The URL can be used to link to this page

09-6-95 Agenda and Packet AGENDA FILE CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1995, 7:00 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER OLD BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Amcon Corporation for a Site Plan Review for a 4,600 square foot car wash building located on 1.78 acres of property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located south of Hwy. 5 on the north side of Lake Drive East. 2. Conditional Use Permit for Multiple Buildings (2) on the same lot and site plan approval for a 1,255 sq. ft. drive through car wash on property zoned BG, General Business District and located at 335 West 79th Street (West 79th Street and Great Plains Blvd.), Gary Brown. 3. Conceptual and preliminary PUD rezoning the property from A2, Agricultural Estate, to PUD, Planned Unit Development; preliminary plat approval for 94 lots and one outlot; site plan approval for 2 four-unit structures, 1 six-unit structure and 10 eight-unit structures on 12.34 acres located at the southwest corner of Galpin Blvd. and Hwy. 5, Scenic Enterprises, Inc., Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition. 4. Replat of Outlot A, Chanhassen Business Center Second Addition into 4 lots and site plan review of a 35,000 square foot office warehouse building (Control Products) on Lot 1, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 3rd Addition (a 12 acre site) on property zoned PUD and located north of Lake Drive West and west of Audubon Road, Eden Trace. 5. An amendment to the City Code regarding limited pawnbrokers as a permitted use in the BF, Business Fringe, BG, General Business, and BH, Highway Business Districts. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 6. Gateway Village Development. 7. Planning Commission Goals for 1996. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m.as outlined in official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If,however,this does not appear to be possible,the Chair person will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. P.C. DATE: 9-6-95 I C I TY O F C.C. DATE: 9-25-95 CASE: 95-12 Site Plan HANUASSEN _ \i � • BY: Al Jaff:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for an 4,600 square foot car wash building Z LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, Abra and Goodyear, north of Lake Drive East and Q Chanhassen Estates and east of Emission Control Testing Station VAPPLICANT : Amcon Corp. Dan Smith / Steve Youngstedt 200 W. Highway 13 4655 Shady Oak Road Burnsville, MN 55337 Hopkins, MN 55343 Q (612) 890-1217 PRESENT ZONING: BH, Highway Business ACREAGE: 1.78 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - BH; Abra, Goodyear, and Hwy. 5 S - RSF; Chan Estates and Lake Drive East E - IOP; DataSery W - BH; Emission Control Station SEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. 4-11 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with W mature poplar and elm trees. 2000 LAND USE: Commercial rn . CI TYE, A!. r IS' .'• ikaii l o , #. O. • .1.4 . lag tr4 iii ig -K Kt ti . I ,. Iilp as I SCHOOL y�* th \ i‘ ' f., „,4 01 • . t:4- 1P .ems Ah:----'' -----} ... •.IC.E T EL 2-1 e:via • mann 0 i par): ,e diva war., / ,1 : •• o� n .. gs Tomos Timm E -- all -, Y : FI Illilli413.0A TO It a* _...oi , p.,,,s . ItirA w pi HIM ?I 1. 1:. c?, Iiiii, 11, emu mac mairivi •:,. Ipa ims. .4. . w • or E , VOL ��/gig _inil .. ■.. ,. !_��z ; ;��,� -NE - - — o-�� • � 4 , SC 00 �� I1��. .n, ir.,„.„y i, tiinJt Co.., irl ? m., r 01A 00• �i r1 "toe 1101;I i E i 4 0 :,_.,,,, AI 001,0. a.• A,!bsr.711111, aliSh:IIIII:51 Ill\N\ .•/- ari— J1_l_ , _ ; i"_"' ^es Fi s/• l�aii ima. .f \,... .firIN . ri.'•vm •.�` y :�` �/��1uf1�1►t•t.("r\s' le 4..vraihrlisral-arisr.c.ii14111W ` !.fir= \►1 = • � 4) �� . i rrir 1 1-.1 ht 41 V II.. AZ iliND 1174 • ieg IP illgri til* '_-_.-:;-:'.-------' 17 �' -..any do 1 t " 1/ r �� i :;...*7 / \ . r :.)1 ft 4 - ‘ - AIL"' - ". - It ,,.x - 1 (i) \ \ z I. N\bul " ; �` co o -*yn 19000 D3 Q m O o a� S \ � n ��z � N �v cm ;7 laaoo �� r W 167TH AVE- 18800 0 rtq (09 '1'11,4 6 -:4 lilik\ --. ,__, 1111/11Th• . IIIKP 1860• 18600 m n m 114 •a 11 Ft• 0 di\ 11\.) (i)N1 , , \ ED -4O O O O O 0 O O O I Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing to construct a car wash facility. The site is located between Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5 adjacent to Abra and Goodyear and east of the Emission Control Testing Station. The area of the car wash building is 4,600 square feet. The site is located in a Highway Business District. The site has access from Lake Drive East via a private drive. The site plan is well developed. Staff has been working with the applicant for the past three months on the site plan and building architecture. The building is a decorative structural brick accented by a natural rock face concrete that will have one service bay and a pitched roof with dormers. All services for the facility will take place inside the building with the exception of vacuuming the inside of the vehicles and a staging area for the customers who wish to dry their cars. Parking for vehicles is located on the south side of the structure away from Highway 5. The parking and stacking lanes will be screened by landscaping and berms from views off of Lake Drive East and residences south of Lake Drive. There will be no outdoor storage or outdoor servicing of vehicles with the exception of vacuuming the interior of the car. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by the applicant. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All of the trees are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not generally thought of as high quality species. However, the large quantity gives it its significance. Their loss is unfortunate but is unavoidable if the land is to be developed. When the Emission Control Site was reviewed, site access was a major concern of staffs throughout the design of the proposal. Our original thinking was that a public cul-de-sac should be required running north from Lake Drive since there may ultimately be 4 sites accessing Lake Drive via that connection. However, staff was concerned that the need to create a cul-de-sac at the end of the street would result in a hazardous traffic situation, whereby traffic entering and leaving the sites would be cutting across the cul-de-sac in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, we recommended that the plans be revised to utilize a commonly owned and maintained private driveway system that will avoid the traffic conflicts outlined above. The private driveway was built to city standards which required the full 32' pavement width and a 9 ton design and curb and gutter. The current access provisions are acceptable. Staff regards the project as well conceived. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site plan, without variances with conditions outlined in the staff report. Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 3 BACKGROUND On January 28, 1991, the City Council approved the final plat #90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. The subdivision resulted in dividing 5.59 acres into 2 lots with an area of 1.9 acres for Lot 1 and 3.0 acres for Lot 2. Lot 1 became the site for the Emission Control Testing Station which was approved as a conditional use permit concurrently with the subdivision. Lot 2 was reserved for future development. On April 26, 1993, the City Council approved the replat of Lot 2 into 3 lots. Lots 1 and 2 are the sites for Abra and Goodyear. Lot 3 is being proposed for development with this application. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The building is situated parallel to Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5. Access is gained off of a private driveway which connects to Lake Drive East. Parking is located to the south of the proposed building. The nearest home is located 200 feet away from the south edge of the actively used portion of the site. Direct views of the service bays will be screened by berming and landscaping from both Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive. The building is located 20' from the north, 39' from the east, 210' from the south, and 60' from the west property line. Materials used on the structure will be a decorative structural brick accented by a natural rock face concrete that will have one service bay and a pitched roof with dormers. Pre-finished metal overhead doors will be used on the east and west elevations of the structure. The building's architecture meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. Auto services will take place inside the building with the exception of vacuuming the interior of the cars and a staging area for the customers who wish to thy their cars. The roof system is being used to screen roof mounted equipment. The applicant has stated that trash dumpsters will be located inside the building. PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The City's parking ordinance for vehicle service stations requires 4 parking stalls per service stall. The site will require 4 stalls. The applicant is providing 17 stalls. Berming and landscaping is proposed along the northwest portion of the site. This will provide screening for Highway 5 of cars exiting the car wash. Evergreens are proposed along the south edge of the site to screen stacking lanes from Lake Drive East. Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 4 ACCESS Access to the site is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS), Abra, and Goodyear. Similarly, this development does not propose any public right-of-way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lot will be private. A driveway or cross-access easement has been recorded in conjunction with the fmal plat recording of Chan Haven Plaza Third Addition to guarantee access to this lot. There should also be a joint maintenance agreement, acceptable to the city, filed against this parcel. We do not wish to see the city petitioned to accept the street at some point in the future. The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed, the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. LANDSCAPING On this piece of property there are woods covering approximately .40 acres. The woods consists of native species such as cottonwoods, willows, elms, oaks and box elders. Construction of the car wash will remove all canopy. The applicant is required to replace lost canopy at a rate of 1.2 times the existing .40 acres. The total for replacement plantings is 20 trees. In addition to replacement plantings, applicant must also supply the required baseline canopy coverage of 14%. To meet this requirement, 10 trees must be planted (14% of 1.78 acres equals .2492 acres x 40 trees/acre = 9.97 or 10 trees). According to the landscaping plan, 31 trees will be provided. The landscaping plan includes four species: Marshall's Seedless Ash, Skyline Honey locust, Austrian Pine, and Black Hills Spruce. According to the ordinance, "no more than one-third of the trees may be from any one tree species." Out of the 31 trees provided, 13 or 42% are Black Hills spruce. The applicant should provide alternate evergreens in the landscaping in order to reduce the number of Black Hills Spruce. Also, along the south lot line of Lot 3, there is a retention pond. This pond has a depth exceeding 8 feet with an average of one foot standing water. There is existing hedges along the southerly perimeter of the pond. Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 5 LIGHTING Lighting locations have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than 1/2 foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. An acceptable lighting plan should be submitted when building permits are requested. SIGNAGE The applicant has not submitted a sign plan. A variance was granted as a part of the signage plan approval for Goodyear and Abra, specifically, the monument sign at the north edge of the site facing Highway 5. Staff proposed that if the Goodyear and the Abra signs were combined into one free standing sign, the third parcel, which is the subject property, located to the south would be permitted to have signage facing Highway 5 too. This third sign would be part of the Abra and Goodyear free standing sign. The area of the sign is 60 square feet. The ordinance allows 64 square feet in area and a maximum height of 8 feet for monument signs. The sign is designed as a monument and not a pylon due to the height of the sign board above the ground. The applicant requested a height of 12 feet. Considering the fact that the applicant could place a pylon sign with an area of 80 square feet and a height of 20 feet, staff was in favor of granting the 4 foot variance for the height of the monument sign. It is a clear benefit to have one coordinated sign instead of three individual pylon signs. The ordinance requires that no wall mounted sign exceed 80 square feet of display area or 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the sign is mounted. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the sign on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of the site. A sign plan acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. GRADING AND DRAINAGE In conjunction with the overall improvements for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition, storm sewers and a stormwater detention pond were constructed to serve this site. The site will convey stormwater runoff via storm sewers into the existing storm sewer system. SWMP fees have already been paid with the platting of the property. The site grading has been reduced from the previous submittal. Due to the grade difference at the intersection of the driveway, the existing street requires a relatively steep driveway grade of 5%. The overall site grading is compatible with the site and staff is comfortable with the proposal. Staff does recommend, however, that all slopes along the pond side be sodded versus erosion control blanket to insure immediate vegetation. Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 6 UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site. These utilities were previously extended to the site in conjunction with Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition improvements. The City has an existing storm drainage easement and storm sewer facilities underneath the proposed easterly driveway. The applicant should enter into an encroachment agreement with the City to clarify restoration responsibilities should the City need to repair the storm sewer line. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION The site plan, from a traffic standpoint, flows much better than previous submittals. Turning radiuses will accommodate passenger-type vehicles throughout the site. Staff requests the applicant reduce the width of the car wash exit from 36 feet down to 24 feet as well as consider removing one of the stacking lanes or bypass lane to reduce impervious surface on the site. COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Car Wash Building Height 2 stories 1 story Building Setback N-20' E-10' N-20'E-39' S-25' W-10' S-210'W-60' Parking stalls 4 stalls 17 stalls Parking Setback N-25' E-10' N-65'E-10' S-25' W-10' S-85' W-60' Hard surface 65% 30% Coverage Lot Area 20,000 s.f. 77,569 s.f. Variances Required - none Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 7 PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land dedication. Fees are paid at the time of building permit issuance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #95-12 as shown on the site plan dated received August 8, 1995, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide alternate mix of evergreen species in the landscaping plan, no more than 1/3 of the trees may be from any one species. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The car wash shall utilize the existing monument sign facing Highway 5. 3. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 4. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal Memo. 5. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 6. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights-of-way. 7. Reduce the car wash exit driveway width from 36 feet down to 24 feet and consider removing one of the stacking lanes or bypass lane. 8. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for constructing a driveway and landscaping over the City's drainage and utility easement prior to issuance of a building permit. Chanhassen Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 8 9. The areas proposed to be stabilized with erosion control blanket shall be sodded instead. 10. Construction access to the site shall be limited to the existing driveway/street and not Lake Drive East. A rock filter construction entrance shall be used and maintained until the driveways have been paved with a bituminous surface. 11. The applicant shall be responsible for adjusting and cleaning all existing utilities that are impacted or disturbed in conjunction with this site construction. The applicant shall perform an inspection of the existing utility lines on site to ensure that they are clean and operational prior to commencing the site work. 12. Park and trail fees will be paid at time of building permit application." ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo from Mark Littfin dated July 3, 1995. 2. Memo from Jill Sinclair dated June 27, 1995. 3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated August 28, 1995. 4. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated July 7, 1995 5. Project Narrative. 6. Plans dated August 8, 1995. CITY 4 F i i::, ,_.,s,„) i:s 0 CIIANHASSEN ,f--" 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner H FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: July 3, 1995 SUBJ: Site Plan Review for a 11, 134 square foot car wash - Lake Drive AMCON Planning Case 95-12 Site Plan. I have reviewed the site plan in order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division,and have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan review was based on the available information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. 1. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #04-1991 - "Notes on Site Plan" copy enclosed. 2. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #07-1991 "Pre Fire Plan Policy" copy enclosed. 3. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy#29-1992 - "Premises Identification" copy enclosed. 4. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #36-1994. "Combination Domestic/Fire Sprinkler Supply Line" copy enclosed. 5. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #40-1994 "Fire Sprinkler Systems" copy enclosed. g:\safetyhn Itcarwash.p]n CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS 1. Fire Marshal must witness the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per NFPA 13-8-2.1. 2. A final inspection by the Fire Marshal before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at construction sites. Details are available. 4. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided and in operating condition during all phases of construction. 5. The use of liquefied petroleum as shall be in conformance with NFPA Standard 58 and the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A list of these requirements is available. (See policy #33-1993) 6. All fire detection and fire suppression systems shall be monitored by an approved UL central station with a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final occupancy is issued. 7. An 11" x 14" As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. (See policy #07-1991). 8. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use. The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: 12/23/94 Page 1 of 2 9. High-piled combustible storage shall comply with the requirements of Article#81 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height. For certain special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. 10. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (See policy #06-1991). 11. Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G, Exception#5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (See policy #05-1991). 12. Maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line policy must be followed. (See policy #36-1994). Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention (.----'-' -71 Policy #04-1991 C, Date: 11/22/91 _ c c',/, �__ Revised: 12/23/94 Approved - Public Safety Director Page 2 of 2 CITY OF i II AN HASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REGARDING PRE-PLAN Prior to issuing the C .O. , a pre-plan, site plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval . The following items shall be shown on the plan. 1) Size 11" x 17 " (maximum) 2 ) Building footprint and building dimensions 3 ) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes 4) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped or dead end 5) Fire hydrant locations 6) P. I .V. - Fire Department connection 7 ) Gas meter (shut-off) , NSP (shut off) 8) Lock box location 9) Fire walls, if applicable 10) Roof vents, if applicable 11) Interior walls 12 ) Exterior doors 13 ) Location of fire alarm panel 14) Sprinkler riser location 15) Exterior L. P . storage, if applicable 16) Haz . Mat . storage, if applicable 17) Underground storage tanks locations, if applicable 18) Type of construction walls/roof 19 ) Standpipes PLEASE NOTE: Plans with topographical information, contour lines, easement lines, property lines, setbacks, right-of-way lines, headings, and other related lines or markings, are not acceptable, and will be rejected. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #07-1991 - / Date: 01/16/91 _ � j Revised: 02/18/94 Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 CITY OF .,.:44_ pg '• CHANHASSEN . el' .:$•-i\k3.11.14 . • . ,- • .,-,', ei •�s-1 , - _ w - 690 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 =-'s-'—' (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director, Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address numbers are posted. Other Requirements-General 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color frorn the background. 2. Numbers shall not be in script. 3. If a structure Is not visible from the street,additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size and location must be approved. .k 4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4". However,requirement*3 must still be met 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers If deemed necessary. Residential Requirements(2 or less dwelling untt) 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1/4". 2. Building permits will not be finaled unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Commercial Requirements 1. Minimum height shall be 12". 2. Strip Malls a. Multi tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. If address numbers are located on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the buildings main entrance. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992 ;;;-;-7-?'.-- - Date: 06/15/92 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of .1 ,a, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 : (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CITY OF CHANHASSEN PROTECTIVE INSPECTION DIVISION POLICY MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIZE OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE ON A COMBINATION DOMESTIC/FIRE SPRINKLER SUPPLY LINE 1. Domestic water line shall not be greater than 1/4 pipe size of the combination service water supply line. 2. 1 1/2" domestic off 6" line 3. 2" domestic off 8" line 4. 2 1/2 domestic off 10" line Option 1: Domestic sizes may be increased if it can be calculated hydraulically that the demand by all domestic fixtures will not drop the fire sprinkler water below its minimum gallonage required. Option 2: Combination domestic and five line service shall have an electric solenoid valve installed on the domestic side of the service. This valve shall be normally powered open and close on loss of electric power or signal from the system water flow indicator. Must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Mechanical Inspector. Chanhassen Fire Department Water Line Sizing Policy #36-1994 Date: 06/10/94 ct3" Revised: Approved - P clic Safety Director Page 1 of 1 CITY OF CH AN HA SS EN' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 .\. (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 1. Permits are required for all sprinkler work. 2. A minimum of four sets of plans are required. Send, or drop off plans and specifications and calculations to: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 3. Yard post indicators are required and must have tamper protection. 4. All control values must be provided with tamper protection. 5. All systems tests must be witnessed by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal. Appointments can be made by calling the Fire Marshal at 937-1900, ext. 132, between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Please try to arrange tests at least 24 hours in advance. All revisions of 25 heads or more will require a test. 6. Main drains & inspector test connections must be piped to the outside atmosphere. 7. Water may not be introduced into sprinkler piping from the City main until the Fire Marshal witnesses a flush test per NFPA 13-8-2.1. 8. The City of Chanhassen has adopted Appendix E (see 1305.6905 appendix chapter 38 of the MBC). Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Division Policy #40-1995 Date: 01/12/95 Revised: 04/26/95 Page 1 of 2 9. All systems must be designed to NFPA-13, 1991 edition and Chapter 6 Standards. All attic systems are to be spaced at a maximum 130 square foot coverage. 3/4" plastic piping will not be allowed at any time in attic space. 10. All equipment installed in a fire protection system shall be UL listed or factory mutual approved for fire protection service. 11. Fire protection systems that are hydraulically calculated shall have a 5 psi safety factor at maximum sy stem flow. 12. Acceptable water supplies for fire sprinkler systems are listed in NFPA-13, 1991 ed., Chapter 7. Swimming pools and ponds are not acceptable primary water supplies. 13. Pressure and gravity tanks shall be sized per the requirements contained in NFPA-13 and 22. Duration of the water supply shall match the hazard classification of the occupancy. 14. Include spec sheets for fire sprinkler heads - dry pipe/pre-action valving. 15. The definition of inspection is contained in MN Rule 7512.0100 Subpart 10, and states that inspection means: 1. Conducting a final acceptance test. 2. Trip test of dry pipe, deluge or preaction valves. 3. A test that an authority having jurisdiction requires to be conducted under the supervision of a contractor. Only licensed fire protection contractors are permitted to conduct these tests. 4. All other inspections including the inspectors test, main drain and other valves are permitted under MN Rule 7512.0400 Subpart-2G, as maintenance activities and do not require a license as a fire protection contractor. 16. Per Section 904.3.2. and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, an approved audible sprinkler flow alarm to alert the occupants shall be provided in the interior of the building in a normally occupied location. (Location must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal). Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Division Policy #40-1995 Date: 01/12/95 I % Revised: 04/26/95 Approved-Public Safety Director Page: 2 of 2 .. 4 CITY OF 0 CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �� (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaf, Planner II FROM: Jill Sinclair, Forestry Intern DATE: June 27, 1995 SUBJ: Replacement and Landscape Plantings, Amcon Corporation Applicant has submitted site plans for a car wash located on 1.78 acres of property south of Highway 5. On this piece of property there is an existing woods covering approximately .40 acres. The woods consists of native species such as cottonwoods, willows, elms, oaks and box elders. Construction of the car wash will remove all canopy. Applicant is required to replace lost canopy at a rate of 1.2 times the existing .40 acres. The total for replacement plantings is 20 trees. In addition to replacement plantings, applicant must also supply the required baseline canopy coverage of 14%. To meet this requirement, 10 trees must be planted (14% of 1.78 acres equals .2492 acres x 40 trees/acre = 9.97 or 10 trees). According to the landscaping plan, 31 trees will be provided. The landscaping plan includes four species: Marshall's Seedless Ash, Skyline Honey locust, Austrian Pine, and Black Hills Spruce. According to ordinance, "no more than one-third of the trees may be from any one tree species". Out of the 31 trees provided, 13 or 42% are Black Hills spruce. Applicant should provide alternate evergreens in the landscaping in order to reduce the number of Black Hills Spruce. Recommendations: 1. Applicant provide alternate mix of evergreen species in landscaping plan, no more than 1/3 of the tree may be from any one species. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer \ DATE: August 28, 1995 SUBJ: Review of Chanhassen Car Wash Site Plan for Lot 3, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition - File No. 95-22 Land Use Review Upon review of the construction documents for Chanhassen Car Wash dated August 7, 1995 prepared by AMCON, I offer the following comments and recommendations: GRADING AND DRAINAGE In conjunction with the overall improvements for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition, storm sewers and a stormwater detention pond were constructed to serve this site. The site will convey stormwater runoff via storm sewers into the existing storm sewer system. SWMP fees have already been paid with the platting of the property. The site grading has been reduced from the previous submittal. Due to the grade difference at the intersection of the driveway, the existing street requires a relatively steep driveway grade of 5%. The overall site grading is compatible with the site and staff is comfortable with the proposal. Staff does recommend, however, that all slopes along the pond side be sodded versus erosion control blanket to insure immediate vegetation. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site. These utilities were previously extended to the site in conjunction with Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition improvements. The City has an existing storm drainage easement and storm sewer facilities underneath the proposed easterly driveway. The applicant should enter into an encroachment agreement with the City to clarify restoration responsibilities should the City need to repair the storm sewer line. Sharmin Al-Jaff August 28, 1995 Page 2 TRAFFIC CIRCULATION The site plan from a traffic standpoint flows much better than previous submittals. Turning radiuses will accommodate passenger-type vehicles throughout the site. Staff requests the applicant reduce the width of the car wash exit from 36 feet down to 24 feet as well as consider removing one of the stacking lanes or bypass lane to reduce impervious surface on the site. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Reduce the car wash exit driveway width from 36 feet down to 24 feet and consider removing one of the stacking lanes or bypass lane. 2. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for constructing a driveway and landscaping over the City's drainage and utility easement prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. The areas proposed to be stabilized with erosion control blanket shall be sodded instead. 4. Construction access to the site shall be limited to the existing driveway/street and not Lake Drive East. A rock filter construction entrance shall be used and maintained until the driveways have been paved with a bituminous surface. 5. The applicant shall be responsible for adjusting and cleaning all existing utilities that are impacted or disturbed in conjunction with this site construction. The applicant shall perform an inspection of the existing utility lines on site to ensure that they are clean and operational prior to commencing the site work. ktm c: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works g:\eng\dave\pc\carwash CITY OF i CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official \1 ' DATE: July 7, 1995 SUBJECT: 95-12 SPR (Chanhassen Car Wash, Amcon) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, JUN 21 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT." for the above referenced project . I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time . g:\safety\sak\memos\plan\no-comnt 4,.t. A Design • Construction • Construction Management PROJECT NARRATIVE CHANHASSEN CARWASH CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA The proposed carwash will sit on a site south of Highway 5 and north of Lake Drive East. The existing site contains a pond, sidewalk and small plantings on the southern third of the property. The buildable area north of the pond is presently covered with a large stand of brush and small trees. To the north of the site is a Goodyear Auto Service Center and an Abra Auto Body Shop. The carwash would utilize a common driveway that also accesses these two businesses. The carwash will consist of a self-service automated single lane conveyor line 100 feet long in the south half of the building. There will be adjoining mechanical and support space in the north part of the building. The plan is organized so the customer can vacuum his/her car in a site staging area prior to entering the carwash. There is an express lane available to by-pass the vacuum stations if desired. The customer then drives into the carwash where an attendant will spray down the car and guide the customer onto the conveyor. The customer remains inside his/her car as it is pulled through the wash conveyor. The cars will exit the building at the end of the wash cycle where there will be exterior staging area available for the customers to dry their cars. Exterior building materials will be brick with accents of rock faced concrete block and stucco. These materials are consistent with and sympathetic to the surrounding buildings. A sloped shingle roof with gable type dormers will give the building a softer, more residential look. Landscaping will provide an affective sreen to adjacent properties, especially the residential area across Lake Drive to the south. Lighting and mechanical equipment will be designed to provide little or no disruption to neighboring properties. ..,_., __d_...e:__,j4) _ryve_e - Colin R. Evenson, AIA 8/7/95 Project Architect, Amcon Corp. 200 W. Hwy. 13• Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Phone: 612-890-1217• FAX:612-890-0064 Offices in Minneapolis•Milwaukee C I TY 0 F PC DATE: September 6, 1995 1 ` ClIANHASSEN CC DATE: September 25, 1995 • CASE #: SP 95-13, CUP 95-3 By: Generous:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conditional Use Permit for Multiple Buildings (2) on the same lot and site plan approval for a 1,255 sq. ft. drive through car wash I- Z LOCATION: 335 West 79th Street (West 79th Street and Great Plains Blvd.) a V J APPLICANT: Gary Brown 1831 Koehnen Circle a► Excelsior, MN 55331 (612) 934-2155 Q PRESENT ZONING: BG, General Business District ACREAGE: Approximately 0.46 acres (20,280 square feet) ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - OI, Office & Institutional, West 79th Street and Railroad ROW S - BH, Brown's Amoco E - BH, Rapid Oil Change W - BH, Great Plains Blvd. and Holiday Station rc-1-Q WATER AND SEWER: Available to site W PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site has been previously graded for development. (n 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial ' - ,VIII!!!! m e Vit► , l �• :. yoow40§��►I�� vl��i �j� �� L A KE s VII �;�■► 44sex v cAirrowa aliall #1111110 ., ,aid inglkiss: , . i Aviv ' L FEN PARK Wig :4,41044 E a 0*# a,.CI#OP. ' ,.:s,) c'411& ��,IIKV�� 1 �' �-40111p�� =;rte, .,1 1 ■■ �` / 'Lrsr4Nl,s �' 0161ismilmj fipea,wa gm pp LAMS ip .ma ' ; ,, i�� En %07 IN log LIS 1 111' 44 47.0 Win . ler4;mt lei ",Iw...::: P3 , ' Ara W SNA i P ``_tilffiF %W WI Matto "&•40 4 . 4 k %. . V'4"4:: ��ce '` • am .%.41 iir 14.t.ftlgillara 1�) d (PVL) •a%' .I _. -. '76 . All Alt* ,, ?" NICHOLASwnr /� �.,..00. --•'..1 I �WQ Wv :Incl. ea MO MOW Elk mAi •,E''v ��'�' EtIMffigMii: ' . ()CA. 0.) .4 BF at RE rn!.1 zsi grAcin. le- ja. :ii,-- °. wil ��1 ... .0-0: �d 11 m Ay- ' �� an mull�� i 1111111 1it �i�`i�l ® g�� N� 111 Illill' •��• , grrilirr gi .• fir;, 0111L.. litiffro. b : • mgr::iiibitwe, = *ESTE" �_ S T _Illikitt6 . rg OW in YE DRIVE qAWN T f HIGH > AIM :�� c �r ��A+= R ,:i7 ai / t ..-4, : am • 0,6 / ILI i. SUS• • ,tz- > ,--- v0 Alit. tisahrip, 4 --0 f . ' 24• '`: 0. sp.&sr at a N a. PARK 1cr 11� a. o d i .:W4114 IF •r w Z 6 .�,n �,1111,� \ `� t- .4., 1. MARSH • W •:; •. ©d !' LAKE W l,qf�- • ��,� / �� CIRCLE PARK INS w w� 6 I,' LAKE SUSAN l, ow I I (%_ _Y " 1�/ Ewa aril I MISSION HI Ir �` �'� leit �� /,--c#, 2-DFRISCO w __ R/Ce M • R� q0;r SWAT MA _- - COURT z jb 44.11t; it .. �. �4 11111 V � Illipy , ��,� Vis_ � - .. ., z... .. Ea IIPM _ P, Abi """it v ....E,A . r is *sib _ -;/"./-7---,(7N- .. 700 to � �� LAN.••■ �� 0 0 /�iiiiiARSH . � N41-7". �, �• / WAY TR•IL �• HILLS 4111 11 ,01■1Wry � ' �,,.—�/ WEST �a� AST --- �-�- �H ZI2 11 ci,,4' ♦t i�iji _1= 2, , T co'uRr o nP�s� - A, ©�i�s� n,�l ya Gam' _ R !^ 1 1 1 i Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow two principal structures on one lot. This parcel was combined with the parcel to the west under one property identification number. Combined, the properties meet the minimum lot requirements in the Highway Business, BH, zoning district. The applicant is requesting site plan approval for a 1,255 sq. ft. drive through car wash. The proposed building is rectangular in shape oriented longitudinally north and south and is 14%2 feet in height. The applicant is proposing the first ten feet of eight inch wide lap siding topped with 4i/2 feet of dark brown inset panel siding. The applicant has also provided an alternate building elevation that incorporates a standing seam metal pitched roof element. Staff is recommending that the pitched roof be required as part of the site plan approval. Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit to allow two structures on the same lot as well as site plan approval subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. BACKGROUND In December, 1986, the property was zoned BH, Highway Business District. On December 5, 1983, a Conditional Use Permit (#83-8) was approved by the city for a car wash on the western half of the site. Approval was conditioned on the following conditions: 1. That the building depicted in the official site plan be shifted 5 feet to the west. 2. That the applicant enter into an indemnity agreement with the City holding the City harmless for any costs in restoring the concrete curb and bituminous hard surface roadways constructed over the permanent 15 foot sanitary sewer easement. In February, 1974, the property was zoned CBD, Central Business District, as part of the adoption of Zoning Ordinance 47A. In February, 1972, the property was zoned C-3, Service Commercial District, as part of the adoption of Zoning Ordinance 47. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE HIGHWAY 5 STANDARDS This property is located within the Highway 5 Corridor District, HC-1 District. The project must comply with the architectural design standards within the district, the intent of which is to attain high quality in both design and construction of the development. Specifically, the Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 3 development must be consistent with all plans and ordinances; must preserve natural conditions to the greatest extent feasible; must establish harmonious physical and visual relationships with existing and proposed development in the corridor; must use appropriate materials, lighting, texture, colors, architectural, and landscape forms to create a high quality design concept; must contain one or more pitched roof elements; must create a unified sense of internal order; must create a suitable balance between the amount and arrangement of open space, landscaping, view protection through screening, buffering, and orientation; must provide safe and adequate access and internal circulation; and must provide adequate separation from adjacent properties. Staff believes that this development has met the intent of the ordinance based on the proposed design and the conditions of approval contained in this staff report. ACCESS The proposed site is to be accessed from the existing car wash facility located on the corner of Great Plains Boulevard and West 79th Street. The proposed drive aisle is approximately 9 feet wide and the radius is too tight for passenger-type vehicles to easily maneuver. The drive aisle should be a minimum width of 16 feet face to face which will allow for passenger vehicles and truck utility vehicles to maneuver the site. Staff has attached a copy of a revised driveway layout (Attachment #1). The same holds true for the access leaving the proposed car wash building. The drive aisle is currently proposed at 9 feet wide and the turning radius would be too tight for passenger-type vehicles. Traffic circulation through the site needs further modifications. The current proposal is to route traffic back through the existing car wash out onto Great Plains Boulevard. Great Plains Boulevard restricts traffic movements to a right turn only which then would require a U-turn at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and West 79th Street. Staff recommends that another access be routed to the east and north of the proposed car wash building back out to West 79th Street. This drive aisle should be a minimum of 16 feet wide face to face. GRADING AND DRAINAGE Only minimal site grading will be required to divert drainage, and create the building pad and drive aisles. Storm drainage from the site will be maintained, for the most part, in its current conditions which is overland drainage to existing catch basins on Great Plains Boulevard or the Amoco gas station to the south which is also owned by Gary Brown, the applicant. Prior to site grading erosion control fence shall be installed along the southerly property line to prevent erosion off-site. Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 4 UTILITIES The site is proposed to be serviced from sanitary sewer to the south and water service from West 79th Street. The plans propose on open-cutting West 79th Street and tapping into the existing 8-inch watermain. According to City as-built records, a 6-inch water lead has already been extended to the site from West 79th Street. Therefore, the applicant will be required to connect to the existing 6-inch lead versus tapping into the City line in West 79th Street. Water and sewer inspections will be required by the City's Building Department and/or Utility Department. Permits will need to be applied for and obtained from the Public Safety Department. MISCELLANEOUS In conjunction with another curb cut on West 79th Street, the City does have boulevard landscaping that may or may not need to be relocated in conjunction with this additional curb cut. The developer shall be responsible for relocation of any landscaping materials along West 79th Street in conflict with the site improvements. LANDSCAPING Staff has reviewed the proposed landscaping plan for this development. The landscaping plan exceeds the minimum requirement for this site. Staff recommends that two of the red maples be relocated to the western side of the property to provide some afternoon shading for the parking lot. LIGHTING/SIGNAGE The applicant has not provided lighting or signage details. Building signage is permitted on street frontage (West 79th Street) only. Any signage, with the exception of directional and traffic circulation signage, would require a separate permit. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 5 (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the City's Highway 5 Corridor design requirements, the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, and the site plan review requirements. The site has few existing natural amenities due to previous development in the area. The site design is compatible with the surrounding development and enhances the open space and landscaping of the area. The site design is functional and harmonious with the approved development for this area with the revisions to the site plan for traffic circulation contained in this report. Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT When approving a conditional use permit, the City must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. Finding: The proposed development is located in a planned commercial area serviced with urban infrastructure and shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or welfare of the community. The development enhances the appearance and convenience of community residents through the provision of service opportunities. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. Finding: The site is designated for commercial use and is located in the commercial center of the City. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the existing and proposed development in the area. The character of the area is commercial and is the commercial core of the community. This area provides automotive services for the community. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Finding: The development is located in the central business area and is consistent with existing and proposed development in the area. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 7 Finding: This development is located in the commercial center of the city and is served by adequate urban infrastructure and services. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding: The development of the site as a commercial use has been anticipated and planned by the city in the design and construction of public improvements. The commercial development of the site will improve the city's economic welfare as well as provide for the convenience and comfort of residents. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. Finding: With the appropriate controls and conditions, as recommended by staff, the development of the site will have minimal impacts to persons, property, and the general welfare of the community. This area has been planned and designed as the commercial center of the city. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Finding: Access to this property will be provided via West 79th Street. Internal access between the two car washes is not provided. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Finding: There are no significant natural, scenic, or historic features present on the site. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. Finding: The applicant is proposing a building that is similar in appearance to the existing self-serve car wash on the site. Staff is recommending the inclusion of a pitched roof element to bring the site into compliance with the HC-1 district criteria. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 8 Finding: This area is planned and zoned for commercial development. Surrounding property values should be enhanced with the completion of this development. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. Finding: The developer will comply with all requirements of City Code and will comply with any conditions of the development approved by the city. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve conditional use permit 95-3 to allow two principal buildings on one lot and site plan 95-13, prepared by Peter Curtis Architect dated June 28, 1995, and site plan prepared by William R. Engelhardt Associates dated August, 1995 and stamped received Aug. 25, 1995, for a 1,255 square foot drive through car wash on property zoned Highway Business district subject to the following conditions: 1. Erosion control fence shall be installed prior to any site grading along the southerly property line and maintained until all disturbed areas have been revegetated or paved. 2. The drive aisles shall be increased to 16 feet wide face to face and another drive aisle shall be looped back to the east and north to West 79th Street to improve traffic circulation. The applicant shall install "Do Not Enter" signs at the looped drive (northeast) entrance and to prohibit westbound traffic south of the proposed car wash. 3. The applicant shall utilize the existing 6-inch water lead from West 79th Street versus tapping the existing 8-inch water main in West 79th Street. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for relocation of any landscaping materials along West 79th Street in conflict with the site improvements. 5. The applicant shall apply for separate sign permits for any signage on site except for traffic circulation sign. Signage shall comply with the city's sign ordinance. 6. The applicant shall use alternate building elevations, sheet A2 Alternate, prepared by Peter Curtis, stamped received Aug 25 1995. 7. Two of the red maples shall be relocated to the western side of the property. Brown's Car Wash September 6, 1995 Page 9 8. The developer shall enter into a site development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of approval." ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Letter from Gary Brown to Planning Commission, City Council, and City Staff 3. Proposed Building Elevations 4. Alternate Building Elevations 5. Attachment 1, Revised Drive Aisle and Signage Diagram 6. Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 7/25/95 7. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List 8. Letter rescheduling Public Hearing to 8/16/95 9. Letter rescheduling Public Hearing to 9/6/95 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: /�R v ��iK� OWNER: a.,� z ADDRESS: te?<-31 C/A- . ADDRESS: K C E e,s',v/L i-h r J 3 3K TELEPHONE (Day time) 93,/-,2/S 5 TELEPHONE: /7V-XV.?? 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit '�p'� 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review - Notification Signs c 5° ` 9. Site Plan Review }Z u 3/0 /'`'<i 41 X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" - ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes 46�(v0 and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ 900 . A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81/2" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION PRESENT ZONING l I REQUESTED ZONING 13 fi- PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION (`il'G-b' REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION f'w� Zh '_.,-'('..��C--�l" REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. f:a:-'-'-4------- Signature of ican Date A f .57J Signature-Mlle Owner Date Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. TO: Planning Commission City Council City Staff Ladies and Gentlemen: It is our privelage to submit to you the plans for our state of the art new touchless car wash. We will construct an all concrete structure and put the same siding on walls that are on the self serve wash, which we own and is twenty feet to the west. In addition, this new building will be the same color as the Amoco wash that we also operate. This site meets all of the city codes and is auto related along with all the other businesses in this area. We will enter and exit off of 79th St. so to eliminate any additional traffic on Great Plains Blvd. This area will be cleaned and maintained by our present staff in order to keep all of the facilities spotless. We will use nothing but biodegradable and environ- mentally friendly chemicals that are all certified to be so. In additional this new wash uses less water than the existing washes that are now in use. Thank you v-ry much for your consideration. 401( Gary Brown N QI 1 £i -- I e ri; iII Iliill ! `i - IIa7 II . 1 Itl't, LV =_,. i =. ! !iIIII• �, ,;.i =alit l iil H '- I 1 I • a 11V s — III jlllllllii $ 41 I ,III 4 o �hOt s 1!,,, i etP if; 0 3 $ It • iliri ' • 1i i rHi1I I 101 1 ....1-� i1i 1 ! , ..I. ILI . (¢ice-- s __ IIII'IIIIiIiII ' j !I�„I.I L__ ,==.. „1,. : p. I! ' 1=-_---, i,HIllii I; I ' .—___. I ! 3i s — I I --\...I_ r 11 — •i= lj � Q I i f . stij. iIIa. MgC I I i a 1a . • �e 1 \•l \ WI l of .iimom - 1;�Etd ! ' f , , , .1. .. - ... , :.SI ......... ; -rd �- 2 ,. 1" I i 1.11111111.. I111v : —L _ _ \! • it0 1LI:11TH rim:I i �I I I naa= eii s MIMI MN _111=111=11 �II ism �~ 1 . ....Emu =,,• — ,,,,,,, ,,!„ ., , 1--i...:......\:, .\\\ \ ,1\\; I ' ...unii 1 st _. ...... f 111aaaaaa■ �E ill II. =PM MIMI ' WIMIN NEENI WE = - re.as i i;; \i ,; . ...1• ij S mos OMR I ....---- i, .... MN- II.......=1-1 , me IIMMIUMII I ___, 4. M 1 t� amil MEM • •—• a 111 .... ,c..1 .cl 1 i r b N. \ v = � ,_---. , � 960--� [, ,� 4 _ _ ________ ,\\ ____ _ _ • _1 1 .._ ...._ -__-= a 1,A$ okoutiRee z91N 01 ,. - � ... . _ . �EST W _____ ...... ...... ____-_-_,--- ,,,9s CONCRETE_PAa ,yam'►' �\ ..,7---- 0 W/ SEC TR S. S 00°25'?• '%r R_.20 .0 08------ i , ✓� 0.9• .5' BI INOUS ESC. _,. .-. -.:,,;•:•20-579.8____.0 - 2{ g86 - s, ALE /__ 1 ..„70.78 opo' 9:, ',aim. ,1t' 966 I19s.5s G QIP a� ,��° 4:3 �� i , -~_\I I , ��5J \. ON `S) 11/4 �62 `�\ - II / � c. cP , II / C JG' cD I•� • ��I O��J 16.00' o . II TIP GUTTER OUT II L,,w O ` d,�f ' II h��\ THIS AREA II IIGhis- Iow N °'``� r; 1, .CONC1 T' A .ON . = .1o� _ < ' / / 2 / 2 / / / . '958.2. �;• o w 1;: \ O i r t o a 0 o VA r, :4- ; O U z co < a co 0 VII 0 ►,1 ,eft. ,� _ 1 1 r O�_1 coco- 0O au -, I�' ',� EXISTING CAR WASH BUILDING #p ��' a°°� �. �\\�a i� . a L 7905 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD Yg . o 9.0' °4\ o= .�\. SLAB EL.= 958.00 gl 'n'i a �, ' mQ • N . m N \\\ ',, .`` 16.00' \ / 11) - -; ;O[ C.R; TE.;.APRON';.,' :k.-- :.' �� N 1�'�t_95 G `? II A � • 8 r O �") I I c6 TIP �`'� 11 a t 958 o I I �,-� GUTTER OUT III o (0 � r (/) � II +� THIS AREA III jai ifs `; CITY 4 F CHANHASSEN \`1 Y 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �r (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official ` (( t- DATE: July 25, 1995 SUBJECT: 95-3 CUP and 95-13 SPR (Car Wash, Gary Brown) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, JUL 0 5 19 9 5, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building peon it requirements. BIM • rairtrii i •■. .© .c; .k —^� --� r NM .W.] .M .v _. .0 Now No© war► In AAIR fiTo� . .G �© := :� ■y min 111 i] 11111 1111111 t NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING , wd o _ ��►�, pill PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _ 111111111111 Wednesday, August 2, 1995 WE sr le`H sr. " :I11111�`�� at 7:00 .m. ItiPM1.70,07400P City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive � � .=aY `' n2 • =L tor ♦ Ail 411 � imE, � � err. Project: Brown's Car Wash HIGHWAY J Vit,*�` ! Developer: Gary Brown / i e:4 01 o �a 11,72 • Location: 335 West 79th Street "4 0•Ak!Mt% A�� s4g1►V 6. � , Y./MS*�!/: ,1 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for Multiple Buildings (2) on the same lot and site plan approval for a 1,255 sq. ft. drive through car wash on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located at 335 West 79th Street (West 79th Street and Great Plains Blvd.). What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on July 20, 1995. 7 urch of St. Huberts Gerald Schlenk, Jean VonBank Al Klingelhutz & Gerald Schlenk )7 Great Plains Blvd. and Mary Goetz 8600 Great Plains Blvd. anhassen, MN 55317 225 West 78th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 lvoline Instant Oil Change Amoco American Oil Co. Chanhassen Post #580 l Main Street E., Suite 1200 Property Tax Dept. P. 0. Box 264 Kington, KY 40507 200 E. Randolph Dr. MC 2408 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chicago, IL 60601-7125 )omberg Companies Michael Sorenson Waterfront Associates 0. Box 730 Rt. 2, Box 187K 440 Union Place anhassen, MN 55317 Belle Plaine, MN 56011 Excelsior, MN 55331 1ph Molnau & Ronald Dubbe B. C. Burdick Holiday Station Stores 5 3' Street West 684 Excelsior Blvd. 4567 80th Street West tconia, MN 55387 Excelsior, MN 55331 Bloomington, MN 55437 addeus E. Korzenowski 545 Radisson Road celsior, MN 55331-9181 C I TY 0 F A\Y . CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �-r (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 July 26, 1995 Dear Property Owner: This letter is to notify you that the following public hearing scheduled for the Planning Commission on August 2nd has been rescheduled to Wednesday, August 16, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers: Conditional Use Permit for Multiple Buildings (2) on the same lot and site plan approval for a 1,255 sq. ft. drive through car wash on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located at 335 West 79th Street (West 79th Street and Great Plains Blvd.) Gary Brown. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 937-1900 extension 141. Sincerely, Robert Generous, AICP Planner II BG:v CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 ♦ August 11, 1995 Dear Property Owner: This letter is to notify you that the following public hearing scheduled for the Planning Commission on August 2nd has been rescheduled to Wednesday, September 6, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers: Conditional Use Permit for Multiple Buildings (2) on the same lot and site plan approval for a 1,255 sq. ft. drive through car wash on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located at 335 West 79th Street (West 79th Street and Great Plains Blvd.) Gary Brown. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 937-1900 extension 141. Sincerely, Robert Generous, AICP Planner II BG:v PC DATE: 9/6/95 CITY 4F CC DATE: 9/25/95 . CHANIIASE • CASE #: 93-5 PUD By: Generous, Hempel, Desotelle STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 12.34 from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD; preliminary plat of Outlot A, Autumn Ridge Addition, creating 94 lots, and one outlot; and site plan approval for a residential medium density development consisting of 2 four-unit structures, 1 six-unit structure and 10 eight-unit structures. The Z development is called Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition. Q (� LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard (County Road 19), north of Coulter Boulevard. a_ APPLICANT: Scenic Enterprises, Inc. Q— 18133 Cedar Avenue South Q Farmington, MN 55024 (612) 469-4066 rims LIN I LOIN UN ky: Hgi*ulLural fstatw, A2 ACREAGE: 12.34 acres DENSITY: 7.62 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - A2, Highway 5 and Miniature Golf and Driving Range S - PUD, Autumn Ridge Addition, 46 townhouses E - OI, Elementary School Site, single-family homes, and Galpin Boulevard W - A2, vacant, guided for Office/Industrial WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. W PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site is adjacent to a large wetland complex (43.8 acres) with an upland agricultural area that was farmed most of the last decade. There is a tree line along the property limits and a (I) perched wetland in the center of the site. The site contains rolling topograhy with several high points of 976. The site drops off toward the wetlands to the west. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Medium Density Residential z i ) •,.ii...b.ii,„„-;, 11 - , I„ .. 1 4,:. ,- --' I , LAKE A 1 0 /4014, i . 1.4 e C 0 hi ..-,1---:-L--..i i • i 1 . .... z • . f-I \ Illt-------:-.- I , Ili 4---\\----. it .•i, x•...- ......„ . ."‘ 7 ..'.. 114, c ° atlo re / -.._ MI uckAim In • 'I '"ARBORET 5 1 ..' -.. ..............„,,, „.......„..., „ , 1=14, I . G1% It?* \ • 111W41101 1111 I dP1''111411 1 e1.e7C;IL e7K. 5T4[11, Ci 1 1POMO :••i ARIP,..gra I Of* , ---, '— :4-1 '• ,inatith, Ai i ..,...... , ! , -•---''-'•-- 1.1 Me Ns.. II . :1- ' '' ''' - Illit• 011iltvvr.. ' • .'.' z' gl11.10_011111111 iik V 7 11111: .... —........... .N.................... (CR 18 I LYMAN 810 - •.. \--:4 .... - -.... ... 1 1 1 1 ! 0 0 ay . 6 o .- proo--1 11111‘7'- -t7: - .1,'i I 1 I . 0 a \ - ca .., 1 . I= • X 0 \ tZ %I % 0 % n a0 CITY OF N 9100 .-. 44 4 IANHASSEN 92 CC !e. i 7_ BASE MAP 500 I r it 1 2 r, 9400— 9500 i — 96019700 a 'T. 9800 A: cr I 04 I - 4 9900 . 4 — BY: ,0200- mrriall IIPP'-4 NHASSEN ENGINEERING DEPT. PrVISFT) .MN. /994 1 N Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Scenic Enterprises, Inc. is proposing to build 94 townhouses on the project located on the southwest corner of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard. There are a total of 13 buildings proposed consisting of 2 four-unit structures, 1 six-unit structure and 10 eight-unit structures on 12.34 acres. This property is currently zoned A2, Agricultural Estate, but it is guided for Medium Density (4-8 units/acre) Development. The developer is proposing densities of 7.6 units per acre. There is a DNR protected wetland which is 43.8 acres adjacent to the project. Coulter Boulevard, which provides access to the project, will eventually connect Audubon Road with Highway 41. This road is part of the City Comprehensive Plan and the alignment was refined in the Highway 5 Corridor Plan. The extension of the collector road must cross a portion of DNR protected Wetland 10-210W. The collector road has been moved to the south to accommodate the school site to the east of the project. The applicants are seeking conceptual and preliminary PUD approval at this time. The design of this project appears to reflect many of the Hwy. 5 development standards. Careful measurement of this project against these standards needs to be made. The building design includes the pitched roof elements, variation in facade treatments with dormers and straight roof edges, variated building components, and the use of colorful and functional plant materials. The applicant has not provided the city with building materials, textures, roofing treatment, and color schemes. Staff is also concerned that the applicant has not, to the maximum extent feasible, minimized the amount of site grading that would be done. Instead, the site will be mass graded to accommodate the proposed building pads for the townhouses. While staff is aware that due to the topography of the site grading and filling is necessary, we still believe that the amount of grading can be minimized through the design of the project and the rearrangement of units. The development has, at times, taken care in arranging building orientations to provide diversity and varying perspectives. However, along the eastern and western edges of the project, the applicant has provided a monotonous building orientation and perspective. Staff is recommending that the applicant alternate building orientations. The applicant should also redistribute the unit types throughout the project to increase site diversity as well as incorporate single loaded units in the southwest corner of the site adjacent to the wetland and in along staffs proposed loop road through the middle of the site (see alternate design schematic). Staff is recommending that this item be tabled to permit the applicant to make modifications to the plan and address other comments outlined in this report. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 3 Site Characteristics The site is currently agricultural. An abandoned farm home and out buildings are located in the far northeast corner of the site. Shelter belt plantings of large spruce and pines are found around the farm home and along the highway with box elders, aspen and eastern cottonwood, black willow and American elm growing within delineated wetlands and on some uncultivated areas. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 12.34 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate, to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. FINDINGS It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria: 1. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. Finding. The major site characteristic of this property is the large wetland complex. The portion of the site that is being developed adjacent to Hwy. 5 slopes, generally, from northeast to southwest. The property along the western edge has trees including elm, box elder and some aspen. Staff is requesting revisions to the plat to minimize the amount of grading. The Tree Preservation Plan needs to be revised based on staff comments. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 4 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Finding. The development plan should be revised to minimize grading for a more efficient use of the land. 3. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. The property to the west of the subject site is guided for a business/industrial park. Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard abut the property to the north and east, respectively. The site to the east is an elementary school. Townhomes, with their ability to be clustered and develop internal amenities, are an appropriate transitional use. 4. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The Comprehensive plan guides the area to the north of the frontage road for medium density 4 - 8 units an acre. The proposed density of 7.6 units per acre is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 5. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The development contains a large wetland complex that will be maintained and enhanced as part of this development. A passive park encompassing approximately 100 acres will be located on this site and the property to the west. The applicant will be constructing a portion of the trail system within the parkland as part of this development. 6. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Finding. The price of the "for sale" units has not yet been determined. 7. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. The grades have been designed around the location of the proposed frontage road and the wetland complex. Staff is requesting that the applicant re-evaluate the proposed grading plans to determine if the grading is being minimized. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 5 8. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Finding. The site will have access from Coulter Boulevard via Galpin Boulevard. Internal access will be provided via a private street in a looped system. Summary of Rezoning to PUD Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility, but allows the city to request additional improvements and the site's unique features can be better protected. The flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for the flexibility, the city is receiving: Development that is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands, trees, topographical features) Sensitive development in transitional areas More efficient use of land As the development is currently proposed, the proposed plan does not meet the minimum criteria necessary to justify the rezoning to PUD. Staff is proposing numerous revisions to the plan that, we believe, enhance the quality of the project. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE Scenic Enterprises, Inc. is proposing to build 94 townhouses on the project on the southwest corner of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard. There are a total of 13 buildings proposed with 10 eight-unit, 1 six-unit,and 2 four-unit structures on a net area of 12.34 acres. The townhouses are located around an internal private roadway system that is accessed via Coulter Boulevard. The project has two sets of development standards to comply with, one is the PUD district and the other is the Highway 5 Corridor Development and Design Standards. The PUD district allows a maximum of 30 percent impervious surface. The applicant is proposing 30 percent impervious surface. Parking, as shown on the plan, meets the city requirements. Two parking stalls per unit are required, one and one-half of which must be enclosed, plus an additional 1/4 space per unit. The development and design standards for the Highway 5 Corridor have been incorporated into the applicant's development proposal. Building height is limited to 3 stories or 40 feet. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 6 This proposal is for two story buildings. Buildings shall incorporate pitched roofs, variations in the rhythms of the building components and architectural details, the use of colorful and functional plant materials, variation in the mass of buildings and building orientation along Highway 5, and the provision of open spaces and sight lines. The applicant has not provided the city with details on building materials, textures, or colors. The setbacks for buildings along Highway 5 are 70 feet minimum and 150 feet maximum. For the interior collector, the setbacks are 50 feet minimum and 100 feet maximum. Parking should not be in the minimum setback area. This proposal meets these standards. There will be no roof top equipment. Signage is proposed for the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and the proposed public frontage road. Detail specifications are not available at this time, but the signage must be compatible with the project design and low profile. Lighting shall be consistent with city standards of %2 foot candle at the property line. The development has, at times, taken care in arranging building orientations to provide diversity and varying perspectives. However, along the eastern and western edges of the project, the applicant has provided a monotonous building orientation and perspective. Staff is recommending that the applicant alternate building orientations. The applicant should also redistribute the unit types throughout the project to increase site diversity as well as incorporate single loaded units in the southwest corner of the site adjacent to the wetland and in along staffs proposed loop road through the middle of the site (see alternate design schematic). SUBDIVISION REVIEW WETLANDS Almost fifty percent of this site is characterized as natural wetland. The wetlands on site can be broken into three separate basins that are described as follows: Wetland A - Wetland A is a DNR protected water (10-210W) and is approximately 43.8 acres in size. Since this is a DNR wetland, this wetland is required to have a natural classification by the City's Surface Water Management Plan. DNR established an ordinary high water mark (OHW) of 931.2 for this basin in the interest of the development. Wetland B - Wetland B is located near the west property boundary (First Addition) and is characterized as an ag/urban wetland. This basin, which is approximately 0.3 acre will be partially impacted by the proposed frontage road. Mitigation for this wetland is permitted under Wetland Alteration Permit 95-4. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 7 Wetland C - Wetland C is located in the northeast portion of the site and is characterized as an ag/urban wetland. This basin, which is approximately 0.3 acre will be filled as a result of the proposed development. Mitigation for this wetland is permitted under Wetland Alteration Permit 95-4. Buffer Strip - The buffer strip width for Wetland A is 10 to 30 feet with a minimum average width of 20 feet. The principal structure setback is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. Since park trail is incorporated along the wetland buffer, an additional 8 feet outside the buffer area will be necessary for the trail. Therefore the range of widths for wetland and trail easement requirements is 18 to 38 feet with an overall average of 28 feet. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP will serve as a tool to protect, preserve, and enhance the City's water resources. The plan identifies the stormwater quantity and quality improvements from a regional perspective necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The City requires storm water quantity calculations for pre and post developed conditions and water quality calculations from the applicant prior to final plat. After review of the calculations, the City will make recommendations for approval of the stormwater plan in accordance with the SWMP. Water Quality The applicant is providing on-site water quality treatment facilities for the first and second addition of the development. Therefore, the water quality fees will be waived. Water Quantity This project is being charged storm water quantity connection fees for medium density land use. The connection charge for medium density developments is $2,975 per developable acre. Based on the proposed development 12.3 acres the applicant is responsible for a water quantity connection charge of$36,592.50. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 8 DRAINAGE The plans propose a series of catch basins to convey storm water runoff to a regional storm water quality treatment pond located in the southwest corner of the site. The pond's side slopes shall be designed as either 4:1 overall or 10:1 for the first 10 feet at the normal water level and 3:1 thereafter for safety purposes. The plans appear to have 3:1 side slopes without the 10:1 foot bench. The City requires the normal and high water levels associated with the ponds and wetlands on the final grading plans. Detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events along with ponding calculations based on Walker's Pondnet methodology shall be submitted to staff for review and approval. Staff recommends an outlet control structure for water quality and an emergency overflow over the top of the pond into the wetland for the 100-year storm events. The City may restore Wetland A in conjunction with the extension of Coulter Blvd. Therefore, the existing ordinary high water level of 931.2 may be raised 1 to 2 feet. It appears that this type of project would not interfere with the development which is 15 to 20 feet higher. Based on a preliminary review, additional storm sewers and catch basins will be needed. Staff will be reviewing these types of improvements at the time of construction plan review and receipt of the drainage calculations. GRADING The plans propose to mass grade the entire site with the exception of the northeast corner in order to accommodate placement of the multi-family type units. The significant oaks in the northeast corner will remain. The existing house and utility structure will need to be removed. In conjunction with reconstructing Galpin Boulevard (County Road 19), the existing roadway grade has been lowered. Commencing at Trunk Highway 5, Galpin Boulevard will be lowered by up to 7 feet. These grade changes are necessary in order to improve sight lines along both Trunk Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard. The applicant's grading plan should be designed to be compatible with the new street grades along Galpin Boulevard. Staff has reviewed the placement of the units and believes modifications could be made to enhance the sight lines from T.H. 5 and modify grades to follow the natural slope characteristics better. Staffs design does not result in the loss of units and actually gives additional green space for landscaping. The applicant's engineer should work with staff in revising the plans accordingly. Berming is not proposed along the frontage road (Coulter Boulevard). Typically along collector-type streets a combination of berming and landscaping is incorporated into the site Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 9 plan to minimize noise and provide screening. All berming shall be located outside the City's right-of-way. Benning is not permitted along T.H. 5 due to grades; however, the area should be heavily landscaped for noise abatement. EROSION CONTROL The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type III erosion control fencing will be required adjacent the natural wetland. The steep slopes may also require some form of terraced erosion control fencing or temporary sediment basin during the grading phase of construction. All disturbed areas as a result of construction will need to be reseeded and mulched within two weeks after grading is completed. The entire site must be graded prior to issuance of building permits. STREETS The applicant has submitted plans and specifications for the construction of Coulter Boulevard in conjunction with Phase I of Autumn Ridge. Coulter Boulevard is proposed to be constructed from Galpin Boulevard (County Road 19) to the west edge of Block 1. The plans for Coulter Boulevard are subject to MnDOT State Aid approval. Since Coulter Boulevard will eventually be extended to Trunk Highway 41 in the future, a temporary cul-de-sac will be constructed at the west end of the project. A condition shall be placed in the PUD/development agreement notifying property owners that Coulter Boulevard will be extended in the future. Since Coulter Boulevard plays a significant role in accessing this development, a condition should be placed in the approval process that the subdivision is contingent upon the City/applicant receiving the necessary approvals from MnDOT State Aid office. The interior streets are fairly well laid out from a traffic circulation standpoint. The interior streets all connect back out to Coulter Boulevard. All of the streets which branch off Coulter Boulevard are proposed to be private streets and not maintained by the City. The private streets shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private driveway ordinance. The minimum street width for multi-family zoning is 24 feet face-to-face with concrete curb and gutter. Parking will be prohibited on all of the private streets. Staff has reviewed the site plan and believes modifications to the street and building layout on the north end of the site are warranted to improve sight lines from T.H. 5 and reduce impervious surface without sacrifice to public safety. Since there will be public improvements constructed in conjunction with this development, the applicant will be required to enter into a PUD/development agreement with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 10 Street lighting should also be required within the development. Staff will work with the applicant to develop a street lighting plan and the applicant shall be required to incorporate it into the street construction plans. UTILITIES The City has previously extended trunk sewer and water facilities to service this area. The trunk sanitary sewer has been extended by the City along the wetlands to Coulter Boulevard. The applicant has provided staff with construction plans and specifications for Phase I (Autumn Ridge 1st Addition) which extends sewer and water to this site. With the exception of Coulter Boulevard, trail and stormwater pond, the utilities in this development will be owned and maintained by the homeowners' association. Due to the size of this development, it is recommended the applicant use the City's standard specifications and detail plates for construction of the utility systems. Inspections for the installation of the private utilities will be performed by the City's Building Department. Staff would like to offer an alternative to the applicant with regards to the utility improvements. Since the utility improvements will be constructed in accordance to City standards, staff suggests that the applicant consider turning over ownership and maintenance to the City after the improvements are installed and tested. This would permit proper maintenance on a regular schedule and provide a better level of service to the residences. It would also avoid having the applicant applying for and obtaining numerous permits and inspection from/by the City. If the applicant wishes for the City to take over ownership of these utilities, the City would charge the applicant at time of final plat recording, a 3% administration fee based on the construction cost to install the utilities. In addition, the applicant would have to dedicate a drainage and utility easement over the utilities. MISCELLANEOUS Mn/DOT's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways. Residential land use adjacent to highways will usually result in complaints about traffic noise. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has established noise standards and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development also has guidelines. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by these agencies. Mn/DOT policy regarding new developments adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. Mn/DOT will not be constructing any noise abatement structures as part of the upcoming T.H. 5 project. The developer should assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any traffic noise. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 11 LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The site is primarily devoid of trees except in the northeast corner and near the wetlands. The significant tree inventory of the site verifies these tree types consisting of maples, oaks, box elder, and elm. Conifers have been planted in the area of the farmstead. The applicant has provided the city with the base line canopy coverage calculations and the development's canopy coverage removal estimates. City ordinance requires a canopy coverage of 20 percent for medium density residential developments. The applicant shall revise the tree preservation tabulations as follows: Min. Canopy Coverage 20% (Med. Density Residential; Add. Canopy Coverage Required 1.798 acres; and total trees required 83 trees. The only significant tree preservation proposed on the site is in the northeast corner of the property and along the northern portion of the site within the Highway 5 right-of-way. However, staff believes additional trees can be saved on the southwest corner of the site through revisions to site grading and building orientation and type. The landscaping plan provides 263 trees which would exceed the forestation/replacement requirements. There are 13 different tree species included in the plant schedule. Of the total number of trees provided, 74 trees are ornamentals (28 percent), 126 are conifers (48 percent), 5 are primary species (2 percent), and 58 are secondary species (22 percent). Staff has two concerns with the landscaping plan. The first is the distribution of tree species. Only 24 percent of the trees are either primary or secondary species, almost half the trees are conifers, and 28 percent are ornamentals. The second issue of concern is that the landscape screening for this development is being provided primarily by the evergreens that are being preserved within the Highway 5 right-of-way. To resolve both these issues, staff is recommending that a more equitable distribution of trees be incorporated into the landscaping plan and that additional groupings of evergreens be planted along the northern project boundary to prepare for the possible future removal of the evergreens with the widening of Highway 5. Conifer trees shall average seven feet with a minimum height of six feet. PARKS AND RECREATION The Park and Recreation Commission met on August 22, 1995 to discuss this development. They recommended the following conditions: 1. Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance. 2. Trail fees for Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition, and retroactively for Autumn Ridge 1st Addition, be waived in consideration of trail construction. This trail construction shall be completed per city specifications within an alignment approved by the city. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 12 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission table this item to permit the applicant the opportunity to address the following comments and revise the plans as appropriate: 1. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 2. Must comply with Premises Identification - Policy #29-1992. Copy attached. Additional address numbers must be installed at entrance of driveways to multi- dwelling units. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for details. 3. On the main looped road there must be posted on one side "No Parking" signs. Signs must be installed with 75 foot intervals. Submit drawing to Fire Marshal for approval. 4. There are fire hydrants shown on the plan that will need relocating. There are also additional hydrants that must be added. These changes will be addressed, and shown on the utility plan. 5. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval. 6. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 7. Obtain demolition permits for the existing structures on site. This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 8. Adjust property lines to permit openings and projections in exterior walls or confirm that no openings or projections are planned. This must be done before preliminary plat approval. 9. Staff is recommending that the applicant alternate building orientations throughout the site. The applicant should also redistribute the unit types throughout the project to increase site diversity as well as incorporate single loaded units in the southwest corner of the site adjacent to the wetland and along staffs proposed loop road through the middle of the site (see attached alternate design schematic). 10. Provide the city with building materials, color schemes, etc. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 13 11. Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance. 12. Trail fees for Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition, and retroactively for Autumn Ridge 1st Addition, be waived in consideration of trail construction. This trail construction shall be completed per city specifications within an alignment approved by the city. 13. Revise the landscaping plan to provide a more equitable distribution of trees and provide additional groupings of evergreens along the northern project boundary to prepare for the possible future removal of the evergreens with the widening of Highway 5. Conifer trees shall average seven feet with a minimum height of six feet. 14. Detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10-year and 100-year storm events along with ponding calculations based on Walker's PONDNET methodology along with pre and post-runoff conditions shall be submitted to City staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration 15. The applicant will be responsible for the appropriate water quantity connection fees based on the City's Surface Water Management Plan. Staff has calculated that the proposed development would be responsible for a water quantity fee of $36,592.50 assuming 12.3 acres of developable land. 16. The wetlands and wetland buffers shall be delineated on the grading and drainage plans. The buffer strip for Wetland A shall be 18 to 38 feet wide with an average width of 28 feet. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the city's wetland ordinance. The city will install wetland buffer edge signs before accepting the utilities and will charge the applicant $20.00 per sign. 17. The developer shall construct an 8 foot wide asphalt trail per city specifications within a 20-foot wide trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conjunction with street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and City Engineer. The legal description of the trail easement shall be prepared by the applicant after the trail location has been determined in the field. 18. The applicant may commence site grading after final plat approval and the applicant entering into the Planned Unit Development Agreement and supplying the city with a financial security to guarantee site grading, erosion control, and site restoration. 19. A condition shall be placed in the PUD/Development Contract notifying residences that Coulter Boulevard will be extended in the future. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 14 20. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation of street lights along the private streets. The applicant and City staff shall work together to prepare a street lighting plan to be incorporated into the street construction plans. 21. The development plans shall be revised to incorporate staffs revisions to the street and building unit layout (see alternate design schematic) including the following modifications: a. Site grades shall be compatible with future grades of Coulter and Galpin Boulevards. b. Incorporate berms and landscaping along Coulter Boulevard and increase landscaping adjacent to T.H. 5. c. A native buffer strip 10 feet in width should be maintained around the natural wetland. The required buffer strip adjacent to the natural wetland shall be 18 feet to 38 feet wide with an overall average of 28 feet. 22. The applicant will be required to enter into a PUD/development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. 23. The applicant shall design and construct the street and utility improvements in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the public improvements shall be submitted to City staff for review and approval. 24. The applicant shall provide a copy of the covenants for review and approval by the City and shall be filed at the County with the final plat documents. 25. The applicant shall provide "as-built" locations and dimensions of all corrected house pads or other documentation acceptable to the Building Official. 26. The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as the MPCA, Health Department, Watershed District, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, MnDOT and Carver County Highway Department. 27. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction. The applicant will comply with the City Engineer's direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the drain tile. Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition September 6, 1995 Page 15 28. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the wetlands. The site may also require additional erosion control fence on the slopes and/or temporary sediment basins. 29. Drainage and conservation easements shall be dedicated over all wetland areas within the subdivision including outlots. Wetland mitigation measures shall be developed and subject to approval by the City. The mitigation measures shall be completed in conjunction with the site grading and restoration. 30. The final plat shall be contingent upon MnDOT's State-Aid office approving the street alignment for the east/west frontage road. Construction plans shall be revised accordingly as a result of the State-Aid review process. 31. The private streets/driveways shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private driveway ordinance for low and/or medium density zoning. 32. The developer shall construct an 8 foot wide asphalt trail per city specifications within the trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conjunction with street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and City Engineer. After construction of the trail the applicant shall dedicate to the City a 20-foot wide trail easement. 33. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review and approval prior to final plat approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Preliminary Plat dated 6/21/95 3. Alternate Design Schematic 4. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 8/23/95 5. Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 8/24/95 6. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List ! yaftr.— • - - ' (//p;p7,-)144-!r--. ._ CItY l31= CNdN11A5SEN g------ 80 cOULTt_ri bglvE tHANHASSgN, MN g6317 • (812) 93T-11)oo bwitUJPWIt MfiVIWiV AprLICAY1oN Apa1ICANt;� SCENIC ENTERPRISES INC dWNEh• JOSEPH M MILLER Abbktts§! 18133- dEbAit AVE SO MINIEss: FARMINGTON MINNESOTA 55024 Tt:LEHItiNb (bay Urn) 612- 469-4066 tELEPHONE: Flax:: 469-4067 1. tornhre1,1mila t'I1H Artit)lidrhont H. • Vbcation of FLOW/Easenionts 2, Conditional U3A permit 12. Variance 3. • Ihiertnt Use f W m . 13. _ Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-contormind Use I'elinll - 14. Zoning Appeal S. , Planned Unit Development ,(,.....) 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6 -``Rezoning ��' b0 �_ 7. Sign PermilS 1 8. Sign Plan fievlevi . X. Notification Signs f/SO.'" 1 1 O.___X__ Site Plan Review • rf X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" �V ($50 CUP/SPRiVACNAWWAP/Meles 1 and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. X Subdivision TOT/LL PEE A list of all property owhbrt within 5o0 teet of the boundaries at the property must Included with the applicetidti. twenty-six full site folded copies of lire pians must be Subnittted. WA" X it- Ftedrlced c.:;+; of tr•.nsparency tot each plan sheet. • NOtE -When multiple 10p5catIong t r± processed. the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. '' Escrow will be required tot other applications through the development contract „Arian=twig A L.'S ?- r4-l er. • LOCA11oi4 • .. in . ._ . . ., . -. . • - S` Lel&DOCRIFIniari _..(266,11t1CCLikr jtuttlijki,13.A.1416m.„... 1 f $ 4T 7Zn+tnrp _4- 1 must=maw_ ; MECUM AND Ulte L SitiN1T1DH CM reauesno LAM 1,18E A t yectlagge44141 REASON POR Tits ROT � Itols app at Pio be 0:malesed b MI end be Oppetnitien of Glee*MOW end must be icoompankid by sfl hlottnaRbn OW pains mad by atom 01), Ottaller100 pins. before MN dad eppikvicrt. Yeti ;holds! Bonier nth the Planning erre to MOM***e'Noble ordinerve end pexedund reciLdrernertte lc your plte A ii. 'Year t:b Omer chat 1 are macho sppice t Orr for tete described boson by the City and that erre reeptinelbfe for adrrpiyirty *eh el Ciity requirements witii NOW m ick to INS rttquest. Mb 11ppia cation*mild be pnoosed In mm y ace end I ant ter party pergd g ba tree tpppliat ort'_ I haw ebarhed a of proof of ; otwtr:s* teetxr COPY of Orfrtenl cadmost,of alae./Kraal of T I or'motto*”igresrrrerk?. or i ern the tultvoxzad person to revtsrs*Ili acipicetbn end tfr♦Yee orKwr hes atib tiled tt>}e eppli ion. I wi3 keep aim*Mand M the dowofxs for outrtt#siert d me** *rid the primes, et reit app ten. 1 further Nnderalar+d*set*Mortal Isa er4 be&begged tar ozrteildr9 Net,MIAOW Sucks, elm ebb tort estimate prior tC any ecri*srlzetfott to proceed wen the stud'. The doeu igots and intomegion I his subm*d are 14 and cornet to the boot Of my feKrefiedge. • I / .44....s. is A - 1 .24,- • 40., IC,,...if.'if IrialreAllVf# / 441 X.,.44:(1 / 9 Necekot NO, fl$ d;holed erintbet$W for tt ager of the=fall report%Mote bi Oft may prior to the g reef fid,a copy of the abort will be nulled to tete egplkvrrtl'e adorers, MTN- r-83 • ., .e N stem., e iiE3 3 n ^ E i - w o Kmu ti-r, V vi C N J V g aa'A1 ; ;i: i' 9' , 9 g 11 1 / k • :5: 1 :I: I io Y q sae 5 • V:- N fi s- J Sri S tr i a1 qY 2 a h' :: i• !....... 1 A : n i I lI1C ...re. - \'; CD 1 1 N — ^mil . _'1,...J., m.= it • 4 ; : illihi 444' ' fil•tz—q / f '.,,,...--. r��y may..*.,�11 - I 1•,i.:- .; /4 = ::\ M1 ..I.,\ , 1 , :,''' :-. :;1?%.:;:\;_y7.-..‘.1".C.-,..,.‘;'-'1.'.:..:.,-,\\..„..;<::::)."s\.\\ .‘ :: 2 : il: : o {� g , . ' ' J, .••, :2, 2 Si;' �.--�.� / iitiob, d ,_,,,, P ,I �r r• .. ;``�.•+i o A • ' t/! 'Bagel a WWI j1' 1 ' li a y ''4/ iia4G,f .. ,,J l�■ J 84,1* Qe�r �. .iite i 6. 11!Vhi • ;fir s J J ` g�Q qs \i\\IOre3 $-...L._ S'''..\ 15a 0i11DT A - y\ ''-.\ } y STATE TRUNK H1GHA'Aj[��f-5� Lc�•1•�op.,,,; \• a — . - -_ ----_. - ---- -- 11 4 —- ------ ------ -- a K PRELIMINARY PIAT PASSE ENGINEERING, INC °�� .r." = =•...-:-:-.•-."---�= AUTUMN RIDGE 9443 FAST RIVER ROM) Sig7R 203 , > , i ".•n.• M• ...A/veer... ._•,•, 2ND ADDITION Y1n•ARAro1,1$ Y1vSF._�71TA 3:,4:13 -- --_-----{t 1 "' - i.7.14=1.1%.".. Cm OT CIIA9!IAR"4.Yr PROW:(Al2) 723 6240 FAX(11121 7253-1362 _ _ — • -, _ \ Y _ / '` � �5441E - ti - _ �� ;; 3j, \ m :;;1(::;\r '? Z , ` r „,..-‘).,,,,.-e‘ N _ T s f _ ,N 1 F _` ,_sii- , • - r .11-, -eR.- . -01 i*�-it v'_#�1 � a ,, r - 3 i -al s . linty if rti F.71 co I ) ~ c !V i - 7 ; 1 7'_art. 1 1„, : --alN. •. i .IR 4-11.-' ,..7c., . s . / •• .. ... . ,,. ,. .,. _._ 0_ii 1 t--' .0 i !/ 1f- .�l�141).411111.111111111.%...'•'•+ .i N *it ).5i, 1 N t s„••<, 11' t . . /-‘3-11 I/ \ " ' .1,,„. :; strew C. t,,4 i (9 a?it i f ' - -_,,4 - 1 ... , (2,,..\?; ,. :„ _ ........... .__..,, ,,. i ..... colitp, %F' 4i. 'au, m .c ••• `-/, r 'i I �� 'V ega N-1 t r ...'.°`/ , ,4, ,,,,` ...it* bti. ' .eft, i �� •.. • - a ___ . _, . - . -iiir , * . ,- , apf fire , e i. Ater r 5 / ; • ,,,, , 1 , : ---,. ---,.. oft, f, , 0....,,,,w.: _.. _ 1 / ., :. , .: ., - ......_ _. . • ..\......„,„., , 4 • / •per Z 4 ;a '; !` � i �`` at I IIIPP er Abb...2-.., ' /0)/ // ,if 141: 0 ' !� ? r' tir el i:0 .1 rU I tri / iy ,/Q4, * �toS , 4 I , . .• „.,. , ie. , *04. -,,, ,' \ '- 41 N...,, 1 leiltilli C ill A _ .t. { ,..... , ... it / rata C. ,..• r 41* ._. .... �' / -.. 41 '.. . 4.1t„. . '*tor • ,,,, . Y �c� ci--4) . .. AP-is-44, ,,,. (2, , .0. . , . - ...... _N., . \.`� ' . _ ,_.,. , s.,......„ , - ea Z . CD ' • .Q _.\ 668 19 rr7 - r G ' ,: \�l�- CITY OF CHANHASSEN ,\ y 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Planner II FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: August 23, 1995 SUBJ: Enterprises Inc., Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition Planning Case #93-5 P.U.D. I have reviewed the site plan in order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division and have the following fire code or City Ordinance/Policy requirements. The site plan review is based on the available information at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. 1. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 2. Submit street names for approval. 3. Must comply with Premises Identification - Policy #29-1992. Copy attached. Additional address numbers must be installed at entrance of driveways to multi- dwelling units. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for details. 4. On the main looped road there must be posted on one side "No Parking" signs. Signs must be installed with 75 foot intervals. Submit drawing to Fire Marshal for approval. 5. There are fire hydrants shown on the plan that will need relocating. There are also additional hydrants that must be added. These changes will be addressed, and shown on Dave Hempel's utility plan. g\c a f c ty ern f\a u trn rd g c.2nd CITY OF . ‘ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official gt DATE: August 24, 1995 �1 SUBJECT: 93-5 PUD(Scenic Enterprises, Inc. , Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition) Dackaround: I was asked to review the plans stamped"CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, JUN 21 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project . Below are an analysis and recommendations from the Inspections Division for the proposed project. Analysis: Street Names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents . The proposed street name should be different from the names of the streets to the south. Due to the number of units and outlets on the same street, the proposed street name should be given an east/west designation. The proposed street name may have a maximum length of three words including the east/west designation. Building Pads. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) must be shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Demolition Permits. Existing structures on the property which will be demolished will require demolition permits. Proof of well abandonment must be furnished to the City and a permit for septic system abandonment must be obtained and the septic system abandoned prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Structure Setbacks. Details of proposed buildings have not been furnished. Bob Generous August 24, 1995 Page 2 Table 5-A of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) prohibits openings in walls that are within three feet of a property line. Projections (decks, overhangs, etc. ) must comply with UBC 503 .2 .1 and 705 which generally permit projections to extend a maximum of one third the distance to the property line, but require these projections to be of one-hour fire- resistive construction. What this means is that property lines should generally be four to five feet from the buildings. Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval . 1 . Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval . 2 . Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations . This should be done prior to final plat approval . 3 . Obtain demolition permits . This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 4 . Adjust property lines to permit openings and projections in exterior walls or confirm that no openings or projections are planned. This must be done before preliminary plat approval . enclosure: January 29, 1993 memorandum g:\safety\sak\memos\plan\autmrdge.bg3 CITY 4 F :,; CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • PD. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORAN i UM TO: Inspections, Planning, & Engineering Staff FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official DATE: January 29, 1993 SUBJ: Dwelling Type Designation We have been requesting on site plan reviews that the developer designate the type of dwelling that is acceptable on each proposed lot in a new development. I thought perhaps it might he helpful to staff to explain and diagram these designations and the reasoning behind the requirements. FLO or RLO Designates Front Lookout or Rear Lookout This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to approximately 4' above the basement floor level. R Designates Rambler. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. This would include two story's and many 4 level dwellings. SE Designates Split Entry. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. SEWO Designates Split Entry Walk Out. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to lowest floor level. TU Designates Tuck Under. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the front of the dwelling. WO Designates Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the rear of the dwelling. SE or sEwo wo �L\ Inspections staff uses these designations when reviewing plans which are then passed to the engineering staff for further review. Approved grading plans are compared to proposed building plans to insure compliance to approved conditions. The same designation must be used on all documents in order to avoid confusion and incorrect plan reviews. Is �0. PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . 1 4 4 ° , -erri ;, NOTICE OF PUBLIC � ` HEARING t PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING if Wednesday, SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 1� at 7:00 .m. ocat•o s� City Hall Council Chambers �1 _ <<A- 690 Coulter Drive • :.0. Project: Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition 7 1: Developer: Scenic Enterprises, Inc. _ c",/ °E . A��,rie.. pelt, ... J am, P,pq: • a 7, 1 Pli il Ns Location: Southwest Corner of Hwy. 5 - ,. io . %'1\and Galpin Boulevard 4J < Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is requesting a Conceptual and preliminary PUD rezoning the property from A2, Agricultural Estate, to PUD, Planned Unit Development; preliminary plat approval for 94 lots and one outlot; site plan approval for 2 four-unit structures, 1 six-unit structure and 10 eight-unit structures on 12.34 acres located at the southwest corner of Galpin Blvd. and Hwy. 5, Scenic Enterprises, Inc., Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on August 24, 1995 clG r, (�^ YI ' w'1 Ind. School District 112 Dale & Marcia Wanninger James Avis 110600 Village Road 8170 Galpin Blvd. 8190 Galpin Blvd. Chaska, MN 55318 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Lawrence Raser JP Links, Inc. Larry & Elizabeth VanDeVeire 8210 Galpin Blvd. c/o John Przymus 4890 Co. Rd. 10E Chanhassen, MN 55317 642 Santa Vera Chaska, MN 55318 Chanhassen, MN 55317 MidAmerica Baptist Social Ser. Lundgren Bros. Const & Mitchel & Mary Krause 2600 Arboretum Blvd. Jay Dolejsi 2380 Timberwood Dr. Excelsior, MN 55331 935 Wayzata Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Wayzata, MN 55391 James & Linda Leirdahl Steven & Sharon Olson Curtis & Jean Beuning 2350 Timberwood Dr. 10809 Washburn Ave. S. 2381 Timberwood Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Bloomington, MN 55431 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Betty O'Shaughnessy 1000 Hesse Farm Road Chaska, MN 55318 CITY OF \ CHANHASSEN f ` 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: August 30, 1995 SUBJ: Limited Pawnbroker Ordinance BACKGROUND The city was approached by Mr. Bert Alexander, who is requesting a limited pawnbroker business. A limited pawnbroker is someone who could only motorcycles, motor vehicles or boats. This item appeared before the City Council on April 10, 1995. The Council directed the Public Safety Commission to draft an ordinance. Scott Harr, through the Public Safety Commission, worked with the City Attorney to develop an ordinance that would allow limited pawnbrokers. The ordinance defines how this type of business would be operated. The issue for the Planning Commission is to determine if this type of business were to be allowed, in what districts should they be permitted. ANALYSIS Staff is requesting the Planning Commission give consideration to which district this use would be allowed. This would be an amendment to the zoning ordinance. The City Council will hold a public hearing as to whether or not they approve the limited pawnbroker ordinance. The Planning Commission is only considering the appropriate district for the use. One of the criteria that would be of concern to the Planning Department would be outdoor display. Under the general license restrictions, Section P, Premise, states that all property deposited, left, pledged, pawned or held for sale must be stored in a closed facility and not stored outside of the premises. It also states that the issuing authority may, however, permit the licensee to designate one off premise locked and secured facility in which the licensee may store only cars, boats and other motorized vehicles. Staff is recommending, based on the fact that there can be no outdoor storage, that this use be permitted in all commercial districts except the neighborhood districts which includes the BH, Highway Business, BG, General Business, and the BF, Fringe Business District. Planning Commission August 30, 1995 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends, subject to the City Council approving the limited pawnbroker ordinance, limited pawnbroker use be a permitted use in the following districts: BF, Fringe Business District BG, General Business District BH, Highway Business District" ATTACHMENTS 1. Pawnbroker ordinance. 2. City Council minutes dated April 10, 1995. 3. Public Safety Commission minutes May 11, 1995. 09:37 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 2/14 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE BY ADDING AN ARTICLE CONCERNING PAWNBROKERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amended by adding Article VII to read: ARTICLE VII PAWNBROKERS Sec. 10-181. PURPOSE. The City Council finds that pawnbrokers potentially provide an opportunity for the commission of crimes and their concealment because such businesses have the ability to receive and transfer stolen property easily and quickly. The City Council also finds that consumer protection regulation is warranted in transactions involving pawnbrokers. The purpose of this Article is therefore to prevent pawnbroking businesses from being used as facilities for commission of crimes and to assure that such businesses comply with basic consumer protection standards, thereby protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City. Sec. 10-182. DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms when used in this Article shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Issuing Authority means the City of Chanhassen. Limited Ptewnbroker piers a pawi&uker whose .1vid are linitedsolely to personal property, ownership of which is evider d bar ertxftca. of title, car:similar umeut issued Fly a state ager y, such as for motor vehicies,'motor es,or boats, sa long as the pawnbroker annually:certifies,the foregoing to the Issuing-Authority. Minor means any natural person under the age of eighteen (18) years. Pawnbroker means a person who loans money on deposit or pledge of personal property or other valuable thing; who deals in the purchasing of personal property or other valuable thing 23822 05/31/95 09:38 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL N0: 612-452-5550 10271 PAGE: 3/14 on condition of selling that same back again at a stipulated price; or who loans money secured by chattel mortgage or on personal property, taking possession of the property or any part thereof so mortgaged. To the extent that a pawnbroker business includes buying personal property previously used, rented, or Ieased, the provisions of this Article shall be applicable. Any bank, savings and loan association, or credit union shall not be deemed a pawnbroker for purposes of this Article. Person means any one or more natural persons; a partnership, including a Iimited partnership; a corporation, including a foreign, domestic, or nonprofit corporation; a trust; a political subdivision of the state; or any other business organization. Sec. 10-183. LICENSE REQUIRED: No person shall exercise, carry-on, or be engaged in the trade or business of pawnbroker or im ted pawnbroker within the City unless such person is currently licensed under this Article. .. ................................:..:............... Persons engaged in the business of pawnbroker on the effective date of this Article must receive a license within sixty (60) days or cease doing business. Sec. 10-184. APPLICATION CONTENT: In addition to any information that may be required by the Counties pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.924, every application for a license under this Article shall be made on a form supplied by the Gity-ef--C-hafillassenIssuing::Authority and shall contain the following information: (1) If the applicant is a natural person: (a) the name, place, and date of birth, street resident address, and telephone number of the applicant; (b) whether the applicant is a citizen of the United States or a resident alien; (c) whether the applicant has ever used or has been known by a name other than the applicant's name, and if so, the name or names used and information concerning dates and places where used; (d) the name of the business if it is to be conducted under a designation, name, or style other than the name of the applicant and a certified copy of the certificate as required by Minn. Stat. § 333.01; (e) the street addresses at which the applicant has lived during the preceding five (5) years; (f) the type, name, and location of every business or occupation in which the applicant has been engaged during the preceding five (5) years and the name(s) and address(es) of the applicant's employer(s) and partner(s), if any, for the preceding five (5) years; 23822 2 05/31/95 9:39 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL N0: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 4/14 (g) whether the applicant has ever been convicted of a felony, crime, or violation of any ordinance other than a traffic ordinance. If so, the applicant shall furnish information as to the time, place, and offense for which convictions were had; (h) the physical description of the applicant; (i) if the applicant is married: i) the name, place, and date of birth, and street address of the applicant's current spouse; ii) the type, name, and location of every business or occupation in which the applicant's current spouse has been engaged during the preceding five (5) years; iii) the names and addresses of the employers or partners of the applicant's current spouse for the preceding five (5) years; iv) whether the applicant's current spouse has ever been convicted of any felony, crime, or violation of any ordinance other than a traffic ordinance. If so, the applicant shall furnish information as to the time, place, and offense for which convictions were had. (2) If the applicant is a partnership: (a) the name(s) and address(es) of all general and limited partners and all information concerning each general partner and each limited partner required in subpart (1) of this Section; (b) the name(s) of managing partner(s) and the interest of each partner in the pawnbroker business and the name of one managing partner to be designated as the contact person for the City; (c) a true copy of the partnership agreement shall be submitted with the application. If the partnership is required to file a certificate as to a trade name pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 333.01, a certified copy of such certificate shall be attached to the application. (3) If the applicant is a corporation or other organization: (a) the name of the corporation or business form, and if incorporated, the state of incorporation; (b) a true copy of the Certificate of Incorporation, Articles of Incorporation, or Association Agreement, and By-laws shall be attached to the 23822 3 05/31/95 09:40 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL N0: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 5/14 application. If the applicant is a foreign corporation, a Certificate of Authority as required by Minn. Stat. § 303.06, shall be attached; (c) the name of the manager(s), proprietor(s), or other agent(s) in charge of the business and all information concerning each manager, proprietor, or agent required in subpart (1) of this Section; (d) a list of all persons or families (including the name of each spouse, parent, child, sibling, etc.) who control or own an interest in excess of five percent (5%) in such organization or business form or who are officers of the corporation or business form and all information concerning said persons required in subpart (1) above. (4) For all applicants: (a) whether the applicant holds a current pawnbroker license from any other governmental unit and whether the applicant is licensed under Minn. Stat. § 471.924; (b) whether the applicant has previously been denied a pawnbroker license from any other governmental unit; (c) the names, street resident addresses, and business addresses of three (3) residents of Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Washington, Scott, Goodhue, or Rice County, who are of good moral character and who are not related to the applicant or not holding any ownership in the premises or business, who may be referred to as to the applicant's and or manager's character; (d) the location of the business premises; (e) the legal description of the premises to be licensed; (f) whether all real estate and personal property taxes that are due and payable for the premises to be licensed, tt owned by i e applicant;; have been paid, and if not paid, the years and amounts that are unpaid; (g) whether the application is for premises either planned or under construction or undergoing substantial alteration, the application shall be accompanied by a set of preliminary plans showing the design of the proposed premises to be licensed. If the plans or design are on file with the City of Chanhassen Building/Inspections Department, no plans need be submitted with the Issuing Authority; (h) if the applicant is a limited pawnbroker; certi ication by the applicant that its pawnbroker actsuities are itnuted solely to personal proper3y,ownership 23822 4 05/31/95 09:41 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: G/14 ............ .... ......... ... .......... cif:> ; .G 1 + l e <b fic e o title�..or simi1ax document issued ON4f-` ; (hi) such other information as the City Council or Issuing Authority may require. Sec. 10-185. APPLICATION EXECUTION: (a) All applications for a license under this Article shall be signed and sworn to. If the application is that of a natural person, it shall be signed and sworn to by such person; if that of a corporation, by an officer thereof; if that of a partnership, by one of the general partners; and if that of an unincorporated association, by the manager or managing officer thereof. (b) Any falsification on a license application shall result in the denial of a license. Sec. 10-186. APPLICATION VERIFICATION: All applications shall be referred to the Public Safety Department for verification and investigation of the facts set forth in the application. The Public Safety Department shall make a written report and recommendation to the City Council as to issuance or non-issuance of the license. The City Council may order and conduct such additional investigation as it deems necessary. Sec. 10-187. APPLICATION CONSIDERATION: (a) The City Council shall conduct a hearing on the license application within a reasonable period following receipt of the Public Safety Department's report and recommendation regarding the application. At least ten (10)days in advance of the City Council hearing on an application, the ._ity Council shall cause notice of the hearing to be published in the official newspaper of the City, setting forth the day, time, and place of the hearing; the name of the applicant; the premises where the business is to be conducted; and the type of license which is sought. At the hearing, opportunity shall be given to any person to be heard for or against the granting of the license. Additional hearings on the application may be held if the City Council deems additional hearings necessary. After the hearing or hearings on the application, the City Council may, in its discretion, grant or deny the application. (b) If an application is granted for a location where a building is under construction or not ready for occupancy, the Iicense shall not be delivered to the licensee until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the licensed premises. Sec. 10-188. RENEWAL APPLICATION: (a) All licenses issued under this Article shall be effective for one year from the date of approval by the City Council. An application for the renewal of an existing license shall be made prior to the expiration date of the license and shall be made in such form as the Issuing Authority requires. If, in the judgment of the City Council, good and sufficient cause is shown 23822 5 05/31/95 09:42 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 7/14 by the applicant for the applicant's failure to submit a renewal application before the expiration of the existing license, the City Council may, if the other provisions of this Section are complied with, grant the renewal application. (b) A license under this Section may not be renewed: (1) if the City Council determines that the licensee has failed to comply with the provisions of this Article in preceding license years; (2) if the licensee or, if the licensee does not manage the establishment, the manager of the licensed premises is not a resident of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, Washington, Goodhue, or Rice counties on the date the renewal takes effect; (3) if in the case of a partnership, the managing partner or other person who manages the establishment is not a resident of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, Washington, Goodhue, or Rice counties on the date the renewal takes effect; (4) if in the case of a corporation, or other organization, the manager, a proprietor, or agent in charge of the establishment is not a resident of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott,Washington, Goodhue, or Rice counties on the date the renewal takes effect; (5) the time for establishing residence in the above named counties may for good cause be extended by the City Council. Sec. 10-189. FEES. (a) Application Fee: (1) The application fees for pawnbrokers and lniiitedpawnbrokers shall be set by resolution of the City Council. (2) The Iicense application fee shall be paid in full before the application for a license shall be accepted. Upon rejection of any application for a license or upon withdrawal of any application before City Council approval, the license fee shall be refunded in full to the applicant except where rejection is for a willful misstatement in the license application. (3) When the license is for premises where the building is not ready for occupancy, the time fixed for computation of the license fee for the initial license period shall be ninety (90) days after approval of the license by the City Council or upon the date the building is ready for occupancy, whichever is sooner. 23822 05/31/95 09:43 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 8/14 (4) When a new license application is submitted as a result of incorporation by an existing licensee and the ownership, control, and interest in the license are unchanged, no additional fee shall be required. (b) Investigation Fee: An applicant for any license under this Article shall pay the City of Chanhassen sorb A t or t at the time an original application is submitted, a nonrefundable fee at a rate set by City Council resolution to cover the costs involved in verifying the license application and to cover the expense of any investigation needed to assure compliance with this Article. (c) License Fee: (1) The license fee shall be paid annually, to be determined from the date of issuance of the license. (2) The annual license fee shall be set by City Council resolution. The application fee shall be credited to the first annual license fee, if the application is approved. Sec. 10-190. PERSONS AND LOCATIONS INELIGIBLE FOR A LICENSE. (a) No license under this Article shall be issued to an applicant who is a natural person if such applicant: (1) Is a minor at the time the application is filed; (2) Has been convicted of any crime directly related to the occupation licensed as prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 364.03, Subd. 2, and has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a pawnbroker as prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 364.03, Subd. 3; (3) Is not of good moral character or repute; or (4) Holds an intoxicating liquor license within the City of Chanhassen. (b) No license under this Article shall be issued to an applicant that is a partnership if such applicant has any general partner or managing partner: (1) Who is a minor at the time the application is filed; (2) Who has been convicted of any crime directly related to the occupation licensed as prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 364.03, Subd. 2, and who has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a pawnbroker as prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 364.03, Subd. 3; 23822 05/31/95 09:45 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 9/14 (3) Who is not of good moral character or repute; or (4) Who holds an intoxicating liquor license within the City of Chanhassen. (c) No license under this Article shall be issued to an applicant that is a corporation or other organization if such applicant has any manager, proprietor, or agent in charge of the business to be licensed: (1) Who is a minor at the time the application is filed; (2) Who has been convicted of any crime directly related to the occupation licensed as prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 364.03, Subd. 2, and who has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a pawnbroker as prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 364.03, Subd. 3; (3) Who is not of good moral character or repute; or (4) Who holds an intoxicating liquor license within the City of Chanhassen. Sec. 10-191. GENERAL LICENSE RESTRICTIONS. (a) Recordkeeping. At the time of a receipt, sale, or redemption of an item of property, the pawnbroker shall immediately record, using the English language, in an indelible ink, the following information: (1) An accurate description of the item of property including, but not limited to, any trademark, identification number, serial number, model number, brand name, or other identifying mark on such item; (2) The date, time and place the item of property was received by the pawnbroker; (3) The amount of money loaned upon or pledged therefor; (4) The full name, residence address, residence telephone number, date of birth, and reasonably accurate description of the person from whom the item of property was received, including: sex, height, weight, race, color of eyes, and color of hair; (5) The identification number from one of the following forms of identification of the person from whom the item was received: a. A valid Minnesota driver's license; 23522 8 05/31/95 09:46 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL N0: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 10/14 b. A valid Minnesota identification card; c. A valid photo identification issued by the State of residency of the person from whom the'item was received and one other form of identification; (6) The signature of the person pledging or selling the item; (7) The pawnbroker t the t a imtt paw €bto r will also take a color photegrapPERO*Wktitt*:4#C44 #4.4 of a frontal view of this person, cross-referenced to the properties. A limited :060zaker guilt ph y The of dmf` regtt red in obse t ( of this Section.anda copy of.the ce ficate of�c or other doeuthern evtdenctng avcrners t#p, cross erenc ,to the:>propertiesThe Chanhassen Public • . . .. . . . ; and (8) A color photograph of any precious metals involved in a transaction. The Chanhassen Public Safety Department may approve a video in lieu of a color photograph if the video produces the same quality picture. (b) Inspection of Records. The pawnbroker, otl than l mited pawnbrol ers:f: shall provide to the Chanhassen Public Safety Department the information required in subpart (A) of this Section by storing it on a computer which connects to the Chanhassen Public Safety Department through the use of a modem or by leaving with the Chanhassen Public Safety Department every business day, before the hour of 12:00 noon, a complete and correct copy of the records required for all transactions occurring on the previous business day. Records left with the Chanhassen Public Safety Department must be contained on a floppy disc that is compatible for retrieval of the information by the Public Safety Department's computer system. The information required in subpart (A) of this Section shall be retained by the pawnbroker for at least four (4) nontss. The licensee must display a sign, in a conspicuous place in the premises and of a sufficient size, which informs all patrons that all transactions are reported to the Chanhassen Public Safety Department. (c) Police Order to Hold Property. Whenever the Chanhassen Public Safety Department, . . . . . - . . •. .• . . • - -- - - . . - .. • : : -- • . • . - ;-- - stolen, notifies the pawnbroker not to sell an item, the item shall not be sold or removed from the licensed premises until authorized to be released by the Public Safety Department or a period of thirty (30) days, whichever is the lesser. Oral notification to hold property shall be confirmed in writing by the Public Safety Department. (d) Receipt. The pawnbroker shall provide a receipt to the seller or pledger of any item of property received, which shall include: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the pawnbroker business; 23822 05/31/959 09:47 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 *0271 PAGE: 11:14 (2) The date on which the item was received by the pawnbroker; (3) A description of the item received and amount paid to the pledger or seller in exchange for the item pawned or sold; (4) The signature of the pawnbroker or agent; (5) The last regular business day by which the item must be redeemed by the pledger without risk that the item will be sold and the amount necessary to redeem the pawned item on that date. (6) The annual rate of interest charged on pawned items received; (7) The name and address of the seller or pledger. (e) Hours of Operation. No pawnbroker shall keep the pawnbroker business open for the transaction of business on any day of the week before 9:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. (f) Minors. The pawnbroker shall not purchase or receive personal property of any nature on deposit or pledge from any minor. (g) Inspection of Items. The pawnbroker shall, at all times during the term of the license, allow the Chanhassen Public Safety Department and other law enforcement authorities associated with the Chanhassen Public Safety Department to enter the premises where the pawnbroker business is located during normal business hours except in an emergency, for the purpose of inspecting such premises and inspecting the items, ware, and merchandise and records therein for the purpose of Iocating items suspected or alleged to have been stolen or otherwise improperly disposed of. (h) License Display. A license issued under this Article must be posted in a conspicuous place in the premises for which it is used. The Iicense issued is only effective for the compact and contiguous space specified in the approved license application. (i) Maintenance of Order. A licensee under this Article shall be responsible for the conduct of the business being operated and shall maintain conditions of order. (i) Gambling. No licensee under this Article may keep, possess, or operate, or permit the keeping, possession, or operation on the licensed premises of dice, slot machines, roulette wheels, punchboards, blackjack tables, or pinball machines which return coins or slugs, chips, or tokens of any kind, which are redeemable in merchandise or cash. No gambling equipment authorized under Minn. Stat. Chapter 349, may be kept or operated and no raffles may be conducted on the licensed premises and/or adjoining rooms. The purchase of lottery tickets may take place on the licensed premises as authorized by the director of the lottery pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 349A. 23822 10 05/31/95 09:48 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 FAGE: 12/14 (k) Prohibited Goods. No licensee under this Article shall accept any item of property which contains an altered or obliterated serial number or "Operation Identification" number or any item of property whose serial number has been removed. (1) Proper Identification. A licensee under this Article shall not accept items of property unless the seller or pledger provides to the pawnbroker one of the following forms of identification: i) a valid driver's license; ii) a Minnesota identification card; or iii) a photo identification issued by the state of residency of the person from whom the item was received; a r. iv) military identification; or iv) passports. No other forms of identification shall be accepted. (m) Redemption andThildifig Period. (_l) Any person pledging, pawning or depositing an article for security shall have a minimum of thirty (30) days from the date when the Ioan or pledge becomes due and payable to redeem the article before the article becomes forfeitable. The date by which an item of property that has been pawned must be redeemed by the pledger without risk that the item will be sold must he a day on which the pawnbroker is open for regular business. (2 Property purcha byi a pawnbroker-must be held by the pawnbroker for at leastsv ty_(60 days after the pawnbr©ker'purchases the property:: (n) Payment by Check. When a pawnbroker accepts an item for purchase or as security for a loan, payment for any article deposited, left, pledged or pawned shall be made only by a check, draft, or other negotiable or non-negotiable instrument or order of withdrawal which is drawn against funds held by a financial institution. This policy must be posted in a conspicuous place in the premises. (o) Restrictions on Sale. A pawnbroker shall suspend for one (1) year, any business transaction with any person who has sold and/or forfeited on six (6) previous occasions articles for which the person received $25.00 or more per transaction within a single six (6) month period. (p) Premises. All property deposited, left, pledged, pawned, or held for sale must be stored in an enclosed facility and may not stored outside of the premises. The Issuing AuthorityCity may, however, permit the Iicensee to designate one (1) off premises locked and 23822 05/31/95 11 09:49 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL N0: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 13/14 secured facility in which the licensee may store only cars, boats, and other motorized vehicles. The licensee shall permit immediate inspection of the facility at any time during business hours by theAl! provisions in this section regarding record keeping and reporting shall apply to oversized items. All property shall be stored in compliance with zoning and/or fire regulations and in an orderly manner subject to inspection by the Fire Department. The premises shall also be equipped with an operational security alarm. Sec. 10-192. RESTRICTIONS REGARDING LICENSE TRANSFER. Each license under this Article shall be issued to the applicant only and shall not be transferable to any other person. No licensee shall loan, sell, give, or assign a license to another person. Sec. 10-193. SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE. (a) The City Council may suspend or revoke a license issued under this Article upon a finding of a violation of (1) any of the provisions of this Article; (2) any state statute regulating pawnbrokers; or (3) any state or local law relating to moral character and repute; or (4) a change in ownership greater than five (5) percent without notificatiol>:ai and approval by the issuing AuthorityCity. (b) A revocation or suspension by the City Council shall be preceded by written notice to the licensee and a public hearing. The written notice shall give at least eight (8) days' notice of the time and place of the hearing and shall state the nature of the charges against the pawnbroker. The notice may be served upon the pawnbroker personally or by United States mail addressed to the most recent address of the business in the license application. Sec. 10-194. PROHIBITED ACTS. No pawnbroker licensed under this Article shall (1) Lend money on a pledge at a rate of interest above that allowed by law; (2) Knowingly possess stolen goods; (3) Sell pledged goods before the time to redeem has expired; (4) Refuse to disclose to the Issuing.Author'ityCity, after having sold pledged goods, the name of the purchaser or the price for which the item sold; or 23822 12 05/31/95 09:50 AUG 30, 1995 ID: CAMPBELL KNUTSON TEL NO: 612-452-5550 #0271 PAGE: 14/14 (5) Make a loan on a pledge to a minor. Sec. 10-195. BOND. (a) Each application for a license required by this Article shall be accompanied by a surety bond and must be approved by the City Council. Such surety bond shall be in the sum of Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($5,000.00). (b) The security shall name the I is ng,A,nthor y as obligee thereunder and shall be conditioned upon the following (1) That the Iicensee will obey the Iaw relating to the licensed business; (2) That the licensee will pay to the Issuing AutttriiyCity when due all taxes, license fees, penalties, and other charges provided by law; (3) That in the event of any violation of the provisions of any law relating to the trade or business of pawnbroking, the bond shall be forfeited to the 4 .4.1P2g.:.:AOTV4tYCity. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this day of , 1995, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen. ATTEST Don Ashworth, Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1995). 23822 13 05/31/95 City Council Meeting - April 10, 1995 9. The installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Trunk Highway 5 and Audubon Road is expected in the next few years. The developer shall be responsible or share the local cost participation of this signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Audubon Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development (Phases I and II) will be required. 10. The existing storm sewers in Lake Drive West which discharge into the temporary pond will need to be modified to convey the runoff to the new permanent pond on Outlot A (Second Addition). 11. Security to guarantee easements and future construction of trails should be included in the development contract for the Second Addition. 12. Park and trail fees shall be paid consistent with city ordinances. Surety/letter of credit for the future trail shall be placed as a condition in the development contract for the Second Addition. 13. Fire hydrants shall be located as per the city Fire Marshal's requirement. 14. Street names shall be submitted for review and approval by Public Safety. 15. All required perimeter landscaping shall be completed with the approval of the first submitted site plan in the Second Addition. Surety for this landscaping shall be placed in the development contract for the Second Addition. All voted in favor and the motion canied unanimously. CONSIDER CREATING AN ORDINANCE REGULATING PAWNBROKERS. Public Present: Name Address Bert Alexander 8501 County Road 15, Maple Plain Robert Schlichter 8501 County Road 15, Maple Plain Todd Gerhardt: Included in your packet is a letter from William C. Pribble, Jr, an attorney representing Capstone Auto Pawnbrokers who have shown an interest in locating their business into Chanhassen. However, part of the financial...is that the city must have an ordinance in place regulating pawnbrokers... Roger has worked on ordinances in a couple other cities. I attached the City of Bumsville's as an example. The City Council should not feel that it has to pass this ordinance but not having an ordinance would not keep pawnbrokers out of Chanhassen...If the City Council is considering looking at adopting an ordinance...direct both Planning Commission and the Public Safety Commission to review this ordinance and other examples... and also look at where pawnbrokers should be located in the city...zoning districts. And also how to regulate these businesses...open to any questions that you may have. I'm not a big expert in pawnbroking businesses... Councilman Mason: I do have a question to ask our City Attorney. On the Burnsville ordinance here it says, under application content, number 1. If the applicant is a natural person. Well, what if the applicant...? I'm sorry. 23 City Council Meeting - April 10, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Roger. Tell us a little bit about this, other than what is contained in the one that we have from the City of Burnsville. Roger Knutson: ...police departments are very concerned with pawnbroking because if you've got...and these regulations are tight...and it's by no means fullproof but then...by computer it's a lot easier now. Then you've got to check all the items received against all the reported stolen items...call people up. It takes a lot of time. ...Minneapolis has a full time pawnshop detail... Mayor Chmiel: Does Council have any questions? Councilman Berquist: Well one more question for Roger. I was stumped by the, why, the cost of licensing...all over the map. And yet you've got...up to $50,000.00. Plymouth isn't even listed on the cities. I doubt they have any at 50 grand but. Todd Gerhardt: I attempted to get names of pawnbrokers that... Roger Knutson: One reason, to point out why the difference in licensing fee is, the licensing fee is not supposed to make money for a community. It goes to recoup your expenses. If, depending on what kind of ordinance you have, what kind of monitoring your have, the city's expenses can be very high. Theoretically you need one full time employee to monitor every single pawnshop... An officer in Burnsville...For each pawnshop needs one full time employee to monitor it...but if you want to do that, then you'd look at...Or you can do nothing. You can just license it and forget about it and not monitor what's coming in and out and then your costs would be very modest and... Councilman Mason: Is this the kind of deal that we can set a conditional license fee the first year and see what transpires and then adjust it accordingly? Roger Knutson: Yes. That'd be...by the time your second year comes along,you'll know what your actual costs are and have a better handle on it. Mayor Chmiel: Were there any questions that you might have of the gentlemen that are here, as Todd had mentioned? Councilman Berquist: I'd like to know the details a little bit about an auto pawnbroker. Bert Alexander: My name's Bert Alexander. I own Capstone Auto Pawnbrokers. We pawn titles of automobiles. We don't physically take the vehicle...and we give money and a pawn ticket against the title of the automobile... I understand the situation that you brought up...we only take the title of a registered vehicle. We check that with the Motor Vehicle Bureau. The driver must have a license and that vehicle must be insured. We operate like an Allstate Insurance office, at an office building and that's our business...do any kind of pawning, I could just move into any...and then you'd have to change the law...The State gave the municipalities the right to license. The State doesn't want any part of it...Although we operate in areas now where we're not licensed...And again, we only deal with titles of vehicles. We don't deal with anything else. Every vehicle has to be insured. Every driver...has to be licensed... Mayor Chmiel: What is the rate of interest that you normally charge? 24 City Council Meeting -April 10, 1995 Bert Alexander: 25% a month. The local pawnbroker down the street gets 35%. We are reducing... Councilman Berquist: And based on value, I mean if I brought a $10,000.00 vehicle into you... Bert Alexander: Basically there's an MBA book we use as a guide...wholesale value. We realize that there's going to be some... Councilman Berquist: How do you recover vehicles? Bert Alexander: We recover vehicles if you don't make the payments...We don't want to be in the car business. Mayor Chmiel: We have two trucks that move rather quickly. Okay, thank you. Bert Alexander: We're the only pawnbroker...drop off a piece of jewelry. Give a price on it and say okay, take the cash and the jewelry. In essence what we do is you bring us the car. We look at the car and we say okay... Councilman Berquist: If we go ahead and start work on passing this, obviously you'll come in and make, and open up a place someplace. Where else did you say? Bert Alexander: We're in Eden Prairie right now and we're in St. Cloud. We're in Rochester, Minnesota. We're in Duluth. We're in Maplewood Mall in Maplewood. We're in Atlanta, Georgia. Councilman Senn: Why do you operate as a pawnbroker rather than a lender? Bert Alexander's answer could not be heard on the tape. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other? Councilman Senn: I'd really like to see us get ahead of the game on this and get an ordinance put in place. I think Roger, what he's presented as far as Burnsville goes, is pretty extensive and a good ordinance when you back it up against...I'm familiar with. There's a few things I'd like to...pass those comments onto Roger if we're going to undertake drafting one. A few primary elements that we'd like to see is, from a municipal standpoint these things are crossed with expense all the way through. You need an application...significant one up front because you need to do some fairly extensive investigations on people or people. It could be quite a number of people because some of these things come in under limited partnerships and everything else, it requires literally checking on quite a number of people. One thing I didn't see in here Roger that I'm used to seeing a surety bond as far as they will comply with the ordinance. So I mean have the annual fee but you also have the surety bond that stays in place as long as they're in business... I've had a fair amount of experience with this in a near- by municipality where...Hopkins and Hopkins went all the way to four pawnshops here in the last couple of years. And it fluctuated anywhere from 0 to 4, depending on how quickly they go in and out of business but it's real interesting to sit around and talk to the police department because they literally had to add full time staff. Effectively one full time administrative staff person for every 2 pawnshops is basically what they told me in Hopkins. And that's the amount of time it takes to keep up with the checks and the police and everything else... Roger Knutson: There is one bright side. You've got... 25 City Council Meeting - April 10, 1995 Councilman Senn: And you know the Hopkins ordinance is not that different than the Burnsville one here and that is a real bright side to it. You know from a fee standpoint, I think what Hopkins ended up doing is Hopkins ended up by just doing a $7,500.00 fee but Hopkins is in a little bit of a unique situation. By the time they undertook the ordinance, they already had one pawnshop in place and knew they were coming so they figured out their costs that way. I would hope that we would look at a fee schedule more like $30,000.00 for the first one and we'll reimburse 15 when the second comes in. Because we'll get the other half back with that first one. With the second one, I asked the Hopkins Police Chief,as far as the two of them, if they can get by with kind of part of a person on one and he said no. He said basically there's efficiencies between the two that we can do two with one full time administrative staff person but you'd still need the full time administrative staff person to do one, which is going back a little bit to what Roger was saying so...approach they did and staff because they figured if they were ever going to get one, they're probably going to get one and...staff person as well as all of the overhead and everything else that went with it and that's where they came up with the...but again, I think it's real important that we get out in front of this and as I understand it, Roger there's no way to delineate between types of pawnbrokers. I mean a pawnbroker's license is a pawnbroker's license....right. And there's no delineation between whether they just do this or just do that and what may just do this today, may do these other things tomorrow and there's no way to control that effectively. You know even with the ordinance there's no way to do it effectively... Mayor Chmiel: Yeah I think I agree to a certain point. I have a little different figure in my mind. I was at $40,000.00... Councilman Senn: Well I said 30 and we get 15 back from the...but again I think you need the surety bond and stuff up front because I'd like to see a ten grand surety bond and a $1,000.00 or $500.00 application fee to cover that initial investigation too and stuff. I mean these things get really wild...Part of it was owned by a family which means like 10 family members and...do an investigation of every one. Roger Knutson: There's a lot of interesting things... Mayor Chmiel: Yeah I think some of those things that you're saying is probably true. I'd like to do a little more checking as well in regards to some of these other cities that you had mentioned, such as Eden Prairie and St. Cloud, Rochester, Maplewood, and even Atlanta, Georgia. Bert Alexander: Well I can help you with any documents. I have all their documents and everything for...to help in any way, I'd like to. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Councilman Berquist: How long has Capstone been in business Mr. Alexander? Bert Alexander: Since August of'94. August 15th. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any other discussion that we'd like to do on this? I don't know if I want to see us go into a motion on this particular item at this particular time, until I do a little more checking as well. I don't know the rest of the Council's feelings there. Councilman Senn: Well couldn't we do some checking but at the same time couldn't Roger kind of get going on drafting something? I mean it is a lengthy process... 26 City Council Meeting - April 10, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we have to go through the process and I think we do have to have something pulled together to have within the city for this kind of a proposal. And along with that I think that there's still some concerns that I have too in regard to total dollars for licensing, but I think that's something that. Councilman Senn: We can work those in. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Senn: I'd like to move that we let Roger go ahead and draft, get going on drafting an ordinance for consideration and when it comes back, we'll have plenty of chances to go through with changes and do things in the meantime so, I'd like to get the process going. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second to that motion? Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second it. I'm curious as to why staff is recommending we send it to Planning as well as Public Safety. Mayor Chmiel: Oh! I think that that's true. They should also look at it and also Public Safety should take a review of this. Councilwoman Dockendorf: But I don't see the relationship with Planning. Mayor Chmiel: Well, where do you. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Put them. Mayor Chmiel: Where is this located. Councilman Senn: I thought, I don't think we have a lot to say about that. Roger Knutson: No. Enticing them I don't recommend. Some cities consider making them conditional uses, but I don't see that. They operate like a retail store. Councilwoman Dockendorf: They're a business, yeah. Roger Knutson: There isn't much of a planning issue. Councilman Senn: Yeah, but the expertise we've got on Public Safety, I'd love to have them look at the ordinance as we are too but I'm not sure, my understanding is we can't really influence on the land use that much so. Councilwoman Dockendorf: That just holds it up. That's one more step. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. There's a motion on the floor with a second. Any other discussion? Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to direct the City Attorney to draft an ordinance regulating pawnbrokers. All v oted in favor and the motion canied unanimously. 27 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 11, 1995 PRESENT: Mayor Don Chmiel, Eldon Berkland, Brian Beniek, Bill Bernhjelm, Dave Dummer, Steve Labatt EXCUSED ABSENCE: Greg Weber STAFF PRESENT: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director Bob Zydowsky, Public Safety Officer Sheila Losby, Community Service Officer Richard Wing, 2nd Assistant Chief GUESTS PRESENT: Sgt. Perry Heles, Bloomington Police Dept. William C. Pribble, Jr. Attorney Hurd Alexander, Capstone Auto Pawnbrokers Commissioner Chair Berkland called the meeting to order to 7:00 p.m. Mayor Chmiel motioned, Commissioner Labatt seconded to approve the 4/13/95 PSC meeting minutes. All voted in favor and the motion passed. Sgt. Heles informed the Commission of the City of Bloomington's past and present dealings with pawnshops and the ordinance regulating them. The Sergeant, plus two full-time officers, are assigned to pawnshop calls. He feels pawn shops need attention from the City in which they are in. Mr. Alexander, auto pawnbroker applicant, explained to the Commission the type of pawnshop he owns, with locations in Eden Prairie, St. Paul, Rochester, Duluth & St. Cloud. Discussion followed among the Commissioners. The applicant and his attorney request to be licensed as a titled pawnbroker. Director Harr will consult with City Attorney regarding the revision to the proposed pawnbroker ordinance. A special session of the Public Safey Commission may be held within 2 months to discuss further. FIRE DEPARTMENT Chief Wing reported on the Fire Department activity, including the delivery of 2 babies and 2 heart saves. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 16, 1995 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m and gave a brief introduction of how a Planning Commission is conducted. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad, Bob Skubic, Craig Peterson, Nancy Mancino, and Mike Meyer MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff Farmakes and Ron Nutting STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Planner II; Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer; and John Rask, Planner I SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 9,161 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE FACILITY ON A 1.57 ACRE LOT, PROPERTY ZONED PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRIAL. LOCATED ON LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER 2ND ADDITION. HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT, INC. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions of staff at this point? I have one Bob on the additional landscaping in that northwestern corner. I thought that you had recommended 7, or 6 additional trees. Generous: We gave a range of 5 to 7 and they provided a plan that allows them to do future expansion without getting into that area. And so we believe that with discussions with the landscaper, the forestry intern, that this would serve as an adequate area that allows a tree to grow and it will stop future damage when and if they come to expand in that direction. Mancino: Weren't we also concerned with the height of the elevation of the whole area. Meaning that you could see the back of this from Highway 5 or from quite a distance. Generous: Right, and we believe by doing this in conjunction with additional landscaping, that the developer would provide that. While it won't block the view, it will soften the view of the building. Mancino: And this is a mixture of deciduous and coniferous? Generous: Correct. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Anyone else have a question of staff? Does the designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Are they here tonight? 1 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Bernard Herman: Madam Chairman, members of the Commission. Mancino: Please come forward and state your name. Bernard Herman: My name is Bernard Herman, the architect of the project. We brought along the color board that illustrated the landscaping. I don't know if that adds anything more to what you've already seen...submitted but you might get a better impact of the density of it as it's shown in color. The darker greens than what was previously indicated, illustrate the landscaping that have been added. Two trees here, 6 here and 5 here. Mixtures of deciduous and coniferous. Totally in accordance with staff recommendations. Mancino: Thank you. Bernard Herman: Is there any value in leaving this up? Mancino: No, I don't think so. Any questions? Thank you very much. We don't need to open this for a public hearing, do we? Let's go ahead and get comments from commissioners. Mike. Meyer: I don't have any comments at this time. Mancino: Okay, Craig? Peterson: No comments. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: I do have a question to this acrylic coating. Is that a painted material? Generous: It would be applied like a paint is. It's sort of like an epoxy finish but different. Skubic: More durable? Aanenson: More durable. That was the intent is to get something durable and we believe this accomplishes that condition. Skubic: I have nothing else. Mancino: Ladd. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad: Nothing. Mancino: My only comment is you, staff believes it satisfies number 2 on page 5 which is color should be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block. And how does it satisfy that? Generous: I take that to mean if it was a block building, that they wouldn't be painting the block. This is the, the next one or one of the other ones talks about coating material for tilt up's and I believe this satisfies the intent that it is a coating for that portion of it. They're going to coat the rest of it in the sealant but this part will be a color added to it. Mancino: I mean I just want to make sure that we're clear. Aanenson: Yeah, to separate between the painted block, for example on Target you've got cut faced block that has color and on the back side where there's no exposure, it's just painted block. And that we didn't want in this so this is just the accent band and that's why we had them re-examine that because we didn't want something that's going to be a maintenance or the color would be deteriorating. So there is some other alternatives, doing tiles or something like that but we believe this meets the intent of having something durable. Obviously we don't want to see all the buildings up there similarly designed with painted or epoxy. We're hoping to get some variety and we believe the next couple of projects that are coming in are going to introduce some other creative designs. We don't want them all looking the same and we already are in the process of reviewing some other ones and we believe there will be a lot of variety at the next park. Mancino: Because I notice that the two are standing are brick and there's a huge. Aanenson: They had similar architects on that so yeah. Mancino: Thank you. I'd like to entertain a motion. Conrad: I'd make the recommendation that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approval of Site Plan #95-11 for Highland Development for plans dated 6/19/95 prepared by Bernard Herman Architects, Inc. subject to the conditions listed in the staff report with no changes. Mancino: Is there a second? Meyer: I'll second that. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Site Plan #95-11 for Highland Development, plans dated 6/19/95 prtpartd by Bernard Herman Architects, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Fire Marshal conditions: a. Submit technical data to Fire Marshal which spells out processes, product commodity manufactured and warehoused. This is used to determine fire sprinkler design density. b. Add one fire hydrant on the east corner of the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. c. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #04-1991. Copy enclosed. "Notes on site plan". d. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #07-1991. "Pre-Fire Plan". Copy enclosed. e. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #29-1992. "Premise Identification". Copy enclosed. f. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #36-1994. "Combination Fire Sprinkler/Domestic Supply Pipe". Copy enclosed. g. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #40-1995. "Fire Sprinkler Systems". Copy enclosed. 2. The applicant shall supply the City with detailed stormwater runoff calculation for a 10 year storm event. 3. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment for the landscape plantings within the utility and drainage easement along the east property line prior to issuance of a building permit. No landscape plantings shall be placed over the city's utility lines. 4. The plans shall include a rock filter construction entrance with the city and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of approval. 5. The applicant shall enter into a site development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of approval. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 6. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc. are to be fully screened by compatible materials. As an alternative, the applicant can use factory applied panels on the exterior to the equipment that would blend in with the building materials. 7. All freestanding signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect with the quality of the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign located near the driveway into the private site. The monument sign must maintain a ten foot setback from the property line. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. The applicant should submit a sign package for staff review. A separate permit is required for all signage on site. 8. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 foot candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. Wall pac units may be used provided no direct glare is directed off- site and no more than 1/2 foot candle of light is at the property line. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: JAMES AND KAREN MEYER FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 6.55 ACRES INTO 4 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND VARIANCE REQUEST TO SECTION 18-57(0) WHICH ALLOWS UP TO FOUR LOTS TO BE SERVED BY A PRIVATE DRIVE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6225 RIDGE ROAD, NORTH OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD. JAMES AND KAREN MEYER. Public Present: Name Address Jim & Karen Meyer 6225 Ridge Road Jack Fess 6280 Ridge Road • 5 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 6175 Ridge Road Colleen Rosenberg 6290 Ridge Road Jon & Ireue Joseph 6260 Ridge Road Dean Wetzel 5820 Ridge Road Carl Zinn John Rash presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff at this time? Conrad: Is it a private road now? When theCunningham Addition went through, what did we change the status of that road in any way? Rask: No. Conrad: It's still private? Rask: Yes, it's still private. A variance was granted at that time. Conrad: What's our obligation to that road? Hempel: Nothing from a street maintenancesWe do maintain. We do have utilities, sanitary sewe and water lines within a public easement that Mancino: John, I have a question on your conditions of approval. Number 10 says obtain permit and install a pool fence prior to recording the final plat. Where's that coming from? Rask: Okay, that was pointed out by the building official. appears that,The cityell with the has an ordinance dinan esubdivisthat requires all pools to have a fence around it and one will not have a fence around it so that's kind of. Mancino: And this is on the Meyer property? Rask: Yes it is and it will remain with that existing home. Mancino: Okay. Okay. And the cabin right now, does it have a driveway off the private road? Rask: No it does not. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 we can work around some of these tree conservation. We're as interested in that as anybody. As a matter of fact, and not to jump the gun. In fact I wonder, could I use your first visual aid, because it's better than what I have. You know, trees are an issue and your forester made a significant point about trees being conservatory, and I might add that right along here, right next to the road there are a lot, this is all heavily wooded and we walk along here and counted, I mean there's a lot of trees. There's 39 to 43 of them, something like that going all the up that are 8 to 10. There's huge evergreens that would literally have to go because I can't take somebody else's property to make this land bigger. And along here it's the same thing. There is a shoulder here that's kind of a packed gravel and of course trucks do meet on that. Right now my home is being built over there and we've had huge, you know the D8 Cats coming up on flatbeds and there's been building on Ridge Road over in Shorewood have used the road over the years. What I'm saying is huge vehicles have gotten through there and have the 23 years I've lived there. We've not had a fire and we've not had any accidents on the road. There has never been a safety problem, but that I understand doesn't mean that there couldn't be one and that we can't make some sort of access or some sort of something to help this out. Basically then we don't have a lot of major issues with this. It would appear to me that the road is a very sensitive issue. It's a very sensitive issue to my neighbors. They would like it to be the kind of country road that it is. The fire and safety commissioner or what have you, came out to our house and we walked the road and he has some recommendations to make about cutting the trees, the brush back so that it wouldn't interfere. Maybe putting no parking signs along the road so that the vehicle, if public safety needed to come up, there wouldn't be any cars parked there so that would mean they'd have to park in their driveways. I would point out as you have already mentioned that this is a thru street. This is not a dead end. There's a gate there and we want to, and are going to, bring that gate up to code. And what I mean by that is right now it's just a chain with a paddalock...get a gate that's going to be approved by the...so this gate can be dealt with in two ways. It can either be just drive through by a big vehicle or it will have a lock on it and we will make the keys available to police and fire and both communities, Shorewood and Chanhassen, which we do at this time. So at this time they can go through and they go right through the gate and there is a turn around there and I would agree with you Madam Chairman that, in actuality, when that event would occur. It hasn't occurred in the last 22 years that I've been there but that they could go through that gate one of two ways. They could just drive through it and turn around there and come back out. So in reality then, this is not a dead end and I know that there are other streets in Chanhassen that you've had to deal with that have a dead end, private roads. You can exit this two ways. You can enter it two ways. I would also point out from a safety standpoint in terms of fire, there are two fire hydrants on this road and I would point out that in a very short distance here, there's a fire hydrant right by the Wetzel's and there's another one right up by here. So for these homes there's a fire hydrant and for these homes there's a fire hydrant and I think that's significant. If you don't have a pumping truck and all that kind of thing, you know if there should be a fire. So we 8 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 are considering the trees and I think that we're making a real move. I think if we're so interested in that tree conservation, that we should...preserving the trees along the road... Another point, Mr. Cunningham did his subdivision and was approved in March. The staff notes read that there was a precedent made. Now I can understand that from a legal standpoint that that precedent is probably not legal binding. But I do think that there's a sense of fairness. A sense of ethics. A sense of logic that would say you know what, we did it there. These people, and the 14 or 15 neighbors who have written letters to you are saying that they're willing to take that, while they want to keep it the way it is, that's what they want. I've not seen any opposition to this subdivision. I mean I live there. I want it to be just like you do. We will maintain it. We do plow it. We do pave it. And so in reality here, there's one other thing that's not mentioned in the staff report but I'm sure they're aware of it. That another thing with extending a road. On the east side of the road right here, there is a gas line. The gas line is not under the road. It's right adjacent to it and I would assume of course that that gas line would have to be torn up. I put that gas line in there. I paid for that gas line for that whole piece of road some time back. It wasn't cheap then. I'm sure replacing it is, to me represents a hardship. I guess that individuals who have already wanted to purchase on my property, have looked at the road and they aren't bothered by the fact that it's narrow. The road is paved. There is a shoulder there right now that's a heavy gravel that you can meet a large vehicle on it. It's not ideal. But I'll tell you this. It works. It has worked for a long time. I have one neighbor that's lived there for 43 years and I'm not sure, but anyway I'll let any other people address that. Bottom line is, we're asking the Planning Commission to make a recommendation for the variance to the road to leave it as is. And basically I think that that's going to save trees. We still have the safety with the fire. We're going to improve the gate. We have a turn around area that has been addressed and I think that will be a very suitable neighborhood. Thank you very much. Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion to open for a public hearing? Meyer moved, Peterson seconded to open for a public hewing. The public hewing was opened. Mancino: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please come up now. State your name and address and please give us any comments you have on this. Jack Fess: Hi, good evening. My name is Jack Fess...neighbor. Second house on the left hand side going up to the Shorewood chain. I'm also the designated neighbor fellow that tries to take care of the road from a maintenance standpoint. I've got a couple comments. The first one is, on the same side of the road there that Jim and Karen are trying to subdivide, my house was the last house that was subdivided along that road back in 1982 where we had to get a variance also and for a number of years, for 12 years I looked across and I had nothing 9 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 but beautiful trees and then Mr. and Mrs. Joseph next door to me developed that large corner lot on the corner of Pleasant View and built that pretty home there last year. One of the concerns that I had was me losing the trees across the street from me where the first house was built on the east side of Ridge Road in that corner, 2 acre lot. If you walk down my driveway today and look up to the front of my house, you would notice in the summertime, because those trees were not cut. Jim at one time owned that property and there was a gate in there which those people were still using that gate and they actually their driveway right through that gate where the tractor used to go through to cut the grass and that property is now trying to subdivide. And I can't even see that house across from there. Now my feeling is, as far as the road's concerned, the trees that Jim has in front of that property, since there's only going to be one driveway cutting into that large parcel for both of those homes, we're only going to have one more driveway on the south side of Jim's current house. And none of those trees really would probably be touched, which means that all of us on the west side of the road would probably not even see these homes because we cannot see that property currently because that's all in grass down there. The other thing is, I think significant is that I have the plans. I wish I had them with me of the Department of Transportation new gate that we want to put in up there and that gate would border Jim's property and the Shorewood house on the county line and would bring it up to Department of Transportation standards, which are very similar at our city and county parks where we have where the gates open. In fact it's the same drawing. One of the questions we have right now, since we all need a variance to go across that road, anyone who lives on Ridge Road, we only have 12 or 13 houses on the Chanhassen side. The rest of those homes are controlled by the Shorewood side. So my counterpart on the other side of the chain, we're trying to work this out and move that actually down where it'd be more feasible for the safety vehicles to come in there. Plus I also want you to know that on the Shorewood side of that chain, a lot of folks don't know that. They don't have city water period over there so we did have a fire there about 19, I think you were out of town Jim. We had a fire when a new house was being built on Ridge Road about 10 years ago. It burned to the ground. It was 2 weeks before there was to be occupancy and we think it was a sabotage deal. A new one went up on top of it but it did burn to the ground and the Chanhassen fire department came to the aid of that fire and they just took that chain with those big cutters they have. Cut that chain off and that fire truck actually went through there. No problem whatsoever. To show you how ridiculous it was, I was sleeping all night and I didn't hear that fire truck. When I got up the next morning and jogged around the lake, the house was literally burned to the ground. It was a brand new house so they can get through there and, we'd like to repave the road when all this construction is finished. It's quite an expense and do what we need to but I don't think any of us would be against cutting back the brush and possibly maybe build the side of that road up a little bit with some more gravel and maybe put some more asphalt on there so. So far it's worked out pretty good. Thank you. 10 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Mancino: Thank you. Jon Joseph: My name is Jon Joseph. I'm at 6290 Ridge Road, and that lady was my wife. When we built our house over this last year, one of the things that we were lucky enough to do was to be able to sell some trees that we had to take down... This area is, when people speak to you about trees, they're not just saying trees as in scrub brush. This is a very old, mature area that is just lovely. It serves as a recreational area, not only for the people who live on Ridge but the people across the street who come from Fox Chase subdivision and there's a constant stream of people going up and down this street. These people are not threatened in any way by motor vehicles or we would know it by now. I think the other issue brought into the record is that everybody on Ridge Road has written the City Council in support of leaving the street the way it is. I think that's a very important point and I know for myself, I have really very little use for Ridge Road beyond where my house come in, which is about 30 feet into the road. In fact when I built my driveway, I built it in such a way that it would be almost impossible for me to go up Ridge Road. I think that the City Council needs to look at this as a very unique place. One that's already been given a number of variances because of it's uniqueness and one that can tolerate some more variances. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else like to comment or approach the Planning Commission? Please come up. Dean Wetzel: My name is Dean Wetzel and I live on 6260 Ridge road. I guess I'm kind of the senior member there. I'm in my 43rd year. I'd also like to mention that since I moved in, my taxes have gone up 6,000%. Not 600. Not 1,000. 6,000%. Now I realize that doesn't buy me anything except equal time up here. But I just thought it was worth mentioning it. We have some of us that have been there that long, I guess I'm the only one down there. We're paying our dues and we'd kind of like to be part of our own destiny. I said I would speak to this point, which I have been in this room many, many times over these years and I've spoken to many issues and I said that I would limit my comments to under an hour and a half. It will be more like 10 minutes. Do you have a pointer up there? I'd kind of like to find a couple of things that might be of interest. Well actually I can do it on there. My property is right here, off of this kind of little bend in the road and when I moved in there 43 years ago, this was a dirt trail. There were three homes on the road. Here, here and here and all the rest of this was open space, as it was up above. So I've seen a lot of change and I moved out here from Minneapolis to enjoy the beauty of this area. I did come down and talk to the planners to get some idea of what the concerns were and share with them a little bit of what my experience has been and in the 43 years that I've lived there, I'm not aware of any accident on that road. It's a narrow road. It winds a little. It's quaint. It has trees on it. People take it easy. Not only that, there are walkers and joggers and bikers up and down the road all day long. They go around Christmas Lake. It's a 4 mile jog around the lake and for 12 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 the mile plus from Pleasant View Road up to Covington Road, I guess it's a private road and I say it's cherished by all these people that walk their dogs and their kids and so it's a neat place and I've enjoyed it all these years. We raised a family there and feel that it really has a lot of offer. On the emergency side, yeah there's been emergencies up there in all those years. Fire that some of you referred to up in the Shorewood area. The trucks went through. They went straight through and they don't have to turn around. They can go up to Covington Road and come back or they can come in from the other way. So it's not a hazard. It's an inconvenience. But the inconvenience...an awful lot of pleasure and an awful lot of beauty for a number of people. And as earlier mentioned, thanks to the earlier planners and engineers and Council, we have water and sewer down here. They put in sewer on the north side when the laws went through to shield Christmas Lake but they didn't put water in up there so we're sitting down there with the fire hydrants with the availability to service the north side, which is Hennepin County, again which we're glad to do and which has been done and successfully. So again we don't need pumper trucks or tank trucks to come up our road to take care of the problems we might have. Now the tree issue is big. It's big on the property that's being developed, and it's especially big right along the road. All the way up from Pleasant View. And there are reasons why there are such beautiful trees right up next to the road. There's a fence about 4 feet from the road and as Dr. Meyer mentioned, there's a gas line between the road and the fence and when...built this home, about 1956 or so, a few years after I'd been there, he pastured this with horses. He actually had horses out here and they kept it all...and chewed down to where the only trees that really had a chance to grow were on this little wedge which runs along the road. In addition to that, over the years with Dr. Meyer's permission, I had nurtured the trees either way from my home along the road here, where there haven't been any homes and in the 70's when we had that drought, I actually watered from my property the trees along that side of the road. So there are big, beautiful trees there. Pine trees. Maple trees. Ash. Hackberry. All natural. So expanding the road to the right, to the east would be devastating to that coverage of trees. Expanding to the right, to the west is practically impossible. Jack Fess is, as he mentioned, lives right here. His driveway starts on a steep hill right up to the road. My driveway, my home is only 30 feet from the edge of the road as it stands today. Susan Price's home is up here and the architect that built that, and he was an architect that lived there, made a mistake or two and her bedroom's about 15 feet away from this road right here, right now, just across from the driveway of Dr. Meyer's. So on a practical basis, you really can't expand that road without some devastating effects, and I don't know how you do it frankly again without tremendous cost. So again, adding all this background and sentiment, etc, I think that it's also important to know that because of the configuration of the lake, is why the road went where it did. Like I said, that was a dirt trail when I moved in. The lake being to the left so the road wound up the hill there...indian trail and the homes were built right up tight against the road because obviously there was never going to be any more development. We were the only ones there. We wanted to live on a dirt road this far from Minneapolis. And times do 13 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 change. So we've maintained this road with diligence all these years. The ones of us that live there, finally graveled the road and graded it and then a number of years ago, paid for the paving of that road and we've maintained it with a lot of pride and we keep it clean. We keep it picked up. So I guess I'll get down to the point that this location would be a problem and I would hope that we aren't going to injure a neighborhood in order to protect. Getting back to the baby and the bath water. Just wash the little kid and throw the water out and keep the baby. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? Carl Zinn: I'm Carl Zinn. I live at 5820 Ridge Road and I'd like to just address the safety issue for a second because I travel several times a day along the busiest part of Ridge Road, the 2/l0ths with the egress and ingress on the north end and it's far curvier. It has much more slope. The sight lines are more restricted by a great deal than they are on the south end and we don't have a problem. More cars. It services over 30 homes and people go slow. There's walkers there. People understand that. We don't have thru traffic and so for the benefit of my experience to you hopefully is...safety issue is something that the residents of the road control and respect and we're able to use that side of the road without a safety problem. Thanks. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else wish to approach? Well come up again. Jack Fess: Okay. Jack Fess again at 6280 Ridge Road. I forgot to mention that a number of years ago, in 1982 or 1983 when I moved here from the East Coast, I wasn't familiar with a private road but was familiar with lawsuits back in the East... I said to my neighbors, one of the things that we need to really watch is getting the Department of Transportation legitimate road signs saying Chanhassen, State of Minnesota so we took our road fund budget and... those folks of you who have been down here to look at this property will notice that we do have a 5 mph speed limit posted as you enter Ridge Road. It's been there for 12 years now and it says no thru street. These are the same signs that work in Chanhassen. So we want to let you know that we do have a speed limit and maybe that's one of the reasons that we don't have problems. That we would also like to upgrade a few things once some of this gets finished because we want to do some more signing on there also. I think that one recommendation is that no parking, to be very honest with you, we don't have any parking on the street. I think when some of you folks might have been out looking at the property, we've had two things going on. We had Jon Joseph having a driveway installed 2 weeks ago. At the same time, Jim and Karen were having trees removed on the Cunningham property. And last, if not least, Jerry Schneider who lives next door to me is having an addition right now, a four season porch put on the house next to me so we've had 3 out of 9 homes, some construction going on that day so I do know it was congested there for a few days. 14 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Mancino: Mr. Fess, I have a question. Just a point of interest. I also live on a private drive. Not as many homes but what's it like in the winter. I mean because that's obviously the hardest because of snow plowing and it doesn't allow you any sides at all to park or to pass each other. Jack Fess: Well, since 1982, we had that two monstrous snows if you recall in December a number of years back. Larry Kerber, who I think...out here on County Road 17. Larry comes in with his Bobcat and his truck and we actually pay him to haul the snow right out of there. Now we normally can plow it on the right and the left hand side of it. It actually does go through the fence that Jim has there. It just literally goes right through the fence and we have all that extra road there. But we have really only had one time since 1982 that I've been involved with the road that we had to haul snow out. It's not a problem. The one nice thing about our side of the road compared to Carl's side, the north side of Christmas Lake Road gets no sun. It's all shade. And we have a private person that plows it and it sands it and salts it. And to give you an idea for that road, we have 20 houses on that road. Our snowplow removal budget, we just paid that bill here in April, was $4,400.00 for that road. I mean it is very expensive just for snowplowing and I kind of get upset because we'd like to put 2 inches of blacktop on that road but we looked at an estimate. We did one-third of the north side of that road last year, it was $18,000.00. It's $50,000.00 to put on 2 inch asphalt from the corner of Covington to the corner of Pleasant View. So you know, we leave that road open for all the kids that jog. I mean we have people going by there constantly. It's like the hot spot in Chanhassen. We ought to make it a designated area for the parks commission. The fact of the matter is, I'm out there today sweeping the road myself. I'm sweeping it. The city of Chanhassen has never come up that road. I've seen one policemen up there in 13 years I've lived there and I called. So I mean we really, the road thing is getting to be, it's tough for us to maintain it but we really are dedicated to maintaining this and keeping it this way and it's getting expensive, there's no doubt about it. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? May I have a motion to close the public hearing? Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to close the public healing. The public hewing was closed. Mancino: Comments from commissioners. Commissioner Conrad. Conrad: I think staff's report is very appropriate. I think they did a good job on the analysis. There's really nothing wrong with the recommendation. I think the only issue that I'll focus on in my comments, and I'll make them brief is number 7. The road. Like I do so many times, I plead guilty for making previous decisions and I think when the Cunningham subdivision came in, we all knew, at least those of us who voted for it, knew what we were doing. There's just no doubt. You don't allow that subdivision without knowing what's going 15 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 across the street so when we set the precedent, we really did know that the Meyer's were going to divide someday. Had no idea when so, and at that time I don't think we really had a real concern. I think we understood that it's a unique ar.;a. The neighbors, like they did tonight, were here for the Cunningham's. I think they're a very responsible group. I think it's a unique area in the city. I think there's some, it's just tough to apply city standards to this. It's just plain tough and I'm probably, I'm not going to be the one to enforce them here. It's just, we'd be destroying some things to protect some, or to maybe help some other areas but again, I think as long as our legal advice says that we're really not opening ourselves to lawsuits, for allowing something like this to happen. As long as the legal advice says that, then I'm really very much in favor of letting this go through. I think some of the things that the Meyer's have volunteered are real important. I think we need that gate structure to be upgraded. I think they have volunteered that. I think that's important. I think they volunteered to restrict further subdivision. I think that's important. I think I've heard that we may want to look at some brush and whatever. Those are temporary things. Those things drive staff wild. That solves it today and what happens later on. Staff doesn't want to hear... They can't deal with it. I would, but I also heard the neighborhood say that they may be upgrading the street a little bit, whether that be surface or expansion of the pavement or whatever. So other than making some comments that kind of, I really want to make sure that the city is protected from any kind of potential lawsuits by not enforcing some of our standards. As long as that's the case, I really feel that the subdivision is appropriate and we should grant a variance. I think again the staff report is appropriate from their standpoint. They're doing exactly what they're supposed to do. I we uld stick something in, a recommendation that really talks about working with the neighbors as they upgrade their paving and I don't know what the words are. Nothing's very enforceable and nothing really probably meaningful but 1 guess if they do that, my recommendation would be if we could somehow incorporate the city into that process where we're either widening the curves or the gravel on either side of the paved lot or somehow giving some future thought into maintaining the width of the street. That's all I have. Mancino: Thank you. Bob. Skubic: I share Ladd's feelings regarding the safety and liabilities of the street. There seems to be some latitude regarding, on the part of the Fire Marshal regarding what is required for that street. There is no mention in there of the street needing to comply with the driveway ordinance. I don't know if you assume that would happen on top of the three recommendations that he made. So there seems to be some latitude there and he also makes mention that a suitable sprinkler system might provide some room for compromise there. But I favor this plan with some additional comments regarding item number 7. Recommendation number 7 that perhaps staff and the applicant can work together to do something there. And one more thing is item 6. It seems to be related to item 7. Maybe we're deferring the issue 16 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 here a little bit because item 6 requests dedication on the westerly edge of three or four of the lots for a public street, which means that the street would be widened and the trees would be taken out I assume. And I also wonder if there's a complication there, if I read the drawing here correctly. There's a gas line running along the easterly, westerly side. Easterly side on the road which seems to be the side that would be widened. Maybe Dave perhaps can shed some light on that. Is that a complication that the gas line would underneath the side of the road that would be widened? Mancino: Yeah, excuse me. Could both you and John talk a little bit about that item number 6. Hempel: Madam Chairman, commissioners. Item number 6 relates to future widening, upgrading of Ridge Road at some future date, 50, 100 years whatever. It gives us the opportunity to obtain the necessary easements, right-of-way to do that at no cost. Typically when a subdivision like this comes forward, we require the applicant dedicate the necessary street right-of-way with the final plat at that time. With this instance, we're recommending that they dedicate the permanent easement at the time that the City Council authorizes the project to upgrade that road. So we would obtain it at that time at no cost to the property owners. Otherwise the city would have to purchase the right-of-way at that time in the future. Conrad: Dave, that's exactly what you worded in the Cunningham agreement. Mancino: That's exactly what I was going to ask. Hempel: The final condition of the Cunningham Addition and we thought it would be appropriate in this development as well. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Skubic: That's all. Mancino: Okay, Craig. Peterson: Well my thoughts are similar to my two predecessors in the fact that I think we do have to maintain what is legally, what we are legally responsible to do. I guess I ask staff, has that been formally reviewed or not by Council? Rask: No it has not. We have not approached it with the City Attorney yet but it's certainly something we can check prior to Council. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Peterson: I guess number one, I would like to see that formally done. And number two. If we were to go ahead and approve this, I would like to integrate in as one of the recommendations that the sign be up, I don't see that formally, the gate be formally upgraded to what has been discussed by the residents this evening. So other than those two, I have no other comments. Mancino: Mike. Meyer: I don't have any additional comments besides something that we've talked about before Nancy and that was they've said that there's no further subdivision of the lots but I don't see it as a point in here and maybe that's something we could add in. Aanenson: I don't think legally we can do that. If somebody wants to...a piece of property, they have a right, if it meets the ordinance, to go through the process. I don't think that the City Attorney would say that we could prohibit that. If someone wants to assemble property, they certainly the right to try to get a subdivision so, it's something we couldn't enforce. Mancino: Can we say something to the, add to the reco:nmendations about the street. The Ridge Road. Maybe it being modified if there are additional homes. 13 homes. Or does that just, will that just automatically come up again? Aanenson: No matter what, everytime one comes back, we're going to bring that before you. That's certainly an issue of health, safety and welfare issue that would be... Mancino: Will keep coming back up, okay. Are you done? I have no new comments. I agree. I think that the subdivision is compatible with the area. The existing area and I think it's well done. Well thought out. I appreciate staff looking at the pad placement and moving some of that to turn out beyond the slope section of Lots, I think it's 3 and 4. Removing those to the west a bit. And I also agree with keeping the driveway, the private drive as it is and not widening it at this point. And those are all my comments. Can I have a motion? Conrad: Sure. I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary plat and variance request from Section 18-57 permitting up to 13 homes on private street for Subdivision #95-16, Meyer's 2nd Addition, subject to the plans dated July 14th and the following conditions as stated in the staff report with an exception to item number 7. I will eliminate the first seitence. The balance of 7 stands. I would add a point 14. That the City Attorney review this proposal to ensure or to make a recommendation or report as to the city's liability in not bringing the road up to a minimum standard as described by ordinance. Number 15 would be that the Meyer's supply, number 15 would be that the Meyer's are obligated to bring the break away fence or gate up to a 18 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 standard that's maybe set by the State parks. Number 16 would be that the Meyer's, and this might sound ridiculous but that the Meyer's would present to the city staff...present to the city staff some brush removal plan to clear as much of that road and give the staff and the City Council. Mancino: A comfort level? Conrad: Yeah, these are the most soft words. Some kind of assurances that this can be maintained in the future. And then I won't include, and that's the end of my motion but again I think I'd really like the neighborhood to work with the city when you're doing your upgrading and get their input. And who knows what's going to happen to this motion but again, from a very personal, I think the neighbors treat this very personally. They're very involved. They're very responsible and I guess I'd ask them very much to incorporate the city as they upgrade themselves, the asphalt. Preferably to get city input and that's what staff is really good at doing. They really do work very well with neighborhoods. So anyway, that's the end of my motion. Mancino: Would you accept a friendly amendment? Conrad: Maybe. Mancino: The friendly amendment has to do with the turn around. An acceptable turn around to city staff that works at the end of, and I think that you had asked, staff had asked on 7 that the roadway be to a 7 ton and a turn around to accommodate public safety vehicles. If there is a way for staff and the applicant, and maybe the City of Shorewood, to ascertain whether that one turn around can serve both ends of the private road. Conrad: That's a good one. For city staff to review the use of the turn around on the Shorewood side to see if it meets the needs of Chanhassen. Mancino: And if it doesn't, then another resolution has to take place on the Chanhassen side. Do I hear a second for the motion? Skubic: Second. Mancino: Any discussion on the motion? 19 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad moved, Skubic seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat and the valiance request from Section 18-57(o) permitting up to thirteen (13) homes on a private street for Subdivision 95-16, Meyet's 2nd Addition, subject to the plans dated July 14, 1995 and the following conditions: 1. Individual detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plans shall be submitted to the City for each lot. The City shall review and approve the plans prior to issuance of building permits on the lots. 2. All wetlands and wetland buffer strips shall be delineated on the grading and drainage plans. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland baffer edge signs before construction of the new houses. The applicant will be charged ';20.00 per sign. A qualified wetland biologist shall survey the property for wetlands and write a brief letter verifying the existence or non-existence of wetlands and impacts, if any, to wetlands on the site. 3. The proposed single family residential development of 6.55 developable acres shall be responsible for water quantity and quality connection charges of $12,969.00 and $5,240.00 respectively. These fees will be due at time of final plat recording. 4. All disturbed areas as a result of construction shall be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading is completed. Slopes steeper than 3:1 shall be sodded and staked or restored with wood fiber blanket. 5. The grading plan shall include the following items: a. Erosion control fencing. b. Move the house pads on Lots 3 and 1 closer to Ridge Road to improve driveway grade and minimize tree removal ani grading. c. Access Lot 1 from the northern end of the lot to minimize tree removal. d. The plan certification shall be signed by a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 6. The applicant shall dedicate to the City a permanent right-of-way easement over the westerly 30 feet of Lots 1, 3 and 4 and the west 25 feet of Lot 2. The easement shall become effective once the City adopts a resolution to upgrade the private road (Ridge Road). Subsequent to the adoption of the resolution, the road shall remain as a private right-of-way and not maintained by the city. The applicant shall obtain and grant cross access and maintenance easements over the lots to gain ingress and egress along Ridge Road. 20 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 7. Parking on Ridge Road shall be prohibited. The applicant shall provide and install the necessary traffic signs. 8. A tree conservation area shall be established on the easterly 135 feet of Lot 3 and the easterly 200 feet of Lot 4. To further reduce construction impact on the woods, staff recommends the building pad on Lot 3 be pulled 30 feet to the west to accommodate a driveway which does not exceed a ten (10) percent grade and for tree protection. 9. The existing cottage and garage shall be razed or removed from the site within 30 days after the final plat has been recorded. The applicant shall obtain the necessary demolition permits. 10. Obtain a permit and install a pool fence prior to recording the final plat. 11. Full park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit approval in the amount in force at the time of building permit application. 12. Tree and branch overgrowth along Ridge Road shall be trimmed to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 13. A thirty (30) foot front yard setback shall be maintained from the dedicated right-of- way. 14. The City Attorney review this proposal to and prepare a report as to the city's liability in not bringing the road up to a minimum standard as described by ordinance. 15. The Meyer's are obligated to bring the break away fence or gate up to a standard that's maybe set by the State parks. 16. The illeyer's present to the city staff some brush removal plan to clear as much of that mad and give the staff and the City Council some kind of assurances that this can be maintained in the future 17. City staff review the use of the turn around on the Shorewood side to see if it meets the needs of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion canied. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 PUBLIC BEARING: HOLASEK GREENHOUSE FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR AN "AFTER THE FACT" GRADING/EARTHWORK FOR 36.000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL LOCATED SOUTH OF LYMAN BOULEVARD (CO. RD. 18) AND NEST OF GALPIN BLVD. (CO. RD. 19). Mike Meyer stepped off from the Planning Commission for this item due to a conflict of interest. Dave Hempel presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff? Okay. Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Earl Holasek. No, we do not. Mancino: Not at all, okay. This is open for, or may I have a motion to open this for a public hearing please. Peterson moved, Conrad seconded to open the public heating. The public hewing was opened. Mancino: Thank you. This is open for a public hearing. Does anyone wish to address the Planning Commission on this issue, as in the public hearing? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Peterson moved, Conrad seconded to close the public he Ding. The public hexing was closed. Mancino: Thank you. Craig. Any comments? Questions. Peterson: No. I think it's pretty straight forward. I don't see any major issues. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: No, I don't have an issue with it. I took a drive by it and I didn't see anything out of the ordinary. I don't know what 36,000 cubic yards of fill really looks like but on that site it didn't look offensive at all. Mancino: Okay, Ladd. 22 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad: I'd just like to ask the applicant why, knowing that you needed a permit, why you went ahead without the permit. Earl Holasek: The opportunity for receiving the type of fill that we were able to get came and went so fast that we did not have time to address the 45 day permitting process. So we went ahead with it anyway to get the... Mancino: Okay? A couple of questions that I have. Dave, on number 4. On page 5 of your conditions. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all costs incurred for the enforcement of this permit, including engineering and the attorney's fees. Do you have an idea what those, how much those costs total? Hempel: Not at this point, no I do not. Mancino: Okay. I would just, I think that that would b.: a suggestion for City Council to kind of pull those costs together to see what those are. Is there anything that the city has, and I had highlighted the 45 days to receive approval. Is there any process that we have when something like this comes up to do it more quickly and legally, in less than 45 days? I mean Mr. Holasek had said, I've got a problem. It's right now. I can get it. Is there anyway that this can be shortcut? And was that asked? Hempel: Mr. Holasek did indicate, was there a way around the permitting process as well as the contractor did and based on the city ordinance, the way it's set up, there was no provision to expedite or waive the permitting process on this amount of earthwork. Aanenson: But there is different amounts that you can do administratively. Hempel: We're allowed to issue a permit administratively for filling up to 1,000 cubic yards of material. We can issue that basically within a day. When it exceeds 1,000 cubic yards, the interim use permit ordinance takes hold requiring the necessary Planning Commission approval and City Council. Aanenson: Can I just add to that? The reason for that is one, we want to know trucking routes and want to know if there's wetlands. Making sure that those are, and that was our concern with this one too. There was a wetland there and we weren't sure of the status of that and what the impacts were and that's why when there's over a certain quantity, then we start looking at the bigger picture. Where it's going. Where it's coming from and making sure that there's erosion control. That's why there's the administrative one and when it's over a certain amount, that we do want to have control and go through the permitting process where you put the conditions on there, where there is some standards or conditions. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Mancino: Thank you, that's helpful. Peterson: Give me a sense of a 1,000 cubic yards. Size of this room? Hempel: Approximately a tandem load dump truck carries approximately 10 to 12 cubic yards. So 1,000 yards would be just about 75 to 100 truck loads. In this case here, they used a belly dump. Mancino: It's 40,000 wasn't it? Hempel: Pardon me? Mancino: Wasn't it 40,000 in this case? Hempel: In this case it's 36,000 cubic yards but they did use larger trucks or the belly dump type. The haul route was actually pretty close. Most of the fill material did come from the city of Chaska, right there on the Jonathan Park I believe it was. It was a relatively short haul so they're able to really move it in a hurry. Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion please? Skubic: I'll make a motion. That the Planning Commission recommend approval of Interim Use Permit #95-3 for Holasek Greenhouses for the mate_ial that has been hauled in as shown on the plans prepared by William Engelhardt & Associates dated May 31, 1995, and subject to the following conditions 1 thru 5. Peterson: Second. Mancino: Thank you. Any discussion? Skubic moved, Peteison seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of hiteiim Use Penuit #95-3 for Holasek Greenhouses for the material that has been hauled in as shown on the pl:uts prepared by William Engelhardt & Associates dated May 31, 1995, and subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall pay a grading permit fee in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, Appendix 70-B, based on the amount of earthwork hauled into the site (36,000 cubic yards). The applicant shall be responsible for a grading permit fee of $319.50. 24 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 2. The applicant shall complete and resubmit the signed Wetland Conservation Act certificate of exemption. 3. The interim use permit shall expire on October 15, 1995. All disturbed areas as a result of the filing shall be reseeded and mulched or employed in crops. The applicant shall supply the City with a financial escrow in the amount of $2,500. to guarantee restoration and compliance with conditions of this permit. 4. The applicant shall reimburse the City for all costs incurred for the enforcement of this permit including engineering and attorney fees. 5. The applicant shall hold the City and it's officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from permit approval or work done in conjunction with it. The applicant shall indemnify the city and it's officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses that the city may pay or incur in consequence with such claims, including attorney fees. All voted in favor and the motion carried. (Mike Meyer did not vote on this item.) PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) APPROVAL TO REZONE 22.4 ACRES FROM RI2, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 46.57 ACRES INTO 79 LOTS, 3 OUTLOTS AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY; SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 76 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ZERO LOT LINE HOMES ON 19.64 ACRES: AND A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT AND WETLAND SETBACK ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON LAKE RILEY BOULEVARD, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LAKE RILEY, NORTH BAY. ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC. Public Present: Name Address Craig Schmidt William R. Engelhardt Associates Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff? 25 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Skubic: Yes, I have one. Bob, was the applicant able to retain the same number of units with the revised plans from the original? Generous: There were 75 originally so they picked up a unit. Skubic: Thank you. Mancino: Bob, on condition number 2 where you have Lot 57, Block 1 and Lot 21, Block 2 are unbuildable for dwelling units and must be maintained for common open space. They're not on my plans so I assume that that's already been done. Generous: Well they show them. It's the large open area on both blocks. Mancino: Oh! That's what that means. I gotch ya. Generous: All the land that's not platted for the dwellings and Lot 21 is the wetland and all the common land on the south side. Aanenson: If it was platted as a lot, it could be buildable so as long as it's in the outlot status, it's non-buildable. Generous: So they could either call it an outlot or plat it as a lot and in here specify that it's undevelopable for dwellings. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Aanenson: So somebody else doesn't it and try to build something on it. Mancino: Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Does the applicant or their designee wish to approach the Planning Commission? Don Jensen: Yes. Good evening. My name is Don Jensen. I'm the Land Development Manager with the Rottlund Company, 2681 Round Lake Road, Roseville, MN 55113. We're here tonight to bring back the development in it's revised form and we are pleased we've been able to resolve most of the conditions that the Planning Commission and Council as well as staff set forth for us in the redesign effort. I have a number of graphics with me tonight that you also have in your packets. The ones I have tonight Ire colored, versus the black lined and reduced copies that you have. So I'd be happy to go through them as we speak tonight in greater clarity or perhaps highlight those at issue for yourselves. I won't go through a presentation as in full depth as I did that last time around but what we have tonight is we 26 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 have the overstory plan rendered, which is on the board here to my left, which highlights the existing trees in the very dark green towards Lake Riley and on the wetland. The balance is our proposed landscaping plan. It shows all the dwellings units in the lighter color that you see around each dwelling unit where all the shrub that we have as foundation planting plans for each dwelling unit. Central common space and entry monumentation. Additional plantings are shown on this plan and then in your packet were highlighted on separate sheets. We also have those at a larger scale, as were in your plans, submitted for review tonight. We have the landscape plans, foundation planting detail renderings. We also have some improved renderings of the buildings for the cottages. The furthest step in our RV if you will. So we're able to show what those particular elevations look like in our final working drawings step. The village homes, which are the smaller dwellings up through here, in terms of the sizing on the ground. At least their footprint impact are still in the design development phase and are unchanged from what we last brought before you. We have an improved buildings and colors and pallet of materials. The board in front of you we've changed recently been able to comply and improve our brick selection through a consolidation of one particular supplier. We have those in front tonight as well. And we also have the architectural floor plans again for your view at the large size tonight. And that's what we have. We'll go through a couple of them as you wish. We would like to thank the staff for their support and recommendation for approval. We do have a key difference, as we had at our previous application with the parks recommendation. We'll go over that in a little bit of detail. That does involve the lakeshore and we would like to be able to describe that a little bit more. We would like to recap that the Rottlund Company will be both the developer of this land and the builder, and that's a little bit different from o.Jr relationship with the Mission Hills project and we would like to be able to clarify and at least for the moment, provide a chance to say that we can only do so much when you're the builder and the developer is obligated to do most of the things on the site. Our previous project most recently in Chanhassen, Windmill Run, which is a single family subdivision. We were both the developer and the builder and I think that the concerns expressed by residents or the city staff were far less than those which had been voiced here on the Mission Hills development, and I think that that goes to illustrate what we can accomplish at the North Bay development. What we did accomplish at the Windmill Run development. We'd like to again highlight what we believe the strengths of the development are. We have a strong pedestrian circulation system. Based on the comments when the Planning Commission at a previous meeting had approved and refined the design for our central commons area is .65 acres in size. Throughout the center area we have a pathway system that links it down to the Lake Riley Road east, as is recommended by staff. That has a sidewalk. Again, it connects it all the way down to Lyman Boulevard and then as well to the property to the east where there's a future park proposed at some place within the next subdivision. That again connects to the trail system on Lyman so we've got the ability for all of these folks in this neighborhood to circulate out literally without a car, walking and bicycling in a fairly safe environment. We have a, I might as well touch on that quickly. We 27 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 have an aerial, in case you're interesting in some context, we can pass that around... That was shot very recently but shows all of the action going on next door at Bearpath, in Eden Prairie, as well as Mission Hills and other locations. What we have going on within the central space and on the grading plan it becomes a little bit clearer, there's really two tiers that are accomplished. Each one of these dwelling units step up the hill, or in this case, down, left to right, approximately a foot to a foot and a half. So what we've done is, as these buildings are stepping down, as they're stepping down in this location, they continue to step down along the street. The NA hole site, as you recall from our last presentation, has about 40 feet of change from Lyman Boulevard as you go up towards the easterly boundary and to the, what we'll Klingelhutz development. What we've able to do with the center space then is flatten out and create more of a useful upper tier. This does not step down as fast as the buildings are and what we've been able to provide then is a ridge and that's what these plantings are located on so that cascades down and you have a situation unlike what you have outside of city hall. Not quite as dramatic from your upper parking lot to your lower parking lot. That area then defines what might be...child's play area down below and the upper area that's larger is more of a consolidated area for viewing or we view it as an adult opportunity. What we've shown on this plan is that we surrounded the area with permanent planting beds so that we've got a private space, public space. The public space as defined on these plans again was .65 acres, so it's a fairly large piece of land for all the residents' use. And we've shown that there's an opportunity that they can decide whether they like gardening. Whether they want to have flowering gardens, active gardens, or if they just want it for open passive get togethers. It could be big enough for volleyball games for example. Big enough for throwing frisbee. And then clown in through this smaller area we've got an opportunity and to be able to incorporate on site...pea gravel and create a container. Once we really see what the mix is. The real opportunity here is to let these folks design the space that they're going to have to pay their insurance over and they're going to have to maintain and take care of based on their mix. And so that's what we're providing in this particular enhanced plan. Our entry areas down at the development's front doors and also on the waterfront area, we have increased planting areas. We have a rock element which is very similar to our Mission Hills signs... So that's located through the main entryway with Lyman Boulevard that's pulling back to make sure that we've got the appropriate sight visibility. Immediately to the west of that our detention facilities begin. Likewise there are enhanced plantings at North Bay Drive, as we go into the neighborhood of village homes. Out onto the lakefront area and this is what we were discussing with staff. Clarifications as to what is going on. This particular area on your plan you have a proposed outlot to the east and what we were discussing with staff is improving the existing gravel access road that's being used today. Staff informs us if you improve it, it becomes a new use and it can't be there but if you just have a curb cut and leave it gravel, it's an existing non-conforming use and it can stay so, there will be a curb cut. This improvement as it's shown here won't occur so that the access is still preserved as an existing non-conforming use. What we were showing here, we were asked to show what ?g Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 could happen down there at the beachfront. The possibility of a small shelter for the residents who have the lakefront rights and the lakefront docking rights. The design of that and the ability to actually construct something is subject to further review and that's the reason that it was as a lot. Staff has suggested that that remain an outlot until it is solved and that would be fine. The third outlot that is shown farther to the west was described as requested by the parks commission as the possibility for a public park area. We're not interested in having the development pay full park fees and be required to dedicate as private park for public purposes and not be reasonably compensated. That's a separate issue and we think that that's, it certainly doesn't get at trying to provide affordability. You're in essence paying approximately 1.75 times the going park rate when you're doing that particular action. The PUD status, as we understand, we're creating a neighborhood such as this, is a mandatory category designation for the city of Chanhassen. It's not optional as some of the parks commissioners may have thought. So we have a separate issue. We understand when we make our point known that it's an issue with the Council and it's not really something the Planning Commission...in any great detail tonight and we'll leave it at that. On the landscaping plan, what you see and really as the neighborhood becomes completed, represents a little over 3.1 new trees, whether they're ornamental, evergreen, or street tree categories, per dwelling unit. And a representative plan...on the plans that we've submitted approximately 30 shrubs and perennials...that's a substantial investment in the quality of this particular neighborhood, we think in comparison to...this city or any in the western suburbs. Another issue that the Planning Commission had asked us to address the last time is what can we do to reasonably assure that there's some interesting looking facades and that there's some differences in building materials. Differences in building colors. What we've submitted to staff and what we have here tonight are some improved building plans where we've got some different roof lines going on from what was previously submitted. We're breaking that up. We're adding some dormers. We're adding some greater eaves. It doesn't show up necessarily as well in this stage or at this size but you have a longer and greater overhang over the garages. You have a break-up of what's occurring over into the garage, in some cases it doesn't extend over the entire garage. We did have a chance on the site plan to turn several garages as we had in the previous concept stage so that not all of the views are the same from the street and that helps to minimize the concern about the garage door. You can see on the board below me, and I don't know if, I'll move it up so the camera at home. You'll notice this is sturdy metal here. What I have on the upper right hand corner of the board are all of the current accent colors that we have. I'll put the other board down below. That's consistent with what we have on the front doors and on all the shutters which is similar to what we've done in Mission Hills development and we have a few more shutters throughout this particular plan. We have a series of three different brick colors. We have a common thread of a singular roofing product for the 76 dwelling units. And then what you see is the second color and then a faux cedar shake that goes typically above the garage elevation so we can adapt the roof line above the garage door. You have this particular 29 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 garage so you can get different...through here. Similar to single family subdivisions. The architectural control over this neighborhood would be, you can't have the same color immediately adjacent to any given lot, which means if you've got this color on one side of the street, you can't have it immediately next door or immediately across the street. It could be angular and so it can go in a triangulated pattern or it could be missing and you would have a different pattern showing up. We think with the modest changes in the elevations and in the building next to you, if you've got 26 of the cottages, which is this particular building. And then we have approximately 50 of the village homes. Those again have slightly different elevations and the color path really gives you the assurance that you're not going to have sameness. And that you have a really good variety of building patterns going on. Mancino: Don, right now on Mission Hills you use the same brick everywhere, from what I could, as I drove around. Don Jensen: That's correct. Mancino: Okay. And this would be the three different. Don Jensen: Correct. They have the different accent colors. Minimum of two per subdivision, and then we also had I believe two different building colors, none of which were the same so there's actually four different accent colors, if my memory serves me correct. With that we did get a chance to meet with staff and go over the conditions of approval. Bob highlighted...There were a couple of minor issues with engineering that were also something that we wanted to touch on and just make sure we understood out of the meeting where we were headed. And those conditions are 21, 25, 27(f) and 31, 32, and 33 we've already touched on a little bit. Our issues with those particular conditions are, with number 21 we had discussed with staff that at the final plat time, the amount of developable acreage is determined and that this condition merely represents a cap number. And so the 47,808, if the plan...what we are asking is that recognition be granted. That number of that could drop. If line up changes or some other things change in how we calculate things, we just want to be able to check the math and staff was comfortable with that this afternoon and we just wanted to double check that this evening. Regarding condition number 25. This was something we did not discuss this afternoon and adding the possibility of adding two words. Final plat approval shall be contingent upon the Council awarding the bid for the first phase of the Lyman Boulevard/Lake Riley Area Trunk Improvement project. We've understood with staff that a utility portion and not the actual bituminous street portion would be on the docket for this fall. And you really can't build a street from there anyway so that's why they're intended that way but we would presume that that condition would apply if a partial ordering of the project. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Mancino: Excuse me, Dave does that meet with your approval? Hempel: Yes, that amendment would be acceptable. Don Jensen: Item number 27(f) we also went over with staff and 27(f) as it stands says revise grading plan to have the rear lots drain through to the front yard. Because these are slab on grade products we, at the moment have designed the grading plan with the high point as a front door entry and that it pitches back. Front door entry is typically behind the garage. ...building plan here. This is the landscaping plan but for example our garage is located up front. Our front door entry then is approximately 20 feet back from the garage, set back from the roadway. That means we're going to have about 40 feet back. Then there's an additional, approximately 25 to 35 feet, depending on the product that's selected for the front or the back of the building and then out in the back yard. We're trying to make sure that we don't have a problem with...heat, which is a real popular mode of heating. Slab on grade structures these days where the heat ducts are in the slab or just below the slab. We're not convinced yet of trying to move all the water from the back through to the front would create either a desirable grading situation in the front or if you have the narrower distance between structures. Or that it would really solve our problem with water. What we agreed with staff today is that we would work with them to arrive at a satisfactory solution for the fine grading, as it dealt with those lots 4, through 31, Block 1. And that wasn't mentioned today, or at least this evening so presumably that's, 1 mean that's a very fine detail issue. I'm just uncomfortable agreeing to push the water all the way through to the front at this time. I don't want to appear that we're not doing what staff has asked for. Item number 31. We also agreed with staff this afternoon that we would arrive at some acceptable language regarding the waiver of procedural or what they would call minor substantive objections to the assessments as they occur. This issue deals, and it's our understanding with whether or not the title company will withhold for pending assessments and how do you really warrant or guarantee that we convey this home or any given home in this particular development, that they're going to get the proper legal notification when the city actually comes to the hearing for the Lyman Boulevard project. So we understand their issue and we don't really object to what they're trying to accomplish but right now the way this condition is worded, it says we're going to give up a lot of rights and we just want to be able to be comfortable with what that says so, in principle we're comfortable with the condition. We just want to revise the language so it will go forward kind of gray. 32 and 33 we already discussed. Dealing with parks and we just want to be able to accomplish a reasonable neighborhood that provides really very little up for maintenance for the residents. We'd like them to be in full control of what their immediate outdoor surroundings are and we're wanting the lakefront to be, at a minimum, for their use and really concerned a point of the public that the residents that are going to be living here get their full dock slip rights as they are entitled to by the amount of frontage of lakeshore that we currently have in this particular property. That's at least 5, if not 6 overnight dock 31 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 slips based on the front footage on the lake so that's a minor issue and again that's for the Council. Outside of that, all of these 36 conditions, many are standard. We're very comfortable with and we'd like to thank the staff for the diligence on this plan. In working with us. We're looking forward to getting it approved so we can wait and see that the project for Lyman Boulevard is awarded this fall. If there's any questions that you have about the building product, about how we redesigned the development and what we are trying to accomplish here, I'd be happy to answer your questions. I don't know that there's a representative from the adjacent property to the... There is from Lakeview Hills Apartments. I don't know that there's a representative here. We have had discussions with them. They have had discussions with staff regarding a pending plat but they are comfortable, and spoken so at the Council meeting in the past about having a single right-of-way for public access on the east side of the property so this plan in fact can be accomplished. We do not have a hostile situation occurring for access purposes. And we're also working with staff on the road alignment for Lake Riley Boulevard. There was a concern, and I'll close with this, that staff would like Lake Riley moved back to it's original location. This is a compromise location which met the design guidelines. What we're not clear on is when that mooshing and smooshing of that final design occurs, there's the possibility that this dwelling unit, if it were to stay exactly as computed here, might be 45 feet away from the right-of-way line as it might be versus the 50 feet that we have today. We wanted to breach that subject now is that this is not reasonable if we're clipping a small corner of this building, that it could be allowed to remain at a 45 distance away from right-of-way. There's really no other impacts around it other than the Lakeshore so that the dwelling unit would be able to preserve. That's all that I have at the moment. Mancino: Thank you. Any questions at this point? We may have some later but thank you very much. Don Jensen: Thank you. Mancino: May I have a motion to open this for a public hearing? Peterson moved, Skubic seconded to open the public heating. The public heating was opened. Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please come up now. State your name and your address. Craig Schmidt: Good evening Madam Chairman, members of the commission. My name is Craig Schmidt. I'm a civil engineer with William R. Engelhardt Associates, 1107 Hazeltine Boulevard in Chaska. I'm here tonight representing John Klingelhutz. He's the property 32 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 owner to the west of this development. Mr. Klingelhutz is out of town. He asked me to come and go over a couple of issues he has regarding this plat. As a brief introduce, back in September of 1992, John Klingelhutz received preliminary plat approval for 68 lot residential development known as Lake Riley Hills. In March of this year Mr. Klingelhutz that approval of his plat had expired and it was no longer valid. As a result of this, two major changes would have to occur on this plat. First was a development of a 5 acre neighborhood park on his parcel. And the second was a realignment of Lyman Boulevard. Since that time we've been in the process of developing new plans for Mr. Klingelhutz. At this time what Mr. Klingelhutz is requesting is that a portion of the land required for the, that would be required by the Rottlund development for park dedication, be dedicated in the northeast corner of their development. And that in the future then, Mr. Klingelhutz will dedicate the remaining land to equal the 5 acre lot requirement. Thus, developing a neighborhood park which would serve both of these developments. That's what he would really like to see happen but he has agreed to a compromise if you will. He would like to see Lake Riley Road, as it comes into his plat. Relocated approximately 170 feet south of it's current location. If that were to occur, that would enable him to more easily fit the 5 acre park in this portion of the development. Of his development and so. Mancino: So it would be contiguous there? Craig Schmidt: So it would be contiguous. And that's really all the concerns that he has. I took a look at the Rottlund plan, based on that realignment and what would occur would be, based on my initial look was actually the addition of two units. 8 large units would be eliminated and 4 would be put back and also 6 of the smaller units so there'd actually be a 2 unit increase, or a possible. One other thing that that could do would be to increase the overall area of this townhome space as this would be realigned. Mancino: Okay, thank you. And I guess how we'd like to, Bob how would you like to deal with that? Aanenson: Well he's kind of caught up at a loss because right now we're just responding to this plan. The departure, you know the recommendation would really have to come from the Park and Rec Department. They look at each plat individually. Now I'm not sure if he's talked to Todd about that but the recommendation for the park issue and the compensation obviously has to be worked through, actually through that whole process. And to now to say well that's how we're going to proceed, the Park Commission's already given their recommendation on this plat. It's kind of an 11th hour sort of thing. We have no chance to respond and Todd's not here to respond on that so I guess we have to respond to this at this point and then take it up at the Council as a suggestion. We can certainly do that. 33 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Craig Schmidt: That, if I could just as a moment. That portion of it was kind of his optimum case. I mean that's what he would like to see because he really feels that that park is intended to serve a wider area than just his development and he has a similar piece of property in that there's a lot of wetlands and so forth and a lot of steep slopes that are difficult to use so. Actually he has much less density allowable in his parcel. What he really wants to see happen most of all would be the realignment of that street and we think that that can be accomplished relatively simply and wouldn't really decrease the number of units that are out there. Aanenson: Again, the Park and Recreation Commission looks at you know access and where. As Mr. Jensen's indicated, he already feels like he's being punitively punished to have public parks so he's already feeling like he's already being asked to donate public property so to say the first recommendation, to give additional, I'm not sure...because they've already asked for public. And as far as relocating it in that area, I think certainly that's something that would have to be the recommendation from the Park Commission before this went to Council. Mancino: So you would suggest that Mr. Schmidt should call Todd? Aanenson: Certainly. Mancino: Okay, and discuss that with him. And then I think at that point you might want to talk with Kate and Bob and also Rottlund. Craig Schmidt: I apologize for the lateness of it. I wasn't made aware of it until late Monday. I was unable to get a hold of Mr. Jensen. Mancino: Well we appreciate your coming. Anyone else like to address the Planning Commission? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing. Meyer moved, Peterson seconded to close the public heating. The public hexing was closed. Mancino: Comments from commissioners. Mike. Meyer: I don't think I really have anything in particular to say. It's a lot to take in. Overall I like the plan as set forth. Really nothing in particular at this point. Mancino: Okay, Craig. Peterson: I think the staff certainly did a thorough job after spending an hour and a half reading the documentation involved. I think that it does go a long way in addressing the 34 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 issues of a project the size of this. Not having been here for the preliminary review, it seems as though the issues that were addressed then have been duly noted and realigned to address those needs so in looking at it generally, I think it is a development that does have some creativity and is, I think they've strived to make it a little bit more unique and different than some of the typical ones you may see so other than the issue that was just brought up that raises concern, I would like to get your feedback at least on that. Your initial one regarding the changing of the road as it stands, for my own edification if nothing else. Don Jensen: Okay. I just wanted to make sure you didn't have any additional questions. Staff made us aware of this possibility that this would come up this evening. We have been working with staff for this alignment and that was based on the previous plat. Presume that that circulation system would occur. What staff asked us if you can have known that loss in dwelling units and you can make this road work down here at the time of the final plat, if you can do that, and we at this time don't see a reason why not. Now that doesn't necessarily mean that there might not be some other issue that won't show up and create some practical difficulty. And I guess what we would say right now is we'd like this approved as is with the understanding that as with all projects, things possibly change as it goes to final plat and if there were a change, that would be viewed as being a substantial conformance to the preliminary plat. We're not at all interested in giving up more land through here for public park purpose. We...full park dedication fees were being used to develop and/or acquire parkland and that the provision of the lakeshore was a reasonable amount of private park. So I think staff, as well as yourselves, understand where we're headed. That that would be a departure for us and this given plan and would certainly change some of the economics. So I guess that's our, initially we don't believe that it would have any significant impacts to the wetlands area down through here. There was some concern probably in this area so when we start to plat...the road too far back, we start to push these buildings towards the wetland areas that we worked so hard to stay away from. There is a concern about setback against the adjacent property... And if there's a change in the...single level rambler style plans. We start to drop a little too many of those, it starts to become a little bit difficult to have enough to really improve the market to a certain price and that's really the goal is to be able to accomplish that. So...answer your question here. We're open to it but I guess we're pretty far along right now. We've spent a lot of time and energy and it would be the second phase of utilities. There is no work that would happen on this until spring, in all likelihood and so the ability to make a second phase adjustment is feasible. Conrad: Will you plan your road into the development to the west? No? You structured this to tie into a plan that had been previously approved I assume. Don Jensen: That is correct. Although it's expired, it certainly was a previous approval with an alignment that made an original amount of sense. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Peterson: No other questions. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: I like it. It's a novel plan to the city. It has a number of benefits. It offers lower priced housing and it's a good buffer between different land uses. And I'm anxious to see these issues be worked out. Nothing else. Mancino: Ladd Conrad: For staff, a quick comment. Tell me, 32 and 33. Payment of park, I did see the Park and Rec report but it says full payment, payment of full park and trail fees. And then dedication of Oudot C. Is that, how come it's both? Is that because this is a PUD? Aanenson: That's the position the Park Commission is taking. And they similarly took that one on Autumn Ridge. That because it's a PUD, they felt that in order to get the PUD they should be given something for that. I guess the Planning staffs proposal was, it could have been higher density but we liked this product. It's a different nitch. We didn't take that kind, we felt that preserving the open space really was the issue. Similarly we did look at the conditional use, as Bob pointed out in his staff report. Until this issue is resolved, they really can't go forward with the conditional use. They don't know how much frontage they have at this point so that's a separate issue. That's still going to have to come back before you. Conrad: So say it again. Staffs position, your, the planning position. Aanenson: We felt, the only way he can accomplish this, as Mr. Jensen indicated, to do this zero lot line is a PUD. In the zoning that's in place right now, you can't do this type of product so he's forced in order to do this project, which we support, it could be a lot of other things. We support this type of product as far as the housing type and nitch. We support the PUD. But the Park Commission is saying that now that you're doing a PUD, therefore you're obligated to give something up. It's an issue. We don't want to split the departments. It's an issue that the City Council is going to have to address. There's certainly some substantial issues... Conrad: This is a neat project. Don Jensen: Thank you. Conrad: It brings a, and I really don't have any. I have nothing further to add other than the recommendations already been made before me but, here we go again. It's taking a high 36 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 density and now we're down zoning, in essence. Even though this is kind of dense. It's down zoning. It is. And 1 tell you, we'll get burned and we've got to force the issue. We've got to force it fast with the City Council because the neat thing about what we've done, regardless of how hostile the residents get when they come in here, we have forecasts where we're going. We have forecasts before they moved in what was going to be there after they built. We continue to talk about high density. We continue to talk about this but it's really comfortable to eat it up. I really like this. I think this should be in here but the issue is our's and the issue is every time we start down zoning, we'd better challenge somebody. That's probably the city staff, to say what are we going about this because we just ate up more high density and we're going to have a real tough time putting it anyplace else because people are already there and they don't want it and we will back down. So again the challenge is to figure that out right now. Every time we do something like this, I think we really, it's just so easy to let it slide and wait for the next 3 or 4 plans to come in, in two weeks and just sort of take a look at it but I think we really have to challenge what we're doing in terms of the zoning impact of what we're doing with the planning impact. So again, this looks real good. Like it. I think you guys will figure the few problems out. But in terms of where we go, I think we have some work to do in terms of how we manage our zoning. Mancino: Well you know, I was thinking about that too and I thought this is a different housing type. We don't have. Conrad: Oh absolutely. Mancino: It's, the other part about it is it goes from the high density, the apartments and it's going to transition nicely into single family, which is on the west of it and I like to see a transition. .And I think people feel much better, more comfortable with it. At least those who cone to the Planning Commission meetings do. So I like it. I think it's a different product and I think because of that, and where it's located, I like the amenities. Conrad: But what are you going to do Madam Chairman? What do you want us to do in terms of other high density in the area? We have not forecast in our comprehensive plan that many high density areas in this city and we love to give them up. And so they're being chewed up and we don't, we're not going to find other places for them unless we put them down in the south. So the challenge there is to challenge ourselves. Everytime we do this, I think immediately we have to say, do we need the high density in town. Do we need, you know what was the last one where we went single family instead of commercial? Well we haven't done that yet. Mancino: But it was tabled. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad: Yeah. But again that's, and it's not that changing the direction is bad. It's just that we, something has to, we can't wait for the next comprehensive plan update in 5 years. We can't, because it will be too late. We won't have the opportunity to rethink where those, where that retail space is going to come from or where that high density space is going to come from because we won't be able to defend our position against the residents. Mancino: Do we have land that we're going to be looking at, study areas along 212 that we haven't designed yet? Aanenson: Yes. We're working on that right now that might be high density but Ladd's right. He brings up an issue that if you look at what the Park Commission is, we're kind of digressing here but what the Park Commission is doing in their study and you look at what land's available, you're right. There's not a lot. What it means is the density that we've taken away from under, coming in under the zoning would be a significant increase in some of those areas that are vacant. Mancino: Where else do have high density? We have it on Highway 5. We have it designated for the Eckankar, part of the Eckankar property. Aanenson: Which will probably never be. May never be built on. Generous: Ward property. Aanenson: Yeah, and the Ward property. Mancino: And the Ward property, and that's it at this point. And then we also have it designated as some mixed use areas. Aanenson: Correct. The one at Mission Hills. I think that's where we'll probably see some of that. In the pods around the 212, 101 area. And similar, the new 212 and the existing, 169/212. Conrad: But if you don't replace it right away, it's going to be real tough to talk to the residents who moved in there before this goes in, and we won't do it. Not that we have to have it. It's just that I think we need some kind of a system to make sure that we challenge the planning staff to tell us if we need it and. If we need it. If we need more high density because in their wisdom they're knowing where the city's going. Aanenson: I think the Met Council says we do. 38 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad: How important it is to have affordable housing. Mancino: I like the project. I have a, I want to tell you what I like Don and what, some concerns that 1 have and that was, I was here for the preliminary when we saw the conceptual. One of the things that we were concerned about were the common areas and the access to it and I think you've done a good job on getting access to those. The only one that I would like to see included would be, and I don't know how you include it because you've got a lot going on there, but between in Block 1 between Lot 56 and 32, it certainly doesn't have to be a trail that connects up to the other trail but I would like to see some sort of pedestrian access there so that the people who live in Block 2, can come in through that southern way and get to that common area in the middle. Have an accessway... Don Jenson: If I could respond to that. I'll hold up another drawing here. If you look at the regular plan, there is an access off'of Lake Riley Road a little bit farther to the west. One of the two lines that are drawn through here indicate overland drainage, which is in fact storm sewers that are back there get plugged or covered with leaves, those types of things, that there's some overflow that have to...two structures. Now, in the summertime people certainly can walk through there with the opening on the grass without a pathway for access purposes into this zone, and in the wintertime they'll be able to come overland through snow just as they would on a regular pathway. ...sort of fit all of those elements in there. Here we provide another access to these dwelling units farther to the east. If we can accomplish it, I'm pretty sure that we'll put a spur in but I want to be sure that the detailing engineering gets worked out so I can fit all those things. Have a drainage swale and a retaining wall and a sidewalk and trying to provide that defensible space that we're shooting for behind each home before we get to that private area. Mancino: Well 1 would like to put it in a condition to see if the applicant and staff can work with putting something in there. Some sort of an access and as I said, it doesn't have to connect up to any of the other trails that you did put in but it's just some sort of an opening so people know they can access it that way. You don't have to cut through people's yards or in between houses. The other, the second comments that were made were on architectural features and I think you did a very good, excellent job on showing to us on sheet 3 and sheet 4 the different facades for the cottage. The one story and the two story. I would like to change the recommendation 34 to be a just a little more specific and say that prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall work with staff to develop a project design plan which specifies how the variation in architectural details incorporating the seven building elevations shown on Sheets A3 and A4 of the plans prepared by Winton Associates Inc, as well as the variation of building material as shown to the Planning Commission on 8-16 are to be accomplished. I don't think you have any concerns with that. 39 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Don Jensen: No. What we're really doing is just reviewing the covenants that we have and the architectural control and the color of materials. Mancino: Good. My only, I have two other concerns and one of them is a much broader concern for the, for Dave and engineering. Is the level of, do we have adequate infrastructure in the area? As 1 drove over there, got on Lyman and I stopped at TH 101 and the way TH 101 is and trying to negotiate going forward on Lyman east coming from Galpin. There's a lot of traffic, at about 5:30 and you just stopped and waited. And by the time this development goes in, if it goes in next spring, you're going to have another 200 cars trying to get on TH 101. TH 101 is a mess right now. It just seems to me that are we building up too quickly for our infrastructure and our service level? And when will TH 101 be upgraded and all those things because it's extremely frustrating now. There isn't a light at that jog and I'm concerned for public safety there. In that whole area. Hempel: Very valid points Madam Chair. I'll just give you an update of what's occurring down in that end of town. With this Lyman Boulevard utility project, we will be upgrading Lyman Boulevard to 36 foot wide at least, if not maybe even wider. That is designated as a collector street on the city's comprehensive plan. It should be completed in the fall of '96 to help transportation needs in this area. We do anticipate other developments occurring here as well as the Rottlund North Bay development. John Klingelhutz' parcel will be back in before you I'm sure with a development proposal. Lundgren also has a preliminary plat approval on the south side of Lyman Boulevard, just west of Lake Riley with quite a few homes there as well. So with the Lyman Boulevard upgrade, that will go out to TH 101. From that part on, the rest of Lyman Boulevard is a county road and under the jurisdiction of Carver County. I do believe that they have in their capital improvement program in the next few years to upgrade that section of roadway as well. On through Powers Boulevard down to Audubon Road. The city will be upgrading Powers Boulevard next year to 4 lane divided highway from Lyman Boulevard up to Trunk Highway 5 which would be an avenue for the transportation from this area to take should TH 101 not be satisfactory, or at least a second alternative. Unfortunately roads, the way we're growing in the community here, our collector roads may be slightly behind development needs but they are on our 5 year capital improvement program, as far as upgrading our major collector streets in concert with the county road. Trunk Highway 101 on the other hand is under the jurisdiction of MnDot. It's, I think still this week classified as a temporary trunk highway, which means that. Mancino: It's not permanent yet. Hempel: Not yet, but there is talks of turn backs to the county and/or city for their upgrading. As you might have noticed out there it's been recently overlayed. It's real nice this year. And next year after the spring thaw, it will probably be broke up again but. We 40 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 have no plans for upgrading that section of TH 101. Not at least until the TH 212 corridor would come through and that would be part of the MnDot interchange. There is some talk of upgrading TH 101 up further to the north on the Mission Hills subdivision. From there up to what's been currently upgraded by the Rosemount facility and just south of TH 5, to make that all 4 lane. That will probably be occurring in the next 3 years. So there are some plans for roadway improvements out there. I guess not being a traffic engineer, I couldn't give you a concrete answer that yes, the current road situation out there will be adequate handled but I suspect with the proposed improvements coming on line in the next few years, that there would be adequate level of service for the proposed developments. Mancino: You didn't say anything about a light or anything. Hempel: The traffic signals and four way stops, they're all require traffic levels to be a certain level to meet warrants to bring on those types of safety improvements. Mancino: I have not been able to turn off of Galpin onto Highway 5 for two years now. Hempel: You may after this weekend. Mancino: It took an elementary school to do it. Don Jensen: Madam Chair, if I might get a chance to respond quickly what my traffic engineers have. The requirement of Chanhassen to have roads in place prior to getting building permits restricts to a great degree the true ability for a neighborhood to be absorbed prior to the traffic improvements that are there to be served. With the Lyman Boulevard project being a pre-requisite for final plat of Lundgren and Klingelhutz, Rottlund, you're really saying that all of the collector roads in Chanhassen will in fact be in place to places where they have jurisdiction. What only gets left out is that we look at this as a tree area, as do the people that live there...There is a secondary access that's recently being improved and there's just a very short link left in Eden Prairie and that's Lake Riley Boulevard as it goes...Bearpath just to the east and that's all in place. Dell Road is all in place. I mean you have...just on the border of Chanhassen and certainly a fair amount of these people are going to work in Eden Prairie or possibly even in Chaska so we balance...and try to find housing opportunities where the jobs are. We're also looking to make sure the infrastructure exists not only in Chanhassen but surrounding areas... Mancino: I understand. I would still like part of this to be reviewed by City Council so that they have some sort of report on the infrastructure and the service area and what it will be like. Because I think it's, I'm not thinking about development at all. I'm thinking about public safety for our community. My last concern is, I'd like to hear from other 41 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 commissioners on it a little bit, is that on the front page of the proposal it talks about that the applicant is proposing a standard setback of 20 feet from Lake Riley Road East and North Bay Drive. The standard is a 30 foot setback and the reason why they're asking, and I understand is to save the trees and the wetlands, etc. My just very practical concern, and question that I have and 1'd just like to hear some discussion is, 20 feet from the garage to the street. Now when I went out to Mission Hills and I measured from the apron of the garage to the street curb was 23 feet and those were pretty close to the street and I measured my car. My car is like 17 feet. So I am somewhat concerned about, and every one of these developments, the villa developments, there are cars in the driveway. I hardly went by one where there wasn't a car parked in the driveway. So again I have a little bit of a safety concern about people getting out of their front door. Walking around to the garage and getting into the car, etc and having to go into the street. And I understand the environmental side of it too but 1 have some just very practical concerns and I don't have a station wagon. I don't have a big camper so 20 feet is, I just want to tell you is very, very little space. Bob do you, I don't know if you want to comment on that or anyone else. Generous: Well just a quick one. Within the property that are fronting on the public right- of-way there's actually another 14 or 15 feet before the edge of pavement. Mancino: But on that private drive, on North Bay Drive. That's where it's 20 feet. Generous: That will be 20 feet, yes. Mancino: And there are 50 houses on that. Right? And I'm looking at that right so you have 2/3 of the houses at 20 feet. Very close to the street. I didn't see, yes I did. I did see in the villa development off of Dell Road. They had for each set of, I think it was 12, they had 4 or 5 extra parking spaces that were kind of segregated, and there were you know a couple boats there. So I just, I don't know how to deal with it. But it is a concern I have. Any discussion? Peterson: Well you're presenting something that doesn't have a lot of options. We're dealing with a wetland issue. That's obviously one of them is get rid of the wetlands but that's not an option. Mancino: Bob, what is the buffer right now in the wetlands? I mean is there a way. Generous: What is the buffer? Do you mean what the code requires? Mancino: Yeah. 42 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Generous: It's a 10 foot average. 0 to 20 feet. Mancino: And that's what we've got right now? Generous: Yes. Don Jensen: Plus the 40 foot setback. Generous: Plus the 40 foot setback. From your edge of your buffer. Don Jensen: Madam Chair if I could comment. Mancino: No...Any comments? Meyer: I think it is a valid concern. I haven't given it a lot of thought. I'll go measure my truck. Peterson: Well I totally agree. I lived in an area that was about probably 20 feet and getting something out of my trunk of my car, I was going over the edge of the, going onto the road regularly. But I didn't park right up against the front of the garage. Mancino: Don. Don Jensen: In comparing this to Mission Hills, which you gave as an example. Two key differences occur. One of which is the Mission Hills development has many buildings located 90 degrees or perpendicular to the roadway. And we tried throughout this plan to have most of the buildings skewed so the 20 foot setback really runs to the angle point of the front of the structure. Given that you've got at least 18 inches to possibly 2 feet of a kind of wall return before the door, you are picking up a couple of extra feet of true driveway dimension if this structure is positioned at the minimum setback. The minimum setback is what allows us to at least design that already fits. So from a pure dimensional standpoint, throughout a lot of these dwelling units the way they're positioned on the preliminary plat, we have an angle which means that we've got a long side and short side but that the setback is to the front of the structure. Not necessarily in front of the garage door, which means you've got a little bit more room to walk if it's at the 20 foot setback. And a little bit more room for a vehicle to occur. Now that's the villa dwelling unit, as Bob pointed out. All of the dwelling units on Lake Riley Road East are angled even more severely. They're at 30 degree angles so you're picking up an additional long side, short side with the setback is to the front of the structure. Plus you have a public right-of-way distance. Then a key difference between what's going on at the Mission Hills development and the villa neighborhood in here are the street width and 43 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 the quantity of two cars versus one car garages. You have one car garages...marketplace. You have a higher likelihood that you might have one in and one out if you have two occupants. You're going to see a few more. It doesn't necessarily mean that there's a traffic problem. It just means you might see a few more cars and... Most of the roadway is in private driveways that are within the Mission Hills development are approximately 24 feet back to back or... In this case what we have is a road that is throughout the development is a...allowing parking on one side which means that there's a greater distance for circulation and a greater distance for public safety. So hopefully that helps. And as a final follow-up, all of these dwelling units have 2 car garages enclosed as well as 2 spaces out so you've got places for people to get inside of their home without really having an impact on either the public or private streets out through here. Mancino: I'm not convinced. I would like staff to work with the applicant and maybe even look at the setback on the east property line and on the north property line. I see right now they're 35 feet and 50 feet and maybe there could be some giving there to pick up another 10 feet. And I'd like you to maybe present both ways to the City Council. Because I did find that whether it was a 2 car or 1 car garage, there were still cars in the driveway, in every single place so I would like the City Council to look at that and put that in as a condition. I think that's it on my concerns and I think it's a good project. I'd like to entertain a motion. Meyer: I will make a motion, with a little help. I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council grant preliminary plat approval for PUD #95- 1 for preliminary planned unit development approval to rezone 24.85 acres from R-12, high density residential to PUD, planned unit development. Preliminary plat to subdivide 52.1 acres into 78 lots, 4 outlots and associated right-of-way. Site Plan review for 76 single family detached zero lot line homes on 19.95 acres. A variance for wetland setbacks for Lots 12 thru 16, Block I and Lots 16 thru 19, Block 2 to permit the house placement as shown on the plans and a wetland alteration permit for North Bay plans dated 4/17/95, revised 5/4/95 and 7/17/95. Prepared by Pioneer Engineering, subject to the following conditions 1 thru 36. There a number of revisions that need to be. Deleting number 6. Changing, revising number 29 to replacing temporary cul-de-sac to temporary barricade. Revising number 27(f). Aanenson: No, that was the applicants. I think if you wanted something, they just want to be able to work with staff to revise the grading plans. Similarly that would be with 31. Work with staff on that. Mancino: Work with staff to resolve the language. Meyer: Okay, so if eve make the. 44 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Mancino: And 1 think on 25 the applicant also wanted to make sure that the awarding of bid was for the first phase. To insert that. Of the Lyman Boulevard/Lake Riley. Peterson: And on number 21. Mancino: The applicant wanted to make sure that on 21, that the amount charged was for the developable acres. It may change from 16.07 so. Meyer: Okay, so we should direct staff to review that 16.07 acres. Alright. I have a note. Mancino: Read my 34? Meyer: 34. I'm going to let you read that one. Mancino: 34 would read, prior to final plat approval the applicant shall work with staff to develop a project design plan which specifies how the variation in architectural details, incorporating the 7 building elevations shown on Sheet A3 and A4 of the plans prepared by Whitman Associates Inc., as well as the variation in building materials as shown to the Planning Commission on 8-26 are to accomplished. Meyer: Okay. I'd like to add number 37 and this is one of your's too Nancy. About trying to, the applicant would work with staff to get an entrance along, which direction would that be. The southeast corner of the park. To try to get a. Aanenson: Yeah, between Lots 32, or building 32 and 56. Mancino: Pedestrian access. Meyer: Okay. Let's try to integrate Klingelhutz development road access. Mancino: The applicant work with staff. Meyer: Okay. The applicant work with staff to consider the Klingelhutz alterations or request for alteration of the road alignment. The applicant has made a request to revise the wording of number 31. I think it's, I don't know if this would be Dave. Could you provide some wording for that? Aanenson: Just work with staff. Hempel: Just work with staff, yeah. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Meyer: Okay. To revise the wording on that. And number 32. Aanenson: Those are really the jurisdiction of the City Council. He's just raising them as an issue. Don Jensen: You can strike that if' you'd like. Mancino: And mine was to add that the applicant work with staff to look at changing the setbacks on the east side of the property, on the north side of the property to allow for 30 foot setbacks on Lake Riley Road East. I'm sorry, not on Lake Riley Road East. Yes, on Lake Riley Road East and North Bay Drive. Meyer: Number 39. Okay. Anything else? Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Skubic I'll second. Mancino: Any discussion? Peterson: My only discussion is the more 1 sit here, the more I can relate to Ladd's comments regarding down the road. I mean I think it's clearly something we as a group and staff have to work together on. I mean you think about it, it's scary. We're just asking for 1:00 in the morning meetings in the next year or two. To that end of my discussion. Meyer moved, Skubic seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council grant preliminary approval of PUD 495-1: Prelinninany Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval to rezone 24.85 acres from R12, High Density Residential to PUD, Planned Unit Development; preliminary plat to subdivide 52.1 acres into 78 lots, 4 outlots and associated right-of-vs ay; site plan review for 76 single family detached zero lot line homes on 19.95 acres; a vari:once fur wetland setbacks for Lots 12-16, Block 1 and Lots 16-19, Block 2 to permit the (rouse placement as shown on the plans; and a wetland alteration permit for North Bay (plans dated 4/17/95, revised 5/4/95 and 7/17/95, prepared by Pioneer Engineer), subject to the following conditions: 1. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by fire fighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 46 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 2. Redesignate Lot 1, Block 3 as an outlot. Lot 57, Block 1 and Lot 21, Block 2 are unbuildable for dwelling units and must be maintained for common open space. 3. Revise the landscaping plan to provide upland and wetland plants to naturally blend the pond into the surroundings, provide evergreen screening from automobile headlights for Lots I, 13, and 15, Block 2; increase the number of evergreens to a minimum of 20 percent of the tree plantings as required by ordinance; and incorporate additional evergreen plantings along the 212 corridor. 4. The applicant shall provide financial guarantees to the city to assure satisfactory installation of the landscaping. 5. Revise grading and drainage plan to indicate lowest floor level elevation and garage floor elevation. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 6. Submit soils report with lot by lot tabulations to the Inspections Division. This should be done prior to issuance of any building permits. 7. Change proposed Lake Riley Road to Lake Riley Road East. 8. Obtain a building permit for retaining walls exceeding four feet in height before beginning their construction. 9. The applicant will need to revise the erosion control plan to include temporary sediment basins, Type III erosion control fence, seeding type and schedule of site restoration. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. Type III erosion control fence shall be used adjacent to the wetlands. 10. All utility and street improvements (public and private) shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval three weeks prior to final plat approval. 11. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before accepting the utilities and will charge the applicant $20 per sign. 12. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to 47 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basins, and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. 13. The applicant shall enter into a PUD/development agreement with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the PUD/ development agreement. 14. The applicant will meet wetland rules and regulations as stated in Corps of Engineers Section =104 permit, the State Wetland Conservation Act, and the City's Wetland Ordinance. Mitigation work shall be implemented prior to or concurrent with wetland fill activity in all phases of the project. 15. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. 16. The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 17. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within any street right-of-way. 18. The lowest exposed floor or opening elevation of all buildings adjacent to the wetlands shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year high water level. 19. The proposed stormwater pond must have side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend the pond into the surroundings is recommended. 20. The proposed multi-family residential development of 16.07 developable acres is responsible for a water quantity connection charge of $47,808.00. The staff will ttview the number of developable acnes. These fees are payable to the City prior to City filing 48 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 the final plat. Credits will be applied to these fees after final review of the construction plans. 21. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 22. Site grading shall be compatible with the future widening and of upgrading of Lyman Boulevard and also with existing drainage characteristics from the adjacent parcels. The applicant shall be responsible for acquiring the necessary easements for grading outside the plat. All site grading must be completed prior to street construction. 23. The existing sanitary sewer located in the northeast portion of the site shall be relocated in conjunction with the development. The applicant may petition the City to vacate the existing utility easement once the line has been relocated. 24. Final plat approval shall be contingent upon the City Council awarding a bid for the first phase of Lyman Boulevard/Lake Riley Area Trunk Improvement Project 93-32B and MnDot approval of the alignment of Lyman Boulevard. The applicant shall also dedicate the required 80 foot wide right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard prior to the finalization of the construction plans for Lyman Boulevard. Final vertical and horizontal alignment for Lyman Boulevard shall be subject to City and MnDot-State Aid approval. 25. All disturbed areas shall be immediately restored upon completion of the site grading with seed and disc-mulched or sod or erosion control blanket. All grading must be completed prior to issuance of building permits on the site with the exception of one model home directly off Lyman Boulevard. Wetland mitigation areas shall be restored in accordance with the wetland restoration/alteration permit. 26. The construction plans shall be revised to include the following changes: a. Delete grading of the channel through Wetland Basin A. b. Provide outlet control structures from the proposed pond north of Lyman Boulevard to the wetland mitigation area adjacent to Lyman Boulevard and from the mitigation area to Wetland Basin A. c. Type Ill erosion control fence shall be placed adjacent to and around all wetlands and mitigation areas. 49 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 d. Provide a temporary sediment basin on Lot 57, Block 1 in or near the proposed irrigation house between Lots 32 and 56, Block 1. e. All storm sewer catch basins shall be protected with hay bales and/or silt fence until the streets are paved and the site fully revegetated. f. Revise grading plan to have rear lots drain through to front yard areas on Lots 4 through 31, Block 1 inclusive versus the swale along the rear lot line. g. Add catch basins on new driveway access to apartments. h. Prohibit parking on one side of all streets. i. Address relocation and abandonment of existing gravel driveway on west property line. j. Include a drain tile system behind the curbs on all lots that are not adjacent to a stormwater pond or wetland. k. Use city standard detail plates. I. Provide utility stub to vacant parcel which lies south of the apartments. 27. The applicant shall obtain and convey to the City at no cost a street, utility and drainage easement over the west 30 feet of the Lakeview Hills Apartments parcel lying north of Lyman Boulevard and terminating where the full 60 foot wide right-of-way begins in the plat of North Bay. 28. The applicant shall provide a temporary barricade at the end of Lake Riley Road and include a sign indicating that "This street will be extended in the future". A condition shall also be placed in the PUD/development agreement acknowledging the intent to extend Lake Riley Road in the future. 29. Parking shall be restricted to one side of North Bay Drive and Lake Riley Road. The applicant may choose which side of the street to restrict parking. The city will adopt the appropriate resolution prohibiting parking and place the appropriate regulatory signs. 30. Staff :urd the applicant shall work together on the appropriate wording regarding the applicant and/or property owner shall waive any and all procedural or substantive objections to the special assessments associated with city public improvement Project 50 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 93-32B including, but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property. 31. Payment of full park and trail fees per city ordinance. 32. Dedication of Outlot C for park purposes. This dedication to be a condition of the granting of planned unit development status. 33. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall work with staff to develop a project design pl:ut ,Iticl► specifies how the variation in architectural details, incorporating the 7 building elevations shown on Sheet A3 and A4 of the plans ptepaed by Whitman Associates Inc., as well as the variation in building materials as shown to the Planning Commission on 8-26 are to accomplished. 34. The applicant shall install a watermain along Lake Riley Road in accordance with the city's feasibility study for Lyman Boulevard Reconstruction Project 93-32B. The city shall credit the oversizing cost back to the applicant by means of a reduction in their assessments for project 93-32B. The oversizing cost shall be the difference between an 8 inch line and the proposed 12 inch line based on fair market value. 35. No improvements to the land south of Lyman Boulevard will be permitted until a conditional use permit for a beachlot is approved by the city. 36. The applicant shall look at putting a pedestrian access to the southeast corner of the pat: between buildings 32 and 56. 37. The applic:urt v oat: with staff to consider the Klingelhutz alterations or request for alteration of the road alignment. 38. The applicant work , itlr the staff to look at changing the 20 foot front yard setbacks to 30 fool funit yard setbacks on Lake Riley Road East and North Bay Drive. All voted in fador, except for Conrad ,r ho opposed, and the motion carded with a vote of 5 to 1. Mancino: Reasons for. Conrad: I want to make it real clear that I can't vote for any project that down zones until staff analyzes the impact on the need for the land as it was previous zoned or guided. 51 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 (Craig Peteisun left the meeting at this point and was not available to vote on the remaining items.) PUBLIC HEARING: AN AMENDMENT TO TUE CITY CODE REGARDING SEASONAL/TEMPORARY SALES. Public Present: Name Address Vernelle Clayton Cathy Gatlin John Rask presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Thank you John. Any questions for staff? Conrad: \\'here did the S400.00 permit fee come from? Rask: I don't know. Conrad: Does it cover administrative costs? Rask: It seems like a good way of discouraging temporary sales. It think too that is guided for longer term uses. We're not proposing on eliminating that. If somebody wanted to have temporary sales or outdoor storage, that would be something that would take review by the Planning Commission so that would still be left in there. You know for lawn and garden for example. If they %yarned to display things outdoor, they certainly could provide that type of use. But those are the kinds of things we don't want in the temporary sales ordinance. We want to review those separately. Aanenson: Again, the way this was set up and the way John tried to do it is we're trying to separate the temporary sales from outdoor display and that's kind of where it got gray. It's something that's ongoing all the time. I mean there's certain things that have a longer life and it just needs, John had put in here the 60 days. There's certain things that have longer seasons. Christmas tree sales you know, 30-45 days. But some things, just your sidewalk sale on a weekend. That's the intent. That they be shorter and temporary. Mancino: Why do we have it 01? 52 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Rask: That is schools, churches. Aanenson: If a certain church would have a festival. Mancino: Gotch ya. I know one that's in OI. Okay. Aanenson: Well a lot of churches do that too. They have...and it's important to keep. Mancino: Good. Do I have a motion to open this for a public hearing? Meyer moved, Skubic seconded to open the public heating. The public healing was opened. Mancino: I see people here who I'm sure have something to say. You're here a lot this week. Vernelle Clayton: ...dissertation on that subject. The subject of down zoning just two nights ago so Fm glad to hear you talk about it. And although I have to say..I think staff does need some direction more than just requests because at the point that some of you have...now they're forced to spend 100 hours on it and bring it to you and the developers spends $10,000.00 to $50,000.00 on it and everybody falls in love. I think something needs to be done before the staff starts on it. And the Council, a couple of the members suggested that they weren't really inclined to do any more down zoning of any type unless there was equal... on some other piece that was presented to them at the same time. And I don't think, I think...idea. 1 think you have to ask Council for direction. Because your job is just to review does it fit. We can say... Mancino: But the other part of that is, when somebody brings in something to the staff, staff can say no. We don't want to do this and they can still force the staff to go through the process. So that's the other side of it. Vernelle Clayton: ...every time something's down zoned, something has to be up zoned. That means before you start the process, everybody would know that. Mancino: It would be so nice if life were that clean and I think that's why we also brought up tonight that we'd be looking at some 1995 study areas in the south and some mixed use in the other but it's a good. Vernelle Clayton: ...to look at and right now there's nothing in place that says that she doesn't have to spend all her time and everybody on here to spend a lot of time on it. It's just an unfortunate situation that... Well anyway, that issue was brought up the other night... I just 53 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 wanted to say briefly on this subject that Cathy and I had so much fun working with the sign ordinance that we did some more. This one has taken as long but speaking of fun, I think that's kind of what we have in mind. We want to make it a simple, uncomplicated for retailers as well as the staff. Not something that would waste a whole lot of everyone's time. Not every retailer plans a long time in advance when they're going to have something fun. This doesn't seem like it would...every other week. ...retail special promotions. A retail center promotion and Cathy and I keep our...get something city wide going from time to time so we'd like to encourage that...and John, thank you. Mancino: Anyone else? Cathy Gatlin: I think how it's outlined, I'm Cathy Gatlin, Chamber of Commerce. Mancino: And your address. Cathy Gatlin: 5036...Road, Minnetonka. The only thing I wanted to add, because I think it's fairly clearly spelled out and it's just that this actually ties in with what the city's looking for and that's to increase foot traffic and that was something that was discussed...earlier. The city is planning and setting up walkways and purchasing things for foot traffic... Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Sl:ubic moved, Conrad seconded to close the public healing. The public hewing was closed. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: It looks just fine to me. To go back to something I raised before, and it will probably be out of context but under 6. Page 6. Temporary food and beverage sales, under (b). And I go back to one thing I really like and that's something that Cub does and it's the charity grilling. And they do it almost every weekend. And it's not obtrusive and it's really kind of a neat little deal so what does our ordinance tell you about what we can, what they can do if Festival or Byerly's wants to start the same thing. Aanenson: Well Vernelle is certainly very cognizant of this. When they came in for a PUD, they weren't allowed to do that sort of thing and this is one of the areas that the Council also had a problem with is having those things on every weekend. They, from my recollection there seemed to be some support but it was for non-profit. But then they're marketing a certain brand. Also a gray area. I guess we were trying to attempt with the Council's issue, that wasn't a significant issue with the Council last time of having that sort of thing. Whether 54 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 they needed Girl Scouts selling cookies out there or as you say, somebody grilling every weekend for charity. So we tried to temper the standard by making something the Council would still consider this. If it's every weekend, I'm not sure it's a big issue but the Council seemed to think so. But if you wanted to give a recommendation. Your recommendation different than that, then we'll pass that on. Conrad: I don't know. I'm not sure I have a real good. I think the intent of the ordinance is pretty good. 1 think there just needs a little, I wrote on this thing. That was the only one of the few things that just sort of stuck out. And I can't take it anyplace. I'm not sure so I'm talking for nothing. Backing up one page. Required information and plans. Under (b). 3(b). A copy of the approved site plan drawn to scale. So we'll accept a hand written. What will we accept? Aanenson: Fur the most part we have site plans on file. Rask: Sure. Yeah, we'd be certainly willing to pull those up but I think for just about every downtown establishment, we'd have a site plan and we have a reduced site plan for most of them which we could copy and give to them. Otherwise, I mean if they want to go out and count parking spots, I mean we I think have a fairly clear idea of how many are there. Conrad: Okay, so Market Square comes in and we're going to have a sidewalk sale. What do they have to do? Rask: Provide the plan. We'd certainly, if it's going to be just immediately in front of their store, and it's not going to obstruct the walkway, they're not going to take up any parking spots. But say...Bicycle wants to sell, take up 4 or 5 parking spots to put out some bikes on display on the weekend. I think we'd have enough of a feel of Market Square, and there are some additional parking spots there anyway because Festival had put some in for their expansion area. So we know there's extra spots out there. 5 isn't going to create a traffic hazard at Market Square so. But if they wanted to put up a tent and have a huge bike sale with 200 bikes and they were occupying a large area, we'd certainly have to look at it closer and see what the, how many they're occupying and what's required and go from there. Conrad: So in some cases you won't require anything and then in some cases. Aanenson: It depends on the scale. You know if someone's going to block off the sidewalk, there is for example at Market Square there is an adjacent property where they're going to expand where the remaining area is and that's an appropriate place for some of these things like Christmas tree sales because there is a large. But if you're going to put it in the middle of the parking lot, then we have a bigger concern so again it depends on the scope of what it 55 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 is. And the longevity. If it's Christmas trees, you're going to have a lot longer but that tends to be more weekends and nights. A bike sale may be more concentrated so it just depends. You have to kind of be flexible on these things and I guess that's what we're trying to build in here is a little bit of flexibility. Conrad: The wording didn't seem flexible. And I looked at this thing.. Aanenson: Right, what we do is we look at Market Square and we say please draw in here where you're intending to be so we have some idea what we can hold you to. You know how big is it. How big is the use going to be. What kind of additional parking that would demand. Mancino: That's what it said to me. Conrad: Flexible? Mancino: Yes. Aanenson: Try to get an idea of the scope. Mancino: I mean just the feel... Conrad: A copy of the approved site plan drawn to scale for the property. That doesn't sound real flexible to me so if you had a different. If you all read it a different way, that's fine. Kate's interpretation is real good. That's absolutely where we want it to be. Mancino: We can put in parenthesis, pick up from City Hall or. Aanenson: Sure, and that's the intent. We do have most of them. And the ones we don't, we would scale off. If you're going into a vacant piece but it has acceptable curb cuts. For example the Legion site. I'm not sure that we've got a scale building there but if they were to draw something up showing we're going to be back 200 feet, just so we know for the safety items. Conrad: I'm not picking. Aanenson: We don't want the registered land surveyor to come out. Meyer: I think what he's saying though is it's saying that it is required and that maybe it should say that it may be required. 56 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad: It could say. It could say, staff may require. Aanenson: Okay, that'd be fine. Conrad: Based on scale. Aanenson: Sure. Conrad: That's it. That's a good ordinance. I like it. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: Looks fine to me. I don't have any comments. Mancino: Do we have to put in anything about non-alcoholic beverage sales? Or is that just given? Rask: I think that's covered in, I don't know what Chapter it is but the chapter that deals with liquor licenses and so forth. Mancino: A question about you know Holiday and those stations right now that have all their stuff outside. I mean. Aanenson: That falls into display. Mancino: Display? 1 saw a car just ram into those salt packs and all the salt's all over and I said to the person, you know who was managing the Holiday store. I said you know you may want to move those. Maybe that's trying to show you that they're not in the right place. Aanenson: That really goes back to our ordinance about outdoor display and that's something that's more a code enforcement issue. We have certain businesses that by nature tend to do those sort of things. I think gas stations are one of them. When they put the windshield washer fluid out and stack it or salt or something. But that doesn't fall into here. That's really outdoor display which is an enforcement issue. It's a well taken comment. Mancino: The only comment, I think this is fine. The only comment that I have that I would like to pass on to Cathy and Vernelle is that, I would love to see the city of Chanhassen either retail center or as a city do something. I could care less about individual retailers. I'd like to see it done where you put up the banner and you say, September 15th through the 17th 57 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 is Octoberfest Days and you know, you close one end of Market Square and the another one and you tell people where to park and it's open and you can walk and it's everybody because we don't do anything as a whole city and I would dearly love to see that a few times a summer. Cathy Gatlin: We're working on that committee. Mancino: And so people know and that you get the city, the community together because I don't think, I mean to me that's the intent of this. To get the whole community out. The individual retailer. That's not the same community feeling. So I would really support that and put that in here somewhere. That you do want it. Vernelle Clayton: ...February Fest. Do something and like we have banners down at Market Square and every‘‘here else where there are banners. All over town the same banners go up and they...but they should be all over. Mancino: Well and it's, 1 mean obviously it's like I'm using the example of an Excelsior. You get people once these trails are in and we vote for the park referendum to come down their trails and cone to the city and cone in. Don't bring your cars. You don't need to bring your vehicles so there's not a parking problem and you know, get on your bike or walk, whatever. Anyway, so 1 don't have any other comments. Mike. Meyer: Either do I. Mancino: ,May I have a motion please. Conrad: Sure. I'll make a recommendation that the Planning Commission approves, recommends approval to the City Council. Do we have any numbers in here? Aanenson: No Conrad: I'll just make it real, the Temporary Sales Ordinance. Mancino: As it stands? Conrad: As recommended and dated something or something. That we see here tonight. This one's a tough one to pin down but as presented to the Planning Commission on, what's the date? August. Anenson- 16th. 58 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Conrad: 16th. With one slight minor revision and that is on 3(b). That the copy of changed, and I really listen to what staff would like to word it but to work in some flexibility in that so that maybe, staff may require based on the scale of the event and the rest of the copy but I'll, and the rest of the copy as already presented in 3(b). Mancino: I'd like to make a friendly amendment to that. It's something I forgot and it's on 6(i). It says no public address system shall be audible from any residential property. Why don't we just say there shall be no public address system? Do we really need one for this? And just put there shall be no. I mean what would do a public address system? Conrad: Oh you've got, if you've got an event, you could have a speech. Aanenson: Christmas music. Conrad: You could have a stage. Mancino: Well that's not a band. A band isn't a public address system. It's a speaker system. Conrad: Well literally it's the same thing. Mancino: Is it? Conrad: Yeah. And typically they're smaller units. You're not setting up for a real rock concert but if you're on stage, you cannot talk unless you have a PA. You can't. So even a minor event. Minor you know, you do need something. Mancino: And then we have hours in here then? Then we limit the hours that people can hear? Aanenson: That's (g). Hours of operation compatible with adjacent uses so. If there's residential next door, you know. Evening. Sunset. Whatever, depending on the time of the year. Maybe 10:00 summers. 6:00, 7:00, 8:00 in the winter. Mancino: Okay, cross out my friendly amendment. Let it stand as it does. Do I hear a second? Meyer: Second. Conrad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the Teunporaty Sales Ordinance amended on item 3(b) to read that the staff 59 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 may request a copy of :un approved site plan is the scale of the event wanunts one. All voted in favor of the motion and the motion canned. APPROVAL. OF MINUTES: Meyer moved, Skubic seconded to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 2, 1995. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE. Aanenson: Nothing was in your packet on the City Council update, being as they met on the 14th. I think I'd just as soon wait until I can articulate it a little bit better. I don't have anything in front of me to go through all those and there's some, I think I wouldn't do justice if I prepared something for you to review such as Southern Oaks and Gestach and those subdivisions. Vernelle kind of spoke to one of those. I think I'd just as soon wait for your next meeting. Bob was there, unless he wants to update. Skubic: Well as you mentioned, I think Southern Oaks was one of the topics and that was tabled. And the City Council brought up one of the same points that we did, and staff did previously and what the domino effect of changing the zoning and the fact that these highways are in fact more suited for industrial uses. Buffer areas and so forth. So they were, it was quite consistent with what we had discussed at the planning meeting. Mancino: City Council also approved, or told the park referendum task force to go ahead with purchase agreements. Trying to get purchase agreements on some property for park acquisition. And what else? Aanenson: The one on Dogwood was on. They approved that. They did allow them to delay the improvements to the street until the first building permit is pulled. Mancino: If there was an intensity increase. Aanenson: ...I'II certainly put all the updates in. Mancino: Okay. Any ongoing items? ONGOING ITEMS. Aanenson: Yes. I did put in your packet the State Planning Conference and I was hoping that maybe Craig or Bob or Mike would have an opportunity to go to these. There's Thursday and Friday there's the opening. Excuse me, planning foundation ones by the DSU. I think those will be very informative and give the Planning Commission the opportunity to 60 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 maybe go one day or the other one...I hope one or two of you can go. Please let me know and we'll make arrangements for that because there's a deadline on the back for reservations. August 24th. Conrad: So the city would pay for what? Aanenson: The city would pay for that, yeah. Diane's speaking on, Diane Desotelle, our Water Resource Coordinator is speaking on, the next level of our storm water plan. The next level of watershed, or water planning is the watershed and that's what we're doing with the Bluff Creek so she'll be speaking on the watershed Bluff Creek plan with someone from Bonestroo. That's on Friday. But let me know if one of you can go within the next. Conrad: The city will pay... Aanenson: Yes. Yes, there is money in the planning budget. Yes, I think it's important so if you do have the opportunity. It's another way to meet other planning commissioners and talk on very specific things... Mancino: Is there a limit on how many people can go? You'd like a couple. Aanenson: Yes. I'd like at least a couple. Let me know. We'll work something out. We'll see what we can do with some transfers. And then the other thing I put in the packet is from the Metropolitan Council updating the livable communities. I'll be going to that at Minnetonka City Hall next Wednesday and getting an update on what the implications are as far as that. On Wednesday, we are a member of the Southwest Coalition. There's a group of committees in the southwest and we're meeting on this bill, they preliminarily put together a list of committees that are not meeting the goals such as diversity of rental. Affordable single family lot size. They've taken all off the 1990 census which really, since 1992 is when we've seen a lot of' these other projects come in so I think we're looking in better shape that what they put us. We're not needing anywhere except for, actually our lot sizes, density requirements. We are meeting the goal there. Mancino: Say that again. We are meeting our lot size and density? Aanenson: Yes. In our sector. In our sector. The ones are Minnetonka, Shorewood, Greenwood. Those have larger lots and they don't have the waters and those situations so that's the one area we are meeting so we'll look at the implications as far as that goes and I'll get back to you on that after the meeting and see. Then we are plugging away on just as far as ongoing items. The watershed and park task force. Nancy brought you up to date on that. That has been back to the Council and they're going forward with that. We had a first 61 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 meeting on the watershed. Bluff Creek watershed and the next meeting on that, if anybody is interested is September. Mancino: September 24th. Something like that. Or 14th. Aanenson: 14th, correct. September 14th. Yes, on a Thursday and so we're getting that kicked off. And so there's some exciting long term planning going. We did get back the rough draft with all the changes to the Highway 5. We'll take that to the printers and hopefully in your next packet you'll get the final document of the Highway 5 that the Council adopted with all the changes incorporated in that. Then that will be going up to the Met Council. We're not bringing that area in the MUSA but all those zoning changes, the land use designations have been made so we'll be sending that up. Just to let you know of some other projects that are coming, that we've been working on. You're aware maybe, maybe not. Vernelle kind of spoke to this, that someone has purchased the Gateway East property and they're looking at turning that from industrial to a mixed use. They have an idea and they're coming forward to meet with you. I've given them my recommendation and they want to hear from you what your feelings are so they're going to come on in just an open discussion. Conrad: What vas your recommendation? Aanenson: To leave it industrial. They want to do a multi-family project I believe. The person who bought it does multi-family. Then there's interest in the Ward property you'll also be seeing shortly, under the concept phase. You had the open discussion on that and I think we're moving in the right direction on that. And also the Legion site. We met with them and they've kind of put together, just tentative kind of layout as far as size of the buildings. Not necessarily uses but parking and buildings. Sizes to get an idea of the density on that. On both the Ward property and the Legion property, based on I believe the complexity and really to make sure we do a good job and have Fred Hoisington give us some additional input on those, just to make sure we're doing a good job on design. Those are two critical, last key commercial projects in the city. We want to make sure we do a good job and I think if we have an additional oversight on that one, it would be very helpful so I've asked Fred to give us some support on that. So he'll be assisting on those. And I believe both of those will be coming in. The Ward one probably in September and possibly the Legion, if not September, October. Those are two, our last big commercial pieces downtown so it's going to be some good reviews for the Planning Commission. Mancino: I would like to see for us, and 1 don't know if it's a little work session or something talking about the down grading or down zoning, etc. And everybody's so concerned obviously about property taxes and what's going to happen because of the lower bond rating and everything and 1 think that had a lot to do with it. I mean it's really perked 62 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 people's ears up, etc. But one of' the things that we don't know in planning and that I thought was interesting w ith the City Council packet, and I obviously didn't read or look at the whole thing. Bob had it and 1 sat with beside him for a little bit and then saw the presentation, or part of it, was that we were never presented the numbers. I mean how does it really affect the city as far as tax base, etc. And yet when it's brought up here, it's brought up not only different kinds of housing but also as a tax base. So maybe we need some, a work session on that too. I mean how does it affect it? I mean the developer got up in front and gave a presentation and showed how there really wouldn't be a difference in taxes compared from the industrial site and how many square footage of industrial you can get on there versus $300,000.00 homes that they built. So what is it? Aanenson: Yeah, but conversely what we raise in our report, which was asked by one of the councilmembers too, is fiscal comparison. You would also look at the cost and cost for single family is, there's other expenditures besides what the city's portion of it and then you also have the school district. The implications of that. Just the general service level. Fire protection. Police protection. All those costs raised. Those we didn't look at. I mean if you look at just strictly taxes, there's no guarantee you can't hold someone to say, I'm going to build a certain value. That that's what you're going to get because we don't do that in our ordinance to say you have to build a $350,000.00 home. So there is ways you can do fiscal impact analysis and to do a trite one, you'd have to look at both sides and that was strictly just looking at the revenues being generated. But that's something certainly we can look at and have someone come and talk... Mancino: Yeah, 1 mean I think it would be worth it. That part of it and just the planning part. Aanenson: I'd also like to take an opportunity to maybe, we talked about this before. Maybe meet with another community and just look at some other, maybe it's Plymouth. Just drive around and see what kind of community, what they're doing and what their vision is and just kind of give ourselves a comparison. Sometimes it helps to check yourself against somebody else to see what we're doing and it'd be an opportunity to get some there. Conrad: On that dow zoning issue. I'm not really all that interested in the tax base. School district affects my taxes immensely but. Mancino: Two-thirds isn't it? Conrad: It's just huge. But you know, I'm not looking, that's just one really. In fact we would, as long as I've been here, I don't think we've ever talked about tax revenue for any project on the Planning Commission or, and maybe that's an over statement but very seldom 63 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 do we really talk about revenue for the city. It's typically, and we've typically left...on the plan was, and this doesn't have to be real complex. I can see some real, there's no magic goal out there but there are, we may feel that we do need 5% devoted for some use and every time we take 1%, or you take a few percent away from that, maybe we've changing the mix and maybe there is some impact and maybe, and that's really what I want to challenge staff to do, make us to do. It's really, they've got to do it to make sure that we're doing our job because I just, what I said tonight is really true. We ain't going to find. You know we're hitting a new stage in Chanhassen. We've never been there before. It's always easy when we only occupying a quarter of the land use, geez. It didn't matter. We can always zone, you know we can always find more of it. Well, it ain't there anymore. So now there is the mix really becomes real valid now. The market has been driving it for a long time but now we have to kind of say, well. We're limiting out and in the final way we want to look, how do we want to look because we are, we're out. And that's why I'm raising the issue real strongly right now. We just have to say, well do we want any more industrial? Do we want, and I'm really concerned more about retail than anything else right now. You know do we want more retail? Are we happy with where it is? Maybe we are. But it is gone and when it's gone, your retail segment stops because it needs extra space to put that new growth part in and then the old part gets refurbished 10-15-20 years later. You know there's a little bit of a cycle in there and we've got a lot of different little zones like that. Different uses where we've got to say, especially on high density. Once we use it all up for lower density stuff, there ain't none of us are going to be sitting here telling the neighborhood that we're going to start putting in some low income, high density high rises across the street. That's just real clear. We won't do it. So it's not as easy a decision as we make it because sooner or later it's going to come back at us. Then it will be a real tough decision. Mancino: Well I agree. I think that that opens it up every more. I mean that's, whether you're down zoning or up zoning, we need to look at every spot. Every land that's guided for something and it may need to be changed from when the comprehensive plan was created in 1989. I mean things have changed in 6 years. Do we want to look at it and do a review of it and say does it need to be changed in certain areas? I mean we haven't done that as a whole exercise either. Because some of the foundations or assumptions that were made then, may have changed and the community values may have changed. Conrad: That's true. And there really wasn't any real ultimate magic in the beginning. I know that for a fact because I kept saying why do we want this much space for that and typically there wasn't a real good answer other than maybe, well it's on a collector. There were other reasons that we put something there. It wasn't like we had set this terrific standard for 70% residential because that's really what made a lot of sense. I never heard that. There were obviously staff at the time were looking at those but there wasn't really, you know, we never had a real assurance that having 5% industrial was the right number. And maybe that's 64 Planning Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 not the right number. 1 don't know what it is but, and Kate's never going to come back and tell us that either. She doesn't know but on the other hand, there are some really financial implications for that and the other thing that really is sort of a revelation to me is, the diversity is not bad. The diversity in this community is pretty good and boy, you wouldn't have heard me say that a while back. To have people be able to work here in town is not all that bad. To have commercial and retail here is really kind of neat. It makes for a neater place, other than a residential bedroom community. That's sort of boring. And I don't know how many people subscribe to that. I have no idea. Mancino: It depends if it's next to them or not. Conrad: Right. That's the truth. Mancino: But it's hard for me to look at every single piece. I mean I need to look at it as a whole and say, do we need to look at some of these areas and as they come in, as you said, look at others that will take it's place...going back and taking a fresh look. Aanenson: Well I guess the approach we've taken is, if we take that out, where do you put it? It goes back to Ladd's premise. There isn't a lot of opportunities. Mancino: And do we really need to put it somewhere? Conrad: Well, we had it there because maybe a Minnetonka or Eden Prairie kind of had the same percentage of land use devoted that way. Maybe. Aanenson: Well, if you go through the comp plan, there was some rationale. Whether you buy it or not but the consultant that was, I mean there is some rationale for that mix and the appropriate, if you look at different mixed communities. Mancino: But maybe our values have changed and we want more of a use so let's try and do. Aanenson: Agreed. Well that's the purpose of doing, the Met Council's or the legislature's mandated that we update our comp plan. Mancino: But you know mixed isn't just through high density or medium density. Mixed is through different housing types too. I mean which takes precedent. Okay. Conrad: When do we update the comp plan again? 65 Planning' Commission Meeting - August 16, 1995 Aanenson: Well, we have to have it updated again by 1998. What we're waiting for now is the park referendum, to see what they're going to do and they're getting options on property. Then we have some property left. \\'e've committed to work on the business fringe, which we're trying to do too. We've got the big chunk, which was the 1995 study area north of Highway 5. That was accomplished with the Highway 5... Conrad: Well 1 think our big decision will be when the former Opus project comes in and we decide what we want to use out there. Mancino: Well you get diversity also depending on which companies come in. I mean it depends on what kind of company. Conrad: Oh yeah. And you find that the other thing you find out is, a good company just makes all the difference in the world. I'd change a lot of stuff for a good company coming into town. Mancino: Is there anything else we have to do tonight? Aanenson: That's all I had. Mancino: Adjourn. Anybody want to call for an adjournment? Conrad u►u\ed, \lever seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.nr. Submitted by Kate Aanenson, Plannin<, Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 66 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 \ =; (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission -FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: August 30, 1995 SUBJ: Director's Report On August 28, 1995, the City Council took the following action: 1. Final plat approval for Lotus Lake Woods for 7 single family lots (Forcier property). 2. Preliminary plat extension for Hiscox Addition (3 single family lots) and Shamrock Ridge subdivision (45 single family lots). 3. Approved the Interim Use Permit for filling and stabilization of the ravine on Bluff Creek Golf Course. 4. Approved the site plan for Highland Development office warehouse in the Chanhassen Business Center. 5. Approved the subdivision, site plan and conditional use for Children's World Day Care in McGlynn Park. CITY OF CHANHASSEN \\\ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission and City Council FROM: Jill Sinclair, Forestry Intern DATE: August 28, 1995 SUBJ: Tree Preservation Ordinance Review It's been a little over a year and a half since the tree preservation ordinance was passed by city council. In that time, enough development has occurred that an evaluation of the ordinance is appropriate. To see what impact the ordinance has had, I have compiled some statistics, field notes, and staff opinions on tree preservation in Chanhassen. Since the Tree Preservation Ordinance was adopted May of 1994, 23 residential developments in wooded areas have been reviewed using the tree preservation ordinance. In the last year and a half, Chanhassen has approved 12 residential developments in wooded areas. This does not include the developments of Trotter's Ridge, Lake Susan Hills, Stone Creek, Minnewashta Landings, or Halla's Great Plain Golf Estates. The original total canopy coverage acreage of all the sites approved was 57.44 acres, (29% total coverage of 195.17 acres). After development, 38.54 acres of canopy still exist (20% total coverage). The preserved woods were acquired by basically three different arrangements: tree preservation easements, individual tree preservation, and tree removal limits. As evidenced in the field and on paper, there are advantages and disadvantages to each method. Tree Preservation Easement Pros: Complete protection for large groups of trees; legal protection of area passed on with ownership of lot; easy to define on plats and site surveys; residents know where it is; works best for large expanses; saves understory vegetation Cons: Difficult for city to enforce restrictions of easement (not enough inspectors, private property); doesn't save the maximum number of trees possible on site; inflexible; may lose wooded character of site due to complete loss of vegetation in front yards Planning Commission and City Council August 28, 1995 Page 2 Individual Tree Pros: Saves maximum number of trees on site; allows for individual attention for each tree; can create the most aesthetically pleasing home sites; allows for greater flexibility Cons: Can put city in middle of decisions and responsibility at building sites; harder to completely protect individual trees; without specifying extended responsibility of the developer for the trees after construction, can leave city vulnerable to complaints and responsibility for construction damage to trees; complaints of tree damage can consume large amounts of staff time Tree Removal Limits Pros: Easy to define on survey; allows good access for builder while saving trees possibly on sides and fronts, allows greatest flexibility for builder Cons: Does not protect trees after construction - homeowner could remove trees with little control by the city; difficult to define on site - easy for builder to expand limits without city's knowledge What is the best possible method? There isn't just one, at least not a simple one. Each site developed is unique. The layout design is different, the tree coverage is different, the quality of the site is different. The city shouldn't expect to save trees in a cookie cutter fashion. The tree preservation ordinance provides a solid base; and from there, the city needs to be flexible and creative in order to fully utilize its ability to save trees. The best course of action is to keep in mind the ultimate goal of preserving original woodlands and use any and all possible means of getting there. Prior to tree preservation decisions, canopy coverage calculations are determined for a site. Applicants submit calculations early in the review process. These are verified by staff using city aerials. It has proven somewhat difficult to verify calculations since city aerials are six years old and significant growth can occur in that time. Since the calculations are relied on by the city and developer to make influential economic and design decisions, accuracy is very important. New aerials or GIS access would assist staff greatly. In section 3 of the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a woodland management plan is required of developers to help preserve significant woodland areas. The 'tree survey' or inventory has proven to be very useful. It enables developers and staff to locate heavily wooded areas as well as get a feel of the size classes that exist in a particular site. The "location and size of replacement/forestation tree planting areas" and "list of all replacement trees including species, caliper, and planting method" are usually included on the landscaping plan for the development and seems the most logical place for those items. Planning Commission and City Council August 28, 1995 Page 3 As for the other items requested as part of a woodland management plan, they have not proven to be effective or useful for promoting tree preservation and health in residential subdivisions. The narrative management plan that contains the methods of tree protection, special construction methods to be utilized, statement explaining why replacement trees are necessary, and rationale for selection of replacement/forestation trees is often given little or no thought by the developer. Rarely is it an honest offering of proven tree-saving techniques, more commonly it is a plagiarized manual. Staff does not feel the plan has been beneficial for the developer or the city. It neither provides a learning experience for the developer nor improves construction techniques on site. It can be a beneficial document for the end-users, or homeowners, who should be the target audience. Rarely, however, do woodland management plans or conservation easement specifications get into the hands of those who would benefit most. What appears to have the most impact upon the developer and/or builder is direct contact with a forester. On-site meetings regarding tree preservation techniques have proven to be highly effective. Often an explanation as the whats, whys, and hows of tree protection at the beginning of a project goes a long way to ensuring that the tree will be healthy when the development is completed. Key factors for successful tree preservation include site inspection and monitoring as well as education and enforcement. The presence of city staff throughout the building process helps to establish expectations and responsibilities. Often mistakes made by builders around trees are due to lack of education about tree preservation. A simple discussion about tree preservation, continuity of staff personnel, and consistency in preservation requirements helps builders and developers to build successfully on wooded sites. Enforcement of tree preservation requirements is also important to the success of the preservation. This can be difficult due to limited staff and time, but in the two summers I have been enforcing tree preservation I have noticed greater compliance by some developers and builders as time goes by. This again can be credited to continuity and consistency which helps to promote established expectations. Only by displaying its own commitment to natural resources can the city expect others to do the same. The City of Chanhassen has one of the best tree preservation ordinances in the state. It has lost only 10% of its woodlands in the last year and a half and is continually increasing the amount of future woodlands with replacement plantings. The sense of environmental commitment that led the city to adopt the preservation ordinance must be maintained in order to see preservation success in the years to come. • --, --v,a�. -0n - ° ORY cm ' c1:0 0- o5._ r. . .... ..,:).. 0 Cp p `, .''..' v+ co D.0< ^, (D E y 8h a' tan 0 to`< (CD g'° F y R ::'"'0 03 CDD •_,. CD 03, '•1 N �P�i SN a C 3 o.^ F w 7.0 "'t_ J lD Pa rF _ _ a r, • a = (Q C/) tnCD � w13 3•�,ry � O � C., DY a � - r Pa o° n.0 a rD .�P, 7 � � A a. : '+.< C `< r a w a 7r * /` Q Cn 0 • (D CD p) ,. C cl' a (�D C CD W () CI cg5.1 C 0='gow� ._0-'0 cr Sao G � O p�aryp � roO � ., 0yw ° telcD cj 3 (, to •wOcp < y aC`C =! ?++ '^' '- ,1-. — *criTgea (9-, - 1 �1.L 3 •• aNA CD x a C1 CI) a ?D, in (Dr„ »C ° pa •vwOGP' n CD71.) G a -+ o (Da o •fDo �''oa 0 -a. two •P, ,.,..< w .7...7 .-< a 0 •<ce, ' - C mB7y 00 C"' T o y 4 �n• < <0 pap0 m �y O ? {' .O .+ Q .• mss. : � 0. �a � o . . ,; ,a ; w 7.00 • Ot r - < w o CD 0 a < = 3'a o m m d ,: .:'- 1'. ?: rn n1114 : a CD CD f.< w .•.O N �,14:41:.> . e CD CD...< P;G. C O W; -- 0.y n F 3 3.0 ,- ,, ..... ��CZ G ti s oc f 3 a '9a = o :�» ' .4 W <• " 1= 3 0 ,.„ c.6. c 5 _ .7It .1--7, ,,....t, -...r ° a G m fl vn" irD o a . m�0 r.. • r c 30- 0oo , C, a J ccca• .» = - . (D (D 3 ;----X ■ co (i.-• ...-,,ma,yy .• • to Y' ?y . 1,A-rot,,c - - 41114 ..y. �nw ono33 ° W 02r �� ` CaD -.00,' .—• air. �aeap NOdC9a ^3to 0 H Ota v' < .-• CA a '''bo.0 < "•t �' . Cl. =�‹ =7 0 P, C.• C) P.+ -•..00.toeD .1toNCn • co to " . • ¢' aCD n co a•�'1 y Cxp O f39 H N 0 3`< a a:p -.a•ww Vl•`<+0 ~ 3 ya tDD 0. * "r:3eO • at < w .a. » -oon" N V' .. paaiGCD RI po r Vl =w P,uo co rt, I51- ti 0. p cz Oo x ro a cr Pc- 3 •1m O CD .. ` < p p a•C7v, gQ° a wn�aaa 0 CD CD to w Nn D N P7 3 n VI el'. a O a w 3OD a_ NNa ^ D o .' o C " � -■Nw ; CO CCti to 'a� wy •< 3 .i3D .m :< a •< w,o0 waw '< C �V ° .o.-- 0 - ° a � <'" ~ ° 'e'vc' woaoo ) D0. CD' < .0o, a < � • ' < E.;- . ..o C -,5v-m0o.•0•"0=• 5•^P. £'''.Ii '10 .c.n �'R £ "�o 7.3°' nY Simy an a-,- ^^ o°v"°-=;.i ,So mH .. 3cro$5;£c `g°-•:,:<:• g“.-4 ;..a- t-;--g 9n, dn . ' � ( `eTin aod nao- �Gno• -PSioaN. n n - cn - 3';'w0'd.y5c o-g � � .rv..m °A�� a°ane�w-°n�•Ei�^S .ovd adi6-nFg.5-: " G '_" _ 3 ` o ° oc`^ oG� Gy o<^3- onv OaOo ' ow w.�' d S E••.....f,,a-d !^!Cw^ a S 3 Fi • C` G Ga'<-non7io < �,%-G , da,, FF• "c�, N� " a5mFiE0 -Om° 3c. oo ;3oQoc ^ ons -'' E B: n a^2 n s,^aE .p-. vyoc ^ 00Fin 9 0-0 ,,,,f,0.-. •' w a' •Toa d9,-.039° � ano �5 -, 0:*-1 _a i` .:�t - 90�aa.. ^-� 9e9 ^ a�< cO-"o��.:: d30J t_0•-. - - neF.-❑ o-v•'-' H 3 G 3 a.' h o .-nCO " -p,,-;-:.;-- d d y 9n °' .o O v,d m a ° ` •' 2 ' -.^ Ld d .-- Cr= °G3 g°w o Q'o 9' a v -n3 er.e 2,:".(.1 a- ,,,, =nZt N=a9, w = o E .p-ryOO-° _ .7- Oa^^ n Si0^A d v ^ .. . , con... -rt. si., nod o n "- m - o no-H c -3mp,y C docoh-o0 d ° d.qdn`< <vc�e c3 <n '_•'FL nonny^< occ- n .--d-9§"."1 :1-F- ^cs� -'c gSn !' .01.6•1,3---=:E.nnnnr' . .$ ° S:-.. d O y ^. ^ = r9, .- N r•n C O 1; •' O S vd£i dg0.=_ .NS<QF. ',o.°On�n J�.0.%.-0-- nO^yOx, -o o•. c G .G < .< - nOov 3 .. civ ^ 1=RR pa ng G£ d Fp7.S 3fin� G' OUyC� ..k0 ,-;,. -7,:r.-. ...,--., d " 2.-0.‘, o ff d�.R, n a w d 7 .. c O_ r• �o �°a O 9,O^`<,n p,E ��■ Tom"cso., n c an r^, a o'^'"-vc•n EZ ._""., '"7..""9"7,.C.5 Eno °n_�E. —. t::: -Id o �3oEo � on•'-rl° a�6,cw°o •"G3< 2� d Cn O9_a Crjg ON <n -' d KY75d SCpOd n •SY •= SE n Sv 7 N Y d O A n C< -� Q ^ � G�•n O dv, C7-OC .77,;°, - - ,n � nn0�4 Q0� 7w nr, p O ECOOGC CO O9O• Hoop00?4 O= 7`Gryry.(.n -^O3 '' 0 (/) =3 c --,-o "n = t.' ,,2,, £ E> 9,'c wag 4n_v :e 3 nao "f n j?� =c o S C 0 v N 0 ^O c S�^S..E Pro is rn o n•?t G := •<'21 0 LI 7 a s - '+ >' -•$„ Ari - _ Ea.0. ° wiz .'g 4?IA r.'r h `: oil 0,7 a.-' -"A • i 'ri, T ` z�•1� . •1:' �;f 3.y , .. r T r i •c. O . 9,m f..-•,r...... • -•. •� f r ^1 q n j '• i•. /r-"' '^• - '� 1r �.� - - 1, • ..t•a:< - A • 777 7 ; s"i . '.4": •r ' 3 • _ :. .f f �j -,,tilt r,r '1/ v' •. it 'II-. `:•••- .y i .,!•} 1 C- ..r 7 r ,i i n :,-.1).e..! ��,''� is, r, rs • I i t,i- a -� • ; -- - • ,a-.•.. - '' ''`fie ° , ier:w `' `_», - :L�'"fI/r ,/ ilii13 O \, i it,„. • 'lb i:rititV 4 0, fD _l.` -.�, , ? --4 ! •-I.: '�t 1 . Wiz' ?i H • Jnr • A ,� • ! I•'•• •. \.ti ^� i 'a•2'' .'4c . r 4 t; '9 n a' Met Council .chair's affordábl& ?z. housingagenda faces firsUésT� ! By Mike Kaszuba progress." t` ?Staf Writer .. ;; . .6= . Johnson's own brand of progress is He's now the man in the middle, already being unveiled in Maple.:: the most pivotal figure in Minneso- - Grove, the suburb that has.-_begn"' to in deciding how much affordable ‘ - ,roundly criticized in'the past'•for housing the suburbs should be being. interested in only building pushed to build.And Curt John-. -, higher-priced homes. •"� _ son's critics say he is scared — "� r ,, ; . • scared to push too hard and scared t _ '- s The Met Council is asking Maple of upsetting his boss, Gov. Arne .;= Grove and three other suburbs to' •Carlson,who appointed him chair- _ . • agree to affordable housing goals man of the Metropolitan Council. .. -,' before the agency approves a:$11 `- million sewer interceptor, a key to "We can run around issuing orders, p development in those suburbs.:;..t;;r sounding righteous," Johnson ..` ., shoots back, echoing a favorite ��.Beyond Maple Grove,Johnson will theme, "[and] all we'll do is get I ' be perhaps the most important play- . Jesse Ventura-style revolutions . . . / , er in saying how aggressively;the creating a backlash." Forcing af- Met Council implements 'a .new fordable housing quotas onto the i- - - - _-f state law that seeks to have;every'`• Minnetonkas and Eden Prairies,he Twin Cities suburb voluntarily" argues, will accomplish next to Curt Johnson agree to affordable housing goals in nothing. exchange for financial aid to help addressing the lack of affordable meet them. 7_:�r,.:: I t7 isn;•7,7;:--:g..„:. w 6A^o.0 Hs•.-r< w<< n a N y•':1 nE 1tt . 1li ! w-r,-- _03 OG •^w O ."f-•a n .n N 0 UN so 0 • 0 n Co 1" Ute, •o n t7 O :,•O ° n w ^.7•.'3 n O 0 a.a tr0,-w O• ao oC �° o W C 0�''--'o 0 Pa o moo o C.n o� n a E �°°o w-< n• t -.,CD tots = o w •-, n, O ON C C -,- w N is n n a• ., n a •�O O `e ...1 .J D.) c) m \cpw OC p v v� 'twn�G6p�p:W � tyonO �p < n. p (^p .ti y 'Co' o T ' w . Cc `< ` w C S �y a n (9 N n < .,y e+ a' � �/ _ H N a. 0 A'9 Q•a a.n n� '.7.O w M Q.?:(I.r.N-`< ., a•w CD to p .•-•o N N'[D N .'a aQ•.+~ '0 \D C p•• 011) I N m �:► 0 E CCD" AO.0 Stn te.°- wpm _^w~ o N H cat [C^D ��'C a• A �. ^ 5no500co� E ..ati /`�, -.Cr° •w.Nca5w� --ov, wg9 ar..,E-;p ° w � ~' 2 0 a N < N p y Q Q7 N p n r`S 7 tz a cr N a- o N =' 0O" �'awo- N-,..p p owwno a-a a N ao c a..r+,w CD [s w o w CD n n £�'�a.; "� oma < o��e n �-,`n° •ow �� o a a ac °' ¢� cc. CD et t9 o n a s o co n -0 n •-•..< . -1 (-) 3 N, "y £ v'. ....,,...•0„.„.,7,.„.. .co �< d G•°=a'g ��, n ci'w p--,is y a0w a'• new a c � n o c c �, n tri x o • x £ts n aao ' 0 CD W� � �WOt3 c �nFwc`� ^ 0Ny�.N� pG'„d_., nSG CtiN -wi � E »nC ^ a N to E CD << O 7 �'a v,' a O a v� . •••., w , rn 0-.�o co n �'w co CD �' , ca, K _,• s'a 2) . ,-... 73 ..,.,f__ _. es E cE n n CD ,.., ,. .„, .........5 > CA • • �Y� cr ►1 •ow � a ?p awao , ”-GQ 0 -a.bcAN.oo%�n� °A �w a ...-..,-..„---;-...=0 �S � .Q -y'-v =. ,•0tp ..-.,--,, „ -, n_, „3 =O w EA ",n Oma' . w 00n• n'` 5.0 �� N .< n = N . , N T'�n 0 �. /" . ...0 , „ . . X = • • . ..p < n p , a' s ' 0a 'Q.an w C ' onOCmNa'dHaOan _2- 004,0 O ,„ nO , ^ ^;n . ,,, 0- soab9y" nag. cn toa,NQo •eraO `'a01J, 00 ° g W - °' � N `I ~7• Nccr - av,n 7 y ; %= Q .o • n w � nn' n -^onoa.an ¢ C/N" w O o,. �..dn cc. Ons� < n .� . ° � � • � Onbn �� ;,.-1iSw E a n' 0 Cn ..) n aO , nwhoAEw < D n N opn CE ' f9 . o n-cow w a0 .;a a0-? O ,_ N ow ..,0- , oC1_wp.Iv 0a. ,wa0a-n _ 0.2 3 •Q '_towooN ^ O� wa.-.oC = to , ,� n n Cp ^- O < ^O o= ^ _a7 a a n w6Ocn 0 oN w y* w '(".1 "0- ii N'0CDw�:Ov "< + » N p, n aO `,< C7 p np ^ -P f ^• w - .0 CD ^ n OO - O ,0 tiO' �e »^ ►�7'a•n r; na , wBo ; wapw � ^ � Ca ' 01. N �. o ^0w0GOvn ^ pncs -oNawa �wO taw, O »wn - co7C • n ° 9a • pwwa•5n aaO •o•a '-' a' a ="0 v n =Co.0on .,, -..-pvo0p ' - awE aweocDa-, �< "� ��vccn., . � s-yavt-_ n o • .� o w 0 •••• — Na ° oXcona0ia a; a cn w �0ati N 'fl ti3O � G 0-c Srn v, C, -- p cro • W b� ° n m:0 ° ' a9o- w a9o.n b � o � 07 oG o -N ' a� < Go pa . C, .•.n 0 c 4 y ¢, pan ; ow - nti - ' a 0- c__•e w n .. . ya•a , w n'na -•n w e r• - .�� o o oNo• y a pD • "w ^ ( a tn O 0 . n CD .. N CD •- 0 CD a n CO w CO n N a.O •- E CA C•.a c'No mi • o• cro= ry 0 � • a n ^+ y C, p c • -,F.n CD 7t-o0 San `' Pr s <.'3: n w ? t3 n p, � 0 0.'0 ....."1 a as n" ,: ato 0 •C n•< N S".....CD N ..o—0 CT 0.2 N CO '. no X_n !°y' wa �tyaow▪ °' co °p •, `^ < 0 w ..,,r <.<Qo p»a ;; co - c cNOa w•; ,� w n 0 `� 0 w O�... a bp, N p, pa cr?• ti a C CO a x•K n CS w �•;•-.`.^ ro a a--Oo w N "", a.:1 o Bina �b ^ ° o � 0 • 0 . n 000 C ° =n n.y c`jti �° .' ,.0 �'o o'o• ao c n B 'a n n a p' o e., 0 ,0 . - -, —, n 0- c 'a -- a-. n o, a z7. 0 ."s`<`< w^ wvW y 0 r a o 0. a-" <•045.w O p, c69 a CS.. 77.9. � a Q o n a : £ -,�� ti -, .N >C O a o•-• c,, o„, E ^ ~a a nn aw 0- n c'o'..n vN,-" a n na cm ; go = N w �.0 a o •< n ° N ° = O^ X>P a.D., .w•. •a-<°••-•a° a• , C R`<E ap aN.a w•: C w a w C a N c9 O• w 0: a Cn w ^• .< n N n ? w'6 a O a •-,• M a a DO t7 .., ...• co N a O 'n w n a n B a a wag •n �o .. wnao �3in aE '^ y00co -Loio �? a 0cr)" yaa oaN •o w 6' a s i• .N+_ a `<co CTS w E a'n9 61 •+,E ,^..N N p s R n N. r, w npw tsw ,ni3O:.� a.?:oNp, an � oa < ,°., N --, ^ oa' B n w '`;s a n _ X_ o r o^ Bxw co'a »on� oH'a �'•-•oa° � � f9p' cco a gnoctro co Iwo 7:••• =; na • .1:1 nnR, "'^ avaaocn �ow ?� n '_,Eac < < °Cy �.. 7a• �..< 0. ,--.- -•-fi .-. ^ � wbZ� R o� N NO ?c n 0-o_. dn ^ '.�:. n n N 0-•,-...., n n;�•a •a-0, a�Sa i, n w C .£,- C9 ...7(7,— 6ry N , a ,,i:. oOO w i•Cnn +•V+ a s:CO N CO f,_ n a w a O n N' =,f-)ntn : ~•`; ac•a•�o'o a4Z E Ca=t° a'o • a Kc_ w c<, c7n0° E O w ��ado 'c•O a O i' a- m n n °ao n E C r) n o c":'n.'o O c x ° CD - n a-a Cr-n n -• xn �, aC '� .b..,0 n "J'" ., o N•n o a N n v- a O "�' < y O n CD N X� n `n a•n G. 0 a• a0 >C Oo a•° S,n•N '�•d w w a E n Cm S N r•l J� paj N <•=t, p £, y . ,<.=`<..'v n a ,�•, a ro 0..'�• N•u. oo a•••, a c n p N N N •wJ. a£ a n 0,6 CTC Z7 n N Q c n0. .0-0, w sa ' awwaB paawOanEwa. atnroJn ° n0-=n 'Wnw . 4n=nnN an , .' Co• n n w " C •-,n•aCcr...^ .a• . •- va�v ° a ° n a (to n , N , •.:. _ w w tC a•n •.< .vo O 0 N y C an. _ ^ Nw � Q _ t a,< ~'•�_ • •w N N . •.a c .. N nin ., n 0 w •a o a' w r•w CT0 0n " 9 2 � w Q. v. nC a < Cy^ `< . •�, � a•a- CD^ N a-w , Oe-. n 0W ^ aw ,,,Qao ° � Qc`< < `"^CE ro `" o ° -. n • . :C, H. ,,,, 00 ►• w occ, 0"rn • oco 17''' ca. aEnaw C. er0 ig �cO ? Oao n pN� '-C a, ^ .ao Oa- pr.. ° n0 pna. ,, iO 00 C � Q� Nnaa � nOn Omo ° p• � aan � `" nn ;C6' ,. .-.1a. � ° '.• _•a _ _.pn0 '< nn 0-`"-000 CD n 00 - ° .. a. ay° nOC C N N n E ., wa aas a na aoQBna aNa •C In r.... Co R . o 0o.^O . a' n a ° C ^ -- °tro• mwp- n n'a • . oHao . . .-01 00cr ap. - ,tnw n ^O ON ' + a0oaa � O g •• O O n n n 0 "L O N � % O� td _ na Sa _. • ?° w O .-. .,na• v+ XE� .?O=c o 0- • -'"tw• Of rn � a• 0 • a ' na n.< N n n ., N .y.+ , n n n N . 1 3 aN N CITY of i :)' .4,.,,. 0 CHANHASSEN `, z-, 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: August 30, 1995 SUBJ: Gateway Villages - Southwest Corner of Highway 5 and 41 Discussion Item BACKGROUND Rottlund Homes is proposing to develop a mixed use development on the subject site which contains approximately 140 acres. This property is zoned A-2, Agriculture Estate, and is guided office/industrial. The plan proposes 4 housing clusters focusing around a Village Square that connects neighborhood shops by way of a pedestrian parkway. The plan as proposed would require a comprehensive plan change as well as a rezoning. The applicants would like to discuss their proposal with the Planning Commission. This property was given conceptual approval for an industrial park in 1992. Since that time, the owner has stated that the industrial park use was dropped based on the fact that the restriction put on the development made it no longer feasible. These restrictions include: limiting access on Highway 5 to right-in/right-out only, limits to the amount of grading and park dedication. The owner has opted to seek other development potential. Rottlund Homes is requesting consideration of their proposal. ANALYSIS While this is a discussion item, staff has done a cursory review of the proposal and have identified the following as possible framework for discussion. 1. 2000 Land Use Designation This property was given an IOP designation at the time of the 1990 Comprehensive Plan update. At that time, the applicants requested the IOP district zoning. As staff has indicated ,....atermirdli"I'llil:r,,. . /poi' Iii Willi ._, ,�' `AN FIELD ' �I31i Ii!r !a Zt:L's'' tgr� :71 y� % / - ;C, `� i �� `1��j M '■z NV i illi."'Yr ,, I ,____„ , LAKE �', ) , i ANL,* �- , ,, ,4„, ...,.....•CARWR ill .` LAKE ,. - / N N E 11T A S NTAV ____,,, wzimi . 1 . ,all '.: - - ''')41 / - •7PAFK :1.I c.......-,,s.„ ..„ 2REVIONAL I M / A LAKE LUCY /y minsiaisiriar----&,. 4 bT- 1411 ;.--:,..,• , ...-..m.Nip.... - 4._ i 44 loot t- P "T , A ''+,. I hi� ,� �(ii1 ,rLAKE ANN �, \ i- d n II u11n[ • ..it:.i/.- ��'a/ .n ' �� : , : a, . - inI01Uh ` &1111 I � it),..„.,. �, I ANgl PARK 51*P STA �— L• :ok. v ; II 1 ct5'. r : (J 1111 �I— NAil•,..,•011/4 t litrilliPIMMr4 „,,,,„„ , ._ , . • , . ,.., .. ,,, . . , n - w 11x.10 %TAM _ i . _ a i GP411•�L.. 0 w -- , / TI' �1 , \J a°� - . -___- -G... \te r ”- .-„,...,::;>,.,,, y...:c,--•, I ? /w i� i�A ,.- o h1 .� •. �'. iib y LrMAH BLVD - R 1 i .L.•, "4. J•y A: .T ".-� I I o g1 'j 1 ......e!....'--.4 s i,NZ-1A ! . 9700—� I t t"'.S'?T!. =r Lw` o I o I . o 0 0 0 0 n n n n S ,ni ,. A r H 9900—I _ -...1.-.. My~- -'�_-.7 •.�..-a +,"" A900 T r A. 9000 =pr ..[.e••weki • Y OF 9100 , QI IASSEN 9200— `i - iE MAP 9300 � 91100 ¢1 - —-^ `� - 1 ; • 95.. 9600 )25 Gateway Villages August 30, 1995 Page 2 with other request for changes in land use designations, where else will the industrial locate. The is one of the largest potential IOP districts left in the city. There is not another site to relocate 140 acres of IOP zoning. To date, there is approximately 350 acres of vacant industrial lands available. The proposed amendment would eliminate 40 percent of vacant industrial zoned property in the city. This area would be impossible to replace inside the current MUSA. Staff is concerned that a reduction in the city's industrial land use is not in the best interest of the community in terms of maintaining an appropriate balance of land uses, preserving an appropriate tax base mix, or providing a range of employment opportunities. 2. Collector Road Location In accordance to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Municipal State Aid system, a collector- type street system has been designated through this parcel to provide a level of service to facilitate the transportation needs of the area under full development. Based on the plans submitted, the meandering street system does not adequately address transportation needs the City has designated in this area. The street system should be more conducive to provide a frontage road street scenario than as proposed. Staff does not believe the proposed alignment of the frontage road will adequately serve the needs of the community for a collector-type street system. 3. Commercial Zoning on the Property The city has recently adopted the Highway 5 Corridor Study. This document reinforces the goal identified in the comprehensive plan regarding commercial development. The Comprehensive plan states: "The city has maintained a long standard policy of directing commercial development into the Central Business District. Chanhassen is rather unique among suburban communities in that it has historically had and maintained an active downtown business community. In recent years, there has been substantial public and private investment in furthering development in this area and there is no desire on the part of the City to see that effort diminished by the construction of commercial centers oriented to highways outside the business district. Consequently, it is anticipated that the overwhelming majority of new commercial development will occur in and around the Central Business District, primarily north along Highway 5 but also in a newly developed area south of Highway 5 located along relocated Hwy. 101." This goal was strengthened with the adoption of the Highway 5 Study. There was a request for commercial zoning on the northeast corner of the intersection of Hwy. 5 and 41. The Land Use designation for commercial was eliminated as a possibility. The reasons that it was Gateway Villages August 30, 1995 Page 3 not appropriate on that corner are the same reasons it would not be appropriate on this site.. In addition, when this property was given conceptual review in 1992 it was specifically stated by the city council and the planning commission that the corner shall have any commercial retail. Support commercial retail was considered as a part of the 1992 conceptual approval but that was subject to the ordinance that allows up to 25 percent support commercial as a part of an industrial park. This was given conceptual approval when this site had approximately 1,000,000 square feet of building. The 11 acres of commercial zoning in the southeast corner compares in size to 13.11 acres for the West Village Center (Byerly's) and 10.29 acres for the Target site and 3.00 acres for the 3 outlots. The commercial proposals are inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. 4. Preservation of Natural Features It appears that the plan proposes to preserve the significant ridge line. It is difficult, based on this conceptual plan, to state how this proposal will impact the land form. It is difficult to state with this level of detail that this plan is saving more of the natural features of the area. 5. Benefits of a PUD Designation The question that staff is asking the Planning Commission to consider is what is the city getting for changing this designation from IOP to PUD and commercial? Is this proposal providing a market niche that is not provided in the city? Currently, there are vacant areas of medium and residential zoning in the city. Is the commercial designation desired at this location? If this area is reguided where will the IOP be redesignated? Staff believes that there is no where else to replace this 140 acres of IOP. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a) The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b) The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. c) The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d) The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. Gateway Villages August 30, 1995 Page 4 e) The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f) Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 2000 Land Use Plan The property is guided for office/industrial land use. The proposed development is inconsistent with this designation. Land Use Goal Achieve a mixture of development which will assure a high quality of life and a reliable tax base. Policies Recognizing that some uses pay their way in terms of the property taxes they generate and some uses do not. Chanhassen will strive for a mixture of development which will assure its financial well being. Planned industrial development will be encouraged as a means of encouraging tax base growth and creating new employment opportunities. It is believed that planned growth can and should be designed to minimize environmental neighborhood and traffic impact. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from Rottlund Homes dated August 12, 1995. 2. Letter from Gateway Partners dated August 28, 1995. 3. Gateway West Industrial Park Concept Plan, 1992. 4. Proposed Park Plan. 5. Industrial Map. 6. Highway 5 site analysis and concept plan. 7. Road system and resolution. ur BuildeYar for life ROTTLUND HOMES' A DIVISION OF THE ROTTLUND COMPANY,INC. August 12, 1995 City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, MN RE: Gateway Village Development Dear Mayor and City Council, Members of the Planning Commission, and City Staff: The Rottlund Company, Inc. would like to present a mixed use development proposal for the approximate 140 acres located at the Southeast corner of Highway 41 and Highway 5. This site was previously proposed as the Gateway West Business Park. The proposal "Gateway Village" has 11 acres of commercial, 5 acres of neighborhood commercial and the balance of a variety of residential housing types. We believe that this site is best suited for residential development due to the topography, relationship to schools, park and existing wetlands. The site is least suited for industrial development. Due to the same above reasons but also the lack of adequate vehicle access today and in the future. Gateway Village is intended to be a unique residential neighborhood/commercial neighborhood focused toward the nontraditional family, such as; empty nesters, seniors, single parents and single professionals. The housing is also moderately priced, ranging from approximately $90,000 to $180,000. The site planning is designed to promote a sense of neighborhood and community. There are four basic housing clusters focusing around a Village Square that connects them from the neighborhood shops and the neighborhood parks by way of a pedestrian parkway. The trails connect all the parks, open spaces, the wetland along the community park and an elementary school to the east. The concept is to promote pedestrian patterns from housing to shops, parks and possibly transit opportunities in keeping with trends towards more transit oriented developments. Village Homes Single Family detached 2-story for 1300 - 1600 sq. ft. $110,000 - $140,000 young professional, single parents and couples. Cottages Single Family detached 1-level living 1420 - 1520 sq. ft. $120,000 - $160,000 for empty nesters and Seniors. Garden Single Family attached townhomes for 1300 sq. ft. $100,000 - $120,000 Homes 1-level living. Townhomes Single Family attached townhomes 1150 - 1250 sq. ft. $90,000 - $110,000 2-story for young professional. Single Family Young families with 65' wide lots 1500 - 2400 sq. ft. $140,000 - $180,000 EOOPP RTUNNG OVPORNNItt 2681 LONG LAKE ROAD ROSEVILLE, MN 55113 (612)638-0500 FAX(612)638-0501 Page 2 August 21, 1995 We are excited to propose a more traditional neighborhood for the nontraditional family at a moderate price. This is a market that is much needed in Chanhassen and we believe this site has the right elements for success. Please give this proposal your fair attention. / uy, � Or*." 1i President ms/chanit.doc cc: Tim Whitten z CHASKA GATEWAY PARTNERS August 28, 1995 Planning Commission City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen,MN 55317 Dear Commission Members: About eight years ago a small group experienced, reputable builders and developers formed Gateway Partnership and purchased a total of 180 acres of industrial guided land in western Chanhassen. The objective was to develop a first class industrial park working closely and cooperatively with the City of Chanhassen. Opus Corporation, a recognized leader in industrial development was hired to market and develop the land. An excellent development plan was prepared by Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc., with support from engineering consultants, Schoell&Madson and others. A Concept Plan was approved in November of 1992 with conditions that major changes could result based on the outcome of a Highway Five Corridor Study in progress. Since that time we have had numerous meetings with the City staff to consider adjustments to the plan and yet insure ultimate successful development of the land for industrial purposes. So many obstacles have been raised and so many concessions demanded of us that we have concluded that we can not successfully develop this site as an industrial park. Staff recommendations voiced at these meetings has convinced us that the development policies proposed by the City can be met by developing the land for a mixed residential use rather than industrial. These policies include: * Retention of existing terrain and severe restrictions on mass grading(essential to efficient use for modern industrial development). * Requirement that 50 acres(1/3 of the 150 acre site)be devoted to public park use. * The preservation of open space view corridors into the site(reducing the industrial development by approximately 1/5). * Limiting of vehicular access to Trunk Highway 5 to right hand in and right hand out only. The latter restriction we know from experience to be particularly damaging to successful industrial development. Trunk Highway 5 would be the most important orientation for industrial and related business(restaurants, etc.)uses. Limiting this access is a major deterrent to successful development of an industrial park. To the east there are two million people (and downtown Chanhassen). To the west is Victoria. We have firmly concluded that we cannot develop the land for industrial use given the development and access policies currently proposed by the City. By contrast, a well planned mixed residential use on this property will not need full access to Trunk Highway 5. In fact, such use will be more conducive to achieving the City's objectives on this site as expressed to us over the past years. As the owners of this land we ask that you give a serious objective review of the proposals offered by the Rottlund Company,Inc. We know they are dedicated and capable people. They will be able to deliver the variety of land uses that will meet the City's objectives. Sincerely, Paul Steiner General Partner 3 • J . 1 -----__________ L_________:___ V Iil '- ' t . (:::::3 111' <:::r• ' . . isi...... 0 : ) ..,roil. f�J■• •... ., ., ,„,„„,,, ....,....„..,,. ;i..._ , , -. i f ma".{� ,' 'r.,liT( wt,,, ..S `i I y �, _ I • ti 11� --At •'*,,,c,„11 �s•�1 i �( ,` 1 1 l',,,.:.!.!;;..t;. . 1,\ 6,1L§. ,:y2,::, ,t-e,i,,,,...-. .,, zy-—ye- , --.1:4f f.: ,\,••i § ; .v).‘.• . _• ,-• 0,•,1".)-,,., 4-. , 1. J.,...,, ____ .._____I . :1 a ,... ' ,,y-..1---7:::1*1. '.\•. .'_._:,-.,_;,_.I;ii.,,%i,P.;,_.•"_.//.:it'L'_I IiR,t..,-j•-,i•' :,1 ik.„04,„4" !4 -ice . .._r_____- . 1, ,.... ,.1 ._=_....._.,,,,,.\ --,-..--..,/pt ,,,, - --. .L(f- iittie, ---- 1 -11)it rs'.. i ), § Tri") - § 1 .- - 11'10. c_,F1 4•-zi',—c((:( ,.‘ ( . -'/ ,'"; I --,..."-- -.-, ii (1 l• . 1 1 --,-2,, '..• .\.v. . c- • .- , .:4 •-.i. • I/ t, —7— I , - :-',/ *-_:. V . 4; 1J' I ; 11 ,p"., !tits., 1ii,..,,.,, Ill L ., I 5 yp ___._t___2 p;...•1., ,..- • .__ _____ ,_ _I-m.16k . :i.L •1 ,.,,' ' -- -- 11 fi• ' I ° a° t o;f'J , /r L -..'. gip ;; r Lill , .� b Q e (17...,::„..;.!..,,--;,:.F.- ::wi g -i - . +I'�~,;`-;; ; -- •$j •.ash: 11 ilikcCC I 0 666 I L 11 7 Li a. co ,.11.00,11 I u w i' --F-Z i 1 N u! m 't o= til 140/ Z 1 ,'aogi,�lagitaiai..;a.1g 1 7 a : a 3 Z w Z f� .y a I:�r {{�11ir.. : e g it `y o C-3 Q Q 1 = a i ! 1I1III11IIIIIIIIFI;I11 4 R = RYA `,11 !i. " cal U ' • b 1 U i lili g o i $ilffl f212 0 O U E3111 I Natld 'QAla N1d1V0 /9 AVMHOIH 1 I;II(If'U')J.,E:)ON uI-it,N,,1 l < i 1 E t B , i •` I I ! i E i�✓ -3• �•`•arm. ! ;' ! \• ..v..,;".1‘.1.,.-.1---Z.-•6'•''•.. rl-ir.i.'mss. ' .i:.7;. j 1 • .:I • s ' ^ p � / 5t� er � !; rt ,,,1 15 4. tt, t. 1 1' i.14.741.: . ?I' -i'.. \ \ r._ .11-._._._till.,-..., .:,-,::.‘,44:, _-.‘•-, -i, I i 1 ate= f t) , ;r r . 1 , . mss , ` , ,c ' ' A /: ! • }- . -- - 1. i 5 i • -,::'..f›:-.4 4 "...;iS -i - ••.: ::,'.-:,,i,--;• 1 1 ,,,, ,:, .: :... L......___,_, ' -.." ''• ' -I i 1 1 j« - � i� Its '�` • • .� 1 1 `/.•• ..,..!:,,,c,.....,././: .4 t•r - 1 J y 1 ` '\ 1. i 1 . r ,� I r i ' II i i 111 yCl LI f. Fii 1 ,o r., arv,n oo/ven.n .ri.,o i �rN e so c r4 r4 0, I.4 rrn I I .. 5 .< a v .. o d5 3 3� 5 ° 36 -° <3• 12-3 E ... 1 °< . I6a. 5 i t ! F BI I- ! I t i I_ ! ! ! >! I i.„zi # , t i. r ; 1 , I ! I !• 1 # I , t •-...:. - :. - -/.11,--1....."-----.4.-,i. =c. ...or, it ice•_ w =r.._ rte„aiiir l.._r�' �_ _ - r p� tl i i7. = c3: ar ".: rr-�"Ly�w. s. • s'':� til';:. 7.E.;...E.•ze, L - • r`• �.1/ i -,e, a.Se4 - o yr.. f _I : i I 1)(1 11-71f - - - c•-_-,---, --- - rir,..--x., - os)b. _.., r ~::...A usir wr• I L.1-- !Jo .11.1 ir i""•— I f3 57 1011r....i.,„,__ ,..,s,. .., . , ___ .... ... . __ 72 __ „,,,,,,,.., , , ... . - , 43.1,.....-__„„ =, , , , .. _ .. i ... __, __ .p.,.. 3 -_i ..,......s. - _ SA. -. 1-1.77.7..._-lei a .. a •2 - . �aL..r-�-J --"I 7__ -.-.�('tt~��ZAi 1//1.1 t ':•.--•- N3 ,-,..-__X---- , Ir-' -- -7 Vt71 ,..• --''..-Gil till I r- A; ---':::riv.t, . , _ - ' -'-' .rt , --..ae-i-d-.. Ai? . ,- ._ , __,_ ,,,,-.1tie.-,b-il.,.a,:,-7.,-P' .__m83 1.4. --,-, _,, or. /• 7.4-*,.... .v4A_ .. 4 A Al sos I 1 . .1; !. e ,,, ...... ... . 1/4„.,.,,_,,:.,_;..,_ .., _:,,,, . . . . 1 _ . ..'t . . � rte. ,Lia,----, , 'di, - • e __ 4 4� CITY OF _ i'..:',.:-., ( r� BASE YAP O Cru-idea TOP . _ _ _I (g Under Desela�mte�f - ; r \141 - , - 5 P4 Reuses+ {or Land 1. .. . ., _- PREPARED 1.: \i �w ' J_.. Use eha �- .: _ CHAM10.SSt7J ENGNEERWG PT. (` 1 . .- . ., Y Ii •• -_ 6 lfCIND J lI .,/ -S i-/ 11'111-- 0 it- • L :..c..,.....„.„...----..\ ` 7 I =ndUS-Fria l Land Supply a w a Z NgZ . c o• Z o wZ C F c„,,10 , F FZ > ' Q1 4.04 "ti j - Li aa..ii t , Z 4 4 > r7.3 r.T4 A i < Lia 1� = a , 10 _ .---J 02: ,1 , 7.A.- : . • 4 4 -,•:-... •\• . • • • "iv r k % t ,Q �1F J<4 I ')'-' "r- . ....„5., 4,:_ii sr. 4.4. CL Eg __ . s• '( i:, ,il, , ; _ - s 'A . 1 , \t• v::-.. .•- •:.,. .v.. 7.- ; N%..-•. ;6:1 a.Z _t• ,,,,, — ---zz-A- dip 1%0_ ,iir- .X. •; '•'. . ill i ___,-;-. -------;,‘ ._-:._._a:.i. ,,,. it , - 4 -...:7--- ......-... ..._ • • •,,... / --. \ ••-; ,..cri iii ,.. it(- ,..._ :;•..- I �L ,:‘71.,5,.‘\--..:7:• + • 1 qlhaloNsas V � =_.^ • x ,1,-;�� ` ' Le ; _ se _ , •• ci • c,,,-) . •/•-6. � ✓// �; 1 _tom'-``= 1\\ _v l`I , 4 �• - '5:1 ,'r:-_ t 1;,` 44-. ,v`. .*��'' ws=.'. r- ,1-� NL.,_..7.2... `J:: 47� (:; V\N-� =i®� -- i.t; I. .. ..,,,,, tf\,:f..., „ :, ...„ :..._, . .,ii,!. -or 1.1 . .i..fJ. \,.1.),•s.I..._ ')N I,-..,4 c ► .,-,_ 1 ;`'-i: - __.- ' a.Ar __ L-- ----- - _ -- 1 1'. 1 w. r ! I'- 7:.4.,..:.,p:.e.;'..fi:.*„.'.:l-Fk.',-:-t'-,g11ie:;.:',cri1'et"r_.-._*.,..'i.t::::-7..;..-11.,..111...i4.Z..':l..:l1:1:.:.,::,;....;,..6%,Z1.,:,:0,, ;pI e'IicnLei'.---_d---7----I0Iiikt...e 1 ► 1�:Ai4�i:i�..�� 1 ,' * mit: :s.----- ., r- ..:1I ''.a 'I�11111rto ',4 7: ; 1 I ipt A\) \.. \i 1 i......._ - ri. t, }_ is CU 11 ifted . co5 V 1117r CC F a F1- 0 ;�(((��` -1 C viip cn F a w Q Z7i. z <z el < <0 CZ a mF- U Ph .0 Id t C.5 la W W % 'i O O F <a. Z Z h oW 2 >. E-.> • = ? ci o > O x �c w3 3 W Z g• N a Z sY - J Q = f: i _jX 4: t Z 0 0 o W F; c ; is: 0 \ id \ . - 1 �• - !. I ir) .LI F. _-- < cm� ni �ue Lii • 411( 00 � wy - �� pe^C 3F� f�HwU •< s., c< p-v < << F J 0 fZ �< �r14. F y w �� ft` I . 47. E ii10 `�1 'cc — 'G �.c -J1 � �� -- a- ..?r.itt-qviirts,1. 1 N.\ 4\71[11.7"M.::t; , N.;\ ;:-.3. NN,,:i- LI/ PIkaiiikui4 Nai tf_*_'. 11 i,46"*... 1 -411- n 1 oZSa,i O € II- 1,94.,,,i.1 aur ,. Nd.,16., _„,.. k r.,......v.. , . . . __ ;,,zil IN 01,;,,, i_ N"ras:—.74. Viti.;:* .... fi - )I . \fir• 1114 , i ( . ,,---1 ,.T., \1` /�-`\`�f'" via 'j " V. N a iii A NNQ ' Pi 'IA. — -:---...------9''' N,4: vs..> '7.-4=---- .•:., - /V, .....igE4.2 --° t."114 ,\.q. ,--,---_--- ---,-- N.'S ,. . rfti4 i , It:'ItiFtlirin k-74.7 \i'C':7:--' \k‘s\;•'''.4... "------ .--.....-1------- - -.4/7"....7-7 -" Alibb,.. . --:;i1411///' 11.1. " '5 Iilli f./. • :17-' '.•... .•r••= \ �/ 1,?., i[!1_ ....1! .:fes / :( ti /j , "6 .. q A,te ‘1,`: ,. . 1 i - ':, . ...0" WU i ,ter �\, ;h.. 'St FIRM 1 "7"..r.rh—hrt. ., r 1 Ili Illtt. ' . < --—LI— I .1101 0 if, . . . , .. ,--,-=,.,... 0,,,Ar . ,,,Aok----\ \ . ,,,,--, ri.. --, ,,,,.,„ 4. • ,,,, ...,. . ,12r, ,•• Plrin-, ..1*,,. : €.8.., I . • {z� 14m i % tte-- ' F 1 ' I /j I Y CC • i r 4 a slmsNexillA q 1:-.1_ir %Fp cn wt 1- c _ < `czLW CO. m 161 IXit 7_f IS O c • b. t Oe o <m A�� F Eg' h s Z, 0, ...s i 1 ! g.1 la 5 E 8. .. .4, 2E p( C. O w ,i U IihIfl C w z I V c El w i4 3Ey ti <g ox= zf C'41)° �• Q Z h.Z. <� C tin Ciy ° ' C7 0 S ■ 5 U II I I 1 I 1 I. 1• 1 i '11 1 1 1 , 1 ' 1 1 1 1- ---ti r 1114 '-':= - . •%-# 2114i71.1\ V , ,r - .. gipI • —. 11— ', . _1.1g...17 li*LT: & I 01•••• .. .. , Irtil a� , _ ��,�� ' -,.... 7l�•r ; : ` t ai.1 0.•• A -s7.1 ):_e.• 4 __ .; 1 . ....wie. _„= . __ _ i -2 L bel , ......„,. _ . _, ix „.„.... , ..= , ut- . ...,. ..• _ II __ i. r 1,4,7; • ; i A I -. "AV& • I . 0..400,1! --1 "mommlii--.14111rat*Ilmi- Nr-A,- - r--3- • ' _ ...,.......a...r 4 ii O I I Ir ...or'' .1 amillini..-.....0061111::ig• r---" 1,..... .51.._._7. ir -_ _. ...5.. . _igftiiit • p4i: WK. _, _ 1 ILI 1 et i I I I 1 I ! L -1— LA( -: -.. 74414‘A/A1 Pa r orr or La- ) -4‘11 17-11 -- .- 7 awii,/ssei , __ ___i __ __.; .. I . iv 4‘ . WM T .mmmin. lir i. "MI : . Recommended - ~ Trap J System -- , _ „,; , _ : L - Major Routes :1 —q . - 0 0 I I If ® • interchanges ---A . ANDia...� - ——I . lk - am r1: 111.r —grim". .—. :--- ' 1141rw ... / I -: 1 10' - ' . 1 � 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 .1 '7' . r .- ''.• I i Pi0 • t►• 7 City of Carver and Hennepinhanhassen Counties, Minnesota DATE: A r '1 RESOLUTION NO: 91-34 MOTION BY: Mason A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADDITION BY: orkman ZTIOH OF MILEAGE TO THE KUNZCIpAL STATE AID STREET SYSTEM AnnuaWHl eS' the State Aid Office re rtification of Mileage quires the submittal of the and g from all cities in the MSA program; WHEREAS, the 1991 certification shows 4 .4 miles of unallocated MSA designation for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, of Chante , THE that E, BE tfollowingTSOLVED b of addition to by the City Council of the City the City 's street designations be considered MSA street system: 1 . East-West connector 41a located north between Galpin Boulevard (CR 117) and STH- ate pproximately 3/4 mile feet. of STH-5. AAbroximate 2. Galpin Boulevard continuity. between STH-5 and #1 above to y• roximate length=4300 provide 3 . East-West eet. : . connection between STH-41 and Gal 19) from a point 1/2 mile south of STH-5 on S Boulevard 300 feet south of STH-5 (CSAR length=5000 on Galpin Boulevard. -41 to a Point feet. Aot�roximate _- 4 • Frontage road south of STH-5 and CSAR from a between Audubon Road and to 19 point 1000 feet south of STH-5 (MSA 106) roximate 0encxtht south 5000 fee of STH-5 on levAudurdn - on Galpin Boulevard. -� Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City — day of April, 1991. Council this 22nd ATTES AIR 1111 4111Wi Aga Don Ashwort� / - Cit Y Clerk/Manager Donald J�� S �mie7, Mayor EQ Mason BS Win Chmiel Pimler Wor}Qrian as= 7, i CITY OF toloi 00, CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: August 30, 1995 SUBJ: 1996 Planning Commission Goals Attached are the ongoing issues as of August, 1995. These are the goals that the Commission recommended for their work task for 1995. We are now into the 1996 budget year and staff is requesting consideration of upcoming goals for 1996. Following is a list of potential tasks: 1. Possible consideration of MUSA expansion. This would depend on timing of services and what can be served already in the community. I believe this additional land in the MUSA may help keep land prices on an equal basis. The area to be considered would be the area most recently gave zoning destination to which would be the northern portion of Hwy. 5 at the intersection of Hwy. 41. 2. Update the Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). The CIP was a five year plan which has now expired. In addition, many of the elements that were recognized in the Comp Plan have been met. As a part of that update, staff would be preparing an evaluation of the comp plan, reviewing areas where we have met the goals and revise them as mandates or issues change. 3. Affordable housing is being mandated by the legislature, under Livable Communities Act (LCA). It appears that we may have to participate in the Livable Communities Act in order to be able to request further MUSA expansions. This will be discussed with the City Council also. 4. I would like to consider some training for the Planning Commission through outside and in-house resources. 5. Continuing with work issues that were scheduled for 1995, we had proposed to do the 1995 Study Area south of Lyman Boulevard. Staff is waiting for the Park and Recreation Commission to complete their work task. They are trying to put out Planning Commission August 30, 1995 Page 2 options on property in this area and feel it would be prudent to wait until they resolve what areas they want to consider purchasing before the Planning Commission starts speculating on the land uses and timing of bringing land into the MUSA or possible future development. We hope to work on the BF District yet this year. 6. Staff will continue working on the Bluff Creek Studies spearheaded by Diane Desotelle. Staff would like the Commission to give direction on any other items they would like to see as a part of the 1996 work goals. ON-GOING ISSUES August 1995 ISSUE STATUS 1. Highway 5 Corridor Study and City Council has selected the southern Land Use Recommendation alignment. In June the council adopted the remaining portion of the Corridor Study. The document is in revised form and will be printed for final dispersement. 2. Southern 1995 Study Area: BF Staff is proposing to study the remaining District and remaining city land land outside of the MUSA. We will be uses outside of the MUSA Line. studying property in conjunction with the Park and Recreation Commission open space study. We will also be recommending land use by the end of 1995. In early 1996, we will begin evaluating the timing for the Planning Commission hearing process and determine how much, if any, area should be brought into the city's MUSA area. 3. Slope Protection Ordinance. The Planning Commission has held one work session on the proposed ordinance. Staff is making changes. 4. Revise PUD Ordinance. The standards of the PUD ordinance do not necessarily merit the increase in the flexibility it allows. Staff believes the PUD should be a process. Proposed changes are included in a Code glitch update. The Planning Commission has requested that the staff review the PUD separate from the "glitch " amendment. 5. Bluff Creek Study The next meetings scheduled for August 7, 1995. 6. Joint Meeting with Park and The joint meeting was held on 1/24/95. Recreation Commission 7. Affordable Housing Staff is exploring the affordable housing issue. We are examining what affordable housing is in the metro area and how Chanhassen fits into this issue. We are also monitoring the Metropolitan Council's new blue print as well as the 1995 Legislature for any housing mandates. 8. Train Depot The Planning Commission requested staff explore the possibility of moving the old train depot to the City Center, especially in light of the train that is providing the rides 9. Transition Zone The Planning commission requested that staff develop an ordinance for transition zones between different densities and intensities of use. The ordinance was reviewed at a work session. The city Council reviewed the proposed ordinance on July 24, 1995. The council tabled the item and staff will rewriting the ordinance. 2