Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
11-15-89 Agenda and Packet
AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15 , 1989, 7 : 30 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 . Wetland Alteration Permit for the Construction of a Boardwalk along the edge of a Class A wetland on property zoned RSF and located at 7280 Kurvers Point Road, Wooddale Builders . 2 . *TABLED UNTIL DECEMBER 6 , 1989, MEETING* Preliminary plat to subdivide 20 . 9 acres into two single family lots of 10 . 1 and 10 . 2 acres on property zoned RR and located off of Dogwood, east of Lake Minnewashta, just north of Crimson Bay, Peter and Deanna Brandt . 3 . *TABLED AT THE APPLICANT' S REQUEST* Cenvesco, Oak View Heights , property zoned R-12 , Residential High Density and located between Powers and Kerber Boulevard north of West 78th Street : a . Preliminary Plat to subdivide 27 acres into 11 High Density Lots for 200 condominium units b. Site Plan Review for 200 condominium units . c . Wetland Alteration Permit to permit grading within a Class B wetland. 4 . Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code, modifying zoning restrictions and locations for convenience stores , gas stations , and automotive service stations . 5 . Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code, regarding revisions to the zoning ordinance to allow for the review and granting of conditional use permits for uses that are tem- porary in nature in all districts . 6 . Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code, Article XXIV, Off Street Parking and Loading, to provide dimensional standards , increased parking requirements if warranted by site plan review and to require enclosed parking for two vehicles for multiple family dwellings. 7 . Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code, Division 6 , Site Plan Review, to revise the procedure, expand on development standards and require financial guarantees for landscaping and other site improvements . APPROVAL OF MINUTES NEW BUSINESS 8 . Amended Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan Modification No. 8 , Todd Gerhardt . CITY COUNCIL UPDATE OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT C I T Y O F P.C. DATE: Nov. 14 ,5 ,1989 1989 •� � C.C. DATE: Dec. UAHASSE N CASE NO: 89-10 WAP Prepared by: Al-Jaff/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Wetland Alteration Permit for Construction of a Boardwalk to Create Access to Shoreline within Five Feet of a Protected Wetland and Filling the Area Adjacent to Lotus Lake to Create a Usable Shoreline Z a LOCATION: 7280 Kurvers Point Road — u Q APPLICANT: Wooddale Builders 410 W. County Road D New Brighton, MN 55112 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family ACREAGE: 0 . 92 acres - 40 . 077 square feet — DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING — AND LAND USE: N- RSF; single family S- RSF ; single family gE- RSF; single family QW- Lotus Lake WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is a riparian lot between Lotus vI Lake and Kurvers Point Road and contains a Class A wetland. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential atk. di 1-�' ���' `` ss a RD �•� t`- "NE 6800 Igt.VIM, go 7''7!�r R lrag ill pa L T U$ _ ' –6900 ti".A ,o Mil alik .. . '091 al r� �Iv gm was �:441,,-...110.'GA '�� F= : 7000 Ow. S/+ r �, a �Fy c l�..� a 01.er,A 3, '- 1� � ��,G�hMet/ _7100 'dk% � ..qo ‘ _ p----..,:t._•'it vik be �t}s _� E y Tab"'ar .r, _ 4 7200 Allk ,-. (_;-_-,,• - gym■ t&A T-13%! • 7300 ill.t% -- --- -- , : , . , a 1 it WI IIjil I VNYi. Obi. a_!-;.�I� E '� — 7400 oo 03 . _ . f-4,4_HI , ______) . ,.1, 0 co lc tti as, Le':"4711Paglig.; 0. 1. - 8 it uadir takw AV-4W ja _ '. .,', .--, , - renTelli warm agov A . i Imp ...._ P I .-./-.1 / ma 01 s� a [imrnI/ � I > > ` J y LT at; az :TA nig rirsVA L4',: / . Y t Millin �� :P I` HIS%11�•►.1;��1::111 % % / ai 3 c '� na-- LE, f:Ir!i til" '.iii_mi mum . _ I `TREE' I tin �i-- 11111111111- -r- g 111 2 m . ,. i muc��iiiir- , TH ST 3 2 k Iv jig al ipW-r-,011111P : - _ ., 111 • Lit ir.. .. ..--- oil rt"..r. in _i 116. fes--- vit�' . dide .a 3 IOP Me ter_ 11116.440. . 1OI %:/ '' ca' I a 4A. i WS 1CD IDz no� 1 51 rtsp =s a :7.:0 „.. —8100 zit ,4, ilmire ,, La ♦ s X1'1 . (1 i,.-- T/)-__I " "'A :V 1 r 17• RSF — 8200 `� i� C/ 11pep'. INNEN i ciAa ....e... \ E ` -8300 SUSAN 4kll i Wooddale Builders WAP November 15 , 1989 Page 2 ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to build a boardwalk located approxi- mately 5 feet north of an existing Class A wetland. The board- walk will be constructed of 2 ' x 6 ' treated lumber and located parallel to the northerly property lot line to Lotus Lake. The boardwalk is proposed to cross a utility and drainage easement. The boardwalk will be constructed over a manmade berm which was created to protect a retention pond located to the north of the property. The retention pond is part of an outlot maintained by the city. The proposed walkway will protect the retention pond from any runoff from the berm which might have a potential of impeding the flow of the outlet pipes of the retention pond. The applicant is also proposing to fill in the area located between the high water mark established by the DNR for Lotus Lake to a berm which lies at a distance of approximately 30 feet from the shoreline . The fill will level out the grade by adding 8 to 10 inches of clay fill at the deepest point tapering out to the high water level and to the berm with approximately 3 to 4 inches of black dirt and sod. The area adjacent to Lotus Lake is not wetland and will allow the property owner use of the lakeshore since the ground is currently too soft and wet to support active use. The applicant is also proposing a retaining wall which will run parallel to the rear of the house. The retaining wall will be built from sections of 5 x 6 feet pressure treated timbers . The height of the wall will range from 4 feet to the south up to 8 feet to the north as it meets the walkway. A lower wall , 3 feet in height , will be constructed parallel to the first retaining wall , creating an island which will be landscaped. Sod will be installed from the retaining wall to the rear of the home. The retaining wall is outside the Class A wetland edge and no sodding or manicuring of the lawn shall be allowed to take place between the Class A wetland and the retaining wall . RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion : "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #89-10 as shown on the site plan dated October 20 , 1989 , with the following conditions : 1 . Erosion control shall be installed between the proposed grading and the Class A wetland prior to any improvements made on the site. 2 . The applicant should be made aware if the city or utility company needs to use the utility and drainage easement. The Wooddale Builders WAP November 15, 1989 -` Page 3 city or utility company shall not be responsible for any — damages to the boardwalk or restoration costs . 3 . The area between the boardwalk and the wetland shall be main- tained in its natural state. 4. The area between the retaining walls and the wetland shall be maintained in its natural state with no sod. — 5. The boardwalk north of the Class A wetland up to the ordinary high water mark of Lotus Lake shall be of permanent construc- tion. " ATTACHMENTS 1. Application 2 . Letter from applicant 3 . Site plan dated October 20, 1989 — LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 • ( 612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: Wooddale Builders OWNER: Don Green ADDRESS 410 W. County Rd . D ADDRESS 15492 Canyon Ridge New Brighton , Mn 55112 Eden Prairie, MN Zip Code Zip Code TELEPHONE (Daytime ) 636-2355 TELEPHONE REQUEST: Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment Platting Metes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review 'X Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME Kurvers Point PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Residential REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Same PRESENT ZONING Same REQUESTED ZONING Same USES PROPOSED Retaining Wall , Walk Way, Grading SIZE OF PROPERTY 40 , 077 Sq. Ft . . 92 Acre LOCATION 7280 Kurvers Point • REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST Give Home Owner a Level , Useable Backyard, Access to Shoreline , and a Level Useable Shoreline. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) Lot 1 Block 2 Kurverjs Point OCT 20 1969 4:1T1E CHQNNAS '� City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS This application must be clearly printed and must bemaccompaniedpleted in ubl and be typewritten plans required b Y all inforationandor plsthis application ,y applicable City Ordinance provisions . filingto determine the youshould andconfer with they Before applicable to your procedural requirements Planner application . q FILING CERTIFICATION: The undersigned representative of the applicant that he is familiar with the proceduralrequements applicable Cityhereby `ertif�e, Ordina. - of all Signe — • tiFF-=can:,. DatE,, AO Ai,- The undersigned hereby authorizedheucertifies that the applicant to make this application P described. has been for the property herein gr34... 41(r' Signed By Fee iwner Date �J F Date Application Received Application Fee Paid City Receipt No. tio This Applicaan will Boaris prAdjustmentsbe considered by the Planning meeting. and Appeals at their Commission/ WOODDXLE BUILDERS, INC. 410 W. County Road D New Brighton, MN 55112 (612)636-2355 Description of proposed Alteration 1 . Retaining Wall a ) The retaining wall will be built from 5x6 pressure treated timbers . The Wall will be approximately 8 ' in height at the walk way from existing grade to the top wall and 4 ' in height to the lower wall and 6 ' in height at the section running parrellel to the back of house and 3 ' in height at the lower wall . Then the wall will return towards the home at both ends and taper into the existing grade . There will br plant- - ings in the middle level and sod installed from the retaining wall to the home . 2. Treated Walk Way a ) The walk way will he built from 2x6 wolminize lumber. With 3" sheetrock screws . It will be built in 10 ' sections running 110 ' in length and 6 ' wide and will have support brackets on both sides every 10 ' . These brackets will be galvanized with galvanized post which will be set into the ground approzimat- ely 2 - 4 ' depending on soil condition . 3 . Grading a ) The grading proposed is from the high water level set by the D .N.R. to the berm approximately 30 ' from the shore line. We propase to level out the grade by adding 8-10" of clay fill at the deepest point tapering out to the high water level and to the berm with approximately 3-4" of black dirt and sod. 4 . Purpose of Proposed Alteration a ) The purpose of these alterations is to give the homeowner a useable back yard , access to the shore line and a shore line that is level . These improvements will be designed by experts _ in the field and install with the proper material and will improve the property as far as appearance and make the use of the property for the home owner better without effecting the purpose of the wetlands or shore line . Hedlund Engineering Ser vicesy0LI a9k 2,Z LW Bo r. CI.11 E1y1.e.r. Lead PI.nn.r. 4 '-f .A.� ��Bv.�_ Su�egor's Certificate f ___ P. /K.- kk. .: ll..rr,,kL w. 6.0 �� - ''-' ... m ' at 9201 E.ri Olow.k+0ion i..•ra, -'`L.•....- ,. 1 i Blooming/on.Mims solo S BOZO Mum.. See.0209 ^•.'..c'y. / SURVEY FOR: hlooddale Builders •*.: ' . ! .I. I DESCRIBED AS: lot 2, Block 2, "' ; ' � 1 ............ CITY OF . . , - _441f CHANHASSEN . , . , Ni%: , „ _ • • • .:. iv. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 �a MEMORANDUM TO : Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning DATE: November 8 , 1989 SUBJ: Proposed Ordinance Revisions Regulating Convenience Stores PROPOSAL/SUMMARY On September 13 , 1989 , the City Council reviewed the draft ordi- nance revisions that had been prepared to regulate convenience stores , service stations and other uses having gas pumps. The - ordinance as drafted would provide detailed definitions for con- venience stores with and without gas pumps and for motor fuel stations . The definitions used the amount of square footage _ devoted to the sale of non-automotive goods to determine when a gas station would be defined as a convenience store. The existing definition for Automotive Service Stations was processed to be _ deleted since it is to be replaced by the Motor Fuel Station defi- nition. The ordinance then would have modified the districts in which these uses could be allowed as either permitted or con- ditional uses . The City Council reviewed the draft and concluded that it does not yet achieve their goals. They indicated that the ordinance should provide separation standards and limit the number and locations of convenience stores. There should be a physical separation between uses with gas pumps due to visual and traffic considerations . There should also be a separation of gas pumps from residential parcels to minimize associated impact on those parcels . Staff has reviewed the record to date. While we believe some progress has been made, particularly with regard to the develop- ment of definitions , it may be appropriate to consider a somewhat different approach. Accordingly, we are proposing that all uses with gas pumps be made subject to conditional use permits. There is a good rationale for handling the requests in this manner since it appears that it is the gas pumps and not the service retail components that are causing the problems . Thus , con- - venience stores without gas pumps would not be subject to con- ditional use permits and would be allowed as a permitted use in the CBD, BH, BG and BN Districts. Planning Commission November 8 , 1989 Page 2 Separation standards will be added to the appropriate section where uses with gas pumps are permitted as a conditional use _ permit. All distances will be measured from the nearest gas pumps. A minimum distance between individual uses with gas pumps of 250 feet is proposed. This may not eliminate multiple facilities on a street, but it will prevent the concentration of multiple uses dispensing gas at a single intersection. The use of separation standards such as this one raises - questions of limiting free trade and of restricing competition. It is also somewhat questionable in that it grants the right to build on a "first come" basis . On the other hand, the city is not deciding exactly where these facilities should locate. The approach is rather one of setting standards based upon concerns with impacts associated with concentrations of these uses . Staff is comfortable with the concept of establishing a minimun separation standard. The second separation standard relates to the minimum distance - between uses dispensing gas and residential parcels . Staff has proposed a minimum separation of 100 feet. In this case, the separation is to provide physical separation between a very intense use and residential parcels . Gas facilities generate high levels of traffic, are well lighted, often operate 24 hours a day and produce a strong odor with gas , exhaust, etc. We believe they are incompatible adjacent to residential uses - even with a high standard of screening. In reviewing the ordinance we found what we consider to be an oversight. While reviewing auto related uses , we noted that auto sales and service are allowed as conditional uses in the General Business District but are prohibited from locating in _ the Highway and Business Services District. I am not an advo- cate of auto sales due to the visual and signage problems they typically cause , but it seems strange that a Firestone or Goodyear type of store or an auto service mall is excluded from a district that is devoted to highway uses. We further note that car washes and automotive service stations are allowed as permitted uses . Therefore, we are recommending that automobile service be allowed as a permitted use in the BH District. As such, any proposal to develop a site with this use would still require site plan approval. The districts in which the three uses are allowed is comparable to what had been proposed in the past. The following table illustrates the proposal . Planning Commission November 8 , 1989 Page 3 BN BF BG BH CBD Convenience Stores Without Gas P X P P P Convenience Stores With Gas Pumps C X C C X Motor Fuel Station X C C C X P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon the foregoing, staff recommends that the following _ ordinance amendment be approved. CITY OF CHANHASSEN _ CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES , MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSSEN CITY CODE BY ADDING PROVISIONS CONCERNING CONVENIENCE STORES T. AND MOTOR FUEL STATIONS The City Council of Chanhassen ordains as follows : Section 1 . Chapter 20 , Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the following definitions : "Convenience Store" - Convenience store means a retail establishment which generally sells a limited range of food products , non-prescription drugs , candy and other perishable goods . This includes soda and similar beverage dispensing and food products which can be heated and/or prepared onsie, and has over 400 square feet of floor area for retailing of non-automotive goods . "Convenience Store with Gas Pumps" - Convenience store means a retail establishment which generally sells gasoline from - pump islands and a limited range of food products , non- prescription drugs , candy and other perishable goods . This includes soda and similar beverage dispensing and food pro- _ ducts which can be heated and/or prepared onsie, and has over 400 square feet of floor area for retailing of non-automotive goods . Motor Fuel Station" - Motor fuel station means a retail place of business engaged in the sale of motor vehicle fuels , but may also engage in supplying a limited amount of related goods . In no case shall the space for the retailing of related goods exceed 400 square feet . No services shall be provided for maintenance or repair of motor vehicles, except for the provision of window washing, air and oil dispensing services . Section 2 . Article I , Section 20-1 . Definitions . Delete the following definition: -"utomot _ ce station means a retail place of busincca engaged primarily in the sale of motor vehicle fuels , but also - --- - • . . ' in the eperatin and maintenance of motor vehicle-s . These may include sale of petroleum products, sale and servicing of tires , , . . . . , . . ^amu lubricaz vn services and the performance of minor automotive Section 3 . Amend Division 4 , Standards for Business Office , Institutional and Industrial Districts . Section 20-282 . Motor Fuel Station as follows : The following applies to motor fuel stations : 1 ) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises except in appropriately designed and screened storage areas . 2 ) All repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance of _ vehicles shall occur within closed building except minor maintenance including, but not limited to tire inflation, adding oil and wiper replacement. 3 ) No public address system shall be audible from any resi- dential parcel . 4 ) Stacking areas deemed to be appropraite by the city shall meet parking setback requirements . 5 ) No sales , storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles , snowmobiles , or all-terrain vehicles . 6 ) Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations . 7 ) Gas pumps shall not be located within 100 feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. 8 ) A minimum separation of 250 feet is required between the _ nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a con- ditional use permit is being requested. Section 4. Amend Division 4 , Section 20-288 as follows : Section 20-288 . Convenience store with gas pumps . The following applies to convenience stores with gas pumps : 1 ) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises . 2 ) No repair, assembly or disassembly of vehicles . 3 ) No public address system shall be audible from any resi- dential parcel . 4 ) Gas pump stacking area deemed to be appropriate by the City shall not intrude into any required setback area. 5 ) No sales , storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles , snowmobiles , or all-terrain vehicles . -2- -) Gas pumps shall not be located within 100 feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. — 7) A minimum separation of 250 feet is required between the nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a con- — ditional use permit is being requested. Section 5. Chapter 20, Article XVI ( "BN" Neighborhood — Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner: Section 20-694. Conditional Uses — Delete: 2) Automotive service stations . Section 6 . Chapter 20, Article XVII ( "BH" Highway and — Business Services District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner: Section 20-712. Permitted Uses — Delete: 3 ) Automotive service stations. Delete: 11) Convenience stores with and without gas pumps Add: — 11) Convenience stores without gas pumps. Add: — 20) Automobile servicing within enclosed structures designed for the purpose hwere fuel is not dispensed. — Section 20-714. Conditional Uses Add: 5) Convenience stores with gas pumps. 6 ) Motor fuel stations. Section 7. Chapter 20, Article XVIII, ( "CBD" Central — Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code remains unchanged. -3- — Section 8. Chapter 20, Article XIX ( "BG" General Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the — following manner: Section 20-752. Permitted Uses Delete: 3 ) Convenience stores with or without gas pumps. Add: — 3) Convenience stores without gas pumps. Delete: — 27) Automotive service stations. Section 20-754 . Conditional Uses Add: 6 ) Convenience stores with gas pumps. — 7 ) Motor fuel stations . Section 9. Chapter 20, Article XX ( "BF" Fringe Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner: Section 20-773. Conditional Uses Delete: 1) Automotive service stations without car washes. — Add: 1) Motor fuel stations without car washes. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen this day of , 1989. CITY OF CHANHASSEN By: Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor ATTEST: Don Ashworth, City Manager -4- CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING SEPTEMBER 13, 1989 Mayor Ctmiel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. COUNC:ILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor C oriel, Councilman Bovt, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Johnson STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Jo Ann Olsen, Paul Krause, Gary Warren and Jim Chaffee ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MODIFYING ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND LOCATIONS FOR CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATIONS, FIRST READING. Mark Koegler: I should catment it's nice to address you during the daylight hours. I will be fairly brief in terms of a presentation because I know you have a lot of items to get through this evening, even starting when you are. Cover maybe just a little brief background on what we have done to get to where we ate now and then certainly invite caments and direction, or further direction from the City Council. This issue of convenience stores started in about December of 1988. At that time Steve Hanson being on staff had prepared some material. Worked with the Planning Commission. With his leaving, I became involved earlier this summer and essentially kind of picked up some of the pieces where Steve left off. I want to emphasize from the beginning the draft ordinance and all of the supporting memoranda that you have in your packet is basically evolved out of one central premise and I think it's important to note that at the beginning because I gather from looking at the Minutes frau the last session that's perhaps where sane of the disagreement perhaps lies. The premise was not to regulate specific locational criteria for convenience type stores. The consensus of the Planning Commission was that that was a free market decision and you don't regulate the number of florists or the number of restaurants or whatever and they took the approach of not necessarily identifying locational criteria but rather to establish an ordinance that allowed convenience store locations consistent with the purposes of the specific zoning districts. That premise was reached, as I indicated, after discussion of a number of alternatives and included among those alternatives were options such as the geographical criteria. You can't have more than 1 per 2 mile radius or whatever that might be. In discussions, that was viewed as being somewhat arbitrary in this case given the fact that land uses can vary fairly widely in a 1 mile circle. You can have the intersection of major arterials occurring in that distance and it was not seen necessarily to be a valid criteria. If I can have Jo Ann turn on the overhead, what happened then as a result of the commission's discussions is took a relook if you will at the ordinance and almost set up a heirarchy type of scheme of defining first of all the zoning classifications which range anywhere from CBD, if we want to say down, we'll say down to neighborhood business at least in terms of intensity and scale. With CSD being the district where you obviously want to emphasize higher employment. You want to emphasize uses that you think are conducive to downtown type areas. On the left side then looking at the types of convenience stores where we've got convenience stores without gas pumps perhaps being the least intensive and going to what was classified as motor fuel stations as being the most intensive, again we get this heirarchy scheme working in two directions. I'm referencing the chart that's on the screen right now which was part of the memorandum that was 1 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 in your packet. I've shown on that the existing zoning categories and the proposed categories that the Planning Commission ultimately came up with. What it ends up being is an approach that attempts to regulate convenience stores first of all by defining them. There's definitions for the convenient stores both with and without gas pumps and then you move into the auto service station which is, in this particular case, a facility similar to the Amoco Food Shop type approach where the main push is to sell gas and then the final one being the more intensive, similar to Gary Brown's operation right now that has mechanical services and so forth. So the attempt was to define which of those uses should be permitted in the various districts. Which should be conditional and which should be totally excluded. And again that was arrived out of this premise that the purpose was not necessarily to actually regulate the number of these things and not to say that you can't have 2 on a corner or 3 on a corner but to say that maybe same of them don't belong in the downtown area or sane of - then don't belong in the neighborhood businesses. As a follow-up I have looked at ordinances throughout the `Lwin City area with a concentration on sane of the developing cities whose composition perhaps is more similar to that of _ Chanhassen's. The Eden Prairie, Maple Grove, Egan, sane of those types of community to see what approaches they take and it varies quite literally from an approach like the City of Bloomington that really treats these very casually and if you meet their conditional use criteria, you're fine, to probably the most specific approach again takes more of a district type of definition in saying that convenience stores are only appropriate in certain districts. Eden Prairie for example allows them only in+neighborhood business districts and only in highway business districts.+ Now that does tend to begin to limit than geographically because in their comprehensive plan they state that a neighborhood business district should occur at probably no more frequent than one mile intervals so you have to a certain degree same restrictions in that regard but then they also allow than in the highway business district which doesn't fall under that same king of geographic type of approach. So I guess I would assure it's appropriate this evening to clarify with the Council what your - direction is and what your interests are and if it certainly is different than that that evolved at the Planning Cammission level, we can take that back to the Planning Commission with perhaps same more clear statement on our part to then of what your end objective is and what it's going to take to achieve that. So with that Mr. Mayor I would suggest, I'll kind of terminate comments and react to any questions or comments that you might have. Mawr Chmiel: Any discussions? Any questions? Councilman Johnson: Looking at CBD as an example and saying that we don't want any kind of gas pumps in the downtown business district. TO me that's a convenience for the people who work downtown to be able to grab sane gas. In this particular location it doesn't make much difference because we have business highway right behind them and plenty of gas stations. But in general, if we're ever to expand or develop a different business district classification someplace, which I doubt we would, it'd make sense to me to have full services available for the people within the district. If we had a larger CBD area, it'd make sense to have gas pumps there so people could get gas but in our particular case with only one CBD and it's very small, with plenty of gas stations all around it, and when there's already a grandfathered one within it, then I don't have a lot of problem. 2 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Mark Koegler: Philosophically I guess Councilman Johnson I would agree with you. You go to downtown Minneapolis, it's hard to find a gas station. There are a few and there are times when you need it but this again was tailored more specifically to Chanhassen's existing land use pattern and projected land use pattern which surrounds the CBD with highway business, with general commercial so you... Councilman Johnson: I ran out of gas in downtown Minneapolis a while back. That's where comment canes from. Mayor Chmiel: In downtown here of course, you're only within 2 blocks of a station. Councilman Johnson: Yes, and we've gone one that's already here. We've already got one convenience. Now does that became a non-conforming use then? Mark Koegler: Yes. Councilman Johnson: What would happen if for same reason they shut down their gas pumps for a year? Jo Ann Olsen: They wouldn't be able to open up again if they closed down for a year. Councilman Johnson: I don't know why anyone would close down for a year but if they had a fire or something, they could rebuild. Jo Ann Olsen: Not if over 50% has been destroyed. Mayor Chmiel: So with a 50% clause is what you're saying? If it's destroyed beyond 50%, they can't redo it? Jo Ann Olsen: Right. Councilman Johnson: A non-conforming use is more than 50% destroyed. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Johnson: Because I'll tell you what. That little gas station on the corner there does a bang up business. I don't know how many gallons they pump but they pump a lot. Mark Koegler: They have the advantage of having historically a gas station on that site also. Same of us used to go to the Mobil station there regularly. Councilman Johnson: Of course they've been gone for 2 years before they got Bill. I'd think we'd at least want to put as a conditional use in that to me it's logical if that did burn completely down to rebuild it as it was. Councilman Workman: Which one are we talking about? Councilman Johnson: The Brooke's. If Brooke's burned down, totally burn down, would we allow them to have gas pumps if they rebuilt? Under this change, we would not. 3 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilman Workman: Maybe I can simplify this. In going from the intent from the previous council, and Jay and Bill can help us a little bit, what are we trying to accomplish in a simple statement? What are we trying to accomplish and so therefore Mark, under what direction did you feel you were trying to accomplish something and are we doing that? I think we're trying to limit than and are we doing that? I guess if we can't do it, this is all just a bunch of hot air but I guess the only real, if we can't control than and we can't tell people not to put them here, which again I've stated that I'm not so sure we should get into that business. But then we're trying to restrict than. I guess the only concern that I'd have is where we have the biggest problem is under Business Neighborhood, convenience stores with gas pumps. Other than that, I mean business, general business district. They're probably going to be allowed and there's not a whole lot of space for that anyway. Are we accomplishing what - we're trying to do here? Councilman Johnson: The other thing we're trying to accomplish is a definition of what the heck a convenience store was because it wasn't defined and that's done well in here. I like the definition of what a convenience store is. That one worked out. At least it's defined now instead of it was ambiguous. Amoco says we're not a convenience store. We're a gas station that just happens to sell Pampers, but that doesn't make us a convenience store. And there's some argument over what is and what isn't and that was one of the biggest arguments as to what just to classify than as. Councilman Workman: So we're no longer trying to restrict having our eighth convenient store type operation? Councilman Johnson: The previous Council wanted to, they had the feeling that we would have 4 convenient stores or potentially 5, another one where the Legion is, in that intersection. That did not :can like a logical thing to do but int his we've got business highway so they're allowed there. IOP, are they allowed in IOP? + Councilman Boyt: No. Councilman Johnson: They're currently not even allowed in IOP so you couldn't get 5 on there because the corner is IOP on one side of that intersection. The specific intersection that this was brought up on, which is the Amoco. Mayor Chmiel: I think the intent probably from the other Council is the fact that the aesthetics of having as many on a specific corner is really what they're getting at. It's not very pleasant sight to see unless you're running out of gas. It's convenient for the motorists on the highway but you have to take into consideration the aesthetics is something that the people within the City are going to have to continue to look at and there have been many cities that have gone to those kinds of locations of maybe 4 on all 4 corners because it's a good intersection. Because it's payable but at the same, and it's a paying situation for than but at the sane time, you look at the sane corners now and those gas stations are gone. In my opinion, frau what they've gone frau to looks a lot better than what it did when they had 4 stations. Councilman Johnson: Right now at, what is it, 15 and 51 out towards ?bund? There's 3 gas stations and a bank. All 3 seen to be getting enough business to 4 City Council Meeting - September 13; 1989 stay in there. 15 and 19. Yes, 15 and 19. Extremely busy intersection. Councilman Workman: But is Mark's report, Mark are you basically saying we've got the definitions for convenience stores and gas stations and we're not doing a whole lot of changing frau what the original states. We haven't changed a whole lot? Mark Koegler: Yeah. I think that's the underlying thing that has to be brought out here is that the approach, the way it evolved, ended up being not a recommendation of changing a lot. Changing sane districts a little bit. Adding sane definitions to control the locations of these uses but not to control the numbers. As I read through sane Minutes from the last session, I know there was at least same interest expressed of should we be controlling the numbers and the Mayor just brought it out now, do we want 3 of these on an intersection or 4 of these on an intersection. I know of an intersection in Phoenix that has 3 out of the 4 corners with the same convenient store. The same one. Councilman Workman: Three PDQ's? Mark Koegler: Three PDQ's in essence. I forget the name of it but I've been shown a photograph of that one and obviously that's not what you're after necessarily but that's why I guess, I thinkDonsuggested we originally we meet this evening to determine if you're end objective out of this is different. If you're looking at numbers, we'll need to go back and scratch our heads and see how that can maybe be achieved and bring that back to you. Again, this was more of a free market approach of saying if, the comment statement you hear, I attend enough Council meetings and so forth, businesses have a right to succeed and businesses have a right to fail. This kind of takes that approach that says the market, if they say 3 of them will work there and if it meets all the City's criteria for traffic. Traffic flow for sight considerations and so forth, they would be allowed to go in under this kind of a treatment so if that's not the direction of the Council, that's what we need certainly to explore. Councilwoman Dimler: I'm just a little bit confused. It sears to me that if you're not going to limit number but you're going to limit location by zoning, that you would be encouraging 3 or 4 within a short distance. Does that not sound reasonable? Mark Koegler : You could almost end up doing that in kind of a defacto kind of matter just by how your zoning map physically looks. Councilwoman Dimler: So then we're really defeating the purpose for what we're doing? Mark Koegler: You may be in one or two isolated points around the city and I guess that's something we quite candidly haven't looked at. We probably should take a look at the map and see what potentials that major hub areas there are for that to occur. As was pointed out, the TH 101 and Thi 5 current intersection you've got 3 out of 4 of those quadrants if you will that could contain, 2 of than do now, this type of land use with the fourth one, at least at present being immune from that due to zoning. I don't know if there's other.. . Councilwoman Dimler: And this would not preclude than from doing that? 5 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Mark Koegler: It would not. That is correct. Providing they met all of the site criteria that were part of the rest of the zoning ordinance. Councilwanan Dimler: So can we really control it by zoning then? Mark Koegler: TO do that I think we're going to have to enter an arena which is not necessarily bad, of trying to look at sane more innovative techniques to do this. Literally no city that I could find in the 'Rain Cities handles these in the type of manner that you're talking about. There may be still 1 or 2 out there because obviously we haven't looked at every single one but all of the major cities, many of them are still in the position where they don't even have definitions of convenience stores. Mayor Chmiel: New innovative thinkers here. Mark Koegler: That's the challenge right? Councilwanan Dimler: I just wanted to ask a question and I don't know who can answer it. In order, do we need an ordinance to have a definition or do we have a definition book that's separate frau ordinances? Paul Krause: It's part of the zoning ordinance. You have to change that to incorporate the new definition. Councilwoman Dimler: But do we have a book that just has definitions? Paul Krause: No. It's an element of the zoning ordinance. Councilwoman Dimler: So you need an ordinance just for a definition? If you changed nothing else? Paul Krause: Right. Councilman Workman: I don't know how far we're willing to go and just as 4 of these convenience stores on one corner wouldn't look pretty, the free market system isn't pretty looking at all. Councilwoman Dimler: No, and this doesn't seen to handle that situation. Councilman Workman: So what happens is I would say that we can't really or we're not really going to control it. Can we then say, well we could say, we could basically make all of these business districts, put an x by then all and say we don't want then in any of these districts and that would essentially take care of it. I don't know if we could do that. Councilwoman Dimler: It'd be illegal. Councilman Workman: Would it? I guess the only place then that I see a problem is in the business neighborhood district, convenience store with gas pumps. That's what we have with Brooke's. We have a problem. That's a conditional use but I would. Councilman Johnson: Brooke's is in BN. 6 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilman Workman: It's not BN. Business Central. CBD. Councilwoman Dimler: What's the SuperAmerica? Jo Ann Olsen: Business Neighborhood. Councilwoman Dimler: That's BN? Mayor Chmiel: That's BN. Councilman Workman: Can we maybe make minor modifications that way and say make convenient stores with gas pumps. Let me ask this first. Would business highway and business neighborhood, could those two conflict? When we get TH 5 going out and everything and we've got a neighborhood just south of TH 5 and we've got a gas station at the mouth of this neighborhood, is that going to potentially be a problem? I know Dien Prairie does that a lot. Can we take convenience stores with gas pumps as a conditional use out of the business neighborhood? Councilman Johnson: Yes. Paul Krause: You certainly could but when you think of the classes of uses that are neighborhood oriented, oftentimes a small convenient store type operation with or without gas pups fits that bill. What do you normally think of when you think of neighborhood businesses? It's the traditional dry cleaner, the small grocery store, place to get a little bit of gas. Councilman Workman: I'm worried about the gas. I'm not worried about the convenience part of it. Paul Krause: These days most of the developers will tell you that they don't put in convenience stores without gas pumps. I suppose presumably you could force them to but that's the orientation the business is taking. Councilman Workman: But I'm saying that might clear up a problem that we continually have. I think the Total over there is fairly separate from the neighborhood but now we've got the Brooke's and that's not so I'm looking at that use, the neighborhood use. The guy's back yard is 50 feet from a gas pump. That to me is... Paul Krause: One of the things you could look at, arra one thing I've had sane experience with is putting distance criteria in the conditional use permits from the residentially zoned property. Councilman Workman: Like liquor stores arra churches. Mark KKoegler: The other advantage I think you'll see as time continues and more residential development occurs in Chanhassen is they'll be able to be planned rather than kind of dropping one into an existing neighborhood which is to same degree what Brooke's did. Where you've got 300 acres of open land and you plan residential and you plan a shall commercial center, you can do buffering around that site in a little better manner than you can in existing conditions. lam Again, I would agree with Paul. Cities do impose various setback criteria fram, particularly when there's gas. Many communities get excited when there's gas 7 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 versus when there's a convenience store just because of the issue of truck deliveries with fuel and so forth being close to houses. Councilman Workman: Well we've got TH 7 and TH 41. That's a classic example and that thing is a long way away. I think the nature of the gasoline business is all around is what people are fearful of. I'm just saying that's maybe where we could restrict these. Save ourselves the headaches down the road. We've got Brooke's before us. We've got the SA before us and I suppose the SA down on TH 212 is probably a problem. I don't know. I'm just throwing that out because it doesn't look like we're going to be doing a whole lot with this anyway other than putting definitions into the zoning. Councilman Johnson: The SA on TH 212 is a legal non-conforming existingly. At the present time right? Mayor Chmiel: That was my understanding. - Councilman Johnson: So we're not changing that particular location. Councilman Workman: I understand that. I don't know, I guess I would move that point with that modification to it. Councilman Johnson: One thing I just went through which might help. Councilman Boyt: Which point? Councilman Workman: The conditional use. The convenient store with gas pumps out of the Business Neighborhood or take the suggestion that we get a distance. Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I like the distance criteria. But we've only got what? Two business neighborhoods in the entire area. Councilman Workman: Well as TH 5 develops, we could have more of than. And TH 212 and everything else. Councilman Johnson: When the MUSA line moves, we could have more caning up and I think a distance criteria is probably the best thing. Maximum, minimum? Whatever. Minimum distance frau any residential district for the location of fuel dispensing facility or whatever. What I did, just as we went through here was, mark down the changes on this little chart they've got there. In Central Business District, convenient stores without gas pump or with gas pumps is going fran conditional use to not permitted at all. Business highway doesn't change. Business general, convenient store with gas pumps going frau permitted to conditional. Business fringe, automotive service station is going frau not permitted at all to conditional. Or I mean going frau conditional to not permitted at all and on business neighborhood, thee only recommended change they've got is going from conditional to not permitted for automotive service stations. Councilman Boyt: Did you say there was a change in business general? Councilman Johnson: Yes. Councilman Boyt: I don't see that change. 8 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilman Johnson: Convenient stores with gas pumps is currently a permitted use under the BH. Councilman Boyt: Well if I'm looking at the right page, Page 4, it says. . . Councilman Johnson: Page 4. Business general. BG. Councilman Boyt: Permitted. Councilman Johnson: No, mine says conditional. C. Conditional. Mayor Chmiel: Page 4 of Mark's letter. Mark Koegler: I don't know if you can see it on your monitor. Councilman Johnson: The first page is the existing. Councilman Boyt: Yeah, that I've got. Councilman Johnson: And then on Page 4, we've added one definition which is what a gas station is. See one thing to me is autanotive service station, a place where Joe can fix your car. To me makes sense to be in a business neighborhood because that's something that supports residential people is Joe's gas station and Joe's Automotive Repair facility. Mayor Chmiel: One of the things that I was thinking about Jay is that presently we+probably have some of those areas classified as agricultural. Even though there's same residential areas within those specific areas, when they came back to rezone that, then you're going to start causing those problems. Councilman Johnson: Yeah. When the MUSA line changes, that's when this is going to be more important. About 20 years from now. 10 years frau now. 5 years frau now. Paul Krause: I think you can get at sane of that by, if you establish a distance criteria that the distance is measured frau land zoned or guided for residential. Mayor C oriel: Distance I think would take care of it. Councilman Boyt: There were several issues the couple of nights we discussed this with the former Council. One of than was certainly, it was a motivation for same of the people was directed specifically at Gary Brown's situation and how does he get more leverage. That didn't happen to my issue. Mine, and I think if you called people that lived around the city you'd see that there's a general concern there's too many of them. The question is, there goes another one. We don't need all these convenient stores with gas stations. Maybe you don't want to regulate those at all. I personally agree with those people that say that every, as Paul said, every shopping strip center that's going to be proposed is going to be proposed with a gas pump and do we want to have that happen or not. I think that's the issue and I don't think the Planning Commission dealt with that issue. Well they dealt with it. They said it was 9 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 fine with then I guess. Well, I don't sense that that's what the community's saying. Councilwoman Dimler: But Bill now are we saying then, the developer may not came in here with a strip center at all if he can't put gas pumps in so we're really saying that we've got enough strip centers. And as we develop, that's plenty. Everybody will have to came to what's existing. Councilman Boyt: I don't know what all the ramifications of our decision would be Ursula. I'm just saying that I think people sense, when there's 5 currently accepted by the City between what was it? Great Plains and whatever the staff report said but roughly within a mile there's 5 of then. The people that live around that say that's more than enough. Councilwoman Dimler: That's true but as we develop, that's not going to be servicing those people that are going to be living out west and I can tell you developer's not going to came in here if he can't make money and if he ^,ccs that having gas pimps is what makes money or draws people in, then that's what's going to keep him out of here. They won't came to Chanhassen. Councilman Boyt: That's why, what we directed staff and the Planning Commission to look at was how do we impact the density of these things. The number of these things. It wasn't how do we eliminate then from the city. We currently have what sane people were thinking is too many in one small area. If we allow the market to dictate this, I can assure you that all you have to do is go back and look at the abandoned gas stations to recognize that the market in the long run, it will sort that out. Do we want to live with the consequences of that sort process? I think that's the issue. Councilwoman Dimler: You can't regulate them by zoning. That's when you're encouraging then to be all bunched up. Councilman Boyt: I think we can regulate them by zoning. I don't think that's enough. We regulate virtually everything by zoning. Councilwoman Dimler: Yes but you're encouraging teem to bunch up which is against what you're saying you want. Councilman Johnson: Or you can also do like the contractor's yard. Have a minimum distance between then because if you look at Galpin Blvd., when that gets to be sewered, there's 4 convenience stores on that corner you know. It will be the next place for sane gas pumps. I guess what we're saying is we want to spread than out. Do we allow mini-golf with or without gas pumps? Mayor Chmiel: If you want to putt around. Councilwoman Dimler: Well I can tell you that I drive west quite frequently and if I'm low on gas, I've got to go all the way to Cenex in Victoria and hope I make it. If I forget to get gas. If I'm low and don't check my gauge before I go out west, I have a hard time. I hope I make it to Cenex. There's nothing there. Councilman Johnson: But what I'm saying is we don't need 4 at that intersection. 10 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilwoman Dimler: But you're going to want same there. Councilman Johnson: We don't need 4 at the next intersection. We don't need 4 at the next intersection as the MUSA line changes. If we could say one within, they have to be spread by half a mile or you could say only 2 within a half mile radius of each other or something of that nature. Mayor C oriel: I think a good example is looking at same of those within the city of Eden Prairie. Gas stations available. They have one on TH 5 and that's frau our corporate limits outside of their corporate limits. Councilwoman Dimler: I can usually make it to that one if I'm going east. But going west, it's tough. Mayor Chmiel: Going east there's not another station. Councilman Johnson: SuperAmerica's the only one on TH 5. Mayor Chniel: There was a station which has been removed right before the railroad tracks. Councilman Johnson: Isn't there one behind there now? Mayor Citiel: Yeah, Mobile has that availability.. . Councilman Johnson: But nobody sees it. Councilman Workman: But is Eden Prairie restricting? Councilwoman Dimler: I don't think they are. Mark Koegler: Through zoning. It's simply through zoning categories. The area where SA is at TH 4 and TH 5 is zoned highway business and you look at the rest of the corridor along TH 5 and you've got large industrial and then you've got a fair amount of residential along portions of TH 5 and there aren't any other opportunities. That's what can be done here. Speaking about the future, the structure of the zoning ordinance can be used to indicate where those things can and can't happen just as the example you're pointing to in Eden Prairie is working now. Councilman Johnson: What we'd have to do is zone an intersection, similar to the Great Plains intersection. It's zoned business highway on one side. Business neighborhood on, or on two corners it's business highway. One corner business neighborhood and one corner IOP. So one's a conditional use and two sides is permitted use. So the max we could have at that intersection is 3 under our current ordinance because IOP is not allowed gas stations. Actually if you consider where Total is, being right next to it, you could get 4. Have�2 convenience stores back to back. That's possible. I've seen it done too. Do we want two convenience stores back to back? Councilman Boyt: Personally, since you brought up convenience stores, I don't understand the need for a definition of a convenience store. That's just a store as far as I'm concerned. 11 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilman Johnson: The Gary Brown situation. Is that a convenience store or is that a gas station? They're saying it's a gas station? It's not a convenience store. + Councilman Boyt: Well I can see where there's a need to describe, well convenience stores with gas pumps and more fuel stations but for somebody to come in and say I want to put a store in here and there aren't going to be any gas pumps around it. Councilman Johnson: Then it's not a convenience store. Councilman Boyt: Why do we need to be in the business of defining what that's got to be? Councilman Johnson: It's a retail business. Councilman Boyt: Well it's only when gas pumps cane into play that it raises my interest level in terms of the concern. As long as I'm kind of interruping Jay here on these definitions. The other thing that escapes me is 400 square feet. I notice that that happens to aim specifically at I think the Standard station proposal but I think it's SuperAmerica that came in, I believe, with same sort of a definition that had to do with number of items. It seems to me that the difference between a convenience store and gas pumps and just a service station that has a few items is the number of items they have. Not how big they are. Councilman Johnson: By the type of iters too. Councilman Boyt: I don't want to encourage some place to carne up with a 395 square foot mini-convenience store. Sell a few videos. Sell a little of this. Sell a little of that. I'm afraid by our definition that's what we encourage. I'd much rather see us say maybe we do a little quick study and see what's the typical number of items sold in a pure service station if we can find any of those animals left. Councilman Johnson: I don't think it has to be a pure service station because I think what they're saying in here, limited amount of related goods. Things that motorists look for. Not very many motorists are looking for video tape rentals. That's not samething that a gas station should be involved in. How do you state something like that? Groceries but snacks, whatever. Chips and dips. Councilwoman Dimler: I don't think we want to get into telling the businesses what they can carry in their stores. Mayor Chmiel: No. I don't think that's our place to dictate that. Councilman Johnson: But what we're saying is, define the difference between a gas station and a convenience store. And what the differnce between a gas station and convenience is what they sell. A gas station services motorists. Councilwoman Dimler: But my point is, we're not going to tell than they can't have videos if that's what they desire. Do you understand what I'm saying? We're not going to sit here and regulate what each one can have and sell. 12 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilman Johnson: It'd have to be kind of in general but yeah. Councilwoman Dimler : I think we're getting way too restrictive. Councilman Boyt: It canes back to the, I think the point is, do we want to say that we want to control the number of convenience stores with gas pumps? If we do, then we need to keep working on this and if we don't, the majority doesn't, then let's stop using consultant time and get onto something else. Councilwoman Dimler: Like you said, if you don't have gas pumps, you may not have convenience stores either because a developer's not going to cane in here if it's not possible. Councilman Boyt: If you were talking about the area that's right around us here... Councilwoman Dimler: No I'm not. I'm talking about future. Out west. Councilman Boyt: But if you're talking about somewhere that's undeveloped, chances are no matter what density that we set up, we're not going to keep them frau building them west of here because there aren't any. Councilwoman Dimler: We can't if you're doing it by zoning though. You don't just zone it for that. Councilman Boyt: Maybe there needs to be an interplay between concentration and zoning so that we do both. We set up the zones we want it in and we set up the number that seems to make sense in a given area. Councilwoman Dimler: Are we wise enough to do that? Councilman Johnson: We're supposed to be. That's our job. If we're not, then we just say okay no rules. Let's all go for it. Councilwoman Dimler: We have general rules but... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I think we're going longer than I anticipated going on this particular subject. I thikn what we have to cane up with is a conclusion. Are we going to send this back to Planning Commission with a suggested recommendations or are you going to say what we have here is good enough? Councilman Johnson: What I would like to see is that the definitions are okay with me. I think we need the definitions. We need gas stations added. I have no problem with the permitted business highway and conditional business general. Leave everything else alone and refer back to Planning Catmission the density issue. Mayor Chmiel: Distances. Councilman Johnson: Yes, distances. A distance frau residential should be referred back to Planning Commission for recommendation on how far a gas pump, whether it's a gas station, automotive service station or convenience store with gas pump but a motor vehicle fuel dispensing facility, how fax that is from a residential zoning. That's the action I would take with this at this time. 13 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Whether that means to table it tonight entirely or go with the defintions at this time and go ahead, pass the definitions and table the rest. Refer it back. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, what's the pleasure of the Council? Do I hear a motion? Councilman Boyt: I would make a motion that we refer it back to the Planning Commission to propose a means of controlling the concentration of convenience stores with gas pumps. Councilman Johnson: Also, would you want them to provide a distance from residential to motor vehicle fuel? Councilman Boyt: Well that's certainly one method of handling it. Mayor Chmiel: Yes, I think that should be under the BN district. A definite one. Councilman Johnson: Well any of thein. Mayor Chmiel: I'm more concerned with business neighborhood with adjacent residential development too. Councilman Johnson: Yeah but CBD also has an adjacent residential. BG has adjacent residential. IOP has adjacent residential. Mayor Chmiel: I guess it does too doesn't it? So they all have. Councilman Workman: The BG isn't going to get anymore. Councilman Johnson: Yeah all they've got is the R-12 in both. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I think that's something that should be looked at too is those distances in each of those districts. Councilman Boyt: Is there a second for that? Mayor Chmiel: I'm going to call for the question. Councilman Johnson: I'll second it then. Councilman Workman: Can you reiterate your motion? Councilman Boyt: The motion was that we refer this back to the Planning Commission with the request that they come up with same proposals for limiting the concentration of convenience stores with gas pumps. Mayor Chmiel: In addition, is there a friendly amendment to that with the distances? Councilman Boyt: Yeah, I don't mean to exclude that. Mayor Chmiel: As one part of it is what you're saying? 14 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Councilman Boyt: Yeah, that's just one way to do it and if you'd like to know what some other ways are. Councilman Johnson: I personally think that no matter what they do, that should be part of it. I think that's pretty plain frau our Minutes that several of us think that way. Mayor Chmiel: Do you have direction? Mark Koegler: One final clarification. When you speak of concentration, you're talking about what I'll call kind of a microscale which is the intersection level that we talked about but you're also talking more macroscaled, talking about neighborhoods. Central Business District. The City as a whole. Is that an accurate? Councilman Boyt: Well I'm not particularly concerned about the City as a whole. I have no way of projecting what that might look like. I'm just saying that the problem that+ I see is that with 5 of then within a mile, I don't think that's the way we want the City to develop. I see pressure to see it developed that way by people who are proposing any kind of shopping center so what I'm looking for is same insight into how we can control that. Is that the sense of the rest of you? Or at least the people who plan to vote for this? Councilman Johnson: Plus the concern of the distance, which is one method of it but even if you don't do it. Even if they say they came back, I still like the distance part. Councilman Boyt: Well if that needs to be part of the motion, I'm alright with that. I just think it's the general sense of what we've been saying. Mayor Chmiel : Mark, does that make sense? Mark Koegler: Yes. I think it's clear and the Minutes certainly should reflect that clearly for the Commission so we'll take a shot at it and bring it back to you. Councilman Workman: I think as one added point, Burnsville, and I know I have family and friends that live in Burnsville and they have what we call a strip mall on every corner. I don't know that they even have a downtown. We're trying to build a downtown and by encouraging even strip malls, and if I own property where a strip mall can go up, maybe all the power to me but if we're encouraging a lot of mini downtowns in areas away frau downtown, it defeats the purpose of what we've maybe frustrating ourselves through all along with the ideal of a downtown. TH 5 and TH 41, there's going to maybe be one there. I don't think anybody really cares to have 4 there and that's another philosophical question. So somehow we've got to keep then in an area or along a busy area. I think that's my point. In keeping then away frau neighborhoods and where they conflict and I know near a neighborhood iswhereyou can make money but that's my only point and I guess I'd agree with moving it onto the Planning Commission with those recommendations. Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to refer the Zoning Ordinance Amendment modifying zoning restrictions and locations for convenience stores, 15 City Council Meeting - September 13, 1989 Gas Stations, and Automotive Service Stations back to the Planning Commission with the request that they cane up with some proposals for limiting the concentration of convenience stores with gas pumps taking into consideration a distance criteria. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Boyt: Maybe while they're doing that, we can see if Jim has any questions since he's going to be on the Planning Commission dealing with it of the thing we just did. Mayor Chmiel: Jim, do you have any questions in relationship to the direction we're trying to give back to Planning Commission in relationship to the last discussion that we had? Jim Wildermuth: You're talking about density... Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Jim Wildermuth: No. APPROVAL OF NEAR MOUNTIAN PUD AMENDMENT. Jo Ann Olsen: Just as a brief introduction, the applicant with the Near Mountain PUD is proposing an amendment to the PUD to replace 114 condominium units with 45 single family lots. The outlot is currently located on the westerly edge of Trapper's Pass at Near Mountain. They. . .north of Lotus Lake along Pleasant View and Iroquois. This plan shows the proposed amendment with the single family lots. The Planning Commission reviewed the PUD amendment and recommended approval to allow the single family lots to replace the condominium units. The major issues with what staff pointed out first was whether or not this still met the intent of the PUD. Since the PUD was first approved, a lot of amendments have been approved that have removed the higher density lots and replaced then with single families. Again, the Planning Commission felt that it was an appropriate use and recommended approval. One of the major concerns for discussion was whether or not Iroquois should be, with the outlot, should be opened up for a street connection to allow a secondary access. This is on a long cul-de-sac. It is very steep. heavily vegetated. There is also 10% slope coming up through Trapper's Pass with retaining walls on either side. Staff is concerned that it would be very easy for that one...closed off there would be no way to access the site. The handout I just passed out was from the engineering department that is still pushing and in staff we agreed that this should be opened up as a street connection to allow that emergency access at all times and a secondary access. The Planning Commission did not agree that it should be opened up. They felt it should be provided as an emergency access with a break away barrier or however it was determined through staff that that would be the most appropriate way to not allow traffic, normal traffic to use it.. . So that is one of the major items that we still are pushing that. That Iroquois would be opened up as a full street connection. Another iter was that the Park and Rec would like to have at least 4 to 4 1/2 acres of parkland provided to be used most likely as passive parkland. They are looking at the lots in this location. Other than that. .. Do you want them to do the slides now? 16 I 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner . DATE: September 7, 1989 SUBJ: Ordinance Amendment - Convenience Stores On August 14, 1989, the City Council tabled action on this item to send it back to the Planning Commission for further review. It was felt that the proposed changes on regulations of convenience stores did not go as far as the City Council wanted. Mark Koegler will be present at the September 11, 1989, City Council meeting to provide further background and explanation of the proposed changes. Also, all of the reports and minutes of the Planning Commission review have been attached. Staff feels that the direction of the City Council had been presented to the Planning Commission, but after closer review both the Planning Commission and staff felt that the proposed changes were the appropriate amendments to the Zoning ordinance. RIDATION If the City Council still feels the recommended changes are not appropriate, staff will take it back to the Planning Commission. Manager's Comments: I erred in my review of this item in August. The only enclosures were the technical ordinance amendments. The amendments have no meaning unless placed in context with the entire ordinance nor do they explain "why" they are being recommended. This item is being resubmitted to the Council. I would suggest starting with Mark Koegler's memorandum of June 12, 1989. I believe that this report (attachments behind such) provides a clearer picture of the alternatives con- sidered by the Planning Ccuadssion, the debate of such, and the basis of their recommendation. If the objectives of the Planning Commission are understood, then developing an ordinance becomes a technical function of the attorney. Unfortunately, we asked the Council to approve the technical document without making sure that the general objectives were acceptable. Mark Koegler will be present Monday evening to discuss his report of June 12, 1989. Dim (9-11-89) �r City Council Meeting - August 14, 1989 �;' ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MODIFYING ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND LOCATIONS FOR CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATIONS. Jo Ann Olsen: This one has been in front of the Planning Commission several times. It started with the moratorium on the convenience stores with gas preps and the Planning Commission, as I stated, reviewed it-several times to see if they should limit the number of convenience stores with gas stations or limit where they can be located. After discussion it was determined that we should just zone, go through the ordinance and sec where they are the correct zone and they went through it that way. So then ordinance inrmitted. ff front s of you, the really only big change is that there's some different definitions of convenience store with gas pumas, convenience stores and then motor fuel stations. We removed convenience stores with gas pumps as a conditional use in the CBD district. We didn't feel that was appropriate in that district. Other than that we're recommending approval of the ordinance amendment. I can answer questions. Mayor Chmiel: Is this giving us everything that we were looking for basically? I don't think so. Jo Ann Olsen: Originally I think it was looking at limiting the number of convenience stores with gas pumps. Like you could have 4, one on each corner of an intersection. Things like that. I think that was one of the intents of the moratorium but again, as it went through the whole process, I think at the Planning Commission level it was determined that that wasn't the way to do it. We can table it and go back and even bring it back to the Planning Commission if that's the intent of the Council and say, go through it again. Mayor Chmiel: I guess you've basically got some of my concerns to go back to doing it. Bill? Councilman Boyt: I'd like to comment on this as part of the Council when this was put into place. I didn't read, it wasn't easy to obtain, or easy enough to obtain all the background on how the Council reached this conclusion but there's a couple things that stand out. They completely missed the direction that I understood the previous Council to be pointing them in which was we sensed that there are too many convenience stores with gas pumps and we want to know what's the best way to control them. Not whether or not we should control them. What's the best way to control them and they completely this. When they missed it, their definitions don't ma e anysense. Conveniencefstores with gas pimps and motor fuel station. They went toreat a prently define then but by where they're zoned, it makes absolutely no differencefort whatto you call them because we don't regulate them any differently from one another. I would say that the only thing that they did was they removed convenience stores with gas pumps from the central busing right over here would no longer be built if .t ss district which means the one n ordinance. I don't know if that's the best answer to this s coming �thinger buthIsknow it doesn' t answer the question that I understood the previous Council to be asking. I kind of .woadel why we went to all this trouble if this is the conclusion that we're going to come to so I would like to tedirect staff to come up with what communities are doing to control these. I don't want us, if we can help it, to have situations that we now see with gas stations where you can go into communities and see corners, busy corners that have, used to have 2 or 3 gas stations and they've now got maybe 1 and they've got 2 buildings empty that 24 city Council Meeting - August 14, 1989 there isn't a great use for because the gas station is sort of a unique situation. I don't think the market's very good about locating these things. Everybody seams to want one and I don't think it's in the best interest of the City so I'd like to see us refer this back to staff. Mayor Chmiel: I would second that. Councilman Workman: I would still, it's tough to make heads or tails of the report but I would still maintain that the best way to control than is the free market system in some way, shape or form. That's tough to say because I don't think I want one of these on every corner as much as you do but it's a very basic idea that says a lot. So when we get, I know when I was sitting out there when you guys approved this, and the ensuing debate, that that was one of the questions. It's a much larger argument when you bring that into it. Councilman Boyt: Which is? Councilman Workman: The free market system in itself being, you let the market decide what's going to came where basically. Councilman Boyt: We don't let the market decide where we're going to put contractor's yards. Councilman Workman: Well maybe we ought to. I think I've been in that debate too. I've said before, we should allow people to do business and stay out of it 71 as much as we can without trying to over burden and regulate and that's my piece. But I would like to table this also. Councilwoman Dimler: I'm wondering if after that if there's a need to look into what other communities are doing to control this if indeed we don't want to control it. I guess I'd go along with the free enterprise system too and ask myself do we want to control it or will the market not control itself? Mayor Chniel: Control is something that I don't like to ever have control of anything. I just feel the direction that was given at the time was differently as you indicated and I think it should go back and have that discussion and table it at this time. Councilwoman Dimler: I guess when he said what the intent of the previous Council was, I was surprised. Just to see what other communities are doing to control this and how are we going to control this. I would no longer be in favor of doing anything so for that reason yes, table. Councilman Johnson: Well I like Section 1. After that I think they lost the point. I do believe we need to define it. I'm not exactly sure that would be my total definition. Convenience stores do a lot of other things rather than perishable goods. I don't consider diapers and stuff like that as perishable goods but it goes a long ways toward saying what is a convenience store which right now it really doesn't. We have a teal problem there so Section 1 of this r- I think ;s a good first step but still they missed the point I agree of what do we want to control here. While the free market is a good theory on how to' control it, it doesn't always work too well. You control it by bankruptcy. Councilwoman Dimler: Controls don't always work too well either. 25 C.7 City Council Meeting - August 14, 1989 Councilman Johnson: Controls don't either but I think that's what a zoning ordinance is for. That's why we have a zoning ordinance that's 50-60 or whatever is to have a vision of what the City wants and what the Cits y'sgooingg to be. I'm not sure if very many neighborhoods want, within the neighborhood business district next to them a convenience store with gas pumps. I know if you ask the next door neighbors to any convenience store with gas pumps what they think of it, they would prefer not to have it next door to them. Councilman Workman: I wouldn't be as harsh with a non-compatible use. saying is we should be careful about settingaWhati I'm to come down and there's going precedence. The Legion's going let's to be an SA or something maybe going up there say. Now all the traffic heading towards Minneapolis in the morning might use that instead of Sinclair. Long time business here. would like to protect Sinclair and don't put anythingre could say were, wI'm m getting into trouble.we're there. That's where Non-compatible uses take right behind Brooke's and we've got a problem right there with fumes, etc.. I don't have problems with that. Councilman Johnson: But see, that's what I want them to look at. that we should be looking at saying oh we're trit I don't think our exiti businesses by not doing this. That is not the pointtofptheezon ng ordinance.. . Councilman Workman: I thought there was a little flavor of that in the Amoco situation. Councilman Johnson: Yes. There was a little flavor of that in the Amoco- situation by former members of the Council but that was not my purpose of voting for that. I don't think that was Bill 's purpose. purpose and I don't think that was Clark's purpose. But But I thinkn't say who IDthink who's purpose it might have been. But I don' t think that that flavor, that you heard. .. Councilman Workman: No, I wasn't accusing you Jay. Councilman Johnson: I don't think that was a council wide flavor. Let's put it that way. Mayor Chmiel: There's been a motion to table. Is there a second? Councilwoman Dimler: Second. Councilman Boyt moved, Councilwoman Dimler Zoningseconded to table action on the Ordinance Amendment modifying zoning restrictions and locations for: convenience stores, gas stations and automotive service stations. All voted in favor and the motion carried. REQUEST FOR RFTONSIDERATION OF WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT, KINGS ROAD AND MINNEWASHT'1 PARKWAY, DARYL KIRT. - Daiy1 Kirt: We that the amount of fill � snail arra it will feel that we re putting in is very, very Yimprove the wetland we're putting it on. We just 26 7 -8'/10/1-) Van DorEn Hazard �--Stallings July �,awc.cn•b,On .w.,.nz July 11 , 1989 MEMORANDUM TO : Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Mark Koegler " DATE : July 11 , 1989 SUBJECT : Ordinance Amendment - Convenience Stores The attached ordinance draft is consistent with the discussion of _ convenience stores and gas stations that occurred at the Planning Commission meeting on June 21 , 1989 . One minor change has been made . On the matrix that was in my memorandum dated June 12 , 1989 , convenience stores without gas pumps were listed as being conditional uses in the BN zone . The intention was to list convenience stores without gas pumps as permitted uses in the BN zone . The ordinance draft reflects this change . PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On July 19 , 1989 , the Planning Commission discussed the zoning ordinance amendment and recommended approval . The Commission directed staff to add a definition for convenience store with gas pumps to be included in the amendment. This has been included in the amendment. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached amendment for first reading. 3030 Harbor Lane North BIdg.II, Suite 104 Minneapolis, MN. 55447-2175 612/553-1950 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSSEN CITY CODE BY ADDING PROVISIONS CONCERNING CONVENIENCE STORES AND MOTOR FUEL STATIONS The City Council of Chanhassen ordains as follows : Section 1 . Chapter 20 , Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City _ Code is amended by adding the following definitions : "Convenience Store" - Convenience store means a retail establishment which generally sells a limited range of food products , non-prescription drugs , candy and other perishable goods. This includes soda and similar beverage dispensing and food products which can be heated and/or prepared onsie, and has over 400 square feet of floor area for retailing of non-automotive goods . "Convenience Store with Gas Pumps" - Convenience store means a retail establishment which generally sells gasoline from pump islands and a limited range of food products , non- prescription drugs , candy and other perishable goods . This includes soda and similar beverage dispensing and food pro- ducts which can be heated and/or prepared onsie, and has over 400 square feet of floor area for retailing of non-automotive goods . Motor Fuel Station" - Motor fuel station means a retail place of business engaged in the sale of motor vehicle fuels , but - may also engage in supplying a limited amount of related goods . In no case shall the space for the retailing of related goods exceed 400 square feet. No services shall be - provided for maintenance or repair of motor vehicles , except for the provision of window washing, air and oil dispensing services . Section 2 . Chapter 20, Article XVI ( "BN" Neighborhood Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner : Section 20-694. Conditional Uses - Omit item ( 2 ) Automotive service stations . Section 3. Chapter 20 , Article XVII ( "BH" Highway and Business Services District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner: - Section 20-712. Permitted Uses - Add item ( 20 ) Motor fuel stations . Section 4 . Chapter 20 , Article XVIII ( "CBD" Central Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner : Section 20-734 . Conditional Uses - Omit item ( 4 ) Convenience store with gas pumps . Section 5 . Chapter 20 , Article XIX ( "BG" General Business District) of the Chanhassen City Code is modified in the following manner : Section 20-752 . Permitted Uses - Omit items ( 3 ) Convenience stores with or without gas pumps and ( 27 ) Automobile service stations . Section 20-752 . Permitted Uses - Add item ( 30 ) Convenience stores without gas pumps . Section 20-754 . Conditional Uses - Add items ( 6 ) Convenience stores with gas pumps, ( 7 ) Automotive service stations and ( 8 ) Motor fuel stations . Section 6 . Chapter 20 , Article XX ( "BF" Fringe Business District) of the Chanhassen City. Code is modified in the following manner : Section 20-773 . Conditional Uses - Omit item ( 1 ) Automotive service stations without car washes . Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen this day of , 1989 . CITY OF CAANHASSEN By: Donald J. Chmiel , Mayor ATTEST: Don Ashworth, City Manager Planning Commission Meeting July 19, 1989 - Page 7 C 3. A deed restriction will be recorded against each lot abutting the wetland stating that the lot contains a protected wetland with a 75 foot setback from elevation 927. _ 4. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit . All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MODIFYING ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND LOCATIONS FOR CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS AND AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATIONS. Mark Koegler presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order. Ellson moved , Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed . Conrad : Tim, we' ll start at your end . Anything? Erhart: No. Not on this one. We discussed this thoroughly- the last time. Earnings: The only thing I thought about when I read this and it may be — real simple. If you have a place selling gasoline, and they have more than 400 feet, square feet of foor area for retailing non-automotive goods, what is it? Koegler : Can you repeat that? Earnings: If you have a place that ' s selling gasoline or motor fuels but — it happens to have 405 feet of floor area for retailing of non-automotive goods , what is it? Does that help? Conrad: It can't be. Ellson: That ' s your definition of convenience store. Wildermuth: Convenience store with gas pumps . Koegler : You' re saying it would kick it above the threshhold of the motor— fuel service station in terms of the retail square footage. That would kick it into the convenience store. Earnings: Now it' s a convenience store? Ellson: Right. 0 Koegler : Convenience store picks up where that one leaves off with over Planning Commission Meeting July 19, 1989 - Page 8 400. Emmings : Okay, but the definition of convenience store doesn ' t include an ability to sell motor fuels . Or doesn' t include the sale of motor fuels . Koegler : There ' s two convenience stores . We have one with gas pumps and one without . Emmings : Okay, and do we already have a definition? Koegler : Yes . Along with . Emmings : Alright . That was the case that popped into my mind and if it' s accounted for , that ' s fine . Koegler : It probably would have been clearer if we would have repeated that in the previous report. Emmings : And I didn ' t look for it . Ellson : I like it . I wanted to make these things and I like the way we' re going so that ' s fine . Wildermuth : I really don ' t have any comments other than I think they 4 probably all should be conditional uses . Permitted and conditional accomodation probably all should be reviewed on a conditional use basis . Headla: No comment . Conrad : My only comment , under convenience store definition . Middle of that paragraph it says this includes soda and similar beverage dispensing and food products which can be heated and/or prepared on site . Prepared . We do want the word prepared in there? Olsen : It ' s in microwaves . Emmings : Some of they do it now. I 'm aware of some that do . Conrad : Prepare? Not heat . Emmings : No , I 'm talking about . . . Ellson: You mean like a bakery in there? Emmings : No , they put together pizzas . I don ' t know to what extent they do it . Conrad : That doesn ' t seem like a convenience store to me . Convenience store doesn' t prepare food. That' s a restaurant . Emmings : Yes , they'd sell a frozen pizza but now make it on site . Conrad : They can heat up what they' re selling to the public. I 'd buy Planning Commission Meeting July 19, 1989 - Page 9 that but to prepare it throws it into a different category in my mind . Does it matter? And I couldn' t take it any further than that but prepared bothered me. Koegler : That definition is a carry over from some of the discussions that you had with Steve when he was here. I don't know what transpired at that time. I don' t know if there was supposed to be a distinction between heated and prepared. I think the intent of the ordinance from at least my— perspective is clearly that it' s supposed to be pre-packaged products that maybe you zap in the microwave for 30 seconds and you go out the door . It' s not supposed to be a food preparation area because that gets you into— health requirements and everything else that these would not begin to meet. You have the venting requirements and everything else under building code that you have with kitchens. I don' t think there's any damage if it's troublesome to strike the word and/or prepared . Conrad: Is Tom Thumb a convenience store? Ellson: Yes . Conrad : Which we have down on TH. 101 and they have a little deli in there. I don't know what they do to get the food to their little deli but it ' s. . . Koegler : They're doing mote and more of that . . — Conrad: There's a lot of business there. I guess you know, it didn' t seem in sync but I 'm not anti that word . I just bring it up and if anybody is bothered by it, we could strike it but on the other hand, just thinking about Tom Thumb. They have a little- deli in it and it' s not bad . I think it is a convenience to their surrounding neighbors and doesn' t bother me. — Ellson: What is your biggest concern? That someone will have a prepared thing and come and call it convenience store? I guess what's the worst — that could happen? Conrad : No, it just took a convenience store another step further into a_ restaurant category which means more traffic which means some other things but I think when I think about the alternatives of striking it, and maybe some assets that it brings to the neighborhood, I prefer to keep it in there. — Ellson: He didn' t mean something that has to be warmed to eat and prepared could be either. Like you said , maybe a put your own sundae or something would be prepared but it wouldn' t be heated so I think it should be in there. Emmings: I supposed being under 400 square feet is going to provide some — limitations too where they' re going to want to be displaying sp much merchandise in a fairly small space that they' re not going to "want to devote much to preparation. I don't know. — Planning Commission Meeting July 19 , 1989 - Page 10 • Conrad : I think the only thing I see Steve is , because of convenience store and where we put them. . . Ellson : He said anything over 400 feet . Conrad : Yes , it would be over 400 feet . I 'm not sure I see a down side . In a business neighborhood , traffic is what we ' re worried about and as long as we can ' t sit down, I guess I 'm not totally bothered after going - through the logic myself. Anyone want to make a motion? I don ' t think we' re talking about any wording changes to what is there. Emmings : I ' ve got a question . Elison: We don ' t have any guidelines . . . Olsen : We ' re looking for it too . Emmings : What , the definition? Olsen : Yes . Emmings : Of convenience store with gas pumps , yes . It ' s not in there . Olsen : Well we don' t even have convenience store but I know that we' ve. . . Emmings : No , it ' s not in this draft of the ordinance unless it ' s been added since. Olsen : That ' s why I 'm thinking it must have been an amendment . Emmings : I feel like I remember seeing it but it ' s not in the Code . Olsen : Whenever we have anything in there , we always define it . Maybe it never was defined. I know that it was . Emmings : What are you looking from us on this? Do we have to make a motion recommending approval? Olsen : This is a public hearing . This is the real thing . Emmings : Do we need to close the public hearing? Conrad : It has been closed . We just need a motion . Emmings : I ' ll move that we recommend to the City Council that they — approve the ordinance as presented to us by staff and I 'd also ask that staff check between now and the time it ' s presented to City Council to make sure that we have a definition for convenience store with gas pumps that corresponds to the other definitions we' ve been presented• with tonight so that they all coordinate together . Wildermuth: Second . Planning Commission Meeting July 19, 1989 - Page 11 Koegler : My only comment would be that convenience store with gas pumps , I think the assumption has been that that ' s self explanatory. That the only differential between the two is the existence of pump islands. If we need to clarify that by adding another one that essentially says the— same thing except this one has pump islands, we can do that but I think the assumption, the way the ordinance is drafted right now is that convenience store and convenience store with gas pumps are the same thing _ as far as the building goes. The only differential is the sale of petroleum outside . Emmings : Maybe you just want to add a sentence under convenience store that would say that if they sell motor fuels too, then it will be designated as a convenience store with gas pumps or something like that . I think it should be defined in there someplace. Emmings moved , Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 20 adding provisions concerning convenience stores and motor fuel stations as presented by staff and directing staff to look into the definition of convenience store with gas pumps between now and the time it reaches City Council . All voted in favor and the motion carried . PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE : A. SECTION 20-3 REGARDING DEFINITION OF DENSITY. B. SECTION 20-409 REGARDING WETLAND SETBACKS (200 ' ) FOR COMMERCIAL DOG KENNELS AND STABLES. C. SECTION 20-441 REGARDING ENFORCEMENT OF THE WETLAND SECTION. D. SECTION 20-1021 REGARDING SWIMMING POOL FENCES. Conrad : Jo Ann , there aren ' t many people in attendance . Do you have a staff report that you want to go through? Olsen : No , we can just go through each one . . . Conrad : Anything different than the last time that we talked about it? Yes , maybe we should go through it . I think for procedural purposes , we' ll open up the public hearing for any comments to the amendments proposed to our zoning ordinance for Section 20-3, 20-409 , 20-441 and 20-1021. Are there any comments? If not , is there a motion to close the public hearing? Erhart moved , Emmings seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Conrad : Let ' s go through them one by one . Any comments on 20-3 , definition of density? Any comments? How about 20-409? Wetland setbacks r Van DorEn Hazard Stallings Architects•Enpneers•Planners MEMORANDUM TO : Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Mark Koegler DATE : June 12 , 1989 SUBJECT: Convenience Stores Chanhassen ' s Interim Ordinance Temporarily Prohibiting Issuance of Land Use Approvals and Building Permits for Convenience Stores with Gas Pumps expires on July 1 , 1989 . When the moratorium was enacted , it was with the clear understanding that the City would review the issue for the six month duration of the moratorium term. Since December , the planning department has prepared a number of discussion reports for review by the Planning Commission . With the ending date of the moratorium approaching , it is now time to finalize all discussion and either leave the present ordinance intact or suggest specific modifications to' the City Council . The current zoning code allows for convenience stores and auto = service stations in the following districts: CBD BH BG BF BN Convenience Stores w/o Gas Pumps C P P X P Convenience Stores w/ Gas Pumps C P P X C Auto Service Station X P P C C P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use X = Not Allowed Use A report prepared by Steve Hanson dated March 9 , 1989 contained two proposed definitions , one for a convenience store and the other for a gas station . The convenience store description defines a use similar to Brook ' s Convenience . The gas station description defines a use such as the proposed Amoco Food Shop . Neither of these are the same use that is currently defined in the zoning code as Automotive Service Station . 3030 Harbor Lane North BIdg.II, Suite 104 Minneapolis, MN. 55447-2175 612/553-1950 Convenience Stores June 12 , 1989 Page 2 For comparison , the three definitions are as follows : CONVENIENCE STORE (PROPOSED — Convenience store means a retail establishment which generally sells a limited range of food products , non-prescription drugs , candy , and other perishable goods . This includes soda and similar beverage dispensing and food products which can be heated and /or prepared on site, and has over 400 square feet of floor area for retailing of non-automotive goods . GAS STATION ( PROPOSED) Gas station means a retail place of business engaged in the sale of motor vehicle fuels , but may also engage in supplying a limited amount of related goods . In no case shall the space for the retailing be provided for maintenance or repair of motor vehicles , except for the provision of window washing , air and oil dispensing services . AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION_ (EXISTING) Automotive service station means a retail place of business engaged primarily in the sale of motor vehicle fuels , but also may be engaged in supplying goods and services generally required in the operation and maintenance of vehicles . These may include sale of petroleum products , sale and servicing of tires , batteries , _ automotive accessories , and replacement _ items , washing and lubrication services and the performance of minor automotive maintenance and repair. The above statements constitute a definitional approach to regulating convenience stores and auto service stations . Other _ approaches have also been considered in the review of this issue. One of these is the establishment of minimum distances between convenience stores with gasoline sales ie . a one mile separation between businesses . Application of this technique seems particularly arbitrary since within a one mile radius , the road system and land use pattern may very easily be able to support more than one such facility. This technique was applied to the contractors yard issue. As all of the contractors yard sites filled up , it became difficult to deny what may have been appropriate sites simply because they were within one mile of another similar use. Another approach in defining this issue to impose primary source of revenue requirements . A number of zoning ordinance regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages by requiring that facilities maintain at least 50% of their revenue in food sales . This same approach could be applied to convenience stores by requiring that - Convenience Stores June 12 , 1989 Page 3 the gasoline portion of the business be incidental to the sale of - grocery products . This could be accomplished with a maximum 30% , 40% or 50% gasoline sale requirement . This approach is not , however , recommended because it is much too cumbersome to continually monitor a business to determine the mix of gross product sales . Having reviewed alternative approaches , the definitional approach seems to be the most equitable method of addressing this issue . The three definitions seem to adequately cover the existing composition of the petroleum sales industry , either by convenience stores (Brooks ) , by gas stations (Amoco Food Shop ) or by automotive service station ( traditional Amoco stations ) . If this method is accepted , the next charge is to define appropriate use categories . Uses to be considered include the three that are referenced above and convenience stores that do not include fuel sales . Identifying appropriate locations for these four uses requires a review of the purpose of each of the commercial zoning districts . The intent of the CBD , Central Business District is to provide for downtown business development. Within a downtown area , most communities emphasize maximized land uses that generate employment _ opportunities while providing a mixture of goods and services . Within this area, it could be argued that convenience stores without gas sales are appropriate because they are consistent with other walk- in retail businesses . They really represent the old fashioned sundries stores that used to be part of most urban areas . Convenience stores with gas pumps , gas stations and automotive service stations may be inappropriate because they devote larger _ amounts of land to automobiles rather than maximizing areas for building construction which accommodates job generation and the availability of consumer goods . The BH , Highway and Business Service District is defined as the area that provides highway oriented commercial development . All four uses appeal to highway oriented commercial clientele . The BG , General Business District provides for downtown fringe commercial development . This area is identified to accommodate some of the more land intensive commercial uses that appeal to CBD area customers . All four types of convenience/gas station uses have the potential to fit in this area. The BF , Business Fringe District is identified as an area appropriate for limited commercial uses without urban services . The thrust of the comprehensive plan is that the BF zone is limited to the grandfathering of the uses that now exist. If this policy is to be continued , it is hard to argue that any of the four uses Convenience Stores June 12 , 1989 Page 4 have a place in the BF zone . Neighborhood business uses , BN , are intended to provide for limited — low intensity neighborhood retail and service establishments . In a neighborhood setting , either a pure convenience store or a convenience store with gas pumps may supply valuable and needed — services to surrounding residential areas . Gas stations which involve the sale of large quantities of fuel and automotive service station which involve the repair of vehicles do not seem consistent with residential neighborhood areas . Commercial developments in the BN zone have to be responsive to the existing and planned pattern of residential development . This — means that each commercial proposal needs to be reviewed on a site specific basis . The method to accomplish this is the conditional use permit. Utilizing this procedure , each proposed use can be required to meet conditions that are tied to the corresponding characteristics of the proposal . For example , commercial facilities surrounded by single family residential uses may have more restrictive hours of operation , signage controls , delivery hours and related items than would a more remote BN site . In addition to specific conditions , all convenience stores with gas pumps must comply with Section 20-288 of the Chanhassen City Code — which identifies a set of standard requirements . The comments portrayed in the previous paragraphs establish a use _ matrix that differs from the present ordinance . Specifically , the following mixture of uses results : CBD BH BG BF BN — Convenience Stores w/o Gas Pumps P P P X C Convenience Stores w/ Gas Pumps X P C X C Gas Stations X P C X X Automotive Service Stations X P C X X P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use X = Not Allowed Use RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission prepare an ordinance modification to accommodate convenience stores , convenience stores with gas pumps , gas stations and automotive service stations in a manner consistent with the matrix identified above . CITY OF tii:11)1irrCHANBASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning 6, 41 DATE : November 6 , 1989 SUBJ : Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Pertaining to Interim Use Permits PROPOSAL There have been a series of discussions in the past concerning the potential of providing a mechanism to allow for special con- ditional use permits on a temporary basis . If properly designed, this type of ordinance provision would give the city flexibility to accommodate and regulate uses that may otherwise be prohi- bited, but which would really not pose any problems or harm to their surroundings if allowed on a temporary basis . The most recent example of such a use is the proposal to place an Assembly of God Church in an office space in the Frontier Building. The City Council was uncomfortable allowing it under a site plan review as had been proposed since it could have a potential for allowing churches to purchase sites within the Central Business District, thus removing them from the tax rolls . The Council was aware that an ordinance amendment to allow for temporary con- ditional uses was in the process of being considered. They believed that this would provide the best mechanism for allowing the church to locate on the site while protecting the City' s long term goals . Last summer the City Attorney drafted an `Interim Use" ordinance to respond to the issue. It was briefly reviewed by the Planning Commission but not acted upon. The ordinance (copy attached) was structured to create a new class of interim uses where a use could be allowed on a temporary basis . The ordinance is struc- tured to create a separate class of uses, i .e. permitted, accessory conditional and interim and and is limited to only those specific uses that are outlined in a district by district basis . Staff discussed an alternative approach with the City Attorney. This would have involved the use of conditional use permits . Rather than list specific uses , it would have allowed the City Council to permit any use on a temporary basis subject to its Interim Use Permits _ November 6 , 1989 Page 2 meeting a series of conditions. The City Attorney expressed con- cerns that while this type of unstructured ordinance is more flexible, it could undermine the effectiveness and consistency of the balance of the ordinance. In addition, state statutes already incorporate provisions for creating interim uses . Based upon this discussion, we are resubmitting the draft of the interim use ordinance for your review. We are satisfied that it achieves the goal of creating a provision for dealing with interim or temporary uses. What we do not believe is that the list of permitted uses is as comprehensive as it could be. It has been our experience that it is difficult to anticipate the variety of temporary uses that the City may wish to regulate under this ordinance. For example, you may wish to add uses such as promotional carnivals in shopping centers , temporary nursery sales, etc. If the Planning Commission is aware of additional uses that should be incorporated at the outset, this will cause no problem. If in the future it is apparent that additional uses should be included to deal with situations that may arise , the ordinance could always be amended. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon the foregoing, staff recommends that the attached ordinance revisions be adopted. LAW OFFICES GRANNIS, GRANNIS, FARRELL & KNUTSON DAVID L. GRANNIS - 1874-1961 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TELECOPIER: DAVID L. GRANNIS.JR. - 1910-1980 POST OFFICE Box 57 (612)455-2359 403 NORWEST BANK BUILDING ELLIOTT B. KNETSCH VANCE B. GRANNIS MICHAEL J. MAYER VANCE B. GRANNIS.JR.* 161 NORTH CONCORD EXCHANGE PATRICK A. FARRELL SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075 DAVID L. GRANNIS. IIl ROGER N. KNUTSON TELEPHONE (612)455-1661 DAVID L. HARMEYER *Am AoirrnnTo July 19, 1989 PIACTICF IN WISCU.YSIN Ms. Jo Ann Olsen Chanhassen City Hall 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RE: Interim Use Dear Jo Ann: Enclosed is a redraft of the interim use ordinance. The only change of substance is the addition of a purpose and intent section. This is a new zoning tool and I suggest some caution in using it. Rather than allowing applications for virtually • anything, I suggest treating them like permitted, conditional, and accessory uses, in that each such use must be listed. Very truly yours, GR S, GRANNI RRELL & NUTS Roger son RNK:srn Enclosure UL 2 0 1989 — OF CHANHAS�L.• CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE BY ADDING PROVISIONS CONCERNING INTERIM USE PERMITS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS : Section 1. Chapter 20, Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding a definition of "interim use" to read as follows: "interim use" means a temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Section 2 . Chapter 20 , Article IV of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Division 5 to read as follows: Division 5. Interim Use Permits. Section 20-381. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of allowing interim uses is (1) to allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is obtained or while the permanent location is under construction, and (2) to allow a use that is presently acceptable but that, with anticipated development will not be acceptable in the future. Section 20-382. Application, Public Hearing, Notice and Procedure. The application, public hearing, public notice and procedure requirements for interim use permits shall be the same as those for amendments as provided in Article II, Division 2 , except that the permit shall be issued on the affirmative vote of a majority of the entire council . Although specific submissions required to complete an application for an interim use permit may vary with the specific use and the district in which it is located, all applications for such permits must include at minimum a site plan that clearly illustrates the following: proposed land use, buildings and functions, circula- tion and parking areas, planting areas and treatment, sign locations and type, lighting, the relationship of the proposed project to neighboring uses, environmental impacts and demand for municipal services. Section 20-383 . General Issuance Standards. The planning commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the council shall issue interim permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: r07/18/89 1. Meets the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in Section 20-232 of the City Code. 2 . Conforms to the zoning regulations. 3 . The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district. 4 . The date of event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. 5. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future; and 6. The user agrees to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for permission of the use. Section 20-384 . Termination. An interim use permit shall terminate on the happening of any of the following events, whichever first occurs: 1. The date stated in the permit; 2 . Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued; 3 . Upon change in the City's zoning regulations which renders the use non-conforming. Section 3. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the following: Section 20-557 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "A-1" District: 1. Mobile homes (compliance with Section 20-905 is not required) . Section 20-576 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "A-2" District: 1. Churches. 2 . Mineral extraction. 3 . Contractor's yards. 4 . Mobile homes (compliance with Section 20-905 is not required) . Section 20-676 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "R-12" District: 1 . Real estate office and model homes. Section 20-696 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "BN" District: 1. Churches. 2 . Outdoor display of merchandise for sale. -2- Section 20-716 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "BH" District: 1. Churches. Section 20-736 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "CBD" District: 1. Churches. 2 . Outdoor display of merchandise for sale. Section 20-756 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "BG" District: 1. Churches. Section 20-775 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "BF" District: 1. Churches. Section 20-816 to read as follows: The following are interim uses in the "IOP" District: 1. Churches. Section 4 . Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by deleting the following Code Sections: 1. Section 20-555 (3) 2 . Section 20-574 (3) 3 . Section 20-574 (6) 4 . Section 20-674 (6) 5. Section 20-694 (4) 6. Section 20-734 (1) 7 . Section 20-903 Section 5. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by amending Section 20-1376 (a) to read as follows: It shall be unlawful for any person to remove, store or excavate rock, sand, gravel , clay, silt or other like material in the city, or to fill or raise the existing surface grades, without receiving an extraction permit for mineral extraction. Such permits may only be issued in the zoning district when mineral extraction is listed as an interim use. Section 6. This Ordinance shall be effective August 1, '1989 , following its passage and publication. -3- ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen this day of , 1989 . ATTEST: Don Ashworth, City Manager/Clerk Donald J. Chmiel , Mayor -4- CITY OF iN lir 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 ' FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO : Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning (;' L DATE : November 6 , 1989 SUBJ: Amendments to Article XXV - Off Street Parking and Loading PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Members of the City Council have asked staff to prepare a zoning ordinance amendment that would increase parking requirements for multi-family residences from one enclosed stall to two. Staff is proposing an ordinance amendment that would accomplish _ the City Council ' s goal . As drafted, two enclosed parking stalls would be required for each multi-family unit except for efficiency and one-bedroom units where only one stall is required. We believe that this standard could be justified based upon actual parking demand. We are further recommending that the enclosed parking be permitted only in areas attached to the residential building or placed underground when the building is larger then 20 units in size ( generally larger apartment or condominium complexes which can provide underground parking) . This is due to our belief that the use of free-standing garages is usually an unattractive approach to meeting the enclosed parking require- ment. While staff was reviewing the parking standard, we noted a series of omissions in the ordinance. The lack of requirements for visitor parking, design standards , requirements that all parking must be provided on site, etc. are making it difficult to ensure that only high quality developments are approved in the City. Therefore, we are proposing a comprehensive redraft of the Parking and Loading Section. As drafted, it would do the following: 1 . Provide general standards including: - prohibition against using required parking for storage of materials or snow Planning Commission November 6 , 1989 Page 2 - guidance as to placement of required parking off-site - review criteria for joint use of parking lots _ - prohibit the use of on-street parking to satisfy parking requirements . 2 . Detailed standards are provided for compact and normal stalls , drive aisles and various parking configurations . The current ordinance states that standards are provided in a Design Handbook which has never been formally adopted. 3 . Clarifies the point that numerical parking standards that are provided are minimums and that the city can require additional parking if deemed necessary by the review of the plan in question. 4 . Provides guidance for calculating parking requirements for mixed use buildings , e .g . , office/warehouse structures . The proposed revisions utilize the parking stall requirements established in the current ordinance . The only change is the standard pertaining to multi-family residential buildings . STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the proposed — amendments to Article XXIV Parking and Loading . ATTACHMENTS 1 . Division 2 , Parking and Loading Standards . ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES , MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE The City Council of the City of Chanhassen Ordains as follows : DIVISION 2 . PARKING AND LOADING. Section 20-1116 . Scope. This division applies to off-street parking and loading. Section 20-1117 . General Standards . a ) Parking and loading shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the following: 1 ) No change of use, tenancy or occupancy of a parcel of land or building, including construction of a new building or an addition to a building, which requires additional parking or loading spaces shall be allowed until such additional parking or loading is approved and furnished. Review may be required under the site and building plan review procedures of Division 6 of this ordinance. 2 ) Required parking and loading areas and the driveways pro- viding access to them shall not be used for storage, display, sales , rental or repair , of motor vehicles or other goods or for the storage of inoperable vehicles of snow. 3 ) Required parking and loading spaces shall be located on the same development site as the use served . On-street parking, if allowed in the vicinity of the site, cannot be used to satisfy parking requirements . The city may approve off-site parking if the city council finds the following: a . reasonable access shall be provided from the off-site parking facilities to the use being served; b. the parking shall be within 400 feet of a building entrance of the use being served; c . the parking area shall be under the same ownership and merged into a single tax parcel as the site served, under public ownership or the use of the parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument, acceptable to the city; d) failure to provide on-site parking shall not encourage parking on the public streets , other pri- vate property or in private driveways or other areas not expressly set aside for such purposes ; and e) the off-site parking shall be maintained until such time as on-site parking is provided or an alternate off-site parking facility is approved by the city as _ meeting the requirements of this ordinance. 4 . Notwithstanding any other provision of this division to the contrary, a land use may provide the required off- street parking area for additional land uses on the same development site if the following conditions are met : a) because of the hours of operation of the respective uses , their sizes and their modes of operation there will be available to each use during its primary hours of operation an amount of parking sufficient to ' - meet the needs of such use; and b) the joint use of the parking facilities shall be pro- tected by a recorded instrument, acceptable to the city. 5. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided in an amount and design adequate to the demand generated by each use. Section 20-1118 . Design of Parking Stalls and Drive Aisles . - a) Parking areas shall be designed in conformance with the following : 1 ) Parking stalls shall have a minimum -paved dimension of eight and one-half feet by 18 feet. Stall and aisle dimensions shall be as noted below for the given angle : Curb Stall Angle Length Length Aisle 45° 12 . 0 ' 18 . 0 ' 13 . 5 ' * 60° 10 . 0 ' 18 . 0 ' 18 . 5 ' * 750 9 . 0 ' 19 . 0 ' 23 ' * 90° 8. 5 ' 18 . 0 ' 26 ' ** Parallel 20 . 0 ' 8 . 0 ' 22 ' * One way aisles only. ** Aisles which are not between two rows of 90° angle parking spaces may be 22 feet wide. *** Dead end aisles must be provided with a 26 ' x 10 ' unencumbered area at the end to facilitate vehicle turning movement. -2- 6 ) All parking areas except those serving one and two family dwellings on local streets shall be designed so that cars shall not be required to back into the street. If deemed necessary for traffic safety, turn-around areas may be required in one and two family dwellings . 7 ) All parking and loading areas , aisles and driveways shall be bordered with raised concrete curbs or equivalent approved by the city. 8 ) All parking, loading and driveway areas shall be surfaced with asphalt, concrete or equivalent material approved by the city. 9 ) All parking stalls shall be marked with painted lines not less than four inches wide in accordance with the approved site and building plan. 10) All parking lots shall provide islands for traffic control as needed. 11 ) All parking areas shall be properly maintained in a neat and serviceable condition. 45 angle * 60 ancle * l5 anglc 9d'on* par_ cwrb It'. -, 1 12' I curi67tn. 110'I Suri'fMe-v 19' I cuv‘ Iirk-y I6.5I - 38 .71 �0 F9777 20 ' le .8{--22--+8r T 9'1' 13.5 _� ones 581 18'51 w-,"ems 644 23' wne 62' 26' w�o-w N _. • cur -fin X9,1 4 /// ----ezmaY \ , ii e, . wn 1 • ifwo-way� _ gone-way ,, t cur{o Dile. an tLymy (fig. z3) b) Up to 25 percent of the total number of required spaces may be for compact cars and have minimum paved dimensions as follows : Angle Curb Length Stall Length 45° 10. 0 ' 16 . 0 ' 60° 8. 5 ' 17. 5 ' 750 8. 0 ' 16. 5 ' 90° 7. 5 ' 16 . 0 ' Parallel 16 . 0 ' 8. 0 ' -3- Compact car parking may be provided if the following con- ditions are met: 1 ) the parking area shall have a total size of at least 20 stalls ; - 2 ) compact car stalls shall be identified by appropriate directional signs consistent with the city sign ordinance. 3 ) compact car stalls shall be distributed throughout the parking area so as to have reasonable proximity to the structure served but shall not have generally perferential , - locations such that their use by non-compact cars will be encouraged; 4 ) the design of compact car areas shall to the maximum feasible extent be such as to discourage their use by non-compact cars ; and 5 ) compact parking stalls shall not be permitted for high turnover parking lots . Section 20-1119 . Computing Requirements . In computing the number of parking spaces required, the following shall govern: 1 ) "Floor space" means the gross floor area of the specific use as defined by Article II . 2 ) Where fractional spaces result, the parking spaces required shall be construed to be the next largest whole number . 3 ) Parking standards for uses not specifically mentioned in this division shall be determined by the city. The fac- tors to be considered in such determination shall include size of building, type of use, number of employees , expected volume and turnover of customer traffic and expected frequency and number of delivery or service vehicles . Section 20-1120 . Yards . On-site parking and loading facili- ties shall not be permitted in the required front yard, side yard - or rear yard. Section 20-1121 . Buffer Fences and Planting Screens . On- site parking and loading areas near or abutting residential districts shall be screened in conformance with the provisions of Article XXV. Section 20-1122 . Access. Parking and loading space shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The number of width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and abnormal traffic hazard. -4- Section 20-1123 . Lighting. All commercial , industrial , and multi-family parking lots shall be lighted. Lighting shall use shielded fixtures and be directed away from the public right-of- way and adjacent residential or agricultural districts . Section 20-1124 . Required Number of On-site Parking Spaces . On-site parking areas of sufficient size to provide parking for patrons , customers , suppliers , visitors and employees shall be provided on the premises of each use. The following standards are minimum criteria. The city may increase the requirements beyond the minimum based upon findings that, due to proposed use and/or design, that additional parking demand is anticipated. The number of required parking spaces shall comply with the following: 1 ) Calculating the number of spaces shall be in accordance with the following: a) if the number of off-street parking spaces results in a fraction, each fraction of one-half or more shall constitute another space; b ) in churches and other places of public assembly in which patrons or spectators occupy benches , pews or other similar seating facilities , each 24 inches of such seating shall be counted as one seat for the purpose of this division ; c ) except in shopping centers or where joint parking arrangements have been approved, if a structure con- = tains two or more uses , each use shall be calculated separately in determining the total off-street parking spaces required; d ) for mixed use buildings , parking requirements shall be determined by the city based on the existing and potential uses of the building. In cases where future potential uses of a building will generate additional parking demand, the city may require a proof of parking place for the difference between minimum parking requirements and the anticipated future demand. e) if warranted by unique characteristics and/or docu- mented parking demand for similar developments, 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 plan must show the location for all minimum required parking spaces in conformance with applicable setback requirements . The city may require installation of the additional parking spaces whenever a need arises . -5- f ) one handicapped parking stall shall be provided for each 50 stalls . Handicapped parking spaces shall be in compliance with the Uniform Building Code and state law; g) the parking requirement for uses not listed in this division may be established by the city based on the characteristics of the use and available information on parking demand for such use. c) The minimum number of required on-site parking spaces for the following uses shall be: 1 ) Assembly or exhibition hall , auditorium, theater or sports arena - One ( 1 ) parking space for each four ( 4 ) - seats , based upon design capacity. 2 ) Auto sales , trailer sailes , marine and boat sales , _ implement sales , garden supply store, building materials sale, auto repair - One ( 1 ) parking space for each five hundred ( 500 ) square feet of floor area. 3 ) Automobile service station - Four ( 4 ) parking spaces , plus two ( 2 ) parking spaced for each service stall ; such parking spaces shall be in addition to parking space required for gas pump areas . 4 ) Bowling Alley - Seven ( 7 ) parking spaces for each bowling lane. 5 ) Churches - One ( 1 ) parking space for each three ( 3 ) seats , based on the design capacity of the main seating area, plus one ( 1 ) space per classroom. 6 ) Dwelling: a . Single Family - Two ( 2 ) parking spaces , both of which must be completely enclosed. No garage shall be converted into living space unless other accep- table on-site parking space is provided. b. Multi-Family - Two ( 2 ) parking spaces both of which - must be completely enclosed in a garage. Additional parking for visitors shall be provided in accordance with the findings of the city. The _ only exception to this requirement is efficiency and one-bedroom units where only one ( 1 ) enclosed stall is required. The City may apply a decreased parking requirement for senior housing projects or - other uses which, by their nature, should generate decreased parking demand. Garage stalls for multi- family buildings containing more than 20 dwellings must be placed underground or attached to the pri- mary structure. 7 ) Financial institution - One ( 1 ) space for each two hundred fifty ( 250 ) square feet of floor space. -6- 8 ) Furniture or appliance store - One ( 1 ) space for each four hundred ( 400) feet of floor space. 9 ) Hospitals and nursing homes - One ( 1 ) space for every two ( 2 ) beds , plus one ( 1 ) space for every two ( 2 ) employees on the largest single shift. 10 ) Manufacturing or processing plant - One ( 1 ) off-street parking space for each employee on the major shift and one ( 1 ) off-street parking space for each motor vehicle when customarily kept on the premises . 11 ) Medical and dental clinics and animal hospitals - One ( 1 ) parking space for each one hundred fifty ( 150 ) square feet of floor area. 12 ) Mortuaries - One ( 1 ) space for every three ( 3 ) seats . 13 ) Motel or hotel - One ( 1 ) parking space for each rental room or suite , plus one ( 1 ) space for every two ( 2 ) employees . 14 ) Office buildings (administrative, business or pro- fessional) - Three ( 3 ) parking spaces for each one thousand ( 1 , 000 ) square feet of floor area . 15 ) Public service buildings , including municipal adminis- - trative buildings , community center , public library, museum, art galleries , and post office - One ( 1 ) parking space for each five hundred ( 500 ) square feet of floor area in the principal structure, plus one ( 1) parking space for each four ( 4 ) rests within public assembly or meeting rooms . 16 ) Recreational facilities , including golf course , country club, swimming club, racquet club, public swimming pool - Twenty ( 20) spaces , plus one ( 1 ) space for each five hundred ( 500) square feet of floor area in the principal structure or two ( 2 ) spaces per court . _ 17 ) Research, experimental or testing stations - One ( 1 ) parking space for each five hundred ( 500 ) square feet of gross floor area within the building , whichever is greater . 18 ) Restaurant, cafe, nightclub, tavern or bar : a . Fast food - One ( 1 ) space per sixty ( 60 ) square feet of gross floor area. b. Restaurant: 1 . Without full liquor license - One ( 1 ) space per sixty ( 60 ) square feet of gross floor area or one ( 1 ) space per two and one-half ( 24 ) seats whichever is greater. -7- 2 . With full liquor license - One ( 1 ) space per fifty ( 50 ) square feet of gross floor area or one ( 1 ) space per two ( 2 ) seats whichever is greater . 19 ) Retail stores and service establishments - One ( 1) space for each two hundred ( 200 ) square feet of gross floor area. - 20 ) School , elementary (public, private or parochial) - One ( 1 ) parking space for each classroom or office room, _ plus one ( 1 ) space for each one hundred fifty ( 150 ) square feet of eating area including aisles , in any auditorium or gymnasium or cafeteria intended to be used as an auditorium. - 21 ) School , junior and senior high schools and colleges ( public, private or parochial) - Four ( 4 ) parking _ spaces for each classroom or office r000m plus one ( 1 ) space for each one hundred fifty ( 150 ) square feet of seating area including aisles , in any auditorium or gymnasium or cafeteria intended to be used as an audi- torium. 22 ) Shopping center - On-site automobile parking shall be - provided in a ratio of not less than one ( 1 ) parking space for each two hundred ( 200 ) square feet of gross floor area ; separate on-site space shall be provided for loading and unloading . 23 ) Storage, wholesale, or warehouse establishments - One ( 1 ) space for each one thousand ( 1 , 000 ) square feet of gross floor area up to ten thousand ( 10, 000 ) square feet and one ( 1 ) additional space for each additional two thousand ( 2 , 000 ) square feet plus one ( 1 ) space for each company vehicle operating from the premises . If it can be demonstrated by the applicant that the number of employees in the warehouse or storage area will require less than the required number of spaces , and if the applicant shall submit a letter to the city assuring that if there is to be any increase in employees , the applicant agrees to provide additional parking area, the city may approve a lesser number of parking spaces . 24 ) The requirements for off-street parking for any uses not specifically mentioned in this section shall be the same as provided in this section for the use most simi- lar in nature, it being the intent to require all uses - to provide off-street parking. Where there is any question regarding the number of off-street parking spaces to be provided, the number shall be determined and fixed by the city planner. -R- Fj CITYOF EN til 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO : Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning DATE: October 31 , 1989 SUBJ: Proposed Amendment to Division 6 , Site Plan Review, of the Zoning Ordinance PROPOSAL/SUMMARY In recent months staff had indicated a concern over the lack of any financial guarantees for landscaping and other site improve- ments . We noted that a letter of credit or bond is normally required in most metro area communities and that without one, staff is handicapped in our ability to insure that a site is developed in a manner consistent with approvals . The Commission encouraged staff to propose such a requirement. We also note that the City Council has been informed of this proposal and agreed with staff ' s recommendation that the recently approved Market Square PUD be required to post financial guarantees . The proposed amendment that follows this report provides the finan- - cial assurances we believe are necessary. Prior to issuing a building permit , financial guarantees must be posted. They will be equal to 120% of the estimated costs of the improvements . Guarantees for landscaping will be held for one full growing season past the date of installation since most survivability problems become evident in the first full growing season. We have also recently had several opportunities to work with the balance of the site plan ordinance. I have become concerned that there is very little structure or guidance in the procedure i .e. , what are we looking for and what right do we have to require changes . Growing out of this concern we are proposing a signifi- cant revision and expansion of the section that would do the following : 1 . Provide a purpose section to establish the intent of Site Plan Review. 2 . Establish general standards for evaluating a site plan that goes beyond simple application of setbacks and other fixed requirements . The ability to review aspects of site design and architecture are clarified. Planning Commission October 31 , 1989 Page 2 3 . Verbalize the process for site plan review that has been followed to date. The draft ordinance outlines notification requirements and states that site plans are to be required _ with conditional use permits and rezoning applications and reviewed concurrently. 4 . Provide for administrative approvals for minor changes to an approved site plan or minor modifications to any property. This will give staff the flexibility to handle minor changes or approvals . - 5 . The draft ordinance specifically allows the city to establish conditions of approval to promote the intent of the ordinance. 6 . The draft clarifies that a site plan approval is valid only for the project that was approved. Significant deviations from approved plans requires new city approval . - 7 . Architectural review standards are described in some detail . While the ordinance avoids the "brick or better" standard adopted by cities like Bloomington, it would prohibit the use of "unadorned" concrete panels and block and also limits the use of metal buildings . We are aware that the issue of metal buildings has been discussed previously, although no ordi- nance revision resulted. This draft is structured to leave a lot of latitude up to the developer . It simply prohibits the use of plain metal exteriors where metal is the primary com- ponent . Agricultural buildings are excluded from this requirement. 8 . The draft establishes financial guarantees for landscaping improvements and requires that the site be maintained in the approved condition. In our opinion, the proposed ordinance will greatly enhance the utility of the site plan review procedure while clarifying the standards against which projects will be judged. Much of what is - being proposed are criteria we have used in the past so that implementation of the draft should not significantly alter development in Chanhassen. The draft ordinance is structured so that the site plan review process remains unchanged. However, the Planning Commission and City Council may wish to give the Planning Commission authority - to review and approve site plans when those applications are not being concurrently reviewed with conditional use permits , plats or rezonings. This would serve to reduce the City Council ' s workload and the length of time it takes to gain approval . The City Council has the ability to place this authority in the hands of the Planning Commission and can even authorize the Commission to approve variances related to the site plan. If a developer Planning Commission October 31 , 1989 Page 3 objected to the Planning Commission ' s determination or if the item was particularly controversial , it could be referred to the - City Council for final resolution. The recent approval of the Rome Office Building on Park Drive is a good example of a site plan that is non-controversial and could have been reviewed just by the Planning Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the following ordinance revisions . ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE The City Council of the City of Chanhassen Ordains as follows: DIVISION 6 . SITE AND BUILDING PLAN REVIEW. Section 20-106 . Purpose. It is the intent of this section — to serve the public interest by promoting a high standard of development within the city. Through a comprehensive review of ' both functional and aesthetic aspects of new or intensified development, the city seeks to accomplish the following: — a) implement the comprehensive plan; b) maintain and improve the city' s tax base; c ) mitigate to the extent feasible adverse impacts of one — land use upon another; d) promote the orderly and safe flow of vehicular and pedestrian traffic; and e) preserve and enhance the natural and built environment. Section 20-107. Approval Required. Without first obtaining site and building plan approval it shall be -unlawful to do any of the following: a) construct a building; b) move a building to any lot within the city; — c) expand or change the use of a building or parcel of land or modify a building, accessory structure or site or land _ feature in any manner which results in a different inten- sity of use, including the requirement for additional parking. Section 20-108. Exceptions. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, the following shall not require site or building plan approval: — a) construction or alteration of a single or two family residential building or accessory building on a residen- tial lot; b) enlargement of a building by less than 10 percent of its gross floor area, provided that there is no variance involved and also provided that the director of planning has conducted an administrative review pursuant to Section 20-113 of this section; c) changes in the leasable space of a multi-tenant building where the change does not intensify the use or require additional parking; d ) construction of buildings for agricultural uses on land zoned and utilized for agricultural purposes . Section 20-109 . Application. Application for a site plan review shall be made to the city planner on forms provided by the city and shall be filed four ( 4 ) weeks in advance of the planning commission meeting at which it is to be considered. The applica- tion shall also include: 1 ) Evidence of ownership or an interest in the property; 2 ) The application fee ; and 3 ) Complete site plans , signed by a registered architect, civil engineer , landscape architect or other design pro- - fessional , to include the following: a . General : 1 . Name of Project. 2 . Name, address , and telephone number of applicant, engineer , and owner of record. 3 . Legal description ( certificate of survey will be required) . 4 . Date proposed, north arrow, engineering scale, number of sheets , name of drawer . 5 . Vicinity map showing relationship of the proposed development to surrounding streets , rights-of- way, easements and natural features . 6 . Description of intended use of the site, buildings , and structures including type of occu- pancy and estimated occupancy load. 7 . Existing zoning and land use . 8 . Tabulation box indicating: ( i ) Size of parcel in acres or square feet. ( ii ) Gross floor area of each building. ( iii ) Percent of site covered by building. ( iv) Percent of site covered by impervious surface. ( v) Percent of site covered by parking area. ( vi ) Projected number of employees . -2- (vii) Number of seats if intended use is a restaurant or place of assembly. — (viii) Number of parking spaces required. ( ix) Number of parking spaces provided including handicapped. — ( x) Height of all buildings and structures and number of stories. b. Site Plan: 1. Property line dimensions, location of all existing and proposed structures with distance — from boundaries, distance between structures, building dimensions, and floor elevations. 2 . Grading and drainage plan showing existing natural features (topography, wetlands, vegetation, etc. ) as well as propose grade elevations and sedimen- — tation and storm water retention ponds. 3 . All existing and proposed points of egress/ingress showing widths at property lines, turning radii — abutting rights-of-way with indicated center line, width, paving width, existing and proposed median cuts, and intersections of streets and driveways. — 4 . Vehicular circulation system showing location and dimension for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot aisles, service roads, loading areas, — fire lanes, emergency access ( if necessary) , public and private streets, alleys, sidewalks, bikepaths, direction of traffic flow, and traffic-control — devices . 5. Landscaping plan in accordance with the provisions — of Article XXV. 6 . Location, access and screening detail of trash enclosures. — 7 . Location and screening detail of roof top equipment. 8 . Location and detail of signage. 9 . Lighting location, style and mounting. 10. Building elevations from all directions . 11. Utility plan identifying size and direction of — existing water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, distance of hydrant to proposed building. 12. List of proposed hazardous materials, use and storage. 13 . Proposed fire protection system. — 14. Such other information as may be required by the city. -3- — Section 20-110. Standards. In evaluating a site and building plan, the planning commission and city council shall consider its compliance with the following: a) consistency 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) consistency with this ordinance; c ) preservation of 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 neighboring developed or developing areas ; d) creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with natural site features and with existing and future buildings have a visual relationship to the development; e ) creation of a functional and harmonious design for struc- tures and site features , with special attention to the following : 1 . an internal sense of order for the buildings and uses 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 construc- tion as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neigh- - boring structures and uses ; and 4 . vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walk- ways , 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 ) protection of 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 neigh- boring land uses . Section 20-111 . Public Hearing. Upon receipt of a completed application, a date shall be set for review of the site plan before the planning commission . The review will be held no less than 10 days after mailed notice is sent to the owners of properties located wholly or partially within 350 feet of the site, as reflected in the records of the Carver County Auditor. Following -4- the hearing or any continuance thereof which is not appealed by the applicant, the planning commission shall make a recommen- dation. The site plan shall be forwarded to the city council with the planning commission' s recommendation for review on the next available agenda. Final approval of the site plan requires a simple majority vote of the city council. Section 20-112. Multiple Applications . Any site and — building plan application which is accompanied by a request for a conditional use permit or for a rezoning amendment to this ordi- nance shall be considered by the planning commission concurrently — with the conditional use permit or rezoning application. Section 20-113. Administrative Approvals. Minor site and building plans and alterations which do not involve a variance and — which are not accompanied by other matters requiring consideration by the planning commission or city council, pursuant to Section 20-100 (b) , may be approved by the director of planning. If any — application is processed administratively, the director of planning shall render a decision within 30 days and shall serve a copy of the decision upon the applicant by mail. Any person aggrieved by a _ decision of the director of planning may appeal the decision to the planning commission in the manner specified in Section 20-111 of this ordinance. Section 20-114. Conditions. The planning commission, city council or director of planning may impose conditions in granting approval to site and building plans to promote the intent of this — ordinance to protect adjacent properties. Section 20-115. Specific Project. Site and building plans shall be valid only for the project for which approval is — granted. Construction of all site elements shall be in substan- tial compliance with the plans and specifications approved by the planning commission, city council or director of planning. — Section 20-116. Architectural Standards. a) It is not the intent of the city to restrict design freedom unduly when reviewing project architecture in connection with a site and building plan. However, it is in the best interest of the city to promote high standards of architec- tural design and compatibility with surrounding structures and neighborhoods. Architectural plans shall be prepared by an architect or other qualified person acceptable to the — director of planning and shall show the following: 1 ) elevations of all sides of the building; 2 ) type and color of exterior building materials; 3 ) a typical floor plan; — 4 ) dimensions of all structures; and 5) the location of trash containers and of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. -5- b) The use of unadorned, prestressed concrete panels and concrete block shall not be permitted. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces , exposed aggregate and or other patterning. The use of metal on building exteriors shall be limited to trim detailing and/or to buildings using metal and glass curtain walls. c) All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment and exterior trash storage areas shall be enclosed with materials compatible with the principal structure. Low profile, self- contained mechanical units which blend in with the building architecture are exempt from the screening requirement. d ) Underground utilities shall be provided for all new and substantially renovated structures . Section 20-117 . Maintenance of Site and Landscaping. The owner, tenant, and their respective agents shall be held jointly and severally responsible to maintain their property and landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris . Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan and which have died shall be replaced within three months of notification by the city. However, the time for compliance may be extended up to nine months by the director of planning in order to allow for seasonal or weather conditions . Section 20-118 . Retaining Walls . Retaining walls exceeding five feet in height, including stage walls which cumulatively exceed five feet in height, must be constructed in accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect. Section 20-119 . Landscaping Financial Guarantee Required. When screening , landscaping or other similar improvements to property are required by this ordinance, a performance bond shall be supplied by the owner in an amount equal to at least 120% value of such screening, landscaping, or other improvements . The security must be satisfatory to the city and shall be conditioned upon reimbursement of all expenses incurred by the city for engi- neering, legal or other fees in connection with making or completing such improvements. The guarantee shall be provided prior to the issuance of any building permit and shall be valid for a period of time equal to one full growing season after the date of installation of the landscaping. The city may accept a letter of credit, cash escrow or bond. In the event construction of the project is not completed within the time prescribed by building permits and other approvals , the city may, at its option , complete the work required at the expense of the owner and the surety. The city may allow an extended period of time for completion of all landscaping if the delay is due to conditions which are reasonably beyond the control of the developer. Extensions which may not exceed nine months , may be granted due to seasonal or weather conditions . When an extension is granted , the city shall require such additional security as it deems appropriate . -6- Section 20-120. Issuance Building Permit and Certificate of Occupancy. A building permit may be issued if the proposed construction conforms to the approval granted by the city council . A certificate of occupancy may be withheld if construc- tion is not consistent with the terms of plan approval and will not be issued until the terms of plan approval are met. Minor changes to the approved site plan may be made after review and approval by the city planner. Major changes shall require the submission of another site plan review application. -7- CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 1989 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7: 45 p.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steve Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Jim Wildermuth and Brian Batzli MEMBERS ABSENT: Annette Elison STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning and Jo Ann Olsen, Senior. Planner .-- PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 5. 06 ACRES INTO 7 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND LOCATED EAST OF POWERS BOULEVARD AND JUST SOUTH OF LAKE LUCY ROAD, RICHARD ERSBO. Paul Krauss presented the staff report. Conrad: Are you the applicants? Richard Ersbo: As far as changing the name, we' ll comply with North or South or whatever you want to call it. Krauss: You can come up with whatever the name is as long as it' s Arlington something. Conrad: Any other comments based on the staff report that you have? Erhart moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed. Wildermuth: After looking at this, I agree with the staff recommendation with the impact on the wetland . . .double frontage issue. . . I have one question. Jo Ann how close is this flag lot driveway coming to the wetland? Olsen: The existing driveway and it' s probably about anywhere from 50 feet to the edge. _ Krauss : Based on the aerial it might even have been at one time. . . Here' s the existing driveway as it comes down. You can see the wetland vegetation comes quite close to where the driveway is but it' s not going to encroach any further. Olsen: They' re not doing anything to the existing conditions. Batzli : But they' ll be grading on the east side of the driveway? Olsen: Yes. Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 2 Krauss : The grading will take place in this vicinity. — Olsen: There will be a holding pond also constructed. Wildermuth : There won' t be any new grading? It will be an upgrade of the existing driveway? Krauss: The driveway will remain exactly as it is. r- Wildermuth: Okay. So nothing will happen there? That' s all I have. Batzli : The first time we looked at this, we had some sort of skimmer device didn' t we going into the holding pond? Olsen: Right . That was an added condition and what happens is that it' s a — DNR protected wetland so it also has to go through a permit process with that. We usually when the plans and specs come in, that ' s where they add that if it' s necessary. If the DNR wants it. If the Watershed District — wants it . The engineering department did not feel it was necessary at this time but it' s something that we usually add . Batzli : I guess I was wondering why we wanted it the first time and not this time I guess was my question. Olsen: It seems like that was added at the Planning Commission level last — time. Emmings: Isn' t it condition 4 under the preliminary plat? — Olsen: Yes. Batzli : Okay. I guess I was looking for it in the Wetland Alteration -' Permit. Sorry. Is it supposed to be in the preliminary plat rather than the wetland alteration permit? Olsen: It ' s part of the drainage easement that' s on the plat also. Krauss: The preliminary plat would have the development agreement attached — to it and that' s the means by which we are sure that it ' s installed. Batzli : Do we normally or did we normally kind of start a trend where approval of one was conditioned upon approval of the other and in compliance with each other that we don' t have those? Okay. My last question, and I agree pretty much with what Jim said. The drainage easement. Is that to the wetland then? — Krauss : Yes . The outlet pipe is supposed to outlet directly into the wetland. — Batzli : Should it clarify then which property owner they need the drainage easement from? The adjacent property owner to the west? Krauss : To the west. Planning Commission Meeting November 1 , 1989 - Page 3 Batzli : Okay. That ' s all I have. Emmings : I 'm wondering about the potential for development of Block 2 . What if they wanted to develop that later on into more lots than one? It ' s = a big piece. Krauss : You' re correct . It is quite a large piece and someday somebody - may want to do just that. However , the house is quite large and there' s also a large pool adjacent to it that fill up a lot of ground . There ' s a free standing garage. The driveway comes up there and what you have is relatively steep topography around it that eliminates much of the useable ground. This property' s probably not subdivisable unless the home is removed which we believe there ' s� a potential for it but right-of-ways in the future and if in fact that does happen, we could consider sharing the - same common private driveway upgrading it because there probably is not another means to access the+ top of the hill . Emmings : Let me ask , we ' ve got this private driveway and the road is , that lot, there ' s 138 feet in there and then you get to the roadway. I can' t remember what we do on spacing of roads along the road like this . What ' s the standard we' re looking for? Olsen : It ' s more with the subdivision main drives itself rather than individual driveways . Krauss : You' re looking at regulating the street intersections . Emmings : We' ve also talked about driveways that . . . Krauss : One of the things that we did with this plat is we had it redrawn so that this street aligned with Arlington Court to the north. The - original proposal had a skewed intersection . The separation, if that was another street going in there we'd have a problem with that . Emmings : I guess kind of putting those two things together , the fact that this is a big parcel back here . The fact that someone may want to develop it someday whether they want to now or not and the fact that you'd have streets so close together there , it just seems to me that the sensible thing to do is to have an access off that cul-de-sac . At least an easement . I think their entrance to their property ought to come off that cul-de-sac but if they prefer to keep the driveway they have, I would care - as long as for the future there was some sort of easement maintained off the end of the cul-de-sac back to Block 2. I know that ' s going to screw yip their lot pattern but I think it ought to be there. As far as, I 'm just curious that it would actually be less confusing to have the name of that street be the same as the street to the north. That doesn' t meet the common sense test here as I sit here but is that really true that it ' s easier for the emergency people? Krauss : Jo Ann and I were talking about this . I 'm basing this on my working with the police and fire services in other communities over the - years where they tell you that if they have a fire call in, oftentimes they Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 4 might just hear the Arlington and not Court or Place and they want to go to — that one place where that Arlington is and they want to know it' s either north or south. What we have here is a common intersection. It ' s a 4 way intersection. The confusion would be if it' s Arlington to the north, Lake _ Lucy to the east/west and something else to the south. There' s a continuity rationale there to have one place that's called Arlington. Emmings: Well I ' ll have to go with your professional experience but it — seems to me, if this is the only Eagle whatever it is in Chanhassen, that would make it very distinctive and real easy to find but I don' t know. But that's my only comment is the access and then off that cul-de-sac to Block — 2. Erhart : My understanding is that we' re looking for a variance for a flag lot? Yon indicated at a previous meeting that you felt our ordinance, we — ought to look at changing our ordinance to allow flag lots. Maybe you could give us 60 seconds on that . Krauss : The older philosophy was that flag lots or neck lots were inappropriate. That the way to serve properties is to require that they have the full frontage on a+public right-of-way. Generally that works very — well if you' re developing along a grid street system in an area that' s pretty flat. What we have in Chanhassen and what you have in a lot of your western suburbs is some very interesting topography that makes it difficult and often inappropriate to run public streets in every place. At the same — time you've got a lot of ground that' s inaccessible or relatively inaccessible through public rights-of-way that provides otherwise ideal home sites. There is plenty of land. They' re serviceable. They' re — secluded. You don' t have, if you have a front yard right behind somebody' s back yard. There are ways in which to do that,+ At the same time too, there are ways in which the ordinance can be amended to require a fairly high standard of service for those driveways. Particularly if more than — one home is using it. We can guarantee that it' s built properly. That it' s maintainable. That it is maintained. That it' s plowed and that it can provide adequate emergency vehicle service. All things being equal , it — would be my recommendation that the City looks at revising the ordinances to legitimize the standing somewhat of neck lots in those situations simply because we do believe that they' re oftentimes the most sensitive way of — serving a piece of ground . There is the existing complication that+ one part of the ordinance allows it at the present. The other part doesn' t. Erhart: Minnetonka allowed them with restrictions? -' Krauss: Yeah. I ' ll get into that. It's quite a long discussion but yes, we did and it was a process that was refined over a period of years. — Upgrading the standards by which driveways were built. Erhart : You feel that this one would pass the Minnetonka standards? Krauss: It certainly would with the one house. More issues would be raised if it was subdivided in the future but that could be dealt with as well . — - Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 5 Erhart : In the past Chanhassen ' s negative position on flag lots have been based on what reasoning? Krauss : Jo Ann, maybe you could . - Olsen: I 'm sorry. Erhart : Why don ' t we like flag lots I 'm trying to say? Olsen : Well some of the reasons that Paul was pointing out or some of the controls he could add to the ordinance were some of the reasons because we didn' t have that where the Public Safety, a lot of the flag lots do just - have small driveways that are not maintained that the fire trucks couldn' t get into and things like that and that was the reasoning. If you had the 90 feet right yip on the street , then there ' s access there . Someway they - would be able to get to it . Erhart : Another reason would be the number of access points along Lake Lucy Road . Essentially here you ' ve got 2 access points at 137 feet whereas if this back lot was . . . Emmings : Then you ' d have a third one at 117 feet . Erhart : Yeah , another one so every 130 feet you 've got an access on there whereas if the Lot 1, Block 2, is that what it is Block 2? Yeah . Was served with the cul-de-sac that would eliminate another access point . Krauss : Yeah , and I would disagree with that at all and normally if it were possible. Well , if I thought it were easy to combine the curb cuts , I would normally recommend that that ' s the case. - What you ' ve got over here though is a fairly significant change in elevation. I 'm not saying it makes it impossible to do it but it makes it difficult to do it. That - cul-de-sac is up, it ' s elevated up above the driveway. That driveway' s coming off a hill and you can see through the grading over here that you ' d actually have to come down the hill and then go back up it again at a fairly significant grade to make the cul-de-sac . Erhart: I ' ll just give you my ideas because it ' s as much the developer as it is ours . Again , I ' ve Jonly� looked at this for 10 minutes and the - developer or the owner has looked over this thing for months so maybe my ideas are naive but my immediate but reaction would be that bringing the street down slightly.+ Use this space to bring these lots down further south and bring the cul-de-sac down maybe out in this area . I think he still has room for the 6 lots but you could access the driveway off the cul-de-sac which would end up down in this area and that does not require you to have a steep grade in the street. It seems to me that would make these lots more valuable if you backed into these wetlands . Again, I 'm just looking at a piece of paper doesn' t give you a whole lot of insight into that but I somewhat agree with Steve in that for the future of all - those homeowners and actually for yourself , not having to maintain the long driveway, it would seem to be to everyone ' s advantage to have that come off the cul-de-sac if there ' s a practical way to do that. Assuming there ' s no practical way, I guess I wouldn ' t and in light I guess of what your Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 6 experience is Paul and the fact that we ' re going to have a discussion on - flag lots , I guess I 'd probably go along with recommending the variance but hesitantly. Going on, you ' ve satisfied whereas in the past we were looking for access over to the east and you ' ve satisfied we don' t need that? That - would not be useful? Krauss : Well , let me say that we think that access to serve the properties to the east is still an issue. We just don' t think that this is the way to - resolve it . The road as was proposed , the road extension really in out view is inappropriate. A 15 foot setback from somebody' s front door for an existing home doesn ' t work very well unless you assume that home ' s going to - be removed. In creating a line of double frontage lots along Lake Lucy also raises some significant reservations . Erhart: This pond , are we creating this pond on Lot 6? Krauss : Yes . Erhart : Okay. The applicant has been made aware of all the Fish and Wildlife recommendations for the pond? Krauss : . . .to a small retention pond . Erhart : It ' s just too small? I guess that ' s all I can think of right now. Conrad : Steve, what were your comments on serving the future development? Would you gothroughthat? Enmings : I guess my notion was just that if there' s potential for that land to develop. It ' s a big piece and it ' s within the MUSA and as land becomes more valuable, if you wind up doing any kind of a development back _ there and I think you can foresee that there ' s certainly a possibility, that would mean then that a road would have to take the place of that bituminous drivway and you'd have, for one thing you 'd have double frontage lots . You 'd be creating double frontage lots in the existing development - that we' re lookdng at tonight and you'd wind up with a road access , well if you could, you'd wind up with the accesses onto Lake Lucy that are very close together . Potentially one where the driveway is , Eagle Circle and - then maybe even one immediately to the east there so it seems to me that the reasonable thing to do would be to preserve an easement off the end of the cul-de-sac back to Block 2 at this time whether you use it or not but just in the event that there ' s development there in the future. Conrad: Paul , what's your reaction to that? Krauss : I don' t disagree with the theory behind that . The problem I see with it is right here you 've got a 12 foot cut. Anything we do to lower this cul-de-sac is going to make the cut more severe and we ' ve already had , _ there' s not a lot of trees up there right now but we' ve had some language put in about tree preservation there. There' s another 12 foot cut approximately over there. There' s really no practical way to come right through here up the hill . If you were to go with something like that , the - only way to do it would be something along the lines that Tim was Planning Commission Meeting November 1 , 1989 - Page 7 suggesting which might be to roll off at some point back onto that driveway because that driveway goes up a more gentle grade. Conrad : So that property to the rear Paul , how are we going to service that if it does get split up? Krauss : At this point with the way the ordinance is structured , you don ' t have to serve it . You are serving it with the existing driveway. You don ' t have to further subdivide it. It ' s somewhat difficult to guess at the future. I can show you this but unfortunately it just doesn ' t reproduce very well . IfLLyou want to come over and take a look at it. This was the composite that we put together because it really was the only way - to see it . What you' ve got is the home . Here ' s the top of the hill . Here' s where they' re excavating out the top of the hill to put in the cul-de-sac . Here ' s the grade and you can see how the driveway starts - coming up the grade right there and there ' s a pretty significant bluff overlooking the wetland . This whole area , this corner here is really not part of that hillside and is probably not developable. The home, the swimming pool and the garage are pretty centrally located and . . .against subdividing it unless they' re all removed . Erhart : This is all high ground over here? Krauss : This is all high ground back here . Erhart : How would that be served? Krauss : The MUSA line comes through here right now. What we were thinking , and we haven' t had a chance to illustrate this is we were looking at if the MUSA line' s expanded and if this property is subdivided bringing in another public street as a cul-de-sac or a thru street and coming back down through here. (The commissioners were carrying on separate coversations at this point during discussion . ) Richard Ersbo : I sit up on a hill that would be almost impossible for the cul-de-sac to go there. If you look over the back there, I have a drop down a hole about 40 feet and I 'm sitting up higher than that . To put a cul-de-sac from where that . . . I 'm sitting on a big hill . It ' s not flat. We went over this whole thing about 10 times already and this was the most feasible way we could do the whole thing . This is the third time we were - going to have this approved . Krauss : Let me say this . If I thought development was it not emminent but realistic on that parcel , we would try to do something to access it possibly a different way at this point . What we would make that determination is that we respect . . .opinion but what ' s more important to us if you look at the ground as easily developable . In our opinion , this - ground isn' t up here for a variety of reasons . The placement of the home and the grades being the most significant . Richard Ersbo: It'd be easier to put a ski slope down this . Planning Commission Meeting November 1 , 1989 - Page 8 Conrad : My only comment is on the wetland alteration permit. It ' s more the process than this particular application. Normally, are we still having the applicants fill out a form for a wetland alteration permit? _ Olsen: We have that when they' re actually going to be affecting or altering the wetland itself. We do give that form out . A lot of times the applicants don' t have the knowledge to fill it out. It gets pretty - detailed . When it ' s a larger subdivision that they really are going to be putting ponds within it and they have the services, we do still have them fill that out. This one we did not . - Conrad : I guess just as a general point , I think we have to go through that process because Jo Ann you understand it but over the years I think it' s been adapted to what kind of works and we don ' t know what that is . This particular application just triggered the thought again that I 'm not seeing the real application . If it requires a permit , I guess I 'm interested in seeing the application unless you persuade me, I understand - what you' re doing but I guess I 'd like to go back through the mechanics of that process and typically what we had been doing Paul is that we 'd have technical documentation , whether it be DNR or Fish and Wildlife or whatever , accompany it or a report coming back from one of those experts that made us feel good . They were really helping us interpret our ordinance is basically what they were doing. But I 'm not seeing that anymore so I 'm not sure what we should be doing and maybe Jo Ann , given all - her time here, is pretty comfortable but I 'm kind of lost again because my first reaction here was what are we doing to the wetland and how does it impact our ordinance and obviously not much but I don' t know that. So I - guess to our list of things to do , I kind of want to review the process . I don' t know that we need to recreate anything but it ' s more the process sometime so at least I understand where we ' re going again . I have no other _ comments on this other than the street name. I guess I 'm with Steve. I would think a special name called Eagle Circle would be clearer than a Court, Circle, Lane. That seems harder for me. If I were driving a fire truck, I 'd rather find the only Eagle Street in town than one that I might - be confused on but again , that ' s not my area of expertise. Krauss : I used to drive the fire truck . In a community like ours or _ others in which I 've worked, when it ' s all said and done. The City' s fully developed and you have 400 cul-de-sacs , it ' s hard to remember where they all are but if you prefer what we can do is just delete any reference to - that condition now and we can consult with the fire marshall before it goes to the City Council and get a final reading on that. Conrad : Any more discussion? Is there a motion? - Batzli : I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped Received October 11th? Mine doesn ' t say October 11th though. I don ' t think. Is there a different plan for the wetland? My plan ' s stamped like October 26th or something . Conrad : Yeah, mine too . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 9 Batzli : Was there a separate set of plans? Emmings : It says as presented on the plat and it wouldn ' t be would it? Batzli : Okay, well October 26th I ' ll say for now, 1989 subject to the following conditions . Conditions 1 thru� 4 with the following added to the end of condition 1. The words "to the west" and a new condition 5 which reads compliance with conditions of Subdivision #87-36 . Emmings: Second . Batzli moved , Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped October 26, 1989 and subject to the following conditions : 1. Acquisition of a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner to the west . 2. Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources . 3. Creation of a storm water retention pond in the northwest corner of Lot 6, Block 1. - 4 . Installation of Type 3 erosion control between the development and the Class A wetland . - 5. Compliance with the conditions of Subdivision #87-36 . All voted in favor and the motion carried . Conrad : Is there a motion on the preliminary plat? - Wildermuth: I move the Planning Commission approve Subdivision #87-36 as presented on the plat stamped October 11th with a variance to allow a 30 foot lot width on Lot 1, Block 2 and subject to the conditions 1 thru 6. Batzli : I ' ll second it . I think the plans are again October 26th , not October 11th . - Wildermuth : I ' ll make that October 26th . Batzli : And we don ' t want to say something like changing the name of the street designated Eagle Circle to something approved by the Public Safety Department. Is that just going to be handled between. . . Wildermuth : . . .check with the Fire Chief . Conrad : It ' s not here is it? Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 10 Batzli : No . It would be something they'd do . - Conrad: I 'm just happy keeping it out of here unless you want to put it in . Batzli : That ' s fine as long as they, I remember seeing something actually from the Fire Chief or somebody at the Public Safety saying that they J didn ' t want the same names in different locations in the City but I don ' t - recall them saying anything about this instance. Do we want� a condition 7 indicating compliance with the wetland alteration permit? Emmings: Yeah . Wildermuth : It 'd probably be a good idea . Wildermuth moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision Request #87-36 as presented on the plat stamped - "Received October 26 , 1989" with a variance to allow a 30 foot lot width on Lot 1, Block 2, subject to the following conditions : 1. Provide final detailed plans of the streets and utility improvements . The plans should be modified as follows : a . Increase the paved cul-de-sac radius to 42 feet . - b. Replace the existing 6" sanitary sewer to Lake Lucy Road and utilize an 8" line exclusively to serve the plat . c . Extend water main service between Lots 2 and 3 with a stub ending at the east property line . d . The fire hydrant at the end of the cul-de-sac is to be provided with a 10 foot clear radius . 2. Lots 1 and 6, Block 1 are to gain access solely by driveway to Eagle Lucy Circle. Access to Lake Road is prohibited . A notice of this limitation should be placed in shared title of both lots . 3. Provide final erosion control plans acceptable to staff. Type III erosion control will be required along teh western perimeter of teh site adjacent to the wetland . Prior to the initiation of grading , staff will walk the site with the developer to mark out trees designated for preservation. Staff will modify the plans as required to improve tree preservation efforts . Drainage swales are to be provided around eafch of the homes . The berm located in the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way is to be relocated onto Lot 1, Block 1. 4. Provide final drainage plans for approval by City Staff . Provide a skimmer device on the sedimentation pond . Redirect the pond outlet directly into the wetland providing the City with such easements that may be required to cross an adjacent property. Watershed District approval of the plat is required . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 11 5. Easements to be provided : a . Right-of-way for Eagle Circle . b. Request the City Council vacate right-of-way for existing streets and easements approved under the original plat . c. Utility easements are required for the proposed watermain and sanitary sewer alignments including the watermain stub between Lots 2 and 3 to the eastern property line . _ d. Drainage and utility easements are required over the pond and storm sewer pipes on Lot 6, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2 and based upon final engineering design may be required over an adjacent parcel to the west . e . Standard utility easements around the perimeter of each lot . - 6. Enter into a development contract with the City. 7. Compliance with the conditions of Wetland Alteration Permit #88-7 . All voted in favor except Erhart and Emmings who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. Conrad : And the reasons? - Emmings : I think I set them forth enough. It seems to me that this plan could be modified by moving that cul-de-sac along the contour or something . I think it ' s short sighted to have the only access to that large lot in the rear come along that existing driveway. Conrad : Tim, your feelings? - Erhart : Pretty much the same reasons . I guess I don ' t strongly oppose it but I 'd sure like us to try a little harder to find a way to avoid having that driveway between those lots . Lot 6 , 5 and 4 and that wetland and also to avoid future problems with access in the Lot 1, Block 2 . Conrad : Paul , in terms of future use of that driveway that access the back lot, there' s no way that the City has to restrict it ' s use . Krauss : You can ' t bind the actions of future Councils either . Wildermuth: The topography is going to pretty well restrict the use right? Conrad : Probably. Emmings: Give me a bulldozer . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 12 Krauss : At this point in time Mr . Chairman , the only way to get additional - building back there is to come back and ask for additional variances . The way things are structured right now and that ' s certainly nothing that you have to automatically have to approve . — Conrad : I think it' s imporant and obvious things change and Planning Commissions and Councils change but I think it has to be a real clear — message that , at least as I voted in favor of this , it was pretty much with the assumption that that back parcel would not be changed . Now you may sell and that ' s obviously your right and that future developer or whatever could do whatever but I just don ' t, I would not be of mind to allow any — increase traffic on the current one driveway going back but there ' s really no way to enforce that posture to my knowledge. Anyway, any other comments? PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE WITH REGARD TO ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM LOT SIZE FOR CHURCH DEVELOPMENT AT 15 ACRES. Paul Krauss presented the staff report . — Conrad : It' s a public hearing. It was published . Peter Beck obviously knows that this is an item. I kind of thought he 'd be here . Wildermuth: It didn' t give any reaction to it which I 'm surprised at . Conrad : And he is still under retainer? - Olsen: I showed him the ordinance when Roger first had drafted it when it had 25 acres . When he was still involved with Eckankar , with the _ development contract and such and that didn' t concern them. Conrad : So the public notice was sent to Peter or was it sent to Eckankar or how? Krauss : I think it was sent to Peter . Conrad : And we would send it to him versus the property owners? Olsen : It just was given to him because he happened to be in the office - the day I received it actually. Conrad : Are we comfortable that that ' s . . . Krauss : Legal notice is published in the official newspaper . Conrad : And there is no other policy stating that we individually identify - those that are impacted by the Ordinance? Olsen : We' ve done it in the past . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 13 Erhart : There ' s some other churches that own property in this city. There' s the, what is it? y Krauss : There ' s the church that owns the property down by the apartment building that ' s up for sale right now. Olsen : Lakeview. Emmings : And Westside Baptist has that piece out on TH 41 . Erhart : But that' s not down here . - Krauss : But there' s no church building on there. Erhart: No , but they would be impacted by such an ordinance . Olsen : Westside Baptist already has approval . Well we could do that . We can notify them. - Wildermuth : If we passed this , would we have to grant a variance to those people? Krauss : Well it ' s a matter of conjecture . You don ' t have to . If you want to see the rest of the property develop, you may. There' s different ways of subdividing that property up and if there was an internal street built on their property to serve the church and to serve whatever development might be proposed , then the probability of it is that the site could be less than 15 acres . If they want to plat out a large enough piece of ground possibly for expansion or whatver but to get their site extended out - to the street that exists now, we think it would be something in the order of about 25-26 acres . Erhart : Paul , would this have any immediate tax impact on the Eck property? Krauss : No . According to the information we ' ve received from the City Attorney, it shouldn ' t have any at all . According to Roger , churches are entitled to a tax exemption for property that they' re using for church purposes . Erhart : I know but if we' re defining that now to be 15 acres instead of 174 , isn ' t that the intent of this ordinance? Krauss : I don ' t believe that it would have any impact on that . Olsen: The intent was that another church couldn' t come in and buy another 100 acres and possibly got that whole 100 acres tax exempt . I think we ' re finding that even if they have 100 acres , that that would not all become tax exempt anyway. Erhart : But that ' s exactly what these guys have done . They' ve come in and bought 174 acres . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 14 — Olsen : It' s not determined that that 174 acres will not be taxed . - Erhart: Okay. So the object of the ordinance then is what? Krauss : Presumably to put an upper cap on the magnitude of the church development that you might see in the community. Conrad : To restrict the non-taxable. — Krauss: That would be the net effect. If the church site was 15 acres , that would be what it would be taxed on. — Erhart: Okay, you're saying if someone came in with just a huge church . Wildermuth: Even a small church on a very large parcel . . . it says a church on church property. Erhart: What portion of the Eck property now is exempt from tax? — Olsen: I don't know that that's been determined. Batzli : It' s all being taxed right now. Erhart: Wouldn't they come in and apply for tax exemption for the whole thing? Wildermuth: Not until they get a structure built and start holding services. — Olsen: They're going to try but it' s not sure if they' ll get it. Erhart: Then at least this would give us some basis to argue for not giving exemption for more than 15 acres so it is , what we' re trying to do. Olsen: Carver County the taxes . — Krauss : It' s also a question of, I don' t think anything like this has ever been tested. Emmings: Why wouldn' t it be grandfathered? Why wouldn' t they, or would that be their argument that they' re grandfathered in because this ordinance — was passed after their approval . Krauss: Well yeah but they wouldn' t be grandfathered in because they' re coming in for subdivision presumably after this ordinance. — Emmings: I see. When you came in for subdivision is when this would apply? Okay. Krauss : I mean if you had an existing church site that was 20 acres , you would be grandfathered in, yes . — Erhart: Are we still in the public hearing? - Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 15 Conrad: We still are. Wildermuth : . . . right now because when they do come in for building their structure, for a building permit . Olsen : It ' s already out . Krauss : It ' s already issued . Olsen : They' re constructing . - Wildermuth: They've already started? Olsen : Yes . Wildermuth : Steve, I think you ' re probably right . They probably will be grandfathered in . - Emmings : I don ' t know. What they' re talking about is when they come in . . . Wildermuth: Until they subdivide. Conrad : They' re grandfathered in . If they ever subdivide . This is still a public hearing so any comments city council members? - Councilman Boyt : I do have a comment . I 'm against this . I think this is , I said it at the Council meeting, I think this is a bad move for the City to make . I personally don ' t think the city should be in the business of + - telling churches how big they should be. The tax impact as I think you noticed during the Eckankar situation is actually a plus in terms of expenses . They have this land sitting vacant than to have individual homes go on it . But+ the bigger issue for me is I don ' t believe the City should be in the business of limiting the size of churches . Batzli : Can I ask one question Bill? How does that square with your argument of not allowing churches in the CBD and taking them off the tax roll in that case? - Councilman Boyt : I think that ' s a good question . In the central business district we' re talking about property that is definitely a revenue generator for the City. If you were talking , I think there ' s a good zoning reason to say that churches don' t belong in the central business district . The land is simply too valueable but I wouldn ' t say that about the residential single family. - Wildermuth : The same thing ' s going to apply to that property along TH 5 though or along the Boulevard . Councilman Boyt : I don ' t disagree with that . I 'm also not in favor of going in and removing churches that already in the central business district . I mean they' re there . I wouldn ' t encourage more to be there . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 16 Wildermuth: I don' t think there'd be any legal way to do it even if you — wanted to. Councilman Boyt: I don' t know. That's a good point to think through. Does it make a difference not having them in the zone at all versus controlling — the size and I do think the City has the ability and should use it to determine where businesses should be with the zoning ordinance. I 'm just not comfortable with limiting the size. I don' t particularly want — Chanhassen to be the first suburb in the country to do that. Certainly the first suburb in Minnesota . Conrad : How did you conclude Bill that it' s saving us money? Councilman Boyt: Well they' re not putting any tax demand on the City. Conrad : So you make an assumption that there would be smaller , cheaper houses going in? Councilman Boyt: If they build houses that are above the City average, it' s my understanding that it would probably generate income for the City so that' s possible. The tax argument may not hold a lot of water . I guess _ I just base mine more on the concern that I don' t want to be telling churches how big they can be. Conrad: Don, any comments on this one? — Mayor Chmiel : No. I guess I look at it from the aspect of looking at what we have in town presently such as St. Hubert's and the local churches. — Neither of those exceed 15 acres. I think what I was looking at was that we not have that much acreage available such as. the Temple of Eck is looking at. Them putting in their church and trying to have it totally exempt, that's not going to happen. At least. . .County Attorney' s office but I think we should have some limitations as to what can be within the community as far as taking the total amount of tax off of the rolls for the properties. I think that' s somewhat of a concern that I have basically. — what I see too is we have a lot of things within our city that are all tax exempt . Many of the things like the Arboretum. Parks . There' s a lot of land that's . . .so my major concern is potential of having a restriction — on. . . Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed . Conrad : Tim, we' ll start down at your end . What do you think about what' s — proposed? Erhart: This was initiated in Council? How long ago was that or is it just that it came in conjunction with the public hearings for Eck? And the — Attorney has, according to your report here, reviewed it all? Olsen: He wrote the ordinance. — - Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 17 Erhart : Yeah but he ' s satisfied that there' s precedent? I have a hard time reading these things . There' s two ways to look at this thing. One that ' s from the tax standpoint . The other one is from a standpoint , are we trying to prevent some church organization from coming in and doing a great big development? For what reason would a church want to use more than 15 - acres for a church? Would it be a conference center then also? Krauss : Presumably a church with an affiliated school could take up that - much property. A church with some other facility, be it a camp or whatever . I ' ve worked on a number of churches over the years and I ' ve never seen one bigger than 15 acres . Including one that+ relocated out of Hopkins into Minnetonka , that old Apostolic Lutheran which had a congregation of upwards to 1 , 100. They were on a considerably smaller site than that . - Conrad : We ' re really restricting a campus type of environment . The question is, do you want to extract that or do you want to. . . Erhart : There ' s two questions I think . It ' s an offsetting question . I think what we ' re trying to do is strengthen our tax position with this ordinance . The offset , what does it do if someone comes in and says I want to build a church campus , a legitimate church campus . I guess my reaction - is , they come along and we can always review the ordinance at that .time so I guess if we ' re strengthening our position with regard to taxes, I have no problem with the ordinance and it seems to me that if 15 acres makes sense , - give them what we have here today. Lastly, I guess we probably ought to go out and give this to the existing church owners in the City that have more than 15 acres . I know they' re going to tell us , they' re all going to tell you, even the church I go to, they' re going to say we don ' t want any restrictions we don ' t need but we ought to probably do that but I guess I 'd support the ordinance . This issue is a big one . - Conrad : Steve, you ' ve got to have some interesting opinions . Emmings : I don ' t have any opinions . I agree with the general notion that - we don ' t want a lot of land off the tax rolls for churches and I think we want to allow people to build their churches and 15 acres seems like a lot to me. I probably would have picked a smaller number but I just wonder if let ' s say that you have some clever church person come in and they buy a 45 acre parcel and they subdivide it into 3 15 acre lots and they put their church on one . They put their church school on the next one and they put a church camp on the next one. Aren ' t they now all exempt? All three of them. Wildermuth : No . Emming : Why? Wildermuth : Because if they meet the State requirements for the test , at - least one of the factors for the test, they have to conduct church services on the site . - Enniings : I don ' t think so . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 18 Olsen: Church purposes. Krauss : Church purposes and one of the questions . . . — Emmings: Now wait a minute. I don' t get the exemption just because I 'm a church. I get it because I 'm for a whole bunch of reasons . There are a whole bunch of non-profit organizations that get tax exemption for the — various reasons. I think that it wouldn ' t be too hard to get around this . Now I don't know if that's. . .by Roger. This only deals with churches. It doesn ' t deal with the other activities of religious organizations and I — think I could put together 45 acres like I said and I don' t think you could tax me. I don' t know. Maybe I 'm wrong or maybe if we thought about it more, we could think of a better example that+ would do what I 'm suggesting — could be done but like Tim, I 'm in favor of attempting to limit this . I don't think this does it and I wish maybe you'd get some comments from Roger on that before it gets to City Council . I 'm going to vote for it hoping that it will do something but I don' t see how it will work. — Erhart: If I could comment. I think in your example there, it seemed to understand that we have an ordinance that says that two pieces of property — that are under the same owner , two contiguous pieces of property under the same ownership is treated as one parcel in the city which I don' t agree with that but that' s the ordinance. I don' t agree with it but that is the ordinance. It may apply there. '— Emmings: But I guess the point is, if I have a 15 acre limit on one activity and it may be that I have a 15 acre limit on my church and have all my other activities on a 30 acre parcel next door and since it isn' t specifically a church, maybe my non-profit charitable status will get me tax exemption on the 30 acre parcel . — Wildermuth : Well yeah it will . Under the State Subdivision. . .exempt property, all acadamies , colleges, universities. . . Emmings: So it seems very easy to get around to me. It does not seem effective to me but Roger's probably thought this through and would know better than I for sure but that' s the only comment I 've got. Oh, I 've got — one other comment. Sorry. I 'm not concerned about what Bill ' s concerned about. About telling churches how big they can be because I think number one, it's hard to imagine a church wanting more than 15 acres. With 70% — coverage, that means a church that' s 10 acres. That ' s a big church. That's almost a Cub or a Fleet Farm so I 'm not concerned about it and if this would work, you still wouldn' t be limiting their size. You'd say, but you're only going to get exemption on 15 acres and the rest are going to — have to pay taxes on. That doesn' t bother me at all . Batzli : I don' t like this ordinance. I don' t like it before or after the — amendment. They' ve deleted one portion of the ordinance which appeared to determine whether this section applied to churches both within and outside of the MUSA line and I would clarify that by adding something to the start _ of this such as the following applies to all churches since the next section applies to those churches outside the MUSA line. I don' t think Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 19 residential concentration is defined anywhere. The structure must be set back 50 feet . Well , what structure are we talking about? Are we talking about the church which is a defined definition or what are we talking about when we say structure? Are we talking about developed or undeveloped non- residential property? Are we talking about net or gross maximum lot size? If we' re going to change the ordinance, I 'd like to see us change the whole ordinance and make it a working ordinance . I don ' t think this is it . I don ' t even like the principle of limiting the maximum lot size of churches . So I 'm going to vote against it . Wildermuth : I don ' t see that this ordinance really. . . so basically I 'm in favor of it although I think Brian' s comments and the ordinance itself are - very worth while . It seems like there should be more. . . Better definitions to put some teeth into it. Conrad : I don ' t have too much of a concern with the ordinance. The things that I think it would restrict are the campus uses . I guess I 'm not real interested in encouraging, I don' t see a net benefit for those campus uses . The trade off is being more acreage closer to town possibly or for - development and for taxes . I do have a question though. Do we want this to be a blanket , across the board restriction by all zoning districts or are there exceptions? Wildermuth : That ' s a good point . Conrad : Supposed agriculture. Is there a case to be made out in the agricultural district to put a church out there or would we never , well we did allow a church outside the MUSA line . — Batzli : On TH 41 there? Conrad : On 41 . Erhart : Even there it' s less desireable to have bigger churches . You just don ' t have the services . Conrad : So is that a case where it would never happen? I can make a real good case for the Eckankar property. It really is taking out some land that I think should be used for other things in the long run and I think it' s real unfortunate that , it' s going to force us to develop other lands earlier than they should . Therefore, I think it ' s really unfortunate that that ' s happening yet if there' s an agricultural area that a church wants to move out on, I 'm not sure that I care . Batzli : I don ' t think that owning a lot of property necessarily means that the church is big either . I think that ' s a mistaken assumption. A church may want to build on 200 acres and only have a 5 acre spot that ' s really landscaped and developed and has a church on it. They may want to be isolated . Erhart : Yeah , but that ' s zoned . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 20 — Conrad : It ' s still not taxable but the agricultural taxes are significantly lower . Wildermuth: They can still own the property. . . — Conrad: Yeah, if they subdivided it . I don ' t know. Councilman Boyt : The question I 'd like to ask , in listening to your — discussion about why you support this , it seems as though it' s tax related so why isn' t the ordinance aimed at all tax exempt organizations? Why are we signaling out churches? Emmings: Wait now. Didn ' t the impulse for this thing come from the City Council? Maybe you could fill us in? f — Councilman Boyt : No I can ' t . Emmings : I can ' t either . My initial reaction to this was that this was - retaliatory because members of the City Council who , it had that appearance at least that it was retaliatory in some ways because people on City Council were opposed to that church for whatever reason . This came out — immediately thereafter and just the timing of it made it look that way and I didn' t like it for that reason but nevertheless it fits with my own instincts that tell me that that churches shouldn' t own big pieces of land _ that are tax exempt. So I agree with you to some extent. That would be better to have it broader . Erhart : The difference I think though is that the other exempt parcels , arboretums, universities , parks are public owned land where this is private owned property. I think that ' s the difference .• That ' s why you wouldn ' t apply this to those . Emmings : But are there other privately owned tax exempt? Batzli : Camp Tanadoona . Emmings: The campfire girls . Conrad: They' re not tax exempt are they? Emmings: Oh yeah . Batzli : They' re non-profit . Emmings: Sure. They' re tax exempt . They couldn ' t survive there . They can' t survive as it is . Erhart : The other question I had is why are we writing this Section 2 that says this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon it ' s passage and publication but shall not apply to churches which have applied for building permit or which have received City Council approval before it' s effective _ date? Why does that have to be in there at all? - Planning Commission Meeting November 1 , 1989 - Page 21 Olsen : To grandfather in existing uses . To grandfather in the Eckankar . Erhart : Why do we want to do that? If we have to do that , why have the ordinance? The probability of having another church coming in with 200 acres . Krauss : Any time you adopt an ordinance that has a standard different than something that ' s in the ground , it ' s automatically grandfathered in . Erhart : Yeah , so I 'ni just saying why do we have to make it . . . Olsen : We probably don' t because they already have their building permit now. Emmings : Are we really talking about churches or are we really talking - about maybe privately owned tax exempt activities? Batzli : I 'd feel much better about it if it was that rather than just churches . Conrad : You feel we ' re treating churches unfairly? Signaling them out? Emmings : Yeah . Batzli : If you ' re really doing it for the tax base , I would make it broader . Emmings : That would be consistent . Wildermuth : Cover all the tax exempt organizations . Erhart : Privately owned tax exempt uses . Conrad : I ' ll go back to my opinion . I feel that the Eckankar , because of it ' s proximity to downtown Chan is a real problem. I don ' t have the same _ problem if it was located 2 miles west. Then I don' t really care even though I 'm putting maybe off a problem to the future. I think my concern is inappropriate use close to where we ' re encouraging development . - Erhart : The way to look at it Ladd , if it ' s outside the MUSA line they' re probably not paying that much tax for farmland anyway. With green acres it' s pretty reasonable . Then at that point when that land gets in the - MUSA line and that area gets developed and the tax rate goes up, then in fact we want this kind of ordinance to sort of automatically take effect , which it will . Wildermuth : I guess I would be in favor of giving this back to Roger and having him look at extending this . . . impact on property. We' re talking about . . .rather than just single family churches . Conrad : What kind of impact on Roger ' s time would that be , and staff time? Krauss : I don ' t think it ' s terribly significant . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 22 Conrad : This is not a real high priority for me right now but if it ' s not a major review and cost . + Olsen : We can do that . Conrad : And you' d want to just look to private ownership but what would you be telling them to do? To review it? To draft and ordinance that would encourage all of that and then if that went to City Council and they weren ' t happy, they could keep the part that they wanted couldn' t they? Erhart : Additionally, just to find out if there ' s some problem we don ' t perceive at this point with expanding this to privately owned non tax paying organizations . Maybe there ' s something we' re not thinking about . Batzli : The more I think about it , I just don ' t like the idea at all . I mean I don' t know that if Camp Tanadoona wasn ' t there and it came in tomorrow, I wouldn ' t be in favor of them setting up a camp on the lake . Erhart : How many acres do they have? Conrad : It must be over 15. Emmings : Oh yeah . Erhart: I bet it' s more like 80 . Emmings : Oh yeah , I 'd say so . Erhart : Camp Tanadoona . How many acres do they own now? Olsen : I 'd say almost 100 . Emmings : That' s a big parcel . It goes all the way out to TH 5. Olsen: It ' s just like Zimmerman' s property almost . Batzli : So I guess my earlier statement that I 'm not in favor of limiting _ churches and I don' t know that that really does it for me. Privately held non-profit . Emmings : Or maybe we should ask Roger too if there is anything to the idea that if they' re+ limited on one parcel , if they couldn' t simply subdivide and have it on contiguous parcels . Krauss: We can get that clarified . Conrad : I think for sure Steve' s comment is , I think we' ve got to research that. I think Brian brought up some wording and things that I think we might as well improve it or at least send it along to City Council with a little bit improved wording if we go with either a positive or negative recommendation . I guess the other question is to research the other parts - that we' ve been talking about. I 'm not sure if that will , by including Planning Commission Meeting November 1 , 1989 - Page 23 more. . .coverage that may take my vote away from a positive vote on this one but I don' t know. Emmings : It ' s tough because what Brian says is right . What if the Campfire organization came in and said we want to put in a camp for kids = here and a conference center that ' s going to be tax exempt . I think we'd be all for it. I really do . Wildermuth : But not on a site like 175 acres . Conrad : You wouldn ' t put it close to downtown . Emmings : You wouldn ' t want it close to downtown but how do you ever define that? Conrad : I don ' t know. I don' t know how to do that . Emmings: Eckankar , you' re right . Eckankar is a simple example and there are a lot of hard ones . I think we should table it . Batzli : You know that old legal maxim. Hard facts don ' t make good law. Conrad : Is there a motion? _ Wildermuth moved , Er►mings seconded to table action on the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the City Code establishing maximum lot size for church development to 15 acres and referring the item to the City Attorney. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES : Batzli moved , Wildermuth seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated October 18 , 1989 as presented . All voted in favor and the motion carried . OPEN DISCUSSION AND CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Erhart: What ' s Cenvesco going to do? What ' s their next move? Krauss : We' re waiting for them to come back with a revised plan . The item was pulled at their request . Conrad : Pulled for what reason? Krauss : Cenvesco pulled it . If you read through the staff report , we raised a number of issues regarding the accuracy of the plan and various criteria . Apparently on the advice of Peter Beck who ' s been retained by the developer , they pulled for approximately 30 days . We asked for and received a letter stating that this delay is at their request . Erhart: This Peter Beck is the Attorney for Eck or is he Eck? Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 24 Krauss : He ' s with Larkin-Hoffman . Erhart : You mind if I have a question on your critique of the things . Emmings: You' re not going to go into this? Mr . Chairman. I have never i sought a ruling from the chair for the years I ' ve been here but now I want you to shut him down until the meeting is adjourned and he can talk to them all he wants . I have had a belly full of Cenvesco . Erhart : This has nothing to do with Cenvesco . Emmings: You' re looking at a Cenvesco packet . Erhart: I know. You have a statement , in addition there is a Class B wetland with a 75 foot setback and wooded area cannot be used towards the — net density calculation. Where did we start excluding wooded areas now? Is this a mistype? Olsen : Yes . Krauss : It ' s out of context. Erhart : You had me worried . I 'm planting all these trees on my property so when I retire. Krauss : That was one of the few items they raised at our meeting that we agreed with them on . Olsen : We ' re going to be bringing that up to you because in the definition of net density, it ' s any area unbuildable . Well , we need to discuss what does that mean because sometimes that ' s been implied to mean steep slopes , vegetated areas. Conrad : Paul , just a real , you had some, or staff . You and Jo Ann had some good comments on Cenvesco. There was more substance in this analysis that gave us some numbers to shoot for . Numbers that they should shoot for . One that was missing however was the number of access drives . That was sort of left open but if it came back , I think it ' s really good and I think maybe you can negotiate that wetland but again it ' s really neat when you have some magical formulas and say here' s what you' ve got to hit. So I really appreciated the staff report from that standpoint . However , you have so many good arguments against the poor design that I would have had a - hard time going with your positive motion because there were so many good arguments that said hey, I don ' t know what it is . I don ' t see a site plan that reflects the good arguments . Wildermuth: It seemed like it should have been tabled again . Conrad : I think it should have been turned down based on that . Krauss: There' s a couple reasons for that and we can discuss some of them after the meeting closes but one thing that you need to be concerned with on this and on several other projects is that State law gives you a certain Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 25 period of time on which to act on projects after which it ' s approved . And you ' re oftentimes in a stronger position laying out exactly what You ' re looking for and voting to affirm it with those conditions than you are to either let it drag on or to deny it . Erhart : If the guy keeps coming up with the same plan and you keep denying it , after a while. . . Krauss : We haven ' t denied it . We ' ve continued it . Erhart : But if you deny it , the clock is reset? Krauss : That ' s right and in fact we think we' re going to resolve another one, Vineland Forest in the next few weeks but if we did not , we were going to bring recommendation to the City Council that they deny it just to stop the clock . Conrad : I guess if this comes back, even so , I would have a hard time going for , when you bring up all the valid points which basically means that they don ' t have that many restrictions up there . They just simply don ' t . They have a lot of acreage. Their only restriction is finances and to present what they continue to present is just not , it ' s not worth my dime to show up and give them an hour of my life every third night. I just want to clear them out . I really can ' t afford to talk to them anymore until they start meeting the intent of our ordinances and they' re not. I just offer that as my comment . I certainly couldn ' t have gone for this one in the positive modeaftersome of the persuasive arguments that you ' ve created in here . I don' t know. I don ' t know what that tells you for the next time through. I guess we have to be prepped if we should pass it on through just to stop the clock but I really don ' t want to spend my life reviewing Cenvesco anymore . Erhart : I ' d just support everything . I think you did a nice job of analyzing this thing and I also agree I 'm getting tired of looking at it . My question is , we were given the opportunity I thought in the joint meeting we had with City Council to do some pre-emptive strikes here and to get some of these things quickly into the ordinance and make these guys comply to them such as requirements for double car garages and . . . Is there any reason why we shouldn ' t be doing that? Krauss: No. Now in reviewing Cenvesco, we looked at the existing ordinances and interpretted them the way we felt we could and found some latitude in those ordinances that wasn' t exercised before but to more direclty answer your question , we scheduled public hearings on a number of ordinance amendments at the next meeting . In particular we've redrafted the entire parking and loading section in the entire site plan review section. Filling in what I perceive to be a lot of significant holes . Now we' ve also discussed that two car parking requirement but rather than just come up with a one sentence ordinance change we' ve changed the whole thing because we felt it was just a deficient section . Erhart: I was referring to the two car garage . Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 26 Krauss : Yes , that' s in there but it ' s in there with a lot of other things . — Erhart: You ' re going to make us think? Conrad : One other thought and then we ' re ready to either move on or go home. As they bought the 5 acres to the north, I 'm interested in what those 5 acres do to the property to the north in terms of densities . In other words , did we approve anything to the north? Olsen : That was already separated as an outlot . Conrad : It was an outlot but would it have been used to calculate densities that we granted to Saddlebrook? It wouldn ' t have? Olsen : And even then it was single family and they wouldn' t have exceeded — in densities . Krauss : Cenvesco is not pushing the density cap in terms of the number of — units multiplied over x number of acres . Olsen : But what you' re asking , it doesn ' t . . . Conrad : See I 'm not worried about Cenvesco. I 'm saying well I want to go back, if they' re giving that land, I don ' t want our decision for density on the lot to the north may have included . Olsen: It didn ' t. It was already a separate R-12 piece. Separated as a part of the Saddlebrook subdivision so that was never included . Conrad : But it would have been bundled into the overall net density though right? Olsen : No . Enumings : It ' s R-12? Olsen : It was zoned to R-12. They have the R-4 strip and RSF and then R-12. Emriings : Of course it ' s R-12 on the other side of it too isn ' t it? The one that ' s existing, is that R-12 or is it R-8? Olsen: That ' s R-12 and that ' s why Saddlebrook became R-12 is because it ' s pretty much all up on the same hill . Conrad : Any other thing for discussion other than Planning Commission interviews . Do we have anybody? Olsen : We' ve got a couple but could you meet like a half an hour eariler next time to interview them or how do you want to do that? Conrad : What kind of agenda do we have next time? The ones that are tabled here? - Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 27 Olsen : Long . There' s a lot of those zoning ordinances . Krauss: There' s only 2 planning items but there' s 4 ordinances . Erhart : Only 2 applicants so far? Olsen : I ' ve only seen 2. - Krauss : I ' ve only seen 1. In fact tomorrow morning Jo Ann and I are going to put, I think the closing date was today. I want to see that if we got a significant number . If we didn ' t . . . Erhart : Would it be worthwhile going back to previous applicants? _ Krauss : We did that . If we didn' t, what we may want to do is talk to the newspapers and ask them to put in an article about it . Conrad : Yeah, I 'm not comfortable interviewing two people . We need to - interview more than 2. Not that those 2 are bad . I don ' t have a clue but it ' s just , we need 5 to pick from and I don ' t now if that ' s the magic number . I guess I 'd prefer to wait until we had some choices out there . - I can ' t believe it . Sometimes nobody wants to be on and then other times , we get 15. Erhart : Wasn ' t last time during an election time or something that it brought so much interest in perhaps? Emmings : How many did we have last time? It was 15 to 20. Krauss : Do you interview all of them? Conrad : Yeah. It was a lot . Olsen : I ' ll check. Maybe today wasn ' t the deadline but it seemed like we tried to . Erhart : I 'd like us to continue to put out that list of projects . Status of projects with each meeting . Olsen : The ongoing list . Erhart : Jo Ann you know what I 'm talking about? Olsen : Yeah . You always ask where is that? Erhart: We kind of like to review whether we' re moving on any of these things . Conrad : On another subject is priorities for this year . Goals . We started and if you recall one Planning Commission meeting we kind of laid out some things we wanted to do . We got City Council input but we never merged the two together and if you took a look at the City Council input , Planning Commission Meeting November 1 , 1989 - Page 28 there was some consistency in what they were saying we should do . So far some of those things we've really not addressed. I think we should take a good look again even though, well , I think we should take a good look at what we' re around here to do. Krauss : I do have one addition thing too . We need to schedule another meeting on the Land Use Plan. I 'd like to distribute a map to everybody that ' s involved highlighting those areas that we had some questions about — so hopefully people can go walk the site and get a feel for it and Mark and I can develop whatever additional information you need but we should set a meeting date 2 to 3 weeks hence. Emmings: Our next agenda you said only has 2 planning items . Krauss : And 4 ordinances . Emmings : Do you think that ' s too much to put it on? Conrad : Yeah . Olsen : It deals with the parking and the site plan . Conrad: Let ' s talk about the week after that then. Do we have one week we' re off . Oh yeah that ' s right . Krauss : Could we do it possibly on a Tuesday that week? Tuesday the 21st? Emmings : I don ' t know without my calendar . Olsen : We can have Vicky call . Conrad : We 've got to move it on . We can ' t sit on it . Let ' s try that - week. Let ' s try Tuesday. I don ' t want to do it next week . Krauss : No , and quite clearly when we have enough time to prepare significant amounts of information , more is accomplished . Conrad : I went out and took a look at the land that we ' re playing around with. The residential little pocket out there and looking at creeks . What ' s funny about barriers or things that divide, in the wintertime they' re not as strong as they might be so the tree line that would divide the houses from the industrial , it ain ' t there in the wintertime. It — basically has a real nice elevation to look down over the industrial park . You've got to get out there and take a look. I don ' t know if there ' s any magic. I got really confused. I don' t have a clue is what it boiled down to down there but I do know that the residents would have a real good gripe for the 5-6 winter months that we have here. And the trees to the west are intriguing but there' s a lot of residential tucked in here and there . Interesting . Olsen : This is moving ahead a lot faster than originally thought too . When those people moved in there, I think they were being told, at least the year 2000, 2010 . - Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 29 Enu'iings: Why do we ever tell people stuff like that? Why don ' t we just - say there are, no one has submitted any plans but when they' ll come we really don ' t know. Olsen : Well we tell them that the soonest that it can be and we always say that it can happen sooner . It can happen later . l y Krauss : You' ve got to hedge it a little bit but the unfortunate thing is , people buying real estate hear what they want to hear . Olsen : So they see that there' s a year 2000 on that map. Conrad : I don' t mind you giving out opinions . Geez, I would want . Who else are they going to talk to to get some kind of feel about development? _ They can' t talk to a developer or other homeowners around . They don ' t have a clue . City staff has got , as long as it ' s not given in the form of a promise. As long as it ' s saying our best guess is and I 'm sure, I have the utmost confidence that staff wouldn ' t be promising something . I think they - have to give a feeling to these people . Olsen : And actually that time is when we discussed whether or not we should be pushing for the MUSA line to be amended and that ' s when the Planning Commission was saying , no let ' s wait . Are we ready for that yet and I think that ' s where it' s . . . Krauss : Does Wednesday the 29th work for a meeting? Batzli : Yeah . Conrad : That ' s not bad . _ Krauss : Why don' t we shoot for that then and we' ll get you some information and some maps . Emmings moved , Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9 : 25 p .m. . Submitted by Paul Krauss Director of+ Planning Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY OF CHANIIASSEN 11 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Todd Gerhardt , Assistant Executive Director 's-p DATE: November 9 , 1989 � `c _ SUBJ: Modification To Tax Increment Financing Plan and Redevelopment Plan No. 9 - Attached is Modification No. 9 to the City' s Redevelopment Plan. As you recall , incorporated in the Redevelopment Plan is the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the redevelopment area which inclu- des the downtown commercial area and the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. The plan is being amended to provide financing for pulbic improvements including the downtown parking lot, Lake Drive, and Market Boulevard. State law requires that the Planning Commission find that the modification proposed is con- sistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Because the modification involves public improvements located on land designated as industrial on the City' s land use plan and zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park, and CBD, Central Business District , the modification proposed is consistent with the City' s land use policies for the subject area. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission adopts Resolution No. finding Modification No. 9 consistent with the plans for development of the City of Chanhassen. " Attachments 1 . Proposed resolution . 2 . Modification No. 9 . a CITY OF CUANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION Date Resolution No. Motion By Seconded By RESOLUTION FINDING THE MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING — PLAN FOR THE CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN — WHEREAS, the Chanhassen HRA and City Council have authorized preparation — of a modified Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project and have submitted the modified Plan to the Planning Commission for comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made a thorough review of the modified Plan and has compared the Plan with the plans for development of the• — ' City as a whole. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota as follows: 1. The modified TIF Plan is found to be consistent with the plan for development of the City of Chanhassen as a whole. 2. It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Chanhassen hold the public hearing required by law and adopt the modified Plan. Passed this day of , 1989 , by the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. Chairperson ATTEST: •,_ Secretary 0511RE11.E40 CITY OF CHANHASSEN DRAFT REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN MODIFICATION NO. 8 NOVEMBER 3, 1989 November 3, 1989 Mr. Robert J. Ostlund Director of Administrative Services & Personnel — Chaska School District #112 1700 Chestnut Street _ Chaska, MN 55318 Re: Modification No. 8 to Chanhassen Redevelopment — and Tax Increment Financing Plan Dear Mr. Ostlund: This is to notify the District that the City of Chanhassen will conduct a _ public hearing on Modification No. 8 to the Chanhassen Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan at the regular City Council meeting on December 4, 1989, starting at 7:30 p.m. in the Chanhassen City Hall. A — representative of the District is invited to attend the meeting or you may send written comments to Mr. Donald Ashworth, Chanhassen City Manager. Enclosed is a draft copy of Modification No. 8, which includes the City's estimate of the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions of the development projects which are the subject of this modification. The chart which appears on page 28 of the Modified Plan summarizes the fiscal impact of the modification on other jurisdictions. — If you have any questions regarding the Modified Plan, please feel free to call me at 835-9960 or Mr. Ron Batty at 337-9262. — Sincerely, Fred Hoisington Planning Consultant - CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY B.BACKGROUND - C. PREVIOUS PLANS AND AMENDMENTS II. PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 5 A.PROJECT AREA B.PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES - C. PROPOSED PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES D.PROJECT AREA PLAN E. PROJECT AREA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS F.PROJECT AREA DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS - III. DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 1 A. EXISTING CONDITIONS B. DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES C. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN HIGHLIGHTS _ D. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLANS E. ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION F. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT G. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION _ H. REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS AND SCHEDULE I. MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT AREA - IV.TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN 1 8 A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES C. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSE - D. RELATION TO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN E. BOUNDARIES OF TIF DISTRICT F.DESCRIPTION OF DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AREA G.DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS - H. HISTORY AND CLASSIFICATION OF TIF DISTRICT I. MODIFICATION OF TIF PLAN J.USE OF TAX INCREMENT K.EXCESS TAX INCREMENT - L. DURATION AND MODIFICATION OF THE TIF DISTRICT M.RELOCATION N. PROPERTIES TO BE ACQUIRED WITHIN THE TIF DISTRICT - O. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLANS - P.ESTIMATE OF PROJECT COSTS AND SOURCES OF REVENUE Q. BASE VALUE R.ESTIMATE OF CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE AND INCREMENT I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to update the City's Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plans in support of imminent downtown public improvements and private development activities. It summarizes all previous plans and amendments, updates the Project Area Plan and the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, estimates project costs, identifies sources of revenue and culminates with a cash flow analysis. A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chanhassen (HRA), adopted a Redevelopment Plan in accordance with Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Authorities Act, Minnesota Statute Sections 469.001 through 469.047 on November 29, 1977. This new Plan, hereafter referred to as Modification 8/Amended Redevelopment " and Tax Increment Financing Plan dated November 1989, shall adopt by reference all prior plans, amendments and modifications thereto, except that those sections which are specifically or by reasonably necessary implication inconsistent with this amended plan shall hereby be repealed. B.BACKGROUND The City of Chanhassen has had a long history of planning for downtown redevelopment activities leading up to the present flurry of redevelopment proposals. Serious planning began in 1977 with the formulation of a Downtown Redevelopment Plan and the establishment of the original Tax Increment Financing District encompassing the area lying north of STH 5. The Redevelopment Plan was amended in 1978 and the district expanded to include the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park and other lands lying south of STH 5. The Amended Plan was approved by the HRA (Resolution No. 78-01) and the City Council (Resolution No. 78-73) on December 18, 1978. In 1979, the City commissioned the preparation of a revised downtown redevelopment plan (the Ring Road Plan), solicited developers and reached agreement with Kraus-Anderson, Inc. and Bloomberg Companies, Inc. to jointly undertake the redevelopment of the Central Business District (CBD). Each was granted exclusive development rights to a portion of the CBD subject to the tendering of an acceptable development proposal. For various reasons, — development agreements were not forthcoming. In 1984, the HRA took a fresh look at downtown Chanhassen to establish whether or not it should continue with redevelopment efforts. The result of the process was a new development concept — for downtown Chanhassen which called for retention of the mainstreet concept and appropriate existing businesses and the provision for incremental or staged projects. That plan, termed — Alternative Sketch Plan 2, became the basis for subsequent modifications to the City's Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plans. The formulation of Alternative Sketch Plan 2 included a protracted process, the purpose of which was to prepare a concept plan that could be supported by the local community and the marketplace. The following is a synopsis of the process leading to approval of the — Plan by the HRA: 1. Public Forum 1. Approximately 350 people were invited and 72 — actually participated in the initial forum (prior to plan formulation) on January 15, 1985. The consensus of the forum _ was that Downtown Chanhassen should be redeveloped and that the existing "Ring Road" concept should be revised or altogether changed. _ 2. Public Forum 2. Approximately 50 people attended Forum 2 on March 14, 1985 to review alternative concept plans. Sketch Plan — 2, showing an additional downtown access to Highway 5, was unanimously supported by the participants. Alternative Sketch _ Plan 1 was accepted by the group as a fallback position should the new access and railroad crossing be denied. 3. Developers Forum. Approximately 40 developers, bankers, builders and brokers attended the Developers Forum on May 9, 1985. That group also supported Sketch Plan 2. 4. HRA Approval. Based on the above input the HRA approved the _ concept plan on May 30, 1985, subject to the preparation of necessary Redevelopment Plan Amendments. 2 Major HRA accomplishments have included the acquisition of the old Instant Web building and resettlement of Instant Web in the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park; the resale of the old Instant Web building and the attraction of the Chanhassen Bowling Center; retention of the Chanhassen State Bank in downtown; the acquisition of a master redeveloper for the Downtown Redevelopment Area and the establishment of a special assessment reduction program as a development incentive for the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Between 1987 and 1989, the HRA/City completely replaced downtown's aged infrastructure (sewer, water, storm sewer/ponding and streetscape), and constructed new streets including West 78th Street, Market Boulevard north of Highway 5 and Great Plains Boulevard. Other major accomplishments include the completion of Townsquare Shopping Center and the beginning of construction of the Heritage Park Apartment and Phase I Medical Arts Projects. C. PREVIOUS PLANS AND AMENDMENTS The documentation since 1977 that comprises, in its entirety, the Redevelopment Plan for the City of Chanhassen, plus recent studies leading to the preparation of this Plan Amendment, is as follows: 1. A Redevelopment Program and Supporting Documentation, October 28, 1977. HRA Resolution No. 77-01 dated November 29, 1977. This document comprises a portion of the Project Redevelopment Plan and is hereby incorporated as part of the official plan. It contains the original redevelopment and relocation plans, a statement of the method proposed for project -- financing, a Project Area Report (existing conditions including an assessment and finding of blight), a Project Improvements Report, a Citizen Participation Report, an assessment of financial feasibility and an Affirmative Action Program/Policy. 2. Modification No. 1/HRA Resolution No. 78-01, December 18, 1978, incorporating the April 1978 Project Booklet and adding the Schmieg Farm, Ward Estate and Parcels I, II, and III of the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. This Amendment also authorized purchase of the five acre tract adjacent to Burdick Park. 3 3. Modification No. 2/HRA Resolutions 79-01 and 79-02, Adding _ lands within the Zamor Addition to the Acquisition List, May 10, 1979. 4. Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project - Amended Plan, March 20, 1980. Modification No. 3/HRA Resolution No. 80-02 (repealed by Modification No. 7 in 1987). — 5. Modification No. 4/HRA Resolution No. 80-04, Adding the Ann Koltyk Property to the Acquisition List, Decmber 4, 1980. 6. Modification No. 5/HRA Resolution No. 82-03, An Amendment to _ the Redevelopment Plan approving a Special Assessment Reduction Program for that part of the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park lying north of the Soo Line tracks, March 18, 1982. — 7. Modification No. 6/HRA Resolution No. 86-02A, An Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan to extend the Special Assessment — Reduction Program to the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Third Addition and the Ward Property lying west of TH 101 for the Lake Drive Project and to authorize the acquisition of Outlot B for park purposes, May 22, 1986. 8. Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Program, May 30, 1985 (including Alternative Sketch Plans 1 and 2). This Program established a new concept and direction for downtown — redevelopment including public parking lot construction. 9. Year 2000 Land Use and Transportation Study, August 1986. — The purpose for this Study was to establish a transportation plan for areas surrounding downtown Chanhassen and to provide access solutions for downtown to STH 5 and future STH 212. 10. Chanhassen Downtown Feasibility Study, November 1986. (Based on #8 and #9 above). 11. Amended Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan, — March, 1987. Modification No. 7/HRA Resolution No. 87-1. An amendment which established the financing for downtown _ public improvements and slightly expanded the Redevelopment Project Area to include lands east of TH 101. It also extended 4 the assessment reduction incentive program to all parcels within the Project Area. 12. West 78th Street North Side Public Parking Lot Feasibility Study, August 1987. 13. West 78th Street North Side Public Parking Lot Feasibility Study Revision #1, February 1989. 14. Trunk Highway 101 Realignment/Lake Drive Feasibility Study, November 23, 1988. 15. Trunk Highway 101 Realiznment/Lake Drive Feasibility Study, _ Supplemental Report #1, December, 1988. II. PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN This Plan represents the official Chanhassen Redevelopment Plan. It includes revisions to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan as established by Modification No. 7. A. PROJECT AREA The Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Area contains — approximately 630 acres of land of which 175 lie north of STH 5 and comprise the Downtown Redevelopment Area. The Project Area is generally described as being bounded by Audubon Road on the west; STH 101 on the east; the north shore of _ Lake Susan as extended westward to Audubon Road on the south and STH 5 and West 78th Street on the north; but also including lands north of West 78th Street that are presently zoned for business and multi-family housing uses. The Project Area officially includes all lands shown in Figure 1 and — described in Exhibit A of City Council Resolution No. 77-72, dated December 19, 1977 and in Exhibit B of City Council Resolution No. _ 78-73, dated December 18, 1978. The following land area, not previously described, was added to the Project Area in March 1987 by Modification No. 7: 5 • -vim \� \ )11 i•.. F 1i— \ i (� •\V /\x�._r.L.I. -- ��? •- \ z W .moi /� - -\ \ ' I 11 � �1 .. 1 . � wZa.a. 'a -..."7.-=._d Lr_it. L'ii \ ‘ '' \ '`.- *it\frd-'. .\ ' 4-,y__, d ) - —•-- o, • - 8 Aka -� II S _i ; — • L { I( \ 1 \\c ` sae ' i t3 o \ � L a w ' .F: '1! � �� W -l: i I ..J- WS,;,,; -i ,I II - ?• ' I 4// 9 , �_: L.1 :� ., \ / f ;- 1 _ — ' / 1„. N s 1 I4.WI el /R ' W 0 6 • li j g ,1 l'— _ - 1 — t j i / +1� •''\\ y I �, , / \i• , _ — --/ co L J / '� \..\.(7) • /. r a� — ry 1 / )) ,I. • ' -f . 1.. Iz � -- liltri - IhL_y • Vii,,//\ ,..\\ \ .• -rte �a Iii - .• , , - '\ : cr W .. �lid _ \ \ \ - Q — iv ` 1w3 I ..._ ..... ..>;----\ \\.\-• - \ )a.e-.•.-:7-•:./ ,:, \ - .\.\ k- ,..„: ;g:: ..., ..........,_.. v.. 7- -J1 E- ,( ,, •/ . aliLi_ __ Ia...li..._...491 _.,. . w _ 'Liz,. ... \I . II I JUI1.4 VAU • •ft.... 71111T1...7;0{I I I I Mb Ef: L\ g,-w n : 1%) —— —mo \ 410 , li amoif . j•-•-. Z> Z,ou z ..c .._ :Lt.: ""= 7-.. \i, \ . .4%. ........: , ,. ..... •'\ --. ..:. /. *.s. -.V 1 ii• % -, ..- "1...1.-i. ..i-i U • f ' • LiL( ,,,..' Fl 71P-Li :_.,_.-... _,_:_, .... L! i- IFITTTY g • !,...._i_1.1.5 1 t 1 :r-- Iii . 1. . . . . . ... - .1 . . :_ij- '\ , 11- . - - -11. \ ./".'"::•;:i 1. ,fi"\ .. .‘. niil.Litii :. 111 , . • t'' :!..; i 1-7 fig. 4 i -•f',-: „.. .:_____•.2._-,____.„...-. ..J_J: n,z, .. ,../ _ 1 i 1, --! i•-• .. t a _ (ror, II 1 i . . k rOffl 7„,// tr -4 1 1 III, I 1 ' I 1 Ti ri. .4:; \ . \'''--;- ''! 1' ". 1 .' .., . '\ ri III: / ' C Lr.-_...,.....--„.. ...-...-„2 L i ' \ . ). • ..1 - . E 5 gi i! •--, 1 i a 0 ZS .4.,........,, : Fl •I II ;.9,7 . t“, ..: , a\ , .4-, % I ) . i i I ! '...., --------- 1 ii --/ • 1 -,.„ I IP F \ •yr \ 0 , 1 . • I a \ .z P V 0 0 Z 1 .,,, .-----=-, - --'—•—•=* •—• _-___ ".,:i..•-•-a••.__Ii_•_i,..!_._ 1 E n 8 ----L - All of that part of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the NE _ 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 13, T 116, R 23 lying easterly of the centerline of STH 101; and All of that part of the W 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Section 13, T 116, R 23 lying north of the southeasterly line of Lake Drive East. — B.PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES The City of Chanhassen together with the HRA through this Redevelopment Plan seeks to achieve the following objectives: _ 1. Diversify the tax base of the City by encouraging commercial/ industrial development which in turn will enhance employment — opportunities, create stability in the tax base and increase and protect property values all of which are the primary objectives of the City/HRA. — 2. Encourage redevelopment of commercial/service oriented bus- _ inesses to better serve the consumer needs of the community. 3. Remove structurally substandard buildings which cannot be re- — habilitated. 4. Acquire and remove buildings that are economically or func- — tionally obsolete and/or buildings that are underutilized. Acquire land that is underutilized to facilitate development. 5. Eliminate blighting influences which impede potential devel- opment in the area. 6. Provide redevelopment sites of such size and character to assure development of the area and strengthen the overall economy — and improve the sources of public revenue. 7. Promote industrial development, provide increased employment opportunities and supplement the financial base of the community. 8. Provide land for publicly assisted housing. 6 9. Provide land for needed expansion of existing businesses in the area. 10. Provide adequate street, utility and other public improvements and facilities to enhance the area for both new and existing — development. 11. Achieve rehabilitation of buildings that will remain. 12. Accomplish the applicable goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 13. Provide maximum opportunity, consistent with sound needs of the City as a whole, for redevelopment by private enterprise. 14. Provide general design guidance in conjunction with suitable development controls in order to enhance the physical environment of the area. _ 15. Encourage and facilitate involvement of the community in resolving neighborhood problems related to business, physical structures and land use. 16. Provide financial incentives as appropriate to stimulate growth and private sector redevelopment efforts within the Project — Area. C. PROPOSED PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVMES The stated objectives of the Redevelopment Plan are intended to be accomplished through the following actions of the City: 1. Clearance and redevelopment. 2. Relocation of buildings and the inhabitants of buildings. 3. The provision of building sites for new and expanding businesses. 4. Vacation of rights-of-way. 5. Dedication of new rights-of-way. 6. Land acquisition and leasing. _ 7 7. Soils corrections and land preparation. — 8. A Special Assessment Reduction Program designed to stimulate — development within the Project Area. 9. New construction, and/or improvement of public streets and — parking lots. 10. Installation or replacement of public facilities and utilities. — 11. Financial subsidies to induce businesses to locate within the Re- development Area of Chanhassen. 12. Landscaping and streetscape improvements. — D. PROJECT AREA PLAN Figure 3 portrays the overall plan for the Project Area. Plan highlights include the following: 1. The Chanhassen Lakes Business Park comprising 450 acres, fully served by sewer, water and landscaped streets. — 2. The Downtown Redevelopment Area which is intended to be redeveloped for a multiplicity of uses including convenience and — specialty retail, services, entertainment, recreational, cultural, office, institutional and multi-family residential and including public parking to adequately serve new developments. — 3. A linear open space system within the business park and _ including parks on Lake Susan and in downtown Chanhassen. 4. The relocation of STH 101 to intersect with STH 5 at Dakota — Avenue and remove traffic from the downtown area by routing it directly to STH 5 and new Market Boulevard. 5. The extension of Lake Drive from County Road 17 to STH 101 to accommodate local traffic demands. 8 I )2v--..,. I- 4z i:I t• ca 8 . _ i E, 1 ,ir - \ �1 _ 1,:. ‘,,,;,\:\ , ,_._ LI _2, .� 4 s, /A i 1 Iir z W ,i z ia -- -v'f. .>.":ii< - .1 0' is W 1 D xy: i-/ 3 :? / a , ' � i I) 1 w 7 to II r' .1 § WgA z �-^�ry Q '- neo i 1 s ' . I I 1 II:,• i . , ......... . _, 1 \� tars. /:.• • =1 (\ ' 1\1 -;‘,.,-.. 1'-'. ( Iiiii • - - H.....1.] s. r �i� �-,..\ C W y,n% J,..--/:--- \ ‘ <a rwv - `" ;, II 3 a -__asss,.eras.ss�. -, - I 2 d Q d 6. The realignment of West 78th Street at County Road 17 to _ provide adequate stacking distance between West 78th Street and STH 5. 7. The widening of County Road 17 from Lake Drive to the northerly line of the Tax Increment District and the creation of an urban section in this Project Area. — 8. The construction/reconstruction of public utilities within the Downtown Redevelopment Area to accommodate new development including the acquisition and construction of a major ponding area with over a million cubic feet of storage to serve all of the downtown area. 9. The construction of Market Boulevard from West 78th Street to the southerly line of the Tax Increment District. 10. The construction of Lake Drive from Audubon to existing TH 101 — and the upgrading of Audubon within the Tax Increment District. 11. Redevelopment of the area north of STH 5 extending from Great Plains Boulevard easterly to realigned TH 101. E. PROJECT AREA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS All streets and public utilities have been previously funded with a — combination of special assessments and tax increment financing and are therefore not highlighted. Detail can be found in bond sale _ documents and feasibility studies for each project. Projects that are immediate (see Figure 7) include Lake Drive which _ extends from County Road 17 to Market Boulevard and Market Boulevard from Highway 5 to the south line of the Rosemount Inc. entrance which road is being designed to serve as the future — alignment of STH 101. Both are being built to municipal state aid standards and both are of critical importance to satisfy the needs of _ the City's major street plans. Incidential sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer/ponding improvements are included with this project as is street lighting for Lake Drive East easterly of existing TH 101. _ Right-of-way acquisition for a portion of Market Boulevard and the temporary connection to TH 101 is also included. 9 Future roadway projects related to this system include the extension of Lake Drive westerly to Audubon Road and easterly from Market Boulevard to existing TH 101. A small portion of Market Bouelvard will also be constructed as a temporary connection to existing TH 101 and the southerly most portion of that roadway within the District will eventually be relocated to the east to connect to future TH 101, which alignment has already been _ established and officially mapped for construction in concert with TH 212 (1995-2000). The detachment of West 78th Street from TH 5 at CR 17 will also be a future public improvement need. F. PROJECT AREA DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS Within the Project Area the HRA has elected to provide land writedowns or other subsidies to induce major employers to locate in Chanhassen. It is the intention of the HRA to continue to use writedowns and subsidies only in very limited instances for major employers and large commercial developments that are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and economic development goals. Projects that have involved TIF land writedowns or subsidies/ incentives include Rosemount Inc. and Empac. Pending projects include the Country Suites Hotel and Market Square Shopping Center. All present and future such projects will be done within available revenues. Each project will stand on its own, generating enough increment to cover public costs. A future redevelopment proposal includes that area lying south of the Soo Line and north of TH 5 extending from Great Plains Boulevard to realigned STH 101. This is a long and very narrow land area consisting of several ownerships and occupied by a mixture of unsightly and incompatible land uses including an obtrusive redi-mix plant, an industrial building, a restaurant and a few small vacant parcels. Access is also very poor and substantial grading will have to be done to establish proper grades for redevelopment. A portion of the property will also be required for the realignment of STH 101. 10 III. DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The centerpiece of Chanhassen's Central Business District (CBD) is the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, a unique entertainment center which draws hundreds of thousands of patrons each year from all — over the upper midwest. The CBD generally lies north of the Soo Line Railroad tracks and aligns itself in mainstreet fashion with West 78th Street. Land use (Figure 4) north of West 78th Street is undergoing _ significant change and redevelopment. Townsquare Center was constructed in 1987/88 and the first of two Medical Arts development phases comprising 20,000 square feet of office and — clinic floor area is under construction. The Heritage Park Apartment project is under construction and Colonial Shopping Center is undergoing a major facelift. The most significant problem — north of West 78th Street is the need to improve and coordinate parking for all of this new development. Development south of the Soo Line on either side of West 79th Street is generally convenience retail and highway service oriented. _ Development of lands along West 79th Street has literally stopped 500 feet west of STH 101 due to poor accessibility, a problem that is currently in the process of being corrected with the extension of the street westerly to Market Boulevard. Development south of West 78th Street is predominantly commercial and entertainment in nature, consisting of the Dinner Theater, Chanhassen Bowling Center, a small area of shops, _ restaurants and bars. Several of these buildings are underutilized and in need of replacement or repair. Uncoordinated and unsurfaced parking areas and poor soils conditions also exist in this — area. B.DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES — The following are the objectives of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan: 11 I • -W-"N\ \\ - \ )1 >T..'•• ..� )r ,'-. I.' fir... • Lill . i i I/J Z (/) -PX-a I _..... ... . ' ill \.\ . •''. . Q \\ ----. AV-777'\... .( tc•). ) k . r- . N 4=i i_ al ``\ �<!; X 1:.1 1 I 7-7—. 1.1 VI. .. 4 A • 11 • -.7.-. ' . I ' f2.1' ,7--. 1 rTil 11 1 : — alF. 1. 1st �� iI.: ii_i .- .Li--.27-t IL, '1 )- 1 .1 ) N ijr."74'e'll1,1 I tams' ' \ ./,' I. i •, ,,e.s..... max: i 1 6... j I 11 1 i ;IP ,/ "Ai/ _ r •1 _:_. , iL \ ., lima ?rail j. //I it , a 1 I IJ I Y O I i' s 1 1 { ,/ J I I ii II 11, 1 _ . "- 1 IG !/ , `-� 1 -- - ,1 i \\., , � � . it 1 , t\\ 11 glir 0 : - • , \ - 11,'s * - `\\ \\., „,,,..„\_. 0 Iii �ft�'\ ��, o 1 rli,=-� __.� .o«•.L_.. W V— 1. To provide convenience shopping to satisfy the needs of residents. — 2. To unify the downtown with architecture, landscaping, signage and public spaces. 3. To maintain downtown's compatibility with adjoining residential _ areas. 4. To provide essential infrastructure to support the Downtown — Redevelopment Program. 5. To improve access (visual, vehicular and pedestrian) to and — within downtown. 6. To capitalize on Dinner Theater traffic including the provision for entertainment, specialty retail, office and lodging facilities. 7. To create a pedestrian environment with appropriate linkages to the community. 8. To provide for incremental or staged projects. 9. To retain businesses appropriate to downtown and relocate businesses which are not downtown use types. 10. To provide joint or shared parking to maximize parking efficiency while minimizing the appearance of downtown as a shopping center. 11. To attempt to develop a festival environment that focuses on the artisan community. — 12. To retain the West 78th Street mainstreet concept. _ 13. To introduce housing as a downtown use. 14. To extend the Special Assessment Reduction Program to the downtown area as a means to stimulate redevelopment. 12 C. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN HIGHLIGHTS The Downtown Redevelopment Area is proposed to consist of four primary land use areas (Figure 3). The CBD is intended to accommodate a variety of uses to satisfy the needs of both visitors _ and residents. Recreation and entertainment is intended to be the primary focus to capitalize on the presence of the Dinner Theater and the Bowling Center. Other prospective uses include movie theaters, a community center, hotel, restaurants, taverns and public spaces. Other developments proposed to be accommodated in the CBD are offices, convenience and specialty retail and cultural uses. Figure 5 generally illustrates one of many potential development concepts for the CBD which would embody such uses. A second zone within the downtown area simply is termed commercial, however, the intended uses will be governed by the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Generally speaking, lands south of the . Soo Line are intended to accommodate highway service and convenience retail uses. Those lying west of the CBD are intended to accommodate general commercial uses as defined by the City's land use policy. Other use areas include multi-family housing and office/institu- tional uses. The former generally boarders the north edge of the _ downtown area. The latter correlates with the existing institutional uses in the vicinity of City Hall. Highlights of the Plan are as follows: 1. Redevelopment of the north side of West 78th Street while retaining the Colonial Shopping Center and the Riviera Restaurant. 2. Redevelopment of the properties on the southeast corner of Great Plains Boulevard and West 78th Street. 3. Establishment of a landscaped buffer between the CBD and the Chan View neighborhood. 4. The construction of Market Boulevard providing a second access for downtown to STH 5. 13 , t . S _11 1 iI,: . i . ... D; 4,11 a. .. , • . ...L.,B. 1- . ! , :-.:,,,; •ill. \ ,h :, •-•,,1' , •,:, 0..41,__..: : . ' • .-7:- i ..• A , t•...., I..-.'; .'.. I•I ______—, .i., -..',-.1:1111 - '',.....:-....; C) :!::, - woo warm aemniiisir - T..%..,......k . — 11A111111/4Irld a- ..,. ..t. -•:- .t---.::Y.,7:.::--:-.1 -. 5:-,i4.., --7". fr e..--- C'.1 . 7:. 1 i .-_,..-:._3 I --. 1''.A-•:,,,:-.-o_;,„: "......:4, ,..r, .: ,":••,,,:::;,s; I 1 - 1 lAi Z 12. ilt •i- i -- -1.% if' • .\\ \.. • 1g d . .::: .••; -1 -7-:--; -11 -I t — ! d • 6 ..... . • .. lige I ! ,1 -old r !1•.:.,..•*$'40.4 i .., .7-0.,'...;,. 1 :'•• 1 1! / T 1 1.;-''' '' ' '•-' 1 ' • -c t i'';' '' "C ...--- ..N. - t‘ ..... ... .... i • /, i ..h• . i '•-•'•''. ,....p.• - .. % 11., ., . ..1 i .4 , c..7.1 v A ,,..,, .. ‘• .., , . ., A F4 I .... A. I is 1 .:-„,:r 1 1 . . '.4 ,- 1 _ 1 TA,...; , . ,..• ......... .. .. ,0 ,• . 4,%•-•A,' ; •10P •° Eli.itti74 _ . _ i -11.K.--,i'M e•• 1;.;', et"' ,(:\.... i•-• . C -iilic .5,4,4 . II .-11111).... ..:\--"V .' ..- . _ '..A'-.7, ••,- .t,.. - • .;•. el k /3 —..— I 'it: 1 r. '' ‘,..:.• ,-:. \ \ cl_i_Ae , 4 ). 1 1 ; .... . 1111 11 - ....... /••• L 1 _ . 1 11'..... ....L._.,a.•:r-I. '`. • III ile.;.; ---' ' .•:. \ - • . 4 011 ,.... . .. 1 \ I _ • i: u -I -.....:.- ..;:-..- . ,,...,...:-..‘_?,. .1:A .. :-) ..-) Il 1 - 1 -,'• .-„••••• ) J .. ! k'' IV. 1 ! _ •:..? ' •1 ' ri• illawi .,;':;:-. ,:,:a.:1,--. .:i•I , „.....- .. ------/ . Z.. . •• .. . • • , , I ll ILI ,. .. 1 ,.,:,, , ,;. • • ... . 4 ;,••,,,:. , ,..., ...:.....:._ : 4 . .,;,,.....- .. - • _ ' i :vi-- ,,- ..,,,,,,, t.... . 7 , . . . '71 ._ i• -4,4114kigi.' - -- - - -••,4,--' 1--- . . 111 0-_,,' lit 1 1041:411c. • L i ,..0 . 1...:. • • .„,,. . ... . _ i--h A 1 ...._. 0 z : :1 I 00 1 , 1 \ \ ) • .. 0 tilli \ ‘ C..._..) : — 5 1 1 ' II i, .. I :1_____ 11 ' --... - —..-..--....- 1 Ai IP! ,'.:- r 1 . pu..„ ,u w i -.1 , •.. , ii,...4., .:41„,.::.;, • .• . ). 2 — .vt \!4Plit I= t -1 1 1 . . '''-IIIIII "*.....3., 111 1- _I Oil 4ritilit 41.___!.,, ,...,::_film. • 1 cc 11J • 1- > ..i :. :.!. P. • .1-.. 1111111111.1 CA Lu , omic num ..... .... s•- •.--,,, i 3 2 ..., .._ y-- , . .. -.._ 1 r----- ii------------‘-,--. ... ./. ,, i A 1 i 1 [ ill _ 1 ...\_____ • . • __. ..... _ _ 5. A connection of West 79th Street to the new STH 5 access creating an expanded ring road concept which interconnects the areas north and south of the railroad tracks. 6. Construction/replacement of public utilities and creation of a storm water collection and detention system. 7. The elimination of on-street parking and the development of public/coordinated/shared off-street parking. 8. Expansion of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater entertainment and specialty retail complex. 9. Creation of a downtown public square or commons area. 10. Establishment of an internal and external walkway/bikeway system. 11. The connection of Coulter Drive to West 78th Street to provide the office/institutional complex with an identifiable entrance. 12. Relocation of the historic City Hall building to serve as the centerpiece for Old Town Square. 13. Relocation of Great Plains Boulevard to facilitate access to downtown. 14. The unification of downtown by the establishment of landscaping, entry features, appropriate signage and compatible architecture. D. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLANS Since most of downtown's infrastructure was replaced (streets, utilities, streetscape, lighting and pedestrian circulation) as a result of projects described in Modification No. 7, remaining public improvements within the Downtown Redevelopment Area are comprised mostly of parking lot improvements associated with redevelopment projects. The most immediate project (see Figure 7) includes the North Side Public Parking Lot improvements (Feasibility Study, February 1989), the purpose of which is to unify parking for several new 14 • I • ,� •: _ • • % o. ti1_ _15 i. t ' 1 C . _ �.' '. '=iA. r1 /r ` ' - ` , V11,- /9 is _ 7 °I ifiCr--. Z\ 711... :. II a •• 1rrziI . 3 ...7-7 1 ._._.. , ,.• it.i !.) 1,,, ,...-.:....-:i • HI / i 1/ /,#:' : 521i I ., I7 i1 iJ '�1 R i1 1;111 I: Y J/ i \`iiiiitti- •4• 113 t 1111i . -:. t /..,1 .. _ • lik ) " , 41 ❑ _; __:, 1 . . 1 I .=, ci It- '-' , \, \ ..,,%e\:),i, ,,l) t !ii 13 .. \ ( it11 0-� _ , i . ___ - .,,,,,t i .,.c :. lir). ./...---m !ili EL 14:11.! 1 . \ . i'f. .. ./.7 , \ 4. ., . ..1 . 7 1 ..ri- 7--:-'n' r---------- - ---41.;_---,._--,--). \ . ' : -:, , 7ir , f c,„ .._ l o , \\ \\ ' W ' JCC UJ .an... a ► 1.______j \*.T %41_ j \\: MO MINIMI - _� � _ 1 a ''J, \ \\- '. ) / : . ?r .. -. -� \;\ I L�i . `iL. 14 \\ .c,! OCG! I _ }H: F1L ; d? '�• 1° 1 i 1 - g it . T111771:17J " i--:"..i.'\.,\ .\ \ i S \\ , `\ ` ). - •V\• /.,. �I r 1 Ti I E I ... Iii-La-ilyr_; ;1 ; \., ))-'\ \i ,.. . =,--- Tf ;,/;.,. � �f cJ._1 � �r :r ) ¢ oa I' �LL iLi n1 i 1 • % j '-0 a i i 1/s •.\\ 1\ /:/ 1 •') g \\• i -------_.- ) L✓/%` 1 x \\\ ,.__L..-..�i._— - i / ),) ....\tri\ . .... -•,... • i ��..\ •�, Li _ .\ T :a' \ I V'�\ \\ - ' 1.—. m_�_._ t_--_-. —— I .,.........„. ..>s•te\:\:\ . . ; j iiii.)7..LL.121.., c 1_,...), L./ ..•,.. ..., .._ k I- — • .. . I, 44 4--4A,,. . .7-- -N. , 1 .., '"--- :))4*\\ • ' ,1-1-ii-u-L--:-1--.:.,\`-N - IL1-'..._1i 1 z ti ii5.. ___ "---—0— .1 -..\\• .k. 1 r--7-77-r—nrs. - 0: r—. I I Lai z a. 0 0 )1 • • i_l_ ; ' • rV-1-1 ==1\ \\ N..,. ei:t .,. .0_1:1/ , 14,\--". ., ...).):• 0-1 -.1 1 zOw_a 2 — C)0 0 a %\-- / ik t f qi ' / _E-._---J 7-1-'a.61 • , , —r--1----ip i.u.J 1,1 ., ,.\\. 1' , .•:-- 4; . ' . /K---. — ' v 1 • . • - .„ I , • 1 ' . .-_ \ t.,'6,,..._.. ._____._(4, E. 0. ,. - ...,,, ir- ---. / 1 \ c--- N... 1 _...,s.r , i ! II 8 i — ill:71-1•14-I " t , * \ \ ‘-aLiW...7-. \ •- I 5 i -, -, A1 . a • - t,t„. • I, 1 414p7TTTV, s'V, // /,,,, 1 ! ,,,,,......::•,-....,:::•••••••••, .-.-- - •, .....„24 _ 11111:11,111:' • -"Wt.--- /•47.44fi, • 1 i '-•,'& -V,V : 1 ,N - , -,--.,.., :-.-: v-c,.‘-:, ,—:._.,---. -...,:.•--, :,,-... ' ' -- --i -I - ' -- • -•-• *; M,/ -i1;.----•:••:-.3,,,,;:-..-f,',- , ' • - •-• .--- ';!•:•• ••••:---.. ....---.,--,,s•-•,r•-;„-•,,,,,,.--,-•,. , : : • . .- ,:.-...-. -- . 't. 4" ' ,•Z.`,,,'C'-itr.' ''.•,--.'''-..ii, &- , _ ..,:v4., ..!-?,-- . .: ,. 1 i -. ....Ny-,....;..... .,'',..., . -3- 7 Ityt44,„ ,,,,,:,;...4.4. 4.:,., X.:WV'', '', "'.A'..:4';;',''''',. : ; '';'',,;1.:1 l'4, : I •.''U'''-•C,'',S,c••;:%.• -,M.-":"'". 5 i -- •%::ev=-' "=—?!"- "I F.--... ...,, ...-- • , f ".'.074.itg•14 1 —1 od ; 1 .4";'4'e,.. d,"s7: ;/ V di Ik i' o . — 1 . I • 5:•,f, ,,.I.'t• : df" ,,,k, / '(- dc li / , %.,_ •1 L ";''-: -44,77,-..÷-14,/' I 1 g ;I "/Iit'1 1 1 0 , . , — I1 0 11 !I ...01/ \ \ .. : l',.: .• ../ r/ t. _/ / l ., -tor--.., :r. ..,.....=•)- _ - ' ',1.1 Ili (--_______ .11,-, ,jzt64‘,....1. I/ . 1 /r--- \ .. ---,•.;,.. , _ 1. k. , / ) 1 - ,:y,?.. 1 .11 . :/ i'l I 7`.. _ i — • 1 I I li i- -1 I •I ? 1 ---... V w il iii 1 . .., ( \ 'i A 5 . j::'11::I .. -• \,4 IA a — . i i 1 • $\ \\.. , i ,.q: $,/ . _ cr p-- A V. • I ,.._ .a - LU 5 :IL - 0. Ir ' • ' )1: 1 . 1 08 . i. 5 cc I 0- --....... • • ' : " wii. ..__..._.... - _______ __\.\.... and/or evolving redevelopment projects on the north side of West 78th Street and at City Hall. Improvements include grading, bituminous surfacing, curb and gutter, landscaping, sidewalks, utilities and lighting. Future projects include improvements to existing and future parking lots within the CBD south of West 78th Street where redevelopment is yet to occur, parking is deficient or not surfaced and/or poor soils conditions exist. E. ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION Figure 8 proposes two different types of land acquisition including 1) lands for public improvements and 2) lands for redevelopment. All lands required for public improvements have been or will be acquired by the HRA. Lands designated for redevelopment are also proposed to be acquired by the City. Where such parcels contain structures and businesses, the City will be responsible for relocation activities. All acquisition and relocation will be conducted in strict accordance with applicable state and federal law and full relocation benefits will be provided to displaced persons and businesses in the manner prescribed by Minnesota Statute Sections 117.50 through 117.56. F. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The environmental impact of downtown redevelopment efforts will be negligable and temporary. More likely they will be highly beneficial due to the solving of existing infrastructure problems. The proposal is entirely consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Traffic generated can be accommodated on existing and proposed streets. There will be only limited disruption of wetlands and wildlife areas and mitigation will be required. There will be no student contribution to the school system. And most importantly, surface waters will be collected, detained and released in accordance with good surface water management practices. The only potential adverse impacts will be temporary in nature and associated with construction activities. Measures will be taken to insure that erosion is controlled in accordance with Watershed 15 District requirements. Business disruptions attributable to the construction of new streets and utilities will be minimized by — phased construction. All appropriate permits will be acquired from regulatory agencies. G. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION The redevelopment project will be administered by the Chanhassen City Manager, under the direction of the Chanhassen City Council/ HRA. — H. REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS AND SCHEDULE The HRA has entered into agreements with developers for four downtown projects which are in various stages of planning/ _ construction as follows: 1. Country Suites Hotel. This project will consist of 84 rooms and — will occupy a site at the southeast corner of West 78th Street and Loredo Drive. Construction is scheduled to commence in the fall of 1989 and be completed in the late summer of 1990. — 2. Heritage Park Apartments. This is a 60 unit housing project _ located on the north edge of the CBD on Chan View. Construction was commenced in the summer of 1989 and will be completed in the spring of 1990. — 3. Medical Arts. This is a two phase medical clinic and office complex located on the north side of West 78th Street. Phase I — will comprise a floor area of approximately 20,000 square feet and will be two stories in height. Construction began in October _ of 1989 and will be completed by May of 1990. Phase II is scheduled for construction by 1992. 4. Market Square Shopping Center. Phase I consists of approx- imately 94,000 square feet of floor area and is located on the southwest corner of West 78th Street and Market Boulevard. It — will include a SuperValu grocery store having 22,000 square feet with the option to expand to 30,000 square feet. Among others, tenants include MGM Liguor, Chanhassen Lawn and Sport and _ Merlins Hardware. This project has received all needed approvals from the City and is expected to commence _ 16 construction in November 1989. The project is expected to be completed in the fall of 1990. I. MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT AREA Maintenance and operation of the public improvements within the Project Area will be the responsibility of the City. Maintenance will be financed by TIF, Municipal State Aid funds, special assessments and such other funding sources as may be available. 17 IV. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN — A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY Pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, (The Act), the City of Chanhassen (City) on December 19, 1977 created a Redevelopment Project (Project) in the portion of the City — north of State Highway 5 (Downtown Redevelopment Area) and established the Area as a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District. On December 18, 1978, the Project was expanded to include an — additional 416 acres in the area south of Highway 5 (Chanhassen Lakes Business Park) and included that area as part of the TIF District. At the time of the creation and expansion of the Project, a Redevelopment Plan (Plan) was adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chanhassen (HRA) and the City. The Plan contained details of the Project, which have since been modified on several occasions, and included a brief discussion regarding the use of TIF. This constituted the "statement — of the method proposed for financing" the Project required by The Act. Due to changed circumstances and new development — opportunities, it is now appropriate for the HRA and City to amend the TIF Plan to reflect changed conditions and new proposals. Accordingly, the City and HRA now wish to adopt a modified TIF — Plan which accurately reflects the financial plan for the Project, with particular emphasis on the Downtown Redevelopment Area. However, adoption of an updated TIF Plan does not constitute an — election on the part of the City or HRA to proceed with the Project under Minnesota Statute, Sections 469.174 through 469.179 (The TIF Act), except to the extent required by Section 469.179. The HRA and City intend to continue to administer the Project as a TIF District created and certified prior to August 1, 1979. _ B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES In addition to the objectives outlined in Section II B of the Redevelopment Plan, the HRA and City seek to achieve the following objectives through the TIF Plan: — 1. Provide employment opportunities within the City; _ 2. Improve the tax base of the City and the general economy of the City and State; — 18 3. Encourage redevelopment of the Downtown Redevelopment Area — of the City, which area has not been utilized to its full potential; 4. Implement relevant portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 5. Assist in the acquisition of certain properties for the purpose of constructing needed public improvements and promoting rede- _ velopment; and 6. Implement a program of special assessment reductions for properties within the Downtown Redevelopment Area whose market values have increased due to new construction since the creation of the TIF District. C. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSE In adopting the TIF Plan and administering the Project, the HRA and City have made the following findings: 1. Redevelopment of the Project Area would not reasonable be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of TIF is deemed necessary; 2. The Redevelopment and TIF Plans will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for development of the Project Area by Private enterprise; and 3. The Redevelopment and TIF Plans conform to general plans for the development of the City as a whole. D. RELATION TO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN The City authorized the Redevelopment Project on December 19, 1977, and modified its boundaries on December 18, 1978. Additional land was included within the Project Area with the adoption of Modification No. 7 in 1987. This Modification No. 8 will describe development activities planned or authorized within the Project area since the adoption of Modification No. 7. 19 E. BOUNDARIES OF TIF DISTRICT Boundaries of the TIF District are shown on Figure 1. The TIF District includes property in both the Downtown Redevelopment — Area and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Legal descriptions of the boundaries of the TIF District were included as exhibits to Resolution Nos. 77-72 and 78-73, adopted by the City Council on — December 19, 1977 and December 18, 1978, respectively. The boundary of the TIF District was not changed as a result of the _ expansion of the Redevelopment Project Area referenced in Section IV D above nor will it be changed as a result of this Modification No. 8. F. DESCRIPTION OF DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AREA The Downtown Redevelopment Area is the portion of the Project Area originally created by the City in 1977. It consists of approximately 175 of the Project's total of 630 acres. The Downtown Redevelopment Area is located north of STH 5 and a majority of it is west of STH 101 (Great Plains Boulevard). The area — contains the retail and commercial core of the City, including the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. Although the infrastructure and public facilities have been improved significantly in recent years, the — Downtown Redevelopment Area is still characterized by the under- utilization of land. G. DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS Historically, the HRA has negotiated agreements with developers seeking to develop land within the Downtown Redevelopment Area. The HRA is currently negotiating with Alfred A. Iverson regarding — construction of an 84 room hotel and with Chanhassen II Retail General Partnership regarding a 94,000 square foot retail facility. In the future the HRA will negotiate with other developers who — propose projects within the Downtown Redevelopment Area. H. HISTORY AND CLASSIFICATION OF TIF DISTRICT The TIF District was established by the HRA and City in late 1977 — and contained approximately 175 acres centered on what is now known as the Downtown Redevelopment Area. The TIF District was expanded the following year with the inclusion of approximately — 20 455 acres in the area south of STH 5 known as the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. For purposes of classification, the TIF District is a pre-1979 TIF District and the HRA and City intend to retain that designation except as required by Minnesota Statute, Section 469.179. I. MODIFICATION OF TIF PLAN This modification marks the eighth formal modification of the Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan. The TIF Plan will be modified again in the future by the HRA and City as changing conditions warrant. Any reduction of geographic area of the TIF District, increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, increase in the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained by the HRA or designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA shall be approved upon appropriate notice and hearing by the HRA and City. J. USE OF TAX INCREMENT All revenues derived from the TIF District shall be used in accordance with the current modified TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance or otherwise pay the capital and administrative costs of development activities within the Project area as identified in the TIF Plan. K.EXCESS TAX INCREMENT In any year in which the increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the TIF Plan, the HRA shall use the excess amount to do any of the following, in the order determined by the HRA: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment therefore; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of bonds; or 4. Return the excess amount to the County Auditor who shall distribute the excess amount to the City, the County and the 21 School District in direct proportion to their respective tax capacity rates. — In addition, the HRA and City may choose to modify the TIF Plan _ again in order to provide for public improvements or other development costs within the Project Area. L. DURATION AND MODIFICATION OF THE TIF DISTRICT The geographic area of the TIF District may be reduced but it — cannot be enlarged after August 1, 1984. As a TIF District established prior to August 1, 1979, the TIF District will expire on August 1, 2009, except as the provisions of Section 469.176, subdivision 1 (e) of the TIF Act may require otherwise. M. RELOCATION The HRA accepts as binding its obligations under Minnesota Statute, — Sections 117.50 through 117.56 for relocation and will administer relocation services for families, individuals and businesses displaced by public action. — N. PROPERTIES TO BE ACQUIRED WITHIN THE TIF DISTRICT In addition to those properties identified for acquisition in previous modifications, several parcels within the Downtown Redevelopment Area will be acquired for construction of public improvements or for conveyance to developers at a reduced cost. Figure 8 shows all properties which have been or will be acquired within the — Downtown Redevelopment Area as a result of actions described or authorized by the modified Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan. O. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLANS Substantial public improvements were undertaken following adoption of Modification No. 7 in 1987. Additional improvements are contemplated at the present time or in the near future, including construction of public parking and related facilities. Figures 6 & 7 show the locations of anticipated public improve- ments. 22 P. ESTIMATE OF PROJECT COSTS AND SOURCES OF REVENUE _ Table 1 is a summary of the costs which have been and which will be incurred by the HRA to support development activities within the Project Area, including costs incurred since Modification No. 7 was adopted in 1987: Costs which are scheduled to be paid out of tax increment funds are those indicated in Table 1. Since the Downtown Redevelopment Area is within an existing TIF District, increment is currently being generated and administered by the HRA. Incre-ment generated by the TIF District has been collected by the HRA since shortly after the creation and expansion of the District and Project Area in the late 1970s. Through the adoption of this Modification No. 8, the HRA commits itself to expend the portion of the increment generated by the TIF District which is necessary to pay the outlined costs. Funds generated through tax increment have been used for a variety of purposes, including land acquisition, relocation and public improvements. The HRA has also initiated a Special Assessment Reduction Program for properties throughout the Redevelopment Area. Under the Program, benefitted properties are eligible for reductions in assessments if there has been an increase in the assessed value of the properties due to new construction. Properties assessed at a rate of less than $30,000 per acre qualify for a reduction equal to seven percent of the value added to the property through new construction. Properties assessed at a rate of $30,000 per acre or more qualify for a reduction equal to 12 percent of the added value. The amount of the reduction for which property owners are eligible is equal to the tax increment from the parcel (as determined by the County Auditor and adjusted for fiscal disparities contributions) for a three year period following construction and commencing with the year in which the HRA receives the first full year's increment, or such other three year period as may be agreed upon by the HRA and owner. However, the maximum reduction shall not exceed the total special assessments levied and outstanding against said parcel 23 8 8 R § 88 282R § N � 8 § H = ty st tri o ci to I: tri CnO N tri t� .a ol to C tv CO ? N N F2 to t� .- to N d mm� °' �� - (� 43 N r> n fA df H f9 69 N I �_� § § 1) o § § o ! :E!; tri triCI 0 ((pp ca tri tri 15- 8 tom'! N O to • •• O0i O 1=1� O V N c dN. p� � . § 1 ri N. N uu N IL N v to rn ail Z ° co r v v U O0 N 8 Cr)bS pQ Z z CD v - C� N O • O LQ Nom >-LI-I _) oN co CO rn Q O ZWU 7 � to 2 Q °tL Ili o m _ _ �" vm� ��I3 2 8 0 E N N O>a a N n 1... t:N o d o 0 NO N CO co N69 60 U3 0 -tN- 0010 s 0 al PTO 0 00 -0 C) 0 N ') 8 § 0 O OI O O pp $ tf^i to tI) In C7 LIT O)t- tC) a) . V N tr) 0 12 01 000 O� C) N C1 Qom) or r N�►�C U Tr .--IA N N C) 7 N ,^ .- Oi .- N C') .- to co N N H Ml 49 N m d 7 E m 7 m t O m O - m 7) m C cTY C o E o § 4 E 7 0 Q m Cl. y o y tX_ E a2 y 8 m N a C D d O W G Q Y C mco m 79 'O m d) O O O am E a �y a` N o 2ma m 2 dy a of > C ym c om a mEoo', m > Eoym v as > i - _cc oo Erc > m >xcc t > ':,=_:-Ec 0 o d a-- E .5 0 m c � rn�Ye' c aa� m m o a5.0 m C L c E CCENya o QNm O Og2 U 2EgQN E8-¢ Nm o r01 , m• c V to co L O Q 45757 7 0 Cl- Q(7a t7 c y V Q v t LI d V Q 7 Z J E CD, O- C1-Cl b 25 C O O-- >_ = a— :ti d = Q O_ •c4 fn _•6 0-22 R >— H > 7 7 to m o tam o — 7 m o m o O N - 0 3a cn 3 0 F .-r.- a) ma `. Q 0 f- La `�a`U I- t- ¢ 0 0 E r2, C ! 2 4 for qualifying public improvement projects. Owners wishing to participate must enter into a Special Assessment Reduction Agreement with the HRA, as recently occurred with the developers of Phase I of the Medical Arts project. _ The HRA has also participated in a loan program with the devel- opers of the Heritage Park housing site within the Downtown Redevelopment Project Area. Under the program, assistance is — made available through tax increment revenue during the early years of the project. As the project begins to generate additional revenue, the developer will repay the HRA for its earlier assistance. Repaid funds will be available to the HRA for other project costs in the future. Certain expenditures within the Redevelopment Project were prefunded through general tax increment revenues available to the — District. Acquisition of several properties were financed in this manner rather than through discrete bond sales because of the length of time generally necessary to acquire property within the Project Area through negotiation or condemnation. Administrative expenses were incurred and paid by the HRA in connection with such acquisitions which would have been accounted for in any bond sale. Administrative costs for the years 1987 through 1989 have been documented by the HRA, and are being included in bonding _ authorized by this Modification No. 8. Q. BASE VALUE Chanhassen's Tax Increment District has been highly successful in _ meeting the goals and objectives outlined in this Plan. Over one million square feet of industrial/office space currently exists with new construction anticipated to produce nearly two million square _ feet of commercial/industrial space. The current total tax capacity of the Tax Increment District is $2,221,929 with a base tax capacity of $150,972. The figures shown do not include the bonds sold in — 1988 as a part of the Rosemount and Empak "pay as you go" land incentive programs. Current estimates would show taxes proposed _ to be generated from Rosemount at $823,000 per year and Empak being $183,000. Both are anticipated to be paid off within a three year period after first receiving full increment. 24 For purposes of this Modification No. 8, the current new values are being compared to current new bond requirements. For example, — Modification No. 7 anticipated a total of $5,460,400 to be needed as part of the Downtown Redevelopment Project. Of these amounts, — $2,261,700 was anticipated to be assessed to benefitting properties with the remaining $3,198,700 paid via tax increment. Current bonding calls for an additional $2,150,000 million to complete — improvements within the downtown area. As the $5 million in total costs was previously accounted for as a part of Modification No. 7, only the additional amounts (current bonding) in comparison to — current revenues are being shown in this plan amendment for consistency purposes. The plan amendment additionally includes _ incentive payments for the supermarket complex (approximately 94,000 square feet) as well as a new 84 room hotel. The additional costs/new revenue associated with these projects is also included as _ a part of the current financing and therefore included in the following sections. R. ESTIMATE OF CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE AND INCREMENT With regard to the proposed 94,000 square foot retail facility and — hotel, the following is an estimate of the captured tax capacity: Assessor's Estimated Market Value $6,730,000 a) Tax Capacity of Completed Development 338,478 b) — Less: Original Tax Capacity - 37,749 c) Captured Tax Capacity 300,729 Tax Capacity Rate 100.179% d) Estimated Increment Income $301,267 — a) Estimated Market Value upon completion of both the Hotel and SuperValu projects. — 25 b) The classification ratios and analysis used to determine the tax capacity of the commercial development are as follows: Property Class Taxes Payable EMV 3a Ratios Tax Capacity — 1993 $100,000 3.00% $3,000 6,630,000 5.06 335,478 TOTAL $338,478 c) The estimated 1989/90 original tax capacity was calculated as follows: 1989/90 Property _ Parcel 1989/90 EMV Class Ratios Tax Capacity 25-195-00-11 * 100,000 3.30% 3,300 306,900 5.06 15,529 — 25-014-01 -00 234,900 5.06 11 ,886 25-150-00-10 38,800 5.06 1 ,963 _ 25-150-00-20 26,200 5.06 1 ,326 25-150-00-30 24,600 5.06 1,245 25-150-00-40 19,500 5.06 987 _ 25-150-00-50 29,900 5.06 1,513 TOTAL $37,749 * EMV of land is $153,200 and EMV of building is $253,700. d) The 1988/89 tax capacity rate for the project area is as follows: Carver County 30.077% _ City of Chanhassen 21 .124 Independent School District #112 (Chaska) 46.052 Special Districts* 2.926 TOTAL 100.179% * Special districts include the Metropolitan Council, the Metro- politan Transit Commission, Watershed District No. 1 and the _ Mosquito Control District. _ 26 Based upon current tax capacity rates, the above-captured tax _ capacity should produce a yearly increment of approximately $301,267 beginning in 1992. 27 - l' 2 53 x 4 re 1-20 1.1 VI 1 / « 82 ^ A 2 Y CC Io 1. 8 8 8 � - a. r g i s 0 x t9 O a Y x '0 52 • a: 8 k V 5 Vv ID ).- Vao- bNw • n V > M E 9 G O O O ~ y t O -u bU 9 O y� ± Y - V� O O 8 Ol p x r • 4. '44', n io M ^ V O Y 4 NI O rar 5'i 26, (�G 2 JV • 4 J V V C = y r Y ' . M Y � •�O . \ • o - 'Ju aR E a 2ppY a. t L Y 'O OI n. lD L 3O L .Vi In i Q .�► r .� u 2 .8 ii4 us eNI P. C 4 id « a . a : ter . L 2 5 4 2 t8 - 2 -- L" 5 ? @ 2 § 01 L O, O • V zSC 3n Y Y --I N ..w • G 0 U L • ) M X Y < V C r - C U U m x V O U • - o • 0 N B 1 a. • h o. m Y ` o c I U u a r r- A n 52 V r V r'O O 6.1 E- ; '0 / 23 : ; 3 m • M pp 0 O 7. N • • N • ~ R Vr1 i 101 x rig 2 . • ; Y M N y p I •-' V II. rj. y O a ; O i pL ^ ▪ yw — .y x • w ��N xuu a N O � O 110 0 4.1 LV Op L - N L'^U '^ O ]iY I- v VV N If M _ F-. Y Y4 g M w Cn M oV ua 1F. to $ yy m Vw • _ T € v 9K u D e P NN b > 14 • V C yx Y C . • J O� A• b O Y Y s-, L L C L O YLN N M Y - a • O Y i s 3 t M - , ' MM : . U 6t % F • ) I. - Y • D _ • C po; '`e" Y �f r N OL • O RY2cc az.zt. — . 2, 0 ..4 ^ 1 I Y H N N CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 1`♦ MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning DATE: November 9 , 1989 SUBJ: Report from the Planning Director At the November 6 , 1989 , City Council meeting the following actions were taken: 1 . The City Council granted preliminary plat approval for the Vineland Forest plat. As we have indicated in the past to the Planning Commission, the current plat utilizes a road connection coming from the south from the intersection from _ Lake Lucy Road and Nez Perce. The road is ultimately designed to run to the northwest across two adjoining proper- ties linking up with Pleasant View Road at Peaceful Lane. The plat that was approved by the City Council was revised to incorporate a single large retention pond rather than the original three small ponds that were proposed. In addition, construction details for the road to the south were clarified and facilitated by the fact that the applicant had purchased property located at the intersection of Lake Lucy and Nez Perce that had been located outside of the plat but on which easements would be required to construct the street. Growing out of the Council ' s interest, tree preservation plans have been clarified with final conditions incorporated concerning the preservation of specific trees. 2 . The Board of Adjustments had recommended an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance relative to the 100 ' lot depth require- ment for docks on recreational beachlots . The ordinance allows the Board to make interpretations of the Code when requested. In this instance, the manner in which lot depth is measured on recreational beachlots was unclear. This application for Robert Pierce and the Stratford Ridge plat. In this instance, the lot is 100 ' wide at the point at which the dock is built but it does not average 100 feet in depth. The Board interpreted the ordinance such that the 100 ' depth at the point at which the dock is located is acceptable thus , Planning Commission November 9 , 1989 Page 2 by this definition, the variance that had been requested was no longer necessary. Councilman Boyt raised the matter at the City Council meeting. He in essence appealed the Board of Adjustment' s interpretation of the Code. It was his _ belief that the matter should be tabled and staff should pre- pare an ordinance amendment that generally achieved the same goal . The balance of the Council agreed and the motion was tabled. Staff will be bringing an ordinance amendment through the Planning Commission on this matter in the near future. 3 . The City Council approved the wetland alteration permit for the installation of a dock at 745 Pleasant View Road for Jeff May consistent with the conditions and recommendations of the ' Planning Commission. 4 . City staff received copies of three environmental assessment worksheets on large scale developments proposed in Eden Prairie, adjacent to the Chanhassen City line. The three projects cumulatively will add 312 multi-family units , 544 single family units , and 69 ,000 square feet of neighborhood — commercial space. Staff composed a letter for the City Council to review that was to be sent to the Metropolitan Council . The letter stresses that the City of Chanhassen is not necessarily opposed to well designed development in Eden Prairie, but was concerned with two primary factors . It was our opinion that commercial development in Eden Prairie along Hwy. 5 is inappropriate in light of its proximity to the Chanhassen Central Business District. Since the request also involved comprehensive plan amendments and repositioning the MUSA line in Eden Prairie, we wanted to ensure that equity is preserved in terms of the ability of Chanhassen to access the Metropolitan Interceptor in the future. We are not aware that there is a capacity problem at this time, we simply wanted to make the Metropolitan Council aware of our concern and this issue. The City Council instructed staff to send out the letter to the Metropolitan Council as drafted. Copies of the letter and the environmental assessment worksheets are attached. 11 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO : Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning DATE: November 2 , 1989 _ SUBJ: Review of Environmental Assessment Worksheets for Large Scale Development Proposals in the City of Eden Prairie Staff has recently received copies of environmental assessment worksheets for three large projects in Eden Prairie . These pro- jects are located adjacent to Dell Road at the eastern border of _ Chanhassen . One of the project areas wraps around to the south side of the DataSery property. The current proposals call for the following : 1 . Jamestown - 112 multi-family units , 60 single family units and 39 , 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial . 2 . Shores of Mitchell Lake - 175 single family units . 3 . Shroers PUD - 309 single family units , 200 multi-family units , and 30 , 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial . Totals 312 multi-family units 544 single family units 69 , 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial To the best of our knowledge, city staff has not been contacted in any formal way by anyone in Eden Prairie concerning these pro- jects . We did receive a mail notice regarding one of the pro- jects but there was not sufficient opportunity to provide any substantive comment. The environmental assessment worksheets indicate that expansion of the MUSA line in Eden Prairie is required to accommodate all or portions of these projects . The magnitude of these projects and the manner in which they are being handled raise some questions for the city. Staff is not necessarily opposed to the expansion of the MUSA line to accom- modate them; however , we believe that equity must be preserved. I think it would be useful to notify the Metropolitan Council Mr . Don Ashworth November 2 , 1989 Page 2 that Chanhassen is also considering expansions to the MUSA line and that we wish to ensure that access to the available capacity of the interceptor is fairly distributed . We are also concerned with the proposal to construct almost 70 , 000 square feet of com- mercial space a short distance from Chanhassen ' s Central Business District. Although these are proposed to be two relatively small neighborhood scale centers , it may have the potential for reducing some of the momentum that development in the Chanhassen CBD has recently gained. A last matter concerns the fact that there may be utility and drainage issues of mutual concern occurring in this area that warrant further investigation by both communities . Due to these concerns we feel it would be prudent to respond in writing to the Metropolitan Council outlining these points of view. Copies of it would be forwarded to the City of Eden Prairie and to the Environmental Quality Board. A draft of the proposed letter is attached for your review. Unless staff is directed otherwise, we will send out this letter after the November 6th City Council meeting. CITY 4F • . i ,,,, . Si CHANIIASSEN ,;. 2 .,... / .... . .. - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 November 7 , 1989 Ms . Ann Hurlburt , Director Comprehensive Planning Section Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East 5th Street - St. Paul , MN 55101 Dear Ms . Hurlburt: We have had an opportunity to review the environmental assessment worksheets for three proposed projects located in Eden Prairie , including Jamestown, Shores of Mitchell Lake, and Shroers PUD. The three PUD' s are located in close proximity to one another immediately adjacent to the eastern border of the City of Chanhassen . Copies of the EAW were forwarded to us by the Metropolitan Council . The City of Chanhassen does not wish to stand in the way of reasonable development within a neighboring community. However, we do have several concerns with these proposals . The magnitude of these projects taken together is great . Cumulatively, they will result in 312 multi-family units , 544 single family units - and 69 , 000 square feet of neighborhood commercial . According to information that we have received, a guide plan amendment is required to relocate the MUSA line to serve all or parts of these projects and to redesignate portions of the site from low density residential to medium to high density residential and for commer- cial use. The City of Chanhassen wants to ensure that adequate capacity remains in the Lake Ann Interceptor to handle not only develop- ment in Eden Prairie but potential new development in Chanhassen. - As you are aware, the City has been working on a Comprehensive Guide Plan update for some time that appears likely to result in the request to expand the MUSA line within the City. City staff has recently been in contact with Metro Council staff to apprise them of our progress and to keep them informed as to the status of our plan update. Chanhassen has experienced extremely rapid growth over the past few years and virtually exhausted the supply of industrial office land and has only a few years supply of residential land remaining in the current MUSA line. Our purpose Ms . Ann Hurlburt November 7 , 1989 Page 2 in raising this issue is be assured that there is adequate capa- city in the Lake Ann Interceptor to handle development in both communities and that what ever capacity there is , is fairly apportioned. Our second concern is relative to the amount of commmercial development being proposed in these projects . A total of nearly 70,000 square feet of what is entitled "neighborhood commercial development" has been illustrated. We are concerned that these commercial nodes are within a short distance of the Chanhassen Central Business District. For many years , the city has had — comprehensive plans that are designed to focus commercial development within our downtown and has expended great effort and a large investment to bring this about. Our efforts are currently being rewarded by substantial development projects which have either been constructed, approved or are currently on the drawing board. We do not wish to see this effort diminished by additional commercial development on the fringe of our Central Business District. We are most directly concerned with whatever commercial development might be proposed at the Highway 5 and Dell Road intersection since this is in the closest proximity to our downtown. It would be our preference to see this commercial area either eliminated or downsized. The third matter of concern relates to items of mutual interest in designing projects on city borders. It is our believe that there are matters pertaining to drainage utilities and access which should be discussed between the two communities prior to project approval . To the best of my knowledge, these discussions have not yet occurred. Chanhassen — City Staff would be willing to meet with Eden Prairie Staff and with the independent developers at their convenience. On behalf of the City of Chanhassen, I would appreciate any con- siderations that you may give on these matters . I would be happy to discuss them with you in person if this would facilitate mat- ters . Sincerely, Paul Krauss , AICP Director of Planning PK:v cc: Mike Franzen, City Planner Marcy Waritz , Metropolitan Council Representative Ann Hurlburt, Director of Comprehensive Planning — Minnesota Environmental Quality Board METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 Fast Fifth Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101 612 291-6359 October 26, 1989 To lelho n It May Concern: RE: City of Eden Prairie Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Schroers/Jacques/Delegard (north of proposed 212) Received 10/23/89 Nltropolitan Council Referral File No. 14988-1 The Metropolitan Council has received the above Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The Council will be reviewing this in the next few weeks and would welcome any comments you may wish to make. Any comments should be sent within one week for _ input or. the Council's response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A separate opportunity to comment directly to the preparer of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet is also provided as a requirement of Environmental Quality Board Rules. If you have any questions regarding this Environmental Assessment, please contact Anne Hurlburt of the Council staff at 291-6501. Thank you. Sincerely, METROPOLITAN camIL John Rutford Referral Coordinator JR:ch v,,. R:= I FILE ND. / 989—� ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) MARK APPROPRIATE SPACE: REGULAR EAW SCOPING LAW —' NOTE TO REVIEWERS: For regular EAWs, written comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the EAW information, potential — impacts that may warrant investigation and/or the need for an EIS. For scoping EAWs, written comments should address the accuracy and — completeness of the info:.mation and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. Such com:n•nts must be submitted to the Responsible — Government Unit (RGU) during the 30 day period following notice of the EAW's availability in the EQB Monitor. Contact the EQB (metro: 612/296- 3985; non-metro: 1-800-652-9747, ask for environmental review program) or the RGU to find out when the 30 comment period ends. I . Project Name: 5rhrorrc / / Delerard (north of nronosed 2121. 2 . Proposer: EDD P:rtnerchip — Contact Person: Dirt: Ferrirk or Don Patton Address: Viking Drive St" te 120 Eden Prairie. MN _ Phone: (=,11) 3 . RGU: City of Eden Prairie Contact Person: Chris En ger & Title: Director of Plannintz Address: 7600 Executive Drive '— Eden Prairie. MN 55344 Phone: (612) 937-2262 1 \l/f-- dr 4 . Project Location: $ections IS and 19. Township 27 North. Rance 22 West. a . County Name: J-lennepin City: Eden Prairie b . Attach each of the following to the EAW: 1 . A county map showing the general area of the project. Sec Exhibit A 2 . A copy(ies) of USGS 7-1/2 minute, 1:24.000 scale map. See Exhibit B 3 . A site plan showing the location of significant features such as proposed structures, roads, extent of flood plain, wetlands, wells, etc. See Exhibit C 4 . An existing land use map and a zoning map of the immediate area, if available. See Exhibits D and E 5 . Describe the proposed project completely. (Attach additional sheets aS necessary.) _ The total area addressed in this worksheet is 280 acres. BDD Partnership has prepared the Schroers PUD Concept plan covering the westerly 129.8 acres and which includes 220 single family lots or a gross density of 1.69 dwelling units per acre. The future extension and construction of Dell Road south of State Highway No. 5 will abut the Schroers PID for approximately 1.300 feet along the east property line before the roadway will turn in a southeasterly direction. The balance of the property. 150 acres, has been sketched out for future development. The major unknown factor at this time is the future alignment of Dell Road. However, assuming a given alignment on our sketch plan, we have prepared a development plan showing R-9.5 and R-13.5 single family, RM-2.5 and RM-6.5 multiple family residential, a fire station location and a small neighborhood commercial arca. The remainder of the area is the Rice Marsh Lake area, the open space around the lake which will be dedicated to the City and an undetermined land use for Outlot A on the south end of Rice Marsh Lake. The land use classifications for the entire 280 acres is broken down on Exhibit F attached. 6 . Reason for EAW preparation: Voluntary. List all mandatory category rule numbers which apply: — 7 . Estimated Construction Costs: — S . Total project area (acres): 280 Acres or length (miles): n/a. 9 . Number of residential units 500 or commercial industrial, or institutional square footage 10. Number of proposed parking spaces: single family - 1.372: Multi - 400; — Commercial - Fire Station - 30. 11 . List all known local, state, and federal permits/ approvals/funding required : Level of Type of Government ,Application `talus U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Wetlands — Nation g'l'ide Permit Minnesota Depart. of Wetlands — Natural Resources Shore Standards N.E. Metro Waste Control Comm. Sewer Extension Minnesota Pollution Control Acency Sewer Extension Minnesota Dept. of Health Water Extension Metropolitan Council MUSA Line Amendment City of Eden Prairie PUD Approval Comprehensive Plan Amend. Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Watershed Permit Creek Watershed District 12. Is the proposed project inconsistent with the local adopted compre- hensive land use plan or any other adopted plans? If yes, explain: No XX Yes A change to the MUSA line location is necessary. 3 13. Describe current and recent past land use and development on and near the site. The current and recent past land use of the site has been farm land and open vacant land. the I.t, Approximately many acres ofsite are in e ach of f011owiRg ctegories? Aceagesshould add up tototalproject area before and after construction.) Before After Forest/Wooded ?5 19 Cropland 184 Brush/grassland 6 Wetland (types 3-8) 55 55 Impervious Surface 75 Other (developed 121lot area) 15. Describe the soils on the site, giving the SCS soil classification types, if known. See Exhibit G 16. Does the site contain peat soils, highly erodible soils, steep slopes, sinkholes, shallow limestone formation, abandoned wells, or any geologic hazards? No XX Yes If yes, show on site map and explain: See Exhibit G 17. What is the approximate depth (in feet) to: a . groundwater min. avg• b . bedrock min. avg• No soil borings have been taken to date. 1S. Does any part of the project area involve: a. shoreland zoning district? No Yes 4 1 S. b. delineated 100-year Yesflood plain? No XX c . state or federally designated es river land use district? No If yes, identify nater body and water andbie state related" landic resources: and describe measures to protect Rice Marsh Lake has been classified as a Natural Environment in Eden Prairie — Shorciand Regulations. The ordinary high water level of the lake is 877 elevation. In conformance with the City's park development plan and with the City's — Guide Plan Map, a public open space corridor will be planned along Rice Marsh Lake. This arca of public open space above the ordinary high water level will serve to carry out the City's park/trailway system and the general — purpose of the Natural Environment classification. There will be no individual riparian lot owners and hence individual property owner will not have access — to the lake and will not be allowed to alter the natural conditions along the lake. The public open space dedication will also give access to everyone to enjoy and experience the natural setting of Rice Marsh Lal:c. 1 9 . Describe any physical alteration (e.g., dikes. excavation, fill, stream diversion) of any drainage system, lake, stream, and/or wetland. Describe measures to minimize impairment of the water- related resources. Estimate quantity of material to be dredged and — indicate where spoils will be deposited. At this time, only detailed grading plans have been considered for phase one (32 acres) of the Schrocrs PUD Concept. 2 0. a . Will the project require any appropriation of ground or — surface water? If yes, explain (indicate quantity and source): XX No Yes b . Will the project affect groundwater levels in any wells (on or off the site)? If yes, explain: XX N'o Y e s 21. Describe the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used. during and after construction of the project. 5 Prior to and during construction activities, erosion control measures will be implemented in conformance with the City's andoWatershed dp Districtope reacand requirements. Silt fence will be placed at the bottom seeding and mulching will be installed in all disturbed areas upon completion of site Brading operations. a . Will the project generate: 1 . Surface and Stormwwater runoff? No Yes Approximately one half of this site will drain toward Mitchell Lake through a series of ponds. Mitchell Lake discharges — ultimately into Purgatory Creek. The balance of the site will drain into Rice Marsh Lake. Rice Marsh Lal:e discharges into Riley Creek. 2 Sanitary Wastewater? No _ Yes Sanitary ste water will be produced by this project consistent with normal residential neighborhoods based upon 100 gallons per capita per day. The sanitary sewer system is sized to _ accommodate the proposed project. Trunk sewer lines will be constructed from the metro interceptor to serve this site. — ; . Industrial Wastewater? No Yes 4 . Cooling Water (contact and noncontact)? No Yes — If yes, identify sources, volumes, quality (if other than normal domestic sewage), and treatment methods. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. See Southwestern Eden Prairie Development Phasing Study Sub-Area 1A. b . Identify receiving waters, including groundwater, and evai- - uate the impacts of the discharges listed ab e. Ifdischarges to groundwater are anticipated, provide percolation/ permeability and other by drogeological test data, if available. 6 23. Will the project generate (either during and after construction): No Yes a. Air Pollution? �; Yes — No _— b. Dust? Y'es No c. Noise? � �'�: Yes — No d. Odors? If yes, explain, including as appropriate: distances to sensitive land uses; expected levels and duration ofnoise; s urctypes ,andnd quantities of air pollutants from stacks, m fugitive emission (dust); odor sources; and mitigative measures for any impacts. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. exhaust — During construction phases, construction equipment will g' . fumes, dust and noise. This equipment will be muffled in accordance with applicable state regulations. The construction equipment will ill constitute a short term impact to the surrounding areas. Water will be used during construction for dust control. wa e 24. Describe the type and amount uthatf ��s1lidbeand/orgenet hazardous the stmethod including sludges and ashes of disposal. �eneratcd at the Normal waste typical for residential developm.nt be per day x 2.5 persons estimated rate of 494 tons per year (2.5 lbs. per person pe r unit x343 s.f. units x 365 days 1 ton/2.000 lbs.) _ (2.0 lbs. per person per — per day x 1.8 persons per unit x 157 multi units x 365 days 4 1 ton/2.000 lbs.). 25. Will the project affect: a . Fish or wildlife habitat, or movement of animals? oXX Yes Normal nstruction activities will temporarily displace wildlife. 1 b . Any native species that are officially listed as statemals and/or endangered, threatened, or of special and describe impact): — plants?) If yes, explain (identify species iX____X— No Yes If yes, explain (identify species describe impact): 7 — 2 6. Do any historical, archaeological or architectural resources exist on or near the project site? XX No Yes An archaeological study of the area has ret been ordered. 27. Will the project cause the impairment or destruction of: a . Designated park or recreation areas? XX No Yes b . Prime and unique farmlands? XX No Yes c . Ecologically sensitive areas? XX No Yes d. Scenic view and vistas? XX No Yes e . Other unique resources (specify)? XX No Yes If yes, explain: ily ?S. For each affected iein ADT contributed ebycuthent.proje tage anddathe traffic (ADT), increase _ direction distribution of traffic. Dell Road is a north south minor arterial on Eden Prairie's comprehensive plan. Dell Road will be constructed south from State Highway 5 to serve this site. This project will generate approximately 5,000 ADT. All trips will flow north of State Highway 5. 9. Are adequate utilities and public services now available to service the project? XX No Yes If not, what additional utilities and/or services will be required? Trunk watermain will be extended south from State Highway 5 to serve this site. It* --•,...,„ .., -1 ri- , ._, , ..„ • ... .. ._ ., . -, 3each . LIMN Lau .... . ,,... It - .. . - ____........... -0.4- - 4 , i• - =,...: - • • - ,t .7e—,-- . ; Tr. ,101, ..„--_ , ;....z_=.1.p.- kb°. :.el..r•ne .1 ...__,.......t., 1 _ es.. -.--; ; ''l-l--, ----‘,..,s L.. __ 7: L ! i ki r;/./ Deenaven - •. . . • A. ,.. .'-'-‘c• ' .•- •• •'irrivamiumn- -......„„J..... i • _...--. - :( I i • -1 ' ill ..- -• ../ •I, - : %I ' . ' t• eme .._.1 . II eS . . .. ..„senores;.. •... .. e e 4..• . .... .11 •I ,_. 3 ..... .. ,.... . .. ' • .. 4••• • - - ' _., •SA _s•_-_•,.: —1---• — -- • ...1 , . .00 r. ,,,.. •.° .4i . • bey tA . r . ' ---i • L..nady inka . i •-•,-,•=1.1..-Lt ' : . ();"'• •• ' 1-..c 1...6 ' ..., •P'.."' a-Y".) • •• 1 ;..r 1 it'. • . 1 -•••• ' ... 1' 'J " .s'''' ti In,. . ;1• -— Greenwooc %,•*/sL., • . ...... . .T, ,.. . ......- ••. Gime+, leek**, , Et . •. .., I bee ._....,.. - Muses' ___• . _.•I _____-, •- ... ,.--••• • --oAW.-A•Y ,r,*--0 • :i• 1 - .....- 1. Low - -7.--14 ,..- , -, ••••-• . .........•.. ,.,,__.. . ' .,-. - .-Exceigint:- - 61 ‘....• \Las,..• -. • 7..• ' !(6 1. "‘. /? 11/1in ntlionka-1. .,..„ .. ty! .....ti."'" • ••"-"'• X.. !I i. • ; s- ... - " ...._."... mi , 1 9 )"., • -- ,i Vs ...•. t• `e• " ...'rie -‘„ .. -- c:outet,... . __ i• ..„ • ..,.... ,...„, .,,,,./..,.... .,... • \ )i•--. • ; , . 82 elm 7 .... ,1 ,./..... . - ,. ...,. : . , .... ir v. ...e. 6_ ,7 -.00"...".1"-• . ,t.c--,, • ..a..•I•. -•- ; •••• 177: ••,....,... \ : ...:P IIC i , „sk..:iit.. /,.. . l.„.:...,.. ... )• • - - • • •••-•••„ _ • ..,-.. .. .. -•••:. ••....-. -„..• „.-.. .:-..„. , • - ...„-„, , •••.• .- •••,... "z......„..„ .,,,: .• - ,., • ,, ) 0 ,'•::...4". / . i - c:•,•••-- . - ;iv- • „ • V:7 ..... ":::V...!•.-n'" Lot . I -\../ '"' • - 700 ..., tfts-•,_•._ ,--.4.-:Ask ",. . •... I . icst.....",E30 •,,.5:1...,, . i. .,.. . 41 ••'-s.. 41" Lir. .. W 1.1";- ILI-11";,, : 1-' _. _.h.„.., • - . i.......- - . s. ... i '.-s•-•\24 -/--' • I. mon !. 4.- ,,...... ..,-;-. -7;••••7-..• •-;7• 1.: •-'•% 18 ••p•/.• - ;-'• ,v,!..••.z.r- Lake .14! k...A.4,:t.t,. i . . 0• .40,... t. ." • . i., . !•out•i r 0L.. i t!i•-•::••• .4.i KS::'r• "r•-• "?••••::: '....‘'.."' : .. • .i....; •A "."- •/._. 60 \ le Ps t I. : / .. . .,.i_ *IA....f4. ...1 i..4.•":::',• A^".,,...`!--• 7.•-•t.,......--..."- .".1 ‘........,. - .7. ...- -;; .,! 4-...,n'S••• •• - ....• -..0 . ,..011111 , '' ..----.-0 '•i 1.-•---t 'It •••• 1--;•--t.....1- :- ..7.-•- ...,,,,t,'- . m ...•.: , 5 ; "-' --- 494./._•••21==k— 16 . . . s- •r--...,„„ i ,.......--.• •••s....., 0% ''' .-...!..1 .....n-U.2'..A'. ",•::.i.-2:;::; .. ......:111". I ,.' ••••'......f • • tS,' ....1••'''':. '."..1• . . ....•• I -^•••• . (...'..., i '.. ... •• • ,i ., ... . ...rib.,. I .... • p • . g••• ? -•-••".' Allh•'''''''.'-•+-1f:-.1 ir,.."--.•••• e.-;-- ,--..., „--., I„. ..Ni'''' "A"'"S Eden,_ t Prairie . • :1 \s.,..\, r7.„...:.•.:. ..r_,.....rao % • -.• .....::-, , %..„,. 14. ......1 W.,. ..a,....e.."-•.Fz.-..-::. ,..,.. .7,..!. • • IVOR Ye • 1 71 t -.•-•-• I• .-.,....* ••.... 'C... ... irk - ......., GM 4 r.......: r--3..,,,;. ,,W Lie.. w v..1p) .. . 0 (14. • i•--,,," -Y2.4.7„,- -r• 1.•.1,-1: •: •:--1:•.•: ilt , \'• \a' ' f.. • • '• - •- • - - • - — - •••••• \kutk 1 I .,. --"12.2&••'• •....,I , • • t , i........e ri ) --. li, ' : ''' - ....•..e :•,:j-tre.:....:_. -1 . - l' .....""' , ----. T.:..., I: '.:: --; 7•1::!...- 4..::..1 ..,,.?,,,....‘,,. . , , '( Pork• • e. i 1.1 il .. . e • . v.'' a • '..• ••••• • : •••‘..44 mmm . o LAW.•1-..-- ". , ..1.-, ..k.:17. -..-.9,;;;.-• f.:1.,:.... F-1..orggnr) . i 1 r %.' .."'•-• ".j',...--.!..4?tv.5.:14i.)ENi.....-10111U101, Lai,,I : • i • . ; < -• ....-..--....... __ 4"•. •;..- ti a.nh a ss eri 1 Itz••••1 . 1 . - - • - i- • ..... :1 i I -:•- •••- • ,-.1:-.: 7.,.:-.-.:•---. . hof..,-.5•;-,....i....,:r--,.._"--terstecr-.1 • -... .... .. , 4 -------.-..._ : . , -1,• .;.::::',.' ...-.4:.•.: • •:-.-r.- .--. -.7.0....::.,1 --r-14•4%-:1" ; , •- • 1 Fly..; 1 I i la •::- ... :.."., 1• .....'..-. ....... '...°••'' '.''41'.. _,•1 7 ..• ,• ' or.' '. C.O., -- ...IN ' ''...- .,...... . „..• 14 . . .. a, • t . -• 1..). , ..ft....7: II 1.•• •;.- cm .'c•,...•••*•''' ....- • I.:- :" ..' ••••;,.:445A."'` -.4' "‘;`':-7-1.•r:.1-: fr."••11, _. . I ....: •e., ......1.42.1,1•1!.... ' .....-;•.........,,,,,.... i - ,.. ..... 169 aska::',1.7:7-4 :i.:*4;Wiii',...-..- .e't--••••.--:".-- — 1 ......„•,.... 1 los -,r„,.g....... ......... ; . ..,.- --.._i .:• -„ ..•.:- 4... ,..„ ,:o• -•,,.,.... ---••• - ‘ _......J...j.,.1 ...--ii...4. ........++ ... .:..,.:.117...f.. ..... - .....-- , _-- .......- .7.,% , --- -.-•....--•[...i... :-...,;...,..- -,,ox..., - ..,..c--,Liu ••• s"---.. ;., ....-,- .-.... .• ''',. ','' /:i•. *;:.- 0m0 .- .!,;;•"--.41- 17--r.. :0,'I in,s',..'eY.i, •k:. '-4• . •-s ... „_... r I.--"'s''.. ..r----7•SZ.Z.2:'•?4•••.: ..:•. - ,- - z.";-..,f,r. I,.47•41 4 I', •'.'s:.4...... 4.--,!-,... - C. \ ...•::„:, - , 1:-.,.,-....*.1. -*..:••• ••--•-;,+•,-...1- ,,,,,..„.•'.74•,•1„5:- - .....---........_ „......_ ?I..:_-, . ...:„. t....... _.....,.__....._„:777„:,...1:•.:1,-•‘•••0:,..\,..: "-=---":... wf....."2-"4.7.—H.s.---iss*...-.--": .„..L-,..::.-----7-s. • N. , - • 1 . .., ,:.r:F.-.. 1 . .. - • ... .• 121 01, ,--1:rt-•:'-'"1.-..,,,e 1,7* 1 .. :0- .-.,.-1- '.-----P.--,." ,.•-.:''7=•--;;;••;‘,:i.:•••-•-••,..... ...‘. IR•c,.!-N „).•7. — '▪ --• ....,---1,....--s--,---,-sr,7.';-,:trr' '--•' '- . ' i -,,•••- --•:. -'T*., ''---...,-. .IBA, --,„.•i:,-,t/-_•,-.i--.•;-• -;"..1...„.:•!,11;;.,_,-.:,-;:::.......,.... .,...;,_11--.,°:.,..-,-.„--.....- ------18 ,i..:,..,--,-•.:. 1 •••.mOkcv-7---- ---- ''.:,\•'r - • I.- - ... _ .t." ,..n: .:',:•.;-•,.....7••.'.;EL•lt--".•-.."-, :,-.:.••'9%.71..7.:•.---i•-".,----:7e ::.•!,..4r,•:••44.7. - •• .•••• •• ---",--..--/-:.- -1•---..*-,.;.....-. - ••„-.. .,.v.." .., - I. ._ --•- ,,i ..7••.. ),,- ,• ... .....s7, ,..p_-•'''':„...r...-----i;tit•iir:sbiasionjel-':-f-••:- -•:;•.-"•%.•.:2-• .,-.-:...,----1 ,..- . .: -.. . . , - „e',... r.:-- :S1,0 - 1:-,.. • •.1.•••••••j....,...••'...•,........•_......•_,jin,•".r.h..,C".....00 ...4•1:.'t1.‘;. 1.7•47',...74 0...”...,kr•:..1:-. :-Cf7c14".I;,C:.4'0.2 4::.2.11-:.:2,-%0 3..i:7.•1:'.....*:::-:-'......17•7174-. -:. :.:-.-7' ...I.'.: '::' :•••'•'• -....••-•••-•". 11..,',‘•• •• ••:::-C.: r,-.:.... '•••i::10... , •••,•• 0 ..::-.._ ..;S C 0. ••••• Zt.. _r , ..... .„.„_...4 . ,.....i............ . .. .. ,,....• . ..• .. . . .. ...„ ..... IN" ../:...:....1'... ..▪ .'''''' .' ••••;•••,.‘-'-. .. .t • ' AL. ,Ote. -.. . ... m=10 ....• . • . ' .r.,••••••••••••• N OR T H — i -•••--....."---.. .. :.---,-..• ---7 , ie- .. . , ! • . 00°...'..." I 2 3 1 LE MILES -,,r--,,L .,---li He nunne:n i '-- 77I-H-7t, co • e le t • ' " ' ' LjI_.-LI tJames R. Hifi, i nc..________ HENNEPIN COUNTY PLANNERS/ENG I NEERS/SURVEYORS SCHROERS / JACQUEAS / DPLEGARD EXHIBIT 94,11 JAMES AVENUES. •81.00rANCJON.mr,:55431 • 6-12-884-3CM ✓ 4 ; ‘' \ f -ter C.-. �� `�'`! _ Lag( _ �'r.w.t�c-•1♦ .� v • .rte'K�*� ^� _ • ._ .. ._.. .. _ - - • !lir:.^.nC:: •-' f 1.--...-_-_- stave.°e. •I ~ • '` ,`� � 1Jc ��1 r / '1 i �rv \ - a• "` �� r- ro. - • s _ f. r _ � •+y_v •• t• i trd< )�-..J. �• :1 ' ,ter R% I '1 �. ✓ --_ _ _ -I 1,.SOo -_ - - \. ii - _ en _= _ -'-moi` -- - - k•�-`:=-_ _ :-.� � y�/= ` ' c �)''C` _..T' `.. 'Harsh L �''•_ -' f `.....9v""). oc : v5j \'1 : Dusan rl - - �_ �� I e _� , - -� _ �-, 1 • • _ 's` = CD s ' _ . -- / � • � ' o __ _ _� \•�-_ -' p - �% � - ` • •••'7.. •s ."_ ;%. : ✓l\ r� - •/ = _ _ - r . ` � . - - _ • • ?saitlPltn=d--.1-7 t . - - - ..*1 --- - .---. ssi - 1,-- '17 1. • • tea,:-. �:' % ' yci:c i P�Icy :/'� r.:• - ,..,k _a - \ / ;- - — - -•_- :, e6•�I " • - //\ - `_%. si.:`r.:,•'4,- - ../1".-- - - ....t.._- ..-�.J.. • L--Ed • .. . • tr,• -.fir .�:. -. • — _ 1 •r..:4-'r.:7- :3:•.7.2.._,--, 1:. _RV-._ IC FEET D;J:)••• - 7:JU'•• IS I. .N SEA LEVE: NORTH N: I` _ SHAKO?E=, MINN. 0/ • `, Sg„ �;�:= h!fAN=10Ni:R ;5 GUAD�+':G�c `_ C':lA'Jn:l:�.LELvC4T1'J►: 1':• •�—V:G:3ii;/.5J James R. Hill, inc. USGS PLANNERS/ ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS SCHROERS I .LACQUERS / D LEGARD S:Oi1nM:5/`VEnuES. • 9L0O'�111�.','iON.MNSSG31 • 612-1131-3C29EXHIBIT �+ • �- _ I r_ r n -/ 1 1 J arc, y 1" — •igee'� ,.,�:._a�� (r �y F .fir j1 t .., ....,------,,,,... . . H 1 rwe'raal'4[1 ' 1 1 r: • .'�Qyy`S..L.' i=7.-1).1% .�l,�� ) - )�)r -.^{', t " '•,.,. ;f.,Lam!%'•J • i I ,, ' '—'�� .�,• rNwi/ fit`\ flTN.. . -.• #� 1 i mi.- ...:/,',- ' 4-' ate- i `..��• � '' J ti� t ?c • I.— 1:— �J ,, 'r —:r ;:1� ti1 .r Vl]' �`.. "�s- � . -, „7'r t... ..is\ --...,---_a--' ,,...:aii 'IT t.,,--;' ‘,--------.',,';'-:, 4::5 :1 -.•-:' 1..... ---:1-- -. .4-CrL, ...r:.),' ....,..,,......--A7:. ‘,...)-.4-1...._,.......H. .),..,,'•' -‘zv:;‘,,,,I.,.......,.....4.c...... ..1.),07,..m.`•:.W. ,.._.4 tiii.'"#. 4.. ) • 1,1., . •‘ 1r,.........,... -,,.....:=,7 7.:)1c17...-1-&-.,..„4. .' ;,J 1 t /,..•s ilk I '"r I _ • e ..; •�k.7..I 1 is-;.S (tj� � 111 -----1 - : — - I.74..•s. I -) \ ... ..1..._,/1 ' -I y >? �. i x;_1 ,. - dirt1 — • a7�' �:`. .. - ,.,,r• ,r0a,:::— ••+-,�._. tty r-`` k. ,.J•z.l 1 g.5,. 11• ..,.,.� - L«:aL`;'•• =� ,..�' ./://f1'�c�1. ,�:.i �.�>'1c Il:.r._vi rz I -•..r 1 I • 1 t _� ( .... M - • - -� �-.=.:- James R Hili inc SRT MwS 4i• $CM.DENS/JA'ZOVESI - jII DELEG>•AD SITE Ea STING COMC'7rOM5 I r/I/,.}MIE/IS/EMG-^16 YA/R.•[7S711S 1[.t•... Lw.1.Oi. t•t•��..,L 0.•••1101. • ` 1 r /�".• . I . 'i — ✓ � — -UND�SIGt' 4T D R M r 16 1 tN RM, Id, fNDZS/ i ,,: _.\- y •-Jr • j a . _ } _.� -� i !p ,� Ir4 .. � , —� •' II s'.; r J Off, /� Itr .,1r i; UNDESIGNATED L' • 'I I I ,� - . `--, :i ! I 6. - UNDESIGNATED - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NORTH R M - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I d - INDUSTRIAL ,..., ilik C C - COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL U R D - RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT WATER — N E - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT WATER P - PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, FLOOD PLAIN, PARK ,fames R. Hill, inc. LAND USE — PLANNERS/ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS SCHROERS / JACQUES / DELEGARD 9:.1)AMESAVENUES. • BIOOMINCON.M\53.431 •6i24&-3.^.'S EXHIBIT D • -....�`L- ,� *-7__....''',.....,4r: i s,1.'.`i1t"ias _; i��, Nt14 T <Z:! C- \ o, _— i I a I , ^•-r tic _t.'--°'__t. IN — \ i " --"\—, r-\ 1 � .-- v‘,Ace--,-.1 0,h1 ,\ ' ►.3r- 1 :-;d- ....7,e__- '� c �= r{cs I • W� �� J.:• ,-nG NN N R.,. ' 1,450:01 < .-- < i..4,, GC 4 Ha i a=wio =T. ( I Q W `.8 1 J..21\--) `r nGRZ r — ... . 4,,,......;.. ;, c.G z M a RICE i;c..Ir z MAP_SN \ II i-kGnZ- ter' — :..e~c ` =5 -`'G �%� 01 21-kr..... j N.� �_: NORTH 1 10- "` __X) ` per �� UI i 0 aoo soy ,z s:t�E FE:. C1SOL !.NJ lJ{JW _ >'Z },.� Hayden Loam, 12 to 1E =i=IJ 3c - iscay" Clay L:7-771 V Y.c32 - Hayden Loam, 2 .6% slopes, eroded ^ded Cordova Si', Clay Loam }S":2 - Hayden Loam, o to 12% slopes, eroded i_ D� Dundas Sit: Loam '=,3 - Erin Loam, 2 to 6% slopes i'cn2 - Hayden Loam. 12 to 18% slopes, eroded _ Hayden & Lester Loam, 24 to 35% slopes_ 32 - Erin Cray. Loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded 1-d-- - yeyder Sandy Loam, 2 to 6% slopes i=ce _;3 - =_stervilie SanHerz: dy Loam, 2 to E% slopes - Lake Beaches, Sandy _ — =ste��ilie Sandy Loam, 6 to 12K slopes Lo {D - Esterville Sa-d -y Loam, 12 to 1E% slopes Ma - MarshNesseLoam. 1 to 4% slopes C,; - Glencoe Silly Clay Loam PmPeat Muck over Loam 1✓a - Hamel Loam - — James R. Hill, Inc SOILS - PLqN; ERS/ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS SCHROERS / JACQUES / DELEGAR 9:.T.)AMESAVENUE S. • BLOOANN"701.MNS1:3: •6124.94-1 �,,. ,,i, EXHIBIT ll h. r. :'. I ..1 t — I1 1: ..',*.V--!...',..............-..; •',rte• •..� -r1'n -� -. ,_..T--' -- "-- O....II .. , .`\.,' y: ..tea`.%%'*��...;•`- �tl--J.. .•, 1{ 1 I I is +` _.. moi= % M - ., .- - _FERPX- dam est 0 yir n Planned DeveloPment a mixed use deyelopment .. City of Eden Prairie. -.4?:,/ • .. 7 ' r iiii•-. 111:01-0.•••- -•'- 1.„3:;...... • ' • %3-a r;� '' • f r 1 -.6.-ji 4 f. ..04.44 4,TT•7;,1,44,4;14,....,,i,...,: pi. 1, .1 ..... ..\, .4.,. . ,.. lit 5,,k, . ��7:'.140� r, ; •`• t.ti• ".•�- « 1, •y • .-.-3.,..i. -. f ` . A4ll1.1 �� .- •`r+,�: .: � � fes. a' -IA r -'+-'� •• F .••it:- 445. .. 4- 1.1011re lyto 4,..---A,I___ .1. - .. ., , --• . )7- roil t ' . f- t • g% . ... l's .'r, i 1 /^ r . . r • • •4:.<4.,IQ. .; : .„ ...4 .r- I • . 7 Ar. p,et>tti I tl:-.,i-I i - 6:1 . 1 C71 -2'7 A,f-:Yq.., 1- le • , *i"!--/:! . - 't ',i) , -.4y.rt- i • , , -- ....--:.- - . bi ;- 1 . - ,u, ::::_,.::...... 7 . ._ ;„ -• r, , A.;.?..;ye/ . f/Lir,' ! _ tk ,-r. r 4 tri ♦ + `� ,•k),tr. , 3 ,.-.., ♦� Wry ! r5.• i 4 a • . ....„. _ • s415r } . 1., •r .4.- k., , 41p9 . 1-7 .6 • .0.4. 1.4i.jitbi_.-p.• , ,c,r..-"Ti ,i ‹; 41,__?„. to A ..• 00.4tre , ..,....4 •.. -. 1Witli " i t it ' , ' 1....k.N• ‘4c , -ro $1. ,:- • ,t1 � •.. fr4, 6,4. .• $ ,ifit• iii , :i • .. . f � �� I, ‘e--;,' 3 1 , . '1/4.ii .t,\i;.- k 1 • , s•! ik f ` ,ref, ;., . ) • r1 r .\ g- - i 1 1 F '' ' .% 7 I 4 ,1 :,:i., ,,i I. „r.. 1 , i ,/i.,Alic,.. •,..‘. . ,,,„ ..j ,.. i. ..ii . ,. .i, I I- .:.-f. ft -:1-; 7,1„. 1. if, / • ,-... .. :. i 1 I I:1$41iftv.1 ,fi,;, :iril i ,, 0.14i f ,.:: .• 4 , r, . . , . . , ,.. , 7/ ,., .., ,.. . ., . , ,,,..,,ar r . t • , 10 t 1.' - -ot•- 1 ' 4P-e • 1 ii , 1‘,/ . ii.fi. • . f r t1/40 14/1 j ;,..• ‘ j ‘ t 11 II' - g . f , .?- '-1) -3 jt ::'°7: P.lal • _ 0 111;,1 e.i, r , I/ 41- •n. . :‘,..A ., ,, . y . ) , ,,. ; 1p. 7,' ;: 4 it . .1 . ., - .;, . *, ... fr, • - Ili' m'i'i ) t'. ii t. . .. ) ' .0--: if, .t f • '..(• !it . ii , --• . igli... irt,-' .11 t ,. - I.., i - ,) , . :C. il ' - Iv 4 i P . . j. ' k . . 4.- . : - *,- !, I; , . i. iii, : Ts id • . . • •' r � I Oi r :••� - 14a.r ?!f 141 i3/41.1 y! k ' ' Environmental Assessment Wor seteet (_-- : � ` ,/I Pi:. I ►; •(:hied in tn.'LORI Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) MARK APPROPRIATE BOX: — D SCOPING EAW E REGULAR EAW completeness o(the EAW — NOTE TO REVIEWERS:For regular EAWs. written comments should address the accuracy and con pEAWe.written EAW i„Inrmation,potential Impacts that may warrant investigation and/or the need lot an EIS. For scoping nom S hould address the accuracy and completeness of the Information and suggest issues(or investigation int the EIS of Such leo comments most be submitted to the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) 8253:during the me30. s.y period _ E Nl•'s availability in the EQB Monitor. Contact the EQfl( etro:612/mment2period ends. tro: I-800.652.9747,ask lot env rnnmental review program)or the RGU to find out whenJ2111estoW4'n Planned Development 1 . Project Name 2 Tandem T'rnnerties 3. RGU _Ci of Eden Prairie Proposer Mike Franzen Dick Putnam Contact Person Contact Person Senior Planner Tandem Corp. , 6440 Flying . and Title _ Address ..4 7600 T�:ecu~-�'e Drive Cloud Dr. , Su: 106, Eden Prairie, 1''IN ""Address Toes. :: Fra==ie '.• : J 13: :d , Phone 613-941-1070 ... • Phone (-''__2:--.-----2---..__________° — 11 t�,; 17 115 __ NI• Townshi; Ranac 4. Project Location: '/4�—'/4 Section – + a. County Name lienne?ir. City/Township Name =den l'-'i-'e b. Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: ... I. a county map showing the general area of the project. 2. a cov±.•(tes)of USGS 7'/z minute. 1:24.000 scale map. 3. a site plan showing the location of significant features such as proposed structures,roads.extent of flood plain. — wetlands,wells,etc. 4. an existing land use map and a zoning map of th. immediate area. if available. 5• Describe the proposed project completely(attach additional sheets as necessary). — The Jamestown Planned Development is a mixed use development proposed on 56 acres at the intersection of T.H. #5 and Dell Road a city arterial street. The project is part of the Southwest Area Study completed by the City of Eden Prairie. Urban — services are currently being developed to serve the area, these include: Metro Waste Red Rock Interceptor Sewer, T.H. #5 highway improvements, Dell Road/T.H. #5 intersection improvements, construction of Dell Road south of T.H. #5, and city water mains. The 60 single family lots, 112 multi-family condo units and 28,300 sq. ft. neighborhood commercial service area are uses proposed to fit with the sites natural features, buffer the T.H. #5 highway impacts and serve the local commercial needs at the area. The neighborhood center is proposed to include: convenience stove and gas, day care center, neighborhood office and neighborhood retail services. The project is proposed to begin with street and utility construction in the fall of 1989. Home construction is anticipated to begin in 1990 and the commercial may begin in late 1990 or 91. We expect the project will take 4 to 5 years to complete. L Coluntar�' Reason for EAW preparation: N/A List all mandatory category rule ''s which apply: c 1 7. Estimated construction cost 00 000 1' /A S� acre` or length(miles) . Intal protect area(acres) F .3n� 9 1;� Number of residential units or commercial,Industrial,or institutional square footage - ^' Ncommercial — 125, single family 240. multi—family 10. Number of proposed parking spaces 11. List all known local,state and federal permits/approvals/funding required: Level of Government Type e of Application Status ArmyCorp. Eng. Wetland Federal: p' Stale: 1. DNR Wetland 2. PCA & N.W.C•C• Sewer Extension 3. 1.1N Dept. Health Water Extension _ Local: City of Eden Prairie Zoning, PUD & Plat pending Riddy Purgatory Watershed Grading Permit 12. is the proposed project Inconsistent with the local adopted comprehensive land use No les plan or any other adopted plans? If yes,explain: Jamestown is a mixed use development that will require a change in the City Comp. Plan from residential to neighborhood commercial, multi-family and low density residential. The extension of sewer to the arca and the expansion of T.H. v5 and frontage road construction halve made the project feasible during 1989-90. The southwest 5+ acres need to be included within the MUSA line. The boundary line would be shifted approximately 200 feet west to correspond with Dell Road, a city arterial street. 13. Describe current and recent past land use and development on and near the site. The site is comprised of agricultural land, wetlands and woodland. The site is currently farmed and has a single home (vacant). Development is proposed surrounding the site. T.H. =S will be expanded beginning in 1990 and will take about 3 acres of the site for R.O.W. Two residential projects are proposed south and east; the shores of Mitchell Lake, and Schroers, Jacques Delegard Residential PUD. Also, 3 single family lots are located south of the site. 14. Approximately how many acres of the site arc in each of the following categories? (Acreages should add up to total project area before and after construction.) Before After 1.3efure After Forest/Wooded 22 21 Wetland(types 3.8) 9 8. 5 tom_ Cropland . n n Impervious Surface n Brush/grassland S 1 . S Other(specify) -- 15. Describe the soils on the site,giving the SCS soil classification types. if known. _ The site has soils suited for urban development with city sewer & water services. The soils map illustrates these soil types. Hayden loams, LeSueur loams , Cordova silty clay & peaty muck. 1 6. Does the site contain peat soils.highly erodible soils,steep slopes.sinkholes.shallow limestone formations,abandoned wells,or any geologic hazards?If yes. show on site he ❑ }c` map and explain: The site as the map illustrates has an area of PA soils which wil l be enhanced for wild life habitats and storm water storag e. The old farm house has a well (to be caped) . \ - 2o h- 7 N'_ ttb �..r..ri Hb. f�4• x:' HbD G 7. rl[ .,�' .t • ,/' _ , re r 41 CIF _Nd EtB • w... '1• moi' Hb6 �� r1.�ybC' �� /' '• N � � 01— Hb6 :7, © i �s s HuC' thip ' • r H. 2 • HcC2 /'1;tP•I:fc'N:a.`.X10 Je� HcC2 • .r .t -� b Z� Y; . • ._tom_ ,. . . / ' q itc41.k." His Pa : :(�. site •d.,� ....7.t ' gi % t t 1 GI .r f'' EtC et xlfa••; • 'r t r-7.–..,. -�• �� • e~ hcB? Co a HbB.{ kt , HIB^ ` Bc .1 •"- -. .. r. •t.�.• - e . . '� EtC r iga r��ri• i�4�� �r,_' -(� ,• •' • ,'r•�% HcDLralp � ,i.? a •�M b vo Ha CoE:B • �r* j�i�s :rr.i= 'l ,w� �; �' e_ r+ ..Dt• •1 ' HCC S'''.'"rf4 •frr7t� ce-ls ` 5. • t, • car? C="V-HcV ,.% . r • r: It O Hc62 HeB tis`i ,‘L . .6 e: • •• a G • .s '. Ha. . 1 7. What is the approximate depth(in feet)to: below 40' • a. groundu•ater__32_min.F-10 avg. b. bedrock .min, avg. 1 8. Does any part of the project area involve: — a. Q Ys a. shoreland zoning district? 1 No U Yes b. delineated 100.year flood plain? No U Yes c. state or federally designated river land use district? if yes,identify water body and applicable state classification(s),and describe measures to protect water and related land resources: 1 9. Describe any physical alteration(e.g..dikes,excavation.fill.stream diversion)of any drainage system. lake. stream, and/or wetland. Describe measures to minimize im- pairment of the water•related resources. Estimate quantity of material to be dredged and indicate where spoils will be deposited. The site has two small ponds that will be preserved and a larger wetland that is occasionally wet that is farmed today. After development the ponds will be created in the larger low area in order to create open water areas, and a more varied wetland habitat. The residential lots are a well suited land use to work with the ponds and woodland characteristics. The Jamestown development will not significantly alter the existing ponds on the site, but will construct storm sewer connection regulating the flood levels of the ponds as required in the city drainage plans. The pond edges will be retained in their natural state except where storm sewer connections are made and will protect shoreland alterations adjacent to the ponds. This approach has worked successfully — with other ponds in the arca and provides a filter for run off as well as the aesthetic and habitat enhancement of the arca. 20. a_Will the project require an appropriation of ground or sutface water? If yes, explain No Yes (indicate quantity and source): (••� b.Will the project affect groundwater levels in any wells (on ur of(the site)? If yes. ex- plain: a No Yes 2 1 . Describe the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be insed during and after construction of the project. During each phase of construction the if geofabric silt. These fence, res w}ll filtrabesi}on dikes aes nd he hay bales will be used for erosion O grading plans for each phase and will be installed prior to constrf the disturU n o completion of grading and site impro+ements, seeding and/or sodding gradi . a filler areas +t ill be completed. In areas where steep slopes result of ter g blanket and mulch mill be used to insure quickgermie do n and soilretention. Additional plantings of shrub and trees will complete oranThe natural edges of the ponds will be retained without grading so as to further reduce potential erosion damage. 22. No lies a, will the project generate: No • lies 1. surface and stormwater runoff? No Yes 2. sanitary wastewater? No Yes 3. industrial wastewater? 4. cooling water (contact and noncontact)? If yes. Identify sources. volumes. Quality (If other than normal domestic sewage). and treatment methods. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. The drainage plan provides for catch basin and storm sewer systems connecting with d with ponds which existing ponds on the site. Those aandds are d dischaen rge initontheel'urgator� iCreek drainage lead to Mitchell Lake on the ca arca. The water is i ftten h dt} e io riseponithin in thetpondsTproo Ldin temporary storage and drain slowly cast through produced by the Jamestown project consistent with normal residential dent water willboo P roximately' 135,000 gallons of waste water will normal neighborhoods. APP dolens per capita per day) which will go into be generated each day (based upon 100 g the municipal sanitary sewer system. The sanitary sewer system is sized to accomodate the development proposed. roP ed b. identify receiving waters, including groundwater, and evaluate the impacts of the discharges listed above_ if discharges to groundwater arc anticipated. provide per- colation/permeability and other hydrogcological test data, if available. 23 . Will the project generate(either during or after construction): No I lies I No Yes a. air pollution? No Yes b. dust? No Yes • appropriate:t, a d. odors? — If yes,explain, including as appropriate: distances to sensitive land uses: expected ev. cls and duration of noise: types and quantities of air pollutants from stacks, mobile sources. and fugitive emissions (dust): odor sources: and mitigative measures for any impacts. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. ust, noise at r on rom During the construction with heavy, it conts structtionaactivilt es necessaryfort construction of and odors,acommon residential development will occur. The duiinn noise and development fumes rom heavy The site's construction generally equipment will be producedg The and noise areas woulden areas will e bece the single homes south e impact on nearby residential areas. statet noise local, and othertregarding hours of operation ants ll be d dust control. Uy the After developeroo and the contractor, uced only in the f construction,ciincidental toir an olnorima,lresidentialand d velopmentwill and neighborhood in the amounts incid — service uses. T}1e primary air pollution source will be the emissions fromhey appropriate vehicles during construction. These vehicles would beola uippeingv d watt s pprop t to emission and pollution control systems with any appropriate action from local or state regulating agencies. 24. Describe the type and amount of solid and/or hazardous waste including sludges and ashes that will be generated and the method and location of disposal: Jamestown PUD development will produce solid waste typical of modern residential — neighborhoods. Approximately 225 tons of solid waste will be produced per year and disposed of by local refuge haulers in either burning or landfill disposal areas. 25 . Will the project affect: ❑ No ❑ Yes a. fish or wildlife habitat,or movement of animals? b. any native species that are officially listed as state endangered. threatened, or of No 1:3 Yes special concern(animals and/or plants)? If res,explain(identify species and describe impact): A. The construction of 172 residential units and 28,300 sq. ft. commercial on the 56 — acre site which is currently vacant or wooded, will alter the existing site's habitat and will affect small mammals, birds and deer movements. Over the past few years the southwest arca of Eden Prairie has begun to urbanize and changi. from an undeveloped agricultural area into a suburban development. Construction of — Jamestown by itself is not responsible for the change in the wildlife habitat, but rather is a result of the construction of roads, sewers, future 212 & T.H. >r5 highways and residential. developments. Within the southwest area of Eden Prairie, two large Park areas exist; Mitchell Lake and Riley Lake I'ark. Those areas can maintain and manage selected wildlife habitats. The areas around the ponds in the Jamestown site which are — wooded or upland grasses, will be maintained to support habitat for wildlife and water fowl. The protection of these areas through scenic easement will insure continued protection of the natural features. 26. Du any historical,archaeological or architectural resources exist on or near the project ❑ No des site?If yes.explain(show resources on a site map and describe impact): 27.. Will the project cause the impairment or destruction of: iho —IL.: Yes a. designated park or recreation areas? E t..I NNo !_I Yes h. prime or unique farmlands? c. ecologically sensitive areas? 1?� No LJ Yes d. scenic views and vistas? L.J No I I Yes e. other unique resources(specify)? No L Yes II yes,explain: 28. For each affected road indicate the current average daily traffic(ADT),increase in ADT contributed by the project and the directional distributions of traffic. — DclI Road is a north-south minor arterial on Edcn Prairie's Comprehensive Plan. Dell Road will be constructed to provide access to this project from state Highway 5. The ADT generated by this project will be 1750 trips. All trips will flow north - to state Highway 5. 29. Arc adequate utilities and public services now available to service the project? If not, ❑ what additional utilities and/or services will be required? No El Yes Amy Summary of Issues For regular EAu's.list the issues es identified by-yes"answers surd above. gig .Di cuss measures tatsves n be sad c nd swiin tive measures for these issues- For scoping EAu's,list known issues.alternatives, Summary: The issues which affect the Jamestown PUD may be grouped in the folloss-ing areas: - City land use and infrastructure systems - Environmental rca and as The City of Eden Prairie has studied the aeveloc streetsf utiliticshparksaa►td ho sling adopted a series of timing and phasing plns f units to guide the growth of this section of Eden Prairie. The Jamestown PUD conforms with the recommendations of the city's plans. Environmental issuesthat affect wetland protection t ttimprovements of drainage and haitat, wooddpreseration, contolofdeclopment related stown impacts such rmsnwith+ r qutiredlcitd y and regulating agency standards ds fore these issues. project conforms CERTIFICATION BY RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENTAL UNIT I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is true and complete to the best of my knowledge and that copies of the completed EAU.'have been made available to all points on the official EQB distribution list. Date Signature METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 Fast Fifth Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101 612 291-6359 October 26, 1989 To Tikxm It May Concern: RE: City of Eden Prairie Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Jamestown Planned Development Received 10/23/89 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14986-1 The Metropolitan Council has received the above Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The Council will be reviewing this in the next few weeks and would welcome any camnr_nts you may wish to make. Any comments should be sent within ane week for input on the Council's response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A separate opportunity to moment directly to the preparer of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet is also orovided as a requirement of Environmental Quality Board Rules. If you have any questions regarding this Environmental Assessment, please _. contact Anne Hurlburt of the Council staff at 291-6501. Thank you. Sincerely, METROPOLITAN COUNCIL j6 _ ohm Rutford Referral Coordinator JR:ch 0 C T 13 0 1989 CITY OF CHAvit1HSSEN -ity of Eden Prairie ''i .- �:. . - ty Offices •_••_�..-• 4_-� taV 763O Exec;.- 'e p" re s Eden Prairie. �!�� 5E34 4-3E— • e,ep'� 6 927-22E.2 r, October 13, 1989 1 t,,LTF,vK.,L.1T/.:-. CaJi.�.1. I 1 r-S Ms. Martha Allen Metropolitan Council - Sc6:4 Pu G. 300 Metro Square Building _ 7th and Robert St. Paul , MN 55101 SUBJECT: CONNECTED ACTION EAW The City is in the process of reviewing three residential projects south of Highway - r5, west of Mitchell Lake, and north of future Highway #212. Although if each project was taken individually no EAW would be required . These projects are interrelated because of necessary infra-structure improvements which would include _ the construction of Dell Road (a minor arterial ) trunk waterline from Highway #5 and trunk sewer extension from the Metro interceptor. Jamestown is a mixed use residential PUD which includes sixty single family homes , _ 112 multiple family units , and 39,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial . Shores of Mitchell Lake is a single family residential development of 175 units . The Shroers PUD has two components . The first part is for 229 single family sunit0 ts west of future Dell Road . The second component is for 80 single family multiple family units, a fire station, and Road.approximately 30,000 sq. ft. of neighborhood commercial east of future oll _ Collectively, these three projects represent 544 single family units, 312 multiple family units , and approximately 60,000 sq. ft. of neighborhood commercial uses . The total residential density of the project is approximately 2 units per acre , which is - consistent with Eden Prairie' s Comprehensive Guide Plan designation of low density residential not exceeding 2.5 units per acre. Development of these 3 projects is contingent upon following: 1. Upgrading of the intersection of County Road #4 and Highway #5. 2. Upgrading of Highway #5. 3. Construction of the Dell Road/Highway #5 intersection. 4. Extension of trunk watermain along Highway #5 . - 5. Extension of trunk sewer line from the Metro interceptor. 6. A MUSA line expansion for 32 for the Shroers PUD. The PUD has 130 total acres outside the e Mac 7. A MUSA line expansion of approximately 5 acres for the Jamestown PUD. N.1 � e Shoreland regulations are applicable to the shores of Mitchell Lake :-ojectandhthe Shroers PUC. Both projects are proposed :.o be developed consistent with _ regulations. Protected wetlands have been identified within the project areas. Development plans are proposed to retain these wetlands. There are significGnt stare of trees primarily in the Jamestown a^d shores of _ Mitchell Lake projects which will be protected ty restricting grading in the wooded areas, or land sill be dedicate to the City. w The Schroers PUD is being developed with land reserved for future 212 right-of-way. If I can be of any assistance please do not hesitate to contact my office at your earliest convenience. Sincerely Yours, City of Eden Prairie --iVit0/0 /#t#1/4--/ Micr,ael D. Franzen Senior Planner MDF:bs -=--• __ ___. . : .... - --rte; 1 _ TRUNK HIGHWAY 5 _ •` � s r r• s• nir _ I • i c.1-, :.-i L N.,':- .:',' crnct I te:s, _......-- . ar--- %.,. r-11-`1 r.),\ q1e.....,:j..741,..t.Lr7......, c33.3". cf.,11-..m.t. ast-L.o.k"------- .1 5 I nr149 ....47.4 -- 1......._ fir' � � ...� �t :�I 7. elan s,4[t'�._�.�. fs'- \. '_ Ii'i ••� CMM.IY_4_ n��,,...•. I IC- t �"... 1 ea 70 ,..1 1 -I ..-tj: E.:.• ._.__:,7_..t.... ) 1 1 P,....-_- --;" 1 1 .... ...4,{...f 0-. .., ......-)1 ............-, ..___,.. 1 .1..-N.-r" ;. .. ,....,crA ' . ''. "� 1.c7,1,7,..=-;.:74 - � fi \t-, - y I , ___ .,.m..........____ iv--,....- .- ,•,-- 1 .........y_ii ._ .)) 1 1-6; .--,—r. li \ - —b„- . ----- 1 ! L.....„..,. ,.__-----' -----\_---____—_-_-::------ _____ — ,.\ it 0\ , '7 4 • % 1 4 \ 3 ` 111 ► \Ii 1 I 1� s_ I..vL-- "----7 1 c— iCI1 " p1 • rov.0111,4.1515.617.001.1.4.1t I s I. -\\---D�1� r =• . 1(-Z.=......-..--\..1 \................"."-' t_ e •�......... I 4 7nf %: ��� t lot, r7—_ :�- 7i , • C• , 1{' �; �` I \ / f Aerosc_1.0.9II .ar• •-•-•''..-- 1 ] v. 1 /, t 2..: 7---i 1 1 L.1.,.--•' \ \..„.......:. i i 1 ii i .... ---• - )./°I i . --' V.. \ ‘ .•..,.•.... 1 ••-! I i 1 „......-..:.. .,,....z.... I \ c:-:7 , i, , , ... i ----t----..., • 1, ,_ %c,,, Ii_I--�, ;, : i , ' 2 ; •3 + 4 + `1,.. '1 V , ..I'. i 1 ..-. R / ��+� t - i �: I S \ 1' , ,_a 111// 1 d. . : . ......„, , ; I....I . - - /.t-2--. 6'-'----11216, 3-.' :5/.../ . ..‘'.'rs''‘.>-"A" '..."13-''....' I 3i , % 'c2 c f � ,,,.-9 \ e'1C � 1 ("1-- /14._ t ) ---- -- i .:7-"F--1-1—\' ------77 Ike .3 rc11:1 --t'D ro6 _ - ) ----' -:!---d p3 ( . <_._ _<_,9 . .-, --i I I: L--. 29 t,—__23 I i ..—ILA: — ' ------ :74t------ t--i) \ -.....\ Lly — — epi;--<1\--) \ Q...>2....:\ � I .J 11 5�Lf c.st.a.o.o ruarc MU:if .......•-•••-'--.----i�-_�- I 2 • ' / : \ /L) 1 / 7 I 6 i 5 I a I 3 .,, ..v/ (l G_._-cO.cr., I Int.1...C2.cut K.. i+Iv ►R�7[IITI[S I ! �� — �,1 4 • 1f t. .C. .. UDII I JASSTOVVtJPUD. ( s•r` 1 -'- i1HI1 1 • 1 -. ' i j.".s. - .7.... : • r" ... ,....1 , ... .ut . 10.____/N,...........c. ,,... L........... .. ,, . . , • . ‘.11 „ .. .I% .1 eaVi\ft'''/ .4...,/0:, . :..f..t A 411 I '''. - ;....' --;:. Vst. C, 4- .:--;1--!..` _. -a. ‘ — -7-, I . /I 4.'"Jf;r:-. .4:A .-,, _ -� :r` y- .- --ix""j,' ••r,, 1 t t p t� �� .- ' " •• .� .lj %f .11 1. ,% u S•!+ _ .--- :..BJ .1 .�: * • �Ipd, prtea ,` �� ; ���•. • i•' .e:?:i ,ti• ;`°:: • -• .."4 a. A_1'' \,.p // ,�.=F� �,',.;,�• N. ,,.......:_•„ •-„;;'•• ;, • ...I-. „„ - • • — •tag; , •)... -1_„' • \ _ n, .r. -. , i• - -.IF ,,it"----. „ , ,j.-01910. it,, 1 , , 44:c,,- : —04 is 1 lIC • Sete �" _'U '' ��``' _ ! _• • ' • .. _r: . ... --- -'•l.l' ! //`/1 .��1 a •"' Isl an • _• i' • .....t.:4,--',4-i s .• 2...t...f._''r 1 1 ;� t IS ;... ."' • ` •f . ~ ./�' •". \\ 1• ..------"-,•-'--.:•-. (ice^/ 7A_...-,,,:./' 44-.4.-.--.4..•••6•--44,:I•, •,.......1p121-1.L1.t%-.-;).r.%...11./.-....',,-.,•l ..•r.-.,.•..'.!•1L. ! ^I i1-- 1 l-� .•.-$Z.4—.. -- I/• \, ti It —J. ..r:.:. - t•r - -- - ;t__ L _ - 6:A•••• •].. • • ..._-- ,,,--1.0:1,:,..T._._-.4,-.!...4s �• / -2.(� • :r�.1 7 EDEN PRAIRIE GUIDE PLAN 19E2 L. u.• Pl.w sne,et-new n.t..w.nt el...cl•r.lcen WMC 1611•6111006._Opera(.Nal .YUSL LINE P iC open SDaCe.ttpOCDU.n.DarR 1:_ I.att.ea'en..r on,nen', water _ _J_RU -"GN4TEO..Snt'Ioesoe resmemyt �+a RD /ecreatton Dereroarrten_water RM .mvotun.Oensny re$.Oen:yl ' • .CMYCf.Cernetary RW .....ttt--...w.- w+..... L n.CS •cty se,..ces C: .oenerao oe.e.o9en..sale• e:0-...,.4 1.Q Rea .M�cense).testa/nue' F .Ire slalom MSC FC/VT stconoary/.oCat.On$I scr.0o: 1990 Tr-n.r.ort.t.en Pl.w G .te t l.. w •' ® E ..,ementary school = .or.nctoal after.al -toac 'a'Ln S _o _sports rr� --^ yne,R�c _ OilOilq squstr:al RQ SC eo .e. ,rorrr.eotate aerta� a -� WO .nenneom co.%1ty — IM1nor arteryi NCiiii .CO n nunot ODe whetCO•niercyl .coleclor CC .COrltrM/n.ly COrtrrterGyl �. O Ares.OUDI.C.ODen S.7aCe.M C/. ME RC eeTOnal coawarkeretat CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE , MINNESOTA Policy A R< ASe. ���;' �r East bet no Y BURNS `‘ e Ar.GRO\'' /'� 1 k : 1 I 1 .P7-----j,... 7 ith Centers Anee.e. {�, r • Rsmaer w ham lar. ANOKA Jam. ; ultural Area / VI:: i��1��__ , =- 1 1 P Area - r r ' ,----- / alp I U{ �� Ripen 1/ cyton 1 ' Q /� j1 —' Iters �• .� t M �I\ n Rapt* Bate. I u � 1 I. HASSANLIN i 1 C. - In \ 7:... , ��_ � 1 � Ns ove / / //, I r C 1 j/ 1 //////;;14/ /�/1 4ate I bu�m,.�p V1 Meu:::.:/c._...,_7.07,H,1-P:7,. / ///�/ Decor/�" I", , Brooklyn hark .. L.+ 1 S • / I d • • ^ / i// /�j/J / J 'Bake �` t 1% ---)r•--2///,^` `.� ; L_e.etto \. ` IN • 7 Gaeta,.,-� , .. •� rl w1T.1•S`y r Arts 1 I i/ :-..z././.2',/,',/, ��%!/ ,/,/ t hex 1, 1 /.-��'‘..----7,. .!I ►T ncn "7y` ticMee ma "-#Date\•• \' • 1 1 2 ' 1r•1', 1 //// \.. .,././ ! I P..maan 1 r+"1 1 I I �1/• \ 1 11 `"' . Z." /n neese.ti e,NCE ,/.2.....-��� 1 i`�^ f"�L V I . a-. t 111 /j/! i -/ //1 i. ... S1 `• , Mee. L.loen / i j /71 r ----'•-r/'•"-- X�'/��j�///• .'1 len mar %\���•L—li!f+ _ - \ r �� 1 /\• / '-,w rs'maim ' I 1 I w Orono 1 •_" 6 a..ti i //' .' . , 1 R ` 1 4,1 ';%pRiisnetneu j �` 1 1 - Mmneef]olrs w W -un �� ►srs l n-rf • // • en C, I M,n tsnka I j I �ccf {Deee Mw �ma 1 1 el, '. / ...z.):..-- . t . , 1 5_.......,..., \ i___ \ ••• esdi 1$:‘,.:.::, • �/ \ n �-�{r y�/ / :;. `./`� `ear{ Shvn•'oee '.�•1 / JP-, Erna / 1 v _ J _ c. ui1� I ,-ti �� jR•e7.tele I{`. /// ' '/ "�t`. Eisen Pra.rr t1'; \ .... •1 Q ) 0/ , I 1 ! -�) " r—: _:: 7„.._ _ L'/ // ;" / 1 i ......... -.... ..--- •••••. �/ / L��: 7 J ' r Ea.ea .r' •..-r�'- Sr-:AKOPE_ QUApr.N :.... .•_4 $�' '� b!i'\'NES,^,TA UI\'.iL� ST�•.iES .`1/4��..; RIOR ` .r_ PO3RFPHI:,) EPARTNENT OF r?E INTE f s ,`�y'- 7.5 N.i'`�� SERIES {•;G' 1 _ _ ''" ...,:-:-.e...-• �: . . r+ SL' uxa M1M ETONKA IS'QUADRANGLE I Gt.OLO3JCAL SURVEY ,. :'h :�" . u�I. rp� rye` ...r.1• d ryr Z40.: • % '+�i-VINt�: •: ,WAYZATA 7 M: 7- V ' lin w + :� �_. 1k�? ..I:�,-^�..•. �.,,5 3 a,.70 Mue^.7 F.22 ri•. I'6C r 1• -.. 1'E. E � ,1iiii. / `" ';• ', ,;e)r--'S �`- . f (/d/rr .. `�8r522 .4.. �/� �i t�.• fel.=•;:...--_...._:„...i.....- '_ .1; ov ,ti! •a3. • • Q;�-'..C-=�� - ;e..as-1 i. a'' �)) 1..`�.� 7--a ,s ''n.-+j. .. ' Me••%!lift ..,_.: ...„ ....„ c,--- — .‘,._.-2:-. ...,..---; ,., c ,..:_-, ,.. . ...,,... .„, It.t. , 1 „ „, r - •......a.. . ..... -.... ....•040•:ma,oar sa....• !( 19/-,a; • 6,, .., .,...„... ....„,......: _S^�`, �� t `~1i. � ••Y--... .ate 1 r::4. +i'" " :r. • mei t�` d..l(Y-. \V.0 - T-11ui 1 - '^�'r`�'`,^3_� _ F O uZ X70 - 1�! ,• r7 r.• '! K - s fir, ' - 1--s- �� am ��*q ,--. .1•••7i•3�1 -- } t1<4: a 'i }� r` `3 :` .1.6=F-•:'1.' 1'�:, . ..„-_,3:',.. : N • ` a.,:i • y1T!r l ::-.2'(<4. .may• "- 1 •` a ` —=l-,,�•!,�'. . bik ii ••-R-, f ,' rJp ▪ ` O / - >.s. �- ✓ e ••••-, - -11,1 O• ..1 t . • �'1 J •f /1 • • m ,' -- t _ -Z._{4' ,i t.9 }c;=. '"'�/ .i"'`� 1j�„ ;-`fes :-- N. `- ... 7117 _ 937 - ' . :�'L•LCJLCIl' �� -T V `_r O• __- •'- 'sem' ,• �'` '"� r. �°° 1 L �I�'':`J !!))ULakc' y • -- . ,r•ef- 4(3—1 I' �/ �...i.,..-_:." ^\ tc: • • • •t '--.7..e: --? , c 11 ' ILJ5G`�:;�t�.n.)t•! . -i... is •� _ rr�•'s. �'�, I( Y/ e...„... •....-!:::;.,,.................um.am ow...ty :... -7-4.:.•.• a et. ....„ -j, .�_�r ,(,,,• fit--.-moi+ b- T 7,!' �J -"\ • .Q��a' /..;..-" .J j:....-- -7: .1.1 .........,..-_-z.- yrs J -4...--,----).,..,C .1 -.� O at'. . _' ':3 7 �, ,______T_____77,.---- !, .. 1, :77. tita.....tffr f,....„ ,\•1 r•-•:•••••-•• rs•i• "----)/••'''' • ,,,--••". •.. . •41. t.'' A„,;-. ..... . -.\---1'• "8'7';i:7-----./..!`"3.---. 4,--'' ':r) .....s.-_--- —'s.:!.").• — :,.• ... ±'�•�- --7d'f•ry�. •••••, �_-_�.'•,fes`.,p, iT ••r .r • •� f ill a..J it - ▪ .�'.,-./,'/ 1! _r•-•..,..1-..... ••-1•747� ( `' - } 1 ' ... . .... _ ,.........,...., ,,•,..., ..... ...,. .. ,J _ , e.. s „ : "i!. �Ill{{L�f•-•a: ``� � :/ i• r t�'� .rrI._•430,�: , c- 75-f:4-'17 - /2-,-----, d: i. _ .° 1;'. . -...- -__..---11-, .w-_ - S, ^GG" ��`} - "� '�=+ '=-c'.'+., �:.J�•+•'cart. J •.-=� 1 11^�"•� 1�'�. .r rM... ---4----; v r- q' _spa ..„......,K11-.) i.k.)•-'fil-6I-:f.97.4,x.j•-.;J:7•......:z•;, ...(- ---.:31 IL••••tk...•_..,•• ,,. -/Iti•t•1,').17--••• .A. \i ;1 .....,•••••,„,r ..... ' ' •••• 1 413 •••4., i."h. .......r. .1.4.4-_,..s:A. , ir ••NtRk43 ••••r • .:i/.• .1 ■ r`= r--�.,/,�, . l.'Fi-1 O, I. rs.---,-..... —__....----,_,--,.` .gyp ...vim.. .r .;. ..� f �� �` c`�'-"� t ✓ �'' =........ �5�-- �" ^-se a: e Cers•, •�'rl et•4,..../...2.-•.c,••••••;.6-ii;• "' '• ' i+r-17i t[ ‘C.:..\3,;, I. . ._/• f—ter / .---..:2;,--z_--;--•• :\..,i... - f-2 y.4';,Y4 I'/ ` ,. -.J'/'.% .^1. --1-1(vy/..-_N,+ ✓/-:-s' :.• J.-C1%./7 . i' y;-... ,fUlatir-)•r6 ^;',rt /i1 i11 - ). . -, .. .,.... --4-..:ocy .;,,-,-1,.,, g•%. ‘.,/,"•-..• 0 ./.!../ .....?:, ,..."--. cr,,. ci...) .________\•••:7- .)--LLI,.. .-7. • . ...,•.— . ••• • .„, ,,,.. • • w••••c..•J.'', .4#.1.1t, ). /re:, .....\,...) . , 0 CI • - r .._ •,..y. lifrs, t;L_-__:_ ,...V,t\ .-1;::,9 i fJ L . ..-S. i• C. Li, iI ti".,"'"r.1�'?i.+.� "•io` ' F. . 0 • 'JG Mil?, ; o .o .41) L�0 fi^t�L.. �t'-:1. \-,./._ .. ..,• ..:_90, �_dpit :_903 d .1.J ' •1 IN";.',.9. ••1 II r-,..L) ‘ r.,;—*....# .7::,..---;---;•: .77",- j 1 •-. ..„.. ei . -7. ,i 1•;.('( /` •i),•/\''.1t((—N.., I .-'::-•::'. al. • ,!.( -pp\ �'tts 11'' ,•.15'� �7.7�. �r-'�'•'��� 0 7 �,scri.� r/�/ o_�''•�tl ,'�1 Li/•:j ����f�Q .,,,r. .\• 1. 212 __)13 1..--•_'-�•'—c' \ r. �_. , 1 1 , ����1._ 1� 'r. :`41 :.�;`\ I :'� i �vl. _ o �,r! o o O ')_ alt l�� 1/•1 ` \• ✓ —� .f_ <I � -�; •pr1 30 - a l8✓ _ I i\ 6s - `' Y [ �K � •,� \_=F Ylh^ l p 0 1 - - .9s = t g�U- , �_"/1c��l\l 44::-:.--1.* j ., w'� g ` ✓ i":-.'-' �./4' tom _ :1.1 1?1 � NI - ��% • ( \\- / ▪ �%�t t• ,. ; � ^ i ` � • • .k , �O- ••- •• i• _ .;, •^t• .. ... f - t RI-2z cau Rli-CZ . j • West - '2 _ � , .R, • /—�,y'_. Jame own • • �yl 1 1) -` Mitchelz r-• PUE Lake .:.:6-f . :.„ I .-2 / y r I - chro,lers 1 I \ , :�- �� \ • Schr • • rs 2 • L. 5_- , < _ .• • i\ _ 1 I a\ ‘A,%11 , 1 ‘ l'Ai..,,j_h_:4( / 1._:L f=I:- .1), s•.'=�."f,,pNtf//_ 0• / w v I -7.--77"1 - coG /. _. � ,,-R-1:22_ I (:' ` ;�. --\� I )fjx� f �.sir \. : si•► =a • t,1 Ir. I - 1.-.kii,;: " iitil 4.11:7-7 .tom: L 1 ih 1 L— i i 114::: _ METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mean Park Centre, 230 Fast Fifth Street, St. lir, MN. 55101 612 291-6359 October 26, 1989 — To Wham It May Concern: 1 RE: City of Eden Prairie , Environmental Assessment Worksheet for - The Shores of Mitchell Lake Received 10/23/89 — Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14987-1 The Metropolitan Council has received the above Environmental Assessment Worksheet. — The Council will be reviewing this in the next few weeks arra would welcome any comments you may wish to make. Any comments should be sent within one week for — input cn the Council's response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A separate opportunity to comment directly to the preparer of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet is also provided as a requirement of Environmental Quality — Board Rules. If you have any questions regarding this Environmental Assessment, please contact Anne Hurlburt of the Council staff at 291-6501. — 2hank you. Sincerely, MEIPOPOLITAN CQJNCIL — Jc)-11. 4r1-4-4 John Rutford Referral Coordinator JR:ch • •ih.•(Itnt'G tri / • r,;_�t.. _.. _ - 7 Environmental Assessment Wor EAWWF MARK APPROPRIATE BOX: E REGULAR EAW ❑ SCOPING EAW NOTE TO REVIEWERS:For regular EAW's,written comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the EAW information, potential impacts that may warrant investigation and%or the need for an EIS. For scoping EAWs,written corn mrnts should address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest issues for investrg.+tion in the EIS. Such comments must be submitted to the Responsible Government Unit (RGU)during the 30-day period following notice of the EAW's availebility in the EQB Monitor. Contact the EQB (metro: 612!296-5253: non-metro: 1-800-652-9747, as4, for envi- ronmental review program)or the RGU to find out when the 30-day comment period ends. 1 . Project Name The Shores Of Mitchell Lake 2 Proposer M-R/USHOT •• 3. RGU City of Eden Prairie • Contact Person Lee Johnson Contact Person Mike Franzen Address 300 South Co. Rd. 18, 0870 and Title City Planner St. Louis Park, MN 55426Address 7600 Executive Drive Phone 544-7333 • Eden Prairie, 1M1!; 55344 • Phone 937-2262 4. Project Location: SE I/. ht t/. Section 17&18 Township 116 Range ' 22 a. County Name Hennepin Cityr1ownship Name Eden Prairie b. Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: 1. a county map showing the general area of the project. 2. a copy(ies)of USGS 7t/2 minute, 1:24.000 scale map. 3. a site plan showing the location of significant features such as proposed structures,roads,extent of flood plain, wetlands,wells,etc. 4. an existing land use map and a zoning map of the immediate area. If available. 5. Describe the proposed project completely(attach additional sheets as necessary). The developer plans to develop a single family residential co;rrlumi ty, including all the necessary improvements required by the city of Eden Prairie. This neighborhood would be comprised of the following number and size of lots. lots @ 13,500 sq. ft. (+) 59 lots @ 15,000 sq. ft. (+) • 20 lots @ 20,000 sq. ft. (+) 174 lots total - • • 1 v. Reason tor EMI:preparation:, 10: + Crf<c:p'' tr.2r 101 rL•a"te tiny iP f (tw T.+S ere proposed. Lkt all mandatory category rule 's which apply: 7. Estimated construction cost $15,000.DO/Lot , 8. Total project area(acres) 96.2 Acres or length(miles) • 9. Number of residential units 174 or commercial.industrial.or institutional square footage 10. Number of proposed parking spaces N/A • 11. List all known local,state and federal permits/approvals/funding required: Level of Government Type of Application Status Federal: NONE State: DNR meet stipulation to not fill below O.H.4i.L. 871,5 Local: - P.U.D. preliminary - zoning reclassification preparing for City submission - variances May 12, 1989 12. Is the proposed project inconsistent with the local adopted comprehensive land use plan or any other adopted plans? ® No ❑ Yes If yes.explain: 13. Describe current and recent past land use and development on and near the site. • The current use of site is undeveloped, non-productive farm land with rental single family homes on the northeast corner of the site. The site has been farmed and has existing barns and utility buildings. The northern boundary of the site is State Hwy. — >f5 and currently undeveloped. The property is zoned single family residential to the west and south. The land is zoned rural and will be developed within a time span similar to this project. The eastern edge of the property is Mitchell Lake. 14. Approximately how many acres of the site are in each of the following categories? (Acreages should add up to total project area before and after construction.) Before After Before After Forest/Wooded —IT— 11 Wetland(types 3-8) Cropland 22-2_ Impervious Surface e Brush/grassland Other(specify) 15. Describe the soils on the site,giving the SCS soil classification types.if known. -biscay clay loam -estervi.11e sandy loam -.heyder sandy loam _ -biscay clay loam depressional -glencoe silty clay loam -heyder complex -cordova silty clay loam -hamel loam -nessel loam -dundas silty loam -hayden loam -salida coarse sandy loam L -erin loam -hayden clay loam 16. Does the site contain peat soils,highly erodible soils,steep slopes.sinkholes.shallow limestone formations,abandoned wells,or any geologic hazards? II yes.show on site Eli Yes map and explain: 1:3 No Steep slopes-refer to slopes/drainage exhibits. Steep slopes will either remain undistrubed or will be graded to a maximum slope of 3:1. Disturbed slopes to be seeded with MnDOT Hwy. 5 and mulched, — 17. What is the appru ifnatc depth(in feet)to: unknown 2 a. groundwater ruin. 11-4wg• b. bedrock min. avg. t 8. Does any part of the project area involve: No Yes a. shoreland zoning district? No Yes b. delineated 100-year flood plain? No Yes If state n federally desbods and a river licable state ese c1strict?lassif classification(s),and describe measures If yes,identify seater bode and app to protect water and related land resources: Mitchell Lake DNR classified as "Natural Environment La..eDeveloper epees to u� abide by City of Eden Prairie shoreland ordinance which protects shoreland involved, 19. Describe any physical alteration(e.g.,dikes,excavation,fill,stream diversion)of any drainage system, Take, stream, and/or wetland. Describe measures to minimize im- pairment of the water-related resources. Estimate quantity of material to be dredged and indicate where spoils will be deposited. N/A 20. a.Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water? If yes,explain No El Yes (indicate quantity and source): b.Will the project affect groundwater levels in any wells (on or off the site)? if yes, ex• No DYes plain: 21. Describe the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after construction of the project. Erosion control fence to be used on site during grading and then after grading " completed. Site will be mulched and seeded with MnDOT Hwy. 5 mix. • 22. a. Will the project generate: • No Yes 1. surface and stormwater runoff? No Yes 2. sanitary wastewater? No Yes 3. industrial wastewater? No Yes 4. cooling water(contact and noncontact)? If yes, identify sources, volumes. quality (if other than normal domestic sewage), andtreatment methods.Give the basis or methodology of estimates. y , Norml Domestic flow from single family residences. Anticipated flow is 100 8/C/D. Sewage to be transported through E.P. lateral sewers to M.W.C.C. interceptors and treated at the Blue Lake Treatment Plant. Surface and storm sewer runoff will be directed to Mitchell Lake. Sump manholes will be used to (Over reduce. amount of pollution to lake. b. identify receiving waters, including groundwater, and evaluate the Impacts of the discharges listed above. If discharges to groundwater are anticipated,provide per- colation/permeability and other hydrogeologicai test data,if available. Mitchel 1 Lake will be the receiving waters for surface and strom water runoff. Natural drainage .flows to the lake at this time. Adverse affects on the lake will be minimal , The Blue Lake Plant discharges to the Minnesota River. The proposed devleopment is within the MUSA line and plant treatment 23. design. Will The project generate(either during or after construction): No Yes a. air pollution? No Yes • b. dust?" No Yes c. noise? X No Yes d. odors? ' If yes.explain,including as appropriate:distances to sensitive land uses:expected lev- els and duration of noise: types and quantities of air pollutants from stacks, mobile sources, and fugitive emissions (dust):odor sources: and mitigative measures for any impacts.Give the basis or metltodolog}'of estimates. — -Dust from grading process :erosien control measures to be used. ' -Noise from grading machinery/construction, - 3 24. Describe the type and amount of solid and/or hazardous waste including sludges and ashes that will be generated and the method and location of disposal: NOrj. — • Except typical single family garbage removal . 25. Will the project affect: ._ No •� Yee a. fish or wildlife habitat,or movement of animals? b. any native species that are officially listed as state endangered, threatened. or of No Yes special concern(animals and/or plants)? LJ If yes,explain(identify species and describe impact 26. Do ans historical.archaeological or architectural resources exist on or near the project (� No Yes site?If yes.explain(show resources on a site map and describe impact): L- • 27. Will the project cause the impairment or destruction of: No Yes a. designated park or recreation areas? No Yes b. prime or unique farmlands? No Yes C. ecologically sensitive areas? No Yes d. scenic views and vistas? No YeS e. other unique resources(specify)? If yes.explain: 26. cont ibuted by the projecdt'and the dcate the irect onalrrent edistributions of tge daily traffic raffic. increase in ADT NONE. 29. Arc adequate utilities and public services now available to service the project? If not, El o what additional utilities and/or services will be required? utilities NoEi Yes and In planning approval stages, City will serve project t,ri.th needed public service. •• . Stirrtma.ry of Issues • For regular EAWs,list the issues as identdbyyesaoe.Dicualternatives and ativemeasures for these issues. For scoping EAts.list known issues, css and above. measures o be sed • 026 - Steep slopes #18a #18b . #,•22e1 #22a2 #23b #23c • CERTIFICATION BY RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENTAL UNIT I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is true and complete to the best of my knowledge and that colors of the completed I:AW have been made available iv all points on the oflici.tl EQB distribution list_ — Date 4Signature — Title • 22. a) Amount of water discharged will be dependant on upstream storage by others. This has not yet been determined as of this date. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning DATE: November 8 , 1989 SUBJ: Meeting Notice There will be a special meeting of the Planning Commission to discuss the land use plan on Wednesday, November 29 , 1989 , at 7 : 00 p.m. in the Old Village Hall . The purpose of this meeting is to further discuss issues that were raised during the prelimi- nary review of the draft plan. I am enclosing a copy of a map illstrating several of the issue areas . These include the following : 1 . Determination of future land use at the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Hwy. 41 with industrial use proposed south of Hwy. 5 and the area north of Hwy. 5 being shown as the 1995 Study Area . 2 . Potential uses around the north and eastern sides of the Timberwood residential subdivision . If possible, members of the Planning Commission should visit the site to assess the quality of the natural buffer that exists around the sub- division. The location of the area east of the subdivision, but west of Bluff Creek as it flows through the area, is of particular interest. 3 . Questions were raised regarding proposed land uses around the Highway 101 and 212 interchange. Suggestions were made that the plan would seek to encourage office uses in the area rather than commercial use in the vicinity of the interchange. Please contact staff is you have any questions or desire addi- tional information on these issues prior to the meeting. If you would like to obtain copies of aerial topographic maps we have of these areas prior to visiting a site, please contact me and I will arrange for these to be delivered to you. An information packet will be sent out prior to the meeting. AiiiiBiiii 1 � Lii 1D.If ! ! ! EI ! { 1 ! ! I ' ; - • 11 If A ,� , 11"N� ��0�'�;�t it I 1 -• !!!, 4 ,s it- __ is ?Y � AW" . pi Attt 1 ellio'i eikk-i,:j __-- _._, ! .� Iii `Ir NEW - .e may. ��rw�� �!' 3' - .L�iP� _ 0 f t- - , .`�� s . ' 3 _i__0 1, . ...-1 44_L 4_, /v,1 real'- "AO" IV. .."4 .- l 1 I-.11-{ I i I 1 Fife; Afr" 1---- _ -Alb- ___. , CITY OF ?A... - — CHANHASSEN � illft I I i_..... •� topirtr .rir II 4 410 r 6. - ---- _▪___ . _ _____ maw=NY. s- I/,, ‘, _ _ . �- -- CIMMYSlN DOPEDIp DOM y f i�. �`1 r -V_J IMP .1111.Ms i _ - - _. ri poi if -- illiLig--- _ 7 _ _...... I 1 k I I I I i i f i emw %%� FEV! ?NI 0fVTb NtEcT GO*ri REVISED NOVEMBER 9 , 1989 ONGOING ISSUES STATUS A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ISSUES 1 . Comprehensive Plan Update April , 1990 2 . Amendments to MUSA Boundary April , 1990 3 . Future Use for Areas Out- April , 1990 side the MUSA Boundary B. ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS 1 . Contractor ' s Yards City Council Approval - May 3 , 1989 2 . Update Zoning Map Ongoing 3 . Blending Ordinance Inactive 4 . Rezoning BF Distict to A-2 Comprehensive Plan 5 . Convenience Store Moratorium Moratorium over - Ord. review by P.C. Nov. 15 , 1989 6 . Sign Ordinance 1990 7 . Update Zoning Code Ongoing 8 . Trash and Recycable Users- Inactive Where should they be located? 9 . Wetland Violations - Add July 19 , 1989 section to wetland ordinance 10 . Tree Ordinance - Mapping of significant vegetative areas Working with DNR Forester 11 . Rezoning of 2f Acres Lots Inactive to RR District 12 . Noise Ordinance Public Safety proposed an ordinance which was denied by City Council 13 . Storage Inactive 14 . Front Yard Fencing Inactive 15 . Standards for R-12 Ord. Review by P.C. Developments - Parking, Nov. 15 , 1989 garages , architectural standards REVISED NOVEMBER 9, 1989 ONGOING ISSUES STATUS 16 . Heliports Inactive C. OTHER ITEMS 1. Update development proce- Close to completion dures including submittal dates, design review com- — mittee, submittal check list and process 2. Computerize land use files, Ongoing permits, conditions and expiration dates on a par- cel by parcel basis — 3 . Wetlands mapping by Fish Staff processing a position and Wildlife Service. paper to review wetland — ordinance & enforcement 4 . Trail Involvement of - Comprehensive Plan — Planning Commission 5. Light Rail Transit Not active 6 . Recycling of Oil Recycling Committee reviewing ordinance 7 . Eurasian Water Milfoil Public Safety Involved 8 . Review of the impact of Not actively pursuing until Residential Development direction from P.C. in on the financial structure response to memo from of the city. Don Ashworth 9 . Temporary conditional use P.C. review on Nov. 15, 1989 permits. — 10. Setbacks from wetlands for Inactive kennels and stables. 11. Maximum Church Lot P.C. review on Dec. 6, 1989 — 12. Neck lots & lots accesseed P.C. review on Dec. 6, 1989 by private drives — 13 . Recreational Beachlot - P.C. review on Dec. 6, 1989 Requirement of Lot Depth — 14. Tree removal requirement Ongoing 15. Definition of structures Ongoing — 16. Sale of farm products Ongoing PLANNING COMMISSION GOALS Priority List Priority #1 Blending Ordinance Update Zoning Code/Map Priority #2 Wetland Violations (Complete) Mapping Eurasion Water Milfoil (Public Safety) Priority #3 Convenience Stores Tree Ordinance _ Contractor' s Yards (Complete) Trail Involvement Priority #4 BF to A-2 Rezoning Recycling Oil Light Rail Transit Rezone 2i Acre to RR Sign Ordinance Comprehensive Plan Priority #5 Noise Ordinance (Public Safety)