results are rounded to
the nearest whole number
(2) Delay value as rounded to the nearest whole number falls at the threshold between 2 LOS
ratings
Table 8
Site Collector & East Site Access
Stop Sign Controlled Intersection Analysis
Critical Movement LOS (1)
Analysis Scenario Critical A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Movement Hour Hour
2010 No-Build N/A N/A
2010 Phase 1 SBR 21 A 3 I A
2012 No-Build N/A N/A
2012 Phases 1 & 2 SBR 31 A 41 A
2020 No-Build N/A N/A
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-A SBL 41 A 91 A
2020 Phases 1,2 & 3-B SBL 10 I A-B ~.t) 61 A
Key: NN.N / X = Delay in Seconds per Vehicle / Level of Service
(1) Delay and LOS were determined by the SimTraffic analysis program; results are rounded to
the nearest whole number
(2) Delay value as rounded to the nearest whole number falls at the threshold between 2 LOS
ratings
QUEUEING ANALYSIS
A queue length analysis was performed using SimTraffic for intersection approaches of interest.
The analysis was conducted to determine whether the 95th percentile queues would be
accommodated in the available storage for turn lanes and between the driveways and
intersections. The 2020 worst-case scenario was tested, with the total volumes forecasted for
Phases 1,2 and 3-A.
Page 12
As shown in Table 9, the available storage was adequate for all movements in the worst case
scenano.
Table 9
95th Percentile Queue Length Analysis (1)
2020 Phase 3 - Worst-Case Scenario A
Location Powers Blvd. & Site Site Collector & West Site Site Collector &
Collector Entr. East Site Entr.
..s:::
~ ~ OIl
q:: I ]
q:: I
l1) PZ q::
....:l l1) PZ
....:l l1)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....:l ~ ~ ~ ~
~ S S S..s::: S S ~ ~ S g ~ S
l1) 0 0 0 S"€o S ~
e ~ ,D o OIl 0 ;:g 0 0 ;:g 0
-B ;::s -B o ;::s -B -B
l1) '€ -B 0 -B -B
~ (/) 0 (/) ~ (/) ~ (/)
0 l1)13 l1) ~13 (/) l1) (/) l1)
::;s 0 0 ~ 0 ro ~ 0 ro ~
r.I) Z ~~ r.I) ~~ ~ r.I) ~
Available 270 290 215 215 200+ 30 215 138 200+ 138 200+
Storage
A.M. Peak 217 36 46 32 42 46 26 4 41 39 3
Hour
P.M. Peak 155 35 102 100 77 47 24 4 62 9 0
Hour
(I) Queue lengths determined by SimTraffic analysis program; lengths are given in feet
Page 13
2008 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
)(
~
""0
.- ~
~ ~
<"
P-
NOT TO SCALE
O\lt)
(t)1t)
O\~ \.
~t-. +-
';.1... .
171 29J ~t,.
-+ ~~
53 9"+-
~Q()
~
~
S2
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Erhart Site
I
I
I
I
I
l____
---
--
--
--
Site C ...................
ol/ector
o
LeaeDd:
000 Average Dally Traffic Volume
000 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Study Area RoacWay
----- Site Boundary
~
CD
lJl
......
Q.l
t.l
C
~
......
c
ill
Q.l
:!::
CJ)
(j)
;::;:
CD
[T1
::l
......
...,
ll)
::l
~
......
lJl
CC
ill
--
-...-
~
)
2010 No-Build
2010 Build
I
I
""0 I
t::S 0 I
::E I
~ CD I
...,
lJl I ~ Q.l
OJ I t.l
CD C
<" I Erhart Site lJl ~
P- I ...... ......
I (j) c
I ~ ill
I Q.l
O\lt)t-. I [T1 :!::
I ::l CJ)
(t) It) \D ...... ......
\.35 182 ...,
O\~"'" ll) lJl
::l cc
~t-.~ +- ~ ill
';.1... .11 57 ~
171 29J ~t,.
-+ ~~~
53 9"+- -...
~Q()~ -...-
~
~
1600
Figure: 5
Date: 7/1/08
Erhart
Medical Office Site
2010 No-Build &
2010 Build
Traffic Volumes
'"
~~~Inc.
7_ Anag..... Drive
Edon PraIrl, MH 55344
PHONE 952-137-5150
FAX 952-137-5l122
TOlL FlIEE 1.-s.9J7-515O
Westwood
c-n..nh..........., Minnesota
_WOItWoo'lI'" ,...,.
Volumes.dwQ
2008 Westwood Professional Servk:es, Inc.
)f
~
"'tl
~ ~
8 ~
c:-
o.
NOT TO SCALE
....
~~ \..
O\~
~t-,. +-
.J-l-~ t
171 29J ~t~
... O\N
53 9. It)~
~t-,.
~
~
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Erhart Site
I
I
I
I
I
l____
----
-...
......
-...
Site C ......-...--
offector
o
LeaDd:
000 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Study Area Roadway
----- Site Boundary
~
CD
(Jl
......
Q)
o
c
~
C
w
Q)
:::
CJ)
(j)
$
m
::3
......
a
::3
~
-
(Jl
<tl
W
-...
-...-
....
)
o
2012 No-Build
2012 Build
I
I
"'tl ,
i 0 I
:;: I
CD I
..., I Q)
(Jl ~
I 0
OJ CD c
c:- I Erhart Site (Jl ~
P- I ...... -
I (j) c
I ;::;: W
I CD 2
~18~ I m i:i5
I ::3
\..64 ...... -
332 ...,
O\~O\ Dl (Jl
~t-,.~ ::3 <tl
+- ~ W
.J-l-~ r 20 103 ~
~
171 29J ~t~
... O\N~ ~
53 9. It)~t-,. -...
-...- ~
~~~
~
....
3500
Figure: 6
Date: 7/1/08
Erhart
Medical Office Site
2012 No-Build &
2012 Build
Traffic Volumes
"T
~~s.w:e..lnc.
7_ An8gram DIM
Ed.n PraIrl.. MN 5S344
PHONE 952-937-5150
FAX 952-937-5122
TOlL FREE 1-881-937-5150
Westwood
C'hAn hAlIlU>1\, Minnesota
---'PO""'"
Volumes.dwQ
2008 Westwood Professional SetVlces, re.
)(
~
"'tl
o
~ ~
8 ~
<"
0.
NOT TO SCALE
O\~
('t)\C \.
~H~
+-
.;~~ t
171 29 J ~t,.
-+ ~~
53 9")- ~~
8
In
.....
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Erhart Site
I
I
I
I
I
l____
-................
--
--
--
Site C -----
a/lector
o
LeaeDd:
000 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Study Area Roaa.vay
----- S~e Boundary
~
CD
CIl
.....
OJ
()
c:
~
C
w
OJ
:!:::
en
ti
Cll
w
en
~
rn
::l
.....
....
Ql
::l
@
--
---
.....
)
o
2020 No-Build
Figure: 7
Date: 7/1/08
Erhart
Medical Office Site
"T
WIItwood Pro'-IoMI ~ Inc.
71599 Anagram Drive
EdM PraIrI, MN 55344
PHONE 952-fi7-5150
MX 952-fiHIIZZ
rou. FREE 1.-.-n7-5150
w.stwood
2020 No-Build
Traffic Volumes
(,l...nl..."""", Minnesota
-~pL<DIII
Volumes.dwQ
2008 Westwood Professional Secvlces, Inc.
X .
I
~ I
I
I
I
I
-U I
i 0 I
::E I
(l) I
NOT TO SCALE ~
CIl I
OJ I
<" I
P- I
I
I
I
~~~ I
I
O\~..,. \.99 510
~ ~ +-
.J.~ r 31 159
171 29 J ~t,.
-+ m~~
53 9..
~~:g
~
Leand:
000 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
Study Area Road.vay
----- Site Boundary
Erhart Site
~
(l)
CIl
~
(j)
;:::;:
(l)
m
='
@
='
(")
(l)
OJ
tl
c:
~
-
c:
LU
2
i:I5
-
CIl
ctl
LU
-----....---
--
--
--
Site C ----.
ollector
9700
~
t:\j ::::
~
.-IJl:
l:t 149.J
367....
)
4 _
462 ----
6600
2020 Build Scenario A
2020 Build Scenario B
-u
o
i !
<"
P-
O\~~
(t')\O....
;~~ +-
.J.~
171 29 J
\. 93 331
r 29 103
~t,.
-+ m~~
~~~
53 9.
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Erhart Site
~
(l)
CIl
~
OJ
tl
c:
~
-
c:
LU
OJ
~
CJ)
(j)
;:::;:
(l)
m
='
~
a
='
~
-
CIl
ctl
LU
t8
....83 4 -
?..- --
r ~ --
Figure: 8
Date: 7/1/08
Erhart
Medical Office Site
2020 Build
Scenarios A & B
Traffic Volumes
'"
WIItwood """-IonII s.rva.. Inc.
7&199 ANgram DrIw
&Ion PraIrl, MN 55344
PHONE 952.J37-515O
MX 952.J37-5l122
TOLLFltEE 1~-515O
Westwood
-~P"""""
'----
n...nh..........., Minnesota
Volumes.dwq
Appendix
Memorandum
A-I Development of Background Volume Estimates
Tables
A-I Key to Intersection Level of Service Grades
A-2 Capacity Analysis Results by Movement - Powers Blvd. & Site Collector
A-3 Capacity Analysis Results by Movement - Site Collector & West Site Entrance
A-4 Capacity Analysis Results by Movement - Site Collector & East Site Entrance
!J
Memorandum A-l
Development of Background Volume Estimates f r Erhart Property Traffic Study
The "Total" (Build) volumes from the "Chanhassen 2005 AUAR" Traffic Study, published in 2003
by Kimley-Horn were used as the basis for the No-build volumes in the Erhart property study.
The following information was included within the Kimley-Hornstudy (which assumed no
development on the Erhart property):
. 2010 Build AM and PM peak hour turning movement volume estimates at the
intersection of Powers Boulevard and Site Entrance
. 2010 Build ADT volume estimates for the west and south legs of this intersection.
In addition, the Metropolitan Council year 2030 ADT estimate for the south leg of the
intersection was also noted. The missing information that must be estimated includes:
. Daily (24-hour) turning movement estimates for all movements involving the west leg.
These turning movement volumes will remain constant through all design years of the
Erhart property traffic study since 100% build out of the Chanhassen 2005 AUAR
property is anticipated by 2010.
. Estimates of daily northbound and southbound through traffic for 2012, 2020, and 2030,
the three design years for the Erhart property study.
. 2012, 2020, and 2030 ADT estimates for the north leg.
. 2012 and 2020 ADT estimates for the South leg (2030 was provided by Met Council as
noted above).
To develop these volume estimates, the following process was administered:
1. Daily turning movements and K-Factors (percentage of daily traffic occurring during the
peak hour) were calculated (for movements to and from the west leg only) for the AM
and PM peak hours using the peak hour turning movement and west leg ADT volume
data provided. Separate K-Factors were calculated for the AM and PM peak hours.
Complementing movements (EBL/SBR and EBR/NBL) were averaged in order to
normalize the daily directional distribution at 50/50 to/from the site.
2. For the south leg, where a 2010 Total (Build) ADT estimate was provided, K-Factors for
northbound and southbound through traffic were calculated using the K-Factors for site
traffic developed in step 2. The same K-Factor for northbound and southbound through
traffic was assumed for the AM and PM peak hours.
3. Using the K-Factor calculated for the northbound and southbound movements in step 2,
along with the site traffic K-Factors from step 1, the 2010 Total (Build) ADT for the north
leg was calculated.
4. The 2030 ADT for the north leg was calculated by assuming the same ratio between
north and south leg for 2030 ADT as for 2010 ADT.
5. 2012 and 2020 ADT estimates for the north and south legs were estimated by linear
interpolation between years 2010 and 2030.
6. Daily northbound and southbound through volume estimates for 2010 were developed
using the K-factors calculated in step 3, then normalizing the results to provide a 50/50
directional distribution.
7. Daily northbound and southbound through volume estimates for 2012, 2020 and 2030
were developed by factoring the 2010 estimates by the ratios calculated in step 5.
March 24, 2008
Esr^BlIShED IN 1972
TWIN CITIESlMETRO
ST. CLOUD
BRAINERD
Table A-I
Key to Intersection
Level of Service Grades
Signalized Intersections
LOS Control Delay Per
Vehicle (in seconds)
A ::;;10
B >10 and ::;;20
C >20 and ::;;35
D >35 and ::;;55
E >55 and ::;;80
F >80
Unsignalized Intersections
LOS Control Delay Per
Vehicle (in seconds)
A ::;;10
B >10 and ::;;15
C >15 and ::;;25
D >25 and ::;;35
E >35 and <50
F >50
-
c
CI)
E
CI)
>~
o~
::i5 III
>- C
.Q .2
III 1:)
:= CI)
:J III
III ...
CI) S
0::: c
.!! :c
III CI)
>- N
iij=
C cu
<C S,
~Ci)
.u
cu
Co
cu
(,)
...
o
1:)
oS!
'0
(,)
~S
<CCi)
:g~
cu'ti
I- >
iii
l!!
~
A.
c
o
~~
CII CII
> f!
Os
.5
-0
>
in ::s
"tl 1:
5 I-;"
o ::s
.D ..
.J::. .J::.
- I-
::s
o
en
-
.J::.
-g~
in
f!
~ 2
o .J::.
a.. I-;"
"tl 2
c .J::.
S I-
.D
.J::.
1::
o II::
Z CII
..J
-
.J::.
.. Cl
~ ~
.!!
'0
(,)
CII
-
en
"tl ::s
c ..
::s .J::.
o I-;"
~~
~ ..J
-
.J::.
Cl
:I ~
CII
U
U
c(
CII
-
en
"tl ::s
c ..
::s .J::.
,g I-;"
Ui ~
~ ..J
o
CII ";:
E III
::s 5i
~~
~.
III
CII
a..
-
.J::.
Cl
~
II::
j
co
-
....
....
<(
-
....
<(
-
<0
o
-
LO
"<t
<(
-
('I)
<(
-
I'-
o
-
"<t
"<t
co
-
<0
....
o
-
O'l
('I)
t)
-
....
("II
o
-
('I)
"<t
....
CII
III
III
.J::.
a..
co
-
"<t
....
<(
-
....
<(
-
<0
o
-
"<t
"<t
<(
-
('I)
co
-
....
....
o
-
"<t
"<t
co
-
LO
....
o
-
....
"<t
t)
-
....
("II
o
-
('I)
"<t
N
III
III
.J::.
a..
co
-
<0
....
<(
-
....
<(
-
<0
o
-
o
"<t
<(
-
"<t
co
-
<0
....
o
-
00
"<t
co
-
"<t
....
o
-
"<t
"<t
t)
-
....
("II
o
-
('I)
"<t
c( III
I 0 I 0
M";: M";:
III III
III C III C
III CII III CII
.J::. U .J::. U
a.. en a.. en
JnOH lIead "VfY
co
-
"<t
....
<(
-
....
<(
-
<0
o
"<t
"<t
<(
-
('I)
€
co
J:
-
o
....
o
-
"<t
"<t
co
-
LO
....
o
-
"<t
"<t
t)
-
....
("II
o
-
"<t
"<t
co
-
LO
....
<(
-
('I)
<(
-
I'-
o
-
"<t
"<t
<(
-
LO
co
-
....
....
o
-
("II
"<t
<(
-
I'-
t)
-
"<t
('I)
<(
-
00
o
-
I'-
"<t
....
III
III
.J::.
c..
co
-
I'-
....
<(
-
('I)
<(
-
I'-
o
-
LO
"<t
<(
-
LO
co
-
"<t
....
o
-
("II
"<t
<(
-
I'-
o
-
LO
"<t
<(
-
00
o
-
o
LO
N
CII
III
III
.c
a..
€
t)
I
co
-
o
("II
<(
-
"<t
<(
-
O'l
o
LO
"<t
<(
-
<0
t)
-
O'l
....
o
-
<0
"<t
<(
-
00
o
-
o
LO
<(
-
I'-
o
-
....
LO
c(
I 0
M "-
..
CII III
III C
III
.c u
a.. en
JnOH lIead .Vfd
co
-
00
....
<(
-
('I)
<(
-
I'-
o
-
LO
"<t
<(
-
LO
co
-
LO
....
....
Q)
.0
E
::s
C
Q)
o
..c
3:
(;)
~
III III
Q) Cl
C C
Q) ~
..c ~
-
.900
'Og
{gN
C C
::s Q)
e Q)
~ ~
l\l ~
$'0
"So
VI ..c
~ ~
E .s
~ Q)
Q) Cl..c
o e :::
.~ a. l\l
Q) VI .!!l
~ .~~
o m Q)
QjC.o
> l\l E
Q) e ::s
...J ..c C
Q) g .!Q
"0 >. 0
:c.oo..c
Q) Q) 3:
> .s (;)
L.. >. ~
~ .0 l\l
III '0 Q)
'0 Q) C
C C Q)
o 'E .s
~ Q) .9
00 Q)
.~ '0 -g
>.~-g
l\l Q) ::s
~ 3: e
II ~ l(l
>< ...J Q)
'0 ::s
z; C m
z l\l >
z ia' ia'
QjQj
>'00
~S!:j.
o
-
<0
"<t
<(
-
I'-
o
-
LO
"<t
<(
-
00
o
o
LO
III
I 0
M ";:
III
III C
III CII
.J::. U
a.. en
c
= 0
l!t;
~ ~
Os
.5
<(
--
N
<(
--
N
<(
<(
--
N
<(
<(
<(
<(
--
N
--
N
--
N
--
('t)
--
N
-
.c
Cl
ii:
<(
<(
<(
<(
<(
--
('t)
<(
--
"""
<(
<(
--
N
--
N
--
('t)
--
N
--
I'-
--
"""
"tl
C
::s
o
..a
.c
-
::s
o
en
a:
=:
j
<(
<(
co
<i:
--
LO
.....
<(
<(
--
Z
<(
co
<(
z
z
--
CO
z
--
.....
.....
--
CO
.
"tl
C
::s
.... 0
C ..a
CI) .c ....
E u 1:: Q)
0 .c
CI)~ C Z E
>~ I! ::l
0 III .... c
::E c c Q)
>> .2 w (5
.c
,Q .... CI) 3:
u ....
J!l CI) en -
Ul
:; l!! CW') .... l!?
CI) <i: III III
III Q)
CI) .... CI) c Ul
C CI) == - Cl
a:: :c .c <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( Q) c
"C oes Cl -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- =:; +:l
III CI) CIS ii: z z a a Z Z a a .9 !1:!
'en N to- 10. en
>>= "tl 0
- CIS .... Q)
CIS C U "tl ...J
~ .2>> "tl c N
C ::l C
'0 ::s e
a-~ 0 2 <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( Q)
0 ..a .c -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Q) ~
'u :) Ui I- a a a a a ..... ..... ..... to
CIS .... ~ .l!l Q)
u; .c
Co "S "tl
CIS Ul (5
0 l!? .c
E Ul
l!?
!1:! =:;
Cl Q)
Q) e .c
0 c.:::;
"~ Ul III
Q) "u; Ul
en >-=
- tii.l2
0 c ....
Q) III Q)
0 .c
> E
Q) lE
...J !1:! ::l
C
"tl Q) I- Q)
c "0 E (5
::s ::s <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( :c en .c
0 ... 3:
..a .c -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Q) Q)
- I- ..... N N N ..... N N ..... > .c in
(/) .... - l!?
III Q) >-
W 0. .c III
Ul "tl Q)
"tl (I) C
C C Q)
=: <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( 0 "~ .c
0 -
(I) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Q) Q) .9
..J N N N ('t) N ('t) LO ('t) en Q)
"~ "tl
"tl Q)
>- l!? "tl
III C
Q) ~ ::l
<( CO <( CO 0 e
0 . 0 I 0 I 0 . 0 II en rJ)
(I) ';: .... N C') ';: C') ';: .... N C') ';: C') ';: 0 III
E III (I) (I) (I) III III (I) (I) III III X ...J Q)
::s c III III III C III C III III III C III C "tl ::l
~ (I) III III III (I) III (I) III III III (I) III (I) :z; c tii
u .c .c .c 0 .c u .c .c .c u .c u III >
en Q, Q, Q, fI) Q,fI) Q, Q, Q,en Q, fI) Z >- >-
Z III III
.ll:: Q) Q)
III JnOH lIead 'W'V JnOH lIead 'W'd ~oo
(I)
Q, ~sa:
-
c
CD CD
E u
CD~ C
>~ I!
0 tIl -
:it c C
>0 ,2 w
.Q - CD
U -
tIl u;
- l!! ~
"'5 -
tIl - tIl
CD C CD CIS
0::: :g w
~ off
tIl CD CIS
.~ ,~ I- ~
0
iG iG -
u
~ c
C) 0
'ii)
~ c 0
'u ::)
CIS -
Q. u;
CIS
0
c
= 0
~
l! U <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
~ l!! -. -. -. -. -. -. -. -.
N N N N ('t) ('t) N ('t)
0..
.5
.. <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
.c
Cl -. -. -. -. -. -. -. -.
ii2 N ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ""'" LO ""'"
'C
C
:J
0
.Q
.c
..
:J
0
U)
~
ii <( <( <( co <( <( <( <(
-. -. -. <i: -. -. -. -.
..J Z Z ""'" -. z z 0) co
a
.....
'C
C
:J
0
.Q
.c
1::
0
Z
.. <( <( <( <(
.c
Cl -. -. -. -.
ii2 a a a a
<( <( <( <(
i-- -. -. -. -.
'C Z Z Z Z
C
:J :J <( <( <( <(
0 ..
.Q .c -. -. -. -.
..
III I- a a a a
~
'C
C
:J :J <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
0 ..
.Q .c -. -. -. -. -. -. -. -.
Ui I- Z Z N N Z Z N .....
111
W
01:: <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <(
j -. -. -. -. -. -. -. -.
N N N N N N ('t) N
<C CO <C CO
0 . 0 I 0 I 0 . 0
Gl ";: ..... N C') ";: C') ";: ..... N C') ";: C') ";:
E 111 Gl Gl Gl 111 111 Gl Gl 111 111
:J C III III III C III C III III III C III C
~ Gl 111 111 111 Gl 111 Gl 111 111 111 Gl 111 Gl
U .c .c .c U .c U .c .c .c U .c U
U) 1:1. 1:1. 1:I.u) 1:I.u) 1:1. 1:1. 1:I.u) 1:I.u)
.lIl:
111 JnOH lIead "V"" JnOH lIead "W" d
Gl
1:1.
....
a>
..c
E
~
c
a>
(5
~
3:
iii
~
co
Q) Ul
C OJ
a> c
.s :;:l
.9 ~
(j)
'C 0
a>
'C ..J
C N
~ C
e a>
a> ~
....
co
$ ..c
:; 'C
Ul (5
~ ~
E Ul
~
~ .s
OJ a>
a> e .s
0 Co -
"2: Ul co
Q) "~ .!!l
(j) J2
- "'1ii
0 c ....
Q) co a>
0 ..c
> E
a> lE
..J ~ ~
c
a> I- a>
C3 E (5
:c en ~
a> a> 3:
> .s iii
.... ;>, ~
a>
Co ..c co
Ul "0 a>
"0 a> c
c c a>
0 "E .s
0
a> .... .9
a>
(j) Q)
"5 "0
"0 a>
;>, ~ "0
co C
Q) ~ ~
0 e
II (j) Ul
0 co
X ..J a>
"0 ~
:z; c "'1ii
co >
Z ;>, ;>,
Z co co
Q) Q)
;>, 0 0
a>
~ ~ ~
S ~TR~ST9oM~
ONSULTING
Memorandum
To: Alyson Fauske, P.E. City of Chanhassen
From: Mike Spack, P.E.
Date: 10/10/2008
Re: Traffic Review of Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center Site
Per your request, I have reviewed the traffic study prepared by Westwood
Professional Services for the July 3, 2008 Chanhassen Fairview Medical Center Site
as well as Westwood's September 4, 2008 memorandum responding to the City's
concerns. The site is located on the southeast quadrant of the recently built Powers
BoulevardlTrunk Highway 312 interchange.
My findings related to the July 3rd traffic report are:
· The traffic report is professionally done using standard traffic engineering
methodology.
· Since this is a recently constructed, undeveloped area of Chanhassen it is
appropriate to use data from the Chanhassen 2005 AUAR as the basis for the
"no-build" conditions.
· The forecasts in the traffic study are largely reasonable, however the traffic
volume forecasts for the 2020 Build Scenario A (in Figure 8) seem to distribute
the traffic from Phase 3 of the development 70% towards Powers Boulevard
and 30% towards Highway 101. This proportion is backwards from the pattern
shown in Figure 4. This results in more traffic using the Powers
Boulevard/Site Collector intersection than is likely to happen. The analysis
shows this intersection will operate acceptably at Level of Service C or better
even with these higher traffic volumes as long as the intersection is traffic
signal controlled. The analysis was done more conservatively than
necessary .
· It should be noted the Level of Service results reported for intersections use
the criteria from the Highway Capacity Manual, but do not use the Level of
Service algorithms from the Highway Capacity Manual. Instead, Westwood
chose to use SimTraffic micro-simulations to develop the delay and queue
measurements reported in the study. This is appropriate because the micro-
simulations provide more realistic metrics at stop sign controlled intersections
in heavy traffic conditions.
. The traffic report does not have a Conclusions/Recommendations section,
although in reference to the Powers Boulevard/Site Collector intersection it is
stated on page 14 "a traffic signal will be required when traffic volumes reach
3268 Xenwood Avenue South · St. Louis Park, MN 55.416 . P: 952.378.5017 · F: 1.866.651.5058 . www..pac::kconsu"lng.eom
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Traffic Review
20f3
Alyson Fauske, City of Chanhassen
Phase 2 levels in order to safely accommodate left turners exiting the site."
This is an appropriate conclusion based on the analysis in the report.
· The traffic report does not draw conclusions about the site's two driveways,
although the analysis shows the proposed lane configuration (no turn lanes)
and the driveway stop sign control (Site Collector Roadway is free flowing) will
be adequate. The analysis modeled a small bypass lane at the westerly
driveway's eastbound approach due to the planned shoulder. I performed a
sensitivity analysis assuming the shoulder does not operate as a bypass lane
(using the 2020 Build Scenario A traffic volumes as a worst case). The
intersection will still operate acceptably if motorists choose not to use the
shoulder to bypass a vehicle waiting to turn left into the site.
My findings related to the September 4th response memo from Westwood:
· Comment 1 - I agree with Westwood's response.
. Comment 2 -
a The warrant analysis was conducted by distributing the daily traffic
volume forecasts per the traffic patterns at Mn/DOT A TR 458. This
automated traffic recorder is located on Chestnut Street in Chaska. It
should be noted this is a significant assumption in the analysis,
however it is reasonable given we don't have mature traffic patterns
along Powers Boulevard.
a The warrant analysis excluded the right turn volume, which is
appropriate per Chapter 4C.1 of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD). However, the analysis
inappropriately assumes 2+ approach lanes on the Site Collector
Roadway when it should have been conducted for one approach lane
on the Site Collector Roadway (per MnMUTCD Chapter 4C.1 - "right-
turn traffic should not be included in the minor-street volume if the
movement enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach
should be evaluated as a one-lane approach with only the traffic
volume in the through/left-turn lane considered.") Westwood did not
provide the traffic volumes that were used in the warrant analysis so I
cannot analyze the impact of changing the minor street approach from
two lanes to one lane.
a Westwood claims the signal is needed for the development on the west
side of Powers Boulevard. The Chanhassen 2005 AUAR found the
intersection would work acceptably with side street stop sign control
(stop sign on the Site Collector Roadway with Powers Boulevard
remaining free flowing) if the intersection was only a tee intersection.
The Levels of Service degrade unacceptably at the intersection with the
addition of the intersection's fourth leg to serve the medical/office
building.
a Access Spacing - I agree with Westwood's assessment that a traffic
signal at the Powers Boulevard/Site Collector would operate acceptably
even though it doesn't meet the County's % mile spacing. A traffic
signal is appropriate at the intersection, when warranted, given the
characteristics of the Powers Boulevard corridor and area topography.
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Traffic Review
3of3
Alyson Fauske, City of Chanhassen
· Comment 3 - I agree with Westwood's response.
· Comment 4 - I agree with Westwood's response.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The Site Collector Roadway as well as the site's two driveway intersections onto the
Site Collector Roadway will operate acceptably as proposed. The Powers
Boulevard/Site Collector Roadway intersection should be controlled with a traffic
signal in the future when the intersection meets warrants for installation. It is clear
the intersection will not need the traffic signal until the intersection is operating as a
four legged intersection and at least Phase 1 of the Fairview Medical Center is built.
The need for a dual southbound to eastbound left turn lane has been raised by
Mn/DOT and Carver County, although the traffic analysis does not indicate it would
be necessary. If the dual left turn lane is required by the County, a traffic signal
would need to be installed to control the intersection. Dual left turn lanes do not
operate safely without traffic signal control at the intersection.
It is recommended a traffic signal warrant analysis be completed for the Powers
Boulevard/Site Collector Roadway intersection before Phase 2 of the Fairview
Medical Center is built. This warrant analysis should forecast the traffic conditions of
Phase 2 using the then existing traffic patterns at the intersection (instead of the
pattern based on A TR 458). It should also use one lane of approach on the minor
approach instead of two.
Please contact me at 952-378-5017 if you would like to discuss any of my findings.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
development plan for the City.
~\l\g c.~
... "
", 1946 ..
~""fy 5\~
219 East Frontage Road
Waconia, MN 55387
Phone: 952-442-5101
Fax: 952-442-5497
CO.SfIVAr". J'Sr',Cr
htto:/Iwww.co.carver.lDD.uslSWCD/SWCDmain.html
Mission Statement: To provide leadership in conservation and teach stewardship of the soil, water, and related resources through a
balanced, cooperative program that protects, restores, and improves those resources.
October 10, 2008
Robert Generous, Senior Planner
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center 08-16
Mr. Generous,
The SWCD has received the plans for the proposed above mentioned project. The following items are
required for our office to review for storm water compliance.
A NPDES Permit is required for this project
A Storm Water Pollution Preventive Plan must be developed and approved by the City and its
consulting partners prior to approval of the plans. The SWPPP must include, but not limited the
following items
- The General Contractor with overall day to day responsibility of the project must be the
contractor must be the contractor for the NPDES permit.
- An individual assigned by the General Contractor must be qualified to complete weekly storm
water inspection reports. A box will need to be placed on site for these specific documents.
- Sequencing of the project is needed with the storm-water pond being built in conjunction with
mass grading of the site to allow for storm water storage on site - temporary basin detail
measures are needed. This is an enforceable measure that needs to be completed.
- Dewatering is an issue on most projects, due to the nature of our clay soils - a plan should be
developed specifically for this project so the contractor is aware ofthis issue.
- All areas of silt fences that are continuous for a greater length of 300 feet will need to turned
up at each end and a new run will need to be placed. Also, silt fence that will not be placed on
the contour must have J-Hooks installed every 75 feet to break up concentrated flows created by
the silt fence. These areas should be shown on the grading plan for the contractor to identify
these areas for installation purposes.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
- Diversions should be shown on the grading plan to show the contractor that they will need to be
installed to allow storm water to be directed to the temporary storm water pond during initial
phasing of the project.
- The concrete washout area must be self contained watertight and handled by state guidelines.
The block layers with their mobile Spec. Mixer will need to have secondary containment around
the mixers.
-Chanhassen City ordinance should be consulted regarding the silt fence protecting an existing
wetland - higher standards are required.
Please include our office in any Pre-Construction meetings your department may have prior to start of the
project.
Sincerely,
Chip Hentges CPESC
Conservation Technician
/ Wt-J \--IJur.( Dl!'W \~~
Carver County. Pu6{ic WOT~
11360 !Higftwag 212 'West
Suite 1
Cofogne, !M!J..L 55322-8016
Phone (952) 466-5.2lXJ ~(952) 466-5223
Jtdministration
Par~
'Engineering
:J-(igliway :Maintenance
'Equipment :Maintenance
Surveying & %apping
Robert Generous
Chanhassen Senior Planner
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RECEIVED
AUG 1 8 2008
CITY OF CH
'ANHASSEN
August14,2008
RE: Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
Planning Case - 08-16 PID 25-1550020
Carver County Road 17 (Powers Blvd)
Dear Mr. Generous:
Carver County Public Works has reviewed the information regarding the above listed proposal transmitted to our
office by your memo dated July 7,2008 and the included CD. At this time Carver County has the following
comments on this proposal. These comments are not meant to be all-inclusive. Additional comments may be
needed as this project develops and approaches approval.
. This portion of County Road 17 (Powers Boulevard) between County 14 (Pioneer Trail) and County Road 18
(Lyman Blvd) was designed as part of the interchange design for the TH 212 Design/Build project. When CR
17 was being designed in this location, there was concern about having an access to CR 17 located at what is
now the constructed access location. When reviewing the access location and existence at that time, Carver
County believes the proposed development that would be using this access was of a much lower density and
would generate a lot less traffic than is being proposed in this most recent development proposal. The County
needs additional information and time to review the impacts this new proposal will have on County Road 17.
The city working with MnDOT in providing information about the previously proposed development, the
roadway system layout, and resulting traffic numbers that were incorporated into the design of New 212 would
be appreciated.
. A review of the transportation study included with this proposal indicates a traffic signal will eventually be
needed on County Road 17 at this intersection to accommodate the traffic generated by this development. It
is understood the traffic signal evaluation submitted was based on the AUAR traffic forecast numbers
generated in 2005. It is requested that the developer also relate the traffic signal evaluation to the traffic
modeling completed as part of the 2030 County Roadway System Plan.
. Carver County does not have a traffic signal installation at this intersection included in our capital
improvement program or budget. The city is asked to consider requiring the developer to be financially
responsible for the installation of a traffic signal and the modification of the intersection as needed.
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on Recycled Paper
Contains Minimum 10% Post Consumer Waste
SCANNED
Robert Generous
August 14,2008
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
. From our review, it appears Phase 2 of this development will require encroachment onto existing Mn/DOT
right of way located along County Road 17. With this proposed higher density development, the County may
require a greater than indicated final right-of-way width on County Road 17 to accommodate the increased
impacts to this intersection area. Alsol greater than dedicated final right-of-way width may be required to
accommodate sight lines, placement of highway signage, installation of traffic control units, installation of
street lighting, and other highway related appurtenances.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. We look forward to working with the City in advancing this
development in a manner that sustains the safety, mobility and corridor characteristics of CR 17. If there are
further questions regarding this letter, please call me at 952-466-5200.
~ ~
RogefttG:Z#V
County Engineer
s/R&B/General Road Maintenance/CSAH/17/Chan Letter-Fairview Proposal 08-14-08
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on Recycled Paper
Contains Minimum 10% Post Consumer Waste
SCANNED
-I w,.,'\~:\^~1 "'ii})f,;.
~l"'\"tlEISO~1o Minnesota D partment of Transportation
~ ~ MetroPol. itan District.
.~ R Waters Edge
~OFn\P.~C;; 1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, MN55113-3174
August 14;2008
RECEIVED
AUa 1 5 2008
CITY OF CH
ANHASSEf\I
Sharmeen AI-Jaff, Senior Planner
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
SUBJECT:
Fairview Medical Center (Chanhassen)
Mn/DOT Review # P08-039
Southeast Quadrant ofTH 312 and Powers Boulevard
City of Chanhassan/Carver County
Control Section 1017
Dear Ms. AI-Jaff:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnlDOT) has reviewed the above referenced plat
in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, subdivision 2, Plats. Before any further
development, please address the following comments:
Area Engineer:
If the "Access Road" for Fairview extends and connects east to TH 101, there is a concern
that this will increase traffic levels at the Powers Blvd intersection. The traffic study shows
just enough storage for the southbound left turn lane at Powers Blvd and the Access Road,
with little or no extra capacity for additional vehicles. Any additional traffic for that
movement could impact operations at the TH 312 ramp.
For questions regarding these comments, please contact Nicole Peterson, MnlDOT Traffic
Section, at (651) 234-7723.
Right-Of-Way Reconveyance:
At present, MnlDOT is in receipt of a request from the previous property owner to reconvey
the area highlighted for reconveyance in the development plan. It is very important to note
that this portion ofTH 312 is still under construction, and nothing will be conveyed until the
contractor has completed all work in the area and released it back to the State. It is therefore
advised that the developer should not design their plans using any of the current MnlDOT
right-of-way until such time that the land is deeded to them. For questions concerning these
comments, please contact Keith McMurray, Mn/DOT Right-Of-Way Section, at (651) 234-
7581.
Water Resources:
. This development will affect existing drainage at the TH 312/Powers Blvd interchange so a
drainage permit will be required. It is difficult to determine how the Stormwater Report,
Preliminary Plans and Wetland Layout correspond because ponding, wetland and drainage
areas do not match between the plans and the models. When the drainage permit is applied
for there will need to be further clarification on what is actually happening with stormwater
and ponding on-site.
An equal opportunity employer
SCANNED
The following information is required with the drainage permit application:
Final drainage plan showing storm sewer plan, storm sewer profiles and pond contours.
Existing and proposed drainage area maps with flow arrows.
Existing and proposed drainage/pond computations for the 2, 10, and 100 year rainfall
events.
Additional information may be required once a drainage permit is submitted and after a
detailed review. .
Please direct questions concerning drainage issues to Derek Beauduy, Mn/DOT Water
Resources Section, at (651) 234-7522.
Permits:
As noted previous, a drainage permit will be required. Further, any work impacting MnDOT
right of way requires a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at
www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup/utility. Please include one full-size plan set, and an 11 x 17 inch
plan set for each permit application. Please direct any questions regarding permit
requirements to Buck Craig, MnDOT's Metro Permits Section, at (651) 234-7911.
As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as
plats and site plans to:
Development Reviews
Mn/DOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require either:
1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans (the electronic version of the plan needs to be
developed for 11" x 17" printable format with sufficient detail so that all features are
legible);
2. Seven (7) sets of full size plans;
If submitting the plans electronically, please use the pdf. format. Mn/DOT can accept the plans
viae-mail at metrodevreviews@dot.state.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is less than 20
megabytes. Otherwise, the plans can be submitted on a compact disk.
If you have any questions concerning this review please feel free to contact me at
(651) 234-7797.
Copy: Roger Gustafson, Carver County Engineer, Cologne, MN
Bill Katter, United Properties LLC., Minneapolis, MN
Blind Copy sent via Groupwise:
Nicole Peterson
Tod Sherman
E.Buck Craig
Derek Beauduy
Keith McMurray
Sheila Kauppi
Ann Braden / Metropolitan Council
File Copy:
Mn/DOT Division File CS 1017
Mn/DOT LGL File City of Chanhassen, MN
Roger Gustafson
Carver County Engineer
11360 Highway 212 West
Suite 1
Cologne, MN 55322
Bill Karter
United Properties LLC.
3500 American Boulevard West
Minneapolis, MN 55431
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
October 9, 2008, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing for Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center - Planning Case 08-16 to the persons
named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to
such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail
with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those
appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by
other appropriate records.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this~ day of~lY\~r ,2008.
~~~ ~
~ Notary p~
j
KIM T. MEUWISSEN j
Notary Public-Minnesota
My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010
0)
c
:s
CI)
:E
0)5
c.-
.- 0
... 0
ctI._
CI) E
::J:E
.2 0
:CO
:JO)
o..c
-c
o c
CI) ctI
(,)-
:;:::0..
o c
ZCl)
o
o
ctI
.s::
c
ctI
.s::
o
0)
c
:;:::
CI)
CI)
:E
c
0)0
c'-
._ 0
i.~
CI) E
::J:E
.2 0
:cO
:JO)
o..c
-c
o c
CI) ctI
(,)-
'_ a..
...
o c
ZCI)
o
o
ctI
.s::
c
ctI
.s::
o
<<l a:
~ .a <<l ~
Ci5 "5.2 Z
.... to c5 .g -g W
g-g a;~ E'gO
>- ~ c:..c - al ..J
al(ti' ....OE:t::O_<(
EQ) .E.ge;:~QjO
Ol..c: 1/1 .!: -;;: ~:5: c
'5:::0 (,)cc.!~alW
'u c.2'2~0'-o==
~ CD .!!U! 0 a: 1/1 ffi Z
en "2 ~ ~.::: Sl c 8 ,-w
1: 0 ffi > :g a: S q ~en
I-Q) ..c~'-c..o en
.-5 Qj:t::en iilGlCD ~<(
E c: .::t:. ;: . - ;: :t:: or- 0l:I:
............ 'en -c:z
ci.~~'-E.g'O _~32<(
o c"'" ....r;:.,!.=.9 <<;:I:
o .- 0 Gl 0 -a, 0 Cf 0. 0
~ -g 12 c.. 0 'r;: :::- Q) (jj
-= ~ I'-!!!.::t:. (,) alc: ~ >:5:
'U!:t '''Q)= ..c:Q)W
co Q) ~~ Q).o2+:'Z>-
O-OQ)-....:J:JQ):J
0,..;.0 III 0 0.:= en oa:
C\J c E g:l: '0 Ci5 Jg -_ct
~.- al +:.2 c:..!: 0.= u.
C\J a; ..c: :s co .Q CD 0.$ I
.... >0 c Q)1ij.2~ Cf....
2 Q) '0 0 -5 0:1:0 a; 'E
0Q)c:0c:'5 all'-'"
- ..c: .- Q) 0.... Gl
o-:J al--o_ 0 al...
oc:o....c: -....
.- 0 0 Q) -0 C\f 1/1 -0 C
:>....._-Ec:<(Glc:o
al$ <<l Ci5 o.al~u al._
-o..!!lI ~P2~$i(te
~:E >- 0' ~ ~ .$ .;: 'E Gl
:Jc::=Q)Q):JenlllQ):t:
I-:JOO:-ooW>o<(
Q)
E
j::
~
Gl
-
ctl
C
c
o
+::
ctl
()
o
....I
c;
I/)
o
a.
o
...
0..
~ a:
~ .a <<l W
....en "5 .0_ l-
. - 0 z
'0 .{g '0 'r;: -g W
c: c: a;~ E'gO
>-~ c: ..c-Ill..J
al(ti ....OE..t:o_<(
EQ) .E.ge;:~Qjo
Ol..c: 1/1 .!: -;;: ~:5: C
'5 :::0 (,) Co c .! ~ al W
.u C .-'2 ~ 0'-0 ==
~CD .~.!!!Oa:enffiz
en"2~ ~.:::Slc8"w
1: 0 - > "0 a: III 0 o.en
I- Q) co ..c .g .. c:: ci E en
.-5 a;:t::en iilGlCD ~<(
E c: -t: ;: . - :s: :t:: or- 0l:I:
c.. 0 al:t:: O"'!" en 23.!: ~
~~E-oo - .::t:.....
0'::::::' ._I-OJ....J:
o .!: 0 CD ~ .E 6 Ci5 ~O
~ -g 12 c.. 0 .g>:::- <i> (jj
1ijQ)I'-~.::t:.o~~>:5:
co g ui' ~ 3l :s .Q -5 ~ !!:!
0'0 CD-....:J'Sai':;>
0,..;.0 :go 0.:= en oa:
C\J cEo:l: '0 Ci5 al-.ct
-'-al._:J c:..c:-u.
or- c: .... ffi c: <::: 0. <<l
C\JQ)..c::s .QQ)o-1
.... >0 c Q)1ij.2 ~ Cf....
Q)Q) o..c:o:l:';::;or-'-
.0 Q) '0 0 - .- 0 al co E
0..c:C: C:'O 1'-'"
u-:Jal:;:~.90al~
oc:o....c: ~- ....
.- 0 0 Q) '0 C\I 1/1 '0 C
:>..... -EC:<(GlC:o
al.$ <<l Ci5 o.al~(,) al._
'O..!!lI ~.Q~.$iaiE
~~ cCT~.gg.i:ES
~5<3~~5tTI~~ct
Gl
E
j::
~
Gl
-
ctl
C
c
o
+::
ctl
(,)
o
....I
ctl
I/)
o
a.
o
L-
0..
'0 'S
lii 0
5; -al Q)
'S '00 -5
~ ~g:s ~
-..c::J en
Ch -"-0.. tJJ
CD C1i:J0Q) . :J
:s: (,).8~..c: u 1il
o +: al Ol- Q) '5
a.. O:J '(j) '0 'e t5
t:: -0 c 0 c: m o..~ g
.!!! >- Q) =-. .-
..c:w~ ~ ; E-5~ m ~c.i.18E
.... -0 .E E .= 0 Q) =
Q) 0 c: 0 al o...c: .0 E
c: 0 Gl .- ~ ..c: 0 - :J 0
:s: W :2 .9 'SO c.g 0.0
al(f.) l/Ieno.Q)..Q)en~Q)
o ~ Gl'- c: ..c: en ..c: c: - ..c:
~ c: 1/1 Ol.- - c..... al E -
>- g CD'~'!: c;.$ '0 Q. 0 -g
..c:'- >al.$.!:en:S:-~al
_'0 GlQ).o-OlQ)C:
0'0 .....c:0Q)c:._Q)-g,o
E <( Gl Q) .~ 2: en > Q)
t:::'- ~ ..c,g.9 E 0 Q) ~ '(j) ~
0';::' ....'O'OQ)=>O'oo
~ c:Jc:..c:OO=Q)
:::l (( 0 0. al - - c: '3: .... .~
_ l/Ien_OlQ)al Q)0l
en":J .- 1: en .!: -5 Q) 'E lii c:
.~ E g.;: ~ :J .c .2:= ca 't:
t::.$ III 00'0 0l0l,g Em
~'SC\JEQ)~ . 25== 0.Q)..c: .
o CO or- C ~ _en u .c :s: g. E .2 u
0: <i C").2 e- E .!!!. - 1a <I> E :0 .*
'0 Iiij:J al 0 Ol......c: O:J....
Q) '0 I- u 0..2 c..!: (f.) I- 0 a.. 0.
:!: +:::'0 0 Q)Q.en lii
c:::l c:-..c: 0.'- Q) .
=>Oal<(l-al-5..c:or-C\icv:)..,t
-
C
ctl
()
~
<(
1/)0)
C C
Gl.-
a.-
a.Gl
ctlGl
:1:==
_Gl
ctl,c
,c-
3:16
>.c
1::0
Gl+::
a.ctl
0(,)
... 0
0......1
en
~
<3
Q)
-5
-
'00
'5
Q)
en
al
Q)
Q.
Ol
c:
~
Q)
E
Q)
-5
.9
,Q) Q)
~ ~~-E..c
.$ >-C\J..c:= Gl....
o.oc\Jo:S::t::~
-enlO-:l:l/lo
..c: :J0>"5 al._,Q
eno_-Ci5..c1ll
'3: CD al.9- -: "0 ~
:JC:Q)Q) .0GlC
o Q) c: ..c: Ol- .... .-
>- <.!J ,g .~ ..s t:: ~ Qj
::: t:: 0.:= Q) 00. Gl E
.Q)>--Q) ....
'Ef5.o~E~'iiic
.Eo: 0 ai~=,Q.2
<OUen E....SGl:::
or- al:J E'O 1/1 ;:.-
cOccoQ)Gl'OE
QoEoo..cGlE
c: 0 . c: c:1-.-o
alQ)ai:l1l~ .20
~ 15 en en .- '0 c: 0. "'"
o ~ m gJ ~ al.Q Gl c'
E Q)Q...c::= c: lZ;'2
en ~ ~ ffi E :;:'E c c
c: ~~..c:.gaiEoS
~ C 'o.~ en E 0 Gl c..
Q) E....oot::O.5Gl
_ . o.@_ al Q)-..c
..c: al c: en Q) o...c: c ....
-Q)Q).-enenQ)_OO
Q)Q) Olenen-5 25 0'00 Gl....
ctS _"-OQ)--'"
en o.al:J Q)..c:..c:en,Q 0
o ..c:oc:o Q)1ll'-
- .0 C:.o Q) :J ~ 'c.. == C.
-Q)alal20....01ll~
ffi:S:{3 Q).o >->-0 ~ (ij'
:s: ~ .....: c: 1ij::: 0. Q) Gl "0
000 0'0 1/1
:J Q) :> Q) = ,...: 0._ ,Q ...
o.~;> E alC") Q) >- ~
>-e:s:0 Eor-c:e==..c
::: 0. :s: en Q) or- 0 0. ;: I-
~..
I/)J!l
c c
o Gl
+::E
m E
~ 0
00
en .9
'0 'S ~ ,Q) Gl
<<; 0 ~ ~~-E..c
>.0 <3 .$>-C\J..c:=Gl....
Q) al Q) Q) o.oc\Jo:S::t::~
'S Q)~,g -5 -5 -enlO-:l:I/lO
o ..c:O.o en ~ ~50>"5.$~,Q
CO -..c::J Q) '>_ -....1ij~(f.)....Ill.
en -....0. en :S:Q) - ..."O~
CD C1i50Q) ~ Q) :JC:Q)~ .0GlC
~ ~ -al~; g 1il m g,~ ~.~ .~~ ~ ~
a.. c:J Q) al '0' ...: '5 Q. ::: t:: 0.:= a; 00. -; EGl
_ 0c:Q)....0 c: .Q)>--Q)....
t::o I/I>-Q)= 0.Q) 0 Ol 'E.o.oenEGl.-c
al.... E..c: 'O~ ~ c: _o....E "'00
€Q) ~....-~ Q).... en ..c:0:0Q)~=,Q_
wC: OE eno.c.i- ~ 0uenE-SGl:::
~~ ~~~j ~~~~ ~ ~.$~~~::i
:s: W "0.9 'S 0 c. c: 0.8 Q) R g E 0 o..c Gl E
al(f.) 'iii en Q) 0 Q) -5 c: 0 . c: c:1-.-o
o~ -o...c:~Q)en..c:Q) alQ)C:Q)al 0
c6 c: ~ Ol.!: - 0. -5 c: - -5 Q) "en Q) :::: > C ii 0
o ... c: c: . Q)..... al E 0 ~ al lZ .;:: '0 0 ~
~E Gl~~~Ci50Q.0-g ~ ~Q)al:S:al~Glc
....'0 ~mE~Ol:S:E~al .0 Q)Q...c::=c:en;~
0'0<( .....c:0Q)Q)c:~Q)'O'O en ~~ffiE:;:~cc
E Gl ~~enQ)Q) c: ~O..c:.oC:Q)EOS
t::: Q) ..c.2.9 E .;: t:. Q) > en al -: .!!!. 0 :J E 0 Gl c..
.- Ol ....:0 '0 Q),g ~ ....o..(j) .Q Q. c: 0 .....: en 0 C
0'0 c:Jc:..c:oo 00 E....oot::_Gl
...J '0:- 0 0. _ _ - Q) Q) - . c."", - al Q) - ..c
...J .u c:=....en ..c:alc:en~Q)o...c:c....
_ l/Ien_OlQ)al:S:Q)- -Q)Q)-enenQ)....Oo
en:J -1:enC:-5 _....Ol Q)Olen-5250'OOGl....
~E g:::~~..c:~ffial~ ialgJ'SCD,gQ)-en~~
t::.$ ~oO'oOlaoEal oo...c:oc:o-5Q)S~
~ ~ ~ c i ~ ...: e == '3. Q) ~ .:::: -a; ffi -al ~ :J o'c.. 'iij is.
0: .C") 0 8.~ ~-5:S: g.E,gg ffi:S:{3 Q).o g,;,g ~ ~
_<(I~:;ffi~Ol1aQ)E.o~:s:~~C:1ij:::o.Q)Gl"O
~_ .w 0.... c:......c:0:J.... 000 0'0 0
Q).Q~(,)O'=O'~(f.)I-Oa..~:JQ):>Q)=,...:o_,Q...
:= - -0 0 Q) 0. en al ~ 0 '- ;> E al C") Q) > - ~
C::Jc:-..c:0.-Q) >-e:s:0 Eor-c:e==..c
=>Oal<(l-al-5..c:~C\icv:)..,t :::o.:S:enQ)~oo.;:1-
.;.;
C
ctl
.~
~
<(
1/)0)
C C
Gl._
a.-
a.Gl
ctlGl
:1:==
_Gl
ctl,c
,c-
3:16
>.c
1::0
Gl+::
a.ctl
0(,)
... 0
0......1
~..
I/)J!l
c c
o Gl
+::E
m E
~ 0
00
00 ID -0 rn ~
c ~_ Ot .~ID ~ ~~
S g~ro E5 ~ ID C
ro 0 ~.~ a. ro - C >.'- a. Q) ca .9
(fiID-o ca~ro 0::0 cacg> ~~ c.cc
~5~ ~~w IDS g<~ ~~ ~'~.Q
<(1).- IDom .cO a.~~ <DID ca~~
-g .E g E (ij ~ m ~ ~ g. Q) a "'0 .~ ; 5.2
~ ~ Q) 5 e 8.~ ~.~ cij ~ c. ~ 2 ~ (ij ~~
~ Q).c ~ ~ e ro 0. 'co:S ...... ~ c 5 ..... UJ - c
>.5.9 ~cao.E~EUJ~o~ ~ 2~~
cn~$ cu Q) a>-g m-5J!:?.9t: :>.~ ~ g.....
m~'~ ~.~~ca~a~~~R ~~ ~gg
~ou m_~E~E~oo-m m> (,)'0
E ~ .~ c ~ 0 $ ~ '(ij.o ~ 5 0 == co <5 >- Q)
~~~ 2 ~'~~ca::UuEg> ~~ c~E
$ 0. en C'O ~ .::L. .c:O CD E 0 - .- - OJ en 0 ~
.E ~ ~ E t) m -;;; ~ S E ~ ~ E ~ .~ ~ ~ c
-g.~= ~~i~~~8~~~ ~~ ~~g
cu~o --.5 oOco~UJ 0_ 'G-~
(ijg-d>c1ii.9'~EQ)~3:Q)~ oen ct:25
c~Q)cQ)Q)o"'O~Ecu"'O~- ca. ~o
~2~~~E~~~-g~~S5 ~! 8~~
~ ffi 8 Q) i c 5. ctS - Q) ~ ~ ~.~ 'S: 0 Z" Q) (f)
cE~E~im~~E~oE~ e~ GeQ
OucQ)=UJ.c.5~caQ)e u a.~ .5
~i~5cu'~~(ij~~~o.~! o~ ~.5E
wE'~U~E2!~oE~;o ;.ffi ~i~
.~ ~ >- ~ -g r~ i.2 ~-6.g 0 a.~ ~= g>-g D..
>mt=-~ -Ecoo-Eo ~ ~_m
Q)"C~cagc>~.g cacUJo.t: ~.~ cag=
a: r~ 0 0 .- .~ a. 0.= Q) Q) g 0 UJ :J "C Q) .- __
c~~--~coIDgUJE~.~UJ 8~ .t:Q)o
cauo.i.ecm.t::J:JumQ>UJ 'c~ .2~~
~~~~~f~;8~~g=~~:~ ~~~
$ ~ ~.~ ~ CD ~ UJ >-~ E 2:.9 ~ Q)'- u a.:: 0
.- C .- ca .e ..Q..... ~ ca ctS Q) a. CD Q) 0 Q) C Q)
~Q)~~g=~~5&~~~~E~~ s~~
~~~i~~~.~!.~:JUJ~~~~B ~.2~
Q)~~o.~~~c~o~~.Qg~~.e .~a.~
[ E g ~ ~ ~ ~.~ == ~ ~ 5- m e 8 ~ .~oo.e g. ~
B<~~E~~.~g~u~gs>-~c~g~i
~~~!~!.QE~~~m~E~~~g.~""';
ID~~2Q)~~Eu.QUJ~m2u~-~.~~s
~ Q) >-.5 S Q) -g 8 >- Cti g> ~ ID.- ~ ~ ~ a. E:o C
.~.~~>-C~IDID~U.~~E~~CD~U~~.-
.. :J ~ 0 ~ 0 J!! E.e ~ ~ 2 $ ~ ::,g g-Q) ~ 0 ~ i
~uQ)~ t'@E~.eEQ):J oc>jQ)Q)C>~u
~!i.Q~R~8~~~~E~~~oE~~~~
-g C a. ~:E ~ Q) ~ ~..... 0 ~C/) ca ~"5 ~ 0 c E c.~
g~E.~jca~ctSgg~~2-g~iu;.~J!!~Q)
~~8~~~~~a.~~~~~.5~~&~~g~
;: 5 chO c ~8.~ g~.Q.g ctS.~~u 0 ~~:E g.g
~~C>c>.2CDQ) .~Q)~:J~=::CDO::Q)~~
';.$.~c~~~8.ctSE.-oUJUJcctS.eo.....UJ~.e
~~g~g:~~!EEO~~g~.~~~i8Q)
oc.g~~~s!Q)Q)8~~~~~~c~.~~~~
~c/)~D..ctSC/)~S=~()()~~a.w<caa.mcaoo
0.. ...
ch Q) '0'0 C> ~
C .e . t .5Q) 0.e
.2 - 5~ca E= 0 ~ ~
~ '0 .- Q) a. ~ <5 C ~~ a. Q) ca .9
~S~ ~.~~ CLQ) ~<.~ ~i e~c:
<Q)- ~o>ca ~~ ~.~ ~Q) ~.~~
~~~ E~~ca~~ ~*& U'$ :~~
ca Q) E~ ~ Q)E1: . Q)a.~ C ~ lo... >-~
:a5 D ~ 8 ID g.~ [.2.~ :5 E "E ~ .9 ~::: g
~g.9 ~~a.Elo...~~~8~ OQ) Q).Q)
~'m.~ caQ)Q)-g~Q)-6~.9t i-~ ~g=
00.e0 ~.2Sca=a.~~ooctS 'a~ ~g~
:J.2~ ca~~E~E~oo~i Q)~ .Ou
E :0 .-. C] 0 $ ~ '~.a ~ 0 0 S (5 >- ID
'~:J~ ~_i.~~caIDUEg oj c~E
$a.~ ca~~.e~Q)Eo-.- -ca ~~~
~caQ) E-ca.....o~EID~C 000 ~~
u~:5 ~~~~E.....o~~~ s~ ~=g
~.5~ .5.~~~o~~€~CL gs ~S~
~g-r:D'EQ)-.~EQ):::~Q)~ OU) ~to~
clo...~cQ)Q)oUlo...Ecau~..... ca oo.~
g2-~.5E~~~~~mss ~~ omS
:g ~8 Q)"53 Co ~ca ~ Q)~ m ~.~ 0 >-;UC/)
cE~E~~m~~E~oE~ ~~ Beg
8~~!~.~:5'~~:~K~~ ~~ m~.2
WmE~;~EE~m~~E~~~"'" ~~_~
;: >cu .e oeD~u u.a; c>~a..
.91<(>-~:Jr~-g.2~u-oo."5 ~:5 eU
>w~=~~c-Ecoo-Eo mC> .~~~
Q)"O~cacO)Q).g ca"EOOO.e ~e m.~--_
~8o.9~~o.~~Q)Q)g00 ~~ .emO
~"O~i!~~~~~~~~~ .g~ o~ca
~i~~~~~-O"Oc.2~~gQ)Q) ~~~
$2~~~~~i~~~~ge~.~~ :J::o
.- c .- ca.e:> ..Q +-' ~ ca C'tS <D a. Q) woo. C Q)
C/)ID~'~o-EoGooQ)-:JQ)E.~~ ~~~
wEQ)>-a<Q)~Q)goo~us~so oo~~
~ -g ~ 1ij a. ~;: .c'2 :J 00 ~.c c C D U := 10.1.
~EIDQ)a.~~~g~2~.~.Q~:Ji.e .~R~
a. gi~~~.~==<D~~~e8~.~~.eca~
g<~wErr~.~ga:u~g:5>-~c~g~~
~~~~~~gEg~~m~E~~~~.~--~
Q)~~$Q)~~EO.2oo~~~O~.....~._g~
~ (l) >-.~ = Q) -g 8 >- ~ g> ~ (l) .- ~ e? ~ a. E ~ C
.~ .~ ~ >- c 15 Q) (l) ~ u 'c LO E ~ ~ <D ~ U ~ ~ .-
.. ~ :!! (,) ~ 0 ~ E ~ ~ g 2 .2l c55 :;: oS? g.1dl (,) g> 'lil
~uIDC t~E~.cECD:J oc>~Q)Q)c>~-g
~~~.~~~~8~;~~E~~~~E~'~~TI
9! @ a..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ .9 -5 00 .9.5 ~ ai .~
o~EE;:roroC'tSoolo...x_cO)Q)nu>--uQ)
~~8~E~~~~~~~~~~~~&~~g~
;: 25 en U c ~ 8. ~ g> -g .2'g ca.~ ~ u 0 ~ E :5 g- ~
~:~gg>g~~o.~~.~g~:5~i~8~~~~
~.~~.~~a.<D~Q)EEOQ)~~009CU:J8~
ocE2c~~~lo....eoE>-~.2~2Q)Q)'~~>-E
~~~~~~~~~~8G~~~~~~K~~~
0.. ...
Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not
intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data
located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the
area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant
that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error
free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational,
tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction
or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found
please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes ~466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges
that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and
agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought
by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or
use of data provided.
Disclaimer: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not
intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data
located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the
area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant
that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error
free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational,
tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction
or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found
please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes ~466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges
that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and
agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought
by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or
use of data provided.
ANDREW T RIEGERT
620 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8601
BRIAN J & MICHELLE R O'DONNELL
1151 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
DANIEL D & KATHERINE HORSFALL
9610 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8688
DAVID R & MARY B BLANSKI
9350 GREAT PLAINS BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8642
DOUGLAS L & PAULA'JO STEEN
701 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
GARY J & MARY LANE BENDZICK
731 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
JAMES & ARLENE J CHURCH
611 96TH STW
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8602
JAMES L & JANET P BROWNELL
1190 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8612
JOHN C & JACKIE J DANIELS
1111 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
JOYCE EKING
9391 KIOWA TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8617
BEVERLY C ERICKSON
520 PINEVIEW CT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8697
CHARLES E & SANDRA R WORM
760 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
DAVID D & STEPHANIE J VIEAU
901 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8609
DAVID S & CYNTHIA L DEVOY
600 94TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8600
EICKHOLT TRUST
3825 CHOW EN AVE S
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55410-1044
GAYLE 0 & LOIS J DEGLER
541 PINEVIEW CT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8697
JAMES D WILSON ETAL
5730 YANCY AVE
NEW GERMANY, MN 55367-9327
JAMES M & TERESA A BYRNE
700 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
JOHN E & CYNTHIA N HART
951 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8609
KAREN KAY HENRICKSON
9651 FLINTLOCK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8605
BRADLEY C WORM
750 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
DAMON D & LISA L KANZLER
1161 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
DAVID L & ROSELEE W WONDRA
9590 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8681
DOUGLAS J & REBECCA A DUCHON
9630 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8688
G&M LAURENT FAMILY L TD PTRSHP
24760 CEDAR POINT RD
NEW PRAGUE, MN 56071-4056
GREGORY M FALCONER
720 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
JAMES H & TERESA 0 GIUSTI
540 PINEVIEW CT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8697
JAMES R & SHARON M HEDBERG
750 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8671
JOHNNIE J & ELAINE A MEYERING
1050 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8634
KEVIN J & PATRICIA A ELLSWORTH
9601 FLINTLOCK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8605
KEVIN L & LORI A BOGENREIF
631 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8602
LORI L LARSON
1051 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8611
PAUL D & CAROL L PAULSON
9250 GREAT PLAINS BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8641
PETER A & JERIL YN M SCHW ALEN
1001 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8611
RICHARD A & BETTY A DERHAAG
711 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
ROBERT A & ELIZABETH K HAAK
770 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8671
ROGER G NOVOTNY
560 PINEVIEW CT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8697
STEPHEN J & COLE EN M WILKER
621 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8602
THOMAS J & SHARON L MESCHKE
9701 FLINTLOCK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8637
TIMOTHY A & LINDA M BLOUDEK
1171 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
KURTW PAPKE &
1131 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
MAGDY A & JUNE L EBRAHIM
521 PINEVIEW CT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8697
PAUL J & CHERYL LOKKESMOE
9650 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8688
PETER A DIRKS
900 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8608
ROBERT & BETTY WOLD
731 PIONEER TRL
CHASKA, M N 55318-1157
ROBERT F ERLER &
9600 FLINTLOCK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8605
RONALD L & KOLLEEN M BROWN
9650 FLINTLOCK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8605
STEVEN J & SANDRA R KADISAK
810 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8673
THOMAS M & CHERYL L JESSEN
9570 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8681
TIMOTHY J LOWE
601 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8602
LESLIE L O'HALLORAN
710 96TH STW
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
PAMELA A O'NEILL
9550 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8681
PAUL T ANDERSON &
9380 KIOWA TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8616
PRINCE R NELSON
7801 AUDUBON RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8201
ROBERT & CHRISTIN E BOECKER
610 96TH STW
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8601
ROGER A & KIMBERLY A LEE
600 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8601
STATE OF MINNESOTA - DOT
395 JOHN IRELAND BLVD 631
TRANSPORTATION
ST PAUL, MN 55155-1801
THEODORE B & KAREN K HASSE
630 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8601
TIMOTHY A & DAWNE M ERHART
9611 MEADOWLARK LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8695
WADE W MARSHALL
9441 GREAT PLAINS BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8607
WAYNE 0 & GAYLE D WENZLAFF
1181 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
WILLIAM F & MARY E HEINLEIN
721 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
WENCES M HORAK ET AL
9700 FLINTLOCK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8637
WILLIAM G & ELIZABETH M AHERN
1191 HOMESTEAD LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8613
WESLEY & CAROL DUNSMORE
730 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8603
WILLIAM J & PAMELA A O'NEILL
9550 FOXFORD RD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8681
Public Hearing Notification Area (500+ feet)
Fairview Chanhassen Medical Center
SE Corner Powers Boulevard & TH 312
(Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Addition)
Planning Case 2008-16