Loading...
PC 2009 03 03 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 3, 2009 Chairman Papke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kurt Papke, Kevin Dillon, Debbie Larson, Mark Undestad, and Dan Keefe MEMBERS ABSENT: Kathleen Thomas. Denny Laufenburger was in the audience. STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Mary Ann Smalley 8815 Lake Riley Drive Denny Laufenburger 8673 Chanhassen Hills Drive Jennifer Thorp 1050 Lake Susan Drive PUBLIC HEARING: WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH EXPANSION: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MULTIPLE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURES ON ONE LOT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 51,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING EXPANSION ON PROPERTY ZONED OI, OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 3121 WESTWOOD DRIVE. APPLICANT: CUNINGHAM GROUP ARCHITECTURE, P.A., OWNER: WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH, PLANNING CASE 09-03. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Keefe: Bob, why a conditional use permit versus you know a PUD or something like that? I’m not familiar with why that designation versus something else. Generous: It’s just, if it was a PUD they wouldn’t need a conditional use permit but the way our ordinance is structured is to have more than one principle building on a parcel you need to get a conditional use permit. It’s just a way so that the city can review and make sure that they’re not creating a non-harmonious design. th Keefe: Okay. Are there paths along Tanadoona and/or West 78 Street? I mean, and is it intended to connect to the Chanhassen sort of path network and bike network? th Generous: West 78 Street does have a trail system on the north side coming in. Keefe: Okay. Alright. Other than that it’s. Planning Commission Meeting - March 3, 2009 Larson: Do we happen to know where, when the, looking at the one picture that you put up on the full site. This last, it looks like we’re just going to do the half of what you’re showing. This is different than. Generous: Right, and I was going to have the architect explain that. Right now we would be approving the entire expansion. They’re looking at doing, expanding in phases due to the financing and so that’s what that plan was for and I was going to have the architect explain that. Larson: Okay. I can wait I guess. That’s it. Dillon: Alright, so I guess I’m a little unclear on this. So this is what it’s going to be at the first. Generous: As an interim, yes. They’re going to build this expansion in two phases is my understanding. And the first phase of that expansion would follow that plan and then they’d add the multi-purpose space in later. Dillon: Okay. Is there kind of a master plan of how this is all going to lay out when all the development is done? Generous: There’s a general one and I don’t know if they brought it but to the, ah let’s see. Go back, if you look to the west of the existing building they would put the main worship hall. And then all the way on the west side they were talking about some type of chapel, and then on the east side of the project they look at the potential social service offices or maybe even dwelling units for missionaries or whatever are part of their congregation. So but as they come in with each, they’re not certain how it’s all going to lay out so as they come in they’ll go through this process again. But generally yes, they have a campus plan that they are. Dillon: So we can assure it’s harmonious? Generous: So we can assure. Dillon: Alright. And so I think the other questions I have would probably be best directed to the owners. Undestad: Nothing. Papke: The only question I had is, is probably pretty simple answer. The level of discretion we have tonight, there is two issues here. The conditional use permits have to meet what’s in the zoning ordinance and the project has to comply with the zoning ordinance requirements. Are there any exceptions to any of those that you’re aware of is this. Generous: It’s pretty clean. Papke: Buttoned down. Okay. Alright. Very good. If there’s no more questions for staff, if there’s someone from the applicant who’d like to step up to the podium and color in the lines a 2 Planning Commission Meeting - March 3, 2009 little bit for us, that would be great. If you could state your name and address for the record please. Charlie Stoffel: Hi. Charlie Stoffel with Cuningham Group Architecture, Minneapolis. I guess getting back to the original point made, the second image that you got. The 11 by 17. After we presented this to Bob and to the rest of the city staff, between that and tonight some of the financing things have kind of shifted on us a little bit so right now the presentation would be showing the multi-purpose, which is the space that’s not showing right now, removed from the building. Anticipating that it would be a future phase, anywhere from actually going in with this building, depending if the additional fund raising that’s taking place in the near future goes well. If not, then it would be the first portion of future phases, so the idea would be, that would be the next thing and then there’s also some additional finishing that would happen on the rest of the building. Currently the plan is to finish the interior of only a portion of the space, so in the future again the multi-purpose along with the interior of the other space would be finished. And then adjusting the master plan then as you would go around the campus then that’s where the primary future worship center would be. The large scale one. And then parking would accompany that along the rest of the site. As far as the materials on the building, Bob had mentioned that we’re going to have cement board. And what the idea with the cement board is, we’re looking at having a solution that matches the cedar siding that’s on the existing building but providing more of a long term, lower maintenance solution. So the cement board will be painted out to match the color of the stain of the cedar siding, and then in the future when the cedar siding is refinished, it will go from what right now is a semi-transparent stain to a solid stain so the two will actually look almost identical. And then the stone is going to be identical to the stone that we have on the…of the existing building. We’ll have a base that will run around the entire building. Typically it’s going to be about a 3 foot height. In some areas we’d bring that up taller. And our trellises, the trellis that you see right there, we actually have one side that’s a full height, stone pier. The other side is again about a 3 foot base of stone. If you were to go to the courtyard view, we actually have the wall of stone that goes about 15 feet tall and what that does is it ties the existing building with our link. It tries to transition the building a little bit more softly between the two. So you can see it just, just to the right of the tree, that’s the left tree, you can see that wall of stone is a little bit higher than the rest of the building. So then we’re transitioning through the spaces and we’re using a darker, metal panel to transition and create a little articulation within the building. Are there any other questions you guys have on exterior materials? Dillon: So I guess I’m a little confused by this picture here. Is this flat thing L shaped then? Charlie Stoffel: Right. Dillon: Okay. So what would be housed in there? Charlie Stoffel: Primarily circulation. Circulation in core spaces. Mechanical rooms. Some storage. Restrooms. Primarily that’s going to be the circulation space so to get from the existing building out into the north, or I guess the northeast parking lot, that’s going to be the primary corridor in that area. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - March 3, 2009 Dillon: Okay, and are you’re an architect so you know better than I but I mean having a flat roof over that big of an area, is that? Charlie Stoffel: No. There’s no issues. We’ll have internal roof drains in that area so any rain water that comes will then spill through the internal roof drains and then out into the storm sewer system. Dillon: Okay, thank you. Larson: No questions. Keefe: What is your schedule called for in terms of you know when you’d start and when you’d finish? Have you established one yet? Charlie Stoffel: Right now our amended schedule would have us starting construction probably June. Keefe: Okay. Charlie Stoffel: And then following through hopefully sometime around Easter next year would be completion of construction. Keefe: Okay. So you can get it done under a year? Charlie Stoffel: Yeah, definitely it’ll be under a year. Keefe: Okay. Good. That’s all. Papke: How much of the utilities and landscaping are you going to do? With the truncated building are you going to go ahead and do all the sewer and water and so on? Charlie Stoffel: The only utility we wouldn’t do would be drainage for the multi-purpose roof. We’re bringing all the water from that roof down downspouts into underground drainage. That wouldn’t be built to begin with but all the rest of the utilities, the sanitary sewer would be re- routed. The electrical would be re-routed. All those things we would do because the portion of the building that will be built is in the way right now of what’s existing so all of that would be built. The landscaping, yes. We’re anticipating we’d do all the landscaping. We may re-shift a little bit of the landscaping out from the south area to bring it up to the front where the multi- purpose was going to be to try to fill that space in temporarily. And then when the multi-purpose space comes, re-transplant that back somewhere else on the site. Papke: Alright. That’s the only question I had. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Charlie Stoffel: Thank you. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - March 3, 2009 Papke: Anyone else from the applicant going to make any presentations or say anything tonight? Or are we good to go? Okay. Seeing no one else, I’ll open this up then for public comment. If there’s anyone from the public who would like to step up to the podium and speak on this application, please do so now. Going once. Going twice. Apparently we have all applicants here tonight. Okay. With that then I close the public hearing and bring it back to the Planning Commission for discussion and deliberation. We’ll start with you Dan. Keefe: You know I’m in support of it. I mean I think it works pretty well with the existing building and I don’t think there are a lot of issues here. Larson: I agree. Dillon: I would have no reason to oppose this. I mean it looks like a nice addition to the property. It’s a nice addition to the community and it’s all within the guidelines so I’m in favor of it. Undestad: I agree. Papke: Yeah, the only concern I had was with the last minute change of plans here. You know the fact that all the utilities and so on are going in is a little comforting because then we don’t have any issues with compliance tables and setbacks and all that kind of good stuff so that’s very reassuring. So I have no other issues. So with that I’ll entertain a motion from the commission. Larson: I’ll make a motion. The Planning Commission, the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a Conditional Use Permit to permit two buildings on one parcel subject to condition number 1 on page 11. And the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve Site Plan Planning Case #09-03 for a 51,000 square foot, two story multi-purpose building, plans prepared by Cuningham Group Architecture, P.A. and Westwood Professional Services Inc. dated January 30, 2009 subject to conditions 1 through 17 on pages 11 and 12. Papke: Is there a second? Undestad: Second. Larson moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approves a Conditional Use Permit to permit two buildings on one parcel, subject to the following conditions: 1.The site development shall comply with the requirements of the approved site plan #09-03. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Larson moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approves Site Plan Planning Case #09-03 for a 51,000 square-foot, two-story multi-purpose building, plans prepared by Cuningham Group 5 Planning Commission Meeting - March 3, 2009 Architecture, P.A. and Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated January 30, 2009, subject to the following conditions: 1.The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2.Windows shall be added to the northwest elevation in the multi-purpose area. Class III 3.In addition to the fire sprinkler system required by the building and fire codes, fire department standpipes shall be added to the building in locations approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal. 4.The applicant shall contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for location of yellow curbing to be painted and locations of “No Parking Fire Lane” signs. 5.Buildings are required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems. 6.Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 7.Retaining walls (new and additions to existing) over four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 8.Inlet protection is provided for all proposed stormwater inlets until such a time as final stabilization is achieved. 9.The rock construction entrance be expanded to 75 feet per City code or, if this is not practical to do so, the applicant must show why this is not practical and maximize the rock construction entrance to the greatest length practical. 10.Silt fence north of Pond B be extended to the northwest to the 990 contour. 11.City details shall be included in the plan set for all erosion control best management practices and storm sewer structures. 12.One of the three inlets into Pond B must be eliminated. It is preferable that the most easterly inlet be eliminated so that maintenance can occur as efficiently as possible. 13.Pond maintenance access should be shown on the plan. 14.The applicant shall determine if any additional permissions are required and apply for and obtain these permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering)) and comply with their conditions of approval. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - March 3, 2009 15.Surface drainage from the top of the wall should be directed to the proposed catch basin, or else a drain tile system shall be installed to convey the runoff to the storm sewer. 16.If on-site earthwork quantities do not balance and materials need to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. 17.Any material exported to another location in Chanhassen may require a grading or interim use permit. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Larson noted the verbatim and summary minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated February 17, 2009 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None. Chairman Papke adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 7:16 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 7