CC Minutes 4-10-06
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
shocked if it came back in exactly the same location. But the, I wouldn’t be shocked if it was
somewhere else either I guess but, I think the key point for me is that, when you said we haven’t
had that discussion yet. That’s the piece that I want to see to occur before we come back in a
couple weeks.
Kevin Clark: Understood, and not to be argumentative but I’m not sure they have an engineering
plan for me to match up to…
Councilman Lundquist: And it may be just a concept plan, that’s fine. So we’ll work with the
information that we have and we’ll go from there. That’s all we can do. And another key point,
clarification again is, it’s not my intention to hold back your project based on whether or not they
have engineering level drawings yet or not. It’s you know, I just want to see, I want to see how
the color pens match up on the paper is all at this point.
Kevin Clark: Understood.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Anything else at this point or questions or clarification or.
Kate Aanenson: I’ve got it.
Mayor Furlong: You’ve got it?
Kate Aanenson: I’ve got it. Direction.
Mayor Furlong: I’m glad somebody has it. Very good. Is there any other discussion? If not, is
there a motion to table?
Councilman Lundquist: I would move that we table item 5 for further clarification and some
more details.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you, is there a second?
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Motion’s been made to table and seconded.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council table
Planning Case #05-24, Liberty at Creekside for further clarification and details. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
CHANHASSEN WEST BUSINESS PARK, LOT 2, BLOCK 2 CHANHASSEN WEST
BUSINESS PARK, APPLICANT EDEN TRACE CORPORATION: REQUEST FOR
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR REDUCED PARKING
SETBACK AT THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR
AN OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING.
42
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The applicant informed us that they were unable to be here tonight
so, but we still want to present the item. There wasn’t a significant amount of issues at the
Planning Commission. Can you hear me?
Mayor Furlong: It’s softer than usual so that’s, but as long as people in the audience can hear
and if it’s broadcasting correctly, which it sounds like it is.
Kate Aanenson: This item was recently approved. The site plan you’re looking at, or will be
th
looking at was recently approved as a part of a PUD back on August 25. The reason it was
given the PUD is to preserve the trees on that larger open space. This is the subject site itself.
And that is the location of Lyman and then there’s the pond over to the, Easter colors. So with
this site plan it’s…46,000 square foot building. Office warehouse building. The issue that came
up on this project was, when the development was originally approved there were setbacks that
were put in place that showed two different standards. There was some discussion at the
Planning Commission. If you look at this drawing closely, if you can zoom in on that. The
drawing itself showed on this side, actually it’s hard to see but there was parking shown in the
front so there was a question as far as the setback so with this application was also an
amendment to the PUD to allow parking in the front of the building. Again the goal with this
building, if you look at how it’s sitting on the site is that the loading docks be located internally
which we try to do so you’re screening those so they don’t have the appearance as you drive
down the street. So the staff did recommend approval of that amendment. There’s some
ambiguity in the letter that came from the County talking and the Planning Commission did
discuss this about, is there enough width? There’s 120 feet on there. We believe adequate lane
width based on future plans of Lyman Boulevard so we don’t think the parking, any additional
right-of-way should impact that at all. The building itself is highly articulated. The one issue
that we did have is two of the sides. So there was the one issue, there’s two walls. Actually
…south side that don’t, there’s about 58 feet that there’s not enough articulation on the building
itself, on the north and south side, and the developer did agree to make those changes. So with
the split face block face and the articulation over the doors, we went through in the staff report,
went through all the design standards that are in place for the PUD. It does meet all those
requirements. The Planning Commission did hold a public hearing to review this project and did
recommend approval of the site plan and the amendment, and those are identified in your staff
report. So with that, the staff is recommending approval of the site plan with conditions outlined
in the staff report and I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I just had one real quick one Kate. Has there been any other
correspondence or reactions from the neighborhood?
Kate Aanenson: We just had one ongoing issue and that’s regarding storage of one of the users
up there in the treed area and the developer has I believe resolved that at the end of last week.
Just trying to keep the site cleaned up. Some of those existing uses as we’re building new
buildings. Put in some storage in areas that we’re trying to preserve. I think we’ve got that
resolved.
43
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions for staff.
Councilman Lundquist: Kate the, I’m okay with the project as a whole and the parking along
Lyman’s not an issue for me. I mean you know, the only one’s who are going to see it is
Holasek’s anyway so.
Mayor Furlong: Not that you don’t care about what they see.
Councilman Lundquist: But they’re not going to get cars parked along Lyman you know. If it
was on the north side of the development where the homes would see it, I’d have a problem.
Kate Aanenson: Right, it is industrial across the street.
Councilman Lundquist: Right. So that doesn’t concern me. The thing, I just want to make sure
that we’re comfortable with the issue of potentially expanding Lyman Boulevard and having
enough room. I don’t want to get into a situation where we’re wiping out trees and shrubs and
curbs and parking spaces so that the County can expand Lyman Boulevard 8 years down the road
or 4 or whatever it comes to be and we get into a match back and forth of you know, what’s
going on or that so just to assure me that everybody’s good there and I’m fine with it.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Lundquist wants a guarantee. Assurance though. He wants
assurance.
Paul Oehme: Well I can only say that the section of roadway that the County is building in
conjunction or MnDot’s building in conjunction with the 212 project is 52 feet wide. That’s by
Powers Boulevard on Lyman Boulevard so, and we are anticipating a similar section to that in
this area just based upon traffic volumes and such so if it’s a 52, 54 foot roadway, we’ve got 120
foot right-of-way out there right now. It’s in our estimation that there should be significant,
enough right-of-way to support whatever improvements.
Councilman Lundquist: You’ve got about 25 feet on each side of that roadway.
Paul Oehme: Yeah, and we’re looking at a trail on the north side of the roadway at this time. No
other amenities on the south side. Potentially a signal at Galpin so.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay.
Paul Oehme: That’s in our estimation. Nothing’s been finalized yet but that’s where it seems to
be heading.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And we’ve already had the discussion with the County about
putting in access off of there that they already ixnayed so we don’t ever have to worry about
them trying to squeeze a road in between Lot 2 and the holding pond or anything like that right?
44
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Can you zoom in so they can see that. I’m just going to show
the overall layout. Can you zoom in on this?
Councilman Lundquist: …I remember having a conversation when we were looking at that and
we said no way we’re coming off of Lyman so we don’t have to worry about the turn lane and
anything like that.
Kate Aanenson: Based on the project itself, this is a storm water pond. It would be difficult to
get a road through there at this point, yeah.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay, I’m good.
Kate Aanenson: So with that again the Planning Commission and the staff felt it was a very well
designed building based on the proposed use so.
Councilman Lundquist: Let the record reflect I’ve been assured.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other questions for staff on this.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: You know I just had one quick one about the rain garden. Is that
something new that we’re doing in Chanhassen?
Kate Aanenson: There’s a few places that we’re trying to implement them where we’re trying to
rectify some storm water capacity issues. Existing situations. That’s typically where we try to
do them but there are other applications for them.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: But we have a history of them being successful? No?
Kate Aanenson: No, they’re just.
Mayor Furlong: Wasn’t there a pond there? To the west.
Kate Aanenson: Yes, there’s a pond here, correct.
Mayor Furlong: Help me understand. Are there rain gardens here as well?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Isn’t there a rain garden? Maybe not. Never mind.
Kate Aanenson: I’m not aware of that. It might be in the overall PUD and I’m not sure specific
on this site. That might be in the overall PUD.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: The Arboretum has rain gardens currently in the community and we’re looking
at some applications out at Lake Ann as a part of the parking lot improvements out there. Just
another way of filtering storm water prior to going into a creek or reservoir.
45
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Okay. Very good, thank you. Any other discussion or
comments? Seems like a reasonable proposal. Consistent with the PUD. Again I think the
request for the variance on the setback off Galpin for additional parking is a very reasonable
request and will include additional landscaping as well that was not part of the original PUD.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. I didn’t show that but that was kind of a trade off to provide
additional so you wouldn’t see the cars and the lights.
Mayor Furlong: And the 20 foot setback is actually less than what could be allowed under
ordinance, as I read the staff report.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: But again, the landscaping would still be there regardless so. Is there any other
discussion on this? If not, is there a motion?
Councilman Lundquist: I would move City Council approves Chanhassen West Business Park
PUD amendment for 20 foot parking setback from Lyman Boulevard right-of-way for Lots 1 and
2, Block 2 for Chanhassen West Business Park and that the City Council approve Site Plan 06-11
with the conditions in the staff report.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that motion?
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
Chanhassen West Business Park PUD Amendment for a 20 foot parking setback from
Lyman Boulevard right-of-way for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Chanhassen West Business Park.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approve
Site Plan #06-11 for a 49,105 square foot office/warehouse building, plans prepared by
Schoell and Madson, Inc., dated February 17, 2006, subject to the following conditions:
1.The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the
necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration, landscaping and rain
garden function on Lots 2 and 3, Block 2. Minimum maintenance and inspection shall
include maintaining rain garden vegetation with non-invasive species and ensuring that the
infiltration function of the rain garden does not fail. All rain gardens and associated
infrastructure on Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 shall be maintained by the property
owner/association or property management company.
46
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
2.A professional civil engineer registered in the State of Minnesota must sign all plans.
3.Staff recommends that Type II silt fence be used adjacent to the storm water pond along
the west side of the lot. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will
require an easement from the appropriate property owner.
4.Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through
the City’s Building Department.
5.Add the latest revision of City Detail Plate Nos. 1002, 1004, 1006, 2204, 3101, 3102,
3104, 3106, 3107, 3108, 5201, 5203, 5207, 5214, 5215, 5217, 5300, 5301, 5302 and
5302A.
6.The site has been previously assessed and each newly created lot will be subject to City
sanitary sewer and water hookup charges at the time of building permit issuance. The
2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermainper
SAC unit, as determined by the Metropolitan Council.
7.Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not
limited to the MPCA, NPDES, Minnesota Department of Health and Carver County
Water Management Area.
8.On the plans show the stop signs per city detail plate # 5217, the driveway aprons per
detail #5207 and pedestrian ramps must be constructed per detail plate #5215.
9.On the utility plan:
a.Show all the existing utilities sewer type, size and class.
b.Show all existing storm and sanitary structures rim and invert elevations.
c.Add a note to maintain 18-in minimum vertical separation between the watermain and
storm sewer intersection on the western car park.
d. Revise CB5 to CBMH5.
10.On the grading plan:
a.Show all the storm water structures rim elevations.
b.Show the EOF.
c.Show the actual existing elevation contours for the site.
d.Show minimum 75-ft rock construction entrance.
e.Extend the silt fence to close off the northwesterly entrance.
11.Cross-access easements for the shared driveway access must be obtained and recorded
against the Lots 1 and 2.
12.Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All
exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year
round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
47
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
Time
Type of Slope
(maximum time an area can remain unvegetated
when area is not actively being worked)
Steeper than 3:1 7 Days
10:1 to 3:1 14 Days
Flatter than 10:1 21 Days
13.Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and
street sweeping as-needed.
14.Construction site entrances and exits shall be indicated on plans and shall have maintained
rock construction entrances as specified on City of Chanhassen detail plate 5301.
15.The building is required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system.
16.The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
17.The accessible parking space at the northwest side of the building must be on the shortest
route possible to the northwest entrance.
18.A PIV is required on the building water service.
19.Detailed occupancy related requirements will be addressed when complete plans are
submitted.
20.The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
21.A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure
that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1.
22.Yellow curbing and “No Parking Fire Lane” signs shall be required. Contact Chanhassen
Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed.
23.Builder must comply with the following Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention
Division policies:
a.#4-1991 Regarding Notes To Be Included On All Site Plans
b.#7-1991 Regarding Pre-fire Drawings
c.#29-1991 Regarding Premise Identification
d.#34-1993 Regarding Water Service Installation
e.#36-1994 Regarding Proper Water Line Sizing
f.#40-1995 Regarding Fire Protection Systems
48
City Council Meeting – April 10, 2006
g.#06-1991 Regarding Fire Lane Signage
h.#52-2005 Regarding Commercial Plan Review Submittal Criteria
24.Lighting shall be high-pressure sodium.
25.The applicant shall revise landscape plan to show 11 landscaped islands or peninsulas
within the parking lot area.
26.The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to show 15 overstory trees, 37 understory
trees, and 52 shrubs along the south property line.
27.Sidewalk connections to Galpin Court and Lyman Boulevard must be constructed. The
sidewalks shall include pedestrian ramps at all curbs.
28.An architectural articulation shall be incorporated on the northern and southern façades.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you everyone.
APPOINTMENTS TO COMMISSIONS.
Mayor Furlong: City of Chanhassen has four commissions on which our residents volunteer
their service and time to serve. Those commissions are the Planning Commission, Park and
Recreation Commission, Environmental Commission and Senior Commission. The service by
our residents on all these commissions is greatly appreciated, past and current and the
willingness for all the applicants that submitted applications to volunteer their time is also very
much appreciated. Their time which is a significant commitment on their part for up to 3 year
terms here this evening will benefit all of us in the city and as a council, and I know I speak for
staff too and everyone involved, we greatly appreciate everyone’s involvement. With regard to
th
this current round of appointments at our meeting on March 20 I believe it was and again this
evening, the City Council interviewed most of the applicants, for those that were able to attend
the meetings and based upon those interviews and discussion, the following appointments are
being proposed which we will pass with a motion of a majority of the council, assuming the
council agrees. With regard to the Planning Commission we had two 3 year positions and 1 year
remaining on an open term. Kurt Papke and Debra Larson will be appointed to the 3 year
positions. Kevin Dillon will be appointed to the Planning Commission for the 1 year remaining
term. The Park and Recreation Commission, we had two 3 year positions available. Ann
Murphy and Jeffrey Daniel will be appointed to those two positions. On the Environmental
Commission, this evening we will appoint Ron Olson and James Sommers to the Environmental
Commission. And on the Senior Commission, we had three 3 year positions available. Pat
McGough, Barbara Nevin and Victoria Prior will be appointed to those. So again we appreciate
all the applicants and all those that serve on our commissions and at this point I would ask for a
motion to approve those appointments.
Councilman Labatt: Can I ask a question real quickly?
49