Loading...
25-10 Staff Report PC 9.2 Application: Site Plan Review & Variance (Planning Case #2025-10) Staff Report Date: August 26, 2025 Drafted By: Rachel Jeske, Planner Joe Seidl, Water Resources Engineer Mackenze Grunig, Project Engineer Planning Commission Review Date: September 2, 2025 City Council Review Date: September 22, 2025 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a site plan review and variance approval for a 42-bed memory care project. LOCATION: 1620 Arboretum Blvd PID: 250101105 APPLICANT: Fusion - AE PROPERTY OWNER: Lighthouse Homes, LLC PRESENT ZONING: R-16 2040 LAND USE PLAN: High Density Residential SITE PLAN ACREAGE: 3.5 gross acres, 3.14 net acres SITE PLAN DENSITY: 13.38 Units/Acre PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the requested site plan with variances for the 42-bed Eden Springs Assisted Living & Memory Care facility subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision.” Page 2 of 16 LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with zoning ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the city must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether the proposed project meets the standards in the zoning ordinance for a variance. The city has a moderate level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Notice of the public hearing at the Planning Commission was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article XV, Division 2 “R-16” District Chapter 20, Article 20-XXIII, Division 20-XXIII-9 Design Standards for Multifamily Developments Chapter 20, Article 20-VI, Wetland Management District Chapter 20, Article 20-VII, Shoreland Management District PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The Applicant is proposing the construction of a 42-bed memory care building. The request consists of a site plan approval with variances to facilitate the construction of a continuing care retirement facility (Eden Springs). The site is located north of West 78th Street and west of Lake Ann Park. Access to the site is proposed from West 78th Street. The site is zoned R-16 District. The site plan proposes to construct a 59,130-square-foot memory care facility. This is considered a “continuing care facility” by city code. The total permitted site coverage is 50 percent, and the proposed development has a total hard coverage area of 38.1%. The site contains multiple wetlands, a creek and is within the shoreland overlay district. The Applicant requests a five-foot wetland setback variance and a front yard setback variance. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan and variances with conditions as outlined in the staff report. The city has previously received, reviewed, and approved an application for this site which allowed for the construction of 48-unit memory care facility. That project was never built, and Page 3 of 16 those approvals have since lapsed. The prior project also requested the same variances, which were approved as recommended by staff. SITE PLAN REVIEW This building must comply with the Design Standards for the multi-family district and the standards required by city code for a continuing care retirement facility. City Code requires development to have an attractive design and use durable materials. The building has a pronounced entrance, utilizes durable exterior materials, and exhibits articulation. The north and south elevations contain patio areas. The roofline is staggered, well-articulated, and enhances the design of the building. The building materials include lap siding for the main body of the building and cedar shakes and stone accent materials. All elevations have received equal attention. Parking is buffered from views by landscaping. The trash enclosures for the building are also screened from public view. Site coverage may not exceed 50 percent. The total hard surface coverage proposed on the site is 38.1%. The applicant is requesting two variances pertaining to setbacks. The first variance is a parking setback variance. The City Code requires a minimum 25-foot setback. The applicant is requesting to reduce the setback to 10 feet. The site contains wetlands on the northern portion of the property, restricting the ability to shift the proposed development further north to adhere to the standard minimum front yard parking setback. The proposed use of the property is reasonable however the wetlands and their buffering create a difficulty in the reasonable use of the property and adhering to the typical front yard parking setback on the south side while also meeting wetland protection and buffering requirements on the north side. The impact of the parking and its proximity to the public right of way is adequately addressed through landscape screening. Staff is recommending approval of the parking setback variance. The applicant is also requesting wetland setback variance reducing the required wetland setback to five feet. In return, the applicant is providing a wider buffer in other areas around the wetlands. Per City Code Section 20-965, Continuing care retirement facility, the following applies to continuing care retirement facilities: 1. The facility shall maintain state licensing. 2. The facility shall conform to the requirements of the Minnesota State Building Codes and Fire Codes. 3. The facility shall be connected to municipal services. 4. The facility shall be of residential style and character with a maximum structure height of 35 feet. 5. Parking areas shall be screened from public or private right-of-way and adjacent single- family residential areas. Page 4 of 16 6. One-third parking space per bed shall be provided with an additional parking space for every employee on the largest single shift. 7. The facility shall be located in a medium or high-density district with a gross density not exceeding 16 beds per acre. 8. Access to the site shall be from a collector or arterial street as defined in the comprehensive plan. COMPLIANCE TABLE *A reduced parking setback requires a variance. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon approval of the variance. **A reduced wetland setback variance is being requested. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon approval of the wetland setback variance. Parking City code section 20-965 establishes that the minimum number of parking spaces required to be provided for continuing care retirement facilities is one-third parking space per bed with an additional parking space for every employee on the largest shift . The project shows a total of 42 Ordinance Requirements Subject Site Lot Area 129,600 square feet 155,251 square feet Lot Coverage 50% 38.1% Building Height Principal 35’ 35’ Building Setbacks Front yard 50’ 51.7’ Rear yard 50’ + wetland setback of 30’ 95.3’ + 5’** Side yard 50’ 79.8’ /133.9’ Parking Setback All Yards 25’ 25 sides and 10’ Front* Parking Requirements Stalls ⅓ space per bed + 1 space per employee on major shift which translates to 14 + 10 = 24 30 spaces (2 of which are garage stalls) Page 5 of 16 beds which requires 14 parking spaces in addition to the 10 spaces required for the largest employee shift. Based on the project as proposed, a minimum of 24 parking spaces are required, with no requirement for covered parking. The project proposes a total of 30 parking spaces. There are proposed to be two garage parking stalls and 28 surface parking stalls. Loading, mechanical, and refuse areas Garbage & recycling services shall be located behind screening walls and gates. Most mechanical equipment will be internal to the building and will therefore not require any additional screening. Some mechanical equipment is planned to be located at grade, between the building wings, north of the connecting hallway, and at the south corners of the building. Plans show these mechanical units being screened by landscaping or out of public view. Lighting City code requires that light fixture height shall not exceed 30 feet. Fixtures are shown at a height of 25 feet which adheres to City Code. Lighting on the building faces shall also be restricted to having a total cutoff angle equal to or less than 90 degrees. City code requires that light levels measured at the property lines in multi-family zoning districts shall not exceed one-half-foot candle. The provided photometric plan dated 8/13/25 shows that the light level at the property line does not exceed 0.2 foot candle at the property lines. Signage Plans provided do not depict final signage plan for the site. Signage for the property shall comply with City Code Section 20-1301 and all other applicable regulations to the site. Sign permits shall be applied for and approved at the time of building permit. Landscaping and Tree Preservation The applicant has submitted a plan which includes the removal of some trees as well as buckthorn and other invasive species within the wetland buffer. Sheet C1.0 Removals Plan indicates which trees have been inventoried and what trees are proposed to be removed. The Applicant shall add a table listing each of the inventoried trees on the property. That inventory shall include the tree species, DBH measurement, and current condition listed as either poor, fair, or good. While the project does not include a subdivision, City Code section 18-61 indicates that tree preservation requirements apply to subdivision evaluations as well as site plans. Applicant to provide an analysis for baseline canopy coverage and minimum canopy coverage requirements. Page 6 of 16 A planting plan was provided for all required plantings. The quantity of plantings in all buffer yards and parking lot landscaping areas meets or exceeds the City Code requirements. The current planting plan does not meet planting diversity requirements. Prior to final approval, the plan must be updated so that no more than 10% of the planting is the same species; no more than 20% of the same genus; and no more than 40% from the same family. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Required architectural standards The proposed development site is in the R-16 zoning district, so the building must meet the design standards for multifamily developments established in City Code Division 20-XXIII-9. Massing and Placement The maximum building height permitted is three stories. The building meets the ordinance requirement. The roofline is staggered, adding articulation to the design of the buildings. The ordinance requires a pitched element on building. Multiple pitched elements are used to break the expanse of the pitched roof to comply with this requirement. Elevations Page 7 of 16 Renderings Materials and Color A variety of materials are proposed for the building, including shake siding, wood lap siding, manufactured stone masonry, and architectural metal roofing. The accent materials exceed the 20% required by code, with 22% of all wall surfaces using cedar shake siding and 10% using a manufactured stone accent material for a total of 32% accent materials used. The colors proposed are neutral including white, gray, black, and tan. It appears that the variation of color complies with the architectural requirements. ACCESS The development fronts on W 78th Street near the intersection of Audubon Road and TH 5 and proposes an access driveway on the far west side of the site that is a full access, and another access on the east side of the site which is restricted as a right-in and right-out. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) was provided with plans for review due to the proximity of Trunk Highway 5 and had comments regarding water resources and noise. A MnDOT drainage permit may be required before development occurs. The applicant must assess the existing noise from the highway and meet any requirements established by the Department of Transportation to minimize the impact on the proposed development. SANITARY SEWER & WATER MAIN Water service is available off W 78th Street via a 12-inch DIP watermain. The applicant is proposing to wet tap two services for the building at the public watermain, one on the east side of the lot and the other on the west side of the lot. This approach is not approved. Page 8 of 16 The City’s sanitary sewer network is not available near the subject property, however the “Chanhassen Interceptor” sanitary main owned and operated by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) is directly adjacent to the property. The applican t is proposing to connect a private lateral directly to the MCES interceptor via a manhole located within the 1680 78th Street property. This connection would require an easement with the 1680 78th property owner. Based on feedback from the applicant, the adjacent property owner is not interested in providing an easement to construct the connection to the interceptor. Prior applications proposed a gravity sanitary sewer connection to the existing interceptor manhole within the city right-of-way. The applicant shall revise the sanitary sewer alignment prior to the City Council’s review of the preliminary plat application. GRADING & DRAINAGE The project site is located north of W 78th Street, west of Lake Ann Park Drive, and south of Lake Ann. It consists of a single parcel that is currently an open, grass-covered lot with woods and a wetland along its northern edge. Under existing conditions, most of the site drains north to Riley Creek, while a small portion within the right-of-way drains south to W 78th Street. Under the proposed conditions, the site will be mass graded to accommodate a senior assisted living facility with an impervious footprint of approximately 58,000 square feet. Stormwater runoff from the facility will be directed to a water reuse basin and a filtration basin. A small portion of the site within the right-of-way will continue draining to W 78th Street, while the remainder will flow north to Riley Creek. Due to site constraints, the applicant proposes grading up to the minimum wetland buffer. EROSION CONTROL The proposed development will impact one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, be subject to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disp osal System (NPDES Construction Permit). The applicant has submitted an erosion control plan and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), however revisions and updates to the plans and SWPPP are required to meet the requirements of the NPDES Construction Permit and Sec. 19- 145 of City Code. The location of stockpiles for grading and for topsoil must be noted. The SWPPP will need to be updated as the plans are finalized when the contractor and their sub- contractors are identified and as other conditions change. An approved SWPPP shall be submitted prior to recording the final site plan agreement. All erosion control shall be installed and inspected prior to initiation of site grading activities. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DISTRICTS • Wetland Protection – Must follow wetland protection guidelines due to the proximity to Riley Creek. • Shoreland Management – Is in the shoreland management area for Riley Creek. Page 9 of 16 • Floodplain Overlay – Is minimally impacted by the FEMA AE Flood Zone from 2018. WETLANDS A Notice of Decision of the wetland boundary and type was approved on 5/29/2025. The wetland delineation indicates the wetland is 0.08 acres of a Type 1/2, located adjacent to Riley Creek. While there is no direct impact to the wetlands on -site, the applicant is proposing to encroach into the proposed wetland buffer during construction activities. Additionally, the applicant is requesting wetland buffer averaging and a reduction in wetland buffer setbacks due to site conditions and constraints, such as dynamic topography, wetland location in relation to site boundaries, and adjacent street frontage treatments. While staff generally agree that the site has inherent constraints due to the location of the wetland and the proposed structure and property lines, the applicant’s proposal is to have a minimum buffering average width of twenty (20) feet coupled with a five (5) foot setback as illu strated below. The proposed plans show a minimum buffer associated with a manage 2 wetland classification but show the building and sidewalks well within the 30-foot setback measured from the buffer edge which would require a variance to city code. Building setbacks act to help preserve the wetland buffers and downstream water resources. To offset the adverse impacts anticipated Page 10 of 16 from the close proximity of the building and walkways an enhanced buffer establishment plan is recommended by staff. During the TEP’s site review staff observed that the proposed buffer areas for both the wetland and Riley Creek were degraded and filled with debris and invasive species including buckthorn. As such, the Water Resources Department recommends that the debris and invasive species are removed, and a native vegetation is established to protect the wetland and creek. As such the applicant shall work with staff to update and enhance the buffer establishment plan. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Article VII, Chapter 19 of City Code describes the required storm water management development standards. Section 19-141 states that “these development standards shall be reflected in plans prepared by developers and/or project proposers in the design and layout of site plans, subdivisions and water management features.” These standards include abstraction of runoff and water quality treatment resulting in the removal of 90% total suspended solids (TSS) and 60% total phosphorous (TP). The proposed project is in the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District and therefore subject to the watershed’s rules and regulations. A Stormwater Management Report was submitted for review to confirm all applicable stormwater management requirements are being met. This includes rate control, volume abstraction and water quality requirements among others. All comments on the proposed design from both the city and RPBCWD will need to be addressed. The applicant shall p rovide final versions of all modeling (HydroCAD and MIDS) and Stormwater Management Report to address remaining comments and confirm rate, volume and water quality requirements are met as part of the final site plan submittal. Additionally, conditional approval from the watershed district shall be provided with the final site plan submittal to confirm the design is meeting all applicable stormwater management requirements. The applicant proposes to meet stormwater management requirements through an irrigation system, a biofiltration basin, and a Jellyfish Filter. Runoff will be routed first to the irrigation system, then to the Jellyfish Filter, and finally to the biofiltrat ion basin. The applicant must provide documentation to verify the pollutant removal rates assumed for the Jellyfish Filter. On-site infiltration is not feasible due to “Type D” soils, which are slow -draining and typically have an infiltration rate of about 0.06 in/hr. Site-specific testing confirmed an infiltration rate of 0.0 in/hr, limiting infiltration opportunities. As a result, the site qualifies as “restricted” under RPBCWD rules, reducing the required abstraction from 1.1 inches to 0.55 inches. The applicant modeled abstraction through the irrigation system and biofiltration basin in MIDS, which indicates compliance with the 0.55-inch requirement. The applicant must confirm the proposed irrigation area with a supporting figure. Freeboard requirements are met for the stormwater basins, with at least 1.0 foot of freeboard to be provided at site low points. An operation and maintenance (O&M) plan is required for all private stormwater BMPs. The O&M obligations apply in perpetuity and must be approved by the Water Resources Engineer (or designee) and recorded against the benefiting properties. Page 11 of 16 The site is located within both the FEMA and RPBCWD floodplains. If grading alters floodplain elevations, the applicant must demonstrate compliance with all applicable floodplain regulations, including compensatory storage. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: 1. Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the Comprehensive Plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; 2. Consistency with this division; 3. Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing areas; 4. Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; 5. Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and 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 design requirements, the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning ordinance if the setback variances are approved, the design Page 12 of 16 standards, and the site plan review requirements. Staff is recommending approval of the request with conditions. The site design is compatible with the surrounding developments. It is functional and harmonious with the area. The project is a reasonable use of the land. The overall design is sensitive to the city’s image. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the site plan with conditions outlined in the staff report. VARIANCE REQUEST #1 The first variance request is for a reduction in the wetland setback requirements. The site contains multiple wetlands, and Riley Creek is located along the northern edge of the site. A reasonable solution supported by City Code is to average the buffer around the wetlands and reduce the setback in return. Staff is recommending approval of the wetland setback variance. VARIANCE REQUEST #2 The second variance request is for a reduced parking setback. The standard parking setback required by ordinance is 25 feet. The intent of the setback is so that the parking lot can be adequately screened from adjacent properties and public right of way. The applicant is providing adequate screening that will accomplish the intent of the ordinance. Additionally, the north side of the property contains a large wetland complex and associated protections, setbacks, and buffering of those wetlands, which creates a practical difficulty unique to the property that does not make it feasible to shift the proposed building and associated improvements to comply with the typical parking setback requirement. Staff is recommending approval of the parking setback variance. Staff supports each of the requested variances. VARIANCE FINDINGS According to Section 20-58 of City Code, a variance may be granted if all of the following criteria are met: 1. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted b y this chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Page 13 of 16 3. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. 4. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. 5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 6. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in M.S. § 216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. Finding: The proposed wetland setback and parking lot setback variances are in harmony with the zoning code and the Comprehensive Plan. Both requested variances are caused by the wetland site encumbrances, and not by the property owner. The applicant offsets the practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance by providing reasonable screening and wetland buffer improvements which will maintain the character of the locality. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested site plan and variances for the construction of the project as proposed subject to updating of plans based on staff review comments. APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTS PLANNING: 1. Approval of the site plan applications is contingent upon approval of the variances. 2. Applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement. The Site Plan Agreement shall be recorded against the Subject Property. FORESTRY: 1. Provide a complete inventory of all trees being removed. Provide the species by name – in some cases, the words cottonwood, ash, or willow are specific enough. Be specific on the type of elm, locust, maple, spruce, pine, etc. That inventory shall include the tree species, DBH measurement, and current condition listed as either poor, fair, or good. 2. Submittal of an acceptable planting plan that complies with diversity requirements. City code requires species diversity such that no more than 10% of the planting is the same species; no more than 20% of the same genus; and no more than 40% from the same family 3. Provide more detail on the location of tree protection fencing, the type of fence being used, and the species being protected. 4. Project to conform with City Code Section 20-1179 to ensure the minimum landscape value meets the required percentage of the overall project value. Page 14 of 16 5. Applicant to provide baseline canopy coverage and minimum canopy coverage analysis as outlined by City Code section 18-61. ENGINEERING: 1. The developer shall enter into Encroachment Agreements for private improvements (e.g., retaining walls and monument signage) located within the 10-foot-wide public drainage and utility corridor abutting 78th Street right -of-way prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Any previously recorded easements located within proposed public right -of-way or proposed public drainage and utility easements must be vacated prior to or concurrently with approval of final construction plans. 3. The applicant and their Engineer shall work with City staff in amending the construction plans, dated August 13th, 2025, prepared by Anders Melby with Civil Site Group, to fully satisfy construction plan comments and concerns. Final construction plans will be subject to review and approval by staff prior to the recording of the site plan agreement. 4. All newly constructed streets and sidewalks will be privately owned and maintained. The developer shall provide for review and approval maintenance agreements for these improvements. 5. Construction design elements associated with the street plans such as stationing, curb tables and alignments, centerline grades, and intersection details will be required prior to recording of the site plan agreement. 6. All sanitary sewer mains shall be privately owned and maintained and their connection to the MCES interceptor be permitted through MCES. Approval to connect directly to the MCES interceptor shall be provided to the City prior to recording of the Site Plan Agreement. The applicant will be required to enter into a maintenance agreement with the city for the proposed inside drop within MCES manhole prior to issuance of building permits. 7. City owned utilities shall be covered by a Drainage and Utility Easement which shall be large enough for the owner to own and maintain. 8. The applicant will be required to enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the City and all applicable securities and fees provided prior to the recording of the site plan agreement. 9. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. MCES, Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBC Watershed District, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, MDH, MPCA, etc.). Once permits are received, applicant shall provide copies to the City’s engineering office prior to start of construction. 10. The developer shall incorporate the latest City Detail Plates and Specifications into the final construction plan submission. 11. Sidewalks must be a minimum of 5 feet wide, and City trails must be a minimum of 10 feet wide. 12. City Standard Detail Plates shall be included in the construction plan set and displayed in a layout format of 2 rows by 4 columns for consistency with City expectations. Page 15 of 16 13. Retaining walls shall be privately owned and maintained. Walls four feet in height and greater shall be designed by an engineer. 14. Removal plans shall be updated to include the impacts into W 78th St in order to construct access off the street. 15. Applicant shall construct a right-in/right-out at their eastern entrance, including medians, and install applicable signage within W 78th St median. 16. The applicant shall loop the watermain within the site, and is only approved to complete one wet-tap on the existing city owned watermain. 17. Provide a traffic control plan to construct the connections to 78th Street and the connection to the existing watermain. 18. Final construction plans shall include a color-coded map identifying publicly owned improvements vs privately owned. WATER RESOURCES: 1. The applicant shall submit documentation demonstrating the removal percentage for the Jellyfish Filter with the final plan submittal. 2. The applicant shall provide an operation and maintenance plan (O&M) for the private stormwater BMPs onsite. The O&M of private stormwater BMPs is required in perpetuity and must be approved by the Water Resources Engineer, or their designee, to be recorded against the benefiting properties, prior to building permits being issued. The O&M agreement shall outline the areas to be irrigated with the reuse system. 3. The applicant shall provide 1.0’ of separation from the emergency overflow routes to the low floor elevation with the final plan submittal. 4. The applicant shall submit storm sewer sizing calculations and catch basin drainage area map with the final plan submittal. 5. The applicant shall secure conditional approval from the watershed district prior to submitting the final plans application to the City. 6. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. MnDNR, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, MnDOT, DNR, etc.) prior to the commencement of construction activities. 7. The applicant shall confirm in the stormwater management report if there are any FEMA/RPBCWD floodplain impacts or not and update the design and plan to meet all applicable rules. 8. The applicant shall work with staff to update and enhance the buffer establishment plan. An approved buffer enhancement plan shall be required before recording the site plan agreement. BUILDING: 1. Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 2. Building plans must be submitted to the Department of Labor and Industry (DOLI) for plan review. Page 16 of 16 3. After DOLI has completed their plan review a building permit must be obtained from the City of Chanhassen before beginning any construction. 4. The building is required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems. 5. Retaining walls (if present) more than four feet high, measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall, must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. Retaining walls (if present) under four feet in height require a zoning permit. PARKS: 1. A pedestrian connection from the internal site to the trail network on West 78 th Street is required. FIRE: 1. Due to driveway and parking lot width, No Parking Fire Lane signs will be required throughout. No parking allowed on curbs or anywhere outside of parking spaces. 2. Will require a full fire alarm with notification system. 3. All egress doors and gates require a hard surface path to the public right of way. 4. Hydrants required within 100 feet of both FDC locations as well as center of building.