The URL can be used to link to this page

02-21-96 Agenda and Packet FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1996, 7:00 P. n°' Knn"nn CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Preliminary plat approval to subdivide Outlot A, Oakwood Estates (2.06 acres) into 5 single family lots on property zoned RSF and located at approximately 532 Lyman Blvd., Eugene Quinn,First Addition to Oakwood Estates. 2. Preliminary plat approval to subdivide 1.22 acres into 3 single family lots located on property zoned RSF, Residential Single Family and located at 8508 Great Plains Blvd., Ted Slather, Slather Addition. 3. Sign variance to permit a second wall mounted sign located on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located north of Hwy. 5, east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Street, Tire Plus Groupe, Inc. 4. Preliminary plat to subdivide 1.6 acres into 3 single family lots on property zoned RSF, Residential Single Family and located on Orchard Lane, Steve Linguist,Linguist Addition. 5. Preliminary plat approval to replat 39.17 acres into 4 lots; site plan approval for two 74,077 sq. ft. and a 92,770 sq. ft. office industrial buildings and a vacation of a drainage easement on property zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and located south of Hwy. 5. west of Dell Road and south of Lake Drive East, First Industrial, L.P., First Industrial Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre. 6. Consider site plan review approval of a retail building of 8,321 sq. ft. and a parking lot setback variance on property zoned PUD, and located on Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Market Square, Market Square 3 Partners, Inc., Amcon Corporation. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 7. Consider Amending IOP, Industrial Office Park District to include Auto Sales. 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. C I TY 0 F PC DATE: 2/21/96 \� C13ANHASS CC DATE: 3/11/96 I CASE#: 92-3 SUB By: Generous:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat approval for five lots on Outlot A, Oakwood Estates, on 2.06 acres, for a project known as Oakwood Estates First Addition. I- LOCATION: Lyman Boulevard and Quinn Road,N 1/2 Section 24, T 116,R 23 W Q V APPLICANT: Mr. Gene R. Quinn (L 4510 West Shore Drive Q_ Rapid City, SD 57702 (605) 343-0234 PRESENT ZONING: Single Family Residential,RSF ACREAGE: 2.06 acres DENSITY: 2.43 units/ac,gross&net ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-RSF, single-family home S- A2,proposed PUD for 134 single-family lots E- A2, single-family homes QW-RSF,vacant WATER AND SEWER: Available to site as part of Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvements w PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site is fairly flat with a man-made pond located in the north- central portion of the parcel and wooded areas in the southwest and northeast corners of the property. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential - Low Density(Net Density Range 1.2 -4.0 Units/Ac.) Jr___________!-L --' ,---), ,, I 1 il 1* Mil IIMII R IO, _2 I °l"` `�I ®�i� t�(n 0 :111 II!!' - ] MUM IF §. WI fa LIPII - 7 c-E al o t c, dIN1114111T/Ir N()' RR S 111 LI 4 W :- WESTERN 0, II idler_ f t11GH—Y tf� [om DRIVE �y e� 0•4 �Lo .� <o� �� a Alto& .3 PARK I 6,� .: • v1110\104R_ . . . iiit,.. i . sus• - . „-, .. uiiti�► ,ice/; __r-----_-:- ,...._. \$ - goiliv , - 6L. rail 11L / _ - -- - SINNEN tow* CPN ©ef fI� :\�` , CIRCLE 4illie s, . ,, _(,/Lir ) ::..... rp,. , .„ 4 t' * �1 i 1, ' ��',,,� I ,) LAKE SUSAN )� r I � -•- - - Virik Oso f 'i . �#, i, , .,,,,, \�� 'V 1,4 Li ‘,\., ,_ ., _:___: _ , (to .: , , ran K • , , i Q ....if 3 .)..trta 0 ' II ( ; ; V:1111110011. , i , ' :6 T H 11-94'' �� iIA am • TM1 I rIuwL. Pte' ® - - — wit�� s 1111■� i '-r �`- / lig Is* �'c k_ll _ tre MI ..c_ E 110 . Lel o *. iw 117#,IMErd CI I ri ii le, 4, mum r2 1 ,‘ *s t Iter a E;a „- i -D 6 &-,3,0 , ...,, ` C----) ., , , t O COUR . • N �7 -..O , �„,/ � c.„ oP il 0:1 -4- K?' --- cr, 1 1 u /( Al --fiJt 11124 .-f: . eQ°7 LOCATION _\ 0 J QOMI 1 r� I/ BAND/MERE J /', HEIGHTS mow Q PARK / 1 BAND/MERE _ r PIA 4e''/f „ ; I ` , / ,/ I ``` / COMMUNITY .`•t r X 711 4 / I PARK k rill( R/1 Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to replat Outlot A, Oakwood Estates into five lots. As part of the request,the applicant is proposing the final platting of Lots 1 and 2. The site is generally flat with isolated groups of mature trees and a small pond. The proposal is to develop the site in two phases. Phase I includes Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Utility service for Phase I of the development will be provided under the Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvement Project. Phase II, however, will require that the applicant extend an improved road(Quinn Road) and utilities to the north line of Lot 5. In conjunction with this development proposal, the City will be upgrading Quinn Road to urban City standards to the north line of Phase I (Lot 2). The applicant will be responsible for the further upgrading of Quinn Road to the north line of Phase II (Lot 5) in conjunction with the second phase of development. A temporary turnaround will be required at the end of Quinn Road upon construction of Phase II. City ordinance requires the lowest floor elevation of dwellings adjacent to ponds, lakes, and wetlands be at least two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. This will restrict the type of dwellings to split-entry type homes throughout the development. Staff also recommends that the walkout or lowest opening of each dwelling be constructed a minimum of one foot above the emergency overflow swale. The applicant's engineer and staff have discussed adjusting street grades to provide for the emergency overflow swale between Lots 3 and 4, Block 1. A 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement will need to be dedicated on the final plat along the common property line of Lots 3 and 4. The applicant is required to have a 35% canopy coverage remaining after construction (.72 acres required). Tree removal for the development is .34 acres of the total canopy leaving .52 acres (25% canopy coverage). The difference is .2 acres and since required canopy is being removed, the required canopy will be increased 1.2 times. Therefore, the canopy replacement required by the applicant will be .24 acres or 9 trees. To ensure preservation of the remaining trees, a conservation easement or tree removal limit should be placed on Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5. This will protect these areas from house pad intrusion or further construction. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed plat subject to the conditions of the staff report. BACKGROUND On March 23, 1992, the City Council granted preliminary and final plat approval for Oakwood Estates to create one single-family lot and two outlots. One of the conditions of approval limited the replatting of the outlots until such time as city sewer and water are available to the site. Utility service for Phase I of the development will be provided under the Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvement Project. Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 3 WETLANDS The site contains an existing pond. The pond is listed in the City's Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP) as a utilized wetland. According to city ordinances,there are no buffer or setback restrictions required with a utilized wetland. This area is shown on the National Wetland Inventory. A question has been raised as to whether the utilized pond area was an expansion or contraction of the wetland on the site. Staff recommends that the applicant hire a wetland expert to delineate the edge of the wetland due to the marginal soil conditions in the area. Based on this delineation, Lots 3, 4, and 5 may not be developable or a Wetland Alteration Permit may be required. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP)to serve as a tool to protect, preserve, and enhance water resources. The plan identifies, from a regional perspective, the stormwater quantity and quality improvements necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the water quantity - portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker, Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on the projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The development's storm drainage system will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's SWMP requirements. The City's public improvement project, Lyman Boulevard Reconstruction/Lake Riley Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 93-32B, will be providing storm sewers and water quality treatment for the site. The development will be assessed in conjunction with these improvements accordingly. Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using the market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of $2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. The proposed SWMP water quality charge of $800/acre for single family resident developments. Fees are based on a total developable land area of 2.06 acres minus the existing pond of 0.24 acres. Therefore,the applicant is responsible for $1,456.00 in water quality fees for both phases. Credits will be reviewed and applied to the applicant's SWMP fees upon final plat consideration. Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 4 Storm Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for different land uses based on an average, city- wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, and open channels and stormwater ponding areas for runoff storage. Single family residential developments have a connection charge of$1,980 per developable acre. The total net area of the property is 1.82 acres as discussed above. Therefore, the proposed development would be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of$3,603 for both phases. Credits will be reviewed and applied to the applicant's SWMP fees upon final plat consideration. All SWMP connection charges will be due payable to the City at time of final plat recording. GRADING The site is generally flat with isolated groups of mature trees and a small pond. The proposal is to develop the site in two phases. Phase I includes Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Both phases propose lot grading to be completed individually at time of house construction. Staff generally concurs with this idea on Lots 1, 2. and 5, however, Lots 3 and 4 should be graded in conjunction with Phase II utility and street construction. Staff recommends that individual detailed grading, drainage, tree preservation, and erosion control plans be submitted for Lots 1, 2, and 5, Block 1 for review and approval by City staff at time of building permit application. The Carver County Soil Survey indicates Cordova and Webster silty clay loam soil present on all lots. This type of soil is typically unsuitable for building construction. A soils engineer can evaluate the house pads on the proposed lots and determine if soils corrections are required. City ordinance requires the lowest floor elevation of dwellings adjacent to ponds, lakes, and wetlands be at least two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. This will restrict the type of dwellings to split-entry type homes throughout the development. Staff also recommends that the walkout or lowest opening of each dwelling be constructed a minimum of one foot above the emergency overflow swale. The applicant's engineer and staff have discussed adjusting street grades to provide for the emergency overflow swale between Lots 3 and 4, Block 1. A 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement will need to be dedicated on the final plat along the common property line of Lots 3 and 4. In conjunction with the City's Lyman Boulevard Reconstruction/Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 93-32B, Quinn Road will be upgraded to a city standard urban road with utilities to the north line of Phase I (Lot 2). This development will be responsible for street and utility assessments as a result of these improvements. Installation of Phase II improvements will be the responsibility of the applicant. Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 5 DRAINAGE The site drains in a southeasterly direction towards Lyman Boulevard. Ultimately,the site drainage and existing pond overflow will need to be connected, via storm sewer pipe,to the City's storm sewer system to be installed along Lyman Boulevard this year. The applicant has the option to install this storm sewer system at their own expense under private contract or petition the City to include this work as a part of the Lyman Boulevard Reconstruction Project No. 93-32B. If the applicant petitions the City, the applicant will be responsible for the entire cost of constructing the outlet control and overflow storm sewer conveyance system from the pond to Lyman Boulevard. The cost of this system will be assessed on a per-lot basis over Lots 1 through 5, inclusive. Since these additional storm drainage improvements are beyond the scope of work previously approved by the City Council,the applicant will be required to sign a document waiving their rights to all procedural or substantive objections to the special assessments associated with these storm drainage improvements including, but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the development. The applicant's engineer will need to submit to the City detailed storm drainage calculations for the storm drainage system as well as ponding calculations for 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm events, 24-hour duration for both pre- and post-development conditions for review and approval by City staff. UTILITIES Utility service for Phase I of the development will be provided under the Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvement Project. Phase II, however, will require that the applicant extend an improved Quinn Road and utilities to the north line of Lot 5. In conjunction with Phase II construction, utilities should also be provided to serve the parcels east of Quinn Road. The applicant will be reimbursed a proportionate cost of the sanitary sewer and water construction costs when these parcels connect to the utilities. Staff will determine the reimbursement amount by distributing the cost of extending the sewer and water lines on a per-lot basis to the benefiting parcels. In the future the City will collect a connection charge from these parcels at time of connection to the City utilities and reimburse the proportionate share to the applicant accordingly. Since the utilities in Phase II will be installed by the applicant and eventually owned and maintained by the City upon completion,the street and utility improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The developer will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements and conditions of final plat approval for both phases. The final plat shall dedicate drainage and utility easements for all Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 6 utility lines which fall outside the street right-of-way. These easements shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Pursuant to city ordinance, existing homes within 150 feet of the city's sewer lines shall be connected to the line within 12 months after the line becomes operational. There are two dwellings on the east side of Quinn Road (520 and 530)that will be affected by this ordinance with the extension of utilities for Phase II of this development. STREETS The site will be serviced off of Quinn Road which is an unimproved gravel street. This street also services other residents in the area; therefore, access must be maintained at all times during construction. In conjunction with this development proposal, the City will be upgrading Quinn Road to urban City standards to the north line of Phase I (Lot 2). The applicant will be responsible for the further upgrading of Quinn Road to the north line of Phase II (Lot 5) in conjunction with the second phase of development. A temporary turnaround will be required at the end of Quinn Road upon construction of Phase II. A condition will be placed in the development contract that Quinn Road shall be extended in the future. A previous subdivision of this property dedicated the necessary 60-foot-wide right-of-way for Quinn Road. No additional right-of-way is required with this subdivision proposal. Quinn Road shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the street and utility improvements will be required for City staff review and formal approval by the City Council in conjunction with final plat approval for Phase II. EROSION CONTROL Erosion control measures and site restoration shall be developed and in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). The preliminary grading plan has incorporated Type I erosion control around the perimeter of the pond and construction limits adjacent to Quinn Road. A rock construction entrance shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the street has been paved with a bituminous surface. LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION The Oakwood Estates development site consists of an extensive stand of mature oak and maple trees with cleared openings. Wooded areas exist on four of the lots for a total site coverage of 42 percent(0.86 acres). Tree removal is necessary on Lots 1 and 5 where the wooded area is concentrated towards the front of the lots. Lots 2 and 3 will be able to avoid any tree removals Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 7 since all trees are at the rear of the lot except four that will be removed for the road improvements, driveways, and house pads. The applicant is required to have a 35%canopy coverage remaining after construction(.72 acres required). Tree removal for the development is .34 acres of the total canopy leaving .52 acres remaining ( 25%canopy coverage). The difference is .2 acres and since required canopy is being removed the required replacement canopy will be increased 1.2 times. Therefore, the canopy replacement required by the applicant will be .24 acres or 10 trees. To ensure preservation of the remaining trees, a conservation easement or tree removal limit should be placed on Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5. This will protect these areas from house pad intrusion or further construction. COMPLIANCE TABLE LOT AREA(Sq. Ft.) FRONTAGE(Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) TREE EASEMENT Code 15,000 90 125 1 28,000 112 250 N 145' and W 20' 2 15,767 99 159 W 60' 3 15,126 95 159 W 60' of S 30' 4 15,588 105 148 none 5 15,117 111 136 N 35' TOTAL 89,600 Setbacks, Minimum: Front- 30 feet, side- 10 feet,rear- 30 feet FINDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the RSF,Residential Single Family District. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city,county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable plans. Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 8 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified in this report. 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets,erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage subject to conditions of approved. 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that City Council approval the preliminary plat of Oakwood Estates First Addition, prepared by William R. Engelhardt Associates, Inc.,dated December 28, 1995, for five lots subject to the following conditions: Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 9 1. Submit an evaluation of the soils at the proposed house pads. This shall be done prior to issuance of any building permits. 2. Revise the grading plan to show the location, lowest floor and garage floor elevations and type of dwelling using the City's standard designations prior to final plat approval. The lowest floor elevations of all dwellings shall be constructed a minimum of two (2) feet above the 100-year flood elevation of the pond. The lowest opening or walkout of each dwelling shall be a minimum of one (1) foot above the emergency overflow swale elevation. 3. Rock construction entrances shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the street has been paved with bituminous surface. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for water quality and quantity connection charges in accordance with the City Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). Credits will be reviewed and applied to these charges upon final plat consideration based on the applicant's contribution for meeting the City's SWMP requirements. 5. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat a drainage and ponding easement over the pond up to the 100-year flood elevation and a 20-foot drainage and utility easement centered upon the common lot line of Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 for the emergency overflow swale. 6. The applicant's engineer shall work with City staff in revising street grades along Quinn Road to provide for an emergency overflow from the pond out to Quinn Road. 7. Individual grading, drainage, tree preservation, and erosion control plans will be required for Lots 1, 2, and 5, Block 1 at the time of building permit application for the City to review and approve. Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 shall be graded in conjunction with Phase II site improvements. 8. The public street and utility systems shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of street and utility standards. Detailed construction plans and specifications shall be submitted for Phase II for City staff review and formal approval by the City Council in conjunction with final plat approval for Phase II. The plans and specifications shall be prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. 9. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 10 10. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm event providing ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's SWMP for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post-developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basins, and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. 11. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 12. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Development, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 13. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant has the option to install the storm drainage improvements from the pond to Lyman Boulevard at their own expense. If the applicant petitions the City to install these drainage improvements under the Lyman Boulevard Reconstruction/Lake Riley Area Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 93-32B, the applicant shall accept the special assessment for the cost of extending the storm drainage improvements from Lyman Boulevard to the pond. The cost of these storm drainage improvements will be assessed on a per-lot basis over Lots 1 through 5, inclusive. The applicant and/or property owners shall waive any and all procedural or substantive objections to the special assessments associated with City public improvement Project No. 93-32B including, but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property. 15. Quinn Road shall be extended and upgraded to a city standard urban road in the future. The applicant shall provide a temporary turnaround with Phase II improvements that meets City standards with a barricade and signage stating that it is a temporary cul-de-sac and this road will be extended in the future. Oakwood Estates February 21, 1996 Page 11 16. Applicant is required to plant 10 trees as replacements for canopy lost. These trees shall be 2 and 1/2 inches in diameter and from the primary species in the Approved Tree List. Three trees shall be planted on each of Lots 3, and 4 and four on Lot 2. 17. A conservation easement or tree removal limit shall be placed over the following lots areas: a. The northern 145 feet and western 20 feet of Lot 1 b. The western 60 feet of Lot 2 c. The westerly 60 feet of the southerly 30 feet of Lot 3 d. The northern 35 feet of Lot 5 18. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around all trees and wooded areas that are to be preserved on the site. Such fencing shall be installed prior to commencing grading, excavations or other site improvements on or adjacent to the lots. 19. Entry monumentation for the development shall require a separate sign permit and must comply with city code. 20. The applicant shall hire a wetland expert to delineate the edge of the wetland due to the marginal soil conditions in the area. Based on this delineation, Lots 3, 4, and 5 may not be developable or a Wetland Alteration Permit may be required." ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Reduced Preliminary Plat 3. Memo from Steve A. Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 2/5/96 4. Memo from Mark Littfin to Bob Generous dated 11/29/95 5. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 6. Preliminary plat dated December 28, 1995. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Mr. Gene R. Quinn OWNER: Eugene R. & Therese A. Quinn ADDRESS: 4510 West Shore Drive ADDRESS: 4510 West Shore Drive Rapid City , S . D. 57702 Rapid City, S. D. 57702 TELEPHONE (Day time) Q,5- 34"5-- 6 Z3 Li TELEPHONE: 7 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUP/SPRNAC/VAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. Subdivision7 1-1 IC TOTAL FEE $ 56 ,l A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. ** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME First Addition to Oakwood Estates LOCATION Lyman Boulevard and Quinn Road LEGAL DESCRIPTION Outlot A, Oakwood Estates , Carver County, Minnesota PRESENT ZONING R S F REQUESTED ZONING R S F PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Subdivision This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of Applicant Date /4(;10"-{—, / . Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on Decl Paid S Receipt No.ild.U.,_(57 The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. ti <_ c ~ ' Alp �- Ain3 N 4 • 30 1 t \. p. ? --ul _ 41 O uo Y .t 4 :;i �yFt //• k 4 it •i' r 1 � Yy�y•� a .., C \/ 7. .��Rill 71%}fir a 'S , L L J .)G"..-7‘...1,-. L C1 C • , : .0.41..-1....--- (----4—I - Fa a. �a V.; n.' MI �: r'r 0 laF •- ��- y. Kiri W �•i ANq t %.1 � a �O • . ( , --- - , .. .. .-- . ) 0 .. ,' o • �' I ti i7>.4 . w Osz=w . :• • w ►---'1^/__ ^'� - .\N. = I .. .! Iii • ., O ¢W�p `rte :'; �, _ , _ !;;, g g 000r Q=h� ;_+�� __r' .•'�/ / �.J '• I ---- 2otr�, • • —— €?yy 11 11114 � J .x `1 __ r. r r o ` • • `• M C • '` { ` ^ _ mi, -i.,- p . 1 Hi '� 1 1 I• a ;tl a ;i $ !hi :R �3 .;S69 5 _ f IEN • F g 00o0.R 8 W tgF+ Y — '._ ma ► C .. y U Int � • i _ r r Z m 1 I ....6, Y# Y #Y f C CI fti tgt . . $ r ti, ®� og mayyy g • • �� I � g . 1EEigky j - aoooo n 5• , EA W1, � - . O •AI \ i f tt sM :iL , i I_ < s • I til 4 W .- _ >� �� 1 0 Z 0 W -W _ Y = N= _L-- _ Y _-- W O tU S U = r —nom _ - o t 1: % .t t LYA3O 8 N V tY A l 321 fl l f1 3 .'J.+ 3 CITY QF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous,Planner II FROM: Steve A.Kirchntan,Building Official �J 1' DATE: February 5, 1996 SUBJECT: 92-3 SUB (First Addition to Oakwood Estates,Eugene Quinn) Background: I was asked to review the plans stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, DEC 28 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT." for the above referenced project. Below are an analysis and recon-unendations from the Inspections Division for the proposed project. Analysis: Building Pads.Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance.For the same reason,proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations and entry level elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO,R,SE,SEWO,TU,WO)must be shown for proposed dwelling types.These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. The Carver County Soil Survey indicates Cordova and Webster silty clay loam soil present on all lots. This type of soil is typically unsuitable for building construction. A soils engineer can evaluate the house pads on the proposed lots and determine if soils corrections are required. Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval. 1. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 2. Submit an evaluation of the soils at the proposed house pads. This should be done prior to issuance of any building permits. g'.saIetyssartnemos'pIan'oarwd I doc j CITY OF 1 .z... .. ! C IIANIIASSEN ` Y1 ., .., ,• , . „ ,• .., v .._ , , -., -. .. ..,.::. - � 690 COULTER DRIVE • P:O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �'T' ViOr (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 p4. MEMORAN P UM TO: Inspections, Planning, & Engineering Staff FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official DATE: January 29, 1993 SUBJ: Dwelling Type Designation We have been requesting on site plan reviews that the developer designate the type of dwelling that is acceptable on each proposed lot in a new development. I thought perhaps it might he helpful to staff to explain and diagram these designations and the reasoning behind the requirements. PLO or RLO Designates Prom Lookout or Rear Lookout. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to appro:dmately 4' above the basement floor level. R Designates Rambler. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. This would include two story's and many 4 level dwellings. SE Designates Split Petry. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. SEWO Designates Split Entry Walk Out. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to lowest floor level. TU Designates Tuck Under. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the front of the dwelling. WO Designates Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the rear of the dwelling. TU gE ilk SEWO WO F/ LOor RLO\ t3 OY r - - ...+ Inspections staff uses these designations when reviewing plans which are then passed to the engineering staff for further review. Approved grading plans are compared to proposed building plans to insure compliance to approved conditions. The same designation must be used on all documents in order to avoid confusion and incorrect plan reviews. I, 4. .5PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF CHANI1ASSEN \ - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous,AICP Planner II FROM: Mark Littfin,Fire Marshal DATE: November 29, 1995 SUBJ: Oakwood Estates First Addition Planning Case#92-3 SUB I have reviewed the preliminary plat approval for the subdivision for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division,I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan review is based on the available information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted,the appropriate code or policy item will be addressed. 1. No comments at this time. „,,. _ rz---7' 111 . 6 ,.-ti°7 I i . - , .. .. , oppil , ,,,,,„.. --- _ ,.. . NOTICE OF PUBLIC , I 1� - g•.__ 1.`,_ HEARING •ii ' e' i PLANNING COMMISSION v. ---' ' MEETING t�'`�Alma w Wednesday, FEBRUARY 21, 1996 *, il ,.►”` -' / at 7:00 p.m. ��►� • City Hall Council Chambers t?" A1- -' 1 ___.� 690 Coulter Drive - � ','/ ' 1 .EVARC -- r Project: Oakwood Estates ---j —1 ( �_ 1 , First Addition -- r _ r..� LOCATION Developer: Eugene Quinn • g BAND/MERE Location: At Approximately 532 Lyman Blvd HEIGHTS PARK Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is proposing preliminary plat approval to subdivide Outlot A, Oakwood Estates (2.06 acres) into 5 single family lots on property zoned RSF and located at approximately 532 Lyman Blvd., First Addition to Oakwood Estates. 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 over view 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 or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearinghas been published in the Chanhassen Villager on February 8, 1996. Thomas & Kristine Uppman Eugene & Therese Quinn James& Patricia Dolejsi 532 Lyman Blvd. 4510 West Shore Drive 9260 Kiowa Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Rapid City, SD 57702 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Timothy & Diane Srdar Gary Skalberg Dixon& Karen Blosberg 550 Lyman Blvd. 510 Lyman Blvd. 530 Lyman Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Bailey& Mary Lou Janssen Russell & Orletta Frederick Andrew& K. Poepoe 500 Lyman Blvd. 540 Lyman Blvd. 520 Lyman Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Richard Chadwick James A. Curry 9530 Foxford Road 4817 Upper Terrace Chanhassen, MN 55317 Edina, MN 55435 C i TY 0 F PC DATE: 2/21/96 6 CC DATE: 3/11/9 CUANIIASSEN CASE#: 93-3 By: Rask:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat approval to subdivide 1.22 into three (3) single family lots. Slather Addition I- Z LOCATION: 8508 Great Plains Blvd. The property is located on the west side of Great Plains Blvd. U 0. APPLICANT: Ted Slather Owner: Don Slather a_ 4425 Chatsworth 8508 Great Plains Blvd. Q Shoreview, MN 55126 Chanhassen, MN 55317 486-7015 492-3239 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Single Family Residential ACREAGE: 1.22 acres DENSITY: 2.46 units per acre ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Lake Susan, RD - Recreational Development S- RSF, Residential Single Family, Future Highway 212 E - PUD, Planned Unit Development, Mission Hills LQL W- RSF, Residential Single Family 17 0 WATER AND SEWER: Available to the property. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The lot has approximately 70 feet of lake frontage. A number of_ pine trees are located on the eastern end of the lot with a variety of trees along the bluff. A single family home is currently located (r) towards the center of the lot. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential-Low Density ....- i 1 I��V' �4ii1.111t.gm g GIHp., , pissw %Wi 0 tat, "IP 4.,Mo. 4 .itr ... • ») , :,0 #: _, t 4, mg k.v.ieogAtigein .‘i.,------P IT cHA i- pAsi.,-,„;40„,vir .. Rat,* mai ill - MIIT-airrrai _ !�, fria p I NICHOLAS ; N%\% t . NNW: IFA•,• WAY - N� — sto ®®® ® .':.c: �� • EI�Eri.0 riv i� ��M wiss,W, , SNS �; • IIJ ,,�;� ■■ . :V4,ELUIHI11111111 : W' o Ft 411111111a 4 .2,2g 111 oar ° I Mill Eir".�,�. MI F11, lo , x .. illikij 0 RD s '� 5% ....00 iv LJ T 5 /, Di op _ .„,......___ -----. 7 Ei �r--.ri fil ,esocilli ---j-pwmhii AT f HIGHWAY t �n ��f 0- tzaa rer ...t. arriv---.4‘ de ea 11,4,._ ,- ♦ 1 01 Mann- N■ IAA O. "› iriliNtri —Ilk' SUS'• :cc—' z� �f�� ! ��r� �� ..3 ARK ' ram"mit* An .� • ESSE,- ,�� 11 ` . O/ !• 1' •, ''�,•• 1/1,� ��•,FR/CE SUFFOLK,.• \ �',111�� I \` - �j• ' MARSH�� NNEN 5 = - - •"RV LAKE Aa r • ~ 1 i 1 1 CIRCLE PARK >>'' -csa.Q 1 /,,) L �4 KE SUSAN `1 �� INN \\„, //._� I-MISSION HI 4p. I rip .• DRIVE /+ R� �1 - /'�•.' 2 CRO(ST z ste 4 R/CE , w � 6 - L______„ cr ' S, � 2111447 , ,,pp�� I 12- lo -Olk ea 14:1 P ,��I��v aff' EMISSION - I_- — 7 \' '- ''r ` WEST •/'' -TR2ILQN ��, MHILLS 11;4 Wil I'�� 11i11le s.� -- , :6 �� FAST _-------t-r- 2l2 . :7• 4A RE 7. ) -...,.'-ip• SIM, - -,;(.,sEs go ,,,g-4- .41,0441 be •''A ...--/ / „„zil,t,,, c• ..44 !.. 41, iw: ) \ uoc 'Fir - - , r•-• . ..,----;" ( ki Ps $S4*v -,\.--- F � '`, *V'''.�% ` -- POND LYMAN = •/1 !f\ �-- r 1 COURT V 90UL 1 1 . e ii, r..f .. � _i.i 0 I i - � om",, _ �� _.r Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to subdivide an existing 1.22 acre parcel into three lots. All three lots meet the minimum width, depth, and area requirement of the zoning ordinance. Lot 3 is a riparian lot and is 20,003 square feet. Lots 1 and 2 are both over 16,500 square feet. However, Lots 1 and 2 both exceed the maximum lot coverage of 25 percent for all structures and paved surfaces. Section 20-615(4) states that the maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25) percent. Lot coverage on Lot 2 is 33 percent. Proposed Lot 1 has a lot coverage of 29 percent. Impervious surface is increased due to the private driveway across the lots. In addition, the proposed house pads on Lots 1 and 2 are 2,590 square feet and 1,612 square feet, respectively. Any future home on Lot 1 would most likely be as large, if not larger than the house pad being shown on the survey. For tree preservation requirements, the Subdivision Regulations require that the applicant demonstrate that suitable home sites exist on each lot by describing a sixty by sixty foot building pad (which includes deck area) without intruding into required setbacks and easements. Therefore, reducing the size of the building pad is not an option. Staff recommends that the applicant revise the plat to reduce the number of lots from three to two. It appears that one lot could be created to the south of the existing home adjacent to Great Plains Blvd., with the second lot incorporating the existing home and lakeshore. Eliminating a lot would also decrease the impacts to tree loss and reduce the amount of impervious service and grading. Staff would recommend against a variance to exceed the maximum hard surface coverage. Maintaining a lower amount of impervious surface is especially critical along lakeshore property. Decreasing the amount of natural vegetation increases the amount of untreated stormwater entering the lake. Maintaining the natural vegetation helps to treat and remove pollutants and sediments from stormwater. The properties located on both sides of the Slather parcel have subdivision potential. The applicant may wish to consider combining his parcel with the neighboring property to the east, or make use of a shared private street that would be located partly on the Slather property and partly on the neighboring property. Currently, the Slather and Gilman properties have private driveways which run along a common lot line. Running a private street over the two driveways would reduced the impervious surface on both lots, and may provide further subdivision potential for both properties. Without sharing a private street, both lots would need to make use of separate private streets to Turthersubdi vide. This-holds-true-fur-a-majority-orfithe-properties located-between-Lake Snsan-arid Great Plains Blvd. Staff examined the feasibility of locating a public street on these parcels. Due to the shallow lot depths, narrow parcels, location of the lake, and the future status of Great Plains Blvd. as a frontage Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 3 road, a public street is not feasible. A looped street is not workable and individual cul-de-sacs are not feasible as they would eliminate the subdivision of various parcels. Further, a public street would provide little benefit because only a limited number of homes could be served by these cul- de-sacs. Therefore, private streets appear to be the most feasible alternative in providing for future access and subdivision of these lots. Staff recommends that the preliminary plat be approved for two lots subject to the conditions provided in the staff report. The common section of the private street would need to meet the private street standards. BACKGROUND The 1.22 acre lot is an unplatted parcel of land located along Lake Susan. The majority of parcels along this section of the lakeshore are unplatted and have subdivision potential. In 1992, a lot split occurred on a parcel to the north. A 1.5 acre parcel owned by Eugene Klein was subdivided into two lots. Both lots were riparian lots which had adequate street frontage. The lot depth did not allow for further subdivision beyond the two lots. STREETS/ACCESS A gravel driveway accesses the site via Great Plains Boulevard (Trunk Highway 101). The driveway is also immediately adjacent to the Gilman's driveway. The driveway accesses onto Trunk Highway 101 at a location which has some sight line difficulties. Existing pine trees south of the driveway along Trunk Highway 101 should be trimmed back to improve sight lines to the south. As a result of this development the existing driveway will have to be expanded and paved to meet the City's private street ordinance. This will result in the loss of several of the pine trees on the south side of the driveway. The City's Fire Marshal may require a turnaround be located on Lots 2 and 3. A cross-access and maintenance agreement will need to be prepared and recorded for access to the lots. The elimination of a lot would significantly reduce the length of the private street, which would also reduce impervious surface and tree loss. The plans propose on dedicating the easterly 30 feet of the parcel for street right-of-way (Great Plains Boulevard/Trunk Highway 101). No additional right-of-way is required. When Trunk Highway 101 is upgraded,the existing Trunk Highway 101 will be used as a frontage road to service the site. Traffic concerns at that time will diminish somewhat. 'LAAHSCA GPFR1 EPRESERVAtf)N Based on information provided by the applicant, existing canopy coverage is 27,234 square feet, or 51 percent coverage of the site. Remaining coverage after development will be 24,113 square feet, or 45 percent coverage. The required canopy coverage for a low density development is 35 percent. Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 4 Staff is of the opinion that actual coverage after development will be much closer to the minimum requirement than the proposed 45 percent. Substantial tree removal will occur on Lot 1. The house pad, future drive, and proposed private street will require the removal of the existing pines on the lot. It will also be very difficult to store building and excavation materials on the lot during construction, which further decreases the chance that the 18" maple and pines will be saved. Unless materials are trucked off-site during excavation and stored elsewhere during construction,the resulting effect on the remaining trees will be root loss due to compaction of the soil. If trees are removed or severely damaged, it will further reduce the proposed canopy coverage. The significant trees on Lot 3 appear to be outside of the construction limits. However, a proposed sanitary sewer service will dissect the rear yard and sever the roots of several trees. The applicant must submit a tree removal plan showing proposed tree protection fencing. The elimination of a lot will significantly reduce the amount of tree loss on the property. If a lot is eliminated, revised tree canopy calculations shall be submitted. GRADING Due to the size of this parcel, very little site grading is anticipated to prepare the site for development. The existing gravel driveway will need to be expanded to 20 feet wide, thus resulting in the loss of many of the pine trees along the south side of the driveway. Tree loss and grading would be significantly reduced with the elimination of a lot. Since no grading plan has been submitted, staff is assuming the proposed dwellings on Lots 1 and 3 will be rambler and/or rambler/lookout style homes. Individual grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans will be required by the City with the building permit application for Lots 1 and 3. The applicant shall prepare a development plan prior to final plat consideration for staff to review and approve. The development plan shall indicate the building type suited for the lot along with the proposed lowest floor, top of block and garage floor elevations. DRAINAGE The site basically sheet drains in each direction. Only a minimal increase in runoff is anticipated with the additional impervious surface from rooftops and driveways. Due to the small size of the development, no storm drainage improvements are recommended except for drainage swales around the homes on Lots 1 and 3 to direct runoff from the driveway. The existing neighborhood -drainage-patterrrwitl-beznairrtained-as-it-existsmay. Te-reduction-of-a-lot would-further-reduce impervious surface and the amount of grading. The City's Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP) does not propose any storm drainage improvements on the site. Therefore, the applicant shall be responsible for the applicable storm Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 5 water quality and quantity connection fees. Based on single-family development, the water quality connection fee is $800 per acre and $1,980 per acre for water quantity. The SWMP does exclude existing homes or developments. Therefore, Lot 2 is exempt from the Surface Water Management fees. Applying the single-family development rate to the remaining 0.84 acres (Lots 1 and 3)equates to $672 for the water quality connection charge and $1,663 for the water quantity connection charge. These fees are payable to the City prior to recording of the final plat. UTILITIES Municipal utility service is available to the site. A 12-inch water line exists along the east side of Great Plains Boulevard (Trunk Highway 101). One water service has already been extended across Great Plains Boulevard to the property line for the existing house. Two additional water lines will also need to be extended to service the two newly created lots. Due to the great distance between Lot 3 and the existing watermain, a 1'/4-inch or 1'/2-inch diameter water line will be necessary. Extension of the water service will require a permit from MnDOT for work within the Trunk Highway 101 right-of-way. The existing residence is connected to sanitary sewer but not City water. The home still utilizes a well system. This well may be continued to be used until the well fails, then the well must be abandoned in accordance with City and State Health Department codes and the existing home connected to City water. A 12-inch sanitary sewer trunk line runs along the west lot line of Lot 3. The plans propose on extending two sewer services from the existing trunk line to service Lots 1 and 3. Given the likelihood that the parcel to the north(Gilman)also has a potential of subdividing in the future, it would be prudent to extend an 8-inch sanitary lateral line from the trunk main along the northerly lot line of Lot 3 to service this development and the Gilman parcel in the future. This would eliminate three additional cut-ins to the City's trunk sanitary sewer line. It is also advantageous from a maintenance standpoint. The 8-inch lateral sewer line will become owned and maintained by the City versus the property owners. The applicant would be entitled to recover a portion of the cost of this 8-inch lateral line when the Gilman parcel subdivides and connects to the system. The City will collect a connection charge from those parcels which connect to the system and then refund a portion of this connection charge back to the developer. Currently, connection charges are $3,500 per unit for sanitary sewer. Each new lot (Lots 1 and 3) will also be subject to a hook-up charge for the sanitary sewer line (1,050/unit). Detailed construction plans of the sanitary and water systems will be required in conjunction with final plat approval. The tonstruetion-plans-and-specifications-shail-be-prepared in accordance with-the-City-s latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security to guarantee the installation of the public improvements and conditions of approval. A drainage and utility easement will Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 6 also be required on the final plat over these utility lines. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. If a lot is eliminated,private lines could be extended to the existing trunk line to serve the two lots. This would reduce the need to extend an 8-inch sanitary lateral line to serve additional lots on this parcel and the Gilman property. In addition,a development contract would not be necessary. COMPLIANCE TABLE BLOCK LOT AREA (SQ. FT.) FRONTAGE DEPTH 1 1 16,709 153 137 1 2 16,563 127 163 1 3 20,003 103 240 FINDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the RSF, Residential Single Family District with the exception of the 25% maximum lot coverage requirement. This could be corrected by reducing the number of lots. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable plans. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified in this report. Further, reducing the impervious surface will improve the quantity and quality of storm water drainage. 4. "The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision-for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 7 Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure and the necessary conditions added to ensure compliance with applicable requirements. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage subject to conditions if approved. The site contains a wooded bluff along the shoreline. Minimum setback from the bluff shall be maintained. Vegetation removal shall be prohibited in this area. 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. A private drive will provide access to the interior lot. The subdivision meets the necessary conditions for the use of a private street. Section 18-57(o) states that private streets may serve up to four (4) lots in the RSF district if the city finds the following conditions to exist: 1. The prevailing development pattern makes in unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a public street. In making this determination the city may consider the location of existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands. 2. After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the -public-street-system-is-not-required to-serve•othergareels-in4he-area, improve access,or to provide a street system consistent with the comprehensive plan. Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 8 3. The use of a private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. Finding: Staff finds that the prevailing development pattern and the size of the lots makes it inappropriate to construct a public street. A public street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area or improve access. In addition, the use of a private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision 96-3, Slather Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall revise the preliminary plat to eliminate one of the lots to comply with the impervious surface requirement of the zoning ordinance. 2. Individual grading,drainage,tree removal and erosion control plans will be required by the City with building permit application. 3. The applicant shall prepare a development plan prior to final plat consideration. The development plan shall indicate the building type, and lowest floor,top of block and garage floor elevations for each lot. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for extending sewer and water service to the parcel. The applicant may be entitled to be refunded a portion of the cost of the 8-inch lateral sewer line when the property to the north (Gilman) subdivides and connects to this system. The applicant's refund will be a portion of the cost for extending a sanitary sewer lateral line to the development divided by the number of lots benefiting from the parcel. The applicant shall also prepare detailed construction plans in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Final construction plans and specifications shall be formally approved by the City Council in conjunction with final plat approval. Comment: The applicant will be responsible for extending sewer and water service to the parcel if a lot is eliminated. However,the applicant may utilize individual sewer and water -services. 5. A drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated on the final plat over the utility lines. The easement shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 9 6. The existing dwelling on Lot 2 may continue to use the well until the well system fails. At that time the well must be properly abandoned in accordance with City and State Health Department codes and the existing home then connected to city water. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for SWMP water quality and water quantity connection charges in the amount of$672 and $1,663, respectively. These fees are payable to the City prior to recording the final plat. 8. The existing pines along Trunk Highway 101 shall be trimmed back to improve sight lines. The common sections of the existing gravel driveway will have to be expanded and paved to meet the City's private street ordinance. Cross-access and maintenance agreements will need to be prepared and recorded against the lots. Comment: If a lot is eliminate, only the common sections of the private street need to meet the City's private street ordinance. 9. Lots 1 and 3 will be subject to sanitary sewer hook-up charges and water connection and hook-up charges at time of building permit application. 10. Full park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit approval in the amount in force at the time of building permit application. 11. The applicant shall comply with the conditions recommend by the DNR as stated in the letter to John Rask, dated February 7, 1996. 12. The proposed 20 foot wide paved driveway must be given a street name. Submit street name to the Fire Marshal for approval. Comment: This condition may not be necessary if one lot is eliminated. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memo from Dave Hempel,Assistant City Engineer dated February 13, 1996 2. Memo from Steve Kirchman, Building Official dated February 8, 1996 3. Memo from Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal dated January 26, 1996 4. Memo from Joe Richter,DNR Hydrologist dated February 7, 1996 5. Applicatiom-from fe&Siatherdated January+8,+996 6. Letter from George Gilman dated February 13, 1996 Slather Addition February 21, 1996 Page 9 6. The existing dwelling on Lot 2 may continue to use the well until the well system fails. At that time the well must be properly abandoned in accordance with City and State Health Department codes and the existing home then connected to city water. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for SWMP water quality and water quantity connection charges in the amount of$672 and $1,663, respectively. These fees are payable to the City prior to recording the final plat. 8. The existing pines along Trunk Highway 101 shall be trimmed back to improve sight lines. The common sections of the existing gravel driveway will have to be expanded and paved to meet the City's private street ordinance. Cross-access and maintenance agreements will need to be prepared and recorded against the lots. Comment: If a lot is eliminate, only the common sections of the private street need to meet the City's private street ordinance. 9. Lots 1 and 3 will be subject to sanitary sewer hook-up charges and water connection and hook-up charges at time of building permit application. 10. Full park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit approval in the amount in force at the time of building permit application. 11. The applicant shall comply with the conditions recommend by the DNR as stated in the letter to John Rask, dated February 7, 1996. 12. The proposed 20 foot wide paved driveway must be given a street name. Submit street name to the Fire Marshal for approval. Comment: This condition may not be necessary if one lot is eliminated. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memo from Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer dated February 13, 1996 2. Memo from Steve Kirchman, Building Official dated February 8, 1996 3. Memo from Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal dated January 26, 1996 4. Memo from Joe Richter,DNR Hydrologist dated February 7, 1996 '5. A slicatiin'frorn Ted-Statheritattd Imlay 1'8,1'996 6. Letter from George Gilman dated February 13, 1996 7. Preliminary plat. 04,1 CITY of toplor. CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: John Rask, Planner I FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer DATE: February 13, 1996 SUBJ: Review of Preliminary Plat for Slather Addition - Land Use Review File No. 96-5 Upon review of the preliminary plat prepared by Advance Surveying and Engineering dated January 19, 1996,I offer the following comments and recommendations: GRADING Due to the size of this parcel very little site grading is anticipated to prepare the site for development. The existing gravel driveway will need to be expanded to 20 feet wide, thus resulting in the loss of many of the pine trees along the south side of the driveway. Since no grading plan has been submitted, staff is assuming the proposed dwellings on Lots 1 and 3 will be rambler and/or rambler/lookout style homes. Individual grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans will be required by the City with the building permit application for Lots 1 and 3. The applicant shall prepare a development plan prior to final plat consideration for staff to review and approve. The development plan shall indicate the building type suited for the lot along with the proposed lowest floor, top of block and garage floor elevations. DRAINAGE The site basically sheet drains in each direction. Only a minimal increase in runoff is anticipated with the additional impervious surface from rooftops and driveways. Due to the small size of the development,no storm drainage improvements are recommended except for drainage swales -around-the-homes-on-Lots 1-and 3-to-direct-runoff from-the driveway. The-existing-neighborhood drainage pattern will be maintained as it exists today. The City's Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP)does not propose any storm drainage improvements on the site. Therefore,the applicant shall be responsible for the applicable storm John Rask Slather Addition PPR February 13, 1996 Page 2 water quality and quantity connection fees. Based on single-family development,the water quality connection fee is$800 per acre and $1,980 per acre for water quantity. The SWMP does exclude existing homes or developments. Therefore, Lot 2 is exempt from the Surface Water Management fees. Applying the single-family development rate to the remaining 0.84 acres (Lots 1 and 3)equates to$672 for the water quality connection charge and$1,663 for the water quantity connection charge. These fees are payable to the City prior to recording of the final plat. UTILITIES Municipal utility service is available to the site. A 12-inch water line exists along the east side of Great Plains Boulevard (Trunk Highway 101). One water service has already been extended across Great Plains Boulevard to the property line for the existing house. Two additional water lines will also need to be extended to service the two newly created lots. Due to the great distance between Lot 3 and the existing watermain, a 1'A-inch or 11/2-inch diameter water line will be necessary. Extension of the water service will require a permit from MnDOT for work within the Trunk Highway 101 right-of-way. The existing residence is connected to sanitary sewer but not City water. The home still utilizes a well system. This well may be continued to be used until the well fails,then the well must be abandoned in accordance with City and State Health Department codes and the existing home connected to City water. An 12-inch sanitary sewer trunk line runs along the west lot line of Lot 3. The plans propose on extending two sewer services from the existing trunk line to service Lots 1 and 3. Given the likelihood that the parcel to the north (Gillman) also has a potential of subdividing in the future,it would be prudent to extend an 8-inch sanitary lateral line from the trunk main along the northerly lot line of Lot 3 to service this development and the Gillman parcel in the future. This would eliminate three additional cut-ins to the City's trunk sanitary sewer line. It is also advantageous from a maintenance standpoint. The 8-inch lateral sewer line will become owned and maintained by the City versus the property owners. The applicant would be entitled to recover a portion of the costs of this 8-inch lateral line when the Gillman parcel subdivides and connects to the system. The City will collect a connection charge from those parcels which connect to the system and then refund a portion of this connection charge back to the developer. Currently, connection charges are $3,500 per unit for sanitary sewer. Each new lot (Lots 1 and 3) will also be subject to a hook- .up.ckazge1 r.thessa0tary sewer1i e-(4,059fanit). -1)et,ailed-censtructien-pla1rs-ef-the•sanitary-and water systems will be required in conjunction with final plat approval. The construction plans and specifications shall be prepared in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security to guarantee the installation of the public John Rask Slather Addition PPR February 13, 1996 Page 3 improvements and conditions of approval. A drainage and utility easement will also be required on the final plat over these utility lines. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. STREETS A gravel driveway accesses the site via Great Plains Boulevard (Trunk Highway 101). The driveway is also immediately adjacent to the Gillman's driveway. The driveway accesses onto Trunk Highway 101 at a location which has some sight line difficulties. Existing pine trees south of the driveway along Trunk Highway 101 should be trimmed back to improve sight lines to the south. As a result of this development the existing driveway will have to be expanded and paved to meet the City's private street ordinance. This will result in the loss of several of the pine trees on the south side of the driveway. In accordance with the City's Fire Marshal, a turnaround may also be required on Lots 2 and 3. A cross-access and maintenance agreement will need to be prepared and recorded for access to the lots. The plans propose on dedicating the easterly 30 feet of the parcel for street right-of-way (Great Plains Boulevard/Trunk Highway 101). No additional right-of-way is required. When Trunk Highway 101 is upgraded the existing Trunk Highway 101 will be used a frontage road to service the site. Traffic concerns at that time will diminish somewhat. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Individual grading,drainage,tree removal and erosion control plans will be required by the City with building permit application. 2. The applicant shall prepare a development plan prior to final plat consideration. The development plan shall indicate the building type, and lowest floor, top of block and garage floor elevations for each lot. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for extending sewer and water service to the parcel. The applicant may be entitle to be refunded a portion of the cost of the 8-inch lateral sewer line when the property to the north (Gillman) subdivides and connects to this system. The applicant's refund will be a portion of the cost for extending a sanitary sewer lateral line to the development divided the number of lots benefiting from the parcel. The .applicant.shalLalso.prepare,detailed.constsuction-plansan-accordance-to-the-City's-Iatect edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Final construction plans and specifications shall be formally approved by the City Council in conjunction with final plat approval. John Rask Slather Addition PPR February 13, 1996 Page 4 4. A drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated on the final plat over the utility lines. The easement shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. 5. The existing dwelling on Lot 2 may continue to use the well until the well system fails. At that time the well must be properly abandoned in accordance with City and State Health Department codes and the existing home then connected to City water. 6. The applicant shall be responsible for SWMP water quality and water quantity connection charges in the amount of$672 and $1,663, respectively. These fees are payable to the City prior to recording the final plat. 7. The existing pines along Trunk Highway 101 shall be trimmed back to improve sight lines. The existing gravel driveway will have to be expanded and paved to meet the City's private street ordinance. Cross-access and maintenance agreements will need to be prepared and recorded against the lots. 8. Lots 1 and 3 will be subject to sanitary sewer hook-up charges and water connection and hook-up charges at time of building permit application. ktm c: Charles Folch,Director of Public Works g:bng'dave'pc'.clather.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN\ — 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: John Rask,Planner I FROM: Steve A.Kirchman,Building Official DATE: February 8, 1996 SUBJECT: 96-3 SUB (Slather Addition,Ted Slather) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED,JAN 19 1996, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time. g'.Asafetykaknemos'plan\slather.doc CITY OF CHANElliSSEN \ _ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 + MEMORANDUM TO: John Rask,Planner I FROM: Mark Littfin,Fire Marshal DATE: January 26, 1996 SUBJ: Plat approval for subdivision-Slather Addition Ted Slather, 8508 Great Plains Boulevard Planning Case: 96-3 SUB. I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division,I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan review is based on the available information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted,the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. 1. The proposed 20 foot wide paved driveway must be given a street name. Submit street name to the Fire Marshal for approval. ML:eb g:/saferyhnUplan96.3 ��STATEnnOF /� I H LI�J E ©d 1T z=�� DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106 PHONE NO. 772-7910 FILE NO. February 7, 1996 Mr. John Rask, Planner I City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Slather Addition, Lake Susan (10-13P), City of Chanhassen, Carver County (City #96-3 SUB) Dear Mr. Rask: We have reviewed the site plans(received January 26, 1996) for the Slather Addition(SW1/4 SW1/4 Section 13, T116N, R23W) at 8508 Great Plains Boulevard and have the following comments to offer: 1. Lake Susan, a Public Water(10-13P), is on the proposed site. The applicant should be aware that activity below the ordinary high water(OHW) elevation of 881.8' (NGVD, 1929) for Lake Susan, that alters the bed of the lake, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may require a DNR permit. 2. The OHW of 881.8' (NGVD, 1929) for Lake Susan (10-13P) should be noted on the plat. Since Section 20-47-9(c)(4) of the Chanhassen Shoreland Ordinance requires that only land above the OHW shall be used to meet the lot area standards, and lot width standards must be met at the 011W and the building line, the location of the OHW should be shown on plats. Although it is the top of bluff setback that is most restrictive in this case, the 011W location is also needed to verify structure setbacks are met. 3. The proposed plan does not indicate how the stormwater will be managed. If a stormsewer is proposed for the subdivision,then the water should be treated before it is released to Lake Susan. If the stormwater will flow overland to Lake Susan, then the vegetation within the shore impact zone should be left natural and unmowed. The unmowed vegetation will act as -a-filter-that44,411-remove-most-ofthe-pellutants-from-the-starmwater. 4. A FEMA designated floodplain exists for Lake Susan. While it appears that the structures will not be within the 100-year floodplain of Lake Susan, the City should be sure that the applicant is aware of the applicable floodplain regulations of both the City and.14.1til9y. Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. • ' �s FEB 0 8 1996 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CITY OF CHANHASSEN Mr. John Rask February 7, 1996 Page 2 5. Lake Susan has a shoreland classification of Recreational Development. The shoreland district extends 1000 feet from the OHW. The development must be consistent with City shoreland management regulations. In particular: a. A bluff occurs close to Lake Susan. The homeowner should be informed that Section 20-482 of the Chanhassen Shoreland Ordinance requires bluffs to be undisturbed and structures to be placed at least 30' from the top of the bluff. b. Section 20-482, subdivision b2 of the Chanhassen Shoreland Ordinance requires the retention of vegetation and topography in a natural state in the bluff impact zone. The bluff impact zone is an area within 20' of the top of the bluff. c. Section 20-485A of the Chanhassen Shoreland Ordinance requires impervious surface to cover less than 25% of the area of each lot. Although we did not use a planimeter, it appears that the impervious surfaces on each of the lots may cover more than 25% of the lot surface. We recommend that impervious surfaces be minimized to avoid increasing negative impacts that the development may have on Lake Susan. d. The structures in the development should be screened from view from Lake Susan using topography, existing vegetation, color, landscaping and other means approved by the city. e. It appears that the riparian lot includes land that is below the OHW of Lake Susan. In general, we are against platting of land below the OHW of Public Waters due to the land's unsuitability for residential use. We recommend that the lot lines be adjusted to allow all of the lots to meet the size requirements without platting land that is below the OHW of Lake Susan. 6. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments: a. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The guidelines within"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas - Best Management Practices for Minnesota" or their equivalent should be used. b. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations permit. It typically takes approximately 60-days to-process-the-permit-application. c. If construction activities disturb more than five acres of land, the contractor must apply for a stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Dan Sullivan @ 296-7203). Mr. John Rask February 7, 1996 Page 2 d. The comments in this letter address DNR-Division of Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack thereof for a particular project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Joe Richter Hydrologist JR/cds c: Robert Obermeyer, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District Gary Elftmann, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers City of Chanhassen Shoreland File CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: / z7 ,// r OWNER: UD/.? /c,( 1' eur ADDRESS: 44 G./Lot; .'4iorT ADDRESS: $ 0g 6t^e-a.-{ 0(cq'i c 4M) C(1.a1111 NV. S TELEPHONE (Day time) - ?(;(7 TELEPHONE: yq) `323/ 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 Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) Subdivision* TOTAL FEE$ 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 �!2l kct[^5 5 �. ,✓. rl, LOCATION S.�o 4/L; / .e LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACREAGE /1 3i WETLANDS PRESENT YES NO PRESENT ZONING 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. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. - • Signature of Applica9t• Date c Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on j — 1 "1(Fee Paid 7( C. Receipt No. 5 -7�'1�y The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. �✓l�r �z��- L' n .` Sri C ...�✓IC- 64-.0. ► 3 I fit"4 (c . 4 )7 -?1 , S53 ;? � 4 a ry c vl4a C ✓J'YL,, ss 3 /7 • as.s /1 , / Ntek Yr5 3 ouz_e_ fr-7 . r-4 44 'tis _tefL Gl _ fv1 l� c - Arc-c-1(_ r'-'L. wQ 7cL5 • c i, &O A/ ae t - -- �.,� �--� ,ate e6 /G+ / A yO ' ' -�-� A.24 /a4 7a a-t9.- c/4--c4 2 . 1j 14.-x-4-2 Z-c.1-11ta- _ mac) ✓ :c - <JL-; L•>-c �� (74-Z7i � 3- 1 `7r.J' / c% -:44:4714 i' L&t,,f cr-.'L i��-+rG7 _d CIGL' `� /4✓w`� /�/L C . Q-s✓L Z J Cr t,-cY �o �. L c.•-c ��c L, 4 ! -717 / cLif � e,g S �D h e � --l'u. 'er1, ; C "A? C1/1--C-r4- d ��.-- -�•f'-�-*�`✓ / .-e—o7, --Lf --7-u,,t) 7. t4-4 ' 2 � -. CU--Q ,�y=J cum o , I � -y C -C�vc- j'i.�c rcr-sr1 - f 2c - 4LI G 'LK etgG�JC C 7 A—ee-de. �� 1 �fiiC ✓c�u4 ?.cam-mac'.� , �7� Gc ER�C� 0,,4") .,/' /-tz,t7 -/KJC Vivi�W ✓✓� '� V �� tCJ../W W"C�...✓`� M1 .t112 a-,021 1 C I TY 0 F PC DATE: 2/21/96 ` 1 . CHANHASSEN CC ADSE#:ATE: 3/161/I96 VAR ,.....\;. . • By: Rask:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Variance request to allow a wall mounted sign on the west elevation(non- street frontage)of the future Tires Plus building ILOCATION: 550 West 79th Street, north of Hwy. 5, east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Z Street a V APPLICANT: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. 701 Ladybird Lane a. Burnsville, MN 55337 a. 4 PRESENT ZONING: BH, Highway Business District ACREAGE: 0.7 Acres DENSITY: not applicable ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-railroad tracks, CBD, Frontier Center S- BH, Highway 5 E - BH, West 79th Street Center(Cheers). QW-BH,American Bank Q . WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. W PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site is currently vacant. The site is relatively flat with I"' very little topographic change. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial NMI ,"�W .: �� C==fit 411' , • r j/1‘ ---•W., ..4l�j q� ••4 a• ` A` ,-�1� LAKE �t� i TWINMAFlit_Ayr .41: 9GSf ORD . V4111 �,tic--- -� C.RCLE UM d AL�k*ggerr goo ewer 4111 . ago �il■■�■E t:: �.� ,.I mvP 70, `��%. �iim•--ri �/11gerw:v �. 7400 ■ O "a taillArt.4 pra. `A�� ,�w ny y�.ser••��l�C�Qd i �0 : �,rs rats �'� R41' 1 1. �'.f ` ; W ,. PA►�j� �� moi 1: ,lei j! ` i . . �.- 1��VIE Ise.A ITMI ATIN .� I. ., •` o P• ,k 1 -•wmakma iin mow. : at/� �k,4.7� 1.0 1( ' Nag N. Wi ..:ter a um .'--.'-.. ' WAIF. 41,4 �� a 'pPR ��a W . mg�u , � rim, u, �!►A ILioN.se% . rf®ifgfj �r -IploP i ►-r,. 2 Y FN �V�I' t a IN: VH V 1- r Ili —/kr C �E ®��ffet. ""_. --1 l l � df W 7:TH ST , OF di ill AT I 0 ' '1' g/ dia 4, rfflo,--- .' 11 -,. ' "'lam ....„,,-,---w, 'gal NI jiiiiiii0'-6 - Wil ...1h0=-.-74,agiurA 1111mtkIlirri‘g--4 44,,�� „ . EESTATE.as , �7 _R MNPAi a,, DRIVE HIGKr J ` •�1vizi. - EaVI j�,V 2 hila�IC Pin-a , LI—Boo EE - --.::: ," '-rigiloCriog. 1461 ati.r4;- r . Zi SUS' ' c-.6';'' if 14 i�,.t -nallat . a_ PARK I t‘.• s'4i�1i;� i`w —8200 o s: , r `o%t i ' MARSH.' SI LAKE w �� - CIRCLE PARK �� I�� II \� a 1 )\' :)11 r,r', LAKE SUSAN f ot 04 ��jJ �r♦ ^�_ R/CM • RSH L A, F ' N,:.-,_--.2- , , 7------%____,--=-_ ti‘ qa— L - 0 , ! ## rlilli6 TM ,, do 0 crier �� •"cD _ Z ♦+g°:w '�� g)faj `��--__.--- OSE.* ,�- - Tires Plus Sign Variance February 21, 1996 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-1303(3) Highway, General, and Central business Districts states that, "Wall business signs shall be permitted on street frontage for each occupant within a building only. . ." Section 20-1253 states that, "The City Council, upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission, may grant a variance from the requirements of this article where it is shown that by reason of topography or other conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of this article would cause a hardship; provided that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely affect the spirit or intent of this article. . ." BACKGROUND On November 13, 1995, the City Council approved site plan #95-10, for Tires Plus subject to thirteen (13) conditions. Condition four (4) stated that, "Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit will be required for signage." From the time the site plan was submitted, the applicants have expressed a desire to have additional signage on the east and west elevations. The original proposal included signage on three elevations along with product advertisements. At the time of site plan review, staff informed the applicant that signage would be permitted on the south elevation only. ANALYSIS Staff recommends denial of the variance as the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. Neither the size, shape, or topography of the lot prevents a reasonable opportunity to advertise on the premise. The permitted wall sign on the south elevation provides adequate visibility to pedestrian and vehicular traffic using West 79th St. and Highway 5. In addition, the applicants have an opportunity to advertise on a monument sign located on Lot 4 (Applebees). The Planning Commission recently recommended denial of a variance for a second wall mounted sign on Gary Brown's car wash building. Upon review and consideration by the City Council, a variance was granted to permit signage on the south elevation based on the fact that Mr. Brown was the owner of the parcel to the south (Amoco Gas Station), which has frontage on Highway 5. However, the variance granted for Brown's car wash is different from this variance because Tires Plus does not own the property to the west. The property to the west of Tires Plus is owned by Americana Bank which fronts on Market Blvd. and West 79th Street. The sign ordinance establishes standards which permit business a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise their name and service, while maintaining the aesthetic environment of the Tires Plus Sign Variance February 21, 1996 Page 3 City. Uncontrolled and unlimited signs detract from the enhanced architecture that the city encourages, and in the long run may undermine economic value and growth. Further,the safety of motorists and pedestrians is affected by the number, size, location,and appearance of signs. Staff finds that the applicant has a reasonable opportunity to advertise their name and service. Staff therefore recommends denial of the sign variance. FINDINGS The Planning Commission shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Finding: The applicant has a reasonable use of the property with the existing wall and monument signs. Other businesses located along West 79th Street do not have more than one wall sign per street frontage. If approved, the variance would deviate from pre-existing standards in the Business Highway District. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally,to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which the petition for the variance is based are applicable to other properties within the same zoning classification. c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: The purpose of the variation appears to be based upon a desire to have additional advertising that is visible from Market Blvd. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The alleged hardship is self-created as the applicant has a reasonable opportunity to advertise with a wall sign on the south elevation and a monument sign. Tires Plus Sign Variance February 21, 1996 Page 4 e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Finding: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to public safety or neighboring parcels. Whereas, the addition of one extra wall sign on this building may not be detrimental to public safety; uncontrolled and unlimited signs adversely impact public safety and unduly distract motorists. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the request for Sign Permit Variance #96-1 based on the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 2. Tires Plus has a reasonable opportunity to advertise their name and service with the wall sign and monument sign. 5. The variance is inconsistent with the purpose and findings of the sign ordinance." ATTACHMENTS 1. Application dated January 16, 1996 2. South elevation showing proposed signs 3. West elevation showing proposed sign CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. OWNER: Chanhassen Housing & Rehabilitation Authority ADDRESS: 701 Ladybird Lane ADDRESS: City of Chanhassen Burnsville, MN 55337 TELEPHONE (Day time) (612) 894-2700 TELEPHONE: (612) 937-1900 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. X Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" $100 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds 10. Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ 100.00 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submttted. 81/2" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME Tires Plus - Chanhassen LOCATION Crossroads Plaza Addition LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Attached PRESENT ZONING Highway Commercial REQUESTED ZONING No change requested PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Highway Commercial REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION No change requested REASON FOR THIS REQUEST To obtain permission to increase signage to Tires Plus facility. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorders Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records. Signature of Applicant-- Date Vk'rNa-ttr-' R-1,‘ Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on —/ • `% Fee Paid/ •---) • `': Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. LAND DESCRIPTION That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Second Addition according to the plat thereof on file in the County Recorder's office, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence easterly on an assumed azimuth from north of 79 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds along the north line of said Lot 2 distance of 230.00 feet; thence southerly 169 degrees 04 minutes 54 seconds azimuth 133.00 feet; thence westerly 259 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds azimuth 230.00 feet to the westerly line of Lot 2; thence northelry 169 degrees 04 minutes 54 seconds azimuth along said westerly line 133.00 feet to the point of beginning. Said tract contains 0.70 acres. Cl., ,,.e R..^N, Yf 3 t` N P U _ oSWaQQ LL$ i# . j 11 Z �-' 3oou tof _pjjw ii. ., . 1 O j R EiNG$_ V 2uO { /1Natin z € oCr $ i R F •i' 1ii it m C H E3iF1iIiiiiii' i1 - oo A t EgilifiiiZaifiiiii O i 0111 'airE z ► I o 'Po I_um els gasii;ai; v� iiii n ex T P N A int w 3r! ! g zv.r.a II!". tl Z.D4/"lllablfigiE et ; O 0$!,..i litt ` MICR'. l — ilii ;Y gli 'p f -ssi_ �.`f ai:e! efts Fl gt- 4 '3.i_ a" I 5 i t2 ii E - ttE N/I 1931!. I 8 lhe VI il j _ fI Jl . cr o, :. ' � 111iio1111 111' o iw.#i i?r t ry 0 et N - 11 Z ' �i�SFi; iilii 8 s a %%ii ILI --4 LI Mai U3 nam ! ® Jo,a vi v 4 gi '� " �`' I t � 3�!; 11111111---- iletd �e, V ,i� �3:11- .111111 kitslaaramni _ g '5g J i 11 PIMP, g i- - . y. .:-_-,.7 N ' /j •rr r W § :_, .... ... __. ,„Fr tu - - !Bila! ' li Eii3 i 1i1IiiI!iiiiiiii!ii; 2 E o.-=P y Z C N U LLLLm N P b Z 3 ,J-a- w 2 p W -ma ti a 4 o H za'u'nw 11:? j Q-< O ggbiwQ!1,3 & cr •H :t,- a �VV /� N Q 1 g li k o ry vino*. limpromm, ot ..:,...jiiErf+±lifilZ2,---- = Itry $ 'mill t! =11, mo J ;iF a N`.--.i -.i $ z c 11.1 aff- R §n crcaLL» I I !4iIi!hiii n -liiiiiiiiii19 ! ,diz't a;l Ell - I1 ! 1. - od 11 girl' 1 "II ii ji pi qi ' 1 ii ' ig s ' - - N { l et 1 ifil- - ir ---,. 1 .1 in 1 1 1 Ill ! itillx.- li 1- . 111- to " II , I 4 iDH � i Z "„ ig I li ,,, o i. _ 9 8 8 E III- I. _- 1 .`-:!'- ',g ;it! 0 q ro..1 : : . ,_ . _ 0 I i. p , a ` 110 -114111 1 x . : !JØ1IIIII!I1il• g5 Z h P 'R8'�" MS tittQ } °alt ? w w ;. 1.II 1 J < Z. H-- n fN 1 N i g i5. ; w 6s '. 4i--1 CITY O F PC DATE: Feb. 21, 1996 `• CUA11AE ' CC DATE: Mar. 11, 1996 _ CASE#: 94-19 SUB • • STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat approval to subdivide 1.66 acre parcel into three single family lots of 332,394 sq. ft., 19,388 sq. ft., and 18,149 sq. ft., Linguist Addition Z 4 LOCATION: 2540 Orchard Lane 0 J APPLICANT: Steve Linguist a_ 853 Howard Lane 4 Chaska,MN 55318 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family ACREAGE: 1.66 acres DENSITY: 1.8 Units per Acre ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- RSF; Highway 7 S - RSF; Residential Single Family Q E- RSF; Residential Single Family, Legal Nonconforming Office Building 1—,,. • W- RSF; Residential Single Family w WATER AND SEWER: Sewer and water are available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site contains a single family residence and four sheds. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density 0 o g o O O O o N cr)0 O O O O O p O O M M M N N co •N^ N N N Cn c4M- N O __-` N MAN R RD IRy iii.s N ICt tom% - -l I '.� 1I NI fft0 VP ......lialirt4:°Wiii "RF`� 111. 2,_ ,.m ,Im ---------------- _ SII .�o�-�-1�`�.�� 11102 . ,4k.,.../11 .: �w i li\e, ..... „ ,,,,., � r� /xQ'iT1t '�L'rA � ,r � � ai .'X”".—=. ....—kW . L.. _now � � ERMAN FIELD �: Aran(�,� \ ./ c_,, ,,.._..,,,._.,,„., , ,, ....., ._ PARK O. 44 11" /iiii 4 ., .,\\, .,, , _. .:_. , .!..._2,„ ,,-, ,_,_.______ !, I LAKE /4Esni N_T, ,, .. .z. 11 )) ' tlIl 1111111°' 0 %• / ' M/NNEWASHTA -P1 A - A. ', ' ._ ...,"0„1 � i( � .. 1 ,..F, LUCY I J � REGIONAL - - . 7 I ,--. _ti PARK - - L A KE 1 . ).1 ai_ HARR/SON •O ,/, ........,„. , * A , (cm i , ,,,yri •: ry, :y, ArhAt..2 - ' 46 CO cb RIVEDvp _' ASI_ UirIiln CA ) .. Linguist Addition February 21, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval to subdivide a 1.66 acre site into 3 single family lots. Lot 1, will be occupied by an existing home. Lots 2 and 3 will be available for future construction. The site is located south of Hwy. 7 and north of Orchard Lane. The site will be accessed via Orchard Lane. The proposed lots meet the minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. The site generally slopes to the north.. The grading plan proposes grading on Lots 2 and 3 to prepare this site for house pads. Staff recommends that a drainage swale be designed and constructed along the east line of Lot 3 to maintain drainage around the house to Highway 7 versus onto the adjacent parcel to the east. The Park and Recreation Commission is recommending that park and trail fees be paid in lieu of park land. Staff believes that this plat request is a reasonable one and consistent with guidelines established by the city Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. We find it to be well designed. We are recommending that it be approved with conditions as outlined in the report. BACKGROUND On December 12, 1994, the City Council approved a metes and bounds subdivision of the subject property, into two parcels. One parcel contained the single family lot and the second one was reserved for further subdivision. On December 13, 1995, staff notified the applicant of the City Council's action and requested deeds and easements be submitted for signatures and fees be paid. The applicant did not respond and the subdivision was never filed. The current subdivision application proposes to divide the subject site into 3 lots. SUBDIVISION The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 1.66 acre site into 3 single family lots. The density of the proposed subdivision is 1.8 units per acre. All three lots meet or exceed the minimum 15,000 square foot of area. A single-family residence currently occupies proposed Lot 1. The home location meets all setback requirements. Linguist Addition February 21, 1996 Page 3 Staff notes that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. Park and Recreation The Park and Recreation Commission recommended the City Council require full park and trail fees be paid as a condition of approval. COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE-RSF DISTRICT Lot Lot Home Home Area Width Depth Setback Ordinance 15,000 sq. ft. 90' 125' 30' front/rear 10' sides Lot 1 32,394 sq. ft. 125.6' 267.44' 30' Lot 2 19,388 sq. ft. 90.05' 243.55' 30' Lot 3 18,149 sq. ft. 90.05' 233.55' 30' WETLANDS There appears to be no wetlands on-site. There is a utilized pond near the northwest corner of Lot 3 that is incorporated into the City's Surface Water Management Plan and is discussed below. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP). The SWMP will serve as a tool to protect, preserve, and enhance the City's water resources. The plan identifies the stormwater quantity and quality improvements from a regional perspective necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on projected future land Linguist Addition February 21, 1996 Page 4 use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to deter- mine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. A utilized pond exists on Trunk Highway 7 right-of-way and the City's SWMP indicates that this ponding is proposed to be increased in the future in order to serve as the water quantity pond for 11.9 acres of drainage area. Based on the SWMP, this pond will be designed to have a normal water level of 961.7 and a high water level of 964.1. An existing 18-inch discharge pipe is shown on the plan to carry the discharge from this pond north across Highway 7 to a pond in Shorewood. Storm Water Quality The SWMP has established a connection charge for stormwater quality systems. The cash dedication will be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using the market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of$2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond if the applicant constructs the pond or $4.00 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond if the City constructs the pond. The water quality charge has been calculated at $800/acre for single-family residential property. The proposed development excluding the existing home site (0.86 acre) would then be $688. Fees are reduced based on the costs of the developer's contribution to the SWMP design parameters. Since the applicant is dedicating an additional 15 feet of drainage and utility easement across the back of the lots (0.09 acre), the applicant will receive a credit of$1,623.00 resulting in a net credit of$935.00. Storm Water Quantity The SWMP has established an connection charge for different land uses based on an average, city- wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes all proposed SWMP trunk systems, culverts, and open channels and stormwater ponding areas for temporary runoff storage. The connection charge is based on the type of land use for the area. Fees will be based on the total developable land. Undevelopable area(wetlands), public parks, and existing development is exempt from the fees. The fees are negotiable based on the developer's contribution to the SWMP design parameters. Low density developments will have a connection charge of $1,980 per developable acre. The proposed development of 0.86 acre low density would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of$1,703.00. By applying the water quality credit of$935.00, the net resulting balance would be$768.00 owed to the City at final plat recording. Linguist Addition February 21, 1996 Page 5 DRAINAGE The property drains to the north toward Trunk Highway 7. A proposed regional stormwater pond is shown in the SWMP to be sized to take runoff from approximately 11.9 acres of land. (See SWMP discussion above.) No additional storm drainage improvements are required as a result of this subdivision. GRADING The lots slope northerly toward Trunk Highway 7. The grading plan proposes grading on Lots 2 and 3 to prepare this site for house pads. Staff recommends that a drainage swale be designed and constructed along the east line of Lot 3 to maintain drainage around the house to Highway 7 versus onto the adjacent parcel to the east. This grading work should be completed in conjunction with the utility construction process in order to minimize disruption and erosion in the area. Additional erosion control fence should be installed along the front of Lots 2 and 3 to prevent erosion into the street. A rock construction entrance shall be employed during hauling operations to minimize tracking into the street. STREETS Orchard Lane is not currently constructed to full city urban standards. The street is paved with a bituminous mat approximately 24 feet wide with minimal storm drainage improvements. Staff believes the current street system is adequate to support this development. UTILITIES The existing house on Lot 1 is connected to municipal sewer and water. The parcel was assessed for one sewer service and two water services. Lots 2 and 3 currently do not have sewer service available. The existing sewer line ends at the west line of Lot 1. Therefore, it is necessary for the applicant to extend the city's sanitary sewer line along Orchard Lane approximately 160 feet to the east in order to provide service to Lots 2 and 3. The sewer line shall be constructed in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required for staff review and City Council approval. If the applicant extends the sanitary sewer line the connection charges will be waived; however, Lots 2 and 3 will be subject to hookup charges at time of building permit issuance. The hookup charge for 1996 is currently $1,050 for sanitary sewer. The site has two water services available. An additional water service will need to be extended across Orchard Lane. Since the parcel was assessed for two water services, Lot 3 will be subject to a $1,375 water hookup charge and a $3,500 connection charge at time of building permit issuance. In turn, the City will be responsible for extending this water service to Lot 3. Linguist Addition February 21, 1996 Page 6 LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION Canopy coverage for the site is approximately 13% and consists of various sized maples and pines. The locations of the house pads utilizes an open area of the site and fits well for tree preservation. Tree removal is minimal. According to plans only four trees appear necessary to remove and realistically could be transplanted elsewhere on site due to their relatively small sizes. A twenty inch maple is close to the grading limits, but is easily preserved using city approved preservation techniques. The existing coverage of the site is below the minimum coverage required for low density residential (25% coverage required). The applicant, therefore, will be required to increase coverage by .19 acres to meet the minimum. This is a total of eight trees. MISCELLANEOUS The plans propose landscaping materials within the future ponding area in the backyards of Lots 1 and 2. These plantings need to be relocated outside the proposed drainage and utility easements to avoid having to relocate/remove them in the future. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision #94-19 as shown on the plans dated January 19, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for extending sanitary sewer service to Lots 2 and 3. The City shall be responsible for extending water service to Lot 3. Detailed construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates shall be submitted to the city engineer for review and City Council approval with final plat consideration. The applicant shall also enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with a financial escrow to guarantee installation of the sewer line and street restoration. 2. Access to all lots shall be limited to Orchard Lane. 3. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the MWCC, Health Department, and PCA for extension of the sanitary sewer line. Linguist Addition February 21, 1996 Page 7 4. The applicant shall be responsible for a storm water quality/quantity charge of $768.00. These fees are payable to the City prior to final plat recording. 5. No landscape materials shall be planted within the northerly 25 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3. This area is reserved for future stormwater ponding. 6. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed along the front of Lots 2 and 3 during site grading and a rock construction entrance employed and maintained until truck hauling operations are completed. 7. Lots 2 and 3 will be subject to a hookup charge and Lot 3 will be subject to a connection and hookup charge. These charges shall be collected per City Ordinance at time of building permit issuance. 8. A drainage swale shall be designed and constructed along the east line of Lot 3 to maintain drainage around the house to Highway 7. 9. Full park and trail fees be paid at the time of building permit approval in the amount of the park fee in force at the time of building permit application. 10. Tree preservation fencing must be installed prior to excavation or any construction on the site. The fencing will follow the proposed erosion control fence as drawn on the grading plan received by the city January 19, 1996. 11. The applicant shall preserve the 20-inch maple located on Lot 2 and consider transplanting the four pines within grading limits along the eastern property line of Lot 3. 12. The applicant shall plant 8 trees on site. Lots 2 and 3 shall receive two trees each in the front yard. The remaining 4 trees may be planted anywhere on site outside of drainage and utility easements." ATTACHMENTS 1. Application 2. Public hearing and property owners list. 3. Plat dated January 19, 1996. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: .-f' l,Pli OWNER: ADDRESS: D5 3 .-/-‘41,,-0.4ADDRESS: C 'V-12 1 -nr?A/ TELEPHONE (Day time) 4 F" 6 6 2 ( TELEPHONE: 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 Site Plan Review' X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) \ Subdivisions TOTAL FEE$ YA 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" 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 l44 qAati-S-JACnn— LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION ,f u .„7 1 - 2 - 3 C n TOTAL ACREAGE I. 4, 0 j, Lori . 7 y 1 2. e �t 9 S 3. c 12 0.64'4. WETLANDS PRESENT YES NO��'� PRESENT ZONING '1� �i iirf� nn,cJz REQUESTED ZONING 7 A �", PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION Li 1') � �� /nrrl c 12 p rt l�fin, 2 t REASON FOR THIS REQUEST r 3 .t/v1,7) 5 This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. Signature of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on _- I--`�7 Fee Paid `J `Receipt No. j` 7 4'2c Y x •` -s The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. I. _J N MAN R R �.� NOTICE OF PUBLIC g,�„�`0� , 0 _ � ��_� . HEARING r11I ' I �� .■�.:: ■.. �,. III � Int f ' r � � al PLANNING COMMISSION ti � •'`�� wu 'L �� MEETING 1 L'lr:di�>r� PARMgN F/ELD ; h: ,iEy Wednesday, FEBRUARY 21, 1996 � at 7:00 p.m. 1 .,s •. i City Hall Council Chambers ,_ _ = e s i 690 Coulter Drive / r ,� J1 4V,'EWASHTA.3 ', ' Project: Linguist Addition4,P.,:. ' '' 'LUCY i1` h Developer: Steve Linguist IL PARK a - - SLAKE Location: Orchard Lane i HERR/SON Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is proposing a preliminary plat to subdivide 1.6 acres into 3 single family lots on property zoned RSF, Residential Single Family and located on Orchard Lane, Linguist Addition, Steve Linguist. 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 over view 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 or 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 Sharmin at 937-1900, ext. 120. 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 February 8, 1996. * The Park and Recreation Commission will review this item at their meeting on Tuesday, February 27, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. inthe City Council Chambers. -,, , d ek C. E. Jr. & Marjorie Woosley Steven& Sandra Blom Linda Conner 4783 Hamilton Road 2511 Orchard Lane 2521 Orchard Lane Minnetonka, MN 55343 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Rhonda Studer Donald& Shirley Livingston Richard & Yvonne Brown 2611 Orchard Lane 2621 Orchard Lane 2630 Orchard Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Ralph& E. Livingston Gail Knutson John& Jill Huber 2631 Orchard Lane 2641 Orchard Lane 2651 Orchard Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Patrick & Virginia Hanily Harold & Terry Janecky William & Suzanne Johnson 2660 Orchard Lane 2661 Orchard Lane 2670 Orchard Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Chester Butterfield Lawrence& Pam Freiberg Jeffrey& Wanda Kamrath 2671 Orchard Lane 2730 Orchard Lane 2731 Orchard Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Geoffrey Pope Robert& Joan Riessleman Terry Stodola 2740 Orchard Lane 6320 Forest Circle 6330 Forest Circle Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Warren& Mary Lou Olson Kingston Spurbeck James & Candace Storm 6340 Forest Circle 6350 Forest Circle 6360 Forest Circle Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Michael Renninger& Jeremy & Beth Cone Kathryn Kladek Michelle Walonick 6320 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6321 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6310 Minnewashta Woods Dr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Alan & Jacqueline Harris William & Patricia Wisniewski John W. III & Patricia Bonk 6331 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6340 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6341 Minnewashta Woods Dr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Darrell & Judy Hinklin Thomas& Barbara Harer Thomas Fisher 6345 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6347 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6349 Minnewashta Wood Dr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Harold Jr. & Cynthia Golden Paul & Carolinda Prenevost Robert Alford 6350 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6351 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 6355 Minnewashta Woods Dr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Ralph Jr. & Kathryn Hegman Dana&Nancy Johnson Timothy& Mary Colleran 6361 Minnewashta Woods Dr. 50 Pleasant Lane W. 6560 Minnewashta Pkwy. Excelsior, MN 55331 Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Dean& Jean Simpson Kenneth& Diane Lund Elsbeth Reutiman (6561 Minnewashta Pkwy.) 7185 Hazeltine Blvd. 5915 Galpin Lake Road 7185 Hazeltine Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Shorewood, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Rick Bateson William & Delores Ziegler James & Jody Majeres 6440 Oriole Ave. 6441 Oriole Ave. 6450 Oriole Ave. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Mike & Diana Dudycha Richard& Paulette Oftedahl Agnes Anderson 6451 Oriole Ave. 6461 Oriole Lane 6470 Oriole Ave. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Robert& June Bauer Ronald& Rita Stevens Peter& Joan Olson 2700 Sandpiper Tr. 2720 Sandpiper Tr. 2721 Sandpiper Tr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Frank& Judith Scott Matthew Gilroy & Harlan& Betty Ninow 2730 Sandpiper Tr. Mary Rose McKenna Gilroy 2740 Sandpiper Tr. Excelsior, MN 55331 2731 Sandpiper Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Stephen& Mary Hughes Frank& Linda Young Douglas & Kathleen Roper 2741 Sandpiper Tr. 2750 Sandpiper Tr. 2751 Sandpiper Tr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Raymond Hinderaker& Howard& Ruth Schmidt Thomas& Edna Schonecker Kimberly Becker 2810 Sandpiper Tr. 2820 Sandpiper Tr. 2800 Sandpiper Tr. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Arnold& Anne Weimerskirch Olive Wilson Neumann Henry & Donna Bechthold 2831 Sandpiper Tr. 2841 Sandpiper Tr. 2722 Piper Ridge Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Charles III & C. Rosenberger Darrell & Laurice Johnson Dean& Delores Erickson 2727 Piper Ridge Lane 2731 Piper Ridge Lane 2762 Piper Ridge Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Jeffrey & Lesly Bornmann Randolph& Kelly Herman Fred Britzius & Susan Stewart 2771 Piper Ridge Lane 2792 Piper Ridge Lane 2444 64th Circle Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Gregory & Michelle Curtis Shawn& Joanne Killian Mark& Danielle Steele 2446 64th Circle W. 2449 64th Street W. 2451 64th Street W. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Gary & Janet Reed Gary & Pennie Reed Current Resident 2461 64th Street W. 2741 64th Street W. 2448 West 64th Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Returned 11/30/94 Thomas & Rebecca Dorr Howard& Michelle Nelson Dean& Judith Bersie 2447 64th Street W. 35 East Co. Rd. E. Apt. 311 2800 Tanagers Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Little Canada. MN 55117 Excelsior, MN 55331 Stewart& Marilyn Peterson Arthur& Ronelva Kimber 2810 Tanagers Lane 2820 Tanagers Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Katherine Olsen Todd& Leslie Pederson Per& Laurie Jacobson 2821 Tanagers Lane 2837 Tanagers Lane 2840 Tanagers Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Michael & Kristine Arone Herbert& Patricia Pfeffer Christopher& Julia Holden 2841 Tanagers Lane 2850 Tanagers Lane 2851 Tanagers Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 P.C. DATE: 2-21-96 C I TY O F C.C.DATE: 3-11-96 CASE: 96-1 Site Plan • CHANHAS96-2 VAC, 96-1 SUB \ 1 SEN BY: Al-Jaff v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for the construction of two 74,077 square foot and one 92,770 square foot Office Warehouse buildings 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 39.17 acres into 4 Lots, Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre Q3) Vacation of a Utility and Drainage Easement V LOCATION: South of Lake Drive East, West of Dell Road, and North of Eden Prairie. CL. APPLICANT : First Industrial, L.P. DataServ,Inc. a_ 7615 Golden Triangle Drive, Suite N 12125 Technology Dr. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 943-2700 829-6553 Jim Paulet PRESENT ZONING: IOP, Industrial Office Park ACREAGE: 39.17 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N -Lake Drive East S-Eden Prairie, Residential E - Dell Road, Eden Prairie, Residential W- Chanhassen Estates,Residential I< SEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is an old farmstead. There is an existing office W industrial building on the southwest corner of the site. 2000 LAND USE: Office/Industrial pi ( , v ��,`r� ,1`f A,1(.7.;---...4k.10-7.7.1 �y�� !�� —700 ilk Pli II P •. I I I •%1 7200 4,�`\ L AKE \ `• •fp - WINMAPLE • l LANE S■ ��idt11114 7300 h ��•` CIRAsswoao CLE xi IfilirdiLl lit! � Tao = �' \ ')� # 2 IrY - �• � .., , VIIIPAr „....\\., ' \,;;;"4, 11I1 Ai41 l • /1t Ro 128 o/ co 7500At r" . . : ly monis WINE -1 Er mL41."ZZA la efiiijk ��a MINI III Ar *VA ‘.4014 -mon mat:or,r ,„..", .„. P _ ,i1 7600 u :'" :© mu 21h.AO � a P - W � �` ■E mum, 11111 iii♦•i.isamir 1•� %j z 77th ST•EET 7700 IIr AWo [ v0m1 ` ig 2 J iz... I ' Ii !Ho iri ao W i8 i��1l, �� lelkhobr" 7:TH ST 0 \B , 1 = ,rte _ 7800 —� i1 _ .. • m iii Ai1•,. `=' /we/ ' / •',I' EAT 7900 O. r, ■ 11/ �R„sir _ / 101)/ irk; �l� NNE � ES /Y � ;� =�� M/N/ PARK . rirtVia. 4 . R .b 1,44,4 8000 i :� ,,.$1J - : E II woear* A� / co c0 / Fr � ra � � w ap { ` _ 810 0 ir" ettsi int-.; - F :„..„ Flak. - -,, a 3 4.3.1„,,,,,,, � , 1 „ 8200 i oP iV*4) L2: 4 MARSH . 14 / _� LAKE SINNEN I 8300 PARK .;. UD_ ., r J /::,II R/CE M • -SH LAKE �� - N_ E' I I �\...____1J� ”1.4 • • -1 8600 DI - R a - --- 2k' __ — --- P..-.POSE _.! 8700 Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY There are three actions being requested with this application, a subdivision, a site plan review for three office warehouse buildings, and a vacation of a utility and drainage easement. The site is zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and bordered by Lake Drive East to the north, Dell Road to the east, and a Lundgren Brothers residential development to the south. The lot area of the office/warehouse sites are 7.71 acres for Lot 1, 5.08 acres for Lot 2, 6.59 acres for Lot 3, and 19.79 acres for Lot 4. The site has full access from Lake Drive East. The subdivision request consists of subdividing 39.17 acres into four lots. Lots 1, 2, and 3 will contain the proposed office warehouse buildings. Lot 4 will contain the existing DataSery building. The east portion of the site is proposed to be occupied by a regional pond. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. (Please refer to the BACKGROUND section for more information on the subdivision). The site plan is for the three office warehouse buildings. The buildings are well designed, and are similar in design. They are proposed to utilize face brick on all four corners of the buildings, as well as areas surrounding entrances in the center of the buildings. Pre-colored, precast panels of rough and smooth face will be integrated into the walls, accented by pre-colored smooth face designs, metal capping, and an evergreen glazed glass. The elevations containing the loading docks will utilize ribbed concrete. Entrances into the building are designed to project 8 feet from the building which enhances the appearance of the structures. The building can be divided depending the needs of the tenant. Loading docks are proposed for those tenants that would need them. These buildings will serve office/industrial tenants. The applicant has proposed to have the parking along the east, west, and south of the building. This area is in the highway corridor which uses the underlying district for setbacks. The parking as proposed including the screening does meet the Hwy. 5 zoning district requirement. Truck dock loading areas are located between the buildings and away from views. This issue was discussed in detail with the applicant. Staff explained that this area must be screened to the extent possible. The applicant is screening these areas by the use of berms and clustering of evergreens and ornamental trees. The site landscaping is of high quality. A meandering berm of 4 to 8 feet in height runs along the south edge of the site to provide screening. Berms along the north edge of the site are an average of 2 to 4 feet in height. The parking spaces are screened •from mews-from-Dell-Road-and•Lake•Drive East.by•berms.and.vegetation. Thereis.a.* mum of two rows of parking at any given location. Staff regards the project as a reasonable use of the land. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the site plan, without variances, the subdivision request, and the utility and drainage easement vacation with conditions outlined in the staff report. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 3 BACKGROUND On November 27, 1995, the City Council reviewed and approved the following applications for CSM, located south of highway 5, west of Dell Road, and north of Eden Prairie: 1) Site Plan Review for the construction of two 64,000 square foot Office Warehouse buildings, CSM Corporation(95-18 Site Plan) 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 61.6 acres into 3 Lots and 2 Outlots, Chanhassen East Business Center(95-18 SUB) 3) Vacation of an abandoned Public Right-of-Way and a Utility and Drainage Easement(95-4 VAC) The site is located south of Highway 5, west of Dell Road, and north of Eden Prairie. It is currently zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and has an area of 61.6 acres. Lake Drive East bisects the site in the middle. There is an existing office industrial building on the southwest corner of the site. The preliminary plat for Chanhassen East Business Center subdivided the 61.6 acres into three lots and two outlots. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, will contain office/warehouse buildings. Outlot A will be reserved for future development. Outlot B was preserved for ponding. The parcel located south of Lake Drive East which houses the DataSery building was recommended to be platted as Lot 1, Block 2. The final plat for this application is proposed to appear before the City Council on February 26, 1996. The current subdivision application before the Planning Commission proposes to replat Lot 1, Block 2, and Outlot B, Chanhassen East Business Center, into four lots. As a condition of approval, the Chanhassen East Business Center plat must be filed with Hennepin County Courthouse prior to the final plat approval of Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed office/warehouse buildings for the construction of two 74,077 square foot and one 92,770 square foot, will be situated parallel to and south of Lake Drive East. The site is bordered by Lake Drive East to the north, and Dell Road to the east. Access to the buildings are proposed from Lake Drive East. Parking will be scattered along the east, west and south of the buildings. A meandering berm with landscaping, 4 to 8 feet in height, is proposed to be installed along the -south-edge•of-the-site-to•previde-screenmg. -A 240-4 foot-high-berm-will-be-located-along-the north edge of the property. The buildings are located 31 feet from the north, a minimum of 75 feet from the east, 100 feet from the south, and 85 feet from the west property line. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 4 Materials used on the three buildings which are similar in design of one another, are face brick on all four corners of the buildings, as well as areas surrounding entrances in the center of the buildings. Pre-colored, precast panels of rough and smooth face will be integrated into the walls, accented by pre-colored smooth face designs, metal capping, and an evergreen glazed glass. The elevations containing the loading docks will utilize ribbed concrete. Entrances into the building are designed to project 8 feet from the building which enhances the appearance of the structures. The building's architecture is tastefully designed and meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. The different colors and materials give the building the desired visual appeal. To further enhance the overall design of the buildings, the applicant has taken advantage of the area around the drainage pond located east of the site and given it a park setting through the introduction of trails and heavy landscaping. This development falls within the Highway Corridor Overlay and must comply with the district's design standards in addition to the Industrial Office Park Standards. The purpose of the overlay district is to promote high-quality architectural and site design through improved development standards with the corridor. The design standards should create a unified, harmonious and high quality visual environment. The plan and design of the proposed development meets the intent of the overlay district with the following features: • The building will be one story and the architectural style is unique to the buildings but will fit in. The buildings will provide a variation in style through the use of brick, precast, glazed glass, decorative wall designs, and projecting entrances. The building is utilizing exterior materials that are durable and of high quality. Samples of the materials as well as colored renderings have been submitted to the city and will be available at the meeting. • The site slopes easterly, and grading of the site is required. The existing site grade ranges from 904 in the southeast corner to 934+on the northwest corner. The landscaping plan provides a variety of plant materials that are massed where possible, particularly along the parameters of the loading docks, Dell Road and Lake Drive East. The berms and landscaping materials will be continuous along the perimeter of the site. The plant materials are repetitious in some locations and variable in others. Proposed plant materials are indigenous to Minnesota. A curb is required along the perimeter of the green space area. All planting areas are adequate in size to allow trees to grow. Clustered plantings along the south portion of the site to further screen the loading dock from the residential neighborhood is provided. • A parking lot lighting plan is required. The plan should incorporate the light style and height. A sign plan has been submitted. Individual channeled letters with the option of back lighting will be permitted. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 5 • The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be screened by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building. Current state statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new buildings. The area of the recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified in Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant should demonstrate the required area will be provided in addition to the space required for other solid waste collection space. Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the same enclosure. 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 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 Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 6 d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the City's Highway 5 corridor design requirements, the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, and the site plan review requirements. The site design is of a high quality and compatible with the surrounding development. It is functional and harmonious with the approved development for this area. WETLANDS A wetland delineation report was prepared by John Anderson with Wetlands Data on December 20, 1995. He found one non jurisdictional wetland on site. The wetland is located southeast of the DataSery parking lot. After meetings with Diane Desotelle, it was determined that the wetland was non jurisdictional. The site was excavated in 1982 in a non-wetland area. Aerial photographs show that the site had been tilled through 1981. In 1982, the water retention pond and two softball fields were created. The remainder of the site remained as tilled agricultural land. The ditch through Lot 1 was created in conjunction with the City's Lake Drive East project in 1989. The City has issued to DataSery a Certificate of Exemption for the consolidation or relocation of this pond south of DataServ's parking lot. Therefore, the wetlands on site are exempt from the wetland regulation process and the applicant may fill or drain them without replacement. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN(SWMP) The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP)that serves as a tool to protect, preserve and enhance water resources. The plan identifies, from a regional perspective,the stormwater quantity and quality improvements necessary to allow future development to take place and-minimize.itsampact.to downstream water-bodies. Ii general,.the.water quantity-portion-o£the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker,Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on the projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 7 optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The development will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. A regional stormwater pond has been designed for both water quality and quantity on this property. The pond's best location is in the southeast corner of the DataSery property adjacent to Dell Road. The stormwater runoff from this development would run through this pond and be discharged under Dell Road into a natural wetland. Stormwater would then travel through the wetland and be discharge into Mitchell Lake. The City of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen agree that the water quality pond should be designed for a natural wetland, retaining 60%to 75% phosphorus according to the Pondnet Water Quality Model. Staff supports the water quantity analysis that was done on this site in the late 1980s, however, hydrologic calculations are necessary to confirm the design. It appears that the applicant and the property owner are proposing to combine the existing pond just south of the DataSery parking lot with the proposed regional pond in the southeast corner of the property. Staff has met with the applicant and project engineer to discuss these drainage alternatives. Staff is comfortable with the proposed stormwater management plans for the most part. Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of$2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. The proposed SWMP water quality charge of$2,507/acre for industrial developments will be waived if the applicant provides water quality treatment according to the City's SWMP standards. The total gross area of the site is 39.17 acres; however, existing development is exempt from SWMP fees. Therefore,the proposed development would be responsible for a net area of 19.38 acres which results in a water quality connection fee of$48,586. The stormwater quality pond shall be designed to retain 60%to 75%phosphorus according to the Walker Pondnet model in order to provide for better water quality to Eden Prairie wetland. Credits will also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees based on oversizing stormwater improvements in accordance with the SWMP. The credits will be reviewed and determined after review and approval of the construction plans. Any credits shall be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees. If the credits exceed the SWMP fees for the development, the applicant will be reimbursed the credits -after.the4mprovementslave.been.completed.and.accepted-by.theCity Storm Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 8 proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. High density developments will have a connection charge of$4,360 per developable acre. The total gross area of the property is 39.17 acres. However, existing development is exempt from the fees (Lot 4). Therefore,the proposed development would then be responsible for a net area of 19.38 acres which results in a water quantity connection charge of$84,497. The oversizing of the regional pond and infrastructure will be credited to the applicant at the time of final plat. The connection fees, if any,will be due and payable to the City at time of final plat recording. GRADING & DRAINAGE The site is designed to drain into a storm sewer system where the stormwater would discharge into the proposed regional stormwater pond on Lot 1. The applicant is proposing to construct a trunk stormwater pipe from Lake Drive East to the regional pond, dedicate an easement over the property to both install the stormwater pipe and construct the regional pond, and come to an agreement with DataSery on the location of the trunk storm sewer pipe and the regional pond so that it meets the needs of all parties. The oversizing of the storm sewer pipe and pond will be credited against the applicant's SWMP fees. The existing drainage ditch and easement through Lot 1 is proposed to be eliminated in conjunction with this development. The applicant will need to submit to the City detailed storm drainage calculations for the storm sewers as well as ponding calculations for a 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm event, 24-hour duration for staff review and approval prior to final plat consideration. Based on these calculations, additional catch basins may be required. Ponding calculations will also be required to document that the pond is designed to retain 60% to 75% phosphorus according to the Pondnet Water Quality Model. The site also conveys drainage from parcels located in Eden Prairie just south of DataServ. Provisions to maintain the existing neighborhood drainage pattern through the site should be considered and incorporated into the site plans, i.e. drainage swales, storm sewer. In addition, drainage easements should be dedicated on the final plat to maintain drainage improvements. The preliminary grading plan proposes to "bench"the site in order to develop building pads and parking lots. This is necessary to develop the site. Pond construction will generate approximately 25,000 cubic yards of material which is assumed to be used on site. If exporting of earthwork material is necessary, a haul route and traffic control plan will need to be submitted to the City for review and approval. The site contains some existing berming along the south property line. The plans propose on increasing the size of some of the berm in some areas; however, there are limitations due to existing landscaping and parking lot improvements. The first floor elevation of the building on Lot 3 will be one foot lower than the top of berm. On Lot 2,the first floor elevation will be five feet lower than top of berm and on Lot 3, the first floor elevation will be four feet lower. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 9 EROSION CONTROL Erosion measures and site restoration shall be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook(BMPH). The final grading plan shall incorporate erosion control fence (Type I)around the perimeter of the grading limits. Rock construction entrance shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the driveways and parking lots have been paved with a bituminous surface. Hay bales and/or silt fence shall be installed around all catch basins until the parking lots have been paved. UTILITIES Individual sewer and water services have been extended to the lots from Lake Drive East. All sanitary sewer and water improvements installed outside the City's drainage and utility easements or right-of-way shall be considered private and not maintained by the City. These utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate permits from the City's Building Department. The plans also propose two wet taps which require excavating Lake Drive East. Staff recommends that the plans be revised to utilize the existing utility stubouts and avoid cutting into Lake Drive East unless fire flows are insufficient for fire protection. In conjunction with the CSM site approval process, Chanhassen East Business Center located just north of this development is responsible for the upgrading of Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south city limits. This assumed that CSM would be final platting and constructing their site before this development. However, should the CSM site fail to develop,the remaining portion of Dell Road would not be upgraded. Therefore,this development proposal should then be responsible for the upgrading of Dell Road from Lake Drive East south to the city corporate limits if CSM fails to final plat. The CSM site is scheduled for the February 26, 1996 City Council meeting to consider final plat, development contract and construction plans and specification approval. Preliminary plat approval for Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre should be conditioned upon the CSM development receiving final plat approval and entering into a development contract with the City. The applicant will be installing the trunk storm sewer system as well as the regional stormwater pond. These improvements will become owned and maintained by the City upon completion and formal acceptance by the City. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee construction of the public improvements and conditions of final plat approval. Fire hydrant locations throughout the site will-be subject4o-Giry-Fire-Mar-shat-approva'.. Landscape materials are proposed over utility lines which may impede/restrict access for maintenance purposes. Landscaping items should not be placed within drainage swales or over utility lines. The applicant may place landscape materials within the drainage and utility easements conditioned upon the applicant entering into an encroachment agreement with the City. The Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 10 encroachment agreement spells out the responsibility for replacement of items within the easement area. STREETS The site is proposed to be serviced from four driveway access points off of Lake Drive Fast. Staff is comfortable with the driveway locations. The driveways and parking lots provide for circulation around the buildings. The drive aisles and parking stalls should be designed in accordance to city codes. The drive aisle widths range from 20 feet to 24 feet wide. City ordinance requires 26-foot wide drive aisles. Staff also recommends that the drive aisles for the truck parking lot be increased to 28 feet wide to accommodate turning movements. All driveway access points onto Lake Drive East shall incorporate the City's industrial driveway apron (Detail Plate No. 5207). Cross access and maintenance agreements will be needed for Lots 1 and 2. The new driveway access points may be in conflict with a couple of the City's street lights along Lake Drive East. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation of these lights. A traffic study for Lake Drive East and Dell Road was prepared based on the land use. The conclusions indicate acceptable levels of service through Phase I of the CSM development with eventually a level of service `B' for the forecast year 2005 assuming a signalized intersection. Level of service is defined as those operational conditions within a traffic stream as perceived by users of the traffic facility. The concept of level of service was originally defined as being a quantitative measure of operational conditions. Such a measure would ideally cover factors such as speed and travel time,delay, freedom to maneuver,traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, safety. In practice, levels of service have been and continue to be defined by one or two measures of effectiveness for each facility type. These measures relate more to speed,delay, and density than they do to quantitative factors or to safety. For each facility type, i.e. intersections, freeways, multi-lane highways, six levels of service,A through F,are defined. Level of service A represents a free flow with individual vehicles being unaffected by the presence of other vehicles. Level of service E represents operating conditions at capacity which may involve delays or back ups and accidents. Based on the traffic study it appears a traffic signal will be required in the future at Lake Drive East and Dell Road. The developer shall be responsible for a share of the local cost participation of this traffic signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development will be required. As mentioned in the Utilities section of this report, staff is recommending that the upgrade of Dell Road be required south of Lake Drive East in conjunction with this development if the CSM applicant fails to achieve final plat approval. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the Dell Road street easements as right-of-way. Security may be included in the development contract to Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 11 guarantee construction of Dell Road south of Lake Drive East depending on the outcome of the CSM development. STREETS/PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The site is proposed to be serviced from five driveway access points off of Lake Drive East. The truck access drive located between Lots 1 and 2, is proposed to be shared between the two buildings. A cross-access easement will be required. The City's parking ordinance for office warehouse buildings requires a total of 120 spaces for Building 1. The applicant is providing 137. Building 2 is required to provide 120 spaces also and the applicant is providing 120 spaces. Building 3 is required to provide 150 spaces. The applicant is providing 147 spaces. These 3 spaces could be added along the southeast corner of Lot 3, however, this will minimize from the screening of the loading docks. The zoning ordinance does allow site plans that are short on parking to be approved, provided the applicant shows proof of parking. If the need for additional parking arises, the applicant would then be required to build the extra spaces. The overall required parking for all three buildings is 390 spaces. The applicant is providing 404 parking spaces. The Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) requires that handicapped parking spaces be provided at the rate of one handicapped space per every 50 spaces in the lot(s). This calculates out to 8 spaces. The submitted site plan includes eighteen handicapped parking spaces. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has specific requirements for van spaces which currently are not part of the MSBC. These requirements are not enforced by the Inspections Division, but should be incorporated into the site plan. Site approaches are regulated by the MSBC, and are not detailed on the site plan. Curb cuts, width, texture and slope are details that must be included on the site plans. LANDSCAPING Presently, the site of the Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre has minimal canopy coverage. Groupings of boxelder, elm, and ash exist primarily on the western half of the site and a landscaped berm has been created along the southern property line. Young spruce and various deciduous trees line the top of the berm, all of which will be incorporated by the applicant into a buffer area between the future development and the existing residential. Ten•percent•canop-y.caverage is-mquircd-for-the site which-equals.approximately 28..trees. :The applicant is providing 227 deciduous and evergreen trees; 57 are evergreens (25%of total), 66 are ornamentals (29%), and 104 are shade trees (46%). Boulevards and parking lot requirements have been satisfactorily met. The applicant has increased landscaping along the southern berm in areas of greatest exposure to truck traffic. On the western end of the berm, four ash trees have Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 12 been proposed to be planted in gap. Staff believes that evergreens should be added to that area to continue the pattern of the existing mix of trees. LIGHTING Lighting locations for the parking lot have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than 1/2 foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted when building permits are requested. Accent lights are located above entry ways into the buildings. Street lights consistent with Lake Drive East will be at 200 feet intervals, staggered from one side to the other. SIGNAGE The applicant has submitted a signage plan. One ground low profile business sign is permitted per lot. The area of the sign may not exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall be permitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15%of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. Staff is recommending the following criteria be adopted: 1. All businesses within a single building shall share one monument sign. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. 2. Wall signs for Building 1 will be permitted along the north and east elevations. Building 2 and 3 will be permitted wall signage along the north elevation only. Signs will be located within the sign bands shown on sheets 10, 12, and 14 of the plans dated February 13, 1996. 3. All signs require a separate permit. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. .5. .Consistency.in.signage-shalLxelate-to.calar,.size,-materials,.and heights 6. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south of the site. 7. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 13 8. Individual letters may not exceed 2 feet in height and logos shall not exceed 30 inches in height and consistent with the standards for the signage. 9. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of all sites. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Building l Building 2 Building 3 Building Height 2 stories 1 story 1 story 1 story Building Setback N-30' E-30' N-31' E-320' N-31' E-85' N-31' E-115' S-120' W-30' S-120' W-65' S-120' W-120' S-120'W-90' Parking Setback N-25' E-25' N-31' E-260' N-31' E-NA N-31' E-NA' S-25' W-10' S-55'W-NA S-55' W-NA S-55' W-NA' Hard surface 70% 43% 70% 68% Coverage Lot Area 1 acre 7.71 acres 5.08 acres 6.59 acres PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are to be paid in accordance to city ordinance. One third of the fees will be required at the time of final plat recording. SUBDIVISION The.suhdivision request consists of subdividing 39.17acresinto four lots. Lots 1. 2. and 3 will contain the proposed office warehouse buildings. Lot 4 will contain the existing DataSery building. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum lot area of 1 acre. The lot areas are 7.71 acres for Lot 1, 5.08 acres for Lot 2, 6.59 acres for Lot 3, and 19.79 acres for Lot 4. The east portion of the site is proposed to be occupied by a regional pond. The subdivision request is a Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 14 relatively straightforward action. (Please refer to the BACKGROUND section for more information on the subdivision). The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be acquired: 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of all lots. 2. Dedication of public right-of-way. 3. Dedication of drainage and utility easements over ponds and drainage ways. VACATION There is an existing utility and drainage easement over Lots 1 and 2. The drainage swale is being abandoned and therefore, the existing easement may be vacated. Staff is recommending the easement be vacated. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission adopt the following motion: I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The City Council approves Site Plan Review#96-1 as shown on the site plan received January 19, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1. The materials used to screen the trash enclosure shall be the same type of brick used on the building. 2. Signage criteria: a. All businesses within a single building shall share one monument sign. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. b. Wall signs for Building 1 will be permitted along the north and east elevations. -Buil g.2-and 3 will.be.pe ttedwall.signage.along the.north.ele- ation only. Signs will be located within the sign bands shown on sheets 10, 12, and 14 of the plans dated February 13, 1996. c. All signs require a separate permit. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 15 d. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. f. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south of the site. g. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. h. Individual letters may not exceed 2 feet in height and logos shall not exceed 30 inches in height and consistent with the standards for the signage. i. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. 3. Applicant must add evergreens to the proposed plantings of Summit ash at the western end of the existing berm. 4. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. 5. Concurrent with the building permit, a detailed lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 6. Meet with the Building Official as requested in his attached memo to discuss commercial building permit requirements. 7. All roof top equipment must be screened in accordance with city ordinances. 8. The parking area for Lot 3 shall show a proof of parking for an additional 3 spaces. If the need arises for these additional parking spaces, the City will require that they be added. 9. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The erosion control fencing and rock construction -entrance-shall-be-dented-en-t ie-€tnal-grading-and-drainage-plans-pxior-to f1na1-pla* approval. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. 10. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 16 11. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way. Landscape materials shall not be placed within drainage swales or over utility lines. The applicant may place landscape materials within the drainage and utility easement conditioned upon the applicant entering into an encroachment agreement with the City. 12. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 13. If exporting of earthwork materials is necessary,a haul route and traffic control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 14. The drive aisles and parking stalls shall be redesigned in accordance to city ordinances. The drive aisles for the truck parking/loading areas shall be 28 feet wide. All driveway accesses onto Lake Drive East shall incorporate the City's industrial driveway apron(Detail Plate No. 5207). Cross access and maintenance agreements shall be prepared for Lots 1 and 2. 15. Approval of this site plan is contingent upon the recording of the final plat for Chanhassen East Business Center with Hennepin County prior to final plat approval of Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre." II. SUBDIVISION "The City Council approves the preliminary plat for Subdivision#96-1 for Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre as shown on the plat received January 19, 1996, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be collected per city ordinance. 2. The applicant shall dedicate cross-access easements into Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 3. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The erosion control fencing and rock construction entrance shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior to final plat approval. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. 4. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 17 5. The applicant shall upgrade/extend Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south City limits as well as install a storm drainage system from Lake Drive East to the regional pond site. All public utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. The private utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City. 6. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and .00-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins,created basins,and or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. 7. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 8. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. 9. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 10. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100-year high water level. 11. A regional water quality and water quantity pond shall be provided by the applicant on site to pretreat stormwater runoff prior to discharging under Dell Road into the Eden Prairie wetland. The proposed stormwater pond must have side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. The stormwater pond shall be designed to 60%to 75%phosphorus removal Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 18 efficiently. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend into the landscape is recommended. 12. Existing wells and/or septic systems on site will have to be properly abandoned in accordance to City and Minnesota Department of Health codes/regulations. 13. The proposed industrial development of 19.38 developable acres is responsible for a water quality connection charge of$48,585 and water quantity charge of$84,497. These fees are payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. The water quality fees will be waived if the applicant provides for on-site stormwater treatment. Credits will also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees based on oversizing costs for the pond and trunk storm sewer system. Credits will be determined upon review of the final construction plans. 14. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 15. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the Dell Road street easement as right-of-way. 16. The installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road is expected in the future. The developer shall be responsible or share the local cost participation of this signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development (Phases I and II) will be required. 17. The final grading plan shall maintain the existing drainage pattern from Eden Prairie, south of DataServ. 18. If exporting of earthwork materials is necessary, a haul route and traffic control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 19. Approval of this subdivision is contingent upon the recording of the final plat for Chanhassen East Business Center with Hennepin County prior to final plat approval of Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre." III. VACATION "The City Council approves Vacation 96-2 of the utility and drainage easement over Lots 1 and 2. subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant shall provide the city with a legal description of the easement proposed to be vacated." Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre February 21, 1996 Page 19 ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo from Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, dated. 2. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated October 23, 1995. 3. Application. 4. Monument sign plan. 5 Plans received January 19, 1996. CITY OF CHANHASSEN t ,_ 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: David Hempel,Assistant City Engineer DATE: February 14, 1996 SUBJ: Review of Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre and Site Plan for First Industrial -Land Use Review File No. 96-3 Upon review of the preliminary plat drawings prepared by RLK Associates dated January 19, 1996, we offer the following comments and recommendations: WETLANDS A wetland delineation report was prepared by John Anderson with Wetlands Data on December 20, 1995. He found one non jurisdictional wetland on site. The wetland is located southeast of the Datasery parking lot. After meetings with Diane Desotelle, it was determined that the wetland was non jurisdictional. The site was excavated in 1982 in a non-wetland area. Aerial photographs show that the site had been tilled through 1981. In 1982,the water retention pond and two softball fields were created. The remainder of the site remained as tilled agricultural land. The ditch through Lot 1 was created in conjunction with the City's Lake Drive East project in 1989. The City has issued to Datasery a Certificate of Exemption for the consolidation or relocation of this pond south of Dataserv's parking lot. Therefore,the wetlands on site are exempt from the wetland regulation process and the applicant may fill or drain them without replacement. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) -The City has adopted a"SuffaceWater`1VlanagementPIanISWIffrtharservesms-a-toalsto proficct, preserve and enhance water resources. The plan identifies, from a regional perspective,the stormwater quantity and quality improvements necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general,the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 2 storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker,Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on the projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The development will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. A regional stormwater pond has been designed for both water quality and quantity on this property. The pond's best location is in the southeast corner of the Datasery property adjacent to Dell Road. The stormwater runoff from this development would run through this pond and be discharged under Dell Road into a natural wetland. Stormwater would then travel through the wetland and be discharge into Mitchell Lake. The City of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen agree that the water quality pond should be designed for a natural wetland, retaining 60% to 75% phosphorus according to the Pondnet Water Quality Model. Staff supports the water quantity analysis that was done on this site in the late 1980s, however, hydrologic calculations are necessary to confirm the design. It appears that the applicant and the property owner are proposing to combine the existing pond just south of the Datasery parking lot with the proposed regional pond in the southeast corner of the property. Staff has met with the applicant and project engineer to discuss these drainage alternatives. Staff is comfortable with the proposed stormwater management plans for the most part. Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of$2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. The proposed SWMP water quality charge of$2,507/acre for industrial developments will be waived if the applicant provides water quality treatment according to the City's SWMP standards. The total gross area of the site is 39.17 acres;however, existing development is exempt from SWMP fees. Therefore, the proposed development would be responsible for a net area of 19.38 acres which results in a water quality connection fee of$48,586. The stormwater quality pond shall be designed to retain 60%to 75%phosphorus according to the WatIcerikrridnermudel-in VI'dCrtrptuvidle fut bctki watei y-tca wetland. 'Gred1ts will also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees based on oversizing stormwater improvements in accordance with the SWMP. The credits will be reviewed and determined after review and approval of the construction plans. Any credits shall be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees. If Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 3 the credits exceed the SWMP fees for the development,the applicant will be reimbursed the credits after the improvements have been completed and accepted by the City. Storm Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts,open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. High density developments will have a connection charge of$4,360 per developable acre. The total gross area of the property is 39.17 acres. However, existing development is exempt from the fees (Lot 4). Therefore,the proposed development would then be responsible for a net area of 19.38 acres which results in a water quantity connection charge of$84,497. The oversizing of the regional pond and infrastructure will be credited to the applicant at the time of final plat. The connection fees, if any,will be due and payable to the City at time of final plat recording. GRADING & DRAINAGE The site is designed to drain into a storm sewer system where the stormwater would discharge into the proposed regional stormwater pond on Lot 1. The applicant is proposing to construct a trunk stormwater pipe from Lake Drive East to the regional pond, dedicate an easement over the property to both install the stormwater pipe and construct the regional pond, and come to an agreement with Datasery on the location of the trunk storm sewer pipe and the regional pond so that it meets the needs of all parties. The oversizing of the storm sewer pipe and pond will be credited against the applicant's SWMP fees. The existing drainage ditch and easement through Lot 1 is proposed to be eliminated in conjunction with this development. The applicant will need to submit to the City detailed storm drainage calculations for the storm sewers as well as ponding calculations for a 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm event, 24-hour duration for staff review and approval prior to final plat consideration. Based on these calculations, additional catch basins may be required. Ponding calculations will also be required to document that the pond is designed to retain 60%to 75% phosphorus according to the Pondnet Water Quality Model. The site also conveys drainage from parcels located in Eden Prairie just south of Dataserv. Provisions to maintain the existing neighborhood drainage pattern through the site should be considered and incorporated into the site plans, i.e. drainage swales, storm sewer. In addition, drainage easements should be dedicated on the final plat to maintain drainage improvements. Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 4 The preliminary grading plan proposes to "bench"the site in order to develop building pads and parking lots. This is necessary to develop the site. Pond construction will generate approximately 25,000 cubic yards of material which is assumed to be used on site. If exporting of earthwork material is necessary, a haul route and traffic control plan will need to be submitted to the City for review and approval. The site contains some existing berming along the south property line. The plans propose on increasing the size of some of the berm in some areas; however, there are limitations due to existing landscaping and parking lot improvements. The first floor elevation of the building on Lot 3 will be one foot lower than the top of berm. On Lot 2, the first floor elevation will be five feet lower than top of berm and on Lot 3, the first floor elevation will be four feet lower. EROSION CONTROL Erosion measures and site restoration shall be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook(BMPH). The final grading plan shall incorporate erosion control fence(Type I)around the perimeter of the grading limits. Rock construction entrance shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the driveways and parking lots have been paved with a bituminous surface. Hay bales and/or silt fence shall be installed around all catch basins until the parking lots have been paved. UTILITIES Individual sewer and water services have been extended to the lots from Lake Drive East. All sanitary sewer and water improvements installed outside the City's drainage and utility easements or right-of-way shall be considered private and not maintained by the City. These utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate permits from the City's Building Department. The plans also propose two wet taps which require excavating Lake Drive East. Staff recommends that the plans be revised to utilize the existing utility stubouts and avoid cutting into Lake Drive East unless fire flows are insufficient for fire protection. In conjunction with the CSM site approval process, Chanhassen East Business Center located just north of this development is responsible for the upgrading of Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to -the-smith City-limits. This-assnm titthat'CSM-would-be final plattinglazid before this development. However, should the CSM site fail to develop,the remaining portion of Dell Road would not be upgraded. Therefore,this development proposal should then be responsible for the upgrading of Dell Road from Lake Drive East south to the city corporate limits Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 5 if CSM fails to final plat. The CSM site is scheduled for the February 26, 1996 City Council meeting to consider final plat,development contract and construction plans and specification approval. Preliminary plat approval for Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre should be conditioned upon the CSM development receiving final plat approval and entering into a development contract with the City. The applicant will be installing the trunk storm sewer system as well as the regional stormwater pond. These improvements will become owned and maintained by the City upon completion and formal acceptance by the City. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee construction of the public improvements and conditions of final plat approval. Fire hydrant locations throughout the site will be subject to City Fire Marshal approval. Landscape materials are proposed over utility lines which may impede/restrict access for maintenance purposes. Landscaping items should not be placed within drainage swales or over utility lines. The applicant may place landscape materials within the drainage and utility easements conditioned upon the applicant entering into an encroachment agreement with the City. The encroachment agreement spells out the responsibility for replacement of items within the easement area. STREETS The site is proposed to be serviced from four driveway access points off of Lake Drive East. Staff is comfortable with the driveway locations. The driveways and parking lots provide for circulation around the buildings. The drive aisles and parking stalls should be designed in accordance to city codes. The drive aisle widths range from 20 feet to 24 feet wide. City ordinance requires 26-foot wide drive aisles. Staff also recommends that the drive aisles for the truck parking lot be increased to 28 feet wide to accommodate turning movements. All driveway access points onto Lake Drive East shall incorporate the City's industrial driveway apron(Detail Plate No. 5207). Cross access and maintenance agreements will be needed for Lots 1 and 2. The new driveway access points may be in conflict with a couple of the City's street lights along Lake Drive East. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation of these lights. A traffic study for Lake Drive East and Dell Road was prepared based on the land use. The conclusions indicate acceptable levels of service through Phase I of the CSM development with eventually a level of service `B' for the forecast year 2005 assuming a signalized intersection. Level af-service~is*efined&as-tliuserperatftmalrarnlitionswvithima-traific-stream-as-pereeived-by users of the traffic facility. The concept of level of service was originally defined as being a quantitative measure of operational conditions. Such a measure would ideally cover factors such as speed and travel time, delay, freedom to maneuver,traffic interruptions,comfort and convenience, Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 6 safety. In practice, levels of service have been and continue to be defined by one or two measures of effectiveness for each facility type. These measures relate more to speed, delay, and density than they do to quantitative factors or to safety. For each facility type, i.e. intersections, freeways,multi- lane highways, six levels of service,A through F,are defined. Level of service A represents a free flow with individual vehicles being unaffected by the presence of other vehicles. Level of service E represents operating conditions at capacity which may involve delays or back ups and accidents. Based on the traffic study it appears a traffic signal will be required in the future at Lake Drive East and Dell Road. The developer shall be responsible for a share of the local cost participation of this traffic signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development will be required. As mentioned in the Utilities section of this report, staff is recommending that the upgrade of Dell Road be required south of Lake Drive East in conjunction with this development if the CSM applicant fails to achieve final plat approval. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the Dell Road street easements as right-of-way. Security may be included in the development contract to guarantee construction of Dell Road south of Lake Drive East depending on the outcome of the CSM development. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The erosion control fencing and rock construction entrance shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior to final plat approval. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. 2. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 3. The applicant shall upgrade/extend Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south City limits as well as install a storm drainage system from Lake Drive East to the regional pond -site. All-public-atility arrd s-shall-be contracted-in-aecordanee-with.the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. The private utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 7 applicant and/or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City. 4. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins,created basins,and or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition,water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 6. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Anny Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. 7. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 8. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way. Landscape materials shall not be placed within drainage swales or over utility lines. The applicant may place landscape materials within the drainage and utility easement conditioned upon the applicant entering into an encroachment agreement with the City. 9. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a -minirnrm of 2-feet-af:rove-the-1.00=year•high-water-level. 10. A regional water quality and water quantity pond shall be provided by the applicant on site to pretreat stormwater runoff prior to discharging under Dell Road into the Eden Prairie Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 8 wetland. The proposed stormwater pond must have side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. The stormwater pond shall be designed to 60%to 75%phosphorus removal efficiently. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend into the landscape is recommended. 11. Existing wells and/or septic systems on site will have to be properly abandoned in accordance to City and Minnesota Department of Health codes/regulations. 12. The proposed industrial development of 19.38 developable acres is responsible for a water quality connection charge of$48,585 and water quantity connection charge of$84,497. These fees are payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. The water quality fees will be waived if the applicant provides for on-site stormwater treatment. Credits will also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees based on oversizing costs for the pond and trunk storm sewer system. Credits will be determined upon review of the final construction plans. 13. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the Dell Road street easement as right-of-way. 15. The installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road is expected in the future. The developer shall be responsible or share the local cost participation of this signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development (Phases I and II)will be required. 16. The final grading plan shall maintain the existing drainage pattern from Eden Prairie, south of Dataserv. 17. If exporting of earthwork materials is necessary, a haul route and traffic control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 18. The drive aisles and parking stalls shall be redesigned in accordance to city ordinances. The drive aisles for the truck parking/loading areas shall be 28 feet wide. All driveway accesses Sharmin Al-Jaff Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre PPR February 14, 1996 Page 9 onto Lake Drive East shall incorporate the City's industrial driveway apron(Detail Plate No. 5207). Cross access and maintenance agreements shall be prepared for Lots 1 and 2. jms/ktm c: Charles D. Folch, Director of Public Works g:\eng\dave\pc\chanpnt.ppr CITY QF � CHANHASSEN ;if \ - 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 C' 1/ DATE: February 8, 1996 SUBJECT: 96-1 SPR and 96-1 SUB (Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre,First Industrial,L.P.) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, JAN 19 1996, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. esafet y\sak'nemos\p l an\chnpo int.doc • . - - ... 7 . .. . . ;if. 9 1 I ___ .,, D..F. 1 4 1 .� ,7 f , 17T 4 , k #1if 1 1 .3 N.j 4 • ,:,.„, . .. ,, • • .:.: . c„ I, ' , • ... .•.. . „....,• .._,..,....._i, .,: .: . . .. • ,• . , . : .. \. . . .,,, ,. " .., :,..:,....... \., :... IL. ,, , 1 , . ,. Vitil11 4. 1l fp ' � i 1 itoNint ii I Uf. • , . . . • . • . . • )t( Com .. • Z 0'd 62LSL26 01 S03/dS1 WOdd SZ:PI 9661-5-Z-Sad • , • 2 z . • 71 S - d0+t 7 • °? .. _ , . • . O • As II , i , . 7 _ i. _ . . _, ,.. . .. . . . �` tww i k •:.' v . 1www wCL. G it ,, . °C)" 1 .1a ,'. 4 ---m-00-0 Vn _ l J� uwiriw . __ Lf) C/) V) V) S • . • , wwww .. i` = -1 J _7 J ``W L' I CS LyCCLv 1•+ LLJ w u.a w III X in ' 0�) ` `<4c .( < W : ' d aa _ ,,` � wwww y,� Q < 4 d a onion, V wwww .4 - l..J�.J -am II I ' _. \....7.\Jsinglim . . " . . . ,,,, --7 • II • 20'd 62LSL26 -1 SOB/dSl Woad SZ:PT 9661-2T-Odd CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: First Industrial, L.P. OWNER: Iata9ery Carpater intmar. - ADDRESS: 7615 Golden Triangle Drive, Suite N ADDRESS: 12125 Tadmicriy n-ivp Eden Prairie, NN 55344 Eda1 Prairie, M 55344 TELEPHONE (Day time) 92700 TELEPHONE: 829-6000 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. X Vacation of ROW/Easements ‘'71C0.02. 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Grading/Excavation Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Interim Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. x Sign Plan Review $0.00 x Notification Signs $150.00 9. x Site Plan Review' $2,669.00 X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost $100 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds 10. X Subdivision 5475:OU y)-= TOTAL FEE $ 3,794.C10 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with me application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed,'1;ie appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. • Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME aanhassen Pointe R sin= Oitre LOCATION last Lake Drive and Cell icad LEGAL DESCRIPTION .. Attached TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT YES X NO PRESENT ZONING IOP Industrial Office Park REQUESTED ZONING No Charge PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Offioe/Irtzstrial REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION IVp change REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Preliminary arra Final Plat arra Site Plan Approval. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency revie Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension fgr' velopment ie . Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extension rare approved b he .pplic-. /Allb• - (/,A, Sig,-tu Il• 'pplicanDate 0<J-4- �7/'C -jam_ 1/1 g 1° to Signature of Fee 0 ne. `Date L - Application Received on I -49 (.- Fee Paid 3i 741 ii , `'L- Receipt No. UC?5-.3 The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre East Lake Drive and Dell Road Chanhassen, Minnesota Project Narrative Submitted Friday, January 19, 1996 Introduction This project narrative is being submitted on behalf of First Industrial for a proposed development in the southwest corner of Dell Road and East Lake Drive, in the City of Chanhassen. The proposed development consists of three (3) office/warehouse buildings. The buildings on Lot 1 and 2 each consist of approximately 74,077 square feet and the building on Lot 3 is approximately 92,740 square feet. In total, First Industrial is proposing a development consisting of 240,894 square feet of office/warehouse. The office component of the development is anticipated to be between 15 and 25 percent of the aggregate floor area. Including the existing Datasery parcel,the Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre development will encompass approximately 39.6 acres of property. Chicago.based First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc.,the country's largest self-administered industrial property real estate investment trust(REIT), owns, manages, acquires and develops bulk warehouses and light industrial properties located in the central portion of the U.S.,with a significant Midwestern presence. The Company owns 269 in-service properties comprising 22.3 million square feet. First Industrial, L.P.,the applicant for this project, is an affiliate of First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. First Industrial's Twin Cities portfolio currently consists of 42 properties totaling over 3.6 million square feet. Todd Geller, Regional Manager of Acquisitions and Development for First Industrial's Minneapolis office, is the project manager for this development. TSP/Eos Architects &Engineers is serving as the project architect and have been active in the preliminary site design and layout of the project. TSP/Eos will be responsible for the architectural components, floor plans, building elevations,building materials and signage details. Rick Wessling,MA of the TSP/Eos Excelsior office will be the project architect for this project. RLK Associates, Ltd. is serving as site planner, engineering and landscape architectural consultant for this project. RLK Associates is a planning, design and engineering firm located in Minnetonka. The firm has extensive previous experience in working with the City of Chanhassen. Steven _Schwanke,AICP_and John Dietrich,ASLA.are_the_principaLcontacts for_this.project January 1996 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. - 1 - Chanhassen Pointe Business Center Submittal The submittal is for a preliminary plat and final plat of approximately 39.6 acres of property located south of Lake Drive East and west of Dell Road. The subject property is guided for "Office/Industrial" land uses and is zoned office industrial park. The proposal is consistent with the current zoning, comprehensive guide plan and meets all code compliance criteria. The material submitted with this narrative includes a completed application form for a preliminary and final plat/site plan approval, list of properties with names and addresses within 500 feet of the property, and a check for$3,794.00. In addition,the following plan sheets are being submitted: Sheet 1 of 16: Cover sheet Sheet 2 of 16: Existing conditions plan Sheet 3 of 16: Preliminary plat Sheet 4 of 16: Overall site plan Sheet 5 of 16: Preliminary site plan Sheet 6 of 16: Preliminary grading, drainage, and erosion control plan Sheet 7 of 16: Preliminary utility plan Sheet 8 of 16: Preliminary landscape plan Sheet 9 and 10 of 16: Lot 1 building and elevations Sheet 11 and 12 of 16: Lot 2 building and elevations Sheet 13 and 14 of 16: Lot 3 building and elevations Sheet 15 of 16: General details sheet Sheet 16 of 16: Landscape detail sheet This preliminary plat application for First Industrial consisting of 39.6 acres is being submitted on the assumption the previously approved CSM plat Chanhassen East Business Center will be filed. Based upon the information provided to RLK, CSM intends to file the final plat and associated final construction drawing for the common storm sewer and regional pond. It is RLK's understanding that CSM anticipates a submittal on February 1, 1996 for the final plat in order for the CSM plat to be brought before the February 26, 1996 or the March 11, 1996 City Council meeting. Existing Conditions The subject property is 39.6 acres in size. The property is bounded by Lake Drive East to the north, Dell Road to the east, the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie municipal boundary and residential properties to the south and residential properties and park land to the west. The site contains the existing Datasery office warehouse facility consisting of 156,000 square feet. An existing stormwater pond east of the Datasery parking lot is proposed to be removed and incorporated into the regional pond adjacent to Dell Road. The site slopes generally to the east, southeast and varies in topography up to 20 feet across the site. An existing landscape and berm easement will be maintained and expanded in the development of this site. Preliminary Plat -Four lots•are•being•proposed-orrthe•propertycontrolled-byFirst Industrial-as•part-ofthk. preliminary plat identified as Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre. The outlot previously identified as Outlot B on the CSM plat has been incorporated into Lot 1. A drainage and utility easement will encompass the eastern 3.0+acres of Lot 1 for a regional stormwater pond. The four parcels proposed for the Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre are: January 1996 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -2 - Chanhassen Pointe Business Center • Block 1, Lot 1: Consists of 7.71 acres and accommodates a 74,077 square foot building plus a 3.0+acre regional stormwater pond. • Block 1, Lot 2: Consists of 5.08 acres and accommodates a 74,077 square foot building. • Block 1,Lot 3: Consists of a 6.59 acres and accommodates a 92,770 square foot building. • Block 1, Lot 4: Consists of a 19.79 acre parcel and the existing Datasery building and parking lot. The existing drainage ditch easement running southeast from the public infrastructure in Lake Drive East, is proposed to be vacated and re-established as a public utility easement between Lots 1 and 2. Preliminary Site Plan The site plan consists of three proposed buildings specifically designed for office/warehouse use. The three new buildings will consist of 240,894 square feet. Sufficient parking has been provided for the anticipated split of office and industrial. The buildings are oriented in a north south direction with offices on one side and the truck/service areas on the other side of the structure. The loading/service area are screened from the public right-of-way by the buildings, berming and dense landscaping. The applicant has enhanced the berm and landscape buffer to the south and, in fact, First Industrial proposes to extend the 50 foot wide landscape easement west along the entire south side of Lot 3. Located on Lot 1 will be the regional stormwater pond for the First Industrial, Datasery and CSM properties. The 3.0+acre pond will be within a drainage and utility easement to enable the City to maintain the pond as required. First Industrial intends to utilize the pond as an amenity to the development and the pond edges will be landscape, sodded and maintained by First Industrial. A bituminous walkway will be placed on the south side of the pond connecting the parking area and Dell Road. Preliminary Grading, Drainacle and Erosion Control Plan The City of Chanhassen stormwater management plan has established the need for a regional stormwater pond to be constructed in conjunction with any development on the First Industrial, Dataserv, or CSM properties. The approved CSM plat was to utilize the existing drainage ditch within an existing drainage and utility easement on the Datasery property to channel the water to the stormwater pond in Outlot B. Accordingly, CSM is still the assigned developer to construct the stormwater pond prior to any development occurring with this area. Outlot B has been removed from the new site plan and plat being presented by First Industrial. The stormwater pond is included in the Lot 1 acreage and will service approximately 60 acres. The pond has been designed according to the SWMP plan in terms of volume, rate control and water quality. Final agreement on the credit and fees for water quality and quantity will have to be determined by the City of Chanhassen. The three proposed lots identify FFE elevations ranging from 918 to 929. The buildings step up with the topography and will continue to utilize the berm on the south to screen the parking and loading areas from the residential properties to the south. All stormwater will be collected along the curb lines running north to south for each property and directed to the stormwater pond. The existing Datasery parking lot storm sewer will be integrated into the new storm sewer improvements. January 1996 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -3 - Chanhassen Pointe Business Center First Industrial has coordinated their proposal with CSM and Datasery in order to accommodate the necessary storm sewer easements and ponding requirements into the site plan. Preliminary Utility Plan The utility plan provides the subject property with sanitary sewer and water facilities of sufficient size and depth to support the anticipated uses in the three(3)buildings. These utilities will be connected to existing public utilities located in East Lake Drive. East Lake Drive has sufficient infrastructure for watennain and sanitary sewer to service this site. Existing stubs for the sanitary sewer are proposed to be utilized. It is anticipated new 8" taps will be completed on the existing 12" watermain, for the proper water distribution to provide a looped watermain for the three lots. The watermain will loop the buildings and all fire hydrants will be installed acceptable to the Fire Marshals recommendation. Preliminary Landscape Plan The landscape plan has utilized plant materials from the City's suggested planting list. The plan incorporates a variety of overstory trees, ornamental trees and shrubs. The perimeter of the pond has also been landscaped in order to provide an aesthetic amenity to Lot 1 and the people utilizing Dell Road. The landscape plan utilizes clusters of plantings interposed with boulevard trees at a consistent spacing along the right of way. Along the southern berm additional plantings have been added between the buildings. Each lot will have an underground sprinkler system and the irrigation limits are shown on the plan. The landscape plan has incorporated entry monument signs and has established a view shed from the corner of Dell Road and Lake Drive East. Architectural Building Elevations The building facades are proposed to have recesses and projections on the corners to present a undulating multiple plan surface for the north and south facades and the office portion of each building. Each building will have up to five entries located along the facade,the final location of the entries will be dependent upon the tenants of the building. The three primary projections of each facade will be a combination of glass, face brick and specialty precast panels. The specialty panels will be scored with recessed boards which will further add to the texture of the building facades. The combination of brick, split faced modular blocks and specialty precut panels,have been chosen for their long term attractiveness, as well as to blend with the existing architecture of the proposed CSM facility. January 1996 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -4- Chanhassen Pointe Business Center That part of the following described property which lies north of East Lake Drive: The North 112 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 18,Township 116 North, Range 22 West,of the 5th Principal Meridian,except that part lying and being within the right of way of State i iighway#5 and except the following described tracts: 1. Beginning at a point in the North line of said Section 18,Township 116, Range E2, 1249.34 fet:t east from the Northwest corner of said Section 18, thence East along said North line of said Section 18, 180 feet thence South and parallel to the West line of said Section 18,317 feet; thence West 180 feet; thence North 317 feet to the point of beginning. 2. The east 180 feet of the West 1249.34 feet of the North 317 feet of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 13,Township 110, Range 22. 3. A strip of land 60.00 feet in width over and across that part of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 18,Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Fl:ennepin County, Minnesota. The centerline of said strip of land is described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Section 18;thence South 00 degress 02 minutes 58 seconds East,aysumed bearing;along the West line of said North Half of Northwest Quarter 614.34 feat to theyoint of beginning of the centerline to be described;thence Northeasterly 113.62 feet along a non-tangential curve,concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 300.00 feet, a central angle of 21 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds, and the chord of said curve bears North 51 degrees 32 minutes 47 seconds East; thence Northeasterly and Easterly 264.37 Iect along a reverse curve,concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 300.00 Feet and a central angle of 50 degrees 29 minutes 25 seconds; thence South 88 degrees 48 minutes 48 seconds East 360.00 feet; thence Easterly and Southeasterly 419.22 feet along a tangential curve,concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 750.00 feet and a central angle of 32 degrees 01 minutes 33 seconds;thence Southeasterly.and Easterly 415.65 feet along a reverse curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 750.00 feet and a central angle of 31 degrees 45 minutes 12 seconds; thence South 88 degrees 32 minutes 27 seconds East 984.42 feet to a point on the East line of said North Half of the Northwest Quarter distant 671.45 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof and said centerline there terminating. EXHIBIT "A" I . �0, ;? ' ,/ 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC � a ? Q 1.„ j . 77thgTREET HEARING ok2 cr,, PLANNING COMMISSION I` MEETING `��_ 7:TH ST Wednesday, February 21, 1996 ►71 � at 7:00 p.m. igle all •• •e • Oiv a c` City Hall Council Chambers ; 1Iz a ��■ rr1h�� Tom,: 690 Coulter Drive 4;ii N!bj1 Project: Preliminary Plat, Site Plan : A- -- and Vacation of Easement — ��I 0 0 10 Developer: First Industrial rr�, 4! —8100 . 1 ill Location: So. of Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive East ala� '>, gli iii4 . ` F .,. and west of Dell Road �. 8200 t fFR/CE •2I A/ftII '4 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant, First Industrial, L.P., requests preliminary plat approval to replat 39.17 acres into 4 lots; site plan approval for two 74,077 sq. ft. and a 92,770 sq. ft. office industrial buildings and a vacation of a drainage easement on property zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and located south of Hwy. 5, west of Dell Road and south of Lake Drive East, Chanhassen Pointe Business Centre. 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 over view 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 or 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 Sharmin at 937-1900,ext. 120. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance 6f the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on February 8, 1996. *THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION WILL REVIEW THIS ITEM ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1996 AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. „1� ' 1 aJ Ken Boehm Arnold L Stevenson Jonathan K Earl Susan Thompson Boehm 8000 Hemlock Circle Rebecca A Earl 18344 Croixwood Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55347 8090 Long Meadow Pointe Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Basu N. & Aruna M Hurkadli David H Thue Rajan N Keswani 18316 Croixwood Lane Kay L Mahlen-Thue Dianna M Keswani Eden Prairie, MN 55347 8006 Hemlock Circle 18634 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 James R & Donna P Koeppl Lundgren Bros Corp Michael T Flom 18288 Croixwood Lane 935 E Wayzata Blvd Elizabeth K Flom Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Wayzata, MN 55391 18656 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Robert L & Cathleen M Griffin Peter J. Essex III Jeffrey C & Wendy J Olson 18285 Croixwood Lane Ulrike I. Essex 18678 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 18528 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Chun Wi Shen Michael & Laurie Campbell Daniel L & Judy J Bachicha Junko Abe 18556 Wynnfield Rd 18700 Wynnfield Rd 8065 Crescent Ct Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Mark A & Renae K Luedtke Mary Jo Burgdorf Philip & Rebecca Becker 8077 Crescent Ct 18584 Wynnfield Rd 18722 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Randal A & Cynthia R Bottelson Michael E & Mary B Cleary Scott F & Jeanne A Knutson 8084 Crescent Ct 18612 Wynnfield Rd 18744 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 John A & Denna Valine James E Ruchie Janet B & Gregory D Palmer 8072 Crescent Ct 8055 Long Meadow Pointe 18766 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Paul G & Lori J Johnson Hong John Kao Steve A Anderson 8060 Crescent Ct 8074 Long Meadow Pointe Susan L Anderson Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 18788 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Thomas & Susan Yezzi Deborah L Hawkins Craig R & Tyra L Brosseau 8015 Hemlock Circle 8058 Long Meadow Pointe 18795 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Jill L Lammer City of Eden Prairie Richard A & Janet Aneshansel 8009 Hemlock Circle 7600 Executive Dr 8115 Currant Place Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Mark J & Patricia_ L Kittock Paul D & Jane B Silverman Henry J & Maree Stypula 8127 Currant Place 8007 Spruce Trail 8086 Currant Place Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Bradley F Robbins Ralph A & Kathleen S Rezac Scott C Lutz Kelly L Robbins 8019 Spruce Trail Maureen B Mara 18771 Wynnfield Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 19133 Magenta Bay Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Mark J & Colleen M Fellner Herman & Leslie Biasing James & Sarah Schaser 18747 Wynnfield Rd 8031 Spruce Trail 19151 Magenta Bay Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Lee T & Jan B Ehresman Michael L & Elizabeth Fahning Raymond Lamovec 18723 Wynnfield Rd 8043 Spruce Trail Catherine A Lamovec Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 19175 Poplar Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Lawrence Sanders Lundgren Bros Construction Inc Robert A & Gail M Lenberg Marianne Sanders 935 E Wayzata Blvd 19187 Poplar Circle 18699 Wynnfield Rd Wayzata, MN 55391 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 William & Teresa Cosgrove Michael J & Paula J Rock Edward A Neer, Jr 18675 Wynnfield Rd 18832 Wynnfield Rd Adrienne K Neer Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 19193 Poplar Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Timm L & Sally J Adams John & Susan Kruse D Bradley Dodds 8010 Spruce Trail 18854 Wynnfield Rd P.B. Dodds Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 19199 Poplar Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Todd & Julie Johnson Peter L Russell Paul J Larson 8022 Spruce Trail 8091 Currant Place Althea P Larson Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 19192 Poplar Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55347 David R Fischer Robert 0 & Louise A Rozanski Susan B fischer Thomas E & Candace Bourassa 8103 Currant Place 19186 Poplar Circle 8034 Spruce Trail Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Raul Hernandez Debuque Michael & Sandra Wieneck Gregory L & Ruth M Hallberg Wan-Chong Kung 8102 Currant Place 19180 Poplar Circle 8046 Spruce Trail Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Bradley & Mary Meyer Thomas K & Deborah A Miller Scott R & Ann M Mikkelson 8058 Spruce Trail 8094 Currant Place 19174 Poplar Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Gregory B & Catherine L Sharp Bradley A & Esti H 011erman Arleane Erickson 18986 Wynnfield Rd 18895 Wynnfield Rd 18296 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Michael J & Diana N Hanline Edward & Renee Ciszewski Donna M Castagneri 18964 Wynnfield Rd 18869 Wynnfield Rd 18294 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 John J & Gail M Swain William R & Barbara J Burg Edward L & Margaret H Requet 18942 Wynnfield Rd 18256 Cascade Dr 18292 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Thomas S & Randi M Thornton Nicholas C Olsen Jimmie D & Cynthia J Henley 18920 Wynnfield Rd 18258 Cascade Dr 18290 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 George Chang Thomas & Patricia Redmond Robin A & Kathy L Wales J Chang c/o Redmond Products, Inc 18266 Cascade Dr 18898 Wynnfield Rd 18930 W 78th St Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Kevin R & Gail A Thomas Lotus Lake Garden Center Inc Clifford W & Helen J Potter 18876 Wynnfield Rd Jay L & Peggy M Kronick 18264 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 8575 Tellers Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Chaska, MN 55318 Mark & Janis CriCht0n Lyman Lumber Company Marjorie P Allman 19072 Magenta Bay P.O. Box 40 18262 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie , MN 55347 Excelsior, MN 55331 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Richard J & Margaret A Meyer The Press, Inc. Carolyn L Bevan 19090 Magenta Bay 18780 W 78th St Charles J Mondyke Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Chanhassen, MN 55317 18260 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Charles L & Martha D Bergren Tandem Properties END 19144 Magenta Bay 2765 Casco Point Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Wayzata, MN 55391 James & Gianna Samargis Richard J Boyle 18947 Wynnfield Rd Richard F Smith Eden Prairie, MN 55347 18322 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 David Gross Mary E McKinsey 18921 Wynnfield Rd 18320 Cascade Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Clifford Whitehill Dunreed Properties Chanhassen Holding Co. 7001 Dakota Ave. 337 Water Street 14201 Excelsior Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 Minnetonka, MN 55343 McDonald's Corp Systems Control, Inc. Walter&Anne Thompson PO Box 66207 Suite 220 8000 Dakota Ave. AMF O'Hare 9555 James Ave. S. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chicago, IL 60666 Bloomington. MN 55431 Jerome& Renee Griep Gerald& Marilyn Wassink Michael & Lisa Dinndorf 8002 Dakota Ave. 8004 Dakota Ave. 8006 Dakota Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Anthony & Lisa Bachman Pauline M. Caldwell Eugene& Nancy Gagner 8008 Dakota Ave. 8010 Dakota Ave. 8025 Dakota Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Richard& Mary Dorfner Michael W. Farrell Robert& Barbara Armbrust 8026 Cheyenne Ave. 8024 Cheyenne Ave. 8022 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Douglas & Kathleen Bagley George& Anabel Jennings N. Einar& Valborg Swedberg 8020 Cheyenne Ave. 8018 Cheyenne Ave. 8016 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Daniel & Linda Robinson Mitchell T. Lebens Richard& Beverly Frasch 8014 Cheyenne Ave. 8012 Cheyenne Ave. 8010 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Thomas & Kristie Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner Micahel & Cynthia Koenig 8001 Cheyenne Trail 8003 Cheyenne Ave. 8005 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerard& Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Loren Johnson '80U7theyenne Ave. 8009 Cheyenne Ave. 8011 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Paul Sjogren& Sandra Wagner Russell & Virginia Hamilton Glenn& Bonnie Hagemen 8017 Cheyenne Spur 8019 Cheyenne Spur 8021 Cheyenne Spur Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Wayne & Michelle Williams Craig& Kathryn Humason Alois& Mary Stumpfl 8023 Cheyenne Spur 8025 Cheyenne Spur 8027 Cheyenne Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 George& Theresa Thomas Robert Seward Conrad & L. Fiskness 8029 Cheyenne Trail 8031 Cheynne Ave. 8033 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mary Ann Wallin Michael & Marie Kraus State of MN in Trust 8035 Cheyenne Ave. 8037 Cheynne Ave. do Carver County Auditor Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 600 East 4th Street Chaska, MN 55318 Metro Waste Control Commission Terry & Margaret Lewis Marilyn M. Stewart Mears Park Centre 8013 Cheyenne Circle 8015 Cheyenne Ave. 230 East 5th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 St. Paul, MN 55101 Kahnke Bros. Inc. Chanhassen Car Wash Partners Add Eden Prairie Names 18012 Pioneer Trail 4711 Shady Oak Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Hopkins, MN 55343 _b,v_ 'J'`�1 --6800 -iekriti all . .4.-.:----441011k1 a - .• • .- -- i - ' 6900 s,- d� 4'4 ittV-711 . 1(,<ehnl& fit=, 7000 _-;',741 n7 oe\ i Eillajj li 4�Iitl 7100 ,;� 441:c. ! SII , i iiii;die. •001 • Atirvtlil 7200 NN11► 4*1 W INMAPLE L A K E A111 '' LANE ` �� 7300 •` 1� ` � b. :Assw000 • CIRCLE 1,0 PI � .►�' - ::\la sir 2 7400 1 111.11 04,4"it,,;;ii A 0 R12CDco um. L� ��vamimma � o/ 700 ii 014 kW'1•:-* cr) �+ SItg J , wili :, ► o�►J '�)� 1 mr_ 7600 . WIN =PA r ofitti li,‘ • .1 !t>1. uj ME .. 0% A riwi"A., fi, .2,..71J .1 PI III . 1111111 NM II1111� '` fr _ �7>h STRE: 7700 o a cam, DEMI 2 =u L, .1.10 41111 7:TH ST 1 _ vN i1111111p- 7800 _ `�� ■ /r' � / „ _11111,1..11 1�,. . V EAST 7900 -- 5 o• .. troi rliAPP=X HANHASS N imil? w •44,�� ENNEESTATES� I „ �L ��: M/N/ PARK . / _ �� ,A� �; 8000 e 0 ....,_ .. . .. wft, rlir CO �') zC VP4:-- ii. 04:4, vi E E . i % —8100 ta t AV i 13 ,fILal ■ • .c 8200 ;0 1 iir41 MAKE �� CIRCLE PARK ^— 8300 \\ C I TY 0 P.C. DATE: 2-21-96 iF C.C. DATE: 3-11-96 � G . CHANHASSEN BCYSE: 9-22 Site Plan • STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for an 8,321 Square Foot Retail Building LOCATION: Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Market Square. North of Subway. west of Market Square I (Edina Realty Building), and south of West 78th Street Z APPLICANT' Lotus Realty Services, Inc. Q P. O. Box 235 V Chanhassen, MN 55317 U CL Q PRESENT ZONING: PUD. Planned Unit Development ACREAGE: 41,490.49 s.f. 0.95 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-OI, and West 78th Street S -PUD, Market Square Q E - PUD, , Market Square II �"" W-PUD,Market Square WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. W-H. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: A level parcel. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial i/ 4.5' ! ."-; ct �a��►�fee,„7„.10:--:•� 111111► i� - _. ._ 41111111 Innlealli: '-; / ;.. I - ., ripspo. _.,-.401.,„.,„,j ..... TV II IMMID:4-0:- ma Il _mi atstri go • hi., a 1-° Ain 11-2111._. .4pR. , -. � 44 c iFit Isi*eV K 3 Cin ,A cilavAhh milrial Ms weir on, faillild - ,.,:•\\ , PA 1` �40 go dip � 1114/91144,4111114 �:a 1, vos watt, dr,"•410F01 dij IIIP'' Idf \ fPVTI „„ .eir.-r n ,�, NICr�OIaS „.,.(s, ■ I war �� %%%%% i�` � ¶E,1 !!IJI s"✓- -- inn IV in an ffl g � VVI me ! ll lin oR y. ,� ill ^X 111 - 111111111111 !..11'4111111111111Witi Ir ilir ' N �:IllIlli �Rp.D 1I crtAimin 111/ m r'" rs IIII iii _. ir Vii..: wiir:iiRW .., so- 9• diliCiS Tq Tf lelDRIVE HIGHWAY 1R a� 11111,6 K' • 811 pm 6 ..**/cm , 4.i '44°C-- PF::3 P,QfTTjtw' ::5 mit;_:_41.3 Qin Lor ► : i s XVIP f Y� 11 ©,,,��F.OLK• 4.q,,j © ©��(PvT *alit itik* ,- \\ _ - *i+� !i `�� •'�� ,/ * 4 Lam`'' 111 ' \ I- I ( SINNEN L `1,,'+' m AN 1� % L A II�E I �i CIRCLE P, �`4 � � v SUS ►n AN l I etRekis m � �� En : Ir _ RI eti /� - /.• , I DRSVE N HIL -.�./ /. _=_- 0 w 1 w ?PR • Stuft" IWI ' ��-Ole* . v COURT z f�/Ci Egerf g pllat,ger dir 46. / • 113- 1°."-.* - iiret .. .,..:71,6,2,:.....1,11 ago _ ii4P- MISSION AR a:-�.-�s .� HELLS SHLAN. �.t1 4 4111Pli / WAY TRAIL MIwLL , �' _ �,�^ e,1li1�� ."%.%__J WEST HILLS in iim WV .c14- OP Al7 •0, , : 4;vJ _ �, ' l COURT • p pR FOSE' t 0• SIN- 44 - .-' b - LYMAN as 44k* ..-")lilts - • OND p` oU�i`� IP' I� 2�2 V la 1 1 I a- : /. /../14 1 1 _ '\• 1 I I r� • ,< Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY On October 8, 1990, the City Council approved the final PUD plan for the Market Square Shopping Center subject to conditions. The site included 4 lots and one outlot. Market Square Shopping Center occupies Lot 1. Lots 2, 3, are vacant. Edina Realty on Lot 4, and restaurant building(Wendy's)on Outlot A. The current request is for the construction of an 8,321 square foot retail building to be located on Lots 2 and 3. The site plan is well developed, however, in some respects it does not meet all current standards. The PUD it is regulated by is almost 7 years old and while it was considered progressive at that time, newer standards have since been put into place. This request is subject to regulations under the existing PUD plan. The architecture of the retail building attempts to reflect the existing use of light gray rock face block foundation, Burgundy Sconce Lighting with tile medallions, green metal to cap the roof line, stucco facade, and burgundy canvas awnings to match the shopping. This type of architecture and materials used is similar in quality to the rest of the shopping center and is consistent with downtown. A parapet wall screens all the roof top equipment as well as adds an attractive architectural element. Site access is provided via existing shopping center curb cuts on Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street. Since Market Square has been completed, traffic circulation throughout the center has had its problems. One such area is turning into the shopping center from Kerber Boulevard. The lane is narrow and the turning radius is tight. Staff believes by increasing the drive aisle width to 26 feet it would improve turning movements into the site. This matter is discussed in detail under Access/Grading further in the report. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. There are some trees located within the public right-of-way. Plans for protecting these trees must be submitted and approved by staff. The building and parking lot is proposed to be constructed on two lots. Consolidating those two lots will take place administratively and will be a condition of the site plan approval. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the site plan request for this proposal with appropriate conditions. SITE PLAN REVIEW General Site Plan/Architecture The applicant is proposing an 8,321 square foot retail building to be located on Lots 2 and situated south of West 78th Street and north of Subway. Access is gained off of a curb cut on Kerber Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 3 Boulevard, and via West 78th Street. Parking is located to the west and south of the proposed building. The architecture of the retail building attempts to reflect the existing use of light gray rock face block foundation Burgundy Sconce Lighting with tile medallions, green metal to cap the roof line, stucco façade, and burgundy canvas awnings to match the shopping. This type of architecture and materials used is similar in quality to the rest of the shopping center and is consistent with downtown. A parapet wall screens all the roof top equipment as well as adds an attractive architectural element. One interesting feature is the use of curved walls on all four elevations. The design gives the building its own unique identity, yet allows it to blend in with surrounding buildings through materials and colors. The applicant is showing the trash enclosure screened by masonry walls using the same materials as the buildings. Staff believes that this is not the most convenient location. We believe that it could be moved to the northeast corner of the parking lot and replace the parking space designated for handicap. The handicapped space would be shifted to the south, facing the entrance into the building. The trash enclosure area would be redesigned by moving curb lines and making up the lost parking space. There are electric boxes (transformers) operated and maintained by NSP, as well as a traffic controller unit, located at the northwest corner of the site. The applicant is proposing to move these units, however, the plans do not show the new location of these units. The applicant should provide staff with this. A 10 foot clearing must be maintained around the units for maintenance purposes. The applicant may relocate the units at their own expense after approval has been given by NSP. The plans also reflect a City Traffic Controller to be relocated. The location was chosen because it provides perfect sight lines of the signals while working on the signals. Also, moving this unit will require major expense due to all the electric circuits that converge at that traffic controller. Based upon the forgoing, the applicant may not be able to move this unit. Staff is generally satisfied with the architecture of the building and note that the applicant has worked extensively to prepare the design. The site on which the building is situated is a highly visible one. Staff appreciates the fact that the building is situated to maintain the West 78th streetscape by its close proximity and orientation. There is no parking between the street and the building, only landscaping. Setting an architectural standard for this building is consistent with the PUD approval which requires architectural consistency with the main shopping center building. Parking/Interior Circulation The city's parking ordinance requires 4.5 parking space per 1000 square feet of gross floor area for retail buildings. The building is proposed to contain 8,321 square feet. The number of parking spaces required is 38. The applicant is providing 39 parking spaces. Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 4 Landscaping Applicant has submitted landscaping plan for proposed Market Square 3. Parking lot landscape area requirements is 8% of the total parking area. Applicant's parking lot is approximately 10,035 sq. ft.; required landscape area is 803 sq. ft. and 3 trees. Applicant has provided nine trees and the required landscape area. There are eight trees existing on site. Of the eight existing trees, it appears that six of them will be impacted by site grading prior to construction. Three oaks along the 78th Street sidewalk are shown to be within grading limits. Applicant has not detailed a plan for the survival of those trees. All existing trees along W. 78th Street must be preserved by the applicant. Staff can work with applicant to devise a preservation plan. Three existing spruce in the southwestern corner of the development will also be impacted by grading. Since they appear on the landscaping plan, it is assumed that the applicant plans to preserve these trees however no plans for their preservation have been specified. Applicant will be responsible for all trees shown on the landscaping plan and will guarantee their survival. On the southwest corner of the proposed building, a landscaped area of Stella de Oro lilies and- two skyline locusts are planned. Staff requests that the applicant provides a paved area in the landscape area to extend the building's sidewalk across to the mall sidewalk. In effect, it would create a crosswalk from Market Square 3 to the mall area. The loss of landscape area will not affect applicant's ability to meet landscaping requirements. The applicant's choice of landscaping materials are acceptable and will work well for the site. An interesting and unique choice is the use of feather reed grass as an accent, although applicant needs to verify the number of plants used; 31 are shown on landscaping plans, but only 26 are counted in the plant schedule. Lighting Lighting locations have been shown on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than .5' candles of light at the property line. Plans should be provided to staff for approval. Fixtures should match those being used elsewhere in the shopping center. Signage The-existing Market£quare-sem-plan-perces-one-motet-sign-only for the mil wilding-site with the following conditions: a. The height of the monument sign shall not exceed 12'10" (the height of the existing Market Square sign). Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 5 b. The sign shall contain no more than 41 square feet of sign area per face. c. The sign shall be constructed to reflect the architectural style of the Market Square shopping center. Staff recommends the sign design be identical to the existing Market Square monument signs. d. The owner of each monument sign shall be responsible for its construction, repair, maintenance and/or replacement. There is an existing sign at the northeast corner of the site. As mentioned earlier, this is an existing sign and it does not meet the required setback. Wall mounted signs are shown on all four elevations of the building. Wall mounted signs must meet the following criteria as identified in the sign covenant for Market Square: a. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted. b All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination. c The signage shall be located on a maximum of two elevations of the building to be constructed. Access/Grading The Market Square Shopping Center parking and drive aisles in itself are somewhat congested. This parcel is the last lot left to be developed. The site will be accessed from interior driveways. The parcel is bordered by Kerber Boulevard on the west, West 78th Street on the north and an interior drive aisle on the east. The site will be accessed from the existing drive aisle directly north of Subway. There are modifications proposed to the north curb line of the existing drive aisle as a result of this development. Staff has reviewed the drive aisle width and finds that the existing drive aisle adjacent to Subway is 24 feet wide face-to-face and then narrows to 22 feet wide to the west of Subway before exiting onto Kerber Boulevard. The City has an opportunity with this site plan proposal to improve a poor traffic situation. Staff has reviewed the site improvements and determined that the existing drive aisle could be widened since the curb along the north side of the drive aisle is going to be removed and replaced with the development anyway. It is desirable to maintain at least a 24-foot wide,preferably a 26-foot wide, drive aisle north and west of Subway out to Kerber Boulevard. This will add a degree of safety and comfort when making the very sharp curve behind Subway out to Kerber Boulevard. Staff has also explored the option to try and reduce the curvilinear drive aisle out to Kerber Boulevard; 4tewever,-dneio-grade-d ffereaees-aleag- h-the-need-toTre a-staek g-d texee-at4he-stop lights on Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street, it was not feasible. It is very important to maintain adequate stacking distance on Kerber Boulevard to maintain vehicles turning into the site from Kerber Boulevard. Staff believes, given the situation, by increasing the existing drive aisle from 24 feet wide to 26 feet wide along and behind Subway will greatly improve traffic Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 6 flow in this area. Therefore, staff is recommending that the existing drive aisle be widened to a uniform width of 26 feet face-to-face. The proposed curb cuts into the site were shown at 24 feet wide yet the drive aisles in the interior parking lot is shown at 26 feet wide. Staff believes there should be a uniform width of 26 feet and it appears there is sufficient room to accommodate this recommendation without loss of parking stalls. Staff has also reviewed the grade difference on this site. There is approximately a 9-foot drop from the northwest corner of the site down to the existing drive aisle behind Subway. The plans propose a fairly steep drive aisle/parking lot slope in this area approximately 5%. When an individual opens their car door on this steep of a side slope, it may be difficult for the car door to remain open without slamming back into the individual. Staff recommends that the parking lot grade be revised to a maximum of 3.5%cross slope. This will result in extending and increasing the height of the retaining wall along West 78th Street (along the north edge of the parking lot). Grading for the parking lot will also impact the existing utility and traffic control box located in the northwest corner of the site. The plans indicate that these will be relocated; however, do not indicate to where and by whom. It should also be noted that the traffic control box has very limited abilities to be relocated. It is necessary to monitor the semaphores at the intersection while working on this traffic control box. Therefore, staff will have to work with the applicant in arriving at an acceptable location. It may be possible by extending the retaining wall to minimize or not even affect the traffic control box. The applicant should explore this possibility. The site grading will also impact the existing oak trees planted along West 78th Street. It is assumed that these oak trees may be temporarily transplanted and then planted back just south of the sidewalk along West 78th Street. The plans also propose a stairway from the southwest corner of the building out into about the middle of the Subway building. Staff believes that this is an inappropriate location for the steps to access and should be relocated to the east approximately 30 feet to be more conducive to pedestrian traffic. In the south parking lot area the very westerly stall is only 12 feet long. This will create a situation with a vehicle will actually extend out into the drive aisle by three to four feet. A way to resolve this would be to extend the parking lot stall which results in a reduction of the sidewalk width in front of the building which is currently approximately 9 feet wide. Another problem exists in this area with the grade difference between the westerly parking stalls and proposed sidewalk. The proposed sidewalk elevation is at 968. The proposed parking lot elevation is at 966. This results into a two-foot deviation. It is unclear whether a retaining wall is anticipated and, if so, whether there is any fencing or a rail in this area. In addition, the parking lot grade on westerly end of the south parking area is very steep, approximately 6%. A -way 4o-resolve-this-would-be-to-lower e-pack g4ot-gee-at-the-aeith-ead.parkang-stalls-to achieve a maximum of 3.5%. This would only increase the retaining wall height adjacent to the sidewalk area. A handicapped stall should also be added on the very easterly end of the southerly parking area. At this point the grades are very flat and conducive to a handicap access point. Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 7 The plans propose a trash enclosure on the very southwest corner of the westerly parking lot. This trash enclosure location is situated on top of the City's drainage and utility easement. The City has a 10-inch water line running directly underneath the proposed trash enclosure. The applicant will be required to enter into an encroachment agreement for the trash enclosure and landscaping materials within the City's utility easement. The trash enclosure can be relocated to the northeast corner of the parking lot. During construction it is often the case that the contractors drive from every street access point into the site. Given the high volumes of traffic and the sidewalk and landscaping improvements along West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard, staff recommends that construction access be limited to the interior drive aisles and not from Kerber Boulevard or West 78th Street. Erosion Control The plans propose erosion control fence in areas along the south side of the development. Staff believes that once the parking lot improvements have been done there is still a need to encompass the east, south and west side of the development with erosion control fence to prevent erosion and also deter contractors from driving where they are not supposed to. The plans should be revised to show the City's standard detail for erosion control measures (Type I). The plans do propose rock construction entrances at the proposed driveway entrances in accordance with City standards. According to the plans, Kerber Boulevard actually extends a couple of feet into the property at the northwest corner of the site. Staff recommends that a street and utility easement be conveyed to the City over the west five feet of the northerly 60 feet of the parcel. Utilities In conjunction with Market Square 1st and 2nd Additions, sanitary sewer and water service has been stubbed to the property. Utility permits will be required from the City's Building Department in conjunction with extending utilities to the building. A comprehensive storm drainage management plan has been prepared with the initial Market Square submittal. Storm drainage from the site will be accommodated by existing storm sewer facilities on site. The storm water will be conveyed to the downtown storm water pond for -treatment. This-dove+lepmoHt-is-Het-se ct-te-any-SWMP-fees. Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 8 Miscellaneous The landscape plan should be revised to show the sidewalk along the south side of the building out to the main drive aisle along the east side of the building and also show the steps and stairs location and relocate landscape plants accordingly. Park and Trail Dedication Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid as part of this development at the rate in force at the time of building permit application. COMPLIANCE TABLE WITH PUD ORDINANCE As a PUD, most of the usual ordinance provisions pertaining to dimensional criteria are waived. Required Proposed Original Plan Building Setback 25' 25' Parking Setback N-10', S-0 N-10', S-0 E-10', W-10 E-0', W-10 Hard Surface Coverage N/A NA Parking Stalls 38 39 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: Site Plan Review "The City Council approves the Site Plan for Market Square III (#95-22 SPR) as shown on the site plan dated February 7, 1996,with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 9 2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. There is one existing monument sign on the site. The sign meets the following criteria: a. The height of the monument sign shall not exceed 12'10" (the height of the existing Market Square sign). b. The sign shall contain no more than 41 square feet of sign area per face. c. The sign shall be constructed to reflect the architectural style of the Market Square shopping center. d. The owner of each monument sign shall be responsible for its construction, repair, maintenance and/or replacement. The applicant is showing wall mounted signs on four elevations. The plans must be amended to meet the following criteria: a. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted. b. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination. c. The signage shall be located on a maximum of two elevations of the buildings to be constructed. 3. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon the consolidation of Lots 2 and 3 into one lot. 4. Fire Marshal conditions: a. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. City Ordinance 9-1. (Relocate the Skyline Locust a minimum of ten feet away from the fire hydrant.) Cross reference page SD-5 and SD-3. b. Comply with the following policies: 04-1991 - Copy enclosed 34-1993 -copy enclosed 07-1991 - Copy enclosed 35-1994-copy enclosed 29-1992 - Copy enclosed 36-1994-copy enclosed c. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs along with yellow painted curbing shall be provided on the entrance road east of the proposed building. Sign spacing must comply with Pelioy-#A6-1991.-Gopy-enclesed. 5. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid to the city pursuant to the city ordinances and City Council resolutions at the rate then in force upon building permit application. Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 10 6. Applicant must provide staff with preservation plans for the eight (8)existing trees. Applicant may not leave existing oaks and spruce in place during grading if grading is to come within ten feet of the tree. All existing and new trees will be guaranteed for two years. 7. The applicant shall provide access on the southwest corner of the building to Market Square mall sidewalk. 8. The applicant to verify that 31 feather reed grass plants will be used for landscaping. 9. The width of the existing drive aisle along the south side of the development shall be increased to a minimum of 26 feet wide face-to-face. All driveway curb cut openings shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide face-to-face as well. 10. The applicant shall work with City staff in relocating the existing utility and traffic control boxes and the existing oak trees along West 78th Street. The plans shall be revised accordingly. The applicant shall dedicate to the City a utility easement for the traffic control box if it is located outside of the City's right-of-way or utility and drainage easements. 11. The steps along the southwest corner of the building shall be relocated approximately 30 feet to the east. 12. The applicant shall lower the parking lot grade to a maximum of 3.5%cross slope on both the westerly and southerly parking lots. 13. On the south parking lot, the westerly stall shall be eliminated or the length of the parking stalls lengthened by four feet. The applicant shall add a retaining wall between the southerly sidewalk and the southerly parking lot where the deviation is greater than one foot in height. 14. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for the trash enclosure and landscaping materials located within the City's drainage and utility easement. The trash enclosure may be relocated to the northeasterly corner of the parking lot. 15. The-eresien-eontFel-plan-shall-be-re 4sed-to-extend-erosion-control Type-I-fence-along-the south side of the construction limits. The plans shall incorporate the City's erosion control detail plate for Type I erosion control fence. Market Square III February 21, 1996 Page 11 16. Construction access shall be limited to the interior driveways and not from West 78th Street or Kerber Boulevard. 17. The landscape plan shall be revised to show the proposed sidewalks and steps on the south side of the building and relocate plant materials accordingly. 18. The applicant shall dedicate to the City a street and utility easement over the west five feet of the northerly 60 feet of the lot. 19. The applicant shall apply for and obtain the necessary utility permits for extension of utilities to the building from the City's Building Department. 20. All roof top equipment shall be screened." ATTACHMENTS 1. Report by Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, dated February 15, 1996. 2. Memo from Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal, dated November 29, 1995. 3. Project Narrative. 4. Plans dated revised February 7, 1996. 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: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer DATE: February 15, 1996 SUBJ: Review of Site Plan for Market Square 3rd Addition Land Use Review File No. 96-7 Upon review of the site plan prepared by Amcon dated February 6, 1996, I offer the following comments and recommendations: ACCESS As you are aware, the Market Square Shopping Center parking and drive aisles in itself are somewhat congested. This parcel is the last lot left to be developed. The site will be accessed from interior driveways. The parcel is bordered by Kerber Boulevard on the west, West 78th Street on the north and an interior drive aisle on the east. The site will be accessed from the existing drive aisle directly north of Subway. There are modifications proposed to the north curb line of the existing drive aisle as a result of this development. Staff has reviewed the drive aisle width and finds that the existing drive aisle adjacent to Subway is 24 feet wide face-to-face and then narrows to 22 feet wide to the west of Subway before exiting onto Kerber Boulevard. The City has an opportunity with this site plan proposal to improve a poor traffic situation. Staff has reviewed the site improvements and determined that the existing drive aisle could be widened since the curb along the north side of the drive aisle is going to be removed and replaced with the development anyway. It is desirable to maintain at least a 24-foot wide, preferably a 26-foot wide, drive aisle north and west of Subway out to Kerber Boulevard. This will add a degree of safety and comfort when making the very sharp curve behind Subway out to Kerber Boulevard. -Staff-has-also-explored the optioii10-tryti- et}ucrthe curvilineai dive aisle out to-K'erber Boulevard; however, due to grade differences along with the need to provide stacking distance at the stop lights on Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street, it was not feasible. It is very important to maintain adequate stacking distance on Kerber Boulevard to maintain vehicles turning into the site from Kerber Boulevard. Staff believes, given the situation, by increasing the Sharmin Al-Jaff Market Square 3rd Addition SPR February 15, 1996 Page 2 existing drive aisle from 24 feet wide to 26 feet wide along and behind Subway will greatly improve traffic flow in this area. Therefore, staff is recommending that the existing drive aisle be widened to a uniform width of 26 feet face-to-face. The proposed curb cuts into the site were shown at 24 feet wide yet the drive aisles in the interior parking lot is shown at 26 feet wide. Staff believes there should be a uniform width of 26 feet and it appears there is sufficient room to accommodate this recommendation without loss of parking stalls. Staff has also reviewed the grade difference on this site. There is approximately a 9-foot drop from the northwest corner of the site down to the existing drive aisle behind Subway. The plans propose a fairly steep drive aisle/parking lot slope in this area approximately 5%. When an individual opens their car door on this steep of a side slope, it may be difficult for the car door to remain open without slamming back into the individual. Staff recommends that the parking lot grade be revised to a maximum of 3.5%cross slope. This will result in extending and increasing the height of the retaining wall along West 78th Street (along the north edge of the parking lot). Grading for the parking lot will also impact the existing utility and traffic control box located in the northwest corner of the site. The plans indicate that these will be relocated; however, do not indicate to where and by whom. It should also be noted that the traffic control box has very limited abilities to be relocated. It is necessary to monitor the semaphores at the intersection while working on this traffic control box. Therefore, staff will have to work with the applicant in arriving at an acceptable location. It may be possible by extending the retaining wall to minimize or not even affect the traffic control box. The applicant should explore this possibility. The site grading will also impact the existing oak trees planted along West 78th Street. It is assumed that these oak trees may be temporarily transplanted and then planted back just south of the sidewalk along West 78th Street. The plans also propose a stairway from the southwest corner of the building out into about the middle of the Subway building. Staff believes that this is an inappropriate location for the steps to access and should be relocated to the east approximately 30 feet to be more conducive to pedestrian traffic. In the south parking lot area the very westerly stall is only 12 feet long. This will create a situation with a vehicle will actually extend out into the drive aisle by three to four feet. A way to resolve this would be to extend the parking lot stall which results in a reduction of the sidewalk width in front of the building which is currently approximately 9 feet wide. Another problem exists in this area with the grade difference between the westerly parking stalls and proposed sidewalk. The proposed sidewalk elevation is at 968. The proposed parking lot levaticnris-at'966. This',csults'intora-two-footxdeviatien. -ft-is-miclear-whether-a-retaining-wal: is anticipated and, if so, whether there is any fencing or a rail in this area. In addition, the parking lot grade on westerly end of the south parking area is very steep, approximately 6%. A way to resolve this would be to lower the parking lot grade at the north end parking stalls to achieve a maximum of 3.5%. This would only increase the retaining wall height adjacent to the Sharmin Al-Jaff Market Square 3rd Addition SPR February 15, 1996 Page 3 sidewalk area. A handicapped stall should also be added on the very easterly end of the southerly parking area. At this point the grades are very flat and conducive to a handicap access point. The plans propose a trash enclosure on the very southwest corner of the westerly parking lot. This trash enclosure location is situated on top of the City's drainage and utility easement. The City has a 10-inch water line running directly underneath the proposed trash enclosure. The applicant will be required to enter into an encroachment agreement for the trash enclosure and landscaping materials within the City's utility easement. During construction it is often the case that the contractors drive from every street access point into the site. Given the high volumes of traffic and the sidewalk and landscaping improvements along West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard. staff recommends that construction access be limited to the interior drive aisles and not from Kerber Boulevard or West 78th Street. EROSION CONTROL The plans propose erosion control fence in areas along the south side of the development. Staff believes that once the parking lot improvements have been done there is still a need to encompass the east, south and west side of the development with erosion control fence to prevent erosion and also deter contractors from driving where they are not supposed to. The plans should be revised to show the City's standard detail for erosion control measures (Type I). The plans do propose rock construction entrances at the proposed driveway entrances in accordance with City standards. According to the plans, Kerber Boulevard actually extends a couple of feet into the property at the northwest corner of the site. Staff recommends that a street and utility easement be conveyed to the City over the west five feet of the northerly 60 feet of the parcel. UTILITIES In conjunction with Market Square 1st and 2nd Additions, sanitary sewer and water service has been stubbed to the property. Utility permits will be required from the City's Building Department in conjunction with extending utilities to the building. A comprehensive storm drainage management plan has been prepared with the initial Market Square submittal. Storm drainage from the site will be accommodated by existing storm sewer facilities on site. The storm water will be conveyed to the downtown storm water pond for treatment. This development is not subject to any SWMP fees. Sharmin Al-Jaff Market Square 3rd Addition SPR February 15, 1996 Page 4 MISCELLANEOUS The landscape plan should be revised to show the sidewalk along the south side of the building out to the main drive aisle along the east side of the building and also show the steps and stairs location and relocate landscape plants accordingly. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The width of the existing drive aisle along the south side of the development shall be increased to a minimum of 26 feet wide face-to-face. All driveway curb cut openings shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide face-to-face as well. 2. The applicant shall work with City staff in relocating the existing utility and traffic control boxes and the existing oak trees along West 78th Street. The plans shall be revised accordingly. The applicant shall dedicate to the City a utility easement for the traffic control box if it is located outside of the City's right-of-way or utility and drainage easements. 3. The steps along the southwest corner of the building shall be relocated approximately 30 feet to the east. 4. The applicant shall lower the parking lot grade to a maximum of 3.5% cross slope on both the westerly and southerly parking lots. 5. On the south parking lot, the westerly stall shall be eliminated or the length of the parking stalls lengthened by four feet. The applicant shall add a retaining wall between the southerly sidewalk and the southerly parking lot where the deviation is greater than one foot in height. 6. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for the trash enclosure and landscaping materials located within the City's drainage and utility easement. 7. The cc usivircontroi-planshall-be-revised-to-extend-erosien-centrol Type-I-fence-along-he south side of the construction limits. The plans shall incorporate the City's erosion control detail plate for Type I erosion control fence. Sharmin Al-Jaff Market Square 3rd Addition SPR February 15, 1996 Page 5 8. Construction access shall be limited to the interior driveways and not from West 78th Street or Kerber Boulevard. 9. The landscape plan shall be revised to show the proposed sidewalks and steps on the south side of the building and relocate plant materials accordingly. 10. The applicant shall dedicate to the City a street and utility easement over the west five feet of the northerly 60 feet of the lot. 11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain the necessary utility permits for extension of utilities to the building from the City's Building Department. ktm c: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works g:\eng\dave\pc\market3.spr 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: Mark Littfin,Fire Marshal DATE: November 29, 1995 SUBJ: Market Square- Amcon Planning Case#95-22 Site Plan Review I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division,I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan review is based on the available information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted,the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. 1. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. City Ordinance 9-1. (Relocate the Skyline Locust a minimum of ten feet away from the fire hydrant.) Cross reference page SD-5 and SD-3. 2. Comply with the following policies: 04-1991 -copy enclosed 34-1993-copy enclosed 07-1991 -copy enclosed 35-1994- copy enclosed 29-1992-copy enclosed 36-1994-copy enclosed 3. "No Parking Fire Lane"signs along with yellow painted curbing shall be provided on the entrance mad east of the proposed building. Sign spacing must comply with Policy#06- 1991. Copy enclosed ML:cd CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS 1. Fire Marshal must witness the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per NFPA 13-8-2.1. 2. A final inspection by the Fire Marshal before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at construction sites. Details are available. 4. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided and in operating condition during all phases of construction. 5. The use of liquefied petroleum shall be in conformance with NFPA Standard 58 and the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A list of these requirements is available. (See policy #33-1993) 6. All fire detection and fire suppression systems shall be monitored by an approved UL central station with a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final occupancy is issued. 7. An 11" x 14" As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. (See policy #07-1991). 8. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use. The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: 12/23/94 Page 1 of 2 9. High-piled combustible storage,shall comply with the requirements of Article#81 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height. For certain special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. 10. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (See policy #06-1991). 11. Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G,Exception#5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (See policy #05-1991). 12. Maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line policy must be followed. (See policy #36-1994). Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: 12/23/94 Approved - Public Safety Director Page 2 of 2 ::0-4: , CITY OF 0' , CHAIIIIASSEN' "_ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 ry`,,t, CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE 1 . Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18" . NO 2 . Red on white is preferred. PARKING FIRE 3 . 3M or equal engineer ' s grade LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. /\ 4 . Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE 5 . Signs shall be posted at each end of the fire lane and at least at 7 ' 0" 75 foot intervals along the fire lane. 6. All signs shall be double sided facing the direction of travel. 7 . Post shall be set back a minimum of 12" but not more than 36" from the curb. - 8 . A fire lane shall be required in (NOT TO GRADE front of fire dept. connections SCALE) extending 5 feet on each side and along all areas designated by the Fire Chief. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL BY THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Sr------2Policy #06-1991 Date: 1/15/91 Gv �— Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 f, tir wPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 y (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REGARDING PRE-PLAN Prior to issuing the C .O. , a pre-plan, site plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval . The following items shall be shown on the plan. 1) Size 11" x 17" (maximum) 2 ) Building footprint and building dimensions 3) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes 4) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped or dead end 5) Fire hydrant locations 6) P. I .V. - Fire Department connection 7) Gas meter (shut-off) , NSP (shut off) 8) Lock box location 9) Fire walls, if applicable 10) Roof vents, if applicable 11) Interior walls 12) Exterior doors 13) Location of fire alarm panel 14) Sprinkler riser location 15) Exterior L . P. storage, if applicable 16) Haz . Mat . storage, if applicable 17 ) Underground storage tanks locations, if applicable 18) Type of construction walls/roof 19) Standpipes PLEASE NOTE: Plans with topographical information, contour lines, easement lines, property lines, setbacks, right-of-way lines, headings, and other related lines or markings, are not acceptable, and will be rejected. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #07-1991 Date: 01/16/91 { �'.�✓1 �� Revised: 02/18/94 Approved - Pu lic Safety Director Page 1 of 1 CITY OF - 41v;„• CHANHASSEN AIN v ;� 693 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director, Building Official , Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address numbers are posted. Other Requirements-General 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from the background. 2. Numbers shall not be In script. 3. 1f a structure Is not visible from the street,additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size and location must be approved. 4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4". However, requirement #3 must still be met 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers if deemed necessary. Residential Requirements(2 or less dwelling unit) 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1/4". 2. Building permits will not be finaled unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Commercial Requirements • 1. Minimum height shall be 12". 2. Strip Malls a. Multi tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. If_address•numbers-are-located-on-a-directory-entry-sign,-additional numbers will be required on-the buildings main entrance. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992 Date: 06/15/92 Revised: Approved - Public SafIty Director Page 1 of 1 ta41, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 0 CITY OF • i Iiii.. , CIIANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 WATER SERVICE INSTALLATION POLICY FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS 1) The Inspections Division shall be responsible for issuance of permits. No permit shall be issued until approval of plans have been obtained from the following: a) Engineering Department b) Fire Marshal c) Minnesota Department of Health d) Plumbing Inspector 2) Plumbing inspectors will do all installation inspections and witness the hydrostatic and conductivity tests. Inspection and Test Requirements a) All pipe shall be inspected before being covered. Phone 937-1900, ext. 3, to schedule inspections. A 24 hour notice required. b) Conductivity test is required. The pipe shall be subjected to a minimum 350 amp test for a period of not less than 5 minutes. c) Hydrostatic test required. All pipe shall be subjected to a hydrostatic pressure of 150 psi for 2 hours. Allowable pressure drop shall not exceed 1 PSI. 3) Upon approval of the hydro test, the plumbing inspector shall submit a copy of the inspection report to the utility superintendent. The inspection report shall note whether the system is ready for main flush and drawing of water sample for the bug test. Inspections Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993 Date: 04/15/93 Revised: Page 1 of 2 as t4. . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C QTY OF toir.-i': of CHANHASSEN ,4.,.'3 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY COOKING EQUIPMENT EXHAUST HOOD REQUIREMENTS 1. FIRE PROTECTION A. Where Required: 1) On commercial cooking equipment, when grease-laden vapors are produced. 2) If any cooking device under an exhaust hood produces grease-laden vapors, then the entire hood must be protected. B. Type of Protection: 1) When building is fully sprinklered, the hood system must be a sprinklered system. 2) In non-sprinklered buildings, any U.L. listed system is acceptable. C. When extinguishing agent is released, hood exhaust must: 1) be shut down; gas to cooking equipment must be shut down; and electricity to grease producing heating appliances must be shut down. 2) Gas and electricity must be manually reset after automatic shutdown. Chanhassen Fire Dcpartment Fire Prevention Policy #35-1994 c274,,,„Fiv Date: 06/07/94 ""�"®' Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 CITY OF y,14),,i , ,4 _,,i, CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIZE OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE ON A COMBINATION DOMESTIC/FIRE SPRLNKLER SUPPLY LINE 1. Domestic water line shall not be greater than 1/4 pipe size of the combination service water supply line. 2. 1 1/2"domestic off 6"line. 3. 2"domestic off 8"line. 4. 2 1/2 domestic off 10"line. Option 1: Domestic sizes may be increased if it can be calculated hydraulically that the demand by all domestic fixtures will not drop the fire sprinkler water below its minimum gallonage required. Option 2: Combination domestic and five line service shall have an electric solenoid valve installed on the domestic side of the service. This valve shall be normally powered open and close on loss of electric power or signal from the system water flow indicator. Must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Mechanical Inspector. Chanhassen Fire Department Water Line Sizing / Policy#36-1994 �z _..Date: 06/10/94_ L Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 MARKET SQUARE III Market Square III is the last part of the Market Square complex. The site is located just north of the Subway, in the Southeast quadrant of West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard. The site consists of two platted lots described as Lots 2 and 3, Market Square. The project will be located on both and it is therefore proposed that these lots be replatted as one consolidated lot. The improvements will consist of an 8321 retail building, parking lot and landscaping. The property will be owned by Market Square Associates Limited Partnership, the same partnership which owns Market Square I (the Festival anchored center),the applicant/developer is Lotus Realty and the General Contractor is Amcon Corporation. Over two-thirds of the building has been leased to Stylists Choice, Inc., a Redmond Products company, who will operate a prototype upscale hair salon and hair products business under a name to be selected. The building has been designed to give the appearance of one continuous shopping center from Festival to West 78th Street, which is important for the shopping center. The streetscape along West 78th street will also benefit from this design. There are two distinctive buildings on either side of the proposed building, Market Square II and the Richfield Bank, and while this will be a freestanding building, designing it almost as a part of Market Square I avoids the choppiness often created along streets with several small buildings each with a unique design. While the design of the building is similar to Market Square and will use the same materials, colors and awnings, it has been updated through the use of curved midsections and a more articulated window design. The parapets have been altered accordingly. These parapets have also been designed to hide the rooftop HVAC equipment from every viewpoint Windows have been provided at all four elevations and public access has been provided at both the west and southern elevations. An emergency exit has been provided at the north elevation and to accommodate that exit a sunken walkway has been provided. Because of the grade at that elevation, a retaining wall has also been incorporated along the north elevation. There are 39 parking stalls located entirely on the site, 2 additional stalls located almost entierely on the site and parts of 5 stalls located partly on this site and partly on the adjacent Market Square I site. If 4 of these are attributed to this site, the total number of stalls on the subject site is 43. The standard established when the shopping center PUD was approved was 4.5 stalls per 1,000 square feet. To meet this requirement, 38 stalls are required. If the standard code requirement were used, 42 stalls would be required. There are existing sign covenants of record for this site. These covenants provide for signage on two elevations with letters of no more than 30 inches in height. In order to provide better proportion with the mass of the center walls of the building,the architect recommends an amendment to the covenants to allow a four foot sign band at these higher midsections. Within this band, single letters shall not to exceed 36 inches, or, if a creative logo or stacked letters (such as depicted on the elevation drawings submitted) are used, the total sign height shall not exceed 48 inches. A 30 inch band has been provided at the lower sections to both the left and the right of the midsections. On request of Redmond Products, we are requesting an amendment to allow signage on the north, the west and the south elevations. The north elevation will be important to the other tenant as well. The south elevation is important because it faces the main area of the shopping center and the west elevation is important because the Redmond entrance faces west and their customers will be parking to the west of the building. There is precedence for signs on three sides at Subway. No monument signs are permitted according to the sign covenants and none is requested. The existing Market Square I monument sign located on the site will remain. As stated above, the rooftop HVAC units will be shielded by the parapets and a trash enclosure constructed of identical materials to those already in place at Market Square Ito the south is proposed at the southwest corner of the site. Sidewalk connections have been provided off West 78th Street at the northwest corner of the building, to Market Square I, at the southwest corner of the building and to Market Square II at the southeast corner of the building. In addition wide sidewalks have been provided at both the south and west elevations to allow outdoor seating for sipping refreshments from the juice bar Redmond plans for its customers or for enjoying products which may be sold in the adjacent space. This project will bring new services and retail products to Chanhassen and to Market Square. The building will very attractively complete the commercial infilling of West 78th Street from Great Plains Blvd. to the one remaining parcel along Powers Boulevard. We are planning for spring and early summer construction. SIGN PLAN MARKET SQUARE III Exterior Signage: A. As to the signbands A(See attached elevation.)the letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted. If stacked words, the sign height shall be no higher than 30 inches. B. As to signbands B (See attached elevation) single letters shall be restricted to 36 inches. If stacked words or logos, the sign height shall be no greater than 48 inches. C. The signage shall be located on a maximum of three elevations of the building, the west front, the south front and the north. D. Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the Tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems, shields and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and approved by Landlord. E. All signage must be located within the building designated sign band and must be centered on the horizontal center of the sign band. Tenants may locate their specific area by referring to the Architect's elevation plan. F. All exterior Tenant signs must meet construction specifications supplied by Landlord. G. Tenant shall submit all sign plans and specifications, including auxiliary signage, such as that used for grand openings, to the owner and to the City of Chanhassen for approval. H. Upon removal Tenant shall restore any damaged building face. Temporary Signage: Temporary signage shall be permitted in conformance with the City Code. Landlord and City approval and City permits are required for all temporary signage. Prohibited Signage: There shall be no signs advertising goods, services or businesses which have not contained within the building. Search lights, inflatable sings, banners, pennants and other devices that extend over parking lots or rights of way are prohibited signage. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Lotus Realty Services, Inc. OWNER: Market Square Associates Limited Partnership ADDRESS: P. 0. Box 235 ADDRESS: Same Chanhassen, MN 55317 TELEPHONE (Day time) 934-4538 TELEPHONE: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. x Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9. X Site Plan Review 13- X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" $100 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds 10. x Subdivision - Administrative /cc TOTAL FEE $ 430.00 Consolidation • A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81/2" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. " Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME Market Square III LOCATION SE Quadrant - W. 78th St . & Mandan Drive LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 2 and 3 , Market Square, Chanhassen, MN PRESENT ZONING PUD REQUESTED ZONING N/A PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Commercial/Retail REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION N/A REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for'complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original document returned to ,ity Hall Records. Signature of Applicant , Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Application �l -?O cc Receipt No. 757 Received on / - _)- � Fee Paid * The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meetinc. If not contacted. a coov of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. B.C. Burdick Dan and Steve Dahlin 426 Lake Street. 296 N. Pascal Excelsior, MN 55331 St. Paul, MN 55075 Chanhassen HRA C.H. Suites of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive,Box 147 do National Lodging Companies, Inc. Chanhassen, MN 55317 9855 W. 78th Street Eden Prairie,MN 55344 City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr.,PO. 147 T. F. James Company Chanhassen, MN 55317 6440 Shady Oak Road, Ste. 500 Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Market Square Associates II, LLC 470 West 78th Street Paul D. Steiner Chanhassen, MN 55317 Steiner&Koppelman, Inc. 360 S. Highway 101 Mithun Enterprises, Inc. Deephaven,MN 55391 900 Wayzata Blvd. E. Wayzata, MN 55391 Douglas M. Hansen Excelsior,MN 55331 17001 Stodola Road Minnetonka,MN 55345 State Bank of Chanhassen 680 W. 78th Street Richfield Bank& Trust Co. Chanhassen,MN 55317 6625 Lyndale Ave. S. Richfield, MN Richard W. Steiner, Jr. P.O. Box 1717 Target Stores Whitefish,MT 59937 33 South 6th Street Minneapolis,MN Twin Cities Western Railroad 2995 12th Street East Glencoe,MN 55336 Wendy's international,-inc. 40 Shuman Blvd., Suite 130 Naperville, IL 60563 \IIINIV # •111 l 'Agit* Aft yt-ci: %AIM % ■■ A&A � ° �'a up fat" � ��■ s �� r Norio �''ri4 'yu4 11 " La tit Ztv.,41apa NOTICE OF PUBLIC „gip meg§ s prifklp. '. � 'HEARINGte ____ tarigi •s • _ IPvTI ��,�� J • PLANNING COMMISSION a r N,PVT �' , W •o •. am um Elm MEETING "": �• ;;, [1'F'k Wo r mr•-) an Wednesday, JANUARY 17, 1996 ®®®®gvv� NEC si =It at 7:00 p.m. 11111111 ICLI KHAN ■.iii16 l .' ` e HallCouncil Chambers DRMini �� City 1 �'j�� 690 Coulter Drive l �'�� 2 a w Project: Retail Shops , Market Square 3 Partners s rt Developer: Amcon Corporation *IR �' . STg7 f al • DRIVE H IGN`� Location: Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Market Square . 8 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is requesting site plan approval of a retail building of 8,321 sq. ft. and a parking lot setback variance on property zoned PUD, and located on Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Market Square,Market Square 3 Partners, Inc./Amcon Corporation. 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 over view 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 or 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 Sharmin at 937-1900, ext. 120. 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 January 11, 1996. MITHUN ENTERPRISES Market Square Assoc. II, LLC Wendy's International, Inc. 900 E WAYZATA BLVD 470 West 78th Street 40 Shuman Blvd., Suite 130 WAYZATA MN 55391 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Naperville, IL 60563 B C BURDICK CHANHASSEN BANK DAN AND STEVE DAHLIN 684 EXCELSIOR BLVD. 680 W 78TH STREET 296 N. Pascal EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 St. Paul, MN 55075 DOUGLAS M HANSEN Richfield Bank& Trust Co. Target Stores 11969 NO. SHORE DRIVE 6625 Lyndale Ave. S. 33 South 6th Street SPICER,MN 56288 Richfield, MN 55423 Minneapolis, MN 55402 C.H. Suites of Chanhassen Richard Steiner, Jr. Paul D. Steiner c/o National Lodging Companies P. O. Box 1717 Steiner& Koppelmann, Inc. 9855 W. 78th Street Whitefish, MT 59937 360 S. Hwy. 101 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Deephaven, MN 55391 CLEMENT SPRINGER PRES T.F. JAMES COMPANY Twin Cities Western Railroad WEISS ASSEST MANAGEMENT 6640 Shady Oak Road, Suite 500 2995 12th Street East #350. 1550 EAST 79TH STREET Eden Prairie. MN 55344 Glencoe, MN 55336 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55317 MR FAN 1-AGERSTROM MR RICH LARSON SUBWAY MGM 7093 BOYD AVE 7856 MARKET BLVD EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55346 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MR JIM HOLM MR KENT LUDFORD MR BOB KING CENTER DRUG MERLINS HARDWARE FESTIVAL FOODS 913 HOPKINS CTR 551 WEST 78TH ST 7900 MARKET BLVD HOPKINS MN 55343 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MS SHIRLEY OLSON Guy Peterson Frank Stocco SOMEONES HOUSE c/o Guy's Grill Frank's Pizza 7882 MARKET BLVD 7874 Market Boulevard 7850 Market Boulevard CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen,MN 55317 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 7, 1996 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Peterson, Mike Meyer, Ladd Conrad, Bob Skubic, Nancy Mancino and Don Mehl MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff Farmakes STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II; Bob Generous, Planner II; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL RAISING OF FUR-BEARING ANIMALS, OPERATION OF RIDING STABLES, COMMERCIAL STABLES AND KENNELS IN THE BF, FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT, NANCY LEE. Public Present: Name Address Nancy Lee Shakopee Pat Blood Shakopee Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Are there any questions? Do any of the commissioners have questions right now for Sharmin? I just have one or two, just kind of big ones. Overall ones. There is no place in Chanhassen where you can take your dog to a kennel overnight right now. I mean this is filling that need. Al-Jaff: Correct. Mancino: And when the public safety finds a stray dog or a stray cat or a stray raccoon or something, where do they take it now? Al-Jaff: Scott County. Mancino: Scott County. And is there something like this in Scott County? A commercial kennel? 1 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Al-Jaff: I'll back up just one second. At times they do contact some local vets and see if they would keep them overnight. There is a need established in Chanhassen, in Carver County for a Humane Society and I found that out after I spoke to the Public Safety Department. Scott County does have commercial kennels. But there is a need for one in Carver County. Mancino: In Carver County. So this could be the one in Carver County? Al-Jaff: Yep. Mancino: Thank you. Conrad: I had a question. Where did we get the specifications that we're applying here? And most specifically with the, well I'm looking on page 3, item number 4, in terms of setbacks. Where did we get those? Al-Jaff: City Attorney's office. Conrad: Okay. Al-Jaff: They have established criteria for other communities and that was the criteria they went with. Conrad: My only concern, literally a kennel is noisy and 200 feet, which is the biggest number that I see in point number 4, is not much block anything. So I'm just curious if we're within standards of other communities because I know there are complaints with people that have kennels in Chanhassen. They're probably grandfathered in and the neighbors complain all the time. The kennel was there first, and I'm probably thinking of one, but the neighbors moved in later and the neighbors are real critical and you know, noise is the issue. And here we are saying we're going to allow this and I'm seeing some small numbers that really don't protect the neighbor from the noise so my only issue, I'm not looking to be a leader in the metro area in terms of. Mancino: Housing and urban ideas. Conrad: Well no, in terms of mitigating this but I sure want to meet minimums. I want to meet any kind of standards that are out there in other communities. So my only point is, 50 feet or 25 or 200, it really doesn't stop the sound. It will be offensive so that's, and I don't know how to resolve that. I don't, I'm not sure if there's an answer to that. My only answer 2 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 is that we'd better make sure that, well we'd better make sure that these are the right numbers. Mancino: Okay. Al-Jaff: On page 4, number 7. As far as the night hours. We are recommending that they remain indoors. Mancino: The other one that you could speak to is on number 9. Dogs are not allowed to habitually bark in a manner considered a nuisance as identified by the city code or nuisance ordinance. And what does that mean? What is the nuisance ordinance? Al-Jaff: We were actually discussing this one before the meeting and we spoke to Public Safety Officer and what they do is they park approximately a block away from wherever the noise is originating and they wait for 5 minutes. And during those 5 minutes if the dogs will bark continuously, then a citation is issued. Mancino: It has to be continuously or just bark? I know. I'm sorry, we're kind of getting down to the nitty gritty here. Aanenson: That was our question. Does it have to be continuous and it's an interpretation of nuisance. If it's pretty much consistently within the 5 minutes they would... Mancino: I have some more questions to ask along those lines. I think I'll wait until we have our public hearing. Any other questions at this point? Mehl: Yeah, I've got a couple. How close are the existing homes to the surrounding the BF district? Are there any near-by or are they a mile away? Al-Jaff: There is Brookside Motel and there are 8 structures there. Mehl: At the motel? Al-Jaff: Correct. Mehl: Okay. Al-Jaff: And that would be on the west side of this parcel. On the east side there is a used car lot. So it's not a residential use. Then the homes to the north of the subject site are on top of the bluff. And they do exceed 200 feet in setback. Now this is on this specific site. The other site, this is Gedney Pickle. Located to the west of the second site and the seminary site is to the east of the second BF district. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mehl: Okay, so there's really no residential that's close, that's within that 200 foot area that you're talking about? Al-Jaff: Well with the exception of the people that live at Brookside Motel. Mehl: Okay. Are there any, like I'm looking at number 6 here in the conditions. Are there any standards or guidelines in that area? Again I'm looking at 200 feet. ...know what's there if they're a half a mile away. Mancino: You're talking about number 6 on page 4? Mehl: On page 7. Mancino: Page 7. Accumulations of feces shall be removed at such periods as will ensure that no leaching. Al-Jaff: They would have to keep the premises clean to ensure that no objectionable odors exist. Mehl: What do they do with them? Do they haul them off-site someplace or do they dispose of them on site? Al-Jaff: Yes they do. They have to dispose of them off-site, yes. Mehl: That's all. Mancino: Okay, thank you. May I have a motion to open this for a public hearing please? Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to open the public healing. The public healing was opened. Mancino: Anyone wishing to come and address the Planning Commission, please do. Come up and state your name and your address. Nancy Lee: I'm Nancy Lee. I'm the applicant. I had a quick question... On the accessory structure... I don't know if it can be changed around...maybe a percentage of the property, size of the property or something like that because the plans that we have.._that I could subdivide. Mancino: Explain that to me a little bit. You could subdivide? 4 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Nancy Lee: We've got 15 acres out there...and I'd like to see the accessory structures be maybe a percentage of the property. That's what we've done in Shakopee, which I know is different than Chanhassen. If that can't be...Sharmin has explained that we can subdivide. I would like to not subdivide if I don't have to but... Are you totally confused? Mancino: Not totally. Tell me a little bit more, could you describe a little bit of the accessory structures. You said one would be stables. It could be stables. It could be kennels where the dogs or cats are houses. Nancy Lee: Yeah. What we're looking at is, we don't want the horses and dogs together ...they irritate each other...so we would get a separate building for them. My main building right now, what we're concentrating on is a horse kennel...depending on the needs of Chanhassen, phase 2 with another kennel. The stables that we're looking at, 1,000 square feet, if you picture...arena, not even holding the kennel area, or the stable area for the houses, an arena is going to be bigger than 1,000 square feet...so an accessory building...as far as what we're looking at is, we're not trying to squeeze...we plan to make them luxury kennels where they have a good amount of space... Mancino: However your principal structure doesn't have a limit, correct? Nancy Lee: No. Mancino: So it could be whatever. There is no maximum. Okay. Nancy Lee: Otherwise that's pretty much what I wanted to say. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Planning Commission? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to close the public healing. The public hewing was closed. Mancino: Questions and comments. Craig. Peterson: I guess I'd like to get a little bit more clarification on the accessory structure as it stands. What was the purpose of limit those to 1,000 square feet? What's the rationale? Al-Jaff: Our current ordinance has a limit of 1,000 feet on accessory structures and we just don't want to see the corrals larger than the building itself. It could be a shed. It doesn't have to be a corral. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Aanenson: I think the other thing there, if you're looking strictly at the commercial district, we do limit accessories. But if you were in a true agricultural district we do say up to 30% of the, I believe it's 30%, of the property. So if this was strictly agricultural or if someone was going to put a barn or riding stables in, they could go up to 30%. I think that's something we may want to consider. The dilemma they would have is, the question you brought up Nancy, which was a good question. Just make the other building but the problem is you can't build an accessory building without the principle structure and their desire is to build the dogs first so they would have to build the accessory. If you put...like you were suggesting, they can't build an accessory without the principle the way our ordinance reads and that prohibits somebody from never putting the... And I think we can accomplish the objectives but looking at the percentages. If you would give staff some opportunity. Maybe just review that with the attorney's office to make sure that, I certainly don't want to do something that would be detrimental by restricting the site so they can't ride horses. I don't think that's the objective but we also are concerned that, and that becomes such a large building that it's, kind of takes away from the integrity of what they're trying to do too, so I think we can come up with an appropriate percentage. Peterson: I think with that in mind, I think as we move to vote on this, my recommendation would be to work out something regarding the percentage. Whatever is within legal parameters that we have. That'd be my only comment, unless we choose to vote. Mancino: Mike. Meyer: I don't have any. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: On the issue we were just talking about. The accessory structure. I really don't mind the lot split, or whatever. I'll let staff figure that out but it sounds like you've got two different uses in a specific case and we're looking at a general case that applies everyplace. Not to their project. Not to their project. So I'm kind of comfortable with what staff has proposed. I sure could be swayed based on more information but, and my other comment is, I'm really, the noise issue bothers me. 200 feet is nothing and the way it reads, 200 feet from an adjacent single family residence. Boy, that would bother me if somebody did that to me. If I was out there next door, I'd be real irritated so I don't know what the right number is, and I don't know how to solve that one but 200 feet is, I guess if you're going to have a kennel it should, and I'm not sure based on where the motel is in this specific case, I'm not sure how close we are but I don't think we need to bother those people so, whether they're renting or whatever. This should not be an impact and so that number makes me uncomfortable and I just don't have a better one. I don't know what to do in that. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: So would you like to have staff come back and do a little bit of checking on different cities? Conrad: I'm real comfortable, I'm comfortable getting it out of here. I think staff can figure this one out and recommend something to the City Council. We don't have any great corner on the market on wisdom on this one but staff could look at it and bring it to City Council. Again, I guess that's it, I'd move it out of here Nancy. Mancino: Okay, Bob. Skubic: I share Ladd's concerns about the noise and it seems to me this is a fairly small area, the business fringe as it's currently defined. Is that likely to change at all? No. Aanenson: It won't be expanded. Mancino: It won't be expanded. Aanenson: Our objective is to try and reduce it. Mancino: Don. Mehl: Yeah, I agree totally with the comments that have been made here. Beyond that I don't have anything else to add. Mancino: Okay. I just have a couple. To piggyback on the noise and that is, what exacerbates the noise to me is that there's no limit on how many dogs there can be here. I mean I don't know if we're talking about 100 dogs on 15 acres or if we're talking about 300 dogs on 15 acres. And that would make a huge difference in the noise level and the continual noise level so I know that we're limited with horses, which don't make a lot of noise but you know you have what, one horse per acre or two per acre and a half. Something like that. Al-Jaff: Correct. Mancino: So what's the thinking on how many can go on so many acres? Aanenson: Really it's part of the conditional use permit. When they come forward, right now you're just setting up the parameters, the framework for them to come in for a permit. Now when they come in, you're going to judge it by the size of the building. Whether or not you feel like that's acceptable based on that piece of property. That's a condition you'll impose. 7 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Is there a magic number? It's really based on the size of the buildings and we'll have to give you some standards, what we think they should be. Mancino: Okay. Aanenson: And that's something that you certainly can put a condition on. Mancino: Okay, great. So that will come back as the individual applicants come in and you can give us some guidance on? Aanenson: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Terrific. I just have two other questions, and I feel comfortable with some of the changes that have been suggested already. Just a real, I guess kind of silly one under, on page 3 Sharmin. If it's unlawful for a person to own or keep three or more dogs or cats, is this anybody in Chanhassen? Al-Jaff: Yes. Mancino: So a farmer? Al-Jaff: Yes. Aanenson: He'd need to get a commercial license. Mancino: Okay. Then under, on page 4, Section 5-20. With Issuance. Number 8. I would suggest just, when it says all dogs and cats shall be housed indoors when the commercial kennel operator is not present at the subject property. I would say when an employee is not there. Al-Jaffa Okay. Mancino: I don't feel it has to be the operator. It needs to be a person in charge and it could be an employee. And then under 11(b) on that same page. Animals kept outside must have continual access to shelter. Only because if starts raining or snowing or icing. And lastly. I would like to see the accessory, the dog runs, etc, further away than 25 feet from public or private right-of-way. I think that should be set back 50 feet. Otherwise I feel very comfortable about sending this on to City Council too with the other comments. Do I have a motion? 8 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: I would Madam Chairman but I haven't tracked your comments so my motion will be real. Mancino: I would certainly add some friendly amendments. Conrad: Yeah, I'm really, okay. I don't understand the motion that staff has prepared and that's what I've been leafing through here. My understanding is that this is affecting fringe business district as well as the industrial district. Is that right? Why, and there's a confusion of the head. That's in here. Why is that in here? Al-Jaff: Okay. The standards for the BF district, as far as conditional uses go, specific conditional uses, are located under industrial. It's standards for business, office, institutional and industrial districts. That's how they are in the zoning ordinance portion of the city code. So we're establishing standards. Conrad: Okay. Just moving them over to business fringe or whatever? Al-Jaff: Correct. Aanenson: Correct. Conrad: Okay. I get it. That's interesting. So my comments before...say, I'm not comfortable with what our current ordinance says. When I talk about 200 feet setbacks, that's really you know, now that I get what this is. Well I'll make the motion just to get us going here. I'm going to need some help. Basically I'd recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amendments per the staff report for Article XX. "BF" Fringe Business District, add the Section 20-773, Conditional Uses, which in the BF district for commercial kennels and commercial stables, per the staff report dated January 17th. And really my, per the staff report. Aanenson: Maybe to summarize what we're doing really quickly, if that would help. You're amending the business fringe district to allow commercial kennels and stables. Mancino: Under the conditional use. Aanenson: Under the conditional use. We're adding clarity to the definitions as shown here in bold, commercial kennels, commercial stables. We're clarifying those. And adding these standards, 20-295. Mancino: And. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Aanenson: And conditional use standards under Chapter 5-22. So that's what we're doing. So we're actually we're amending the code in those specific places. Mancino: Four specific places. Aanenson; Yes. Four specific places. Correct. Conrad: These will not be changing any of the conditions as in the staff report but my comments will reflect what I'd like staff to do between the time that it gets, goes from here to the City Council and one would be to review the accessory structures size limitations. Two would be to review the setback from the neighborhood. The single family residence. Plus I would entertain any other kind of additions based on what the Planning Commission has said in their previous comments. Mancino: My friendly amendment or adding to that would also to be reviewed the number of feet from a public or private road right-of-way. And then also under Section 5-22, under issuance is to just change that from the operator to employee. Conrad: I would agree with those. Mancino: And the last one is under 5-22. Under issuance on number 11(b). Just having continual access so that animals can get in and out. Conrad: I would agree with that. Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Meyer: Second that motion. Mancino: Any discussion on the motion? Having none. Conrad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the City Code amendments to the BF, Fringe Business District to allow commercial raising of fur-beating animals, operation of siding academies, commercial stables and kennels, as amended per the staff report dated January 17, 1996 and the following revisions by the Planning Commission: 1. Review the accessory structures size limitations. 2. Review the setback from the single family neighborhood. 10 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 3. Review the number of feet from a public or private road right-of-way. 4. Under Section 5-22, Issuance, change from the operator to employee. 5. Under Section 5-22, Issuance, number 11(b). Having continual access so that animals can get in and out. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mancino: When will this go in front of the City Council? Be presented. Aanenson: The 26th. Mancino: February 26th. Go in front of the City Council. Thank you. JOHN KNOBLAUCH FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF 8.35 ACRES INTO 12 LOTS, ONE OUTLOT AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL; AND A VARIANCE TO THE WETLAND SETBACK OF 20 FEET FOR LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 2; THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YOSEMITE AT THE CHANHASSEN-SHOREWOOD CITY LIMITS. THE PROJECT IS KNOWN AS KNOB HILL. Public Present: Name Address Martha Cleveland 6185 Apple Road Joanne Dake 12336 Ithilien Dan & Tom Wilder 21740 Lilac Lane Marc Simcox 21600 Lilac Lane John Knoblauch 16921 Weston Bay Road, Eden Prairie Joe Knoblauch 13017 Maywood Lane, Minnetonka Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Is the applicant here? And does he wish to address the Planning Commission please, on these changes and the current, what we're looking at now. In the conditions. If you could respond to those please. John, could you state your name and address please. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 John Knoblauch: Oh, I'm sorry. John Knoblauch, 16921 Weston Bay Road, Eden Prairie. I'm the developer of the parcel known as Knob Hill. There was a problem in January so now I'm back again. I handed out two plats there and Bob's right about the, I think we've addressed a lot of the concerns that he had referring to future access to the Donovan parcel, and also hopefully solving the road grade situation on the roadway... I'm still unhappy with the...one issue on the plat. Or on staffs recommendation for approval of a preliminary plat. That condition is the 30 foot right-of-way being recommended by staff on the northeast corner of the property, and that's to provide, as Bob mentioned, possible extension or for future connection of a public street to Lilac Lane. This 30 foot right-of-way is what most of the property owners to the east are concerned about and that's why they've taken time to come to a few of the meetings we've had so far and basically it's just based on that one issue. To review briefly what's happened so far. The first review and introduction of Knob Hill came December 6th when we passed out the same information that you're seeing now. And we made some...discovery as far as how future connection to Lilac Lane would affect the surrounding area. I'll refer back to that in a minute. The second meeting took place and the public hearing got completed. The plat was tabled because of the road variance request. I was instructed by a motion and I believe Mr. Conrad to resolve the grade issue and connection issue for future development to the Donovan parcel. I brought in a new plan to the staff that basically met all the city requirements...serve Mr. Donovan's parcel... I believe, is that correct Bob? Generous: Yes. John Knoblauch: So we've complied basically with the city needs to provide access to the east and I have the 7% road grade accomplished which meets, I believe is that staffs city code? Aanenson: Yes. 7% does. John Knoblauch: So basically I feel we've complied with the city's need to provide access. The rest of the staffs conditions can easily be met with the exception of one. That is where the staff is requiring 30 foot of public right-of-way in the proposed tree preservation area. Basically the information speaks for itself but I'll review it with you a little bit. We've got two substandard roads that are proposed to possibly be connected in the future to Lilac Lane and Apple Road... We've got nearly 60 neighbors that don't want to see a thru street in this area. We've got poor visibility area for sight lines. We have a large stand of trees that would be removed in the 30 foot right-of-way area to make it work, and that's not including the two dozen trees or so along Lilac Lane, as I mentioned before. We also have a ravine, a pretty steep drop that drops about 10 feet in elevation and 20 feet at the, in or near staffs recommended 30 foot right-of-way recommendations. The environmental impact of that one 12 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 area alone is...watershed implications to the pond. I believe it's to the north. We have road grades in here at both intersections that don't meet city requirements. We have neighbors who have spoken out against this right-of-way citing everything from loss of property values... who this public right-of-way is supposed to benefit if it doesn't want it and doesn't need it and to top all this, I mean disregarding any minor issues, we have a city to the north that owns 2/3 of Lilac Lane. The Lilac Lane right-of-way that has issued a... I don't know if anybody disagrees with these facts but that's pretty much the bottom line to where we're at with the public right-of-way. It's very clear, I stated this before that the thru street, if it was needed for the city to function appropriately, it should have been planned for long before the Ithilien Street was put in to the east. Clearly the logical thing should be done, as a condition for the right-of-way should be removed as one of staffs recommendations to the platting of my property... It reminds me of the...both the city and developer in this case, that you can't always get what you want but if you try, sometimes you finally get what you need. In essence the developer, that is me, doesn't get what I want, which is a cul-de-sac on my development. Chanhassen engineering department doesn't get what they want of public right-of-way. I do get what I need, which is to build my home and get my property developed. And staff gets what they need by providing Mr. Donovan access. And hopefully everybody goes home happy. Now I'm not naive enough to think that...compromises can be met at, all the time since everyone in this room realizes that politics plays a big part of everyday life but in this case I'm asking the Planning Commission to do just that by revising the entire community space in the city government which is basically the bedrock of the entire democratic way. As a note, don't get me wrong about my attitude towards the city staff. I've been involved in building over 250 homes over the past 7 years in over 20 different communities. Never have I gotten so much cordial help in trying to accomplish a goal and helping hand and to get basically educated on how to develop this parcel. So I ask for a motion, a recommendation for the removal of the 30 foot right-of-way condition on my property so we don't have to... Then hopefully we will go full steam ahead with a successful development of my great grand- dad's land, Knob Hill. Mancino: Thank you. John Knoblauch: I believe, Dave we said the outlot could be changed? I'm sorry. We have an outlot for the private drive that was mentioned in the report which was not going to be an outlot. Mancino: Which will not be an Outlot A anymore. You are correct. There's not an outlot there anymore, and I think it's actually part of the 26. On condition 26 it says, delete Outlot A and combine with the adjacent lots to dedicate a 30 foot private street easement over Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 for ingress and egress. Does that make sense? 13 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 John Knoblauch: Yeah. I thought I heard it mentioned before that there was still an outlot. Mancino: No. Part of the condition is to delete it. John Knoblauch: Okay, thank you. Mancino: We have had two public hearings on this but I would like to open this to a public hearing. If you have not come before the Planning Commission before or if you have new information to give to the Planning Commission tonight. So if you haven't had a chance to participate in the prior two public hearings, may I have a motion to open this for a public hearing? Peterson moved, Meyer seconded to open the public hewing. The public hearing was opened. Mancino: Is there anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission that has not? Please come up. State your name and address. Marc Simcox: My name's Marc Simcox and I live at 21600 Lilac Lane. I've been through this process before with other developers so...ax to grind. We went through this process on Teton Lane. Our neighborhood was invaded with...and we're not naive enough to know...5 years on that property...that what the city wants, the city most often gets. I think it's real clear here regardless of the disclaimer that there's no interest in putting Lilac Lane through or no concern about that until the Donovan property is developed but I think that's kind of a surprise to hear that when part of this process is the dedication of 30 feet of property for just that purpose. And I'd just like to pass on two observations. I wasn't going to say anything during this process because I thought it was so obvious that the city staff would pick up on the feelings of the neighborhood and actually look at this development and the possibility that Donovan's property would be developed and I think that's a foregone conclusion. It's going to be developed someday. We all know that. And it appears now that the bulldog hold that the city staff has now on this punching through this street onto Lilac Lane again, as they did with Teton Lane, is not going to go away. It's surprising to me on a couple of points. One is, that it appears that the developer is being forced to provide this property for extortion. I've heard of no, the city not offering anything other than approval of the plat for this property. If there's money or fear or exchange for the property for money, I haven't heard anything about that, and forgive me for saying that if that's true. If it's not true, it simply appears to be an extorted gift to the city in exchange for approval of the plat. One of the things that's different about this development than the other developments we've experienced in our neighborhood, and I would guess in nearly all developments, is that the builder does not usually live in the development afterwards. I remember we were referred to as the neighbors of the Centex development. The developer called us his neighbors and nothing's further from the truth. He 14 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 has no intention of living in that development. And does not. Mr. Knoblauch intends to live here and raise his family in that area. I think his concern about the neighborhood is genuine. It's really obvious and I think it's well founded as well. I think that during this whole process we got to sit through another discussion concerning the David Carlson development over here off of Powers Boulevard and one of those concerns was, there was quite a bit of time spent on it. I didn't hear was the resolution was at the end but it was over the loss of one tree, and it was a large old oak tree, granted but during this process and maybe it happened after I heard half of the second or third time it came. I never heard anyone suggest. They suggested cutting the tree down as the only alternative left and then grassing it over. I never heard anyone suggest planting another tree, which was kind of surprising. This is a development where we'll lose a lot of trees. That doesn't seem to be any concern of the staff. This is eventually... Another thing that really surprises me is when you look at this whole thing, back and away is more of a, kind of an objective view. Why, when the Planning Commission considers this recommendation to Council, the 30 feet again you're talking about, the requirement. If the city ever did need that, the city could obtain that through condemnation. There's no doubt about that. But why it is that everyone, and I think John made it real clear. I have heard absolutely not one single proponent of this plan with the 30 feet, which is clearly...plan through, from anyone who lives in the neighborhood. Not one. The only people that want this are city staff and city officials. And it's in the vein that a future city need would require the thru street, although cul-de-sacs are littered throughout that entire neighborhood. And they're littered through that neighborhood for reasons of the lay of the land is difficult in some cases but it's one of the things that makes Chanhassen such a desirable place to live. For the peaceful part of the neighborhood and actually gives a lot of value to those neighborhoods and makes people want to live in them. Want to pay school taxes and want to pay city taxes. I can't imagine, well we heard the Planning Commission say that their concern is what's going to happen 50 years and 100 years in the future and again, I'm just incredulous. I can't imagine why every single person that lives in that neighborhood would oppose it now. The people that live in those houses, 50 or 100 years from now, I can't imagine that they would want it. So if we want to think about 50 or 100 years in the future, think about the residents now because we're not talking about an area that's going to increase by another 50 or 100% development. It's almost totally developed. And one other thing when considering this 30 foot requirement that the dedication has. The connection, that's the connection to Lilac Lane. Is that the only thing that needs to be left here is the possible buffer. A buffer between a property that is sparsely developed, I think it's the 1 acre requirements just on the north side of Lilac Lane. There's a large wetland area that's dedicated on the north side of Lilac Lane with drainage from that area and there's just so many environmental considerations to...part of this and I think in the approval of this plan and the proposal, the recommendations to Council on this should take into consideration the desires of neighbors that live in that neighborhood and are going to continue to live in that neighborhood, including the developer, and the actual atmosphere of that neighborhood that 15 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 would easily be preserved for the future and if the city at some time, 20 or 30 years from now or 100 years from now and Jim Donovan eventually moves on to some other place, that the city could still obtain that property if it was really necessary through some sort of condemnation proceedings or some other resources that they have to put it through to Lilac Lane, and that's the only thing I wanted to say. I continue to oppose that portion of the recommendation. Mancino: Thank you. Appreciate your comments. Anyone else? I'm Joe Knoblauch. I live at 13017 Maywood Lane in Minnetonka. John's my son. I'm here to tell you not about the development. About my Aunt Marguerite. She died last week. 102 years old. Lived on this property for 85 years. Same place. She came there in 1910 with my dad. My dad was just a kid. Went to Excelsior High School. She lived there all these years. That may not be a record but it's a heck of an accomplishment. 85 years until she was 92 years old. Same property. Mancino: Thank you. Appreciate that. Anyone else? Joanne Dake: My name's Joanne Dake. I live at 1336 Ithilien. I'm just going to read this because I'm really nervous. Mancino: That's fine. Joanne Dake: My name's Joanne Dake and I'm speaking as a concerned homeowner and taxpayer in the city of Chanhassen. We live at 1336 Ithilien with our backyard backing up to Lilac Lane. It's been suggested that with the Knoblauch development and the possible future development of the Donovan property, that Lilac Lane would become a thru street. If that is the case, we've been told that Lilac Lane has to be upgraded and widened 17 feet. We would have a busy street out of the back of our lot...Cul-de-sacs are desired when buying houses... enhance property values of those homes. I think it is a common...I think of Shadow Ridge development ...Lake Lucy Pointe, the one that...and just an example of Fox Chase which has 48 houses and only one entrance and...has 38 homes after the last property... If access to the Donovan property was or is a concern, why wasn't it made possible off of Ithilien. The property at 1352 Ithilien...has the potential of losing 15... If the widening of Lilac Lane has always been in the future plans, why was 1352 Ithilien given the variances to be built on it's present site? Why now are we as homeowners expected to sit back and you take a portion of our property and use...upgrade a road that is not only unnecessary but without the road, property values and quality of life...who live on the Shorewood side of this. At this time Shorewood maintains the street. If Lilac needs widening, who will maintain it? I assume because it has to be widened on the Chanhassen side, that the city of Chanhassen would be 16 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 responsible and hence more of our tax dollars would be spent on maintaining a road that was never needed or wanted. I can find nothing positive about this plan, but only the loss of property values and quality of life for those who's property...Lilac Lane. I'm not opposed to the Knoblauch development but I am opposed to the city direction that he give the 30 feet for a possible right-of-way for Lilac Lane to go through. I know it's your job to plan for the future and when we do there are many things to consider. I'm asking you to think about how is this going to impact the immediate neighbors, their property values and quality of life. Needless to say, if there's any property that is involved... In summary, access from the Knoblauch to the Donovan property can easily be achieved without doing anything to Lilac Lane. Access from Apple road appears to be the best solution and it's consistent with a number of other... When we moved to Chanhassen 2 years ago we received a...Chamber of Commerce. On the back it reads, rich in tradition and quality. Chanhassen offers a...mixture of relaxing countryside living and metropolitan...opportunities. It's nice to know that places like Chanhassen still exist offering the kind of opportunities and quality of life that are... Come to Chanhassen. A friendly place to live, work and play. I would like to think that what that says is true but when I have to be concerned about lowering property values and the quality of life... If this potential road was going to be backing up to your property, what course of action would you take? Mancino: Thank you for your comments. Anyone else? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Meyer moved, Peterson seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Before we go on, Bob I just have a couple questions or comments. On the 30 feet, that everyone has talked about tonight. Could you please go over for us again the reason for the 30 feet. Is it for in the future looking at and making Lilac Lane, take it from a substandard street to a standard street in the future? Is it for access into the Donovan property? What is the purpose for the 30 feet? Generous: I wonder if maybe Dave. Hempel: Madam Chair, thank you. Maybe I could show you on the overhead, if Bob could throw up that general neighborhood overview. Lilac Lane and Powers Boulevard to the west, and Teton Lane. That was upgraded I believe about 3 years ago as part of the Ithilien development. Lilac Lane was a substandard street actually maintained by Shorewood. The city, as a part of that, tried to enter into a cooperative construction agreement with the city for financing part of the project. There was joint benefit to both the city of Chanhassen and the city of Shorewood residents. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: And that is from Teton to Mill Street, or where was it upgraded? From where to where? Hempel: Powers Boulevard to Teton Lane. Mancino: Okay. Just the first, I don't know how many feet. Hempel: 400 feet maybe. Approximately and then Teton Lane down from the Curry Farm subdivision was also upgraded. Most of that cost was absorbed by the area residents of Chanhassen that were assessed. Also the developer picked up an additional 20% of the assessments and then the city of Chanhassen's general taxes picked up the rest of that. The City of Shorewood did not participate in the funding of that upgrade. So the residents of Shorewood did not receive any assessments for that. Mancino: Because they didn't benefit? Hempel: Well they did benefit. The city of Shorewood, through the assessments, did not want to proceed with the...that road. Anyway, the agreement came up that the City of Shorewood then would maintain Lilac Lane versus the city of Chanhassen so. As you go west then on Teton Lane, it is back to a substandard 24 foot wide maybe rural type street section out there. As part of the Ithilien development there was an additional 17 feet of right- of-way granted or conveyed with that final plat of Ithilien for potentially updating Lilac Lane at some time in the future if it is so desired. The right-of-way is there now. Mancino: It's there now, existing. Hempel: It does not have to be purchased by the city and the burden put onto the taxpayers for that purchase. Mancino: Which is what, which is very standard for us to do when a preliminary plat comes in and we know that we may be upgrading a road? Okay. Hempel: That's correct. And if in the future, if the Donovan parcel develops some other fashion, the road doesn't go through, the property can be vacated or the right-of-way can be vacated and...back to the property owner. Mancino: If we want to use that 17 feet, which the city of Chanhassen has as an easement right now, they would negotiate with Shorewood who is responsible for the upgrade, if Lilac were to be continued to be upgraded from Teton west, correct? 18 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Hempel: That's correct. We would want to work with the city of Shorewood and try to get an cooperative agreement again for funding that project, because most of the residents right now, Chanhassen would not benefit from the road. The Donovan parcel's the only one that would use it. The Ithilien would service from the interior street and not take access from Lilac Lane west of Teton. The city of Shorewood residents on the north side do utilize that road... Mancino: So tell me, if when the Donovan property develops, and it is decided at that time that the temporary cul-de-sac that is put on Knob Hill is not to be continued, because remember we have four options at this point. Nobody's making a decision tonight whether Knob Hill will go through to Lilac Lane. That decision is not being made tonight. What is being made is that there is a temporary cul-de-sac in that area. Hempel: Right here. As Bob mentioned earlier, that exact location can be shifted back 15 or 20 feet from the property line to allow for a buffer area in there to keep the existing vegetation in place. We typically do put a barricade there with a sign saying this road may be extended in the future to let perspective homeowners know the potential. Mancino: So let's say the Donovan property comes and is developed. The City Council decides at that point that let's make that a permanent cul-de-sac. Let's not, I mean let's still access Donovan property off of Lilac. Let's keep Lilac just the way it is. Do we, does the city still need the 30 feet to be able to do that? From Knob Hill. Hempel: If I understood you correctly. If the Donovan parcel is going to be solely serviced from Knob Hill. Develop in a fashion where the road would extend through into a cul-de-sac and a cul-de-sac made up from this area here. This connection would no longer be needed. Mancino: So you would vacate that? Hempel: That's correct. The area that we're looking at for a 30 foot wide right-of-way is kind of a sliver or a pie shaped piece that's in this area here. There's approximately 18 feet I believe between the Knob Hill plat and the property corner of Ithilien so you've got a very small, well this would be like the property line on Ithilien so in here it's approximately 18 feet I believe. So with another 30 it gives you approximately closer to 50 feet. It gives you enough room to put an urban section street in there. Mancino: Okay. Any other questions from commissioners to Dave at this point on the street? Thank you. 19 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Hempel: Let me add just a point too that the property owner at this corner in Ithilien, there was an easement provided at the last public hearing showing that Mr. Donovan had a roadway easement across that individual's property and again it's an exclusive easement for Mr. Donovan. It cannot be...city for general public use so we are restricted in there to an 18- 20 some foot wide easement. And I heard tonight that Mr. Simcox I believe that the city could in the future go back and condemn that property if in fact when the time came that the Donovan property developed and that was the only access in. The city certainly could do that but at the cost of the Donovan...or general taxpayers in the area to purchase that property. Mancino: To purchase it and go through condemnation hearings. Hempel: Right... Mancino: So that would be, okay. Thank you. Is there any other property that the applicant is dedicating? Are we asking for any other dedication off of Yosemite? Hempel: There is sufficient right-of-way along Yosemite at this time. Mancino: Okay. So we're not asking for any dedication there. Thank you. Hempel: No we are not. Mancino: Comments, questions from commissioners. Don. Mehl: That public street coming through that is definitely going to end in a cul-de-sac. So they will be...turn and back out. Mancino: For public safety. Mehl: Yeah, right. Now the private driveway, private street would it be necessary...Lots 1 and 2. Mancino: And 3. Mehl: And 3, actually 2 and 3. What's going to prevent people from coming down, or just driving down there? Is there a turn around? ...use that street. I'm talking about somebody who doesn't know anything about the neighborhood and they're in that cul-de-sac at the end of the public street and they see this road go to the right so they go up it. Is there a way for them to turn around down there? To back up...in somebody's driveway. Will there be adequate signage telling them it's a private street? 20 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Bob, does there need to be a turn around at the end of the private street or gate? Generous: Only if the Fire Marshal requires it. Hempel: Typically they do place signs out by the street, private driveway and hang the addresses on there for public safety to find out the addresses back there and it is up to the Fire Marshal to determine whether or not the driveway is long enough where he needs to have a turn around back there or if he can back his vehicles out. Mancino: I can tell you on mine, yes. We have a sign that says private driveway and at the end there is a turn around that we have. Mehl: Does the sign keep people out? Mancino: Yes, actually it does. I mean you always get a few who want to see what's back there but I have a bear posted. Mehl: There is, you say you do have a turn around and I don't see what look like there would be a turn around up there. It looks like it just abruptly ends and then there's a pad. The road kind of curves around so the end of it, maybe...get down there and have to back up. Mancino: That may be a condition you'd like the applicant and staff to work out. Mehl: Yeah. I think that ought to be looked at. Other than that, I guess I don't really have anything. I agree with the way staff is proposing this. I think we have to look at it from the standpoint that it's going to eventually develop and the road may, it could be 100 years from now, go through. It may not. But I think it has to be provided for. Mancino: Okay. So you feel comfortable with the 30 feet dedication. Mehl: Yeah, sure. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: I think it's unfortunate that the driveway to the south of their property couldn't be combined with the drive, than the development here save some of the topography and some of the trees over there. Also the driveways look like they're separated by 20 feet in some sections there... It's unfortunate that didn't work out and I appreciate that it was explored. Would you confirm that if the thru street would not go through from Knob Hill to Lilac Lane until and unless the Donovan property was developed. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Generous: Yeah, the city's not contemplating condemnation proceedings to continue that roadway now. We're just providing development options for the Donovan piece. Skubic: Thank you. And I favor providing the option of putting whatever street seems necessary in the future. I favor the option, I favor the 30 foot easement for the purpose of whatever street is necessary to put in there. I certainly hope it never comes to that but obviously there have been plans set forth to make provisions to get a street improved up to that point and I think this is a continuation... I don't understand what happened to the east of this property with Ithilien. It seems like maybe something could have been done there so on the one hand I say well, it's unfortunate that didn't happen. On the other hand, it's not too late to do some planning here for future provisions. So I'm in favor of passing this onto City Council with the 30 foot easement. Mancino: Thank you. Ladd. Conrad: What came back is far better than the last time we saw it. Dramatically different. Dramatically better in my opinion. And just so you know from a resident standpoint I totally agree with what you're all saying. If I were where you're living, I wouldn't really want the character changed. The access changed. But also to let you know, tonight is not about the access, really. It's about preserving access to another site later on and just to have options open. And that's really what we do as a Planning Commission is make sure our options are open and when we close it, and we do that. So I think whatever we vote on tonight, it's not to say that's where we want to go. We want to go up Lilac Lane. Tonight it really doesn't make sense to me. I'd probably be saying that's not what we want to do. But on the other hand, the standards that we set and I was kind of offended by some of the things that you said. We do a very good job planning here. We really do. That's why people move out here. And it's because we kind of anticipate the future that people like the city. Obviously you've got a very valid concern and I agree with your concern but on the other hand, our job is to plan. Our job is to make sure that the staff is doing their job and they are doing their job in this respect. Just so you hear my opinion. I think what I see in front of me makes a lot more sense. There are less variances than we had before. I really didn't like what I saw before. Now I do. The only thing that I really would say on cul-de-sacs and I really don't like temporary cul-de-sacs. It's like saying we're coming through. In my mind, Mr. Donovan was here, said he's never going to build. Well that's not going to, you know he's never going to build. He will. Everybody, we hear that so many times and everybody comes back and wants to develop... But my point is, I don't like temporary cul-de-sacs. I like neighborhoods that have permanence to it and as long as, and I guess this is not going to be in a motion but maybe it's more of a comment to staff is, you know we may have been talking about barricades or whatever at the end and that's just not, that just says we're not finished with the street and as far as I'm concerned we're finished with that street until we have to put access 22 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 through there so the, I'd like to make that cul-de-sac look a little bit more permanent at there as it butts into the Donovan property. It for sure should be back from the edge of the property. There's just no doubt about that but it should look permanent. And then the other parts of the staff report, I agree with. Mancino: Actually Bob is there a, I didn't see a condition in here about the cul-de-sac. So is that something that we do need to add? Generous: I don't remember seeing a specific condition on that. It was more of a... Mancino: Okay. I think maybe we would want to add one. To have the cul-de-sac is placed 20 to 30 feet away from the Donovan property. Conrad: It's probably what's there but... Mancino: I didn't see it. Mike. Meyer: I don't have a lot additional to add. I guess as a Planning Commission we do need to keep our options open and I think that's what we're doing in this case. Overall I like the plan and I guess I'm in favor of it. I have nothing further additional to add. Mancino: Craig. Peterson: I also agree with the recommendations made thus far and certainly parallel Ladd's thoughts about making it look as permanent as possible. I think that is, I don't think that's an emotional response. I think that's a logical response because I totally agree too. Whenever I see that I go well, I wonder when this is going to happen so I'd like to see that as an amendment within the package going to Council. Mancino: Thank you. I think that the revisions to the plat from the last time, it's going to be a great subdivision. I also am concerned, like the neighbors on Lilac about what happens to Lilac Lane and we aren't making that decision tonight. I did on Saturday and Sunday I made some trips in that area and found that I could not get up Lilac Lane from Powers. I tried five times and could not so we have a little public safety concern there. Trying to even get up Lilac Lane. And I'm not sure that I would be in favor, just for public record, in the future of connecting this into Lilac Lane. So I would also like to see a more permanent cul-de-sac. In reviewing the conditions, Bob I would just like you to go over them in a little more detail on condition number 12, and I'm not going to spend much time on this. It's Lot 5, Block 2 instead of Lot 11. And in 21. The retaining walls are Lots 2 and 3, Block 1. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Generous: Correct. Mancino: And I would also like to add in 22, well actually it doesn't need to be a condition. But I would just like to direct staff and the applicant on Lot 1 and 2 of Block 1 there are significant trees on that eastern edge and if there's any way to pull those homes forward. I mean if you feel that some of those significant trees could be saved, I would be in support of a variance to the front yard setback. And I'd leave that up to staff and the applicant to decide. Otherwise I too am in support of this and I think that the staff and the applicant have worked well to revise the plans and have them come to us so may I have a motion. Meyer: I'll make a motion. Before I do Nancy, could you clarify how your second point, the revision that you made. Mancino: On number 21, that it's Lots 2 and 3, Block 1. Meyer: Alright. I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #95-20 for 12 lots, one outlot and associated right-of- way, plans dated January, 1996, prepared by William R. Engelhardt Associates Incorporated and a front yard setback variance of 10 feet and a variance to the wetland setback of 10 feet for Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, subject to the following conditions, 1 through 27. Amending number 12 to change Lot 11 to Lot 5, Block 2. And number 21. Adding in Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, just to clarify that. And I guess that's how it stands, unless you have anything. Conrad: I'd like to make a friendly amendment, if I can. Add point number 28. Where the cul-de-sac be made to look permanent and set back the appropriate amount, which might be 30 feet, from the Donovan property. Meyer: Would we still have the sign that says this street may be continued through? From the real estate standpoint, which is what I do, you know I can see where people get misled if it looks like a permanent. I know where you come from too though. Conrad: I don't know how to solve that. Meyer: City staff any? Aanenson: We've learned. We've learned that unless you apprise people in every way, shape and form, that they didn't know that it would go through. Conrad: But on the plat. Then we should do that on all access to the Donovan property, shouldn't we? Should we put one up on Lilac Lane too? 24 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Aanenson: There's nobody there. Mr. Donovan's right there. Mancino: It is standard. Conrad: I just don't want to make, excuse me but it may be permanent. It may just be that way and I want to give the neighborhood the feeling that that's the way it is. And I'm not reacting to how the development of the Donovan property is made. I hope they never do it. And therefore I want to make this look, to put a temporary thing in. Mancino: Yeah, it takes away from the value of the subdivision. Conrad: It does. It does. Mancino: It just takes away from it. Conrad: Let the City Council figure that out. Who has the last word on this by the way. Mancino: So Mike, do you accept the friendly amendment of Ladd's, without that addition? Meyer: Without that addition of? Mancino: Of the sign. Meyer: I would accept it. Maybe we should make a note to them just to see what they say. Mancino: Okay. Do I have a second for the motion, or is there a second? Skubic: I'll make a second. Mancino: Any more discussion? Mehl: I'm just curious. Do we need to add anything to number 23 regarding staffs need to review and develop whatever, appropriate turn around radius at the end of the private drive? Mancino: Sure. Would you like to add that as a friendly amendment? Mehl: Yeah, is that added to the, as another condition or is it an extension of condition 23? Mancino: I think you can do it either way. You can add it to 23 and add a sentence after that second sentence. It says, second sentence says a private street shall be constructed in 25 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 accordance with current city ordinances. Staff and the applicant will work out a turn around at the end of the private street. Or whether one should be constructed. Aanenson: The current ordinance covers that. That's our interpretation of it...if it needs to have a dead end... Mancino: So are you saying it's not needed? Aanenson: Right. That would be our interpretation. If it needs to say dead end or not a thru street or it needs to have a stake to indicate the address, then we would make sure there's an appropriate sign. Mancino: Glad you brought that up. Any other discussion? Meyer moved, Skubic seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #95-20 for 12 lots, one outlot and associated right-of-way, plans dated January, 1996, prepared by William R. Engelhardt Associates, Inc; and a front yard setback variance of 10 feet and a variance to the wetland setback of 10 feet for Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Full park and trail fees shall be paid per city ordinance in lieu of land dedication. 2. A minimum 40 foot building setback (10 foot buffer and 30 foot setback from buffer line) shall be maintained from the wetland on Lots 5 and 6, Block 2. 3. A Tree Conservation Easement shall be designated on the southern and eastern wooded areas on Lot 5, Block 1. The applicant shall prepare a legal description and survey for this easement for city approval. 4. Fifteen foot tree removal limits shall be required around the building pads on Lots 3 and 4, Block 2. This tree removal limit shall be shown on the building permit application for each lot. All lots shall show existing trees on building permit application surveys. 5. The applicant is required to plant 37 trees as replacement and reforestation plantings. Trees must be selected from the City's Approved Tree List. 6. Any proposed entrance monument must comply with city code. A separate sign permit must be submitted to the city. 26 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 7. Submit street names and turning radius dimensions to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval. 8. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 9. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 10. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to the city for review and formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the downstream side of the construction limits and Type III erosion control along the perimeter of the wetlands. Rock construction entrances shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the street has been paved with a bituminous surface. 11. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 12. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's SWMP for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basins and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. The sediment pond shall be designed adjacent to the wetland on Lot 5, Block 2 outside the street right-of-way. A wet meadow seed mix should be used to encourage native plants in and around the wetland. 13. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 27 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 14. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 15. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 16. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the city's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer signs before accepting the utilities and will charge the applicant $20.00 per sign. 17. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year high water level. 18. Existing wells and/or septic systems on site will have to be properly abandoned in accordance to city and Minnesota Department of Health codes/regulations. 19. The proposed single family residential development of 7.69 developable acres is responsible for a water quality connection charge of $6,152.00 and a water quantity fee of $15,226.00. These fees are based on the applicant providing for the City's SWMP requirements and will be deducted from the totals after final plat review. 20. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 21. Retaining walls shall be employed in the rear yards of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 and street grades modified to be more conducive with existing grades. 22. Individual grading, drainage, tree preservation, and erosion control plans will be required for Lots 1, 2, and 5, Block 1, and Lots 2, 3, and 4, Block 2 at the time of building permit application for the city to review and approve. 23. The public street and utility system shall be constructed in accordance with the city's street and utility standards. The private streets shall be constructed in accordance with current city ordinances. Detailed construction plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and formal approval by the City Council in conjunction with 28 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 final plat approval. The plans shall be designed in accordance with the latest edition of the city's standard specifications and detail plates. Final plat approval is contingent upon approval of the construction plans by the Chanhassen City Council. 24. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat street right-of-way along the easterly 30 feet of the northerly 160 feet of Lot 5, Block 1. 25. Fire hydrants shall be installed with 300 feet maximum spacing. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. 26. Delete Outlot A and combine with the adjacent lots and dedicate a 30 foot private street easement over Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 for ingress and egress. 27. The applicant's engineer shall work with city staff in revising the construction plans to minimize grading on the site. 28. The cul-de-sac be made to look permanent and set back the appropriate amount, i.e.30 feet, from the Donovan property. All voted in favor and the motion canied unanimously. Mancino: When will this go before City Council? Generous: February 26th. Mancino: Thank you. Thanks for coming. (Craig Peterson left the meeting during the following item and did not vote on the remaining items.) APPLEBEES INTERNATIONAL REQUEST A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 5,500 SQUARE FOOT APPLEBEE'S RESTAURANT; A SIGN VARIANCE REQUEST FOR TWO WALL SIGNS; AND A VARIANCE TO SITE COVERAGE OF 5%TO PERMIT 70% SITE COVERAGE LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT, LOT 4, BLOCK 1, CROSSROADS PLAZA THIRD ADDITION. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff? 29 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: Yeah. The 5% variance. I think, I wouldn't have a problem with it if we were talking about 1 or 2 but I really, I don't know how to rationalize the 5 Bob. The only way I could rationalize the 5, if we change the whole district back to 70%. The city owns this. It's a city project and we're going to change the standard to 70% from 65. I just philosophically have a real problem with that and it seems that we're doing it because of our convenience because we own it. That's my only comment. Well no. I guess I need Bob to respond. I asked the question and didn't wait for you to respond but how do we rationalize that? Mancino: Well we rationalized it by saying the comprehensive plan assumes site coverage of 70% for commercial development. Conrad: Okay. Mancino: I read the comprehensive plan and did not read anywhere in the comprehensive plan that it assumes a site coverage of 70% for commercial. I haven't found it in the comprehensive plan. I spent some time looking at it and said where does it assume this? I haven't found it. And so... Conrad: But I think commercial, our standard is 70 and 30, right? Mancino: Well, for CBD there's no max. I mean the CBD is no max at all, and that's where we said we would have higher density. We would have a lot of parking and not a lot of green space. In the CBD and we were planning on that. And in the business, the general business district it's 70%. In the BH it's 65%. And in the IOP it's 70% but when you get out to business fringe it's 40%. Otherwise it's 65% so we have a real mix. We don't have assumed at 70 from what I found in the city code. Conrad: Bob, do you think the intent of a 65%, 35 split in the highway business district is for buffering? Is that really the. Generous: I think so and to give the view of the green, the open area. Mancino: As you enter the downtown. Generous: Right. Mancino: Yeah. Generous: Now the city could have resolved this if they would have included the land across the street that we're keeping for open space as the green area on the site because we're 30 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 shifting it all around and the whole thing's going to meet the 65%. But we didn't do that as apart of our subdivision because we are keeping all the land. Part of the acquisition of this property was a deal to purchase the property to the south. On the south side of West 79th and we were going to use that for wetland mitigation and storm water ponding over there and keep, make that an actual amenity for the downtown and entry treatment and natural state. So yeah, we're picking it up on a different property. Mancino: But what about the Americana Bank and some of these others? I mean I think we have to play fair to all businesses in this district and did we require them to come in at 65%? Generous: I didn't check Americana. Cheers is over. The restaurant is over. Over 70%. Mancino: Which restaurant? Generous: The one that's closed. That Prairie. Mancino: The one that's closed, okay. Generous: You know some of those older developments. Mancino: I mean that Cheers area, is that 65%? Generous: No. I looked at it. It was over 70%, but that was an older development. They have a lot of parking lot. Very minimal green area. They went all the way around their building and that's, you know it was a convenience at the time and the idea was to provide all the surface so people could circulate around there. I don't have the exact number. If you'd like, I could calculate all those. Mancino: Well I just think that's a big principle. I mean once we set it and we ask certain businesses to come in, it just seems unfair to business owners to have it not be consistent so. Generous: Right. We couldn't deny the variance on this and just push it off to Lots 2 and 3, which is established as part of it. We did a green area on the site. Because we're really treating this all as one unit. Conrad: Well, I'm just real uncomfortable on this one Madam Chair. It's like we own it so we're going to change the law, the rule, and we forced some others I know to maintain it and I think Bob, I don't really have a problem with the plat. I take the subdivision and it all looks good. You know it's just like, it's fine. It's just fine but a 5% change is big and I guess I could, next one in, I don't know how I'd talk to them. I'd just say, what do you want. 31 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Bob, will you also, oh I'm sorry. Conrad: I'm done. Mancino: Take a minute for me and just let us understand the extra 22 parking spaces that we're going to pick up from Americana Bank. That development. Generous: Well it's Americana, part of the arrangement that Todd or the HRA has worked out with, for these four lots and the Americana Bank so that we could have a more intensive development in this area. The bank closes at 6:00. Their parking lot's empty soon after 5:30. One of the peak times for restaurants in that evening period so they can, they're going to pick up that extra space. Mancino: Are we going to have a problem during the day because I actually went over to Americana Bank and I didn't see 22 extra parking spaces to pick up during the day so I was just wondering if everyone feels real comfortable about that. Generous: We think it will work out. You can't really tell. It really depends on the next two lots to develop and we're trying to work out one user for both of those and if that's the case, then it's easy. We have lots of excess and you'll see, what we don't want to do is you know these parking standards are planned for you know the 95, the highest use hour and most of the time they're vacant. We really don't want to see that on this. Mancino: Sure. I understand the mix. I just want to make sure that everybody was real comfortable. Generous: We think overall it's going to work out and we'll get a lot of, noon hour is the concern. Mancino: Sure. Generous: But we're making it pedestrian friendly so it will get people out of their car to walk there. Mancino: Is the applicant here and would they wish to present please? Make their presentation. Gary Fischer: Good evening. My name is Gary Fischer. I'm with Applebee's International from Overland Park, Kansas. I'll be happy to answer any questions with regard to our operations, the site plan. I have our architect and our civil engineer is here tonight also to 32 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 answer any questions with regard to the two variance requests that we have tonight. The variance for coverage. We've been working with, we had been working with city representatives on this site plan for some time now to try to get our adequate parking to support our operation. We feel that we've had to make some concessions along the way to get our landscaping and other ordinance requirements to a point where we feel that they accommodate the city's needs. We also are very concerned though about the parking that we need for our operation, to a point where we really would hate to lose any more parking on the parts where we have no landscaping...cross parking that we have with the bank. Potentially that we'll have with the bank and with Tires Plus. And for that reason we're requesting the variance to coverage to the percent of coverage and hoping that you would take that into consideration with future development on the adjacent lots as far as taking it out of there. With regards to the variance on the two building signs. We feel that we do have somewhat of a hardship here in that,considering the configuration of the land and the adjacent right-of- ways. If we were to just place the single building sign on the south side of our building facing the highway. As you would approach the building from the north. Say coming down Market Street. Making a left on 79th Street. Coming around the curve. You would not be able to see the sign on our building facing Highway 5 because of the angle that the street is in relationship to that building. You're actually driving away from the building. As you pass our building and then eventually coming to that curb cut so the signage would not really be visible coming from the majority of the city. Although on the other hand, if you would place the sign on the west side of the building facing Market Street, towards Market Street, you would be not identifying a very important elevation on our building which does face...and for that reason we're asking for two signs. They're not, we feel they're done very tastefully. They're not excessive in size and we feel it's an appropriate request. So if there's any other questions with regards to the site plan... Mancino: Any questions from commissioners at this point? Conrad: Just one. Is there, will there be a stop sign between the bank and Tires Plus? The access through there. Is that planned Dave? Hempel: At this point there is not a traffic signage plan but we could certainly look into that throughout the development, similar to like Byerly's or Market Square. There should be. Some sort of traffic signage. Conrad: It's sort of a strange, it's not the perfect access from Tires Plus through Americana because you basically go through the drive thru. Hempel: It's an unusual one. 33 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: We have to give that some attention because basically the right hand turn there, it's a tough one as you're going out of Tires Plus or Applebee's. The right hand turn into Americana is a tough turn. And then a quick left to get out. If you went back to the north I guess. So again I'm not sure how that works. I guess the only thing we don't want them to do is to drive through the drive thru so I guess that's. Generous: Unless they're depositing. Conrad: Yeah. Well that's right. That's right but it's a strange deal and I think we should take a look at how that access really does function. That's my only comment. Mancino: Thank you. A question. This is the west side and the south side of the building, correct? This rendering shows the south side toward the parking lot? Gary Fischer: Actually what you're looking at here would be the west side. This would be the north side. The sign would not be on this north side. It would be on the opposite side of the building. So this rendering is not accurate as you see it. Mancino: North side, yes. Yes, okay. Gary Fischer: So this is, when you're saying this is north side. You're looking at the... northwest corner. The sign that we're proposing would not be here. It would be on the other side facing the highway which you've got here. Mancino: Which would be the south side. Gary Fischer: Which would be the south side. Mancino: Okay. I'm a little interested on the east side. What does the east side look like? That is where people entered the, the east side of the building is going to be the main entryway to this whole...complex and could you go over that site elevation. It looks a little bit like a, the back of a building. Gary Fischer: Well unfortunately all restaurants have to have, or most buildings have to have a front and a back. We do have the necessity to have a service area for the restaurant where we have pick up trash, dumpster, building coolers, and what we do is typically on the, what we call the back of the building, we have that enclosed in a masonry...wall that matches the building itself. And like I said before, we went through great lengths working with the city to try to come up with a layout...There was just no better way to do it. But like I said, it is fully screened. Done with the same material as the building. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: I'm sorry. What is fully screened? I see 1, 2, 3, 4 doors. Generous: You have to go to sheet A-11, which is the one right in front of that. Mancino: Okay. So this is the east elevation? Gary Fischer: This would be the east elevation. Generous: Those doors are enclosed behind this elevation. Mancino: Oh! Thank you. That's very helpful. Generous: In addition, if you look at the first 18 feet 4 inches, staff is recommending that they incorporate a sloped roof element over that. Gary Fischer: That's the coolers here. But there's the plan view. Here's the back... Mancino: Now will you have any sort of decorative lighting here or do anything or any plantings to soften this? Gary Fischer: We can put some landscaping in along there. I believe we have, well the...so we will have some landscaping that will come in along that driveway. Mancino: Okay. Is that part of the condition... Generous: Yeah, they could put some shrubbery up in that area. Gary Fischer: We could put some low shrubbery. I think we have some already in the front. Mancino: I would say some higher shrubbery to soften. Generous: Lilacs. Gary Fischer: We can do that. Mancino: Thank you. Any other architectural questions at this time? Skubic: I have a question...commissioner questioned the colorings and at the time I didn't understand the significance of that until I saw a building come up and that gives a new appreciation of what he was asking. The illustrations here show a matte finish. The colors 35 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 aren't luminescent at all. Are these renderings accurate of the colors? I'm particularly thinking about the awnings. Gary Fischer: Actually those would be more accurate than the renderings. Skubic: Thank you. Mancino: Any other questions? Mehl: I had one. What side of the building will the, is the piping for the gas meters and the electric meters and water meters and this sort of thing placed? It seems like there's, are they ...behind the wall or concealed in any way? Gary Fischer: I believe the water, we have a utility room in the building and that's going to be on the northeast corner of the building. So that any, if there are any of those meters, I don't know that we've picked out a...location but it would be on the north side of the building because that's where the majority, our utility room is right here...Yeah, it is on the north side. The northeast corner. Mancino: Bob, we are not deciding, we are not okaying signage at this point tonight? That will come back to us as a separate item. The monuments. Generous: The general. Mancino: The specifics of the monument sign. Generous: The specifics we're not approving and that wouldn't, they'd be generally like this. Mancino: Okay. Generous: It shows it on that Sheet A-11. Mancino: But again we're not approving this tonight. This monument sign. Generous: In a sense. Aanenson: I guess that's what we're looking for. For direction from you to have the monument sign and that's what they're asking for for the variance on the additional wall sign. To give us some guidance. I mean that needs a decision in there. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Oh I understand the variance. Okay. Generous: So the answer would be yes, you are but they'd have to come in for a separate permit. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Generous: Which would not come back. Mancino: Which would not come back. Okay. Thank you. I don't think there are any other questions that we have at this point. If we do later, we'll certainly ask. Can we have a motion to open this for a public hearing? Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to open the public healing. The public hearing was opened. Mancino: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on the Applebee's restaurant, please come up. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing. Meyer moved, Mehl seconded to close the public heating. The public healing was closed. Mancino: Comments. Mike. Questions. Meyer: Nice looking plan. Really I don't have any specifics. No specific comments. Mancino: Okay, Ladd. Conrad: Nothing. I like it. I just don't know how to handle the 65 versus 70. I really don't. I can't bundle it into this site plan. I honestly don't know how to do that Madam Chairman so my concern would be beyond this site plan and back to the entire subdivision itself. But that's not a function of the site plan. In my mind. Mancino: But you would be denying the variance for 70%. Conrad: My preference is not to do that. Mancino: But you haven't found a way not to. Conrad: But I don't know how to solve the problem, yeah. The way to solve the problem is to change the ordinance and to allow all fringe business to be 65%. That's one way. The 37 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 other way is to give staff directive to try to find, try to squeak out some added the other part and that's chancy. And it's just that I really don't know how to handle the next person that came in that didn't meet our 65%. I'd just say sure. You've got what you want you know so basically I'm, if I go with this site plan it's saying, my new standard in this district is 65%. Mancino: 70%. Conrad: 70%, yeah. Sorry. Mancino: What about sign variances. Having an additional wall sign not on a frontage road. Now that is, they already have the frontage on 79th, which is very visible from Highway 5. Wonderful site for Applebee's. I mean it's just great. Gary Fischer: I'll compliment our real estate person for that one. Mancino: And there is a monument sign on 79th so that when you are on Market and you turn east on 79th, you're going to see that monument sign. It's visible. It's right there. In fact it's out a little way...on 79th from either end. Anyway. So your feelings on the...area for the wall signs. Conrad: I don't think we need one. Skubic: I also don't feel we need a sign variance for the reason that Madam Chair pointed out and I'm also perplexed by the coverage issue that Ladd pointed out. I don't have anything to add to that. I would favor adding to the recommendations that we have landscaping along the eastern side to cover that area which doesn't have very many features to it. Mancino: Don. Mehl: I think a lot can be...northern side. Can't have a sign on the west side. But if we have the south properly done and placed...going to take care of the whole...I had concerns earlier about the placement of the meters and... I know you can't avoid them but you can hide them. I think by putting them on that northeast corner like you're talking about, it's going to hide it. I have seen some good looking buildings that...bad side. You know they've all got either one side...If the red, that looks great. By the way, I think the entire plan really looks great. Great set of drawings. The...looks great. It's going to be a nice looking building. Doesn't the Tires Plus building have red on it? Is that red...red brick? Is that a red roof? Generous: It's a red brick and they have red trim. 38 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Is it compatible? Mehl: Yeah. How close would that be? Generous: It's a little bit darker. More blood red. Mehl: Will there be any kind of flashing or are they going to compliment each other? Generous: I believe that they should be compatible. It's not, they won't clash and one will be a little bit darker than the other. You also have some depth. It will be nice with the, our interior landscaping will get some green in there too and that will help break it up once the trees grow. Mehl: Okay. I just wanted to bring that up. I vaguely remember the Tires Plus having a lot of red on it. I want to make sure that it wouldn't be something clashing. We mentioned the, I don't know several meetings ago about pedestrian friendly parking lots. And I kind of take a look at the parking lot layout here and I don't know...makes it any more pedestrian friendly than any other parking lot. It looks like people either have to walk in and around the cars or walk on the street. They can't really walk across the little end dividers on each side with shrubberies and trees. I don't know what we can do about it. If it needs to be done but we did bring that up... Generous: There is that, the most easterly islands do have a sidewalk on them. Mehl: Where is that Bob? Mancino: On the eastern edge here...I think some of that has to do with, as we were talking about just the size of the parking lot and how many spaces are needed. Mehl: Okay. Regarding the 65% and the 70% issue. I feel that needs to be taken a look at somehow to...get to that 65 or closer to that. I agree with Ladd. I think there's not a lot of difference between 65 and 70...It's been a number that's been established, I think we have to work to get close to that. I have nothing further. Mancino: Okay, thank you. I think that the rendering looks great. I like the welcoming, kind of the energy level of those two sides and I'd like to see some of those architectural enhancements on that east side to landscaping or I mean you certainly don't want to do, I don't think you want to, what are those things? The awnings, but something that, this is just so wonderful and people will be driving right in on that east side. If there's some way to enhance it and you can work with staff on that. To enhance that east side. My other 39 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 comment about the sign variance is, also I think that the monument sign will give you a presence as you're on Market or coming down 79th from either side so I don't see the reason for the wall sign on the west side of the building. I would like to see some sort of, in this plaza area, standard for lighting. I've noticed that on the western edge of the city where we have some fast food restaurants, there's lighting. Different kinds of lighting. Different heights. Different colors so I would like to see this compatible with Americana Bank. The height and the color of the lights. And I know that there was something about 20 bronze poles with shielded shoebox lighting. I think that's fine but again please make it compatible with that whole area. I would like to see staff come back and tell us that the entire, I call it a plaza, can come in at 65%. I don't want to put the onus on anyone but I want to make sure that the entire area can come in at 65% and therefore maybe grant a 70% variance. I've just got to know that it's going to work. Generous: Okay. Well deny the variance and we'll push the rest of the subdivision. Mancino: Okay. Conrad: Deny the variance. Mancino: And push the rest of the. Generous: Because as part of the subdivision we said overall we'd meet the 65%. Mancino: Okay. Gary Fischer: Excuse me. Mancino: Wait until I'm done. Just one second and then I'll let you come up. Bob I can also see in some of the plantings on the south side of the building where you've asked for enhanced landscaping to do something because it's so visible from TH 5, etc. Something with flowering or perennials or add some creative landscaping to it. If that would work with the applicant. Now this will be landscaped by a certified or registered landscape architect, correct? Generous: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Those are my only comments. Please. 40 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Gary Fischer: With regards to the coverage permit. Is it possible that the variance, that you could almost remove the variance request from our application as it strictly affects our lot and make it more applicable to the whole subdivision? Generous: Well that's in essence what would happen. If they deny the variance, we're going to have to make up that 2,700 square feet. Gary Fischer: Okay. So it really wouldn't matter whether it's denied or it's just. Generous: Well it does affect the next property. Gary Fischer: Yes. Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion. Conrad: Sure. I make a motion the Planning Commission recommends denial of the sign variance request to permit wall signage on two building elevations based on the findings contained in the staff report. Is that separate? Mancino: I was going to say, do we need to vote on that separately? Generous: Well I set it up separately. Mancino: Okay. May I have a second to that motion? Meyer: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Conrad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the sign variance request to permit wall signage on two building elevations based on the findings contained in the staff report All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mancino: There will be no variance for the sign on the second building frontage. Conrad: Madam Chair, I'll make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #95-20 for a 5,500 square foot restaurant building on Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, based on the site plan dated 12-4-95 and revised 12-13-95. Eliminating the next sentence. The balance of that sentence in the staff report with the 15 conditions as of the staff report dated January 17th. 41 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: May I add a friendly amendment that there be a subdivision standard for lighting established for not only the height of the pole lighting but also the color of the lights. Conrad: Say that again. You said for the subdivision and I didn't understand that. Mancino: Well this whole subdivision. Generous: It should be compatible. Mancino: Yeah. See they got it. Conrad: I'm...sort of the lowest common denominator here. Remember that. Mancino: And 17, that we add, that the applicant and staff work with adding landscape and maybe some architectural features to the east side of the building. Conrad: I agree with those because they're so specific. Mancino: I want 20 trees. Second to the motion. Meyer: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Conrad: Yeah just a little bit. As I tried to rationalize this, one way or another. We're short 3,000 feet and basically we're going to have to find that 3,000 feet and you'd probably pick up on something close, or 2,000. You know everybody's going to feel we tried and we're close and philosophically we can hang in there. But intellectually speaking, if you had to buy that 3,000 square feet, you'd be paying x dollars per foot, right? Mancino: Yes. Conrad: Now intellectually couldn't you say okay. So there's a cost there. Now maybe there's something else that we can get versus that cost that the developer, the building. Aanenson: Sure. Replacement of trees somewhere else. Conrad: Yeah. And that's what I. Meyer: Sort of a trade-off? 42 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: Yeah. That's. Mancino: Boy you're going to make this complex for everybody you do business with. I mean now we're going to get into. Conrad: This is just a discussion because I haven't been able to figure this one out. I really stumbled on this and I think we're just forcing the, we're limiting the city's potential to sell the balance of the project, which makes me a little bit uncomfortable. I'm not really wild about that or whatever. We may not get the value out of it but we should. And what we're doing is we're letting the current project get away without imposing any kind of cost on this one in terms of maybe additional landscaping. In other words, if there's a $5,000.00 or $10,000.00 landscaping premium here, then maybe we could justify something happening on the balance of the subdivision that doesn't add up to that 3,000 feet that we're trying to get. Okay, that's just my little thinking that would make me feel comfortable but, and maybe this is going no place Madam Chairman but that would be the only reason we would not want to pass what we just made a motion to. That this project should pay a little bit towards a penalty for the impervious surface. Aanenson: The developer being the city. Conrad: Yeah, that's right. That's right. That's where it would be. Aanenson: It's part of the negotiations with Applebee's. They were concerned about, you know the easy way to solve it is to do joint parking and that's where we tried to put the additional sidewalk in. That took out some landscaping. They wanted to insure a certain amount in their purchase agreement. Amount of parking within their jurisdiction or control. So this is all part of the negotiation process. I think what you're saying might, well Bob did. There's another way to accomplish getting that back and certainly we looked at some of those opportunities but we, the city being the developer. But I think in the next piece it's not that... Mancino: Before we get to vote, we're still in discussion. I noticed that on the conditions there's nothing about the conditions that they have to have an agreement between the development to the west for parking spaces. Should that also be in the conditions? Or I didn't see it. Generous: That's part of the subdivision conditions. Mancino: That's part of the, where? 43 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Generous: The subdivision was approved and it said they have to have cross access and parking agreements between the parcels. Mancino: So that fulfills that. Thank you. Generous: So that's contained in a separate document as a part of their purchase agreement. Mancino: Okay. Thank you. Conrad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #95-20 for a 5,500 square foot restaurant building on Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, based on the site plan dated 12-4-95 and revised 12-13-95, subject to the following conditions: 1. Install aeration tubes in the 8 1/2 foot center islands. 2. Replace the pin oaks with red oaks on the proposed landscaping plan. 3. Provide ornamental plantings in the sodded area in front of the north side of the building. 4. Incorporate trees in the landscaping on the south side of the building. 5. Install three trees adjacent to the western property line west of the parking lot. These trees shall be selected from the approved tree list and must be overstory trees suitable for parking lots. 6. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint the curbing yellow. Contact the Fire Marshal for the exact location. 7. Full park and trail fees shall be paid per city ordinance. 8. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement for the property and provide the necessary security to meet the conditions of approval. 9. The applicant shall incorporate a pitched roof element over the cooler units on the east side of the building. 10. Eliminate one of the parking spaces in the southwest corner of the site, eliminate the paving squares under the two Applebee's benches adjacent to the entrance to the 44 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 building, and eliminate the sidewalk area north of the building to expand the landscaping area. 11. The applicant shall apply for a separate sign permit for all signage on the site. Signage shall comply with city code requirements. 12. The joint parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. 13. Staff recommends that the radiuses on the parking lot islands adjacent to the main drive aisles be increased from 10 feet to 20 feet. 14. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for adjusting any existing storm sewer manholes and cleaning the city storm sewer system as needed in conjunction with this site development. 15. Rock construction entrances should be included with the site plan drawings. All catch basins shall be protected with silt fence and/or hay bales until the parking lot is paved. 16. That a subdivision standard be established for the height and color of the pole lighting. 17. Additional landscaping and architectural features be added to enhance the east side of the building. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mancino: And when does this go in front of the City Council? Generous: February 26th. CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CONCERNING BLUFF PROTECTION AND SIDE SLOPE SETBACKS. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff? For Bob. Comments. Don. Mehl: I really don't have any. I go along with and support the recommendation. Mancino: Bob. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Skubic: Let's go ahead and make the correction. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: I trust Bob. Let's do it. Mancino: Your life is in his hands. Mike. Meyer: No comments. Mancino: I have no comments either. May I have a motion. Meyer: I'll make a motion, if I can here. I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to the Bluff Protection ordinance as shown on Attachment #1. Conrad: Second. Mancino: Any discussion? Meyer moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to the Bluff Protection ordinance as shown in Attachment #1. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CONCERNING LANDSCAPING AND TREE REMOVAL FOR TRANSITIONAL BUFFERING BETWEEN USES. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Bob, a question for you. On the Ward property that's going to go, it's going to be some kind of mix use at some time. At this point it is and it goes right next to a single family subdivision, low density. And it meets C, right? Generous: Yes. Mancino: So that's saying to me that the most buffer that they have to put in between the mixed use area and single family residential low density is 30 feet. Generous: The most, yes. 46 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: That's the most that has to be inbetween. Generous: However we could as part of, the development standards establish the bigger setback. Mancino: Okay. But that's kind of our minimum. Generous: Right. Mancino: And what kind of fence could we require there? How does the fence work into here? Generous: That's more of an aesthetic thing. If you look at F-1, that doesn't provide screening. It's just separation. Aanenson: You don't have to require a fence. As part of a PUD you might say, maybe it needs to be bermed. Maybe there's some sloping existing. Because it's a PUD, you still have the opportunity to negotiation some different. Mancino: So how do the fences come in here? Where are they part of the matrix? Generous: They become, under C. The bottom one. Mancino: Oh, the 10 feet. Generous: But they really get, they're more intensive under D and F-2 and F-3. F-3 is the stockade fence with 6 to 8. Mancino: So I kind of looked at this and I said, but you're telling me we can certainly change this if between the low density subdivision and a mixed use area the developer wanted to do 10 feet and then just have a split rail fence. To me that wouldn't be enough. Aanenson: You wouldn't have any flexibility to change. If you had like two single family zones, you wouldn't have any buffer anyway but when we have two permitted uses in a district, you're not going to have much flexibility for changing it. If it's a PUD or something else that requires site plan review, you have an opportunity then to add conditions to mitigate the impact so you can go beyond that. Mancino: Okay. My other question is on page number 3. Section 3, number 3. Existing natural features such as slopes, woodlands or wetlands, or man-made features such as 47 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 stormwater ponds which provide physical separation between developments or between a development and a collector and, the only problem I have with that is storm water ponds don't really act as a buffer. Generous: Except for you get separation. Mancino: You get separation but they certainly don't buffer a collector or arterial street. Aanenson: ...noise. Mancino: No. Or lights. So I mean it doesn't go back to the objective, the intent of this so I have some concern with that. Any other comments? Mike? Meyer: I agree with your last comment. I have nothing to add to that at this point. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: Just some wording. I've asked this question every time this comes in and I lose sight of it. Bob, without looking at the paper, it's got to be from memory. This is a test. Tell me what a plant unit multiplier is. Generous: It's based on 100 linear feet, you have so many trees, shrubs, evergreens that go in. If based on the width of your buffer yard, it either reduces the amount of trees per that unit. Conrad: So you would multiply the 100 feet and that will tell you how. Generous: How many trees I should get within that area. You know we might look at the entire length and we can get a total number of landscaping and then we can look at adjusting it to take care of it. Conrad: So the definite, here's what we have on 2(c). It says the plant unit multiplier is a factor by which the basic number of plant materials required for a given buffer yard is determined in accordance with the selected width of the yard. We haven't told, I guess once you know what it means, then the words make sense. When I read the words, it didn't make sense. I don't know. Basically it's going to force you to explain it to people. And I've talked about this before on that one. Basically you can't read the ordinance and really understand it, or is that just me? Mancino: You have to spend some time with it. 48 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: I don't know. I guess I'd like to be able to read it and say, I get it. I guess I'd rather have you hand this off to the developer and say, just do it. Generous: Well that's why they have the pictures. Conrad: Yeah. The pictures are really good. That's worth a lot. You're the one that's stuck with it so I'm not going to. I have nothing else Madam Chair. Mancino: Thank you. Bob. Skubic: I don't have anything. Mehl: No. I don't have anything either. Mancino: I just have two other comments. I have a feeling that (e), (f), (g) and (h) and the Arboretum and the landscape people saying you couldn't do it. I think most of the reasons why these were in was so that in (e), nobody would do a 15 foot buffer because they'd have to put too many plants so they were trying to get bigger buffers out of transition areas because...overall question for you. Very quickly on purpose and intent. Section 2(b). It says, this article doesn't apply to Al, A2, RR, RSF and R-4. What's the density for R-4? 4 units. Generous: 4 units, low density. Mancino: Low density. Thank you. Generous: It's those twins. Aanenson: It's those twin homes. Mancino: May I have a motion? Skubic: I'll make the motion that the Planning Commission adopt a motion recommending approval of the revised buffer yard ordinance as shown in Attachment #1. Mancino: I'd just like to add a friendly amendment to Section 3, number 3 and that is that we eliminate or man-made features such as storm water ponds so that it reads, existing natural features such as slopes, woodlands or wetlands which provide physical separation between developments, or between a development and a collector, satisfy the buffering function. Do you accept the friendly amendment? 49 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Skubic: I accept it. Mancino: Okay. Is there a second to the motion? Meyer: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Skubic moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the revised buffer yard ordinance as shown in Attachment #1, with the amendment to delete the phrase "or man-made features such as stormwater ponds" from Section 3(3). All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Conrad moved to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 3, 1996 as presented. The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at this point for a work session regarding Planning Commission Goals. The public portion of the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 50 CITY OF I, CHANHASSEN \ _ 690 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. AICP DATE: January 11, 1996 SUBJ: Proposed Auto Sales in the IOP District Bernie Wagnild has been meeting with city staff regarding the consideration of rezoning property along State Highway 5. This property is zoned IOP. Auto sales is not a permitted use in this district. Staff has stated that they would not support amending the district. If the IOP district was amended, auto sales would be permitted in any area guided IOP. In addition, staff is concerned with the introduction of commercial uses along Highway 5. Staff believes this is in conflict with the Highway 5 corridor study. Please see attached letter dated August 23, 1995 to Mr. Wagnild. Staff has suggested that Mr. Wagnild appear before the Planning Commission under open discussion portion of the agenda. Mr. Waginald and staff will be providing additional information at the meeting. C OLDS•PONTIAC•GMC 7500 West 145th Street • Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 • (612) 432-9500 January 1996 To: Members of the Planning Commission City of Chanhassen From: Bernie Wagnild President Valley Sales of Waconia Re: Locating our Pontiac-GMC Truck dealership in Chanhassen It is our desire to relocate our Pontiac-GMC Truck dealership to a 5 to 6 acre plot in McGlynn Park, outlot A, in the city of Chanhassen. I will be attending the planning commission meeting on the evening of January 17 to outline our project, answer questions you may have and look for direction on moving forward with the project. Following is an outline of the principals and the project to give you some basic understanding of our proposal. The principals. Bernie Wagnild is president of Valley Sales of Waconia. I am entering my fortieth year in the automobile dealership business. 1 have been a dealer for over twenty years. I am the president of Valley Sales, Inc., an Oldsmobile, Pontiac, GMC Truck located in Apple Valley as well as president of Valley Sales of Hastings, in Hastings. Jim Paul is vice-president of both corporations. Jim has over 26 years experience and has lived most of his life in the Chanhassen, Minnetonka area. Jim is also vice-president of our other two dealerships and executive manager of Valley Sales, Inc. Paul Brown has over twenty years experience in the automobile business, is secretary-treasurer and executive manager of Valley Sales of Waconia. Paul has operated the dealership for over eight years and would be our operator in Chanhassen. Paul is also a area resident. The reason for the location. General Motors is in the process of the greatest realignment of franchises in their history. They are cutting the number of franchises substantially, requiring dealerships that fit what the public and communities are looking for prior to the year 2000. An example are the new Saturn dealerships. After extensive research, both Pontiac and GMC Truck have settled on this area for our relocation. It also fits State of Minnesota franchise laws. Our reasons for the particular location are numerous. Visibility, accessibility, availability of utilities and price are among the factors. We neither want or need to be in a high traffic retail area. Automobile retailing, both sales and service, is destination retailing and as a result, the McGlynn property is a very desirable site. j-f:i J C\\ OLDS•PONTIAC•GMC f3 7500 West 145th Street • Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 • (612) 432-9500 The facility. Our project would meet or exceed the standards of your highway corridor plan and be one of the most attractive buildings in the area. We are not proposing a sea of cars like the Target or Byerlys parking lot. Instead we would propose a buffered area with the building being the star. The initial facility would be approximately 25,000 square feet. Benefits to Chanhassen. We are a solid, stable organization and a good corporate citizen that would bring skilled, high paying jobs to the city. Demographics show the business potential is similar to our Apple Valley operation. In 1994 Apple Valley did in excess of$42,500,000 in volume, employing almost 90 people and had a payroll of over $3,000,000. We would continue our reputation of being very involved in the community and supporting local youth and charitable organizations. We would be a substantial tax payer. Supporting local business is also important to us. We are happy with the positive reception we have received from members of the community who are aware of our plans. We ask you to join us in making this project a successful reality. A project everyone would be proud of One that would be a feather in the cap of the community and would show that Chanhassen remaions a progressive community. CITY QF CHANHASSEN J �1 ' - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1'"l ti (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 August 23, 1995 Mr. Bernie Wagnild Valley Olds Pontiac GMC 7500 West 135th Street Apple Valley, MN 55124 Dear Bernie, This letter is a follow up to our meeting on August 2, 1995. At that meeting, I told you I would discuss with the City Attorney the concern I have about amending the IOP district to allow for auto sales. I have also discussed auto sales on the Highway 5 corridor with the consultant who developed the Highway 5 Corridor Study. As you are aware, I have been opposed to amending the Industrial Office District to allow for auto sales because it flies in the face of what the city has spent the last 3 years to prohibit, more auto related uses along the highway. One of the objectives of the Highway 5 Study as stated in the document is "buildings will be oriented to reduce massing and scale where appropriate in proximity and to screen undesirable elements from view. Undesirable elements include parking lots, loading docks, etc. Generally, buildings should have office and design amenities located closer to the highway. The undesirable elements should be located behind the building when viewed from the highway." While you have stated that you believe you can present a design that can meet our concerns, there is a broader issue and that is conflict with the Highway 5. In speaking with the city's consultant on the Highway 5 Study, once a car dealership goes in, there is enormous pressure for auto related uses to follow. I personally observed several other locations to see what uses would go next to auto sales. My first observation was that car dealerships locate next to each other. I didn't see a single dealership in an area, at minimum was two. Auto repair and maintenance related, and service stations are also located in adjacent areas. It is the opinion of the City Attorney that if auto sales were permitted, this definition would also allow for boat, truck, recreational vehicles and motorcycles, etc. I find it highly unlikely if this zone were amended to allow for auto sales that there would not be requests for these types of uses. Mr. Bernie Wagnild August 24, 1995 Page 2 They city has spent 3 years developing the Highway 5 Corridor Study. The view of our community is offered by the trips along this highway. It is the primary exposure to our community. I believe the adoption of the Corridor Study and its recommendations are well founded and are supported by the community. After speaking with the city attorney and our consultant on the Highway 5, study I am not willing to recommend changing the IOP district to allow for auto sales. I hope you continue to look at existing commercial districts that are available in the city. Sincerely, 1.(C&U, A-726,A,00(.. Kathryn R. Aanenson, AICP Planning Director c: Don Ashworth, City Manager Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager Land • •Stewardship `r Project's V' 1 0 0 0 IFY ENDS (MINNESOTA Balancing Growth and Conservation AND 1ATTERNS Vunr,r I9 6 1'..i. 1 No. "Open Space" Zoning: What it is and Why it Works ST RANDALL ARENUT Arendt is author of In order to avoid disturbing the equity held by existing land- Connecticut River Design - owners,open space zoning allows the same overall amount of Manual for Conservation development that is already permitted.The key differences are and Development,and its that the technique requires new construction to be located on sequel,Rural by Design. only a portion—typically half of the parcel.The remaining His latest book is entitled, open space is permanently protected under a conservation Designing Open Space •Fs easement co-signed by a local conservation commission or land Subdivisions.He is vice- trust,and recorded i n the registry of deeds president of Consertarion J Programs fur the :T 1'4 As"open space zoning"is based upon the technique of"cluster- Pernuylrania-based ing,"these two terms are used interchangeably throughout the Natural Lands Trust,an rest of this article.It should also be noted that the cluster organization that works to concept can be restricted to detached,single-family homes, conserve land in the each on its own down-sized houselot,in communities or in Delaware Palley.Arendt has been in the forefront of those specific zoning districts where this is politically desirable.In 4.44' planners whit argue that conventional zoning has fostered a other words,cluster housing is by no means limited to ids t `• Se`"� sprawling pattern of development that))miecessarily results in townhouses,apartments,or condominiums,as is typical in many " f.L 0Rr&l a the consumption of large amounts of open space and PUD(planned unit developments)and PRD(planned residen- -. `-A ••• v agricultural land.This article originals-appeared in the tial developments).In fact,the classic rural village settlement Planning Commissioners Journal. pattern is a superb example of single-family clustering,some- times with a central green constituting the permanently . The Land Stewardship Project's Local officials in most rural and suburbanizing areas preserved open space. 1000 Friends of Minnesota. have a long-term choice about which many are not The Landmark Series fully aware.That is whether to continue implementing"con- Cluster Design and the Sr.Paul League of wine v-entional zoning."or whether to refine their existing land-use The basic principle of cluster development is to group new Women Voters invite you regulations to ensure the preservation of open space through homes onto par of the development parcel,so that the remain- to two programs that will creative development design.Conventional:ening is essentially der can be preserved as unbuilt open space.The degree to examine the policies and tax a blueprint for development,and development alone.Of course, which this accomplishes a significant saving of land,while structure that foster sprawl. zoning normally separates incompatible uses,and it does providing an attractive and comfortable living environment, establish certain standards(such as maximum densities and depends largely on the quality of the zoning regulations and the minimum setbacks),but it typically does little to protect open expertise of the development designer(preferably someone February 6, 1996 space or to conserve rural character. experienced an landscape architecture). April 2, 1996 The reason many subdivisions consist of nothing more than (though the concept of clustering is fairly simple,this houselots and streets is because zoning and subdivision design "new"form of development has raised concerns among 7-9 PM standards usually require developers to provide nothing more. some residents of rural suburbanizing areas because it is quite Landmark Center While many ordinances contain detailed standards for pave- different from the conventional,standardized subdivision Frrc.a,.I Oren to the Poblc meat thickness and culvert diameters,very few set any norewor- pattern with which most of us are very familiar.Interestingly. thy standards for the quantity,quality and configuration of open the conventional suburban model,commonplace in many space to be preserved. growing communities,is actually a pattern that is at odds with IFor more derails see page four.) the otherwise traditional rural landscape.It looks"at home" Conventional zoning assigns a development designation to only in our sprawling metropolitan post-war suburbs,where it every acre of land,generally residential,commercial,or indus- has become the predominate building pattern. trial.The only lands which are normally not designated for development are wetlands and floodplain.Conventional The Advantages of Open Space Development zoning has been accurately described as"planned sprawl," The conventional approach to development results in the because every square foot of each development parcel is entire parcel being covered with houselots and subdivision converted to front yards,back yards,streets,sidewalks,or streets.Communities which have had a lot of experience with driveways.Period.Nothing is left over to become open space in this type of development ultimately realize that,as one parcel this land-consumptive process. after another is developed,their formerly open landscape evolves into a network of"wall-to-wall"subdivisions. A Better Solution Local officials who are interested in ensuring that their commu- The beauty of open space zoning is that it is easy to administer. nines will not ultimately become a seamless web of subdivisions, does not penalize the rural landowner,does not take develop- shopping centers and office or industrial parks now have a ment potential away from the developer,and is extremely practical and effective alternative:compulsory open space effective in permanently protecting a substantial proportion of zoning.This technique has been successfully implemented by a every development tract.It does not require large public number of municipalities in New England and the Mid-Atlantic expenditures(to purchase development rights),and allows stares,and by several counties in Virginia.Washington State and California. Open Space(continued on page four) LaNU 11"1-1"t_ttNS I Open Space(continued from page one) farmers and others to extract their rightful equity without seeing than,say,50 percent of the parcel,and that at least half of this their entire lard holding bull osnd forcomplete coverage by housekns open space must be shaped so as to be useable for active recreation or agriculture,for example. --- T his pattern of down-sized houselots and preserved open space offers distinct economic advantages to all parties. Requiring Open Space Design Developers can reduce the costs of building roads and,if Experience has shown that when clustering and open space applicable,water and sewer lines.Local governments save on preservation are left optional,only a small percentage of snowplowing and on periodic road re-surfacing.And home developers choose to take advantage of this approach.Most • buyers often pay less because of these cost savings.Landowners simply continue to do as they have always done:creating • who view their property as their"pension"no longer have checker-boards of house lots and streets.This means that to destroy their woods and fields in order to retire with a even though the clustering option is in the toning ordinance, guaranteed income,as their equity is not diminished. it remains essentially unused.The community is still left Local governments do not have to raise property taxes to with conventional development patterns repeated over finance expensive open space acquisitions,and are not faced fields and woodlands. with the administrative complexities posed by TDR(transfer of development rights)systems.Developers are not placed If a community is reluctant to require clustering,it might under unreasonable constraints,and realtors gain a special consider the approach taken by Clallam County,Washington. marketing tool,in that views from the new houses will be The County recently revised its zoning from a density of one THE FORCES guaranteed by conservation easements protecting the open unit per five acres(which was creating non-functional SHAPING space from future development. "farmettes")to a minimum of 30 acres.However,the original MINNESOTA'S one unit per five acres density remains available if the houselots GROWTH Why Require Cluster Design! are downsized so as not to consume more than 15 to 20 percent PATTERNS Perhaps the most controversial issue surrounding the cluster of the parcel.Applying this kind of stiff"density penalty"to concept is the suggestion that this open space approach be discourage land-consumptive farmettes may be a far more made mandatory.The rationale is that there are certain types of effective technique than offering meager density bonuses to irreplaceable natural resources which are extremely important encourage clustering. to protect.Among these may be aquifers,riverfront land,fields Tuesday,February 6 and pastures.In addition,clustering allows flexibility in layout so that a developer can avoid impacting important wildlife --- Grace for Change:A Look at habitat areas,such as deer yards,or scenic features of the rural Local Government Cooperation ! landscape,such as large nock formations,hill crests,and mature Houselots become"too large to mow, and Restructuring in Minnesota , treestands.It is a local decision whether to require the cluster ii Guest Speaker approach when development is proposed on any or all of these but too small to plow,,and the Beth Walter Honadle, resource lands. greater distance between homes .'r„fassor,sf Applied Economia. Street Standards in Cluster Developments University of Minnesota When cluster developments are designed with privately effectively stifles the emergence of .Addressing advantages and maintained road systems,planning boards are often asked to any sense of neighborhood. reduce their normal street construction standards.This has disadvantages of various tn.ms.including loin[power sometimes created substandard conditions,and is a practice which communities would be well-advised to resist.If subdivi- a�cements.mergers,and ---- +r,nezataxi in reSton street construction standards are excessive—as they often ro are—they should be revised for all types of new development, -,11-life situations. so that street width bears a reasonable relationship to the Preserving Their Future expected volume of traffic. West Manchester Township,in south-central Pennsylvania, Tuesday,April 2 amended its zoning ordinance to require open space develop- Sewerage and Septic Systems ment within an undeveloped portion of the township.The area Protecting FmmLvu!and Because of the shorter road system needed to serve lots in a had been zoned for single-family detached residential homes on Open Space Turning Owcluster development,substantial savings are possible with half acre or smaller lots.Before amending the ordinance,the Hnsvnv-.the Minnesota Ta, respect to the construction of roads,sewers,and water lines. township had prepared built out maps showing what the area System.low Our FriendWhere sewer service is unavailable,however,people have might kook like if developed under the existing conventional expressed concerns about siting septic systems on the smaller zoning.These maps vividly showed the potential loss of the Guest Speakers cluster lots.Recognizing this factor,officials are requiring such existing farmland and open space.The township also mapped Farmer State Representan.; houselos to be located on that part of the parcel where soils are out the open space it hoped to preserve to show landowners and Pam Nears and John Jam,- most favorable for leaching fields.The flexibility of cluster developers exactly what was envisioned: interconnected open Fredrickson Si Hiroo,PA design allows this to happen.On the other hand,in a coven- spaces crossing parcel lines. ti nal subdivision septic systems are located wherever the soils Learn how our present tax manage to pass minimum health requirements,even on mar- Under the township's open space zoning provision,a .„rem encourages sprawl it ginal soils whose long-term suitability is questionable.In v developer first prepares a sketch plan showing the tural areas and what can F. addition,it should be noted that septic systems can be located ' number of units that could be built under a conventional dome to change the ii‘,'-, beyond one's lot lines,on an easement within the protected development pattern.This determines the allowable density open space. that can be used when the project is designed in a clustered manner.Allowing the same densities was important to allay the Large Lot Zoning concerns of affected landowners.At the same time,preserving 7-9 PM One of the"solutions”that many conventional zoning ordi- views of open space would make developments more attractive Landmark Center nances use for presumably maintaining open space and rural to home buyers.This open space zoning requirement only Courtroom 317 character is large lot zoning-that is,establishing large,five-to- applies to developments involving more than 15 acres. ''d'e,ta sue,s..,m..,..sum:Pau!, ten acre minimum lot sizes in rural zoning districts.Although large lot zoning does reduce the number of homes that can be Summing Up F ere and Open to the Public built,it also spreads out the homes in such a way that none of Whether continuous coverage by large-lot subdivisions is more the remaining land is useable for farming,forestry•,or even desirable than a mixture of village-si ed cluster lots surrounded recreational[rails.Houselots become"too large to mow,but too by permanently protected fields and woodland is a decision for small to plow,"and the greater distance between homes effec- residents and officials in each town.As king as everyone is clear nvely stifles the emergence of any sense of neighborhood. about the ultimate consequences of the various development types which are available to them,these decisions can be made Open Space:%'hat Si:e and Shape.' on an informed basis.p — Unless local regulations require the open space to be at least a certain size with specific minimum dimensions,it can end up being a long narrow fringe abutting rear lot lines and the parcel's outer perimeter.This can be easily avoided by clarify- ing,in the ordinance,that lots and nods shall not cover more 4 11'nitir 1990 iAda01 a319I031:1 'nog( ao} ale sdoyspaom esayl 1910-1LESS NN N3SSVHNYHO 17l X08 80 2l311f20O 069 N3SSYHNYHO 30 A110 86SS13N 80103810 JNINNY1d 0999 X NOSN3NYY 31Y0 LEIS'°N IpJad NW 'Ined 'lS 1.01-55 elosaum `fined luies alYd dOV±SOd 'S'n 1-017 el!nS �Idw SSV-10 !awls lePaO 08f 03!AJOS 6uluieal luewuaano0 LAND USE PLANNING WORKSHOPS FOR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS v i INCLUDES: FEBRUARY — , • ANNUAL PLANNING APRIL 1996 +r� �j INSTITUTES j • BEYOND THE BASICS xe r 7 TO l f�1 Sponsored by: GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE HAVE WORKSHOP — WILL CONSIDERING A GOAL-SETTING_ TRAVEL! OR TEAM BUILDING SESSION Government Training Service can customize the = FOR YOUR GOVERNING BODY workshops in this brochure and other planning topics, OR AN ADVISORY COMMISSION? especially for your community! You choose the topics, date, location, and supply the GTS can provide trained facilitators participants.We'll provide the faculty and materials. who have extensive experience Some possible in-house planning workshop topics include, but are not limited to: working with local governments like • Updating Your Comprehensive Plan • • Planned Unit Development yours! We can also facilitate a • Environmental Issues process designed to gather citizen • Housing & Economic Development Tools • The Art of the Deal input, to guide problem solving, to • Visionary Leadership help re-allocate scarce resources • Hanging Tough in Tough Times More and more cities and counties are taking and make budget decisions, or to advange of this convenient, cost-effective way to help strengthen existing teams. make such educational opportunities available to those involved in local planning. OTHER BENEFITS: Using professional, objective assis- • The content can focus on your current issues. tance can be even more beneficial • The program can be presented fora diverse group when you are faced with these —advisory commission members, elected officials, y staff, interested citizens. times of reduced resources and • Costs can be shared by two or more jurisdictions. tough decisions. Call Vivian Hart (612)222-7409 to explore the possi- bilities. I d 1 z z oo c 1 a; o c - Y C II Y 7s � o <o L VO don Y CD CA U a 0 UC I Y3 y i3 cn 0, ad. -� � d" o dom fn a c a . E Ra QE cii '0 1 a o EE in vO E - '' co L. L. a o O E � LL y a00S ° o ►- o y = - c o E LDN COo -7c to C w- O n6 0 d w CC E I I. it U `CM w a •a c daO O a) t cLCwc a d FEa o°'O o oc°`ro cc Q d Od c E coQ ! dO a C o OO ' J CO m �, �ZO O O � • �, Zo � o 0 o • '(3OOwx 0 0a a C3 x 0o m , naZ F- a) a E 2.) N , Z ° E >.Z r u. cQ � wa a 0 a> c Z r- I z ct cfl � .501 _ fl (n Q d o o c El a, °' J H 0 -ci c E = rn 1° W w d � w c CL CI) Q «' 0 o oa � m f� J v a a, a "' E I W co a`, co w c To (11 LL) d a `m a H 'ca ^ 11.1 (� J c.) a t'a a .% > > a a . o. fCi ` c I Cr) W a Q d �o `�° n occ v c ac z 2 I � � a ac' ° f- � Z 0 o Q d el c c cn Q T T R o E N I Z 0 : . c E N J co $ W dN Q >, > e9 o EN E N y y el to f, g ro I E c �JCj1 ` j N E E d N C O 7, Q 42 y H •'a1 O t!, 6, d H . N `c a i= o 'o v v 0 x I E o v a o 0 0 o o oa co 'co "- O ~ v m ar---- '•- x• Q u d O a Cy Yt H t0 :O O y v E 0U 0f is .c .0 OE , 0t d HC N 00V dOaL d 1 C N CO Y C Z C 2 = 0 ,% - I- CSE ,....% •,6;) Y O W V W U m L m 0 E ' ' ` U U« � co o o CO 0Z H -� U 3 3 ❑ C ❑ a " z m v 3 3 ❑ ❑ a 0 ea ANNUAL PLANNING INSTITUTE: BEYOND THE BASICS THE BASICS Thursday, March 7,Thursday, March 28 or Thursday, February 22, Saturday, March 2 Saturday, April 27, 1996 or Saturday, March 23, 1996 9:00 a.m. -4:30 p.m. 9:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Learn about preparing and using planning tools to For those new to land use planning and zoning or interested deal with a wide variety of development problems, in a review of fundamentals plus an in-depth review of the planning process — INTRODUCTION TO PLANNING from proper legal notice to development of sophisti- • Why plan? cated findings of fact. • Players in the planning process • Understanding the planning process PLANNING FOR DEVELOPMENT • Elements of a comprehensive plan (Of Any Size) BASIC PLANNING TOOLS—PART I: • Some definitions and background ZONING,VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS • How tools relate to each other • Definitions, Rationale, Uses, Myths/Misconceptions, How Subdivision exactions and dedications to's, Non conforming Uses. • Role of comprehensive plan; standards • Public and private sector perspectives ZONING CASE STUDIES: • Implementation strategies HYPOTHETICAL PROBLEM SOLVING • Legal issues Participants are placed into small groups in which they • Pitfalls/words to the wise work on rural or urban zoning issues. • Adoption requirements YOUR LEGAL LIMITS: BASIC LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS YOUR ROLE AS A DECISION MAKER • Open Meeting Law • The changing environment in land use • Conflict of interest • Legal limits • Making findings of fact that support your land-use • Procedures to keep from being sued decisions • When something goes wrong, who's liable? • Conflict of interest RECENT CASE LAW UPDATE • How your attorney can help • Video presentation: "Rudehaven" "WHAT'S HOT,WHAT'S NOT" • Summary of recent land use cases HOT ISSUES—PART I: • Any proposed new legislation ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS (Faculty Panel) BASIC PLANNING TOOLS—PART II: SURVIVAL SKILLS: SUBDIVISION REGULATION COPING WITH THE REALITIES OF THE PLANNING Definition, Rationale, Uses, Content, Procedures, Design PROCESS Standards, Financial Guaranties, Special Provisions. • How to (and how not to) conduct public hearings • Legal guidelines EVALUATION OF A SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL: • Practical tips from a local elected official A SIMULATION Participants work in small groups to evaluate a develop- ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREA-WIDE REVIEW er's subdivision plan using standard planning tools—the comprehensive plan, ordinances, and maps. QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC SITUATIONS (Faculty Panel) HOT ISSUES— PART II: ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS (Faculty Panel) FACULTY CORE FACULTY BRUCE MALKERSON, Attorney, Popham, Haik, IAN TRAQUAIR BALL, Planner and Attorney, Schobrich and Kaufman Rasmussen & Ball JOHN SHARDLOW, President, Dahlgren, WILLIAM GRIFFITH, Attorney, Larkin, Hoffman, Shardlow and Uban, Inc.; planning consultant Daly& Lindgren ROBERT LOCKYEAR, Director of Planning and TERRY SCHNEIDER, Councilmember, Minnetonka Public Affairs, Washington County LOCATIONS LOCATIONS Thursday,February 22,1996 - No Henn.Comm.College-Room 132 Thursday,March 7,1996-Kelly Inn 7411 85th Ave.No. • Brooklyn Park,MN 55445 • (612)424-0880 Highway 23&4th Ave.S.•St.Cloud,MN 56302•(612)253-0606 Saturday.,March 2,1996-Sawmill Inn - Hwy.169 So. Thursday,March 28,1996- Earle Brown Center-U of M St.Paul Campus 2301 Pokegama Ave.So.•Grand Rapids,MN 55744•(218)326-8501 1890 Buford Ave.•St.Paul,MN 55108•(612)624-3275 Saturday,March 23,1996-Earle Brown Center-U of M St.Paul Campus Saturday,April 27,1996 - No Henn.Comm.College•Room 132 1890 Buford Ave.•St.Paul,MN 55108•(612)624-3275 7411 85th Ave.No. • Brooklyn Park,MN 55445 • (612)424-0880 FEE FEE $80 per person or $70 per person for 3 or more people $90 per person.This course has been approved for 6.5 from same jurisdiction. This course has been approved hours of continuing Real Estate Education Credit. for six hours of Continuing Real Estate Education Credit. GENERAL INFORMATION We are pleased to once again offer workshops using the forms in this brochure. Fill out one form designed especially for citizen planners. for each workshop; duplicate forms if needed. Fees Participants will enhance their knowledge of vari- will be refunded less a $15 service fee if the ous areas of planning and, as a result, become bet- registration is cancelled 3 working days before ter equipped to make recommendations and deci- the program. Substitutions for registered partici- sions about the communities in which they live. pants may be made at any time. Should inclement weather (or other circumstances beyond our con- Program Features Include: trol) necessitate program cancellation or postpone- ' An accomplished faculty with extensive ment, registrants will be notified via announce- backgrounds in both planning and ments on WCCO radio and other local radio sta- instruction tions. ' Presentations focusing on current issues and timely information FEES ' Handy reference materials designed to Registration fees for all workshops include a meal, make your job easier refreshment breaks and handout materials. See If you would like to make your contribution to solv- inside for details about group discounts for three or ing land use problems as informed and effective as more participants attending "Annual Planning possible . . . REGISTER TODAY! THESE PRO— GRAMS ARE FOR YOU. IMPORTANT: To qualify for the group discount, reg- WHO SHOULD ATTEND? istrations must be mailed in the same envelope! Members of planning commissions, boards of CO-SPONSORS adjustment/appeals and governing bodies in • Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Minnesota cities, counties and townships. Also • Association of Minnesota Counties valuable for members of other advisory commis- • Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs sions, housing and redevelopment authorities, staff • League of Minnesota Cities (especially those without degrees in planning), real • Minnesota Association of Townships estate professionals, and others working in areas • Minnesota Chapter, American Planning related to specialized workshop topics. Association ATTENDANCE AT THESE WORKSHOPS PRO- • Minnesota Planning Association VIDES ADDITIONAL BENEFITS FOR CITY • Minnesota Planning ELECTED OFFICIALS! FURTHER INFORMATION If you are enrolled in the new League of Minnesota Contact Barb Wright (Registration) or Vivian Hart Cities Leadership Institute for Elected Officials (or Pro ram at Government TrainingService, (612) want to be!), these courses count toward the 40 2g ) 222-7409 or Minnesota Toll Free (800) 652-9719. credits required for Certification. Each Land Use Planning Workshop is worth 7 credits. The About Government Training Service (GTS) Certification Program was inaugurated in January, 1996. Application forms are available by callingr-W -I Recipient of Organizational Support for Cathy Davidio at the League offices at (612) 281- — , Excellence in Training Award 1250. Call Sharon Klump at (612) 281-1203 with (American Society for Training and questions about the Leadership Institute program. IlimmimI Development) REAL ESTATE CREDITS GTS is a public organization whose mission is to provide innovative, comprehensive, practical training and con- Participants of "Annual Planning Institutes" and suiting to address the changing management and lead- "Beyond the Basics" can earn Continuing Real ership needs of policymakers, staff and appointed offi- Estate Education Credits. cials in publicly funded organizations in Minnesota through educational services designed to enhance indi- REGISTRATION/CANCELLATION vidual competency and through organizational services designed to strengthen group effectiveness. Register at least 7 days prior to the workshop date toio Printed on recycled paper.