Loading...
12-3-97 Agenda and Packet FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Conceptual PUD request for an office-industrial project which would permit a church/institutional use on property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate, and located south of Hwy. 5 and north of Coulter Boulevard at Stone Creek Drive on 27.3 acres, Land Group, Inc. and Bluff Creek Partners,Bluff Creek Corporate Center. 2. Bluff Creek Overlay District. NEW BUSINESS 3. Chanhassen Historical District-Discussion. OLD BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 4. Library Needs - Jill Shipley, Library Board. 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. PC DATE: 12/3/97 CITY OF CC DATE: ::D NANHANCASE �-- By: Generous:v STAFF REPORT 4 PROPOSAL: Request for Conceptual PUD approval for an office-industrial project which would permit a church/institutional use,Bluff Creek Corporate Center LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5 and north of Coulter Boulevard at Stone Creek Drive z U APPLICANT: Land Group, Inc. and Bluff Creek Partners 123 North Third Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 333-2244 PRESENT ZONING: A2, Agricultural bstate District ACREAGE: 27.3 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - PUD-R, Walnut Grove and Highway 5 S- PUD-R, Townhomes at Creekside and Coulter Blvd. E - A2, vacant W-OI, Bluff Creek Elementary and Chanhassen Recreation Center QWATER AND SEWER: Available to the site 0 PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site contains rolling topography with a high point in the east-central id portion of the site of 962. The property is bounded on the east by a tributary to Bluff Creek and on the t-- west by the main branch of Bluff Creek. The site is bounded on the north by Hwy. 5 and on the south by (75 Coulter Boulevard. An electric transmission corridor bisects the site running from the north to the south. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial and Parks/Open Space W ,s A I 1 1_, I li , ' i/111111. 'Mai 11. 11, ..7 lir. 11 ra: Fa ,AIRY OW V in'lir 11111111 1111k* Asiberlwiodit °all' ` 11PIN at ?alogir 1 :lvd Park it Nu 17 a mai a,- Illifik i alikiniii P= \ •..„ 1 ININIP.P.INI Lake VII i___,.. .-- ; 1 list •-• • i ak,,,,iiq lirjalten:n .7,----------------___________„ \ r WV .• 4.. n - ' \ Ann ""1" M°' j .\ , Park , • ,r4r3v ma: , , ------ _ ----------- - -: ,-r • -•-•- , r- \ ‘114 IS lifiwilvw Ei-rs) F Park , • , , .---- ii • -. MoG/ynn Rd , \ Court ------- Etwe4.4* . ,e..1.• 40. Ce Coupe :ou•‘ ‘03 ... L.; ‘. • er Blvd. ' .., 'till alli'-N'&,N,,...Coulter Bivc*----" to 11111111* ' ulcer Blvd , . int, S \, Park 1% 111‘111111111 Dr ..o,:3 Al /el 1111•3‘W 1 -N\ ilph, . AM ..9 c ' `3 11.• AI, 0 da F-7' 41P )4.-1 As iik.._ ipr, ,e013-710:11ipailiiir ki,/,, Li .1 04...1 i a as a 1 0 • P grhille LE .0 ill "Pk* di --gins ;to,e reek- Vaii- . - 0-. :1 . IltkNIM to e Allittimin iiill a llwar S.L`P'N _,.... tone creek 1111r* 1 0 we ce-Imm'mc P11111 IFAIIII14 36 gee ;iiiri. .. 4111.1" 7 VIP 4R-41',/ . a ke D i‘ • an.qt Its) , • tt ,(% / . ira, Atitafigall Ea "::c5, toli310.1"Viliga ,x % _, 0 --/ m V.41MAKet•Vir ••aim 0 .7 u wir,--tillik "v NI`I'd / . Anti lb ArrAilaro 1110 - / ,t_•e / am krill mLII ill ) •• Lyman 86 1-.\ 't =he mil 444 v. revierown a elipif nut MI,/-- .` . cC.;7: -4\% ' - V,40., lami La' fa ••41,7 . •"ft'4. . All 117„Onirri ill Ipir • ill 41 irafliNAMIN 11...1 1 • . \ s AP P VgrE137471 Power 44 # 4 ;Rill #, , Park Oil%°41112410 , \ . \ VV. pp. • i ,, 4 • • ••J - -,, _,. ) 9000 Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing a Conceptual PUD approval for Bluff Creek Corporate Center,an office-industrial project which would permit a church/institutional use. The primary issue that needs to be addressed as part of the concept review is whether the institutional use is appropriate for the site. Staff advised the applicant early in the process that we could support the inclusion of a church facility in the project if there was some benefits to the development and the community at large. Specifically, staff envisioned that the church would provide shared parking that would permit the development of the office and industrial use with greater building square footages than would be possible based on their individual sites. Staff estimates that the church use displaces approximately 250,000 square feet of office industrial uses. Based on the use ratio proposed by the developer, this corresponds to approximately 160 parking stalls. Staff recommends that the church commit to provide this amount of parking for the industrial office users of the property. This equates to all the parking located east of the end of the institutional building. In addition,based on the ratio of proposed uses in the development and ordinance parking requirements, staff has calculated that Lot 2 is overparked by 116 parking stalls and Lots 3 by 62 parking stalls. Staff recommends that the amount of parking and impervious surface on Lots 2 and 3 be reduced. In addition, shared parking also should be required for the church on the office/industrial parcels The applicant's concept plan proposes three large buildings. A large expanse of parking is the dominant feature of the site. Staff is also concerned about the building and parking lot configurations. There is an enormous amount of parking lot adjacent each building site. For example, the church's southeasterly parking lot, the stalls are up to 500 feet away from the church's front door. To improve the layout, staff suggests designing a parking lot on both sides of the building, e.g., St. Hubert and add sidewalks. The same scenario holds true for the proposed office/warehouse on Lot 2. Staff believes that a U-shaped building on the northerly portion of the property would be more appropriate to address pedestrian circulation to the proposed warehouse as well as address the sight lines for the truck loading facility. Currently, westbound traffic on Coulter Boulevard will have a clear view of the office/warehouse truck loading bays. Staff would recommend that the building orientation be primarily toward Highway 5 and Coulter Boulevard, especially for Lots 1 and 2,rather than the orientation shown on the concept plan. This would require the building on Lot 1 to be reoriented 90 to 180 degrees and the building on Lot 2 to be reoriented 90 degrees. Staff would also suggest that the church investigate a walkout type facility, similar to that used for the St. Hubert Catholic Community in Villages on the Ponds,to help reduce site grading. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 3 The plans propose servicing the site via two private streets from Coulter Boulevard. Staff disagrees with the applicant's assumption that public streets would be prohibitive to the development. Staff strongly believes that the main access at Stone Creek Drive/Coulter Boulevard should be a public street with a cul-de-sac terminating on the common property line of all three lots. The other private street access from Coulter Boulevard, west of Stone Creek Boulevard, for the church may remain. Staff does not believe that this development will meet the warrants for a private street in accordance with City Code. The City's subdivision codes require a 60-foot wide right-of-way and 60-foot wide radius cul-de-sac. The developer has requested to transfer or maintain the right to have a right-in/right-out onto Trunk Highway 5 from this site. The plans currently do not propose a right-in/right-out with this development and therefore future rights should be extinguished or the developer should negotiate with MnDOT to transfer the right-in/right-out access to the parcel directly east of this development. The proposed project is between east and west(main)branches of the Bluff Creek. Both the east branch and the main channel of Bluff Creek are DNR protected. The City of Chanhassen has planned to have the Bluff Creek as a natural resource corridor from the headwaters to its discharge point at the Minnesota River. Staff recommendations for this project will be maintaining the natural vegetation and landscape where it still exists, intensify the proposed landscape plan along the creek to improve the buffer and to keep setbacks from the creek at a minimum of 100 feet with an 50 foot buffer area. This area has also been identified by the Bluff Creek Management Plan, as a candidate for floodplain forest restoration. The applicant should incorporate some element of forest restoration in the landscape plan. Plantings along Bluff Creek and the proposed storm water pond should be chosen based on wildlife food and/or cover value. Since an important facet of the management plan is to provide a wildlife corridor along Bluff Creek, it is essential to landscape appropriately. Proposed overstory and ornamental trees could be a choice of quaking aspen, amur maple, willows,black cherry, serviceberry, swamp white oak, or aborvitae while proposed shrubs could include highbush cranberry, winterberry, and red-osier dogwood. The proposed prairie and wetland seeding mixes are nice amenities in the landscape plan and will benefit the site greatly. Staff has prepared a draft design standard for the development. While modeled after other developments, these standards attempt to address the specific concerns for this site. Staff is recommending that the concept be approved. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 4 Site Characteristics The site contains rolling topography with a high point in the east-central portion of the site of 962. The property is bounded on the east by a tributary to bluff creek and on the west by the main branch of bluff creek. The site is bounded on the north by Highway 5 and on the south by Coulter Boulevard. An electric transmission corridor bisects the site running from the north to the south. The site is highly visible from Highway 5. In addition, it serves as a transition area to less intensive development to the south and west from the potential more intensive industrial uses to the east. The proposed project is between east and west(main)branches of the Bluff Creek. The City has planned to have the Bluff Creek as a natural resource corridor from the headwaters to its discharge point at the Minnesota River. This site can showcase the city's attempt to preserve, protect, and enhance the bluff creek corridor. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 27.3 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate, to PUD, Planned Unit Development. There are two(2) components to the PUD: industrial/office and institutional. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility,the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. FINDINGS It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria: 1. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 5 Finding. The applicant has shown some interest in protecting natural features on site. If the developer incorporates staff recommendations for setbacks, reforestation/revegetation, additional protection will be achieved. 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Finding. The mixing of land uses can be more efficient provided sufficient shared parking opportunities are provided to reduce the total amount of impervious surface. 3. High quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community. Finding. The proposed design standards will assure a high quality design. Each site would be reviewed through the site plan review process. 4. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. The inclusion of the institutional facility assists in providing a transition from the less intensive uses to the south and west to the more intensive uses. In addition, the preservation of the Bluff Creek corridor would be assured. 5. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 6. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The comprehensive park plan does not propose public lands in this area. The Bluff Creek corridor would be preserved as part of the development. 7. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Finding.Not applicable as part of this development. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 6 8. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. Additional conservation could be achieved if the design standards are followed. 9. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Finding. Appropriate traffic management techniques will be used. The developer and site users will be required to use traffic demand management strategies. Summary of Rezoning to PUD Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility,but allows the city to request additional improvements and the site's unique features can be better protected. The flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for the flexibility, the city is receiving: • Development that is consistent with Comprehensive Plan • Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands, trees, topographical features) • Sensitive development in transitional areas • More efficient use of land • Reduced impervious surface • Higher quality site design and building architecture GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The development would need, at a minimum, to comply with the Highway 5 Design Standards. In addition, staff would recommend that the development comply with the following: DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light.industrial/office park. 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. Photo- composite images of proposed development adjacent to Highways 5 shall be submitted as part of Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 7 the review process. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking shall be required of the development. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to institutional use on one lot only or light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition,the City Council shall make that interpretation. Light Industrial- The manufacturing, compounding,processing, assembling,packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure,with no outside storage. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise,vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Warehousing- Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Office-Professional and business office. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Indoor Recreation/Health Club- establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness conditioning. Hotel/Motel- establishments engaged in furnishing lodging, or lodging and meals, to the general public. Research Laboratory- establishments engaged in scientific research or study. Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Showroom - 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. Telecommunication Towers and Antennas by conditional use permit only. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 8 Day Care- establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children on a daily basis. Prohibited uses • Contractors Yard • Lumber Yard • Home ImprovementBuilding Supply • Garden Center • Auto related including sales and repair • Home furnishings and equipment stores • General Merchandise Store c. Setbacks The development is regulated by the Highway 5 and the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone. The following setbacks shall apply: Street Frontage Minimum Setback Maximum Setback Building/Parking Building/Parking Hwy. 5 (Outlot C) 70/50 150 Coulter Boulevards 50/30 100 Interior Street 30/20 NA Bluff Creek 100/100 NA The average hard surface coverage does not include Outlots A and B if dedicated to the city, nor Outlot C. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. Any one site/lot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case can the entire finished development exceed 70 percent. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Building Area Building Square Footage Breakdown Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 9 Use [Percent Total Square Feet Office 20% 90,000 Light Industrial/Warehouse 80% 240,000 Ancillary/other 20% 90,000 Institutional 33% 100,000 Total (Maximum) 300,000 2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 3. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or 40 feet. e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Primary building orientation shall be to Highway 5 and Coulter Boulevard. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 5. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or pre-cast, and shall be finished in stone,textured, coated,or painted . 6. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or,as trim or as HVAC screen. 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 8. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery,tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 10 9. 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. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. 10. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Center. 11 Each buildings shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections,canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of-ways. All elevations visible from the street shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. Landscaping along Highway 5 shall comply with Buffer yard standard C. Coulter Boulevard shall comply with Buffer yard standard B. The master landscape plan for the Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD shall be the design guide for all of the specific site landscape developments. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 2. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with masonry fences and/or landscaping. 3. Undulating or angular berms or elevation changes of 3'in height shall be placed along Coulter Boulevard. The berms shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of each project Phase grading and utility construction. The required buffer landscaping may be installed incrementally,but it shall be required where it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 11 g. Signage 1. The Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD shall be permitted two identification signs: one sign on Coulter Boulevard and one sign on Highway 5. The sign on Coulter Boulevard shall not exceed eight feet in height. The sign on Highway 5 shall not exceed 20 feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted per sign. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty(80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight(8) feet in height. 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 throughout the development. The applicant should submit a sign package for staff review. 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 5. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. 6. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 7. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The street lights should be designed consistent with the existing lighting along Coulter Boulevard. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture(high pressure sodium vapor lamps)with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 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 property line. This does not apply to street lighting. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 12 i. Alternative Access 1. Each site shall accommodate transit service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. CONCEPTUAL REVIEW GRADING The majority (90%±) of the site is proposed to be graded to develop the streets, parking lots, storm drainage ponds and building sites. The site ranges in elevation from 927 at the Bluff Creek west branch to 962 in the center of the parcel. The three building sites range from 938, 950 and 956. It appears the building elevations will retain some of the topographic characteristics of the site with the bench-type or step-down building pads. Site grading will require extensive earthwork. Should earthwork quantities not balance on the site and material needs to be imported or exported from the site, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if the material is proposed to be hauled off site to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted the properties will be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. The plans proposed two storm water drainage ponds for pretreatment prior to runoff into the wetland. One of the ponds is located northeast of the church which will take the majority of the site's runoff. There is also another pond located southeast of the church parking lot near the intersection of Stone Creek Drive and Coulter Boulevard (Pond No. 2). It appears,based on the applicant's narrative, this Pond No. 2 is designed with a twofold purpose. One is to serve as stormwater treatment and the other as an amenity to the entrance to the corporate center. The applicant's engineer should review the possibility of connecting into the City's existing storm sewer in Coulter Boulevard from this drainage pond thus eliminating the need to extend additional pipe within the development. The City also attempts to limit the number of stormwater ponds from a maintenance and water quality standpoint. It appears,based on grades, that Pond No. 2 could be combined with the proposed pond north of the church. Either scenario would be acceptable to staff; however, if Pond No. 2 is constructed the City will not be Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 13 responsible for maintenance and the developer will not receive credit against their SWMP fees. The stormwater pond shall be constructed with 4:1 slopes overall or 3:1 with a 10:1 bench at the normal water elevation. Given the size of this development,temporary sediment basins should be designed with the final grading plans to address site runoff during the grading operations. DRAINAGE The plans propose a series of storm sewers to convey surface water runoff from the individual lots to the regional stormwater ponds for treatment prior to discharging into the wetlands. The development's storm sewer system shall be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Ponding calculations and drainage maps including pre- and post-development conditions for a 10-year and 100-year storm event will also be required for City staff review and approval prior to final plat consideration. The applicant should consider coordinating with MnDOT in conjunction with the Trunk Highway 5 upgrade a combined storm sewer system to address stormwater runoff from Trunk Highway 5 into the proposed stormwater pond directly north of the church site. Currently, MnDOT is proposing to directly discharge into the Bluff Creek west branch. It may be feasible to coordinate with the applicant's engineer to combine storm sewer drainage systems to pretreat Trunk Highway 5 stormwater in the proposed stormwater basin thus eliminating the need for another stormwater pond upstream. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water is available to the site indirectly. Subdivision of this parcel will require the extension of sanitary and water service into the development to serve all three lots. Currently, watermain service has been extended to the property line at the Stone Creek Drive/Coulter Boulevard intersection. The City's sanitary sewer trunk line runs parallel to Bluff Creek west branch. The City did not obtain easements for this work since the applicant was one of the petitioning property owners and it was presumed that the easement would be dedicated with the final plat of the development. The applicant did sign a right-of-entry form for the City to perform the work. The extension of utilities throughout this development will require submittal of detailed construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates for City review and City Council approval. The mainline utility improvements to serve all three lots will,upon completion, become City maintained and owned. The individual sewer and water services to each lot will be privately owned and maintained. Building permits from the City's Public Safety Department will be required for the private utility portion of the project. Drainage and utility easements will be required over the public utility lines outside of public right-of-way on the final plat. Depending on the depth of the utilities, the minimum drainage and utility easement shall be 20 feet wide. The developer will also be required to enter into a PUD Agreement/Development Contract with Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 14 the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee utility and street construction as well as the final plat conditions of approval. Upon review of the preliminary watermain layout, it is likely the two proposed office/warehouse buildings will require a looped watermain system. It would also be prudent from a fire flow and dependability standpoint to extend a watermain lead to the east underneath Bluff Creek east branch for future looping and connection to the next phase east of this development. The proposed wet-tap watermain near the trail in the southeasterly corner of the site should be relocated. The current proposal would interfere with existing trail and steps that were recently constructed with the pedestrian bridge. STREETS The plans propose servicing the site via two private streets from Coulter Boulevard. Staff disagrees with the applicant's assumption that public streets would be prohibitive to the development. Staff strongly believes that the main access at Stone Creek Drive/Coulter Boulevard should be a public street with a cul-de-sac terminating on the common property line of all three lots. The other private street access from Coulter Boulevard west of Stone Creek Boulevard for the church may remain. Staff does not believe that this development will meet the warrants for a private street in accordance with City Code. The City's subdivision codes require a 60-foot wide right-of-way and 60-foot wide radius cul-de-sac. The public streets shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Staff is also concerned about the building and parking lot configurations. There is an enormous amount of parking lot adjacent each building site. For example, the church's southeasterly parking lot, the stalls are up to 500 feet away from the church's front door. To improve the layout, staff suggests designing a parking lot on both sides of the building, e.g., St. Hubert and add sidewalks. The same scenario holds true for the proposed office/warehouse on Lot 2. Staff believes that a U-shaped building on the northerly portion of the property would be more appropriate to address pedestrian circulation to the proposed warehouse as well as address the sight lines for the truck loading facility. Currently, westbound traffic on Coulter Boulevard will have a clear view of the office/warehouse truck loading bays. The parking lot drive aisle widths are less than City Code for 90 degree parking. According to Code, drive aisles shall be a minimum of 26-feet wide for two adjacent rows of 90 degree parking. The parking layout proposed is similar to having three large-scale grocery or Target Store parking lots. Traffic circulation along the common lot line of Lots 1, 2 and 3 should be improved. There are numerous drive aisles with direct access onto the main street. Access Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 15 points along Main Street should be reduced in this area to minimize and control turning movements. Reconfiguration of the drive aisles and parking lot areas would also permit additional green space be incorporated between parking lots and the main street. Based on the current site plan, staff believes the impervious surface coverage of the site may exceed limitations as well. This site is permitted a right-in/right-out access onto Trunk Highway 5. In conjunction with the upgrade of Trunk Highway 5, the grade difference between the proposed plans and future Trunk Highway 5 would make it difficult to incorporate a right-in/right-out onto Trunk Highway 5 later. The developer has requested to transfer or maintain the right to have a right-in/right-out onto Trunk Highway 5 from this site. The plans currently do not propose a right-in/right-out with this development and therefore future rights should be extinguished or the developer should negotiate with MnDOT to transfer the right-in/right-out access to the parcel directly east of this development. BLUFF CREEK The proposed project is between east and west(main)branches of the Bluff Creek. Both the east branch and the main channel of Bluff Creek are DNR protected waters, which require a minimum building setback of 50 feet. The City of Chanhassen has planned to have the Bluff Creek as a natural resource corridor from the headwaters to its discharge point at the Minnesota River. The City recently completed The Bluff Creek Watershed Management Plan, a study of the creek's watershed which proposed increased setbacks,to preserve the creek and its natural qualities. This study recommended 300 foot setbacks along both sides of the creek. The report committee felt that distance was necessary to maintain the integrity of the creek's natural features and to buffer it from the intense development of streets and homes. Staff recognizes that due to intense land use(farming) this portion of the creek corridor no longer contains the significant or native vegetation along the west branch, and very little along the east branch. The proposed setbacks would also greatly reduce the developable area of this site. Staff recommendations for this project will be maintaining the natural vegetation and landscape where it still exists,intensify the proposed landscape plan along the creek to improve the buffer and to keep setbacks from the creek at a minimum of 100 feet with an 50 foot buffer area. This area has also been identified by the Bluff Creek Management Plan, as a candidate for floodplain forest restoration. The applicant should incorporate some element of forest restoration in the landscape plan. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 16 WETLAND The proposed wetland impacts of this project will affect a 845 sq. ft. type 2, Ag/urban wetland basin that has previously been altered due to agricultural practices. The west,or main branch of the Bluff Creek was the site of a shallow marsh restoration project in conjunction with required wetland mitigation needed for wetland impacts incurred while extending Coulter drive. The wetland created with the Coulter Boulevard project was required mitigation and cannot be used for additional wetland impacts. However, the proposed filling of the 845 sq. ft. wetland on site would not require wetland mitigation, under the Wetland Conservation Act's 2,000 sq. ft. deminimis rule. The applicant's proposal to use stormwater ponds as wetland mitigation is unnecessary, and not allowed under the State of Minnesota's Wetland Conservation Act. Up to 75 % of a stormwater pond is allowed for wetland mitigation, but, only after a new wetland is created to replace the size and type of the initial wetland impacted. LANDSCAPING Site canopy coverage is minimal, 1.5%, and consists mainly of trees within the riparian corridor and 34 boulevard trees planted by the city. The setbacks from Bluff Creek and its tributary will protect much of the existing natural areas, but it is unclear as to whether or not the applicant is intending on preserving the boulevard trees. The trees were planted in fall of 1996 and spring of 1997 and are still under warranty. Grading is proposed up to the trees which would negate the city's warranty on the trees. Staff strongly recommends all 34 trees be preserved and guaranteed by the applicant. Where trees need to be removed for entrances, they must be replaced elsewhere along the boulevard in order to protect the city's investment. Baseline canopy coverage requirement is 10%, or 94 trees, in addition to required landscaping for the parking lots. Applicant is proposing to plant 212 trees, most of species recommended by the Bluff Creek Management Plan. The site is suitably landscaped,but lacks required landscape islands, loading dock screening on the east side, and adequate parking lot screening from Highway 5. The additional landscape islands are to be provided at a ratio of one island per 6,000 square feet of vehicular use area. The loading docks of the southern warehouse building are visible from Coulter Boulevard and will require evergreen plantings. Visibility of the expansive parking lots from Highway 5 should be limited as much as possible. Increasing evergreen plantings and using berms will help to obstruct sight lines into the parking areas. Plantings along Bluff Creek and the proposed storm water pond should be chosen based on wildlife food and/or cover value. Since an important facet of the management plan is to provide a wildlife corridor along Bluff Creek, it is essential to landscape appropriately. Proposed Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 17 overstory and ornamental trees could be a choice of quaking aspen, amur maple, willows,black cherry, serviceberry, swamp white oak, or aborvitae while proposed shrubs could include highbush cranberry, winterberry, and red-osier dogwood. The proposed prairie and wetland seeding mixes are nice amenities in the landscape plan and will benefit the site greatly. PARKS AND RECREATION The Parks & Recreation Commission met on November 25, 1997 to review the proposed concept plan. The City's Comprehensive Park Plan identifies this site as a portion of the service area for the Chanhassen Recreation Center/Bluff Creek Elementary School. No additional public park areas are required in this service area. Comprehensive Trail Plan: The City's Comprehensive Trail Plan identifies Coulter Boulevard and the Bluff Creek Corridor as "planned" trail routes. Coulter Boulevard borders this site on the south and the main branch of Bluff Creek borders the site on the west. Both the Coulter Boulevard trail "main branch" and Bluff Creek Trail are already in existence. Trail connections from this development site to the existing trails is desirable. The submitted plans do not identify such trail connections. The applicant should be instructed to do so. MISCELLANEOUS Response To Issues Raised In The Applicant's Narrative The applicant indicates a desire to dedicate the creek setback outlots as park. These outlots are protected by ordinance and as such do not require the designation of"park"to be protected. If the applicant wishes to dedicate these areas to the public, no park fee credit will be available. The Townhomes at Creekside, located directly south of this development, did choose to dedicate the creek"buffer"to the city as open space. No compensation or credit was granted in return. Staff concurs that these outlots are very appropriate for open space purposes. Setback requirements will ensure that these areas remain free from development. I spoke to Charles Folch, City Engineer concerning the portion of the Bluff Creek/Coulter Boulevard trail which has been placed on the applicant's site. He indicated that the necessary right-of-entry permits were secured from the landowners prior to construction. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 18 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approve of Concept PUD#97-2 subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit site coverage and impervious surface calculations for each lot and the overall site. 2. Staff recommends that the church commit to provide approximately 160 parking stalls for the industrial office users of the property. 3. Staff recommends that the amount of parking and impervious surface on Lots 2 and 3 be reduced. 4. Staff believes that a U-shaped building on the northerly portion of the property would be more appropriate to address pedestrian circulation to the proposed warehouse as well as address the sight lines for the truck loading facility. Staff would recommend that the building orientation be primarily toward Highway 5 and Coulter Boulevard, especially for Lots 1 and 2, rather than the orientation shown on the concept plan. This would require the building on Lot 1 to be reoriented 90 to 180 degrees and the building on Lot 2 to be reoriented 90 degrees. Staff would also suggest that the church investigate a walkout type facility, similar to that used for the St. Hubert Catholic Community in Villages on the Ponds, to help reduce site grading. To improve the layout, staff suggests to design a parking lot on both sides of the building and add sidewalks. 5. Staff strongly recommends all 34 boulevard trees be preserved and guaranteed by the applicant. Where trees need to be removed for entrances, they must be replaced elsewhere along Coulter Boulevard. Protective tree fencing shall be installed around all boulevard trees prior to any grading activity. 6. Additional landscape islands are required in the parking lots; a minimum of one island for each 6,000 square feet of vehicular use area. 7. The loading docks of the southern warehouse building are visible from Coulter Boulevard and require evergreen plantings to screen the area. 8. Visibility of the expansive parking lots from Highway 5 should be limited as much as possible. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 19 9. The applicant shall incorporate increased evergreen plantings and berms to obstruct sight lines into the parking areas. 10. Plantings along Bluff Creek and the proposed storm water pond should be chosen based on wildlife food and/or cover value. Proposed overstory and ornamental trees could be a choice of quaking aspen, amur maple, willows,black cherry, serviceberry, swamp white oak, or aborvitae while proposed shrubs could include highbush cranberry, winterberry, elders, sumac, and red-osier dogwood. City staff shall approve final landscape schedule. 11. In lieu of parkland dedication and public trail development, the city shall collect full park and trail dedication fees for this development. In the event that the applicant deems the dedication of the"creek" outlots into public domain desirable, the Park & Recreation Commission would review this offer. But, again, no park fee credits would be granted. 12. The applicant is required to plan private internal trail connectors from their site to the surrounding public trail system,thus maximizing their benefit of the recreation system already in place. 13. The applicant shall dedicate a 20 ft. trail easement over the trail segment located in the southeast corner of the site that lays outside the Coulter Boulevard right-of-way. 14. The development shall maintain the natural vegetation and landscape where it still exists, intensify the proposed landscape plan along the creek to improve the buffer and to keep setbacks from the creek at a minimum of 100 feet with a 50 foot buffer area. 15. This area has been identified by the Bluff Creek Management Plan, as a candidate for floodplain forest restoration. The applicant shall incorporate some element of forest restoration in the landscape plan along both branches of bluff creek. 16. The developer shall supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff for materials imported to or exported from the site. If the material is proposed to be hauled off-site to another location in Chanhassen, that property owner will be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. 17. The applicant's engineer should review the possibility of connecting into the City's existing storm sewer in Coulter Boulevard from the southerly drainage pond or combining the pond with the proposed storm water basin north of the church. If the developer desires to construct the southerly pond, the City shall not be responsible for maintenance and the developer shall not receive credit against their SWMP fees. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 20 18. All ponding basin side slopes shall be 4:1 overall or 3:1 with a 10:1 bench at the normal water elevation. 19. The grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall incorporate temporary sediment basins to address site runoff during the grading operations. 20. The storm sewer system shall be designed for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. Ponding calculations and drainage maps including pre- and post-development conditions for a 10-year and 100-year storm event will also be required by City staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration. 21. The applicant shall work with MnDOT in coordinating the storm drainage system from Trunk Highway 5 into the proposed stormwater basin north of the church site. The applicant may be entitled to credits against their SWMP fees as a result of pond oversizing and pipe extension. 22. The public street and utility improvements throughout the development will require detailed construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. Final construction plans and specifications shall be submitted for City Council approval. The private utilities shall also be constructed in accordance with City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. 23. The developer will be required to enter into a PUD Agreement/Development Contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee utility and street construction as well as the final plat conditions of approval. 24. The proposed wet tap on the watermain near the trail in the southeasterly corner of the site shall be relocated to avoid interference with the existing trail. 25. Public streets shall be incorporated to provide access to all three lots. A 60-foot wide right- of-way with a 60-foot radius cul-de-sac shall be incorporated into the site plan. The private street shall be constructed to a 9-ton design. 26. All parking lot drive aisles adjacent to 90 degree parking shall be a minimum of 26-feet wide pursuant to City Code. Drive aisle configurations near the intersection of Lots 1, 2 and 3 lot line shall be reconfigured to minimize drive aisle points onto main street. 27. The developer's right for a future right-in/right-out access to Trunk Highway 5 shall be extinguished upon final platting unless the developer negotiates with MnDOT to transfer the right-in/right-out access to the adjacent property to the east. Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 21 28. The City's standards for boulevard street lighting shall be incorporated in the public portion of the streets. 29. A 10 foot clear 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 ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 30. Install post indicator valve on fire water service coming into the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal or Fire Inspector for exact location. 31. An additional fire hydrant will be required near the church main entrance. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of hydrant. 32. 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 time of construction. Pursuant to Minnesota Uniform Fire Code 1991 Sect. 10-502. 33. "No parking" fire lane signs and yellow curbing shall be provided. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations of signage and painted curbing. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy#06-1991. Copy enclosed. 34. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within jurisdiction when any portion of the facility, or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building, is located more than 150 feet from apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exception: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic sprinkler system the provisions of this section may be modified by the Chief. When access roads cannot be installed due to topography, waterways, non negotiable grades or other similar conditions,the Chief is authorized to require additional fire protection as specified in Section 10.501 (b). Note: As building plans become available we will review the plan to determine if standpipes are required in any portion of the building due to the fact that we cannot achieve 150 foot access of all portions of the building." Bluff Creek Corporate Center PUD December 3, 1997 Page 22 ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Letter from Liv Homeland to Bob Generous dated October 31, 1997 3. Bluff Creek P.U.D. -Narrative 4. Family of Christ Luthem Church Narrative 5. Reduced Bluff Creek Corporate Center Concept Site Plan 6. Letter from Ceil Strauss to Robert Generous dated 11/20/97 7. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 11/19/97 8. Memo from Minnegasco to Robert Generous dated 11/7/97 9. Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 11/21/97 10. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Land Group , Inc . OWNER: Bluff Creek Partners ADDRESS: 123 North Third Street ADDRESS: 123 North Third Street Minneapolis , MN 55401 Minneapolis , MN 55401 TELEPHONE(Day time) 333-2244 TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit _ Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit _ Variance Non-conforming Use Permit X Wetland Alteration Permit $2.75 X Planned Unit Development* $750 _ Zoning Appeal X Rezoning _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review X Notification Sign $150 Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) Subdivision' TOTAL FEE$ 1,175 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. 'ROJECTNAME Bluff Creek Corporate Center _OCATION Highway 5 , West of Audobon Road , East of Galpin , East of Bluff Creek GAL DESCRIPTION Parcel # 25 . 0151100 TOTALACREAGE 24 . 4220 Acres WETLANDS PRESENT X YES NO PRESENT ZONING Agricultural (Farm , Non-HSTD) REQUESTED ZONING P U D PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Office Industrial REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION Office Industrial REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Re-zoning and subdivision 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. Land Group , Inc . B y : /-firl l pyo • /°/.3//97 Signature of Applicant Date Bluff r ek P tners BY: er0.�.� /9/3// l Si tura of Fee Owner Land Group, Inc. , PTNR 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. C;: 7. ) 11i17 LandGroup Land Group, Inc. 123 North Third Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 333-2244 October 31, 1997 Bob Generous City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Submittal for PUD Concept Approval for Bluff Creek Corporate Center with Site Approval for Family of Christ Lutheran Church. Dear Bob: Accompanying this letter are 26 copies each of plans and narrative for the Bluff Creek Corporate Center and the Family of Christ Church. We feel this project will be an asset to the community of Chanhassen. The quality of the project will be high. The mix of office warehouse and church on the site provides the opportunity for crossover parking between compatible uses. Density for the office warehouse buildings is thus maximized. As you know, the Family of Christ Church is anxious to proceed with purchase of their favored site and eager to begin their fund raising for a new church building. We look forward to review of the project and your comments. Please call me with any questions you may have. As always, it has been a pleasure working with you and other staff members through this process. Sincerely yours, Liv Homeland President BLUFF CREEK P.U.D. - NARRATIVE: The Bluff Creek Corporate Center development is a mixed-use project consisting of a campus of office and warehouse buildings and a church. The site planning takes advantage of Highway 5 visibility as well as the creeks on each side of the site. The church setting sits dramatically on the hill overlooking a pond with an excellent exposure to Highway 5. The office and warehouses are situated close to Highway 5 and Coulter Boulevard to form a strong edge consistent with the corridor study guidelines. The north and southwest elevations offer window and architectural opportunity for a front door image at all exposures. Service areas are screened on the creek side with an existing tree buffer. Parking areas are broken into small groupings separated by large landscaped islands and terraced to handle grade changes. The parking counts indicated on the plans reflect cross-over parking to minimize large expanses of parking. The compatibility of off- peak usage between the church hours and office and warehouse building operation allows for this design. The church has 258 stalls to handle the congregation during the week and shared parking of office and warehouse building on weekends. The office and warehouse parking reflects 20% office and 80% warehouse based on market predictions. We also envision opportunity for a further increase in density with other building areas utilized as cross-over parking. Access to the site is from Coulter Boulevard. The main entry aligns with Stone Creek Drive and features a small pond and special landscaping. Another access is provided for convenience of the church to the west. Circulation through the site is provided by a private drive that serves all buildings. Due to the constraints of setbacks, topography, powerline and unusual configuration of the site, a public road would be prohibitive. The approved MNDOT access from Highway 5 for this site would be reserved for a location to the east for access to the larger creek five parcel. MNDOT is currently designing Highway 5 and is proposing an 80' setback in the center of the site and up to 110' along both creeks to allow for sloping from the roadway. The City setback from Highway 5 is 70'. We propose an agreement discussed with the City that allows a 35' outlot for future acquisition by MNDOT and an additional 45' no-build setback totaling 80'. This would provide a 70 foot wide green area between the proposed parking lot and future shoulder on eastbound T.H.S. Along Coulter Boulevard, this land is to be dedicated for roadway on south border of site. In addition, we wish to preserve the previously MNDOT approved right-in and right-out on Highway 5. The setbacks along Bluff Creek are proposed at 100' versus the 150' recommended. The 100' setback matches that provided on the Townhouses at Creekside project on the south side of Coulter Boulevard. A reduction in the creek setback to 80' is proposed in the northeast corner of the site. This would be offset by a 120' setback on the Creek Five Associates parcel east of the creek which is controlled by the Bluff Creek Corporate Center developer. This land along the creeks would be dedicated as park. These are shown on our plans as outlots. Currently a trail has been placed on our site in the southeast corner without any obtaining of easements. The Townhouses at Creekside project property to the south donated such land, and therefore a precedent has been established. This land is very appropriate as future park and recreation land with its adjacency to the school and ability to continue the trail system. The City has also installed a sanitary sewer line within our creek setback along west edge of property without obtaining an easement. Pg. 2 Continuation of Narrative: There is an existing powerline that runs through the center of the site. In order to maximize development potential, this line should be relocated. When MNDOT expands Highway 5, both poles in the north center and northwest corner of the site will be taken down and relocated. We are asking the City to specify that single metal poles be used as replacement rather than existing old wooden poles to ensure a quality image for the development. The rerouting of the powerlines from the center of the site to the northwest corner requires only one new pole along Highway 5, again helping the upgrade of image. With the need for only one pole, we believe MNDOT could bear the entire cost of the pole and rerouting fees. It is uncertain how this pole replacement will affect the lines to the south across Coulter Boulevard. Ponding has been accomplished on site in two locations, one at Coulter Boulevard entry, and one within the flood plain. The City has already created a large pond along the creek on our site without obtaining an easement. The existing wetland, 845 sq. ft. in average, in the northern part of our site will be filled for a proposed parking lot. It is proposed that the mitigation be provided by the pond constructed on this property under the Coulter Boulevard project. The proposed storm water ponds would also provide wetland mitigation credits. We are requesting a tax increment district to be established for funding to ofd set development costs including infra- structure, moving of powerline, soil correction and land costs. In keeping with the Highway 5 corridor study, the landscaping and architecture will reflect the quality and intention of the guidelines. Rich masonry materials and architectural detailing will reflect in the facades that form a strong edge along Highway 5 and Coulter. Extensive landscaping and continuous trail systems will provide a pedestrian friendly environment within the site. Building to land coverage ratio is18.36%. FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTHERN CHURCH NARRATIVE GENERAL 1) The church's building complex will consist of a grouping of interconnected volumes or modules of varying sizes and heights, rather than a single, inclusive volume. This alone provides an opportunity to add variety and interest to massing. As a function of the spaces they will house,some of these volumes will be single-story with high ceilings,while others can be two-story with `normal' (8-9 ft.) ceiling heights. This implies that different volumes will have somewhat different scales. Roof shapes will probably be a combination of flat(we like to call them low-slope)and sloped. The master plan concept calls for these modules,together with associated parking,to be built in several phases over time. CHANHASSEN CITY CODE-ARTICLE VIII. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, Sec. 20-501. Intent 1) Two prominent and attractive features of the site are the corridors created by the floodplain of two branches of Bluff Creek. The church building will be sited on a knoll in a natural bend of the west branch of Bluff Creek. The top of the knoll will be reshaped into a plateau upon which the building will sit. Nestled against the floodline on its west and north sides,the church will thus dominate the vista north to Hwy. 5 along the creek's corridor. Conversely,the church will be seen as a landmark terminating this vista when viewed from Hwy. 5,raised as it is on its plateau. Enhancing this composition strategy will be a retention pond located just north of the church,within the floodline. Another prominent and attractive feature of the site is the grouping of knolls that rise generally from Coulter Blvd. on the south side up to Hwy. 5 on the north. Although the existing contours on the site (including beyond the church site)will be smoothed out, the general fall of the land will be followed by sloping the parking lots and open-areas between buildings-thus preserving this site feature. Parking for the church will be kept to the south and east sides. No parking will be located between the building and the floodplane. In terms of landscaping,the relationship of the building to the creek will be softened by plantings consistent with the Bluff Creek Watershed model. On the north and west sides, then, the building will appear to sit in a park. This feature reinforces the park-like relationship existing between the creek and the playing fields belonging to the school across the creek to the west. 2) The church's agreement with Landgroup calls for sharing a certain amount of parking with the office/warehouse buildings envisioned for the rest of the site, thus making more efficient use of the site than would otherwise be achieved if the church and other buildings were to be built on separate properties. Some of the programmed spaces in the church can be combined into two-story blocks,thus increasing the density of use without increasing the footprint of the building. 3) Design for lasting quality is integral to church design,because churches tend to build for the long term. A church is certainly a use that is compatible with the school to the west and with housing south of Coulter Blvd. Located between the school and the proposed office/warehouse buildings east and northeast of the church(two somewhat less compatible uses),it will act as a buffer between them. Architectural design standards for the HC-2 District will be addressed below. 4) The relationship of the church and its site to the Bluff Creek corridor creates an opportunity for incorporating park and trail enhancements. CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDINANCE No. 212-HIGHWAY CORRIDOR DISTRICTS, Sec. 20-1454. Architectural Design Standards a) Monotony is prohibited(!) As described above,the massing and scale of the different building components envisioned in the church's master plan will mitigate against monotony and create ample opportunities for variation in colors,textures, shapes, rhythms,heights,detailing,the play of light and shadow,etc. b) The building height limit of three stories or forty feet will not be exceeded,with the probable exception of the Assembly Space-but this is not unusual. c) Quality of materials-the exterior appearance of the church as we envision it at this time is this: A combination of brick,decorative block,and/or stucco on outside walls; metal clad,standing seam roof or heavy-duty asphalt shingles on sloping roofs;ballasted, single-ply EPDM roofing membrane on low-slope roofs,with parapats at the perimeter;clerestory window openings in the Assembly Space;a combination of window groupings alternating with areas of unfenestrated wall;varying roof lines and parapet heights. The only`emblematic' feature on the building,aside from the shape and scale of the Assembly Space,will likely be a roof cross or steeple. Use of`garish' elements or colors will be avoided. d) Any outdoor equipment and refuse(dumpster)areas will be screened from public rights-of-way. Sec. 20-1455. Landscape Design and Site Furnishings a) Preserve natural or existing topographic patterns-addressed above. b) Parking and sidewalks will comply with ADA. c) Preserve and enhance natural features-also addressed above. d) We will strive to keep lighting levels as low as possible, consistent with the intended effect. With the help of setbacks,light will not fall directly on adjacent properties. 1 1 1 1 lI1.1 il a ` IIl ; l II I – \ ' I` – I 1 ,__ " � w! ! I 1 , 1 • IW / a 1 I I -\-\ 11 /'i..C.-1---::::-- -.— ...-.- _, /1-.1 1:— - -'''.. --'-. . '1..IT I ill 11 till : 101- -- - t ! J` J il 141, 4 a It'e.____/I ::/.....LI _ t- / .1 iill " ty 1 •! _ - - — (:.:— I ;� €'EE I 1I — R'^ ' / • r Y Yuf I I til lu _ - , — t 1 ;/l //_ '\ LLJ ITM 1 r tx 1 - J' ��G.. / 1 yl•I .rMy ,✓ �.. \ . Ii V ! L�� \ 11 I'll Ti� L,'' - ,1 1 --L1111 / 1 111 II1 ��i! '-•0 \ . RI t \ I r/ 1 \ \\ I'1 !# ' s \ \ fI Ii, c-- , \ 1 p1 a 11 1I 1 1I f�� \ \ ip � \ � I 4i.'7 i s I I II 1 1/ / \ \ \ \ \\- - ___I � I 2V .-,,- 1 I I I1 i 1 \ ,4+\\ – _ ) 1 I, 1 1111 1 g \ ...„2„ , _– _�►� 1` VUR' �\ I I Id I �. \��__ , \ / \ 1 II III 1 — '' \\ , `ip� I { \ i 1 1 I li i s9! 1 I ii \ t \ t1\ n \ I\ \ , I I I I j \ \ , l I III 4 '1 5. . 1 1 1 I t i;; g . !i 1 s f4 8 `a _.l g 8 g x . ��P�.of mitis, SOTS ��► Minnesota Department of Natural Resources m Metro Waters- 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 '�- Akio;oTelephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977 49'0F74,74,0 ;a November 20, 1997 Mr.Robert Generous ^ 2 5 1997 City of Chanhassen _ 690 Coulter Drive,P.O.Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55317 RE: PLANNING CASE: 97-2 PUD,BLUFF CREEK,CITY OF CHANHASSEN,CARVER COUNTY Dear Mr. Generous: We have reviewed the site plans dated October 1997(received November 5, 1997)for the above-referenced proposal and have the following comments to offer during this conceptual stage: 1. Public water Bluff Creek is on the west side of the proposed development. Any activity below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation, which alters the course, current or cross-section of protected waters or wetlands, is under the jurisdiction of DNR and may require a DNR protected waters permit. For watercourses the OHW is the top of the bank of the channel. A tributary to Bluff Creek,which runs along the east side of the proposed development,is not a DNR Protected watercourse. 2. There may be wetlands on the site that are not under DNR jurisdiction,for example the proposed floodplain ponding sites. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be consulted regarding pertinent federal regulations for activities in wetlands. In addition,impacts to these wetlands should be evaluated by the city in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. 3. We strongly recommend that the proposed structures meet the minimum required setbacks expected be implemented by the City in the near future in order to help ensure that future development is consistent with the City's management plans for the Bluff Creek corridor. The development of the City's Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan was a cooperative effort involving City citizens and staff, with input from many agencies. Immediate implementation of the City's plan will help to ensure that the natural resources within the Bluff Creek corridor are preserved. In addition,it was unclear in the site plan where the structure setbacks were being measured from on the creek. The Watershed District measures setbacks from the center of the creek and the City's shoreland regulations measure from the OHW,which is the top of the bank of the channel on a creek. 4. Federal,state and local floodplain regulations need to be addressed in the floodplain of Bluff Creek and the tributary to Bluff Creek Some degree of encroachment may be allowed by the City's and Watershed District's regulations,however,consideration must be given to the intent of the City's Bluff Creek Plan. Since any net encroachment on the floodplain adds to the cumulative impact downstream,serious consideration should be given to avoiding such encroachment. Also,since increases in flood and base flows in Bluff Creek could have very detrimental impacts on the steep,erodible portions of the creek downstream,the development should have no net increase in the peak flows from the site relative to pre-development conditions. It would be preferable if the there were no increase in the volume of runoff also.The proposed pond in the floodplain,while it may be adequate to meet water quality requirements,will not be adequate for flood water retention purposes. DNR Information:612-296-6157. 1-800-766-6000 • TTY:612-296-5484. 1-800-657-39229 An Equal Opportumt}Entplo}er If Printed on Rec clod Paper Containing a Who Values Dtsersntia Minimum of 10'i Post-Consumer Waste Mr. Bob Generous November 21, 1997 Page 2 5. The plans note a building to land ratio of 18.36%. The impervious surface that needs to be calculated to determine if the plan is consistent with the limits in the City's regulations would include buildings,parking lots, private roads,etc. Also,the portion of the land area that is with in the shoreland district(the area that is within 300'of the stream or the landward extent of the 100-year floodplain boundary,which ever is greater) should be evaluated in the same manner to be sure that it is compliant with the City's shoreland ordinance. 6. It should be noted that this parcel has been rezoned from a low density residential use to a higher density PUD zone as a result of the Highway 5 corridor study. While we agree that the higher density zoning is appropriate adjacent to Highway 5,it should not be at the expense of the Bluff Creek corridor. The development needs to maintain a balance between maximizing the use of this Highway corridor site with maintaining the integrity of Bluff Creek. For example,the proposers should be commended for the proposed development's compatible uses which allow for sharing parking spaces,thus optimizing the use of the site with less overall impact. 7. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments: a. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan and Soil and Water Conservation Districts)guidelines,or their equivalent,should be followed. b. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is needed. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. c. Construction activities which disturb five acres of land,or more, are required to apply for a stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(Dan Sullivan @ 296-7219). d. The comments in this letter address DNR-Division of Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack thereof for a particular project. Please contact Hydrologist Patty Peltier or me at 772-7910 should you have questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist CCS/PP/ c: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District,Bob Obermeyer CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: November 19, 1997 SUBJ: Request for a conceptual PUD approval for an office/industrial project which would permit a church/institutional use on property located south of Highway 5 and north of Coulter Boulevard at Stone Creek Drive on 27.3 acres, Land Group, Inc. and Bluff Creek Partners, Bluff Creek Corporate Center. Planning Case 97-2 PUD. I have 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 review is done 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 clear 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 ensure 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 fire water service coming into the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal or Fire Inspector for exact location. 3. An additional fire hydrant will be required near the church main entrance. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of hydrant. 4. 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 time of construction. Pursuant to Minnesota Uniform Fire Code 1991 Sect. 10-502. 5. "No parking"fire lane signs and yellow curbing shall be provided. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations of signage and painted curbing. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy#06-1991. Copy enclosed. 6. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within jurisdiction when any portion of the facility,or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building, is located more than 150 feet from Mr. Robert Generous November 19, 1997 Page 2 apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exception: I) When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic sprinkler system the provisions of this section may be modified by the Chief. 2) When access roads cannot be installed due to topography,waterways, non negotiable grades or other similar conditions,the Chief is authorized to require additional fire protection as specified in Section 10.501 (b). Note: As building plans become available we will review the plan to determine if standpipes are required in any portion of the building due to the fact that we cannot achieve 150 foot access of all portions of the building. g:\safety\m I\plrev97-2 NOV-10-1997 15 38 MINNEGASCO-NCCS 612 321 5573 P.01/01 ro17E - rE"OR" ?Rati'Sh1?55Ibti START=JOU-E7 14:32 5A).. :J-67 14151 F:LE NO.= 114 NC_ Cal PBEC/NTLK S;CT[ON N`a`1_/ FP.S PR:3.40. PRQGRPr NAlE TELEP-ONE Nn. s 5 022/231 022 OK g 95=75739 021/231 -re:N I_3 S_1-NCCSlelop * **., **a.**A,:,,, ***vas*** Mx re - **mom - 612 M1 551A - 1 ° .04Y134 agronana &R Date: 11/7/97 To: Chanhassen Robert Generous Phone #: 612-937-1900 Fax #: 612-937-5739 From: Minnegasco Robert Huffman Phone: 612-321-5527 Fax: 612-321-5573 Pages: Including Cover _0_ - Subject: Bluff Creek Corporate Center Gas is available in this area of Chanhasen to serve the needs of this project per tariff. TOTAL P.G1 CITY QF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official . DATE: November 21, 1997 SUBJECT: 97-2 PUD(Bluff Creek Corporate Center, Land Group, Inc. and Bluff Creek Partners) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, OCT 31 19 9 7 , CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT" for the above referenced project. I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. g:\safety\sak\memos\plan\B-Ccntr l NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �� 111�1 I,& ���Ea ial .y1.1 I PLANNING COMMISSION I ' " %jUIluuuiuup1 IIILW49 unIiii Wednesday, December 3, 1997 "'� at 7:00 p.m. CityHall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive e ,,,,,,. 14.4 4111 — - -••:--7---_,A IN ___.: SUBJECT: Conceptual Planned Unit '� ` Development for Bluff Creek o, Corporate Center ` .t p *Land Inc. and Bluff CreekI jr APPLICANT. Group, Partners � `Cio��•o, miTi 41 LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Coulter :1,/:�l Blvd. at Stone Creek Drive lo Ilirng111"4 •••11 r'A_or%.1,A 3 1 77A/ NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Land Group, Inc. and Bluff Creek Partners, are requesting conceptual planned unit development for an office industrial project which would permit a church/institutional use on property located south of Hwy. 5, north of Coulter Boulevard at Stone Creek Drive on 27.3 acres. 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 at 937-1900 ext. 141. 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 November 20, 1997. k ,1 J 7 IICHAELJ GORRA 680 ARBORETUM DR ;HANHASSEN, MN 55317 \RRY&ELIZABETH VANDEVEIRE 390 CO RD 10 E HASKA, MN 55318 ITY OF CHANHASSEN 90 COULTER DR .HANHASSEN, MN 55317 'ILLSBURY 000 AUDUBON ROAD ;HANHASSEN, MN 55317 ;HAMROCK PROPERTY PARTNERS 350 COMMERCE LN 'RIDLEY. MN 55432 'RINCE R NELSON '801 AUDUBON RD :HANHASSEN. MN 55317 v1ARK J FOSTER& 3020 ACORN LN ;,HANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD D & MARY A FRASCH 3000 ACORN LN CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 CENTEX HOMES 12400 WHITEWATER DR. #120 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 CITY QF 101 '.14- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 _ CHANHASSEN (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 eta MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: November 25, 1997 SUBJ: Bluff Creek Overlay District Over the last few months the Planning Commission has been reviewing the draft of the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The public hearing is to provide for all comments on the proposed ordinance The purpose of this Overlay District is to protect the corridor including wetlands, bluffs and significant stands of mature trees. The intent is to promote development patterns that reduce the impervious coverage, resulting in large areas of the site being left as permanent open space. A copy of the ordinance was sent to the Twin Cities Builders Association. Notice was also • given to property owners in the Bluff Creek Watershed. Staff is recommending the Planning Commission approve the adoption of the ordinance to the City Council. 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2 CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES,MINNESOTA 3 4 ORDINANCE NO. (DRAFT#4) 5 6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 18 AND 20 OF THE 7 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING AND 8 SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES, ESTABLISHING THE BLUFF CREEK 9 OVERLAY DISTRICT 10 11 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: 12 13 SECTION 1. Section 18-40 (2) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 14 subparagraph k. to read: 15 16 k. Within the BCO district, the application shall also include: 17 18 a. Identified boundaries of the Primary Zone and Secondary Zone on a 19 drawing depicting existing conditions and on a site plan depicting the 20 proposed development pattern. 21 22 b. Calculations and/or drawings that identify the allowable density (number 23 of units or building coverage) under the Chanhassen City Code including 24 lands lying in the Primary and Secondary Zone. Calculation of allowable 25 density shall specifically exclude lands classified as bluffs, flood plains 26 and designated wetlands. Calculation of allowable impervious cover may 27 include bluffs and flood plains but shall specifically exclude designated 28 wetlands. 29 30 SECTION 2. Section 18-64 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the a 31 paragraph to read: 32 33 Within the BCO District, meet the additional purpose, intent and standards of the BCO 34 District. 35 36 SECTION 3. Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the 37 following definitions: 38 39 Cluster Development means a pattern of development that arranges the layout of 40 buildings on a compact area of the site so as to reserve a portion of the site for common 41 open space or green space that is protected in perpetuity. 42 43 1 1 Ecosystem means a community of interacting animals, plants and microorganisms and the 2 physical and chemical environment in which they live. 3 4 Natural Habitat Area means an area that is characterized by being primarily in a natural 5 state, with only minor evidence of disturbance from modern human activity. Natural 6 habitat areas may include forests, wetlands, or endangered or threatened species habitat. 7 8 Primary Zone means the buffer zone that directly impacts Bluff Creek and/or its 9 tributaries. The primary zone, which is generally delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed 10 Natural Resources Management Plan, is intended to be preserved as permanent open 11 space. (Map to be added) 12 13 Secondary Zone means the buffer zone that contains habitat areas that are valuable to the 14 delicate balance of the Bluff Creek ecosystem. The secondary zone, which is generally 15 delineated in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan, is subject 16 to development limitations in order to minimize the impact of new development on the 17 Primary Zone. (Map to be added) 18 19 SECTION 4. Section 20-201 of the Chanhassen Code is amended by adding the 20 following special district: 21 22 BCW, Bluff Creek Watershed District 23 24 SECTION 5. Section 20-106 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 25 subparagraph (7) to read: 26 27 (7) Within the BCW district, meet the additional purpose, intent and standards of the 28 BCW district. 29 30 SECTION 6. Section 20-109 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 31 subparagraph (7) to read: 32 33 (7) Within the BCW district, the application shall also include: 34 35 A. Identified boundaries of the Primary Zone and Secondary Zone on a 36 drawing depicting existing conditions and on a site plan depicting the 37 proposed development pattern. 38 39 B. Calculations and/or drawings that identify the allowable density(number 40 of units or building coverage) under the Chanhassen City Code including 41 lands lying in the Primary and Secondary Zone. Calculation of allowable 42 density shall specifically exclude lands classified as bluffs, flood plains 43 and designated wetlands. Calculation of allowable impervious cover may 2 1 include bluffs and flood plains but shall specifically exclude designated 2 wetlands. 3 4 SECTION 7. Section 20-110 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding 5 subparagraph (8) to read: 6 7 (8) Within the BCW district, consistency with the purpose, intent and standards of the 8 BCW district. 9 10 SECTION 8. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Article 11 XXX to read: 12 13 14 ARTICLE XXX. BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT 15 16 DIVISION 1, BCO DISTRICT 17 18 Section 20- 1460 Purpose. 19 20 The Bluff Creek Watershed Area and the development within it have a major influence 21 on environmental quality in the City and the region. Development within the corridor must be 22 designed with utmost sensitivity to the environment and the development pattern must be of a 23 quantity and quality other than what might occur in the absence of specific standards. The 24 purpose of the District is to: 25 26 (a) Protect the Bluff Creek corridor, wetlands,bluffs, and significant stands of mature trees 27 through the use of careful site design, protective covenants, sensitive alignment and design of 28 roadways and utilities, incorporation of natural features, landscaping, techniques outlined in the 29 City's Surface Water Management Plan, and the practices delineated in the City's Best 30 Management Practices Handbook. 31 32 (b) Encourage a development pattern that allows people and nature to mix spanning multiple 33 ecosystems. Development in the corridor should be ecologically designed and built around 34 natural features such as trees, wetlands, and bluffs. Significant natural features should impact 35 development rather than development impacting significant natural features. The natural 36 qualities of the corridor should be preserved to ensure sufficient habitat area for wildlife. 37 38 (c) Promote innovative development techniques such as cluster development and open space 39 subdivisions to measurably reduce the amount of impervious cover compared to traditional 40 development practices resulting in significant portions of a site being retained as permanent, 41 protected open space. 42 43 3 1 (d) Foster the creation of a greenway connecting Lake Minnewashta Regional Park and the 2 Minnesota River Valley. The greenway will serve as an uninterrupted pedestrian trail, bikeway 3 system, and wildlife corridor affording opportunities for recreation, education, physical fitness 4 and transportation. 5 6 (e) Encourage cost effective site development. Open space design practices can reduce 7 infrastructure engineering and construction costs because of lot configurations, shortened streets, 8 and reduced utility runs Long term cost savings can also be realized by the City of Chanhassen 9 associated with infrastructure maintenance costs. 10 11 (f) Implement the policies and recommendations found in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural 12 Resources Management Plan. The terms, definitions and appendicies found in the Management 13 Plan are incorporated herein. 14 15 Sec. 20- 1461 Intent. 16 17 The City intends that all development within the district should blend into the natural 18 environment while protecting Bluff Creek and sensitive land areas abutting and in the vicinity of 19 the watercourse and its tributaries. The criteria by which new development in the district shall be 20 judged are as follows: 21 22 (a) Consistency with all provisions of the Comprehensive Plan which includes the Bluff 23 Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan, as amended from time to time; the 24 Surface Water Management Plan; all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision 25 Ordinance not specifically overridden by the provisions of this district; and all other applicable 26 land use regulations. 27 28 (b) Preservation of the natural conditions found in the Primary Zone and to the greatest 29 extent possible, preserving significant resources and minimizing impacts in the Secondary Zone 30 through cluster development and other practices which minimize the removal of vegetation, 31 minimize site grading, and application of practices found in the City's Best Management 32 Practices Handbook. 33 34 (c) Creation of a suitable balance between the amount and arrangement of open space, 35 landscaping, view protection, bluff protection, and vegetation protection and the design and 36 function of man-made features. 37 38 (d) Creation of an interconnected open space network that preserves migratory patterns for 39 wildlife. 40 41 (e) Creation of an interconnected open space network that provides recreational and 42 educational opportunities for people. 43 4 1 Sec. 20— 1462 District Application. 2 3 The BCW district shall be applied or superimposed (overlaid) upon all zoning districts as 4 contained herein as existing or amended by the text and map of this ordinance. The regulations 5 and requirements imposed by the BCW district shall be in addition to those established for 6 districts which jointly apply. Under the joint application of the districts, the more restrictive 7 requirements shall apply. 8 9 Sec. 20- 1463 Boundary Delineation. 10 11 (a) Generally. Primary and Secondary Zones shall be subject to the requirements established 12 herein, as well as restrictions and requirements established by other applicable city ordinances 13 and regulations. The Bluff Creek Watershed regulations shall not be construed to allow anything 14 otherwise prohibited in the zoning district where the overlay district applies. 15 16 (b) Boundaries; maps. The Primary and Secondary zones include land that is generally 17 defined in this article and in the Bluff Creek Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. 18 Boundaries as established by officially adopted city maps shall be prima facie evidence of the 19 location and type of watershed zone. The official maps shall be developed and maintained by the 20 planning department. The applicant shall provide appropriate technical information, including 21 but not limited to, a topographical survey, flora and fauna survey and soil data deemed necessary 22 for the city to determine the exact watershed zone boundary. The planning director shall make a 23 determination to maintain the officially designated watershed zone boundary or if the boundaries 24 need to be corrected on city plans and maps based upon the data that is supplied. Data for 25 watershed zone delineation shall be generated and provided by a qualified professional 26 specializing in watershed management, environmental science or other related profession. The 27 applicant may appeal the planning director's determination of the watershed zone boundary and 28 type to the city council. 29 30 Sec. 20 - 1464 Impervious Cover and Slopes. 31 32 To the greatest extent possible, all development shall minimize the amount of impervious 33 surface by clustering development, using common access drives and utility corridors and 34 minimizing building footprint size. Roads, walkways, bike trails, and parking areas must be 35 designed parallel to natural contours with consideration to maintaining consolidated areas of 36 natural topography and vegetation. Management of surface run-off caused by impervious cover 37 shall be designed using practices delineated in the city's Best Management Practices Handbook. 38 39 Within the Secondary Zone of the BCW district, areas with average slopes exceeding 25% 40 shall be preserved in their natural state and maintained as permanent open space. Areas with 41 average slopes less than 25% but greater than 10% shall not exceed an impervious surface 42 coverage of 25%. Impervious coverage for areas where average slopes are less than 10% shall be 43 governed by the underlying zoning district. 5 1 2 Sec. 20- 1465 Bluffs. 3 4 Bluffs shall be preserved as provided for under Article XXVIII. 5 6 Sec. 20- 1466 Site Views. 7 8 Through environmentally sensitive design such as "terrain adaptive architecture"(see Figure 9 1.), landscaping and site planning, site views both to and from the BCW district shall be 10 preserved and enhanced to the greatest extent possible so as to maintain views that reflect and 11 protect the natural beauty of the BCW District. Special attention should be given to views that 12 are highly accessible to the public such as scenic overlooks, ridges and trails. Clustering of 13 development away from natural overlooks is encouraged. Develop terrain-adaptive ; —` architecture for steep slopes. _- Un steeply sloping sites,the = 111•-{a �,"-,1"1:-fr propsed building should step =-__ 11 11 iit ' down the hillside. ,b•' ` S;:.•:„71_ '- - '-• - 0-1 Side garage access requires less p- `�' • site disturbance. inn Terrain-Adaptive Architecture 14 15 Figure 1. "Published in APA PAS Report#466" 16 17 18 Sec. 20 - 1467 Density Clustering. 19 20 Density clustering shall be allowed as a tool to facilitate cluster development within the 21 Bluff Creek corridor. Density clustering may be used in areas where portions of the site are 22 unsuitable for development because of the location of the Primary Corridor. Density clustering 23 shall not be allowed for areas that are otherwise considered unbuildable due to wetlands, lakes 24 and other areas not suitable for building purposes. 25 26 27 In areas where density clustering is applicable, density may be transferred to unconstrained parts 28 of the site within land included in the Secondary Corridor, subject to the restrictions of this 29 ordinance, and within land lying outside of identified corridor areas. Additionally, the following 30 conditions may qualify for density clustering: 31 6 1 a) Land slopes in the Secondary Zone that exceed 25% on average. 2 3 b) Land in the Secondary Zone containing stands of native trees. 4 5 c) Land with suitable natural habitat to endangered or threatened species or a fragile 6 ecosystem. ! vc----z,,._...: ---,t, F.T.---i: • _ ardsaeokyical !tea 10....F �Lf 14 . • AC?%-.. - _..e�`�-' -ie sons \ — -'.- ...,, . I ,Jr...1.10. --' • , - :+..•} 41 .- .,. , v" i ,.0.: � _ y ---- • a 1 a v..1::41_,..... ....43,0 I ligiall# tit . • .... _...1 7. '''. -Z). 1 Nikleill • a Aeld a 2.-*_\,,A,,,#- c_ \ i. �! _ •,...... wetland! , ' floodplain - A ` creek • 7 Traditional Development Pattern "Designing Open Space Subdivisions, Randall Arendt" 8 9 — —__ • _�� archaeological ' 1*T' ellken•dan•gered site '- -;.'• -;`. Y ief ..♦ .S •>a •til e•a,. ' Jy � r.l'_.. ":'--*:...''''''::::-...-7;'--!-,•,--F,,OIfJ 1. .Q �'� ,. n . .,•••: i. .aVQ 1.r-i. upland er ' •••y. ,s•�N.w 14,3 1:.C: T�Q '" .woods_................... � '` . �.•. -. � • • a ' Lon ._ �i-ry;:�:, . � ,j1 467.: .1 1_40--. .. • traits�� .: ? �. .2T, The / trails : • •� �:µ , _ awp, Green.:� . y . . ' I: -medow° :_ . 4* $ r1.oaos— s '°= t ./__ e tlands loo-year,-- •' -'-'-`-'7. '"- — ---="-----':".-----•• • .floodplain Community" creek -- —s • Dock -T— - 10 Cluster Development "Designing Open Space Subdivisions, Randall Arendt" 11 7 1 2 Sec. 20— 1468 Standards and Guidelines for Single-Family Attached or Cluster-Home 3 PUDs. 4 5 Single-family attached,cluster, zero lot line, and similar dwelling types shall only be allowed 6 on sites designed for low, medium or high density residential uses by the City of Chanhassen 7 Comprehensive Plan. 8 9 Sec. 20- 1469 Natural Habitat Preservation. 10 11 a) Natural habitat areas within the Primary Zone shall be preserved as permanent open 12 space. Any development that occurs shall be directly related to the continuous greenway along 13 the creek from the Minnesota River to Lake Minnewashta as outlined in the Bluff Creek 14 Watershed Natural Resources Management Plan. 15 16 b) Where possible, any disturbances of natural habitat areas within the Secondary Zone shall 17 be avoided. Any alterations to the natural habitat within the Secondary Zone shall adhere to the 18 practices delineated in the city's Best Management Practices Handbook. 19 20 Sec. 20 - 1470 Natural Habitat Restoration Plan 21 22 If natural habitat areas located within the Secondary Zone will be disturbed during any stage 23 of development, the applicant shall submit a detailed plan identifying the resources that will be 24 disturbed and a corresponding restoration and/or mitigation plan. Such restoration might include 25 wetland mitigation and replanting of habitat significant to endangered and threatened species. 26 27 Sec. 20- 1471 Open Space Requirements. 28 29 Open space shall comprise 100% of the area located within the Primary Zone. The City will 30 establish the boundary for the Primary Zone using data provided by the applicant. 31 32 Sec. 20- 1472 Structure Setbacks. 33 34 All structures shall be setback a minimum of 40 feet from the Primary Zone. No disturbance 35 of the site shall occur within the first 20 feet of such setback. 36 37 SECTION 9. The boundaries of the district established by this chapter are delineated on the 38 zoning map; the map and all notations, references, and date shown thereon are hereby adopted 39 and made part of this chapter and will be on permanent file for public inspection at the 40 Chanhassen City Hall. 41 42 SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and 43 publication. 8 1 2 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED on this day of December, 1997, by the City Council of the 4 City of Chanhassen. 5 6 ATTEST: 7 8 9 10 11 Don Ashworth, City Manager Nancy Mancino, Mayor 12 13 14 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ) 9 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED AMENDMENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, December 3, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive. The purpose of this hearing is to review a proposed amendment to Chapter 18, Subdivision Ordinance and Chapter 20, Zoning Ordinance, establishing Bluff Creek Watershed Overlay District. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Kathryn R. Aanenson, Planning Director Phone: 937-1900, ext. 118 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on November 20, 1997) • A '' _ GILBERT P & MARGARET C LAURENT Owner STEVEN F & KATHLEEN M BURKE TRUSTEES OF TRUST 9591 MEADOWLARK LN Ownadr 24760 CEDAR POINT RD Owncty, Locational PRAGUE, MN 56071 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8693 NEMICHAEL J & LISA A REILLY TRUSTEES DEAN & LOIS DEGLER RICHARD J CHADWICK TRUST 9111 AUDUBON RD 9530 FOXFORD RD 2305 INDIAN RIDGE DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9412 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8681 GLENVIEW, IL 60025 LAWRENCE C & ELIZABETH KLEIN DENNIS M MILLS DAVID 0 HANSEN 9170 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 9510 FOXFORD RD 108 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8606 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8681 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8659 JEFFREY A & TERRI L FOX TRUSTEES OF LAKE RILEY WOODS HOMEOWNERS WILLIAM T & CAROL ANN GRAY TRUST FUND 1660 HWY 100 S SUITE 428 50 PIONEER TRL 5270 HOWARDS PT RD MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 8368 DOUGLAS BERGESON WILLIAM J & PAMELA ANN O'NEILL PAUL M & DAWN M PEARSON 9201 AUDUBON RD 9550 FOXFORD RD 601 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9412 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8681 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DAVID R & MARY B BLANSKI RICHARD A & JOANNE M LAMETTRY STEPHEN L WHITEHILL 9350 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 9490 FOXFORD RD 6247 INDIAN MEADOW CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8606 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ORLANDO, FL 32819 ROBERT & MARGUERITE PETERSON THOMAS M & CHERYL L JESSEN RALPH E FREUDENBERG 9250 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 9570 FOXFORD RD 631 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8606 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8602 GEORGE & C ST MARTIN DAVID P & KAREN L DAOUST MICHAEL T & TERESA A MONK 9231 AUDUBON RD 9470 FOXFORD RD 9671 MEADOWLARK LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9412 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8695 PATRICK A & LAURENE FARRELL WILLIAM S HENAK & KRISTIN ALLERS TIMOTHY A & DAWNE M ERHART 801 LYMAN BLVD 280 EASTWOOD CT 9611 MEADOWLARK LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8695 BRUCE JEURISSEN WILLIAM L & LINDA C JANSEN HAROLD L & VIRGINIA SIEVERS 1500 PIONEER TRL 240 EASTWOOD CT 9491 FOXFORD RD CHASKA, MN 55318 1147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8687 DUANE D & SUSAN S HOFF KENNETH N POTTS & KAREN KING-POTTS RONALD R & LINDA M LANDIN 3511 FOXFORD RD 9431 FOXFORD RD 710 96TH ST W 2HANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8687 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8603 °AUL J & MARY M MARTIN ROBERT G & SUSAN I MCCARGER ROLLIN & LINDA FAHNING 610 FOXFORD RD 9450 FOXFORD RD 720 96TH ST W HANHASSEN, MN 55317 8688 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8686 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8603 AYNE A & BONNIE J KINION MATTHEW J & CHARLENE M THILL WESLEY & CAROL DUNSMORE 451 FOXFORD RD 9610 MEADOWLARK LN 730 96TH ST W HANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8694 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8603 TAMES & ARLENE J CHURCH STEVEN R & JILL L SHIPLEY PAUL H JEURISSEN ;11 96TH ST W 261 EASTWOOD CT 750 96TH ST W :HANHASSEN, MN 55317 8602 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ;TEPHEN J & COLEEN M WILKER STEVEN R MCCLINTICK & JUANITA D CHARLES E & SANDRA R WORM ;21 96TH ST W MCCLINTICK 760 96TH ST W :HANHASSEN, MN 55317 9551 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8682 ..AWRENCE CHASE & CATHERINE KIRK CHASE WILLIAM L & LYNN H STOKKE STEVEN J & SANDRA R KADISAK '01 96TH ST W 241 EASTWOOD CT 810 PIONEER TRL :HANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8683 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8673 IICHARD A & BETTY A DERHAAG ROGER A & KIMBERLY A LEE KEVIN J & PATRICIA A ELLSWORTH '11 96TH ST W 600 96TH ST W 9601 FLINTLOCK TRL :HANHASSEN, MN 55317 8603 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8601 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 IILLIAM F HEINLEIN WALTER & VIRGINIA R WARREN ROBERT F ERLER & JULIE K MILLER-ERI 721 96TH ST W 610 96TH ST W 9600 FLINTLOCK TRL :HANHASSEN, MN 55317 8603 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8601 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ;ARY J & MARY LANE BENDZICK KENNETH G & MARY R PUNG BRAD D & BARBARA J BAKLUND 131 96TH ST W 620 96TH ST W 9650 FLINTLOCK TRL 2HANHASSEN, MN 55317 8603 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8601 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TOHN W & KATHERINE ANDERSON THEODORE B & KAREN K HASSE JAMES L & JANET P BROWNELL 1531 FOXFORD RD 630 96TH ST W 1190 HOMESTEAD WAY 'HANHASSEN, MN 55317 8682 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8601 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8612 DAVID D & STEPHANIE J VIEAU ANDREW P GINDER LEGRAN HOMES INC 901 HOMESTEAD LN 9821 DEERBROOK DR 1521 94TH LN NE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8609 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8550 BLAINE, MN 55449 ARLIS L & MARGARET OLSON CARVER COUNTY JEFFREY R & BARBARA C MICHELL 9370 FOXFORD RD 600 4TH ST E 9961 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8684 CHASKA, MN 55318 2102 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8552 RICHARD S & KATHERINE S ASPLIN BLUFF CREEK GOLF ASSOC DENIS C & MARY E DUKER 541 PINEVIEW CT 1905 CONCORDIA ST 9940 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WAYZATA, MN 55391 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8551 MAGDY A & JUNE L EBRAHIM DONALD J & ROSEMARIE DUDYCHA PAUL & DEBORAH GRAFFUNDER 4617 GRAND AVE S 9820 DEERBROOK DR 10001 GREAT PLAINS BLVD MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8549 CHASKA, MN 55318 9466 ARTHUR B JOHNSON DENNIS J BARTHOLOW & CATHERINE S DAVID HALLA 3323 BAVARIA RD BARTHOLOW 10095 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA, MN 55318 9662 9841 DEERBROOK DR CHASKA, MN 55318 9466 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8550 LOWELL W PETERSON JOHN E & ANN LONSTEIN RICHARD W DENMAN 15900 HWY 169 9861 DEERBROOK DR 9960 DEERBROOK DR EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8551 RICHARD P VOGEL GREGORY J LAWLER PAUL S & LESLIE A YAGER 105 PIONEER TRL 9900 DEERBROOK DR 10071 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8660 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8551 CHASKA, MN 55318 9466 DAVID J & SHARON K GATTO JOHN M & LINDA J REVIER JIMMY M & MARY E ROANE 9631 FOXFORD RD 9881 DEERBROOK DR 9981 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8550 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8552 JAMES D & JANET M DINGEL GARY A KOCH PAUL TAUNTON 9351 FOXFORD RD 9901 DEERBROOK DR 9950 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8685 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8552 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8551 WENDELL & JACQUELINE SCHOTT JOHN S & JANE POULOS JONATHAN T & GAYE L GUYTON 7034 RED CEDAR CV 9921 DEERBROOK DR 1385 81ST ST EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 7795 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8552 VICTORIA, MN 55386 9646 WALTER G & CHRIS A ARNDT GARY & DEBRA ANDERSON LOREN P WHEELER 10151 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 725 CREEKWOOD 445 LAKOTA LN CHASKA, MN 55318 9469 CHASKA, MN 55318 9621 CHASKA, MN 55318 9457 'SALE & PEGGY GUNDERSON BRUCE & TINA PAUL DEVAL U & DATTA D MEDH 345 CREEKWOOD 10240 MANDAN CIR 535 LAKOTA LN :HASKA, MN 55318 9643 CHASKA, MN 55318 9401 CHASKA, MN 55318 9456 )AVID & CLARE JOHNSON RENEE L STRICKLAND JOHN J & J PHILLIPS ETAL 321 CREEKWOOD DR 10251 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 734 ASHLEY DR :HASKA, MN 55318 9643 CHASKA, MN 55318 9468 CHASKA, MN 55318 1539 JEFFREY & KATHLEEN DYPWICK DANIEL SCHAITBERGER & CATHERINE A NORMAN & KAROLINE L MONROE 10300 GREAT PLAINS BLVD SCHAITBERGER 565 LAKOTA LN PO BOX 115 ;HASKA, MN 55318 9467 10241 MANDAN CIR CHASKA, MN 55318 0115 CHASKA, MN 55318 9402 \NNE & CLARA VOGEL -a, Pa_ 1 VERNE L & SUSAN SEVERSON 315 CREEKWOOD DR , 10240 MANDAN CIR 675 LAKOTA LN :HASKA, MN 55318 9643 C kv. / M tiJ 5 5 31g CHASKA, MN 55318 9455 )ONALD E HALLA & SANDRA J CWAYNA RICHARD T HALVER MAYNARD C HAPPE iALLA 10271 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 495 LAKOTA LN L0000 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHASKA, MN 55318 9468 CHASKA, MN 55318 9457 :HASKA, MN 55318 9465 JAMES & JANET L SABINSKE GUY RONALD MUNDALE & MARIAN H MUNDALE RILEY PURGATORY BLF CRK WS C/O RAY HA 775 CREEKWOOD 460 MANDAN CIR 222 S 9TH ST #3300 :HASKA, MN 55318 9621 CHASKA, MN 55318 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 :ITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O CITY TREASURER JAMES E & GAIL E BECKER JAMES M & CHERYL A SULERUD 590 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 10291 MANDAN CIR 730 VOGELSBERG TRL :HANHASSEN, MN 55317 0147 CHASKA, MN 55318 9402 CHASKA, MN 55318 9461 DAVID R TEICH JOHN & ELAINE Z MALAKOWSKY LOIS A RIESGRAF 1217 SOUTH MONROE 10301 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 720 VOGELSBERG TRL SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 CHASKA, MN 55318 9467 CHASKA, MN 55318 9461 SPENCER L & GLORIA A BOYNTON JAMES E & R SUSAN PEDERSEN DEBRA L WENDORF 777 CREEKWOOD DR 10300 MANDAN CIR 740 VOGELSBURG TRL :HASKA, MN 55318 9621 CHASKA, MN 55318 9401 _ CHASKA, MN 55318 9461 ALLEN R ROTHE 750 VOGELSBERG TRL CHASKA, MN 55318 9461 TRACY OIL CO INC 11650 COURTHOUSE BLVD E INVER GROVE HGTS, MN 55075 LARRY HOPFENSPIRGER 7300 FRANCE AVE S SUITE 450 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435 EMERALD PROPERTIES PO BOX 260 CHASKA, MN 55318 0260 ALBERT & AUDREY THOLEN 1805 STOUGHTON AVE CHASKA, MN 55318 2215 DORSEY & DORSEY 1551 LYMAN BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9403 Jwner TIMOTHY K LEHNER & AMY A ROBERT E DRURY Dwnadr MUNSON LEHNER 575 FLYING CLOUD DR PO BOX 193 Jwncty, Location 470 FLYING CLOUD DR SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 CHASKA, MN 55318 9502 THOMAS W & BEATRICE I ZWIERS J MICHAEL SORENSON HAROLD F H 1111 DEUCE RD RT 2 BOX 187K 1425 F CREEK DR LKO, MN 55020 BELLE PLAINE, MN 56011 9305 C KA, MN 55318 9515 HOMAS W & BEAT I ZWIERS LE VERNE M VASSAR SKIP S COOK 11111 RD 285 FLYING CLOUD DR 15506 V GE WOODS DR Ss2CO3 MN 55020 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 EDE RAIRIE, MN 55347 HCMAS & BEATRICE ZWIERS TRACY OIL CO INC STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPT OF 390 267TH ST 11650 COURTHOUSE BLVD E TRANSPORTATION _ AKEVILLE, MN 55044 INVER GROVE HGTS, MN 55075 METRO SQUARE BLDG ?j 5 J;,V\ -1--r 44— ST PAUL, MN 55101 h31Vd. . EON C MESENBRINK THOMAS & BEATRICE ZWIERS STATE OF MINNESOTA D T OF 50 FLYING CLOUD DR 9390 267TH ST TRANSPORTAT MET ARE BLDG HASKA, MN 55318 9502 LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 PAUL, MN 55101 NITED STATES OF AMERICA FISH & TRACY OIL CO INC CHANHASSEN SPRINGS CO C/O ARNOLD ILDLIFEFEINBERG 11650 COURTHOUS E 'EDERAL BLDG FORT SNELLING INVE E HGT MN 55075 4725 EXCELSIOR BLVD T PAUL, MN 55111 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 ARLES L & LISA M DAVIDSON JACK BRAMBILLA LOUISE E ZAMJAHN ETAL C/O DAVID TABLES ZAMJAHN '40 FLYING CLOUD DR 550 VALLEY PARK DR 7506 ST :HASKA, MN 55318 9502 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 7506 77TH CHASKA, MN 55318 9600 )AN & VALERIE TESTER PATRICK BLOOD & NANCY LEE EMERALD PROPERTIES :30 FLYING CLOUD DR 718 3RD AVE WJ Pp 9'f PO BOX 260 :HASKA, MN 55318 9502 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 CHASKA, MN 55318 0260 THOMAS & BEATRICE ZWIERS HAROLD F HESSE UBA PARTNERSHIP '390 267TH ST 1425 BLUFF CREEK DR 7900 1ST AVE S ,AKEVILLE, MN 55044 CHASKA, MN 55318 9515 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420 'RACY K & HOLLIE D OLENE SKIP S COOK STATE OF MN-DNR TAX SPECIALIST :50 FLYING CLOUD DR 15506 VILLAGE WOODS DR 1201 E HWY 2 :HASKA, MN 55318 9502 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347 GRAND RAPIDS, MN 55744 NEIL A KLINGELHUTZ TIMOTHY A & LINDA M BLOUDEK ROBERT W SCHOEWE 9731 MEADOWLARK LN 1171 HOMESTEAD LN 9611 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8613 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8689 DOUGLAS M & LORI A RYNDA DAVID R & BEVERLY C ERICKSON DONALD B & CYNTHIA N DEAL 9411 FOXFORD RD 520 PINEVIEW CT 9390 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8687 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8684 DANIEL WHALEN MICHAEL P & HOLLY L HUNT JOSEPH M & ADRIENNE F CARRICA 9650 FOXFORD RD 9701 FLINTLOCK TRL 900 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8608 MICHAEL P WISE & BRENDA K DAVID A & SUSAN C GRAYSON KURT W PAPKE & SUSAN L ROGMAN PAP, SCHIEFFERT-WISE 540 PINEVIEW CT 1131 HOMESTEAD LN 9571 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WAYNE 0 & GAYLE D WENZLAFF THOMAS J & PAMELA R F WARTMAN RONALD J & MARY E RAISLEGER 1181 HOMESTEAD LN 9715 AUDUBON RD 1151 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8613 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9410 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RANDY L & MARY E REDETZKE STEVEN P & CARMEN R MCMEEN JOHN C & JACKIE J DANIELS 9700 FLINTLOCK TRL 9391 FOXFORD RD 1111 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8605 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8613 LOREN & KAREN HENRICKSON STEVEN J ZUMBUSCH & CHARLOTTE M THOMAS E & BRENDA L ANDERSON ZUMBUSCH 9651 FLINTLOCK TRL 9371 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8605 9700 MEADOWLARK LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL D & MONICA S WISTRAND ROGER G NOVOTNY CHARLOTTE E MORRISON 9670 MEADOWLARK LN 560 PINEVIEW CT 1051 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 8611 JOHNNIE J MEYERING & ELAINE A GERTKEN WILLIAM A & SHERYL M BARTHOLOW RICHARD J & PATRICIA A CARRUTH 1050 HOMESTEAD LN 1161 HOMESTEAD LN 1001 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOEL N & KATHY R MEYER MARK J & STARLA J DANIELSON JOHN E & CYNTHIA N HART 9410 FOXFORD RD 9751 MEADOWLARK LN 951 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 :ELEN SALDEN ETAL C/O ALFRED HESSE OTTO & DOROTHY KETTNER 100 KREEKWOOD RD 1791 STOUGHTON AVE HASKA, MN 55318 9384 CHASKA, MN 55318 2213 ANHASSEN SPRINGS CO C/O ARNOLD IRENE L PAHL :INBERG 13056 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR RT 3 25 EXCELSIOR BLVD SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 :NNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 'ATE OF MINNESOTA DEPT OF STEVEN M FINK tANSPORTATION 1915 STOUGHTON AVE :TRO SQUARE BLDG CHASKA, MN 55318 2217 ' PAUL, MN 55101 kRY W DUNGEY & GARY L BROWN LLP M A GEDNEY COMPANY 75 79TH ST W BOX 8 iANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHASKA, MN 55318 0008 CLFRED H JR & KATHLEEN DAHLKE 705 FLYING CLOUD DR HASKA, MN 55318 2432 CATE OF MINNESOTA IN TRUST /0 CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR 1800 FLYING CLOUD DR) 30 E. 4th Street laska, MN 55318 CRY W DUNGEY & GARY L BROWN LLP 75 79TH ST W {ANHASSEN, MN 55317 MMES L SOWLE JR 317 LARKSPUR LN 3INA, MN 55435 RENE L PAHL 3056 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR RT 3 HAKOPEE, MN 55379 )SEPH R & KATHIE J MONNENS 781 STOUGHTON AVE iASKA, MN 55318 2213 CITY QF CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 -�� . MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director DATE: November 25, 1997 SUBJ: Chanhassen Historical District The purpose of this document is to address issues raised by the City Council. This document is a draft only. The purpose of this review is to discuss the issues and decide the next coarse of action. Please review and be prepared to discuss any issues you may have. City Council Meeting-October 27, 1997 Councilman Mason: I will move approval of the 1997 Livable Communities Act with the changes as proposed in the staff report. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the 1997 Livable Communities Act with the changes proposed in the staff report. All voted in favor and the motion carried. DISCUSSION OF DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The purpose of bringing this before you tonight is several. One, I wanted 9'1✓ you just to kind of review the elements of the document. Kind of the boundaries that I established. The scoping of the document,and then review with you the procedure I'd like to take with it. And this should really go back to the Planning Commission for their review if they could,and have a public hearing and then be brought back before you. ...kind of go through the document itself. This came about based on the,being precipitated by St. Hubert's moving and the change,possible change in use of the old St. Hubert's building. And it kind of changes the character of the neighborhood with the removal of the old Paulys/ Pony/Pryzmus site so with that Council wanted to look at what kind of this being the historic area. The centennial. We moved the railroad depot down there. Should we look at some architectural standards? So based on that we tried to develop a study area...really this is the core that's down there and try to label the uses that are down there. Give the existing, kind of the character to the area. There's a couple of documents that come into play with this. One was the Vision 2002. Some of you may have been involved in the process that kind of talked about what we're trying to do with the downtown and focus on this as the historic area of the city and what that means as far as the community's culture and how do we maintain that. Whether it's architecture or types of uses that you want to allow in that district. Some of the designs that you want to do to maintain that. Proximity to the street. Some of the same things we're trying to do in the downtown corridor itself. Also the comprehensive plan speaks to this area. The fact that we should try to preserve the structures. While there isn't a lot of architectural significance.really the ones would be the Village Hall and the Old St. Hubert's. The rest of them...have historic significance based on the fact of use of the building itself. And we do have better pictures of photo copies didn't go the greatest job on that but we have a pictorial essay of all the buildings that are down there just to give you an idea, kind of give you a flavor of design of the buildings themselves. What's down there. Starting on page 4,just try to go through the existing uses that are down there...future land uses and some possible alternatives. Again this is something I want the Planning Commission to go through. I know...park and rec desires for some open space down... The Planning Commission may have some different concerns so we'll kind of shift through that part of the hearing process and come back to you with more specific alternatives on the different designs. Such as the Colonial Center. We talked about that being an extension of the Medical Arts facility and moving that building forward. St. Hubert's,as you're aware, has several different opportunities,whether it retain a private religious school or even we've heard talk of maybe being senior housing facility. And also...introduce more residential property on the Schlenk property which that's guided for. And then the old Klingelhutz building down there which is historic in the fact that the date of the building,but if that was to go away,what should be the use on that and could that be something architecturally significant. Again,we talked about the Pony/Pauly/Pryzmus site. Whether or not we want to form that corner...or maybe a pocket park and how useful that would be and how that should be presented. And then also I included the original...we've had a lot of requests for that to be commercial and the staff's position on that. Then also I just kind of gave a brief description of some designs that could be...recommendations that the Planning Commission wanted to do like an overlay or if they saw architectural. Maybe it's just some certain designs that they wan:to put in. To add to the building that would go with the area 38 City Council Meeting-October 27, 1997 remodeling because St. Hubert's wouldn't change. What would we want architecturally to be reflected on that building? Then I just included some different design ideas on the last pages like the residential, the Schlenk property. I think that'd be really,we talked about that being senior housing...cemetery. That would be nice. We want to maintain,we've got some nice old housing stock at that end of the city. Mayor Mancino: Senior housing proximity to the cemetery. Councilman Senn: I can tell you,I've already been through that argument once. Kate Aanenson: Well we thought it'd be nice to keep the residential character and not introduce...so it's close to downtown and it makes sense. And also just to show you some other pictures of street furniture, landscaping and how that works in a downtown area. Councilman Senn: Cemeteries and mortuaries. You don't try to put senior housing close to them. Kate Aanenson: So with that I guess 1'd like to turn it back to the Planning Commission unless you want something else further studied or if you had some other concerns that you would like...relayed back to the Planning Commission for them to study or if you wanted to expand the scope of the district,or something like that. Councilman Senn: So what are you looking for us to do? I mean give. Kate Aanenson: One, if you wanted anything additional studied,your direction to the Planning Commission. If you feel like the size of the district is adequate or if you wanted that expanded... And then if you were in concurrence that it should go back to the Planning Commission to go through the process there. I guess that's what I'm looking for. ...before we start the process... Councilman Senn: So let me just clarify. This is the outline for the process to go through? Kate Aanenson: Right. Councilman Senn: Right. So the intention of this plan was not to try to reach closure or recommendation on anything. It was simply to. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes. This is going to become a planning document but to do that you need to hold a public hearing and a draft to approve. To do that you go through the Planning Commission. Councilman Senn: Okay. I thought I was hearing two different things there. So okay. So if I'm understanding correctly then,the purpose of this document then right now is to create a plan. Kate Aanenson: Right. And what I'm saying,this is the format we're laying out. What I'm asking you for, is this meeting what your expectations were or is there something else you wanted to study. Did you have concerns,do you want to add additional parcels. Are you concerned about that something was missed that you wanted studied. A specific uses that you were concerned about. Each property have been identified for different uses. If you have concerns with any of them. Councilman Senn: No, I understand but normally in a planning document you reach,you know some kind of closure in terms of where you're at from a recommendation standpoint and. 39 City Council Meeting-October 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Oh,the recommendation's too broad for you at this point? Councilman Senn: Well I mean yeah. What's happening to me is as I read through this and read the recommendations,or I guess as I read through them I viewed them as discussion items. I didn't view them as recommendations. I viewed that they lacked any closure. You know a good example,the St. Hubert's School and Church. To simply say that housing is a potential land use that would fit the site. I mean to me we should,this is our opportunity and we told them to wait while we looked at it. We should be telling them okay. If you don't sell it you know effectively as a church again,here's how we view the site being used. I think we ought to be very specific about that. Not very broad and general about that, okay. Mayor Mancino: So I'm assuming that it's going back to the Planning Commission for a specific recommendation and then will come in front of the Council for a specific,to either yes to that specific recommendation or no. Councilman Senn: But I mean not just that. I mean I want them to go through, I mean to me I don't know. I just kind of read through this,Colonial Center I mean,well 1 mean yeah. So okay, Medical Arts building's looking to expand there. Well I mean, fine. If they're looking to expand there but I mean I would look at this at this point,changing a whole different set of architectural guidelines than we used on the first one or two of those things and tie that back into the architectural elements and do it but I just, I'm not getting any kind of a tie or a sense that way,Country Clean. Nothing's happened on it. Kate Aanenson: I can give you an update on that. There's some EPA problems...getting that resolved. What I tried to do is give a point of jumping off point for the Planning Commission to take that. They'll come back with specifics. If you want them to look at an ordinance,they may come back with an overlay district ordinance. We'll draft that. This is kind of a jumping off point to give you the background... Councilman Senn: Well I mean if they're going to recommend something to us,I'd just as soon, I suppose if they want to give us discussion items that's fine. Then let's not send it back to the Planning Commission. Let's sit down and make some decisions on uses. But I mean I'd much prefer it to go back to the Planning Commission and have the Planning Commission specifically kind of take the discussion to an end point,to a conclusion and give us a definitive recommendation on land uses,you know specific uses as it relates to each one of these things. I don't think they've done that. Now I don't know. Mayor Mancino: No, it hasn't been to the Planning Commission yet. Kate Aanenson: That's the process we're laying out. Councilman Senn: Okay. Kate Aanenson: I'm giving it to you first to say, is there something that's not in here that you want them to look at. It hasn't even gone to the Planning Commission. They haven't seen it. Councilman Senn: Why haven't we. Councilman Mason: You made the mistake in giving it to us in the first place. See I wondered when I saw this, I thought. 40 City Council Meeting-October 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: I wanted to see where we were in the historic district. What had happened. To check in with us. Councilman Senn: Well I mean my sense is we've gone. Mayor Mancino: It's my fault. I'll take it. Councilman Senn: Okay,you take it. It's been months and months and months and it seems like we're nowhere. And we promised these people that we were going to take a hard look at this stuff and establish some direction and get back to them. I mean I hope we're not looking at 6 months more you know to do that. I mean I really kind of expected to be that point by now. Mayor Mancino: Oh you wanted to see it further along is what you're obviously saying. Councilman Senn: Yeah,much more. Much more. Mayor Mancino: Kate,what's your timing on it at this point? I mean it's not like we have a lot of people here waiting but. Kate Aanenson: Well there are people that are interested and want to make sure they're in the process... At the next,not the November,November 17th Planning Commission. Mayor Mancino: 190h? Kate Aanenson: 171h. Mayor Mancino: 17'h, is that when it is? MM: 17'1' is a Monday. Kate Aanenson: 19t. Mayor Mancino: 19th. I know that date. Kate Aanenson: For a discussion item. Mayor Mancino: So we probably won't get it until some time in December or January it will come back. So the next 2 or 3 months. Councilman Senn: I mean other comments because I don't want to lose. Mayor Mancino: I was going to say why don't you add some comments. Councilman Senn: I don't want to lose the opportunity. The Schlenk property you took kind of where I expected these all to go. I mean it brings it down to a conclusion and you know kind of says okay. I mean it should be townhomes. It should be two story. You know and here's the way it should be developed,etc. I mean that's kind the closure I'd like to see on each one of these. The old church,the old Village Hall. I think we need to tie that into the issue and I'm not sure that's something the Planning 41 City Council Meeting-October 27, 1997 Commission's going to be able to deal with but I mean we need to tie that into the issue over investment and ownership and community use and all that sort of thing. I don't know. I mean I'm not sure. Mayor Mancino: But I think the Planning Commission would have some good recommendations as far as community use. I think that would be a good idea. Councilman Senn: But I mean again,I think that's the way the direction needs to go. Mayor Mancino: So a design overlay district and also community use as part of that design overlay district. Councilman Senn: So those types of things. Mayor Mancino: I would also like to see conceptually,and it would probably be in the,what's it called, the cleaners area. Colonial Square. How the Planning Commission would look at that as retail down below and housing up above. And having specific and different architectural design standards than what, than may be different a little west of that area. And again pulling it forward. And I would also like to see the St. Hubert's. Kate,I don't know market wise with St. Hubert's. I'd like to see some residential, multi- family in there. I'm not sure that we as a city or the Carver County HRA or whatever has the ability to meet all of our, you know would have the ability to meet a housing need there. Kate Aanenson: The other thing that I pointed out too is the issue with the old,old St. Hubert's. The steeple and what development... Mayor Mancino: And the other thing I'd like the Planning Commission to look at is maybe not making that entire Pauly/Pryzmus area a park but maybe part of it to add to the existing common areas and again making that office/retail that was also suggested in the 2002 plan. Kate Aanenson: That was the staff's. Mayor Mancino: Yeah,adding to it. Kate Aanenson: I'm trying to get some feedback without over... Councilman Senn: Well I think the sky's the limit. They just need to push the ideas and come forward with them,but at the same time like for example on the St. Hubert's,the old St.Hubert's site. If it's not resold for the institutional use, I'm hoping that in their process they'll have a real down and dirty conversation with the neighborhood around there. Kate Aanenson: Right,and that's another issue. Councilman Senn: In coming up with that. I mean I don't want it developed in a vacuum at the same time just trying to orientate effectively towards 78th or downtown. I mean I think there's a major consideration there with the residences around there and how they you know... Kate Aanenson: ...cleaners and wanted to expand it. The home behind the old St. Hubert's,there was talk about whoever bought that property,what happens to the character. How that changes so that's why I was saying the scope of how you look at that because. 42 City Council Meeting-October 27, 1997 Mayor Mancino: I think that would be a good idea. I think that's a very good point. Councilman Senn: But I mean again, I do want to remind you when we went through this discussion before we asked everybody for 6 months to do this. Mayor Mancino: And we're about there. We're getting there. Councilman Senn: You'd better turn on the after burners. Mayor Mancino: We've had a lot of things coming to the front burner I hate to say it. Councilman Mason,any other? Councilman Mason: Interested to see what they come up with. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: I'll wait and see what they come up with. Mayor Mancino: We'll put the weight of the world on your shoulders. So we don't need to make any formal action. Thank you for updating us and telling us where you are and where you're going and when we're going to see it again and some of us may even come to the Planning Commission meeting and listen. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Mancino: The next item is Council Presentations. Does anybody want to get up and make a presentation? Okay. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt: I have one on the Triax. I handed out,regarding that. Some direction or agreement on settlement of outage credit back to the residents and a list that was submitted to the City Council this past month. Mayor Mancino: I'm sorry,and what do you want us to do? Todd Gerhardt: Well there was,I think they were providing a 75%credit, if I remember right. And we felt that it should be more of a 100%credit over that three month period. Councilman Senn: No. I think their,I don't know. Maybe something's happened since we last visited with them on it but when we last visited with them,the credit they were offering was a one month credit of I'm going to say no more than 20%. I mean I thought it was in the 10%to 20%type of range. Off of a one month bill and then we had,we took our list basically from the neighborhoods involved and figured on the three months that it was closer to 25, 50 and 25%in terms of the outages. So we were looking at 100%credit effectively over a one month period. More or less meaning that 50, 25,25 out of three months. But the other thing was that they'd come back in only with a partial list of affected areas which we asked them to broaden to include the other areas and mentioned what the other areas were and they were supposed to kind of go back and do that. I don't think they've ever done that. We did get their complaint,you know list which would kind of be the verification you know of all that but I'm not sure 43 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 19, 1997 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad,Alison Blackowiak, Allyson Brooks, Craig Peterson, LuAnn Sidney and Kevin Joyce STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II; and David Hempel, Asst. City Engineer COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions or feedback primarily for staff? Joyce: Bob, under park and recreation you have all the expenditures in '98. Is that through the referendum? Generous: Primarily. There are some that they had programmed previously. Joyce: Does that mean you're going to spend it all in '98 then? Generous: Some could be carried over. It depends on how fast... Joyce: ...get it all done. Generous: I'm not sure...I believe it's like... Peterson: We spoke a couple meetings ago about the number of potential units that the plan...as far as into the future of how many buildable lots or homes available... How does the capital improvement plan as it's designed today,parallel that? Or does it parallel that exactly or is it ahead or behind of the same philosophy that you used before. The number of units you want to keep available. Aanenson: Maybe I could talk a little bit about that. We're doing something different in our comp plan. You are allowed to do a floating. The reason that we...floating MUSA... by having a long range plan...ability to shift resources...to accomplish that. So we wanted a long term, what's the best use of where... We're looking at a 3:1 ratio as far as housing stock... IS that what you were looking for? Peterson: Yeah, exactly. Planning Commission Meeting- November 19, 1997 Aanenson: ...flexibility... As Bob indicated...we're dependent on outside sources for the roads and that's... Peterson: What kind of assumptions have you made relative to 212 and Highway 5 expanding? Anything? Aanenson: Highway 5 is programmed to...and no build assumption. That's why we need to have the flexibility...so those are some issues that we have to look at. Peterson: What about Bluff Creek specifically? I mean that's probably the next one in queue to go into the housing stock or go into production, quote unquote. How do, when do you factor that in or did you,just out of curiosity? I know it's a... Generous: Well as part of the amount of housing...steep slope area. ...factored in housing units... Peterson: Where are we at in the process of review? Are we really the first, other than your staff Kate, are we the first people to really see this or has Council? Aanenson: Actually yeah... Generous: This specifically has... Peterson: I know they're working on that now and so have they already tweaked this or not? Generous: They like the idea... Peterson: Thanks. Other questions, comments? Blackowiak: I've got a few questions. First of all one that we had talked about today. The supply of buildable land. This is I think getting at what Craig was talking about. We have come up with another source for a good rule of thumb for buildable land supply or? Generous: Well Kate just provided the Met Council... What I found out from the Builders Association, they said at a minimum a 5 year supply to keep the land values stable... Blackowiak: I guess my question to Bob,just so you understand is, I feel that the Building Association might be a little bit biased towards having a larger supply so I was wondering if Bob could find some kind of an academic source that might be a less biased source and I guess that couldn't happen so. It was short notice I realize. Okay. I do have a couple more things. Also in the existing policies, number 7. We talked a little bit this morning about the fact that demonstrating adequate future funds might be difficult and I didn't know if it should be worded that way. So I have, I don't know if you looked at that at all. I have a suggestion anyway and I don't know we'll kind of start at this point but instead of saying capital improvements should not 2 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 be funded until it's demonstrated that adequate future funds will be available to cover 0 & M costs. I would suggest something in the line of,before capital improvements are funded, future 0 & M costs should be estimated and factored into the budgeting process. Something along that line so, I don't feel that you could ever actually demonstrate that there will be adequate funds. I mean so that's just wouldn't make sense to me. I mean find budgets for them. Try to figure out what they might be. I don't think it's really fair to ask you to demonstrate that something you can't, I don't think really do that far out so, something maybe like that. Estimating costs, etc. And then finally,Bob or Kate I'd like you to talk a little bit about some of the funding sources that you've identified in terms of their liability. Their longevity and also any possibilities for new sources. And specifically could you define enterprise funds? I wasn't clear on that. I need some help on that and that's it for me so. Generous: Just to let everyone know, on pages 24 and 25 of the document. That's where all the... Enterprise funds are directly related to an enterprise... In this instance it's the city sewer and water service... As a part of that fee,people pay not only for the actual water that they use but...and some of the fee goes into a capital...use for those specific programs... They're not translatable to other programs... Assessments. Those are the primary...funds for capital improvements... There are some variances in that for the 429 projects which use some... ISTEA are the federal dollars that are generally used to do road projects... The park and trail fees are directly...park and trail improvements. Referendum of course...State aid is a form...roads that are designated by the State as State Aid highways. Storm water fees or SWMP fees are the fees that the city collects, I believe it's quarterly and also as part of any development... The tax increment financing dollars are for...and finally the developer... In that case what's...facilities that are beyond what their project...for instance going from an 8 to 12 inch water line or upsizing the storm water facility... Blackowiak: Okay. Most of these seem like they're fairly...amounts or fairly predictable amounts in terms of the assessments and general funds and so on and so forth. For example the ISTEA and the State aid. Do you see any major changes, either up or down in any of these or I mean. Brooks: ISTEA actually hasn't been re-authorized by... There's numerous competing bills in ISTEA funding and ISTEA is really going to depend on the funding and which bill gets passed. I think there will be an ISTEA bill, otherwise America will not have a Department of Transportation or a highway system. But it's the degree in which it passes. The other question that is up in the air right now is the enhancement portion with the trails and preservation and railroad depots. There is a move on by some states not to include enhancements anymore. There's some departments of transportation that don't like spending money on enhancements...so it is not clear at this point whether that will continue to be. Aanenson: The park and trail fees are also predicated on development. ...developer and the economy... Blackowiak: Thanks. 3 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 Peterson: Any other comments? Conrad: A couple Mr. Chairman. Bob,what's the procedure for reviewing capital investments? These numbers on an annual basis. What happens? Generous: They're part of the budget process... Aanenson: The way the comprehensive plan is written right now, it should be reviewed every 5 years. The last time was in 1991 so really the Planning Commission should be looking every 5 years and the Council should be looking at it as part of their budget process... What we're hoping for tonight is something that's not... Conrad: Well my question does relate to that. When you put a 20 year plan out in front of me, that makes me nervous. I think most companies can't really project past 5 and you're trying to do 20. But I can't give a stamp of approval past 5. It's really tough to do 5 so my methodology therefore is to say, or my rationale after that is okay,that's your best guess and that's good to forecast where you're going but I need to know what the annual review process is because we are not involved here. I want to make sure that if this is there, one the City Council's doing it. But then there are two other groups. At least one that I know of. Park and Rec should be reviewing that annually too, which should be fed up to the City Council. If there is an environmental protection committee, or whatever this other, I'm not even sure if we have one or they're functioning. I'm just ignorant of that but I want them to review these numbers. I don't know, 1 won't know but I want...procedure supporting the policy. The policy should say on an annual basis these numbers are reviewed. So my point is I want, I need to know that there is a procedure for reviewing this annually. I need to know that the environmental group is doing that specifically. I think Park and Rec is doing that. Generous: Yes. They review that. Conrad: Okay. There's nobody that can supervise... Aanenson: Yeah, you can't do the budget without doing an annual. What we're saying, the reason we went to 20...that's our ultimate build out so to work backwards is where are we going to be. What's the priority's going to be? We just took it to the... Conrad: I can support the policies as long as I know that there's a review process. Because priorities change and I can't say that these just generally are the right ones to follow every year. I want people reviewing them. Specifically, I'm going to make a point because I don't know when it comes back. Under park and rec. When I look out 20 years and I've been talking about this for as long as I've been around. We don't have an outdoor amphitheater in Chanhassen. And we talk about meeting and greeting and community and we don't have an outdoor amphitheater which is basically a hillside with dug in benches. So I'm real bothered by the fact that it's not there. I've talked to people over the years. It's always we don't have funding. I won't vote for this. I think if you're responsible and you're trying to get citizens of Chanhassen together, we say we are. We do have a pretty nice theater in town and we do have some history in theater and 4 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 other communities have amphitheaters and they're small. They don't cost a lot of money. You have to find the land to put them on. I don't see that being attempted and that bothers me. So that is a real irritant. The other specific that I just would,under the storm water management section. Lake Minnewashta has some major money going into it and I'm just curious as to what that, Bob if you knew what the. My recollection was it was $600 and some thousand dollars. Is there one specific project that is causing the bulk of that? Aanenson: The reason for that is, Lake Minnewashta is pretty much...storm water generally... We've done quite a bit of projects that aren't accounted for on Lotus Lake, so...really go back to a plan that was put... We tried to typically sprinkle those around when we try to do a project and then looking at what other road projects are like, as Bob indicated...tie resources together. If we've got a road improvement project,tying the storm water... Conrad: Is it supporting...plan? Aanenson: Yes. We're following...but there has been a little bit of development. There will be some... Peterson: Tagging along on what Ladd, one of Ladd's questions. What about, other than ourselves and Council...provides feedback to the numbers, citizen input process facilitate that? Aanenson: Eventually this whole process... Peterson: So this is the exception within the comprehensive plan that we. Brooks: What is the interpretative center? Is that new that we're building? Aanenson: Right, that was a part of Bluff Creek. The intention there was to provide an interpretative center, the 100 acres that we acquired, the O'Shaughnessy property... Brooks: Is it a million dollar to build a center? Aanenson: No. That's what we put out. That's an estimate. There's options. There's an existing home to put on the property...other resources too. That was supposed to be in connection with the school... Brooks: So was that the same with Bluff Creek? Aanenson: Or the elementary school for school children. Where they can actually have a resource...with that 100 acres as kind of a laboratory. Brooks: Okay. Peterson: Other comments? 5 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 Sidney: Just one more. This one I have for Bob. Wondering about land acquisition for park and rec...project out farther than... I guess I saw on the first page that we have a specific density requirements of having a neighborhood park within a half mile of each residence. I'm wondering if,based on...future for parks. Generous: Yeah, as part of the park plan and... Sidney: Are there numbers associated with... Aanenson: The way it's currently calculated, by so many acres per person...depending on density. Higher density...so when we looked at the original park element, that was something that was attached specifically to tell you where park and rec... As far as larger parks go... Generous: The quick answer is no, we can't be certain...once you get it out beyond 5 years... This gives you a general... Sidney: They really can't predict beyond '98? Aanenson: Well we can in a rough sense based on the comprehensive plan...but that's the best we can do to put that dollar amount... Peterson: Have we given you enough? Brooks: I liked...amphitheater. I think that's a good idea. Conrad: Everybody says it is and we never do anything about it. Sidney: How long have you been asking? Conrad: Oh probably, again there's so many reasons not to do it and money is one and finding the right land is one. But I`ve talked to folks for 5 to 10 years that this is, I think this is an important thing for the community to do. You go to Eden Prairie,they have some nice amphitheater over at, what Starring Park or whatever it's called and they have their community plays and outdoor celebrations and we have no place to really do that here. And unless you put it in the plan, it won't happen and it probably wasn't funded through. There's a lot of things that don't happen, that don't force it to happen but it's one of those things that you think, you've got that's supposed to happen you know. Brooks: I know Anoka's been working really hard to bring back their amphitheater. They have a...falling in disrepair and they wanted to try to bring that back so, I think it's a good idea. Aanenson: Todd did put out those...park referendum. Got some identified... Conrad: Well that's a tough deal Kate because you know you have a referendum, you offer something to every section of the community so everybody gets something for their 6 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 neighborhood. And in the absence of that,then you put money into sports facilities and then you ignore maybe some things that we really talked about and what we've had major activities over the last 5 years of where this community should go and what brings it together as a community and that is one of those things that does it. That we tried to do it with the parade,but that's a couple hours and you can meet on a baseball field but there's something wrong with that you know because that's not for everybody. The amphitheater is something that I think should be done. Jill Shipley: ...Carver County Library Board and I'm Chanhassen's representative to the Board and I'd also like to speak to the library issue with regards to this plan. A library is another facility that truly builds community and you'll see from this plan that it's slated for, along with the City Hall expansion, to be improved in the year 2005 and the dollars slated for it are a million dollars. We've been working very closely with the Chanhassen City Council over the past 6 months to present the need for improved library facilities in Chanhassen. Chanhassen is the ideal community of a strong, strong library. We are a high income community. These are the people who use and value library services. We are a highly educated community. Again, these are the type of people that truly value and will use a library if we provide the facilities that are needed. I would like to make a request tonight that you not approve this plan until you have spoken with the Carver County library board and heard some of our data of our needs. We'd like to make a presentation similar to what we did with Council to show you the really strong need for a... I'd also like to request some sort of representation from the City because we have such a unique arrangement in Carver County with our library services where the County does the funding for personnel and for materials,but the city provides the space. There's no Todd Hoffman of Parks and Rec. within the city staff who speaks to this issue. I would like to find some, either planning commission liaison for library services as well. Any comments? Questions to that effect. Peterson: Maybe just questions for Kate more than anything else. Is that, I mean it certainly sounds like a logical idea of some sort. Some kind of,whether that be with us, I don't know if that's the most logical. Aanenson: Maybe to give you a little bit more background on this issue. As part of the budget process, the library board did ask for additional space and dollars... I did look at this as part of...budgeting process... We're not asking you to adopt this tonight. We said we want you to look at the...and ultimately the Council's going to decide that but if you want to keep feedback on the timing and want more information to help you prioritize... Peterson: I think it would be interesting to see the scope of what you're requesting. Whether you're requesting of that$l.whatever million. If you're requesting$100,000.00 or if you're requesting the full...for expansion. Not necessarily tonight but in some format that we can go forward basically. As we talked about earlier,this is a...process that will be approving in the coming weeks and months so. Jill Shipley: I'm confused by Kate's comment because we've not made a request for anything in the budget process. 7 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 Aanenson: No, you did make a request for providing additional space... Jill Shipley: I'm not aware of that request at this point. Aanenson: What... Jill Shipley: We requested that a task force be... Aanenson: The Council elected to do that. The Council at this point...but a task force was... and if you have additional information, we certainly agree...we concur with that. What we're looking at is...but if you feel that you want to make it a higher priority, want to convey that...if you felt it was important to have... Peterson: My first reaction is I think it would be interesting, speaking on behalf of fellow commissioners,just to see a one page summary of what you're really,what the scope of it is. I mean right now I don't think any of us can respond other than yeah. It's a great idea but then there's a lot of great ideas in here that aren't in here as a cost...the balancing that we have to do. But I think as you heard Ladd speak to...reiterate by saying a gathering point and that is one that certainly has a priority in the hearts of a lot of the citizens. So if you could present a one page synopsis of what some of the scope is...first step. Jill Shipley: Okay. We'll go from there. Thank you. Peterson: Anything else Bob you want to hear from us? Good job. BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT DISCUSSION. Mark Koegler: Chairman, members of the commission. The draft that's before you tonight, continuing the process with the Bluff Creek ordinance, contains changes that really came from a variety of sources. From the discussion we held a couple of weeks ago. We think we've addressed most of those points. From comments that were offered by the City Attorney as part of the ordinance draft and then some additional staff items. Let me just kind of quickly highlight some of the major things and then I want to point to another case study that we've looked at in the last couple of weeks which maybe gives you a better picture of how this applies to a piece of property. First off, one of the major changes occurs on the first page and it's simply we cross referenced with the city's subdivision ordinance in addition to the aspect of the zoning code. You probably noticed also at the City Attorney's request, it's now called an overlay district right up front rather than referring to it as the Bluff Creek Watershed District. There was confusion in that regard. There was a modification to natural habitat area. Definition that was again in response to some of the comments that Roger had offered. The discussion that occurred at the Planning Commission last time, there were a couple of points raised that kind of led to modification of purpose statements. First of all to get some language in there about the benefits, the financial benefits and so forth associated with this type of development pattern. And then secondly and perhaps more importantly, to make a direct reference to the Bluff Creek Watershed management plan itself and that's done in line 16 on page 4. It refers to the term, definitions and 8 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 appendices... What that does then is that ties back to not only defining some of those things like significant resources and some of those other significances and that's what we talked about last time, but also it contains the listing of some of the species and things that are endangered and that are of concern so that incorporates that by reference as a part of the ordinance draft itself. Further on in the ordinance, again at the request of the City Attorney we've talked about potentially clustering rather than transferring. A technical sense we were looking at clustering of density rather than transfer per se,particularly with transfer occurring in other properties. And I think that essentially was some of the major changes. There were some minor verbiage changes and we've cleaned some things up as we've gone along. Some of those pertaining to the issue of this ordinance and how it ultimately will react and relate to the PUD ordinance which is going to be modified somewhat in the future. Let me quickly highlight another case study that we've taken a better look at to give you a feel for how this fits and then Kate and I can sit and we'll answer questions that you might have. If you recall last time we talked about taking a look at the property generally known as the Erhart property and we have done that. We looked at a couple of scenarios and hopefully... For orientation. This piece of property fronts on Highway 101 and 96th Street. North is up on this particular graphic. We started with a traditional subdivision approach if you will, looking at single family detached lot arrangement. Total site is about 122 acres but it does get impacted by right-of-way for TH 101. Additionally there is right-of-way for 212 which is over on this side of the site... The 145 lots depicted here aren't really...you might be able to add a few more lots...Net density is right around 2 units per acre. Just a hair over. The average lot size being about 21,300. The smallest lot about 12,000 square feet. The total... That compares to a density, I think the average lot...pretty comparable to some of the Longacres developments... We then took a look at application of the standards that are in the Bluff Creek ordinance. First of all we...is pretty heavily impacted by both primary and secondary corridors in the western area. The primary corridor being a line hatched area. The secondary corridor being the dot pattern... If you look at the kind of clustered approach, it still takes single family detached...what you can end up with, and again this is a hypothetical example. The pattern may be similar to this...as a part of the development. In this particular case we have...to about 3.8 units per acre. Average lot size depicted here is about 11,300 square feet. Smallest lot would be 7,500-8,000 square foot... There happen to be 167 lots depicted here but that number could go down a little bit...in that previous scenario you could get a few more than 125...is concentrated into a different area of the site. Preserving then what becomes about 51% or so of the site in the area that occupies the primary and secondary areas of the corridor, as well as...wetland portion of the property. So another graphic example in kind of a series of those that we've looked at where the piece of property obviously is heavily impacted by the existence of the primary and secondary corridors that are outlined in the Bluff Creek Watershed Management Plan. With that Mr. Chairman, as I indicated before, I think Kate and I would be happy to respond to questions that you have. Still the goal is to reflect any further comments that you might have regarding the ordinance and ultimately to take that to public hearing in the near future. Peterson: Thank you. Questions? Comments? Joyce: Mark, I have a question... Number one,on the Erhart property. Is that entirely in the Bluff Creek overlay? 9 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 Mark Koegler: It is within the entire overlay corridor. The only area, again the watershed area itself goes beyond the primary... Joyce: That's, because I have a related question to that but that's what I'm trying to figure out. Mark Koegler: I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong,but I think it is wholly within the overall Bluff Creek watershed area. Joyce: Do you remember what the comprehensive plan guide looks for as far as zoning? Mark Koegler: It's low density residential. Joyce: Low density residential,which is what? 4? Mark Koegler: 1.2 to 4 I believe gross units per acre. Aanenson: That's what the first drawing reflected. Joyce: Right. Aanenson: If someone was to come and lay it out...low density subdivision, with an average...so averaging,coming in with a PUD, the average lot size has to be... Joyce: So the net would be, I guess I'm just trying to visualize. You have the comp plan and the guide, and then this overlay which supersedes the zoning...? Aanenson: In addition to the zoning. Joyce: But first of all the standards are higher on,particularly like on a primary. Secondary, certainly they're higher and that would supersede... Then we go back to the comp plan, the low density. There is an example you have a net that currently doesn't exceed the density level. The highest you can go to is 4 units per acre. Aanenson: Right,but what we did is we took the entire piece...but what we want is a way... Joyce: I understand that but you could not go to 4.1 units per acre against the comp plan, correct? Mark Koegler: Well that would depend on definition because what we've done when we've put this new layer of ordinance onto this piece of property is we said, we're taking now out for purposes of development, the primary corridor area which up to this point in time has been included within a net density calculation. If you look at the traditional pattern as this one that's on the screen right now,we're at 2 units per acre. Largely because obviously we're developing that primary area as well as that secondary... I think what becomes the issue is, once you go from this level of calculation to applying the ordinance, do you still use the same set of ground 10 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 rules as to how you look at net. Do you look at net as taking out the primary area for the whole site or do you somehow at least in the secondary area look at net by saying well yes,but it includes the primary area and factoring that into net density is really so and so for the entire property. Joyce: So you are including the primary? Mark Koegler: We did in the example,just to show what the impact is. Joyce: But in the ordinance you didn't? Mark Koegler: The ordinance actually takes it's derivation back from, this is really I think a very valid exercise because the process is that there needs to be a concept prepared such as this that shows how a property could be developed. What kind of density could be achieved on the site and it has to be a realistic plan. Then essentially what we're seeking to do with the ordinance is to cluster that density in other locations on the property. So we're not looking to provide... necessarily to increase that density but to accommodate that density. Joyce: Right. Mark Koegler: In this particular case it does fall within the 4 units per acre no matter how you cut the net calculation. Whether or not that would happen in every single case, I suppose we'd have to look at that a little further. Joyce: Well that leads to my second question. A lot of this property within the Bluff Creek overlay...things like that. So for them to change the zoning, I mean obviously you'd have to go...low density or something like that. Aanenson: Well we've guided it. Again, this is an area outside the MUSA and it may not...but we've guided it for low density... The other part to your question was, under the current ordinance the 4.1, they couldn't do that even... That's why we're trying to change the PUD. We're not trying to penalize people for clustering. We want to encourage clustering. Joyce: Promote it is what it says in the... Aanenson: Well what we're trying to do is, the development pattern is different than we did in the past where we got more sensitive and this is again...where there's a primary and secondary zone. Not just to cluster for clustering sake but... Joyce: And I'm just trying to figure out if there's control here. Aanenson: Exactly. There's a large lot subdivision to the south of this. A small one that actually the people benefit from clustering because the homes that are on that northwest corner will actually benefit because the cluster...but we're going to have to look at that individually and 11 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 there may be circumstances where they'd have to buffer... but for the most part, the primary and secondary, or in the overlay district,they all have to... Joyce: I'm getting more comfortable with this ordinance. I'm glad it's come up a couple of times. You kind of have to work through it. Aanenson: That's...we think we've worked through... Mark Koegler: Again, this is just in quick concept form but we have shown for example what the existing developments on 96, with the concept plan. Larger lots abutting that and open space immediately north of some of...to accommodate transition of uses between existing developments... Brooks: I noticed and I probably should have talked about this earlier...clustering residential but I don't see where it really addresses industrial where we have areas within the Bluff Creek overlay... Mark Koegler: Well we reference that by talking about clustering of units and impervious cover because when we were dealing with,basically we have two types of land uses for the most part outside of the open space designations within the corridor. Either industrial, industrial office park or residential. There are a few very small pieces of commercial that are kind of some of the donut holes and things. But we're dealing with that and the impervious basis rather than on a square footage or some other basis in which you might look at those buildings. I think a meeting or two ago we looked at an example of the industrial park and it was based on impervious cover and being able to transfer that amount of impervious cover that would be allowed on that site to a tighter area within the same property. Aanenson: So instead of 70...maximize the part that you're going to... Brooks: And that's why, you know an office park to me is fine but when we say industrial, and I bring that back up to Mark... Aanenson: That gets back to the comprehensive plan... Brooks: ...about the wildlife and stuff and all of a sudden... Mark Koegler: I think you raise a good point though in that probably more of the focus has been on residential and maybe we just need to go back and make sure,and enunciate clearly enough that there's a commercial industrial component to it. Brooks: Yeah, I think that would be a good idea. Peterson: Other comments? Conrad: Mark, could you get us a copy of a good ordinance that uses density transfer? 12 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 Mark Koegler: I can,boy a good ordinance. You had to qualify that. There are some examples you know as we've talked about before in these series of meetings. They really are not examples with the same kinds of components that we're looking at, and particularly the urban scale densities. I can easily provide you with a number of examples that are more rural in nature that are dealing with,you know 1 unit per 1.2 acres. We've even looked at those just simple to examine some of the techniques and there is no direct application. Aanenson: We've exhausted all the resources. Mark Koegler: Close. We are continuing to search for that but we have not found a really apples to apples. Aanenson: We also had, we think it's the right... Conrad: Have you just looked in the State? Have you looked outside? Aanenson: We've looked outside, everywhere. Conrad: This has been an issue for 10 years Kate. Density transfer has been preached. Aanenson: We're on the cutting edge. Peterson: Have you checked our libraries by chance? Conrad: The PUD ordinance will become a factor in density transfer? Is that right? Will it really, density transfer,will it be guided by our PUD ordinance restrictions and guidelines? Generous: The only way you'll be able to do it is...because you could do a large lot subdivision and just lose the primary... Aanenson: ...only do clustering...which we've always felt that...historically we've had a problem with large lots in certain areas... Conrad: There aren't many regulations in this ordinance. It's pretty open and on the one hand I'm not going to challenge it because I love,I like density transfer. I think it's,but Kevin I just, you know your point is you're getting more comfortable with it and I think that's great. But a lot of this will come down to how much do you want to protect an area and are you willing to allow 5.7 units to protect that area, which will take us over the single family and put it into a different category. Joyce: ...understanding of that. Conrad: Well no, it's open. We haven't addressed. 13 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 Joyce: But the comp plan still supersedes that, correct? Aanenson: Yeah. Joyce: So that was the point I was trying to make is our comp plan is our control feature. So if you have this as low density, some of it clustering, and if they average out to 3.87, so it's not over 4. Conrad: Over the whole site. Joyce: Right. A lot of this land is, what large estate which is. Aanenson: That's what it's zoned. Not guided for. It's zoned large lot. Joyce: I'm sorry. But it's zoned A2 so it had to come in front of us to get it to low density, correct? Aanenson: Right, although it's guided... Joyce: And it's guided low density, I mean it's guided large lot. Aanenson: We've guided the whole city. Remember before we said we weren't going to guide large lot in the rest of the city. We don't have that designation. It's currently zoned that way until such time as urban services are provided...but what we said is we don't want to take a first example throughout the rest of the city because what it does it takes out the significant features. What we said is we'd rather have it go a little bit smaller yard and preserve some natural features... We're not trying to...we're just compressing it into...small lots. It might not be the same type of... Brooks: Let me ask a question...large lot. If you have a large lot, a 5 acre lot by Bluff Creek and Joe Schmoe wants to subdivide it and now sell off 2 %Z acres and build a house. Now, are we going to be able to guide the house going up the slope and off the primary zone? Aanenson: You will be able to do that. If it's in the primary or secondary zone. Pardon me? Joyce: I said if it's in the primary,he can't develop on it at all, correct? Aanenson: Well you have to, we'd have to look at that...it'd be a taking... We looked to see if there were any of those... Mark Koegler: I'm trying to think if we have examples dealing with the vast majority of them with larger, currently undeveloped parcels that are either in, there might be a few. Peterson: Other comments? Thank you. 14 Planning Commission Meeting-November 19, 1997 OLD BUSINESS: Aanenson: Just to let you know what's going on for the December 3rd Planning Commission meeting. We will put on the historic district. Talking about what should happen in the area... First you need to decide whether you have the right area that we have identified and kind of set some framework... Also we received an application for...site plan review for Bluff Creek Partnerships...property east of Bluff Creek Elementary...church. There will be a public hearing... That will be our last meeting...That's all I had. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: LuAnn Sidney noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 5, 1997. ONGOING ITEMS: Blackowiak: I have a question. Did the City Council interview Planning Commission candidates and? Aanenson: Correct, and it is scheduled for a meeting on Monday... Blackowiak: Okay,thank you. Aanenson: In December we should have someone. Peterson: I thought they already met them. Aanenson: They interviewed. I'm not sure who...select somebody. Peterson: Anything else? The public portion of the meeting was adjourned and the Planning Commission held an open discussion regarding the auto dealership. Conrad moved, Sidney seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 15