CC Minutes 3-23-09
City Council Meeting - March 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Councilwoman Ernst.
Councilwoman Ernst: I think it’s a good project. I guess my only, I do have some questions
about the whole financing piece which I ask at a later date obviously, but you know I think it’s a
good project.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. I agree. I started out by saying this is a good starting point. It is a
good starting point. I agree with the comments made. It also is a good public investment right
near one of our major employers in town which is the Dinner Theater, and this is really going to
create opportunities. One of the advantages for locating this transit station, the parking ramp
where we are is Monday through Friday it will serve transit needs in the area and evenings and
weekends it will serve our theater guests. Patrons to our town so it really provides a dual
purpose and it’s nice to see it. Together I would like to publicly thank Mr. Gerhardt and anyone
on his staff that has been actively working behind the scenes trying to move this forward, and
successfully moving it to the point where we are today. I think we’ve got a few more things but
there’s some complexity to this and so we’ll work them out in the next few weeks and bring it
back and keep it moving.
Todd Gerhardt: Keep that plate spinning.
Mayor Furlong: Keep it going. Very good. If there are no other comments, is there a motion
that the City Council approve acceptance of the feasibility study.
Councilman Litsey: I’ll make the motion the City Council approves a resolution accepting the
feasibility study for the downtown park and ride project 08-11.
Councilman McDonald: I’ll second.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
Resolution #2009-25: Councilman Litsey moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the
City Council approves the resolution accepting the feasibility study for the Downtown Park
and Ride Project 08-11. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote
of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: I would ask the council, given the time, do we want to take a quick 5 minute
break before we continue? Okay. Let’s go ahead and do that and let’s just take a quick break
subject to the call of the Chair but let’s make it really short. Thank you. We are in recess.
WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH EXPANSION: REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MULTIPLE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES ON ONE
LOT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 51,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
EXPANSION, 3121 WESTWOOD RIVE, APPLICANT: CUNNINGHAM GROUP
ARCHITECTURE, P.A. OWNER: WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH.
53
City Council Meeting - March 23, 2009
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the council. As you indicated there’s two
requests with this action tonight. One is for a conditional use to allow more than one building on
a lot, which we do allow in the commercial district, and secondly for a site plan approval. This
item did appear before the Planning Commission on March 3, 2009 and the Planning
Commission voted unanimously 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the project. Just to give a little
background of the project itself. This site. Originally the Westwood Church was given approval
from the City Council back in 2001. At that time the only access to the property was off of
Tanadoona Drive and they do have all their own private utilities on this site. With their next
th
expansion we did request that West 78 Street be built and so now there’s two access. And they
th
use that as their primary access. West 78 Street. So that resolves a lot of the issues that we
had. We didn’t do an environmental assessment but we did do a traffic study on this so this
project isn’t increasing the traffic, just providing additional building. The site plan that I’m
showing you.
Mayor Furlong: Now we lost it.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: There was such an echo I think, back feed that was going on.
Someone in the audience asked that we speak a little clearer and louder in the microphones.
Kate Aanenson: Alright. So the arrow that’s pointing, so this new building will be located
between the existing sanctuary and the parking lot, so there’s minimal grading. Minimal for
engineering wise. Minimal disruption of the site so the wetland, all the utilities are put in place
for this to actually be a pretty smooth project. So the applicants themselves are proposing the
darker building is the new addition. A 51,000 square feet to their existing fellowship hall which
is 72,120 square feet. So the new additional includes classrooms, offices, meeting rooms,
gathering spaces and a multi-purpose room. I’ll go through the architecture a little bit more. So
this would be the new facility. Now I’m looking at their valuation of their plans. The entire
building may not be built at this time. The gymnasium portion of that piece on this which would
be to the top of the screen, that area may not be built at this time. The classroom space. I’ll
show you how that is represented in a picture in a moment. So the two buildings facing you
would be the addition, the building behind you is the fellowship hall. So the building that’s
closest, in the foreground is actually a building that we’ve asked for a little bit more fenestration,
a little more windows on that and that’s a multi-purpose kind of gymnasium. Just to the top. If
you’ll notice there’s some smaller windows on the side facing the parking lot. If you could just
switch to this screen Paul. This is the material samples. The existing building’s cedar board.
They’re going with a hardy plank cement board and with these bricks which will be the…which
will be very similar in architecture. You can switch back, thank you. So again mimicking the
existing building, how that goes.
Councilman Litsey: Kate can I just ask you?
Kate Aanenson: Sure.
Councilman Litsey: Are you saying there’s, you’re asking for more windows than
what’s…here?
54
City Council Meeting - March 23, 2009
Kate Aanenson: On the top, yep. On the top. On the top portion of that.
Councilman Litsey: Okay. Right up there?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Exactly. Thank you. So that would be to make it compliant and it has a
high visibility. So other than that I’ve gone through in the staff report it talks about all the
th
architectural detail that it does meet, and again the access coming off of West 78. The grading
and drainage. There is a wetland on site. The storm drainage is on site. I think I’d have to go to
another view of the building. So now in the foreground is the new portions of the building. You
can see the fellowship hall with the brick towards the front, so they’re mimicking that brick as I
showed you on the materials on those lower portions. So it does meet all the architectural
standards. It does meet the site design. There is a play area. You can see between the two
buildings on the back there, which is nicely landscaped but then it comes towards the wetland,
storm water pond in the foreground on that picture. So the Planning Commission felt it was well
designed. Again we have done other projects where we’ve done them in phases where we’ve
done, approved 3 stories for a building. They’ve only built 2 so if this is built in phases, what
we’re doing tonight is approving the site plan for the entire site, and then if they break it into
phases, they wouldn’t have to come back before the Planning Commission or the City Council.
They would just submit their building permit and continue on with that phase so we’re giving
site plan approval for the entire site. Again the motions would be for the conditional use for
more than one building and then for the 51,000 square foot multi-purpose building. So with that
I’d be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Ms. Aanenson, the request for additional
windows on that one building. Is that included in one of the conditions?
Kate Aanenson: Yes. It’s condition number 2.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. And does this, is there a standard for fenestration for buildings?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Is it 50% or what is the requirement?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, what we did is we looked at the entire building and then looked at the
purpose of that building and putting it up higher, it works.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay. So when it just says windows, you’ve already, well we can ask
the applicant.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we discussed how…
Mayor Furlong: Is there agreement on that?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
55
City Council Meeting - March 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay for now. Thanks. Any other questions for staff at this time?
Okay? No? Is the applicant here this evening? Or representatives. Is there anything you’d like
to address the council or come forward at this point?
Charlie Stoffel: I don’t think so.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. The issue on the windows, you’re in agreement with that and what staff
is proposing?
Charlie Stoffel: I guess I will speak to that. Charlie Stoffel with Cunningham Group
Architecture representing Westwood.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Charlie Stoffel: I guess the windows really was the only thing that came down to any of the I
guess items that staff had an issue with. It’s going to be a multi-purpose space which can be
used as an alternate worship venue. Right now we have very limited windows in this space
because they want to treat it as a black box on the interior. So adding windows to that face
defeats the interior use of the building. So if we were to put windows on it we’d end up putting
black out shades on it and have black out shades on it primarily during the entire use of the
building. So that would be our only, I guess our only concern with that exception to what we
have presented to the City so far.
Kate Aanenson: In other circumstances where we’ve done that, for example on Office Max
we’ve used the spanrow windows so they have the window look to that so I think we’d like to
work with you and do something so architecturally it looks like there’s something there. I think
we can work through that.
Charlie Stoffel: That was the only comment we had and I think we can come to a solution on
that.
Mayor Furlong: Good. Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Okay, thank you. Any
thoughts or discussions on the matter before us this evening? There are a number of motions.
So it’s a conditional use permit, modification to a conditional use, or approving it, plus the site
plan approval. Any questions on that?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: It seems to be pretty well in order. I guess it was one of those
scenarios we talked about where it’s not necessarily rubber stamped but a lot of work has been
done in the background with staff and the Planning Commission and now it is here and it seems
to be everything’s in order so I recommend going ahead with it.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any other comments?
Councilman Litsey: I feel likewise. I think it’s pretty straight forward and I think it’s a nice,
architecturally it looks very nice and compliments what’s there already so I think it will be a nice
addition.
56
City Council Meeting - March 23, 2009
Mayor Furlong: I guess I’ll just make a quick comment that, I’m happy to see the Westwood
Community growing and needing more space and that’s positive for that organization I know as
well as the City so good to see. Would somebody like to make a motion?
Councilwoman Ernst: Sure.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Councilwoman Ernst: I make a motion that we approve a conditional use permit to permit two
buildings on one parcel, subject to condition number 1 on page 11 of the staff report. And that
we approve Site Planning Case #09-03 for a 51,000 square foot, two story multi-purpose
building, plans prepared by Cunningham Group Architecture P.A. and Westwood Professional
Services Incorporated dated January 30, 2009, subject to conditions 1 through 17 on pages 11
through 12 of the staff report. And adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and
recommendation for Planning Case #09-03.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Litsey: I’ll second that.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilman Litsey seconded that the City Council approves
a Conditional Use Permit to permit two buildings on one parcel, subject to the following
condition and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and recommendation for Planning
Case #09-03:
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.
Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilman Litsey seconded 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 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.
3.In addition to the fire sprinkler system required by the building and fire codes, Class III fire
department standpipes shall be added to the building in locations approved by the
Chanhassen Fire Marshal.
57
City Council Meeting - March 23, 2009
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.
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.
58