04-2-97 Agenda and Packet FILE
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY,APRIL 2, 1997 AT 7:00 P.M.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL,690 COULTER DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Site plan review of a 35,000 sq. ft. office warehouse building on 2.74 acres of property
zoned PUD and located at the northwest corner of Audubon Road and Lake Drive West on
Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition, CH & C Building, Eden Trace
Corporation.
NEW BUSINESS
2. a. Elect Chair and Vice-Chair.
b. Adopt Planning Commission By-laws.
OLD BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE
ONGOING ITEMS
OPEN DISCUSSION
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.
At
CITY 0 F P.C. DATE: 4-2-97
CHMTUA E
C.C. DATE: 4-28-97
CASE: 97-3 Site Plan
BY: AI-Jaff:v
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Site plan review for a 35,000 square foot office/warehouse building- CH&C
Building
1-
Q Z LOCATION: Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition
0
APPLICANT: Eden Trace Corporation Cerani, Hadle & Cerani
C.. Suite 2000 LYRA CH&C
O. 14500 Martin Drive 1660 Lake Drive West
Q Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Chanhassen, MN 55 317
(612) 975-9452 (612) 361-6667 .
PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development. PUD
ACREAGE: 2 74 acres
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - PUD, IOP Chuck's Grinding
S- PUD, IOP Vacant lot
E - IOP, vacant lot
W- PUD, Paulstarr Enterprises
Q
F WATER AND SEWER: Available to site.
1.1 PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site has been graded and is devoid of vegetation.
ILL 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial
(I) '
,.,
AhCoulter Blva_.. Co uker Blvd lip. 10 . )zipr.c.1
fit $Agorivki
. . .,.. .. ,
ail. c.13 Vt if EN .
4.'
, 1100,4.•-ce iii;1*. . '11
0:; - F,.., - 4_, 41-• .
...,,,o. ,...,..._
. i a
7amitait I I ariti ks-
*.- Mus 111 No mg 1
-.411114
-a - -- ,P111111111013- It
-- •4, .;46#,
• •
°q
— - 0111k• A sl .
tone cTeek it- - Pimillhip I
Peng*Mit cam,'" fitliVIMA . "wen pp 0114-.- virAtp
'Alt • AE-pr WI' e 6 & to Ai 4* lit,i 0,I, ,;.,••;"
1--flew my/7 -01110 ilir .,. .4. ,zi iii,- .404 Audi ao ill -: ,siz-:
wt.ilor4jit 01 *°-
Lake D
.. glow ill ,,, min 4-11C RalievIVORIONIIM aitls,v414 R.,.
10 ollogrimfaigi* °• _,i 1 4 NAPTiAllif, Teti - v°
il, •••• . 11, 1
N-' ' Alli 4i4L aim i • .-Af i k..*
? smik ,citi
40 or RID iiiilW ik .et+ ..„1".• alft .41 0,4 ge-Vict (<
- Iit A ; tji WO ; A,* Bet No LI cj.:
1! IFILVA,INC g ,Arytta Vi;%;.--r-
AtAilidela - . -` - . • - - . . ----- --- - - - - ge..- . if wi.. ow - - A.rmet ' ••• ''' -a*
.o , r • ,,HWITIIMIEET „„,„/ ,!_c•pl# 1., _ 4%,,ate-yori ..a. .. &re-,
1: '0 v' v* v ... – — *alp • ,* -.6.1, fo. iion °iv- .,
1 641
Park • wa Ik W
1 0 e" 31:1941 11
e v
,,15
4evri... , Hill_ way,
7 -. it • , Park ‘failly.
* : 1 Arafat
‘,.
1111.111r71-7:i --
: (
, ..._,
, .11
...
l•
'...„*.c .,..,.._..._.,.
•', Al.
-.1A,..r.;.. .1:...2a Lyman Blvd (C.R. 18) \
. .
1
1
kJ ...k
b ..
. I
i I
k,
R
t1
Q•
0
a
I ..
/ % I
r t i N I
li • %%
%t
N •/\ .....
1 I • I
f", 0
5 c4
I .
1,• 0 A i
1 I
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting site plan approval for the construction of a 35,000 square foot office
warehouse building on Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition.
The site is zoned PUD-IOP, Planned Unit Development-Industrial Office Park, and bordered by
Chuck's Grinding to the north, Lake Drive West and vacant land to the south, Paulstarr
Enterprises to the west and an industrial vacant lot to the west. The lot area of the
office/warehouse site is 3.56 acres. The site has full access from Lake Drive West and
Commerce Drive.
The applicant is proposing the use of smooth face concrete masonry on all four sides. The PUD
requires that all walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or
appropriate landscaping. Horizontal bands and geometrical shapes of rough face block,
accentuate the building. A pitched element and glass adorn entry ways (four) are proposed into
the building. The overall design provides variation and detail on the facade of the building.
The building will serve office/industrial tenants. It is designed in an "L"shaped configuration.
Parking for vehicles is located along the south portion (front yard) of the site and the truck
loading area is located along the northwest portion of the site. Staff had lengthy discussions with
the applicant regarding the location of the parking lot and the number of parking spaces. We
expressed that we do not wish to see the parking lot visible from Audubon Road. The solution
was to lower the elevation of the parking lot by an average of 4 feet from the elevation of
Audubon Road, and add a retaining wall along the southeast corner of the site. The parking lot
will not disappear from views but will be minimized in size since it will be screened by the
retaining wall,berm, and landscaping. The overall landscape plan is of good quality. However,
certain areas are lacking, such as the easterly portion of the site. The applicant could use a
variety of trees and bushes for additional screening. A meandering berm of 3 to 4 feet in height
runs along the entire edge of the site that does provide screening.
Staff regards the project as a reasonable use of the land. The overall design is sensitive to the
image of the industrial park and meets the standards established as part of the PUD. Based upon
the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the site plan, without variances, with conditions
outlined in the staff report.
BACKGROUND
On January 13, 1992, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for the Chanhassen
Business Center as shown on the attached site plan. The PUD was amended on February 8,
1993, to allow for a church as a permitted use and the final plat for phase I of the project was
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 3
approved. On April 24, 1995, the Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition, subdividing Outlot
C into 7 lots, was approved by the City.
The Chanhassen Business Center is an industrial/office park on 93.7 acres. The original plat
consisted of 12 lots and 2 outlots. The ultimate development for this proposal was to have a total
of 700,000 square feet of building area with a mix of 20% office, 25% industrial and 55%
warehouse. The first phase of final plat approval included two lots. The National Weather
Service (NWS) was built on Lot 1, Block 2 and the Jehovah Witness Church was built on Lot 1,
Block 1 of the ls` Addition. Highland was built on Lot 2, Block 1, Power Systems on Lot 4,
Block 1 and Paulstarr Enterprises was built on Lot 7, Block 1 of the 2nd Addition. One of the
original conditions of the PUD was that the perimeter landscaping was to be installed as well as
the trail. This condition has been met and the landscaping is consistent with the approved
landscaping plan for the original PUD.
On September 25, 1995, the City Council reviewed the replat of Outlot A into Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4,
Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 3`d Addition. Control Products is built on Lot 1, Block 1,
Chanhassen Business Center 3rd Addition.
GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE
OVERVIEW
The proposed building is situated on a corner lot facing Audubon Road, Lake Drive West, and
Commerce Drive. Access is gained off of Lake Drive West and Commerce Drive. Parking is
located to the south of the proposed building. Direct views of the docks, which are located to the
southwest of the building, will not be visible from Lake Drive West nor Commerce Drive.
Trucks will access the site from Commerce Drive.
The building height is 16.8 feet, located 50 feet from the east, 24 feet from the north, 10 feet
from the west, and 110 feet from the southern property line.
The owner of the proposed building is the same owner of the existing building to the west of the
subject site (Paulstarr Enterprises). They intend to use common elements that would tie these
buildings together. This is being achieved through the use of similar color exterior materials.
However, additional elements are being added to the proposed building, such as entry ways with
pitched elements, decorative geometric designs, and a smooth face concrete masonry as the main
exterior element. This variation gives each building its own identity,yet allows a common theme
to exist.
The applicant is proposing the use of smooth face concrete masonry block on all four sides. The
PUD requires that all walls be given added architectural interest through building design or
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 4
appropriate landscaping. Horizontal bands and geometrical shapes of rough face block,
accentuate the building, as well as windows along the south and east elevations. A pitched
element and glass adorn the four entry ways into the building. The overall design provides
variation and detail on the facade of the building.
The north and west elevations contain loading docks. The applicant has not specified the color
of rock face material to be used on these elevations. Also, the decorative horizontal band has not
been extended along these elevations. Staff is recommending the bands be continued and the
white scored burnished concrete masonry units be used which is the same material as that used
on the south and east elevations.
The applicant has not shown the trash enclosure location. The materials used to screen the trash
enclosure shall be the same type of block used on the building.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -
The development standards will remain the same as previously approved with the PUD.
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.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to 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.
1. 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.
2. Warehousing. Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property.
3. Office. Professional and business office, non-retail activity.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 5
FINDING: The proposed uses of light industrial and office are consistent with the parameters
established as part of the PUD.
c. Setbacks
In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and
parking setbacks. The landscape buffer on Audubon Road is 50 feet, south of Lake Drive and
100 feet along the southern property line. The PUD zone requires a building to be setback 50
feet from the required landscape buffer and public right-of-ways. There is no minimum
requirement for setbacks on interior lot lines.
The following setbacks shall apply from the right-of-way:
Building Parkin
Required (interior road system) 25' 15'
Provided 110' 15'
Required (Audubon Road) 50' 20'
Provided 50' 20'
FINDING: The proposed development meets or exceeds the minimum setbacks established as
part of the PUD.
d. Development Standards Tabulation Box
Chanhassen Business Center Second Addition
CBC PUD Lot Size - Bldg Ht. Bldg Sq. Ft. Building Coverage Impervious
Acres (ft.) Surface
PUD 2.74 40' 27,000 23% 59%
Requirement
CH&C 2.74 18' 35,000 29% 69%
The building square footage, building coverage, and impervious surface exceed the requirements
for this specific lot. However, the building is in compliance with the overall requirements for the
Chanhassen Business Center(see Building Square Footage Breakdown for entire development).
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 6
COMPLIANCE TABLE
PUD CH&C
Building Height 2 stories 1 story
Building Setback N-10' E-50' N-41' E-50'
W-10' S-25' W-10' S-110'
Parking stalls 57 83 stalls
Parking Setback N-0' E-20' N-10' E-20'
W-0' S-15' W-0' 5-15'
Hard surface 70% 69% -
Coverage
Lot Area 1 acre 2.74 acres
Variances Required - none
The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. Even though
this development is within ordinance requirements, staff believes the hard surface could be
reduced by adding a landscaped peninsula within the northwest portion of the site, adjacent to the
building and between the loading docks.
Parking Standards: Office -4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet; Warehouse - 1 space per 1,000 for
first 10,000 square feet, then 1 space per 2,000 square feet; Manufacturing - 1 parking space for
each employee on the major shift and 1 space for each motor vehicle when customarily kept on
the premises. Staff has estimated the required parking at 57 spaces. The applicant has provided
83 spaces.
Building Square Footage Breakdown for entire development
Office 20% 120,700 sq. ft.
Manufacturing 25% 150,875 sq. ft.
Warehouse 54.09% 326,425 sq. ft.
Church 0.91% 5,500 sq. ft.
Total 100% 603,500 sq. ft.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 7
FINDING: The proposed development meets the development standards established as part of
the PUD. The city has previously approved the following square footage within the Chanhassen
Business Center:
Development Office Manufacturing Warehouse Church
PUD Requirements
120,700 150,875 326,425 5,500
Church 5,500
National Weather
Service 17,500
Power Systems 7,433 20,317
Paulstarr 7,287 18,017
Enterprises
Highland 1,802 7,359
Control Products 10,000 16,750 - 8,250
Technical 7,749 20,999 10,000
Industrial Sales II
Chuck's Grinding 2,560 14,144
U.S. Postal Service 21,000
Annex
CH&C 8,750 26,250
Percentage of 7.2% 8.04%
CH&C building
from entire
development
Total Remaining 36,619 113,126 265,482 0.0
Building Area
Total Used 84,081 37,749 60,943 5,500
Building Area
Finding: There are three vacant lots remaining within the Chanhassen Business Center
Development. The remaining three lots can easily be accommodated within the allowable
remaining developable square footage.
e. Building Materials and Design
1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural
standards and site design. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material
compatible to the building.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 8
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 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 or coated.
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 by walls of compatible appearing material.
Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be
fully screened by compatible materials.
9. The use of large unadorned, prestressed concrete panels and concrete block 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.
10. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures for all
developments in the Business Center.
FINDING: The applicant is proposing the use of smooth concrete masonry. The PUD requires
that all walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate
landscaping. The plans include horizontal accent bands and geometrical shapes surrounding the
building. The building design in general meets the intent of the PUD design requirements.
f. Site Landscaping and Screening
1. All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I area to be
installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping
being required ahead of individual site plan approvals but we believe the buffer yard and
plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the
higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be
screened. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of
the site plan review process.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 9
2. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces shall be landscaped, rockscaped, or covered
with plantings and/or lawn material.
3. 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. The master landscape plan for the CBC 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.
4. Undulating or angular berms 3' to 4' in height, south of Lake Drive along Audubon Road
shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of Phase I grading and utility construction.
The required buffer landscaping may be installed in phases, but it shall be required where
it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard
landscaping shall be sodded.
5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required
where deemed appropriate.
FINDING: CH&C Building- Eden Trace
Landscaping and Tree Removal
No tree removal is necessary for the site. Existing trees include boulevard trees along Audubon
Road planted by the City and along Lake Drive West and Commerce Drive planted by the
developer. Although not shown on landscape plan, these trees are to remain on site as is and be
incorporated into the applicant's proposed landscape plan.
By ordinance, applicant is required to provide the following: 11 overstory trees for reforestation,
3,819 sq. ft. of landscape area, and 15 trees within the landscape area. Buffer yard requirements
include 15 overstory trees, 30 understory trees and 45 shrubs along Audubon Road.
According to submitted landscape plan and count of existing trees, applicant meets the landscape
area and reforestation requirements. There is a shortage in the buffer yard. A total of 12
additional understory and 23 shrubs need to be added along Audubon Road to meet minimum
requirements.
g. Signage
1. All freestanding signs 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 with the quality of the
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 10
development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the
development. The applicant should submit a sign package for staff review.
2. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign located near the driveway into the
private site. All signs require a separate permit.
3. 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.
4. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights.
FINDING: The applicant has not provided details regarding signage for the site. All signs must
receive a permit prior to installation.
h. Lighting -
1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the
development.
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
foot candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting.
FINDING: The applicant has not provided lighting details or calculations for this development.
However, city ordinance and the PUD standards provide sufficient control to assure compliance
to an established standard.
GRADING& DRAINAGE
The proposed site grading complies with the grading plan for Chanhassen Business Center 2nd
Addition. The first floor elevation will be approximately the same elevation as Audubon Road
and Lake Drive West. An existing earth berm along Audubon Road will remain. The plans
propose on constructing a retaining wall into part of the berm for the south parking lot.
Additional berming should be considered in the southeast corner of the south parking lot to help
break up the massive parking area in front of the building.
A storm sewer system is proposed to convey stormwater runoff from the northerly parking lot
into Commerce Drive. This storm sewer system should also be designed to accommodate the
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 11
roof runoff from the building. The southerly parking lot is proposed to be drained via a storm
sewer pipe into the city's storm sewer system in Lake Drive West. This drainage system must be
redesigned to drain northerly around the building to tie into the storm drainage system from
Commerce Drive. The overall development drainage plan has proposed this entire lot to drain
northwesterly as it currently exists towards Commerce Drive where a storm sewer system
conveys storm runoff to a regional stormwater pond for pretreatment prior to discharging off site.
The building may have to be shifted slightly to the east to accommodate construction of a storm
sewer line along the southwesterly side of the building to the south parking lot.
UTILITIES
Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site from Commerce Drive. A sewer
service is also available from Lake Drive West. The appropriate building permits will be
required for extension of the utilities into the building.
PARKING LOT & CIRCULATION
The parking lot is fairly well laid out. Drive aisles range between 24 and 36 feet wide. Drive
aisles in the south parking lot should be increased to 26 feet wide to accommodate two-way
traffic and turn radiuses for emergency vehicles. The drive aisle into the northerly parking from
Commerce Drive is proposed at 36 feet wide. Given the cul-de-sac dimensions and the number
of existing or proposed driveway curb cuts, staff recommends that this driveway access be
reduced to 30 feet to avoid encroachment on to other driveway approaches. The northerly
parking lot is a massive parking lot area. Staff believes that a green space could be added
towards the middle of the lot adjacent the building between loading docks to break up this sea of
asphalt.
Rock construction entrances are proposed at the driveway access onto Commerce Drive,
however, none at the Lake Drive West access point. A rock construction entrance will also be
needed off of Lake Drive West. Access to the southerly parking lot will involve removal of the
city's existing sidewalk. The plans need to add pedestrian ramps with construction of this drive
aisle to accommodate pedestrian traffic. The northerly curb access onto Commerce Drive shall
incorporate the City's Industrial Driveway Detail Plate. In addition, the applicant should review
the pavement design for the northerly parking lot. The proposed pavement section appears to be
somewhat light for the proposed truck traffic anticipated.
Erosion control measures are proposed around the southwesterly perimeter of the site for the
most part. Additional erosion control fence should be added along the northwesterly side of the
property as well as along Lake Drive West.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 12
SITE PLAN FINDINGS
In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance
with the following:
(1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides,
including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may
be adopted;
(2) Consistency with this division;
(3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing
tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the
general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing
areas;
(4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site
features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the
development;
(5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with
special attention to the following:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community;
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of
the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and
neighboring structures and uses; and
d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives
and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public
streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior
circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement
and amount of parking.
(6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers,preservation of views, light
and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations
which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 13
Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan, the
zoning ordinance, the design guidelines established as part of the Chanhassen Business
Center PUD with the modifications outlined in the staff report, and the site plan review
requirements. The site design is compatible and harmonious with the approved industrial
developments throughout the city.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan 97-3 for a 35,000 square foot
industrial office building, located on Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center Second
Addition as shown on the plans dated received February 28, 1997, 1996, and subject to the
following conditions:
1. Rock construction entrances shall be used at all access points.
2. Drive aisles in the southerly parking lot shall be increased to 26 feet face-to-face wide.
The drive aisle access from Commerce Drive shall be reduced from 36 feet wide to 30
feet wide face-to-face. The applicant shall construct an industrial driveway apron at the
Commerce Drive access point in accordance with City Detail Plate No. 5207.
3. The applicant shall supply the City with detailed stormwater calculations for a 10-year,
24-hour storm event. The southerly parking lot shall be redesigned to drain into the
existing storm sewer from Commerce Drive.
4. The applicant shall incorporate a green space in the northerly parking lot adjacent the
building between loading docks. Additional berming should also be considered in the
southeast corner of the south parking lot.
5. The applicant shall install pedestrian ramps at the sidewalk in conjunction with
construction of the drive aisle from Lake Drive West.
6. Erosion control fence shall be extended along the northwesterly property line and along
Lake Drive West.
7. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. Add hydrant located at south side of building. The options for an additional
hydrant are:
a-1. Tap into water line from Lake Drive West and have hydrant at entrance.
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 14
a-2. Tap into water line on south side of building and install hydrant off of
southeast corner of building(refer to plan for specific location. Minnesota
Uniform Fire Code 1991 Appendix 3-b).
b. Show location of post indicator valve(P.I.V.) on plan.
c. Fire department connection (F.D.C.) will need to be placed on south side of
building by front entrances. Please contact Fire Inspector for specific placement.
d. Fire lane signs will need to be installed in south parking lot. Please refer to plan
areas noted in red. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy#06-1991
(Attached).
8. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement/contract with the city and
provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of
approval.
9. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material.
Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc. are to be
fully screened by compatible materials. As an alternative, the applicant can use factory
applied panels on the exterior to the equipment that would blend in with the building
materials.
10. The freestanding sign shall be limited to one monument sign. 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 with the
quality of the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's
entrance monument and will be used throughout. Each property shall be allowed one
monument sign located near the driveway into the private site. The monument sign must
maintain a ten foot setback from the property line. The signs should be consistent in
color, size, and material throughout the development. The applicant should submit a sign
package for staff review. A separate permit is required for all signage on site.
11. Revise the site plan to show code complying accessible parking. The spaces must be
eight feet wide, and at least one space must have an eight foot wide access aisle. Other
required access aisles may be five feet wide. Revised plans shall be submitted prior to
final site approval.
12. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the
development. 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.
All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than Y2
CH&C Building
April 2, 1997
Page 15
foot candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. Lighting
equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in
the private areas. Wall pack units may be used provided no direct glare is directed off-
site and no more than V2 foot candle of light is at the property line.
13. Park fees shall be paid in accordance with city ordinance requirements. One third of the
fee was paid at the time of platting. At 1997 rates, remaining park fees equal 2.74 acres x
$3,000 per acre or$8,220. This amount shall be paid at the time a building permit is
granted for the CH&C building.
14. Existing trees planted by City and developer will remain on site as is and be incorporated
into the proposed landscaping plan. To meet buffer yard requirements, 12 additional
understory and 23 shrubs must be added to the landscaping along Audubon Road. The
red maples proposed in the parking lot island will be changed to a species recommended
in the City's Approved Tree List for planting in parking lots. A revised landscape plan
will be submitted to the City before final approval.
15. The applicant has not shown the trash enclosure location. The materials used to screen
the trash enclosure shall be the same type of block used on the building.
16. The applicant shall utilize white scored burnished concrete masonry along the north and
west elevations. The accent bands shall be continued on all four elevations."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Chanhassen Business Center Preliminary Plans.
2. Memo from Dave Hempel dated March 25, 1997.
3. Memo from Greg Hayes dated March 11, 1997.
4. Memo from Todd Hoffman dated March 6, 1997.
5. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated March 21, 1997.
6. Site plan dated received February 28, 1997.
,•3• . -7;-. -- -"'
WKS los•)artua N303 — O, 1,441•4051‘..4•••11,3
P144Z•01.42,41 isu.r.CM
IsSEGIMIP Sb3.1•••010 D,....-.rs!.n
LS azssn (s3IN33 SS3NESINE N3sass.N.su sanos aassanto II
1141213N11114 Z6 acessonv 7.--"÷:v1•1•11"."7--1.77:7,1:7-.'2. -Dm*S3110011,1Ctt...1:4,3 t mill.*
3•'4, 11011311111NO3 woa ION
••-•-••.; Pone ANYNivd113114 01,4,7,
.34.0 1.401.3e •14,11}.01/ZW
OrCee
4,4c T.4 i 1 ird I
.,... CaT CS Si.e.c9T .-, ,:...' .1 . .4,o. j, •,;,---.....
,
1.. ........... -661.501.
A ki : i r•-%II\‘ gen .. t-', s..........'..."-, ----...7......-
`1.,..., Z "a 1 :: . 1r•-•.... .."....-... ."'". ...._
. '.. 1 'S \ :2,_8 /it - \ 5; •0 ;:: -.......0. ,1 --...... ;:,-... --- --:::' •*-*".--....1'..-:. •
\'..1\ ."'• .ss IE. a i g \ .4 E ) '-• '' --- .Z;-4.-----_:-- ;;:`-`.'••i.,
'',0., ... •/ \ z g 0 „....„.1 T.. .. A .._ .
,,, isi: cs „ \\... ,A 7 - .-- j,-._:--- ......:•0.3;-_:-...
\....,6 "..\‘',: /4. /,'' r'Ne• .,''''' .3 s-••\ 1.....A': 3,e --- ----- -- :. --. -:....._
-..,,, \.,., - - ,„,.. ...„• II._ vc.s.,\....., „. ,., --...... 7 . -......•,••
. i i : %)._. .,6 ••...\...-,.C.;:i.....'...".::,•94, /Or g
.".r. '.4,, N ---.: , ....k._%.,. • --,1.,... .....::-% ..,,,,,,,-?, a .- _ :.-, .?, _____,-..-1,-._. • -
:,... sv:-. \ - ‘',..- . • ••:,.o. .7 ____ -
/-Asere.'V/N\\I.'S;\,.... %\tf•.hk- -.'sir 8 ....-.....
' /
.,. // ...-.. .
. • t' 1‘ -... \ 7 //
6, -- ••':co''s, -,N.j.• „,. 6 • •
Z , ",..1 11....t ‘ •- •''";::.••,' :;!!! \ 7-2, z?./, z 1. ...1
' ; g
%..) ! u) ,:::::„... . •••. : li
,..),', \,-*-- *.` ./, .
,, • •
....- ......,-,› . - ) . .\./'-...--.- - 5...• , . .
•EE .,, ..:” \ • ••4.3... ' • C ' • ,t
/1-,..• p ' •-i'4;.• g .....;_„. ...::.„,..\:......„,,,,
••=, )- ,T, z :‘, , 1!i*.•.•
d ..,,--, `4.' ..%';4 •
. ii) .8 8 --. / .••••, ;i *
• ':_-\\,., ..
..c . -, ....,21- • 2 i •
...• *-••,,f••••
iNki u)...•;.-'
A -' • ,
- :: z --- •'••i.- •• -
., • •
- 4,, 4 ..,", 13'.....-*. •..* -
.' 4.2, 44 '** 3• !..- ,....,.••...,, \ ...„.; I"
,,,,,,ty... .......• . ..• ••• .
-e...; ..,
I
! 1.....QZ...---.-:•--•••‘ --r----- ---'-'••'----••--' —
• \\., '•
s%\\ ...• •••• -—._ .,..---4.-;.... t _-....,-- i -. ,
, c.,•„, , .... 1....- / .........- _.2„.,•-_,-...-I- • . 0
4•5 t•N;•• ..../ --•••-•-.- A ... ; .:
V, c - ,7-7--- ;5 0
'...''••' \ ....,;:,-. i-E : 0
:I. ! V) 1:.:::, 4 • i
.• \\N• 4';;' i 8 u) i •
s
z
'1- ,,...•• I , (7) 1 : . ,
is. -...,
/ • ai -
\\'7,„`, •,121. ':-7......f'.
- 0 2
§ -•
2 0
• t. ..., tu d tu
tO li ;
os s
...--'s 2 `• .
• • ' u .
-...... .
,,,..
•S k ('''' -.._ .. ., •
-II-': N •:,
. \
II Es Vi
.i -• • • • 1• 1 v
%
A •_ I <t2ti,5
il
r '
a i s s ssi, .
•`' 'I'8 xi r I
il - 4/i
\ s
24 34
wit I
I /. 15 I • -I
1 23 c, ' . '.
4
d 1-
P.:
! r
•1. as * sr_
''''....- •-....s-•••\ .,, . ,
up ii:1 1 1 as cc. :- ...- — --- -- -r--
-;!!‘ s:-.s: - ....-.---.-....-.L..-- -
I 1111; i11111 %..
11 11 I: 1 1 1 1 .\ ---_—___....sr t •NN
* .1. ----\ 7. .
....!
's
I 3_ •
\
11 1 3 1 . 11 1 1 II 11 1 i 1 1 3 1t 21.1 1.1:: : a: : 1.
\ z Lt.'' .1 :4
m •••••, i
II .:...: i %,\ ?•111i \
11 i 4 I 11:1 E qiEsiii 171 liliiiiiti II I11.r.: i. \ rile
i• III I t e 14 f I 11 t f 1.11 1 \ \ i•E 8
I I I 1 '4: %
; !
II 3111111111
1 ' iiq ! I ! 11!1 IiI "iiiiiiiilll Izilii • • • • •I li 3 133 i 1 1 N t"\
-.r.
- I i - I 1
1 \ •
;.:
• C.\
ii 111112212 t
I I 1 * * * * • • • 4. i 1 i C
•\ Z
- -.. 3
1 3-- 1 i 3-- I l• i I 1 II 1 3 111 iilii \ .
•
\ i
\
•
i . .
CITY 4F
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
n.
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff,Planner II
FROM: David Hempel,Assistant City Engineeri.';
DATE: March 25, 1997
SUBJ: Review of Site Plan for CH & C (Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd
Addition) -Land Use Review File No. 97-4
Upon review of the plans prepared by Schoell &Madson, dated February 28, 1997,I offer the
following comments and recommendations:
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
The proposed site grading complies with the grading plan for Chanhassen Business Center 2nd
Addition. The first floor elevation will be approximately the same elevation as Audubon Road
and Lake Drive West. An existing earth berm along Audubon Road will remain. The plans
propose on constructing a retaining wall into part of the berm for the south parking lot.
Additional berming should be considered in the southeast corner of the south parking lot to help
break up the massive parking area in front of the building.
A storm sewer system is proposed to convey stormwater runoff from the northerly parking lot
into Commerce Drive. This storm sewer system should also be designed to accommodate the
roof runoff from the building. The southerly parking lot is proposed to be drained via a storm
sewer pipe into the city's storm sewer system in Lake Drive West. This drainage system must be
redesigned to drain northerly around the building to tie into the storm drainage system from
Commerce Drive. The overall development drainage plan has proposed this entire lot to drain
northwesterly as it currently exists towards Commerce Drive where a storm sewer system
conveys storm runoff to a regional stormwater pond for pretreatment prior to discharging off site.
The building may have to be shifted slightly to the east to accommodate construction of a storm
sewer line along the southwesterly side of the building to the south parking lot.
Sharmin Al-Jaff
March 25, 1997
Page 2
UTILITIES
Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site from Commerce Drive. A sewer service
is also available from Lake Drive West. The appropriate building permits will be required for
extension of the utilities into the building.
PARKING LOT & CIRCULATION
The parking lot is fairly well layed out. Drive aisles range between 24 and 36 feet wide. Drive
aisles in the south parking lot should be increased to 26 feet wide to accommodate two-way
traffic and turn radiuses for emergency vehicles. The drive aisle into the northerly parking from
Commerce Drive is proposed at 36 feet wide. Given the cul-de-sac dimensions and the number or
existing or proposed driveway curb cuts, staff recommends that this driveway access be reduced
to 30 feet to avoid encroachment on to other driveway approaches. The northerly parking lot is a
massive parking lot area. Staff believes that a green space could be added towards the middle of
the lot adjacent the building between loading docks to break up this sea of asphalt.
Rock construction entrances are proposed at the driveway access onto Commerce Drive,
however, none at the Lake Drive West access point. A rock construction entrance will also be
needed off of Lake Drive West. Access to the southerly parking lot will involve removal of the
city's existing sidewalk. The plans need to add pedestrian ramps with construction of this drive
aisle to accommodate pedestrian traffic. The northerly curb access onto Commerce Drive shall
incorporate the City's Industrial Driveway Detail Plate. In addition, the applicant should review
the pavement design for the northerly parking lot. The proposed pavement section appears to be
somewhat light for the proposed truck traffic anticipated.
Erosion control measures are proposed around the southwesterly perimeter of the site for the
most part. Additional erosion control fence should be added along the northwesterly side of the
property as well as along Lake Drive West.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Rock construction entrances shall be used at all access points.
2. Drive aisles in the southerly parking lot shall be increased to 26 feet face-to-face wide.
The drive aisle access from Commerce Drive shall be reduced from 36 feet wide to 30 feet
wide face-to-face. The applicant shall construct an industrial driveway apron at the
Commerce Drive access point in accordance with City Detail Plate No. 5207.
Sharmin Al-Jaff
March 25, 1997
Page 3
3. The applicant shall supply the City with detailed stormwater calculations for a 10-year, 24-
hour storm event. The southerly parking lot shall be redesigned to drain into the existing
storm sewer from Commerce Drive.
4. The applicant shall incorporate a green space in the northerly parking lot adjacent the
building between loading docks. Additional berming should also be considered in the
southeast corner of the south parking lot.
5. The applicant shall install pedestrian ramps at the sidewalk in conjunction with
construction of the drive aisle from Lake Drive West.
6. Erosion control fence shall be extended along the northwesterly property line and along
Lake Drive West.
jms
c: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works
\'cfs1\voLbng'projects\cbc'ot6-blkl site plan.doc
CITY OF
toi, ,,,
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
'tea
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II
FROM: Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector
DATE: March 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Planning Case 97-3 Site Plan Review
I have reviewed the site plan review for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire
Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy
requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional
plans or changes are submitted,the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed.
1. Please add hydrant located at south side of building. The options for an additional hydrant are;
a. Tap into water line from Lake Drive West and have hydrant at entrance.
b. Tap into water line on south side of building and install hydrant off of southeast corner
of building.
Please refer to plan for specific location. Minnesota Uniform Fire Code 1991 Appendix 3-b.
2. Please show location of post indicator valve(P.I.V.)on plan.
3. Fire department connection(F.D.C.)will need to be placed on south side of building by front
entrances. Please contact Fire Inspector for specific placement.
4. Fire lane signs will need to be installed in south parking lot. Please refer to plan areas noted
in red. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy#06-1991 (Attached).
g:lsafetylgh1site97-3
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director
DATE: March 6, 1997
SUBJ: Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2"d Addition, CH & C Building,
Eden Trace Corporation
Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2ne Addition is subject to two-thirds of full park
dedication fees. One-third of the fee was paid at the time of platting. At 1997 rates, remaining
park fees equal 2.74 acres x S3,000 per acre or$8,220. This amount shall be paid at the time a
building permit is granted for the CH & C building.
iI 1
CITY of
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II
FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official I a 4 z
DATE: March 21, 1997 SVT
SUBJECT: 97-3 SPR(CH& C Building, Eden Trace Corporation)
I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, FEB 2 8
19 9 7 , CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT." for the above referenced project.
Analysis:
Parking. Table A-11-A of the 1994 Uniform Building Code requires four accessible parking spaces. The
spaces must be eight feet wide, and at least one space must have an eight foot wide access aisle. Other
required access aisles may be five feet wide.
Recommendations:
The following condition should be added to the conditions of approval.
1. Revise the site plan to show code complying accessible parking. This should be done prior to final site
plan approval.
[ would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early
as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements.
g;\safety\saklmemoslplan\ch&cbld I
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING II 1 41111
PLANNING COMMISSION
S*$A
Wednesday, April 2, 1997 - IIIII�
at 7:00 .m. 1W� s I
111,
City Hall Council Chamberstt= SW690 Coulter Drive • 0
id1
/k
....,i, _ 4
;II
,,-,
VOW
.,
SUBJECT: Site Plan for 35,000 sq. ft. ( „� . ��� how.
Office Warehouse Building 34w1s�: i��'�
j ��� Mut:p �I�tv��
APPLICANT: Eden Trace Corporation -=- " ► 02ti1 sat s J
LOCATION: NW Corner of Audubon Rd.
and Lake Drive West %0111 IIlI INii•V. �i►� m
♦i►e►�Auk � � 'a :►
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The
applicant, Eden Trace Corporation, is requesting site plan review for a 35,000 sq. ft. office
warehouse building located in a PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and located
at the northwest corner of the intersection of Audubon Road and Lake Drive West.
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 Kate at 937-1900 ext. 118. 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 March 20, 1997.
X1)3 X41
I�
Control Products Technical Industrial Sales Construction Heaters
1724 Lake Drive West 1670 Lake Drive West 8360 Commerce Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Paulstarr Enterprises Redmond Products David A. Stockdale
1660 Lake Drive West 18930 West 78th Street 7210 Galpin Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Audubon Partnership 92 Power Systems Chucks Grinding
Attention: Dennis Derlam 8325 Commerce Drive 11300 K-Tel Drive
15241 Creekside Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Minnetonka, MN 55343
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
Kingdom Hall of Jehova's Current Resident Current Resident
Witnesses 8460 Bittern Court 8450 Bittern Court
8300 Audobon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Current Resident Current Resident Current Resident
8451 Bittern Court 8461 Bittern Court 8471 Bittern Court
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Current Resident Current Resident Current Resident
8470 Swan Court 8460 Swan Court 8480 Swan Court
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Collings Properties
1670 Lake Drive West
Chanhassen, MN 55317
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
APPLICANT: E OWNER: CSIVJOIIIMIUMMAIN
ADDRESS: ILA`,-;-CC, Mar 4"h VA' ADDRESS: 10110LM
TELEPHONE(Day time) ( 2 - cl 7.5 9 `4 S 2- TELEPHONE: '1,2
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit _ Vacation of ROW/Easements
Interim Use Permit _ Variance
Non-conforming Use Permit _ Wetland Alteration Permit
Planned Unit Development* _ Zoning Appeal
Rezoning _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review Notification Sign
K Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost**
($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes
and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB)
Subdivision* TOTAL FEE$ 1156. co
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the
application.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
*Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy of
transparency for each plan sheet.
Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
NOTE-When multiple applications are processed,the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME C'i-1 ' C t� c1 j
OCATION L 4`.'-,-`t DI i.►i
LEGAL DESCRIPTION L 0tI<:.,,l~- k C Le...--.L-c),- '-1 "s,At Cc k. 2 .=s
` (a 1� . 4t 1-1-2--,—
,
TOTAL ACREAGE 2 . 1`{
WETLANDS PRESENT YES u NO
PRESENT ZONING () ,1(
REQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning
Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
" determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written
.ice 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.
1 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.
04 <_ T�
cQ-^A. ti4,-c..: {-4) 3 - Lt' }'. ri
Sign ure of Ap• icant Date
�,i
3-- y— til
ig ire of ee Owner Date
Application Received on 3/4/9 7 Fee Paid 150 . try No. �°47L-9 7
:e 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.
J_I
CITY OF
CHANIIASSEN690 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: March 27, 1997
SUBJ: Organizational Items
a. Election of Chair and Vice Chair
The Planning Commission should make nominations and select a Chair and Vice Chair
for 1997.
b. Adoption of Planning Commission Bylaws
The bylaws should be reviewed and adopted every year by the Planning Commission.
The commission should discuss any comments or changes they feel necessary at this time.
c. Liaison Attendance at City Council Meetings
In the past, a schedule has been formulated where all the Planning Commissioners would
rotate attending the city council meetings. The commission should discuss whether or not
to elect one person to attend or to schedule all commissioners on a rotating basis during
the year.
BYLAWS
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
The following bylaws are adopted by the City Planning Commission to facilitate the performance
of its duties and the exercising of its functions as a commission established by the City Council
pursuant to the provision of Subdivision 1, Section 462.354 Minnesota State Statutes annotated.
SECTION 1 - DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES - PLANNING COMMISSION:
1.1
The Planning Commission shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council through carrying
out reviews of planning matters. All final decisions are to be made by the City Council.
1.2
The Planning Commission shall prepare a Comprehensive Plan for the future development of the
city and recommend on amendments to the plan as they arise.
-
1.3
The Planning Commission shall initiate, direct, and review the provisions and standards of the
Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations and reports its recommendations to the City
Council.
1.4
The Planning Commission shall review applications and proposals for zoning ordinance
amendments, subdivisions, street vacations, conditional use permits and site plan reviews and
make their recommendations to the City Council in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Ordinance.
1.5
The Planning Commission shall hold public hearings on development proposals as prescribed by
the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances.
1.6 - Establishment of Subcommittees
The Planning Commission may, as they deem appropriate, establish special subcommittees
comprised solely of their own members.
SECTION 2 -MEETINGS:
2.1 - Time
Regular meetings of the Commission shall be held on the first and third Wednesday of each
month at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 690 Coulter Drive,unless otherwise directed
by the Chairperson, in which case at least 24 hours notice will be given to all members. Regular
meetings shall have a curfew of 10:30 p.m. which may be waived at the discretion of the
Chairperson. All unfinished business will be carried over to the next regular Planning
Commission meeting.
When the regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, there shall be no Planning Commission
meeting.
2.2 - Special meetings
Special meetings shall be held upon call by the Chairperson, or in his/her absence, by the Vice-
Chairperson or any other member with the concurrence of four other members of the
commission, and with at least 48 hours of notice to all members. Notice of all special meetings
shall also be posted on the official city bulletin board.
2.3 -Attendance:
Planning Commission members shall attend not less than seventy-five (75%)percent of all
regular and special meetings held during a given (calendar) year, and shall not be absent from
three (3) consecutive meetings without prior approval of the Chairperson. Failure to meet this
minimum attendance requirements shall be cause for removal from the commission by action of
the City Council.
SECTION 3 - COMMISSION COMPOSITION, TERMS AND VACANCIES:
3.1 - Composition
The commission shall consist of seven(7) voting members. Seven members shall be appointed
by the Council and may be removed by the Council.
3.2 - Terms and Vacancies
The council shall appoint seven members to the commission for terms of three (3) years.
Vacancies during the term shall be filled by the council for the unexpired portion of the term.
Every appointed member shall, before entering upon the charge of his/her duties, take an oath
that he/she will faithfully discharge the duties of his office. All members shall serve without
compensation.
3.3 - Quorum
Four planning commission members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
Whenever a quorum is not present, no final or official action shall be taken at such meeting.
SECTION 4 - ORGANIZATION:
4.1 - Election of Officers
At the first meeting in April of each year, the planning commission shall hold an organization
meeting. At this meeting,the commission shall elect from its membership a Chairperson and
Vice-Chairperson. This shall be done by secret ballot. Each member shall cast its ballot for the
member he wishes to be chosen for Chairperson. If no one receives a majority,balloting shall
continue until one member receives the majority support. Vice-Chairperson shall be elected
from the remaining numbers of the same proceeding.
4.2 - Duties of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson
The Chairperson or in his/her absence, the Vice-Chairperson, shall preside at meetings, appoint
committees from its own membership, and perform other such duties as ordered by the
commission.
The Chairperson shall conduct the meeting so as to keep it moving rapidly and efficiently as
possible and shall remind members,witnesses and petitioners to preserve order and decorum and
to keep comments to the subject at hand.
The Chairperson shall not move for action but may second motions.
SECTION 5 - PROCEDURE:
5.1 - Parliamentary Procedure
Parliamentary Procedure governed by Roberts Rules of Order Revised, shall be followed at all
regular meetings. At special work session meetings, and when appropriate, the commission may
hold group discussions not following any set parliamentary procedures except when motions are
before the commission.
SECTION 6 - PUBLIC HEARINGS:
6.1 - Purpose of Hearings
The purpose of a hearing is to collect information and facts in order for the commission to
develop a rational planning recommendation for the City Council.
6.2 - Hearing Procedure
At hearings, the following procedure shall be followed in each case:
a. The Chairperson shall state the case to be heard.
b. The Chairperson shall call upon the staff to present the staff report. Required reports
from each city department shall be submitted to the Planning Commission before each
case is heard.
c. The Chairperson shall ask the applicant to present his case.
d. Interested persons may address the commission, giving information regarding the
particular proposal.
e. Petitioners and the public are to address the Chairperson only,not staff or other
commissioners.
f. There shall be no dialogue among the commissioners giving information regarding the
particular proposal.
(The Planning Commission members may ask questions of persons addressing the
commission in order to clarify a fact,but any statement by a member of any other purpose
than to question may be ruled out of order.)
•J
g. After all new facts and information have been brought forth, the hearing shall be closed
and interested persons shall not be heard again. Upon completion of the hearing on each
case, the Planning Commission shall discuss the item at hand and render a decision. The
Planning Commission, if it so desires, may leave the public record open for written
comments for a specified period of time.
h. The Chairperson shall have the responsibility to inform all the parties of their rights of
appeal on any decision or recommendation of the Planning Commission.
6. 3 - Schedule
At meetings where more than one hearing is scheduled, every effort shall be made to begin each
case at the time set in the agenda,but in no case may an item be called for hearing prior to the
advertised time listed on the agenda.
SECTION 7 - MISCELLANEOUS:
7.1 - Planning Commission Discussion
a. Matters for discussion which do not appear on the agenda may be considered and
discussed by the commission only when initiated and-presented by the staff and shall be
placed at the end of the agenda.
b. Matters which appear on the agenda as open discussion items will not be recorded
as minutes.
7.2 - Suspension of Rules
The commission may suspend any of these rules by a unanimous vote of the members present.
7.3 - Amendments
Amendment of these bylaws may be made at any regular or special meeting of the Planning
Commission but only if scheduled on the meeting agenda in advance of the meeting.
7.4 - Review
At the first meeting in April of each year, these bylaws shall be read and adopted by the Planning
Commission.
Chairperson: Date:
4
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS 1997 SCHEDULE FOR
ATTENDANCE AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Planning Commissioner will receive City Council packets as shown on the following schedule:
Conrad January 13
Farmakes January 27
Joyce Februrary 10
Skubic February 24
Peterson March 10
Blackowiak March 24
Brooks April 14
Conrad April28
Sidney May 12
Joyce May 27 (Tuesday)
Skubic June 9
Peterson June 16
Blackowiak July 14
Brooks July 28
Conrad August 11
Sidney August 25
Joyce September 8
Skubic September 22
Peterson October 13
Blackowiak October 27
Brooks November 10
Conrad November 24
Sidney December 8
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 19, 1997
Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Allyson Brooks, Bob Skubic, Alison Blackowiak, Craig Peterson,
LuAnn Sidney, Kevin Joyce, and Ladd Conrad
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and
Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO REZSONE 102 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2.
AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL) LOCATED AT THE S3
QUADRANT OF HIGHWAYS 5 AND 41, GATEWAY, STEINER DEVELOPMENT.
Public Present:
Name Address
Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Boulevard
Rick Wrase 8175 Hazeltine Boulevard
Fred Rickter Applicant
John Uban
Tom Kordonowy Steiner Development
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item.
Peterson: Any questions for staff?
Brooks: I have some questions. Is there any Federal...for this project or any State funding that's
being used for this project or State permit?
Aanenson: Well the access possibly...
Brooks: What about wetland?
Aanenson: There's no DNR wetlands or...
Brooks: I guess,they're not going to fill any wetlands?
Aanenson: Yes there will be some wetland mitigations that they will have to be permitting. The
City would be improving...
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
Brooks: But they are, how old are these structures that are being demolished?
Aanenson: The farmstead, I'll have to let the applicant talk to that. Whether or not they're
historic. There is a historic piece, the Wrase one and we've spoken to the Wrase's. That's
certainly something, if they would decide to sell, that we would want to move that home and put
it, as part of the large park that we're talking, as a possible interpretative center for that park.
Brooks: Okay,but if that house is eligible for that and you move it, it will lose it's eligibility.
Okay, so this is something to keep in mind. Also, it says that instead of an EIS you're
recommending an AUAR. What exactly is that?
Aanenson: What it does it scopes the same issues. It's on a little bit shorten review process. We
believe that because of the level of detail that we do our ordinances already, our tree ordinance,
our wetland ordinance, we already require so much in our city, that we're not requiring anything
above and beyond that.
Brooks: So are they going to be required to do a...resource survey?
Aanenson: Yes...
Brooks: Okay. You have to...three sites on the Villages so, and this with wetlands would be
another good area.
Aanenson: They've already done...
Brooks: Thanks.
Peterson: Other questions of staff?
Joyce: Kate, the only thing I can think of, a quick question. What happens if you put Coulter
Boulevard through, what kind of impact is that going to have on what we're talking about here?
I didn't quite understand that.
Aanenson: The Coulter Boulevard project,when we did the Autumn Ridge, we looked at the
soils and that...touch down point has already been established because there is poor soils in that
area and there was a lot of discussion of whether or not we could abandon that...but we believe
with the volumes on Highway 5 that it is a good alternative, east/west connector that's always
been identified in the City's comprehensive plan to have a connector...
Joyce: But will it impact the conceptual plan that you have here?
Aanenson: ...actually what it does, Coulter...significant change in grade between this
development and State Highway 41.
2
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
Joyce: So Coulter will stop right, or you will have to turn right?
Aanenson: Yeah, we have this movement coming in to the north/south.
Joyce: Okay, yeah. I guess that's my point. There's going to be a T right there is what their plan
is, right?
Aanenson: Well they could build...temporary cul-de-sac before it gets to TH 41.
Joyce: Okay.
Aanenson: They're going to need an east/west connection... Eventually this will come through.
It's when Highway 41 is widened...
Joyce: Okay, thanks.
Skubic: Kate, which businesses qualify as service commercial?
Aanenson: When we put...what we talked about is maybe some restaurants, a gas station, bank,
day care...but it's certainly not going to be a big box user or anything like that...
Sidney: I had a question about the mix of commercial residential and as I understand a PUD can
have up to 25% non whatever it is zoned for buildings and things in it. And they're proposing
24.99% right now. I'm wondering about the ratio of commercial to residential in that 24.99%. If
there's a rationale for more commercial than residential or what is that ratio?
Aanenson: That's a good question. We really haven't done that many true mixes like this. I
guess when they went back to the City Council, the area that we're talking about for residential is
probably the most wooded piece. Concerned about the sensitivity of the development of that and
some of that can build with the topography in mind. Certainly the intent of that commercial is to
support the industrial, not necessarily the residential. The residential certainly can benefit from it
but...
Peterson: Other questions?
Blackowiak: I have a couple quick ones. Talked about discharge into Chaska's system. 20,000
gallons per day. Is that something that's feasible? That the applicant feels is going to be a
workable amount for them.
Hempel: Again this is an interim situation until we're able to extend sewer and water services
out to the site, which those utilities could be extended this summer out to that area.
Blackowiak: But 20,000 would be sufficient until something is extended to them? I mean I have
no.
3
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Hempel: That would be a question for the applicant.
Aanenson: That's something, as this evolves...that they can meet that.
Blackowiak: Okay. And secondly, the Park Commission, they met last night regarding this?
Aanenson: I apologize, it's actually next week.
Blackowiak: Oh, it's next week so the 18`h, all right. That's it for me.
Peterson: Before we call the applicant up I just want to remind you all that, the total
Commission, this is a concept approval so the developers and staff are really just looking for a
more general feedback and direction so they can move ahead and get more detail so we will see
this again. So with that in mind does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning
Commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address.
Fred Richter: Good evening. I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development. We're in Wayzata.
Let me just start off by introducing the gentlemen here with me tonight as part of our team. Tom
Kordonowy, Steiner Development. Then our planning consultants from Dahlgren, Shardlow&
Uban, Howard Dahlgren and John Uban. ...we have over the years worked a lot with the city
staff. Gone through a lot of gyrations and various directions...and kind of enter into a
dialogue... what we think is workable on this site...not only to Steiner Development but also to
the City in it's vision. ...have industrial with the residential, trying to work the wetlands and
kind of relate to the...Park Commission's desires and so on. So I think in a nutshell, we're pretty
in tune with city staff and have some ideas that we want to share with you and I think my purpose
is introductory. Is to introduce Steiner Development...proposal and then John Uban will go kind
of a detailed... We've got a few,just images. This is a office industrial PUD. I guess the first
question you ask yourself, what is an office industrial park. What does Steiner Development
bring to the table to guide it that way. These images are a project that we accomplished in the
southwest quadrant of the metro area. ...Steiner and Koppleman, residential branch to
commercial has done a lot of development in the southwest. We're very sensitive to some of the
topographical as well as project features. It's our role as a developer to be the component of
buying the marketplace... and livable project in detail. This project here, I put together the
Edenwood. It's down by Valley View in Eden Prairie and I think one of the overall features in
this development... This is an office showroom type of project that was built in the late 80's.
Another project we did a little further out this way, is one completed just in the last couple years.
It was more of a smaller site so the overall site issues weren't the same but again it was trying to
take the industrial building, which by nature is long and horizontal and not...talking about office
industrial often 20%office. The rest of it is storage, distribution and in some cases light
assembly... It's all driven by the southwest metro market,which is... We've built and manage
over 2 million square feet of industrial area and we're constantly seeing things grow and change
and in some cases we're talking... This project, it sits on a wetland...the landscaping. I think
some trails around the pond... Other Steiner Development projects have ranged over the years,
our home building on TH 101. This could be an example of the commercial, which is a small
quasi professional type building. We've done a medical building out in Waconia attached to the
4
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
hospital... The large building here is the... building in Chaska. You can see that
probably...working in Chaska we came over the years knowing that their interest in Highway 41
and keeping it, more of a rural feel... When you look at materials in an industrial area like this,
our building here, this is actually right across 82"d. It's the United Postal building. You have a
mixture of brick and masonry and the architecture is again an office industrial multi-tenant, but
by and large we'll be...is masonry, either brick or architectural block or architectural precast so
we can photograph to show those combinations. I say architectural precast. That needs to be
added...there's elements, windows and other... One other thing that... I think in summary,
Steiner sees after being involved with this for over...the land is owned by members of Steiner
Development and other individuals. We've had several inquiries in the last three years. Specific
ones and we feel now is the time to move forward. The timing issue is crucial in the sense that
we're partners with the City. The utilities are brought in, area wide assessments in place, we
have...marketplace on several proposals... We have a first phase proposal for an industrial
user... This is important because it establishes the overall framework of the development. ...pay
back the utility and street improvements, and we have that understanding with an end user. A
local corporation. The other thing in the PUD I think to focus on, the main issue tonight is
conceptual and that is...the overall concurrence that this should be guided under this framework.
The framework being the 150 acres by the time we take out the TH 41 and TH 5 easements, 146
acres. Then we take out the parkland, wetland...developable and we think because of the nature
of this land, certain parts of it do lend itself better to residential and then some for commercial,
we're into a ratio of approximately 67 acres that are industrial. Approximately 14 are commercial
and then the residential, 23. And John Uban will go into that in detail so I don't want to get too
far... But I think the thing I do want to stress...to answer questions and try to, that you
understand a lot of the background, not only from our own work but the city staff has come into
this...
John Uban: Good evening, I'm John Uban. I'm here really to give you an overview of the
property and some of the design considerations that we're looking at, including the industrial
business part of a varying piece of property. It's varied in that there's a quality wetland with
extensive trees and so forth. On this initial sketch we've indicated a road system that goes
through the property. Here's Highway 41. Highway 5. We've indicated some of the pioneering
natural features of the site. In green, there's a wooded corner of the site. It's hard to tell on the
screen but these two larger wetlands have been there for quite a while, and some of the sort of the
extensions you found were agricultural drainage systems which we're working...under the new
criteria which portions are wetlands and which are not. However, about half of this wetland has
always been under cultivation over the last 50 years. And so it has returned, on the wet years,
been turned into a more natural state and then is cultivated historically during the dry periods.
We saw all of this with the natural systems as being a very important part of the site. And when
we first came to the City we proposed a park over all of these natural features of the site, and that
would be donated to the city. And that really, at first we really did not have that notion in
the...but over the years with the wisdom of creating this natural park has grown with the citizens
and city staff and we're really pleased at this point that 36 acres of this natural area is part of our
plan as dedication to the city. These wetlands are quite frankly some of the most beautiful ones
I've ever seen because of the growth that is around them and they offer very nice amenities to be
enjoyed by everyone. And so we are anticipating in the center area,that the 36 acre park. The
5
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
wooded areas at this time are contemplated for a residential type development. They have the
higher amenities. They have the nice views into the parkland. This open space. They have
trees...and they're very nice. Also, in building...the park department,they may be interested in
part of that southeast corner. We do not know and we have to meet with them next week and so
we will be finding out more as we go through this process what input from the neighbors... If
that happens, a residential development in this corner will be... We have about 1.2 million
square feet that we...25% of that is proposed for other uses of support commercial and
residential. About twice as much residential as there is commercial. So there's an actual...
There's nothing really magic about that... The other thing I'd like you to notice on this diagram
are where the lines are close together is where we find the steeper terrain in the property. In
order to develop this we have to do a fair amount of grading. Several things are happening
around the property that we have to adjust to. First of all, Highway 41 is scheduled to be lowered
so we'll need to be grading portions of this site to accomplish that. And that is sometime in the
future, and we don't know exactly when that will be scheduled. Sometime shortly after Highway
5 is completed we believe. Additionally we are leaving some of the natural growth in place. For
instance this area where the slopes provides a wonderful view back towards the property. We
anticipate this would be a great place for a restaurant, theme restaurant...or a hotel... The rest of
the site will be reterraced to match into the property lines that separate the different uses. And so
what takes place is a terracing. Not a leveling of the site but a terracing. Where we have one
building set higher or lower than the one next to it with slopes in-between. Then we're
proposing also...natural state so you'll once again see those edges of slopes between the
buildings screening from each other the back side. Overall this gives you a polarized version of
the land uses. We have park on the eastern side. Residential, associated with that park, and this
is the area with the highest amenities. At the entrance to Highway 5, restaurant, hotel type of
services up on top. And at 82"d, more convenience type commercial, whether it's a gas station,
bank, those sorts of facilities. The rest of it, then moving over, will be industrial business type of
uses. The road system supports that. This leg of the road will probably be the last one built.
...have to be done with Highway 41. All of the roads anticipate this terracing of these lots so
their grading has to adjust proportionately. So the whole site really has to be designed as one
element...out of 150 acres, 62 acres is industrial, 14 is commercial, 23 is residential,park is 36
and right-of-way 13. That's how it breaks down. The additional things that you will see as we
bring, in front of you again will be the amenities referred as the design elements that we're
putting together to tie this as a single business park. This is very guide...does not equal a tree
but it's to show the general intent and ideas that we're trying to accomplish. The plan here
shows the sort of pairing of trees around the perimeter. This is to replicate orchard type
plantings. This is... The area used to be an orchard. Next to an orchard. It's the closest to the
Arboretum. This technique has been used I believe around the elementary school and so this is
our theme for the perimeter. To use flowering trees in a setting of replication of orchard
plantings. We also anticipate monumentation and signage at the entrances. At three points. We
also anticipate the gateway type feature at the very corner of TH 5 and TH 41. Within the
development a streetscape that will include clustered trees. Not just trees lined up evenly along
the street but placed in clusters. Lighting, individual signage. The whole package put
together...coordinated. In addition we propose several ponds and so the trail system that will
integrate the site with the park. These are basic elements that we'll be bringing forward in
addition to our... Overall the concept is reflecting this idea of returning...some historical point
6
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
that of an orchard and at the same time create an interior matching in with the natural setting of
the park. Just to summarize, we have to do a phasing of this development. Utilities come from
the south, from Chaska to begin with. The utilities from Chanhassen are brought in from the east
at a later date so there's a sequence of events. Each phase is sort of... on the development and it
allows us to grade portions of the site at one time. We do not anticipate mass grading. Right
now it's a little bit different scale from the sketch that we've completed. Phase I will include
both development on 82nd Street, a portion of the road system and working with the Park
Department on the timing of the east/west road. Phase II then is completing the north/south road
with the lots that abut this area. This north/south road we anticipate being installed
approximately when the completion of Highway 5 is done. And that allows that north/south road
to act as a by-pass to Highway 41 when that is complete so we're trying to tie the interior
development to help offset against the... The last phase is along Highway 41. That is the last
improvement. It also, we're saving this corner parcel, or group of parcels, for the very last.
We're anticipating holding that to really see how, you know some premium development. We
don't know what it is. Just something that the City will really go for. We don't know exactly at
this point how long that will take but we're certainly willing to wait to find out. I think that's
about it. If you have any questions, we're here to answer them. This is where we're at and when
we come back again...
Peterson: Any questions from commissioners?
Conrad: Sure. Why do you need the residential on this? Why, it's the first thing you're going to
develop. What's your logic in terms of persuading us that we should take our industrial and turn
it residential, which may be a loss for us and we're probably not going to be able to find more
industrial land in this city. So I guess I'd just like you to tell us, is there a demand right now for
residential and that's what you're responding to?
John Uban: Well there certainly is a demand and we did bring this through one time to be
reviewed as all residential and we found the market was interested in this parcel for residential
development. I think the important part is why residential in that particular spot and that really is
a beautiful spot. ...looking at that area, it is much more of a residential site than it is an
industrial site. It has the amenities of view. The association with the future park and trails.
Close facilities to the elementary school. It has many of the features that you would really like to
have in a residential development. Now it happens to be in a development here that will have
other businesses around it. So it has to be done carefully and we're fortunate that most likely it
will be buffered by park on almost all sides except the west side and that side we are in control
of. We already are looking at the development of the lot. This one right here that looks directly
across the street from them. That will be a very handsome building. Properly landscaped up
front. Car parking perhaps in the front with all the loading hidden around back. And on the
residential side there could be berming and...to make that work. We also like to have a variety
of uses in industrial parks. Opus is an example where that took place. Much has been learned
from that. We're finding that, we've been planning...relationship of business, housing and
commercial coming closer together. Rather than placing one thing way over here and...and then
get in your car and drive over here... Now that will happen no matter what we do, but we think
that designing and building things to a high standard where residential and businesses and other
7
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
things really do have to take place in close proximity and perform well. So we're designing
something that performs well enough to accommodate.
Conrad: What kind of residential are you envisioning right now?
John Uban: Primarily townhouses would be our idea of what would happen today. Small lot
single family maybe or townhouses. Not apartments... On the other side of TH 41,before the
Arboretum purchased that.
Conrad: What do you envision on the corner? The biggest lot you have, right on the intersection
of TH 41 and TH 5?
Fred Richter: ...at this point in time we don't have a specific vision. Your question, your first
question about residential and timing. Right now...marketable down here and as you move this
way the time frame is further out. In the last year and a half.
Conrad: Because there's not the demand?
Fred Richter: There's not the demand for, to really justify... Right now there's a demand for a
certain amount of office industrial,but we see this corner as being office, more corporate
identity. In the last year and a half we have talked to people who have maybe entertained that
area but they've found sites further in Eden Prairie...494. It's our belief, as John said, as we
move this way and start the quality development here, it's really in our best interest and the city's
best interest to wait and see if we can't get something...take advantage of the exposure... One of
the things that we...we can't get too out of line with our development costs...metro competition.
As nice as we all think this area is, we're competing with Shakopee. We're competing with
people moving out to areas... We know the quality of the site, a better site...but we still want to
keep competitive so we see that Phase I being very sensitive... So we're like to see stay with this
plan to give us as much flexibility. We're not sure if it's a cul-de-sac or it could even be a loop
road. It's somewhat conceptual over in this corner. I think going back to your question, you
asked earlier about why residential. The other thing that you can see in this diagram here,
industrial office, what's marketable today, really would just destroy. We have problems with this
wetland... Residential is being tucked in. We could save a lot of the trees...
Conrad: When you come back it would be very persuasive to show how residential fits there and
is more sensitive to the environment than industrial. Very definitely. I want to see that so that's
important.
Fred Richter: ...townhouses. A 2,000 square foot or...footprint versus office industrial building
which in today's marketplace is literally 50,000 square feet...2,000 you can move with the
topography versus 50 has to be just flat.
Conrad: Kate, are we looking for more land for homes right now?
8
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Aanenson: No. I guess that's the point that we raised. Frankly we have a lot of that. I think
what we're saying, our recommendation is to come in with...product or a different price point.
...issue that we have. It's got to be something different.
Conrad: And it could be, you're saying different affordable.
Aanenson: That's one option. Or just different architecturally. Price point or something that
we've got a lot of townhouses being approved. Autumn Ridge right to the east. I think you want
to see, to give them that, we want to see something different.
Conrad: What property's to the south? Is that Chaska?
John Uban: That is Chaska and there are a variety of industrial uses but some of them have a lot
of open space...
Fred Richter: ...but there's Chaska Business Center here and another smaller corporate use.
Conrad: When I look at one lot here, can I envision one building? Is that what we are assuming?
Maybe not on that corner lot but when you divide this up, how should we right now respond to
how you've divided them into the 9 or whatever number lots here. One major building per lot or
is it just, this is how you think you're going to be able to see it off or?
John Uban: Primarily yes. One building per lot. Some of them may combine together, if
there's... Up here this may become two restaurants versus one restaurant, depending on the size.
If it's small, a 5,000 square foot restaurant you could probably get two buildings there, versus the
larger theme...
Aanenson: ...that's one of the reasons why we want to do a PUD on this property. They've
talked to some users, as they've indicated. We've talked to them too. We're happy with the
people that are out looking at this, and it may just happen that someone wants to...on that corner.
A big corporate user or something else. That would be fine with us. What we're trying to deal
with in the environmental assessment...and then if they snap it into different lots, that's okay.
There will be some...
Conrad: What's the biggest concern you have with the City right now and how we're fitting in?
John Uban: Well getting it nailed down I guess.
Fred Richter: ...to move the project forward. Our intent is to try to take an opportunity with...
Not only take your leadership and guidance but we've got...study and we're well aware of the
nature of the you know... One other thing, kind of follow-up. ...This is TH 5. This is TH 41
going to Chaska. This is the property under consideration. This is Peavey Road. This is all
Chaska. What's interesting, as we look at this, developing this we have done studies... Until that
happens, the type of land we're offering...for this to become marketable. So to a large degree we
see kind of the projects kind of moving up out of Chaska and at the same time we're constantly
9
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
capturing the amenities coming down TH 5 from 494. Right now 494 and TH 5...would be more
than happy to... The 5 corridor is probably where... Going back to the major site building...
Peterson: Other questions?
Joyce: What portion of this is going to be a TIF District? First phase of it and everything
involved here. I noticed you said in the first phase could be where you have the.
Fred Richter: I don't see Todd. The TIF district, I know it's driven by the blue.
Joyce: The industrial portion of it.
Fred Richter: The industrial. Kate, some of the red can be in the TIF district, is that true?
Aanenson: Yes. In order for the city...
Peterson: Other questions of the applicant?
Brooks: I'd like you to readdress the landscaping issues. I sort of liked what you showed until
you said a tree doesn't necessarily equal a tree and that started concerning me a little. As you go
west from Paisley Park studios, right now you get a real nice feel of Carver County as being
agricultural. And when I see this, I just would like a better feel, you know I'm a little nervous if
you put your restaurant and everything right up to Highway 5, then all we're going to have is a
strip that's continuing all the way down to, well eventually unfortunately Waconia so I just, I
would like a little bit better sense of if you plant to set some of these things back a ways so that
the visual is less intrusive. The other question I have is when you border Chaska, I once heard
the Mayor of Chaska say, and rightly so, that he wanted to green belt his city so that when you
move from Chanhassen to Chaska, you know you've left one town and entered another town,
which is a fair thought. Otherwise it just becomes endless suburbia. I would also be interested in
hearing how you plan to landscape the division between Chan and Chaska.
John Uban: I'll take both of those, and when I commented that a tree does not equal a tree here it
means this is diagrammatic and we'll have more trees than what you see here.
Brooks: Well that's good.
John Uban: This is here for conceptual to try and get a feel for it because we haven't gotten into
the detail of it yet. We do recognize the importance of having an attractive...on Highway 5.
Then with the issue of the restaurant, we have a lot of steep slopes in here and this will have to be
sort of uniquely defined you know back and forth. How much should be landscaped. How much
is for parking and things like that. The real opportunity comes from the larger site as you form
the corner and that corner is where everyone stops and is part of sort of the gateway feeling
through the Arboretum as you head that way. You know north, Minnewashta Park and...Chaska
so we recognize that there are a lot of important ingredients that have to happen. And perhaps
the City and the Arboretum have some...feeling that surrounding that intersection you know with
10
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
trees or something to form a very unified pattern that could take place around the intersection.
We only have one corner. But those things we'll explore with the city and we've also talked to
the City of Chaska and they have actually given us some suggestions on how to incorporate
Highway 41 into their theme as you go through town. And now when it comes to separating
Chanhassen from Chaska at the border, you have to recognize that Chaska didn't do their share.
And we hopefully contributed to our share by working with the Arboretum and...Chanhassen
portion, at least on the west side. On our side we just, we'll have an attractive development... as
well as what Chaska did. Now what happens, what makes these marked difference...how the
water tower is treated on the Wrase parcel. Something there might happen that might give some
identity to that separation. But we'll have landscaping throughout but because 82nd Street is
really on the line, there's no open space that can separate Chaska from Chanhassen. And so the
other separation is then as you move to the east, and you know we're keeping all these wetlands
and so forth, and if the park wants to expand, that also will help create a very definite separation.
Whole different flavor...so I think we'll try to do our best but we have to practical and we have
recognized many things that we can do and we'll be bringing those details to you.
Brooks: Yeah, I think you're just in a visually sensitive area, especially with the Arboretum so
it's just important to keep in mind.
Fred Richter: I think we...Chaska really invested a lot of money into protecting their
"downtown". Being that the road leads away from them, the more natural terrain and less rural
town center... At the same time we're in a very sophisticated suburban environment that needs
industrial...so I think what John is really describing is the landscaping that is... At the same time
the residents are going to need some commercial support...
Peterson: Other questions?
Sidney: I was wondering if you could give me a better sense of what you meant by terracing. I
was wondering about, I hope you have pictures or something.
John Uban: I do have just a quick sketch. It's diagrammatic in the sense that there's not...on the
site but this would indicate an upper and lower terrace. It will define... Where this land has
some slope to it,portions of it get flatten out to accommodate the buildings and parking...rear
portions of the site. And then we have the change in slope and what we're proposing is the
natural... slope. Nothing that we would mow. Put natural materials back on to...natural feeding
and then following up with naturalized planting of trees and shrubs. When you do that on the
slope you use lots of small material that...very readily and yet on the upper portions obviously
you have sort of shade trees... What's also nice is that we control the drainage so that we won't
have erosion in there. There will be control of the water that...controlled drain system that will
minimize the amount of water that would want to run down the slope. And all of this together
then starts to re-establish the natural edge. And we want to do this so that each building has it's
own setting. Has sort of a frame or wrapping around it and although this you know, seed it and
small things to begin with, with patience these things do grow very quickly, especially after the
fifth year...
11
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Sidney: Are you making use of natural the topography?
John Uban: Readjusting. ...I mean the grade on the top and the bottom, we just have to adjust
that and make plateaus at different levels...
Peterson: What kind of elevation drops are we talking about? When you go back to the top map.
Can you give us some sense of what areas and how large of drops you're talking about?
John Uban: From the very highest point to the very lowest across the site, there's about 100 feet
of drop. The upper portion will be lower, I think around 15 feet, depending upon the elevation of
TH 41. And then as you terrace in three sections, so we have probably 20 to 30 feet in a terrace.
So that's...maybe around the height of the building itself. We don't have... These will be
different elevations and I think that will in of itself create an interesting arrangement, more so
than you would find in sort of a flat corn field type of industrial park.
Blackowiak: I have a quick question about the residential. Based on the plan, it seems like
they're going to be somewhat landlocked in the middle of an industrial park to the west and an
industrial park to the south. And no other residential around it. Can you speak to that issue?
And also, do you have a potential number of residents that would be in that area, based on what
you envision at this point in time.
John Uban: Right now our program we anticipate, between 100 to 120 units in that area. You
probably, 2 to 2 %i people per unit. But the number of people, we don't know how many people.
Whether it's isolated, there really is a neighborhood just 100 feet away from it. The Trotter's
Ridge neighborhood really is right here. Directly to the southeast...so the two together I think
form a very nice edge from one residential development into the next.
Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Thank you. Hearing none I'd like to have a motion
please to open it up to a public hearing.
Conrad moved, Skubic seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was
opened.
Rich Wrase: Can I say a couple words? My name is Rich Wrase. I'm representing my father
and mother, Henry Wrase and Edna Wrase and this is...right here. And in the first place...We're
interested, we're not against this development. We'd like to see this in the future be part of the
development. We don't want to be a residential area in the middle of commercial property and
that's all I have to say for now. We want a reasonable offer...access 82nd Street. Thank you.
Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the commission? Can you state your name
and address please.
Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz of 8600 Great Plains Boulevard. Henry Wrase and Edna,
who own this property, called me this afternoon and asked me to come in front of the
commission... I guess Henry's afraid at the present time, if you look at this plat here and you see
12
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
a little...from Highway 41 into the industrial property,but you don't see any into Henry Wrase's
property. The Highway Department, when they improve Highway 41 is going to allow an
entrance to Henry Wrase's property where it is at the present time. It looks to me like the two
accesses are going to conflict on a major highway right there because normally there's a 500 foot
distance spread and that...so Henry's biggest concern at the present time is to see to it that
either...development,there's access to that property. For the time being I think he can keep the
access he's got now and I think it's very important,and...something about a water tower for his
property. If the Highway Department says no,there can't be an access to the property, what is
the value of that property? Or what is the value of his property to the City for a water tower?
They're going to have to have access to the property, for a water tower on the property too.
Henry would sell the property...very reasonable price. There's two homes on the property.
One's fairly new and the other one is one of the older homes in Chanhassen. Henry Wrase's
been a resident of Chanhassen for 82 years. He's a long time resident. His wife lived in
Chanhassen. Was born and raised in Chanhassen township and happens to need her own place in
Chaska. Now if...so that's a real concern for Henry. Henry just recently came out of the
hospital. He has cancer. Still recuperating so that's why...somebody else could come up here
and speak for him. I'd like to thank you.
Peterson: Thank you. Dave,can you speak to the issue of access off of TH 41 a little bit?
Aanenson: Maybe I can do that. The City Manager and myself met with Mr. Wrase and his son.
The developer is aware of the situation and there's a number of different scenarios that can
happen to this site. Certainly we need a water reservoir on this site,and that's one option. If we
take it for public purposes, the City could acquire that property which is certainly an interest. Or
maybe...developer... Certainly we would want to improve Mr. Wrase's driveway situation. The
developers are aware of that. Even if no one buys the property and they continue to live there,
we would certainly recommend taking the driveway access...but we're aware of that as this
project evolves...
Peterson: Okay, thanks. Anyone else wish to come up to Planning Commission? Seeing none,
may I have a motion to close the public hearing?
Skubic moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Peterson: Commissioners. Ladd,do you have any thoughts that you'd like to start off with?
Conrad: No, I'm fine with it. Yeah, I'm not fine with giving up,we give them the same deal
again that we talked with. That the applicants are very aware of. I'm not real thrilled about
giving up industrial. But I think if they come back,but overall the PUD looks reasonable to me.
I think if they come back and give us,to tell us a little bit about how they plan to put residential
on there and if they give us a product that we may feel is appropriate for it, and a couple other
things, for me we,you know I've got to be convinced that you're treating that property with the
residential, that's the best use of the property. Very defmitely. I've got to see that. It's certainly
not going to make Chanhassen any money so I've got to make sure that it's doing something for
the property. Number two, I want to make sure that that corner is really a high grade corner.
13
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
There's just no doubt. Again, the only, as we give up residential, I just want to make sure a
couple things are happening and I think they'll take care of the landscaping but that corner just
absolutely has to be high grade. This has to be our entry, our gateway to Chan so I trust that
you'll make it that and it's to your advantage and obviously something that we want here. Other
than that, I really don't have any major other issues with the project as defined in this sketch
plan.
Peterson: Do you have any thoughts as it relates to the type of housing? Whether it be
affordable? Whether it be, is that going to be...any more compelling. The aspect of how it fits
in the environment or is it going to be the type or is it going to be a combination of both?
Conrad: That's a good question Craig. We don't really need, we don't need townhomes. It's a
sellable product right now and therefore they can sell the land, and that's okay. That's, but we
should motivate them somehow and make sure that they can get this project rolling. You know
for me, right now I think Kate worded it well. We need something a little bit different. I don't
think we want the same old, same old. I wouldn't say it's got to be affordable but it would be
nice if it were. It would be nice if we had a new product that complimented what else we had in
town. I don't know what that is. I'm not smart enough to figure that out so. But it's got to be
enough to motivate us to take 23 acres out of industrial. Along with whatever else we say here.
That's sort of, you know we've got to say what we'd like to see on the other part. The part that
stays I0...hear what that is. I'm trying with the support commercial. I think that's important.
It's a PUD. I think that a hotel there is fine. I think that services are fine for the residential. I
think that just makes sense. That's what a PUD is about. That's what we'd like to do. That's
what we discovered in the Villages is to make sure that we give, we're not really, that we're
supporting the uses there with other things so.
Peterson: Good. Thanks. Kevin.
Joyce: I actually like the plan. I don't have that much problem with the residential. I think it's a
good opportunity for the city. That would be the place to look at securing some affordable
housing. Some of the issues we have, I think that's just a good spot. I do agree with Ladd that
townhomes, we don't need any more townhomes or anything. Come up with something a little
more creative in that regard. But I do like the concept. Just a couple of odds and ends. Number
one, as far as the Wrase's are concerned, I think that we should be a little more concrete when we
come up with. I look at the recommendations, I don't see anything mentioned about the
residential portion of that. And I think they do have some legitimate concerns and if we can put
in something there to ally their concerns. If they do continue to live there,they'll know that they
won't have these problems they're talking about with the upgrading of TH 41 and that, and I
think that's important. I'm kind of hearing that on that compliance table, those are just
guidelines of what possibly might be going into those lots. I understand that. I would definitely
look at Lots 10 and 11 which are on Highway 5. Those are going to be sensitive lots and I think
we're going to be very limited on what we can put there. I can't imagine putting...stores and
things like that obviously on the Highway 5 corridor. They wouldn't allow that but if those will
become commercial type of lots we're going to have to look at those very seriously. The only
14
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
other thing I have a thought on the orchard tree clusters. Personally, my own personal taste, I
don't like the orchard tree clusters.
John Uban: We need to know that.
Joyce: And that's why I'm saying it because it just, I'll look to the other commissioners but I
didn't like that idea. So other than that, that's all I have to say.
Peterson: LuAnn.
Sidney: Well like the other two commissioners I don't have any problem with the plan. In fact I
do like the proposal the way it's presented. I do have some concerns about the treatment of the
residential area and how that fits into the parkland. I'd like the applicant to consider strongly the
possibility of adding some of that land into the park system if possible. I think it would make a
very good transition between the residential area and the other, that residential area and Trotters
Ridge residential area. As well as help to act as a buffer to the south to the Chaska area. And as
I drove by that area this afternoon there are some very nice industrial properties to the south.
However, I believe as you go along, is it 82nd? There is one property where you have truck
loading docks right up to the road and I would think that the trees and that pond area would help
to shelter the proposed residential area from that part of the Chaska development. I think overall
I think it's a good plan.
Peterson: Thanks. Alison.
Blackowiak: Well I agree that the concept is good. My general comments in terms of guidance
would be, sensitivity to the existing topography. I think that mass grading, that term just scares
me and I think that the terracing is a good way to look at it. I like the idea of some type of a
cover on the terraced slopes to try to keep more of a naturalized, natural look. But I would say to
limit grading whenever possible. I just, I don't want it just a big flat piece. I mean if we're going
to do this piece as PUD we need something interesting. We need something unique and this is
going to be a very important piece in Chanhassen because it is the western gateway to the city.
So I mean we need to really seriously consider that. I would stress creative use of natural
landscape features. I would like to see, I like the idea of the ponds. The wetlands area. The
things that, from what I've heard, that is pretty much in place to take the eastern couple of outlots
and...I don't know what the specifics are but I'd like to take a look at something architecturally
interesting to avoid the large rectangular industrial building. We've got a nice area so come back
with something that will really wow us. I agree with staff on the building orientation, especially
with respect to the potential residential component and loading docks. Loading docks are kind of
a touchy subject right now so we need to be careful of loading docks and residential areas. And
finally I'd say we need to give some serious consideration to the Wrase property. Their access
issues and what they would like to do and what they would like out of this development because I
don't want them to be just in there in a sea of office buildings. I think they should, I think they
should really talk to, that Steiner should talk to them and work something out before maybe the
next meeting or just so we can kind of be kept abreast of what's going on with that. And that's
it.
15
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
Skubic: This is the first extension of commercial business I've become familiar with since I've
been here, outside of downtown so we want to be careful with what kind of commercial business
we have here. And it sounds like we are. Do we need to review what support commercial is?
Do we indeed have a support commercial?
Aanenson: Right, what we're looking for is input from you tonight and we'll be developing a
specific list. Whether it's square footage or specific list...make sure that we've got that control
and then also feel like we're getting, those views that are close to TH 5, the architectural
standards...
Skubic: And I think what you have outlined here is pretty consistent with what I, with eat in
restaurants and...storage and so forth. And in a residential area here, one suggestion would be to
do a cluster development similar to our North Bay, north of Lake Riley. You could preserve the
natural features of the land and still get something that might be a little more unique. And
regarding the perimeter landscaping, it's winter most of the year around here so I don't think
those trees will be flowering very much. I would like to see some coniferous trees in there for
screening. That's all.
Peterson: Allyson.
Brooks: Well I think I basically stated most of my concerns. I mean I don't mind the plan. I
guess I'm just very concerned that we don't make Highway 5 look like a strip. I agree with
Allison and I would like to see this stay away from sort of the massive, blocky structures. Some
of the first buildings that were shown were actually quite nice. They looked like they were set
back a ways and there were some others that were sort of bigger and grander that were more
visually intrusive. But it sounds like you're thinking about that and you're working towards
making it very sensitive to the landscape anyway. I think the Wrase situation is an issue. Which
one, Kate, which property did you say was the historic?
Aanenson: There's two homes on the site.
Brooks: Right, one is new and one is.
Aanenson: Right, the original one sits to the rear of the property.
Brooks: And how old is it? You have no idea? ...yeah, that's pretty original.
Rick Wrase: ...1885.
Brooks: That's pretty old for Chanhassen. Are there out buildings with that? The out buildings
are not...
Aanenson: They're falling down. They're actually probably...right now.
16
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Brooks: Well I think that that's, you know even if we do end up removing the home, I would
like to see some consideration. We do have a, there is supposed to be historic preservation
component to our comprehensive plan and it would be nice to see some, whether it's a booklet on
you know the history of Chan. Something to kind of contradict the fact that we may have to
remove an 1885 home. There really aren't a lot of those left.
Aanenson: It's been documented in the City of Chanhassen...
Brooks: All right. But that's basically some landscaping is my only concern. Other than that the
proposal looks okay.
Al Klingelhutz: The home is probably in better condition than a lot of them that were built 10-15
years ago.
Brooks: Well that's true. Yeah, I'd just like to see some kind of mitigation you know. If we are
forced to remove a home that's that old, there is a loss to the city. It would be nice of the
developer to propose some kind of mitigation to account for that. Whether it's doing
presentations to school children or just something to account to the fact that we are losing
something.
Nancy Mancino: Or move it.
Brooks: Yeah, move it. I like the idea that Kate, you talked about moving it as part of an
interpretative center in the passive park. That sounds neat.
Aanenson: What this area was like.
Brooks: Exactly. Yeah, that's...just so as long as we lose something, we gain something. Okay.
Thank you.
Peterson: My comments are not that dissimilar. I think we've got a definite theme that hopefully
we're painting a picture for the developers that is one that we, at least my sense is that most of us
are in agreement that we would approve the conceptual plan. I would recommend that you spend
a little bit more time working on the residential side prior to going to Council. In looking at the
presentation tonight, I was searching to get, and thinking in my mind about, I had a difficult time
picturing both the residential and some of the industrial. I think that the Council members would
probably like a little bit more also. So if you can present a better picture, visually somehow, I
think it'd be beneficial for you. The PUD I think is the best concept for this property because of
the Highway 5 proximity and because of the wetlands and the general area. You commented on
the terracing side of it and I looked at it and I thought to myself, I like the idea of terracing. At
the same time I struggle with picturing, you have an office building overlooking another office
building and you're looking at the roof of another office building so I think it's an obstacle that I
think can be overcome but in my mind I've got that picture and I can't get that out of my head.
I'm overlooking another office building roof. You know I think you also mentioned that the size
and the pictures you presented are generally smaller to middle sized office products and you also
17
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
mentioned that you may combine some of the lots, if the right purchaser would come in and want
a larger unit. I'd be motivated to set some kind of limitations on size. I think Kate you
mentioned briefly that, to try to keep the atmosphere a little bit smaller. Maybe go potentially
larger in the corner and essentially give a smaller feel. Kind of a winding, terracing kind of
uniqueness that's not dissimilar to the property that I think you mentioned in Eden Prairie that
has that kind of a feel. The winding roads and different elevations. As far as the residential side.
I struggle with this,just as everybody else does. In order for me to vote on rezoning, I really
have to see something unique and even though that that site may be conducive from a visual
standpoint for residential, there are a lot of industrial office types of companies that also want
that kind of a feel for a corporate office so that wouldn't be a compelling enough reason for me
to say let's rezone that and take it out of industrial office. So I guess I would leave you with the
fact that I wouldn't be comfortable, unless there really is a defined uniqueness, and that could
potentially be affordable, as much as I don't like to say that, but that's something that the city
doesn't have that would be unique to the city. But I would like to definitely be wowed as one of
the other commissioners said earlier so with that, that ends my comments. Any other comments
or questions from anybody? With that, can I hear a motion and a second?
Conrad: Sure. I'll make the motion that the Planning Commission recommends conceptual
approval for the Gateway Business Park PUD#92-6 as shown on the site plans dated February
26, 1997, subject to the conditions on the staff report dated March 12`h. 1 through 13 with the
following additions. Point number 4. I'd add some verbiage to the multi-family development be
developed sensitive to the landform with focus on preservation of the trees and the natural area
and also with a direction for designing a unique product type for Chanhassen. Something like
that. I'd also add a condition number 14. That the applicant, when they come back with
preliminary design, that they present their idea for a gateway treatment and also that they present
to us their concept for what's going to, a high grade use of the intersection. High grade business
use of that intersection. Add a point number 15. That the Wrase property be incorporated into
the presentation when the applicant comes back, and I'd be open for any other amendments to
this.
Peterson: Any friendly amendments? Is there a second?
Joyce: I'll second that.
that the Planning Commission recommends conceptual approval for Gateway West Business
Park PUD#92-6 as shown on site plans dated February 26, 1997 subject to the following
conditions:
1. Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit.
Proof of septic and well systems that are abandoned are required.
2. The design standards be consistent the Highway 5 Standards.
3. A tree inventory be completed.
18
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
4. The multi-family development be developed sensitive to the land form with focus on
preservation of the trees and the natural area. Affordability be considered for some of
the units along with direction for designing a unique product type for Chanhassen...
5. Completion of an Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR).
6. The applicant shall secure a Wetland Alteration Permit.
7. Dedication of park land as requested by the Park and Recreation Commission.
8. The applicant should work with the City in coordinating a final location providing
internal street access for the water reservoir site in conjunction with preliminary plat
submittal.
9. Sanitary sewer and water service from Chaska to the southwesterly portion of the site will
be limited to a discharge of 20,000 gpd. The remaining portion of the site will require
sanitary sewer and water service from Chanhassen via the Upper Bluff Creek Interceptor.
The applicant should petition the City for the extension of utilities and street (Coulter
Boulevard) to service the site.
10. The street and utility improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
the City's standard specifications and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications will be required upon final platting for staff to review and City Council
approval. Erosion control measures will need to be developed on the grading, drainage
and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice
Handbook.
11. The developer shall incorporate the City's Surface Water Management Plan when
developing a overall comprehensive master drainage plan through the site. The
developer's construction plans shall also be designed to be compatible with future
upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41.
12. The developer shall work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans for
compatibility with future upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41 improvements.
13. A traffic study shall be prepared by the applicant to determine traffic warrants for
intersection signalization, auxiliary turn lanes and street widths. The traffic study shall
also address pedestrian circulation.
14 When the applicant comes back with the preliminary plat design,that they present
their idea for a gateway treatment and also their concept for a high grade business use
of the intersection of Highways 5 and 41.
15. That the Wrase property be incorporated into the presentation when this application
comes back.
19
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
Aanenson: ...City Council recommended that...find another location. They have found another
location. It does require a public hearing so we will have a special meeting, in order to keep
them on track and to be proactive. That special meeting is set for March 24`h. We're hoping
that... meeting at 6:00. I believe Bob handed out the agenda item.
Joyce: What are you doing? You're having a Planning Commission meeting and then a City
Council meeting right after it?
Aanenson: It's scheduled for 6:00 because there is a Board of Adjustment meeting so you won't
be in here that whole time until 7:30. I don't believe it should take that long.
Joyce: Well you guarantee it only lasts an hour...
Aanenson: Well they do having them co-locate on one site so, it is a public hearing and... That's
all I had for new business.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Joyce moved to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting dated March 5, 1997 as presented.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Aanenson: I'll be happy to. Actually there were several planning items on the last City Council
meeting. The Planning Commission approved the three additional buildings on West Village
Heights a number of months ago, but that was tabled while some negotiations were taking place,
but the Council did approve that. Next to the Byerly's site so there will be...with a drive thru and
one larger user then a multi-tenant building. So we're looking at construction this spring. Joe
Scott's building on Great Plains was approved...the Highlands was given conceptual approval.
...but that will be exciting. Woodridge Heights was approved. There was a preliminary and a
final plat. So that's been a way. That's the Centex property off of Galpin. Lake Lucy. And
then...wetland, and that was the one that said it was expired...
Peterson: Going back to the Byerly's, specifically with the Kinko's building. I know when that
was presented to us months ago we talked about trying to get them to put some more landscaping
in the Kinko's building. Were you able to do anything there or not?
20
Planning Commission Meeting- March 19, 1997
Aanenson: Yeah, I think part of the problem is that there is...down there with the brick but it's
such a small, the course is so small, the shadowing isn't enough and... That would really need
some arc. I think...right next to the building you see that there is some change in the facade, it's
just so subtle. And they have added additional landscaping.
Generous: They have committed, at least verbally...as one of the conditions of approval.
Aanenson: So that will be done. And that's the concern that the Council had too on the corner...
ONGOING ITEMS:
Aanenson: As I indicated last time...that the Legion, that they were not selling the property...
Peterson: Are they waiting for more money or are they just playing hard to get?
Aanenson: Yeah, I don't care to speculate.
Peterson: Well you've got to speculate... Any other items?
Aanenson: I think LuAnn is going to that Planning...that Planning Commission training
workshop...
Conrad moved,Joyce seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
21
Administrative Section
On-Going Issues
April
1. Comprehensive Plan Update Calendar to be submitted in April —
Joint PC/CC meeting. City meeting
in May.
2. Bluff Creek Ordinance Different zoning options scheduled
for May 21.
3. Joint CC/PC meeting Goals and affordable housing
scheduled for April 21, 1997.
4. PUD Ordinance Revision Staff has prepared an issue
paper, draft ordinance may be
combined with Bluff Creek
Ordinance.
:a C a W 0 0 X09 0= q a0, ,Wn o= c' ° u o Gc TOY
a. 0o• 4J .o.nt E x e4) 0.....c-. 0 ..-a, c °o a aU� a,,m
• 0 o aa, t.0 to o aaF OZ O `. a G•2� 5.2 Ly E-C
Z 0m'= °ta1n ac* 0 . 0.0 .,5X ° ., 0 a, =.. Oa E E v, m a -Q "' pa 00a
rte= e�o a'�, �L H ao aE of o m 9 G y c ao, �y 4 E
C.7= O C•e 4.) C a e C C^a u.- C o .A
A•0 ,ON • a'-O':°.`.° e�0yaa > a 4) us ad,
= N x c E a y_0 a 7 L E a o'aO t-0 00 C to N af1.0 L N
l o e ',,i
a.=0.„,-
O�• C OV p u 0 a u, 9 3 a.. E d �.-at
a IOU ,,i'ZW a`*• t0 a 7 u.o.,t u E3 :°`o > N E aye o
a •• > 00O of.0 ° ai°•.. E Na.. o E ° Aa30
�O= =3ac ° v9a3c•e °....aaa, o - da006u
* °▪ A��mya >oZoaT' Eo0r; o°=xoaisai. co0" .
O NVo N..CC 3t :E3a=t asaN 'emaEe
h cm 4.,70 ,... >, a s tt N C ODN
.L O 6.y+ N C a9 T
F
O
p V ydT
m•a C =
S ' 13
aNaN ° au = aoo°▪ C= e E a, a, e > a = dsTO = ° vma== 0 :
: ° oa a eoar uEoAcve0Uceo
du e
c „� 000�!t 3 0 Q-J C c.4•u o y a o;-std C O
u 3 O- ... p a ' G7 ,i7C .a. au 't'••yzowCa_IP V
m a >> `.°. u a70 o a m 4 y ar um o f o_a =0 ..
■� =Z.•. a.0 d 7 d N7 O. e C a C c2 O. C C C5•cF
°0 = aF" ` ° ° ae, ovoa>, o,.-, a,� acoma > 3=
Z RI' 3 oat m m > Srcu�v 010 t 8 U V V L V
0 e T=a=-0 o • eye _�o e e q a s
.. y- 70- > CO ,a.. N ,a. 7 ° a A OO y 7
a 0 _C 3 A..0 t o y0 a ° E T • 0 u
o0 �° a 'na 3 �L 3 ° o Wamy ce
O m:° m� u C u u17 a0 L i 'fl NL
■- 7 a 0 0 C t O Y.0 .O�C ea d Q CJ ,0,E.0 •ul a o4 4
5 V N.T. m- ° a e d o O a, = 0 C cat N •n O
a ,a.. e a • 7 a. 23 `'=-500..3 "' .55..- c .N ' .b .. a'- rC y
E .'AooaAQomx
CL) Eu Oems0H 0 ,E ,0o E 8.- > O a'- y atiC
O ` `e 2•e s 0 N 3 e N ::a a. 7.. rat,0 t� 3 e
i-r '- C a- ▪ a C N R 49 t.- E . °` °
�^ H � a , a)'0 RI E- 7a7a7Fea N`.: aam >Ca
0 N
= d 'J t°i u�' m 0 LC 3 0 3 Vin d C2Ly 'c,.
OY N M m • 12
L � a....N.. C air, 0 y 0 V, A C ,. A agar, = a L =a„ a.-,,
+/�„�j - _- o ., N O aL L_ a u e O c0 o
,...as °t c7 6•a N mY C u to e 007 O a a V'yp -Can• 3 3
as O ° '0 C•- °' 0:y C Te
CD - of O,i- C`V 7a a CL u a CY CZ �L Md N
i.
Val ° O ••N-• mFC7aiC3y7a as Ea70 -V� e
E 3u dyC9EOxe
0i= v AG yoe o 4“:1 °71•aaNo
4cda 0C „, ; 0 .LN m.0ta$Eara18- aaymy
go o
(el
a...`H N ya; O- . .a.'a0 ae, 5. ,L,aa,00300 ... i.N
MC y 5• °3v x3 , Ea Hs E°-ov°G Swa
— cs d e�0 o
aOV�M ayeEca °>
�' �'a+� d c es aou a,
ihim �' gU' t' veam
tip 8 a 1, �' a 3 E= a'9'fl d d
it as
O B 116 E 1 . a.. . . r,•2.=e
y d ° r3���
E 90 NOCaL�
°I . - C z 7, E- N ate=
•
Or. a2N .. m OL- •dCe ay ;y 11
r ea C0O•c ( 40.06.000 9 `. a .- m.y ,0
O 0U. •
° 0 3 0 °= E ° c 0 C m u E °
0
t° A:E co N t o •=s E C= c a' 3--ne, a cy "
° m� p 0 a 0f m°'-5. 7 N a a a T O ` a 0
> 0`.-.00
... 3 mgt O. as>. azoEo0-a Inue� 0 _
pa .54 CgEE 0aa0•e 3vomOc-.g0.ca •0E3
} 0 C Mme.m.0 ca O � ,0,,�? a 00 as ` C °a.0
< 1-.00 = eyc•C s4.) ueroa = - a$to ._ E.-0
0 C O a.T. ° a "' ^LL N ad 00L.. O S•a al a ab O
o E`• LACE CNIr.� O.,L 0,E CS .0 OaL a«. m
..g <'OC�s � `_7 E6`' N 00
. a Co=""E"CF C.E." °NY
E-. m,n aU- am.. a.. c2= ate,.. E ao o Ea
Metro/State 4 STAR TRIBUNE•PAGE.
1 'DUCES from Bl _.
Rental property
. a,_
owners upset �"" 4:tilk
over paying jhigher taxes
• The heads of the House and ::+Senate tax comminees have either ' ''.:41t.: ''''',.
introduced bills to reduce rates or . s "e' � v/„voiced support for such a reduc• r u r tion.Gov.Arne Carlson also has :� .k r ll� t.
proposed a rental-property tax �.) :`•
cut 4 n'r:
Rental-property owners are j,
keeping their fingers crossed that ' t
all of that intent will come to
fruition.If not,they say,rents will . , .
continue to rise as development - - . `.
remains stifled.
The issue,rental-property own-
ern say,is also one of fairness: ,
Renters,who typically have lower i f
incomes than homeowners,often
pay three times as much in prop-State feels erty taxes-through rentpay- 9tarTroteePink,try Orin Brewster
ments—than homeowners do. Pam George,chief operating officer of Real Estate Equities,said rental-property tax reef would help property own-
Fairness is the chord struck ers put money Into thee'complexes to stay competitive and eventually ease the upward pressure on rents.
the hidden by a brochure that the Minnesota
Multi-Housing Association dis-
tributes to tenants.'THINK AS A "I think this is about
Costs ofRENTER YOU DONT PAY PROP-
ERTY TAXES?'it states.'THINK Rental property taxes
AGAIN.' profit going to the
renting The brochure goes on to ex- r roW landlord's pocket."
plain that the renter of a$72,000 Preeerto e"'n ere err'o'g the "_-
townhome pays about 31 times asrares
taxed in _ —Lynn Shellenberger,president of
Rental-property much in property taxes as the '�
owners pay higher the St Paul Tenants Union
owner of a$72.000 townhome. 1995 tar on a 20-unit J
That's because homesteaded apartment complex worth "Iirhen a building is
taxes than those in property is taxed at a lower rate $600,000 struggling financially...
most other states. than residential rental and cont- 'h that new security system
mercial and industrial property. New Jersey
By Wayne Washington1is put o That new
'If you agree that this is unfair... r r •f3t935
Star Tribune Staff Writer wrong ... and just plain un- Ninetieth _ carpet is put off l believe,
Minnesotan,join the fight for taxzd '$29073 (lower rental-property tax
To see the new townhouse equality,' the brochure states. rates]would int rove the
development on Columbine 'Write and call your legislator 3 lows /1
Rd.in Eden Prairie,to smell the today,and demand action now!' .$26.476 quality of housing."
•
newness of its rental units,is to 4 Micas
know nothing of how much it Different Views ••$24879 —Larry BUckLy who owns a
took to get it built. Not all renters,however,see managementconpany.
The 32-unit project would the issue the same way that rental- 5 0s"yO* •f23367
not exist if not for tax credits property owners do. •
that the federal government , 'I think this is about profit
and the city of Eden Prairie pro- igoing to
the landlord's pocket,' , Wisconsin
vided,said Pam George.chief said Lynn Shellenberger. presi-
122.186 five years ago.'There were spe-
operating officer of Real Estate dent of the St. Paul Tenants app pkv cials then.'she said.'Properties
Equities, the Minneapolis- Union. 'Tenants have not been 20 •513.675 were )offering] one month free.
based development company screaming,'We pay too much in some two months free.'
involved in building the project. property' taxes.' It's all coming 2 7 North Delefas$128✓is Shellenberger thinks the market
Taxes are so high in Minne- from the business.real estate and is so tight that it will take many years
sofa. say George and otherdevelopment interests—all of the nel range • to be loosened,even if rental prop-
rental property owners, that I w0o
people who directly benefit.' ►$12.654 erty'taxes are reduced.'Rents are
developers see no profit in de- ' In fact,if rental-property taxes not going to go down.'she insisted.
seloping.squeezing an already- are reduced,low-and moderate- 'There are still too many people out
tight rental market at a time income tenants could face higher sauce w escsa Tw''''s ass°°a°o" there who need housing.'
when communities are in dire housing costs.That oddity could Maybe not immediately,said
need of affordable housing. result because the rental-property HowMinnesota rental taxes work Larry Bucklin.who owns a man-
This year there seems to be tax credits that low-and mod- agement company that oversees
some momentum at the State erate-income tenants receive is How tares are calculated on rental and 560 units in the metro area.But
Capitol to reduce the amount of based.in part.on the taxes paid on homestead properties in Minnesota . reducing the rates would help
taxes that rental property own- the property they live in.If the ter mix seerefteepsewer lwl 23permit attete veer renters.
ers pay.And the state's pro- taxes go down,their tax credits Warwsstle.giw.N"aearew) 34perert°tbt/.efe 'l would wager that the first
jetted 52.3 billion surplus is would,too. thing the money would be spent
pushing that debate along. Shellenberger said that any 'sPeweeie 2pec affest$72000eftele, on is deferred maintenance. he
peair
change in rental-property tax rates tementesaid.'When a building is strug-
Turn to TAXES on 07 for. must ensure that tax credits are Example for a$72,000 townhome gling financially,even though the
—How rental property tares protected. owners wouldn't wish it,capital
cork,and how Minnesota's Rep.Ann Rest,DFL-New Hope, Homesteads° Renet°wrexme improvement and maintenance is
compare with other stares: is sponsoring a bill that seeks to do toennems-z.000 r r %5720 $�.000 IC wee
e convex)
-r 52448 affected.That new security system
put that.It would tie the rental tax is put off.That new carpet is put
_ credit to the rent paid rather than off. I believe (lower rental-
to taxes paid on the property.So if Mom Ta•i 015 n eee'nines W Q1e 1e'i e4'•C0 4 e°*"..1 a Palle$"•t' property tax rates)would improve
taxes are lowered but rents do not e°° °G° s"e° � the quality of housing.'
decline, tenants would get the Last year there was a consensus
- same tax credit. S°ucerarneseta MJMgeeg xssocaten Star rrtere par. among legislators to lower rental
Shellenberger. who said the taxes,but there was disagreement
Tenants Union is not against The current system, George other states. Nor does anyone on how the taxes should be
rental-property tax relief, still said,simply doesn't work. quibble with the argument that reduced,and the tax relief was taken
thinks the push for tax relief has Standing on the icy landscape rents are rising and unit vacancies out of the tax bill that was passed.
more to do with helping owners of the Columbine complex.she are diminishing. Still, simply getting to that
than helping tenants. pointed toward acreage on which Dawn Crawford, manager of point was a victory of sorts for the
'It's not rent relief.'she said. her company wanted to build Apartment Search in Minnetonka. Minnesota Multi-HousingAssoci-
'Don't try to snow me.If(rental- another set of rental units last said rents have risen an average of ation.For years,the association
property owners) are not man- year. $10 to $25 over the past five lobbied legislators who were con-
dated to build more or to make 'We had an option on a piece of months.Some places have seen sidered to favor homeowners over
improvements.how willthe renter land around here.'she said.'We sharper increases.An Apartment renters, who typically are less
benefit?' had it all worked out.And then we Search survey showed, for likely to vote.
George said market forces met with the assessors and they instance,that the average rent of a That hurdle seems to have been
would demand that rental- gave us an estimate of what the two-bedroom apartment in Wood- cleared. And, once again, the
property owners put the money taxes would cost. We couldn't bury increased by a whopping debate on rental-property tax
back into their complexes to stay make the deal work.That single 5100 per month from August 1996 reduction seems to becentered on
competitive. And developers, factor kept us from developing.• to January 1997.The average rent how,rather than if,or why.
freed from what they believe is an .„, of a three-bedroom apartment in 'The momentum's been build-
onerous tax burden.would begin sing rents Bloomington rose S43 during that ing for the last couple of years,'
building more.which would even- No one disputes that rental- time,the survey showed. said Mary Rippe,Multi-Housing
tually ease the upward pressure on property owners in Minnesota pay The rental market, Crawford Association president.'We'll just
' rents. far higher taxes than those in most said.is a lot different than it was keep working.'