1984 03 14
e
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 14, 1984
REGULAR MEETING
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.
Members Present
Jim Thompson, Tom Merz, Susan Albee, Ladd Conrad, Bill Ryan,
Howard Noziska and Mike Thompson.
Members Absent
None
Staff Present
Bob Waibel, City Planner and Vicki Churchill, Secretary.
Site Plan Review, Pen Industrial Center, Lot 1, Block 1,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Third Addition.
Terry Kilbane, the architect, was present to answer any questions
that the Commissioners had.
e
waibel stated that this proposal was to construct six buildings
over four phases totaling 495,000 square feet of office, assembly,
service and warehouse facilities. He stated that this proposal
was compliant with the zoning Ordinance for industrial develop-
ment with the exception of the impervious surface area standards
for Shoreland areas. He added that the D.N.R. has found that the
plan as proposed is acceptable due to the drainage improvements
proposed to be constructed.
Waibel stated that the project has gone through an Environmental
Assessment Review in accordance with Minnesota Environmental Quality
Board Regulations and resulted in the finding that no Environmental
Impact statement is necessary and that prohibition on local govern-
ment approvals of the project is lifted.
waibel stated that Jim Castleberry, the Fire Marshal, recommended
the need for a revised final utility and hydrant location plan. The
Fire Marshal also advised that the service drive on the south side
of the office portion of the plan be connected to the service drive
on the south side of the service building.
e
Waibel noted that a feasibility study will need to be done for
the installation and extension of public improvements to the
site. He added that the proposed building and parking phasing
plan adequately addresses interim traffic circulation and parking
needs and modifications that may occur would involve location of
temporary curbs for interim drainage purposes and the timing of
construction of the service road on the south side of the power
center. He indicated that it is staff's feelings that these mat-
ters should be addressed in greater detail when building permits
for individual building phases are applied for.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
March 14, 1984
Page 2
Waibel summarized that as in all industrial site plan approvals,
the proposal will be subject to the requirements for 1) the
installation of concrete curbs on the perimeter of all vehicle
manuevering and parking areas, 2) the screening of rooftop
mechanical equipment from view at street level, 3) the installa-
tion of shielded high pressure sodium illuminaries, and 4) main-
taining all parking within the areas so designated on the
approved plans.
e
Tom Merz questioned the adequacy of the proposed method of
handling storm water runoff. He felt that too much of the runoff
would be routed directly to the lake and such could affect the
water quality of the lake. Waibel stated that the plan has been
designed so that all of the runoff from the developed portion of
the property would be directed to two holding ponds, one lying
north of the site and the other lying to the west near County
Road 17 for sedimentation purposes prior to discharge into Lake
Susan and Riley Creek. He also noted that the City Engineer has
determined that there is sufficient flexibility to provide
ponding capacity for this development as well as other develop-
ment within the subwatershed. He stated that the City Engineer
has found that the actual size and capacity of these ponds will
more appropriately be determined at the time when the feasibility
study for public improvements for the extension of street, sewer
and water services is prepared.
Merz expressed concern that berms and/or noise walls might be
considered along the southerly portion of the project to diminish
traffic noise in and around the site. Terry Kilbane noted that
throughout the planning research stages of this project he had
been working closely with Mr. Jim Murphy, President of the Lake
Susan Homeowners Association, on design considerations. He noted
that some of these considerations included the placement of
building and driving areas to be as visually unobtrusive as
reasonably possible. Measures taken to achieve this were loca-
tion of certain buildings and activities that would be most
effectively screened by existing vegetation, positioning
buildings in the more visible areas of the site so that a reduced
angle of view from the existing homes would result and by keeping
the developed portions of the site well within the setbacks from
Lake Susan that were established as part of the Zoning and
Subdivision approval of the property.
e
Albee inquired as to the impact of the impervious surface area
within the shoreland area of the lake. Waibel noted that the
D.N.R. Division of Waters has determined that since the runoff
from the developed portion of the site will be routed to holding
ponds prior to discharge to streams or lakes, the impervious sur-
face area ratio as proposed is acceptable. It was also noted
that the impervious surface area ratio is still 16% lower than
what would be allowed by the City for other typical industrial
Planning Commission Minutes
March 14, 1984
e page 3
and commercial proposals and furthermore the feasibility study
will investigate the need for construction of skimmers or baffle
weirs, etc. within the holding ponds to be used by this property
and other properties within the watershed.
The use of berms and landscaping were further discussed by the
commission for diminishing traffic noise and headlight glare from
the site. Kilbane mentioned that berming the top of the
lakeshore slope would probably result in the need to adjust gra-
des down the slope and/or placement of additional retaining walls
along the slope. He mentioned that the design of the plan
included minimizing the amount of area where retaining walls
would be needed. He noted that working with the Homeowners
Association on this plan it was his impression that, with the
exception of landscaping plant materials, the Association wanted
to retain the shoreline side at present grades and appearance as
much as reasonably possible. He felt that any changes including
berms and retaining walls should be brought back to the
Association for their consideration.
e
Wayne Holtmeier representing Lake Susan Association stated that
from a neighborhood perspective they would rather see evergreen
plantings for screening rather than berms or soundwalls in order
to keep the shoreline slope as natural as possible. He mentioned
that the neighborhood has three other concerns concerning the
project. One was the lighting on the lakeside of the property.
They felt that lighting would be alright for just the sidewalk
area, but felt no need to light up the whole building. The
second concern was the need for more landscaping in between the
building and lake. They would like to see evergreens so that
there is cover year round. The last concern was the color of the
concrete building. They would like to see concrete with an earth
tone color to blend into the landscape.
Conrad was concerned about vehicle driving and parking areas on
the lakeside of the project. Kilbane stated that the project was
designed to keep truck traffic oriented to the interior areas
however, due to building design, there would be the need to have
some automobile traffic and parking located on the lakeside of
the buildings.
Noziska felt consideration should be given to designing the
access south of the power center so that it would be used by
emergency vehicles only and not have the appearance or function
of a roadway.
Kilbane mentioned that the first phase is now planned for 1986.
In response to the question concerning noise level involved with
the testing area, he stated that the testing areas have
soundproofed interiors with muffled exhaust vents.
e
e
Planning Commission Minutes
March 14, 1984
Page 4
Ryan stated that measures should be taken to assure that the
drainage between phases be directed away from the lake. He asked
when Lake Drive is planned to be extended to 101 to which Waibel
stated that it is staff's feeling that this is to be determined
as part of the feasibility study for Lake Drive improvements.
Conrad was concerned with the apparent conflict between D.N.R.
responses on the plan. He stated that it is important that it be
demonstrated that water quality after development will not be
deteriorated.
Ryan stated that the motion should include the D.N.R. comments
when the design for the holding ponds is being studied and also
should include a statement about assuring that drainage between
phases of construction be directed away from the lake.
J. Thompson moved, seconded by B. Ryan that the Planning
Commission recommends approval of the Pen Industrial Center Site
Plan submittal dated received December 15, 1983, and as marked
Official Copy and contained in Planning File 83-2 Site Plan
Review with the following conditions:
e
1. That project construction not commence until plans for the exten-
sion of street, sewer and water services to the property have
been initiated.
2. That a final plan showing the revised water main looping and
hydrant and service road connection location be submitted prior
to issuance of a building permit.
3. That consideration be made from comments from the Soil
Conservation Service District Conservationist, D.N.R. and
the Planning Commission concerning runoff, landscaping, road-
ways, building aesthetics, noise and site preparation plans
include allowance for drainage during interim period.
4. That the applicant obtain all necessary local, state or federal
agency permits.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1984 P-District Review
The Planning Commission reviewed updated summaries of all
existing p-Districts, in accordance with Section 14.07 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
e
J. Thompson moved, seconded by Albee that no change in status i
recommended. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
.
.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
March 14, 1984
p~e5
Approval of Minutes
Albee moved, seconded by M. Thompson to approve the minutes of
February 22, 1984 as written. J. Thompson, Albee and M. Thompson
voted in favor. L. Conrad, B. Ryan, H. Noziska and T. Merz
abstained. Motion carried.
Adjournment
Noziska moved, seconded by Ryan to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.