03-3-93 Agenda and Packet FILE
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1993, 7:30 P.M.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Site plan review for a 16,410 square foot office/warehouse facility on property zoned IOP,
Industrial Office Park and located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Park Place
and Park Road, Lot 3, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition, Mark
Undestad/Eden Trace Corporation, Technical Industrial Sales.
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE
ONGOING ITEMS
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS
OPEN DISCUSSION
2. Informational Meeting regarding proposed alternatives for a frontage road north of
Highway 5 between Powers Boulevard and Highway 41.
3. Discussion of Entry Monuments - Todd Gerhardt.
ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
pr
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
£z. (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I
DATE: February 24, 1993
SUBJ: Site Plan Review for a 16,410 Square Foot Office/Warehouse Facility
(93-1 SPR) to be located on Lot 3, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park
5th Addition, 1.3 acres of property zoned Industrial Office Park, Mark
Undestad
On February 17, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal to construct a 16,410
square foot office/warehouse building for Industrial Technical Sales, Inc. The Planning
Commission tabled action on this item because the building's architectural design was fairly
poor. proposed landscaping was inadequate, and the parking area needed to be reconfigured.
Staff had proposed improvements to both and recommended the applicant revise the plans
prior to the City Council meeting. The Planning Commission wanted to see the revisions
before they appeared before the City Council.
The parking area has been reconfigured to accommodate the northwest dock area and the
northeast most parking space as was recommended by staff. The previous design of the
parking lot did not allow vehicles in those two areas to backup. One minor adjustment that
needs to be made to the northwesterly parking space is striping it rather than turning it into an
island to allow trucks to back-up into the space. Truck turning movement will still encroach
onto the most northwesterly stall. Staff recommends it be deleted and striped.
The design for the rooftop equipment has been submitted. The applicant is proposing to
screen them with prefinished metal panels that will compliment the pitched roof material.
_ Also, at the February 17, 1993, meeting, staff pointed out that trash enclosures need to be
constructed of the same material as the building. The applicant stated that the trash will be
stored inside the building.
The materials to be used on the building consist mainly of rock face concrete block. The
building architectural design has been revised to add some elements such as a pitched roof
es-
t$t 4
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Planning Commission
February 24, 1993
Page 2
entrance into the building and glazed tile to accent it. The glazed tile has been introduced on
all four elevations. Staff also pointed out that there were limited windows on the west
elevation. The applicant has introduced the accent tile as well as heavy landscaping. The
landscaping plan has been revised and staff must point out that the revised plan is of high
quality. Staff is recommending that the plants parallel to Park Road be staggered. We are
also recommending that the applicant provide additional landscaping along the north side of
the site. Vegetation shown on the north side of the building is scrub and should be replaced
with a mix of conifers and deciduous trees.
A revised grading and utility plan was submitted. The plan addressed all of the Assistant
City Engineer's previous concerns and fulfilled his requirements.
Staff is recommending that the site plan be approved without variances subject to appropriate
conditions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the forgoing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following
motion:
I. SITE PLAN REVIEW
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #93-1 as shown on the
site plan dated February 22, 1993, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall submit a detailed drawing of proposed signage. A separate sign
permit is required.
2. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District
permit as outlined in their attached memo dated February 4, 1993.
3. All disturbed areas should be seeded or sodded immediately upon completion of the
parking lot. The City's boulevard along Park Road must be sodded. Vegetation along
the north shall be replaced with a mix of conifers and deciduous trees.
4. The northwesterly parking space shall be striped to allow trucks to back-up into the
space. The most northwesterly stall shall be deleted.
5. Connection to the City's storm sewer system shall be in accordance to City standards.
City staff shall inspect and approve the storm sewer connection prior to extension onto
the site. The applicant's contractor shall contact the City's Engineering Department
for an inspection 24 hours in advance of the proposed work. At the time of building
Planning Commission
February 24, 1993
Page 3
permit issuance, the applicant shall escrow $500.00 with the City to guarantee the
proper installation of the storm sewer and payment of any inspection fees incurred by
the City.
6. Meet all conditions of the Fire Marshal as outlined in his memo dated January 26,
1993."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Minutes dated February 17, 1993.
2. Staff report dated February 17, 1993.
3. Revised plans submitted February 22, 1993.
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 14
PUBLIC HEARING:
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 16 ,410 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE FACILITY ON
PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF PARK PLACE AND PARK ROAD, LOT 3, BLOCK 1,
CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 5TH ADDITION , MARK UNDESTAD/EDEN TRACE
CORPORATION, TECHNICAL INDUSTRIAL SALES .
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Undestad 8800 Sunset Trail
Richard Andresen Representing PMT Corp
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item . Acting Chairman
Scott called the public hearing to order .
Richard Andresen : I 'm Richard Andresen . My last name is Andresen . I 'm
resident of Savage , Minnesota . I 'm Plant Manager for PMT Corporation and
like she pointed out , I would like to see them also add their own
landscaping , and not just utilize our current landscape . He 's right next—
to it right now the way he shows it and I 'd like to see some more of his
own landscaping being put in there . That 's what I 'd like to state .
Scott : Okay , and then so you basically agree with the condition that are
there?
Richard Andresen : Yes . Yes , definitely .
Farmakes : Which side are you connected?
Scott : You 're the existing building correct?
Richard Andresen : Yeah . I 'm the existing landscape that they 're showing
now . PMT Corporation .
Scott : Good . Any other comments as part of the public hearing? Yes ,
Councilman Wing .
Richard Wing: Richard Wing , Chan City Council . I just wanted to again
hit the landscaping because so many times on the last buildings that have
come in on the last issues that we 've dealt with at City Council , they 've
come through staff , through Planning Commission and they 've sort of been
good but then we get them and we wondered why they 're not a little better .
And then suddenly I say , we want more trees and then everybody says , oh
no . It winds up going back so I 'd like the applicant to take this
landscaping issue very seriously so that when it gets to Council , I don 't
have to say it 's inadequate . I 'd like them to come in as a good corporate
citizen . Understand what landscaping means to the city . Recognize the
fact that we are working on a new landscape ordinance that 's going to be
extensively higher I hope than we have now . Demand much more trees . Much
more landscaping . And we have to start now so being there 's TIF money
involved , I think staff supports getting this thing going . I 'd like
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 15
Planning Commission to be aware of that and just a personal comment to the
applicant again , repeating myself , that we want some trees and we want
some overstory . We want this to get into kind of an urban forest setting
and I agree , it 's inadequate and I think Sharmin and the staff are pushing
it . I think we want to push even a little harder and so if this is to run
smoothly when it gets to me at Council , it would behoove the applicant to
really seriously look at the landscape plan and come in with a really good
one . I 'd appreciate if he 'd put that effort into it .
Scott : Good , thank you . Is the applicant here or a representative of the
applicant that would like to address the Planning Commission?
Mark Undestad: My name is Mark Undestad with Eden Trace , the builder .
Reviewing everything here you know that we will indeed do quite a bit more
landscaping on that site . This was kind of a fast pace plan put together
here . The question that I have is , on the rooftop screening , you say a
parapet wall . Is that around the entire building or parapet something
around the individual rooftop units?
Al-Jaff : Around the entire building so that if you were from any of the
adjoining streets , or the streets within the area , you won 't be able to
see the rooftop equipment or if you are at one of the neighboring
buildings .
Mark Undestad: So the rooftop screens themselves , I mean there 's from an
economic standpoint there 's a big difference to put a parapet wall around
the entire building versus screening in the rooftop units themselves on
there . I think what we 're looking at was like a parapet , or like a screen
just screening the units themselves in there .
Al-Jaff : We could do that . You haven 't shown us any type of rooftop
equipment so .
Mark Undestad: Okay . I thought you said that you wanted something to ,
parapet just to phrase exactly that . You put a parapet wall around the
entire unit . Am I missing something?
Al-Jaff : That is our preference . However , we could work with other
solutions . Other alternatives .
Mark Undestad : Okay . We ' ll get this together for you on there? The
parking stalls , the one on the upper right hand corner there . Yeah , that
might be a little tight backing in and out of there . However , the one on
the other corner , that one yeah . On the left side , that area back there
is not set up for tractor trailer traffic . It 's strictly a van door , drop
door so that we wouldn 't have any large trucks going back in there and
trying to maneuver around back in that corner . So I don 't think that
really we would have to eliminate that rear stall back there . The loading
docks are in the , or a loading dock is in the front side for the tractor
trailer traffic .
Hempel : I believe when we did look at it though , we 're still going to
have some conflict . When you pull in , there 's not much room for you to be
able to back up to that parking or to that loading dock with a utility
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 16
type van . We had some concerns there . I guess if you can demonstrate
turning radius or whatever , that you can accommodate your turning
vehicles , that might be a solution too . But we 're looking at also a
future use I guess . Will it always be a utility type function or maybe it
will be expanded to a larger type . Small tractor type trailer operation -
that may utilize that stall . Then at that time there would be no parking
there and then you would be deficient of a parking stall , according to the
ordinance .
Mark Undestad: Okay . Well we can run that through engineering and let
them see how that would work out in there . Really everything else that
we 've looked at on here is fine . We ' ll take care of it .
Harberts : I 'd like to ask a couple questions of the applicant . How many
people do you look to employ at this facility?
Mark Undestad : Right now they employ 10 on site . The majority of their
space is warehouse , shipping and receiving . What they plan to increase by
increasing their size here , I don 't know . Technical Industrial Sales
wasn 't available to show up tonight . They 're out of town here but like
I say , right now they employ 10 people at their current facility . They
have several sales associates out in the 5 state area but part of this -
process is an increase in space and I 'm sure they ' ll be looking to bring
on a couple more bodies anyway .
Scott : Any other comments from the public regarding this item? I 'd like
to have a motion to close the public hearing please .
Mancino moved , Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing . All voted i
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mancino : I have just a clarification for Sharmin . Would you put the ,
light up the overhead again . On that northwest corner , you show losing
one stall but we 're actually going to lose two . Or there are going to be
two eliminated on that northwest corner correct? That 's what you had
down in your , so there 's going to be a total of 3 parking spaces . . .
Al-Jaff : Correct .
Mancino: I just wanted to make sure . So they will need to redo a whole
parking lot schematic , or whatever you call it to show you how . . .
Al-Jaff : Correct .
Mancino: That are needed by the City Code . Okay . Oh I know . What I
would like to take a second and just show the other commissioners a
building used of the similar rock faced concrete block that I saw in my
travels this week . I think Sharmin came up with a good idea for having a
little bit of different detail and having some glazing tile . This
particular building uses brick as it 's detail running through it . And
actually . . . little bit of brick detail over the windows also so it
architecturally has a little more going on to it . I just would like any _
discussion about some other architectural enhancements we could make to
this building .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 17
Harberts : Sharmin , why did you suggest going?
Al-Jaff : It was just a suggestion .
Harberts : I just wondered if there was a specific reason .
Al-Jaff : No . Not at all .
Farmakes: This structure is meeting the requirements the City 's proposed ,
correct? As it is currently being proposed . This isn 't a TIF .
Al-Jaff : It 's a TIF site .
Farmakes: It is .
Al-Jaff : It could benefit from some architectural .
Farmakes : The applicant mentioned that he was rushed to put this
together . Is this , I 'm assuming that what we 're looking at here is the
building that 's being proposed . Is that what we have? I guess what I
wanted to clarify is what we 're looking at here is a site plan review but
does this mean that the buildings could change later or you 're changing
the roof?
Mark Undestad : This kind of shows a little bit more of how the break-ups
are to using various types of block and little different looks . Technical
Industrial Sales wanted something real simple and clean looking . On the
other hand I know most cities . . .so we 're kind of in the middle here . What
I did here was get something with the accent line that would break up
along here using . . .to get the accent line down here . And then basically
just . . .variations of block . It gives it a little . . .what the owner would
like is similar to the Dayco concrete block . . .These were Federal Expressed
down to him . They were supposed to be there Monday for his approval and
get back to us Tuesday . Federal Express didn 't get it there on time .
This is what we have . I did talk to him today and we did make a change .
Above these windows we had this lighter accent color above all the
windows . . .tone that down a bit . . .
Harberts: There isn 't really a whole lot you can do with warehouses .
Farmakes : Sure there is . I guess my response is , citizens or a partner ,
it gives you a little more leeway to put input into it . The problem that
we have with industrial buildings is you almost feel guilty adding on
anything to it . It still ignores the fact that the building 's going to be
here for 20-30 years . Dick 's comments are well taken . I think that not
only will additional landscaping be more pleasant to look at but it will
help hide the building . I think that the applicant has probably come
forward and said that they don 't think it 's an architectural wonder but it
serves it 's purpose . I guess if we want to add something more to that , I
know it seems like the neighbors , the industrial neighbors that you have
here are somewhat concerned . I know PMT has a nice facility . Very nice
building next door . Is there a reason why the City and some of the
commercial structures that I know have bricks up the roofline . We 've been
talking about doing that , at least in the entrance areas of the building .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 18
Is there a reason why we didn 't push for that here? Or we didn 't feel it
was necessary .
Al-Jaff : They meet the minimum standards of .
Farmakes: And that gets back to a philosophical thing . I mean it 's an
unfortunate thing that you don 't want to wind up living in a community of
minimums but it still is reality of an ordinance . If you have a minimum -
that you meet , and it 's up to the applicant to go beyond that .
Mancino: Plus it 's not on a main road . I mean it 's not like it 's on
Highway 5 . . .
Farmakes: That 's correct . And it 's a different relationship . I guess if
you have a company that comes next door and decides to invest serious
money and build a nice structure . On the same hand I guess they know
building that building that their development next door might meet the
minimum requirement . But I 'm wondering what more can be done to that
building . It wouldn 't take much more to incorporate some of the stuff
that we talk about .
Ledvina : The one thing that we have to do is provide screening of the
roof equipment and talked about the parapet wall . Perhaps that can be
used to give the thing more of a broken roofline . Perhaps in the front of
the building or Park Road or something , that could be just the height of
the roof and then beyond the entranceway and the back two-thirds you cool(
have a parapet cut across the roof . You know , I don 't know but then
again , if the equipment is back there and that would give it a broken roof
line anyway . I mean you 've got to do the screening . Maybe you could tak(
advantage of that aspect of the modification that 's required and give it
better look .
Scott : Diane , do you have some comments?
Harberts : I pass .
Scott : Sharmin you were going to .
Al-Jaff : The west elevation of the building is also one large span of
wall . One way this could be addressed is by landscaping . Massing
landscaping where we have walls . Or by adding windows . That would be the
third elevation .
Scott : Basically where we 're at is that the building as proposed meets
the minimum standards . I 'm assuming there will be equipment . HVAC
equipment and so forth on , so that 's a given so there will be some sort o.
parapet structure . You have to make the determination , I mean obviously
you know what we 'd like to see but then you also know what the minimums
are . I think what the Planning Commission is all about is expressing wha'
we 'd like to see as a vision of a particular part of the city . But you 'r
well aware of the minimums and you also know what you are legally required
to do . But the bottom line is that you obviously have to put together a _
project that is going to meet the requirements of your customer . But I
think you know what we 're trying to say . We 'd like to have this look as
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 19
nice as we possibly can and we also expect that you 're going to be a good
neighbor , because we obviously , the people at PMT have made a significant
investment in the city . And I think that 's the end of my editorial
comment . Are there any other , Diane?
Harberts: I have a question . Where are the trash bins or waste
receptacles going to be kept?
Mark Undestad: They 'll be inside . . .
Harberts: So the garbage truck will come in and back up to a loading
dock? That 's it .
Farmakes : I have an addition . I think in the past we 've shown a little
bit more aggressiveness in asking more than the minimum when there has
been community investment within the structures . I think that does give
us an opportunity to ask for more . This particular structure is actually
quite a bit in shape and appearance like Target , and many of the things
that we discussed and issues of Target I think are also applicable here .
Just because , as I said , just because it 's an industrial area does not
mean that they don 't have neighbors and neighbors that are concerned about
what their structures look like . This particular case I think we have an
applicant who , it 's a warehouse . You know , that 's what it is . It 's a
warehouse and it doesn 't need to look like anything more than a warehouse .
I think we should take advantage of the fact that it is a partnership
arrangement and that we should try to resolve some of those problems .
Aesthetic problems . I don 't think throwing a few tiles on concrete block
resolves that issue . Maybe dealing with accenting the entrance structure
or changing the so the plane of the roof is broken , perhaps you can
incorporate that with your covering . Your screening . Yeah , I guess I
have reservations about putting wood boxes on top of buildings too so
that , to help you with this , that hasn 't went very far in the last 3-4
years . Getting away with that so I think the site plan is fine with the
reservations that you have about the parking . And I agree with Dick . If
failing that , if you 're not serious about that , and changing the structure
of that to try and blend in a little bit better , and certainly an
investment . When you 're looking at square footage of the building , we 're
on the entrance . You can certainly do something there . A portion too , I
think what your expenditures are on the building , it should be a
percentagewise small . The issue of the landscaping , at least you can
hide what else you have there .
Mancino: Jeff , what about the windows? Putting some on that west side or
else making the windows longer . More vertical . It has more of a
proportion .
Farmakes: Well most buildings of this structure usually have the larger
windows by the entrance of the office sections of the building . They
don 't have large picture windows in the warehouse area . You can sort of
see where that begins and ends . The security concerns there are certainly
valid and the warehousing . It does however add additional cost to add
windows also . So I think that 's part of the concern here as well . This
building costs and that 's reflected on the plan .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 20
Mancino : It 's also the minimum allowed .
Farmakes: Yes . It 's just a question of what 's reasonable to request from
the client . What do you maximize out? If they firm up the edge there
and fill it up with trees , you may not be seeing those windows . It 's a
question of what they come back with I guess .
Scott : Jo Ann , or Sharmin , what 's the value of this structure? From the
TIF standpoint . How much TIF money 's involved here?
Al-Jaff : I don 't know .
Scott : Okay . That 's .
Olsen : Todd Gerhardt .
Scott : A Gerhardt question . Okay . Do we have any other comments?
Al-Jaff : One more thing . Another way of accenting the building is over
the windows , just like Commissioner Mancino mentioned earlier . . .that
should be a condition of approval .
Mark Undestad: . . .was too busy and he wanted us to . . .
Farmakes : One of the things that contrasting material , we very rarely
ever see materials in here . You can bet your bottom dollar that when thi
architect finished , he brought in material to sell this plan . That 's the
way architects operate . They come in , they show you materials . They hav, -
material samples and they 're explaining it as part of the process
explaining what the building 's going to look like . We never see that
stuff here and it often , in this case with industrial buildings , you will _
have different facia pre-cast or block but when you look at it from 100
feet , you can 't tell the difference . You just can 't see the difference
and basically if you find out what that block costs per block , there is no
difference . They 're the same priced block . They 're just slightly
different facia on it . So the question is sometimes when you 're requirin
different materials , is it a different color? Is it running vertically
and the rest horizontal? Just because it 's a different material doesn 't
necessarily make it a detail .
Olsen: I think that you were saying that you had proposed this color
above the windows . . .
Mark Undestad: Right , and . . .already and that did give it a totally
different look . Like I say , the owner 's requesting . . .too busy .
Mancino : It would be helpful in the future to see actual samples every
time somebody presented .
Farmakes : The way to make it least busy would be to paint the entire
building black and have a smooth surface on it . But you know , not to be
facetious but it 's obvious that we 're not making a Sistine Chapel out of
the warehouse . I don 't think we should require it but it should require
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 21
an effort to come to a reasonable attractiveness in relationship to your
neighbors .
Scott : Jeff , are you suggesting another condition to the ones already
proposed by staff relative to seeing exterior plans?
Farmakes: Should we be more specific and ask what your feeling there as
to what , how you can incorporate that with the screening?
Al-Jaff : We could . But if you would like to add a condition that would
improve the architecture .
Farmakes: Well we could list detailing an area particularly around the
entrance to the building . And the issues of landscaping , I 'm not sure
how , you know Dick often gets in there and wrestles with , if you 're
proposing 12 trees , he wants 24 . I 'm not sure how , since we don 't have a
detailed plan here , how do you want to approach that? We have a very
minimal landscape plan here as a part of this proposal .
Scott : Is it our consensus that we need more information before we can
approve this subject to conditions? Is that what we 're saying here? Do
we have enough information to say yes or no?
Farmakes : I would like to work out those things prior to it going to City
Council . Or at least that 's the idea I got in the recommendation . It may
be to the applicant 's benefit for us to work this stuff out rather than
you get hung up on that end .
Scott : Are you working , is there a short fuse here? What 's the deal
here? When does this have to be done? What 's on your back?
Mark Undestad : We 're looking to make , what the deal is where they 're at .
The State has bought their facility in Eden Prairie . . .break ground here ,
we 're looking for the Council March 8th and then break ground any time
after that .
Scott : So when do they have to be out of their building in Eden Prairie?
Mark Undestad: They have June 15th right now . They have to be out of
there .
Scott : Okay . So basically what has to happen is this baby 's got to be
done before June 15th? Now that 's significant information .
Harberts: When did the State buy them out? Was it for the 212?
Mark Undestad: No , this is part of the school , elementary school .
Harberts : Do you know when they bought them out?
Mark Undestad : The whole deal was just finalized maybe a month and a half
ago . Two months .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 22
Harberts: Do you know how long they were involved in negotiations? I was
at a meeting this morning and MnDot was there and to me it sounded like it
was an extensive negotiation process and I 'm just , I guess I raise the
question , did they wait until the last minute to start this ball rolling?
Mark Undestad : They did in Chanhassen . They had a project that they were
doing in Eden Prairie and . . .one of the realtors in the area here
approached him and put this deal together out in Chanhassen . . .
Scott : So you 're going to build this thing in 90 days?
Mark Undestad: Yep .
Farmakes : I take that back , it may be 12 years .
Scott : Pardon me?
Farmakes : It may be a life expectancy of 12 years .
Scott : Alright . So your plan is you 're going to break ground on March
8th?
Mark Undestad: Or there about 's , yeah .
Scott : Okay .
Olsen: There is a possibility of bringing it back on the 3rd . March 3rd
and still having it on the 8th . We 've done that with exceptions where you_
pay Nann to do the Minutes fast . The next day . So we can still get it
out to the Council .
Mark Undestad: The stuff , the recommendations that you 're making here for
this to be approved here .
Al-Jaff : With the addition of what the Planning Commission is requesting-
which is breaking the entryway .
Olsen: I think the Planning Commission is saying they want to see it
again rather than just passing it on .
Scott : Yeah . I think we 're going to get backwards on next meeting versus
the Council meeting aren 't we?
Olsen: It 's March 3rd .
Scott : Our next meeting is the 3rd and the Council meeting .
Olsen : Is the 8th .
Scott : Is the 8th , okay . I think we need to see this again . What do yoi
guys think? Yes?
Ledvina : Unfortunately yes .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 23
Scott : Is that why they call it architorture? Is that how that works?
Can I have a motion then? I 'm sorry , did you have a comment? This is
like an auction .
Farmakes : I 'm wondering , do you have an idea on the landscaping what
you 're proposing or are you looking for the number of trees or are you
looking to re-attack this problem?
Mark Undestad : . . .enough trees in the landscaping . . . The landscaping was
put on there . . .took in , wherever they get their information from the city
and it is the minimum . I disagree with you that this is the minimums . Any
building I put up , the landscaping . . .we ' ll do that on the plan to show you
that the landscaping . . . We ' ll screen up this west wall a great deal .
We ' ll do . . .fence around the front or rock . . .and I apologize it 's not on
this plan . . .we will show what the landscaping will be .
Farmakes : How flat is the topography on that one side?
Mark Undestad: Real flat .
Farmakes : Pancake flat huh?
Olsen: One of the things we could maybe suggest for the landscaping is
similar to what we did with Rottlund where we had those primary species .
That they take the majority of the plantings of the trees , take that
list . . .and make sure you just don 't get Lindens and Ash .
Farmakes : Well and the other thing . Something with some substance that 's
going to be solid throughout the year . Either some , to break up that mass
there and even with the primary species , you 're still , you 're not going to
get a lot of coverage there .
Olsen: Well we have that recommended . . .
Mancino : Are there any evergreens on this plan?
Scott : Oh yeah . There 's all sorts of , I 'm not an arborists or anything
but . Fir , spruce and pine .
Mancino: . . .way over on , I want to say the east side of the property .
The existing pines and the existing firs I 'm sorry are really on PMT 's
property .
Ledvina : Well I would move that the Planning Commission continue Site
Plan Review #93-1 until the March 3 , 1993 meeting .
Farmakes: Second .
Scott : It 's been moved and seconded that we revisit this item at the next
meeting .
Ledvina moved , Farmakes seconded to table Site Plan Review p93-1 on an
office/warehouse facility for Technical Industrial Sales until the next
Planning Commission meeting . All voted in favor and the motion carried .
C IT Y O F PCDATE: 2/17/93
CHA}7IIASI CC DATE: 3/8/93
•
CASE # : 93-1 Site
y: Al-Jaff
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for a 16, 410 Square Foot
Office/Warehouse facility
Block11
1, Chanhassen Lakes Business
Q LOCATION: Lot 3 ,
V Park 5th Addition
APPLICANT: Mark Undestad Ray Collings
i•� Eden Trace Corporation Eden Trace Corporation
Q 1057 Stoughton Avenue 8050 Wallace Road
Chaska, MN 55318 Eden Prairie, Mn 55344
0
PRESENT ZONING: IOP, Industrial Office Park
ACREAGE: 1 . 3 acres
DENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N - IOP; vacant
S - IOP; Industrial Bldg
E - IOP; Mail Source Bldg
Q W - IOP; PMT
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
0
W PHYSICAL CHARACTER. : Vacant parcel which slopes to the east .
WIMP
v/ -
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Industrial
Industrial Technical Sales, Inc .
February 17 , 1993
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to construct a 16,410 square foot office/warehouse building for
Industrial Technical Sales, Inc. They are manufacturing representatives and undertake light
assembly. The proposed intent of this building is to store and assemble equipment.
Office/Warehouse is a permitted use in the IOP district. The overall site plan is very simple
and well conceived. However, The building's architectural design is fairly poor and
proposed landscaping is inadequate. Staff has proposed improvements to both. The project
is expected to receive Tax Increment Financing assistance through the City's Housing and
Redevelopment Authority.
There are several additional elements that need to be developed further. The parking area
needs to be expanded or reconfigured to accommodate the northwest dock area and the most
northeast parking space. The current design of the parking lot does not allow vehicles in
those two areas to backup. The design for the rooftop equipment and trash enclosure needs
to be constructed of the same material as the building. Drawings need to be submitted for
the parking lot lights and signage plan for staff approval.
Staff is recommending that the site plan be approved without variances subject to appropriate
conditions.
BACKGROUND
On September 5, 1990, the Planning Commission reviewed an application for Site Plan
Review #90-9 for the Emission Control Station. The City Council reviewed this site plan on
October 24, 1991. The Systems Control proposal was rejected at this location, in favor of
another site on Lake Drive East/Hwy. 5.
On October 2, 1991, the Planning Commission reviewed an application for Site Plan Review
of the Mail Source Building. The City Council reviewed this same application on October
28, 1991. There was a metes and bounds subdivision application that accompanied the site
plan proposal that split the Mail Source site into parcels A and B. Parcel A was the site of
Mail Source and Parcel B is for the proposed Technical Industrial Sale building. The site
plan that was approved for the Mail Source building showed a future expansion to the site in
the form of an addition. The number of curb cuts to this lot was an issue for staff during
approval of the Emission Control site plan. One of the conditions of approval of the Mail
Source site plan was that future curb cuts on Park Road serve both Parcel A and B. There is
a 10 foot grade difference between the two sites which will make sharing a driveway
impossible. We are recommending that no future curb cuts be permitted for the Mail Source
building as a result.
Industrial Technical Sales, Inc .
February 17 , 1993
Page 3
GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE
The site is located on Lot 3, Block l in Chanhassen Business Park 5th Addition, and has an
area of 1.3 acres. The front of the building faces Park Road. Parking will be located to the
east and north of the building. The materials to be used on the building consist mainly of
rock face concrete block. The building offers little in the way of architectural design. We
have no doubt it is functional, but it needs to be improved to be consistent with the city's
expectations. Staff is recommending the building be accented with glazed tile rather than
concrete block. In addition, there are limited windows shown on the west elevation. Staff
would recommend that more windows be used on the west elevation to break up the blank
wall. The proposed architecture meets the standards of the ordinance. Any rooftop
equipment will need to be screened with material consistent with the masonry building
materials. It is preferable that the parapet wall be raised to eliminate the need for separate
screening. Similarly, screening of any outdoor trash enclosure is required. The enclosure
must be made of materials compatible with the building facade.
PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION
Parking lot circulation is fairly straight forward. The proposed building is divided into three
uses for consideration of parking standards. These uses include office, assembly and
warehouse. Under those standards, 23 stalls are required. The applicant is providing 24
stalls. Staff recommends deleting the two stalls in the northwest corner of the lot to
facilitate backing up to the loading dock. In addition, the parking stall in the northeast
corner should be also deleted to facilitate backing out of the adjacent stall. These
modifications will result in a loss of 3 parking stalls, thus making the total number of
parking stalls one deficient of the total required by code. Staff feels that the parking area
needs to be reconfigured to accommodate these changes and meet city standards.
ACCESS
The site plan proposes one driveway access into the site from Park Road. It is recommended
that the site plan incorporate construction of the City's typical industrial driveway apron
detail (No. 5207).
LANDSCAPING
The landscaping plan is weak. The proposal shows 8 trees along the west and 3 along the
east that are existing and not even located on the subject site. All those trees belong to the
neighboring property. Staff recommends that 8 over story trees be located along the west
edge of the site. The south edge of the site shows 5 maples. The trees shown on the
landscaping plan are 21 feet in diameter. It is likely that they will reach this size in 10 or
15 years, but until then additional landscaping will be required. Additional landscaping is
Industrial Technical Sales, Inc.
February 17 , 1993
Page 4
also being requested on the north and east side of the site. Vegetation shown on the north
side of the building is scrub and should be replaced with a mix of conifers and deciduous
trees. Lastly, plant massing should be used to help break up the massing of the west wall of
the building. All disturbed areas on the site shall be reseeded or sodded.
LIGHTING
Lighting is not shown on the site plan. Only shielded fixtures are allowed. Final lighting
plans should be provided for staff approval.
SIGNAGE
The applicant has not shown any signage plans. Ground, low profile monument signs cannot
exceed 8 feet in height and 80 feet in display area. A separate sign permit is required before
erecting any sign. In addition, a detailed drawing of the sign will be required.
GRADING/DRAINAGE
The majority of this lot was graded with the development of the adjacent property (Mail
Source). The plat grading proposes minimal lot grading in conjunction with the proposed
building construction. It appears more than one acre of land will be disturbed in conjunction
with development, therefore the applicant should obtain a watershed district for a permit.
The parking lot is proposed to drain in two directions with the southerly portion draining out
on to Park Road and the northerly portion draining into a proposed catch basin. The storm
sewers located in Park Road have been designed to facilitate storm runoff from Park Road
only. Therefore, it is recommended that the applicant either redesign the parking to convey
storm runoff from the site to the north or extend a catch basin to pick up drainage prior to
discharging into Park Road. Staff recommends the applicant's engineer provide copies of
storm sewer calculations to the city engineer for review. The plans do not indicate the size
or type of storm sewer pipe to be used. Staff recommends that all storm sewer constructed
within the City's easement be constructed with reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). In addition,
all storm sewer construction should be in accordance with the City's 1993 Standard
Specifications and Detail Plates. Since the plans propose connecting to one of the City's
existing storm sewer lines, a security escrow is recommended to guarantee the proper
installation of the storm sewer. This amount has been estimated at $500.00. The security
escrow will be required upon issuance of the building permit and refunded upon
satisfactorily completing the storm sewer improvement.
Industrial Technical Sales, Inc .
February 17 , 1993
Page 5
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Municipal sanitary sewer and water service has been stubbed to the property line from Park
Road. The applicant will be required to pay the typical sewer and water hook up fees
associated with the building permit issuance.
EROSION CONTROL
The grading plan describes enclosing the entire site with Type I silt fence. The grading plan
should also show the location on the plans. There is a wetland located approximately 110
feet north from the grading limits. Since the buffer between the wetlands and the site is
heavily vegetated, it will not be necessary to incorporate typical Type III erosion control
measures. The erosion control fence should be maintained until vegetative cover has been
fully restored.
COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT
Ordinance Proposed
Building Height 4 Stories 1 Story
Building Setback N-10' E-10' N-90' E-65'
S-30' W-10' S-30' W-10'
Parking Spaces 23 Spaces 21 Spaces
Parking Setback N-N/A N/A N-45' E-10'
S-25' W-N/A S-60' W-10'
Lot Coverage 70 % 63 %
Lot Area 1 acre 1.3 acres
Variances Required none
PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES
The Park and Recreation Department is requiring that park and trail fees be submitted in lieu
of park land. Fees are paid at the time of issuance of building permits.
— Industrial Technical Sales, Inc .
February 17 , 1993
Page 6
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves the Site Plan Review #93-1 as shown on the site plan dated
January 19, 1993, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must provide detailed drawings of material to be used for screening
rooftop equipment. This material must be compatible to the building material. The
applicant must also submit a detailed drawing for the location of the trash enclosure,
screened with materials compatible with the building. Alternatively, the applicant
may submit plans for internal trash storage to staff for approval, in such event no
exterior trash storage shall be allowed. The building shall be accepted with glazed
tile.
2. The applicant shall submit a detailed drawing of proposed signage. A separate sign
permit is required.
3. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District
permit as outlined in their attached memo dated February 4, 1993.
4. All disturbed areas should be seeded or sodded immediately upon completion of the
parking lot. The City's boulevard along Park Road must be sodded. Eight over story
trees shall be located along each of the east and west edges of the site, and 5
additional maples along the south. Vegetation along the north shall be replaced with
a mix of conifers and deciduous trees. Plant massing should be used to help break up
the massing of the west wall of the building.
5. The parking area needs to be expanded or reconfigured to accommodate changes
proposed by staff.
6. A revised grading and utility plan showing the following items should be submitted
for review and approval by staff:
A. Size, type and elevation of storm sewer lines including detailed storm sewer
design calculations.
B. Provide catch basins to intercept storm runoff prior to discharging into Park
Road or revise parking lot grades so that it drains to the north to the proposed
catch basin.
Industrial Technical Sales, Inc .
February 17, 1993
Page 7
C. Remove the last parking stall on the northeasterly corner of the site to
facilitate turning in and out from the adjacent parking stall.
D. Indicate B-612 concrete curbs and gutters around the parking lot and driveway
access.
E. Incorporate the City's detailed plate for industrial driveway apron (Detail No.
5207).
F. Show a typical parking lot pavement section. It is recommended the parking
lot be constructed with a minimum of 6 inches of Class V gravel with 3
inches of bituminous.
G. Show erosion control fence on grading plan (dashed line).
H. Plans shall be signed by a professional engineer.
I. Describe or show how rooftop drainage is being handled.
J. Straw hay bales shall be staked around all catch basins for sediment control
until the parking lot is paved with bituminous.
8. Connection to the City's storm sewer system shall be in accordance to City standards.
City staff shall inspect and approve the storm sewer connection prior to extension
into the site. The applicant's contractor shall contact the City's Engineering
department for an inspection 24 hours in advance of the proposed work. At time of
building permit issuance, the applicant shall escrow $500.00 with the City to
guarantee the proper installation of the storm sewer and payment of any inspection
fees incurred by the City.
9. Meet all conditions of the Fire Marshal as outlined in his memo dated January 26,
1993.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memo from Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District.
2. Memo from Engineering Department.
3. Memo from Fire Marshal.
4. Overview statement of proposal.
5. Site plan dated January 19, 1993.
`"°"". Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
__„ O ` Engineering Advisor:Barr Engineering Co.
!,!" 8300 Norman Center Drive
Suite 300
''' r-
, , ` Minneapolis,MN 55437
_ r ' � 832-2600
Legal Advisor: Popham, Haile.Schnobrich&Kaufman
3300 Piper Jaffray Tower
_ 222 South Ninth Street
Minneapolis,MN 55402
333-4800
February 4, 1993
Mrs. Joanne Olson
Senior City Planner
City of Chanhassen
- 690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, Mr 55317
Dear Mrs. Olson:
The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the
Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary
information as submitted to the District for the Technical Industrial Sales in
- Chanhassen. The following policies and criteria of the District are applicable
for this project:
1 . In accordance with Section E (2) of the District's revised Rules and
Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit will be required
from the District for this project. Accompanying the permit
application, a grading plan showing both existing and proposed
contours must be submitted to the District for review.
2 . A detailed erosion control plan must be submitted to the District for
review and approval.
3 . A stormwater management plan must be submitted to the District for
review and approval.
Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this project at an early date.
If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please call me at
832-2857 .
cere /z; ,1
ly
Ro rt . Obermeyer
B rr Engineering Co pany
Engineer's for the District
c: Mr. Ray Haik
Mr. Fritz Rahr
23\27\053\SALES.LTR
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 I
FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer Rig
DATE: February 5, 1993
SUBJ: Site Plan Review for Technical Industrial Sales, Westerly Part of Lot 3, Block
1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition
File No. 93-6 Land Use Review
Upon review of the grading and utility plan prepared by Rehder& Associates, Inc., stamped
January 19, 1993, I offer the following comments and recommendations:
Grading & Drainage
A majority of this lot was graded with the development of the adjacent property (Mail
Source). The plat grading proposes minimal lot grading in conjunction with the proposed
building construction although it appears more than one acre of land will be disturbed in
conjunction with development therefore the applicant should consult the watershed district
for a permit.
Parking lot drainage is proposed to drain approximately in half with the southerly portion
draining out on to Park Road and the northerly portion draining into a proposed catch
basin. The storm sewers located in Park Road have been designed to facilitate storm runoff
from Park Road only. Therefore, it is recommended that the applicant either redesign the
parking lot to convey storm runoff from the site to the north or extend a catch basin to pick
up drainage prior to discharging into Park Road. Staff recommends the applicant's engineer
provide copies of storm sewer calculations to the city engineer for review. The plans do not
indicate the size or type of storm sewer pipe to be used. Staff recommends that all storm
sewer constructed within the City's easement be constructed with reinforced concrete pipe
(RCP). In addition, all storm sewer construction should be in accordance with the City's
1993 Standard Specifications and Detailed Plates. Since the plans propose connecting to
one of the City's existing storm sewer lines, a security escrow is recommended to guarantee
the proper installation of the storm sewer. This amount has been estimated at $500.00. The
es
to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Sharmin Al-Jaff
February 5, 1993
Page 2
security escrow will be required upon issuance of the building permit and refunded upon
satisfactorily completing the storm sewer improvement.
ACCESS
The site plan proposes one driveway access into the site from Park Road. It is
recommended that the site plan incorporate construction of the City's typical industrial
driveway apron detail (No. 5207). Parking lot circulation is fairly straightforward. Staff
recommends deleting the two stalls in the northwest corner of the lot to facilitate backing
up to the loading dock. In addition, the parking stall in the northeast corner should also be
deleted to facilitate backing out of the adjacent stall. These modifications will result in a
loss of three parking stalls thus making the total number of parking stalls one deficient of
the total required by code.
Erosion Control
The grading plan describes encompassing the entire site with Type I silt fence. The grading
plan should also show the location on the plans. There is a wetland located approximately
110 feet north from the grading limits. Since the buffer between the wetlands and the site
is heavily vegetated, it will not be necessary to incorporate typical Type III erosion control
measures. The erosion control fence should be maintained until vegetative cover has been
fully restored.
Utilities
Municipal sanitary sewer and water service has been stubbed to the property line from Park
Road. The applicant will be required to pay the typical sewer and water hook up fees
associated with the building permit issuance.
Recommended Conditions of Approval
1. A revised grading and utility plan showing the following items should be submitted
for review and approval by staff:
A. Size, type and elevation of storm sewer lines including detailed storm sewer
design calculations.
B. Provide catch basins to intercept storm runoff prior to discharging into Park
Road or revise parking lot grades so that it drains to the north to the
proposed catch basin.
Sharmin Al-Jaff
February 5, 1993
Page 3
C. Remove the last parking stalls in the northeasterly corner of the site and the
last two parking stalls in the northwest corner of the site to facilitate vehicle
turning movements.
D. Indicate B-612 concrete curbs and gutters around the parking lot and driveway
access.
E. Incorporate the City's detailed plate for industrial driveway apron (Detail No.
5207).
F. Show a typical parking lot pavement section. It is recommended the parking
lot be constructed with a minimum of 6 inches of Class V gravel with 3 inches
of bituminous.
G. Show erosion control fence on grading plan (dashed line).
H. Plans shall be signed by a professional engineer.
I. Show how rooftop drainage is being handled.
J. Straw hay bales shall be staked around all catch basins for sediment control
until the parking lot is paved with bituminous.
2. All disturbed areas should be seeded or sodded immediately upon completion of the
parking lot. The City's boulevard along Park Road must be sodded.
3. Connection to the City's storm sewer system shall be in accordance to City standards.
City staff shall inspect and approve the storm sewer connection prior to extension
into the site. The applicant's contractor shall contact the City's Engineering
department for an inspection 24 hours in advance of the proposed work. At time of
building permit issuance, the applicant shall escrow $500.00 with the City to
guarantee the proper installation of the storm sewer and payment of any inspection
fees incurred by the City.
Jms
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
Attachment: Industrial Driveway Apron Detail No. 5207
•
W -
2 ~
mi 0 F-
Z CnI co
a F' I } -Q
Z W ti
111 O r J
4
' i •
�r 1
WI 4 1 I _
1111 I t a
.re.sei
T� cc0 ~
5 . " W
L
IN �
W I Z �y,�
<
71) r . Cr 3
F-
I-
W
I X a I-Q
ilZ N - 2 8 % QWy
W I Z ♦ W f-U
Cl)III W
1g W
oll (7 F- Q _ • tD ~
IU m i •W. - N
a I cooJ co
mz
I '3 ~u
I • w iv i~ W5
• \ ~ ww0 CC n UO� B�<
Z Z F— a.
\Ili..
U F-11I D ' Z = N r�
oz-JDF- F"" d
F- 0 >- 0D M - ��
co VMJ - 1• 1' ' - 1
Fr aia
u 1
CITY OFINDUSTRIAL
tte7 CHANHASSEN DRIVEWAY
IDATE 2-91 PLATE NO. 5207
ATTACHMENT 1
,
CITY 0 F _.
illloto ,
CHANHASSEN _
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 -
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al-Jaffa Planner I
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal —
DATE: January 26, 1993
SUBJ: Site Plan Review of a 16,410 square foot office/warehouse
Lot 3, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition
Planning Case #93-1 Site Plan Review —
I have reviewed the site plan and have the following requirements:
1. Add one (1) fire hydrant on island by loading dock. Contact Chanhassen Fire
Marshal for exact location and approval. Pursuant to 1988 UFC —
Sec 10.301(c).
2. Building is to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13. Pursuant to UBC 1988
Appendix Chapter 38.
3. A ten (10) foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants.
Pursuant to City Ordinance. t
4. Install two (2) "No Parking Fire Lane" signs or either side of main entrance
of Park Road. Pursuant to 1988 UFC Sec. 10.207 (m). �;
5. Additional information needed regarding processes, storage and commodity
classification per 1988 UFC Sec. 81.104 and NFPA 13 Appendix A, regarding
occupancies classification. _
cc: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official
Jim McMahon, Fire Chief —
Is
-
to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
OVERVIEW STATEMENT - TECHNICAL INDUSTRIAL SALES
CHANHASSEN, MN.
SANITARY SEWER Proposed building will be served by a 6" PVC service
that will tie into an existing 6" stub in Park Road.
WATERMAIN Building will be served by an 8" DIP service that will
tie into existing 8" stub in Park Road. Building will
be sprinkled.
STORM SEWER Proposed storm sewer will be placed in north curb line
and will be connected to existing 30" storm sewer
20'+/- north of the property. 30" pipe drains to
east.
GRADING & DRAINAGE Proposed building will be a slab on grade with dock on
east side and drive in doors on north and east sides.
North side of building will drain to proposed CB in
north curb line and east side drainage is split with
half draining north and half south. Building has
scuppers for roof drainage (split north and south) .
The earthwork appears to come close to balancing.
EROSION CONTROL Will be placed around site perimeter.
WATERSHED PERMIT Permit submittal deadline is January 25, 1993 with
permit issuance on February 3, 1993.
JuRn A. Rrausert, P.E.
Rehder
& associates, Inc.
CIVIL ENGINEERS&LAND SURVEYORS 3440 Federal Drive, Suite 240 • Eagan, Minnesota 55122 • (612) 452-5051 • FAX (612) 452-9797
Rehder & Associates, Inc.
by LAK- date 1-1S-ct S subject 'i tN.i►tA . 1-.NOn Atlat*L SALE i. sheet no I of I
chkd by date job no C - M,S.10
i . .
DAAv.JAI.0 'f0 p.o110SeQ . CQ To M•Rs*f
i i Oa-A�A6c Me = 111 too ff. -_ 0.51 aL —
i i C_ - VAw� = 0.9 •
i
i t 'Y
ldu- ( t. 4, ( S Iftvi) . .
4 -A.
1 i
'i- t
I • . 0.9 (1.1.) (o.S0
.� 1.3.3 tF s J s r 12' R rP e o.-i S°►• "..,.
L ; _.-. _ i 1—tt. R4i.►occ- W'
T 1+ 0lw A.S i 0.41+4 tu- pT
RA.4 o et. « QS o
'1 FAST
`,—t-__ . .- 9101)01ta twat OAT.
.
ti —
• - t i -
.1— .1. -
i � t
i
i •
- i • i'
1+--s
--I ..; t
t i'
} - , t i
i : ..
i 1 .
• {
1
•
t
Rehder & Associates, Inc.
by 5A u- date 1-NS-AS subject 'cj( J M... "Tn+n...,tTR.A` SA<f i ' sheet no I of I
chkd by date job no 9z1 - m,S.‘o
r ' •
V. aA.NAbF 10 (1+1soieb ce To N•RTA
IT ; •
' '0M•14 WWF -- 111 100 ff -: 0 51 AL
{ ' E
'• i `,- VAmrf t 0.1 '
1 i ' 1 ` .l 1 1 -
.Lj = C. A a .
Qk, ••
•L .• • . O.9 C12.) (o.S►)
:
I ,
in.: -._1 = 13.3 tri I M s cr 12 RcP e 0.10. :1•A...,.
•! -� I hE t WJo4 1 OAT. OtAw i Sow['+► w 1.%. ORA.• co El. Lg'i 4 S° 4'A ST eG
piopoit t•.R0 t�Tt.
h
1.
ini .1 . . . ,
a
0
ift.
HANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 17 , 1993
Acting Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 p .m .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Diane Harberts , Matt Ledvina , Joe Scott , Nancy Mancino ,
and Jeff Farmakes
MEMBERS ABSFNT: Brian Batzli and Ladd Conrad
STAFF PRESENT: Jo Ann Olsen , Senior Planner ; Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner I ;
and Dave Hempel , Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING:
THE ROTTLUND COMPANY ( MIKE KLINGELHUTZ ) PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE
OF GALPIN BOULEVARD , APPROXIMATELY 1/2 MILE NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5, WINDMILL
RUN:
A . REZONE 17 .2 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2 , AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO RSF ,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY; AND
B . SUBDIVIDE 17 .2 ACRES OF PROPERTY INTO 35 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS .
Public Present:
Name Address
David Stockdale 7210 Galpin Blvd .
Tom & Dar Turcotte 7240 Galpin Blvd .
Mark ( Red ) White Representing Prince Nelson
Wayne Tauer Pioneer Engineering
Jo Ann Olsen and Dave Hempel presented the staff report on this item .
Acting Chairman Scott called the public hearing to order .
Ledvina : Mr . Chairman , I have a question . Dave , does the developer have
the option of constructing ponds and maintaining the pre-development
runoff rate , I mean as opposed to going ahead and making the payments to
the City for oversizing the storm sewer? Is that his option that we ' ll
give him or is that . . .
Hempel : In this particular development , we 're looking at actually
probably both scenarios where the pond that 's being proposed in the
southwest corner of the site is achieving the City 's requirements for
water quality and quantity but yet , that will only cover western one-third
of the development . The remaining two-thirds of the development is left
untreated or unretained .
Ledvina : Would it be possible for him to const' uct a equalization pond
for that other two-thirds of the property?
Hempel : It would be but when we look down the road here at our overall
comprehensive storm water plan , this could be an island if you will , that
still is the old where we have maintenance ponds on site instead of being
a part of the overall network . Storm sewer network which drains to the
regional holding pond south . From our perspective , I guess we 'd like to
Planning Commission Meeting _
February 17 , 1993 - Page 2
see it be a part of this overall storm sewer network that we want to
incorporate with the comprehensive plan .
Ledvina: What do you think is most cost effective at this point in
time? For the developer . Obviously if you build ponds he 's going to lose
lots and things like that . You haven 't set the rates for this surcharge
or whatever . I 'm just , getting a feel for that at all? —
Hempel : That 's a very good question . I don 't think I have a real good
answer for you . We felt , just looking at it at this stage that by leaving_
the lots as temporary holding ponds until they 're dealt with in the
future , it gives the applicant some opportunity to come back and still
build and utilize those lots . Maybe the applicant tonight maybe will want
to respond to that a little bit further . What his desires would be .
Scott: Is there anymore comments from staff?
Hempel : Not from engineering .
Scott: Would the applicant or applicant 's representative wish to make —
some comments? And please state your name and your address , and spelling
of your name if it 's not intuitive .
Wayne Tauer : Thank you . My name is Wayne Tauer . That 's T-a-u-e-r . Not —
T-o-w-e-r naturally . I 'm from Pioneer Engineering and I represent the
Rottlund Company tonight . Couple of things just to expand a little bit on
what Dave has talked about . The pond that we 're presenting building in •-
that southwest corner was basically dictated to us by Mr . Ismael Martinez .
and as I understand it , this part of the master plan has been completed .
Therefore that 's why that pond is where it is and that 's why it 's the size_
it is . It 's part of the master plan , obviously and unfortunately most of
the water that goes into that particular pond is only approximately a
third our 's and two-thirds somebody else 's . Therefore , we 're building a
holding ponds and NURP treatment for other people . I guess our only
concern is the fact that if and when the master plan does get implemented
and all the pipes and drainageways are in place , that it be noted and
credited to our account so to speak . That we have been already assessed -.
so to speak . We built enough ponding and NURP treatment to handle
approximately I would say nearly 20 acres . Our site is 17 .2 so just so wc
are on record that we won 't be assessed again . And I guess also to
address some of the concerns of the Commission here tonight is , we will bE'
willing to temporarily take one , two or whatever it requires lots out of
the subdivision . Well , wrong term . Out of building the homes on those
particular lots . We 'd like to have the lots approved with the condition --
that when everything is settled and all the drainage is worked out , that
we can go back and then of course build on those particular lots . And
with an easement over them I think we 'll have to vacate that easement
ultimately when building plans and permits are issued . I guess that 's
really most , oh . There 's a couple other minor things . Should I run
through what our concerns are or do you want to just throw some things at
me? -.
Scott: Sure .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 3
Wayne Tauer : There were just a couple things . There was , I guess item
number 1 where they asked us to lower the street on the south end of
Windmill Drive . Certainly willing to do that . That 's not a problem . I
guess what we really need to do is get a little more topography and
project a vertical curve . We 've often run in our development 's experience
into roads that are poked out into space so to speak . And after that , you
— don 't know where they 're going . I guess just a little more topography
would really make more sense than just to say , raise it a foot and a half
or 2 feet or whatever it is . Okay? Leave it at that . Okay , good . Some
of the other things that we 're a little bit worried about . I know a new
condition showed up here tonight is about berming along the county road .
One of the things we 're worried about there is whether the county road
_ will remain as a rural section and will it have a ditch . If that 's so ,
then the berming is not a problem for us . If it does not remain a rural
section kind of design , berming in there may clog up or what we call are
positive overflow . As you see there is water coming from the property
from the north . If we don 't have a positive , we are extending some storm
sewer up there to pick up normal rainfalls you know . 2 to 5 year storms .
Anything beyond that , those storm pipes will not handle that volume .
Therefore it has to be able to flow overland without flooding somebody ,
specifically those two northwesterly lots . If berming is going to cause a
problem and block up our positive overflow , I guess we have a problem with
that . If it doesn 't and the rural section then we can maintain a natural
— swale that will reach that pond ultimately , then we ' ll definitely go along
with that and we can work that out I think between the engineering
department and ourselves .
Ledvina : Just a point on the berming . What would the , so the purpose of
the berming is to screen , to provide screening for the residents
from the traffic on CR 117?
Wayne Tauer : Agreed , right .
Ledvina : What would the height of the berm that would be required? I
guess I don 't have a feeling for what we 're talking about .
Olsen : We were talking like around 4 foot because of the width that even
would require is 24 feet . We were figuring at a 3: 1 slope . So I don 't
know that we could go with , with what 's there , I don 't think we could go
much higher than that .
Wayne Tauer : Well the real problem is also they want a 20 foot easement
for a bike trail . Now are we taking 20 feet off our land and then another
24? And are we now losing 44 feet or whatever it 's going to be off of
those lots? I don 't know if we can really aff all of that and still
build it .
Mancino: You are going to lose a little bit of that 40 . In the ordinance
in our city code landscape ordinance , in Section 18-61 , number 5 it says
landscape buffer around the exterior of the subdivision shall be required
by the City when the plat is contiguous with collector or arterial streets
as defined by the comprehensive plan? Required buffering shall consist of
berms and landscape material consisting of a mix of trees and shrubs . So
that 's where the berming came from .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 4
Wayne Tauer : Okay , thank you . —
Olsen: And we 'll have to be working with that because we have to massage
everything . There 's the 20 foot trail easement but within that trail
easement is the 8 foot bituminous trail . So we have room for berming .
Room for landscaping within that 20 foot easement , to a certain extent .
Plus there 's also the possibility that trail can actually be located in
County right-of-way , if they permit it so it can go in and out where —
there 's room or lack of room . So it 's one of those things we 're really
going to have to work on and we can 't be specific right now .
Wayne Tauer : Most people assume that berms have to be 3: 1 period . You
know , if it 's 4 foot , it 's 12 feet horizontally , 4 foot vertical . So on
and so forth . That isn 't necessarily so . Depending on how you treat the
berm and how you plant it . There are a number of ways to make berms —
higher without sticking with that 3: 1 . If you totally plant them with
ground covers and fairly densely populated plant materials , you can
certainly maintain a steeper slope , assuming that no one has to mow them —
everyday . And I also assume that those berms will be on private property
Therefore , it 'd be the responsibility of the maintenance of them to the
property owner who owns them . Therefore I assume they 're going to take
care of them and not try to mow them obviously if they 're mowable . So it
just depends on how we design that berm and how we plant it will also
determine the width of that particular berm , so . And there were lots of
ways . There 's even fencing I suppose . Opaque fencing of some sort . I •—
don 't know if that 's allowable in your city or not .
Olsen: We don 't prefer it .
Wayne Tauer : Not preferred , okay . But like you say , there 's options and
again , maybe we can work it out with the staff to make it fly .
Scott: But as far as the issues relative to berming and right-of-way and
storm sewer and so forth along CR 117 , staff does not see any issues that
cannot be resolved? I just want to make sure that this issue is not --
something that 's going to cause them to , or this project to be non-viable
for some reason . But I get the reason that you don 't see that as an
issue . Okay .
Hempel : I don 't think it will be an issue . The berming or landscaping
can be used also in the trail easement corridor . It also I 'm sure will
extend out into the properties though somewhat to a point .
Wayne Tauer : Oh yeah , agreed . Yeah , no problem there .
Hempel : We 're told because the landscaping will effect large trees , the
root systems and so forth on any kind of trail base that we put in there ,
plus hazards of limbs and tree trimming and so forth . So we 're going to
be careful of what plantings and where they 're located in relation to the--
trail .
Wayne Tauer : We just don 't want to restrict those two abutting lots to —
the point where they 're no longer viable lots . Although we do have fairl'
large setbacks there already . So I mean we made those lots obviously
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 5
larger than the standard lots . It 's just a matter of making sure that we
have at least a 50 or 60 foot building pad to put a nice house on .
Farmakes: What 's the City 's experience with maintaining private berm
areas? Or does the private individual maintaining the berm area? Has it
been good?
Olsen: The ones I 'm thinking of are the ones on Kerber . I don 't know
that it 's , I think on their side , on the interior side they do maintain
it . On the exterior side , I don 't know that . I think that we do . We end
up maintaining that .
Scott: It looks like they 're mowed up about as far as someone can safely
go so there 's usually a section of about 10 to 12 feet that doesn 't work .
And then I think , weren 't there a tremendous amount of pine trees at one
time? That ended up dying an untimely death .
—
Farmakes: I think they 're still there .
Olsen: Some of them , yeah . •
Farmakes: Where does the City define it 's responsibility on that berm
then? Property line?
—
Olsen: Typically yeah . The end of the right-of-way or beyond . Anything
beyond the trail easement we would not maintain .
—
Mancino: So if the landscaping and the trail easement . . .
— Olsen: Well I think we would make an accommodation that we wouldn 't be
responsible for that .
— Farmakes: But if we defined what the landscaping is , we should be
cognizant of maybe that part of it may not be taken care of so much .
Olsen: Right , and the landowner wouldn 't understand that that 's their 's .
Farmakes: Well not only that but physically it might be difficult for
them to maintain it . Particularly if you want to increase the grade of
it .
Wayne Tauer : Well if we increase the grade , there won 't be much
maintenance involved is the whole idea behind it . Is to put plant
materials in there that will not require a lot of maintenance . Especially
mowing , which is a weekly .
— Farmakes: That 's what I 'm saying .
Wayne Tauer : Right , which is a weekly problem .
Scott: Wayne , do you have any other comments that you 'd like to make as a
part of the public hearing?
Wayne Tauer : No , I guess that 's pretty much it . I 'll take your questions .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 6 —
Scott: Okay . Any questions from anyone that you 'd like to address to —
Wayne?
Ledvina : Does Rottlund , is it acceptable for them to pay the cost for the
oversized pipes that will be placed at a later date? As I understand the
is that something that we 're willing to do?
Wayne Tauer : I think so , as long as it 's a common denominator for
everybody . As I understand it , it 's an ordinance not in place presently .
It 's wishful thinking kinds of things and I know that Dave is looking for
that process and many other cities have that and why should Chanhassen be —
different right? You know , really . I mean it does make some sense . If
you can have regional ponding as opposed to these little potholes all ovet
creation , I mean that really is a pain to most developers and if the city
can go in and actually develop regional ponding areas where they make
sense , I think most developers will be in agreeance with that . Assuming
the assessment is reasonable and the City isn 't making necessarily a major
profit on the project . That it covers the cost and makes the system work —
no . I think Rottlund would be absolutely agreeable with that .
Farmakes : Do you have an idea of the square footage that they 're looking _
at building per lot? Square footage of the building .
Wayne Tauer : The square footage of the building?
Farmakes: Are you looking at a range for the development? Just curious .
Wayne Tauer : You 're talking to the wrong man unfortunately . I don 't know_
what they have in mind here . I 'm sure it 's $120's to $175 's . You know
I 'm just thinking . I shouldn 't even probably say that . I don 't know .
Farmakes: You 're talking price range . I 'm talking square footage .
Wayne Tauer : Square footage . Well , I mean they 're kind of related I
guess . No I don 't . I really don 't . We could certainly get that number --
to you . What they think will be coming in here but I don 't know .
Scott: Any other questions? Okay . Is there anyone else as a part of the
public hearing that would like to comment on this project? Okay , seeing
none , then can I have a motion to close the public hearing please?
Ledvina moved, Mancino seconded to close the public hearing . All voted i--
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Scott: Now we 'll , Diane if you 'd like to start with your comments . We --
started down here last week . Two weeks ago . Do you have any comments or
questions?
Harberts: Thank you Mr . Chair . I told you it was a long day . Maybe this'
is somewhere between a question and a comment with regard to the temporal-.
.
turn around easement . This is going to be an actual asphalt that 's laid
down . Are those two lots , Lot 1 of Block 3 and Lot 5 of Block 1 , are ther-
going to be available to be built on right away with that turn around
there?
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 7
Olsen: They could still be accommodated . Well Lot l 's going to have the
pond on it . We 've had that before where the lots , buildings can still be
located there and then , as Dave can explain , it 's just no curb . It 's just
asphalt that 's easily removed .
Hempel : The original permanent street is actually put in and what they do
is pave what I 'll call a tab outside to complete the radius for vehicles
to turn around so they 're not turning around in somebody 's driveway all
the time . It will be a little less grass for the homeowner to mow until
the street gets extended . When the street does get extended , the
homeowner will receive a sodded yard back where that pavement is . It will
be torn out by the next developer and resodded . Building setbacks would
be still from the property line , not the easement line so the setbacks
would remain the same .
Harberts: I feel a little bit that this is one of those situations where
this is plopped down and I guess his meridian that he used , what 's going
to happen around the other , you know surrounding it? Are we going to see
some plans for that? I mean we have this road . We have this group of
homes and we 're talking about sewer .
Hempel : I can expand on further west of this subdivision . As you may or
may notbe aware , Lundgren Bros have been before us with a preliminary
plat for quite a large subdivision but it 's further to the west , closer to
Trunk Highway 41 . There 's also some talk of another property owner , the
Song 's and also possibly Carlson 's getting together with Lundgren Bros
also and do a development on the west side of Galpin , slightly north of
this development . The applicant may want to expand on the potential , the
parcel north of this immediate development . There was some talk trying to
combine .
Harberts: Yeah , there 's a single family home just .
Wayne Tauer : Yes , there is one . The property owner himself lives up in
that northwest corner of that particular property but we have also looked
at that property and have actually had a sketch plan type design on it and
Rottlund is negotiating with the Davidson 's at this time to try to
purchase it . So it 'd be very nice if we could , I mean nothing guaranteed
at this point in time but .
Harberts: How many acres is it?
Wayne Tauer : It 's approximately the same size as this one . About 17
acres . Minus whatever that little corner is . That 's probably an acre out
of there . Maybe it 's around 15-16 acres . There is a wetland in the
northeast corner which you will have to obviously avoid but yeah , we 're
._ trying to expand this particular plat if we can .
Harberts : I think that 's it . Thank you .
Ledvina: Let 's see here . A couple of things . In the staff report on
page 3 , talking about grading and drainage . You say , I think this is
probably your piece Dave in the last sentence of the first paragraph .
Grades throughout the plat should not exceed 3: 1 slopes for maintenance
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 8
purposes . And when you say maintenance , do you mean the homeowner 's —
maintenance?
Hempel : That 's correct . I referred to this for like backyard areas and —
so forth . There was one particular area that appeared the slopes may have
been a little bit steeper than a 3: 1 . It was on the east side of the
development , Lots 3 and 4 , Block 1 where it appears the backyards were
fairly steep grades and it 's difficult to maintain vegetation also in some—
of
omeof those slopes when you increase the grades beyond 3: 1 .
Ledvina : Okay , so for the homeowners benefit you 're suggesting that? —
Hempel : That 's correct .
Ledvina : And then the pond . You suggest that the volume be increased by
1 .2 acre feet . Is that easily done with the area that they have to work
with?
Hempel : That number came .
Ledvina : It just means deepening the pond correct? —
Hempel : Essentially , yes .
Ledvina: Okay . And then there was a suggestion that related to the
placement of draintile behind the curbs to prevent or to provide some
drainage for sump pump water and things like that . Would these draintiles
be connected to the catch basins and such? Is that how that would work?
Hempel : That 's correct . We 'd like to network it with the storm sewer
system . Soil borings that were taken throughout the development here ,
there was one particular area that showed kind of a high ground water , or
water table elevation where similar areas of the city have experienced ,
the homeowners have experienced sump pumps that run pretty continuous
throughout the day and during the winter months they also continue to run ;-
And to discharge outside creates a big ice build-up and with the
homeowners , well in the summertime it creates a very wet and spongy yard
and homeowners usually extend the draintile then out to the city street . —
And during the wintertime and ice build-ups and it becomes a real hazard
for both traffic and pedestrians . Lately the city crews have been
actually going out and repairing a number of these isolated areas around __
the city and we 're trying to implement now with the construction of these
new developments where we know up front where we can anticipate water
problems to try to correct them in advance . We have a similar development
where they actually stubbed out individual services to run to the house --
for the draintile . Some basket to connect into because of the high water
table . It 's worked fairly well . Most of the time homeowners , if they
can 't discharge it outside , or if it gets the yard wet and so forth , a lot-
of times they ' ll just discharge it down into the sewer system within the
house which is illegal and it 's bad for the city from an infiltration
standpoint . The City pays an annual fee based on how much sewage goes to
the MWCC and by having all these sump pumps hooked up to it , it just make(-
our utility rates increase annually which is in turn passed onto the
homeowners through rate increases .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 9
Ledvina: Okay , so the City is actually , in certain problem areas , the
City is actually constructing these drains behind the curb as a remedial
technique to avoid these problems?
Hempel : In some of the areas we have , we 've worked with the homeowners
and/or the builders/developers to go back and pay us to do that work . So
it 's much easier to do it now as a part of the initial road construction
than having to go back and tear up the boulevards and restore yards and
driveways . So it 's a better situation this way .
Ledvina : Is there a maintenance concern to keep these drains free flowing
over the long term? Are there clean-outs and that type of thing?
Hempel : There are clean-outs . Spaced approximately at about hundred
feet , hundred foot intervals .
Ledvina : So that 's flush with the surface?
Hempel : That 's correct , yeah . So far we 've had draintile systems put in
for a little over 2 years now and we 've had no problems with freezing or
clogging or crushing of the pipe .
Ledvina : Okay . Let 's see . Okay , I think that 's all I have for my
comments at this time .
Scott: Great . Jeff .
Farmakes: I think I 'll make a couple of statements . One , I think that
the applicant can come forward with the solution if that 's agreeable to
the engineering firm to solve the temporary problems along the highway .
I 'm not I guess going to hand out any awards here for the lot development .
It meets all the requirements of the city and I think that it serves a
need to have a range of prices . Square footage of homes and so on . It
worries me a little bit that when we place developments out in the middle
of nowhere , we 're not quite sure what 's going to go in there later on . We
have a general idea I guess if we turn to our master plan but that part is
really handled by private enterprise and development . That particular
part is handled by the property owners with some guidance from the city
but we 're not defining how big the houses are . We 're just defining what
the minimums are . We 're not defining how big the yards are going to be .
Just how little they 're going to be . It seems to me kind of an odd mix
from some of the surrounding properties that I hear are being developed
out there , but maybe that 's good . Maybe that 's good that we have a range
of development . To each his own .
Olsen: This is also little pieces that there is , you can 't really do too
many fun things with it .
Farmakes: Right . It 's a small , and I think once we start developing
more , our flat farmland , we 're going to find more and more of that . I
think in the last year or so we 've been seeing odd topography type
developments where they 're been doing a lot of contouring and around trees
and trying to save certain areas and I hope we continue some of that
creative development . And I know that we don 't have ordinances requiring
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 10
that but this is a small development and I think it meets the requirements_
that we have on the books . I ' ll leave it at that .
Mancino: I agree with that . Thanks Jeff for bringing that up . . . .rolling
terrain right there and I live on Galpin and this is the first development
that 's going to be let 's say . . . Just one little question . Jo Ann , we
have a problem . Now I know that it 's still nebulous about how the trail
and how the berming and everything is going to work . If the berming is or-
private property , can we still guide the plantings for landscaping?
Olsen: Well , sure because that 's still , they 're still responsible for _
providing that along Galpin . It always is on the private property with
the landscaping .
Mancino: So . . .wanting more massive plantings than just the rows . . .and —
guided that way?
Olsen: Right , and that 's something that in your condition , if you want to-
add 20 , that instead of just row you can . . .
Mancino: Okay . That 's all I have . Thank you .
Scott : Okay . The questions that I had have been addressed by the other
members of the Planning Commission . So do I have a motion?
Ledvina : I have one more question . Jo Ann , you suggested adding , or did
you suggest adding an additional condition as it related to the utilities
being available to this site?
Olsen: Well that 's in there . But the one I did suggest was that , there 's
nothing in there about being provided easements for the temporary ponding
on Lots 1 and Lots 3 and 4 . That does need to be added . —
Ledvina : Okay .
Olsen: I don 't know if you have a good way of wording that , or can it be
added to one of the other conditions perhaps .
Scott : Or is that something that we 'd be more comfortable putting
together a motion after some of these issues have been developed in
writing with staff doing that and then revisit it? Or is this something
that we 're comfortable with acting on right now?
Ledvina : I think if it 's an easement issue and the developer is willing
to grant those easements , I think that can be worked out with staff . —
Scott : Okay , so that 's something we could act on today .
Ledvina : Yeah , I think so . —
Harberts: Mr . Chair . Also , with the point that was brought up with
landscaping with berming . Is that something then that staff will address —
and bring back your recommendation if that should be included or not? As
part of the landscping .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 11
Olsen: Well the way I , what we were suggesting is that you would just add
that they shall provide a landscaping plan which provides landscaping
species and berming recommended by staff .
Scott : Okay , so we just an amendment to item 20?
Olsen: Right . And so that it would not come back to you .
Wayne Tauer : Would we be locked into that city list of plant materials?
Olsen: That 's what this recommendation is . What we 're saying is that
half of them be from there .
Wayne Tauer : Half of them? Oh , okay . We have some options .
Mancino: Then I ' ll go ahead and move that we approve the Rezoning #93-1
to rezone 17 .2 acres from A2 , Agricultural Estates to RSF , Residential
Single Family with the following conditions , 1 and 2 as stated in the
report .
Ledvina : Second .
Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Rezoning #93-1 to rezone 17.2 acres from A2, Agricultural
Estates to RSF , Residential Single Family with the following conditions:
1 . The rezoning will not be final until the final plat has been approved
and recorded and utilities service the site .
2 . All conditions of preliminary and final plat must be met .
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Ledvina : I 'd like to move that the Planning Commission recommend that the
City Council approve Subdivision #93-4 for the Windmill Run subdivision
subject to the staff conditions with the following amendments and
additions . The first condition shall read as per the staff report with
the additional statement to read , additional contour data shall be
obtained to optimize the vertical alignment of Windmill Drive . And
amendment of condition 20 . An addition to read , a landscaped soil berm
shall also be included subject to the staff review . And adding a 22nd
condition to read , drainage easements must be granted for the pond located
in the southwest corner and other temporary ponding areas as necessary .
Scott : Is there a second to the clarification of items number 1 , 20 and
the addition of items 22?
Harberts: Second .
Scott : It 's been moved and seconded . Is there any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Harberts seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #93-4 for the Windmill Run subdivision with the
following conditions:
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 12 —
1 . Elevation of the southerly cul-de-sac should be adjusted to provide —
better grade continuity for the future extension of Windmill Drive tc
the south , and additional contour data shall be obtained to optimize
the vertical alignment of Windmill Drive .
2 . The water quality/retention pond proposed in the southwest corner of
the development shall be increased to provide a wet volume of 1 .2
acre/feet . In addition , an outlet restricting flows shall be limite&
to 4 .5 cfs at the high water level .
3 . The applicant shall design and construct temporary holding ponds for —
storm runoff on Lot 1 , Block 1 and Lots 4 and 5 , Block 3 to maintain
the pre-developed runoff conditions . In addition , the applicant
shall pay into the City 's Surface Water Management Program for future
downstream water quality improvements . The specific amount will be
determined by the City 's storm water consultant .
4 . The applicant shall pay the appropriate storm water trunk fee to be —
determined by the City 's storm water management consultant to
contribute towards the future extension of storm sewer downstream .
—
5 . All street and utility improvements shall be constructed in
accordance with the City 's 1993 edition of Standard Specifications
and Detail Plates . Street construction shall also include a drain
tile system behind the curb to accommodate household sump pump
discharge .
6 . The applicant shall submit storm drainage and ponding calculations —
verifying the pipe sizing and pond volumes . The storm sewer shall be
designed and constructed to handle 10 year storm events . Retention
ponds shall be constructed to NURP standards as well as maintain the _
surface water discharge rate from the subdivision at predeveloped
runoff conditions for a 100 year , 24 hour storm event . Drainage
plans shall be consistent with the City of Chanhassen 's Best
Management Practice Handbook . —
7 . The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from
the regulatory agencies such as the MPCA , Health Department , —
Watershed District , DNR and Caver County Highway Department .
8 . Prior to the City signing the final plat , the applicant shall enter
into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary —
financial security to guarantee construction of the public
improvements and compliance of the conditions of approval . The
development contract will be subject to City Council approval . —
9 . The applicant shall provide at a minimum a right turn lane along
County Road 117 and any other improvements required by the Carver _
County Highway Department .
10 . Both temporary cul-de-sacs that are proposed for future extension
shall be provided with a turnaround 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 .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 13
Imo
11 . The preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the City Council
ordering the public improvement project No . 92-5 for the trunk
sanitary sewer and water improvements through the development .
12 . The applicant shall dedicate the necessary drainage and utility
easement for the extension of the trunk sanitary sewer and possible
storm sewer over Lot 1 , Block 1 .
13 . Lot grades throughout the development shall not exceed 3: 1 slopes .
14 . The applicant shall dedicate temporary street easements for those
areas of the temporary cul-de-sacs outside the dedicated
right-of-way .
15 . Indicate lowest floor elevations and garage floor elevations for each
house pad on the grading plan .
16 . Submit details on corrected pads including compaction tests , limits
of the pad and elevations of excavations to the Inspections Division .
A general soils report for the development should also be submitted
to the Inspections Division .
17 . A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants , i .e .
street lamps , trees , shrubs , NSP and Northwestern Bell , cable boxes ,
pursuant to city ordinance .
18 . No housing construction beyond Lots 12 , 13 , 16 , 17 may start until
fire apparatus access roads are provided . These access roads shall
be designed to the City of Chanhassen Engineering standards , and meet
the approval of the Chanhassen Fire Department pursuant to Uniform
Fire Code 1988 Edition , Section 10 .20( f ) .
19 . The street named "76th Street West" is unacceptable and must be
renamed . The reason being that the city already has a 76th Street
and 76 does not line up with the city 's grid map system.
20 . The applicant shall submit an amended landscaping plan which provides
landscape species recommended by staff . A landscaped soil berm shall
also be included subject to the staff review.
21 . Meet conditions of the Park and Recreation Commission .
22 . Drainage easements must be granted for the pond located in the
southwest corner and other temporary ponding areas as necessary .
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 14
PUBLIC HEARING:
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 16,410 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE FACILITY ON —
PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF PARK PLACE AND PARK ROAD, LOT 3, BLOCK 1 .
CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 5TH ADDITION, MARK UNDESTAD/EDEN TRACE
CORPORATION, TECHNICAL INDUSTRIAL SALES .
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Undestad 8800 Sunset Trail --
Richard Andresen Representing PMT Corp
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item . Acting Chairman
Scott called the public hearing to order .
Richard Andresen: I 'm Richard Andresen . My last name is Andresen . I 'm (-
resident
resident of Savage , Minnesota . I 'm Plant Manager for PMT Corporation and
like she pointed out , I would like to see them also add their own
landscaping , and not just utilize our current landscape . He 's right next —
to it right now the way he shows it and I 'd like to see some more of his
own landscaping being put in there . That 's what I 'd like to state .
Scott : Okay , and then so you basically agree with the condition that are
there?
Richard Andresen: Yes . Yes , definitely . •
Farmakes: Which side are you connected?
Scott : You 're the existing building correct?
Richard Andresen: Yeah . I 'm the existing landscape that they 're showing
now . PMT Corporation .
Scott : Good . Any other comments as part of the public hearing? Yes ,
Councilman Wing . --
Richard Wing: Richard Wing , Chan City Council . I just wanted to again
hit the landscaping because so many times on the last buildings that have _
come in on the last issues that we 've dealt with at City Council , they 've
come through staff , through Planning Commission and they 've sort of been
good but then we get them and we wondered why they 're not a little better .
And then suddenly I say , we want more trees and then everybody says , oh
no. It winds up going back so I 'd like the applicant to take this
landscaping issue very seriously so that when it gets to Council , I don 't
have to say it 's inadequate . I 'd like them to come in as a good corporate-
citizen . Understand what landscaping means to the city . Recognize the
fact that we are working on a new landscape ordinance that 's going to be
extensively higher I hope than we have now . Demand much more trees . Much
more landscaping . And we have to start now so being there 's TIF money
involved , I think staff supports getting this thing going . I 'd like
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 15
Planning Commission to be aware of that and just a personal comment to the
applicant again , repeating myself , that we want some trees and we want
some overstory . We want this to get into kind of an urban forest setting
and I agree , it 's inadequate and I think Sharmin and the staff are pushing
it . I think we want to push even a little harder and so if this is to run
smoothly when it gets to me at Council , it would behoove the applicant to
really seriously look at the landscape plan and come in with a really good
one . I 'd appreciate if he 'd put that effort into it .
Scott: Good , thank you . Is the applicant here or a representative of the
applicant that would like to address the Planning Commission?
Mark Undestad: My name is Mark Undestad with Eden Trace , the builder .
Reviewing everything here you know that we will indeed do quite a bit more
landscaping on that site . This was kind of a fast pace plan put together
here . The question that I have is , on the rooftop screening , you say a
parapet wall . Is that around the entire building or parapet something
around the individual rooftop units?
Al-Jaff : Around the entire building so that if you were from any of the
adjoining streets , or the streets within the area , you won't be able to
see the rooftop equipment or if you are at one of the neighboring
buildings .
Mark Undestad: So the rooftop screens themselves , I mean there 's from an
economic standpoint there 's a big difference to put a parapet wall around
the entire building versus screening in the rooftop units themselves on
there . I think what we 're looking at was like a parapet , or like a screen
just screening the units themselves in there .
Al-Jaff : We could do that . You haven 't shown us any type of rooftop
equipment so .
Mark Undestad: Okay . I thought you said that you wanted something to ,
parapet just to phrase exactly that . You put a parapet wall around the
entire unit . Am I missing something?
Al-Jaff : That is our preference . However , we could work with other
solutions . Other alternatives .
Mark Undestad: Okay . We ' ll get this together for you on there? The
parking stalls , the one on the upper right hand corner there . Yeah , that
might be a little tight backing in and out of there . However , the one on
the other corner , that one yeah . On the left side , that area back there
is not set up for tractor trailer traffic . It 's strictly a van door , drop
door so that we wouldn 't have any large trucks going back in there and
trying to maneuver around back in that corner . So I don 't think that
really we would have to eliminate that rear stall back there . The loading
docks are in the , or a loading dock is in the front side for the tractor
trailer traffic .
Hempel : I believe when we did look at it though , we 're still going to
have some conflict . When you pull in , there 's not much room for you to be
able to back up to that parking or to that loading dock with a utility
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 16
type van . We had some concerns there . I guess if you can demonstrate
turning radius or whatever , that you can accommodate your turning
vehicles , that might be a solution too . But we 're looking at also a
future use I guess . Will it always be a utility type function or maybe it
will be expanded to a larger type . Small tractor type trailer operation —
that may utilize that stall . Then at that time there would be no parking
there and then you would be deficient of a parking stall , according to the
ordinance . —
Mark Undestad: Okay . Well we can run that through engineering and let
them see how that would work out in there . Really everything else that
we 've looked at on here is fine . We 'll take care of it .
Harberts : I 'd like to ask a couple questions of the applicant . How many
people do you look to employ at this facility? —
Mark Undestad: Right now they employ 10 on site . The majority of their
space is warehouse , shipping and receiving . What they plan to increase by_
increasing their size here , I don 't know . Technical Industrial Sales
wasn 't available to show up tonight . They 're out of town here but like
I say , right now they employ 10 people at their current facility . They
have several sales associates out in the 5 state area but part of this —
process is an increase in space and I 'm sure they ' ll be looking to bring
on a couple more bodies anyway .
Scott : Any other comments from the public regarding this item? I 'd like
to have a motion to close the public hearing please .
Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mancino : I have just a clarification for Sharmin . Would you put the ,
light up the overhead again . On that northwest corner , you show losing
one stall but we 're actually going to lose two . Or there are going to be
two eliminated on that northwest corner correct? That 's what you had —
down in your , so there 's going to be a total of 3 parking spaces . . .
Al-Jaff : Correct .
Mancino: I just wanted to make sure . So they will need to redo a whole
parking lot schematic , or whatever you call it to show you how . . .
Al-Jaff : Correct .
Mancino: That are needed by the City Code . Okay . Oh I know . What I _
would like to take a second and just show the other commissioners a
building used of the similar rock faced concrete block that I saw in my
travels this week . I think Sharmin came up with a good idea for having a
little bit of different detail and having some glazing tile . This —
particular building uses brick as it 's detail running through it . And
actually . . . little bit of brick detail over the windows also so it
architecturally has a little more going on to it . I just would like any —
discussion about some other architectural enhancements we could make to
this building .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 17
Harberts: Sharmin , why did you suggest going?
'- Al-Jaff : It was just a suggestion .
Harberts: I just wondered if there was a specific reason .
Al-Jaff: No . Not at all .
Farmakes: This structure is meeting the requirements the City 's proposed ,
correct? As it is currently being proposed . This isn 't a TIF .
Al-Jaff: It 's a TIF site .
Farmakes: It is .
Al-Jaff : It could benefit from some architectural .
—
Farmakes: The applicant mentioned that he was rushed to put this
together . Is this , I 'm assuming that what we 're looking at here is the
building that 's being proposed . Is that what we have? I guess what I
wanted to clarify is what we 're looking at here is a site plan review but
does this mean that the buildings could change later or you 're changing
— the roof?
Mark Undestad: This kind of shows a little bit more of how the break-ups
— are to using various types of block and little different looks . Technical
Industrial Sales wanted something real simple and clean looking . On the
other hand I know most cities . . .so we 're kind of in the middle here . What
I did here was get something with the accent line that would break up
along here using . . .to get the accent line down here . And then basically
just . . .variations of block . It gives it a little . . .what the owner would
like is similar to the Dayco concrete block . . .These were Federal Expressed
down to him . They were supposed to be there Monday for his approval and
get back to us Tuesday . Federal Express didn 't get it there on time .
This is what we have . I did talk to him today and we did make a change .
Above these windows we had this lighter accent color above all the
—
windows . . .tone that down a bit . . .
Harberts: There isn 't really a whole lot you can do with warehouses .
i
Farmakes: Sure there is . I guess my response is , citizens or a partner ,
it gives you a little more leeway to put input into it . The problem that
we have with industrial buildings is you almost feel guilty adding on
anything to it . It still ignores the fact that the building 's going to be
here for 20-30 years . Dick 's comments are well taken . I think that not
only will additional landscaping be more pleasant to look at but it will
— help hide the building . I think that the applicant has probably come
forward and said that they don 't think it 's an architectural wonder but it
serves it 's purpose . I guess if we want to add something more to that , I
— know it seems like the neighbors , the industrial neighbors that you have
here are somewhat concerned . I know PMT has a nice facility . Very nice
building next door . Is there a reason why the City and some of the
commercial structures that I know have bricks up the roofline . We 've been
—
talking about doing that , at least in the entrance areas of the building .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 18
Is there a reason why we didn 't push for that here? Or we didn 't feel it —
was necessary .
Al-Jaff : They meet the minimum standards of . —
Farmakes: And that gets back to a philosophical thing . I mean it 's an
unfortunate thing that you don 't want to wind up living in a community of
minimums but it still is reality of an ordinance . If you have a minimum —
that you meet , and it 's up to the applicant to go beyond that .
Mancino: Plus it 's not on a main road . I mean it 's not like it 's on —
Highway 5 . . .
Farmakes: That 's correct . And it 's a different relationship . I guess if
you have a company that comes next door and decides to invest serious
money and build a nice structure . On the same hand I guess they know
building that building that their development next door might meet the
minimum requirement . But I 'm wondering what more can be done to that —
building . It wouldn 't take much more to incorporate some of the stuff
that we talk about .
Ledvina: The one thing that we have to do is provide screening of the
roof equipment and talked about the parapet wall . Perhaps that can be
used to give the thing more of a broken roofline . Perhaps in the front of
the building or Park Road or something , that could be just the height of —
the roof and then beyond the entranceway and the back two-thirds you coulc
have a parapet cut across the roof . You know , I don 't know but then
again , if the equipment is back there and that would give it a broken roof-
line anyway . I mean you 've got to do the screening . Maybe you could takf
advantage of that aspect of the modification that 's required and give it a
better look . —
Scott : Diane , do you have some comments?
Harberts: I pass . —
Scott : Sharmin you were going to .
Al-Jaff: The west elevation of the building is also one large span of
wall . One way this could be addressed is by landscaping . Massing
landscaping where we have walls . Or by adding windows . That would be the
third elevation .
Scott : Basically where we 're at is that the building as proposed meets
the minimum standards . I 'm assuming there will be equipment . HVAC —
equipment and so forth on , so that 's a given so there will be some sort 01
parapet structure . You have to make the determination , I mean obviously
you know what we 'd like to see but then you also know what the minimums —
are . I think what the Planning Commission is all about is expressing what
we 'd like to see as a vision of a particular part of the city . But you 'rc
well aware of the minimums and you also know what you are legally required
to do . But the bottom line is that you obviously have to put together a
project that is going to meet the requirements of your customer . But I
think you know what we 're trying to say . We 'd like to have this look as
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 19
nice as we possibly can and we also expect that you 're going to be a good
neighbor , because we obviously , the people at PMT have made a significant
MEP investment in the city . And I think that 's the end of my editorial
comment . Are there any other , Diane?
Harberts: I have a question . Where are the trash bins or waste
receptacles going to be kept?
Mark Undestad: They 'll be inside . . .
Harberts: So the garbage truck will come in and back up to a loading
dock? That 's it .
—
Farmakes: I have an addition . I think in the past we 've shown a little
bit more aggressiveness in asking more than the minimum when there has
been community investment within the structures . I think that does give
— us an opportunity to ask for more . This particular structure is actually
quite a bit in shape and appearance like Target , and many of the things
that we discussed and issues of Target I think are also applicable here .
Just because , as I said , just because it 's an industrial area does not
mean that they don 't have neighbors and neighbors that are concerned about
what their structures look like . This particular case I think we have an
_ applicant who , it 's a warehouse . You know , that 's what it is . It 's a
warehouse and it doesn 't need to look like anything more than a warehouse .
I think we should take advantage of the fact that it is a partnership
arrangement and that we should try to resolve some of those problems .
— Aesthetic problems . I don 't think throwing a few tiles on concrete block
resolves that issue . Maybe dealing with accenting the entrance structure
or changing the so the plane of the roof is broken , perhaps you can
- incorporate that with your covering . Your screening . Yeah , I guess I
have reservations about putting wood boxes on top of buildings too so
that , to help you with this , that hasn 't went very far in the last 3-4
years . Getting away with that so I think the site plan is fine with the
reservations that you have about the parking . And I agree with Dick . If
failing that , if you 're not serious about that , and changing the structure
of that to try and blend in a little bit better , and certainly an
— investment . When you 're looking at square footage of the building , we 're
on the entrance . You can certainly do something there . A portion too , I
think what your expenditures are on the building , it should be a
percentagewise small . The issue of the landscaping , at least you can
hide what else you have there .
Mancino: Jeff , what about the windows? Putting some on that west side or
— else making the windows longer . More vertical . It has more of a
proportion .
Farmakes: Well most buildings of this structure usually have the larger
windows by the entrance of the office sections of the building . They
don 't have large picture windows in the warehouse area . You can sort of
— see where that begins and ends . The security concerns there are certainly
valid and the warehousing . It does however add additional cost to add
windows also . So I think that 's part of the concern here as well . This
building costs and that 's reflected on the plan .
Planning Commission Meeting —
February 17 , 1993 - Page 20
Mancino: It 's also the minimum allowed . —
Farmakes: Yes . It 's just a question of what 's reasonable to request from
the client . What do you maximize out? If they firm up the edge there —
and fill it up with trees , you may not be seeing those windows . It 's a
question of what they come back with I guess .
Scott : Jo Ann , or Sharmin , what 's the value of this structure? From the —
TIF standpoint . How much TIF money 's involved here?
Al-Jaff: I don 't know . —
Scott: Okay . That 's .
Olsen: Todd Gerhardt .
Scott: A Gerhardt question . Okay . Do we have any other comments?
Al-Jaff : One more thing . Another way of accenting the building is over
the windows , just like Commissioner Mancino mentioned earlier . . .that
should be a condition of approval . —
Mark Undestad: . . .was too busy and he wanted us to . . .
Farmakes: One of the things that contrasting material , we very rarely
ever see materials in here . You can bet your bottom dollar that when this
architect finished , he brought in material to sell this plan . That 's the
way architects operate . They come in , they show you materials . They have-
material samples and they 're explaining it as part of the process
explaining what the building 's going to look like . We never see that
stuff here and it often , in this case with industrial buildings , you will —
have different facia pre-cast or block but when you look at it from 100
feet , you can 't tell the difference . You just can 't see the difference
and basically if you find out what that block costs per block , there is no
difference . They 're the same priced block . They 're just slightly —
different facia on it . So the question is sometimes when you 're requirinc
different materials , is it a different color? Is it running vertically
and the rest horizontal? Just because it 's a different material doesn 't —
necessarily make it a detail .
Olsen: I think that you were saying that you had proposed this color _
above the windows . . .
Mark Undestad: Right , and . . .already and that did give it a totally
different look . Like I say , the owner 's requesting . . .too busy . —
Mancino: It would be helpful in the future to see actual samples every
time somebody presented . —
Farmakes: The way to make it least busy would be to paint the entire
building black and have a smooth surface on it . But you know , not to be
facetious but it 's obvious that we 're not making a Sistine Chapel out of —
the warehouse . I don 't think we should require it but it should require
—
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 21
an effort to come to a reasonable attractiveness in relationship to your
neighbors .
Scott : Jeff , are you suggesting another condition to the ones already
proposed by staff relative to seeing exterior plans?
—
Farmakes: Should we be more specific and ask what your feeling there as
to what , how you can incorporate that with the screening?
Al-Jeff : We could . But if you would like to add a condition that would
improve the architecture .
Farmakes: Well we could list detailing an area particularly around the
entrance to the building . And the issues of landscaping , I 'm not sure
how , you know Dick often gets in there and wrestles with , if you 're
proposing 12 trees , he wants 24 . I 'm not sure how , since we don 't have a
—
detailed plan here , how do you want to approach that? We have a very
minimal landscape plan here as a part of this proposal .
— Scott : Is it our consensus that we need more information before we can
approve this subject to conditions? Is that what we 're saying here? Do
we have enough information to say yes or no?
Farmakes: I would like to work out those things prior to it going to City
Council . Or at least that 's the idea I got in the recommendation . It may
be to the applicant 's benefit for us to work this stuff out rather than
— you get hung up on that end .
Scott : Are you working , is there a short fuse here? What 's the deal
here? When does this have to be done? What 's on your back?
Mark Undestad: We 're looking to make , what the deal is where they 're at .
The State has bought their facility in Eden Prairie . . .break ground here ,
we 're looking for the Council March 8th and then break ground any time
after that .
Scott : So when do they have to be out of their building in Eden Prairie?
Mark Undestad: They have June 15th right now . They have to be out of
there .
Scott : Okay . So basically what has to happen is this baby 's got to be
done before June 15th? Now that 's significant information .
—
Harberts: When did the State buy them out? Was it for the 212?
— Mark Undestad: No , this is part of the school , elementary school .
Harberts: Do you know when they bought them out?
—
Mark Undestad: The whole deal was just finalized maybe a month and a half
ago . Two months .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 22 —
Harberts: Do you know how long they were involved in negotiations? I was-
at a meeting this morning and MnDot was there and to me it sounded like it
was an extensive negotiation process and I 'm just , I guess I raise the
question , did they wait until the last minute to start this ball rolling? —
Mark Undestad: They did in Chanhassen . They had a project that they were
doing in Eden Prairie and . . .one of the realtors in the area here
approached him and put this deal together out in Chanhassen . . . —
Scott : So you 're going to build this thing in 90 days?
Mark Undestad: Yep .
Farmakes : I take that back , it may be 12 years .
Scott: Pardon me?
Farmakes: It may be a life expectancy of 12 years . —
Scott: Alright . So your plan is you 're going to break ground on March
8th? —
Mark Undestad: Or there about 's , yeah .
Scott : Okay .
Olsen: There is a possibility of bringing it back on the 3rd . March 3rd
and still having it on the 8th . We 've done that with exceptions where yoy-
pay Nann to do the Minutes fast . The next day . So we can still get it
out to the Council .
Mark Undestad: The stuff , the recommendations that you 're making here for+
this to be approved here .
Al-Jaff: With the addition of what the Planning Commission is requestinc-
which is breaking the entryway .
Olsen: I think the Planning Commission is saying they want to see it —
again rather than just passing it on .
Scott: Yeah . I think we 're going to get backwards on next meeting versus_
the Council meeting aren 't we?
Olsen: It 's March 3rd .
Scott : Our next meeting is the 3rd and the Council meeting .
Olsen: Is the 8th . —
Scott: Is the 8th , okay . I think we need to see this again . What do you
guys think? Yes?
Ledvina: Unfortunately yes .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 23
Scott : Is that why they call it architorture? Is that how that works?
Can I have a motion then? I 'm sorry , did you have a comment? This is
like an auction .
Farmakes: I 'm wondering , do you have an idea on the landscaping what
you 're proposing or are you looking for the number of trees or are you
looking to re-attack this problem?
Mark Undestad: . . .enough trees in the landscaping . . . The landscaping was
put on there . . .took in , wherever they get their information from the city
and it is the minimum. I disagree with you that this is the minimums . Any
building I put up , the landscaping . . .we 'll do that on the plan to show you
that the landscaping . . . We ' ll screen up this west wall a great deal .
We ' ll do . . .fence around the front or rock . . .and I apologize it 's not on
this plan . . .we will show what the landscaping will be .
Farmakes: How flat is the topography on that one side?
Mark Undestad: Real flat .
Farmakes: Pancake flat huh?
Ols.� One of the things we could maybe suggest for the landscaping is
similar to what we did with Rottlund where we had those primary species .
That they take the majority of the plantings of the trees , take that
list . . .and make sure you just don 't get Lindens and Ash .
Farmakes : Well and the other thing . Something with some substance that 's
going to be solid throughout the year . Either some , to break up that mass
there and even with the primary species , you 're still , you 're not going to
get a lot of coverage there .
Olsen: Well we have that recommended . . .
Mancino: Are there any evergreens on this plan?
Scott: Oh yeah . There 's all sorts of , I 'm not an arborists or anything
but . Fir , spruce and pine .
Mancino: . . .way over on , I want to say the east side of the property .
The existing pines and the existing firs I 'm sorry are really on PMT 's
property .
Ledvina: Well I would move that the Planning Commission continue Site
Plan Review #93-1 until the March 3 , 1993 meeting .
Farmakes: Second .
Scott: It 's been moved and seconded that we revisit this item at the next
meeting .
Ledvina moved, Farmakes seconded to table Site Plan Review #93-1 on an
office/warehouse facility for Technical Industrial Sales until the next
Planning Commission meeting . All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 24
NEW BUSINESS: --
Mancino: I have a question from staff or Commissioners . As Richard Wing ,
Councilman Wing told you , the Tree Board is just getting going . It 's up _
and running . We 've had two meetings and we will be starting in March to
look at the landscaping ordinance . Taking it apart and rewriting it . Anc
also the landscaping and subdivision city code . So that if you could by
our next meeting , give me , write down , call me , anyplace within the —
ordinance that you would like to see changed . You can be very general .
You can be very specific . Or if there are areas that are not in the
ordinance that should be that you would like addressed , maybe parking _
lots , just write it down . Give me a little note and then we can after the
beginning of re-writing of ordinances . . .
Farmakes: Are you going to the parking lot conference?
Scott: Any other new business?
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Scott : Everybody 's read the Minutes of the last meeting so I 'll ask for a
motion to approve the Minutes of the last Planning Commission .
Farmakes moved, Harberts seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting dated February 3, 1993 as presented. All voted in --
favor and the motion carried.
Scott: I don 't see any other items . Any items for open discussion? —
Ledvina : Just one other thing . Do you have anything from Paul here that
you wanted to talk about? Report from the Director? Okay . And the _
moratorium is dead?
Scott : Yes , it is .
Ledvina : Okay .
Farmakes: I have a question about the folks at Goodyear . I assume in —
short succession we should see one from Abra . Very shortly after that ,
probably one from Crown Auto .
Scott : You mean Goodyear? —
Farmakes: No , I think Crown Auto probably will follow shortly after Abra .
I think that 's what they 're shooting for as far as getting that third —
building in there . At least that was the general discussion at one time .
You were involved with that , did you think that that was resolved
admirably or is that? _
Al-Jaff : As far as the third site?
Farmakes: No , not the third site . I was talking about that particular —
development and that particular area in general . There were three
buildings , one of which the City Council gave approval to .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 25
Al-Jaff: Which was Goodyear .
Farmakes: Correct . Some of the many things that we talked about on that
building , do you think that those issues were resolved or they solve it by
just saying , build it in brick?
Al-Jaff : Well , they did resolve most of the issues such as additional
landscaping . Additional dormers . They did require that th=_ building be
brick . So all the issues were resolved . Everything that you pointed out
at the Planning Commission has been addressed by the City Council and
resolved .
Farmakes: But essentially the last revision that we looked at is
essentially just being in brick , correct?
Al-Jaff: Correct .
Farmakes: I mean they 're not adding dormers anywhere and they 're not
changing?
Al-Jaff : Yes they did .
Farmakes : Oh they did add that?
Al-Jaff : Yes , they did add .
Farmakes: The site plan review though is coming back . Is that the
signage for that particular building or all three or just the pylon?
Al-Jaff : It would be a package for the three sites . . .and as it looks ,
it 's a lot better than what the first initial design was . Definitely a
lot better . It 's got a combination of a mansard and a pitched roof . It 's
a block , concrete block building . It has , the garage doors are recessed
underneath the pitched elements so that is kind of different and
interesting I thought than what we had before . The east elevation is one
big bland wall . There 's nothing on it and we are requesting additional
architectural elements be incorporated to that .
Farmakes: Is there a reason why that 's not coming to the Planning
Commission or is that not part?
Sam
Al-Jaff : Because of your recommendation of approval , you requested
additional dormers . Improve the design and then send it .
Farmakes : For Goodyear?
Al-Jaff : No , for Abra .
Farmakes: For Abra , okay .
Al-Jaff : And send it to the City Council and that 's why .
Farmakes: I thought they had pulled that and we 're going to start all
over again .
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 26 —
Al-Jaff: No . —
Farmakes: But that 's who I understood Paul 's communication .
Al-Jaff: Your recommendation was that they improve the design before it
appears in front of City Council . The design went backwards and that 's
why we pulled it off the City Council agenda .
Scott: Okay , any other open discussion?
There was some discussion between Nancy Mancino and Jo Ann Olsen regarding_
a public hearing for the Highway 5 access boulevards which was not picked
up on the tape .
Farmakes: Is Paul satisfied with the response on , his criticism of how —
that was being staged on the Highway 5 Planning Commission . They were
going to sort of back up and start over with dealing with our goals and
our intent? —
Olsen: Is he satisfied?
Farmakes: I don 't know . I sat through the meeting and listened to words
like Main Street . I was thinking , well what is that . Are we going to put
that in the intent statement? What does Main Street mean?
Olsen: I know that he and Kate are working on all that right now . That 's
exactly why they are a step back . That meeting was so disorganized .
Farmakes: I think the views obviously , they 're going to be disorganized
because we have many people from , we have both property owners . We have
people who are interested in civic affairs . We have planners and we have
a lot of different viewpoints there . So it will be interesting to see we —
take that and make that into a paragraph .
Harberts: Can you clarify what those access boulevards are? Are these —
accesses onto Highway 5?
Farmakes: She 's referring to the roads that we were looking at . A , B, C ,_
D on TH 5 . You were at the meeting . She was at , you were at the Highway
5 meeting weren 't you?
Harberts: No .
Farmakes : Oh . There 's someone there that looks just like you . I 've been
saying hi to her . —
Mancino: In fact I know who that is . No , there 's going to be a road that
runs parallel to Highway 5 and it 's going to be north of Highway 5 .
Olsen: It will just be an access road to Galpin .
Farmakes : It 's what they were referring to originally as frontage roads . —
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17 , 1993 - Page 27
Harberts: Oh , they have different names for those now . Access
boulevards . Okay , got you . Frontage roads . Okay , we don't have frontage
roads in Chanhassen . We have access boulevards . Got you . . .
Scott: Any other open discussion? Then I close this meeting of the
Planning Commission . Thank you all for coming .
The meeting was adjourned at 9: 15 p .m.
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CITY TF
CHANHASSEN
- i
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director
DATE: February 26, 1993
SUBJ: Report from the Director
At the City Council meeting of February 22, 1993, the following actions were taken:
1. Final Plat Approval for Stone Creek First Addition, 8400 Galpin Boulevard, Hans Hagen
Homes: This plat was approved on the consent agenda. The Planning Commission
approved the preliminary plat last year. Due to delays in extension of utilities to the site,
the developer was unable to bring lots on line before last fall's freeze. Thus, he decided
to wait until this spring to open up the first phase of the subdivision. The utilities are in
the process of being completed to the site and Mr. Hagen is proceeding with his project.
2. Final Plat Approval, Gateway East for Lotus Realty: This plat was approved by the
Planning Commission some time ago. It concerns the replatting of the area around the
Hanus building and Rapid Oil sites. The final plat was approved by the City Council.
3. Interpretation of Conditional Use Permit Validity, CUP 88-11 for a Contractor's Yard,
1700 Flying Cloud Drive, Jeff Carson: Approximately five years ago, a conditional use
permit for a contractor's yard located along Highway 212 near the Chaska border was
approved by the City of Chanhassen. The applicant began construction of a storage
building in accordance with the plan, but never completed the project. Since then, staff
believes the site was not utilized for its intended purpose. Last year, staff became aware
that there were a number of trailers being stored on the site. We attempted to contact the
owner and ascertain the purpose and request their removal. After a protracted period of
time without getting a satisfactory response, we worked with the City Attorney's office
to take legal action. Staff has interpreted the CUP to be invalid since it was not utilized
for its intended purpose within an appropriate period of time. The attorney representing
Mr. Carson questioned staff's interpretation. The matter was brought before the Board
of Adjustments, who on a split vote determined that the CUP is no longer valid. The
matter was referred to the City Council. The City Council tried to re-phrase the question
Is
t0, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Planning Commission
February 26, 1993 —
Page 2
from one of determining the CUP's validity to one of accepting its validity on its face, —
but determining that it should be revoked. They asked that the matter be brought back
to them at the following meeting.
4. Abra Auto Service Center, Lake Drive East, Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit: As
the Planning Commission is aware, the review of this and the related Good Year project
has taken an unusually long period of time. Most recently, action on this and the Good
Year request was delayed while the City Council considered imposition of a moratorium
on Highway 5. Ultimately the City Council determined that a moratorium would not be
enacted, and approved the Good Year. As you may recall, the Good Year building was —
modified to include brick construction and additional landscaping to gain approval by the
Council.
The Abra Auto Service Center was approved by the Planning Commission with some
significant reservations. Unlike the Good Year building which the Planning Commission
believed was acceptable with some minor modifications, the commission generally found
the Abra proposal unsatisfactory. The applicant was directed to work with staff to
develop a revised architectural plan submittal before review at the City Council. This
hearing at the City Council was to review a revised development proposal. Staff is not —
sure as to what kind of design standards are being applied, but believe that the current
proposal was a significant improvement over the earlier one. The City Council really
did not take the opportunity to discuss the proposal, but rather again brought up the —
possibility of a development moratorium. The item was continued so that the City
Council can discuss on-going development and moratorium issues at the upcoming March
3rd work session which will occur prior to the Planning Commission meeting. —
5. Preliminary Plat Review to Subdivide 36 Acres into 33 Single Family Lots and 3 Outlots,
Boley Subdivision, Minnewashta Parkway, Lundgren Brothers: This item was approved
by the City Council with relatively little discussion. Conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission were adopted by the Council.
6. School/Recreation Land Acquisition, Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard: The City Council
was asked to allocate tax increment funds to acquire a 40-acre parcel located at the —
southeast corner of the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Highway 5. This land has
been designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a potential school site, and is in fact being
sought by the Chaska School District for the construction of a new elementary school. —
The proposed acquisition represents the culmination of 4 years of effort to get new school
facilities into the community. Both the City Comprehensive Plan and the Morrish Study
perceive this site as extraordinarily important in terms of preserving it as a public space —
relative to its location within the corridor. Councilman Senn raised questions regarding
financing and other aspects of this proposal. He asked that it be continued to the March
— Planning Commission
February 26, 1993
Page 3
3 work session for further discussion. Ultimately the City Council agreed with this
request.
Other Matters of Concern
— 1. Moon Valley Litigation Continues: The on-going saga of the City of Chanhassen vs. the
Moon Valley Gravel Pit is continuing at a snail's pace. Last fall, after extensive
meetings, discussions and litigation, the City Council approved a non-conforming use
permit for the Moon Valley operation. The Moon Valley operator is refusing to agree to
the conditions applied to their operation by the City Council. They returned to court to
seek legal recourse to prevent the city from imposing these conditions, while the city
— returned to court to have the operation shut down for non-compliance. As has been
common with this issue, the court hearing was protracted. Written summations are not
going to be submitted until the week of April 1, with rebuttals following several weeks
—
later. In the past, Judge Kanning has used the full 90 days allotted to him to render the
decisions, thus we do not expect to see any resolution of this matter until some time in
mid-summer. Staff is quite frustrated by the inaction on this matter, but is subject to the
—
legal process and decisions of the judge. We will keep you informed as to any progress,
or more likely the lack of progress, as it occurs.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
04: 1‘ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director
DATE: February 25, 1993
SUBJ: Review an Affirmation of Alignment Alternatives for the North Highway 5 Access
Boulevard
As the Planning Commission is probably aware, work is continuing on developing the Highway
5 Corridor Plan. One aspect of this plan deals with coordination with MnDOT on the design of
Highway 5 main line improvements as well as coordination between the city and MnDOT on the
construction of the north access boulevard,referred to as "Arboretum Boulevard" in the enclosed
materials. In conjunction with the Hwy. 5 development program, the city has gained MnDOT's
support not only for Hwy. 5, but also participation in the right-of-way acquisition and
construction costs on portions of Arboretum Boulevard. MnDOT is utilizing the new federal
transportation bill in part to justify support for the city's efforts in constructing this roadway.
This roadway will also ultimately have a beneficial impact on Hwy. 5 since it is designed to
intercept local trips from throughout the northern half of our community.
For this local/state funding and design effort to proceed, it is important that the Hwy. 5 and
Arboretum Boulevard programs track together. The city is funding drafting of the Environmental
Assessment document that is required to obtain state and federal funding for Arboretum
Boulevard. The City Council views this as an investment that will secure a considerably larger
amount of state and federal funds as a part of cost sharing for the roadway itself.
Arboretum Boulevard Background
The idea for what is now being called Arboretum Boulevard goes back to the city's 1990
Comprehensive Plan. It contains a description of access boulevards to be located on either side
of Hwy. 5. The one located south of Hwy. 5 is somewhat discontinuous due to existing
development patterns. The one located north of Hwy. 5, which is now being referred to as
Arboretum Boulevard, has the potential of extending from Hwy. 41 over to Hwy. 101, east of
the Chanhassen CBD. At the time the comprehensive plan was developed, it was believed that
this road would be important to manage traffic issues.
tof PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Planning Commission
February 25, 1993
Page 2 —
The idea of parallel frontage roads or access boulevards was given great emphasis by the plan
developed for the City by Bill Morrish and his staff. Bill viewed these roads, particularly the
northern route with its continuity, as an extension of the main street of Chanhassen. In part, this
stems from its connection to West 78th Street in the Chanhassen CBD, but also because of its
continuity throughout the community. Their report described these routes as high amenity —
boulevards that could be used to orient development. The goal was to avoid having development
oriented to the main line highway which is what has been normal practice in most communities.
The typical pattern having a 300 foot wide corridor for a 4-lane highway, an 80 foot wide
corridor on either side of the highway for frontage roads, and potentially up to an additional 200
to 300 feet of black top beyond for parking lots, is what has yielded the bleak urban vision of —
University Avenue in Fridley. Rather the report conceptualized focusing development on these
routes directly. These routes also offer a means for residents to utilize a much more user friendly
facility to get from their homes to community parks, schools, centers of employment and —
shopping opportunities.
As these early plans were developed, staff began working in earnest with MnDOT to secure their —
cooperation and support their ultimate construction. MnDOT agreed to help fund only the
northern route. Their decision is based upon the fact that only the northern route offers full
continuity across the community. Additionally, MnDOT had already proposed building short —
segments of a frontage road in this general vicinity to serve properties whose sole access would
otherwise be directly to Hwy. 5. As time went on, staff worked with MnDOT to develop a joint
approach towards coordinating the construction of this roadway along with Hwy. 5. MnDOT —
support was conditioned upon the City of Chanhassen's undertaking the completion of the
Environmental Assessment document that is required to secure the use of federal funds. The City
Council authorized this expenditure and gave firm guidelines to staff and the Highway 5 Task —
Force that it was imperative that the Hwy. 5 project itself not be delayed because of this effort.
Additionally, MnDOT established the ground rule that their participation was linked to the
coordination of the construction of Arboretum Boulevard with Hwy. 5. —
Highway 5 Task Force Actions
The analysis of potential alignments has been reviewed by the task force on several occasions.
Preliminary alignments were developed by Chanhassen staff and our consultants from Barton
Aschman, Inc. The alignments were based upon several factors including consistency with the —
city's comprehensive plan and Morrish studies, an analysis of existing and proposed land uses,
environmental constraints and opportunities, including wetlands, topography, significant
vegetation, and upon traffic engineering criteria. Two routes were developed which are basicly
in the northern and southern alignments. The southern route closely approximates a typical
frontage road in location, while the northern route offers the opportunity for having development —
occur along both sides of the street. The Highway 5 Task Force determined that in terms of
design characteristics, the roadway was to use a narrow 32' paved, two-lane roadway. The street
is to be equipped with a grade separated 10' trail. Its alignment is curvilinear and generally _
Planning Commission
February 25, 1993
Page 3
follows the terrain of the land to minimize environmental impact and maximize the views that
would occur along its route. It is anticipated that there would be an extensive landscaping packet
— along with the roadway.
•
• LOW.
f�-Q c-r r Q-c
fr-r
arm It a� 1 I
tI l��eo.w.
The Hwy. 5 Task Force attempted to refine these alternatives on two occasions. Although there
are essentially two routes, the total number of alternatives is complicated by the fact that there
are two cross-over points located on either side of Galpin Boulevard in the vicinity of Bluff
Creek. Thus, there are actually a fairly significant number of alignments that could result. The
Hwy. 5 Task Force had some rather lengthy and arduous discussions on attempting to eliminate
some of the alternatives and thereby facilitated the completion of the Environmental Assessment
document. What we ultimately found was that they were unable to restrict the number of
alternatives at this time since the full analysis of the ultimate land uses and urban design issues
of the corridor has not yet been completed.
Due to the need to keep the completion of the Environmental Assessment document on track,
staff took several actions. With the concurrence of the Mayor, we asked the consultants to keep
in all of the alternatives at this time. Thus, it is anticipated that all the variations of the north
and south routes with the cross-over points will be studied in the EA. It is anticipated that by
time the EA is completed later this spring, the Hwy. 5 Task Force will have sufficient
information to make recommendations as to a firm alignment.
Planning Commission Action
_ To keep this project on track, it is important that the city undertake an official review of the
potential alignments for Arboretum Boulevard. After undertaking this review, the City Council
will be able to formally act to initiate the Environmental Assessment process. To keep this
process on track, it is important that this item be brought not only to the Planning Commission
for a public information meeting, but also to the City Council and have formal action completed
by the end of March.
Planning Commission
February 25, 1993
Page 4 —
The Planning Commission is being asked to review alternatives. You are also holding an
informational meeting where you can receive additional testimony. The roadway concepts have
already received significant comment from property owners who are directly affected. If the
alternatives under study are considered to be inappropriate by you, you do have the ability to
eliminate various segments of the two alignments. If however, you are comfortable with the
proposals as currently drafted, we are asking that you affirm them and forward them to the City
Council for their action. Please keep in mind that along with the Hwy. 5 Task Force, the
Planning Commission and City Council will have the opportunity to make final decisions on the
ultimate right-of-way.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission affirm the draft alternatives for analysis in the _
Environmental Assessment document.
BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
111 T^-d Ave^ue South Suite 350•M;nneaoo.s M.nnesota 55401 USA•(612)332-0421 •Fax (612)332-6180
MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth
Paul Krauss
Kate Aanenson
Charles Folch
COPIES TO: John Mullan
Barry Warner
_ Dave Warzala
James Unruh
FROM: Deborah Porter re
DATE: February 17, 1993
SUBJECT: Arboretum Boulevard Alternatives
In our last correspondence dated February 3, 1993, we requested concurrence by the
— city staff on the currently proposed alternatives and cross-over options for study in the
Environmental Assessment (EA) (see enclosed graphics). This memorandum and
attached information sheet address the purpose and schedule of the EA document and
critical path of major tasks prior to the programmed construction letting date of
February 1996 for both the TH 5 mainline and Arboretum Boulevard projects.
As also stated in our February 3 letter, if it is determined that the cross-over options
should be added to the Alternative 1 and 2 corridors for study in the EA, it will be
necessary to modify the scope of work and compensation to incorporate these changes.
Based on a review of the preliminary engineering and environmental analyses outlined
in Tasks 1.1 through 1.4.25 in our original scope of work, we estimate that the
incorporation of the cross-over options in the EA would cost approximately $14,770
including labor and expenses. This work would include preliminary layouts, cost
analyses, environmental impact and mitigation analyses, and response to agency and
public comment on the possible cross-over alignments.
It is MnDOTs understanding that the Arboretum Boulevard project will be
incorporated into the TH 5 Design Project which is programmed for February 1996
construction. A review of the critical path timeline prior to that date indicates the need
for completing environmental review and most of the final design work on the
preferred alternative by the end of 1993 in order to begin right-of-way acquisition in
early 1994. Right-of-way acquisition for a project of this scope typically requires a two-
year period prior to construction, which is programmed for early 1996. TherefotEi, E.VED
F `` t 1993
(PARSONS
JTRANSPORTATION GROUP
-MY OF CHANtiAbs0
February 17, 1993
Page 2
the Arboretum Boulevard project is to remain on track with the TH 5 mainline project,
it is necessary to make a final selection of the alternatives for study in the EA by the
March 22 City Council meeting to adhere to this schedule.
The attached project overview has been prepared to inform those involved in the
project and the public as to the intent of the EA process, potential funding sources, and
anticipated schedule of activities related to the Arboretum Boulevard project.
Please contact me if you have questions about this process or necessary actions by the
city prior to initiation of these activities.
dmv
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
ARBORETUM BOULEVARD
— PROJECT REVIEW
— This information provides an overview of the environmental review process, potential
funding sources, and anticipated schedule of activities for the proposed Arboretum
Boulevard project.
The proposed project will function as an access boulevard to provide access to
developing areas of Chanhassen and to facilitate local trips in this area thereby reducing
— the amount of local traffic on TH 5. The proposed design is a two-lane urban roadway
and adjacent bicycle/pedestrian trail that meets geometric standards and minimizes
environmental impacts.
Purpose and Scope of Environmental Assessment (EA)
—
Federal and state-funded transportation projects in Minnesota must follow environmental
review and public involvement procedures mandated by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
under the provisions of current regulations. A comprehensive review of the
socioeconomic and environmental impacts of two build alternatives and the no-build (do
nothing) alternative will be contained in the EA document. Potential mitigation
—
measures for identified impacts will be included as well as addressing any concerns
expressed by regulatory agencies or the public. The EA document will be made
available for public and agency review and comment at a public hearing during this study
—
process.
At the state and federal levels, the EA is conducted to provide sufficient information to
determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or that a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) and Negative Declaration (for an EIS) is appropriate.
Project Funding Sources
— It is anticipated that a combination of federal, state (MnDOT), and local (city) funding
will be available for construction of the proposed project. Right-of-way acquisition costs
are expected to be funded by the city and MnDOT contributions. Based on MnDOTs
— preliminary review of the proposed alternatives, and past commitments to purchasing
controlled access along TH 5, MnDOT has indicated their support in contributing to
right-of-way costs associated with those portions of the proposed access boulevard that
— are adjacent to or very near the TH 5 mainline right-of-way limits. Further discussion
— 1
between the city and MnDOT is necessary to determine those parcels that may be
included in such an agreement. MnDOT will also provide project overview and
sponsorship of the EA and design documents.
Critical Path Timeline
The following schedule of major tasks and approvals needed for the proposed Arboretum _
Boulevard project is based on the understanding that the project is incorporated into the
TH 5 Design Project which is programmed by MnDOT for a February 1996 construction
bid letting. The critical elements and their time frames of this three-year schedule are _
listed below. Construction activities are preceded by right-of-way acquisition which is
anticipated to begin in February 1994 (two years prior to construction). Environmental
review, various permit applications, and the majority of final design work must be _
completed for the preferred alternative prior to initiation of right-of-way activities.
Therefore, the environmental and preliminary engineering work for the proposed
alternatives must be completed in 1993 to adhere to this schedule. It should be realized
that failure to meet this schedule could jeopardize the funding opportunities for the
Arboretum Boulevard project and possibly delay the TH 5 construction activities.
Public Issuance of EA and Public Hearing; Review of August 1993
Preliminary Design
EA/FONSI Determination; Preliminary Design August-November 1993
Review
Permits Acquisition; Construction Limits December 1993-February 1994
Right-of-Way Acquisition; Final Design Activities February 1994-February 1996
Construction Bid Letting February 1996
This project overview has been prepared to inform the City Staff and Council, and
Planning Commission and TH 5 Task Force members. _
2
CITY TF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
'errrs (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
February 17, 1993
Mr. Jim Andrews
Co-Chair, Highwa 5 Task Force
131 Fox Hollow Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Jim: _
I appreciate the concerns you voiced in your February 8, 1993, letter regarding the progress or
lack of progress of the Task Force. After attending the last meeting, receiving your letter and
discussing the matter with staff. I can agree with many of the things you outlined.
Taking the road issue first. it is important that the Highway 5 upgrading program stay on
schedule and it is equally important that the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the frontage
road tracks with it. Any delays could jeopardize its status with MnDOT and have a major impact
on the availability of State and Federal funds. This last factor is extremely important since
MnDOT's agreement to fund a majority of the frontage road represents a major change in their
policies. Additionally. they have recently agreed to consider not only construction costs but also
— right-of-way acquisition as well.
We have been informed that the City Council must approve the frontage road alternatives being
studied in the EA by no later then mid-March at the latest if we are to keep on schedule. As a
result. I am having staff place the alternatives on the March 3, 1993, Planning Commission
agenda for public comment and planning on having it referred to the City Council for their
March 8, 1993, meeting. Input developed by the Task Force on this issue to date will be made
part of the record and the attendance of these meetings by any of your members is welcomed.
— I realize that you arc also concerned with staff's action to have the consultants revise the
alternatives being studied after the last meeting. I think that if you look closely at the situation
you will find that staff has only acted to keep the door open on alternatives that were discussed
— by your group and not to change any directives that were received. By keeping this matter
moving forward, I believe that options are being preserved and more effective decisions can be
made later this spring as the study progresses.
Irs
t 0 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Mr. Jim Andrews
February 17, 1993
Page 2
As for the other concerns you outlined, I can agree that the Task Force needs to become more
focused. In part, this may reflect back on a lack of direction received from the City Council.
However I am sure that several past and present members of the Council believed that their
direction was contained in the study that was completed by Bill Moorish and his staff last year.
I think that staff's approach of developing goals and policies is a good one and urge you to keep
working to move your group forward. The discussions that you undertake on these important
issues are vital if the City Council is to make educated decisions later on. I would also be happy
to discuss ways of improving the function of the Task Force with you in person.
Sure / /
Y.
.414111110r-
Donald J. C el
Mayor
pc: Don Ashworth. City Manager
Paul Krauss, Planning Director
Gene Borg. Chair, Hwy. 5 Task Force
City Council
Planning Commission
Highway 5 Task Force
•
February 8, 1993
Mayor Don Chmiel
City Of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Dr.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
From: Jim Andrews
Co-Chairman Highway 5 Task Force
Dear Mr. Mayor,
= I am writing this letter because of personal concern about the lack of direction and progress
the Highway 5 Task force has been able to make. At our January meeting we were able to
make several motions which were passed. I received a letter form Paul Krause stating that
staff has decided that the Task Force decision were expanded to now again include all
various north route options. I have no personal preference as to what options we choose.
My concern is that the Task Force is being directed by staff in the direction staff deems as
proper and correct. If staff needs to modify a Task Force motion then present these
modifications prior to passage of a motion or present their recommendations in the form of
reconsideration of a motion. If the intent of the City is to use staff planning and
recommendations than why not disband the Task Force and save the City money and the
members a lot of personal time. I would be the first to agree that the City planning staff
and the various consultants contracted by the City have far more expertise about this
complicated project.
Secondly. Paul's letter stated that as a Task Force, we need to create a overall mission
statement. We have been meeting since last Fall with very little progress. If there is a need
for a mission statement, that mission statement should come from City Council. We are not
= an independent entity with freedom to choose our own direction. We are a Task Force
appointed by City Council. We have an assigned task to do. If we are unable to perform
our task, as its seems we are at this moment, then we should request the City Council to
either provide a more specific request for task completion or have the City Council disband
the Task Force. I am constantly frustrated by those among the group that feel we can not
make any even small decision without some grand unified consideration of all aspects of the
project at once. Perhaps the Council should prioritize specific areas, such as road design,
land use, building designs, landscaping, etc., and assign due dates. It is not possible to make
timely progress if we can not make small decisions and then begin to build. There is nothing
to say that as a group that we may not go back and reconsider a previous decision if we
discover a better, more acceptable solution later. We are however a Task Force with a
deadline to meet and many businesses and residents waiting for the City to move forward.
I would appreciate your reaction to my concerns. I also do not wish to put any blame
anyone regarding my concerns. I believe we are are all struggling in our own way to reach
our goals. I think the problem is that we need a stricter task master(The Council), a more
specific task, and a better understanding of the roles we are all to play.
Sincerely
Jim Andrews
7014 Sandy Hook Circle
Chanhassen, M's; 55317
937-0516
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
-- t$017-,
�. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
Nicr
February 17, 1993
Mr. Jim Andrews
Co-Chair, Highway 5 Task Force
131 Fox Hollow Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Jim: _ 7/ 1'
I appreciate the concerns you voiced in your February 8, 1993, letter regarding the progress or
lack of progress of the Task Force. After attending the last meeting, receiving your letter and
discussing the matter with staff, I can agree with many of the things you outlined.
_ Taking the road issue fust, it is important that the Highway 5 upgrading program stay on
schedule and it is equally important that the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the frontage
road tracks with it. Any delays could jeopardize its status with MnDOT and have a major impact
on the availability of State and Federal funds. This last factor is extremely important since
MnDOT's agreement to fund a majority of the frontage road represents a major change in their
policies. Additionally, they have recently agreed to consider not only construction costs but also
right-of-way acquisition as well.
We have been informed that the City Council must approve the frontage road alternatives being
studied in the EA by no later then mid-March at the latest if we are to keep on schedule. As a
result. I am having staff place the alternatives on the March 3, 1993, Planning Commission
agenda for public comment and planning on having it referred to the City Council for their
March 8, 1993, meeting. Input developed by the Task Force on this issue to date will be made
part of the record and the attendance of these meetings by any of your members is welcomed.
— I realize that you are also concerned with staff's action to have the consultants revise the
alternatives being studied after the last meeting. I think that if you look closely at the situation
you will find that staff has only acted to keep the door open on alternatives that were discussed
by your group and not to change any directives that were received. By keeping this matter
moving forward, I believe that options are being preserved and more effective decisions can be
made later this spring as the study progresses.
to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Mr. Jim Andrews
February 17, 1993
Page 2
As for the other concerns you outlined, I can agree that the Task Force needs to become more
focused. In part, this may reflect back on a lack of direction received from the City Council.
However I am sure that several past and present members of the Council believed that their
direction was contained in the study that was completed by Bill Moorish and his staff last year.
I think that staff's approach of developing goals and policies is a good one and urge you to keep
working to move your group forward. The discussions that you undertake on these important
issues are vital if the City Council is to make educated decisions later on. I would also be happy
to discuss ways of improving the function of the Task Force with you in person.
Sinfi�re ,
onald J. C -eel
Mayor
pc: Don Ashworth, City Manager
Paul Krauss, Planning Director
Gene Borg. Chair, Hwy. 5 Task Force
City Council
Planning Commission
Highway 5 Task Force
February 8, 1993
Mayor Don Chmiel
City Of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Dr.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
From: Jim Andrews
Co-Chairman Highway 5 Task Force
Dear Mr. Mayor,
I am writing this letter because of personal concern about the lack of direction and progress
the Highway 5 Task force has been able to make. At our January meeting we were able to
make several motions which were passed. I received a letter form Paul Krause stating that
staff has decided that the Task Force decision were expanded to now again include all
various north route options. I have no personal preference as to what options we choose.
My concern is that the Task Force is being directed by staff in the direction staff deems as
proper and correct. If staff needs to modify a Task Force motion then present these
modifications prior to passage of a motion or present their recommendations in the form of
reconsideration of a motion. If the intent of the City is to use staff planning and
recommendations than why not disband the Task Force and save the City money and the
members a lot of personal time. I would be the first to agree that the City planning staff
and the various consultants contracted by the City have far more expertise about this
complicated project.
Secondly, Paul's letter stated that as a Task Force, we need to create a overall mission
statement. We have been meeting since last Fall with very little progress. If there is a need
for a mission statement, that mission statement should come from City Council. We are not
an independent entity with freedom to choose our own direction. We are a Task Force
appointed by City Council. We have an assigned task to do. If we are unable to perform
our task, as its seems we are at this moment, then we should request the City Council to
either provide a more specific request for task completion or have the City Council disband
the Task Force. I am constantly frustrated by those among the group that feel we can not
make any even small decision without some grand unified consideration of all aspects of the
project at once. Perhaps the Council should prioritize specific areas, such as road design,
land use, building designs, landscaping, etc., and assign due dates. It is not possible to make
timely progress if we can not make small decisions and then begin to build. There is nothing
to say that as a group that we may not go back and reconsider a previous decision if we
discover a better, more acceptable solution later. We are however a Task Force with a
deadline to meet and many businesses and residents waiting for the City to move forward.
I would appreciate your reaction to my concerns. I also do not wish to put any blame ec -
anyone regarding my concerns. I believe we are are all struggling in our own way to reach
our goals. I think the problem is that we need a stricter task master( The Council), a more
specific task, and a better understanding of the roles we are all to play.
Sincerely
Jim Andrews
7014 Sandy Hook Circle
Chanhassen, MN 55317
937-0516
E NVI RON ME N f. ,. AMERICANPLANNING
ASSOCIATION .
De/I) io
e DECEMBER 1992
.13,n
Three Layers county and the municipalities of Manassas and Manassas Park.
Its watershed lies athwart the rapidly developing 1-66 corridor,
of Watershed
extending westward from Washington, D.C. Its outflow discharges
_ Protection into the Occoquan Reservoir,the raw water source for large
portions of Fairfax County and neighboring jurisdictions in
By Robert M. Lean suburban Washington.
The watershed,composed of five smaller drainage areas,is
— The dire effects of development in watersheds that serve as sparsely developed. Forecasts of anticipated growth over the next 20 '
drinking water supplies have often moved legislatures to enact years envision more than 20 million square feet of new commercial.
measures to preserve surface-water quality. But what happens when office,and industrial development on some 8,000 acres and more
such efforts are guided by political expediency.public outrage,and than 20,000 new dwelling units.The lake's continued viability as a
— environmental sensitivity?The result tends to be a profusion of water supply and amenity was endangered.
large-lot zoning.buffer areas,sedimentation ponds, forbidden uses, The major public policy recommendation flowing from a study
and impermeable area controls.Often.the law of unintended of the watershed by consultants and a special advisory committee
— consequences has exacted a terrible roll when simplistic solutions was nondegradation. Stated simply, the lake must retain its present
have gone awry. Large lots,for instance,encourage fertilizer and high water quality despite the introduction and operation of myriad
pesticide contamination of streams,and small detention basins fail substantial new uses.
for lack of maintenance."X e deserve better. The policy was easier to state than to implement. However.
A program for Prince William Count-,Virginia.applied a a series of techniques emerged that provided a straightforward
comprehensive response to the challenge of preserving an endan- approach applicable to other water bodies whose water-supply,
gered water supply by relating specific solutions to the range of recreational,and aesthetic qualities are threatened by new uses.
threats to that public asset.
— Special Public Interest -
Lake Manassas Best management practices for pollution sources District 'i.
The Lake Mlanassas impoundment, side slopes The watershed's future land-use "'
located in the southwestern part of swore slopes 3:i or less Railroad tie plan called for a wide range of
the count. is a major raw water as close to zero check-dam permitted uses from very low-
os drainage (increases
supply for large portions of the
I will permitinfiltration) density residential to very intensive
f manufacturing.warehousing. -
research,and commercial
- operations. Protection of the lake -
required an overlay approach, r
Dense
— _1 growth ._ modifying and supplementing the
of grass - k _
—
Weep hole.l : ; r
q
— s•'. •••♦ 3 ..
7 Stone prevents
downstream scour
._
i
. . . ..,...il.„,
• • r 1 4 � `'fit�, rad.,. �+,
•
R-2 • - t - _
s' 4 �i �.e - . .
Zoning controls on pollutant �.,. N,4,:11 e� ,., "ii
storage and use
l✓ .I - I , I . . , I•. ' 1 r i I.. 14 I .\`-`
present and future underlying zoning and other land-use controls. Solutions
Other plan elements mandated overlay zones to protect Civil War X'e developed, in association with Grizzard.a three-tier control
battle sites and Broad Run,a tributary to Occoquan Creek and the structure—one for each threat—for the SP1-1 district.
Potomac River.The count's zoning ordinance also contained The first level of control operates by shortening the existing list
additional overlay districts of varying age and complexity.The of permitted and permissible uses in the various zoning districts.
study group suggested a common method to handle overlays We accomplished this by banning those uses storing,processing. —
designed to eliminate confusion and administrative complexity. employing,or producing elements,compounds.or materials
An amendment—think of it as local enabling legislation— contained in the most recent editions of Hazardous Wastes from
established a special public interest(SPI)district approach within Nonspecific Sources and Hazardous Wastes from Specific Sources.
the zoning ordinance.This technique is described in PAS Report published by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency under the —
No.287,Special Public Interest Districts.with examples of actual authority of the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act.
ordinance wording. Grizzard cited these as the best sources for lists of pollutants
The SPI amendment established a common process by which dangerous to surface waters.The Prince William County zoning
all rpes of overlay districts are justified,prepared,considered, ordinance allows a broad range of uses in commercial and industrial —
adopted.and administered.Each district differs in intent, coverage, districts.many of which could use or produce substances capable of
and application,bur all must be similarly structured, justified,and causing catastrophic damage to the lake.The EPA documents
enforced. Jurisdictions employing overlay districts for such provide a ready reference for staff and citizens on whether a —
purposes as historic preservation.sign control,view protection, proposed use is allowed within the district.
hillside development control.and watershed protection find that We added language to permit relatively small amounts of
the SPI technique ensures administrative clarity,efficient pesticides,for instance,to be sold at retail and used domestically
enforcement.effective policy implementation,and consistent while prohibiting bulk production,handling,and storage. —
ordinance format. Amendatory wording also addressed.by revisions to the
The initial step in preparation of a SPI district is to identify and regulations dealing with nonconformities,those present uses that
express the special and substantial public interest the district is to would not comply with the regulations. Fortunately,only a very
serve.The operational wording for the Lake Manassas"k'atershed small number of open uses of land fell into this category,so only
Protection (SPI-1) District states succinctly: ". . . it is the intent of one of the five kinds of nonconformity needed attention.We
these regulations to implement a policy of nondegradation of the recommended cessation after a three-year amortization period.
water quality of Lake Manassas to preserve it as a public water In other jurisdictions.nonconforming use of both open land —
supply. . ." and structures may merit reconsideration.
The solution to the second risk directed that certain pollutants
Watershed Protection Problem Sorting be completely contained within each development site. This
The next step entailed preparing the applicable regulations. Debate requirement recognized that many activities that pose some _
began on possible approaches to Lake Manassas protection.Thomas potential threat to the lake,such as a retail gas station. must still
J.Grizzard.director of the Occoquan Watershed Monitoring be accommodated within the watershed.The ordinance placed
Laboratory,furnished invaluable assistance.The organization is a responsibility for control of these pollutants squarely on the
branch of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and is responsible for landowner. —
monitoring water quality in the Occoquan Reservoir.the major The regulation states that uses shall be so designed and operated
source of raw water for Fairfax and Prince William counties and as to contain within the development site 100 percent of those
downstream from the Lake Manassas dam. Sorting the problems elements,compounds,and materials contained in the most recent
revealed three separate menaces to Lake Manaccac from expected editions of three other U.S. EPA publications: Priority Pollutant
development. List. Safe Drinking Water Regulations,and Hazardous Wastes from
The first came from activities employing or producing elements. Commercial Products, Intermediates and Residues.Those items listed
compounds.or materials that would result in catastrophic and in the third publication solely because of ignitabiliry are exempt. —
irreparable harm to the lake if released into the surface waters. For Further,those items covered in the first level of control.sold at
example. releases from a plant producing pesticides.where large retail and used domestically. must be confined to the site.
amounts of very toxic material are handled and stored,could The ordinance mandates the use of best management
destroy Lake Manassas as a water supply and as a source of public practices—a well-recognized technique—to keep listed pollutants —
recreation. from entering the receiving streams and the lake.The system is
The second threat arose from operations employing elements. designed to handle the worst storm likely to occur over a 10-year
compounds,and materials which,if discharged into the lake or its period.
receiving waters.would accelerate eutrophication of surface waters, The third control was more difficult to formulate,not because
result in acidification of the receiving waters. increase the difficulty of an inability to identify pollutants,but as a result of the need to
and cost of raw water treatment,and generate other serious effects. decide how best to control them before they enter Lake Manassas.
Retail gas stations typify such uses. Measurements for determining achievement of the nondegradation —
Pollutants primarily related to urban development and the policy occur where the Lake Manaccac tributaries cease to be free-
attendant increase in site impermeability posed the third hazard. flowing.that is.at the point where they enter the impoundment.
These include suspended sediments, phosphorus,nitrogen.zinc, Grizzard and I concurred that some degree of water-qualiry
and lead in surface waters.Runoff from construction sires. roads. deterioration might be allowed in the tributaries as long as it was —
lawns.and parking lots is a prime example. corrected prior to the water reaching the lake. Our conclusion
sprang from our desire for a more effective removal of this class of
Robert.t1 Leary.A1C,is president of Robert M. Lean'&Associates in pollutants than that achieved by the site-specific approach used by —
Auburndale, Florida. the count.
_ g
Developers,citizens,administrators,and designers are
increasingly dissatisfied with individual site responses to runoff, Chesapeake States
erosion.and sedimentation control.This is particularly true for Fine-Tune
— areas with many lots of varying sizes. leading to the establishment Bay Restoration
of numerous small control devices scattered across the watershed. program
The"chicken-pox' approach results in faulty maintenance, failures,
and difficult enforcement.all contributing to water-quality A new version of the Chesapeake Bay agreement got underway
- degradation. in August with the backing of surrounding states,the District of
Therefore.we recommended that Prince William County Columbia,and U.S.EPA Administrator William Reilly.The
assume responsibility for installing and operating appropriate changes increase the focus on land-based pollution sources because
engineering works to extract certain pollutants—primarily the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments effectively address the
sediments,zinc. lead,phosphorus.and nitrogen—from the atmospheric issues.The revisions also impose a jointly operated
tributaries before they reached Lake Manassas. We envisioned monitoring system housed at the EPA that will inform states of
financing the construction and operation of these works on a the quantity and types of pollution each of them is generating.
— utility basis,where the impost on each property would be based The Chesapeake Bay area has been the focus of multistate
on the relative amount of contribution from each development. cleanup pacts since 1972. The bay then was brimming with
This approach allows larger.more efficient and effective engineering nitrogen and phosphates,both of which are by-products of treated
works supported by a utilities approach to stormwater management. sewage.detergents.excessive pesticide runoff,and emissions from
- This technique.employing a combination of assessments for both factories and automobiles. Excessive concentrations in an estuary
capital and operating costs,exists in scores of L'.S.jurisdictions. produce nutrient blooming,in which algae proliferate and create a
This policy shifted control of erosion products and related cap on the water,causing plants and animals to die from lack of
pollutants from the individual property owner to a governmental sunlight and oxygen.
unit having adequate area coverage.the power to raise funds, Beyond the bay itself,a 64,000-square-mile watershed was
permanence.and political accountability. imperiled by groundwater pollution. Oysters,which serve as a
Prince'William County reaps an additional benefit because natural filter for the bay water,no longer could clear the sediment
— decisions about which subwarershed area will receive priority in filling the bay.The commercial fishing industry,valued at S 100
the installation of treatment facilities also determine the order of million, was also in danger. .
development among those actors. The affected area includes the District of Columbia.
The following wording set the standards for controlling this class Pennsylvania. Maryland,and Virginia,with major tributaries in
of pollutants: Man•land•s Black River,Pennsylvania's Susquehanna River. .
Virginia's Rappahannock and James Rivers,and the Potomac.
Arnie C OfT it:r De./rarer Prrnu::ed Although west Virginia and Delaware have not signed the latest Y
(1.r Deselopment may discharge the following pollutants off-site to a
.— maximum of 50 percent of the difference between predevelopment and pact because they do not share the Chesapeake Bay coastline.they
postdeselopment conditions have basically mimicked many of the requirements and cleanup ,,
la. S,.spended sediment efforts implemented in the participating states. .1,_,
(b.'Total phosphorus The participants have revised the pact twice since 19-2. In
(e..Total nitrogen -:
w (d. Lead 1983.they mandated a cooperative framework within which the
(e.)Zinc basic elements ofa restoration program could be identified and
(2)In malting calculations for compliance w ith this requirement.the developed. The regional effort to reduce excess nutrients in the hay
design storm shall be on,of a In-year frequencv. became known as the Chesapeake Bar Program.The 1983 pact :-;''
(3.,The following definition.shall apply within the SPI-I District: created an interstate legislative committee, the Chesapeake Bay
(a.1 Pnrtdr:e•lopmen:means that condition which may be reasonabh
expected or anticipated to exist after completion of the land development Commission.A number of research and local action groups w cr
act:city on a spe,ifi.sire or tract of land also formed.including the Alliance for the Chesapeake Ba‘.a ,-r,.z
(h.)Predetel jnt,,::mans that condition which exists at the time plans for watchdog group,and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation,whose
chc development ala tract of land are approved by the plan approvals
� i primary function is to lobby for bay restoration projects and their
authority Where phased dcsdopmenr or phased plan approval occurs
funding. In addition. several county-and municipal-level action
prelimman grading.roads and utilities.etc. the first item approved orr.
permitted shall establish the predevelopment condition. groups have formed to carry out local responsibilities. Cities have ii,':'45
— instituted public awareness programs,recycling efforts,beach
There is nothing magic about the 70 percent figure. It could as cleanups.and drain-painting programs(stenciled warnings on 'I=
readily be set at +0 or VO percent. In many cases.the containment storm drains that feed directly into the bay). Local governments ' "-c:!..7
must also monitor emissions,issue permits.and enforce compliance
P
activities required by the second-level controls achieve at least this p'
level of removal of erosion products and related pollutants. with area standards.A ban on phosphates has produced a 46
This pragmatic view of watershed protection has been embraced percent reduction in the bay's phosphate level.
by policy makers in Prince William County. Some of the In 198-. the signatories agreed to develop,adopt,and
ordinances are already in place.while other components are still implement a plan to cut nitrogen and phosphorus in the bay by
cR..
being adjusted for local conditions. 40 percent by 2000.They developed a strategy that relied on a
mathematical model to evaluate how the bays water quality would '?
This approach offers a unique three-level control system tolc
9
preserve an urbanizing watershed. It relates effective solutions respond to a variety of nutrient-reduction scenarios. They have E '
P phosphorus sinPos P forby detergent
goal
d
l
areay met thehhl
- directly to the three threats to water quality..provides relatively earequiring .;'
administration,and ensures equitable financing. It deserves serious manufacturers to distribute phosphate free products.Nitrogen ;
consideration for application in similar situations. removal has proven more difficult because it does nor come from a
3
k,
single identifiable source.One major source,the percolation of • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
pesticides through soil and into groundwater,does not manifest 1 992 Index
itself immediately.Thus,the nitrogen levels measured in the bay
today result from fertilizer applied up to 20 years ago.To date,only Airports
about 10 percent of the bay's nitrogen has been removed.However, Airport Siting:The Environmental Challenges,July —
a process called biological nutrient reduction,which involves Chemical ladvstry
sending bay water through a treatment plant and filling it with Buying Out a Neighborhood(Port Arthur.Texas),April
nitrogen-hungry organisms,has sped up the process. Environmental Scorecard Repealed(Louisiana),May _
The monitoring under the new pact will enable states to create floedplains
specific plans and apply more targeted technologies to reduce New Rules for Floodplain.January
pollution levels and eliminate sources,rather than simply conform
to a regionwide reduction program.Pennsylvania will begin forestry
New York City Axes Tree Budget.January —
cleaning sewage treatment plant outfalls instead of focusing on Urban Trees,Air Quality,and Energy Conservation,March
farm-nutrient reduction strategies.Maryland will shift its focus
from sewage treatment to farm-nutrient reduction.Virginia will be aoawdwahr
expanding its program in all sectors,while Washington,D.C., Austin Vi'orks to Protect Aquifer,February —
continues its efforts with urban runoff and water treatment plants. Habitat Preteetioa
The efforts are beginning to pay off.With a more enlightened, Rats and Raptors at Issue in Moreno Valley,Jure.
Gimme Shellter(Tortoise Habitat).October
cooperative business community and citizenry,bay towns have seen
a return to striped bass fishing,which was banned for five years. Hazardous Waste —
Oysters are staging a comeback.And the bay grasses,which fell From Polluted Arsenal to Wildlife Habitat,July
from 120,000 acres in 1970 to 15,000 acres in 1984,have now Municipal Hazardous Waste Liability,October
sAvoiding the Sting:Cities and Contaminated Sites,November
grown back to 70,000 acres. Michelle Gregory
Natural Disasters —
• Rebuilding Oakland.November
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Open space
Legal Notes New.Tack on Land Trusts,February —
pesticides
Pesticide Spraying Challenged.May
• Top of the List Radioactive Wash
A survey by the National Association of Home Builders,published Can Money Buy a Home for America's Radwaste,April —
in Builder in August,listed wetlands at the top of the list of builders' Illinois Town Welcomes Radwaste,September
concerns,ahead of financial issues like workers'compensation, shorelines
c::- lumber prices,and impact fees.The issue was listed as"critical"by Building on the Beach.September
57 percent of those surveyed. —
Sell Erosion
Minimizing Environmental Damage on Construction Sites.Apr(
When to Dump the Ash
U.S.EPA Administrator William K.Reilly issued a September 18 state Agencies• —
memo to regional administrators declaring that ash from municipal Louisiana.Agencies Fight Budget Cuts.July
• solid waste incinerators would be classified by the agency as Waste Management
nonhazardous(see Legal Notes,February).Although Trash Disposal:Asking the Right Questions,June
High Court Nixes Waste Restrictions.August
•,r environmentalists are certain to dispute this point,Reilly contends NYC Seeks Home for Sludge.August —
that Congress,by not addressing the issue in RCRA,allowed the
EPA discretion to adopt its own interpretation. Meanwhile,the Water
EPA has also backed away from its earlier proposal to revise its Colorado Hosts Another Water Fight,March
hazardous waste rules(Legal Notes,May). Water Pollution —
Ready or Not.Stormwater Deadlines Loom,Ma)
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Georgia Targets Hotueboats..�ovrmbrr
Three Lavers of Watershed Protection.December
Environment&Development is a monthly newsletter published by the American Planning Chesapeake States Fine-Tune Restoration Program,December _
Association.Subscriptions arc available for 550.Israel Stollman.Execuriye Director:
Frank 5.So.Deputy Executive Director:William R.Klein,Director of Research and Wetlands
Education. Wetlands:Swamped in Rhetoric?,January
Environment e-Development is researched.written.and edited by APA's Research Wetlands:A Way Out of the Morass?,February
Department in Chicago:Jim Schwab,Editor:Fay Dolnick.Sarah Dunn.Michelle Gregory. Tracking Wetlands With GIS,August —
Chris Harris.Marva Morris.Amy Van Doren.Reporters.Production,including copy
editing.layout.and design.is provided by APA's Publications Department in Chicago:
Cynthia Cheski.Assistant Editor:Dennis McClendon.Design Director.
Copyright C1992 by American.Planning Association.1313 E.60th St..Chicago.IL 6063-.
- The American Planning Association has headquarters offices at I776 Massachusetts Ave..
NW..Washinpon.DC 20036.
All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form
or by any means.electronic or mechanical.including photocopying.recording.or by any
information storage and retrieval system.without permission in writing from the —
. American Planning Association.
Printed on recycled paper.including 50-'0%recycled fiber
and 1040 postconsumer waste.
4