Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
11-5-97 Agenda and Packet
FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION - WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1997 AT 7:00 P.M. _ CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE L. CALL TO ORDER NEW BUSINESS 1. Buell Consulting is requesting a site plan review for an accessory building for cellular tower equipment. The antenna will be located on the West 76th Street Water Tower. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Conditional use permit for the operation of a ham radio tower on property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate District,and located at 1905 Stoughton Avenue, Stephen Kubitz. OLD BUSINESS 3. Site plan review for a 5,300 sq. ft. building for a Famous Dave's Restaurant property located at the northeast corner of Hwy. 5 and Great Plains Blvd. within the Village on the Ponds development, Lotus Realty Services. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 4. Bluff Creek Overlay District ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m.as outlined in official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If,however,this does not appear to be possible,the Chair person will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. CITY OF PC DATE: 11/5/97 \ I C IANUAS SEN CC DATE: 11/24/97 CASE #: Site 97-14 By: Kirchoff:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: A request for a site plan review for an accessory building for cellular antenna equipment. z Z LOCATION: West 76'h Street Water Tower V APPLICANT: Buell Consulting 905 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 210 St. Paul, MN 55102 225-0792 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Single-Family Residential ACREAGE: Approximately 11,250 square feet DENSITY: INA ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential S-RSF, Single-Family Residential E -RSF, Single-Family Residential :Cr W-RSF, Single-Family Residential Qr WATER AND SEWER: Available to the Site PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: This site contains an existing water tower with.two structures. The lot is flat with sparse vegetation. (t) 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential „ , . s ov” \f-)- la is Nib - • . . - s . . pm, SIrm\ 7r,aar 40 I 12.1P ill aropl....110 lifkrii4riT\--. Av.'4711 eft/ 1 • , -_ 0! ii*,,,..,.7. • .:, y-.„--w .--- .40 iir ,,c,..\,40p, AR 'ic,i ," r,Lz 5 1 imilia.= . ....,* 'en *Pi iiini 1Pg cj MM. `rk — / 1 aimi0w,P• 1 pm • WI _, .... .. ..2mItti"%. . ,->• gy- —nix 4.-.---11,71 -.. ... s./ .,-,--ic cp7.7-n---;-Y..LJ I ro-- _ c. . i. --• .. \:'.,,,A„),..i, .•-., ,:s. , •,' ,,o/,. -5-Q.,-114M-. .- ',‘,•>-\'—.,iv ,,K N, , - Lake . _ 7300 ::-<:, • ) niu.y:s. :‘ ''''s\-,!,-'. 1 ..--. - - , .\..1_ _ – .. ,....3 g ssy,f•'•• w. r• . M•y- i . ' I lige J. ell calli I H h. i - ...Ir r 0 '- / .' 1 _ . •at° FA if-1 1111 13i!eAlAnliN'O. toll . 7400 --\\-- - • ..- ?\ II I _*, • ..,.\---- .„, NOM VP' •- \ , c Ch. -rThe so'::)---1---:•` . w. hi v-i, ......., a C 1.14a USA VI , . Chi- ', - II rf. , •i El 1/ 1\.\ .......,- o c° ' a MID .•,;s1.5 1st A. ' mum., oftmen, 0 cO , ill .INII....,r14,1111411.12: o ri Dr I Eli\ 411,, ow E4 It - - \ iiiitmmenum MC _____42. -,117:9,. > —,. , , wr • , ,40 „,..",>,--_,--- ...,/, •.r 1,6,x-•• 5. ‘i >,14 j4 Emin MIEN 't ---- / --1 eA/.0w,•,,,11::::44 tis 1 11: Frit ii MI EN rem ---1/4,„z .? sy,,‹L\i - w.tv.„, , froer u an ti, 0 s (5)>,/ 90 ,.....:>>.„,--- 70' - m U o - fil glig MIN& gili7Z11- 1F11 • V '----- ,(-77if _______, ,, .,.. , g •isgs.)>„, . a. City Hall )..ii III Ilia 0,... 1 ' 14- ' 1 1 1!I 1.I liffill. \s.4.- I Oa ESMII k' 1 a nu .... wan 1-t sm_...3 . , N . Coulter Di., L_En11111. ‘7,,x ,-5 nm uPy , 1\4%.•••••••11....11", Ali 1 \ \ 1-------.......:--77,7,---'-- ,t. b, PI 1 \ \ L_____-1-- cii L_ . MI \ ' — c‘• / / .. _a. Chanhassen Ilk (. w ...- . \ c; 11 "I" (-Sinlirriffi Estates .4A59 0-_ ...,, A .r-C_: - ,:m0 Mini Parlc. _. . -:.---- ----2--7-______State Hwy r trir , \ L Vi--.;:-v-1 •r / , - •• Gil IP '-"IF - 0.Y/ --- i /- • 141 .4 ib41: la/ le eV itri '. 8100 ---Z-7 --. , v -"P-1041-*'..., . • L:,:„... % / „, _.-„,. _ 0, am ego- "1 -Aso v---(911 lia IOWA ii \I 74^ 8200 () ILL 'f;rd 83 -- 1) • /-)/t 1 - -I' l Rice Marsh Lake Park / ' Lak( Susan Rice 84 .z., .of 1 / * Marsh Lake IZ • At / C 1:1) . \ A....4.,;Z:../ /Th\ Isrtr 1.2_ / tit CO •- -------- TT & ,,c(eAt, 1 CLI : 0_ .‘/(1";:seAV:i4 r9.- S '%_ I B. • , ..,<-2, 4,:$-,,,i: - ..q,,, Eatmc -; = c '., co - = ,.- 0411hland Trail i._,...._,1 .......-- .....__. I, 4... 46 1. o •• - .1 I I -$.1-4• • _44...... 1 t ›•• Kubitz CUP November 5, 1997 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-110 states that a site and building plan shall be in compliance with standards set forth in the City Code. Antennas are a permitted use in this district. The City will enter into a lease agreement with the applicant. The purpose of this meeting is to apply any conditions necessary to mitigate the impacts and put them into the lease agreement. BACKGROUND The applicant is co-locating an antenna on the 76t11 Street City water tower along with U.S. West. The U.S. West accessory building has been partially constructed. The brick exterior finish has not been affixed to the building as of yet. The purpose of this review is to give the Planning Commission and the neighboring property owners an opportunity to review the proposed building prior to construction. This will ensure that the building is compatible with the neighborhood. ANALYSIS Nextel is constructing an accessory building to house the equipment necessary for the operations of the antenna to be placed on the City water tower. A neighborhood meeting was held on October 20 to address any concerns the neighbors had with the proposal. The applicant stated that only one person attended this meeting. The accessory building will be located just south and east of the water tower. Currently, there are two buildings on this site, the City storage building and the U.S. West accessory building. The exterior of the City storage building is painted siding. It is a shade of tan so it blends in with the neighborhood rather well. (At first sight, it appears to be a garage for the neighboring property.) The U.S. West building will be covered with a brick veneer. The Nextel building will be covered with the same brick and the same pattern as the U.S. West building. The brick exterior is similar to the exterior for all recent utility buildings built within the community. Both the U.S. West building and the City storage building have pitched roofs. The proposal indicates that the roof will be flat but will have a slight slope to remove water from the roof. In order to be compatible with the other buildings, staff believes that the Nextel building should incorporate a pitched roof. Staff believes that this building is compatible with both of the existing structures and the neighborhood. Therefore, it is recommended that the building site plan be approved. Kubitz CUP November 5, 1997 Page 3 LANDSCAPING The proposed building is sufficiently landscaped to screen it from adjoining properties. Plantings are located on the southern and eastern border of the building. However, staff would recommend that the plant species Arborvitae be changed to the 4' to 6' variety rather than the Hetz Midget. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the site plan for the construction of an accessory building for a cellular antenna with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a lease agreement with the City. 2. The building shall incorporate a pitched roof. 3. The landscape plan shall be revised. ATTACHMENTS 1. Section 20-110, Site Plan Standards 2. Site Plan 3. Property Owners and Public Hearing Notice tfr c E'1 v1-cm-E ZONING § 20-110 within the city shall be submitted.Such images and renderings shall be from key vantage points and provide an undistorted perspective of the proposed develop- ment from abutting properties, less intensive land uses, and/or from entryway locations. Photorealistic imaging or renderings are the appropriate level of res- olution. (6) Within the HC districts, the application shall also include: a. Building elevations from all directions, indicating materials, colors and land- scaping at installation. b. Building and site views from Highway 5,the appropriate access boulevard(north or south of Highway 5),and any other appropriate arterial or collector roadways. c. Site views showing the relationships of the proposed building or development to adjacent development, including buffered areas. d. Drawings of all significant or atypical site features,such as unusual landscaping, manmade water features other than retention ponds, outdoor sculpture, or other large-scale artwork and other uncommon constructs. e. Sample building materials, upon the city's request. f. Sample paving materials, upon the city's request. (Ord. No. 119, 2-12-90; Ord. No. 203, § 2, 5-9-94; Ord. No. 212, § 4, 7-11-94) Sec. 20-110. Standards. In evaluating a site and building plan, the planning commission and city council shall consider its compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, in- cluding the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) 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; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following; a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and uses on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neigh- boring structures and uses; and Supp.No. 7 1171 § 20-110 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points,general interior circulation,separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) 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 neighboring land uses. (7) Within the HC districts, consistency with the purpose, intent, and standards of the HC districts. (Ord. No. 119, 2-12-90; Ord. No. 212, § 5, 7-11-94) Sec. 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 ten(10)days after mailed notice is sent to the owner of properties located wholly or partially within five hundred(500) feet of the site, as reflected in the records of the county auditor. The director of planning may require an expanded mailing list for sites fronting on lakeshore where the development would be visible over a larger area. Following the hearing or any continuance thereof which is not appealed by the applicant, the planning commission shall make a recommendation. 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. (Ord. No. 119, 2-12-90) Sec. 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 division shall be considered by the planning commission concurrently with the conditional use permit or rezoning application. (Ord. No. 119, 2-12-90) Sec. 20.113. Administrative approvals. Minor site plan and building alterations which do not involve a variance, which are consistent with the intent of the approval relative to all aspects of the site and building plans and which are not accompanied by other.matters requiring consideration by the planning commission or city council, may be approved by the director of planning. The director is not authorized to approve the principal construction of new buildings or alterations to existing buildings that would add more than ten (10) percent to the existing gross floor area. If any application is processed administratively, the director of planning shall render a decision Supp. No. 7 1172 ll NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING a/X*4K I l l l PLANNING COMMISSION 7 tis *. A/111111 4, Wednesday, November 5, 1997 II i - �• 7:00 p.m. bo, at MIMI 1111 City Hall Council Chambers iiilEiiiiiiiii 690 Coulter Drive ► IIIIIIIIUP!IUI - iiiim mai ENE som a' - • NEN MIR al Mir MI AIM =MI SUBJECT: An Accessory Building for 1.1111;1.1111;� . MEI �� � Cellular Tower Equipment �� MN ' ■ MIMI Ili 11. APPLICANT: Buell Consulting .- 111nr LOCATION: West 76th Street Water Tower it NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Buell Consulting, is requesting site plan approval for an accessory building for cellular tower equipment. The antenna will be located on the West 76th Street Water Tower. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 23, 1997. -/4-(-Qt?(t-- /( �' 3 - < / STEVE BECHER ROBERT A&SHERYL W RUNNING JAMES L&TERRI A BUKER 402 76TH ST W 7604 HURON 514 LAREDO LN CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DALE & KRISTINA LARSEN JAMES&JANET SCHINDLER CRAIG R& CATHLEEN BURD 404 76TH ST W 7606 HURON 515 LAREDO LN CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ELLIS L JR &JANET A THOMAS MARTIN H & BEVERLY J RICKER MICHAEL&JOYCE E WALSH 406 76TH ST W 7608 HURON 512 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DENNIS HOPIA LINDA ORWOLL NORMAN A & FAYE MARIE RADTKE 408 76TH ST W 7610 HURON BOX 883 510 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ADELINE M SKLUZACEK JOHN R RYAN JOHN F&SHARON A BEAR 410 76TH ST W BOX 154 7613 IROQUOIS AVE 508 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GEORGE& BERNADINE J BENIEK SCOTT A BRADY& JUDITH A LEATHAM 412 76TH ST W PO BOX 303 7611 IROQUOIS AVE 506 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 JOHN T BUSCH & THOMAS H KURTZ MARK & DIANNE JOHNSON 7607 HURON 7609 IROQUOIS 504 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 LAURA LEE HEIM BAUMTROG RICHARD ALLEN POWELL& JOSEPH F& DELIA G WARNEKE 7605 HURON PO BOX 296 7607 IROQUOIS AVE 502 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WESLEY E &ALICE I FLANDERS JOHN R & DONNA B MITCHELL CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7603 HURON 7605 IROQUOIS 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DALE W& MARY ANN GEVING RICHARD E & PATRICIA A BERG KENNETH C & DARCY N HALL 7602 HURON 7603 IROQUOIS 501 76TH ST W CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 EUBEN &SANDRA M KELZENBERG CHARLES J& CATHLEEN M GALLAND NANCY L WEFEL 304 IROQUOIS 7604 KIOWA AVE 416 SANTA FE CIR HANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 (CHARD L& RENEE F CARLSON JOHN F&SHIRLEY M KREGER DENNIS M & MARION J ANDERSON 306 IROQUOIS 7606 KIOWA AVE BOX 252 414 SANTA FE TRL HANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 AVID A&TERESA L BOETTCHER JAMES G & MARY ANN GUNVILLE NICOLE FORSMAN 308 IROQUOIS 7608 KIOWA AVE PO BOX 15 412 SANTA FE TRL HANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 OBERT T& DAWN M BRASCH ANTHONY M & PATRICIA PIERI JOHN A& ANN E CURTIS 310 IROQUOIS 7607 LAREDO DR 410 SANTA FE CIR -IANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 AROLD & BETTY E MANTEUFFEL BRIAN S& CHRISTINE M BENIEK SUSAN MARIE ORN 111 KIOWA AVE BOX 174 7605 LAREDO DR 415 SANTA FE TRL -ANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 4RIETTA E LITTFIN ELAINE D BJORNSON ROSS R & MARY JO KAMERUD ,09 KIOWA AVE BOX 214 7603 LAREDO DR BOX 261 413 SANTA FE TRL -IANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 \YMOND& ROSE PEITZ MATT JOHNSON RICHARD J & RACHAEL GALARNEAU 07 KIOWA AVE BOX 205 424 SANTA FE CIR 411 SANTA FE TRL -IANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 ARENCE& LORRAINE A PESHEK BONN H & VERNELLE E CLAYTON DAVID TRAUTMANN 05 KIOWA AVE BOX 255 422 SANTA FE CIR 409 SANTA FE TRL -IANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -EPHEN J&LYNDA L TERSTEEG DANIEL L&LEZLIE A BERG LEONARD J &JUDITH J SWANSON 03 KIOWA AVE 420 SANTA FE CIR 407 SANTA FE TRL 1ANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 )DD M & KARON ALCOTT DONALD & RENELDA J SATHER RONALD L& PATRICIA A MIELKE 02 KIOWA AVE 418 SANTA FE CIR 405 SANTA FE TRL IANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 LARRY A HEUER BRUCE L& REBECCA GRANOWSKI 403 SANTA FE TRL 504 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JIM & MARIANNE MOLINE TIMOTHY C ARLT 507 DEL RIO DR 517 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GARY C & D KRAUSE WILBUR F& MILDRED A AYDT 505 DEL RIO DR 515 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DAVID L& MARY L GRIGNON WOJCIECH WORWAG 503 DEL RIO DR 513 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 KAROL K NIELSEN BRUCE L&CAROLYN J ANDERSON 516 DEL RIO DR 511 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GORDON J &SHARON E NAGEL JAMES A& KATHLEEN BLETTNER 514 DEL RIO DR 509 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD W& BECKY A TURPEN MARVEN N& MARY J NYBERG 512 DEL RIO DR 419 SANTA FE TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 PETER G & KAREN J JEAPES XIANGSHENG MENG & 510 DEL RIO DR 417 SANTA FE TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 NORBERT S &THERESA L KERBER 508 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 BRET W& MARY E HAGEN 506 DEL RIO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 C I TY 0 F PC DATE: 11/5/97 \\10 iyy 1 C 1 A I' n A s s CC DATE: 11/24/97 CASE #: CUP 97-5 By: Kirchoff:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSALS: A request for a conditional use permit for a sixty-four (64) foot ham radio tower z LOCATION: 1905 Stoughton Avenue z 4 V APPLICANT: Stephen Kubitz 1905 Stoughton Avenue 0.6 Chaska, MN 55318 448-1995 Q I PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estate Distnct ACREAGE: 3.5 Acres DENSITY: N/A ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-BF,Fringe Business S - City of Chaska E-A-2,Agricultural Estate District fQ W-City of Chaska QWATER AND SEWER: Not Available to the Site W PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: This site contains an existing single family home. The lot is wooded with slopes and is located on the Minnesota River Valley. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Parks and Open Space and/or Large Lot Residential -.- , H7 . , • , S . _.!, . ., • - —a ,......,--'' i 1 . .! i -. . .' '-! ,'-• .......i'. "" - -,. •— 1 ! • - j .... , ---. - ..---- - ..--- --, I _____, ----- _ - -- .1 i 1 '?. ; •- i • _-- „.. .:._ . ,-:_--:::::--------- - .,___( ,..' '—• I 1-, 'r.— ---4 - / . , • - \—. , .,. ,..,--- ......,(jr. _________.--'01, .• -.... ---"), . _ ,I2A /2 . ! •.; L.....-\'..j. ., . . V.,.. _ .. . . ... , . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . .• • •:_. •• ,..,- ..- _',_...: .,--..._-_-_:- _.:.,..m....-...N5H .. . ...1 ... . .. . . . .. . . .. _ • . . .. ... . .. . . .... .. . _...., . .... . ... ... ... • -.T. ,„.- - ..te'_-• .:, ( '7? • i v-.- -' • / ,rd „ .. ..- , 1 • ‘..,---4-V .LOV LA • .,.,... i ,,k,o t l'-''.:'2' - • ') . ,_ • ,, - - c., (1‘0>N‘ u9wIDI-r-1 et9NA--L--- ,c__,,• , ( ...--- . ..., .... -,_•:,-, FeFkt I V ..." • kt ...„------\_ :.-.-•7:-. N , .• ,... - ... -- ,• ./- .,%.„.. . ...., -v .,.. .• ,,,,t1 . ,, - 7 ca ..:,- ___,-.' .- N... rve -- --- "SCOtt • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C:0 Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CN3 H 0 Ln di • 0 C-) 0 c0 r". ri H 0 01 r•I 1-1 0 H I—I 1-1 N C 1 H 1 H H 0 . • I %.0 . . ! T-11 . , • . . i . I I 1 I , .... Kubitz CUP November 5, 1997 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-915 states that amateur radio towers shall receive a conditional use permit in all districts prior to installation. BACKGROUND The applicant would like to construct a ham radio tower. This tower would be operated at an amateur level as this is a hobby for the applicant. More importantly, this would allow him to report on inclement weather; such as tornadoes and floods. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to install a ham radio tower. This tower will be constructed in phases. The first phase will be a 48 foot tower as the site plan indicates. In the future, the applicant would like to increase the height to 64 feet. There is no maximum height stated in the ordinance. Staff believes that the 64 foot tower should be approved as part of the current application. The tower is proposed to be located directly behind the existing home. The survey reveals that the rear yard is lower in elevation than Stoughton Avenue. Therefore, the tower will not be as noticeable as it would if it were the same elevation as the street. The concrete base pad of the tower is 5 feet. The tower as a conditional use is permitted under Section 20-915. This is an accessory use and must adhere to the following: must not be located in the front or side yard; shall be setback a distance equivalent to the height of the tower; the location shall not obstruct the views of an adjacent property; and requires a building permit. The proposal complies with all of the requirements of the ordinance. The tower will be located in the rear yard and will be over 78 feet from the western property line, exceeding the minimum required for a setback. A 64 foot setback is required for the future tower. Being that the tower is directly behind the home and the property exceeds 3 acres in area, the adjacent property views are protected. In addition, this is a fairly wooded area near the Minnesota River Valley so the tower will be screened by trees. The applicant will be required to apply for a building permit as part of the conditions of approval. The tower will be galvanized steel and subsequently gray in color. The first phase will consist of six sections, each 8 feet in height, totaling 48 feet. When the tower is increased to 64 feet, it will have a total of 8 sections, 8 feet each. Staff has expressed concern over the climbability of the tower. The applicant offered to affix non- climbing secure panels, constructed of 4 foot by 8 foot plywood, directly to the bottom of the tower. Kubitz CUP November 5, 1997 Page 3 Staff believes that this tower will benefit the community by allowing the applicant to communicate in a time of severe weather. Therefore, it is recommended that the conditional use permit required for its installation be approved. FINDINGS The Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: 1. Will not be detrimental to or damage the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood of the city. Finding: On the contrary, the tower will serve to protect the safety and comfort of the community in the event of severe weather. Being that the property is 3.5 acres, it will not affect the views or comfort of adjacent property owners. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. Finding: This area of the City is guided large lot residential and/or park/open space. Staff does not believe that this proposed tower will be inconsistent with the objectives of the comprehensive plan. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. Finding: A building permit application is required prior to the installation of the tower. Within this application, a site plan and structural components must be specified. In addition, the tower is required to comply with requirements of the National Electrical Code. This will ensure the tower's safety as well as the compatibility of the structure with the character of the southern part of the City. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Finding: The tower will not be hazardous to existing or planned neighborhood uses. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. Kubitz CUP November 5, 1997 Page 4 Finding: The tower will be served adequately by streets and police and fire protection 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding: The proposal will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. Will not involve uses,activities,processes,materials, equipment and condition of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes,glare,odors,rodents,or trash. Finding: The tower will not be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents or trash. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Finding: The proposal will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic surrounding public thoroughfares. Access will be gained through the existing driveway. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Finding: The tower will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. Finding: The tower will be aesthetically compatible with the area. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. Finding: The tower will not depreciate surrounding property values. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. Finding: The proposal will meet the standards provided in this article. Kubitz CUP November 5, 1997 Page 5 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit for a 64 foot ham radio tower upon the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant must obtain a building permit. Engineering design for radial ice and tower structure is required for the permit. 2. The applicant must make the tower inaccessible. 3. Compliance with Section 20-915, amateur radio tower standards. 4. The applicant must obtain a building permit when the tower is increase from 48 feet to 64 feet in height." ATTACHMENTS 1. Application 2. Section 20-915, Antennas, satellite dishes and amateur radio towers 3. Site Plan 4. Tower Specifications 5. Property Owners and Public Hearing Notice \ h v t 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN r�TV OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 .00T 2 1997 (612)937-1900 CHANHA :' rwwivuvu UtPT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 6/ /.73/1//-, APPLICANT: $/ /?//�� , � I7 7� OWNER: c )' ADDRESS: i%" `I/;'C9/1-i? r ADDRESS: ti 111 t-.." c'1 \tib ) !` t b�1\ 1 TELEPHONE(Day time), /,N/ �2 w/j Sr TELEPHONE: )-) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit 'Conditional Use Permit .7> ✓;J _ Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit _ Variance Non-conforming Use Permit _ Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development` _ Zoning Appeal Rezoning _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds,$400 Minor SUB) Subdivision' TOTAL FEE$ 115 'CO A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. "Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2"X 11"reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE-When multiple applications are processed,the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. 1 PROJECT NAME " 1''/f�/%! I �/` !; . ! f? 1�r 1 s I 1N -;.\<-N 11, LOCATION /f(7'% C` '''.-L'; (]\r' t .N-1. _ ..- / _ LEGAL DESCRIPTION l'� r-2-_ �' f l �.— ' j, ,f,(r / '�=)�� �� 1 ;� t� . ,�.i ,,_17,',)1 - t 1 TOTAL ACREAGE 7. t WETLANDS PRESENT 2 YES NO PRESENT ZONING . .2 REQUESTED ZONING fit : PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION •/ t=',' ' = ./; ,/ .-/— ; — ; , - -)s , REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION 7' ; ,� ; I I- REASON FOR THIS REQUEST T1 ;.,i /,^ !' -z: This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title,Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. c , .`)1�� '\.(/ 4,, V.;: i!� - ) �l/ Signatur0 of Applicant Date /T----;------1,. 7 ; // . N .. Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on IL-1 9-1C7 Fee Paid It,rik .LC Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted,a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. /1ttlf') (YlE-v ft J\ ZONING § 20-915 Sec. 20-914. Private swimming pools. No private swimming pool shall be allowed in any residential districtexcept as an accessory structure for the enjoyment of the occupants of the principal building of the property on which it is located and their guests. Fence requirements as stipulated in division 5 of this article shall be met. (Ord. No. 80,Art. VI, § 18, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-915. Antennas,satellite dishes and amateur radio towers. (a) Satellite dishes, television antennas, and ground-mounted vertical antennas shall be permitted accessory uses within all zoning districts. (b) Amateur radio towers shall receive a conditional use permit in all districts prior to installation. (c) In all residential districts, only one(1)of the following are permitted per lot: (1) Satellite dish. (2) Amateur radio tower. (3) Ground-mounted vertical antenna. (d) A ground-mounted satellite dish shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height above ground level. (e) No ground-mounted satellite dish, amateur radio tower, or ground-mounted vertical antenna shall be located within the required front yard setback or side yard setback. (f) Ground-mounted satellite dishes, amateur radio towers, and ground-mounted vertical antennas shall be set back from all adjoining lots a distance equivalent to the height of the dish,tower or antenna. If a portion of the tower or antenna is collapsible or securely fastened to a building, only the portion which can fall will be used to determine the setback from property lines. Location shall not adversely obstruct views from adjacent property. (g) A building permit shall be required for the installation of any satellite dish, amateur radio tower, or ground-cover mounted vertical antenna. Building permit applications shall require the submission of a site plan and structural components. When a satellite dish or radio antenna is located on the roof of a building, the applicant shall furnish the city building official with building plans and structural components displaying the means of securing it to the building. The building official must approve the building plans before installation. (h) Each satellite dish, amateur radio tower, and ground-mounted vertical antenna shall be grounded to protect against natural lightning strikes in conformance with the National Electrical Code, as adopted and amended by the city. (i) Satellite dish, amateur radio tower, and ground-mounted vertical antenna, electrical equipment and connections shall be designed and installed in adherence to the National Electrical Code, as adopted and amended by the city. (Ord. No. 80, Art. VI, § 21, 12-15-86; Ord. No. 90, § 8, 3-14-88) Cross reference—Technical codes, § 7.16 et seq. Supp. No. 1 1235 /6 ±0461 111-ejl t Z CL tir a CllzGI�' 0 _= CLii 5UU oE � � Cr) C � o I „I..o i-.-.) _ .i x CL) U •— O 0 • 0 O nn -1— 4 IIN :75 ...-----•• V) 0 X L- C., -Q C 77,3 .. 7,-::::). s- 0Cin C=:, I i1 COeN A N co 1 1 1 1 1 Su RUES /- td � - �"- a�T Scc 3, ?,.,p //b Ric Z3 tita., '- , —463.39 - - --- ---' ../37,"<- •J�` ,I c r-- _ •e co/a/+',/ w•/? on./ /0 c0 Teel Sot,/h �`�� 14'=� 1� 't1'°'' of fh, A/0 e'11.4 ken' or /he go-'/I• NE/C �,- °p - 1y,1q' / , • 6 fy� 'tip `/Z`fi 1 ��, I N J i y / /' - i" ', i o i .! \ %' b ,� --- '���.���� :, V i .-.,.5V :.--z-,;:--- ,� / 1 ,` 7 O li t1 sLamU 0c3.�� 1 - ,v1;4 33 8Zoi s , A yT \.. ' �_ y \ 0Sea Ip. f ,_ o O N°. \1 • .f; 35 R0. o� . �flfiCfY7 F 111,I 155.0 01 Gem e,�'`'e '•J Y v�� `1 I 1 \ q.3c ,a/— 0, }kqv c. �• ' I / �. 1'''e°Pke(l)open ,15 �`a .� , • --- _ $0 59 J Benchmark: 119.01 CO. Rd. No. f? elevation = ...- _- r".. PROPOSED PROPERTY DESCRIPTION That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 3, -/Z Township 115, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, lying Southeasterly of a line parallel with and distant 33.00 feet southeasterly of the centerline of County Road No. 10, lying Northwesterly of a line parallel with and distant, 350.00 feet southeasterly of said centerline and lying Northeasterly of the following described line: i Commencing at the Northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of said• Fe Section 3; thence East (bearing assumed) along the North line of said was I. a r , ! II • CITY OF CHANHASSEN : N= i ; RECEIVED ? o U ©C1 21997 RW =o I- o- ; , 44\- gi. CHANHHJJCIV ru-milnvt;DEPT . - J , E. oos 4 � � li • - - Ss..vors umw. 0 VJ �o' I y el"' _ For o..,'7,,0✓R".J V .. a C� 1 —SFe no.v N.- BN-/ V .o� I . 3 : ` =o- a li t u o Q / .I I\ ; o ;' rl f t, r • S«MOTT ACIDS.' T.,.0 '77D.rIV:lJ �-- —Srcr,o,.No. 6W-I II 1� ______! - 1_x. - .tia:'F:'FTM T S ..SFC"WA,-S W .>..J 7-,..‘7a/ ^, Sze/7, pf)! r..... Be,ece,.....re- ode,-l0 •/;---%":7, 1--, ---Secr u-No BA-3 (ay owe F..C1 Dw.ar)7 n.r acme 1 I 1 I1 44 I� ow I"'-- - Sec ro.v/.o.de-,r R.,......„41 i li>1Res'ERc xE D•ean:•� -"-SECT oN At BX-S CS• i> 1I Sfc7--o.4/'.6-/"D. id'C-Z-J-'? �„- Srer ws 1:-voI!'aft'.AT C-'J›.1.£7 TJ-f.!F.r,kon , 7; eI/IS/ L. Cum"J:."Mc-Ail Z1bOl7. • fo✓.D47.ow r..'.'As...! .6'.•Ser,,,,-{at. i I //iw.ee.'i:o.:...TF 6..se':G.::A::--:.:c!)N•. CY4I.DI.t.31 %3,,,,J: .., at j) a AON1 34,s/6 r.7n:.tb '-?509.^9-QZ- Ar--See7.oN/.6.Bir-6 Lent+•h.WI/.7vr4-W...1,=/7..e.A. A-7.1-03,..1.r. Tow-e--SICT/o,Par,FPyKs:,;%ro ni lJ-X0,724. I 7*E.e 0e54"4'/)p..- P.•.-Air 5-7:702.s" Y//C.A{ 7;.1 FR/.w<[r.Vs:Ora.4h F 1().700. Azzcie.AI(e,47-e4'wA%C..:^J'V At:•/I.%xl:•/ • h c7,crro.%N.SA-7 I� I, i� �i --�EC7ioN Ant,5X-.9 TT I �x— I',. • ti A2. " t- 1 4 r v1, .z. 1 1 , . ,... m N cs M t. W - j F Z Ci 1. 1 — I. if ` _rya A a a a a 'g o c o o U oL -o \ a o a ch ,L $ h I I f \ r.--k---] 4, til;,�'!,�.- I: )l I 1 .e, >i •ks y ,1. tf P N C) . .%.1.1^".72 rota ' fl 1 t; '`' ti 2 7 '; .e1:%' G fl r - - N - TD r�' ;,t. A4 a. 111 ` ) \ a ' 7> syr �A�� CA ^ w cirr ;) L '-,,1 CA - 7_ c'. V C,'s.eil!,*;••1 r)4 ON IN M 4., I gif.IJ '1 I t. • i.. . Ps C. X. .ili 1 ii .1' 1 ;IA 4 , O I1 IIS l..',t.- '''7c. :. l 6.t ti ' hi N. NI hi I , m a ;l. 1 1 f . 1 i 1 i �: ¢ , � .ate __.:::,-- MO 8X 73 WER CITY OF CHANHASSEN FF( FR/Gn i XL L O PY/18LE ANTENN,4 ZOADS * 100-1 2 1997 W//ID PeEssueE _ 20 PSF (70 7MP,v) NO•s1/.VAL COMB/NAT/ON OF A.PEf11 2 eusT E74-H7 -To C WZOG 46. ToivER sEGT/ONS SD.FT. Z85. FT. BX-/-2-.3 8X-24 6 /20 24 Bx-2-3-4 NBA'24 /2 240 BX-3-4-5 //DBX -2¢ 20 400 4 BX-/-2-3-4 6X-32 6 I /20 32 BX-2-3-4S ti9X-32 /2 ! 240 BX-3-4-5-6 /iOBX-32 /8 360 BX-/-2-3-4-5 BX-40 6 /20 40 BX-2-3-4-3--6 RBX-40 /0 200 BX-3-4-S-6.-7 NDSPX-40 /8 310 8X-/-2-3-4-5-6 8i"-48 6 /20 >c — 48 8X-2-3-4-5--6-7 f/8X-48 /0 200 BX-3-4-5-6-7-8 1/D8X-48 /8 360 BX-/-2-3-4--s 6-7 BX-S6 6 /20 S6 8X-2-3-4-5-6-7-e //BX-3-6 /0 200 C4 8X-/-2-3 -4-5-6-7-8 BX-64 6 /20 * THIS LOAD CAN BE APPLIED AT A POINT 3FT. ABOVE THE APEX OF THE TOWER IN ADDITION TO THE GIVEN WIND PRESSURE ACTING ON THE TOWER. NOTE : ANTENNA TYPES SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THOSE HAVING A MAXIMUM BOOM LENGTH OF 10 FEET. NO ENGINEERING DATA RELATING TO THE USE OF BOOM LENGTHS IN EXCESS OF 10 FEET IS AVAILABLE AND THE USE OF SUCH BOOM LENGTHS IS NOT RECOMMENDED. m 4 VI'Al � k ° Oki p. N 48114 & keg 1 ! qi k. u b z ,.- ‘ V ry h %. . . ,. � IQIcIo i � � a — ° 11:11 };, 1 %rs! N. w 4 .41 ' � I o w � � OM t— J h Z. lk Q 2 1.r4IyIT 161!)."'I' -11-111`11.--11 O ; ' I I 1 �� L 1 1 4 v I. Q .4 h h N o ^i r 1 y`' Q � -:I I 1 .1 ‘J '\1 $ s L' r�; l 3 u 1 . F. , �• 1 ��1 `1' I y O .1%I'LI.k 1-��01-1 1�`?1?i•�1., I\1 i 1 1 -- --t I 0 I 1 11 1r. : --+ - r - I i vi-- 1 , ; N D i I i Z � a • h1 ti j 1^ I ^-?1. HII Q h' Lq Z 1 t h I n 1 h ' . . I£ ' I V Z i b . n . h . m -ail zli 1 P Iu,iRk iCi C' � ir: 1 �S ! ref " i Lfq .. „� N: n-i,� ln ! 1 Q I y ~ In I ` ^ �. ` v ~ \ \ 1 ` 1 \i 1Zih I , I ' � R p oil p , Q o . ,ti .„. 1-,. 1k„,11 ..., ll IN, o QN 'ti " lAII " '''I � a, 1� I z --I-`- h \ 1-T� ` " =J V k 1 Q I I Irn v p I n ol. - r. k ' 7 .,, io. i% ? '-1N I p V '0 .k .'N I I Q• Qs � I i+1 I N �. I rr, ; W O • ' 'N �'N. . ^ ' b. A ! 0. ;Q•• 1 • tkCI F Ck '� n ia• o � % I p i N Itr ; > k I \ '' j ; =" \IN. N h W ` ` 1 1 W 0 iM lk!O : 041a y Q { I i— 1 y V � h 0 % �ri .t� a Q N. ' hti � `I• I`e1 ti pIV 9 1br1, 1 � : . IN ti tilti 4 oQ �� 2 n o ON n � lYiI ti � � I I Q k H ti h 1^1 .4i I I 1 1 Ip , p I,� QIo -I kJ nIS Iti ' g 4 aI k M h n '�, h h �'+ % ? lh !h1n �o• %Citi 0 n Ih n n i 4 p o % I- I Nk 4 W I Q 4 4 h V ' I h I M O Z h 1 Q64 ` h v h ti ff t. •n, W o ilk V d7 I "' IR 1n h t 1 aC k > a a1N Inly v r. v 0- �' a `a 1`o , ti v vI ti I •• I o Im n R , . T ? T O� * T C * 11i I M i^1 i 'l M h N h I -- - - 41 1 v 'h �� •Iti °kli IL I r. '0 K N. 'V 10 IZ• I`0 nim.til '- 1YI:- I W l I� I I4 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, November 5, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. City Hall Council ChambersGO)690 Coulter Drive 522 F\y`ng v • SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit for a ham radio tower APPLICANT: Stephen Kubitz LOCATION: 1905 Stoughton Avenue NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area The applicant, Stephen Kubitz, is requesting a conditional use permit for a ham radio tower on property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate and located at 1905 Stoughton Avenue. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting. the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 23, 1997. 4/11-0-4--LIL"' CCL, IEVEN M FINK R. WERMERSKIRCHEN 115 STOUGHTON AVE 1930 STOUGHTON AVE -IASKA, MN 55318 CHASKA. MN 55318 A GEDNEY COMPANY OX 8 -IASKA, MN 55318 ILFRED H JR& KATHLEEN DAHLKE '05 FLYING CLOUD DR -IASKA, MN 55318 RY W DUNGEY& 100 STOUGHTON AVE -IASKA. MN 55318 'ATE OF MINNESOTA IN TRUST 0 CARVER CO AUDITOR 600 EAST 4TH ET -IASKA, MN 55318 .BERT&AUDREY THOLEN 05 STOUGHTON AVE -IASKA. MN 55318 AERALD PROPERTIES 3 BOX 260 -IASKA,MN 55318 ITO& DOROTHY KETTNER 91 STOUGHTON AVE -IASKA,MN 55318 )SEPH R& KATHIE J MONNENS 81 STOUGHTON AVE IASKA, MN 55318 iEODORE FINK 25 STOUGHTON AVE iASKA, MN 55318 NEW PID NAME ADD1 ADD2 CITY STATE ZIP 25-0030500 STEVEN M FINK `- (, 19915 STOUGHTON AVE CHASKA _5-u 3 e�.cc '1 c c G `-"wK- gas MN 55318 25-0030700 M A GEDNEY COMPANY BOX 8 CHASKA r ' cl-beilVc g, ivo- '/l ! rake,,_, ( 1 1 610-#101-,. /W MN 55318 25-0030900 WILFRED H JR & KATHLEEN 1705 FLYING CLOUD CHASKA MN 55318 25-0340100 GARY W DUNGEY & 1900 STOUGHTON AVE CHASKA I 10 MN 55318 25-0340200 STATE OF MINNESOTA IN C/O CARVER 25-0340300 ALBERT & AUDREY THOLEN 1805 STOUGHTON AVE CHASKA MN 55318 25-0340400 EMERALD PROPERTIES PO BOX 260 CHASKA MN 55318 25-3880010 OTTO & DOROTHY KETTNER 1791 STOUGHTON AVE CHASKA MN 55318 25-3880020 JOSEPH R & KATHIE J 1781 STOUGHTON AVE CHASKA MN 55318 CITY OF 1C DATE: September 3, 1997 1 CHANUAEN ctobe Ne \ r 195, 1997 OC DATE: October 27, 1997 LASE #: Site Plan 97-11 STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Site Plan# 97-11 approval for a 5,300 square foot restaurant on Lot I. Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, Famous Dave's (Building 3) Southwest Corner of Hwy. 5 and Great Plains Blvd., Villages on the Ponds Z APPLICANT: Lotus Realty Services, Inc. AUSMAR Development Co., LLC P. O. Box 235 c-o Lotus Realty Services. Inc. Chanhassen, MN 55317 (6120 934-4538 a_ 4 PRESENT ZONING: PUD ACREAGE: 6.095 Acres: Outlot A = 3.96 ac.. Lot 1 = 0.941 ac.. Lot 2 = 1.192 ac. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N -BH, Highway 5 S- PUD, Villages on the Ponds E - BN, Great Plains Boulevard W- PUD, Villages on the Ponds a WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site has been prepared for development as part of the Villages on the Ponds development. Abutting the site to the west is the Village pond which wraps around the site to the north. (I) 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Mixed Use: Commercial, Institutional, Office, and Residential j► ;!1111111111-� � ran uggia si . •flea gat gy o m m _um mvima T.. ,in xamato m the;totillsiti01/... 40 ,,, ,.„,.„ ; .of__Al ply 41Lit, ;a::..• .. . --roesvi- --*, - - 1.....g.,...-IP,.....4 AI: ----- __ ri., /.0c:-.....f-ii ciiiQR ii.� �0J to. e 4424� 6.1 =PIply jr:+ 01 4 ,. . --""71 4 VIV:411;MI—4 ininallifil iiiii iliii,M.';'Allit -. , ti -- -.4 1 mmtiC 1maim � 1: ,111 1111111- t, auk r / . • - tio p wrvir.iiri...ii ip: opir- - °� ��1I�. ■ mu my pyo i ar °„,.E '411.,A1. --'” 4:iimis' ' i#A,....0.. 111W la aro ..;:z...dv4.5 �i1 ' iir' « . 1 r 1• ► -'R !I%IP,. %Lai Part l mom „les _ _._ 00 . n,��i —'�w��! 8100 - 4 .....„;:......::::\ 101111 ea.,.F,-4,, .. 01, 0A,42!it 4 - :- . �”' 1 8 Agot,�,,!..vs i 8200 . - la an11►7 • , 11111116, AI�'� 8300 -:.-T,74,.:3..maw 1 1II . g....:, I a Park Rice' '-• La Susanrip8400 aft moo r + -• arsh Lake �j -' � c 8500 eked] 64P I ;•;W,:e.A. 1 : EL , .... ,,„„inkil- "F.:- .ill 1 -VAIIIPM,4,4*.'Jill.'''' La C .... .t _/ 5 inn = i.`—,..; i_.--- 1----r" _ ft,4.-4111111 — ,.., 8700 • • • 41' �U :J / y ti4. 3800 • li /," r I -- e-, , �< < 8900 I: 9000 4 • 73 V„...--- .. -......,..-__...... ---: I • 9100 rsi�Q / 3 Park t� ,= 9200 Qu • o j .������n,�,,�','`'.� Lake r posiamity f ��, T c 9 3 0 0 / :y • t, Riley ' v Sialir CQ n P YY s-a •7vs�+sr�at �.,r»:srvs = 4 a 9 4:0 0 9500 \ ril 4.0f : 1 1_77 4 W196tl�5 I a :" ,, 9600 Famous Dave's Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Building 3 is a one story, 5,300 square foot, single tenant, commercial building. It is proposed to be occupied by a restaurant(Famous Dave's). The building is located immediately east of the Village pond which is at the heart of the Villages on the Ponds concept and overlooks the wetland environment. This area is highly visible from Highway 5 as well as from the northern tier of the development. The applicant is proposing a 5,300 square foot restaurant for Famous Dave's BBQ Shack. The restaurant has a specific image they wish to maintain. On September 3, 1997,the Planning Commission tabled action on this item mainly because the design of the building was incompatible with the vision and standards set for Villages on the Ponds. The applicant, at the direction of the Planning Commission, has redesigned the structure. Due to the multiple frontages on this building, it was essential that none of the elevations give the impression of a rear of a building or service area. The applicant was highly successful in achieving this objective. All elevations are designed to contain a pitched element, windows, awnings, arched windows, decorative doors,planter boxes and a cupola. The exterior materials consist of wood and stucco. The roof is asphalt shingles. Staff has not seen a colored rendering nor the actual materials, however, they will be available at the meeting. The design is compatible and meets the intent and criteria for Villages on the Ponds. The eyebrow window along the east elevation does not contain the same decorative elements the other windows have. Staff is assuming that it was an oversight and recommend the applicant add it to match the other elevations. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan for building 3 subject to the conditions of approval. BACKGROUND On August 12, 1996,the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD#92-1 including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial,Institutional,Residential Medium Density,Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Commercial,High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings,and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD,Planned Unit Development(first reading); Preliminary plat for 13 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-way;Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental Assessment Worksheet Famous Dave's Restaurant Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 3 (EAW)fmdings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Villages on the Ponds project. On September 23, 1996,the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial,Institutional,Residential Medium Density,Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings,and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD,Planned Unit Development(final reading); and final plat dated"Received September 19, 1996"for two lots and ten outlots and public right-of-way. The city has also approved site plans for St. Hubert Catholic Community,Americlnn,an office building(building 17), and a commercial building(building 4)within the Village on the Ponds project. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed development must comply with the Villages on the Ponds Design Standards, Sector II (see attached Exhibit C) for the PUD. The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office,and residential uses. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined in the design standards. The design criteria cover all aspects of the development including lighting consistency, signage requirements,uses,building materials,design and architectural detailing, site coverage,and building square footages. ACCESS Access to the site will be provided via cross access easements with abutting properties. The primary access will be at Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water is available to the site. Sanitary sewer and water is proposed to be extended from Great Plains Boulevard into the site by the developer. All of the utilities proposed will be constructed and privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City, therefore, detailed construction plans will not be required with the final plat. However, a utility plan sheet will be required with the building permit application. All utilities shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The Famous Dave's Restaurant Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 4 applicant and/or contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water, and plumbing permits from the City's Building Department. Since the parcels will be sharing the utility improvements, cross access easements will be required and dedicated over both lots. Upon completion of the utility improvements, mylar as-built construction plans of the utilities will be required by the City. At this point, the City has not formally accepted the utility improvements in this phase of Villages on the Ponds. However, the utilities have been installed and tested but not formally accepted, therefore,prior to connection to any of the existing utility system,the developer of Villages on the Ponds must receive formal acceptance from the City. LANDSCAPING A mix of shrubs, evergreens, overstory and ornamental trees surround the building on all sides with the exception of the north elevation. This side faces Highway 5 and offers maximum exposure for the building. However, landscaping should be added to this side and can be done so as not to detract from the building's presence along the highway. Shrubbery, herbaceous perennials, and ornamental trees would work to increase the aesthetics of the site without hiding the building. Additionally,the 5 proposed Black Hills Spruce should be changed to deciduous overstory trees. These will blend in better with any other landscaping proposed for the neighboring wetland area. Approximately 16,750 sq. ft. of the site is covered by parking area. According to city ordinance, at least 6 overstory trees and 1,340 sq. ft. of landscaped area are required. The applicant does not meet the requirements and should increase landscape area for the parking lot. One opportunity to do so occurs at the trash enclosure location. Enlarging the islands on either side by at least 5 feet each would allow enough room for trees and other landscaping. This would soften the trash site which sits in the middle of the parking lot as well as create an oasis of shade in the future. Additionally, trees and shrubs could be added along the perimeter of the northern side of the parking lot to help meet ordinance requirements and screen the lot from Highway 5. The northerly landscape island should also be widened to accommodate trees GRADING/DRAINAGE The proposed grading plan matches fairly well with the approved grading plan for Villages on the Ponds. The site has already been rough graded in coordination with Phase I of Villages on the Ponds. Only minor grading is anticipated to prepare the parking lot and building pad. Overall, the site drainage conforms with the comprehensive drainage plan for Villages on the Ponds. Stormwater runoff from the parking lot will be conveyed via storm sewers to an on-site Famous Dave's Restaurant Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 5 pretreatment basin prior to discharging into the wetlands off site. Roof drainage from the building still needs to be addressed. Typically,roof drainage is connected into the storm sewer. This will have to be investigated further prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations including a drainage area map for a 10-year, 24- hour storm event for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to issuance of the building permit. EROSION CONTROL In conjunction with Phase I, some erosion control fence still is in place as part of the overall site grading. Additional, erosion control fence may need to be installed in those areas that have become obliterated or removed. Staff will work with the contractor in developing an erosion control plan that fits the site. A rock construction entrance will need to be employed at the access off of Great Plains Boulevard. The rock construction entrance shall be maintained until the site is paved with bituminous. The proposed catch basins will need to be protected with hay bales during construction. Once the parking lot and/or drive aisles are paved, there should be provisions for protecting the catch basins until all disturbed areas have been revegetated. Temporary protection for the catch basins could include rock filter dikes or other measures approved by staff. PARKING LOT CIRCULATION Overall, the parking lot and drive aisles appear to function well with the exception of the drive aisle and parking lot configuration from Outlot A just south of Lot 1. The plan proposes a curvilinear drive aisle in excess of 90 degrees with a very large, undelineated pavement area. In addition,two pedestrian crossings are proposed in the same location which raises pedestrian safety concerns. Staff has reconfigured the parking lot and drive aisle in this area (see attached). Staff believes that this layout provides a much safer vehicular and pedestrian traffic plan. In addition, I believe the Fire Marshal may have concerns with turning radiuses with such a tight curve. Staff recommends this area be redesigned in accordance with staffs' layout. Depending on timing, it will be necessary to have a paved surface extended to Famous Dave's to meet requirements from the development contract. At this point,Lot 2 is not built upon and depending on timing, may not be built on prior to issuance of a building permit for Famous Dave's. Therefore, the applicant will need to provide Lot 1 with a drive aisle that meets fire code requirements, i.e. 20-foot wide paved bituminous, 7-ton design prior to issuance of a building permit Famous Dave's Restaurant Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 6 LIGHTING/SIGNAGE Proposed parking lot lighting shall be provided by the developer and be consistent with that provided elsewhere in the project. The applicant is proposing a sign on the building's north(Highway 5) elevation. Staff has not reviewed the signage for compliance with the PUD standards established for Villages on the Ponds. A separate sign permit application must be submitted by the applicant to approve any signage. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: (1) 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; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) 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 the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; Famous Dave's Restaurant Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 7 c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) 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 neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed site plans are consistent with all plans and specifications and development design standards for the Village on the Ponds Planned Unit Development. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motions: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan#97-11 for a 5,300 square foot building on Lot 1,Block 1,Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, dated 10/20/97, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the necessary security required by the agreement. 2. Add three ornamental trees to north side of building. 3. Add 3 overstory trees to parking lot landscaping plan: one on each side of the trash enclosure and one in the northwest corner of the parking lot. Enlarge islands on either side of trash enclosure to include planting space for trees. Enlarge landscape island at the north end of the parking lot to accommodate trees. Landscape islands less than 10 feet in width must have aeration tubing installed with the trees. 4. Change 5 spruce trees to 5 deciduous trees on west side of building. Famous Dave's Restaurant Site Plan Review November 5, 1997 Page 8 5. Add landscaping(shrubs or hedges)to north side of property to screen parking lot from Highway 5. 6. The applicant shall provide detailed sign plans for staff's review and approval. A separate sign permit shall be applied for by the applicant. 7. Lights that do not appear on the elevations plan shall not be permitted on the building. 8. The eyebrow window along the east elevation shall match the other windows and contain the same decorative element." ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Design Description/conformance to PUD 3. Reduced Site Plan 4. Memo from Mark Littfin to Sharmin Al-Jaff dated August 13, 1997 5. Revised Parking Lot Layout-Famous Dave's 6. Exhibit C - Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards 7. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List CITY OF CHANHASSEN • 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: 4OTU 5 le£4c J' y S£R v I c f c , /iv c OWNER: ((,54,4' ,0Fa toe,6/,/./Fiv7* ('o_ LLC ADDRESS: ?O. 0O4" 2 3S ADDRESS: e /oTC s ?Fx/L7 f . _ cs Al/U 5-3"7 TELEPHONE (Day time) 93:� yS 3 �' — TELEPHONE: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5._ Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 111111111111111111111111 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9.= Site Plan Review d`/ '1(000 'i '`)/40 X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** 4, 3 saoc' 4e GC ($50 CUP/SPRNACNARIWAP/Metes ta—Co y 'O and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. )l Subdivision S' TOTAL FEE $ 0. o0 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8W' X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. NOTE - When multiple applications are processed,the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME V Le-X/ G FS r 7/,N __ r:),,„05- A1/2n% s 2 r `/ ld4/7;OUf Z'G' 'e. - `;/,-. E r�/c LOCATION /V 7#F4/U PA!,e r a t- Cl/r4a7- C. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (UTL QT (° - 7o he ,42, /./Z 7Wn xis ,L,, r,5 / a- 2 Cr. ,!)U., li_br N, V/z__Lrg CF 5 0 .c771/e PO/J.Q 2/,01 Xi,D,) /tioN PRESENT ZONING Ty,/D- ivo-e,t1 G/5 6') S/ TEs 4f5/G�✓n TG/ 4S R7-,4/4- REQUESTED ZONING /OA PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Sec- ,OF Oti, REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION i✓/4 REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. lorae46-Y / Se.('v/ces. /ivC . Ey i •.- e� •, /X-//9 7 Sigrfature of Applicant / Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. r � CTR.MILO 250 PRAIRIE DRIVE. STE. 200 ii • I 1 A / ARCHITECTURE EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55344 41 pan y GROUP (612) 944-6242 • FAX (612) 942-74% Retail Building #4 1. Design Description/conformance to PUD 1.1 Site Planning In terms of the use, location, relationship to I-5 and surrounding uses, the building fully conforms to all positive provisions of the PUD, Sector II. In every respect the proposed building and site utilization matches the PUD plans and texts. In addition, site grading and proposed landscaping conform to PUD plans as well. The main pedestrian entrance area is from the parking lots on the west and south side to which the retail storefronts are oriented. The PUD plans do not envision any direct entry to the building from the Great Plains Boulevard, due to lack of significant pedestrian circulation and sidewalk along the face of the building facing the Boulevard. There is an ample amount of landscape area between the buildings and the Boulevard, plus the wetlands are north of the building, along Highway I-5. Yet, even though the building is set back away from the roadways, it is the first and closest building to the major intersection of I-5 and Great Plains Boulevard. As such it is very much exposed to the views and, in a way, of utter importance for the whole image of the Village. Hence, the building design and the architectural character are crucial for setting the proper direction and the tone for the Village in general. Parking is provided at a ratio of 5 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of building area, but it is part of the shared parking concept within the whole Village. 1.2 Building Design The design team made an effort to integrate this building into the overall Village "traditional"character and vernacular architecture. The intent was, from the onset, not to design another typical suburban retail "pod building." Instead, to design the building that would be a reflection of the typical "Main Street," turn-of-the-century small town architecture and character. Looking at the building from any angle, it is not easy to recognize it as one single building, erected at the same time by one single developer. The 200+ feet long building has been composed of three very different looking buildings that are commonly found on traditional "Main streets." Yet the store front design allows for flexibilities and all features required by modern retail industry. 072197-DES.7320B ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS • CONSULTING ` % 11 1 >r f � : FOS 0 I. a of V I I I Zi Ei- 8 U z Z ' E Et it u�_ ¢ 3 m a s C E Pt 3 QEi ao o c >o CGGC<C li Niia ��Ilea� SEKC 6 Ilk Cill —J Wo HR '. -. LY / in 4- Alf,„.. , ` / a i,•p. 4 Ste`: q,��.� `4� `�'� l.: 1 As �i� �� IdS. .n i- Y lSa�~Pt c �i` t" 11 .A .. 'd a � no rt �� I JI 3 6je _ i y;�ae # -s SE 3 [— o-:a 7 .6-,•:, - .0 Cc i 7F �` gild �. •1 „�, y i xwi ��>3Gkx R II. -15 yam':-e- _L� - • r4 ;; � -7-\\ 11 I I I III= =I I I�� 1 '- O 3 - s its11 O 7 St 3 Z Zt 8 x LR H .U 0 EC„ zz" - I z ml zr oK s O o g z K-''p m h. W Ks E" -- a o n xo� 0 I Rif, ' Ov tO..y v CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Shartnin Al-Jaff, Planner II FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: August 13, 1997 SUBJECT: Request for site plan review for a 5,200 square foot Famous Dave's Restaurant located at the northeast corner of Highway 5 and Great Plains Boulevard within the Villages on the Pond Development, Lotus Realty Services. Planning Case 97-11 SPR have the reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department'Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted,the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. 1. A 10 foot clearance space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e.,street lamps,trees,shrubs,bushes,NSP, US West,Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 2. Install post indicator valve on the fire water service coming into the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal or Fire Inspector for exact location. 3. When fire protection including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required,such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Pursuant to Minnesota Uniform Fire Code 1991 Section 10.502. 4. The building must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy#29-1992. Copy enclosed. 5. `'No parking fire lane"signs and yellow curbing shall be provided. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal or Fire Inspector for exact location of signage and painted curbing. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy#06-1991. Copy enclosed. 6. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy#04-1991. Copy enclosed. 7. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding maximum allowed size of domestic water service on combination domestic/fire sprinkler line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy#36- 1994. Copy enclosed. G:\sa fety\ml\pl rev 97-1 I CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIZE OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE ON A COMBINATION DOMESTIC/FIRE SPRINKLER SUPPLY LINE 1. Domestic water line shall not be greater than 1/4 pipe size of the combination service water supply line. 2. 1 1/2"domestic off 6"line. 3. 2"domestic off 8"line. 4. 2 1/2 domestic off 10"line. Option 1: Domestic sizes may be increased if it can be calculated hydraulically that the demand by all domestic fixtures will not drop the fire sprinkler water below its minimum gallonage required. Option 2: Combination domestic and five line service shall have an electric solenoid valve installed on the domestic side of the service. This valve shall be normally powered open and close on loss of electric power or signal from the system water flow indicator. Must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Mechanical Inspector. Chanhassen Fire Department Water Line Sizing Policy#36-1994 ‘ 17-\1 17‘ 17 Date: 06/10/94 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 i CITY OF 011 . -is CHANHASSEN' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 .,..„.., (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS 1. Fire Marshal must witness the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per NFPA 13-8-2.1. 2. A final inspection by the Fire Marshal before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at construction sites. Details are available. 4. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided and in operating condition during all phases of construction. 5. The use of liquefied petroleum las shall be in conformance with NFPA Standard 58 and the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A list of these requirements is available. (See policy #33-1993) 6. All fire detection and tire suppression systems shall be monitored by an approved UL central station with a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final occupancy is issued. 7. An 11" x 14" As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. (See policy #07-1991). 8. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use. The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: 12/23/94 Page 1 of 2 9. High-piled combustible storage shall comply with the requirements of Article#81 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height. For certain special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. 10. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (See policy #06-1991). 11. Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G, Exception#5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (See policy #05-1991). 12. Maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line policy must be followed. (See policy #36-1994). Chanhassen Fire Department • Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 f?-616-:\! �ti` Revised: 12/23/94 Approved - Public Safety Director Page 2 of 2 Al CITY of CHANHASSEN ,*14' �-; 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE 1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18" . NO 2 . Red on white is preferred. PARKING FIRE 3 . 3M or equal engineer's grade LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. /\ 4 . Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE 5. Signs shall be posted at each end of the fire lane and at least at 7 ' O" 75 foot intervals along the fire lane. 6. All signs shall be double sided facing the direction of travel. 7 . Post shall be set back a minimum of 12" but not more than 36" from the curb. - - 8. A fire lane shall be required in (NOT TO GRADE front of fire dept. connections SCALE) extending 5 feet on each side and along all areas designated by the Fire Chief. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL BY THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991 Date: 1/15/91 Gt?.1 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 Is f-«rr PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF , ...-i,-.--; -t\ 0' - • CHANHASsEN .. .....:, , :, ,,,e:ii, .,..., ,.s.,;.,41 „ , ".:.1.-0,,fr 4-(4 1 Alk 417/,'!•- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 - • � (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 • CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following — Public Safety Director, Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address numbers are posted. Other Requirements-General 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from-the background. 2. Numbers shall not be In script 3. If a structure Is not visible from the street,additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size and location must be approved. i 4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4". However,requirement#3 must still be met. 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers If deemed necessary. Residential Requirements(2 or less dwelling unit) 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1/4". 2. Building permits will not be finaled untess numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Commercial Requirements 1. Minimum height shall be 12". 2. Strip Malls a. Multi tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. If address numbers are located on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the buildings main entrance. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992 r_ / -- Date: 06/15/92 Revised: Approved — Public SaAty Director Page 1 of 1 to.so PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ..__ s"--- i I 111111 . :_/.-• '-:• -',/7 ../. ./ .;•-•: / ..-. / . • Q I --i:—•'--"-*---"-4----' +---'t ' i I .....-- - • ,..-.2 I I 1 1 i 1 ---' ',.._--- ,„_- ' -• , . . ....- . .- - _ 1 Jot I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I i A--` I I I - I -) I / ' . I ' i j ,t...._,..,j4 ,, i li /I • to 1 I 1 ) 111 I I IS IN ____,, .. . , i 1 0 I i i AS 00CV 1 '\i. MN MI . AIOIE; I 1 .., li --- - / aanva enortid r_...._.....„.1 1 _71 , ---'1 --) . . ,______, . -.` ,-----/.. / / N ...-- ,- 1 9t.176 \ - -L-1-'7 -:IL----:---"n'-----22:LSI LS 3 3 ,0.0 -=' 1 limo I I ONV113M 33S ISNOISN31110 2:10.3 Liccg NY i `uassoquo e laaJ4S 1449/.. lsoM IS uoowv/sao!nias Alioad snio :83d013A30 Sa-IC) g60-9 1 1 •11-bs -anc'co7 i . EXHIBIT C VILLAGES ON THE PONDS CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office, and residential uses. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to uses as defined below or similar uses to those as listed in the Standard Industrial Classification. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall make that interpretation. No single retail user shall exceed 20,000 square feet on a single level of a building. A maximum of thirty- three (33) percent of the square footage of the retail users within the development may be of a "big box" category. The intent of this requirement is to provide a variety of users, including small retail shops, service providers, coffee shops, cabarets, etc., for residents of the Villages as well as the community as a whole, rather than typical suburban type large, individual users dominating the development and detracting from the "village"character. Retail users should be those that support and compliment the residential development located within the development, providing goods and services which enhance residents of the village and the community. Office. Professional and business office,non-retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. bank/credit union finance, insurance and real estate health services - except nursing homes and hospitals engineering, accounting, research management and related services legal services Personal Services. Establishments primarily engaged in providing services involving the care of a person or his or her personal goods or apparel. dry cleaning beauty or barbershop shoe repair photographic studio tax return preparation laundromat health club optical goods computer services day care center copying mail stores Institutional. Establishments that are public/semi-public in nature. church library education services day care art gallery dance studio cultural facility Commercial/Retail. Establishments engaged in commercial operations including retail sales and services and hospitality industries. Apparel and Accessory Stores shoe stores electronic and music store and musical instruments restaurant- no drive through restaurant - fast food only if integrated into a building no freestanding fast food and no drive through drug store/pharmacy book/stationary jewelry store hobby/toy game gift novelty and souvenir sewing, needlework and piece good florist camera and photographic supply art and art supplies, gallery sporting goods video rental food stores including bakery and confectionery hardware store computer store hotel/motel entertainment liquor store pets and pet supplies home furnishings Residential. Residential units shall be provided as upper level units above the commercial/office uses within the village core and as stand alone units. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be rental units. Of the rental units,the city has adopted a goal of 35 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. For the ownership housing,the city has adopted the goal of 50 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. Prohibited Uses: auto related including auto sales, auto repair,gas stations c. Setbacks In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Building Parking Great Plains Blvd.: Buffer yard& Setback C, 0' 0' Market Blvd.: Buffer yard& Setback C. 50' 20' Hwy. 5: Buffer yard& Setback B, 50' 20' Interior Side Lot Line: Buffer yard& setback NA, 0' 0' East Perimeter Side Lot Line(adjacent to D, 50' 50' residential): Buffer yard& setback West Perimeter Side Lot Line(adjacent to B, 50 20 industrial): Buffer yard & setback Buffer yards are as specified in the City of Chanhassen Landscaping and Tree Removal Ordinance, Article XXV. No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. 3 d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height 1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold,but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent.. 2. More than one (1)principal structure may be placed on one(1)platted lot. 3. The maximum building height shall be Sector I- three stories (with residential loft)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to two stories/30 feet), Sector II -three stories/40 ft., Sector III -three stories/40 ft., exclusive of steeples and bell towers, and Sector IV- four stories/50 feet 4. The maximum building footprint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g.,pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL sq. ft. Retail (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) f sq. ft.) Units Sector I 114,500 70,500 @ 0 154 185,000 Sector II 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 32,000 @ 0 112 @ 32,000 TOTAL 174,500 116,500 100,000 266 391,000 ® As an alternative, the office/service could be increase by 13,000 square feet in Sector I if the 32,000 square foot office building is deleted in Sector IV and replaced with 56 additional dwelling units. * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors subject to approval by the Planning Director. Building square footages may be reallocated between uses subject to approval of the Planning Director. However, the reallocation of building square footages between uses shall only be permitted to a less intensive use, i.e. from commercial to office or institutional,or from office to institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. e. Building Materials and Design 4 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. The intent is to create a pedestrian friendly, "traditional" village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper midwest and the atmosphere within this development,yet with the amenities and technological tools of modern times. The village elevations shown on the PUD drawings are to be used only as a general guideline and the reflection of the overall village image including the north- midwestern architectural vocabulary, village like human scale and flavor, and variety in design and facade treatment. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass,stucco,architecturally treated concrete, cast in place panels, decorative block,cedar siding,vinyl siding in residential with support materials, or approved equivalent as determined by the city. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Bright, long,continuous bands are prohibited. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors may be used only for accent purposes and shall not exceed 10 percent of a wall area. 3. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted,or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder")blocks shall be prohibited. 4. Metal siding, gray concrete,curtain walls and similar materials will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials,or as trim or as HVAC screen, and may not exceed more than 25 percent of a wall area. 5. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 6. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery,tanks,etc.,are to be fully screened by compatible materials. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. 7. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size,mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. 8. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal or accessory structures. 9. There shall not be underdeveloped backsides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. 5 10. The materials and colors used for each building shall be selected in context with the adjacent building and provide for a harmonious integration with them. Extreme variations between buildings on the same street in terms of overall appearance,bulk and height, setbacks and colors shall be prohibited. 11. Slope roof elements shall be incorporated in all structures: Sector I- minimum 70 percent of roof area shall be sloped, Sector II -minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, Sector III - minimum of 30 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, and Sector IV -minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped. An exception to this requirement are roof areas designed for human use such as decks, garden areas, patios, etc., which will not be counted towards flat roof area. 12. The following design elements should be incorporated into individual structures: Building Accents Towers, silos, arches, columns,bosses, tiling, cloisters,colonnades, buttresses, loggias, marquees, minarets,portals, reveals,quoins, clerestories,pilasters. Roof Types Barrow, dome, gable, hip, flat. Roof Accents Cupolas, cornices,belfries, turrets,pinnacles, look-outs, gargoyles,parapets, lanterns. Accent elements such as towers, turrets, spires, etc., shall be excluded from the sector building height limitation. Window Types Bay, single paned, multi-paned, angular, square, rectangular,half-round, round, italianate. Window Accents Plant boxes, shutters,balconies, decks,grates, canopies, awnings,recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. 13. Street level windows shall be provided for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground level wall area. 6 f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping being required ahead of individual site plan approvals, but we believe the buffer yard and boulevard plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process. 2. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces, except for plaza areas, shall be landscaped, rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. Tree wells shall be included in pedestrian areas and plazas. 3. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited. 4. Undulating or angular berms 3'to 5' in height, south of Highway 5 and along Market Boulevard shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of grading and utility construction. The required buffer landscaping may be installed where it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. 6. Native species shall be incorporated into site landscaping, whenever possible. g. Signage 1. One project identification sign shall be permitted for the development at each end of Lake Drive and at the south end of Main Street. Project identification sign(s) may also be located at the entrances to the development(s) in Sector IV. Project identification signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. One project identification sign, with a maximum height of 20 feet, which may be increased in height subject to city approval based on the design and scale of the sign, designed as a gateway to the project shall be located at the north end of Main Street. Individual lots are not permitted low profile ground business sign. Within Sector III, one sign for the church and one sign for the school may be placed on streetscape walls. The top of the signs shall not extend more than eight feet above the ground and the total sign area for the signs shall not exceed 64 square feet. Pylon signs are prohibited. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. 7 3. Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. 4. Projecting signs are permitted along Main Street and Lake Drive and along pedestrian passageways subject to the conditions below. Signage Plan and Restrictions Wall Signs 1. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. In Sector II, sign height may be increase based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood,metal,or translucent facing. 2. If illuminated, individual dimensional letters and logos comprising each sign may be any of the following: a. Exposed neon/fiber optic, b. Open channel with exposed neon, c. Channel Letters with acrylic facing, d. Reverse channel letters (halo lighted),or e. Externally illuminated by separate lighting source. 3. Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15%of the sign area unless the logo is the sign. 4. Within Sector II, architecturally,building-integrated panel tenant/logo sign may be permitted based on criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building design and architecture. 5. Back lit awnings are prohibited. Projecting Signs 1. The letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign area. 2. All wooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall be an integral part of the building's architecture. 8 3. Signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered and such minimal messages such as date of establishment of business. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band or within the projecting sign and do not occupy more than fifteen(15)percent of the sign display area. 4. Projecting signs shall be stationary, may not be self-illuminated but may be lighted by surface mounted fixtures located on the sign or the adjacent facade. 5. Projecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant on street frontage and pedestrian passageway and my not exceed six square feet. Letters shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. 6. Projecting signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and shall not project more than six feet from the building facade. 7. Plastic, plexi-glass, clear plex, or similar material projecting signs are prohibited unless used in conjunction with other decorative materials. 8. Projecting signs may be painted,prefinished, or utilize exposed metal. Any exposed metal shall be anodized aluminum, stainless steel, titanium, bronze, or other similar non- corrosive or ono-oxidizing materials. Window Signs 1. Window signs shall not cover more than 25 percent of the window area in which they are located. 2. Window signs shall not use bright, garish, or neon paint, tape, chalk, or paper. Menu Signs 1. Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries and shall not exceed 4 feet in height. 2. Shall be used only to convey daily specials, menus and offerings and shall be wood framed chalkboard and/or electronic board with temporary handwritten lettering. No paper construction or messages will be permitted. 3. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet. 9 Festive Flags/Banners 1. Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting. 2. Plastic flags and banners are prohibited. 3. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric. 4. Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users,businesses, services, or products. 5. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two feet. 6. Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet. 7. Flags and banners which are torn or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the city. I3uildin1T Directory 1. In multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet. Pole Directory Sign 1. Pole directory signs consisting of single poles with individual nameplate type directional arrows may be located within the development. 2. Pole directory sign shall not exceed 15 feet in height. 3. Directory signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk. 4. A maximum of eight directory signs may be provided per pole. 5. The maximum size of an individual sign shall be 18 inches long by four inches wide. 6. Poles shall be a minimum of 10 feet behind the curb. h. Lighting 10 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous developments, the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. 2. A shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with decorative natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas. 3 Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the project perimeter property line. This does not apply to street lighting. 5. Light poles shall be limited to a height of 20 feet. 6. Lighting for parking areas shall minimize the use of lights on pole standards in the parking area. Rather, emphasis should be placed on building lights and poles located in close proximity to buildings. i. Parking 1. Parking shall be provided based on the shared use of surface parking areas whenever possible. Cross access easements and the joint use of parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. 2. A minimum of 75 percent of a building's parking shall be located to the "rear" of the structure and in underground garages. 3. The development shall be treated as a integrated shopping center and provide a minimum of one space per 200 square feet of commercial/retail area. The office/personal service component shall be treated as an integrated office building and provide 4.5 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 49,999 square feet, four per thousand square feet for the second 50,000 square feet, and 3.5 per thousand square feet thereafter. Residential uses shall provide 1.5 spaces per unit as underground parking with visitor spaces provided as part of the commercial/office uses. Within sector IV, visitor parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.5 stalls per unit. Hotel/motels shall comply with city ordinance. Churches/schools shall comply with city ordinance, however, a minimum of 50 percent of the parking shall be shared. 11 Li"s.,2,- VILLAGES ON THE PP -, 7 _:,:----- __- _-- _-- , 1 _-- i .. _„ -• __ 't".3.• . • - • _ _ .\_,, .._,,,,___— e'l , Viii - - _ - --- . . .- -._--... - -..s.„ 1E. ' -Ills •_ • .„4 . .. • •MI. i !ii r• 1 11 I! 6 III ' fiIIHII:1111% ` • ----\• . •_. • MINIM MIMI III • ,i '' •! — III - • • . i • . • i illit,ifq .-..*-4-kN..\. — ` I:. ...-... ':-...-7-.,:. \s, 'g c- r...-z?,454 -;. .-1' -- • ;. t• i •,, •••:.-1,..... --.-.:: . I— •Pik:7-7-.. .- - --F.V47.-t 10.s •<,..,-4.,.4..7 : ..._ •••••,•!•fnv."-.` r•-..,:•::•:•:,''.:,- -I "!'• „t. 1 • ;. 'i x :i' - L __LI-1 -,-.--..," • •:•••••....„ •••••.s.-.1--•• -••••7:,..•.z.'.7.••••-•:-• -2_ 4,4, = 4. ; .'- ....., \ -, , ,.....-:„:,-_--,.. ...„--,- - .. _ ,.... i , ..;• -, , .1 0 I / . ;.I k. :-. .'i', .. i;Z ; ,.''.- # •/ , , O . i•- 1 I = I ii !. .1: ..-... .• gji, .--• , -- -r -/ • 1 i. ,„,,,....num v• .- .., -.., 6 r 1: .'•' . ......:•-•. -% allisamaii.' igipmalls_.-----1= - , --A, r • ., ----________1_ ,, = , t .....j.:s.--.,..--,_ c...)..6.<,,, ,y..... .. , . . :.'..`"'" 1 1:-fr• ' - ' _ , • .._„•:. o : .,,,, 1,.- •-,,), \; -. -:_ •••`' 1 ,• 0 I [ ,"?.- -- '-',-'•'''' r•sV/ 7. : l'• i 1 - ' -------' - r .--4- 63.......:.... r_ _, ., •\ \.„, 1 .. , , .... . •...._ • _::,._••,.:,..,... ... • .„ , ., ..... •••_ ...--„. .::. _ , ___,,,-,. _.. is.. 1: ....„—. HI i-- . . •:, * .. \ . •---- . ,..,_4::___ _,f,—, , .---.. , ..,. ,•••,..,". : 1, ---[ ••••.'...:\ \ •,,, ' • . , s\c, .:',-,-;0...,..e0c.aemeeteco po .., ,,,,,;,, e .,,,.. _:, .7 ct. ... ,i. .._.,"7. : .t'---,-----" ---' • i - ! . . '2= (-- ,..... ......, i;._=,._ .0,.- . - ,Cs1:7:.%.11:, .. f:;•.% ---T .•rr _ .4 -,....0— .... ir.• -., rilt,'.. ii14.= : = , = ;' •- - , .. / - — = ...—J —....,. 1\i/f1 • -- - •• . - 7- •.''... , V ••• '. F- . ._ T -- =•-= --*----=:_- E 1 \2T ? \ -±- ''' t:2" '41, 1,/, ..--• .-, ---- 7_,___- _ , ='-- — = i 7-_ :4;.,- 74 . I ., . \ ; E — 1,----/, L- a -.= .,.7.6.a..- =-• - . fl ./-4 ;.\ \Ar'') 1 ---3..- (;r-,,I, Tilimum° -aaa- ir ilt i • , !• I .. . _T ..f. 1 . /(----, —7111 • .m.... 7 rtt t—1 / i ...; .. --- .4k ' .-\. ------- :-/t, ---; ,\ - ..-7,A4t, - \V t----- ....__J---,--,... \\ .. ‘'' '%:- ''..,__,., ___,.....1:'::!:,:f.!"..7::.,•.:::::,..21M.0--- ,, 1, r i \ (1111Zs' - '-'N\ ...L=. ..-_, --...) --,-.7, I 4Ftili 'it A, I ,!-)• ••!., •--"-1-1-1-------, -%,.••••• 1 . \\ (...0); .* ., ! 4 „ - . / ,,•:_711•... _ _ ,,. j ...• •i6 - I._ _ ! --;•.-2_;..- / .16-•*. 4 i , j : Ai z :.--,--. ' ••‘"S, 1.-.2.1..• • A ii4e.v_I 4 w : s • 7—A31.1 ,,,, \.4 )..i./ ) tf:i \ J ' \ ( _ E =_ . , I 11 / N ' '• r--71 /7-- il 7 I isumummossimut , iliiintiu‘ , ... . I • \ i ---0-4-.• 1 S.•• 10100----- ••...---.._----- •• :?.,.,rr..--.t 0 1 '., II. j ) , 1•:, c\I 4:7::-.7:7--_-•-. -- ...,,Y...,S;:...i;.0.,,, -If: \_ '''„ ' --•-:.. ..., -..., . ‘.\\, • . . • k---:.•;4= I A '•13•?-:-• !•';•'* .011 •..1.-...; ir, _ -161, .is=im mos Es willki_+-- /, it I 1. \Sz )) . . • '''--)_. . 0 r • L..,;.-.:`,. '........ -"\I 1 al ; • ..:,- ' , , i 1 , c--....... ! N , : ,1 i ; • 1‘,..-----. i . ' . °11) #### _ .>k, \ ,. \ \‘. ... ( - L ---;-- .L.-- , .--‘ \\ J. ... G ' ) ,, 1 1 ' \--....,f- 1 i • ‘ .-• . -;., 1! i .. . ... ., . • _ , . . ..._„•,.., .-7 , 1 \I ; •-••••. ..... ....., , /ill , i : 1 I • VILLAGES ON THE POND CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 1 MOTEL : 2 RETAIL 106 ROOMS 3 STORY 3 STORY 8.50C SF 52.375 SF riZ RESTAURANT 13 RETAIL 1 STORY 3 STORY 7.500 SF 13.000 SF RETAIL 1.:3 1141 RETAIL 1 STORY 3 STORY 5.300 SF 12.50.00 SF 4 I RETAIL 151 OFFICE/ SERVICES 1 STORY 1 STORM 14,000 SF 8.825 SF 5 I RETAIL !..f6I CHURCH/ SCHOOL 28 STORY2 SF 1-3 STORY 100.200 SF 161 RETAIL �17J OFFICE/ SERVICES 3 STORYi___717' 2 STORY 22.000 SF 30.000 SF 7 RETA OFF-ICE/ SERVICES 3 STC cL -- s .,RY1Y 0._03 SF 8 ] RETAIL t I RESIDENTIAL 3 STOR- 4 STORY 2.5OC S% 54.000 SF g I OFFICE/ SERVICES . Q RESIDENTIAL I STOR' 4 STORY 5.000 SF 94,000 SF 1Q OFFICE/ SERVICES .11 RESIDEN;'!AL I STORY 4 STORY 12.000 SF 84.000 SF ;. 1 RESIDENTIAL 2 STORY 26.000 SF . NOTE- BASED ON DELTA-4 DRAWING i ,-/ 1 ..11:°.46-: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING '---� 11 . : i-j 7 ,,,,,,---- PLANNING COMMISSION 11` , j ,, rf Wednesday, September 3, 1997 , ��� ! if at 7:00 p.m. � '� � e�� City Hall Council Chambers State H -- a •` 690 Coulter Drive ,\ �'�.� .t i I ~ , , 1 - I f . SUBJECT: Site Plan Review I Q, i 1 1 APPLICANT: Lotus Realty i i l --- \ L ___.i - -,� LOCATION: Northeast Corner ofi Hwy. 5, and Great Plains Blvd. `I ! , I I i NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Lotus Realty, is requesting final plat of Outlot C, Villages on the Pond, into 2 lots and site plan review for 5,300 sq. ft. Famous Dave's BBQ Restaurant and a 14,848 sq. ft. retail building located in the northeast corner of the Village on the Ponds development, Lotus Realty. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob (ext.141) or Sharmin (ext.120) at 937-1900. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on August 21, 1997. clyl Jci1 • iANHASSEN POST#580 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CIO CITY TREASURER RANDY G & KIMBRA J GREEN 3 BOX 2648103 MARSH DR -IANHASSEN, MN 55317 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN,MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 'EVEN J KOKESH & CITY OF CHANHASSEN MICHAEL M& PRUDENCE L BUSCH ;NCY L ECOFF CO CITY TREASURER 8113 MARSH DR 01 GRANDVIEW RD 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 iANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN,MN 55317 BERT&JEAN SINNEN DONALD F MCCARVILLE MARK C&ALEXANDRA M LEPAGE 50 GRANDVIEW RD 3349 WARNER LN 8123 MARSH DR IANHASSEN,MN 55317 MOUND, MN 55364 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 :,HARD A& LINDA G ANDERSON JAMES P ADANK ROBERT J & LOIS A SAVARD 10 GRANDVIEW RD 350 HIDDEN LN 8080 MARSH DR (ANHASSEN,MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN,MN 55317 ,RY S BERNIER JAMES A& CAROL A UDSTUEN JAYS ANDERS 55 GRANDVIEW RD BOX 157 360 HIDDEN LN 8090 MARSH DR ANHASSEN,MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RVEY& ROSEMARY WILL PETER A KNOLL& MARTIN J&TIMAREE FAJDETICH 51 GRANDVIEW RD MARY Z STAUDOHAR-KNOLL 8100 MARSH DR ANHASSEN, MN 55317 370 HIDDEN LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TATE OF MARTIN J WARD BISRAT& DENISE ALEMAYEHU YAGUI WEI & )JEROME RAIDT PERS REP YUYI LIN 50 FRANCE AVE S-STE 113 380 HIDDEN LN 8110 MARSH DR INA,MN 55435 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 SEMOUNT INC WILLIAM R&DEBRA E PRIGGE DARRYL T&SANDY L WROLSON TN:CONTROLLER 390 HIDDEN LN 8120 MARSH DR )01 TECHNOLOGY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 EN PRAIRIE,MN 55344 SEMOUNT INC ANDREW G &JEANNINE R CONE PAUL F& RITA A KLAUDA TN:CONTROLLER 321 HIDDEN LN 8130 MARSH DR 101 TECHNOLOGY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 EN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 Y OF CHANHASSEN BRIAN E SEMKE& WALT K& PAMELA S CHAPMAN CITY TREASURER DEBORAH C DUETSCH I COULTER DR PO BOX 147 331 HIDDEN LN 8140 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 1RUCE D&CYNTHIA J MARENGO 4. xtu f-Cit-/ 050 MARSH DR ;HANHASSEN,MN 55317 770 7 Alai Q�a�t'g � CA ' P&BRENDA K LUND 140 �F t DAKOTA 71 'HANHASSEN, MN MN 55317 Fang (33-'ei "` , /2') .9-5-3 9 / ;ITY OF CHANHASSEN ;/O CITY TREASURER 90 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 ;HANHASSEN,MN 55317 ,LUE CIRCLE INVESTMENT CO 125 BLUE CIRCLE DR IINNETONKA,MN 55343 ;HANHASSEN NH PARTNERSHIP 00 2ND AVE S 1100 INTERNATIONAL ;ENTRE IINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 IOLIDAY STATION STORES INC 567 80TH ST W LOOMINGTON,MN 55437 HADDEUS E KORZENOWSKI 0645 RADISSON RD XCELSIOR,MN 55331 ITY OF CHANHASSEN /0 CITY TREASURER 90 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 HANHASSEN,MN 55317 HANHASSEN INN 31 79TH ST W HANHASSEN,MN 55317 Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 comprehensive plan to say we're allowing commercial on Highway 5...open it up for other commercial. We went through that process over a year ago, so that's why we're at this point today and there's a whole history of that process which we slightly...in the staff report. That's why they're here today spending this amount of energy because we eliminated that option. Joyce: I appreciate that but I hate, I think it would be a good business in town here and I just hate cavalierly saying well,just because it didn't fit here we can't figure something out. Aanenson: Well they got that earlier from the Planning Commission that we wouldn't support that and that's why they decided to take...take the commercial, existing commercial and try to work it in, in defense of them. That's what they were given as direction. That's what they... Joyce: I just think they'd be a good tenant in Chanhassen and I just, and I would hope that they would come back with something that we could, this isn't going to work. Okay? Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. My comments are also not dissimilar to my peers. We are clearly tasked to listen to developers and the citizens and try to really interpret how the plans or put into the City Code and how they're interpreted. And obviously the applicant is of the perspective that this does fit within the Code and the PUD. You've heard my fellow commissioners say that they don't feel that way, and obviously we will pass it on now to City Council with that opinion, and mine is not dissimilar to that as I just don't see a compelling reason to rezone. And the only new item that I bring forth would be, I think the City has made a major commitment to pedestrian traffic and specifically as the pedestrian bridge is right there, that I think is also another pretty significant area that the City has made an investment in and doesn't necessarily in my eyes fit at all with the use of the car dealership, again more, less pedestrian oriented than we're looking for. So with that, may I have a motion and a second please. Joyce: I'll make a motion the Planning Commission recommends denial of Rezoning 4.2 acres of BN, Neighborhood Business, to PUD, the preliminary development plans, parking lot, hard surface and sign deviations as shown dated received April 4, 1997. Peterson: Second? Blackowiak: I'll second that. Peterson: Is there any discussion? Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of rezoning 4.2 acres of BN, Neighborhood Business to PUD, the preliminary development plans, parking lot, hard surface coverage, and sign deviations as shown in the plans dated Received April 4, 1997, based on the rezoning to PUD and site plan findings. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: 23 • Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 LOTUS REALTY SERVICES- PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HWY. 5 AND GREAT PLAINS BLVD WITHIN THE VILLAGE ON THE PONDS DEVELOPMENT: A. FINAL PLAT/REPLAT OUTLOT C, VILLAGES ON THE POND INTO TWO LOTS. B. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 5.300 SQ. FT. BUILDING FOR A FAMOUS DAVE'S RESTAURANT. C. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 14,848 SQ. FT. RETAIL BUILDING LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER. Public Present: Name Address Gary Disch 8170 Marsh Drive Rhonda Collins 8060 Hidden Court Cindy Marengo 8150 Marsh Drive Dale & Zola Klabande 8160 Hidden Court Susie& Kerry Blake 8040 Hidden Circle Vernelle Clayton 422 Santa Fe Circle Scott D. Schlachter 5633 Morgan Avenue So. Lois Savard 8080 Marsh Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Help me understand the roof issue a little bit better. Walk me through it again, or walk me through it if you would. Generous: Okay. If you look at the roof elevation on the Building 4 you see that it has a flat roof cross area in the middle that is actually a flat roof elevation. The slope roof elevation on that building, observable from someone standing on the street is approximately 70%of the building. However, if you look at it from a birds eye view, it's probably maybe half of the building. The roof area. So we need clarification whether or not we should interpret it to mean that it's,was visible from the ground or what's visible from above. Peterson: And your rationale for that position, the rationale for their position was? Generous: Well that with the higher peak that would be in it,we were looking, primarily when we were doing the design we were looking at larger units and making it look consistent with our downtown area. The office, the Medical Arts building down on West 78th Street. Peterson: And that's the standard we've followed with the other buildings? Generous: So far. 24 Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 Peterson: Other questions of staff? Joyce: On this handout, remember this part of the handout. What exactly is this? Generous: That just shows you the sectors. If you look at the design standards, there are different, with any...slightly different standards Joyce: Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. All right. I was just wondering, the dotted line looked like a thoroughfare or something through. Can you actually take your car and go through that whole dotted area? Through parking lots and everything like that. Generous: You can't get out to Highway 101 that way. Joyce: Okay. All right. Generous: It's just to delineate the different sectors within the plan and the signage standards are slightly different than some of the requirements. Joyce: Okay. Sidney: I have another question about the flat roof portion of that building. Would that be visible from other buildings in the Villages? ...see higher elevations. Generous: We may in the Village corridor develop up to four story or 50 feet. Sidney: Okay, so that might be visible then. Peterson: Other questions of staff? Joyce: Just one. Now that I understand what I'm looking at here. You said that we're adding 14,000 square feet of retail to Section 2 and taking it out of Section 1 then. Generous: Right. Based on the additional, there's a Building 2 that will come in the future that's approximately 7,500 square feet. Joyce: And you're,there isn't anything confirmed but we're looking at a restaurant on that site too. Generous: Correct. Joyce: Thank you. Peterson: The only other thing Bob, I think I don't normally preach this but within the packet I know it's some within your control but we didn't have a proportionate rendering. It's pretty 25 Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 m. It's difficult to get...tonight so .fopoiont�his gfinger With thatt does theopment applicantaor their designee y important that we have thatpacket so e wish to address the Commission please? Vernelle Clayton: Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. My name is Vemelle Clayton and I'm with Lotus Realty. I would like to have the rest of the group in here before we start but let me talk first just a little bit about the, are you going to do this one by one? Do the plat and vote on that and... I didn't say vote yes. I just said vote. Do you want me to talk about the plat first and then you talk? Okay. I would like to just,just a couple of comments. We don't have any problem with the change in number 5. Backing up to number 2. I just want for the record to say that I believe that we alreadyhave adequate cross We should take access easements as a palook at them before the of the covenants that are filed,but this is a good test plat's recorded and see that they fit. I do also want to state for the record that I would like, I will not actually formally object to item number 1,but given that we picked up the copy on Tuesday. I read it...that night. Caught it last night and we were still busy with Famous Dave's today, I didn't really get a chance to talk about it. But we'll have a chance to talk about it between now and the Council meeting and it's probably fine. I just want to understand what the ramifications might be. And that's all the comments I have on that. Peterson: Any questions? Kevin, any comments on replatting? Joyce: No, I don't have any. Sidney: No comment. Peterson: Ladd? Nor do I. With that, may I have a motion and a second please. Blackowiak: I'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, PUD #95-2, subject to conditions 1 through 8. Condition 5 shall read, the applicant shall pay the City GIS fees in accordance with City fees at time of recording final plat. Joyce: I'll make a second on that. Blackowiak moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Villages on the Ponds Second Addition, PUD 95-2, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall grant to the City of Chanhassen a conservation easement over Outlot L, Villages on the Ponds as described in the conditions of approval for the Villages on the Ponds. 2. Provide cross access easements and maintenance agreements shall be dedicated over Lots 1 and 2, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition for access and utility purposes. 3. The appropriate drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the plat over the stormwater basins and wetlands on the property. Drainage and utility easements shall 26 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 be dedicated on the final plat for the stormwater basin and wetland up to the 100 year flood elevation. 4. The applicant shall enter into an addendum to the development contract/PUD agreement for Villages on the Ponds. 5. The applicant shall pay the City GIS fees in accordance with city fees at time of recording of final plat. 6. The proposed commercial development of 2.13 net developable acres is responsible for a water quantity fee of 89,287. This fee is due payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. 7. All utility improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the applicant or their successors shall supply the City with a mylar set of as-built construction plans. All utilities installed within the plat shall be owned and maintained by the property owners and not the City. 8. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees pursuant to City Code. All voted in favor, except Conrad who abstained, and the motion carried. Peterson: Next item. Vernelle, do you want to? • Vernelle Clayton: I guess one of the things that I will talk about after we talk about the building itself, is landscaping. Bob and I have talked about that a little bit and we can deal with that after we talk about the building. I would like to say that we have Mika Milo with us. Most of you, I think all of you know Mika Milo from our prior presentations. We have Ken Merriman who is our expert leasing person and a delightful person to know. And we have Scott Schlachter from Famous Dave's. I would just like to say that I did invite all the folks that were here for the last session to come and sit in on this presentation, number one because they were so successful. And number two,because they all said oh, Famous Dave's. When are you going to open? But that is, aside from, the only other comment I want to make about Famous Dave's is, number one. Everybody seems to like them and want them here. Number two. I want to publicly express my appreciation for their patience with us as we have wrestled with their design. They've been not only patient. They've been understanding. They've been flexible and so far they haven't even gotten angry as far as I know. We have been working with them, not because their design was bad. But because it didn't quite fit what everyone's ideas and assumptions were as to what would be built in the Villages. To that end they've been very flexible. They are also under a little bit of a time line. They want to get going as soon as possible so staff has been actually bending the rules on when we can get the last copies of things into them and we appreciate that. We got Mika involved in some redesign. He got that copy to us in time to get it to staff and to Famous Dave's at the same time. We wanted both to review it. Famous Dave's had a few changes that they wanted to make and thanks to Mika who learned of a couple of them at 4:00 27 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 this afternoon and has been out in the hall making the color copy as you discussed car dealerships, I think we have a fairly complete presentation. You will see that there are some things that are completely different from the way it was described or set forth in the packet. We'll try to point those out to you as we go and I would like to introduce Mika Milo to discuss the elevations. Mika Milo: Mika Milo, principle of Milo Architecture Group in Eden Prairie. And your Honorable Chairman and Planning Commissioners, it is my pleasure to present now the two projects here that are really like one project. All on one site basically, sharing the same parking lot. One is the Famous Dave and then the retail building#4. I guess we'll first address the Famous Dave building, and you will see that there is some relationship, some visual relationship and correlationship between these buildings and color schemes. When we, like Vernelle said, initial design that was a typical, proto typical design for Famous Dave and they approached us here, in essence was a good design that would fit to the Village character in general terms. In terms of massing and the slope roofs and the size of the building and bulk and shape of the building. And the restaurant is Was°hely very welcome use for character of the finishesande `theages...in and materials that they are tdoors. The problem we had is more, it proposing in a typical design, and we have been working quite a while with them and they worked until we received, until we arrived to that point to present to you these change design that I believe now much closer matches the intent with the Villages and what we are trying to achieve there. I will show you what the material that was presented... This is the last roof, sheet metal roof and wood siding that was proposed. It was rather...raw wood appearance like northern...farmhouse combination with very... But in any case, we felt it is not really matching what we are trying to achieve here at the Village and we would like that building to blend more with the overall...design that we have, that are not so strongly, how would you say, woodsy. They're a little bit more sophisticatedand �we be darker thantheested to change tcolor �ed onele roand oeaas well as to change the finishes, the color of the roof would suggested that also we finish for the wood siding becomes a solid stain rather than a transparent stain...and we also created a base that we propose of being...so this is basically what happened and I will show you the design that we are now proposing. I think you have the smaller, reduced copies. You have received that. Peterson: Bob, does the copy that you just gave us differ from...? Does the copy you just gave us differ from the one that's in our packet? It seemed to. Generous: Just the trash enclosure. Peterson: Oh okay, sorry. Al-Jaff: There were some changes that were made to the plans that you have attached so they are different. So what you have is the latest revision. Mika Milo: ...substantial change from these initial materials. The red roof that you see is more of the brownish color, darker...we are suggesting that darker color...stained color. The stain is a light brownish...and the wood frame around the windows to take a darker tone of this...darker 28 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 one would be for the frames and around the... Then to have as a base of that...of approximately 6 inches above the ground and we use that teal green,teal color for...and we are considering or re-using that teal color because it might not be... Any questions that you might have? Vernelle Clayton: I think they might have some questions as to how it's different from what you had in your packet. Is that a reasonable assumption? The differences are four. The roof. Over the kitchen...here was too small for their HVAC... Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Brooks: I have a question. In your design...you state, in no case shall the architecture lead to the... This really does not, it's inconsistent with where you're going. I realize that Famous Dave's has an image that...when I look at that building that you presented... boy these are really far apart in architectural styles. We're talking about compatibility in Villages on the Ponds, and we're going from sort of very modern and glass and it was very nice to sort of rustic, western theme and I don't feel that, I just want your opinion on this. This doesn't seem to follow the design character reference book of what you... Mika Milo: ...that text reads like that and the intent is not to copy. Can you please read one more time that particular important sentence? That couple sentences. Brooks: However, in no case shall the architectural...of a Disneyland street or... The main goal is to create a pleasant...highway pedestrian oriented streetscape that has the base qualities of a traditional village. The building architecture... Mika Milo: Obviously I wanted to say, we don't any...temporary architecture dealing in the Village. However, we are basing the architecture on the traditional value, and traditional symbol and expressions of the architecture of the past times and especially the beginning of this century. Small town America and the intent would be very simply...we like to have some cohesiveness in the Village and a certain direction and...materials and design but I don't think that our intent is to really have very uniform, very similar everything. I think we do welcome some varieties. We do welcome some different architectural...and expressions that suggest building a village over the period of time that is composed of various...and not just the one single developer who is doing everything very uniformly. In that respect I think that yes, this is a very different than the office building, though the function is also very different. It is more rustic and woodsy and so on but it's also on the other end of the village and not directly next door to the office building. I think it's more now in an environment where that will fit rather well. Where we have the restaurant next, in opposite side of the pond is another restaurant and then we have also the Americtnn which are using all the siding and wood shingles and they are a little more rustic and woodsy type of design. I think that will blend with this area in general terms so I think. Brooks: But this is not small town Wyoming land...but it's just very, very different flavor from what I see being presented so far... I guess my question would be, when we're doing Famous Dave's, is this rustic wooded look the only look that they have for their restaurant because I 29 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 believe Alison...Maple Grove. Also this is right next to Highway 5 and all of a sudden we have this rustic, Wyoming look right on Highway 5. Mika Milo: Let me explain one thing only. We are talking about rustic. I would like to point out that... We talking about the creamy,beigey color... So I do think that I feel comfortable that we are close enough to...different. It still has some of that Wyoming flavor... I think there has been a tremendous transformation... Brooks: ...on your last building, you did such a great job of going beyond form...and even here you're saying, you know you don't want to guided...self expression but which does not... I mean it was going so great and now it's seems like we've gone back to traditional restaurant... This probably is a, I'll stop because it's probably a moot point anyway because...but I just wanted to make the point that I think that we're going in one direction and...this doesn't quite fit with what you were doing architecturally to start out with. Mika Milo: I have just one more thing to say. That this...they really have to more fit with the product...are of the Villages is more isolated and... Aanenson: I'm sorry I have to stop there because I think we have to be really careful about that type of thinking because we really tried hard to tie those pieces together architecturally. I understand what you're saying. We had the same discussion on the motel. Different...sitting out there and we worked really hard. We spent a lot of time reworking the hotel to get it to fit in so I'd be really careful about going down that path. It is part of the project. It is...Highway 5. To say well, it's not part of it. That's not true...staff and Sharmin spent an inordinate amount of time. We did give them a benefit. We were working up until, delivering plans until the last minute. We have changes tonight that we're not...we want to work with them. We've tried really hard. We got something that was completely different than what our PUD standards are. Sharmin spent a lot of time trying to get it to where we thought it worked. They can do different things. They can. They have. What is acceptable under the standards and that's where we're struggling. We're hoping to get a read from you tonight and that's part of the reason we put it on here tonight is get some direction. We're kind of at a standstill as far as some of these issues, but it is hard. It does, it is important what it looks like. Joyce: This was the same issue as American Inn. This is the same thing. Aanenson: Exactly. That's why what Mika says concerns me because we did spend a lot of time putting together...standards and the mission statement just as you read, that is important what it looks like...as a staff we were concerned... Brooks: And I do...architectural standards provided by...by other reasons. Aanenson: Franchises do have a certain style. We understand that but then we have to say well this PUD also has a certain style. Peterson: Well, we can sort out those issues as we continue the evening. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 Vernelle Clayton: I just want to say one thing. That I agree with Kate that this is an important part of the Village. Just because it's on the edge and it's not a part of the core doesn't mean it's not important. It is also the first thing, and sometimes the only thing, not just this one but everything along Highway 5 for some people will be the only thing that they see. We hope that because of what they see there they'll come into the Village. However, I would like to point out one thing that we haven't brought out and that is,perspective. That we keep this in perspective too because just for example, the 30,000 square foot building that we saw on the south end was six times as big as this and Americlnn is eight times as big as this. So we need to keep the relationship of the mass and the overall impression in line too. This looks as big as the 30,000 square foot building, because they put it on the same size paper, and we all get carried away by that. Just looking at it in relationship to the building that we're coming, that we'll be talking about in a few minutes. It's less than half the size. It's in square footage it's one-third. One elevation is a little longer than the other. So the issue is, can the Village absorb this without being disadvantaged? Maybe we're too close to the issue because we've gone through many versions and this one, we feel it can absorb. Does it look a little western, or if you're from the south, does it look like a road house? Which is what they want. They want people to say oh there's a Famous Dave's road house. Can it be adapted to another use? Yeah. One of the things if you're looking for flexibility, then it's better not to have it brick. Brick is a very hard medium to change. Once you have a brick wall, you've got a brick wall unless you simply take the walls down. That's one of our concerns. The other concern is that in considering brick it really doesn't get at what everyone's issue is. The issue really is the design. But we've added a lot of elements to tie it in so I guess what we'd like to have you do tonight is think about, can the Village, because of it's mass, and it's relationship to this relatively small building, can we absorb it? I guess as a developer we're comfortable that we can. It's not perfect but we've come a long way and I don't know that we can make it much different and still have Famous Dave's in town. I'm not 100% sure we can do this and have Famous Dave's in town so. Peterson: Any questions? Blackowiak: Yes Mr. Chairman. Could we pass around the color rendering, the changes so that we can see. I'd like to see up close what has been changed. Peterson: As we're passing that around, this item is open for a public hearing. May I have a motion to open and a second please. Joyce moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: The public hearing is open. Anyone wishing to address the Commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Gary Disch: My name is Gary Disch, 8170 Marsh Drive. I'm fairly close to this building that's going to be going in. One of the concerns that I have with the restaurant. I have no problem with Famous Dave's and stuff but I'm very close to it. I'm wondering if my back yard's going to be smelling like barbecue and I'm not the one doing it. You know. We're talking about huge fans, 31 Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 ventilators, whatever. What types of things are they going to do for our neighborhood. You know if we get all the smells all the time, the same thing on the other retail, somebody said there was going to be another restaurant there. I guess do we know what's going in there or are we just building it and see what comes? As far as the brick and stuff,you know she says we're over budget. Famous Dave's may not build here. I don't believe that. It seems like everybody wants to come to Chanhassen. It's getting to be a very viable space. You're right. There's brick. I like the brick, or the rock face. Why are we cheapening it up I guess. There's brick in Maple Grove. We shouldn't be pressured into making a western house, as what you said. I don't like the design either. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Lois Savard: Hi. My name is Lois Savard and I live at 8080 Marsh Drive and the look of this building is very important to me because I'm going to see it right out my back door. I live right on the corner. The looks of the building is fine with me. I like the wood. I like the western look. That doesn't bother me. The restaurant bothers me a little bit. I'm concerned about hours of operation. We like to have our windows open in the summertime. The smell, the barbecue smell is probably nice and that doesn't bother me as much. I'm concerned with the traffic and the noise and the everything that goes with a restaurant. I'm concerned about the view. Which side of the building we're going to see. Are we going to see the back of the building. Where is the trash going to be taken out, etc., etc. We have had the commitment made that we will have some landscaping done in our backyard. What it is we don't know so I don't know how concerned as homeowners we should be with the view. We don't know yet what the landscaping in our back yard will be. So those are my primary concerns. Peterson: Thank you. Aanenson: Let me just clarify exactly where this is... Joyce: So the retail would block any kind of views from their window Kate? Aanenson: There still may be an... Lois Savard: You'd be looking from the east elevation. Audience: The office building would not block her. Peterson: Anyone else? Scott Schlachter: My name's Scott Schlachter. I'm with Famous Dave's. I just wanted to answer a couple of the concerns the residents had as far as the smell. If we are a restaurant, there is going to be some smell from our charbroiler. As far as the smoking of the meat we have specially made ovens and we use about 3 ounces of wood to smoke. It's smoked for a very long time and because they're enclosed in smaller ovens, we don't use...wood and so there isn't going to be puffs of smoke going up and permeating the neighborhood. Well maybe a little bit but 32 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 nothing that's going to be huge. Hours of operation. We open at 11:00, Monday through, seven days a week and we close, typically we close at 10:00. We're very family oriented, both for our customers and for our staff. Any other questions I can answer for anyone? Joyce: Yeah, I have a question. What about, one of the conditions on this is the applicant shall provide detailed sign plans to staff and obviously you don't have today. Could you tell us what, is the sign going to use that logo on the side of your shirt right there? Scott Schlachter: Famous Dave's, the letters, the script is what we'll use on the front of the building. Joyce: What about the pig? Scott Schlachter: No. Just the script. Joyce: Okay. So that's the sign then, right? Aanenson: Similar to what's shown on the... Joyce: But it will be a separate sign somewhere, correct? Aanenson: Scripted wall sign. Joyce: Okay, so there's no other pylons or anything else around there? Okay. Right, exactly. I'm trying. to think of, okay. Generous: The only place it could be is on the directional signs. The little finger. Joyce: Oh, okay. All right. Peterson: Anyone else? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please. Sidney moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Vernelle Clayton: Do you want to talk about the landscaping? Peterson: Pardon? Vernelle Clayton: Did we want to talk about the landscaping a little bit? Or do you not want me to talk anymore? Peterson: Can you do it briefly? 33 Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 Vernelle Clayton: Yes, I can do it briefly. The conditions are listed for Famous Dave's start on page 11 and basically what I have to say affects item number 2. A little bit of item number 3. Item number 4. And item number 5. And that will, essentially I'll say the same thing about the next plan because what it means is that we want to substitute the plan that you've already approved. When the staff reviewed this they didn't realize that the landscaping plan that was in, and it was our fault. We should have given another landscaper for this project that. The ddidn't g plan for the peripheral area covers that area and that'shy include it. Superimpose the landscape plan from the peripheral area onto this plan that we have actually more trees and shrubs shown on this plan...staff report recommended. Our landscaper misunderstood my instructions and dilakgproject. is... I would like to talk about the trash enclosure but I'd like to save that for the nex Aanenson: I'm not aware of any discussions. Generous: Yes, this is part of the hardscape, landscape plan. And I just, we didn't have the detail on that area. It does meet the...provided they put that landscaping in. Aanenson: Sorry. Miscommunication. I wasn't aware of that change... Peterson: Right. Kevin. Joyce: Let me ask one question before I say anything. Nov the trash enclosure, we're going to talk about on Building#4 correct, so we don't even have to deal with that right now? Aanenson: It includes both buildings... Joyce: I have mixed feelings about this thing, to tell you the truth. I'm not as adamant as Allyson is about the looks of the building. My concern is the view shed, where this is going to anchor our view shed. Building #3, #2 and#3 that will be on either side of that pond, come in to our Villages on the Pond so it's really two anchors to this whole concept. So as we were talking about the importance of this building, I think it's rather important. Rather than a side note. With that said, I feel like I'm in the position that I was back with the American Inn. I think it can be improved. I don't feel like I have a grasp on the design ck facades on there. certainly inIg ertainlyhe original thing that we received in our pamphlet,we had some ro liked more. I know there's economics involved here Vernelle but this is what's going to stand out when people look at the thing. I think it's worth the investment. I'm interested in what the other commissioners have to say because I think there can be improvements here and I don't feel like I can really give any direction as far as that. I'm not real comfortable right now. So I would listen to what the other commissioners would have to say. Peterson: With that, LuAnn. Sidney: I think I'm sitting in the confused section too. I have mixed feelings about what has been proposed. I agree that the design of the building could be improved and what I mean by improved is that it might be closer to what's currently in the PUD design character reference 34 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 book. And I think what we saw today, or this evening is going the other direction. I'd like to see the use of river rock, if possible. ...but not in detail the building in Maple Grove and I said, oh that's nice. At least I recognize that it was a nice built building and I guess I would echo the fact that this is going to be an important view on Highway 5, representing the Villages. And I'm wondering if there are other alternatives to what's been proposed as currently shown to us this evening. I'd like to hear what the other commissioners have to say. Brooks: ...I'm pretty adamant about my feelings. I do not feel as though the design fits their reference book, at all. I mean I have mixed feelings too because I appreciate that Famous Dave's as a franchise wants to conform to a certain image. Unfortunately in the spot that it's in, I think that we set a certain tone for the development. I'm not sure that what I'm looking at, I'm not comfortable that this corresponds to it. The other thing is, we reviewed a rustic sign... It was a boarding sign and that was rustic and my understanding was the City Council turned that down because they didn't like it and they thought it... Well this is a lot bigger than a sign. This is a rustic looking building and I don't know if I'm as comfortable with that image and location that it's in considering what the whole purpose of the project... Peterson: Alison. Blackowiak: I guess I'm not really comfortable with this either. I went up to look at the Maple Grove property. I liked that a lot better than I like this. I heard the comments or the questions, can the Villages absorb Famous Dave's and I think that's the wrong question to be asking so early in the process. I think that when we get around to building 18 or 19 or something, then you can talk about possibly absorbing a smaller building somewhere on the interior and making it fit. But this is right at the corner of Highway 5 and Great Plains. Lots of people are going to be seeing it and it's an early building and it would set the tone so I don't think you want to talk about absorbing a building at this point in the process. So I would not be comfortable with moving forward this evening. I would like to see another revision utilizing more, I guess I liked Maple Grove so more in that direction. Peterson: Ladd. Conrad: I'm not going to be voting. I guess I just have a comment. Just a perspective. Famous Dave's is fun. The Villages can't be stodgy. Just stand back and say, tell the developer what design to follow. Buca's? Is that what you're looking for? Give them a restaurant. This is a 5,000 square foot restaurant, and I'm going to stop talking but 5,000 square feet. The design options, they can change these but you should, I think we need to give them some guidance if we don't like this. It's not a 30,000 square foot shopping center. Think about a visual that you have of a restaurant that you'd like here. You should let them know what that is. My only other perspective is, I think when it fits with the lake and other buildings, there is variety. Sameness doesn't, sameness, there's a limit to sameness so I'll stop there. Peterson: My comments I think are pretty simple in the fact that I'm not comfortable with what I've seen and I don't think I've seen enough. Talked about changes. I don't think staff's up to speed so I do think we need to see it back again. But back again with the comments of my fellow 35 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 commissioners along with I think architecturally I'm not comfortable with the lines and that are within the guidelines set forth. I mean these, there's a lot of language here, a lot of verbiage that clearly can, a building can be built and hopefully it is Famous Dave's that can meet those architectural standards. You know I think that building materials, even though the colors have changed, I think the same rustic feel is still going to eminent from that. You know the chimney doesn't seem to fit. The metallic roof like it is doesn't seem to fit. The railing doesn't seem to fit. I do see a lot like I did with the AmericInn in that I want to ride my horse up and tie it up to the railing, and I don't think that's the neo traditional look we're trying to achieve. So I would offer that I'd like to send it back to the drawing board to try to be more creative within the budget constraints that are there. So those are my comments. With that, may I hear a motion? Blackowiak: Okay. I'll recommend the Planning Commission table Site Plan #97-11 for a 5,300 square foot building on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Pond 2"d Addition. Brooks: Second. Peterson: Any discussion? Joyce: Yeah, I just want to make a quick comment. Being the first to speak I got a little bit of a feel from other commissioners and I have to agree with Ladd. I think this can work. I really do. I think this isn't bad and Ladd picked on something and I agree with. It can't be stodgy. It can't be, once you start becoming too restrictive on this thing, it's going to look phony. Brooks: ...happy medium. Joyce: There is a happy medium. Absolutely. And so my direction here is, I think we tweaked the American Inn. I did not like the American Inn. Okay. I like Famous Dave's a lot better than American Inn when we started. When we started with American Inn, that came a long ways. So I think tweaking here can get this through and I think this needs to be cleaned up before we can send this to the City Council. I think that was the problem here. That there was some cleaning up to do and I think that's all it is. I really do. But I think there's going to have to be a little more investment. I just think with a little bit of rock face there that we had, that river rock, whatever. I think that's the kind of tweaking that's going to go a long way. So that's my comment, but I agree with, I don't want to look at this Villages on the Pond and say oh that was a planned unit. I mean we planned it. I mean you couldn't make a move. Let's have a little bit of fun with it too. Peterson: Other than the rock, give them any more direction? Joyce: Well for instance, there was a suggestion about the screening. Now I didn't see that. I don't know what it's going to look like. I think it's a good idea. If it looks right. I think you're going to want some alfresco type of dining. I did not get that. I mean you know, you can't see that well seeing it. There's another issue that you know I think this whole concept was to bring people out. I mean I love to, except for the neighbors. I don't know, you know we have to put 36 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 some parameters on that obviously but it'd be fun to have screened in, a place to dine screened in like that. I think that's a good idea. But it wasn't on there. Brooks: Alison...in Maple Grove and it's a little more modem. It's still fun. If we want to be fun, fine. It's still fun. It's still Famous Dave's. But I would say that style fits in a lot better than...St. Paul every day and it's cute. I mean I'll admit it, it really is a cute design but not for where we're putting it. And I think, I mean I understand...what they've done in Maple Grove... Joyce: You know I've seen Maple Grove and it is nice,but I don't mind this. I don't mind the concept. The look. Even the little bit of western in it. It's just, there has to be more, looking at detail. I mean that's the whole, that's what we've all looked at this thing is we've got to look at detail and what's going to have to go back, I don't' want to sound like a broken record but you go back to American Inn. It was very plain looking. Very ordinary looking. Once they started fiddling around with some of the stuff, I mean it came out to be pretty nice. And I don't think this needs as much tweaking if you will as the American Inn. Peterson: We have a motion and a second. Blackowiak moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission table approval on Site Plan #97-11 for a 5,300 square foot building on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition. All voted in favor, except Conrad who abstained, and the motion carried. Peterson: The next one is the office building. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, can I clarify one point? I think we overlooked. Do we need to address the issue of the 70% roof slope before we move on? Vernelle Clayton: That's on the next building. Generous: That's on Building#4. Blackowiak: Okay. So do we need to say anything about that before or do we just want to deal with that? Generous: That's part of your discussion for Building#4. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Vernelle Clayton: Thank you. Before I start, would anybody think that we have summarized your thoughts tonight wrong if we bring back this plan tweaked? Peterson: Define tweaked. I mean. Vernelle Clayton: Well, that's the hard part. But you're not saying start over. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 Joyce: Oh no. I'm not. Peterson: You've got a dispersion of opinions here. I mean I am concerned as far as architecture and all that. That doesn't necessarily mean start over but I just don't see it fitting in to the... Brooks: It would be nice if the options of other styles... Vernelle Clayton: Well Famous Dave's is evolving and their prototype is the one that you passed every day on West 7th in St. Paul and if you go to Stillwater you'll see the same one. That's the one they'll be building all over the country. This is not the one they'll be building all over the country. Maple Grove is not the one they'll be building all over the country. Aanenson: But every city has different standards. Vernelle Clayton: Right. The one in Minnetonka will look a little bit different, but very similar to the one on West 71h. So there is some, they want some continuity. Brooks: Which is fair but we can still...see the options... Vernelle Clayton: You wouldn't like them. This is it. I mean this basically what, we changed, that's basically it. Maybe we went too far. Maybe we should go back and simplify it. Well, we didn't, you didn't agree to become architects when you signed on for the Planning Commission so I just wanted to see. I don't think I know, but we'll work on it. With respect to Building #4, again I would like to have Mika Milo talk about the elevations. I'll talk a little bit about the landscaping. We went a little fast over the site plans when we talked about it. I think in the interest of time,because it's now almost 10:00, I won't just talk about the site plan but I certainly will answer questions if you have any. Would like to talk a little bit about the trash enclosure first because we deferred it to this portion. Do we have the colored copy of it somewhere? We have a black and white copy I think. Did I give you a colored one with that? It probably looks a little better. I'm looking for the... The staff report says we had trouble...There didn't seem to be any obvious place that worked that wasn't right in the way of something. It was either in the way of neighbors. In the way of the people looking from Highway 5. Or in the way of the people walking across the ponds. Or walking up from the north. And so we got out some pictures that we had taken from Celebration and they had the trash enclosures right in the middle of the parking lots, and therefore they could have far fewer and it seemed to work for them. It seems to work here we think. We decided that we'd put a roof on it to match, to coincide with, there's a language in our covenants that say that any other,I forget what the wording is but it's in your staff report. Auxiliary structures have to be,have to coordinate with the architectural style of the surroundings. And we put a standing seam roof as we have, will have on many structures in the Village and have on one of the adjacent buildings. I just want you to take a good look at the landscaping now so we don't have to talk about it again. Our thought was that we would hide it quite well with large hedges. Again, the staff didn't have this when they wrote up the report and so staff, you know using good judgment suggested we put a couple trees there. We've got on our landscaping plan we've drawn in the trees. We'll go either way. Although there is something to be said for a large hedge. With two trees we'll have to have lower plantings, or we can have a 38 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 large hedge and it's just an option I'll just point out to you. I guess I'd like to have Mika talk about the, oh no. I would like to talk just a little bit, ah however I changed my mind. I'll come back and talk about the roof thing after you've seen the elevations. Then you can have it in perspective. Mika Milo: ...we are going to propose that building to be a building...more of a traditional, old town. The main street buildings are composed of these taller buildings and...other than just one single building and one shopping...The building really looks like being composed of three... three buildings. The north building, middle building and the south building. The north building is the one that is closest to the Highway 5 and the face of that, narrower face of that building is that elevation...elevation in the north end of that building. The building you have the smaller... And so that is the north building we are talking about and the south building. The forms are different, because they look like the buildings are composed of three buildings. The only thing that is...unifying is the standing seam sheet metal roof that...north and the south. The middle building looks like a flat roof building from outside. The middle building is also what we're projecting... presenting you almost to seeing north and south. But in general terms... We don't see that directly relationship. We could possibly...than the sheet metal and that would be really even more difficult. So the way we have it now, there is some homogeneous approach...here but yet there is a different amount... But there is quite a bit of variety. The north building here is the stucco building. The middle building is the brick building and the south building is the siding... The stucco building or...temporary looking element here that...but it is very stylistic and more in the modern sense of why it just actually all glass... That will have also the sheet metal roof like the other buildings. At night it will be lit. It's going to...roof of that building will be a signature building. That way, and we have said and that's actually the...The awnings are rather very lively and playful. Stronger colors that will bring... The materials for the buildings are more, not attention crying type of colors and materials but the awnings are really colorful and therefore... On the north end of the building...glass element, we are suggesting to use that light green glass... It can be a little bit clear glass but I think a light green would be nicer. The other buildings may be also light in the gray or the clear glass...so they don't like too much to have colors you know and this is...so I think the light green or the light gray would be acceptable for the retail. The north building, the middle building is brick building with some...stone type of brick which is... Very good quality and... On the one side, on the facing parking we are proposing that those be... On the other side facing the street, that could be a darker green or teal color...connecting the building with the roof. You see the buildings are in general of terms looking...on the side facing the Great Plains Boulevard and the parking because this is one building. The north building here. North building here... The south building is the...wood sided building with very light...and also darker colored stain for the framing around the windows and we are using a... On the south side, we're using the same,probably the same color of the awning. And the wood siding, and you see at the base of that building we are proposing the...that one but I think it will be very good idea... The colors are blending and working together even though they're very different. We think they are good combination and give enough spark and interest... We believe that that building will be a good projection of the main street architecture...and connect the office building that we have planned for the... 39 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 Vernelle Clayton: I would then like to address just briefly the issue of one person hearing one thing, another person hearing another thing when you're reading the same language, and that's with respect to the overall roof. I,and a whole lot of the rest of us, assumed when we were talking about that condition, the 30/70%condition,we were talking about what you saw when you walked up to a building. Is this looking like it's a flat roof... That was my assumption. And if I would,I would have said you're crazy if it was anything else. I mean that's just what I understood and the rest of us understood. Staff, and possibly...so you'd have their rating before we went through this process. We still can do that. We can take it to them as part of their review when we take the building to them. Nancy's question was,you know I understand what you're saying. Tell me what the down,tell us what the down side would be. And so I said to Kate, that's going to be your role to tell them what the down side is because I guess I don't,just frankly I don't understand why we care what we see from looking down from the air. I'm kind of baffled. I have to say that and I don't mean to be,I'm not trying to be difficult but I don't understand it so. The reality of this particular building is that it wouldn't look like this if we made the roof steeper from... Aanenson: We're not asking...the other office building was improved... We're not saying you have to... I guess we're saying that was our interpretation... A couple ways we can handle it... Peterson: How much of the HVAC will you see as it's designed right now? Vernelle Clayton: Well this is all, it will all be shielded because this is actually the top of the roof. The HVAC will just be down in here like this. Aanenson: So it acts as a parapet. Vernelle Clayton: A parapet. And someone asked earlier, would you be able to see it from the rest of the Village and the two story buildings. Actually Bob I don't think so because of the grade. Generous: ...four story. Aanenson: Or from the neighbors. Generous: What's residential. Vernelle Clayton: Except that the elevation goes down so dramatically from here. Mika Milo: ...so there is practically, there is no way that anybody will ever see the equipment... Vernelle Clayton: Any questions on that? Joyce: Kate,just to clarify then. If we were to approve this,we would strike condition 6? 40 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 Aanenson: Maybe it'd be better if you'd add some modification, and again the intent is to screen the equipment so if you want to put, a pitched roof with the intent, as shown on the site plan... mechanical equipment. That would exclude the neighboring residential property. I guess I'm not sure that you're making that interpretation for all the future uses but based on this... Joyce: I mean a PUD, it's kind of like a variance but not a variance type of situation. Aanenson: A variance within the PUD, or interpretation of those standards. So if you agree and acquiesce to say well...but we want to modify 6 to say. Joyce: But we're not, my only concern is we don't have a problem with other sites saying well there's precedent set here or something like that. Vernelle Clayton: Now that you've said that, it's in the Minutes and we agree. We'll take each case by case. Maybe it will never come up again, we don't know. Peterson: Other questions? Blackowiak: I have a question. What is the downtown standard? You were alluding to that earlier. Can you clarify that please Bob? Do all buildings have to have 70% roof slope in downtown? Generous: Not downtown. Within the Villages on the Ponds. Blackowiak: Okay. What's the downtown standard, or is there any such thing? I mean you talked about Crossroads Medical Building. Aanenson: Pitched roof element. Blackowiak: Okay, so you don't have a percentage. Generous: We were trying to quantify it within the Villages on the Ponds design standards condition. That's why we put the exception in that created the occupiable space if you will... Blackowiak: But basically you intended to say 70%, not from where you stand on the street but overall? Okay. Joyce: Thanks. Vernelle Clayton: The only other thing I have on landscaping then is number 4 relates to whatever you want to decide with respect to the trash enclosure landscaping. Number three, add an overstory tree and shrubs or hedges at the north end of the parking lot. And I just want to show you what, where did it go? Can you hand me that one. What we have, which is... landscaping which is essentially taken...there's a slight modification in the...landscaping which 41 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 is essentially taken from the...but there's a slight modification in the boundary here but this was, this plan...taken from the landscape plan that you approved for the overall project. Aanenson: And we haven't seen those. We'd like to get a chance to review those before they go to Council to make sure... Vernelle Clayton: That would be fine. You do have the plans that we submitted. Aanenson: Sure. We just haven't had a chance. Vernelle Clayton: Yeah, that's right. Aanenson: If you just want to modify that condition to...we thought the tree element with the trash enclosure would help as far as reducing...and also kind of create kind of an island out there. That's what we were looking for. And again we're open to discussion on that. That's kind of what we were thinking on that... Peterson: This item is also open for a public hearing. May I have a motion for the same and a second please. Sidney mo\ed, Brooks seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Seeing none, may I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Brooks moved,Joyce seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. LuAnn. Comments. Sidney: I have a few comments. I had been looking at the design as it's presented and the... drawing and I was a little concerned but after I saw your color sketches and the materials, I really warmed up to the building. I guess I don't have a great concern about the roof at this point. I understand the intent and it does serve the function of the retail building. I do have some concerns however with the element of the silo,and I can understand it might lend some interest but still I don't know if that's the kind of thing I want. That's right at the corner of that entrance to the Villages. So I would suggest maybe something else, I was thinking...maybe different landscaping or some other elements other than a silo because to me that's again,back to the Famous Dave's argument of it looks kind of western. This looks kind of farmstead. I'd like to have it more European looking if possible. And I guess about the trash enclosure. I guess I'm a little concerned about having that as an island. I really don't like to drive into a parking lot and see that type of thing in the middle of a parking lot. I'd rather see a tree, or some type of other piece of plantings. And also that type of enclosure might work in Florida,but I'm not sure at 30 below in Minnesota somebody's going to be willing to tote trash out that far into the parking lot. 42 Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 I can see people just kind of putting it outside the door for you know, a convenient time so I'd question that as one of the things in the plan. Aanenson: Mr. Chairman, can I comment on that? We had a lot of internal discussions on that, and maybe I can tell you where we ended up on that. If you look at the retail building, it's almost a triple sided building. You've got the presence on Great Plains, which you want to have... You've got the presence on Highway 5 and you've got the other entrance road coming in... It really limits the design of the building, what they're trying to do...but the other one that really gets difficult...so in putting it in the middle, we really... It's nice to have it inside the building... but for the retail building, that's really tough to have the look we're trying to get there and still accomplish that. If anybody's got any suggestions, we spent a lot of time on this. Joyce: Have you had any problems with...? Aanenson: No. Haven't. And they have to walk it across. Peterson: There's one by Subway too. Aanenson: Wendy's is actually between the buildings. Like some of them we have been requiring to actually put in the building. That's a first choice. To try and put it in the building. But because of the presence we're trying to create with the awnings and that, it just seemed to detract from the building. We struggled with it. Peterson: Okay, thanks. Brooks: Well I like this building. Now this is a building that I think of as fun. This is more fun, and I actually like the glass silo. I think this is where we're taking an element of American architecture and doing something funky with it. So instead of taking a ranch building and making it look like a ranch building, we're taking a feature from our past and playing with it, without I think...Disneyesk. I mean there's no neon involved here. We're making a glass silo and I think that's cool. I think you want to do something fun. I think it's fun without doing the main street replica thing. But I have to say that I really liked this building and this is the type of design that when we talk about Villages on the Ponds, that I think we're looking for. Not Disney World. It's funky and it's still a small town feel. It's pedestrian friendly, and it has some interesting elements that you don't see in other places. So those are my comments. Peterson: Alison. Blackowiak: I agree. I like the building. I'm not an architect but I'm just the type of person that I know what I like. Famous Dave's, I didn't have a lot of affection for but this I like. I like the silo. The issue of the trash enclosure. I don't think there's a good place to put it on the building. So in the middle of a parking lot, although it might not be my first choice, I think is a good compromise. The landscaping I will let staff and the people work out because that's just something that's going to have to be decided later but I think that that's a good spot for the trash. I don't think you want to put it on the building because just like Kate said, there's not a good 43 • Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 place to put it and the building is nice the way it is. I like it. The 70%roof area, I would tend to side with what staff said. In other words that overall it should be 70% sloped but I don't even know if I want to tackle that issue. I think City Council can have a work session and can work it out so I will kind of I guess defer to what they think but my interpretation would be 70% overall and not 70% from the street because if it would have been 70% from the street, they would have said 70% from the street and not made exclusions for roof patios or that type of thing so I can see where the issue is but I don't even think I want to get into that. I like it overall. Peterson: Ladd. Conrad: Yeah, it's a neat building. Peterson: Beat that. Joyce: I was going to say. This is exactly what I envisioned the Villages on the Ponds. It's great. I think three facades. I really do, and that leads up to my, the business about the 70%. The interpretation I had is what the staff said. However, I can definitely see putting in a condition allowing this to avoid that because I think it would deter, if we forced the 70%. I like this very, very much. I wouldn't want to fool with it. I like the silo I'm sorry to say LuAnn. I think it's cool. I really do. I think it's a real nice, it could be kind of a trademark or something of the, of our Villages on the Pond. I think the trash enclosure's kind of neat too. I would suggest we really do a nice job on it. I don't know how you do a nice job on trash enclosures but if it works we can use it in other places. But I think it's a good idea. I mean it's what this is all about. It's trying to find different ways of handling things and the form to functionality situation so I liked the idea of the trash enclosure. I suggest that you really do a good job on it, however you do a good job on trash enclosures, I think will work. Great job. Peterson: I also think it's a great building. My first impression was I didn't like the silo. And the second impression was I liked it so I think it's going to be one of those controversial things where half of your audience is going to think it's great and half of your audience is going to think it's just totally off the wall. As it relates to the roof line, I think it works in this case if properly screened. If it's not properly screened...work. With regards to the trash enclosure, it's proven that it will work not connected to the building. You know I'm leaning more towards shrubs for what it's worth. I think that if your primary reason Kate was heat, 105 degrees outside, whether it's sunny or cloudy isn't going to make a great deal of difference if there's shade...hide it more pleasantly with the shrubs. With that, can I have a motion and a second please. Joyce: Well I'll make a motion. The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #97-12 for a 14,849 square foot building on Lot 2, Block 1, Villages on the Pond 2"d Addition, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group dated 7/23/97, subject to the conditions 1 through 11. Adding onto condition 3 that the staff review the landscape plan. Is that right Kate? Aanenson: Yes. Actually it's 3 and 4. 44 Planning Commission Meeting - September 3, 1997 Joyce: Adding onto 3 and 4, the staff review all the landscape plans. Kate could you help me on item number 6, or condition number 6. To provide a pitched roof element to screen equipment and then. As shown on site plan. Aanenson: Dated September 3`d Joyce: I just want to make sure this is, going site by site on this. That it's just this project only. Aanenson: ...remaining silent on it, I mean the general interpretation on the 70%... Joyce: Exactly. Thank you. Okay? That's mine. Is there a second? Sidney: Second. Peterson: Any discussion? Joyce moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #97-12 for a 14,849 square foot building on Lot 2, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group dated 7/23/97, subject to the following conditions: 1. Increase width of landscape islands. Landscape islands less than 10 feet in width must have aeration tubing installed with the trees. 2. The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the necessary security required by the agreement. 3. Add an overstory tree and shrubs or hedges at the north end of the parking lot area and have staff review the landscape plan. 4. Add two trees to parking lot landscaping in landscape islands adjacent to trash enclosure and have staff review the landscape plan. 5. Add planter boxes to west and south sides of building. 6. Provide a pitched roof element to screen the roof top equipment as shown on the plans dated September 3, 1997. 7. Provide the City with a detail on the trash enclosure for approval. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 8. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The building setback line and erosion control fencing 45 • Planning Commission Meeting- September 3, 1997 shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior to issuance of a building permit. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. 9. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 10. The sidewalks and trails on the site shall be constructed in conjunction with the overall site improvements and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless inclement weather conditions prohibit. 11. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water and plumbing permits from the City's Building Department. Cross access easements for the utilities and driveways shall be dedicated over the lot. All voted in favor, except Conrad who abstained, and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE,CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE XXX, TOWERS AND ANTENNAS,TO ALLOW FOR TEMPORARY MOBILE TOWERS. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions of staff? Conrad: So tell me where it can be located. It said non-residential. Aanenson: So it's consistent with the underlying district. So we don't allow those in a residential district except for city parks, so they're not allowed in any residential single family district. But they are allowed in city parks. ...the City Council can do a lease. That would still be the... Conrad: But it's on a truck. So it's located in a parking lot. Aanenson: Well whatever the site's going to be. It's in close proximity while they're under construction. Conrad: And normally there's a fence around all our sites. So there's a fence around the truck. Generous: Mr. Chairman. The site that was on Quattro Drive, they had a...Eden Prairie water tower and really it's a trailer. 46 MEMORANDUM ©© Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. ©® TO: Chanhassen Planning Commission and Staff DATE: October 28, 1997 SUBJECT: Bluff Creek Watershed Ordinance, Draft 2 FROM: Mark Koegler The attached Draft#2 of the Bluff Creek Watershed Ordinance incorporates additional modifications resulting from comments offered by the Planning Commission and further general review. New ....................... ........................... .......................... additions to the draft are highlighted and items that have been deleted are noted as stfilEeetits. Major changes include the following: • Addition of a cluster development definition. • Addition of a purpose statement related to cluster development • Modification of the"conflict clause"found in Section 20— 1462 to establish the BCW Ordinance provisions as taking precedence over other aspects of the code. It is important that the PUD density transfer provisions of this ordinance take precedence over Sec. 20-508. • The density transfer provisions in Section 20-1467 have been reworked. • The structure setback identified in Section 20-1472 has been increased from 30' to 40' so that the number used is the same as the required wetland buffer setback for natural or ag/urban wetlands. At the last meeting, we spent time reviewing general development scenarios resulting from the application of the draft ordinance provisions. At that time, I noted potential problems with impervious cover limitations, particularly in areas zoned industrial. Additional investigation seems to indicate that most of the problems that were identified were theoretical rather than real, principally due to the amount of undevelopable land found in this portion of Chanhassen. In order to better clarify the implications of both industrial and residential development in the Bluff Creek area, other, more detailed examples will be presented at the meeting on November 5th . 123 North Third Street,Suite 100 Minneapolis,Minnesota 55401 (612) 835-9960 Fax(612)835-3160 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2 CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES,MINNESOTA 3 4 ORDINANCE NO. (DRAFT#2) 5 6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE 7 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, 8 ESTABLISHING THE BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 9 10 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: 11 12 SECTION 1. Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the 13 following definitions: 14 15 Cftt tex I u� ent means pa is �f deve opmen arcan e d e[a t .: 16 qx dtrt n<ai o p ct cea of the stte so as fiv reserve a.p rtloa a ..th ::; it fpr; o a 17 open space orgrneespace t at;. s::protected pet tt�tfi , 18 19 Ecosystem means a community of interacting animals, plants and microorganisms and the 20 physical and chemical environment in which they live. 21 22 Natural Habitat Area means an area that exhibits non-human created qualities such as, 23 urban forests, wetlands, endangered or threatened species habitat, steep slopes, and bluff 24 lines. 25 26 Primary Zone means the buffer zone that directly impacts Bluff Creek and/or its 27 tributaries. The primary zone, which is generally delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed 28 Natural Resources Management Plan, is intended to be preserved as permanent open 29 space. 30 31 Secondary Zone means the buffer zone that contains habitat areas that are valuable to the 32 delicate balance of the Bluff Creek ecosystem. The secondary zone, which is generally 33 delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan, is subject 34 to development limitations in order to minimize the impact of new development on the 35 Primary Zone. 36 37 SECTION 2. Section 20-201 of the Chanhassen Code is amended by adding the 38 following special district: 39 40 BCW, Bluff Creek Watershed District 41 42 SECTION 3. Section 20-106 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 43 subparagraph (7) to read: 1 1 2 (7) Within the BCW district, meet the additional purpose, intent and standards of the 3 BCW district. 4 5 SECTION 4. Section 20-109 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 6 subparagraph (7) to read: 7 8 (7) Within the BCW district, the application shall also include: 9 10 A. Identified boundaries of the Primary Zone and Secondary Zone on a 11 drawing depicting existing conditions and on a site plan depicting the 12 proposed development pattern. 13 14 B. Calculations and/or drawings that identify the allowable density (number 15 of units or building coverage) under the Chanhassen City Code including 16 lands lying in the Primary and Secondary Zone but excluding those lands 17 not otherwise counted as part of lot area due to wetlands, slopes, flood 18 plains or other limiting factors outlined in the Code. 19 20 SECTION 5. Section 20-110 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 21 subparagraph (8) to read: 22 23 (8) Within the BCW district,consistency with the purpose, intent and standards of the 24 BCW district. 25 26 SECTION 6. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Article 27 XXX to read: 28 29 30 ARTICLE XXX. BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 31 32 DIVISION 1, BCW DISTRICT 33 34 Section 20- 1460 Purpose. 35 36 The Bluff Creek Watershed Area and the development within it have a major influence 37 on environmental quality in the City and the region. Development within the corridor must be 38 designed with utmost sensitivity to the environment and the development pattern must be of a 39 quantity and quality other than what might occur in the absence of specific standards. The 40 purpose of the District is to: 41 42 (a) Protect the Bluff Creek corridor, wetlands, bluffs, and significant stands of mature trees 43 through the use of careful site design, protective covenants, sensitive alignment and design of 2 1 roadways and utilities, incorporation of natural features, landscaping, techniques outlined in the 2 City's Surface Water Management Plan, and the practices delineated in the City's Best 3 Management Practices Handbook. 4 5 (b) Encourage a development pattern that allows people and nature to mix spanning multiple 6 ecosystems. Development in the corridor should be ecologically designed and built 7 around natural features such as trees, wetlands, and bluffs. Significant natural features 8 should impact development rather than development impacting significant natural 9 features. The natural qualities of the corridor should be preserved for recreation and to 10 ensure sufficient habitat area for wildlife. 11 12 (c) Promc to innovative development techniques such as cluster developmenf d bpen space 13 subdivisions to tubly reduce the amount of impervious Gower compared to 14 traditional development practices resulting in:significant pt rtions of a s te.being detained 15 as permauent,<Opte..c.:tedoPenisPace..; 16 17 (d) (e Foster the creation of a greenway connecting Lake Minnewashta Regional Park and 18 the Minnesota River Valley. The greenway will serve as an uninterrupted pedestrian trail 19 and bikeway system affording opportunities for recreation,education, physical fitness and 20 transportation. 21 22 Sec. 20 - 1461 Intent. 23 24 The City intends that all development within the district should blend into the natural 25 environment while protecting Bluff Creek and sensitive land areas abutting and in the vicinity of 26 the watercourse and its tributaries. The criteria by which new development in the district shall be 27 judged are as follows: 28 29 (a) Consistency with all provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the Bluff Creek 30 Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan, as amended from time to time; the Surface 31 Water Protection Program; all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance 32 not specifically overridden by the provisions of this district; and all other applicable land use 33 regulations. 34 35 (b) Preservation of the natural conditions found in the Primary Zone and to the greatest 36 extent possible, preserving significant resources and minimizing impacts in the Secondary Zone 37 through density transfers, cluster development and other practices which minimize the removal 38 of vegetation, minimize site grading, and application of practices found in the City's Best 39 Management Practices Handbook. 40 41 (c) Creation of a suitable balance between the amount and arrangement of open space, 42 landscaping, view protection,bluff protection, and vegetation protection and the design and 43 function of man-made features on the other. 3 1 2 (d) Creation of an interconnected open space network that preserves migratory patterns for 3 wildlife. . ' ' - -- - .- .. 4 5 : . 4 dfi!g ['4gootiittOtdo`>::;* ::::: ::A#et fit:. 6 e i on ' >.po: s `o ''.: opl 7 8 Sec. 20— 1462 District Application. 9 10 The BCW district shall be applied or superimposed (overlaid) upon all zoning districts as 11 contained herein as existing or amended by the text and map of this ordinance. The regulations 12 and requirements imposed by the BCW district shall be in addition to those established for 13 districts which jointly apply. - - • - . . . . . -- . -- - . - - ' . 14 c se :of crit fi t twe r this s ction; nd tl er se tions of tl 15 Chanhassen City Code.,this section shall take precedence. 16 17 Sec. 20 - 1463 Boundary Delineation. 18 19 (a) Generally. Primary and Secondary Zones shall be subject to the requirements established 20 herein, as well as restrictions and requirements established by other applicable city ordinances 21 and regulations. The Bluff Creek Watershed regulations shall not be construed to allow anything 22 otherwise prohibited in the zoning district where the overlay district applies. 23 24 (b) Boundaries; maps. The Primary and Secondary zones include land that is generally 25 defined in this article and in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. 26 Boundaries as established by officially adopted city maps shall be prima facie evidence of the 27 location and type of watershed zone. The official maps shall be developed and maintained by the 28 planning department. The applicant shall provide appropriate technical information, including 29 but not limited to, a topographical survey, flora and fauna survey and soil data deemed necessary 30 for the city to determine the exact watershed zone boundary. The planning director shall make a 31 determination to maintain the officially designated watershed zone boundary or if the boundaries 32 need to be corrected on city plans and maps based upon the data that is supplied. Data for 33 watershed zone delineation shall be generated and provided by a qualified professional 34 specializing in watershed management, environmental science or other related profession. The 35 applicant may appeal the planning director's determination of the watershed zone boundary and 36 type to the city council. 37 38 Sec. 20- 1464 Impervious Cover and Slopes. 39 40 To the greatest extent possible, all development shall minimize the amount of impervious 41 surface by clustering development, using common access drives and utility corridors and 42 minimizing building footprint size. Roads, walkways,bike trails, and parking areas must be 43 designed parallel to natural contours with consideration to maintaining consolidated areas of 4 1 natural topography and vegetation. Management of surface run-off caused by impervious cover 2 shall be designed using practices delineated in the city's Best Management Practices Handbook. 3 4 Within the Secondary Zone of the BCW district, areas with average slopes exceeding 25% 5 shall be preserved in their natural state and maintained as permanent open space. Areas with 6 average slopes less than 25%but greater than 10% shall not exceed an impervious surface 7 coverage of 25%. Impervious coverage for areas where average slopes are less than 10% shall be 8 governed by the underlying zoning district. 9 10 Sec. 20- 1465 Bluffs. 11 12 Bluffs shall be preserved as provided for under Article XXVIII. 13 14 Sec. 20 - 1466 Site Views. 15 16 Through environmentally sensitive design such as "terrain adaptive architecture"(see Figure 17 1.), landscaping and site planning, site views both to and from the BCW district shall be 18 preserved and enhanced to the greatest extent possible so as to maintain views that reflect and 19 protect the natural beauty of the BCW District. Special attention should be given to views that 20 are highly accessible to the public such as scenic overlooks,bridges and trails. Clustering of 21 development away from natural overlooks is encouraged. Develop terrain-adaptive • architecture for steep slopes. =- - -On steeply sloping sites,the yi l f7 „"' -J',6r propsed building should step __- i11 t 1�•Ii ' I �ss,. ''" down the hillside. ;.'i,' ` -- . , Side garage , _ access requires less „ • site disturbance. &Ws • Terrain-Adaptive Architecture 22 23 Figure 1. "Published in APA PAS Report#466" 24 25 26 Sec. 20- 1467 Density Transfer. 27 28 `- - - • . . . . .. . .. _ .' . _ 29 =- - -- --- - -- - - - - - - :..- '- such as bluffs (excessive slopes), wetlands or soil 30 31 5 1 2 a) Land slopes in the Secondary Zone that exceed 25% en average. 3 4 . ' - - e -- . - ... . .. - - , -.. - . . - 5 or watercourses. 6 8 eeesyste .. 9 10 . e - - .. . - --- . . .. ' . 11 12 Density transfers shall be allowed as a tool to facilitate cluster development within the 13 Bluff Creek corridor. Density transfers may be used in areas where portions of the site are 14 unsuitable for development because of the location of the Primary Corridor. Density transfers 15 shall not be allowed for areas that are otherwise considered unbuildable due to wetlands, lakes 16 and other areas not suitable for building purposes. 17 18 In areas where density credits are applicable, density may be transferred to unconstrained parts of 19 the site within land included in the Secondary Corridor, subject to the restrictions of this 20 ordinance, and within land lying outside of identified corridor areas. Additionally, the following 21 conditions may qualify for density transfers: 22 23 a) Land slopes in the Secondary Zone that exceed 25% on average. 24 25 b) Land with suitable natural habitat to endangered or threatened species or a fragile 26 ecosystem. •rchatoroticar r `', endangered` ++� • • �., 1 rayr ____ ra! t sue • . op . . 'N'\ tor, ,, /T.,„hi.i_ ,_,_,,, • ,. cy „ _„.__,__::..1.. . siik..A411 * .-- i -- ------ ,-.7:.:4- it t . o 7':':' p*, ig . iso .... a " • ikk , .z..i_ me (I g Oik. 0 1: 4 ....v..6 _.7 3 • • . . • IL • ,..,J2-' _ __,..„... • • TA __ . _ __ -Y` / wetlands 100-year )'• ` —c_.,—-.74‘ JloodPrau+ �,� creek .S 27 Traditional Development Pattern "Designing Open Space Subdivisions, Randall Arendt" 6 -- �l - archaeological �_,sh f s endangered = - � site •= . .Yy t •species •''`• �•• ...x.7l• e , '.,,+�" •!.� . .-------`-,`,..-- :%.^.ztii�\-.,,,,SONY �� s Jam-'- ` r_ ' iy`j4ri ,•t A A. ;.. :139#111 .. uwoods- _ '4.514 {'y n '" ge5 tq. S 1 . a:r aCy -i'Y a�� h bpm.-�;a;:�. w , � ,.� ,t .4 , Qac . '.Vit# ) t vr. r u . •. ' trade • ,..:(44, K.�, —w.. •ti' .' .{ , -The /;. . The ' `.5 `r t 4 r 4 day ?,� y,. • 'S"L Green. .. ''••., t V trailt,. �....... r '.., a e - y qp�!� _ �.. =�„ tti .meadow a `-�.•:.•', Oma` �.= - -1� ' - L`0: , ' wetlands z 100-year` - � j - —77- floodplain ?Community creek — _.A93s 4;;Z Dock _ ._ s 1 Cluster Development "Designing Open Space Subdivisions, Randall Arendt" 2 3 4 Sec. 20— 1468 Standards and Guidelines for Single-Family Attached or Cluster-Home 5 PUDs. 6 7 Single-family attached,cluster, zero lot line, and similar dwelling types shall only be allowed 8 on sites designed for low, medium or high density residential uses by the City of Chanhassen 9 Comprehensive Plan. 10 11 Sec. 20 - 1469 Natural Habitat Preservation. 12 13 a) Natural habitat areas within the Primary Zone shall be preserved as permanent open 14 space. Any development that occurs shall be directly related to the continuous greenway along 15 the creek from the Minnesota River to Lake Minnewashta as outlined in the Bluff Creek 16 Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. 17 18 b) Where possible, any disturbances of natural habitat areas within the Secondary Zone shall 19 be avoided. Any alterations to the natural habitat within the Secondary Zone shall adhere to the 20 practices delineated in the city's Best Management Practices Handbook. 21 22 Sec. 20 - 1470 Natural Habitat Restoration Plan 23 24 If natural habitat areas located within the Secondary Zone will be disturbed during any stage 25 of development, the applicant shall submit a detailed plan identifying the resources that will be 26 disturbed and a corresponding restoration and/or mitigation plan. Such restoration might include 27 wetland mitigation and replanting of habitat significant to endangered and threatened species. 7 1 2 Sec. 20- 1471 Open Space Requirements. 3 4 Open space shall comprise 100% of the area located within the Primary Zone. The City will 5 establish the boundary for the Primary Zone using data that-will-be provided by the applicant. 6 7 Sec. 20 - 1472 Structure Setbacks. 8 9 All structures shall be setback a minimum of 30 40 feet from the Primary Zone. No 10 disturbance of the site shall occur within the first 20 feet of such setback. 11 12 SECTION 9. The boundaries of the district established by this chapter are delineated on the 13 zoning map; the map and all notations, references, and date shown thereon are hereby adopted 14 and made part of this chapter and will be on permanent file for public inspection at the 15 Chanhassen City Hall. 16 17 SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and 18 publication. 19 20 21 PASSED AND ADOPTED on this day of December, 1997, by the City Council of the 22 City of Chanhassen. 23 24 ATTEST: 25 26 27 28 29 Don Ashworth, City Manager Nancy Mancino, Mayor 30 31 32 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ) 8 612-3386638 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 776 P02 OCT 2? '97 17:39 � 1 V C4411 C41-4 4:L1 4- 1"1-42 r_�ti 1 CTI('Y OF CHANHASSEN 2 CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA 3 4 ORDINANCE NO. (DRAFT#2) 5 6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE 7 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, 8 ESTABLISHING THE BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 9 10 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: 11 12 SECTION Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the 13 following definitions: 14 aC l 1: 15 �'Itcs er 1 V�'flt7r teFi�i r nS a Gatti ru fdevc1opment t(i t arranges tho'la got tt 4 l 16 btt,dd3.ngs dirt a pppyg t area Pf he site so as tos t erve p©a ton c ft.he;.cite,foi OPITT1on 17 ap `space,s rgreen,spare.U Al xs pr tecied :.1 1I ity 18 19 Ecosystem means a community of interacting animals,plants and microorganisms and the 20 physical and chemical environment in which they live. 21 22 Natural Habitat Area means an area that exhibits non-human created qualities such as, 23 urban forests, wetlands, endangered or threatened species habitat, steep slopes, and bluff 24 lines. 25 26 Prima,y Zone means the buffer zone that directly impacts Bluff Creek and/or its 27 tributaries, The primary zone, which is generally delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed 28 Natural Resources Management Plan, is intended to be preserved as permanent open 29 space. 30 31 Secondary Zone means the buffer zone that contains habitat areas that are valuable to the 32 delicate balance of the Bluff Creek ecosystem. The secondary zone,which is generally 33 delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan, is subject 34 to development limitations in order to minimize the impact of new development on the 35 Primary Zone. 36 37 .-------SECTION Section 20-201 of the Chanhassen Code is amended by adding the 38 following special district: 39 40 BCW, Bluff Creek Watershed District ' 41 v 42 SECTION Section 20-106 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 43 subparagraph (7)to read: 1 612-3386838 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 776 F'05 OCT 27 '97 17:39 LA \1; "- 1 , ,gyp , ' � (7) Within the BCW district,meet the additional purpose, intent and standards of the c)L . BCW district. 4 ` 5 SECTION4rSection 20-109 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 6 subpa. raph(7)to read: ° (7) Within the BCW district,the application shall also include: 1 i q.`- Identified boundaries of the Primary Zone and Secondary Zone on a 11 drawing depicting existing conditions and on a site plan depicting the 12 proposed development pattern. 13 14 � Calculations and/or drawings that identify the allowable density (number 15 of units or building coverage)under the Chanhassen City Code including 16 lands lying in the Primary and Secondary Zone but excluding those lands 17 not otherwise counted as part of lot area due to wetlands, slopes, flood 18 plains or other limiting factors outlined in the Code. 19 `4,1. 20 SECTION.'.. Section 20-110 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 2I subparagraph (8) to read: 22 23 (8) Within the BCW district, consistency with the purpose, intent and standards of the 24 BCW district. 25 26 SECTION Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Article 27 XXX to read: 28 29 30 ARTICLE XXX. BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 31 32 DIVISION 1,BCW DISTRICT 33 34 Section 20- 1460 Purpose. 35 36 The Bluff Creek Watershed Area and the development within it have a major influence 37 on environmental quality in the City and the region. Development within the corridor must be 38 designed with utmost sensitivity to the environment and the development pattern must be of a 39 quantity and quality other than what might occur in the absence of specific standards. The 40 purpose of the District is to: 41 42 (a) Protect the Bluff Creek corridor, wetlands,bluffs,and significant stands of mature trees 43 through the use of careful site design, protective covenants, sensitive alignment and design of 612-3386838 HOISINGTON KOEuLER 776 PO4 OLT 27 '97 17:39 1 roadways and utilities, incorporation of natural features, landscaping, techniques outlined in the 2 City's Surface Water Management Plan, and the practices delineated in the City's Best 3 Management Practices Handbook. 4 5 (b) Encourage a development pattern that allows people and nature to mix spanning multiple 6 ecosystems. Development in the corridor should be ecologically designed and built 7 around natural features such as trees, wetlands, and bluffs. Significant natural features 8 should impact development rather than development impacting significant natural 9 features. The natural qualities of the corridor should be preserved f r_ee f tion to 10 ensure sufficient habitat area for wildlife. 11 a , ::^KyQfo((. �k•°3XJX�Arxx t:Ae,X> ei.X•%k , l iit.XxY x « k .%.,,...nlxst esxr . �kr ;.b.eX K:.. .itI cecii�ues, cur s 11 e 13mit surteetie.amou to.frnpevzouc9verc tamp-teal('raditio .dv 1opkt prtcceeitrngnSgnfCupotoOa Sin�gtcae 15 per�an0PPro. ctpa x 16 17 ( )(c) Foster the creation of a greenway connecting Lake Minnewashta Regional Park and 18 the Minnesota River Valley. The greenway will serve as an uninterrupted pedestrian trail , 19 - and-bikeway systemaffording opportunities for recreation, education, physical fitness and 20 transportation. • . 21 r. 22 Sec. 20- 1461 intent. 23 24 The City intends that all development within the district should blend into the natural 25 environment while protecting Bluff Creek and sensitive land areas abutting and in the vicinity of 26 the watercourse and its tributaries. The criteria by which new development in the district shall be 27 judged are as follows: 7g 29 (a) Consistency with all provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the Bluff Creek 30 Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan, as amended from time to time; the Surface 31 Water Protection Program; all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance 32 not specifically overridden by the provisions of this district; and all other applicable land use 33 regulations. 34 35 (b) Preservation of the natural conditions found in the Primary Zone and to the greatest 36 extent possible,preserving significant resources and minimizing impacts in the Secondary Zone 37 through density transfers, cluster development and other practices which minimize the removal 38 of vegetation, minimize site grading, and application of practices found in the City's Best 39 Management Practices Handbook. 40 41 (c) Creation of a suitable balance between the amount and arrangement of open space, 42 landscaping, view protection,bluff protection, and vegetation protection and the design and 43 function of man-made features on-the-other. 3 612-3:86:333 HO I S I NGGTON KOEGLER ??6 F'o5 OCT 2? '97 1?:40 1 2 (d) Creation of an interconnected open space network that preserves migratory patterns for 3 wildlife. .-: . ' ' • - .. . .. _ - 4 x.;6xar. a� a«. F x„ .. 5 s W � , � kad ' ,e '.,,.P g0ewcfr.4.xeI f. r;;oyqlx lagsAP . 41, .,6 7 8 Sec. 20— 1462 District Application. 9 10 The BCW district shall be applied or superimposed (overlaid)upon all zoning districts as 11 contained herein as existing or amended by the text and map of this ordinance. The regulations 12 and requirements imposed by the BCW district shall be in addition to those established for 13 districts which jointly apply T. - 14 C ie' a n£1tCt etw tt tb��.s Cttpn end ,ther se t vn' til`th - 15 Chatrhmen City Cede, ih s se.ctrr r slz l tak rec c e - - 16 17 Sec. 20 - 1463 Boundary Delineation. 18 .. : 19 (a) Generally. Primary and Secondary Zones shall be subject to the requirements established 20 herein, as well as restrictions and requirements established by other applicable city ordinances 21 and regulations. The BIuff Creek Watershed regulations shall not be construed to allow anything 22 otherwise prohibited in the zoning district where the overlay district applies. 23 24 (b) Boundaries; maps. The Primary and Secondary zones include land that is generally 25 defined in this article and in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management PIan. 26 Boundaries as established by officially adopted city maps shall be prima facie evidence of the 27 location and type of watershed zone. The official maps shall be developed and maintained by the 28 planning department. The applicant shall provide appropriate technical information, including 29 but not limited to, a topographical survey, flora and fauna survey and soil data deemed necessary 30 for the city to determine the exact watershed zone boundary. The planning director shall make a 31 determination to maintain the officially designated watershed zone boundary or if the boundaries 32 need to be corrected on city plans and maps based upon the data that is supplied. Data for 33 watershed zone delineation shall be generated and provided by a qualified professional 34 specializing in watershed management, environmental science or other related profession. The 35 applicant may appeal the planning director's determination of the watershed zone boundary and 36 type to the city council. 37 38 Sec. 20 - 1464 Impervious Cover and Slopes. 39 40 To the greatest extent possible, all development shall minimize the amount of impervious 41 surface by clustering development,using common access drives and utility corridors and 42 minimizing building footprint size. Roads, walkways,bike trails, and parking areas must be 43 designed parallel to natural contours with consideration to maintaining consolidated areas of 4 612-3386838 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 776 P06 OCT 27 '97 17:a1 1 natural topography and vegetation. Management of surface run-off caused by impervious cover 2 shall be designed using practices delineated in the city's Best Management Practices Handbook. 3 4 Within the Secondary Zone of the BCW district, areas with average slopes exceeding 25% 5 shall be preserved in their natural state and maintained as permanent open space. Areas with 6 average slopes less than 25% but greater than 10% shall not exceed an impervious surface 7 coverage of 25%, Impervious coverage for areas where average slopes are less than 10% shall be 8 governed by the underlying zoning district. 9 10 Sec. 20 - 1465 Bluffs. 11 12 Bluffs shall be preserved as provided for under Article XXVIII. 13 14 Sec. 20 - 1466 Site Views. 15 16 Through environmentally sensitive design such as "terrain adaptive architecture"(see Figure 17 1.), landscaping and site planning, site views both to and from the BCW district shall be 18 preserved and enhanced to the greatest extent possible so as to maintain views that reflect and 19 protect the natural beauty of the BCW District. Special attention should be given to views that — 20 are highly accessible to the public such as scenic overlooks,bridges and trails. Clustering of 21 development away from natural overlooks is encouraged. • • • Develop terrain-adaptive architecture for steep slopes. 'On steeply sloping sites,the _� 1 �. ^Jl�r• • propsed building should step �>f�T 8746 dawn the hillside. 'A710116• - ' Side garage access reqvires less '� .='' • �, site disturbance. Aiiw ';-r-`;y::• Terrain-Adaptive Architecture 22 23 Figure 1. "Published in APA PAS Report#466" 24 25 26 Sec. 20 - 1467 Density Transfer. 27 28 31 - _ -, - - ' . - _ _ . - 5 612-7706838 HO I S I NGTON KOEGLER 776 P07 OCT 27 '97 17:42 I '') • . 3 4 : _. -: .-: :. -:- 4.4.ti -.- : - .- --• , ::2•- ' ; '. ' 5 ef-WtereetIESE397 6 7 . . . 0 . ..... 8 ecosystem. 9 10 d) Other lands as deteffnined by City Council. 11 :.• ,•_,.,,,,,F•.,•,-i.•:,;-,,,c1;.:;.:•:••.,.w7.•;,,---.7.--,•:...:_ yor,ireff-lTr$,', r-,:-Telfr-inffs7ri,----i,17-1..fv?7. --zw.,1,-,-thiritiw.:P . 12 ,.:. :_;,•-•,:;g„Lierksiw•tranner.s•ip ,',., 5_..Anovie' Y 4,too Aw aa ita af e US eri e,-• oRraMwl • ., • .;',,T,. --.: .:..- . •,,..:•; . ...:-.. ;.,.:A?3,.;h•'Ne.,..4 .'..;.,;' „ .,.:.,..A:i..g.:..4,:.,..L<J,4:::::::::,`" !!::: 13 Bluff'Cretk:ttittiOpt...•..laenqt•Ftiiiti.Ster5-..inay.t.fu•$edlit:Vea$:.Jvvheit.::p•OrtiOngitir IlteVtejait. 'L.::.:"j.:';'•,::•:;-• . ..;.:.: .....•:.,:: . ,:.;:•:,...,,,,,...„.•::,...,:•„,:,.,,.....,-,;,..„.,.,,,,,,..,-..,:••,;•,•:,...•.4,......:::_•,:•;:,...,•:: . ..;•,..,....•,;•.•.4.•.4••.1:--:::•:. ..,-..•...•---••••;.: :-..•.•.•;.-„Ji....;,i•,..,..•45:,.,..?,••••••••••;::•--,-: 14 unsuitabl6for:dey:OlOpfntintbeeaa't:-Ofthelo4t.tott oftke:'RrirnaryS.7-,oitdOriDen,liviztr-ausfer.4., .. shall• • :-.:,„,•:•,•:.•_•.,..--::::•,-J., :.:•,...,_,.,:i:::;:::, :•-••,•-,.:„.:..,:..:-..;.:::......i.•-::•-•••••••.:. •:.:•:<:.::;:.:::.7iii• •••••-.=•,•,.•-•:::.•:.:::;:-.... --.----,.•:-••••!•5.-:0,- .•:_:::• -•.:J . ,:;:,:,:.;.r-;.:•;.r•-•,..:.:•••.,;•„..:.,•;•• ::..• 15 .not be:a11.0Nved:fol areas fht--ar6--otlierOsetoiS..idered-runbliiIdAblq-Aue-.TO,Vett •grAs,-;1 • . .: - . :,..:•: :•-•-:•.:•,...- ••--;;:-,,,,--, •,..;.-•:.::: :-.-.::::••••- •-:;:,- -,!-.-:•••• :•,•;;.;:: :-:•• ••,_•••;„:"...?!,;.•-!:v . ;, :-::: •- 17-P-.5:,•=iF.,: -.'-;. --,f.;•k',•,-; ,;*:;-:-,i,-:.i::::-::. 16 and•otherarea.S::•not,•:$Uittble..lot biiild41g:purposos;•,--,, :-,-..: : :-..-..- -:,T:':•.:-. .,..4if ,,,,iiiii,:-..-.11-,Y,1:-.-!1._S;I::5,:„,--,,,, ';................... ::,......;: : :.:::.:„.::.•::.......................................::-::.:::.:;-,::: ::,..•::‘,...:.:,- •::::.:::::.:! ;,::-._:-_,.:-::•i•,.-.::;,•,.....;: ::.:-.::::::1::::::.::,::::::gi--:-.„Jai ,;!-,!,4;;;.=1;-::!,,-;!,:r:.::-•:;; ;;;;:;:,. 17 • .••••••:::....•-•••• •••••.••,,.•..:.•:::•..,-.--•-•-•••..:;...•••:,•:•••!..-•-.,.;........r•-•:••••:•••••• ....,.. •-:<.:::,-:-;.••••••:•.:-.••--...-. ..... ••:•• •,-...-,::::-.,:,........i.-•,-.<-:•_.--,,,..„•.,4...i:,..:-.-.::•n,-,.--••••• •-•:-••-,•• : •••:...,•••.:•.. •-•;..: •.-:•••••.,.!,--N.••••••;.•:.:•..••,•:-•••::••-•,•••••••••.,..;:;:•,----.••••-:•:•,:r:.:':.: •!..-f•-••.:,•----,•-•-,,,,:,,c,!;;T:-:-••••,-•,-...;:.,--;::-.,•-••.,.;,,i.:.,,....;:..::::-..:• : •.:::.:.....•• •••.•”.: .:;••.-<:!-.;.•: ••-•:•:-••••• •,.....ili.:•.:::.*.•••••• my be I 8 In density.0eas::where: 0editS: 170:••••applitable;:;-,denSity.'MaYbP:ttari§l'egOatcyliiiWmtrainett.prWx.. ...-.„, ..:.....•••; ••:,..••••,;.•::;•:-:„.:.::,„•••••;::::•,:„,.,• ,:,............. ...:••.,..,:::-.,„:••••...•:••:•.,:,•.::::,......,:••::::... .,..:,,i.•,:,•••.„.„,,,::••:,:...•. ,...,•,...:::.,...,:::-:.,..„,,•: -.,!-:,,,, :._•.:,..:,...,:,....:,..•..•:..: 19 the Site:within-lanct inelaledin':"{lie,SeoonddryCorridoi;•?.;stibieet-to•the:restrietionsbt.:tlils:: :: :::••:,::::.-. 20 ordirfnnee-and withinlond•.1yIng,ontsLde:Ofidentified.-'.-corridot•areas;. AdditionAllythe..folloihrig: - -.--,••:•••:-..'...-:•• ••••:...f::..• ••-•.-:----: :::: :::; -.....,..-....-.:•-•-:: :: ::•:• .-.:::•:•••<:.:-••:,:z4::.... , .--•- ,2:;:-..,-.‘,•::..z.-:-..r...7..:•.i:::•••• ••-•:;-:-;:-.: =:•::::. ,-,:;:-.--•:1-- ---,?• :::.. ..2.'"•:•-•-•:.• 21 conditions:May gniilify:for detiSity•trausfdrs:;;11.:•:;:-.:-, ;:;!:...;-,;:,:4-:;,-.-,r,:::,-i-..,-.„.:•••••,,i: .:_:- .-g.,n,!:.,:.:•:>;;,;:: ::::r.,;,•,••••••••••<. :::w.•:••;.!:. •••-•...- ...... •••••• ..,...... ..-. ••-•-•:•••••••••- ••-•,• •:!. -----,-,z•-•:•.0,;,..:::;---...- --...••< •.:,-;,•••:•:•••;::.:•!.::r.-!:••,.--,..,.:_: : :-..•:.--:::•:!:,..-• ,, • •• :- •--•:••••-• ---•••••••--••:. :: ,-,::-•---- •••••••:-...:-..----:---..,,.:.,:--:••••--.::_:... -..,.:,-!•:-•-•-:-4-..:•-•:•.;•••:•.,...:::•;:,-,:--,-•,..:,...:4:.::g„..,,----,,,,,i.„...:.,...• - ' .::::-:...:....::::: •"•:••••••••:._- _::••,-,••••:•:- •':.,_::::...:: -••-•••:•:-:,..z:.-:.: :-:,,•:.,---•••;:•: : ::::---•-••;••••>•2• ,---;;!-::,,,,•!---•-,•-,4=-•!!.3-:,:.i-..ir.:-::.•,•:•A•:.•-•: :;!.:.•;=-:,:,:,:••:••• -- - ': . ••..•••••.••-..:._•::•.:.... .-;•;••-:• -,::.•..:.:::,•:.••••:'••-•„...... .:::::••:•- •,,:.•.„..•- •:,:.;...,...:,••,•-.•;•: :::-:•:_••- •,, ,,,,,.,,,,„:,...:!••.-:•:_.<,•••.: :.,-,,-._:-_,-,.....,•.j..j.,.. .:::,., ...,.,...!; •;_,..„: .,,,,..,...•.,:,::•• 23 a) ' ::'•:.•':Land%16136-$.....i&ttiorSa0iidiii7k.ZObiiiiiiCe:XWd25cr 6476i.t'dilkt-i,i.;;;L:i.r•-;,.;. ''.:',;.'...-a-,:':!::.22:_;;.;*• .• .•• -.•• • • •-7-:.••••:•..:-.:.•.--.::-.. •;•-:•.:iy:: ::!:•:•-••••••:.•:•:.:-.1:..•--.:•••••.:-....:,:.:::-::.•!:;•-2::::-:-.-••••••-,?,::: :-.r.,•:•,•-:-;;,-.,-. ••,, ,,,<:?,::::<.; -,:;-::?-,,•-••••••:••::... 24 : • •.••••••::-.••:•:...,•••:.....•: ,-.••,:::: •::.::::„...-,:-...:.••-•,„:•,....:,:.:.;•••••••- •!,..,•;.- :..:::::.::;-.;L:::;•, ...;-.•••::,....:•.,<:-:-...-;!;;,;••,-.1;.• .,L,0•:-,,,,:::;:,'-. ‘,...,-h;---,-,,;,,:•:- -....::;.::2-.; . •.,..i,..„..::••,....,.:::..,..: ::::::-, ,,-.•;•c,,,?•:• •>>:.::-.•• • •••••••••••••••.-:::•••:::-.... •-•-••••••-..........• ,,r:-:--.--;•:,-...,,,4:1,4-!...,.: •,-••:.--,•-•-.4,;v.:,;;,•:,.....;r1z,v4,.............................. . .. -••• •••• . ..••-•... ..•..•-•-•<.•:.,,,,••••••,,,-,...,-::::-...-••••••••••••••••••,•.,. ::::-••::--,•,•:„...• :•;.-.,...:•-.,•:-,-,•-••,,,.. .:r.,....„.„..-„. ,-•••••• •...,-.. 25 •••.....::: ...".:11)•;::::::.1-•'•:::::-..:Land:Mtlif`.i;iiitablenatalliabitii.tio!.:;6"iidangetedbilh .4(enedieeefo.t SizftigiTt ,::•. • -..:•• ,•• •:,....•....:,-•:•:,..„,.:...,, ,,.::-.••••-••••:••••,....::::•._..:,:'':'''::.'..:.::;-..%.f.:'''—':':'',---,,, :;1:: :':•"'..,":'''. .i-rii:%isli<,.. .if'''''`‘.firf.%:-::"::.-7":.. ....:.'.. 26 .. •...:... ....-_:„....:::• -....,.•-:.„.••••.,„:..:•,•,•::: .,•••,•:_:::•...„,•..._•:...„...:,•:.....•:.;.7.,• -„,::,,•,:-..„.:-...•:::•...-_.,::.. -.,,nN:-.-.••••nif.i,....,;-.,-----:i?,•$.•:---.4,-------::•::•--:•••,;•-:: :: "::.•, .....':::.. -:-PcPY. 4041;1::•-:•, :..,.--:•;:::':a.•-::::L . .•.•_.-;:.,:::-.. •:-.-;:: ::::::.•:•.:•J:::::,i,xi,.'4;.:,::::=:--1..„-.,i.....,:.itair4.',;;; 111-.--:_,I.,33--ii--i- ?:... 1 ,;-----5.— . -.,7-...._- archa role:kW * I • r./. ___ :,. ,. , .: endaRtred \ ., ...c.r, site ._............._ ..-______-tsle...-24.5.- * —vr rpectes .di —,. ... ...____.• , .4Yi • c ---- • - • -- */ - -. -.1eart T. ._,:. / N., . / I It..., 1 a ; I • .-\\\ *'ii . "Vo iy.. Ly_, ' 4 *Th‘kl• -7 • . • • 11 1 7• , . .•pw-=." A --4- . _1--_ / —::-..--77 i 4.;-IP 411: a --1.7.'s."‘ • lin ii a/ • / ., • a is • . .... ..,__ --.. o ..„ _...,_• . . j. , 401-k • . 4 11111111111 ......_,11 I. I/I I, . .1• The Buy b • . . ._ , .,.....„,. 4/ . a • .)— 7:_;.-^ z.A*- .... - wetfanele — 100.year__„)'... ----7--- -r.— -..S.,--.... .1_, floodpia in .. ' creek ..-___7;,--_.- -.. ____i. — 27 Traditional Development Pattern "Designing Open Space Subdivisions, Randall Arendt" 6 612-3386838 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 776 POB OCT 27 '97 17:44 :4 r.:1 = —�` - archaeological �� ,.,—'. ��..�. ^ i-s '-;14,14.‘,,. . sift w. vr„ :..' sb-itilif :.?:-;�� ..+" .......;� .J o, —�� -L T 1"4,. 7 tSyip .:-:' '.t•T.A14;t'. • •-:7=1 1.A.,'..:4--IFF - ------------4-3 ,71.;7::.T ,..5- Wri,W.',5,,,,' s".4.5.:Ik -:.'' ......• : 414: -'.•9'4,7 *,' VI? i: 4r; 1 1... . '7 l'zleiz -L-r--• j; , '.':.;',ia•:.: ... &I V..4 tel17._.... " b‘t°1:%•:::.:11,4*4..Y)i-A4.14:'?.. • w•. 4A AVI, w •..•:••*k • • ,S141 -.'' trails ♦ 4-...* '., , .\-1 c ti ): t� ♦ Bay Itrails:, :i.. , • . -,4-5:.., ._..: • Cretn. ♦ .•• +;;i., "" i• meadow •♦ mss% �s - :x .ISO ` T�' - }' Y \ i .$ rr +"floodplain Community ctcl • ::•\„weyc C= k. Dock _ '' F '. . 1 Cluster Development "Designing Open Space Subdivisions, Randall Arendt" 3 4 Sec. 20- 1468 Standards and Guidelines for Single-Family Attached or Cluster-Home 5 PUDs. 6 7 Single-family attached, cluster, zero lot line, and similar dwelling types shall only be allowed 8 on sites designed for low, medium or high density residential uses by the City of Chanhassen 9 Comprehensive Plan. 10 11 Sec. 20 - 1469 Natural Habitat Preservation. 12 13 a) Natural habitat areas within the Primary Zone shall be preserved as permanent open 14 space. Any development that occurs shall be directly related to the continuous greenway along 15 the creek from the Minnesota River to Lake Minnewashta.as outlined in the Bluff Creek 16 Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. {` -4 "`` `:�". '� 17 18 b) Where possible, any disturbances of natural habitat areas within the Secondary Zone shall 19 be avoided. Any alterations to the natural habitat within the Secondary Zone shall adhere to the 20 practices delineated in the city's Best Management Practices Handbook. 21 22 Sec. 20- 1470 Natural Habitat Restoration Plan 23 24 If natural habitat areas located within the Secondary Zone will be disturbed during any stage 25 of development,the applicant shall submit a detailed plan identifying the resources that will be 26 disturbed and a corresponding restoration and/or mitigation plan. Such restoration might include 27 wetland mitigation and replanting of habitat significant to endangered and threatened species. 7 R42-3386838 HO I S I NGTOh1 KOEGLER 776 P 9 OCT 27 '97 17:45 1 2 Sec. 20- 1471 Open Space Requirements. 3 4 Open space shall comprise 100%of the area located within the Primary Zone. The City will 5 establish the boundary for the Primary Zone using data that will be provided by the applicant. 6 7 Sec. 20 - 1472 Structure Setbacks. 8 9 All structures shall be setback a minimum of 34)46 feet from the Primary Zone. No 10 disturbance of the site shall occur within the first 20 feet of such setback. 11 12 SECTION 9. The boundaries of the district established by this chapter are delineated on the 13 zoning map; the map and all notations, references, and date shown thereon are hereby adopted 14 and made part of this chapter and will be on permanent file for public inspection at the 15 Chanhassen City Hall. 16 17 SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and 18 publication. 19 20 21 PASSED AND ADOPTED on this day of December, 1997, by the City Council of the 22 City of Chanhassen. 23 24 ATTEST: 25 26 27 28 29 Don Ashworth, City Manager Nancy Mancino, Mayor 30 31 32 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ) 8 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1997 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: LuAnn Sidney, Craig Peterson, Allyson Brooks, and Kevin Joyce MEMBERS ABSENT: Alison Blackowiak and Ladd Conrad STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE AN AUTO SALE ESTABLISHMENT ON PROPERTY ZONED FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT, BF, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN AUTO SALES ESTABLISHMENT ON 0.53 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF HWY 169/212 AND EAST OF HWY. 101/169, SOUTHWEST AUTO BROKERS, JAMES OLSON. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions of staff from fellow commissioners? Brooks: With regards, can you state that one more time? The applicant shall. Generous: Comply with the conditions in the letter from Scott Peters to Robert Generous dated September 8, 1997. Peterson: Questions of staff anyone? The only thing I'd like to have you do Bob is just kind of walk us through the landscaping plan...than what's really in the narrative. I was trying to picture really where, is it just trees that we're talking about? Generous: There are shrubs that will go along the Highway 169 frontage. More trees are shown in the right-of-way. They do have to be on the property for them to be relocated. We will... They are adding... The rest of this is natural vegetation right here... There is a rock swale in this location which drains the storm water to the corner and that's one of the conditions of the under drainage that we talk about in the staff report. Peterson: Wouldn't it be normal to request something around the building? Or is that overly detailed? Generous: Under new construction you would... Peterson: Other questions of staff? Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 Sidney: Well Bob, I had asked this before but I guess for the benefit of those here. I noticed in your staff report written that this area has a history of illegal dumping and wanted to talk a little bit about the dump sites. Do you feel that this property needs a general clean-up and do you feel that that might be a condition that we should add? Generous: Well part of this, the use of the site, to use it...they will have to clean-up the junk that's lying on the paved area. Down in the wetlands that's off site, I don't know how we can really hold this property owner responsible for that. Peterson: Okay. Other questions? Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? If so, please come forward. State your name and address please. James Olson: James Olson, 9636 Woodridge Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Mr. Generous had handed me this letter from Scott Peters. We've discussed this already. I've been down cleaning the property up. It has been sitting for quite a while and we've taken a lot of debris and I've cleared a lot of the, oh there's weeds quite high and cleared a lot of that out and cleared, you know with Round-up killed a lot of it off. There's like a small soffit overhang that we'll be painting and cleaning and I think it will do, it will be a lot better than what it would have down there, down on the highway. Yeah, I plan to do it. We had talked about quite a while ago about treeing and shrubbing and landscaping and doing some things on there to make it, basically that's where, you know the reflection of myself so I wanted to make it look as nice as I could you know. We were talking about this quite a few months ago. I was going to try to blacktop it and make it one, look pretty nice but probably get it done by this spring so it will look a real nice building. And we don't have, I don't have any, everything else that is on here we already discussed with Mr. Generous earlier, about a month ago so I don't have any other things to say about it. Peterson: Any questions? Joyce: How many cars do you plan...when it's all up and running, how many cars would you have? James Olson: Probably around 30. Joyce: 30? And they're used cars, right? James Olson: Yes, yes. Peterson: I mentioned earlier about the landscaping around the corner. Is there from your perspective anything you can do to soften, obviously it's a highly visible building. Anything we can do to soften that look from your perspective? James Olson: As far as, I'm sorry. 2 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 1997 Peterson: As far as putting any kind of landscaping around the building itself. Something you're thinking about or could we possibly do it or is it cement all the way around the building. James Olson: It's like a cement pad. Kind of like when you walk to the SuperAmerica. Probably about a 3 foot pad around there and what my wife was going to do, we were going to get some planters and put flowers. She plants everything under the sun and it grows for her though. But she's going to be planting, we were going to put some flower boxes and planters up and around the front of the building also to give it a more of aesthetic look, you know. Welcoming. Feeling to come in. Peterson: Any other questions? Thank you. James Olson: Thank you. Peterson: This is open for a public hearing. May I have a motion to open to do the same and a second please. Sidney moved,Brooks seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Seeing none,may I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Sidney moved,Joyce seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Kevin, any thoughts? Joyce: I don't have any problem with it. It's going to improve the site from where it is right now to something that's constructive,useable. I know we had Paws and Claws, was that across the street and we had some concerns about, Craig you brought it up about the metal and I don't know if it's just, I'm certain we're much busier with other areas of the city as far as what we're going to plan for down there. You can't, I don't think you can gauge what's going to happen with that thoroughfare. It's not exactly what I'd want to see down there, let's put it that way but it is a use. It utilizes what's there right now so I guess I don't have any problems with it. Peterson: LuAnn. Sidney: I don't have any problems either. I went down and viewed the site. I think fixing it up will be a big improvement to what's there now and one thing too,you know we're not getting to the 2000 Land Use Plan goals of parks and open spaces and residential lots. Large lots. Still I think what is stated in staff report holds true. That the City must provide a reasonable use of property based on existing zoning. Certainly this is a use that makes sense for this property. Peterson: Allyson. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 Brooks: I agree with the other commissioners. I'd rather see the property used than an abandoned SuperAmerica. And I also...illegal dumping because there's some... I think it's a good use. Peterson: Good, thanks. Well I have no further comments. I agree. Let's get it cleaned up and get some activity down there. With that may I have a motion and a second please. Sidney: I'll make the motion. Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit#97-4 and Site Plan#97-13 for Southwest Auto Brokers at 615 Flying Cloud Drive,plans prepared by Curiskis Architects, Inc. dated 7/21/97, subject tot he following conditions 1 through 13. Condition 7 has been amended to include the sentence. The applicant shall comply with the conditions in the letter from Scott Peters to Bob Generous dated September 8, 1997. Joyce: I'll second that. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Sidney moved,Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit#97-4 and Site Plan#97-13 for Southwest Auto Brokers at 615 Flying Cloud Drive, plans prepared by Curiskis Architects, Inc. dated 7/21/97, subject tot he following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with Section 20-291 of the City Code. 2. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security as required by the agreement. 3. The applicant shall install site landscaping as shown on Landscape plan prepared by Curiskis Architects, Inc. dated 8/14/97. 4. Overstory species from the City's Approved Tree list be used. Shrubs shall also be chosen from the City's list. 5. Revise site plans as follows: Narrow both driveway accesses onto Trunk Highway 169 to 30 feet wide. Reduce turnaround tabs 5 feet at each end of the parking lot. Add erosion control silt fence at the southwest and southeast corners of the parking lot approximately 10 feet from each corner. 6. The applicant and/or property owner shall supply the City's Building Official with maintenance and pumping records of the septic system every two years. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining and complying with any and all permits from MnDOT for construction within Trunk Highway 169 right-of-way. The applicant 4 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 shall comply with the conditions in the letter from Scott Peters to Bob Generous dated September 7, 1997. 8. The applicant shall restore the drainage pattern to previous conditions. This work includes re-grading and restoring the rock swale on the south edge of the property,remove trash obstructions from corner drainage points and construct rip rap swale from parking lot to natural ditch. 9. The applicant shall agree to establish a wetland buffer zone along the south property line. In creating the buffer zone, the applicant will agree to allow natural vegetation to grow, agree to keep all business, storage and maintenance activities out of the buffer area. Wetland buffer areas shall be identified in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. 10. Provide proof of septic tank pumping by a licensed pumper to the City. This must be done before the building is occupied. 11. Provide ties for the septic tanks,pump tank and distribution box. This must be done before the building is occupied. 12. Revise the proposed site plan to provide the correct accessible parking. This should be done before Council approval. 13. A separate sign permit shall be required for all signage to be installed on site. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION-RECREATION. Aanenson: We're up to the Parks Open Space. Recreation component of the comprehensive plan. This element is going to have some rewrite but it's mostly...background checks. We want to update all the parks...and again try to project into the future needs of the city. The goals that were put in place in 1991, we believe for the most part are really pretty accurate and would recommend to continue in the future. There may be a couple that we might want to look at...capital improvement plan and I think that's policy anyway... so that's something that has not been done but certainly should be set as a goal. And some of the other goals,just to...again back in 1991...acquisition for the school district and Bluff Creek Elementary, but for the most part we're recommending the goals realistically should be...and remain the same. And unless, as we go through the process something sticks out,we may add it but otherwise we're going to recommend that the goals... Since 1991,while the goals address,that we have, open space, passive and active,up until probably the last few years,most of the park direction has been active because of having a young community. Most the parks have been trying to address neighborhood needs for soccer, community play fields and the like and there were 18 existing parks since 1991 with development of subdivisions brought on the Stone Creek Park,the Forest Meadows, the Roundhouse Park in Minnewashta. And also we did acquire the 50 acre park just south of 5 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 1997 Highway 5 and Galpin and TH 41, the O'Shaughnessy piece and the Arboretum Park. That will be a passive one but we did acquire quite a few. And our parks are all broken down,besides the neighborhood parks and community parks, including Bluff Creek Recreation programming is taking place probably more... Lake Ann which kind of serves...ballfield program to a bigger scale. And then also Bandimere which...little bit broader neighborhood programming. We also have some other regional facilities such as the Arboretum, a golf course and then Lake Minnewashta Regional Park. So our categories of open space and parks are broken down into neighborhood, community and regional. Also the Park Commission has been asking for...trail connection and that will continue in the future...based on the timing of development...how do you make those connections... other improvement projects. With the approval of the referendum of$4.9 million, there will be some other acquisition improvements to existing parks and the Park and Recreation Commission and the task force...on how that money will be distributed and how it should be best used. So there will be some changes and we'll try to put those back into the comprehensive plan so. Again trying to project into the future,we wanted to try to look at what the needs are. The Park Director is planning a needs assessment...for January to try to get at better handle. We did find out a lot of information as a part of the referendum. A lot of data. What needs are out there. What people are happy with. Some of the things that we're finding out, or that they're finding out is that a lot of the programming in the past has been for young kids...there's been some talk now...try to do some programming to meet other needs. The trails, it's a lot of...making sure that we're tapping into all those so that will be some of the information that comes out...and again that will be programmed back. Before you see this again we're going to come back and inventory, put all the complete data in there. Again, I believe the goals are pretty much staying the same and even the philosophical intent...open space is. The difference between...and regional, I think again that stands. I think that stands the test of time and...but we're going to let the Park and Recreation Commission see that and comment on it and bring that back. So it will be a few months before you see the document. Other than that, if you've got some concerns, questions of things that you want to make sure that we do look at,that's all I have. Peterson: Questions, comments, feedback? All of the above. As I read through it Kate, reinforcing the fact that what we've got here is sound. Hardly anything so I mean I'd like to be able to give you more feedback other than to say, it reinforces what we...originally. Aanenson: And with the referendum,how do you acquire property when the price goes up with development. That's something you...the area south where we have the wildlife refuge that we've always kind of said we want to have open space,and I'm not sure that we can solve that but it seems like we're chasing those dollars...trying to get the park planning out... We know that there's a couple other neighborhood parks slated but for the most part... Peterson: When is the referendum money available? When can they start? Aanenson: It will be bonded for this fall. Peterson: I assume they're looking now. 6 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 1997 Aanenson: Correct...And another component,not just for programming work but as they're looking now at...trust for public land. Other groups that are looking at just trying to preserve open space. That doesn't mean it has to be graded...and that's something we'll be looking at with Bluff Creek... Brooks: ...time table for the trails... Aanenson: Some of those are accomplished through the referendum. That's something that we're planning on looking at. At how those dollars work out and some of them make sense...tie them in with development. Better stage with road improvements... Generous: I believe Todd is looking at spending the money in `98-99. Aanenson: You're talking about for the referendum. Brooks: I'm just talking about like... Aanenson: That's longer term. That's why I said... Generous: Yeah, they'll be tied into, try to tie them in with utility improvements. Putting in with corridor and roadway improvements. Aanenson: So that will tie back to our transportation plan. What we're looking for as far as upgrading...tying into subdivisions, so some of them are internal and some of them are street... Peterson: Other questions or comments? Okay. Move ahead. BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT DISCUSSION. Mark Koegler: Mr. Chairman,members of the Commission. I want to take a little bit of agenda time tonight to continue the discussion of the ordinance to regulate lands within the Bluff Creek watershed corridor. The boundaries of the corridor I think you're aware were established by the Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management Plan. That's the graphic that's on the display right now. The areas within the Bluff Creek is the area that's kind in the soft yellow. Then you can pick out hopefully some other colors here. There's kind of a green which is identified as a primary corridor area. Kind of a brown pattern, the secondary corridor area. The differential essentially being between those is the sensitivity that each of those areas have based on natural resources primarily. The creek itself, tributaries,wetlands, wildlife habitat and so forth and I think all of you are pretty familiar with that report. The purpose of the ordinance and what I've given you tonight is just kind of a quick shot. It's not meant to be an all encompassing statement. We'll actually have it modified when the ordinance draft comes back to you but just to give you some idea, the intent of the ordinance,the purpose of the ordinance is to protect the environment. To encourage the development pattern that allows land development and people to come into this area and co-exist with the natural resource space that's there. And then certainly one of the 7 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 1997 vision aspects that was identified in the plan was to foster the use of the corridor as a recreation and educational resource, and that has some pretty broad base implications. Everything from trail connections that meander some 5 miles up through the city of Chanhassen and really become an integral spine to the trail system overall that you were just talking about, to some educational tie ins that can work with the schools and some of the other educational institutions in the area. The ordinance will address a number of issues. One of them certainly is land uses. And land uses as the ordinance will look at those, again is something that you have seen. It dates back to what has been put forward thus far as Chanhassen's 2000 Land Use Plan. That land use plan being one that's been before this body before and is basically part of the comprehensive plan update process that you're involved in. So the uses that are depicted there are the uses that we are looking at accommodating within those areas, within the restrictions that are necessary in order to protect the environment that's there. The ordinance will include environmental protection measures. If you recall on the plan there were a number of specifics mentioned and we're factoring those in as they fit. Specifically for example there's a reference in bluff areas or buffer strips. The plan recommended 50 to 100 feet from the edge of a bluff area in undeveloped areas. About 30 feet in developed areas. We'll be looking at those kinds of standards and those will be included within the ordinance draft that will come back to you. There's a number of tools out there that we've talked about before in a couple of different sessions. Primarily being, looking at things like conservation easements. Restrictions on impervious cover that we're looking at now, as well as density transfers,and I want to come back to that in a few minutes and let that be kind of a focal point of part of the discussion this evening. One of the things that we're learning too as we get further into this is the ordinance probably is going to have to have some supporting actions along with it. As you'll see there may be cases where there are properties that simply the existence of that primary and that secondary corridor take so much of the land and given ownership patterns and things, that it may preclude development of that property and we'll have to look at those on a case by case basis but there may be some supporting actions that are required too in terms of implementation money. Similar to what the City does with it's storm water management program in terms of acquisition of lands and we'll have more on that when we come back with it next month. I think maybe to kind of illustrate the impact of this primary and secondary corridor, let me refer to a quick graphic. What's on the screen now in front of you is a graphic that shows some of the properties that are, we've labeled basically as undeveloped but impacted by this and they occur obviously within the Bluff Creek watershed. They consist of really two categorizations. One is kind of this brown color,which are properties within it but within it there are the hatched areas that shows up and a darker brown that's actually part of the primary and the secondary pieces of those parcels as defined by the watershed plan itself. So those properties, what we've attempted to do there is to pull out or begin to pull out some of the properties that aren't likely to be impacted or certainly not significantly by a set of regulations that we'll be putting forward for this area. Specifically that includes things like obviously existing Park and Recreation open space areas. You had a discussion a few minutes ago on the referendum and there was a component of the referendum that was for acquisition of land. Depending upon what properties are ultimately selected and what kind of negotiations take place, it's estimated there will be about a 40 to 100 additional acres that will come out of that, in essence and be permanent open space. A lot of that is likely to be within this corridor. You've probably seen some maps that show some very blanket kinds of things and I think that's all that's available to this point in time. Wetlands, flood plains, some of the other areas obviously will not 8 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 be developed and are out of there and that's some of the darker, some of the...you see in some of these areas are actually existing wetland complexes are there. There's quite a difference in properties as we begin to look at these in more detail from essentially north to south. If you look in the northern reaches you'll find properties that while they're within the overall Bluff Creek area,they're not necessarily heavily impacted by it, at least from a standpoint of not being directly in the primary or secondary corridor areas. It's easy enough though just by where the mapping of the dark areas are, for example south of Lyman, and what's generally I think probably called the Degler and Fox properties. This is a different world right there. A lot of things come together. You've got tributaries. You've got the main creek and it really creates a very large primary and secondary area and we're trying to refine now how an ordinance can work and really kind of appeal to both of these,and it's an interesting challenge and one that I'm sure you'll get into as well when we get into this next month. Density transfer is likely to be one of the significant tools and it's one that you have used before,and I want to spend a few minutes on that. I'm particularly interested in your observations. There have been a couple of development proposals that you've reviewed in recent past that due to the fortunes of your staff being able to work effectively with the developers and let's face it, having a fairly willing developer, you begin to achieve really quite a bit of the intent of this ordinance without yet having the ordinance in place. Obviously you can't have that happen every time so the intent of the city is to look at putting the regulations in place that require that, but what I'd like to do is spend just a couple of minutes reviewing the townhomes at Creekside and the Walnut Grove subdivisions because they are good examples of this and if I can stick these on the overhead. The first of the two subdivisions is the townhomes at Creekside. I think these are good graphic examples of the concept that's being employed here,and what I guess I'm most interested in getting back in terms of feedback from the Commission this evening is you went through these projects. You were in negotiation with the developers you were reviewing the plan. I'm kind of interested from your perspective how that experience went. Were there process items that you would call to our attention? Were there outcomes that you would like to talk about that maybe have implications as to how the ordinance ultimately is set up? Now in this particular case, looking at this first project,this one is relatively small. It's only about a 7 acre site but it's interesting because about 42%of it falls within what I'd label as corridor land which is that primary and secondary corridor area again and that's the area that's cross hatched on the map. The lower area, the speckled area being the primary. The line pattern being the secondary. Within those areas, in the primary there's about 12% impervious cover in this particular one. In the secondary area, secondary corridor there's about 14%. That really reflects streets and street and housing units. You can see quite clearly that the housing units have been essentially pushed off to the northeast, away from as much as practical the limits of the corridor and obviously effectively has limited the amount of impervious cover within the zone. If you look quickly at the second of the examples, the Walnut Grove, this is probably a better comprehensive example simply because of the land size and the mix of units that we're involved with here. This property is about 50 acres in size. About 19% of it or just under 10 acres is within the primary and secondary corridor. This one has a net density of about 5.77 units per acre. But if you look at the amount of land that's in each classification, in the primary we're dealing with about 18%impervious cover out of 6 V2 acres, being streets and housing. In the secondary we've got 2.9 acres, of which about 25%of that, or I'm sorry. That represents about 25%of the land area within that category so again you've got percentage ranges that run from 18 to 25 here. In this particular case there was obviously a lot 9 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 more flexibility with the development pattern. If your intent is, if your ordinance is to accommodate x number of units per acre and you've got more acres,you can begin to push these around a little bit. I think that probably happened here. Obviously there's a concentration of the higher density,kind of to the south. There's a band of homes in the middle that I understand are going to probably be some kind of bungalow type configuration and then you've got more traditional single family detached to the extreme north. And I'm sure there was trading of densities as this thing went through the process. I'm not sure how all of that unfolded. But I guess I am interested, as I said before,with experiences that you might have taken from these because these are very good,real world examples of the concept that we're looking at in density transfer and trying to effectuate this ultimately over some larger land parcels in the future. With that, I don't have any more presentation comments. As I said, I'm very interested in hearing first hand experiences that you have or thoughts or concerns that you may have encountered while these projects were going through their review cycle so we can make sure that we address those as we begin to put the finishing touches on the ordinance. I'll come back after that and we can talk for a minute about schedule. The intent is to be back here in essence in a month with a draft that you'll be reviewing. With that, I would welcome any comments or thoughts you might have. Joyce: Say Kate,on the Walnut Grove situation. See this is a good idea doing what you're doing right here. Showing us the actual projects,but we had a different graphic. We didn't have the primary and secondary and if I remember correctly, weren't they, didn't they give us the buffer? Aanenson: If you recall in the draft document there was a 300 foot requirement. That really has no standing on the ordinance... Joyce: I understand that. • Aanenson: So,this goes beyond or it averages the 300. Joyce: That was it. They averaged 300 feet. Aanenson: Right. As Mark was saying, because we pushed the density south, I think we may have been able to keep it out of that secondary corridor but the objective, we had some competing objective that we were trying to balance. Joyce: Right, right. Aanenson: Right. But that was the average was the 300. Joyce: I guess that's what I'm bringing up is that we did get that average. Aanenson: Yes. Joyce: Okay. 10 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 Mark Koegler: I should indicate too that these were assembled by taking obviously very large kind of gross map scales and applying them to site specific scales so take this with a grain of salt but it's pretty close in terms of at least showing relationships between the parcels. And I think it was a pretty good graphic example in both cases that the efforts resulted in the units being pushed out of these sensitive areas. Joyce: What else did we do with them on that? There was something else that the City gave them. Aanenson: The right-of-way. Joyce: The right-of-way, right. Aanenson: Yeah. Some of the discussion that Mark and I were having was,obviously the primary corridor is something that we definitely wanted to try to keep development out of. In some cases it becomes a finger that may be difficult because it's an anomaly that's hard to work around. And the secondary corridor, while it's significant from a vegetation and wildlife mode, we're trying to figure out what exactly the implications are when you have that additional corridor setback. Will density transfer work? There's going to be some sticky ones,that we've been discussing. When you've got industrial you don't have as much to say, that's one thing that... But we wanted to see you know, if we're going to do density transfers, everybody's got to recognize that we're pushing to get the preservation area...compressing some of these areas... We tried to go out and look at a couple of different... Peterson: I think in many ways both of these examples, I don't as I recall,the Bluff Creek corridor was not the primary driving force behind this moving the setback back and, the flow in transition from one type of housing to another in many ways so I'm thinking part of it was the Bluff Creek and part of it was just flow...developer. Aanenson: Well Walnut Grove, we definitely wanted when you came in to give it a look of open space and go back to the big woods because that in the corridor plan,that was identified as an area to go back and have the underpass there. You want to go back with woods in there and have some sort of a habitat...and everybody can enjoy that,which we tried to accomplish. Joyce: But it fit into the plan though, that was the thing. I mean it,where you would expect it to be. It wasn't right down the center of the plan where you had to separate everything. Aanenson: Right,although sometimes developers do like to put them on that side of the road to maximize the use,which you have on Creekside. You're right...but the Creekside one as you recall,when this first came into staff, we recommended we wanted the density to go up. We wanted a different configuration because there was an area that we felt the topography, topographically it was separated. We thought we could have density,but the developer wanted this type of more traditional townhomes kind of product and... But I think you're right on this one Craig. There probably wasn't as much...and we did allow the NURP pond to go into the flood plain. 11 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 1997 Peterson: ...Walnut Grove is a PUD. Aanenson: Yeah, they both were. Peterson: But with that we have more anonymity but it is critical timing because they're going to come fast and we need in the specs and... Joyce: Are there any areas that you see problems...on the Bluff Creek where you can see maybe industrial. You had mentioned industrial. Where? Aanenson: That was the Degler piece I think Mark... Joyce: Maybe we can look at that for a second. Brooks: Is that the piece...by where I live where the Bluff Creek follows the wetlands... Aanenson: South of Lyman. Brooks: This would be north. Generous: Along the west edge. Brooks: There's a real nice wetland. There's a huge wetland right there. Aanenson: That's Bluff Creek. Mark Koegler: The area that we're talking about, if you recall the land use aspect of the Comp Plan in some cases they're... That area that we're talking about is right here south of Lyman. We've shown the underlying color as gray and the potential...you're correct. That one... Brooks: There's a section right north of Lyman also is a wetlands. ...right next to it in front of that...I think when a townhouse developer came in...real sensitive area. Beautiful wetland area... Mark Koegler: That industrial piece is just guessing,probably 20%within the primary corridor and 80%within the secondary corridor. It is wholly within it, and that's going to be a very interesting challenge and I don't have an answer yet tonight as to how we're going to address that detail. When we've talked about development to date with this,I think we've focused more on the residential side and yes,we can shift units around but what are we doing when you have an intensive use like that that is wholly within designated corridors. Joyce: What will the watershed ordinance,well let's take that piece for example. We put in the watershed ordinance. Now they come in and they want to put in industrial. What do you do? 12 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 Aanenson: One of the things we talked about is the requirement for impervious surface so we're making them...that's an option too because they're preserving more over a larger segment that would have a no build and then you would...still would average it all out. The parking lot, but still, you're taking away... That's critical. One of the other issues we're talking about, we're really focusing in on the primary and the secondary corridor. You brought that up before. I think we need to look carefully at it. That line was drawn based on information that we had. Vegetation. Wildlife. And we had to look carefully at where exactly that line falls and maybe in some places it might depend on some of the corridor. That's something we may have to give in order to get something. Put that flexibility in it. Maybe, you try to have an ordinance that's flexible and Mark and I discussed that maybe as details come in, the plans come in and we say well you know what, that line, you know just like a wetland. It's kind of...a wetland but when we get better information,we've got to build some flexibility into it to say maybe this is an area that...but we'll let that slide but we'll try to stick it up here because we can enhance this area. Somehow we've got to build that flexibility into the ordinance. That's going to be a challenge. Mark Koegler: That would be my comment too is we have considered it would be like a wetland delineation. Whereby you take a better look at it and see if truly this...really works or whether it's more refined than that. I think there's another aspect that the plan speaks to also and that is that while we're focusing on the primary and secondaries, we're not losing track of the entire watershed and the plan talks about, I think realizes that in some cases compromises will have to be made over the course of time. So it advocates looking at the watershed as a whole and you know, maybe you make up for it. You don't do that maybe totally but at least in some context you make up for it elsewhere in the corridor. It's maybe not quite in such a sensitive area but it helps balance it overall, and I think those are the kinds of trade-offs we're going to have to look at and see what fits. It's not going to be easy on that,that's probably the most extreme example that you can identify out of any of them. That one's at least a little easier to deal with because it's a sizable parcel. You know of equal concern is the smaller parcel that's in the middle of these that has no opportunity to acquire something else and how do we deal with that if it's totally encumbered and that's where again the purchase may be a factor. Peterson: General question Mark. This is really the first time that we've seen an overall purpose. As you build the ordinance, as I assume you're building it now. Give us some sense if you would as to how much detail we can expect. Obviously we're going to need it as a tool in seeing proposals in front of us. Mark Koegler: We're trying to I guess respond certainly with a level of detail that's going to make it a tool and not make it something that's ambiguous. You know we are looking at the impervious cover limitations that will contain suggested numbers that you'll have a chance to review and see you know and they'll obviously be compared to other aspects of the City Code. As I mentioned in my quick comments, there are other resource protection measures that are outlined in the plan such as bluffs and things that we need to make sure are covered between that and other sections in the Code as well. So the intent is that it will be tangible. You know something certainly that has enough details in the standards that it's not an ambiguous, lay it over the top and try to see what fits. The challenge is still unfolding though, I'll be quite candid with you. It's, we have a lot of work yet to do but. One of the things that I'm interested in I guess in 13 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 feedback. One of the things that has been of some concern on the housing front is, it's easy as we talked about before to talk about density transfers and then when you get into a Planning Commission meeting and you've got a proposal in front of you, somtimes the chairs f irs are full and sometimes those decisions are quite as easy and I'm curious,probably a Creekside. Was there much resident reaction from Walnut Grove? Probably in the course of some meetings talking about densities and shifting units here and there and was that something that people were very sensitive to. So I think that's an issue that's going to be faced later down the road each time one of these subdivisions come in and you'll be forced with balancing the objectives of this plan with balancing maybe sentiments of people in the area and what they want to see. Peterson: And there was significant on Walnut Grove but it was primarily with the single family homes to the north. Talking about what kind of density was between them and the high density and that transition. My reaction,I think we have less resistance because this is essentially a new area. It's, it will go in gradually. As soon as we plant one in there,persons next to it in a different kind of density are going to be the ones sitting in the chairs. But at least we can compare individuals living in the area as to what is going around them. I don't think the staff, we deal with this all the time. As people come in and ask, well what's going to go next to me. Aanenson: I think it's our job to make the compelling argument about what we're preserving and what we're trying to accomplish. Preservation...long term corridor. What we're trying to accomplish... Clustering. Not necessarily increasing the... Peterson: This is kind of off the wall but after we had it set and...exactly the way it would have proceed. Is there any way we can deal with developers to provide buyers,put buyers with information regarding what that whole area is and 3 miles around them is going to be? Aanenson: I think as part of the public hearing process,that's something that the comprehensive plan is trying to do. I think the developers though,the larger...that's what we've been trying to say that the area of the city along the creek in the southern area,because of it, it's going to be developed. It's not going to be...so I'mot talking about density of development...and I think tewards of the land and they care about heir property... the people that are down there are good s Peterson: I just want to be able to provide some easy way of letting residents know. I mean public hearings aren't going to do it. Aanenson: No. There's going to be some areas where we've got those larger lots. Mark Koegler: One thing that's interesting about this entire endeavor is this ordinance piece that we're focusing on is just one piece of the whole thing,and if you recall on looking through the implementation plan,that as the part of that overall document,there's a lot of educational, a lot of resource kind of outreach things and I would presume it's quite possible. Somewhere along the line somebody will produce some kind of a printed piece about this. Kind of a summary version if you will of a plan that could be available generally what isthe out there and what they're that would make an excellent way to help people understand 14 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 maybe buying a house adjacent to. That implementation program is just full of different approaches. Everything from funding mechanisms to acquisition mechanisms and I've got to think coming out of that there's a lot of education that's a part of that as well. So I think there will be great opportunities to really publicize the resource that's there for the people of Chanhassen. Aanenson: Good point too. We had on the steering committee some...Bluff Creek Elementary they'd use that as a resource so we need to talk about going back to why we're doing this. That'd be good...And now with the acquisition of the 100 acres on the north end...passive park and how that ties back in... Mark Koegler: Great opportunity there for all these little elementary kids to go home and educate their parents. Peterson: That may be one way of doing it. So we see the draft on the 15`h? Is that pretty much in stone? Mark Koegler: Yeah...ordinance in place by the end of the year. That was in response to physically too, some of the kinds of concerns that the commission had. Identifying a path and trying to keep things moving along as people keep marching on with projects. So we're looking at coming back with a draft on the 15`h. I think the packet that you go had a typo in it, that November 5`h will be the Planning Commission public hearing. We weren't scheduling a special meeting for you on a Friday or whatever date that ended up being. And hopefully then going to Council on about the 24th of November for review and beginning of action by that body so that things are essentially in place by the end of the year. We're pushing for that schedule and have every reason to believe that we can adhere to that. Aanenson: If you do need another meeting, there is another Planning Commission available in November. If you do need that before the next Council meeting in December, you can do that. Peterson: Does this assume we can get the ordinance draft? Aanenson: You'll get it ahead of time. Mark Koegler: Oh yeah. I don't expect you to speed read it that night. Promise. Peterson: Thanks. Mark Koegler: Thank you. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: LuAnn Sidney noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 3, 1997 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: 15 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 1997 Aanenson: Yes,we are set for October work session. We'll have it upstairs in the courtyard conference room. I've also scheduled Planning Commission interviews. We've got four candidates. Peterson: Four? Aanenson: Yeah, so if it's okay, can we start at 6:00 that night? Joyce: I'm not going to be here that night. I'm going to be out of town. You're not going to have a public meeting then, the first is what you're saying? Aanenson: No. We'll just start at 6:00. Have dinner. Have the City Attorney talk about legal issues. Planning Commissioners and from 7:00 to 8:00,I thought we'd talk about other ongoing issues. Goals for next year. Kind of where we're at with ongoing issues. And then I set up interviews from 8:00 to 9:00... Peterson: Why don't we try to get tape recorders there. I mean not knowing what Roger's going to say but I assume anything he'll say will be...advice. I'd like to be able to. Aanenson: Sure. We can do that. Peterson: Even for new members that would be. Aanenson: I know Alison will be there... Peterson: Anything about the Council? I guess they haven't seen much until they get the car dealership on Monday. ication,we're Aanenson: Yeah, that will be Monday. actually Mark wa 11 be back and then hopefullywe' at the second meeting of November...October when see...that meeting. Brooks: How are they doing? Aanenson: Actually they threw the baby out mebest thing to do. sWe'll also have theng from te gelement Which is sometimes the best, yeah. Sometes th of the comprehensive plan,the water... Transportation,we're working with Carver County. We added on to theirs...out to bid and we added onto our issue. Hopefully they'll meet our deadlines. Right now we're still tracking with,we'll probably hold our public hearing end of March, first part of April. Brooks: So you're using SR... Aanenson: Yes. We did give them,ask them for a bid and had what we wanted in engineering... 16 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 1997 Brooks: They did a pretty nice job...steering committee. ...why are we doing a plan if there's no money to build the roads anyway. And...of SRF came back and very eloquently said, rightly so that if there is money,we need a plan. If you don't have one... Aanenson: So they're sitting down with members of our staff and...go through, we're going to need some...but that's going to be our last... Actually for the council and for you, that's going to be critical in our road management... Peterson: Any other discussion points? May I have a motion and a second to close? Brooks moved,Joyce seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 17 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 15, 1997 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Allyson Brooks, Alison Blackowiak, Ladd Conrad, Craig Peterson and LuAnn Sidney MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Joyce STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner and Mark Koegler, Planning Consultant COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION - UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION. Generous: Thank you Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. The infrastructure...of the comprehensive plan are basically the framework of what your community grows. As part of this update we've been looking at responding to the Metropolitan Council's growth strategy...for developing a phased expansion of the metropolitan urban service area, the MUSA line. A second major issue that we'll look at is providing or developing a policy for the extension of services to large lot subdivisions. Older subdivisions in the community. A third issue we need to discuss is whether or not to adopt specific level of service level for our roadways. Level of service standards determine the flow of traffic along a stretch of roadway or...intersection and their grade level determines how congested the roadway is. And the fourth issue that we'd like to point out is we're looking at expanding policies and facilities...transportation. Pedestrian and bicycle access... In the 1991 comprehensive plan there was a list of roadway deficiencies within the community. Part of our analysis we looked at some of the deficiencies that have been corrected in the last 6 or 7 years. In addition however there are at least five roads that still retain deficient... We have entered into a contract with SRF for the transportation study in conjunction with the Carver County study to look at transportation specifically in the City of Chanhassen. Unfortunately we won't have useful results from this until sometime probably in December or January. And then the final study for the Carver County won't be until next June. However, as part of the existing deficiencies,the Highway 5 upgrade currently scheduled that for letting in 1999 and construction in 2000 and 2001. However, our concern is the State has continually... to fund it. We're a little hesitant to rely on...heavily. As I said one of the issues we're looking at is the level of service standard. Whether or not we should officially adopt part of the comprehensive plan. Level of service standards are two edge swords. If you adopt the level of service standard B or in their community and don't need it, we cannot legally permit new subdivisions to be approved until either the mitigation measures are in place or the level, or the projects that...are funded. The problem with this is if they don't develop here, they may move farther out west and further impact our major roadway system, Highway 5 and Highway 212. And so we wanted to look as part of our discussion whether we should adopt level of service standards for local roadways only or for roadways that are both local and...and hope that the Planning Commission can give us some direction on this. Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Brooks: So you're talking like Trunk Highway 5? Bob Generous: Trunk Highway 5. Brooks: That's at level of service F isn't it? Bob Generous: No. ...generally accepted appropriate level of service during rush hour. Brooks: It's a D during rush hour? Bob Generous: Yes. As part of that study that they prepared for Highway 41 and 5, the Arboretum Business Park. They said in 2003 we would hit F. Based on background flows of traffic. Brooks: It doesn't move at rush hour now. Bob Generous: Yes. But it does, it hasn't failed. Brooks: Oh I think it failed. Bob Generous: Which is the level of service F. While it may be congested, it still operates. Brooks: What's Trunk Highway 7? Bob Generous: I don't know. Hopefully as part of the study...contact MnDOT. That's the other part of this... Brooks: Did you get a copy of the transportation system plan? Bob Generous: Yes... As part of our... Again I said, and finally we looked at strengthening specific policies regarding mass transit,pedestrian, bicycle. Probably the most important component of our update is the MUSA expansion proposal. Staff has prepared a proposed MUSA line expansion that would take the City to ultimate build out around 2020. The existing 2000 MUSA line, we would propose that everything north of Lyman Boulevard be brought into the MUSA area by 2003. And then the area northwest of Trunk Highway 101, the proposed right-of-way for 212 be brought in as 2008. And then this small area off of Highway 101 that is actually will be served by the Lake Riley Trunk Utility area. Brought in as part of that expansion. The next area will a 2013 MUSA area that would incorporate the land east of Trunk Highway 212 and north of...26 and 25. And then finally the ultimate MUSA that would incorporate the balance of the community. As part of our capital improvement program and the capital investment program we have shown how this can be done and we'll be bringing that with our next update. Brooks: People who are on rural septic now, are they required to hook-up or is it an optional? 2 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 Bob Generous: Currently it's discretionary. Up to City Council but there's no specific policy. As a general guideline we've been stating that unless a majority of the property owners within those developments petition for it, that we leave them outside of the utility expansion. There are exceptions when there's failure in the systems and that is for public safety reasons. And that health and safety exemption...looking at providing the other policies that they'd only... Part of the rationale for that is we don't want premature connection because if we do a utility expansion...you have to,you can only assess the benefiting properties... Peterson: And what can we do Bob, if anything, as we continue to grow outside the MUSA and people are putting in septic systems? About creating a policy that would put the onus upon them to do testing every 2, 3, 4, 5 years. I don't know. Right now there isn't that. I mean we're depending upon the trust that the homeowner, if it does fail, that it's reported to the City, etc., etc. Bob Generous: I believe the policy related to that,the public building department is working on a program to address that. Peterson: I mean we've got a pretty large percentage of sewer and water within the City I would imagine, don't we? Bob Generous: Right. There might be 300 homes. There are very few large lot subdivisions that are undeveloped... They just requested a 2 year extension on their plat. Development... Peterson: I mean it would seem at least, it would seem easy for us to, on new systems for both water and sewer, that we could put in,put the responsibility on them to provide the City with a verification of usability. Bob Generous: Well that's,yeah on page 8. Or page 9, the policy addresses the septic system. In discussion with the building official, they're looking at implementing next year. It depends on the budget process. Peterson: Okay. Bob Generous: I hadn't intended to go through the specific policies in the statement. Most of them are still appropriate like I stated, we'd like to expand the multi levels of transportation element to include the MUSA expansion lines. We do have some concerns,questions,whether MUSA expansion areas are too restrictive. We believe there is sufficient land,however you might want to develop...how we can expand... Or maybe the City wants to slow down growth rate... Conrad: Mr. Chairman, it's real tough for me to figure it out based on some lines. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Bob Generous: Well that's what, the first attachment there we were looking at within each of these MUSA expansion areas. The number of units that we would anticipate based on our current level of...and these numbers we have taken from... Using our GIS. Conrad: I think you have to go through that with us so we understand what you're doing. Bob Generous: Okay. For every, we estimate annually,we'll have about 300 permits for residential development. So for every,well you divide the total number of units by 300. That will give you your capacity for the development...area. Conrad: Standard for development? Year supply do you like to have in the hopper? Bob Generous: ...about 7 total within the 5 year plan. You'd like. Conrad: And that's what you feel keeps prices equitable? Bob Generous: Right. Conrad: And is that a standard based on what? Bob Generous: That's what's in the comp plan now. We have a 30% overage. Conrad: That is what Mark has recommended that we keep that kind of standard in to keep the prices? How do we, I just want to know how our standard is developed versus what's in there. I need to know what the best thinkers we have say we should have to keep the prices stable. Not inflationary. So with that aside, yeah I'd appreciate a quick overview of how you determine how many acres and. Bob Generous: Well we were using to develop this line is probably incorporated a logical division area. We have about 5 years inside the MUSA and so I just,this was the first run through. I finished the calculations...so in the first MUSA expansion we have about, a little over 2 years of growth. In the second MUSA expansion area we have 6 years...such fine lines. Maybe we call it a 2008 MUSA. Conrad: Well wait,you've got to hang in there with me Bob. So, and your graph, your chart that says 1998 to 2003. Bob Generous: So we've taken total acreage of land from each land use. The wetlands have already been taken out as part of our GIS. Conrad: Okay, so what does BC 7 mean? Bob Generous: Oh, that goes with the utility expansion area typically. 4 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 Conrad: Bottom line is I didn't get this at all. And I didn't get why it was snuck in with utilities and I understand utilities in relationship to utilities to expansion but it's sort of like, wow. We're talking utilities and all of a sudden we're into our MUSA expansion and it seems. Bob Generous: Well MUSA's directly related to utilities. Conrad: I get it. I understand that but it's. Bob Generous: We could have described it,just described an area. The BC 7 is related to the sewer expansion plan that was approved in '93. Completed by the City. It's just the way... service area. Conrad: So BC is, that's just. Bob Generous: If you look on,Bluff Creek 7. It's a service area. And there will be...way to designate it. I figure that related this map to the MUSA expansion. We used, the MUSA area within each of those potential expansion areas,you can look at what sewered area they're incorporated in. It really ties in, you'll see more of it when you bring the capital portion together with this. Because they're all related to a specific service... Peterson: If you go back and take a look at 1998 through 2003 then and you look at total units, 653. How does that correlate to the 300 per year? Or am I looking at something different altogether? Bob Generous: No, that would be the total estimated units developed in there based on the assumption we have here. Large lot, 2 %i acre minimum lot size. Low density of 1.8 units per acre. Medium density is 6 units per acre and high density, 11 per acre. Conrad: How does that fit that 3, we've got 300 building permits? Bob Generous: The assumption is if you have 600 units, that would provide you with... Conrad: But you've got 5 years for a time period. Peterson: So you're losing your 7 years. Bob Generous: But we're also, some of the stuff in the current MUSA area hasn't developed yet as we expand the line out. Conrad: You've got a supply. Bob Generous: Yes,we have an excess. Conrad: You're just adding two years worth. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Bob Generous: Basically. Now if we wanted to make 15,000 units, or 1,500 units every... Peterson: Would it be safe to say that of your 300 units,probably the far reaching majority will be within inside the MUSA? That's already defined currently. Bob Generous: Yes. Because those will have to be developed. It might have been... For example the Longacres development... We have almost 300 units coming in in Walnut Grove and it's... When we get down to the bottom the numbers converge with what has been estimated all along. Conrad: How do I know what our inventory is? The acres right now in the current MUSA? Bob Generous: Well that's part of the,you will... Conrad: Did I miss that? Was I in a meeting or I missed a meeting? Bob Generous: Well yeah. We haven't provided all the background materials. It was in. Conrad: How critical do you want us to be right now Bob? Bob Generous: Well I'd like you to provide, what information you need. These are good things. Specific things to address. It helps. Conrad: It's really hard for me personally to react because I see the logic. I know what you're doing. I've done this before. It's just if I don't,my goal is to keep enough inventory out there to keep land prices stable. We don't what inflationary prices in this community. At least that's a personal belief. But I don't know how many units we've got and how many acres we've got available and we add this to,you know that. Let's see how you're calculating it. I just need a bigger picture of available units and I think I need to believe that there's a standard. See at the end of 2003,I've got to believe there's still going to be several years of supply out there to keep prices stable. Now that's just one side of this whole equation. The other side is cost and whatever and putting in utilities and putting in... I just need to see how we're doing that. To react to your,yeah so therefore I can't really react to what you're showing me tonight Bob. Other than tell you what I need to know to see that we have a standard of having, every year there should be so many years of supply of land and I understand that the,we go in 5 year increments so that's a problem and that's the Metropolitan Council land use planning so I get it at the end of the 5 years we're going to have less than the beginning of the 5 years. But I don't know that I want a standard of only having two years of supply left in the year 2003. I think we should all know that that's going to drive up land prices. Stop development. Maybe that's good or bad. Bob Generous: Well maybe that's the policy then. We look at we want to have x amount of years left. Conrad: I would think we would. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Peterson: I think if that point is important to us, we think, let's find out somebody who knows and do the analysis of what,how does it affect land prices and the growth and can we afford to put in MUSA to balance the prices versus the cost of putting in additional MUSA. Conrad: Mr. Chairman, the only reason I'm pushing this is we have this affordable housing goal and land drives housing prices. Not the timber. It's the land. You've got a 2 year supply. You're going to push up the prices. I don't have a crystal ball. I don't know what I'm really talking about. I just know that's the way it works. So if we have this goal, I haven't said I believe in the goal but we do have it out there and 50%of our houses, housing units are going to be affordable, then we'd better make sure we don't artificially force the price of the land up. That's what you could do if. Brooks: Yeah,but isn't that somewhat contingent too though, we talk about the analysis. Somebody would have to come in and talk about the turnover rate of housing units. I mean it can't be just land alone. I mean I don't know what the median life span. Conrad: New home construction, cost of a new home is totally dependent on the cost of the land. It is a multiplier effect. The developer says land costs x amount. I can put a house that is 4 to 5 times that valuable on that land. That's how they, so if you increase the cost of the land, then you've got a multiplier effect on the cost of the housing that you're going to build so that's just for new housing. You're right. Brooks: Yeah, that's just for new. Conrad: But as far as inventory, you're right. Different subject. Brooks: Yeah, but there's got to be a relationship somewhere. I mean no everybody who moves to Chanhassen wants a, you know has to have a new house. Conrad: But we're zoning future use. You know we don't care what... Peterson: I mean an excellent example being,you look at lot prices today. I mean generally speaking, speak to this if you will Bob. Trying to find a lot for a single family home under $50,000.00 is virtually impossible today. And 4 years ago it wouldn't have been impossible. And accordingly our housing starts are down substantially to 4 years ago also. Brooks: Do you know, what is the average price per lot? Bob Generous: Well it depends on amenities. It runs $40 to $150-$200,000.00. ...developed subdivision. One of the last lots. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, I've got a quick question about the dates. When we put a date down, for example 2008 and say that we're going to offer MUSA services to that area in 2008. Are we as a city bound to do that? 7 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Bob Generous: You amend the map every 5 years. It depends on how fast you... Blackowiak: My thought was, instead of putting dates, I mean can you have dates in your head or whatever and phase it in? This is Area 1 that's coming in. Area 1 will come in,you know no earlier than 10 years from today. This is Area 2. It will come in no earlier than, can you do something like that as opposed to putting specific dates on that we may be bound to honor and not want to honor. And 5 years is a long time I think. I mean if you've got, you know we make a decision tomorrow and then all of a sudden we decide we really didn't want to do that,we have to live with that for 5 years. Can we not put dates on? Can we put a range? Can we time it to say, you know x number of years after the staging of Phase 1? Something to that effect as opposed to specific dates. Bob Generous: Well we can...if we go,the policy is to keep a 5 year supply of land available... Blackowiak: But I mean, you're not going to. Bob Generous: Then we'd drop out dates. Say we'll keep a... This is our phasing plan...how we'll grow. Blackowiak: I just worry about putting a date. I mean it looks good on paper but do we want to be bound by the date 2003 if we decided that's just not an area that we need to develop. Or 2008, let's say 2003,all of a sudden has not been developed at all. Do we want to invest an infrastructure for 2008 and spend all the money and potentially not have any development there. That to me sounds like a not real wise use or wise allocation if you don't have a building where you want it. Why provide infrastructure to an area which you had envisioned as being developed after 2003? Bob Generous: I'll have to...specific. Peterson: Other comments? Questions? I don't now whether it's appropriate now Bob or not but within the context of the plan itself it really doesn't talk about the growth of the roadways as a standard to set. You talk about it in a narrative,the memo of October 8th but it's not necessarily specifically put in there. I mean we talk about the MUSA line and preparing for that growth. We don't talk about zoning and do we make a decision and we put in the plan that we will not, unless this roadway is upgraded, that we will not build out this development or put development in this area. Bob Generous: That would be...in essence you are saying that. In Florida they have a... requirement. The facilities either had to be in place or in a capital program to meet the demand... Peterson: My personal opinion is that I think we need to go in that direction and make a stand more strongly than we currently have. That's my humble opinion. I don't think we're doing that by what's in here. I don't think it's strong enough. We sit through many meetings talking about traffic and congestion. What TH 5 is and what's happening on Pioneer Trail and what's 8 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 happened to TH 7 and the other roadways. I don't think we're addressing it from that perspective adequately. I don't know if my fellow commissioners are. Brooks: Well I agree with you and I think one of the main problems that we're facing is that there is no state and federal funding coming our way to build more roads. So how do we want to deal with that? Maybe we need to put the onus on the developers and say that's great if you want to put a development in but then you're going to have to upgrade the road to go along with it. Peterson: I mean there's no easy answers to this but I think we need to start getting used to a different perspective and tone. We're going to have to say no eventually. Whether we start thinking about it now, which I think clearly we need to do. Sidney: Bob, do we have all the data for a level of service for all roads? Bob Generous: That's part of this study. Brooks: We have our first transportation advisory group meeting tomorrow night for the County plan so I can come back and, as we have our monthly or you know meetings, I can come back and let you know what's happening. I think the first meeting all they're at the point now of is talking about the issues we're facing,which is a rehash of everything everybody knows but they started. Bob Generous: Part of the problem with the level of service standard... Peterson: It's no different than us penalizing a car dealership for not getting in here soon enough to get into the right zoned land. Timeliness is a fact of life to some degree. I empathize,but if we don't take a stand it's going to get worse and worse and worse. I can just see us letting it slip by and we have to let this one go but we've built up MUSA and fortunately the roads haven't followed. Put another 300 unit development in and another down the road and another down the road. I mean I wish I had an answer but I'm just getting a sense that we're going to get caught up without doing enough early on now. I mean Ladd you're staring at the ceiling and thinking. Conrad: Well yeah. I'm not sure what,you sure a lot about the concern for transportation. I'm just thinking. Because I'm in the north part of town, I have no problems. It's better than it's ever been and I've lived here for 27 years. Brooks: Do you take Trunk Highway 7 then? Conrad: No, 62. Crossroad which dumps out. It's perfect. So if I were to survey anybody north of downtown,anybody north. They don't believe there's any problem. Peterson: Particularly now that 62. Conrad: 62 is just so good. I can get home 5 minutes faster. Faster than I've ever been able to do. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Brooks: But it's going to build. Conrad: Sure. Brooks: As people find it. I mean I take 62 now too. Conrad: But my point is, it is faster than it's ever been. It's a better road system for where I live right now. Brooks: Right. But I think you also have to stop and think a minute. Do you want to wait for 62 to build and then congest TH 101 or do we look ahead and say,we know this is going to happen. We know TH 101 is going to be a disaster zone. Let's plan now. Why wait for everybody in the north end to complain? It takes 20 years to get something done. Conrad: Yeah...the residents have not felt comfortable with 212. And Highway 5 is, Highway 5 is the problem. I don't know of other problems in town. There are minor problems but you can see the,we've solved quite a few of them over the last 5 years. I live on one of the future needs in Chan,based on recommended... In fact I use all of it. I'm just not sure,and that's why I was staring at the ceiling. I was just trying to figure out how bad really is it and it's a state problem. Highway 5 is a state problem. It's not our highway and therefore I'm sort of wondering, well what do we do about it. We really got involved in 212. Chanhassen very much was, and the visuals got very involved in getting it moved ahead several years ago. Then it got delayed. Brooks: Well delayed for 20-30 years. Conrad: We got very involved as a city and as individuals felt it was important to do, and it didn't pass so we've lost 212. TH 5 1 think,there's going to be something happening on TH 5. Brooks: You're getting a couple of extra lanes,you know a mile. I wouldn't do a dance over that one. Conrad: But it's better than what I'm used to before we did improve TH5 for 5 years. So again I'm not trying to make any other point than I'm just trying to... Brooks: But there's other things we can do besides building roads. This is where SRF I think has to be really you know watched carefully. I mean there's all sorts of alternative traffic management studies where you redirect local traffic off of TH 5 and get more people to use TH 101 and 62 or.get people maybe to move up to TH 7 or when they're doing local roads,maybe we want to look at upgrading city streets to have them use alternate routes off of TH 5 to get to where they need to go. But you know,that's an important part of this transportation study is going to be not just coming back and saying, gee we need more money to build more roads and there isn't any. Because we could say that. 10 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 Conrad: The study, I don't know anything about the study. It is being done on Highway 5 right now? Bob Generous: All the major roadways. We have a signed agreement with them to do specific roads... Peterson: Well, there's some feedback for you. Conrad: Yeah, take that. Bob Generous: ...it's hard working...what are the specific issues that...I was aware that we'd like to see what our...capacity is so we'll make sure...how many approved plats we have. Conrad: I think it's neat to have a level of service type of deal. I think that's cool. I'm just not sure what we do to it because...the ones that I'm aware of, I don't know how we can affect positively. We can say, it's like cutting off your nose to spit your face. I just look downstream and say okay. Well we have a F rating on Highway 5 so let's stop. We'll show them. We'll just stop. We'll show the people who invested in our community. Let's just stop and then we'll wait until the State figures out that they can do something for it. What's wrong with this logic? That's not very. Brooks: But that's why I was saying, we have to think more, we have to think in a bigger context than trunk highways. We have to think about alternate routes. Upgrading city streets. Transit. I mean Hennepin County is spending a lot of money on a commuter rail study. I know every time somebody says commuter rail everybody runs in 15 different directions but it's coming closer. It's more real than it's been in a long time and we need to think in a broader transportation perspective. Not just a trunk highway perspective. Peterson: Our hands are tied. We just need to try to figure out some creative ways to loosen up the ropes a little bit. We can't do anything per se because if we do say stop development, which we can easily do with hardship,then Victoria and Waconia. Conrad: Yeah, they'll expand. And I think there's some people who moved into town in the business community that were really dependent upon us growing and would not be happy if they didn't... Major folks are struggling. So I don't know. We do have to do the planning and I do like level of service... Bob Generous: That's one of the ideas. Do we just tie it to our local jurisdiction roads where we do have control. Conrad: That's theoretically all you can do because that's all you have control over. Brooks: Well the trunk highways are so bad now anyway, what's the difference? It's not like what are we going to do? Well, we're at level of service F. We'll keep it there. I mean. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Peterson: Other comments or feedback for Bob? Conrad: On this whole thing? Overall, you know really some of the standards are pretty good. Some of the things that we did before are,the policies geez. I have Mr. Chairman nothing to add. I think they're strong. Yeah, they're strong. They say what we want to say. My only comment, and I made it earlier on and that's when we,throwing in this land use and MUSA stuff in the midst of all this just sort of faked me out. It seems like it's a subject all by itself. It was tucked in. All of a sudden I burst upon it in the staff report and you know,how did we get here from there and I think if staff can do a job of bringing us through the inventory bit. How much we have. How much is left. Then I can understand that whole page and that's my only other. Peterson: Anyone else? I think it does, every one of the points really has standed the test of time and I think that is probably the greatest compliment to the people that participated in developing them a number of years ago so. Good. Thanks. BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT - DISCUSSION. Bob Generous: Mr. Chairman, Mark Koegler with Hoisington-Koegler is here to present the draft ordinance. We stated that it's tentatively scheduled for a public hearing for...depending on the discussion today if it's a public hearing... Mark Koegler: Good evening. Let me do a couple things in covering maybe some introductory remarks. Kate, in her absence had asked that maybe we just take a moment briefly and step back and revisit the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan that was done just to set the stage. Set the context for what we're going to be talking about in more detail this evening. The management plan itself was completed in '96 and '97, adopted earlier this year and it really, it was an overall plan for the Bluff Creek area which I think the Planning Commission is certainly aware of the boundaries from just north of Highway 5 essentially...essentially the western edge, encompassing quite a substantial area within western and southwestern Chanhassen. The plan was a broad based view of the whole corridor involved a technical and a steering committee that went through and did an establishment of some vision and some goals as a part of that. Did a very detailed inventory. Natural resource inventory of the area. Out of that inventory basically you kind of began to define by geographic segment various plans. Various suggestions for ultimately improvements within the corridor district. The primary goal to preserve water quality,preserve wildlife habitat within the Bluff Creek area. The watershed management plan defined what they called a primary and a secondary corridor,which is kind of a hierarchy if you will,of quality of resources. The primary area being more pristine,more connected to water quality and wildlife habitat and movement issues secondary, still having a relationship but not quite as strong. The implications of the vision were translated into this plan. There were a series of recommendations in the plan that included a lot of major topical areas. There were preservation of some sites that were out and out called for. There was an educational component of the plan itself. There were physical improvements that are called for as part of the implementation program and then the thing that we're really beginning to focus on in more detail tonight,the rezoning and land use modifications that were laid out in kind of a general context 12 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 and we're trying to take that down to the more specific this evening. That was identified in the implementation program as a high priority among all of the projects and if you have a chance to revisit the document, there are a number of suggested things that are going to be happening in the upcoming years. So the plan was adopted by the Council. The charge back to the Planning Commission as we've been talking about in a general sense for the last few months is then to craft an ordinance that begins to take the plan and put the plan into reality of via the ordinance structure of the city, which is what I want to focus on this evening. I want to begin my remarks I guess by saying that the draft that was in your packet is very much a working draft in our mind still and I think that leads into Bob's initial comment. I think what we're going to talk about tonight still has a number of what I would call rough edges that need a little bit more work, and I'll highlight some of those as I go through some of the things that at least from our perspective we think still need some additional attention and some direction. We're going to take on that in certainly any direction that you would like to offer this evening would be most appropriate. So as far as schedule goes,probably the more realistic schedule, and again it depends on your comfort level, is to consider coming back with a revised version of this on the 5th and the 19th being then the public hearing date and we've always had that kind of as an alternate as part of the overall program for getting the ordinance adopted. With that as kind of a lead in, if it's appropriate Mr. Chair, I could go through and just highlight maybe some of the major aspects of the ordinance draft. Then maybe use some examples to relate what I think are still some issues and some concerns that we have that still need a little bit more work. And then bring it back to a discussion mode if you'd so choose at that time. The ordinance fits obviously into the City's overall code structure. There are some definitions that have been added that really, to a large degree come out of the plan that was done. There are some terms like ecosystem, natural habitat area, and then certainly defining this primary and secondary zone which are shown graphically on the plan map itself as again these two areas where there's kind of a hierarchy of the importance of the resources within those areas. What we're talking about establishing is a Bluff Creek, what we're calling the Bluff Creek Watershed District or perhaps the BCW designation as far as zoning might go. The map, ultimately the zoning map for the city would be amended to include the overall limits that are shown as part of the Bluff Creek Watershed Management Plan graphic. Eventually we'll take that and we'll fold that into the zoning map. This is identified as being an overlay zone. Very similar to the zone that you crafted a number of years ago for Highway 5. There is a number of points in the initial portion of the ordinance to just kind of interrelated to other aspects of the current code, and I'm not going to go through those in great detail. We can come back to those but yet maybe perhaps more to the meat of the ordinance itself. Looking first of all at the purpose. The purpose and intent statements come largely out of the body of work that was done in putting that plan together. The vision that was a part of that in essence in protecting the Bluff Creek corridor and the resources that are there such as the wetlands, the bluffs, tree cover,through a variety of techniques of which this is one. Encouraging a developing pattern that allows the mixture of people and nature development if you will,while still to the degree possible respecting the natural resources that are there. And then one of the goals as part of the plan has been to allow creation of a greenway that ultimately would go from the southern portion of Chanhassen,meandering up the boundary of the Bluff Creek corridor and connecting up to Lake Minnewashta Regional Park. That would become a very strong corridor. A very strong linkage for pedestrian, bicycle flow through the community. As far as intent of the ordinance itself. It is to craft a district that allows again this blending of the development pattern 13 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 that will be coming into the natural environment in land areas that are suitable and in a manner such that the unique resources there are protected. Consistency certainly with the comprehensive plan,with the watershed plan, with the surface water plan, with the community's existing zoning and subdivision ordinances and other applicable references there are included. Preservation of natural conditions found in the primary zone and that's something I guess I have to stress strongly is that the ordinance is structured to preserve what was identified as the primary zone. That was a very strong direction that came out of this effort,and that's something that I'll talk about a little bit more in how you do that and really what the implications of that are. And then minimizing impacts in the secondary zone. Not necessarily precluding development by any means,but effectuating the appropriate controls that will make that development as compatible as possible with the resources that are there. Creating a suitable balance between the amount of open space landscaping,view protections,those kinds of things and the man made features. How do those all work together. And then back to the open space again. Again facilitating the possibility of having an open space linkage that will be a part of this that's viewed, not only as a recreation and transportation corridor, but providing access to the educational resource that's there as well as part of the Bluff Creek. It is as I said an overlay district, which would be applied over the top of the underlying zoning so the underlying zoning would still prevail with regards to uses with anything that we ultimately make exceptions to as a part of this ordinance. The ordinance draft talks about boundary delineation and essentially we will use this as a guide but the ordinance looks at requiring somebody to come in with a development proposal. It would take a better look at the delineation of the primary and secondary corridor areas based on some of the kinds of standards that are contained in the plan. Very similar to what's done with wetlands. Not terribly different. You know as a general guide where they are from the maps that are present but really the field observation is what ultimately determines that and we're looking for that to be a part of this process as well. There are regulations in the ordinance dealing with impervious cover. Relating back to the Best Management Practices Handbook the City references in many of the ordinance sections. Development minimizing essentially the amount of impervious cover by encouraging clustering, common access drives,utility corridors, things of that nature. There are some standards in there regarding impervious cover in areas of steep slopes and they're kind of on a sliding scale. Where slopes are less than 10%, this looks at allowing the impervious cover to be consistent with the underlying zoning. For example if it's a PUD, it would be 30%in a residential. It'd be 70%in the industrial and by and large I'm presuming that a lot of the pieces that you would see developed here in the future would be done as planned unit developments. The ordinance doesn't take any means to define bluffs beyond what it's already in other sections of the code. It does deal with the sight views, and I guess I would highlight there is an example graphic that's there and it's our intent to make this ordinance more graphic in it's orientation, similar to the Highway 5 ordinance so that we will be developing some graphics that support some of these other clauses that are a part of the code. So you'll see more of that in the final draft that comes back. Encouraging design though that takes advantage of essentially laying the structure into the landscape in order to preserve views. Those views not necessarily only being associated with bluffs which are covered in other portions of the ordinance right now,but they may be views from public arteries for example in and across wetland areas. Density transfer is certainly we've talked about before,one of the key concepts and something that I want to provide some examples on in a few minutes but the intent here is whether it's a residential or an industrial property is to allow a transfer of density from,particularly the primary 14 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 area and to the degree that it's appropriate, from secondary areas to other portions of the site. What I'll show you in a few minutes is that works I think reasonably well in residential. I think on the industrial side we still have a little bit of work to do. That one's still somewhat of a challenge and I'll touch on the specific in a moment. One of the things that I want to highlight is that based on the size of the parcels that are out there that ultimately will be developed and the extensive amount of primary and secondary corridor areas, it's likely that what will happen is what's on the top of page 6. That in order to effectuate the residential density transfer, there's a proviso in the PUD standards right now that essentially don't allow you to put anything but single family in the low density categorized lands in the comp plan. This looks at changing that to allow any type of housing that's allowed in the community to go into those low density categories. The reason being again is we have so much natural resource areas here that we're trying to protect that you have to go to another housing form in order to maintain that same density and maintain that same level of development, and we can come back and visit a little bit more about that tonight too if you would like. There is sections in the ordinance dealing with natural habitat preservation and habitat restoration plan. Not only trying to preserve resources within the primary zone but in the secondary zone for example in areas where wildlife habitat for example may need to be disturbed because of development. What is the means of mitigating that? What are the means of replacing that resource if possible and asking to address that as part of a plan? The ordinance calls for 100%open space within the primary zone. That's consistent with that goal of that is the area that is to be preserved. There are some structural setbacks that are identified there, specifically a setback, structural setback of 30 feet from the primary zone with no disturbance to occur within the first 20 feet of such a setback. We're essentially talking about a Bluff Creek impact zone if you will, much like you see in a shore impact zone or some of the other portions of the code. Part of the logic behind requiring a 30 foot setback from a structure to the edge of the primary zone is what you might call kind of the residential creep that happens over time in any community. That if you build a house next to a wetland, next to a resource you're trying to protect, the more it goes out a little further. The more it keeps going out a little further and pretty soon the back yard's gotten bigger so there's just some means in this to try to hold that edge and define that edge as a part of this with setbacks. As I indicated before the boundaries will be delineated as part of what ultimately will be a zoning map change and that's something that we'll have back for you next time also. But the new boundaries will reflect the boundaries that were established as part of the plan. With that what I'd like to do is take a couple of minutes and talk about a hypothetical, somewhat hypothetical residential and industrial development pattern in some of these areas and maybe that helps to bring some of this to focus. I've got some handouts for you to follow along if you'd like. We've taken a hypothetical site that is somewhat less than hypothetical, and it sits right here in the community but what we did is we selected this particular site because it appeared on the surface of things to have kind of a blend of all, first of all, all of the types of properties...outside of the corridor areas and those that are in the primary and those that are in the secondary...any one category. The property that's been selected without naming any specific names, is an 80 acre site in Chanhassen within the Bluff Creek corridor. A major roadway along the west side. Quite a mix of topography. Existing wetlands occurring in pockets on the site. Some fairly steep slopes that occur and some isolated areas with the bulk of the site being relatively developable. Being a farmstead now. Being tilled now. If you look at applying in a general sense the primary and secondary corridors to that site. Suddenly we're chewing up quite a bit of the property. The primary being this line 15 Planning Commission Meeting-October 15, 1997 pattern that comes across,and certainly it encompasses the wetlands but it also encompasses basically tributaries that are part of the Bluff Creek. Those are the lands that were analyzed as needing to be sensitive enough that they were categorized as primary. The secondary then being kind of that buffer strip if you will that comes around each of those. Those being then the two areas that are designated as part of the corridor. What we've done thus far, and it's a very simplified and very general sense but it begins at least to point to some of the issues that we're dealing with, is we looked at two scenarios. One says okay. If we look at a single family, detached housing development going in or a traditional Chanhassen PUD if you will, and bear in mind this is a simplistic approach. If we've got a total site that's about 80 acres. The wetlands is about 5.4 of that so if we pull that out we've got a net site area of about 75 acres. Assuming about a 20%relationship of streets in a typical pattern like that. We're saying 15 acres of street right-of-way with a net developable area of about 60 acres. Now we're ignoring the fact that there may be stormwater ponds. There may be park dedications that would skew this but we'll just use it consistently the same simplified model. Leaving the 60 acres, if you look at the average PUD right now is 15,000 square feet per unit, in this hypothetical example we get 175 units that could go in there. We then look at what happens if we apply some of the provisions of the Bluff Creek ordinance. What happens then? Suddenly, first of all and foremost, we're looking at preservation of the primary corridor, which in this case is almost 30 acres of an 80 acre site. Again, a substantial number. So suddenly our net developable area is down to about 50 acres. If I as a developer still want to sell that single family detached house product in Chanhassen of a typical PUD, suddenly I've got 40 acres instead of 60 acres and I can get 119 units instead of the 175 so in essence I've lost quote unquote if you will, the ability to develop 56 units. What we're talking about through means of density transfer as a part of this ordinance is that,we want to call it the ability of the development to be put in at a level of 175 units but it preserves a part of this ordinance by transferring that density out of that primary corridor area, into either the secondary or the unaffected portions of the property. So in essence what we're doing is we're taking this 175 units that's identified here and instead of putting it on a 60 acre site in terms of a net review of things, we're putting it on about a 40 acre site because again we've preserved the rest of that as open space. So if we just focus on the net density around the development patterns if you will, it's gone from about 2.9 to 4.3 units per acre. Average platted lot has gone from 15,000 to about 10,000 square feet. The form of housing may or may not change. It could remain single family in this model. It might become doubles if you have a more, if you have a different piece of property,I suspect it would force you into maybe a townhouse configuration or something like that in order to preserve that same density. Again, bear in mind this is a very simplistic model. Not meant to take in all the nuances and the sublities that are part of the development process but just a quick comparison of how some of the numbers look. This looks pretty workable. The framework. I think we're beginning to have methods crafted that this kind of a transfer could work. You've experienced this before. This is nothing that's terribly new to you. Maybe it's come with some pain but you've gotten used to it and you... The industrial side, if I can touch on that real quickly,paints a little different picture. If we assume again that properties may be developed in a PUD fashion so that we're dealing with 70% impervious cover limitation as part of an industrial planned unit development. The scenario works like this. We've got again still our 80 acre site in a traditional development. We're looking at 5.4 acres coming out. We're at 75 again. We're using about a 10%number for streets in this case,which is probably a little high. Again, that developable area that's about 68 acres. If 16 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 we can have 68 acres at 70%impervious which would cover buildings,parking, sidewalks, all the rest of those kinds of things, we've got 47 %2 acres of potential development there. Again, this is a perfect scenario. This is a square site that you know a square building fits on and square parking lots fit on. Real world says these numbers won't get that high. If we use that as a basis of comparison then for the watershed district development,the Bluff Creek District development. Again,total site area of 81 acres. Pulling out that corridor again,the primary corridor of 30 acres. That net site area drops down to 50. Pulling out street right-of-way, we're down to about 45. Suddenly when we apply the 70% impervious to that, we now have 32 acres of building and parking instead of the 45. Quite a differential that occurs there. That again in terms of density transfer can be potentially shifted if you will, from the point and we'll end up with probably higher net impervious cover in the secondary and non-corridor portions of the site may be higher than 70% in some cases. But what's kind of intriguing are the examples like this one that are extreme and some that are even more extreme in that if you look at if we're trying to accommodate, we have a development that should be at 47.5 acres of total cover. We've only got 45.9 acres of site now within this non-primary area. We don't even have a 100% relationship. We're over 100%. So in that case we've got 1.6 acres in this primitive example of building and parking that is basically being taken if you will from the property owner, from the developer, that we may need to think in terms of some other means of compensation and how we deal with that. Is the shifting of impervious enough alone to accommodate that? In this case, maybe. In this current example. There are other sites though that continue to pose more interesting technique or more interesting concerns which is kind of in this portion of the site here so we really have an entire property that's either primary or secondary. We can shift out of the secondary into the primary but I'm not sure, and we'll look at some specific examples on that still but I'm not sure we can shift enough of that again to get back to a 1 to 1 parity relationship. In all likelihood, if that property is to be preserved, it's going to have to be acquired. Or portions of it are going to have to be acquired and how are we going to deal with that in the mix of things. It's kind of intriguing because the land use matter, this will be a little harder to see and I apologize for that but we don't have any better map. But what you're seeing in the southern portion and the reason we picked this site is it's shown on the land use plan as having an industrial designation. But it's also shown as possibly having some residential. So we looked at that and we're not saying it could go either way... If you look at the parcel just to the north of that,that's industrial with open space underlined. Of course it can't be open space. The plan right now says it should be industrial. And that's certainly consistent with the land uses that you would find if this map was expanded to the City of Chaska. Brooks: Are you south of Lyman? Mark Koegler: Yes. I'm sorry. I should have provided some orientation. This is Lyman. Brooks: That's okay. It's just really hard to see. Mark Koegler: ...Lyman is here. Audubon is right here. This is the piece...Degler property. The piece to the south I think is under Chaska Investments. Fox and so forth are to the east of that piece. The point being,without any specific names attached, is we've got an industrial piece there that industry by it's nature obviously is land intensive. It's impervious cover intensive. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 That's in direct conflict with what we're trying to achieve in Bluff Creek. So finding that balance is very tricky. That's part of what still needs some polish I think in all of this because I'm not going to stand before you tonight and tell you that I think the industrial density transfer is nailed down. I don't think it quite is as of yet. I think we're getting there and we'll get there and certainly would welcome any input that you would have tonight on not only that aspect but certainly other aspects of the ordinance. Brooks: Can you just put the overlay back down for a second? Mark Koegler: Sure. That doesn't show too well either. Brooks: No. It's really hard to see. Peterson: And the overlay is a primary and secondary corridor? Mark Koegler: Yeah, the overlay is to simply, an acetate version of the delineation that's on this map. Brooks: You have a whole primary corridor going up from north of Lyman. Mark Koegler: ...camera can focus on it but,the area that we're in here, the primary is in the area that's in green. So for example as we look at this piece of property,especially the southern half of that to the eastern edge of that is all in primary. The balance of that entire site,what we've got, the approximation of 50/50 relationship there or primary and secondary with none of that property wanting outside of those two designations. The piece that we've highlighted for example...obviously a little different in that you've got a substantial primary down in this portion, as you can see,that is ringed with some secondary and smaller primary on the north but you've got this kind of curling shape of property that's outside of the primary, secondary corridor designations on that site also. Brooks: Well...piece actually above Lyman. That it's zoned I believe industrial. Remember they wanted to put the townhouses on there, and I look at that all the time and I don't know, that's going to be so difficult to do something with without wrecking that. That's a huge wetland area. A pretty good sized wetland area. Mark Koegler: I should have indicated too,the dark blue is wetland. The wetlands on this map too. Brooks: And that's something that I don't know how it ever got zoned industrial because I don't know what you'd do with that piece without wrecking the whole area. Bob Generous: ...make it more... Brooks: What do you mean? Oh, that little hill where they wanted to put the townhouses? 18 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Bob Generous: No, that...meets the ordinance. Brooks: Yeah, of a bluff. Mark Koegler: So that's an overview of what's there right now and what I think are still a couple of challenges that still lie out there, which is the reason I would not paint this as being a draft that's ready for public hearing but I think we...certainly welcome any comments, questions, clarifications. Anything that we can provide at this point. Peterson: Commissioners, feedback for Mark. Blackowiak: I have a few questions. When we're talking density transfers, both for the single family and say the residential portion and the industrial portion. Are you making the assumption that the City needs to accommodate the developers in some way? Mark Koegler: I'm making, we're making the assumption I guess that that property under today's rules could develop hypothetically to a certain level. A certain intensity, if you will. And that we're now putting another set of rules on that property, which are pretty broad and pretty wide spread in their purpose and their intent. I think one of the things that we can come back to you with is the City Attorney's view of all of this. What the comparison with the transfer has been that set of standards could be applied today compared to the new set of standards, what is that differential? And is that equitable? Does that constitute at all a taking of any of that property? Is it more burdensome than what would normally be allowed? It certainly goes far beyond the normal wetland legislation that you find everywhere. The bluff legislation that you find everywhere because this is a unique natural resource that's trying to be protected so we've been trying to, to the degree that that's possible, facilitate some transfer of density. Whether that has to be 100% I think is a good question. I don't know the answer to that yet. Maybe it doesn't have to be. But I think there has to be some transfer in order to constitute a legitimate use of that property. Blackowiak: Okay, yeah. That would be a question is you know, how accommodating do we have to be as a city because we're talking about an area that we say is valuable and should be preserved so I guess my question would be, does it make sense to try to keep the same amount of development on that property or would it make sense to just keep the current zoning requirements in place and have fewer units and therefore less intensive use of the available land? I don't know that I am convinced that we need to do a 1 to 1 transfer and exceed impervious covers, etc. on remaining areas outside the primary and secondary zones. My second question is back to the habitat preservation and restoration. That's talking about Sections 20-1469 and 1470 about disturbances, etc. And talking about plan disturbances. What about unplanned disturbances and is the ordinance a place for any penalties in the event that there is disturbance of a primary or secondary zone of the corridor? Mark Koegler: If I understand your question there, I don't know an answer off the top of my head. 1Q Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Blackowiak: Yeah I don't either and I don't really expect one I guess. I'm just sort of. Mark Koegler: ...whether this would be the proper venue for that or whether that's a development contract provision that has penalties associated with that. Blackowiak: Or even,maybe even a line in here just acknowledging that we reserve the right to, or the development penalties or something will be mentioned or agreed upon in any development contract or something to that effect because again we're talking about an area that is so important and I don't know that, I mean I understand that we need to put...any disturbances but I think that there will be unplanned disturbances regardless of how careful people are and we just need to plan for that event when and should it happen and make sure that we know what we're going to do when that happens because I often say that we've got all this wonderful agreements and conditional uses and no enforcement means whatsoever and this I really think we need to look into how we enforce this. Let everybody know that we plan to be serious about it if we're going to do it. We're taking the time. Mark Koegler: That line of questioning,you can take that a bit further into the implementation mode and question, where is the appropriate place to require for example some kind of staking, fencing or whatever of this delineated line. Talk about delineation in a planning context but not necessarily delineation and just like you're put up erosion control. This edge condition would be less obvious I think perhaps to somebody driving a dozer but that's another good point. Blackowiak: Right, and that's it. Peterson: Other feedback or questions? Conrad: Mr. Chairman, I really like this. It's not real specific yet. I really like the direction. I am a proponent of density transfer. It is philosophically, if you want to protect something, this is the way to do it. As Mark said,and I'm not going to belabor the point. We've got some problems, especially in the industrial type of transfer. I don't know how to solve that and I guess we just need staff and Mark to advise us in the alternatives and we should probably go through where we, every, we should go through the entire Bluff Creek site and where we're going to have problems and we should also understand how, I like density transfer but I also want to know what it would do to neighbors that are there. Brooks: Well it's also a question of wildlife. I mean the parcel that I'm kind of harping on that I don't see how it will ever be developed without something giving because of the large wetland area within the parcel. I mean the scary part of that is that it's a, you know the geese fly over there. I mean it's a,the natural resources. The wildlife that are a part of that are a major part and you, you know I don't know the answer. You know you do a big density in one section but then what are you going to do to the wildlife that inhabits the area. I mean the noise. The air. And I think we need to look at parcels like that and question whether are we really going to make an active effort to preserve them or we're going to have to just let them go. Conrad: Or buy them. 20 Planning Commission Meeting - October 15, 1997 Brooks: Or buy them because it's not, it's almost a situation where if we develop it, it's going to get ruined. Peterson: Anything else Ladd? Conrad: No. Again Mark was looking for feedback and...some details that he's recommending and,but boy. I sure like,personally like how this reads. It preserves just a great asset and it also gives the landowners the chance to do something economic with their land. That's not very much feedback for Mark. Philosophically. Peterson: Anybody else? I just had a couple of questions, more than anything else Mark. If you look at, we talk about the green way will serve as uninterrupted pedestrian trail and bike system. I mean where are we at in trying to lay that out within the district itself. Is that something that, the one thing that the public will be interested in. When they see that on paper they go oh. Where's that going to go, you know. And I mean are we,how much development is it going to take for us to bring that, the first development we have come in, we need to be thinking about that. If we're going to be putting it in. Where's that fit? Mark Koegler: It is a concept, still at this stage that has certainly been reinforced by this plan. I think it's really kind of been in the back of a lot of minds in this community for a long period of time. That's an ideal place for a corridor connection. But there has been nothing put to paper in terms of an alignment as of yet...end of the earlier topic you talked about is the MUSA line expansion...and those development pressures take place,that will be a logical question. Where do you want it to go? How does it impact properties? That does need to be probably another thing that has to happen, fairly close on the heels of. Peterson: In the intent area,under D. You talk about the creation of interconnected open space that preserves migratory patterns for wildlife and facilitates recreational opportunities for people. Those are separate and distinct and in many ways I see them almost as being conflicting. To balance migratory patterns and recreational opportunities. You've got a lot of delicate balances in here but that one seems to be more than,more difficult than many of the other ones. General feedback. I was also surprised that we didn't,we left that bluffs and didn't become more strict what our current standards are. In many of the other areas we went more aggressive on what our current standards are and the bluffs we didn't. I'm just, I'm relatively surprised that we didn't take a more aggressive stand in preserving even over and above what we currently have,just because of the delicate nature of that area. Was that a conscious decision or do we just feel that the...that we currently have or no? Mark Koegler: We looked at that pretty carefully and we can certainly investigate that a little further if that's your desire. But in looking at you know,kind of first of all I wish somebody had a perfect model for this kind of an approach, and it's not out there from what we can tell. You can certainly find bits and pieces that have been done in Minnesota or in the northwest or in California that have some similarities but nothing hits the mark at all. But in looking at what communities have done generally with bluff related provisions in sensitive areas like this, 21 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 Chanhassen's current ordinance basically was right in line with everything that we found. The one exception was, and the plan for example recommended a 30 foot setback for new development. Well that's already in Chanhassen's code. The code now has I think it's a 5 foot, is that right Bob, setback for existing conditions from the bluff. I think there's a 5 foot provision that's in there. We found a lot of examples of 10 and didn't think that that 5 feet in that context was probably significant enough that we addressed that separately from the ordinance that's already there. One of the goals is certainly to make this as easily implemented as possible so therefore not to create conflicts with other portions of the code or differences from other portions of the code that don't have to fundamentally be there. So the initial review, our feeling and staff's feeling was the bluffs are pretty well protected,pretty well addressed in the current ordinance and...some minor things but it's probably not worth it. Peterson: Lastly, we talk about density transfer. Can you list three separate and distinct areas for allowing that and guidelines and we put down other lands as determined by City Council. I generally have an adversion to throwing something like that in there. I think it's asking for problems personally so that's my feedback for you tonight. Any other questions or comments? Anybody? Conrad: Mr. Chair,just, Bob when this comes back. All of us have to understand what we're doing. You need to take us through the entire site. The entire thing so when we say density transfer, not just an ordinance. Like Mark did tonight. He took us through a specific deal. I think all of us want to see, as you move that 1 to 1, or whatever the ratio is,this is the implication. This is probably what's going to happen so we all understand what that is. If there are sites that can't take that. Or at least know. Brooks: ...can't take that transfer. Conrad: Yeah. So it's a great exercise. Mark Koegler: Don't lose sight of the fact that one of the parallel things that's going on right now is that there was a sizable portion of referendum proceeds that were, by the voters, that currently negotiating properties, some of which may well be some of these more sensitive areas we're.talking about. That hasn't been determined yet and I guess that's a subject of a lot of factors in that decision. One of them being what can be bought at a reasonable price but it is in all likelihood some of these properties may be acquired and preserved in advance of even having any development pressure on them. But I assume that's going to be coming. Brooks: Little farther out than that don't you think maybe? Bob Generous: Well, they're working on some of the negotiations right now. Brooks: I realize that but. Bob Generous: They could eat up that money very quickly. 22 Planning Commission Meeting- October 15, 1997 Brooks: That I agree with. Mark Koegler: There may at least be some of these chunks that will fall out of this equation. Part of that from an ordinance perspective. Hopefully there will be some of those that are more difficult to deal with. Peterson: Good, thanks Mark. Any old business? OLD BUSINESS: Bob Generous: Famous Dave's is coming back. Peterson: When? Bob Generous: The 5th Conrad: Where? Bob Generous: Same spot. Different architecture. Conrad: Better? Bob Generous: Sharmin loves it. It's interesting. Peterson: Sharmin loves it. Interesting. Brooks: Does it look like any other Dave's bar-be-que shack that we've ever seen? Bob Generous: No. Brooks: Oh cool. Maybe it meets the design standards Ladd. Bob Generous: Well Mika did the design work. Brooks: Pardon? Bob Generous: Mika did the design. Peterson: Other old business? Is the dealership coming back for a work session at all or is that? Bob Generous: Yes,I believe it's the second meeting in November. Peterson: We don't have any Minutes to note. Ongoing items,anything? Bob Generous: I can tell you what the Council did Monday. 23 Planning Commission Meeting-October 15, 1997 Peterson: Go ahead. Bob Generous: Okay. They approved the temporary tower ordinance. The final reading. They also approved the Villages on the Pond 2°d Addition, final plat. Southwest Auto Brokers conditional use permit down on 169. They were happy that the site... Then they tabled the amendment to the interim use permit for...the nursery, wholesale on 169. Peterson: Tabled it primarily because of the signage being inappropriate to. They were spending a lot of time, as we did with the sign for Hooves,I can't remember. I always get it. ...Paws, Claws and, and they were setting high standards for that sign and then the Henning sign was not near the level of quality that that one was. There was a conflict there, what they should let go so they tabled it to get a better design created. Any open discussion items from anybody? With that, may I have a motion to adjourn. Blackow•iak moved,Brooks seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:38 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 24 ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION :0,, , CITY QF tif ,: C IIANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Engineer Kate Aanenson, Planning Director Todd Hoffman, Park& Recreation Director FROM: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works(\ii DATE: October 24, 1997 SUBJ: Coulter Boulevard, Phase III- Project Nos. 97-1-1, 97-1-2, 97-1-3 This is just a note to remind everyone that I am scheduling a City Council item for the regular meeting Monday, November 10, 1997 for the City Council to consider authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the second stage of the Arboretum Business Park Improvements consisting of the 2 million gallon water storage facility, traffic signal at West 82nd Street and Trunk Highway 41, and the construction of Coulter Boulevard from its currently terminus in Autumn Ridge west to the proposed north/south Century Boulevard road corridor. These project elements were presented to the City Council earlier this summer during the project feasibility hearing. From discussions at the feasibility hearing, it is apparent that the road extension issue is of particular interest to Councilmembers as well as other staff and Commissions. Recalling from my notes, the Mayor has asked that the Planning and Park Commissions be notified of the meeting when the road issue is to be considered. Therefore, I would ask Kate and Todd Hoffman to notify your respective Commissions of this issue coming up on November 10, 1997. Another important note for Todd Gerhardt is that Mark Senn has asked for the estimated best guess TIF financing schedule to be presented with each phase of the Arboretum Business Park project. This next phase of the project is estimated to cost approximately$3.4 Million consisting of$2.5 Million for the water storage tower, $800,000 for the construction of Coulter Boulevard, and $20,000 for the traffic signal at 82nd Street and Trunk Highway 41. There is also an additional $300,000 for the Wrase property acquisition which is not included in the project costs. If anyone would like to meet to discuss any aspect of this next improvement phase prior to the Council meeting,please feel free to let me know. Thank you. jms \`cfs I\vol'``cng`charles4ncmos`couher blvd phase ui.doc fromthe editor ....„,,,_____ , , , ,,,.._ _.;,.._ : 0„dam ,1/4-,.. The Sullivans'California yj • W ^+ - home(page 57)was F V.,.:y fashioned to blend with its a ,,,..,.,,,,,,.___- ___ ' _ �' -1- -- prr3� ._` neighbors.Architect Tobin Y t-t _ IR Dougherty earned a design •- award for his efforts W 4 1 ;--0 i� -z3 : , nding the curl,they're always at risk of being swat- ��li � r ,'s;;x�; - lowed by the next wave of development.The irony '7,.-{,, ` is that some of the people protesting the loudest are r}e living on homesites carved from the landscape - � _ _,,,, - they now struggle to protect. :la __ Developers must bear some of the blame for ` ' unpopular practices that would take more than a r cartoon mascot to overcome,such as building sub- Ho Goin Bananas divisions where the only visible difference g between homes is the paint. Stripping land to the y Q subsoil to cut construction time and maximize the El parceling process isn't any more endearing. (I — veryone is someone's unwanted neigh- recall one suburban Chicago developer who bull-1E BEM bor.As a slogan,this can't compete with dozed trees from a development he then named "Visualize Peace” for optimism. But it something like Colonial Woods.) does score points for realism as Part of the problem is economics. Everyone suburbanites fight to slow or even halt needs a place to live,so mediocre subdivisions still the growth of their communities. sell despite their shortcomings.Also,laws and reg- Homeowners living on one-time forests, ulations set a predictable course for developers to cornfields, and meadows now balk at the loss of follow. Our look at how zoning affects neighbor- ----- any more trees,crops,or open spaces.They're only hoods(page 120)partly explains how we arrived in half-jokingly referred to as "BANANAs," an this situation. ig acronym for Build Almost Nothing Almost But if your homesite is the target of a local no- .0 a Nowhere at All. growth movement, you'll also want to see how l.l The no-growth sentiment is a national move- others have coped. The Hearthstone house ment with regional chapters. In the Midwest, the (page 38) shows how you can develop a luxury ° 0d cry is "Save the farmland." In the Northwest, it's home on the small lots that result when land devel- "Save the trees. In the South,"Save the wetlands." opment is limited.The Sullivan house(page 57)is Government response has been more development a triumph of excellent design over almost insur- restrictions, impact studies, and permit require- mountable zoning obstacles. Even the Layman O ments—greening by red tape. house (page 110) is a product of a no-growth What you don't hear is anyone pleading to policy—this one directed at freeways. "Save the subdivisions," a campaign complete The message from these projects is that land is with a cartoon mascot. How about "Digby the too valuable to waste on a house that isn't right for V Developer," a round face humanoid with soulful you.If you worked hard to find just the right loca- saucer eyes peering from beneath a hard hat plead- tion for your new home,work just as hard to fash- ing,"Don't be a construction obstruction." ion the right home for that site. O Maybe the debate should rise beyond emotions, especially those of newly minted suburbanites who / have spent thousands of dollars to escape the urban / squeeze and live on the suburban frontier—that 0 re C fragile, ephemeral space between nature and the ROBERT WILSON ever-expanding path of the bulldozer. Like surfers Editor,Home Plan Ideas 6 HOME PLAN IDEAS WINTER 1997 Order 1 Sheep weren't the first thing to be cloned. Builders and city planners have been doing it for years in \esv America's tract neighborhoods. to the BY DOUGLAS A. PETERSON treet after street, house after bases.As America fought a world war, fast and suburban house—sometimes they functional were the priorities for base housing. all look alike.You wonder if Ugly, disposable structures were the result. homeowners living there ever "After the war,we took that production ability wander through the wrong front into residential neighborhoods," says Barry door after a hard day at work. Berkus of B3 Architects/Berkus Design Studio in Neighborhoods used to be more Santa Barbara, California. diverse. Many building materials were only "The big concerns were affordability and available within certain regions, whether it was social stability and a booming population at the white clapboard in New England or red brick in end of the war," adds Debbie Bassert, senior Kentucky. Materials and climate reinforced land-use planner at the National Association of regional architecture, says Jim Constantine of Home Builders in Washington, D.C. Community Planning& Research in Princeton, The politicians'slogan was no longer a New Jersey. chicken in every pot, but two bedrooms and a Railroads and the interstate system changed all one-car garage.America was settling into the that, spreading both building materials and suburbs, children were being born at a record architectural styles from coast to coast. It became rate, and these young families needed affordable just as easy to build a row of Cape Cods in housing—fast. Much like the military bases a California as in Massachusetts. "Home building few years earlier, block after block of identical, is an industry where producers tend to copy nondescript little houses filled America's suburbs. ideas from one another," Constantine says. Berkus also points to profit-driven builders for much of the homogenization of home styles after All those tiny houses the postwar boom. Detail was sacrificed, roof Though America won the war in 1945, it lost the pitches came down, and houses were built closer • battle for custom-crafted housing in the following to the street to reduce the lot size and cut the years. It started with the quarters on military cost of driveways. Garages were moved to the front of the house, which had the additional l 11 l l 7.0 1111 l t' e\1$t'(j 1. ill(�v bonus of making homes appear larger. "All those things drove the price down, but also erased were all thrown l l(lwl l O"f Ii f l' character," he says.Builder Ric Weinschenk, who designs and PeuI)le « ere kin"I" ill i i if' I1ii(_[U\\ builds custom homes in Portland, Maine, recalls his days as a construction worker in Long Island, of• i I to S I l l uk e sl i i ek. New York, during the late 1960s. "One crew built three hundred houses in one hundred and I)+'IJril' l3,l--rrl `cni' r I.ati+l l ,r !'limner twenty days—three hundred houses of four \ati+,tlal .1 +n'itI il' ! ++1 1 l+fine iluii+Irr, models. No variations" 120 HOME PLAN IDEAS WINTER 1997 New to the ..1'11(' ait.,vf r IS e2 to )111 character back _:, -fl: ' ysiz r = ? iillo the street . if it's handled correctly," he says, downplaying —Bann 13erktl, the concept of front p porches as a cure for 113 .\rrltilrri'/Brrkai, Dr,jt!l Sitylin isolation. "I think that if we look at the whole idea of what the front porch is, it's a friendly A few neotraditional neighborhoods were built gesture, but not used much" during the 1980s, but their success was slowed Berkus also predicts a rebirth of downtown by high interest rates, and later by an economic areas. He feels it's more viable than the recession that devastated many real estate neotraditional approach, which promotes a small markets. "There's been some finger-pointing that commercial area in each neighborhood. "It's these things are not financially viable," Bassert much more important to reinforce the fabric of says. "But it's important to see them in the the downtown—to develop something that's context of when they were built—they were on already in place," he says. the front line." Instead, Bassert will be watching the Officials want more control neotraditional neighborhoods being built now. As communities compete for pe people and the Many of these retreat from the higher-density property tax dollars they bring, city leaders are plans their predecessors used, which means fewer increasing their role in neighborhood people, homes, and apartments. development. "City officials are having input on "There's a demand for the neotraditional everything—lot sizes, elevations, both front and product," says Deen Hyde of Pulte Homes, "but rear," Hyde says. "But we've also found we can it's probably a little narrower than for traditional change people's thinking in markets by bringing product offerings." something else into a community they hadn't Pulte builds 14,000 homes annually in 41 U.S. planned." cities. Its experience with neotraditional She points to a Michigan community recently neighborhoods is limited to a gated community built by Pulte. Rather than fill it with single- in Indianapolis where the company will build on family homes, which would have been the nearly half the lots. company's goal a decade ago, Pulte sacrificed a few lots for a recreation center with swimming People want security pools and tennis and volleyball courts. "By 3 Berkus offers a nod to neotraditional working with zoning people and the planning communities, but favors neighborhoods that commission, we ended up with a neighborhood provide more security.That's the primary factor with three different product types that bring in home-buying decisions, he says, and it's homeowners in this area something they can't lacking in neotraditional communities where get anywhere else:' Hyde says. Development street patterns provide multiple entrances and decisions like this are based on extensive exits. Developments that rely on partially consumer research the company performs before concealed alleys and detached garages present a it buys the land. new set of security risks. Unlike the four home styles from "The answer is to put character back into the Weinschenk's days as a Long Island builder, street," Berkus says. "That can be done Pulte tries to ensure variety by offering up to 14 architecturally, with patterns that end up with facades for each home plan. Pulte also uses some spurs or cul-de-sacs." marketing research to develop its home designs, Acknowledging the opposition to cul-de-sacs, and stipulates how often a specific plan can be Berkus points to their peaceful and traffic-free used in an area. • nature. Where else can children in-line skate or "If you build a house, the two people to the play hockey safely in the street without trucks running by at 30 or 40 mph? (Continued on page 147) "The street can become a place that's very social, and the neighborhood organizes around it HOME PLAN IDEAS WINTER 1997 1 23 1 – — - 1 i 1 — — X. `_ -r.". World War II;'Constantine says. Even in tract , :;, �r subdivisions, developers and local governments r f *� e `. ;�Q� � y ,r• h want a focal point, a gathering place, such as a --- \.- _�\ . '-'4,;,'` ' neighborhood square,that has some social value. '" is. d�1r. t�I 1 `tr If? 1�P ~' • �'' "You'll go there when you're out for a walk, ;' — 'T -- =" =--+''i 1Z.:� and if your neighbors are doing the same thing 3- — ..; : ii=--- after dinner with their dogs and baby strollers, • 'is _' you'll bump into one another," Constantine says. —7-- ;; _ '_ It's this opportunity to escape from suburban ;W �.� I isolation that leads many to these neotraditional neighborhoods. "We're all so busy that it's hard �" `- =_: to spend time to get to know your neighbors;' .s . -'—'4":",---' = A Bassert says. "The neotraditional neighborhood J.k� _ e,' 4 ! 7.. ,"' a--' movement has brought us back to some f Fri . "A.' fundamentals. It's reminded us of the importance Y Z ._ of having some real public,civic, or human space, not just some leftover space, which Northwest Landing is a owner who wants to build a barn-style home in a happened in some planned communities in the neotraditional community neighborhood of traditional designs. '60s and '70s' in DuPont,Washington. Zoning's drawback is that it doesn't look at In neotraditional neighborhoods, small front When it's complete,it will how a neighborhood will perform for those who yards bring homes close to the sidewalk so it's include 4,300 homes, will live there. It's more concerned about safe easy to relax on the porch and chat with your apartments,and streets, nice views, and places for children to neighbor who's out for a stroll. Streets are condominiums covering play.And while zoning certainly separated homes designed on a modified grid pattern, instead of 3,200 acres.The community from factories, it also discouraged mixed use of the loop road and the cul-de-sac model, adding also includes space for land in many areas.There's no longer a corner to the pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. ) industry and retail that's grocery store where you can send your child to Garages are set deeper on lots or built in the within walking distance of get a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread. rear and served by alleys,placing the focus on the homes,reducing reliance "Zoning is just a crude legal mechanism to landscaping and pedestrians. Smaller lots reduce on cars. solve some of these nuisance problems," Bassert yard work for busy,two-income families and says. "It doesn't do a lot to address livability or open space for neighborhood squares and greens. aesthetic concerns:' Home designs recapture elements of historical That, along with the fact that many people are neighborhoods, with the deep front porch often yearning for a return to old-style neighborhoods, mandatory. Some neotraditional neighborhoods has sparked a new dialogue. "There's a cometlike include single-family homes, townhouses, and trend right now that subdivisions of the future are apartments on the same block, rather than going to feel like the neighborhoods prior to isolated in separate clusters. Developments also feature space within walking distance of homes for offices and basic I • t) community services, such as a grocery store,dry Mere ti a cometlike urn( !�!t„111 cleaner, and post office.These village-type 4. now- that subdivisions are uoi communities reduce dependence on cars, and 1 l 7 downplay the role of roads in the streetscapes. tU l(el like the neiolll}orhoods But until there are more successful examples \ i of neotraditional neighborhoods, developers will )!,!l)1, to World]1 \\ill• 11..` be slow to propose them, and banks slow to finance them. City planners also are reluctant to . —Janie, (.in1-1aunlifty accept them for the same reason. "They end up Cutuliiiiiiiit I'1anitill r S.: Ile-ward] being the protector of the rule book," Bassert says of these planners, "and find it difficult to vary from the guidelines they've used for the past 30 or 40 years." 122 HOME PLAN IDEAS WINTER 1997 i ab . --Iwo., tic) A developer would buy a farm, Weinschenk . 1 von& ill # ; ' ,,• to ,,. says, and build small houses on slabs, selling ,, , p ig . •1970s conventional singl< them for$25,000 to $40,000 each. "The • 1%,,. ��sR��a's,,, family lot pattern with loop houses would sell faster than we could build �• , ,:;' ��u��� ? ,, streets and cul-de-sacs. them. We'd build the same house five or six �� " 1110111M1 ER,, times in a row." `ie+' `� .... �x , Public spaces and aesthetics were scarce in i °°° ,�, �� these neighborhoods, but the prices were right. "People don't want to pay for the amenities if '�eee o°°s ,� ,' they can't afford them,"Constantine explains. p Urban muck brought ;� 04 Oa ` •Open space corridor suburban sprawl �� 4 . • RRI� Suburbs weren't invented in the 1940s and 'SOs, \ � LW'z d, �/ �rit��,� •1990s traditional sin however.They evolved in the late 1800s when 7� ea r� �' famil _ tip . 4I •�O -. y lot pattern with varyint streetcar companies extended their lines, opening �;."' lot sizes and streets arranger ®��Q���, air a a.':• . `, on a modified grid. rural land to fleeing city dwellers. - . "The cities INNEINIES W f;-, people lived in and worked in at - •— :'� ,� that time were very unhealthy," Berkus says. ." ;:rte►�s, •Pedestrian mews "People were dying because of influenza. INF • 1 %7 ""`� Am r They �„ t' 2s..4*--...--�'.1 ;„ were dying because of the factories and -• - 'r slaughterhouses next to where they lived." Quick ..�,�''.. i.' r ;, 4`* sales of land and homes drove the design of !-V 1 H' , i•'.`�' , ', _, •Townhomes these streetcar suburbs, whose streets were set up �� NM onagrid. MI Riverside, Illinois, showed fes' t•- f• 'i people there was •" : ,4 :-.1 •Shopping center another way. Now a Chicago suburb, Riverside •? was the first planned community in the United States. It was designed by landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted beginning in 1868. With rail connections to the city, it allowed higher-paid governments, allowing them to control the use The Woodlands is a 1970s- workers to escape to quieter, gardenlike settings and subdivision of land. era planned development near Houston.It was at the end of their workdays. Zoning had already been used in the late Out of 1,600 acres of undeveloped land on the 1800s to improve living conditions for designed as villages on cul- Des Plaines River, Olmsted set aside 700 acres immigrants flooding into New York. But now de-sacs connected by loop for public use—places for neighbors to gather. town planners could wield it to separate noxious collector roads.In the 1990s, He rejected the grid pattern of streets as being at factories and industry from residential areas. Pete Brownionacreated aect odds with nature, and designed a 40-mile "Until zoning existed" Bassett says, "they were Peter new • network of curving roadways that followed the all thrown together. People were living in the Woodlands modified-grid terrain and mimicked the bends of the river. shadow of the smokestack" based on a modified grid Eventually 1,000 acres were developed for street layout that's friendlier and only one public area was lost. Cities now can use zoning to control everything from the number of pets a family can to pedestrians, "He was all about romance," Berkus says. "A have to the minimum square footage for a new lot of the neighborhoods that have curving home. In many subdivisions, zoning also limits streets and more random, or organic, planning the exterior materials that can be used. A typical came from Olmsted's thoughts." restriction might require siding to be brick, stone, A place for everything or masonry veneer, and exclude wood or vinyl. Neighborhood associations and developers can There's another side to neighborhood take it a step further and require an architectural development: zoning. In 1926, the U.S. Supreme approval committee to review designs for new i Court ruled states could zone property according homes and additions. That may hinder creativity, to use. States passed that power on to local but it protects your investment from the property HOME PLAN IDEAS W'IN'TER 1997 121