The URL can be used to link to this page

77-03 - MTS System Corp SPA pt 1CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEsP 0 BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 p,Vlon bV P--1"r l:. PLANNING REPORT Tnd,rse'!--`� DATE: March 15, 1978 pate TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth .� FROM: City Planner, Bruce Pankonin SUBJ: MTS System Corporation's Planned Unit Development APPLICANT: MTS Sys-tems Corporation (Paul Strand, P. 0. Box 24012, Minneapolis MN) PLANNING CASE: P-350 Petition As shown in the "Chanhassen Site Plan Study", enclosure 1, as prepared by Ellerbe Architects, MTS Systems Corporation is proposing to initially construct a 160,000 square foot office/electronics manufacturing facility in Chanhassen. This facility is proposed to be expanded to employ approximately 1,500 persons in the early 19801s. Background 1. Community Location: As shown in the community location graphic, enclosure 2, the subject property contains approximately 70+ acres located in the south west quadrant of STH 5 and 184th Street. The subject property is commonly called the "Beiersdorf Property" and is located immediately adjacent to and west of Chanhassen Estates in the Hennepin County portion of Chanhassen. 2. Existing Zoning: The subject property, pursuant to city ordinance 47, is zoned P-3, Planned Community Development District. 3. Existing Utilities: a. Sanitary Sewer: Sanitary sewer service would be provided by gravity sewer extended to the -property from the existing line west of the site. The sewer should be located south of the building so it can serve the possible future expansions to the east. Mr. Don Ashworth -2- March 15, 1978 b. Water Main: The existing 10 inch watermain located at the northwest corner of the property should be extended southward to the frontage road serving the subject property. In addition, the 10 inch water main should be extended to the easterly property line of the site when expansion occurs. C. Frontage Road: As shown in enclosure 3, a detached frontage road will have to connect the subject property with Dakota Ave. located to the east. At Dakota, this frontage road should be aligned with the future frontage road across Outlot 1 (center line 25 feet north of the south property line of Outline 1). d. Drainage: Runoff from the major part of the proposed first phase development were directed to a proposed holding pond located behind the building complex. This pond should be designed to restrict drainage to the creek. Requirements of the Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District will have to be followed. 4. Comprehensive Plan Proposals: a. Land Use: Pursuant to the adopted City Plan, the subject property is to assume a planned unit development identity. The scope of the PUD regarding land use, density, circulation is not specifically called out in the City's Plan. b. Transportation: Pursuant to the city's adopted Transportation Plan, a detached frontage road is proposed to be constructed beginning at STH 101, to the west and terminating at a 184th Street on the eastern edge of the subject property. This roadway will provide local access to adjacent properties on the south side of STH 5. 5. Physiography of the Subject Property: a. Elevation and Topography: The site is generally rolling with slopes exceeding 20% located in the southwest corner adjacent to Chanhassen Estates. Approximately z of the site has slopes ranging from 0 - 4% and the remaining area ranges from 5 to 9%. 41 feet of vertical relief exists between the high, located behind the existing farmstead, and the low located in the southeast corner of the subject property. b. Natural Drainage: 2/3 of the site drains to the southeast, the remaining area drains to the southwest. C. Existing Natural Vegetation: Approximately 4% of the site is heavily'.wooded with hardwood trees. This wooded area, adjacent to Chanhassen Estates, consists of Oak, Elm, Maple and Basswood. In the drier areas, on the east ridge, Oak and Elm are dominant with thickets of Hazelnut, Hawthorne and young Oaks. Below the Oaks and Elm is a hardwood mixture of Basswood, Oak, Elm, Ironwood, Maples and Blackberry. In this middle area and in particular, on the west slope, the undercover consists of Gooseberry, Hazelnut, Dogwood, Blackberry, Pung Maples, Brambles, and Currants. In the lower area, where there is more moisture, Box Elder, Elm and Cottonwood are found. Mr. Don Ashworth -3- March 15, 1978 From a planning perspective, I believe the woodlands are a unique natural resource that should be protected and considered during all stages of urban development for the subject property. Specifically, slopes exceeding 15% should be restricted by protecting indigenous vegetation. By doing so, the community can insure erosion control and protect scenic linear recreational areas. To achieve this, the applicant should be prepared to dedicate the east slope of the subject property for passive recreational purposes. This dedication was previously committed in the heretofore approved Beiersdorf Planned Unit Development. 6. Previous Council Actions: This matter and site has been considered by the Planning Commission and City Council at many previous meetings at which various development plans were discussed. At one time, the subject property was zoned for commercial, industrial and residential (1/3 each) then designated the subject property to P-3, Planned Community Development District in 1972 when the current zoning ordinance was enacted. On January 20, 1975, in response to a development petition by Ken Beiersdorf (existing property owner) the City of Chanhassen approved a development plan consisting of apartments, open space, utility arrangements and local access roads. Said development approval was conditioned upon a written time schedule wherein the applicant would complete the initial phases by 1978. Any changes to the original approval would require an amendment to Mr. Beiersdorf'.s original planned unit development approval. Said amendment to the Beiersdorf PUD is the crux of the MTS proposal. Planner's Comments 1. The criteria for evaluating an amendment to Mr. Beiersdorf's 1975 plan approval is found in section 16 of the Chanhassen zoning ordinance. 2. As you know, the P-3 use district is to provide for a variety of residential, commercial and industrial uses designed as an overall planned unit development. The uses as proposed by MTS Systems Corporation are, I believe, permitted within the context of the P-3 use district. 3. As shown in enclosure 4, city staff requested MTS Systems Corporation to prepare an EAW Work Sheet. This work sheet is pursuant to the Minnesotz Environmental Policy Act, 1973, wherein local units of government are responsible for initiating the environmental review process. Upon completion of the EAW Work Sheet, it has been determined by city staff that MTS Systems Corporation will not meet the "threshold limits" of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and therefore, said EAW will not be forwarded to the Environmental Quality Council. 4. The documents submitted to date, by MTS Systems Corporation, are sufficient to understand the micro -effect of MTS on the subject property. The macro -effect (City of Chanhassen) required the analysis of traffic circulation as outlined in enclosure 3, BRW's report. Specifically, BRW feels the a.m. peek hour traffic volumes for existing conditions at Dakota warrant a traffic signal and with the influx of traffic from the MTS development will cause the Dakota/STH 5 intersection to work at capacity. When MTS employment grows beyond the initial 480 persons, 184th Street will have to be available as an access point to relieve the traffic burden at Dakota. Upgrading the intersection of Mr. Don Ashworth -4- March 15, 1978 Trunk Highway 5 and 184th Street conforms with the State's policy to implement safety improvements at major intersections on Trunk Highway 5 when problems exist. Comments from General Public As shown in enclosure 5, the Planning Commission duly held a public hearing on Wednesday, March 8, 1978, to test neighborhood sentiment regarding the MTS proposal. Notice of said public hearing was duly published in the Carver County Herald and adjacent property owners, within 350 feet of the subject property, were also notified. As shown in the public hearing minutes, the general public did not voice any strong opposition to MTS's proposal. Planning Commission Recommendation As shown in the March 8, 1978, Planning Commission minutes, "Hud Hollenback moved that provided adequate access in accordance with the standards of the BRW study are provided to the MTS property, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the MTS preliminary development plans as presented. Motion seconded by Les Bridger and unanimously approved." Planner's Recommendation I believe MTS Systems Corporation's development intent for the subject property is positively consistent with the spirit and intent of the city's plan for land use, transportation, utilities and zoning. I recommend the council zpprove the preliminary development plan for MTS and instruct the developer to proceed with final plans incorporating a' -.utility plan consistent with the city engineer's standards, a transportation plan consistent with the provisions outlined in the BRW report, a drainage plan consistent with the standards of the Riley - Purgatory Creek Watershed District, a conservation plan consistent with soil conservation practices that is required by the Carver County Soil Conservation Service and an open space plan which will dedicate the east and west slope of the drainage swale located in the southwest corner of the subject property to the City of Chanhassen. Action by City Administiatoli Endorsed L-'O*'- Modifyed--,.. �i Delta - Data Et;la -,ittc... rf Ilk - _��RW ki - � •cr n 6 U.0 r13joKVdGVn0 23dOMVHS 1. inob Ilk 07 C19 1 II 606 06 006 p. III � 7.• % � ! - I ! ��\._ f }�:..,` • ('r !i __ -� -%' ,,� ' nor;. •' ,, 1 , � < \ , •� / �,-ocle-. 1,. ;• � • • l ,5 1il i j�i; `/ ,.. � „� � 1, � ` --� l •. �� z % m ` I,it._� ` ) SB8^ r•� it �s 1 _. C 9Q6 y�� .r f _--� : O Ogg ' uvsn3 a��. , .III xIC , { n r �., �( '• IN os� \) 10 ti � y 1' 1 i _• �` /. � • •` �, •I - :�� (' � it �•- � _._ I PH > I .J � �!i,' � I � � ..�' • �31 add 1 -�. ' �•! 1 :,�;� 3 � A • ' � • � 8�� ` a �� '. 1333 r„ 1 it O �� °- 00000 n ` \' I u896 00 CCGJJ �J • 11' .r � I �.I I � 1J( �: °smod,, o _ 3 II IOT R \OS6 > 000 l - .QW "fir Y ,r )EiZ5obV 'M zz'a L "NNrW Ol '! E •/V1 £Z �a 1333 OOOOZT Z np�rZ£ LSO 95O '1W L V LV7,( VM. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF HEARING STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) Donald Ashworth being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says that he is and was on Ma>_30 19 78 , the duly qualified and acting City Clerk -Administrator of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date he caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of hearing on a Proposed Plan Amendment for MTS Systems, Chanhassen, Mn. inthe City to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mails with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer of Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. 1 Subscribed and sworn to before me this day o l< 1974. N )Lary.Public aaQaaa,�.: ,AAAAAAAAa��Aaa Kr,Y Kbii6ELHU dOTARY PUBLIC - IVIiNIJESOTri f"nv CARVER COUNTY `$ My Commission Expires Jan. 30, ? 98'. XiCV rF r1llY�i� t ii W �V tltl X CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FOR MTS SYSTEMS, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday, the 14th day of June, 1978, at 10:45 p.m. at the City Hall, 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota, for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the amending of the MTS Development Plan to allow for the construction of a office/professional building proposed on the following described tract of land: The north z of the northwest 4 of Section 18, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that part taken for State Trunk Highway No. 5 and except the 16.5 feet thereof. Also, except the east 180.0 feet of the west 1249.34 feet of the north 317.0 feet of the north 2 of the northwest 4 of Section 18, and also except the east 180 of the west 1429.34 feet of the north z of the southwest 4 of said section 18. A plan showing said proposed plan amendment is available for inspection at the City Hall. All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. Dated: May 26, 1978 BY ORDER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Bob Waibel, Assistant City Planner (Publish in the Carver County Herald on June 1, 1978) . CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF: PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FOR MTS SYSTEMS, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday, the 14th day of June,..1978, at 10:45 p.m. at the City Hall, 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen,; -Minnesota, for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the amending of the MTS Development Plan to allow for the construction of a office/professional building proposed on the following described tract of land: The north 2 of the northwest 4 of Section 18, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that part taken for State Trunk Highway No. 5 and except the 16.5 feet thereof. Also, except the east 180.0 feet of the west 1249.34 feet of the north 317.0 feet of the north 2 of the northwest 4 of Section 18, and also except the east 180 of the west 1429.34 feet of the north 2 of the southwest 4 of said section 18. A plan showing said proposed plan amendment is available for inspection at the City Hall. All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. Dated: May 26, 1978 BY ORDER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Bob Waibel, Assistant City Planner (Publish in the Carver County Herald on June 1, 1978). MTS Syse4 Corporation Richard Connell Thomas Krueger ; 8055 Mi cYPll Rd. 55343 8022 Cheyenne Trail $023 Cheyenne S Spur y P Chanhassen, MN 55317 Eden P e, MN Chanhassen, INN 55317 Harry Kerber Bob Goldberg Dean Hermanson 8025 Cheyenne 18791 W. 78th Street Eden Prairie, MN 55343 8020 Cheyenne Trail 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN Chanhassen Center Blvd. George Jennings Alois Stumpfl 8027 Cheyenne Trail 7701 Arboretum Chanhassen, MN 55317 1818 Cheyenne Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gabbert & Beck N. Einar Swedberg George Thomas - 3510 W. 70th Street 8016 Cheyenne Trail g029 Cheyenne Ave. y Chanhassen, MN 55317 Edina, MN 55424 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Robert H. Mason, Inc. Alex Krengel R. Craig Shulstad 14201 Excelsior Blvd. 55343 8009 Cheyenne 8031 Cheyenne.. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Minnetonka, MN Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, The Real Estaters, Inc. Alice Sieren Conrad Fiskness 7701 Arboretum Blvd. 8011 Cheyenne 8033 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 c 11rA"t?i , AI Chanhassen Holding Co. 8q �'o�,�! ��A /� 10 18790rWer78th Street Eden Prairie, MN 55343 4913 West Coventry Rd. Hopkins, MN 55343 Ray Kerber 18210 W. 78th Street Eden Prairie, MN 55343 George Schroer 8080 184th Avenue Eden PrAi.rie, MN 55343 Mr. Hank Dimler Waconia, MN 55387 Vernon Husemoen 8015 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 Richard Matthews 8017 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 D.R. Boedigheimer 8019 Cheyenne Spur Chanhassen, MN 55317 City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Rd. Eden Prairie, Mn. Ken Biersdorf 8120 Penn Ave. S. Suite 546 Mpls., Mn..- 55431 Dean Hoffman Donreed Properties 8021 Cheyenne Spur Ld� 137 .PPt- _r S._rP,-, ern, -7 2/8/77 I. MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE E.R. # NOTE: The purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is to provide information on a project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the project requires an Environmental Impact Statement. Attach additional pages, charts, maps, etc, as needed to answer these questions. Your answers should be as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are estimated. SUMMARY A. ACTIVITY FINDING BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON) Negative Declaration (No EIS) Cl EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required) B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION 1. Project name or title Office/Manufacturing Facility 2. Project proposer(s) — M.T.S. Systems Corporation Address Box 24012 Minneapolis, MN 55424 Telephone Number and Area Code (612 ) 944-4000 3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Chanhassen Address 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information on this EAW: Bruce Pankonin Telephone (612) 474-8885 4. This EAW and other supporting documentation are available for public in- spection and/or copying at: Location Chanhassen City Hall Telephone 474-8885 Hours 8:00-4:30 5. Reason for EAW Preparation Mandatory Category -cite �^] Petition X L I Other �--J MEQC Rule nLoiber (s) t� C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY 1. Project location County Hennerin City/'gNT0dX*V name Chanhassen Township number 116 (North), Range Number 22 East or (circle one), Section number(s) 18 Street address (if in city) or legal description: v 2. Type and scope of proposed project: Office/Manufacturing Facility 3. Estimated starting date (month/year) August 1978 4. Estimated completion date (month/year) October 1979 5. Estimated construction cost $6.1 Million 6. List any federal funding involved and known permits or approvals needed from each unit of government and status of each: Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status (federal, state, or Federal Funding regional, local) Riley -Purgatory Cree Storm Water Run -Off Watershed District City of Chanhassen Zoning Permit Building Permit 7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act? NO YES X UNKNOWN II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION A. Include the following maps or drawings: 1. A map showing the regional location of the project. 2. An original 83� x 11 section of a U.S.G.S. 7� minute, 1:24,000 scale map with the activity or project area boundaries and site layout delineated. Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original U.S.G.S. sheet must be main- tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied to other EAW distribution points.) 3. A sketch map of the site showing location of structures and including significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc). 4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency. Photos need not be sent to other distribution points. B. Present land use. 1. Briefly describe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site. Site —Agricultural South/North/East - Agricultural West - Residential 2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are: a. Urban developed acres b. Urban vacant acres c. Rural developed acres d. Rural vacant 2.31acres e. Designated Recre- acres ation/Open Space f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) g. Shoreland h. Floodplain i. CroplancYPasture land j. Forested acres acres acres 64 acres 3 acres - 2 - 3. List names and sizes of lakes, rivers and streams on or near the site, particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within 300 feet. None C. Activity Description 1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of development (if any), operational characteristics, and major types of equipment and/or pro- cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tons of raw materials, etc). See Attachment #1 2. Fill in the following where applicable: a. Total project area 69.31 acres g. Size of marina and access - sq. ft. or channel (water area) Length - miles h. Vehicular traffic trips generated per day 970/42.50 ADT b. Number of housing or recreational units i. Number of employees 480/1700 c. Height of structures 15 ft. J. Water supply needed 15,000/ gal/da Source: City of 51,000 d. Number of parking Chanhassen spaces 385/1360 k. Solid waste requiring disposal 100 tons/yr e. Amount of dredging - cu. yd. 1. 00WDxXXM%X]UX1DX 80, 000/225, 000 f. Liquid wastes requir- industrial floor space sq. ft. ing treatment __gal/da 15,000/51,000 III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY 1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently exceeding 12%? X No Yes 2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project, such as fault zones, shrink -swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? X NO YES 3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts. - 3 - M.T.S. SYSTEMS EAW ATTACHMENT #1 The proposed building is located on a 69.31 acres site immediately south of Highway 5 on the eastern boundary of Chanhassen, described as the north half of the northwest fourth of Section 18. T 116 R22 Hennepin County. The site is presently in agricultural use and zoned P.U.D. residential. M.T.S. Systems Corporation of Eden Prairie, is the Owner and only proposed user of the property. M.T.S., an expanding Twin City based company, has selected the Highway 5 corridor its present headquarter office/manufacturing location for expansion minimizing employee relocation and continuing to draw from the proven employee resources of the western portion of the metropolitan area. The new facility is initially planned to house 480 people in approximately 160,000 sq. ft. of equally distributed office and light electronic manufacturing space. The low profile or earth sheltered building provides the site planning advantages of relating to the existing topography and the land use efficiency of parking over the building. Initial occupancy is scheduled for the fall of 1979 while the building design allows for linear expansion to the east. The ultimate or long-term potential size of the building is 550,000 sq.ft. housing 1,700 people which is also evenly distributed between office and light electronic manufacturing. 4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project. Suitable for foundations 5. Estimate the total amour �/cu77 f��}}ding and filling which will be done: 2g85 � Or 0 0 yd. grading 9r, 89 3(i. yd. filling (none to be moved off site) What percent of the site will be so altered? 33 % 6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? 25 % 7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and after construction? Seeded/sodded and/or planted slopes B. VEGETATION 1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following vegetative types: Woodland 4 % Cropland/ 92 % Pasture Brush or shrubs - % Marsh - % Grass or herbaceous 4 % Other - (Specify) 2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 0 acres 3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique botanical.or biological significance on the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon Ones.) -NO YES If yes, list Ehe species or area and indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact. C. FISH AND WILDLIFE 1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage- ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? X NO YES 2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife on or near the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon X NO YES Ones.) - — --- — 3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish X NO YES habitat? 4. If yes on any of questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on them. - 4 - D. HYDROLOGY 1. Will the project include any of the following; If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures to reduce adverse impacts. a. Drainage or alteration of any lake, pond, marsh, NO YES lowland or groundwater supply X b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes X c. Dredging or filling operations X d. Channel modifications or diversions X e. Appropriation of ground and/or surface water X f. Other changes in the course, current or cross- section of water bodies on or near the site X 2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impervious surface? 10/30% 3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run- off and/or treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, etc.)? Collecting pond with oil skimmer 4. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 Year) floodplain by new fill or structures? X NO YES If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO YES S. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on the site? Greater than 20 feet WATER QUALITY 1. will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage or other waste waters to any water body or to groundwater? X NO YES If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the water body receiving the effluent. '2. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is planned, identify any toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants in the wastewater. None 3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? X NO YES If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method of disposal. - 5 - 4. What measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified in questions 1-3? 5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile, depth to crater table, and proposed depth of disposal. F. AIR QUALITY AND NK)ZSZ 1. Will the activity cause the emission of any gases and/or particulates into the atmosphere? NO X YES If yes, specify the type and origin of these emissions, indicate any emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the approxi- mate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and without the emission control measures or devices. 385/1360 cars 2. Will noise or vibration be generated by construction aticiXJPb1X*h of the project? NO X YES If yes, describe the noise source(s)= specify decibel levels [dB(A)J, and duration (hrs/dat for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the noise/vibration. Normal equipment used to construct a building 3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or reduced air quality -(hospitals, elderly housing, wilderness, wildlife areas, residential developments, etc.) are in the affected area and give distance from source. 600 feet to residential development G. LAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY 1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production or currently in such use? 'NO X YES If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable el crop or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use. 64 acres of cropland 2. Are there any known mineral or peat deposits on the site? X NO YES If yes, zpecify the type of deposit and the acreage. - 6 - 3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? NO X YES Complete the following as applicable: a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.) Estimated Peak Demand Annual (hourly or Daily) Anticipated Firm Contract or !ype Requirement ISummer Winter Supplier Interruptible Basis? Elec. 5 x 106 KWH 2500 KVA 2000 KVA NSP - Oil/#2 64,000 gal. 62.8 (h) 1 12.4 g(h - - b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on -site fuel storage. 40,000 gallons No. 2 fuel oil c. Estimate annual energy distribution for: space heating 17 (oil) lighting 40 (elec) ; air conditioning 59 (oil)/ processing 40 (elec) 20 (elec) ventilation 24 (oil) $ d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment incorporated into this project. Passive system/earth sheltered building e. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project (e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, etc?7 None - facility only 3 miles from existing M.T.S. facility H. OPEN SPACE/RECREATION 1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or oca recreation or open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails, lake accesses)? NO +X YES If yes, list areas by name and explain how each may be affected by the project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse impacts. Rice Marsh Lake Park - 1/2 mile south. Project will have no effect. - 7 - if. TRANSPORTATION 1. Will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation systems (highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? X NO YES If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) will be affected. For these, specify existing use and capacities, average traffic speed and percentage of truck traffic (if highway)f and indicate how they will be affected by the project (e.g. congestion, percentage of truck traffic, safety, increased traffic (ADT), access requirements). 2. Is mass transit available to the site? X NO YES 3. What measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned to reduce adverse impacts? J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES 1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensive plans? NO X YES If not, explain: If a zoning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate existing zoning and change requested. PUD residential/commerical to commercial/industrial 2. Will the type or height of the project conflict with the character of the existing neighborhood? X NO ' YES If yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to reduce conflicts. - 8 - 3. How many employees will move into the area to be near the project? None How much new housing will be needed? None 4. Will the project induce development nearby --either support services or similar developments? No If yes,explain type of development and specify any other counties and municipalities affected. 5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle the project and any associated growth? Public Service water wastewater treatment sewer schools solid waste disposal streets other (police, fire, etc) Amount required for oroject Sufficient caocity? 15,000/51,000 gal/da Yes 15,000/51,000 gal/da Yes 600 feet Yes -0- pupils - 10 ton/mo Yes 1995 L.F. miles 1230/1500 L.F. On Site 0 Yes _ If current major public facilities are not adequate, do existing local plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this one project and its associated impacts? 6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part of a Related Actions EIS.or other environmentally sensitive plan or program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES If yes, specify which area or plan. 7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, storage,release or disposal of potentially hazardous or toxic liquids, solids on gaseous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisions, etc? X NO YES If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage and any measures to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents. - 9 - 8. When the project has served its useful life, will retirement of the facility require special measures or plans? X NO YES If yes, specify: K. HISTORIC RESOURCES 1. Are there any structures on the site older than 50 years or on federal or state historical registers? X NO YES 2. Have any arrowheads, pottery or other evidence of prehistoric or early settlement been found on the site? X NO YES Might any known archaeologic or paleontological sites be affected by the activity? X NO YES 3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and explain any impact on them. L. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Describe any other major environmental effects which may not have been identified in the previous sections. None III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts that have not been described before. None - 10 - V. FINDINGS The project is a private ( ) governmental ( _) action. The Responsible Agency (Person), after consideration of the information in this EAW, and the factors in Minn. Reg. MEQC 25, makes the following findings. 1. The project is ( ) is net ( ) a major action. State reasons: 2. The project does ( ) does not ( ) have the potential for significant environmental effects. State reasons: 3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( ) of more than local significance. State Reasons: IV. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION NOTE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparation Notice is not officially filed until the date of publication of.the notice in the EQC Monitor section of the Minnesota State Register. Submittal of the EAW to the EQC constitutes a request for publication of -notice in the fW Monitor. A. I, the undersigned, am either the authorized representative of the Responsible Agency or the Responsible Person identified below. Based on the above findings, the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the following conclusions. (Complete either 1 or 2). 1• NEGATIVE DECLAiiATION NOTICE No EIS is needed on this project, because the project is not a major action and/or does not have the potential for significant environmental effects and/or, for private actions only, the project is not of more than local significance. 2. EIS PREPARATION NOTICE An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a major action and has the potential for significant environmental effects. For private actions, the project is also of more than local significance. a. The mEQC Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances, the mEQC cm sRecifically authorize limited construction to begin or continue. If you feel there are special circumstances in this project, specify the extent of progress recommended and the reasons. b. Date Draft EIS will be submitted: (month) (day) I(year) (MEQC Rules require that the Draft EIS be submitted within 120 days of publication of the EIS Preparation Notice in the EC.Monitor. If special circumstances prevent compliance with this time limit, a written request for extension explaining the reasons for the request must be submitted to the EQC Chairman.) c. The Draft EIS will be prepared by (list Responsible Agency(s) or Person(s)): Signature Title Date B. Attach an affidavit certifying the date that copies of this EAW were mailed to all points on the official EQC distribution list, to the city and county directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or municipalities likely to be directly impacted by the proposed action (refer to question III.3.4 on page 9 of the EAW). The affidavit need be attached only to the copy of the EAW which is sent to the EQC. C. Billing procedures for EQC Monitor Publication State agency Attach to the EAW sent to the EQC a completed OSR 100 ONLY: form (State Register General Order Form --available at Central Stores). For instructions, please contact your Agency's Liaison Officer to the State Register or the Office of the State Register--(612) 296-8239. - 12 - CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEeP.O BOX 1470CHANHAS_SEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM TO: Bruce Pankonin and Planning Commission FROM: Building Inspector, Jerry Schlenk DATE: January 31, 1978 SUBJ: MTS Systems I have no problem with MTS as proposed. I would like to see the proposed water system to the building, size, location and hydrant placement. We should look at a second way in and out for emergency equipment until such time as the road to the east is installed. `v 448-2111 EMERGENCY PHONE + Chanhassen Fire Department P. O. BOX 97 • 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 BUS. PHONE 474-9191 January 31, 1978 TO: Bruce Pankonin and Planning Commission FROM: Mark Littfin, Bureau of Fire Prevention CT: James R. Hill, Inc. 1. e street named Santee Lane sounds similiar to Shawnee and San wh h are existing streets in Chanhassen. Some confusion cou resu in communication distinguishing the different names 2. The inteAt ction of Carver Beach Road and Penamint La could be a hazardbus intersection in that the two could on a hill. SUBJECT: Chanhassen %kes Business Park 1. Will there be a water n and fire h ants located on the church property for fire protec on? 2. Where will the driveway be get to the church property? 3. Will the 12" watermain e looped the system by the Standard Service Station or nhassen Esta s to eliminate a dead end? SUBJECT: Minnel�shta Creek 1. Not erofgh information. 2. affic coming out of Minnewashta Creek Developme should not enter ,00'onto State Highway 7. SUBJECT: Office Building - Old Feed Mill Site 1. Not enough information. SUBJECT: MTS 1. What is the size of the watermain going to the building for fire protection and is the system going to be looped? 2. Will there be a secondary access road to the plant off Highway 5 for emergency vehicles in case the main entrance is inaccessible? CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE®P.O. BOX 1479CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 January 18, 1978 MTS Systems Corporation Attn: Mr. Paul Strand P.O. Box 24012 Minneapolis, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Strand: I apologize in the delay in responding to your telephone inquiry as to the City's position on industrial revenue bonds. As noted in that telephone conversation, this office is unable to provide you with a definitive policy established by the Chanhassen City Council. I can inform you that the City Council has acted to state that they would consider the use of industrial revenue bonds for two previous commercial activities proposed in Chanhassen. As a part of that consideration, the City Council acted to state that the developer would be required to submit a financial statement and other financial disclosures as required by the City Attorney, provide specific development plans for which the industrial revenue bonds would finance, to provide other documentation as requested by the city attorney and/or city manager, and to provide an escrow deposit to insure costs associated with council review of the request would be paid by the applicant. All of the previous requests failed to reach the City Council for final consideration. This office is unaware of whether the decision to seek final approval was based on a change in economic conditions, a change in developer plans, or the inability of the applicants to obtain lease commitments or arrange financial commitments. As such, again, this office is unable to give you a definite policy as to what specific considerations may be important to the City Council in finally considering an industrial revenue request. I would hope the above parallels our telephone conversation and provides you with the written response you requested. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerel Don As worth City Manager a��, .7rt DA:k t r it :I �. • 1 �1 9 u D r VA small Ilk IMI" 2;;;lII= Fj u S 1, • ' o PW I, WA c �I 1 • • • i = w Y LO F 3 Z LLJ 3 = s = w Lu 7 h N _j 0 WA YZATA 7 mi. R) 456 457 3213011 2 120 000 FEET 3 MI. TO MINN. 7 R.22 W. 1 460 93o 30I T— 4405213 ;e Ann 956 N Chanl�asse �• - �680000 7< { tj',si � J FEET q ill L ssz- _ i i, I o 6 " . , • TH SITE 926 n ii L•-- ��f— -t' o . __ Mitche M J• ppclF, r- Lake \I z z o a • n _ — 876 it N Lake Susan - Nharsh " fake i iisoo It • �. I ase. " �\ 906 _ T. 4966 CD �It q 7� 7 826101 4965 Lake Riley p — 501 4964 E .2 � U m 3� OPOSED OF LAND FOR et a '" MINNESOTA. NOTICE IS HEREBY GliE7N that the Planning tbrnmission of the City of Chh-nhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday, the 8th day of March, 1978 at 9: 0. at the City Hall, 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanbasse rrsota, for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the amending of Ken Beiersdorf's developmf t contract to allow M.T.S. Systems Corporation to cr .- stract a 160,000 sq. ft. office/electronics manufacturing facility on the following described tract of lam "The north % of the northwest % of Section 18 T IN R. 22. Hennepin County, Minnesota except that part taken for state trunk Highway No. 5, and except the t 16.5 ft. thereof. Also except -the east 180.0 ft. of vest 1249.34 ft. of the north 317.0 ft. of the nortt^ the northwest % of Section 18, and also exceppt ast 180.0 ft. of the west 1429.34 ft. of the north ie northwest % of said Section 18. Ian showing said proposed rezoning and sub - a is available for inspection at the City Hall. persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. flatrd: February 10, 1975 BY ORDER OF TH P'_ aNNING COMMIES? uc s ankonw, City Plaa..ei PL61ith m the rsr-.. 'c ale on Fe}; awry 22. of Publication Sate of Minnesota ) ss. County of Carver ) William McGarry ,being duly sworn, on oath says he is and during all the time herein stated has been the publisher and printer of the newspaper known as Carver County Herald and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (1) Said newspaper is printed in the English language in newspaper format and in column and sheet form equivalent in printed space to at least 900 square inches. (2) Said newspaper is a weekly and is distributed at least once a week. (3) Said news paper has 50% of its news columns devoted to news of local interest to the community which it purports to serve and does not wholly duplicate any other publication and is not made up entirely of patents, plate matter and advertisements. (4) Said newspaper is circulated in and near the municipality which it purports to serve, has at least 500 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers, has an average of at least 75% of its total circulation currently paid or no more than three months in arrears and has entry as second-class matter in its local post -office. (5) Said newspaper purports to serve the City of Chaska in the County of Carver and it has its known office of issue in the City of Chaska in said county, established and open during its regular business hours for the gathering of news, sale of advertisements and sale of subscriptions and maintained by the managing officer of said newspaper, persons in its employ and subject to his direction and control during all such regular business hours and at which said newspaper is printed. (6) Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State Historical Society. (7) Said newspaper has complied with all the foregoing conditions for at least one year preceding the day or dates of publication mentioned below. (8) Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1, 1966 and each January 1 thereafter an affidavit in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State and signed by the managing officer of said newspaper and sworn to before a notary public stating that the newspaper is a legal newspaper. He further states on oath that the printed M.T.S. System hereto attached as a part hereof was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published therein in the English language, once each week, for On successive weeks; that it was first so published on Wed. the 22nd day of Feb • 19-Oand was thereafter printed and published on every _ to and including the day of 19 and that the following is a printed copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of said notice, to wit: abcdefghijkhnnopgrstuvwxyz Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of (Notarial Seal) LORRAINE LANO it NOTARY PUBLIC — MINNESOTA t� CARVER COUNT;' w4..• My Commission Expires lone 29, 1982 �o.: seror.�o No.^N.vml+ Notary public, -A" County, s to My Commission Expires 19X CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O BOX 1479CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMO RAN DUM DATE: March 7, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Paul Strand, MTS Systems Corporation, Box 24012, Minneapolis, MN 55424 FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner SUBJ: MTS Systems Corporation Preliminary Development Plan PLANNING CASE: P-350 APPLICANT: MTS Systems Corporation CITY ORDINANCE. REF: Ordinance 47, Section 16 Please include the following with your copy of exhibit 1, MTS Systems Corporation Planned Unit Development: 10. Traffic Access Plan for Area South of State Highway 5 East of County Highway 17 and West of City Limits. 11. City Planner's Report dated March 7, 1978. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: March 7, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Paul Strand, MTS Systems Corp. FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner SUBJ: MTS Systems, Preliminary Development Plan PLANNING CASE: P-350 APPLICANT: MTS Systems Corporation Background As shown in enclosures 1 - 10, the applicant, MTS Systems Corporation, is proposing to initially construct a 160,000 square foot office/ electronics manufacturing facility in the City of Chanhassen. This facility is proposed to be expanded to employ approximately 1500 people in the early 19801s. The.Chanhassen Planning Commission, at its meeting on Wednesday, February 8, 1978, duly ordered a public hearing to consider MTS System Corporations proposed planned industrial development. To that end, city staff duly notified all adjacent property owners within 350 feet of the subject property and caused notice of said public hearing to be published in the Carver County Herald. Access to the MTS Property As shown in enclosure 10, Bather, Ringrose and Wolsfeld, Inc., analyzed MTS System Corporation proposed affect on Chanhassen's infastructure. As outlined in the analysis, the detached frontage road 28 feet wide on 60 feet of right-of-way will be necessary to intially to handle MTS's development. The initial affect of MTS's development will cause the city, through the public improvement process, to upgrade Dakota Ave., petition for traffic control at Dakota/STH 5 and install a. detached frontage road across outlot 2, Chanhassen Estates. Jim Benshoot, Traffic Engineer from BRW, will be presenting his analysis of MTS traffic circulation at the scheduled public hearing on Wednesday, March 8, 1978. Planning Commission -2- :March 7, 197.8 Planner's Recommendation The MTS proposal, like Dunn and Curry's planned industrial development, will, I feel, have many positive far reaching affects on the City of Chanhassen. Incumbent upon the City of Chanhassen and MTS, for that matter, is the necessity to develop an adequate access system so as to facilitate a free movement of goods, services and residents in the general area. To this end, MTS Systems Corporation, should be required to petition for public improvements as outlined in BRW's report. I feel MTS's consultants, Ellerbe Architects, have done an excellent job of siting the proposed development on the subject property and I feel the Planning Commission should look favorably on MTS's request and forward a positive recommendation to the city council. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF HEARING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) Don Ashworth being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says that he is and was on February 21 , 19 78 the duly qualified and acting City Clerk -Administrator of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date he caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of hearing on a Proposed rezoning & subdivision of land for M.T.S. SYSTEMS in the City to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mails with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer of Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribe and sworn to before me this day of % Ir Notary ublic ./ _. X I Ni Y PUBLIC fV121IdESOTA _ CARVER COUNTY P.4;r C;.;nmission Expires Jan. 30, 199' ►�:� �v'�'i` v �v'v`'r' +V Y ,'t'' 4"Y"G'ty':�"i� v'd'9�YL S�'C°F�Y?( — - /,/ 0- - Don Ashworth City Manager CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED REZONING AND SUBDIVISION OF LAND FOR M.T.S. SYSTEMS, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday, the 8th day of March, 1978 at 9:30 p.m., at the City Hall, 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota, for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the amending of Ken Beiersdorf's development contract to allow M.T.S. Systems Corporation to construct a 160,000 sq. ft. office/electronics manufacturing facility on the following described tract of land: "The north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 18 T 116 R. 22. Hennepin County, Minnesota except that part taken for state trunk Highway No. 5, and except the east 16.5 ft. thereof. Also except the east 180.0 ft. of the west 1249.34 ft. of the north 317.0 ft. of the north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 18, and also except the east 180.0 ft. of the west 1429.34 ft. of the north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of said Section 18. A plan showing said proposed rezoning and subdivision is available for inspection at the City Hall. All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. Dated: February 10, 1978 BY ORDER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Bruce Pankonin, City Planner (Publish in the Carver County Herald on February 22, 1978) MTS Sys Corporation Richard Connell 8055 M' c ll Rd. 8022 Cheyenne Trail Eden P i 'e, MN 55343 Chanhassen, ,NN 55317 Harry Kerber Bob Goldberg 18791 W. 78th Street 8020 Cheyenne Trail Eden Prairie, MN 55343 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Center George Jennings 7701 Arboretum Blvd. 1818 Cheyenne Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gabbert & Beck N. Einar Swedberg 3510 W. 70th Street 8016 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55424 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Robert H. Mason, Inc. 14201 Excelsior Blvd. Alex Cheyyennenn e 8009 Cheyenne Minnetonka, MN 55343 e Chanhassen, MN 55317 The Real Estaters, Inc. eren 7701 Arboretum Blvd. Alice 8011 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Al Kerber 18790 W. 78th Street Chanhassen Holding Co. Eden Prairie, MN 55343 Hopkins, West Coventry Rd. Hopkins, MN 55343 Ray Kerber 18210 W. 78th Street Vernon Husemoen Eden Prairie, MN 55343 Chanhassen, Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 George Schroer Richard Matthews 8080 184th Avenue 8017 Cheyenne Ave. Eden Prairie, MN 55343 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mr. Hank Dimler D.R. Boedigheimer Waconia, MN 55387 8019 Cheyenne Spur Chanhassen, MN 55317 Thomas Krueger 8023 Cheyenne Spur Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dean Hermanson 8025 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 Alois Stumpfl 8027 Cheyenne Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 George Thomas 8029 Cheyenne Ave. Chanhassen, MN 55317 R. Craig Shulstad 8031 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 Conrad Fiskness 8033 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN 55317 C TY Di EoEA., )"AiRi6 Donreed Properties Dean Hoffman8021 Cheyenne Spur 337 water Street rlu .,, , ARAT C:r-„, CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 14710CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 January 18, 1978 MTS Systems Corporation Attn: Mr. Paul Strand P.O. Box 24012 Minneapolis, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Strand: I apologize in the delay in responding to your telephone inquiry as to the City's position on industrial revenue bonds. As noted in that telephone conversation, this office is unable to provide you with a definitive policy established by the Chanhassen City Council. I can inform you that the City Council has acted to state that they would consider the use of industrial revenue bonds for two previous commercial activities proposed in Chanhassen. As a part of that consideration, the City Council acted to state that the developer would be required to submit a financial statement and other financial disclosures as required by the City Attorney, provide specific development plans for which the industrial revenue bonds would finance, to provide other documentation as requested by the city attorney and/or city manager, and to provide an escrow deposit to insure costs associated with council review of the request would be paid by the applicant. All of the previous requests failed to reach the City Council for final consideration. This office is unaware of whether the decision to seek final approval was based on a change in economir conditions, a change in developer plans, or the inability of the applicants to obtain lease commitments or arrange financial commitments. As such, again, this office is unable to give you a definite policy as to what specific considerations may be important to the City Council in finally considering an industrial revenue request. I would hope the above parallels our telephone conversation and provid You with the written response you requested. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerel Don As north City Manager DA:k 2/8/77 MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL ENVIRObBONTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE E.R. # NOTE: '-he purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is to provide information on a project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the project requires an Environmental Impact Statement. Attach additional pages, charts, map$, etc, as needed to answer these questions. Your answers should be as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are estimated. I. SUMMARY A. ACTIVITY FINDING BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON) Negative Declaration (No EIS) El EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required) B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION 1. Project name or title Office/Manufacturing Facility 2. Project proposer(s) M.T.S. Systems Corporation Address Box 24012 Minneapolis, MN 55424 Telephone Number and Area Code (612 ) 944-4000 3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Chanhassen Address 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information on this EAW: Bruce Pankonin Telephone (612) 474-8885 4. This EAW and other supporting documentation are available for public iii- spection and/or copying at: Location —Chanhassen City Hall Telephone 474 -8885 Hours 8:00-4:30 cJ Urac�n nr FbW L%Y PT.IYafil( -1 __ IMandatory Cictegory -cite MEQC Rule number (s) C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY 1. Project location OPetition ' X I Other County Hennepin City/%gNWXbname Chanhassen Township number 116 -(North) , Range Number 22 East or (circle one), section number(s) 18 Street address (if in city) or legal description:... 2. Type and scope of proposed project: Office/Manufacturing Facility 3. Estimated starting date (month/year) August 1978 4. Estimated completion date (month/year) October 1979 5. Estimated construction cost $6.1 Million 6. List any federal funding involved and known permits or approvals needed from each unit of government and status of each: Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status (federal, state, or Federal Funding regional, local) Riley -Purgatory Cree Watershed District City of Chanhassen Storm Water Run -Off Zoning Permit Building Permit 7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act? NO—YESY R UNKNOWN II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION A. Include the following maps or drawings: 1. A map showing the regional location of the project. 2. An original 8� x 11 section of a U.S.G.S. 7� minute, 1:24,000 scale map with the activity or project area boundaries and site layout delineated. Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original U.S.G.S. sheet must be main- tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied to other EAW distribution points.) 3. A sketch map of the site showing location of structures and including significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc). 4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency. Photos need not be sent to other distribution points. B. Present land use. 1. Briefly describe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site. Site - Agricultural South/North/East - Agricultural West - Residential 2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are: a. Urban developed acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) b. Urban vacant acres C. Rural developed acres d. Rural vacant .3lacres e. Designated Recre-- acres ation/Open Space g. Shoreland h. Floodplain i. CroplancVPasture land j. Forested ----a c re_s acres acres 64 acres 3 acres - 2 - 3. List names and sizes of lakes, rivers and streams on or near the site, particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within 300 feet. None C. Activity Description 1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of development (if any), operational characteristics, and major types of equipment and/or pro- cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tons of raw materials, etc). See Attachment #1 2. Fill in the following where applicable: a. Total project area 69.31 acres g. Size of marina and access - sq. ft. or channel (water area) Length - miles h. Vehicular traffic trips generated per day 970/4250 ADT b. Number of housing or recreational units i. Number of employees 480/1700 c. Height of structures 15 ft. J. Water supply needed 15,000/ gal/da Source:_ City of 51,000 d. Number of parking Chanhassen spaces 385/1360 k. Solid waste requiring disposal 100 tons/yr e. Amount of dredging - cu. yd. 1. 0i>OW800WL1;XX]@XXA1X10x 80, 000/225, 000 f. Liquid wastes requir- industrial floor space sq. ft. ing treatment __dal/da 15,000/51,000 III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY 1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently exceeding 12%7 X No Yes 2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project, such as fault zones, shrink -swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? X NO YES 3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts. - 3 - '1 M.T.S. SYSTEMS EAW ATTACHMENT #1 The proposed building is located on a 69.31 acres site immediately south of Highway 5 on the eastern boundary of Chanhassen, described as the north half of the northwest fourth of Section 18. T 116 R22 Hennepin County. The site is presently in agricultural use and zoned P.U.D. residential. M.T.S. Systems Corporation of Eden Prairie, is the Owner and only proposed user of the property. M.T.S., an expanding Twin City based company, has selected the Highway 5 corridor its present headquarter office/manufacturing location for expansion minimizing employee relocation and continuing to draw from the proven employee resources of the western portion of the metropolitan area. The new facility is initially planned to house 480 people in approximately 160,000 sq. ft. of equally distributed office and light electronic manufacturing space. The low profile or earth sheltered building provides the site planning advantages of relating to the existing topography and the land use efficiency of parking over the building. Initial occupancy is scheduled for the fall of 1979 while the building design allows for linear expansion to the east. The ultimate or long-term potential size of the building is 550,000 sq.ft. housing 1,700 people which is also evenly distributed between office and light electronic manufacturing. ' ` 1 4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project. Suitable for foundations 5. Estimate the total am oun 7QfQ�j�ding and filling which will be done: 1g75,000/cu. yd. grading l85;502. yd. filling(none to be moved off site) 2Wha5.�cent of the site will be so altered? 33 6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? 25 % 7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and after construction? Seeded/sodded and/or planted slopes B. VEGETATION 1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following vegetative types: Woodland 4 % Cropland/ 92 P, Pasture Brush or shrubs - % Marsh - t Grass or herbaceous _ 4 % Other - (Specify) 2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 0 acres 3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique botanical.or biological significance on the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon Ones.) _.&_NO T YES ff yes, is species or area and indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact. C. FISH AND WILDLIFE 1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage- ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? X NO YES 2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife on or near the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon X NO YES Ones.) 3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish X NO YES habitat? 4. If yes on any of questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on them. D. HYDROLOGY 1. Will the project include any of the following: If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures to reduce adverse impacts. a. Drainage or alteration of any lake, pond, marsh, NO YES lowland or groundwater supply X b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes X C. Dredging or filling operations X d. Channel modifications or diversions X e. Appropriation of ground and/or surface water X f. Other changes in the course, current or cross- section of water bodies on or near the site X 2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impervious surface? 10/3% 3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run- off and/or treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, etc.)? Collecting pond with oil skimmer 4. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 year) floodplain by new fill or structures? X NO YES If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO YES 5. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on Greater than 20 feet the site? WATER QUALITY 1. Will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage or other waste waters to any water body or to groundwater? X NO YES If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the water body receiving the effluent. 2. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is planned, identify any toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants in the wastewater. None 3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? X NO YES If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method of disposal. 4. ghat measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified in questions 1-3? 5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile, depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal. F . AIR QUALITY AMD MOISE 1. Will the activity cause the emission of any gases and/or particulates into the atmosphere? NO X YES If yes, specify the type and origin of these emissions, indicate any emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the approxi- mate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and without the emission control measures or devices. 385/1360 cars 2. will noise or vibration be generated by constructiondfdC�Xif► of the project? NO X YES If yes, describe the noise source(s); specify decibel levels [dB(A)J, and duration (hrs/day for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the noise/vibration. Normal equipment used to construct a building 3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or reduced air quality -(hospitals, elderly housinq, wilderness, wildlife areas, residential developments, etc.) are in the affected area and give distance from source. 600 feet to residential development G. LAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY 1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production or currently in such use? NO X YES If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable crop or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use. 64 acres of cropland 2. Are there any known mineral or peat deposits on the site? X NO YES If yes, z1 ecify the type of deposit and the acreage. .-1 3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? NO X YES Complete the following as applicable: a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.) Type Estimated Annual Requirement Peak Demand (Hourly or Daily) Anticipated Supplier Firm Contract or Interruptible Basis?' summer Winter Elec. 5 x 106 KWH 2500 KVA 2000 KVA NSP - Oil/#2 64,000 gal. 62.8 (h) 12.4 g(h - - b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on -site fuel storage. 40,000 gallons No. 2 fuel oil c. Estimate annual energy distribution fort space heating 17 (oil) t lighting 40 (elec) air conditioning 59 (oil)/ % 20 (elec) ._ ventilation 24 (oil) processing 40 (elec) d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment incorporated into this project. Passive system/earth sheltered building e. What secondary energy use effects nay result from this project (e.g. more or longer car trips# induced housing or businesses, etc)? None - facility only 3 miles from existing M.T.S. facility H. OPEN SPACE/RECREATION 1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or oca recreation or open space areas near the site (including wild and. scenic rivers, trails, lake accesses)? NO X YES If yes, list areas by name and explain how each may be affected by the project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse impacts. Rice Marsh Lake Park - 1/2 mile south. Project will have no effect. fi. TRANSPORTATION 1. will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation systems (highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? X NO YES If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) will be affected. Tor these, specify existing use and capacities, average traffic speed and percentage of truck traffic (if highway)l and indicate how they will be affected by the project (e.g. congestion, percentage of truck traffic, safety, increased traffic (ADT), access requirements). 2. Is mass transit available to the site? X NO YES 3. what measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned to reduce adverse impacts? J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES 1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensive xES plans? If not, explain: If a zoning change or special use permit is necessaryt indicate existing zoning and change requested. PUD residential/commerical to commercial/industrial 2. will the type or height .;f the project conflict with the character of the existing neighborhood? X NO YES If yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to reduce conflicts. - 8 - IPA 3. How many employees will move into the area to be near the project? None How much new housing will be needed? None 4. Will the project induce development nearby --either support services or similar developments? No If yes,explain type of development and specify any other counties and municipalities affected. 5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle the project and any associated growth? D.,hlin COYVIP�P Amount required fnr nrnier_t Sufficiant nanacity? water 15,000/51,000 gal/da Yes wastewater treatment 15,000/51,000 gal/da Yes sewer 600 feet Yes schools -0- pupils - solid waste disposal 10 ton/mo Yes streets other (police, fire, etc) 1995 L.F. miles 1230/1500 L.F. On Site 0 Yes If current major public facilities are not adequate, do existing local plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this one project and its associated impacts? 6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part of a Related Actions EIS or other environmentally sensitive plan or program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES If yes, specify which.area or plan. 7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, storage, release or disposal of potentially hazardous or toxic liquids, solids on gaseous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisions, etc? ge X NO YES If yes, please specify the substance ' and rate of usaand any measures to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents. 8. When the project has served its useful.life, will retirement of the facility require special measures or plans? X NO YES If yes, specify: K. HISTORIC RESOURCES 1. Are there any structures on the site older than 50 years or on federal or state historical registers? X NO YES 2. Have any arrowheads, pottery or other evidence of prehistoric or early settlement been found on the site? X NO YES Might any known archaeologic or paleontological sites be affected: by the activity? X NO YES 3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and explain any impact on them. L. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Describe any other major environmental effects which may not have been identified in the previous sections. None III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts that have not been described before. None - In - V. FINDINGS The project is a private ( ) governmental ( .) action. The Responsible Agency (Person), after consideration of the information in this EAW, and the factors in Minn. Reg. MEQC 25, makes the following findings. 1. The project is ( is not ( ) a major action. State reasons: 2. The project does ( ) does not ( ) have the potential. for significant environmental effects. State reasons: 3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( ) of more than local significance. State Reasons: TV. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION NOTE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparation Notice is not officially filed until the date of publication of the notice in the EQq Monitor section of the Minnesota State Register. Submittal of the EAW_to the EQC constitutes a request for publication of notice in -the ZQC Monitor. A. I, the undersigned, am either the authorized representative of the Responsible Agency or the Responsible Person identified below. Based on the above findings, the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the following conclusions. (Complete either 1 or 2). 1. NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE No EIS is needed on this project, because the project is not a major action and/or does not have the potential for significant environmental effects and/or, for private actions only, the project is not of more than local significance. 2. EIS PREPARATION NOTICE An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a major action and has the potential for significant environmental effects. For private actions, the project is also of more than local significance. a. The MEQC Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances, the MEQC eamspecifically authorize limited construction to begin or continue. If you feel there are special circumstances in this project, specify the extent of progress recommended and the reasons. b. Date Draft EIS will be submitted: (month) (day) (year) (MEQC Rules require that the Draft EIS be submitted within 120 days of publication of the EIS Preparation Notice in the EQC Monitor. If special circumstances prevent compliance with this time limit, a written request for extension explaining the reasons for the request must be submitted to the EQC Chairman.) C. The Draft EIS will be prepared by (list Responsible Agency(s) or Person(s)): Signature Title Date B. Attach an affidavit certifying the date that copies of this EAW were mailed to all points on the official EQC distribution list, to the city and county directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or municipalities likely to be directly impacted by the proposed action (refer to question III.J.4 on page 9 of the CAW). The affidavit need be attached only to the copy of the EAW which is sent to the EQC. C. Billing procedures for KQ�j Monitor Publication State agency Attach to Lhe 'EAW sent to the EQC a completed OSR 100 ONLY: form (State Register General order Form --available at Central Stores). For instructions, please contact your Agency's Liaison officer to the State Register or the Office of the State Register--(612) 296-8239._ CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 41 �35 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Paul Strand, MTS Systems Corp. Box 24012, Minneapolis, MN 55424 FROM: Bruce Pankoni.n, City Planner SUBJ: MTS, Preliminary Development Plan PLANNING CASE: P-350 APPLICANT: MTS Systems Corporation Please include the following with your copy of exhibit 1, MTS Systems Corporation Planned Unit Development 6. EAW Work Sheet dated February 8, 1978. 7. Building Inspector's Report dated January 31, 1978. 8. Fire Marshal's report dated January 31, 1978. 9. City Planner's Report dated February 3, 1978. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 147eCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: February 3, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Paul Strand, MTS Systems Corp. FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner SUBJ: MTS, Preliminary Development Plan PLANNING CASE: P-350 APPLICANT: MTS Systems Corporation Background As shown in enclosures 1-5, the applicant, MTS Systems Corporation, is proposing to initially construct a 160,000 square foot office/ electronics manufacturing facility in Chanhassen. This facility is proposed to be expanded to employ approximately 1,500 people in the 1980's. Procedure for Planned Unit Development Approval, As shown in enclosure 3, the applicant is proposing to amend the previously approved (Ken Beiersdorf) planned residential development. If you are keeping track, we are at Step 6 in the PUD process. EAW Work Sheet As shown in enclosure 6, city staff requested MTS Systems Corporation to prepare an EAW Work Sheet. This work sheet is pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, 1973, wherein local units of government are responsible for initiating the environmental review process. Upon completion of the EAW Work Sheet, it has been determined that MTS Systems Corporation will not meet the "threshhold limits" of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and therefore, said EAW will not be forwarded to the Environmental Quality Council. Staff Comments As shown in enclosures 7 and 8, the building inspector and fire marshal, respectively, question whether the water system will be looped and if an emergency access could be constructed onto Highway 5. Planning Commissio. -2- Planner' s Comments Februapry. 3, 1978 The documents submitted to date, by MTS Systems Corporation, are sufficient to understand the micro -effect of MTS on the subject property. The macro -effect (City of Chanhassen) has yet to be determined. Specifically, I have questions regarding the validity of our assumption that it is necessary to construct a detached frontage road connecting new County Road 17 in the west with 184th Street in the east (MTS property). Further, I do not know if it is in Chanhassen's best interest to have a signal light intersection with protected left hand movements at the Dakota/STH 5 intersection. This issue becomes particularly complex when we consider the impact of the MTS proposal. If we find, however, that the Dakota is the best location for the intersection to provide local access to STH 5, I have a further problem as to the necessary horizontal section to handle future traffic loads, intersection configuration and method of financing these improvements. And, the needed horizontal section for detached frontage road along STH 5 is vague at this time. To get a handle on these questions, the city council retain the services of a professional traffic engineer (Bather, Ringrose and Wolsf eld) to analyze the affect of MTS and Dunn and Curry's industrial proposal on Chanhassen's future traffic system. The result of this study will be available prior to the March 8, 1978, Planning Commission meeting. Planner's Recommendation From the documentation we have at hand, it will be easy for a traffic engineer to determine the effect MTS's proposal will have on Chanhassen's infrastructure. This being the case, I suggest the Planning Commission order a public hearing to test neighborhood sentiment regarding the MTS proposal. Said public hearing could be held on Wednesday, March 8, 1978, at 8:30 p.m. W 2 1 W CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM DATE: December 13, 1977 p TO: Planning Staff, Staff and Paul Strand, MTS Systems Corporation Box 24012, Minneapolis, MN 55424 FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner SUBJ: MTS, Preliminary Development Plan PLANNING CASE: P-350 APPLICANT: MTS Systems Attached hereto, for your consideration and review, are the following documents submitted in support of MTS Systems Corporation's planned unit development: 1. Chanhassen site plan study. 2. Community Location Graphic. 3. Procedures for Planned Unit Development approval. 4. City Planner's Report dated December 13, 1977. 5. City Engineer's report dated December 8, 1977 mEro Gb a(Dan n� o n Xrt�• o H (N fD a�woaa a ro (D (D (n N• H n w GwrrNNw y Fl-5 0) N rtE 0b G� G rt F"m G rGr (DD W rt W Fl- O 1-h (a " 0 n rt 0' a ro N _IVF..tj G'G (DW�•�'� K Fj• (D P. n 0(nrtOCn �� t�' (DU)(i) Pi��00�< o0 o ril (Dtr rfi rh O (D rtG rtt7tortnN lr N�"(D(DD0 0CD(D0 M lj P_ pJ (D (DCD(D -I �m a5o a a F �- rt If- n(D rt F-rrtt O �'' N (D D) b fv O En F rt fD O tr W (D (D Fi Fl mk< a G -�q N• (n G G rt � F- (D O o rt a� (D O NFj n (D O -4 O Fj W G Fj O' F� ��-' pia �c o m- N:fz O n N w F l- a P-COO(D Ea °, w FGJ- � � pOGWr�tW0,° t,:5 a w rh F.• (� Q F- W (n N- 5 9 n "C rr rf• po � H w N F, rt G W A� O a G ;O rt N 'O G+ P. rt hJ O (DO rt (A LQ w Hfvp xrtW �rhN 0 '�'Cf-hh�10 FiNrtSN (D F J 0 F _j' < Fl- DY :t G (D "0 F(D (D to Fi O I�-� (�D ►C COi rrt W (D (D O r-ho O X C (D En (DDti m"'�n nouim ft F� C FF-- w w (D (D F-i Fi ¢L (D i O a n l rt(D okco �n rt(D 4� 5Z(D -�� Gnn rr 0) (D F-' a � W rt. P)n N a Fl P) F-h.(D ro rt� p, n az Gr�r Pi (D Al Fl- G N ] C) F_ rr (D (D ' C O (D P. n fL N O rt.rt • N. N t(D F✓ Ft' (GD (D P) Cr Ort Gro(n O G H � G• w o(n• h (-� o H.¢'. o rhwp• (nm G G . a n F-h rt w (D O a11DrtGrta4 (Vcn ,�' 0 rtn ~ � n F✓• 0 (Dp- roGJ' (D 0 F-+ 3- � rrr (D P)> W F- t: A 0 :G E 0 0� NU) pi A► O G oo �J•CO rt o (Dt (D(D O G (n� o r � G N �F,•�uaro rt G F• cn'ii O Fi H rat a uF O O (D (� m (D E � & rt � rt rn r-h'Z3 � LQ F-h n Fj: FO•( a (n (On 'C (Do +� F�- F-h (D � N- (D L rt x (D n (D o° a F-h rt r (D O a FJ- Fj a -go D� ZZ —2 CAM vy F m IzZ ;ICI Ida I N� cz § v'n a s m 0 I� a i I 0 2 1 z Im 0 POE 1 9 BM20 N YI1RmllmmmRNj t ka �--w-mg VI(I F * 41p, q :44 1 JL lio NOL lot - OF F• IF OF • p10Necb renu • • � Riley OF • • F 1 OF •F rY� CHAPTER FOUR PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS OR PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS -27- PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS (PRD) OR PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS (PCD) Chronology Introduction The City being confronted with increasing urbanization and acknowledging that technology of land development and demand for housing are undergoing substantial and rapid changes, intends: 1. To provide the means for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design than is provided under the strict application of the zoning and subdivision ordinances without compromising the health, safety, order, convenience and general welfare of the City and its residents: 2. To encourage the more efficient allocation and innovative use of common open space adjoining residential buildings in order that greater opportunities for better housing and recreation may be extended to the residents of the City. 3. To provide for the establishment of regulations and procedures for planned residential district development designed to meet the need for moderate and low cost housing, including the uti- lization of preconstructed and preassembled dwelling units of a permanent nature without sacrificing quality construction and assembly standards and tax base; and 4. To provide administrative procedures which can relate a planned development district to a particular site and which may encourage the disposition of planned development district proposals without undue delay. Step -by -Step Procedure for Processing an Application for Planned Residential Development. (Ref. Ordinance #47, Section 14). Step 1. PETITIONER a. Initial Information. All applications for PRD or PCD shall be filed in the office of the zoning Administrator and shall be accommodated by adequate evidence that PRD or PCD will be under Single Ownership or Unified Control. �1 -28- b. Additional Information - Sketch Plan The applican may prepare a sketch plan of the proposed development for review by the Planning Commission. Such sketch plan will be considered as having been submitted for informal discussion between the applicant and the Planning Commission. Step 2. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR a. Reviews documents submitted in Step 1 above, and request any additional information from petitioner. b. Forwards copies of petition to other staff or governmental agencies (i.e. Metropolitan Council, Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Highway Department, Watershed District, Environmental Quality Council, adjacent governmental units, Industrial Commission, Central Business District Committee,Fire Chief, Park Board, etc.) as deemed appropriate at least fourteen (14)—days prior to the Planning Commission meeting. c. Prepares planning report which includes comments from other staff and forwards copies to each Planning Commission member and petitioner no later than Friday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Step 3. PLANNING COMMISSION a. Reviews documents and reports as submitted in Step 1 and 2 above. b. Hears petitioners informal presentation of the proposed PRD or PCD. c. Advises the petitioner of the extent to which the sketch plan conforms to the Comprehensive City Plan, Zoning Ordinance and other ordinances of the City. Step 4. PETITIONER a. Reviews the comments made in Step 3 above. b. Prepares a Preliminary Development Plan containing the following information: (1) Maps and drawings which may be in a general schematic form and showing: a) enough of the area surrounding the proposed development to demonstrate the relationship of the planned development to adjacent uses, b) proposed land uses, area, population densities and land use intensities for each area of land included in the proposed development, c) existing topography, -29- (1) cont. - d) existing tree cover, buildings, streets and other site improvements, e) proposed access system, indicating both public and private streets, f) common open space and public uses, including schools, parks, recreation areas and undeveloped properties, g) the architectural style of each different type of building. (2) A written report or statement which shall include a) the nature of the applicant's ownership or control in the land proposed to be developed, b) a description of:the type of proposed development, including population densities and land use intensities, c) requested modification in the requirements of this ordinance other- wise applicable to the property, d) the expected schedule and sequence of development. c. Deposits with the city an escrow account as outline din item 10 on page 2. Said escrow account shall be deposited prior to Planning Commission review as outlined in Step 5 below. d. An abstractor's certificate showing the names and addresses of all property owners within three hundred fifty, (350) feet of the outer boundaries of the property in question. Step 5. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR a. Reviews documents submitted in Step 4 above, and requests any missing information from petitioner. b. Forwards copies of petition to other staff or governmental agencies as deemed appropriate at least fourteen (14) days prior to the Planning Commission Meeting. C. Prepares planning report which includes comments from other staff and forwards copies for each Planning Commission member and petitioner no later than Friday prior to the Planning Commission Meeting. Step 6. PLANNING COMMISSION a. Reviews documents and reports as submitted in Step 1 - 5 above. b. Hears petitioners informal presentation of the proposed PRD or PCD. c. Sets date for public hearing or requests additional information from petitioner. If additional information is requested, Steps 4 and 5 shall be repeated. 011-1 -30- Step 7. PUBLIC HEARING. a. City Administrator. (1) Advertises notice of public hearing as governed by State Statute and City Ordinance. (2) Notifies owners of adjacent property, as supplied by the petitioner, of public hearing at least ten (10) days prior to hearing. b. Planning Commission opens public hearing for the purpose of hearing: (1) Petitioners formal presentation. (2) Arguments from general public. c. Planning Commission either continues public hearing to a future date or closes public hearing. d. Plannin Commission forwards a report to the City Council stating its in ings and recommendations within sixty (60) days of the date of the public hearing, designation such conditions and guarantees as the commission deems necessary for protection of the public interest. Step B. CITY COUNCIL. a. Considers Planning Commission recommendations at the second regular meeting after Planning Commission action. b. Council either grants or denies PRD or PCD Preliminary Development Plan. c. If the Council approves Preliminary Development Plan the Council shall find: (1) The proposed development is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. (2) The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boudaries. (3) The proposed uses will not be detrimental to present and future land uses in the surrounding area. (4) Any exceptions to the zoning and subdivision ordinances are justified by the design of the development. (5) The planned development is of sufficient size, composition and arrangement that its construction and operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any other unit. �^1 -31- (6) The planned development will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which are proposed to serve the development. (7) The planned development will not have an adverse impact on the reasonable enjoyment of neighboring property. d. If the Council denies Preliminary Development Plan, the Council shall state reasons for disapproval. Step 9. OPTION The City Council may hold whatever public hearing it deems advisable and shall make a decision upon the application to approve Preliminary Development Plans if the Council decides to hold a public hearing the procedure for public hearing notification as outlined in Number 7 above shall be repeated. Step 10. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. a. Forwards copy of the Council action to Planning Commission and petitioner and retains a copy in Case file folder. b. Requests City Attorney to prepare and execute development contract as per City Council action. Step 11. PETITIONER. (Final Development Plan) a. Prepares Final Development Plan which include the following: (1) Preliminary plat in accordance with the applicable provisions of Ordinance 33, Chanhassen Subdivision Ordinance, including agreements, provisions, covenants and specifications required for approval of the final development plan. (2) Final building drawings and specifications. (3) Final site plans including a landscape schedule. (4) Engineering plans and reports as required by the Council. (5) Any other information or documents required by the Council for the approval of the final development plan including a planned unit development contract and any bonds, deposits of money or security. Step 12. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. a. Reviews documents submitted in Steps 7 - 11 above, and requests any additional information from petitioner. -32- b. Prepares Planning Report which includes comments from other staff and forwards copies to each Planning Commission member no later than Friday prior to the Planning Commission Meeting. Step 13. PLANNING COMMISSION. Recommends approval or disapproval of Final nevelopment Elan to City Council. Step 14. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. Step 15. Forwards Planning Commission recommendation to City Council. CITY COUNCIL. a. Approves Final Development Plan. b. Disapproves Final Development Plan stating reasons for the disapproval or; c. Approves final Development Plan subject to specified modifications or conditions. Step 16. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. a. Forwards copy of Council action to Planning Commission and petitioner and retains a copy in case file folder. b. Instructs City Attorney to prepare and execute Final Development Plan contract as,per City Council action. c. Maintain a "come -up" file where a time limit is stated by the City Council. d. Returns remaining escrow deposit to petitioner. Step 17. PLANNING COMMISSION. The Planning Commission shall review all PRD or PCD districts at least once each year and submit a report to the City Council on the status of each development. Step 18. CITY COUNCIL. a. If the Council finds that development has not occurred within a reasonable time after approval of the final development plan, the Council may instruct the Planning Commission to initiate rezoning to the original zoning district by removing the Planned District zoning. -33- b. Amendments: Changes in uses, any rearrangement of lots, blocks, orrbuilding tract, any changes relating to common open space areas, and all other changes in the approved final development plan may be made by the Council only after a public hearing by the Planning Commission and the submission of its recommendations thereon to the Council. No amendments may be made in the approved final development plan unless they are found to be required by changes in conditions which have occurred subsequent to approval of the final development plan, or by changes in the development policy of the Council. All such changes shall be filed in the office of the Zoning Administrator as amendments to the final development plan. r1 -34- INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING�AAMINISTRATIVE-FORM ENTIT.LED:` APPLi.bAtIOI4' FOR" CONSTDERAT109 OF PLAN] ING REQUEST," PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.OR PLANNED'COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: (Note: This instruction sheet should be given to each applicant petitioning for planned development). 1. The applicant should become familiar with the provisions set - forth in Ordinance 47 as amended entitled "Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance," and the City Administrative Procedures Manual. 2. Case No., escrow paid and date will be filled out by the Administrator; or any other authorized person charged with accepting forms for the Planning Commission. 3. Applicant refers to the person actually submitting the form, if different than owner. If applicant is also the owner, write "same" after "name." Address refers to the applicants mailing address. 4. Owner refers to the actual person holding title to the property in question; it does not refer to a contract buyer, renter, or lessee. Address refers to the owners mailing address. 5. Address of Property in question refers to subject property street name and number. If the property is undeveloped,.the address may be obtained from the City Building Inspector. 6. Legal Description of property in question refers to the lot number, block number and name of subdivision, or if unplatted, the meets and bounds description or registered land survey as recorded of the subject property. This information may be obtained from the Carver County Register of Deeds, located in the County Courthouse, Chaska, Minnesota. 7. Present zoning of property refers to the specific zoning district in which the property is located. 8. Present use of property refers to the existing land use, i.e., single family residential, office building, agricultural, etc. 9. Proposed use of property refers to the specific improvement intended for the property in question. 10. Documents attached are required by City Ordinance 47, Section 14. 11. The remaining portion of the application is for administrative use. e -35- PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD) or CASE NO. PRD/PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (PCD) City of Chanhassen Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Date of Application Escrow Paid Date Received by" '" " .......... Applicant Name: Last First Initial Address: Number and Street City State Zip Code Owner: Last First Initial Address: Number and Street City State Zip Code Address of property in question: Legal description of property in question: Present zoning of property: Present use of property: Proposed use of property: The following documents shall be attached to this application: 1. Sketch Pla4 2. Preliminary Development Plan Date Received Initial 3. Escrow Account Date Received 4. Abstractor's Certificate 5. Final Development Plan Initial I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on the attached documents are true, and that I.shall reimburse the City for all expenses incurred in processing this application for planned unit development. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner Date Received by Title Date (Following to be completed by Aoning Administrator or City Official) CHRONOLOGY DATE BY Sketch Plan on Planning Commission Agenda Planning Commission Postponed to Preliminary Development Plan on Plannin Commission Agenda Plannin Commission Postponed to Newspaper Publication Adjacent Property Owners Notified Publ c Hearing Planning Commission Action Preliminary Development Plan on Council Agenda Council Postponed to Council Action Preliminary Development Plan Contract Final Development Plan or -Planning Commission Agenda Planning Commission Postponed to .Final Development Plan on Council Agenda Council Postponed to Final Development Plan Contract Executed Escrow Returned - Amount: " -37- PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (Preliminary Development Plan) On this day of 19 , this PRD/PCD was recommended or (approval), d sapproval subject to the following conditions: Chairman of Planning Commission Action by City - Preliminary Development Plan On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City Council, Carver an- Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved) this Preliminary PRD/PCD subject to the following conditions: By order of the Chanhassen City Council Mayor Attest: City mina.strator fy µ, -38- PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION - Final Development Plan On this day of 19 , this Final Development Plan was recommen a for approval), disapproval) subject to the following conditions: Chairman of Planning Commission Action by City - Final Development Plan On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City Council, Carver an Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved) this Final PRD/PCD subject to the following conditions: By order of the Chanhassen City Council Mayor Attest: City A ministrator CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVESP.O BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: December 13, 1977 TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Paul Strand FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner SUBJ: MTS Systems Corporation's Planned Unit Development APPLICANT: MTS Systems Corporation PLANNING CASE: P-350 Petition As shown in enclosure 1, MTS Systems Corporation is proposing to initially construct a 600,000 square foot office/electronic manufacturing facility in Chanhassen. This facility is proposed to be expanded to employ approximately 1,500 persons in the 1980's. Background 1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 2, the subject property contains approximately 70 acres located in the southwest quadrant of STH 5 and 184th Street (the subject property is immediately adjacent to Chanhassen Estates in Hennepin County). 2. Existing Zoning: The subject property, pursuant to city ordinance 47, is zoned P-3, Planned Community Development district. 3. Existing Utilities: As shown in the city engineer's report, enclosure 5, sanitary sewer and water trunk service are available to the subject property. This matter and site has been considered by the planning commission at many previous meetings at which various development plans were discussed. At one time, the subject property was zoned for commercial, industrial and residential (1/3 each) then designated PUD when the current zoning ordinance was enacted. 4. Comprehensive Plan Proposals: a. Land Use: Pursuant to the adopted city plan, the subject property is to assume a planned unit density identity. Planning Commissio.^ -2- December 13, 1977 b. Transportation: Pursuant to the city's adopted transportation plan, a detached frontage road is proposed to be constructed beginning at STH 101 to the west and terminating at 184th Street on the eastern edge of the subject property. This roadway will provide local access to adjacent properties on the south side of STH 5. 5. Physiography of the Subject Property: a. Elevation and Topography: The site is generally rolling with slopes exceeding 20% located in the southwest corner adjacent to Chanhassen Estates. Approximately z of the site has slopes ranging from 0 to 4% and the remaining areas range from 5 - 9%. Forty-one feet of vertical relief exists between the high, located behind the existing farmstead and the low is located to the southeast corner. b. Natural Drainage: Two-thirds of the site drains to the south- east, the remaining area drains to the southwest. C. Existing Natural Vegetation: Approximately 4% of the site is heavily wooded with hardwood trees. This wooded area, adjacent to Chanhassen Estates, consists of Oak, Elm, Maple and Basswood. In the dryer areas, on the east ridge, Oak and Elm are dominant with thickets of Hazelnut, Hawthorne and young Oaks. Below the Oak and Elm was a hardwood mixture of Basswood, Oak, Elm, Ironwood, Maples and Blackberry. In this middle area and in particular, on the west slope, the undercover consists of Gooseberry, Hazelnut, Dogwood, Blackberry, young Maples, brambles, and currants. In the lower area, where there is more moisture, Boxelder, Elm and Cottonwood are found. From a planning standpoint, I believe the woodlands are a unique natural resource that should be protected and considered during all stages of urban development for the subject property. Specifically, slopes exceeding 15% should be restricted by protecting the indigenous vegetation. By doing so, the community can insure erosion control and protect scenic linear recreation areas. To achieve this, the applicant should be prepared to dedicate the east slope to the city for passive recreational purposes. 6. Previous Council Actions: In 1972, the Chanhassen City Council rezoned the subject property to P-3, Planned Community Development District. On January 20, 1975, in response to a development petition by Ken Beiersdorf (existing property owner) the City of Chanhassen approved a development plan consisting of apartments, open space, utilities, and local access. Said development approval was conditioned upon a written time schedule wherein the applicant would complete the initial phases by 1978. Any changes to the original approval will require an amendment to Mr. Beiersdorf's original planned unit development approval. Planner's Comments 1. The critiera for evaluating an amendment to Mr. Beiersdorf's 1975 plan approval is found in section 16 of the Chanhassen zoning ordinance. 2. As you know, the P-3, use district is to provide for a variety of residential, commercial and industrial uses designed as an overall planned unit development. The uses as proposed by MTS Systems Corporation are permitted within the context of the P-3 use district. Planning Commissio. -3- December 13, 1977 3. From a planning perspective, I fee MTS Systems Corporation is positively intent of the city's plan for land use I whole heartedly encourage the planni favor on MTS's request and encourage t preliminary development plan as p�escri 1 the proposal a consistent with , transportation, ng commission to he applicant to bed by city ordi s suggested by the spirit and and utilities. look with proceed with. nance. 4. In developing preliminary development plans, the applicant should be cognizant of the requirements for access, sewer, drainage, grading, etc. of the Soil Conservation Service and Chanhassen city engineer. WILLIAM D. SC,HOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY JACK E. GILL RODNEY B. GORDON THEODORE D. KEMNA JOHN W.EMOND KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT BRUCE C. SUNDING SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS d) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 OFFICES AT HURON, SOUTH DAKOTA AND DENTC V, TEXAS December 8, 1977 City of Chanhassen c/o Mr. Bruce Pankonin, City Planner Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Subject: MTS Systems Corporation Site Plan Review Our File No. 7120 Gentlemen: We have reviewed the subject site plan as prepared by Ellerbe and dated November, 1977. DRAINAGE Runoff from the major part of the proposed first phase development will be directed to a proposed holding pond located behind the building complex. This pond should be designed to restrict discharge to the creek to that prior to development. Requirements of the Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District will have to be followed. FRONTAGE ROAD A frontage road across Outlot 2 of Chanhassen Estates will provide access to the site. At Dakota, this road should be aligned with the future frontage road across Outlot 1 (center- line 25 feet north of the south property line of Outlot 1). The road should intersect Dakota at a 90 degree angle and not deflect for 50 feet. The street could then jog southward using a reverse curve with radii of not less than 100 feet. . The improved street width should be 26 feet with bituminous berms with no parking allowed. Concrete curb and gutter install- ation should be delayed until the final width requirements are determined by development east and west of Dakota. SCHOELL & MAOSON. iNc. City of Chanhassen December 8, 1977 c/o Mr. Bruce Pankonin, City Planner Page 2 Subject: MTS Systems Corporation Site Plan SANITARY SEWER Sanitary sewer service would be provided by gravity sewer extended into the property from the existing line west of the site. The sewer should be located south of the building so it can serve the possible future expansion to the east. WATERMAIN The existing 10-inch watermain located at the northwest corner of the property should be extended southward to the frontage road to Dakota. In addition, 10-inch watermain should be extended to the easterly property line of the site. We recommend approval of the site plan subject to the conditions mentioned herein. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. WJBrezinsky:sg CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE9P.O BOX 1479CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM DATE: December 8, 1977 TO: Planning Commission and Staff FROM:' Bruce Pankonin, City Planner 3 SUBJ: MTS Planned Unit Development PLANNING CASE: P-465 APPLICANT: MTS Systems I will deliver a complete planning packet regarding MTS planning proposal under separate cover. This report will be delivered to your house no later than Monday evening. CITY OF F CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 November 18, 1977 Mr. Paul Strand 8055 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 Re: Chanhassen Site Planning Study Dear Mr. Strand: Please have Ken Beirsdorf sign the attached application and return to my attention. Thank you. Bruce Pankonin City Planner enc. NOV 1977 e OP C)) /y�� -35- PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD) or CASE NO. PRD/PCD 3�v PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (PCD) City of Chanhassen Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Date of Application v /Sa Escrow Paid Date Received by �qp Applicant Name: MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION Lasr- First Initial Address: 8055 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 NumrUer and Street City State Zip Code Owner: MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION Last First In is Address : 8055 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 Number and Street City State Zip Code It Address of property in question: Legal description of property in question: The north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 18 T 116 R. 22. Hennepin County, Minnesota except that part taken for state trunk Highway No. 5, and except the east 16.5 ft. thereof. Also except the east 180.0 ft. of the west 1249.34 ft. of the north 317.0 ft. of the north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 18, and also except the east 180.0 ft. of the west 1429.34 ft. of the north 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of said Section 18. Present zoning of property: P.U.D. Residential Present ,:.se of property: Agriculature Proposed use of property: Office Industrial The following documents shall be attached to this application: 1. Sketch Plan 2. Preliminary Development Plan 3. Escrow Account jVW Date Received Initial . ee.�--- -36- t 4. Abstractor's Certificate 5. Final Development Plan Date Received initial I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on the attached documents are true, and that I shall reimburse the City for all expenses incurred in processing this application for planned unit development. by Sig atury�o Applicant �� gnature o // -77 Date A;0a no! Received by Title Date (Following to be completed by Aoning Administrator or City Official) CHRONOLOGY DATE BY Sketch Plan on Planning Commission Agenda / Planning Commission Postponed to 'Preliminary Development Plan on Planning CO.V-dL 36.w rr, Agenda Planning Commission Postponed to Publication -Newspaper Property Owners Notified -Adjacent Public Hearin Planning Commission Action Preliminary Development Plan on Council Agenda Council Postponed to Council Action Preliminary Development Plan Contract Final Development Plan or Commission Agenda -Planning Planning Commission_Postponed to Final Develo ment Plan on Council Agenda Council Postponed to Final Development Plan Contract Executed Escrow Returned - Amount: CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O BOX 147eCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM TO: City Planner, Bruce Pankonin FROM:. Assistant Planner, Bob Waibel DATE: November 10, 1977 SUBJ: Applicability of Environmental Review to the MTS Proposal As you know, pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, 1973, local units are responsible for initiating the environmental review prcess. The following are the minimum situational requirements whereby a local unit of government is responsible to arrange for the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for industrial develop- ments similar to the MTS proposal. a). Construction of a facility or integral group of facilites with at least 175,000 square feet of industrial floor space, unless located in an industrial park for which an EIS has already been prepared. b). Construction of a commercial or industrial development, any part of which is within a shoreland area, as defined in Minnesota Statute 105.484 (1974), covering 20,000 or more square feet of ground space, not including access roads or parking areas, and located on a parcel of land having 1,500 feet or more of shoreline frontage. c). An action that will eliminate or significantly alter a wetland of Type 3, 4 or 5 (as defined in U.S. Dept. of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Circular 39, "Wetlands of the U.S., 1956') of five acres or more in the seven county metropolitan area, either singly or in a complex of two or more wetlands. Although the MTS plan may not fall in any of the above categories, we may keep in mind other developmental areas in Chanhassen, i.e. Lake Susan Hills Pj'D, Minnewashta Regional Park, that may be expedited if arrangements are made in the near future to carry out the environmental review process. WILLIAM D. SCHOELL I a i CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLEfl :•-: C=C� �� iLD E. DAHLIN * f�a`. •, AriRY L. HANSON SCHOELL & MAOSON. INC. RAYMOND J. JACKSON . WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS JACK E. GILL THEODORE O. KEMNA JOHN W.EMOND KENNETH E. ADOLF (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 55343 DANIEL R. 80XRUD WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT OFFICES AT HURON, SOUTH DAKOTA AND DENTON, TEXAS November' 4, 1977 City of Chanhassen c/o. Mr. Don Ashworth P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Attention: Mr. Bruce Pankonin Subject: Highway 5 South Frontage Road Location on Outlot 2. Gentlemen: With placement of traffic signals at the Highway 5 - Dakota i Avenue intersection a virtual certainty, we feel the best location of the frontage road immediately east of Dakota would be along the south property line of Outlot 2. We feel the location of a signal light at Dakota will divide the usage of the frontage road east and west of Dakota and eliminate the need of aligning the two sectors. Movement of the east section of the road southward will provide needed stacking room for entering and exiting the eastern sector. The frontage road must have: a minimum right -of --way width of 50 feet, a mininum street gutter -to -gutter width of 26 feet (no parking), 9-ton capacity and B618 Concrete curb and gutter. The improved street may be offset within the right-of-way, with a minimum 10-foot distance between the back of curb and right-of-way line. If you have any questions, please contact us. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON., INC. WJBrezinsky:cm cc: Mr. Robert F. Dill A7 P-� (D :4 �] P- (D (D rt (D a� O �G (n 0 r-h N• � G G W • F� �c 0 E �- U2 (n rh co � a I-'• G (GD ((DD � a �Jro U)Fj FJ• F.,• 0 1-- rt � o �j w rt (D FJ"00a]H ab((D a 0 (D Fi GaF-d0�J GrtKw-X(D co w rt. 'Q w E (D w ] �r 5 (D a(D rt' 0' Fh t-h V (n (D m Fh o (D N H p- " F- (D ^C F- n rt n Fl- H- Fi (D rt F- rt- (D (D Fi Fi rn K G F�(D O o "C rt F O U] P• v o o 0. � G o 1- I-h Lq Fj• 15 1.1 F- a (n W 1-0 ft rt aoF,G FJ r' rt W 0) Ft, N F' G" 0 rF F✓ `Q (D '0 r (DOnob 0 X C H- i-h F-J C P- F'- G Iv n rt•�� Fm (n G (D rt � 'zy sv a (D rt tr o (D (D k< o F,- 0 Fl• O �Lo rtHu, G a Fi (D 7 rt m w (D " (D ed F,• F- I-- V � "C A] o G OD a E(D CD afro a(D 0 0 0 rt Fh Ft p V Fl. Pt FJ (D F-' P- (D (D 0 (D Fi- 0K'xft �: rt-Ea�'%-<. P_b �] 0 pin�• Fi w (D Fl- oO (n rt O cn O �l t.0 kc � rt rt tr UU) rt. (D gym w� (D w (D (D Cl) Fi g- a (n (DO N4 0 (D o nm0'w3 Po roo�w�ao,° Ff j rt rt � Pi00 (D G � � Fn A] 'b �mm��0 K Fj \ M cn N Fi LTJ A] (D (D 5 F� Fi a In F✓ w (D rt (D 0 0 �j � G n G rt Fi R) Fh. (D ro 0 rt P) a Fi (D r- o a (n o rt rt . F,• : G �:• H Fi O Fi (D H- Ft, w N (r] (D rt QJ F,. �nF��,�' E 0 n° a rt EOnwrrf xm ((DD 0 00 u' roO p] J 0 as (D O rFi LQ o.13 rt � Q, 1 a u]] 0 n 1 q ron0(� n rt_IV aro N m !y' 0 (D O En. rt to tJ f-h (D (D O rt p F-+ U) N �< (D 0 Di P- (t (D o t)r G N• (a G G O o rt H. w H- a Fi F� tr' O H- N• OO (D Fn G G• >jx�Q F� H A] N• F'- G F-J D En Fi F-' rt E F-+ a' (D lC 0 (.n rt. N N O (D `D x ct � a' m _IV rt N 11) H (D S]1 O hh (D 01 G a w R+ (� Fh rt W roGrtK~ crt(D 0 t7� G O ((DD . 0 r- [n Fi Hrt- a(n (DG' wp. U](DEnrt F-j- (D (D a (n (n � firtO, rt (D P• a F✓ Po Dn ZZ �D N CI)m -qZ n� 0 D X WE Fj 17 CITY OF C89NAdSSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P. 0. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317. • (612) 474-8885; April 20, 1977. Mr. G. N. Butzow, President NITS Systems Corporation Box 24012 Minneapolis, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Butzow: I was pleased to receive your letter.of April 18, 1977, and happier to know you are considering a possible site in Chanhassen. I would enjoy discussing, at your leisure, your needs and potential sites you are considering in Chanhassen. I am also requesting: the City's Consulting Engineer, Bill Schoell, Schoell.and Madson, and the City's Planner, Bruce Pankonin, to provide you with any information you may desire in site selection.. I'm sure you'll find both Bill and Bruce open and.frank in discussing potential concern areas that both you and the City will have in reviewing sites. Thank you again for your letter and interest in Chanhassen. Sincerel yours, Don Ashworth City Manager DA:k cc: t ity Planner, Bruce Pankonin City Engineer, Bill Schoell, Schoell and Madson, 50 Ninth Ave. So,., Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 938-7601 18 April 1977 Mr. Don Ashworth 7401 Longview Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Ashworth: As president of MTS Systems open and constructive dialog your city. MTS IIIIIIIIIIIM MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION BOX 24012, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55424 TELEPHONE 612-944-4000 TELEX 29-0521 CABLE MTSSYSTEMS Corporation, I wish to enter into an about our interest in locating in Our present plant is located in Eden Prairie. Our growth over the last 10 years has brought us near the limits of developing that site. We are, therefore, seeking to develop a second site for expansion over the next ten years. We think our company has been and will remain an asset to Eden Prairie. We feel we have been good citizens and contributed to respectable industrial development of that city. We think these things, but encourage you to investigate our present and past behavior for yourselves. It is our plan and need to select and secure a site within the next several weeks and then develop a long range site develop- ment plan so that construction of a new building could be com- pleted in 1979 at the latest. We have enclosed information on our company, people and products. We invite you to visit our operations. Our staff and management are available to discuss our company and company plans with anyone who might have concerns about what effect MTSr operations might have on Chanhassen. As a former Chanhassen resident (1959-1970). I know you are concerned about your city's future development. We share your concern, and would not want to locate in a city where no one cared what effect our operations would have. We want to be open in approaching this situation, we hope you will encourage us and will accept us as a constructive element in the development of your city. Sincerely, MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION G. 11. Bu ow Presiden� Affidavit of Publication Sate of Minnesota )ss. County of Carver CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPU4 William McGarry COUNTIES, MINNESOTA being duly sworn, on oath says he is and during NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ONPROPOSED PLAN s_ all the time herein stated has been the publisher and printer of the newspaper known as Carver County Herald and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows- (1) Said newspaper is printed in the English language in newspaper format AMENDMENT FOR MTS SYSTEMS, and in column and sheet form equivalent in printed space to at least 900 square inches. (2) Said newspaper is a weekly CHANHASSEN, MINNEsoiA and is distributed at least once a week. (3) Said news paper has 50% of its news columns devoted to news of local interest NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That the Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, Will to the community which it purports to serve and does not wholly duplicate any other publication and is not made up entirely of patents, plate matter and advertisements. (4) Said newspaper is circulated in and near the municipality which meet on Wednesday, the 14th day of June, 1978, at 10:45 p.m, at the City Hall 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen, it purports to serve, has at least 500 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers, has an average of at least 75% of its Minnesota, for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider the amending of the NITS Development to total circulation currently paid or no more than three months in arrears and has entry as second-class matter in its local t-office. (5) Said newspaper purports to serve the City of Chaska in the County of Carver and it has its known pos Otte P=an allow for the construction of a ional building -on the following described tract of I office of issue in the City of Chaska in said county, established and open during its regular business hours for the proposed 1 gathering of news, sale of advertisements and sale of subscriptions and maintained by the managing officer of said land: The north I of the northwest 'A of Section M newspaper, persons in its employ and subject to his direction and control during all such regular business hours and at Townihip 116. Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, taken for State Trunk Highway No. 5 which said newspaper is printed. (6) Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State Historical least the day dates except that part Except the 18,5 feet thereof. Also, except the east \Society. (7) Said newspaper has complied with all the foregoing conditions for at one year preceding or and IRO.0 feet of the west 1249.34 feet of the north 317.0 feet of of publication mentioned below..(8) Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1, the north % -of the northwest Y4 of Section 18, and also 1966 and each January I thereafter an affidavit in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State and signed by the except the east iao of the west 1429.34 feet of the north % managing officer of said newspaper and sworn to before a notary public stating that the newspaper is a legal newspaper. of the southwest 1/4 of said section 18. . A plan showing said proposed plan amendment is Public Hearinc: available for inspection at the City Hall. All persons He further states on oath that the printed interested may appear and be heard at said time and hereto attached as a part place. Dated: May 26, 197' BY ORDER OF.THE PLANNING hereof was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published therein in the English language, COMMISSION Bob Weibel, Assistant City Planner May 31,1978) • once each week, for one successive weeks; that it was first so published on V'e d the 3.1 st (Pub. in the Carver County Herald on . .1 day of May 17-8— and was thereafter printed and published on every to and including the — day of — — — 19 and that the following is a printed copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of said notice, to wit: abedefghijklmnopqrstuv-xyz Subscribed and sworn to before me this —day o'__V( 19 (Notarial Seal) ' LORRAINE LAND NOTARY PUBLIC MINNESOTA CARVER COUNTY My Commission Expires June 29,1932 Notary public, IF—Ck"60"-—'" County Minnesota My Commission Expires (�T;z a . I19 Minutes of the 12-17-80 Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 (5) Lakea<Susan.South: Mr. Waibel described the Lake Susan South Development plan and noted it had received preliminary developent plan approval by both the Planning Ccaudssion and City Council. Ile recc nded _ it be maintained on the annual review list for a 1981 review. Chainnazz. Horn felt the status of the alignaent of Highway 101 should be noted as it related to the development. The. Commission generally agreed with staffs recommendation and that Highway 101 should be maintained as a "watch" item. . (6) Lake - Susan West: Mr. Waibel described the developnent and said it had received final development approval for the first phase by the Planning Commission. The City Council had not yet gives their approval because there was a discrepancy as to what plans should be reviewed in lieu of the Planning Ccrmdssion's reservations on that multiple phase area and because there were so many conditions set on approval of the plan. He receded the district be maintained on the annual review list at this time. The Commission generally agreed with staff s recommendation. (7) Lotus Lake Estates=.lst, ;.2nd; .,.and- 3rd Additions: Mr. Waibel explained the development and its status and recommended removal of the 1st Addition fram the annual review list, because public -improvel-nents on the addition were completed with 70 percent of the horre construction complete. The 2nd and 3rd Additions should be maintained under active review status. The Ccwtissin felt the entire development should be. retained under annual review until the public improvements had all been completed. Chairman Horn said he felt this should be done for every development. (8) Lyman Ltnmber - � Park-' F.- Mr. Waibel described the development, noted the status and recce ended. that both be maintained on the annual review list. Discussion occurred on the financial involvements of Park I. The Commission generally agreed with staffs recamTendation. (9) Minnewashta- Creek- 2nd° Additionv Mr. Waibel explained the development and its status noting it included an outlot with a conditional - T use permit. He said the public improvements had been completed and approximately 15 percent of the homes were complete. Mr. Waibel- recommended the district be removed fron,ithe annual review list. The Commission generally agreed with staff's recommendation. (10) M.T.S.: M. Waibel described the developwnt and said any construction start was indeterminable at that time. He reccamTended thatany.iacilities construction proposals be forwarded to the Planning Commission for full site plan review and that the district be imaintained on theannual review list. Mr. Hamilton moved the Conraiss.ion ask the City Council to direct them to hold a public hearing to initiate a down - zoning of the subject property due to the lack of action on the site by the developer. Mr. Partridge seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried. r 0 7 from. City Administrator Referred To.. Mayor Council Planner Building Attorney Engineer Treasurer Polico Parks & Rec. Street Maint. Utilities _ Press other o,.t,,,,,, City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION BOX 24012, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55424 TELEPHONE 612-944-4000 TELEX 29-0521 CABLE MTSSYSTEMS 6/IP Attention: Mr, Don Ashworth Gentlemen: 12 4une. 1979 MTS has had a number of contacts with your elected officials, Planning Commission, City staff, and residents in recent months as we prepared and presented for approval the develop- ment plans for our property in Chanhassen. We sincerely appreciate the courtesy shown us in all of these contacts. In an effort to continue the fine spirit of cooperation that exists, we are writing to inform you of the current status of those plans. We have found that specific needs for facilities have changed. In part this is because of more rapid growth and in part because we cannot subcontract our normal proportion of heavy machining. Because of this, we find we must extend our heavy machining and mechanical assembly adjacent to our present shop. Accordingly, we are deferring our plans for the Chanhassen building. We cannot at this time give you an estimate as to when construction will take place, but we do not see any likelihood that it would be before 1982. Again, we thank you for your kind past considerations. We look forward to continuing our association. Very truly yours, S Svstems Corporation I G . But w 6ell JUN 1979 President ECEAVCD GNButzow/ps VILL AGE i1�5 HAl�IffS= , MINK. _c i .• CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: June 9, 1978 TO: Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Assistant City Planner,.Bob Waibel SUBJ: Plan Amendment for MTS Systems, Public Hearing, and Site Plan Review for Roman Roos APPLICANT: Roman Roos PLANNING CASE: P-350 and P-552 Pai-i ti nn At it's May 24th meeting, the Planning Commission ordered this public hearing to obtain neighborhood sentiment to the construction of an office/professional building in the northwest corner of the MTS property, such action being prescribed by ordinance. Background 1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1 and la, the subject building site is 1.85 acres in the northwestern most corner of the MTS property located on that part of Chanhassen located in Hennepin County and south of MTH 5. 2. Existing zoning: The subject property is presently zoned P-3, Service Commerical District. The adjoining land to the west of the subject property is zoned C-2, Commercial District. 3. Utilities: Sanitary sewer and municipal water are available to the subject property. Sanitary sewer service would be provided by extending an existing line from the west of the subject property. Municipal water would be supplied from a 10-inch main located at the northwest corner of the property. 4. Comprehensive Plan Proposal: a. Land Use: The adopted City Plan indicates the subject property to be planned unit development. b. Transportation: The adopted comprehensive plan indicates part of this property to be included in a grade separated overpass of a secondary highway over MTH No. 5. More recent transportation _t plAnn ng Report -2- dune 9, 1978 studies for this property and its environs have recommended the use of a frontage road as shown in enclosure 2. Planner's Comments 1. As shown in the included site plan, Mr. Roos intends to construct two professional buildings on that part of the MTS property severed by the proposed frontage road. The enclosed data sheet indicates that building no. 1 is proposed for professional services and building no. 2 is proposed for medical/dental services. 2. At this juncture it is difficult to estimate the number of parking spaces needed for this proposal. Using the most stringent ordinance requirement of 1 parking space for every 300 sq. ft. of gross floor area, it can be determined that 73 spaces are required. The proposed plans are 13 spaces deficient from this standard. This problem may be augmented, however, if the applicant at this time can tell us how many medical or dental tenants will occupy building no. 2. Section 9.07 of Ordinance 47 states that a minimum of 6 offstreet parking spaces shall be required for each doctor or dentist maintaining profes- sional offices within a principal structure. 3. Item no. 6, in the attached letter of May 24, 1978 from Mr. Butzow, President of the MTS Systems Corp., states that the applicant will present his plans to an open meeting of the Chanhassen Estates residents. The applicant has done so, and has indicated that no opposition was placed against the proposal. 4. Except for the yet to be resolved parking discrepancy, I feel that the plan submitted is acceptable to the City standards for land use, zoning, and utilities. I am, however, quite concerned that local land economics , have not been favorably responsive to attract a proposal of this nature to an area within the tax increment district. From a planning perspective, it seems that the submission of this proposal at this time, would present an excellent opportunity for the HRA to investigate what can and/or should be done within the context of the HRA's statutory powers., and overall land use compatibility plans for the tax increment district. The Planning Commission at this time.should do all in its power to establish coordination and communication between itself and the HRA, in order to optimize land use and economic growth through the evolution of the tax increment district. Planner's Recommendation I find Mr. Roos' proposal to be, with the exception of the resolution of parking requirements, positively consistent with the City's plan for land use, zoning, transportation, and utilities, and subsequently recommend that the Planning Commission move to recommend that the City Council approve said preliminary development plans. • I ` l • • ll • Lotus �;�� • Lake Luc l� • • • • ' -� • ;,� ��i�• �' PL _ rJ • PK • .F OF I • C Lake \ 1 � • • ••• `� � � Lake Ann ; • �\ /� (II PK ' \1 • • • • • OF � J PK Cr i� o ® t •F • • � PB • _T e• B LE VARa •F PUB'+� DO •F O � • LI RB IB E • • F0 ' OF •F OF � OF � RB Cc y<. R R OU gpvFIG OPo o f� y • — S�. Q ❑ Su/3J�cT ' OF OF �f�\` • PK Lake Susan -' • �� Rice �- ' Marsh 11 Lake l\OF OF F _ — — •F OF '• I OF • 34[:3 • O __ 3900 3q r BOULEVARD • • • • �� • I k: OF PK �?•.,, ,- ,' Lake e WITS MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION BOX 24012. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55424 TELEPHONE 612-944-4000 TELEX 29-0521 CABLE MTSSYSTEMS 24 May 1978 Mr. Roman R. Roos 8001 Cheyenne Chanhassen, MN Dear Mr. Roos: This letter will constitute an offer by MTS Systems Corporation to sell to the addressee approximately 1.8 acres of land which constitutes the Northwest Corner of the site which is known as the "Beiersdorf Property" in the City of Chanhassen. The offering price is for the approximately 1.8 acres. This offer must be accepted by the addressee by closing the purchase of the land on or before January 2, 1979, or the offer becomes void. This offer includes the following conditions, all of which must be complied with or the offer is voided, and certain disclaimers: 1. The owner of the remaining or majority share of property should have architectural control (by over the buildings,'landscaping, parking areas, shadow area utilization. This shall be entered .for the land. This approval is in addition to mental approvals normally required. the Beiersdorf right of approval) signs, and into the deed all other govern- 2. MTS Systems cannot guarantee the exact location of a road to service this site from the south or east, nor can we guarantee any availability date for such road to be in place. 3. `The addressee shall pay all costs associated with surveying, description, and registration of this approximately 1.8 acres. 4. MTS Systems Corporation -can withdraw from this offer at any time. If it withdraws without reasonable cause, it will reimburse the addressee for out-of-pocket costs for surveying and registration - but not for architectural expenses which are assumed essentially independent of site. 5. The addressee can withdraw at any time without cause. Mr. Roos 24 May 78 2 6. The addressee will present his plans at an open meeting of Chanhassen Estates residents to test their support or opposition. MTS will audit this meeting and significant opposition is considered reasonable cause to withdraw under paragraph 5. 7. MTS will be made aware of and will be allowed to have a representative present at all public sessions in which the site utilization is discussed. 1 8. It is assumed that all procedures and permissions will be followed and obtained as required by the city, state, or other agencies who audit or control land use. 9. The addressee will negotiate a settlement with the party (lessee) who has a corn crop in progress to reimburse him for his losses. MTS Systems Corporation Lk tlu'�r - - G.N. But w, President GNButzow/ps 3 R I C H A R D L. LUNDAH L, A.I.A. ARCHITECT 5509 1 0 E N PRAIRIE ROAD CIEN LAKE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING MINNET0NKA, MINNESOTA 55343 TEL.(612) 933-3011 CHANHASSEN PROFESSIONAL BUILDING PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION SITE AREA SIZE: 1.85 ACRES UTILITIES: AVAILABLE AT SITE PARKING ALLOCATION TO MEET CITY ORDINANCES BUILDING AREAS MAIN FLOOR RENTAL AREA UPPER CORRIDOR ENTRY LOBBY, REST ROOMS LOWER LEVEL RENTAL LOWER CORRIDOR EXTERIOR MATERIALS 48'-0" X48'-0" X 22 = 4608 S.F. 48'-0" X12'-0' = 576 S.F. 12'-0" X28'-0' X 2 = 672 S.F 48'-0" X48'-0"X 22 = 4608 S.F 48'-0" X12'-0' = 576 S.F. TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE 11040 S.F UPPER PORTION: LAPPED REDWOOD SIDING LOWER PORTION: BRICK FRONT ENTRY: STUCCO GLASS: SOLAR BRONZE, 1" INSULATING BUILDING FULLY AIRCONDITIONED, ZONED TO INDIVIDUAL TENNANTS TYPE OF PROSPECTIVE TENNANTS BUILDING NO. 1 - PROFESSIONAL BUILDING NO. 2 - MEDICAL/DENTAL b oc IAJ 6- -V- Re -A. 9� eo lweEe� Fi;4sfSjG%T.Y STUP N r/ Ts 2�S ��sa rW�� CfeL E C',4gs,<A