11. Edina Realty and Wendy's Site Plan ApprovalCITY OF
CHANHASSEN
"- CASE #: 89 -2 PUD
' By: Al -Jaff.v
l Z
U
a
Q
�Q
H
IO
i W
1 `n
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for a 10,084 Square Foot Retail/Office Building, and a I
2,533 Square Foot Wendys Restaurant
2) Replat of Outlot A, Market Square into Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square
Second Addition, 41,193 Square Foot Lot .
LOCATION: Southwest corner of the intersection of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street
APPLICANT: Lotus Realty Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 235
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: PUD, Planned Unit Development
ACREAGE: 79,946 Sq. Ft. (Wendy's Site 41,193 s.f. - Office/Retail Site 38,753 s.L)
DENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N - OI
S - PUD, Market Square
E - CBD, Filly's and Country Suites Hotel
W - PUD, Market Square
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: I A level parcel.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
11 .
PC DATE: 2/16/9
CC DATE: 3/28/94
Acft 6y CR jR MWERN
Fklo /-
Modifie
Rejecte —
Dat
Date SuWadd to Commission
Date SUbMilited to Council
3- Z's -5�t
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 2
On February 16, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed the following application:
1 1) Site Plan Review for a 9,960 Square Foot Retail/Office Building, and a 2,533
Square Foot Wendy's Restaurant
I 2) Replat of Outlot A, Market Square into Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square Second
Addition, 41,193 Square Foot Lot
' As an oversight by staff, the application was published in the newspaper but a notice did not get
sent to property owners within 500 feet. Consequently, the public hearing was not closed, and
the decision was tabled.
Shortly following the February 16, 1994, Plannin g g Commission meeting, staff had some in -house
discussion with a few members of the Planning Commission and City Council. It was suggested
' that a unified building which would house the office /retail as well as the Wendy's facilities
should be studied. Staff has not had time to develop designs, however, we find merit in this
suggestion. A unified comprehensive and compatible architectural style could be developed and
we recommended the applicant investigate this possibility.
' On March 2, 1994, the Planning Commission completed review of the applicant's proposal. They
recommended approval of the subdivision request and denied the site plan review application
based mainly on the traffic circulation and design quality of the buildings as reflected in the
Planning Commission's minutes dated March 2, 1994. The applicant revised the plans twice
since they were first submitted to the Planning Commission and the changes are extensive.
Rather than amending sections of the report, staff has written a new one.
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
' On October 8, 1990, the City Council approved the final PUD plan for the Market Square
Shopping Center subject to conditions described in the attached report. The site included 4 lots
and one outlot. Market Square Shopping Center occupies Lot 1. Lots 2, 3, 4, and Outlot A are
I vacant. The current request is for the construction of a 10,084 square foot office /retail building
(Edina Realty) on Lot 4, and a 2,533 square foot restaurant building ( Wendy's) on Outlot A.
' The site plan is well developed, however, in some respects it does not meet all current standards.
The PUD it is regulated by is almost 5 years old and while it was considered progressive at that
time, newer standards have since been put into place. This request is subject to regulations under
' the existing PUD plan. Staff is recommending some changes that will allow the overall plans
to work more efficiently. The revised architecture of the office /retail building attempts to reflect
the existing use of light grey rock face block foundation and columns to match the shopping
center, brick facade to match the City Hall building material, gabled roof to reflect the theme in
downtown, and arch shaped windows along the north and south facade to reflect some of the
I �
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 3
Byerly's design. This type of architecture and materials used is a better quality than the rest of
the shopping center and is consistent with downtown. Staff is recommending the applicant uses
cedar shingles rather than the dark grey asphalt shingles. The recommended shingles will
complement the Country Suites Hotel roof material. The Wendy's Restaurant building is
proposed to have brick veneer exterior. The color of the brick should be of a tone that blends
with Market Square. A pitched roof and a parapet wall screen all the roof top equipment as well
as adds an attractive architectural element.
Site access is provided via existing shopping center curb cuts on Market Boulevard and 78th
Street. Internal access is a somewhat more complicated situation. There are two internal access
points onto Market Square's north drive. The Planning Commission denied the site plan for
Wendys and the retail building on the basis of poor traffic circulation among other reasons. Staff
was directed to review with the applicants different alternatives to improve the circulation. This
matter is discussed in detail under Traffic Circulation further in the report.
The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue
by staff and the applicant. Additional landscaping is being requested south of the site. There
are some trees located within the public right -of -way. These trees must be moved and contained
within the site property lines.
In an accompanying subdivision request, the outlot is being replatted into a lot. The only change
taking place with the replat is the change of status from an outlot to a lot. The replat request is
a straight forward action.
Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the City Council approve the site plan and
subdivision request for this proposal with appropriate conditions.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
General Site Plan/Architecture
The applicant is proposing two buildings. The first building is a 10,084 square foot office /retail
building (Edina Realty), will be located on Lot 4 and situated at the southwest corner of West
78th Street and Market Boulevard. The second building is a 2,533 square foot restaurant building
( Wendy's) and will be located on Outlot A, south of the future Edina Realty. Access is gained
off of a curb cut on West 78th Street (right in/out only), and via Market Boulevard. Parking is
located to the west, south, and between the two proposed buildings. Vehicle stacking is located
south and east of the Wendy's building so that direct distant views from West 78th Street to the
north of the site will be minimized. Direct views of the stacking lanes will be screened by the
two buildings and landscaping from the north of the site. The revised architecture of the
office /retail building attempts to reflect the existing use of light grey rock face block foundation
and columns to match the shopping center, brick facade to match the City Hall building material,
F1
u
I �
J
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 4
' gabled roof to reflect the theme in downtown, and arch shaped windows along the north, east,
west, and south facades to reflect some of the Byerly's design. This type of architecture and
' materials used is a better quality than the rest of the shopping center and is consistent with
downtown. Staff is recommending the applicant uses cedar shingles rather than the dark grey
asphalt shingles. The recommended shingles will compliment the Country Suites Hotel roof
' material. The Wendy's Restaurant building is proposed to have brick veneer exterior. The color
of the brick should be of a tone that blends with Market Square. A pitched roof and a parapet
wall screen all the roof top equipment as well as adds an attractive architectural element.
' Wendys typically uses a bright red band to surround their buildings. In this instance, this will
not be the case. The trim will be of a bronze color.
The applicant is showing the trash enclosure screened by masonry walls using the same materials
as the buildings. Both, Wendy's and Edina Realty will utilize a single consolidated trash
location. Three electric boxes (transformers) operated and maintained by NSP, as well as a
' traffic controller unit, are located at the southeast corner of the site. These units will be screened
by landscaping to the north, west and south. A 10 foot clearing must be maintained around the
units for maintenance purposes. The applicant is showing those units to be relocated by the City.
' Staff agrees that these units are unattractive, however, the city recently went through relocating
these units which cost approximately $7,000. The applicant may relocate the units at their own
' expense after approval has been given by NSP. The plans also reflect a City Traffic Controller
to be relocated by the City. This is the master transformer for all the downtown signals. The
location was chosen because it provides perfect sightlines of the signals while working on the
' signals. Also, moving this unit will require major expense due to all the electric circuits that
converge at that traffic controller. Based upon the forgoing, the applicant may not move this
unit.
' Staff is generally satisfied with the two building's architecture and note that the applicant has
worked extensively to modify this project. The architecture style of the Office Retail building
' has been revised extensively and the Wendys building was rotated to provide a more attractive
elevation to viewers north bound on Market Boulevard and the service door was moved to the
north of the building to give it better screening.
The site on which Edina Realty's building is situated is a highly visible one and which is highly
likely to become one of the most important intersections in the Chanhassen CBD. Staff
appreciates the fact that the building is situated to maintain the West 78th streetscape by its close
proximity and orientation. There is no parking between the street and the building, only
landscaping. Setting an architectural standard for this building is difficult in part due to its
' location. The PUD approval requires architectural consistency with the main shopping center
building. However, at the same time, this site is essentially the transition point from the
shopping center site into architectural styles found elsewhere in the CBD. Therefore, staff
believes that the architect's intent to combine the style of the shopping center building, along
with other downtown buildings such as the Country Hospitality Suites, is a sound one.
r
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 5
Parking/Interior Circulation '
The city's parking ordinance requires one parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area '
for retail buildings. Edina Realty's building is proposed to contain 3,000 square feet of
office /retail space. The number of parking spaces required is 15. The office portion of the
building requires 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet gross floor area. The building is proposed to '
contain 7,000 square feet of office space. The number of parking spaces required is 31.5 spaces,
resulting in a total of 47 spaces. The applicant is providing 47 parking spaces.
The ordinance requires one parking space per 60 square feet of gross floor area for fast food '
� P g P P � �'
restaurants. The Wendy's building has a gross area of 2,533 square feet. The number of parking
spaces required is 42 spaces. The applicant is providing 44 spaces which exceeds the ordinance '
requirements.
On March 2, 1994, the Chanhassen Planning Commission denied the site plan for Wendy's and '
retail building on the proposed plat of Market Square 2nd Addition. The denial was largely due
to the traffic circulation but included other reasons. The Commission directed staff to review
new alternatives for traffic circulation and provide advantages and disadvantages to each option. ,
Prior to preparing the summary of the options, some design elements that are used in the design '
of parking lots based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers must be explained.
The design of a parking facility is very strongly influenced by its intended operation. The basic '
design elements and their associated operational features may be identified in successive steps
as follows: '
1. Vehicular access from the street system (entry driveway).
2. Search for a parking stall (circulation and/or access aisles). ,
3. Maneuvering space to enter the stall. '
4. Sufficient stall size to accommodate the vehicle's length and width plus space to open car
doors wide enough to enter and leave the vehicle. '
5. Pedestrian access to and from the facility's boundary (usually via the aisles) and vertically
by stairs, escalators, or elevators in multi-level facilities. '
6. Maneuver space to exit from the parking stall (access aisles). ,
7. Routing to leave the facility (access and circulation aisles).
1
Market Square H
February 16, 1994
Page 6
8. Vehicular egress in the street system (exit driveway).
Based on the design elements listed above, the Assistant City Engineer put together a list of the
advantages and disadvantages of three options that were provided by the applicant. Each of the
options is followed by a list of the advantages and disadvantages for consideration. The
corresponding parking circulation drawings are attached to this report (Attachment #1). Option
#3 is the parking lot design that appeared before the Planning Commission. This option was one
of the main reasons why the Planning Commission recommended denial of the application.
Advantage
OPTION NO. 1
1. Maintains pedestrian access through both sites.
2. Provides additional green space.
3. Eliminates the need for a cross - access easement.
Disadvantages
1. Limits ingress and egress to both sites to only one access driveway.
2. Creates more demand on the southerly access (Wendy's) versus dividing the traffic
circulation to two exit points.
3. Limits parking to each site.
4. No vehicle stacking distance on northerly access for vehicles leaving retail parking.
Advantages
OPTION NO. 2
1. Promotes smoother traffic circulation through both sites - user friendly.
2. Opens up site distance at intersection of cross aisles with northerly driveway access (retail
area).
3. Provides two access points.
4. Provides some stacking distance for vehicles leaving retail parking lot.
Disadvantages
1. Northerly access aisle does not align across with existing drive aisle in Market Square
Shopping Center.
2. Does not promote pedestrian circulation between sites.
r
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 7
OPTION NO. 3 (ORIGINAL DESIGN DENIED BY PLANNING COMMISSION)
Advantages
1. Provides pedestrian and traffic circulation between both sites.
2. Both driveway accesses align across with existing drive aisles in Market Square Shopping
Center.
3. Provides two access points.
Disadvantages
1. Intersection of retail parking lot and Wendy's parking lot not perpendicular, potentially
leading to driver confusion and turning conflicts.
2. No vehicle stacking distance on northerly driveway access for vehicles leaving retail
parking lot.
Upon review of these options, Engineering staff feels the most comfortable with Option No. 2
even though the northerly access aisle (driveway) does not align across with the existing drive
aisle in Market Square Center.
Access
Since Market Square has been completed, traffic circulation throughout the center has had its
problems. One such area is turning into the shopping center from Market Boulevard at the most
northerly access point. The driveway access is designed with three lanes of traffic; two lanes
outbound onto Market Boulevard and one lane inbound. A center median also exists dividing
the inbound from outbound lanes of traffic. The problem exists on the inbound lane. The lane
is narrow and the turning radius is tight. Numerous vehicles have "jumped" the north curb line.
Staff believes by increasing the northerly radius to 30 feet it would improve turning movements
into the site. The City's Fire Marshal has also indicated that fire trucks heading south on Market
Boulevard to access the site are unable to enter the site without swinging far out over the
northbound lane of Market Boulevard. The applicant has modified the plans to reflect the
requested turning radius.
The inbound access driveway from Market Boulevard currently is constructed to 14 feet wide
concrete curb on the north side. The inbound lane of traffic was to be constructed with bit curb
(temporary) 14 feet wide; however, since the existing curb is concrete and not bituminous, staff
recommends that only the easterly 100 feet of the driveway access from Market Boulevard be
increased to 16 feet wide face -to -face with concrete curb and gutter (B612). This 100 feet should
offer a smooth transition distance and adequate turning movement for vehicles to ingress and
egress into the shopping center. Staff discovered that the curb line (aisle) west of this site is
I�
17
J
Market Square H
February 16, 1994
Page 8
already slightly offset by a couple of feet. Thus, moving the curb further north into the site will
only aggravate the offset.
' An existing fire hydrant located at the southwest corner of the site might be impacted by the
widening of driveway radius. City policy requires a 5 foot setback for hydrants from the curb
' as well as a 10 foot clear zone around the hydrant. The applicant shall adhere to these
requirements.
' Landscaping
Although the landscaping plan appears to be generally reasonable, staff is recommending
' revisions to the plan. The first is that five additional over -story trees should be incorporated in
the green space located south of the site.
The city's West 78th Street project also includes groupings of tree plantings along West 78th
Street boulevard. The city's plans propose to plant five linden greenspire trees adjacent to the
sidewalk in front of the retail building. The applicant should incorporate these trees in the
landscaping plan and remove any of the proposed site landscaping from the city's right -of -way
or easement areas. It appears it may be necessary for the applicant to convey to the city a
' permanent landscaping easement over the trail easement in order for the city to plant the trees
previously described in this section.
Lighting
Lighting locations have not been shown on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the
' applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than .5' candles of light at the property line.
Plans should be provided to staff for approval. Fixtures should match those being used elsewhere
in the shopping center.
' Sianage
The existing Market Square sign plan permits one monument sign only for the retail/office
building site with the following conditions:
' a. The height of the monument sign shall not exceed 12'10" (the height of the existing
Market Square sign).
b. The sign shall contain no more than 41 square feet of sign area per face.
C. The sign shall be constructed to reflect the architectural style of the Market Square
shopping center. Staff recommends the sign design be identical to the existing Market
Square monument signs.
d. The owner of each monument sign shall be responsible for its construction, repair,
maintenance and/or replacement.
f
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 9
The applicant has submitted a monument sign plan. One monument identification sign is '
proposed at the northeasterly corner of the site. This sign is identical to the two existing
monument signs for Market Square. The location of the proposed monument sign is in conflict ,
with the existing NSP transformers and traffic control box, as well as being.located with in the
sight distance triangle. This sign must be moved and conform to the sight distance triangle
requirements. ,
Only one wall mounted sign is shown on the northern elevation of Wendy's building. Wall
mounted signs must meet the following criteria as identified in the plan: '
a. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted.
b All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five '
inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination.
c The signage shall be located on a maximum of two elevations of the buildings to be
constructed. '
Grading/Drainage I
The entire site is proposed to be graded to develop the building footprint and parking lots. Only
minor earthwork is anticipated since the site is essentially level. Catch basins and storm sewers '
are proposed to convey surface runoff from the rooftops, lawn areas and parking lots. The runoff
will be conveyed into the city's downtown storm water pond located south of the railroad tracks
west of Market Boulevard (fountain pond). No additional ponding areas are required as a result '
of this development. The proposed storm sewer system will be a private system and maintained
by the applicant. The installation of the storm sewer will require permits from the city's
Building Department. I
The proposed grading also appears to encroach onto the city boulevard which impacts the
existing sidewalks. Any damage to the sidewalks as a result of construction associated with the I
site improvements will require restoration by the applicant.
The plans also propose for the city to extend a 6 foot wide sidewalk along Market Boulevard
to the corner of West 78th Street. This was the responsibility of the Market Square developer.
They were to coordinate with the city's West 78th Street contractor for the installation. The
plans should be revised to reflect this. '
Utilities
Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site. These improvements were installed '
as a part of the original Market Square development.
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 10
The utility plans submitted by the applicant must be signed by a Professional Engineer. The
Building Department will require permits and inspections of the storm sewer system. Also, staff
had previously requested a fire hydrant to be located between the Wendys and Office Retail
building. The plans must be revised to reflect the requested fire hydrant in the recommended
location.
' Erosion Control
' Erosion control provisions were not applied to the site plan. Erosion control measures should
be in accordance to the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type I silt fence
should be employed along the southerly perimeter of the site at the construction limits.
' Temporary construction entrances should be required at each entrance point to minimize tracking
off site. Construction access points shall be limited to the existing parking lot and not from West
78th Street and Market Boulevard.
In conjunction with the storm sewer installation and prior to paving the parking lots m
J P P g P g �� a storm.
' drainage inlets (catch basins) shall be protected with hay bales and/or silt fence to prevent
sediments from washing into the drainage system.
'
Park and Trail Dedication
Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid as part of this development at the rate in force
'
at the time of building permit application.
COMPLIANCE TABLE WITH PUD ORDINANCE
'
As PUD,
dimensional
a most of the usual ordinance provisions pertaining
to criteria are waived.
'
Required
Proposed
Original Plan
Building Setback 25'
25'
Parking Setback N -10', S -0
N -10', S -0
'
E -10', W -0
E -10', W -0
Hard Surface Coverage N/A
24%
Parking Stalls Combined 92
97*
* The 97 parking stalls include 3 Handicap stalls.
r
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 11
SUBDIVISION '
The subdivision proposal is a simple request that will serve to change the status of Outlot A to
Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square Second Addition. Staff has added a condition making the site
plan approval contingent upon the replat approval. The following easements are either illustrated
on the plat or should be required: ,
1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of Lot 1.
'
2. Cross access easements need to be rovided over the north . drivewa
P Y
Planning Commission Update:
On February 16, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed the following application:
'
1) Site Plan Review for a 9,960 Square Foot Retail/Office Building, and a 2,533
Square Foot Wendy's Restaurant
'
2) Replat of Outlot A, Market Square into Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square Second
Addition, 41,193 Square Foot Lot
,
As an oversight by staff, the application was published in the newspaper but a notice did not get
sent to property owners within 500 feet. Consequently, the public hearing was not closed, and
'
the decision was tabled until March 2, 1994. Notices for the March 2, 1994, meeting were sent
to neighboring property owners, and the Planning Commission was able to continue discussion
of this item and vote on it.
,
The plans were reviewed by the Planning Commission in fine detail and lengthy discussions.
Numerous issues were raised regarding traffic circulation; one vs. two buildings on the site, retail
'
and commercial land use, and design and architectural style of the building. Ledvina, Conrad
and Nutting voted in favor of the approval of the site plan. The rest of the commission was
opposed. The site plan was denied by the Commission with a vote of 4 to 3. The subdivision
'
application was approved unanimously.
The following is a summary of the issues raised by the Planning Commission:
'
1. The interpretation of the word compatibility was questioned as it pertains to color,
materials, and architectural design of the buildings reflected in the site plan.
t
Commissioner Farmakes questioned if the word meant "replicate a development to the
extent that you have an extension of that development." The choice of the color grey on
the buildings was also questioned as it relates to compatibility. Staff explained that the
'
intent was to have buildings that shared elements of compatibility in style, design, and
f
0
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 12
materials. For example, it would prevent a Victorian style building from being placed
next to a modern glass building. Commissioner Farmakes was concerned that using the
same color on the buildings could result in a "boring city."
2. The applicant showed two roof designs for the Wendys building. These designs included
a mansard roof vs. a pitched roof. Roof top equipment could be screened in an easier
manner with a mansard roof than with a pitched roof. The Planning Commission favored
the pitched roof option.
3. Commissioner Mancino questioned the use of a satellite dish on top of Wendys building
as currently exists at the TH 7 and TH 101 Wendys. The applicant stated that there will
not be a satellite dish on the roof.
4. Chairman Scott wanted to see this item delayed until such time when the Vision 2002 has
completed their task of evaluating the City Center and to determine if this proposal is
compatible and fits in with the overall plan.
5. Traffic circulation was one of the major concerns for some of the Planning
Commissioners and a main reason for the denial recommendation of the site plan. As
discussed earlier in the staff report, this issue has been addressed by presenting three
alternatives accompanied by advantages and disadvantages for each option. A second
issue which relates to traffic circulation is the drive -up window. Some members of the
Commission preferred a building without a drive- through to provide smoother traffic
circulation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motions:
Site Plan Review
"If the City Council approves the Site Plan for Edina Realty and Wendy's ( #89 -2 PUD) as shown
on the site plan dated March 10, 1994, staff would recommend the following conditions:
1. The northerly access to the shopping center from Market Boulevard should be widened
to 16 feet wide face -to -face over the easterly 100 feet of the site. In addition, the
northerly radius should be expanded to 30 feet to improve turning movements into the
shopping center. "No parking" signs shall be placed along the west curb line of the
parking lot lying north of the northerly access to the retail site. In addition, "no parking"
signs shall be placed along the east curb line of the drive -up window lane to Wendy's.
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 13
2. The applicant shall work with the city in resolving final placement of the sidewalk along
West 78th Street along with the landscaping. Landscaping other than the city's boulevard
trees shall be prohibited within the city's right -of -way or trail easement area. The site
plan shall be revised to show replacing the sidewalk along Market Boulevard.
3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the
necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval.
4. The applicant shall grant the city the necessary landscape and street easements along West
78th Street.
5. The applicant shall incorporate the City's Best Management Practice Handbook to control
site erosion. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the southerly perimeter at the
construction limits. Temporary rock construction entrances shall be required to minimize
off -site tracking. Construction access points shall be limited to the interior parking lot
and not on West 78th Street and Market Boulevard. After the storm sewer installation
and prior to paving the parking lot, the storm drainage inlets (catch basins) shall be
protected with hay bales and/or silt fence to prevent sediment from washing into the
drainage system.
r
6. No window signage shall be permitted on the Wendys or the Office/Retail building. I
7. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. One
monument identification sign is proposed at the northeasterly corner of the site. This
location is in conflict with the existing NSP transformers and traffic control box, as well
as being located with in the sight distance triangle. The monument sign shall meet the
following criteria:
a. The height of the monument sign shall not exceed fourteen feet.
b. The sign shall contain no more than 41 square feet of sign area per face.
C. The sign shall be constructed to reflect the architectural style of the Market Square
shopping center. Staff recommends the sign design be identical to the existing
Market Square monument signs.
d. The owner of each monument sign shall be responsible for its construction, repair,
maintenance and/or replacement.
Only one wall mounted sign is shown on the northern elevation of Wendy's building.
Wall mounted signs must meet the following criteria as identified in the plan:
a. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted.
0
L
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 14
' b. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth
of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube
' illumination.
C. The signage shall be located on a maximum of two elevations of the buildings to
be constructed.
' 8. Five additional overstory trees shall be added along the southern portion of the site. A
berm shall be incorporated into the plan to screen the trash location from views. The
applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in
calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to
building permit issuance.
' 9. Revise architectural plans to reflect the use of cedar shingles on the office /retail . buildin
g g
' 10. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon the replat approval from Outlot A to Lot 1,
Block 1, Market Square 2nd Addition.
' 11. Stop signs shall be placed at the exit points of Wendy's and Edina Realty's parking lots.
' 12. Submit revised utility plans to reflect a fire hydrant location between the Wendys and the
retail office building.
I 13. The Fire Marshal will provide information regarding placement of "No Parking Fire Lane"
signage at the time of building permit application.
I 14. The office /retail building must be fire sprinklered pursuant to Chapter 38 MN Building
Code.
I 15. Submit radius turn dimensions to Fire Marshal and City Engineer for approval pursuant
to 1991 UFC Sec. 10- 204(c).
' 16. The plans shall be revised clarifying the applicant's responsibility for relocating the NSP
transformers and extending a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk along Market Boulevard to
the corner of West 78th Street. The city's traffic controller shall be left in place.
' Subdivision
"The City Council approves the replat of Outlot A, Market Square to Lot 1, Block 1, Market
Square 2nd Addition as shown on the plat with the following conditions:
' 1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid to the city pursuant to the city ordinances and
City Council resolutions at the rate then in force upon building permit application.
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 15
2. Provide the following easements:
a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the lot.
b. Cross access easements need to be provided over the northeasterly driveway."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Report by Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, reflecting the pros and cons of 3
options for the parking lot design.
2. Memo from HNTB dated March 18, 1994, evaluating the Site Plan Parking Options for
Wendy's and Office/Retail Building.
3. Letter from Market Square Associates Limited Partnership and Lotus Realty Services, Inc.
dated March 21, 1994.
4. Planning Commission minutes dated March 2, and February 16, 1994.
5. Staff reports dated March 2, February 16, 1994, and October 8, 1990.
6. Plans received March 14, 1994.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 0 FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planning Department
' FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
' DATE: March 9, 1994
SUBJ: Update to Site Plan Review for Wendy's Restaurant and Retail Building Within
Proposed Plat of Market Square 2nd Addition
LUR File No. 94 -3
i
On March 2, 1994, the Chanhassen Planning Commission denied the site plan for Wendy , s and
retail building on the proposed plat of Market Square 2nd Addition. It appears the denial was
due to the traffic circulation and other reasons. As directed by the Commission, staff has
reviewed with the applicants different alternatives and provided advantages and disadvantages to
each option.
Prior to preparing the summary of the options, I would like to provide some design elements that
are used in the design of parking lots based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers.
The design of a parking facility is very strongly influenced by its intended operation. The basic
design elements and their associated operational features may be identified in successive steps
as follows:
' 1. Vehicular access from the street system (entry driveway).
2. Search for a parking stall (circulation and/or access aisles).
3. Maneuvering space to enter the stall.
4. Sufficient stall size to accommodate the vehicle's length and width plus space to open car
doors wide enough to enter and leave the vehicle.
5. Pedestrian access to and from the facility's boundary (usually via the aisles) and vertically
by stairs, escalators, or elevators in multi -level facilities.
1
1
1
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff
March 9, 1994
Page 2
6. Maneuver space to exit from the parking stall (access aisles).
7. Routing to leave the facility (access and circulation aisles).
8. Vehicular egress in the street system (exit driveway).
Based on the design elements listed above, I have put together a list of the advantages and
disadvantages of three options that were provided by the applicant. I have attached each of the
options with a list of the advantages and disadvantages for consideration.
Upon review of these options, Engineering staff feels the most comfortable with Option No. 2
even though the northerly access aisle (driveway) does not align across with the existing drive
aisle in Market Square Center.
jms/ktm
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
MARKET SQUARE EXISTING PARKING LOT CONFIGURATION
i
OPTION NO. 1
Advantage
1. Maintains pedestrian access through both sites.
2. Provides additional green space.
3. Eliminates the need for a cross - access easement.
Disadvantages
1. Limits ingress and egress to both sites to only one access driveway.
2. Creates more demand on the southerly access (Wendy's) versus dividing the traffic
circulation to two exit points.
3. Limits parking to each site.
4. No vehicle stacking distance on northerly access for vehicles leaving retail parking.
f i•
W 7 �nv S; .
�r
�i
...........
`►�
I t
t
t
t
t _
'�OSSC a AQOON •LBB8f 6Z t9 $
�0
� f
��
OPTION 1
OPTION NO. 2
Advantages
1. Promotes smoother traffic circulation through both sites - user friendly.
2. Opens up site distance at intersection of cross aisles with northerly driveway access (retail
area).
3. Provides two access points.
4. Provides some stacking distance for vehicles leaving retail parking lot.
Disadvantages
1. Northerly access aisle does not align across with existing drive aisle in Market Square
Shopping Center.
2. Does not promote pedestrian 'circulation between sites.
;I
-i i
I�
_.
1AK
TH 45
.................................
ti
s�
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
OPTION
t
1
1
OPTION NO. 3 (ORIGINAL DESIGN DENIED BY PLANNING COMMISSION)
Advantages
1. Provides pedestrian and traffic circulation between both sites.
2. Both driveway accesses align across with existing drive aisles in Market Square Shopping
Center.
3. Provides two access points.
Disadvantaees
1. Intersection of retail parking lot and Wendy's parking lot not perpendicular, potentially
leading to driver confusion and turning conflicts.
2. No vehicle stacking distance on northerly driveway access for vehicles leaving retail
parking lot.
1
zasua�a c.v. «,
IN
r
s.
�s
r
i
ooTroNIP
1
ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS 3-40 W 66th Stmt
5uih• 250
MEMORANDUM 11Dlneap'dls.
TO: City Council Minnesota 55-1.35
(612) 92ag666
FAA (0 12) '12401',3
FROM: Larry Dallam, Steve Manhart
SUBJ: Evaluation of Site Plan Options for Wendy's Restaurant and Retail Building
DATE: March 18, 1994
HNTB has evaluated the traffic circulation effects of the site plan options stated in Dave
Hempel's March 9, 1994 memorandum. Our evaluation focused on traffic to and from Wendy's
restaurant in relation to traffic associated with Market Square Center and a potential retail
establishment north of Wendy's.
I FINDINGS
Option 1 (Single Access)
1. Conflicts will occur between entering and exiting Wendy's traffic at the access point and
between Wendy's traffic and Market Square traffic at the intersection of the access point,
the West 78th Street roadway and the parking drive aisle -- creating a "bottleneck" during
peak hours at the single access point. The delay and inconvenience could result in the
loss of patrons for Wendy's.
2. Unfamiliar patrons entering from West 78th Street may turn into the north retail lot
expecting access to Wendy's and either do a u -turn to exit or park in the retail lot next
to Wendy's and walk across the drive -thru lane. Patrons wishing to avoid the bottleneck
would also find this access and parking attractive.
Option 2 (Two Accesses)
3. Provides alternative entering and exiting points -- making the site more
accessible /convenient and traffic circulation more fluid.
4. The alignment of the northern access point with the Market Square parking drive aisle is
not a critical factor in determining the location of the access point -- since there will be
a minimal amount of infrequent traffic desiring to cross -over to and from the drive aisle,
the sight lines are unobstructed, and the traffic speeds should be low.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the preceding Findings, it is recommended:
r,
That the City Council approve Option 2 as the preferred site plan for traffic
circulation.
T h e H\ III Co mpan ies kA22281 /C0UNMM18
'
OFF I(L TLA N A!;A!0\ F "GE LA. BUiI ON NIA. CHARLESTON. )XV CHI( V H.
:Ai;O. IL: CLEELAND O CONCORD. (.A. DALLAS T.N. DENVER. CO. RF
FA IE: it N'.
NAF. n. I I'. IIlV I 0S. T\ !':Di ANAp )i.... I\. IR \IN1. CA. KA\ A. CITY. \h) LAN �IN,; \II: LOS .ANGEL ES. CA. LOUISM LLE. Al. VIAV I. FL \I ILWAC AEC. VT VINNEAPOI Is. SIN`
oK; AH•.1A 117) O!;. ORIA \DO. FL O \'F.RLAND PARK. A >. PHOENIV AZ, RALEIGH. NC. ROC ALAND COL'NT). Nl'. SEATTLE. \\A:IAVDA. FL TLL >A. OK
i ^\
MARKET SQUARE
S H O P P 1 N 0 C E N T E R
March 21, 1994 ,
TO: Whom It May Concern '
FROM: Market Square Associates Limited Partnership
and Lotus Realty Services, Inc. '
RE: Letter from Guy's Grill
It is our understanding that a letter dated February 11,
1994 from Guy Peterson was submitted to the members of the '
City Council, HRA and Planning Commission.
The likelihood of Wendy's being located at Market Square has
been a topic of conversation with various of the merchants ,
at Market Square for several months. Some of these
conversations have also included Guy Peterson and we were
therefore surprised to learn of his letter since he had not
expressd any real concern to us.
In response to Guy's suggestion that there might be a
conflict of interest on the part of Lotus personnel in '
promoting the sale and /or leasing of properties on the
outlots of Market Square, it is our belief that Lotus not
only has a right to do so, it also has a responsibility to I
do so.
Brad Johnson of Lotus Realty and Herb Bloomberg of Bloomberg
Companies, the entity which previously owned and now has an
'
option on Lot 4 and Outlot A, are both partners in the
Market Square Associates Limited Partnership (MSALP), the
partnership which owns the Market Square Shopping Center.
It has always been the assumption by the partnership,
'
Bloomberg and Lotus that the outlots would be developed as
anticipated by the overall PUD agreement and it is the
judgment of all of the members of the partnership that the
'
additional traffic generated by the development is critical
to the success of the center and the merchants who conduct
their businesses there.
'
Therefore, we have all been working together attempting to
assemble the various ingredients necessary to the '
development of Lots 2, 3, 4 and Outlot A ever since the
shopping center transaction closed on February 28, 1992.
F
F
1
Shopping center developments throughout the country often
are platted with a large tract which serves as the site of a
large, multi- tenant building and with several smaller tracts
located at the edges of the larger tract. These smaller
tracts are usually developed after the larger tract, as is
the case with Market Square.
'
Frequently larger anchors in the shopping negotiate
limitations on the use of the smaller tracts as well as
"exclusive" clauses relating to the shopping center as part
of their lease negotiations. Smaller tenants also
frequently negotiate for the exclusive use clauses but only
as it relates to the shopping center building, typically not
'
the outlots.
At Market Square, Gateway /Festival sought and received
protective covenants which are of record which prohibit
certain uses and limit the height of buildings to 24 feet in
order to preserve sight lines. None of the other tenants
requested any limitations as to the outlots. Very few of
'
the tenants requested any "exclusive" rights within the
shopping center building and neither did Guy. His lease
contains nothing which gives him any exclusive right to
restaurant usage.
Despite that, not only out of concern for the businesses
located in Market Square, but also using prudent judgement
on behalf of the shopping center as a whole, we have always
'
sought not only to keep a varied mix of tenants, but also to
avoid duplication.
As to prospective tenants for space within the Market Square
building prior to 100% occupancy and as to potential use
of the outlots, hair cutters, gift shops, drug stores, dry
cleaners and others have been turned away.
Guy Peterson entered into his lease agreement at a time when
'
there was a pizza operation planned for the entire area now
occupied by Subway and Westermann's. When that
pizza
operation decided not to locate there, Guy was offered that
space and he opted to stay with the location he presently
'
has. At that time, Guy was operating a business in what we
call the old drive -in and a business which we in Chanhassen
called either "Guy's" or "The Taco Shop ". His change to
Guy's Grill is quite recent and came after we were well into
the negotiations with Wendy's.
Prior to that time, in deference to his business, we had
turned down a request by Taco Belle for a proposal for them
to locate on one of the outlots.
J
r
As a part of the negotiations with Gateway /Festival, we had
also negotiated an agreement with Gateway /Festival that they
would except from their exclusive right to sell food, not
only the existing restaurants at Market Square, but also
future restaurants, specifically including Wendy's, on the
outlots.
Guy's letter expresses a concern for sight lines, use of the ,
parking lot to access the site, parking, etc. Although the
tenants at the shopping center building are anxious for us
to develop the outlots, we're sure they all have concerns
regarding sight lines, as do we. Within the constraints of '
various code requirements, we have been attempting to
preserve as much visibility as possible. Fortunately, the
siting of the buildings as recommended by the City staff I
also serves to preserve a fair amount of visibility.
As to access through the Market Square parking lot, it is
not obvious unless looking at a plat that both of the
'
primary drives into Market Square are each 50% on the Lot 4
and Outlot A parcel. It has always been intended, and the
PUD Agreement requires, that the access to that parcel will
be from the existing entrance drives and not directly from
'
either street. In addition, we have complied with a
suggestion that the entrance drive off Market Blvd. be
widened as a part of the proposed development of Outlot A.
It has also been assumed that the additional parking for the
buildings on the outlots will be advantageous to the Lot 1
development. Cross parking easements are already in place
'
for all of the parcels within the PUD.
We have no knowledge of any promises of additional open
space or greenways made by anyone, including the City, at
the time the shopping center was proposed. Nor do we
believe either the Merchants' Marketing Group or the Lions
'
ever anticipated any long term use of the vacant land for
events or Christmas tree sales. The merchants recognize
that Wendy's will attract a far greater number of folks to
the center then might be lost due to the lack of space for
promotions.
We are confident that anyone in the business of owning and
managing shopping centers will wholeheartedly agree that the
traffic generated by the proposed development is an
important ingredient to the success of the shopping center
and its merchants.
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
there's some reason that we're not able to give specific direction to staff or you can't come
up with something that fits "the Byerly's thing ". Then what we need to do is to work out our
variance. Signage variance and maybe that's what we, maybe it's not an ordinance. Maybe
it's our variance criteria. So I think we have two options.
Harberts: It's of interest that we didn't attack this signage ordinance before this particular
piece.
Scott: Agreed. Normally since the public hearing has been closed but if you wish to say
' something briefly.
' Charlie James: I wanted to say one thing. If you're going to be considering this ordinance
later on this evening, one of the things you might want to consider, because someone raised
the issue of advertising, is go downtown. Is it Subway or is it Subway Sandwiches? Is it
MGM or is it MGM Wine and Spirits or liquor or whatever it is? Is it Festival, as we refer
to it in the industry or is it Festival Foods? So I mean there's a whole multi dimensional
thing there so.
' Farmakes: Is it Holiday or is it Warm Snacks and Beer? You're right. It is a problem and
it's currently, under the current ordinance, subject to the manager of the store...
Scott: Okay. Thank you very much for your comments.
PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO REPLAT
OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE INTO LOT 1, BLOCK 1, MARKET SQUARE 2ND
ADDITION FOR THE LOCATION OF A WENDY'S RESTAURANT ON PROPERTY
' ZONED CBD AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WEST 78TH
STREET AND MARKET BOULEVARD, LOTUS REALTY SERVICES.
C!
Public Present:
Name Address
Brad Johnson
Lotus Realty Services
Lotus Realty Services
7008 Dakota Avenue
Bloomberg Companies Inc.
7900 Xerxes Avenue So., Mpls
Naperville, IL
Landscape Architect
27
Vernelle Clayton
Herb Bloomberg
Clayton Johnson
'
Peter Beck
Jurij Ozga
Kevin Norby
Lotus Realty Services
Lotus Realty Services
7008 Dakota Avenue
Bloomberg Companies Inc.
7900 Xerxes Avenue So., Mpls
Naperville, IL
Landscape Architect
27
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 f
Harberts: I just want to ask a question first. It's m understanding that the city owns this
J q Y g
piece of property.
Scott: The HRA does. ,
Harberts: Or the HRA does.
Scott: That is correct. I
Harberts: Well, the HRA, which is a different entity by Statute. Is the city interested in
having, is the city interested in selling this piece of property to have this development occur I
on this piece of land?
Krauss: There have been some discussions about that but the fact is, is that there's a I
purchase or a repurchase agreement I guess...
Harberts: Does the city have the intention of selling this piece of property in order for this I
development to occur?
Krauss: There are questions that have been raised regarding that and it's ultimately going to
be a decision of the HRA.
Harberts: When will they consider that? I
Krauss: But I should state that that has really little or no bearing on what you as a zoning,
planning and zoning commission do with a site plan that's before you. I
Harberts: Oh I agree Paul.
Krauss: The fact of city ownership. The fact that someone along the line, other elements of '
the city may decide to sell it or not to sell it or use it for something else is not what's before
you. What's before you is the site plan.
Harberts: I agree with Paul on that but my only concern here is that, are we spinning our
wheels? ,
Krauss: Well yeah, I can't answer that. I really don't know how it's going to turn out. But
you as a Planning Commission are empowered to review projects based upon in place PUD
agreements. Based upon the zoning ordinance. Based upon the Comprehensive Plan. That's
28
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
it. Whether or not the HRA elects to or elects to do something else with it, is really their
decision.
' Mancino: So anybody can come up in front of us with a site plan on any land, whether it's
going to be sold or not, and just say we want you to review this site plan?
' Krauss: Anybody who has a legitimate interest in a piece of ground.
Scott: What's a legitimate interest? How do you define that? They're interested in doing
something.
Krauss: Well they have a purchase agreement or they own it outright and in this case they
have an agreement to repurchase the land. I mean this goes back to an in place PUD
agreement that's been around for 4 1/2 years.
Harberts: I have to agree with Paul in terms of what is before us this evening is to
concentrate on the site plan that's before us. My only frustration is understanding what the
background events are. I'm a little, maybe a little bit disappointed that we as a Planning
Commission, and maybe this is just one of those flukes, one of those weaknesses, and the
purpose of a Planning Commission that we're spending our time, perhaps spending our time
on a project that has so much controversy, so much who knows what direction this is going to
' go, that I believe we have better things to do with our time and so I agree with you Paul and
I may be speaking out of turn a little bit but I'm just, I think we have better things to do and
I don't know if there's an opportunity to clearly define that projects that come before us have
some legitimacy in one way or the other so we can spend our time more effectively for the
city.
' Krauss: Well I'd say first of all we're holding this project to the same standards of
legitimacy as we do with any other in terms of it being a legitimate interest to bring a project
before you. I don't know how that other issue's going to turn out. I appreciate the concerns
that you have in spinning your wheels, as you describe it, but then again you've spun your
wheels for two meetings on the Centex townhome project and that died for reasons beyond
the purview of the Planning Commission. Those things happen.
Mancino: Yeah but the city didn't...
I Krauss: No.
' Scott: I happened to be in, I know Commissioner Mancino was at the City Council meeting
4 weeks ago. I was at the one on Monday night. This issue was discussed very specifically
29
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
and major questions were raised at that level. Do we want to retain this as city property for a ,
public project? Centex obviously didn't have that sort of exposure and I don't know, I'd
have to defer to some of the commissioners that have more tenure than I do but do you, have
you seen a project of this type that got to this point where the city was involved with the
property? Has owned it.
Farmakes: The criteria that I've used in the past is the more the city is a partner in these
projects, the more negotiation position it has and that becomes a gray area. Now whether or
not we should be involved with that, it seems to me that in particular if the City Council asks
these questions, that's part of our charge. To investigate what those questions are. And
especially if they get into the areas of interpretative things such as architecture or how this
affects the city in general. Those aren't quite the same as saying, whether or not you're '
meeting the height requirement.
Krauss: If we go back to the history of the site, the Planning Commission had no problems
approving the Americana Bank proposal on the same property. It was in the same context. It
was still owned by the city.
Farmakes: There were roblems with the building as I recall.
P g
Krauss: But you approved it. It was redesigned certainly and I think you were the major
focus of that discussion.
Farmakes: Well yeah. I don't see any difference though in what is the reason this wasn't '
approved at the last meeting. Or excuse me, not approved. Continued for some other reasons
that I recall but the public hearing was actually continued. '
Mancino: On the American Bank, was there a task force that was looking over the whole
downtown to decide about land use?
Krauss: No there wasn't at the time but I would argue that what a task force does or doesn't
do, unless there's a moratorium involved, what somebody may or may not do in the future
cannot color your decisions based upon your review of the zoning ordinance. That gets into
pretty dangerous territory. You can't make the rules up as you go along and when you do
that, you run into some legal problems, which is why we often counsel... Commissioner '
Harberts, you raise an interesting question. Is the Planning Commission out in front of this
one and is that the place for you to be. The fact is, 5 years ago I recall there was a great
deal of consternation, Steve Emmings was in the room a second ago. He may well
remember. Ladd I'm sure remembers. That the HRA was driving projects and the Planning
Commission got them second. And there was a great deal of frustration with the Planning
i
30
I
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Commission that projects were already in the pipeline. And we reversed that process largely
at your request because we thought it made sense for the Planning Commission to be in the
driver's seat. Now this is one of those rare instances where it may backfire a little bit but
that's how that happens.
Harberts: Well like I said Paul, I don't disagree with you in terms of what our charge here
is. What our purpose is. It just, like I said, it's somewhat disappointing and somewhat
frustrating given the large amount of pieces that go through us here when there clearly seems
to be some discussion in terms of what you should occur at the site because it's a focal point
to the community. Because we have this 2000 year task force. Those type of pieces.
Krauss: Well, what you may consider though is, I think you have a responsibility under the
' zoning ordinance, under the infamous PUD agreement, to make some kind of a judgment in
that context. If you have, and I understand that you do have, other concerns that should be
brought before the City Council and the HRA, or to the Vision 2002 committee, fine. You
make one set of actions on this proposal based upon what's in place now and send along a
second set of recommendations of what you think should happen in the other context. But
the idea of somewhat arbitrarily saying well, because there are things that are happening
' outside this, we don't think it's necessarily a good idea. Therefore we continued this. That's
not really a valid use of your authority.
1 Harberts: And you know to be fair too, I guess you know I get a little bent out of shape
when public policy seems to in a sense tweak the developers or tweak the public when in a
sense we should be more in a partnership. And like I said, maybe I'm speaking out of turn a
' little bit on this issue but like I said, I agree with you. Our charge is certainly to look at the
site plans and again I would just share that same comment with my colleagues here. That
that's what's before us rather than what do we think is a good use of this area. That certainly
will come into play here but you know we do have a charge here.
Mancino: But that's part of planning, deciding what's a good use of an area of land use. I
mean'that's what we're supposed to be doing. Not just reviewing site plans but as an overall
land use, is this a good land use.
Conrad: Well tonight this is a legal use. If it's not, somebody has to tell the City Council
it's not but tonight it is and we really can't change zoning.
Farmakes: The question is, as I recall at the last meeting, is the content of what goes in there
and not the criteria that it's an office retail. But what it is that goes in there.
Conrad: It's reviewing a PUD.
31
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
Farmakes: We've had other applicants come in here with the concepts who didn't technically
own the property so it's not, I don't see it as a problem or a waste of time for us to do this
now. I think this is part of the process. I don't see it necessarily as a partnership but as a
system of checks and balances of what we're doing here and hopefully in the end you get
different representations of different interests in these type of things and hopefully the
community comes out ahead in the end. There are commercial interests in this property and
'
there are community interests in this property and I think that the system as it's set up is a
good one. And allows for the other checks and balances to take place.
Conrad: Absolutely but when the applicant came in here with the rest of Market Square they
said, we didn't say is there going to be a library there? We didn't. We knew full well this
'
was going to be retail commercial so that's how, you know there was no deception about that
and we didn't raise any issues with that. Any.
Krauss: No. I mean it was wide open.
Conrad: So at that time, at that time if we had a problem.
1
Mancino: So you were expecting fast food and retail.
Conrad: We didn't expect anything but I think the applicant talked about retail and talked
P Y g
about food.
11 a public hearing on this articular item has been continued from last time so if
Scott: We p g p
someone would like to address the Planning Commission, please step forward. Maybe from a
staff report standpoint, talk about anything that has changed. Specifically what has changed
since the last time.
Sharmin Al -Jaff gave a staff report update at this point.
Scott: Any questions or comments for staff? I
Ledvina: Just one thing. Is the traffic circulation in terms of the alignment of that egress, is
that addressed in the report or would that have to be added as a condition?
Al -Jaff: It's not addressed in the report. Dave might want to answer that question. You had
the meeting with ... this morning. I
Hempel: It was recently created as early as 8:05 this morning so no update has been placed
in your items for you this evening so it would be appropriate to put something in to make
32 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
revisions to the plan.
Mancino: Sham what does that do to the number of parking spaces that are required?
Al -Jaff: What you might look here, you'll be able to make up so you will end up with the
' same number of spaces because. Well this, we could probably add 4 spaces here and you
would be losing 3 spaces with the first. But I think it would be a wash. You have a total of
91 parking spaces. The ordinance requires 89.
Mancino: So you still have the same number of intersections there. You would just
straighten out the line.
' Al -Jaff: Correct.
F
Mancino: So it wouldn't eliminate.
Al -Jaff: You would still have 5 intersections but they won't be center.
Hempel: Actually you still have 4 intersections.
Mancino: 1, 2, 3, 4. But you have incoming traffic too from that. North, south. The main
entryway. The north one.
Hempel: Sharmin, would you please put the overhead back on.
Scott: Any other questions or comments?
Farmakes: This site plan that we have seen, north elevations and west and east show no
signage ... duplication south elevation to the north?
Al -Jaff: I'm sorry, I couldn't hear that.
Farmakes: The north elevation and the west elevation and the east elevation show no
signage. The north elevation, east and west be a duplication of the signage that we see in the
south elevation?
Al -Jaff: No. It would be limited to the north and south only.
Farmakes: Alright, so the north elevation that we see currently would be a duplication then
of what is currently is shown on the south.
a]
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Al -7aff: Correct. 1
Scott: I think what we'll do, since the public hearing is continued, I think what we'll do is
we'll continue that public hearing and then if the applicant would like to speak as part of the
public hearing, make a presentation. That's fine. If other members of the public would like
to do so, all we ask is that you step in front and state your name and address and state your '
case. So who would like to begin? I'm sure someone would like to speak.
Vernelle Clayton: One of the things that has occurred ... is in our effort to quickly turn around
a response to their request, sort of at the same time that the reports are going out, you're
getting reports that say one thing and then pictures of something in an envelope that look like
something else. This is the very latest of.-in response to my conversation with Dave this '
morning. I think I'll show you this rather than if you have, if you want to know what
happened before we have sort of a chronology of things here and we do have what came '
immediately before that which was a site plan that we incorporated one—since the last
meeting but until I met with Dave, we didn't want to incorporate those changes on the site
plan. After we met with Dave we incorporated those changes on the landscape plan so if you '
want that ... as far as getting an overall idea of what it's looking like. So that's what we have
before you now. And as Sharmin explained—actually 5 exits into this corner. Now we have
the 4 with this one off to the side ... Can you see it? I guess the other changes are ... we had
made earlier...So before we move off the site plan and over to the landscape plan, I'll give
you an opportunity to ask questions if you'd like.
Mancino: I have a question for Dave. I'd like to hear his comments on, you've gone
through the drive thru. You're stopped and you're going to exit. You're just going to go
through the middle of all that traffic? Do you see where I mean? Now you stopped right
there, the end and you want to exit on that northern, yeah. And go straight. Tell me about
traffic and traffic safety there and who knows when to stop where and how many people do
you have to look at and all that kind of stuff. '
Hempel: First of all parking lots are difficult in the first place to make safe but the site has
very tight configurations. The buildings and the parking lots and so forth like that. To add a
drive thru with the circulation, to even try and bring out a point that's trying to give the most
ease of access to get in and out of the site. With the drive thru like this, you're avoiding the
additional traffic movements in the retail parking lot ...to bring that more out into the location
for quicker access to the site. The turning, the second type of movement out of the driveway
would be backing a car out of the parked stalls on the west side of Wendy's and proceed
north is basically no different than that.
Farmakes: Would it make more sense to widen the area, the exit from Wendy's. Put an
34
0
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
island between the two so you didn't have the converging in the same spot from the office
building and the fast food?
' Vernelle Clayton: I'm sorry. Say that again.
Farmakes: I don't know anything about traffic allocation designs on how you're doing that.
I can see where sort of the cars are all being angled to the same point in that parking lot and
what I'm wondering is, if your finger, if you just bring it straight down. Just straight down
' from the parking lot from that fast food lane there.
Vemelle Clayton: Here?
' Farmakes: Yeah. Just bring it straight down and keep on going with it. Keep on going.
i Vemelle Clayton: We've talked about that too and I've been—we originally had the exit here.
More like here and you wanted it lined up with across here. This would be fine with us if it
' would come out here.
Hempel: Right. That was part of the existing parking lot on the other side which serves
Subway and the rest of the Market Square has these existing islands here which dictate the
' access point or openings for traffic flow across the intersection here. Ideally, yes. That
would be great if we could continue one movement right off the road. But you've got
constraints such as the parking here where you don't have that on this side. We're not able
to mirror.
Farmakes: Well how many parking spots do you lose then though?
Hempel: This, and you'd essentially have to reconfigure the opposite side of the street as
well. You would have offset points coming out onto your access road. That's the problem
with that situation.
1
1
f
it
Farmakes: You wouldn't necessarily drive from the parking lot into Wendy's? A straight
vertical line though wasn't it?
Vernelle Clayton: Are you saying why is it important that they be across from each other?
Mancino: Yeah.
Farmakes: No. Why is it important that the access from that parking lot drive across the
thru road into Wendy's? It doesn't seem to me to be the same destination. Wouldn't the
35
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
majority of the traffic come through the thru road? The road that goes north and south to
access the property.
Hempel: Right. This would be the major access feeder for this whole site for the shopping
center. The major access to Wendy's would be the most southerly one.
Farmakes: Right. I mean ... people leaving to the middle area there. The majority of them
entering to the right. My point is, I would assume you wouldn't have very many of them
driving across from the opposite parking lot. That would be driving north, east and west. ,
Vernelle Clayton: He doesn't think there are going to be many people coming from here.
Farmakes: Right. So what I'm saying is.
g Y g
Vemelle Clayton: So why can't we have this down here and then they'll be going out here
or down here anyway.
Hempel: I see. '
Farmakes: I don't know that. I'm assuming that somebody with traffic patterns.
John: If I can try to answer what I think was the problem. Is this roadway is one of the
main entrances to Market Square shopping center so in theory it would have more traffic at a
higher speed. People would tend to drive through the main entrance to get to wherever
they're going.
Farmakes: It's 25 mph, right? '
John: Right. But their—they have a right to continue. Even though I was there this ,
evening and it seems like the road stops at every intersection. However, that would be one of
the main entrances, just like this is one of the main entrances into the shopping center. So
from a traffic perspective, you would prefer to have, whatever decisions have to be made,
happen in this area before you would get on the main entrance roadway. So that's what I
think staff was trying to achieve and I didn't want to have any confusion at that intersection.
So they wanted to have this line up with the passageway and the parking lot across the way '
so there wouldn't be any confusion in that area. The car would come up here. Stop and
make a turn if they wanted to proceed across there...
Farmakes: I can see what you're talking about. If a car comes, travels let's see that would
be to the east, or west. It's coming down after getting their hamburger and they come to the
36
I�
I
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
' access road and look north and south to see if there's any traffic coming and go out to the
lane of traffic. If they turn to the north where the 4 access points sort of come together there,
they would sort of have to do a 360 to see exactly what was coming at them.
John: No, not really because to understand the flow, what you don't see over here is the
stop signs. So when you come out of the drive thru. Pick up your product. You come to
this point you stop. Same thing coming from this part of the parking lot.
' Farmakes: But you have to look right and left.-intersection again. Look right and left again.
Turn. Look to your left and then come down to the access road.
John: But just remember, that traffic's not even going 25 mph. You're basically idling.
You're coming out, a way out of a parking lot.
Farmakes: But it's a drive thru.
John: You're not going at the speeds someone would be going on an entrance road. And
' from a traffic perspective, you're looking to say, we want to make all the resolutions or
decisions happen on the lot. On the site plan before you get into what would be the regular
thoroughfare.
Hempel: One other thing I'd like to add is, this access point here, that's a pretty heavily
traveled one. It's the one that takes you behind Subway and out the back way of the west
exit or entrance on Market Square as well. So it is, it's more heavily used than either one of
those two.
Farmakes: But what I'm saying is, that doesn't mean that they couldn't drive straight across
and the entrance would still be there. I'm talking actually about two ways to leave that
property. One would be to enter where it currently is now, wanting to come straight down
' leaving Wendy's, which is probably only going to be departures I assume. But I'm just
looking at that from a consumer's standpoint. I have no expertise on that whatsoever. And
to me that doesn't.
John: From Wendy's perspective we would not have a preference. However, I can see
1 from your staff making decisions here, where people are traveling slow. So it's easier to
stop.
Farmakes: From being a consumer, driving in these parking lots, those multi entrances where
you have several angles coming together, is usually where I have my problems in parking
lots.
37
r-1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
Hempel: It's similar to McDonald's drive thru that . you have now currently.
'
P Y Y
Farmakes: Kind of a free for all at some particular exit. '
Hempel: At some point you do with most drive thru's. This gives you an opportunity to go '
either direction where this one you're limited to going one way on and more congestion in
this area competing with traffic for the retail site. I agree, it's not a perfect parking lot
configuration but dealing with what we have on the other side of the street. With the access ,
points. I felt it's probably the most.
Mancino: Dave, on a scale of 1 to 10, how hazardous is it? I mean would you design, I
mean starting from scratch, something like that?
Hempel: That's a tough question. I
Mancino: Well you're evaluating public safety all the time.
Hempel: On that size of a parking lot, it's difficult with a mall ... those traffic generates all of
the uses. That's a pretty heavily traveled roadway. What helps here is it's a right- in/right -out
only or it would even be worse traffic. But I guess I'd probably rate it at 7. 6 or 7. '
Mancino: Okay. A question for you. Can an 18 wheeler go in, drop off supplies, food,
everything else and make those turns to the Wendy's in the parking lot? Can they do the ,
radius turns?
Hempel: I would say they'd be able to maneuver at this intersection. I guess I would
question that over there.
Vemelle Clayton: Did we decide they could get around there or did we decide you weren't ,
going to be using them much?
Jurij Ozga: Yes, we oriented them around the building, yes. '
Mancino: Because I know we had problems with the entryway into Market Square off of
Market Boulevard. ,
Jurij Ozga: Yeah, we have roughly 22 feet here. We did look at...that configuration... Usually
deliveries are made before the restaurant's open so there's no cars. '
Mancino: Yeah. I'm just wondering if they can actually make the turns. Getting in.
38
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Scott: Any other questions or comments for the applicant?
Vernelle Clayton: We have here a boat and pick -up and a boat.
Harberts: I'm sorry.
Vemelle Clayton: A pick -up and a boat goes around too.
Harberts: But is it a Suburban?
Vernelle Clayton: Well, I had to make it more fun to make a pick -up so anyway.
Harberts: The radius worked?
' Vemelle Clayton: It worked. We're essentially then done with the site questions that you
have of us on the site plan?
Scott: Yes.
' Vemelle Clayton: Alright. Listen, if you think of other questions we can come back to it but
we wanted to get back to elevations. A little discussion of what we did for changes on
elevations...
Kevin Norby: Since the last time we looked at this, again there were a couple of changes.
We tried to address Nancy's concern about pedestrian safety and crossing parking lots and
we've extended the sidewalks on either side of the building here to directly incorporate the
concrete pavement in the parking lot. That will help designate... indicating a pedestrian
crosswalk. The other area we looked at was this utility corridor and I've got a ... Basically
what we did was try to cluster those utility boxes and provide access to them from a central
courtyard. What do you call it. We then screen them from the adjoining roads with various
plant material, roughly 5 to 7 feet tall. Some of that materials is evergreens. A little bit is
deciduous so we think it's a year round sort of screening. We would probably need an
easement dedicated for putting those utilities in that location. Basically beyond that the
planting plan hasn't changed unless you've got questions.
Mancino: Kevin, one of the requests I think Sharmin made was on the south side she
requested 5 trees and you added 3. You have a space there.
Al -Jaff: 5 in addition to what was there originally.
39
n
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
Mancino: Okay. Has that been done. Was there a reason not to?
Kevin Norby: Well we discussed that at the last meeting and I thought the way we left that,
'
there was some concern about the viability of the plant material in that particular location and
we tried to put plant material that we thought would take the salt and the heat. It's a fairly
narrow area with traffic moving and snowplows moving a lot of snow into that area. You'll
,
have a lot of salt residue. This is exactly the same plan you saw last time with that regard.
Mancino: Okay. Then refresh my memory a little bit. Are any of the perimeter plantings
'
trees inside the parking lot or perimeter plantings conifers? Besides what's around the utility.
Kevin Norby: No. There are a couple here that are actually inside of that right -of -way. It
r
would be considered interior I suppose but they're really part of an exterior sort of planting.
Those are not.
'
Mancino: Any particular reason? Because I know when we drafted our new preservation
ordinance, we asked for 20% be conifers.
'
Kevin Norby: It was a matter of space limitations. Wanting to use something we thought
was appropriate. We thought they could be best used along the perimeter to provide
'
buffering. The sort of spaces that were typically given here, along the building are anywhere
from maybe 3 feet to 10 feet wide and we're talking about putting a conifer in there that's
got a spread of 15 to 30 feet. We didn't think that was appropriate.
'
Mancino: Gotch ya. Then people couldn't walk around it.
Kevin Norby: Right.
Scott: Dave.
,
Hempel: I just had one question, or actually two questions. Has NSP been consulted with
relocating these boxes, if it's even feasible?
'
Vernelle Clayton: Yes. I called...
timing Hempel: I know the city has a traffic controller at th at intersection as well for the g of
the traffic signals at the intersection and I have some reservations on how much that can be
moved.
'
Vernelle Clayton: I think we were hoping we might be able to build that into the line...
,
40
I n
u
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Kevin Norby: It's currently shown in the location with the rest of them here but there's been
some discussion and of course we want to talk with you about this but actually incorporating
it here as adjacent to or as a part of that monument.
Hempel: One last question I guess as far as if the boxes are moved down to that location as
' proposed, I would assume that NSP would be given right of entry or access easement or
something because I don't think there's going to be an access to it from Market Boulevard.
Kevin Norby: This drawing I gave you would provide access from the, basically from the
Wendy's site. And we'd maintain the 10 foot access corridor.
' Mancino: Kevin, can you also refresh my memory on the south side of the office retail
building. Is there going to be any planting, any planters, any welcoming green space there?
L_1I
L
Kevin Norby: There are some spaces there. I'm not sure that you can see them from there
but along the entire perimeter of the building with the exception of where the doors are. In
lieu of providing planter boxes like at Market Square in front of Lawn and Sports and Guy's
and those places, we felt that, I felt that those would complicate the circulation. They create
some awkward situations as far as trying to plant them and maintain plant material. So I've
proposed planting strips along the entire perimeter of that building.
Mancino: About how wide?
Kevin Norby: I think we've got them at 30 inches.
Mancino: Okay. And will there be sprinklers to maintain themselves or drip system or
something?
Kevin Norby: My understanding is that the whole site will be irrigated, including the
planters.
Scott: Any other?
Hempel: Mr. Chairman, if I could ask one more question. As far as the monument of that
corner, what's the height of that monument sign?
Vernelle Clayton: What is it Sharnun? You have it on that drawing.
Al -Jaff: 12 feet 10 inches.
41
I n
u
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
Hempel: I'm just a little concerned, would that monument fall into our sight triangle.
Al -Jaff: No. I measured that. '
Hempel: Okay, thanks.
Farmakes: Aren't we hearing from Wendy's? '
Scott: Maybe next.
Vemelle Clayton: We had, we will talk a little bit about the materials that we're going to be
using next. And also put up the boards on which you have the elevations for the new plan of '
the retail office building. You saw it on the overhead. I think the TV may be a little clearer
on this and I also have some sketches. Ink drawings which will give you a little bit of depth
perception. One of the things that you asked for was a chance to see what the materials look '
like and so Bill, our architect by the way, I should explain ... This is the choice of brick that
Bill selected and it's ... It's got, we discussed the fact that the corner, the buildings near the '
corner have a rosy cast as does this building and certainly the Country Suites motel. So this
is picking up on that and this is a piece of the break off block that would—There are a couple
of remaining elements that tie in with Market Square. One is the break off block all the way '
across the bottom. All the way around and then the other is just this kind of hint of.-This is
a sample of the asphalt shingle for the roof.
Farmakes: That would be gray, not green? '
Vemelle Clayton: I'm sorry. I
Farmakes: Those now would be changed to gray, not green?
Vemelle Clayton: Right. We kind of heard you say you weren't too happy with the green
and we feel that this style of building, because it's a little less dramatic, that it probably needs
the subtlety of the more muted colors. These are the colors, the Market Square colors. I'll
just put them up here. This is the green and these are the pink colors. This is the green
tile...
Mancino: Where is the Sr een? '
Vemelle Clayton: The green, the metal, the coping around the building at Market Square is ,
this color. The roof, the pitch ... the pitch on the top of the monument signs are the colors.
There are little insets of tiles here and there on the gabled portions and that's the green.
42
F
L
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Probably more of the green we're talking about though ... and this, if you consider this as the
way the building might look at night and this is the way it might look during the day.
There's a fair amount of glass and I think it will be quite dramatic at night with the lights on
through the arched windows and doors. During the day then you'll see this is ... for this trim.
The windows is the burgundy so that will be kind of the hint of the tie -in's to the awnings
over the windows at Market Square. The windows here will have a burgundy. And I think
those will pick up the brick. This will give you I think a little better feeling of the depth of
the building and the way these plans work and just jutting out here 2 feet and then back in
and out here 2 feet and back in and...cutting in the corners. This is, she has outlined these as
a sign band...
Mancino: Would there be any wall lighting? I know you have it over at Market Square. It
looks like a different feel. I see you having different light in the Market Square but I just
wondered if you had gotten to that degree and picked out.
Vemelle Clayton: We haven't.
Farmakes: The gabled areas with the larger window space, is that reflective material or is
that transparent?
Vemelle Clayton: This is ... currently as glass.
Farmakes: See thru glass, it's not.
Vemelle Clayton: Right. Right.
Farmakes: Currently our window display ordinance for PUD, what is the issue for tenant
display in the windows? Is there a percentage allotted or what?
Al -Jaff: It's not addressed. They may not display. You're referring to signage?
Farmakes: I'm talking about window spaces. You know when they tape up 15% off of
shoes. Currently in the PUD for instance, MGM. Their entire wall, window space area is
taped up with temporary signage. What would be, what we would be seeing there. What are
the restrictions of what we would be seeing. The north elevation and the.
Al -Jaff: That no window signage take place at all.
Mancino: Yeah, we would make that a condition. We could make that a condition?
43
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 '
Al -Jaff: Yes. This is something that weren't addressed originally in the PUD agreement. I
Mancino: Okay yeah. I'd like to see that not duplicated, either at Wendy's or here. I
Farmakes: Are the large window areas part of retail space? Or is that a through...The large '
window areas, are those part of the retail actual square footage in the interior or is that a walk
thru area or what?
Vemelle Clayton: Right behind the window... directly behind the window you would see '
people sitting at desks working...
Farmakes: Well if it's office retail, one way or the other, it potentially could be somebody at '
their desk or somebody at a counter selling video tapes. So the large window areas that you
see, the two of them in each north and south elevation and one in the west and east elevation, '
do you see through to the actual retail space or is that like a walk thru hallway?
Vemelle Clayton: No, that's right... '
Farmakes: What do you envision the problems that you would see for retail if the window
spacing there was reflective and not transparent? '
Vemelle Clayton: It would be devastating. I
Farmakes: For?
Vemelle Clayton: They need to be able to see in for retail. That's the whole idea of being ,
in an area with a big window.
Harberts: I would have a concern from a public safety perspective. If you can't see in, there '
could be some type of robbery or something that may occur so I would just lend my
comments in that area. '
Farmakes: Yeah, there are office buildings however that have reflective windows and the
question I had, is the retail level, the question of goods, the question of goods being portrayed
pretty close to the street here in the main drag of Chanhassen, the question would be, how
that would be applied. It's a pretty big window space. I question the definition of whether I
put my 15% off of shoes in the window or just push my wooden shoes up within a foot of ,
the window with the 15% off.
�1'
44
1
I Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Mancino: Yeah, that's a good question because so many people use their front windows as
display. Have their mannequins or whatever.
Farmakes: There's nothing wrong with that.
Vemelle Clayton: That's the whole idea.
Farmakes: I don't think that there's any intrinsicately wrong with that. This is a commercial
area but what I'm saying is that, do we leave that type of application either to the PUD or
restriction. Deal with that in the ordinance or do we leave that up to the store manager? I'm
not saying it should be excluded. I'm just saying it be considered as part of the signage. It
' seems to me that the signage itself is pretty moderate, what we would term moderate.
Scott: Okay, any other questions or comments? Okay, what do you have next?
' Vemelle Clayton: Okay. I would like to introduce a couple of folks, and I learned two
things after reading the Minutes last time. One is that I need to articulate a little better and
the other is, it's a good idea to spell names from time ... We have John ... from Wendy's and
you read the name wrong ... and next time we'll have Jurij Ozga and that one is Jurij Ozga.
John, would you like to come up and talk a little bit again about Wendy's? We have one
member that wasn't here last time and a new member.
John: As was discussed the last time, the reason Wendy's likes the area is that our market is
' that we strive to go after the market that's a little more upscale. A little more white collar.
A little more upper income than some of our competitors. For that reason we design our
building to fit into areas such as the downtown area of Chanhassen, office complexes. We
' try to use materials that are much more subdued and a little more amenable to that type of a
background. Incidentally, Wendy's will use the same materials that the office retail space
will use. So we'll use the same brick and Jurij has a picture up here. We'll have a little
relief over there that will be that gray taupe color ... so from a market perspective, the
Chanhassen market is the perfect market for us. Our interior of our stores, once again to
appeal to a more upscale environment. We use carpeting on our floors in the dining area.
We have free standing movable chairs and tables to attract the more adult and more upscale
clientele once we gotten to that. Our signage is red or subdued. We use either red letters or
' white letters. We prefer the red letters. They're our standard. From a perspective of the
drive thru, questions were asked, would our drive thru accommodate an RV van with towing
a boat. Again, we've calculated the radius and the width of the drive thru. We not only
1 provide for a drive thru lane but also a by -pass lane, which is different than our major
competitors have done ... in your village and they don't provide for a by -pass lane. So for that
reason we will accommodate the RV van with the boat. Some of our marketing, we like to
45
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 '
Mancino: Oh, on the mansard part? '
Jurij Ozga: Yes.
Farmakes: The trim that we discussed last time, what color is the trim that we discussed last '
time?
46
'
get involved in the community. To get involved in marketing. Local marketing and
advertising that supports civic activities such as Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Junior League clubs,
different types. Perhaps there's a local promotion where you buy a hamburger, fries and soda
'
and perhaps we contribute so much money for each combination—purchased. What else? In
terms of our menu board. There was a question about that last time as to the size and when
we looked at your proposed new ordinance, sign ordinance, the size of our menu board that's
'
located on the drive thru is actually smaller than what we could in theory have as a menu
board. It's substantially smaller. I think you allow something like 8 feet in height and our's
in about 5 1/2 feet in height. Jurij, you have a picture of it. In terms of stacking. We
'
recommend 6 cars of stacking, and we do provide that on our site plan. 6 cars of stacking
would actually bring you up to this area here. If for some reason, someone raised the
question, what if your operations was absolutely awful. You had the worst day in Wendy's
'
history, we could actually provide for another 12 cars up to this point. It's not ideal. That is
not something that we would propose would ever be the norm We find that in our
operations, 6 cars is more than enough for us. The drive thru is designed with having two
windows. The reason for that is in a perfect operation situation we could accommodate up to
4 cars every 5 minutes. Now that isn't, in the business that we have, we'd like that business
but we don't have that business. But if we were having a time demonstration to see how fast
'
can you handle that type of a drive thru business, you could handle it that fast. And the
reason for that is it's a two step process. Some of you may be familiar with that—to have
two drive thru windows. The first drive thru window you pay for your products. Say order
your product at the menu board, then you move to the next stage which is where you pay for
the product and then pick up your product at the second drive thru window. What that does
is it allows for faster movement of the vehicle process so you don't have someone at one
'
window saying I'm ordering and then pay for it. I've got to look for my money. Get my
wallet out and then also deal with the products so it's a three step and it makes that
movement flow a lot easier. Jurij could address perhaps the design elements as to some of
the materials and the look.
Jurij Ozga: From the previous meeting we made revisions in our elevations. On each side
we have taken off the doors and put in a side ... Also we include a facia...facing Market
Boulevard. So this facia would be the same type that we have here and this is the—finish. It
will be a copper finish with—brick.
Mancino: Oh, on the mansard part? '
Jurij Ozga: Yes.
Farmakes: The trim that we discussed last time, what color is the trim that we discussed last '
time?
46
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Jurij Ozga: The trim, I have changed as requested. A bronze. I've illuminated the red band.
However, I would, it gets to be ... not going with a red band, I would prefer to go with the
burgundy which would tie into the shopping center.
Farmakes: So it would be similar to the awnings?
Jurij Ozga: Yes.
Farmakes: So it will be a combination of red. The green material, is that bronze and
burgundy that's currently on the Market Square I?
Jurij Ozga: Correct. Basically what would happen is we have that bronze parapet taking the
red...
Scott: ...please go ahead. Sorry for the interruption.
1
1
Farmakes: This is the bronze sample that you just showed?
Jurij Ozga: Right. The red would be burgundy and then we have a beige.
Farmakes: And then this would be burgundy?
Jurij Ozga: Ah yes. And the only red would be the letters.
Farmakes: And the difference that we would see here is that this part of the sign would be...
Mancino: And what's the square footage of the signage?
Jurij Ozga: The square foot of that sign is, let's see. It's about 24 square feet.
Farmakes: I have a question. Did staff, when you discussed this issue and we talked, we had
this discussion before—interpretation of the word compatibility. It takes two directions that
we've got. One is the same as and the other one is pieces out of adjacent buildings. I was
wondering, obviously in discussing colors, and say for this instance you're talking about
picking up the trim. The style of the buildings are slightly different but you're picking up
some of the colors. Gray for instance of the brick. Was the intent of the ordinance, and I
wasn't here at the time of the ordinance. Was the intent of the ordinance to replicate a
development to the extent that you have an extension of that development when you're
talking about the verbiage. The way that it's set up. That that's a good thing. I wasn't
aware in our discussion the last time that this was going to come back. That the base color
47
t
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
48 1
was going to be gray and then the other buildings were going to be gray and so on. I was
wondering what your thinking was on that direction. Motivation for that.
'
Al -Jaff: Well, as far as compatibility, I think what the ordinance was trying to get at is you
won't have a Victorian building next to a modern building. You would have some element of
'
compatibility in style, design, materials. As far as why it was changed, I believe that the
materials, it was often said that during the last meeting that the quality of the materials
weren't what you were looking for.
'
Farmakes: I was talking about the coloration. Duplicating gray ... That was staff's input or
you came back with that or how?
John: No. At our last public hearing meeting, it was recommended by all of you that we
were striving to blend the colors of Market Square more than the other three colors and what
,
was recommended to us was to try to use materials and colors that would try to blend in, so
it would blend in with the whole four comers, was the recommendation. And how that arose
was when we showed you the colored picture of the Wendy's, so you could get an idea of...
'
the members that were here liked the use of those materials in the building.
Farmakes: I guess the interpretation of the word compatible. That's the hang up.
John: I think they were trying to blend in color scheme and you made a few
recommendations as to office buildings. About some other office building down the street
which is ... down the street and so that's what we tried to incorporate into this.
Vernelle Clayton: Probably the only documentation that would have for compatibility, it
,
could be the design of the buildings that were designed and ... at the time to be built on Lots 2
and 3. And take a look at them. Everything... interpretation of design. But if you look at
them, they aren't just like the shopping center for example. So that's the only thing of record
,
that gives clues.
Farmakes: What I'm trying to ascertain with my question is that there's really two
ordinances that contain this. One is the one for the PUD and there's an overlay downtown
comment that deals with this also and I still haven't even set up in my own mind exactly
what it means and what's best for Chanhassen in regards to how that's interpreted. Whether
compatible means same quality as. Same architectural style as. Same color as. It seems to
be kind of interpreted as we go along depending on which version of what developer comes
,
in or how they feel to compete is going on that piece. In the future I think we should maybe
clarify that a little bit because I think there's some confusion even in the interpretation of the
city...
'
48 1
I
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
i
Mancino: What does compatibility mean?
Farmakes: Well I don't think it's bad that you have different types of architecture. It gives a
city some flavor and the issue of compatibility is that there's obviously some things that don't
fit in at all. I don't think that's the issue here so don't hang on my comments but you can
' make a boring city that way. You can make a company town that way. It might look like a
military thing where everything's the same color and everything looks the same exactly. You
still can have differences in architecture and have them go together. Anyway.
' Scott: Do the commissioners require any other information from the applicants at this time?
No?
Al -Jaff: There is one thing that was mentioned a few minutes ago when we ... and that was in
regard to the roof top equipment...
' Jurij Ozga: ...lining up our roof top units with this treatment. And that's from the standpoint
of proportion of how high we'd go with this type of treatment and ... proper ventilation. The
' other option I have this option. We have...
Scott: So the roof top equipment would in essence be no higher than the top of the dormer.
Is that what you're saying?
Jurij Ozga: ...this is higher. It's above the roof top units.
Scott: Say again please?
Jurij Ozga: This treatment is higher than the roof top units.
Scott: Oh okay. Thank you.
' Al -Jaff: With this option, the roof top equipment would be guaranteed to be screened. I
questioned the elevation of Highway 5 in relationship to this building and I don't have an
answer for you.
Mancino: Can we get a perspective. A simulated perspective.
AI -Jaff: From TH 5.
' Mancino: Yeah, from Highway 5 to see exactly what we're going to see in both buildings.
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
Scott: Okay. . Unfortunatel that item was tabled.
Mancino: At your TH 7 and TH 101 Wendy's you have a satellite dish on the top. Now ,
would that work with the other roof treatment, because it needs to be open I assume to allow.
Jurij Ozga: Yes. That's another issue ... This type of screening I have no problem '
Mancino: So you're saying on the other one. '
Jurij Ozga: See this one is, if the satellite dish goes in, it would be visible.
Mancino: But if we said you couldn't have anything that was visible, you couldn't put a
satellite dish on there.
Jurij Ozga: Then you'd have to go with... ,
Mancino: Is that even workable for you? ,
Jurij Ozga: A satellite dish.
Mancino: Not having one.
Jurij Ozga: Well yeah. We'll have to go with a different type of music system. In other ,
words, instead of having a satellite, we will have to have tapes...This would be no problem
doing this...
Farmakes: How do you wish to refer to those? Are there option numbers on there?
Jurij Ozga: Yeah, this is Option B. I
Farmakes: And Option A then would be the other.
Scott: Any other comments? Okay, do we need any more information on the project? No.
Great, thank you very much. This is a public hearing. If there are other members of the
public who would like to comment on this particular proposal, please do so. And all we ask
is that you state your name and your address. Go ahead.
Brad Johnson: Brad Johnson, 7425 Frontier Trail. I just thought I would comment that one
of the things that we've been working on on this corner for about 4 1/2 years is that we
probably have a fast food type of a restaurant. We've got people from Dairy Queen, Taco '
50
I
1
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Bell, which we turned down because of conflicting with somebody else in our center. One of
the reasons we were kind of excited about Wendy's, which has been just displayed, is they're
flexible. We were really worried that materials and things like that they would not be able to
meet any type of a criteria that you set. I think they've demonstrated between last meeting
and this meeting, they certainly have demonstrated to us throughout the entire process with
them that they have the flexibility and are trying to fit into the community and so they're
fulfilling that. I think you should give them some credit for that. The reason we have the
two type of roof types simply is, there's at least one person on the HRA that sort of likes
peaked roofs and we're not saying that's good or bad but I guess you did set a precedent with
the Byerly's. There is no ... so we maybe don't need to them there but I think we're flexible.
I think they pointed out that the row of air conditioning equipment, you know we have to...
some place and the worst place to have them is on the ground because they look over at our
building on the professional building where you have everything on the ground and you have
to have a big screened in area off to the right on the side of the building because you
couldn't put it anyplace else. ...and I'm also, the architect... must have spent 4 or 5 days
changing quickly the design. I've never seen a design change so dramatically as far as the
office building is concerned. I think they've done a very good job of trying to meet the
compatibility probably from quality—than Market Square simply because we're using a brick.
But I wanted to thank Wendy's for their efforts.
Scott: Good. Would anybody else like to address the Planning Commission?
Harberts moved, Farmakes seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
(Joe Scott's comments were distorted on the tape and hard to understand.)
Scott: Comments? Well I'll start. I'm just going to briefly reiterate some comments that I
made last time. City of Chanhassen takes very seriously... it's citizen committees... spent quite
a bit of time assisting us at the Planning Commission as well as the City Council in
determining how buildings, land use and so forth will ... My particular feeling is that this item
should be tabled until we get input from the 2002 people...So that's the extent of my
comments. Anybody else?
Ledvina: Sharmin, I had a question. Is there going to be a pylon sign?
I Al -Jaff: No.
Ledvina: Okay. I didn't think so but I just wanted to make sure that wasn't the case because
I saw that in the photograph.
51
k
r,
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
tl to would be identical to what is at Market S
Al -Jaffa The only sign they are entitled 4
right now. There are two existing signs. A third one would have to be identical to it out
there. And then they have the wall signs.
Ledvina: Okay. I just wanted to finish up my comments. In terms of the architectural '
options that we saw for Wendy's, I would support Option A, which was the one that was
previously presented. It provides a bit more novelty to this type of building. I think it's a
nice way of setting it apart. As far as the office building is concerned, I think that the
improvements that have been made are pretty dramatic and I'm not an architect but I like
what I see in terms of the changes that have been made. I think we're definitely going in the
right direction here so I would support that. I guess that's the extent of my comments.
Conrad: Just two thoughts. One, I like the changes on the building, especially the corner
building on Edina. I think that's attractive. Two, Joe I'm curious what you think that '
delaying for the Vision 2002 will accomplish.
Scott: Well I think the important part of it is, we have this group of individuals who have '
been tasked with giving us some input as to what they would like to see in the downtown
area. There is, this is really the first real time specific application for that particular group. I
think it's, and I know that Mr. Gerhardt could speak to this as well as Mr. Wing who have
been involved. Is that I think that group has come along from the standpoint of being
citizens who were not particularly clear as to what their charter was, to now starting to form
some sort of a cohesive group and this is a very significant location in the city. It basically,
it's pretty much the center point, the focal point of our city at this point in time, and I think
that we should give them an opportunity to give us some input on, in a real time basis, prior
to making a decision on this. I think it's a good opportunity and we have this group. I think
we should gather some of their input as well, and that's my feeling on that particular issue.
What we will get out of it I think is some citizen input and from people who aren't
necessarily parts of commissions. Who don't necessarily have a vested interest in the
property itself and that's one of the things I was very clear at the fast meeting that I was at
with this group is that each table was asked to select a spokesperson but it couldn't be a
member of city staff. It couldn't be anybody on a commission. They were very, very careful t
about getting people who have a fresh input and really don't know all that much about how
things work. So those are my thoughts. ,
Conrad: And because it's your opinion this land is, could be put to different use based on
that input? I
Scott: Possibly. But I don't know what the input is. And they really have been asked.
They've been asked, what are the boundaries of the central business district. They have put
52
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
together a statement of intent. That it has to do with being pedestrian friendly. To be
something that enhances the quality of the central business district but they really haven't
been asked a specific question such as what do you think should be here. So this I think will
give them an opportunity to deal with something that is very, very specific. It's here and
now and I think it's an excellent opportunity for that group of people to do that.
Farmakes: Are you suggesting that the option lion is open to rezone the property?
g
Scott: No. No. But I think it's an opportunity. There are a number of different uses that
are applicable to this particular property and my thought is, is that this is.
' Farmakes: Other than what it's currently zoned for or what it's zoned for?
Scott: What it's zoned for within the existing zoning. And I think it's a good opportunity
' for that group of people to give some input. And that's basically the extent of my comment
on that. Public hearing has been closed.
' Vemelle Clayton: I understand but we didn't know this would be discussed. You were told
that it should not be a consideration so I'd just like a chance to add a little bit on that.
' Scott: Well the public hearing has been closed. Excuse me. I think we have an opportunity
for some organized citizen input. I think we should take that opportunity.
Mancino: I have a question for you. A question for all of us. You're referring to the
Highway 5 and we certainly did look at some zoning issues and land use issues on Highway
5. We did next to the Arboretum on the north side of TH 41. Or on the west side of TH 41
there and we sought to change some land use designations.
1 Farmakes: The point here made by the applicant, the point here made by city staff, as I
understand it, is that the city has a performance contract, an obligation of which the zonement
for this is in place. What exactly goes on there is somewhat flexible within that zonement.
' Whether or not it's a realty company or whether or not it's a video store. Currently under
that agreement, as I understand it, that option is up to the whoever wishes to rent it. Within
the restrictions that we have for that PUD agreement. And it seems to me that if you
' envision that, as I said, it could be a law firm or it could be a video store. I'm not sure if
this is an agreement that was made 5 1/2 years ago. I'm not sure within that agreement that
has been made, if not having been to those meetings that you're talking about. I'm not, you
' know I've heard and read some things but I haven't been fortunate enough to be able to go to
the 2002 Vision. But I'm not sure how much of that is up for.
53
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 '
Mancino: They haven't even started that specific yet. I
Conrad: And that's a little bit what worries me. You know I don't think they're, that group
is looking at that and I guess I'm part of that group. I wasn't there at the last meeting but I
don't know that they're chartered to go out and come back and say this is the type of retail
we want on that northeast corner of Market Square, you know. They could say we want a
library there. That's a different issue altogether but tonight that's not an issue I think we're '
dealing with. And therefore the issue is what's in front of you and if the task force and the
City Council wants to propose not selling it back or offering more money, that's a different
54
irl
Mancino: Jeff, it hasn't been brought up to rezoning. I mean that hasn't been a question.
That hasn't been where the thinking is going at all, that I've heard in the Vision 2002. At
this point.
Farmakes: As I understand and as I, Ladd you were here when they got into that. The one
question that I had and I was going to bring up in my comments was, you have a specific
'
piece of property. That property is either considered one lot or it's considered two lots.
From a developmental standpoint. If you have a free standing building like you have now
outside of the main building, where you have two lots. One is a permitted commercial use
and the other is office retail. I'm not sure specifically if they could be interchanged or not in
those lots in the agreement but versus putting one building on the whole piece of property.
Or one development on the whole piece of property. I'm still not clear in my own mind
'
exactly what those options are on this developmental plan or whether or not that is an option
to be looked at. If the city does not wish to pursue putting a fast food operation and they
consider it not to be compatible with using the compatibility issue of downtown development,
1
one of the two ordinances, what else goes there? What other free standing small amount of
square footage is going to survive as a free standing building? If it's not a fast food and I'm
having a hard time coming up with something that amount of square footage that's going to
,
be viable as a destination. So that was my concern on just the general site plan. I had some
other comments here. Should I go through my comments or are we kind of jumping around
back and forth but I don't know if you wanted to discuss that further. If that works into your
concept issue of what that's being used for or not.
Mancino: I don't have a use but I was going to say that if you didn't do fast food, you
t
would certainly have a much bigger building that you could put there because you wouldn't
need the drive thru, etc area. So that the building could be, whether it be a book store or
something else that could go there. It could be a family restaurant. It wouldn't be fast food.
'
You could do something like that. Go ahead.
Farmakes: Are those the things that are being discussed?
Mancino: They haven't even started that specific yet. I
Conrad: And that's a little bit what worries me. You know I don't think they're, that group
is looking at that and I guess I'm part of that group. I wasn't there at the last meeting but I
don't know that they're chartered to go out and come back and say this is the type of retail
we want on that northeast corner of Market Square, you know. They could say we want a
library there. That's a different issue altogether but tonight that's not an issue I think we're '
dealing with. And therefore the issue is what's in front of you and if the task force and the
City Council wants to propose not selling it back or offering more money, that's a different
54
irl
f
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
issue than what we're looking at. We're looking at Market Square and what's permitted.
1 Farmakes: I would tend to agree with you on that.
Conrad: You know. If I thought that that group was out there and specifically thinking about
this stuff, it might be worth while waiting for some input but I don't, you know, it's been
operating for 4 months or 6 months and I guess I just don't know that it's got this as an
objective. That it's going to come in in 2 weeks so I guess I don't have, I'm going to close
my comments on that one. I just don't think it's worth while postponing for that. Their
input can come to the City Council but I think we should react to what's in front of us
tonight.
' Harberts: I have a technical question for staff. Since this is going to be, I don't know what
the word is. From Outlot A into Lot 1, Block 1. Changed I guess. Is the impervious surface
' guidelines still being met? I don't know if, I reviewed the numbers. Do they exceed 70 %?
Since it's moving into a lot. You know does that change it?
Al -Jaff: It's a PUD. It doesn't have a hard surface coverage.
Harberts: Minimum or maximum?
Al -Jaff: Minimum or maximum.
' Harberts: Okay. Just wondered.
' Mancino: Going back to Ladd's question. Todd, can you talk to what the Vision 2002, what
their mandate is and what to come up with. Will they be addressing this particular comer?
And do a site analysis of it. Is that part of what the Hoisington Group is going to be doing
with that committee?
Gerhardt: The meeting that's coming up in March, it's the ad hoc committee. Really when
the larger Vision 2002 group gets together will be in April. The ad hoc committee was trying
to narrow down more a vision statement for what the downtown really consists of. And what
the Vision 2002 group were going to do, and still will do, is to take any vacant land and say
this is what would be appropriate for that land. But you know as pieces come in and develop
you know holding up developments for that, I don't think we get into legal issues so. But we
were going to do some visual elements on the vacant pieces of land. Proposed stop lights and
that.
Mancino: If this were vacant, would this be one of those comers that you would do some
i'
55
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
planning on.
Gerhardt: Sure.
Mancino: Okay. Is the City Council open to any sort of moratorium to wait for this?
Gerhardt: I don't feel comfortable talking for the City Council. I think the direction that
Sharmin and Kate have given you on this, to review it and try to make a decision on what
you've got and move with it. If that is that you can't make a decision, pass it onto Council.
I mean we have to go through the process with this.
Farmakes: It would seem to me that if we have this contractual agreement to be interpreted,
whatever is interpreted between city's lawyers and who the contract is with, that that's out of
our hands. That they have whatever options that they wish to use to control the property, '
that's really not for us to comment on.
Scott: Well the question was asked what the City Council's position is and we have ,
Councilman Wing here. If you'd like to give us some input, we'd certainly appreciate it.
Councilman Wing: At this point I wouldn't even be willing to offer my own personal
opinion.
Scott: Thank you for that input. I
Harberts: Let me just kind of add a couple of comments. You know personally I sit here
and I recognize the principles or the vision that's trying to be established for the city, which I '
support with regard to being pedestrian oriented. And I think that this piece of land would
certainly benefit the community in some way but when I look at again the charge that we
have before us tonight, in terms of what our role is, I would have to, this is what we're here
to do tonight. I offer my comments that I like the color schemes. The blending. I have a
real tough problem yet with the circulation. Traffic pattern circulation. I think it's too tight.
I deal with circulation in my job day to day and I'm just not very comfortable with it and
that's really the only piece that I'm uncomfortable. I think it would be a good draw for the
mall. It's a mall right? Shopping center, thank you. I think it would certainly enhance the
viability. It would certainly in a sense be attractive to members of the community in terms of
the goods that will be offered. You know with regards to traffic circulation, I guess I'm just
uncomfortable because I don't know what would be in that office/commercial site. We could
have something that would be in demand for traffic at the same peak time perhaps as
Wendy's. Maybe that's an assumption. That's what I'm uncomfortable with with regard to
traffic. That's basically my comments.
56
I Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
1
f
J
Scott: Do you have a suggestion as to how to ease that issue or just making a statement?
Harberts: I'm just making a statement. Again, I definitely support what you're saying Joe
with regard to you know, how many opportunities do we let go in terms of trying to structure
things or plan things that would really compliment the community. But I think we have an
obligation to, I think it was said earlier. This is a bonafide site plan and our purpose is to
look at this bonafide site plan. The frustration comes in with, Nancy you're right, with
regard to planning. But I guess looking at the content of this, I guess I'm just having a tough
time with the traffic patterns. Circulation.
Scott: Any other comments?
Farmakes: I'd like to make some comments. First comment would be, I don't have a
problem with us discussing detail or even outside of the ordinance. Some of these issues that
we have discussed in the last, previous meeting and this meeting. Where I expand my
comments I think or my comment base is if the city owns the property or the city has an
interest, I feel an obligation to go as far as I can, even up to including getting my hands
slapped. Getting into areas that are inappropriate outside of those that are legal ... But I do feel
that if this was a straight application coming in and met the ordinances. For instance I use an
example of a building I didn't like, the Rapid Oil Change over there. That wasn't a PUD. It
met the ordinances. It virtually you couldn't oppose it even though you didn't like it. I don't
think it was an asset to the community that that went up but there was nothing that could be
done about it. These type of developments are different birds I think and it seems to me an
obligation of what we're doing here is that we represent the community in this situation. Or
we try to. In trying to enhance what is put in. Now whether or not we get it or not, I think
we're part of the overall equation of that. Whether city staff negotiates that or City Council
does, I think that we need to put in that input. The final decision does not rest with us and if
it doesn't go outside of the legal contract or obligation, and particular when a community is
in financial partnership, I think we should—as far as we can to have input into that. And I'll
use an example of what we receive out of that. I think that we got a better building out of
Target because of that. I think that we've gotten a better building here than we're starting
with. Than what we had and I think our community benefits from that. You know going
back to this specific building, because I know we have other business to do here. I'm just
going to critique these buildings as I see them. I'll start out with the Wendy's. I prefer
Option A as it looks and I'm not sure that we should be doing the same color schemes for all
these free standing buildings. I'm concerned, and have been concerned for quite a while that
our interpretation of compatibility not be looked at the same as. That we wind up with 3
blocks of gray buildings or that it be interpreted as an extension with absolutely the same
architectural details and so on and I can understand where some of the applicants, they get
confused with what we're talking about and how we treat that. I don't have a problem when
57
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
I look at the quality of the building, say the Chanhassen Bank, or the Country Suites and so
on. Those are dissimilar architectural styles. I see, when I see the word personally of
compatibility, I see quality of building. Cost per square foot and so on. If something is
made, if it weren't plastic, it may have the square foot cost but it really doesn't belong I think
in the downtown area. So it's somewhat a gray area and subject to interpretation and it's
hard to put into an ordinance. But I'd like for Wendy's, this seems to me to be a nice
Wendy's. I mean it's pretty compatible. It's pretty modern in how it's being proposed.
Whether or not a fast food type operation goes there I think is something left up to the Vision
2000 or the City Council or whether or not they want to see that there. I'm not convinced
that that shouldn't go more over by CR 17 and TH 5. However, I don't apply the same
importance to that piece of property as I do to the office retail section. I think that that area
is pretty pivotable and screened somewhat, if particular screening of the mall area from
whatever the city does with the block. The city park area across the way here that they're
looking at doing. In looking at the office retail section, I would be concerned about a couple
things. One would be the window display areas and how that's enhanced. I would not be
adverse to allowing the applicant to have some display to the south elevation where the
parking is. That's turned into the parking lot area and that type of flexibility is a good thing
for retail as long as it's a moderate amount, or even allowing to put a stack of hair care
bottles or something up by the front if they're a hair care place or something. It gives them
some flexibility and it is a commercial area. I am concerned how that would be abused
however on the area north. Or it would be the elevation to the north and to the east in
particular. There is no really traffic coming in from that direction so it's not as if you're
stopping—coming by or walking along the side of the building and they're going to come in.
As I interpret the traffic pattern, there is none there. That I can see along 78th to the east of
Market Boulevard. The traffic and access would be from the south. Now I don't know if
you want to entertain something like that or if you're banning it overall but as I said
before ... 14 foot display. I'm not trying to be anti business there. What I'm trying to do is
achieve what we're looking for, for a moderate amount of signage that fits into what we're
doing overall in downtown and allowing flexibility to retailers without letting it get
overboard. Where it trashes up the street area. I think that the quality of the building that
we've seen come back is an improvement. Quality of the materials and so on. Somewhat in
looking at it, I think that it probably fits the bill of some of what we've talked about. I
personally think that they get buildings too linear and too long but it does incorporate some
of the things that we've talked about and the window treatments of some of the materials.
Failing that, or just looking at the building as it is, the wainscoting that comes down below
with that brick, I'd like to see some houndstooth limestone or something that incorporates in
some of the other elements that would be going in downtown. The window treatments I think
are a major improvement over what they were. ...and so on and that sort of thing. That does
give it some character. The long linear area at the top of the roof is what I'm talking about.
It's just a total, there's nothing breaking it up but the problem of critiquing these type of
58
A
t
n
u
L
. Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
things and the applicant hearing that critique is that they start out with a building. They hear
critiques so they move a couple things around and then another committee says, well move
this or add this here. Pretty soon you wind up with a willoby of a building. What I was
hoping to see or hoping to pass on, and I don't know if I would hold this up for that, but
what I would like to pass on to the City Council is that they consider, discuss with the HRA
a building of some architectural merit there. That goes beyond that. A commercial, what
you'd expect to see with the retail but you do see it with some business office type buildings.
It, to me perhaps is getting away from the overall zone flexibility offered in that contract and
I'm not a lawyer and I'm not going to discuss that any more than that. I think that's
something for the Council to look at seriously. Whether or not as owners of the land that's
what they would like to see. Looking at this solely as a retail, this is an improvement over
what we've seen. I don't know if it's maximized the potential of what it could be.
Mancino: Jeff, can I ask you a question just so I'm understanding what you're saying. And
that is, would you like to see it, one of the best quality architectural buildings that I think we
have in the city is the Chanhassen Bank and it has a very contemporary architectural feel to
me. Do you.
Farmakes: The question is, would I like to see that there?
Mancino: No. Or this more contemporary. Having more contemporary.
Farmakes: No. It's not the style of architecture. I go back to compatibility and I don't think
we should get into that can of worms where we say that this should be a Georgian building
here because I happen to like that. I'm looking at this, I'm seeing this incorporates some of
the things in general terms of architectural discussion that we talked about. It has some
shading, some detailing. It uses a better quality of materials than wood clapboard. And I
think that when you build a city, 100 years ago you used to come by. The buildings were all
made of wood ... city developing and if you came by and it's made of brick. You know our
great grandfathers came by and they built buildings with brick like our church down here
because that meant something. That meant that was permanent. It was, you know you built a
brick house for you wife, that meant something. And in looking at some of these things and
look at the commercial aspects that are involved with this, that's a whole separate game from
what I think some of the things we're looking for here. We're looking to build a city that's
going to be here a while and that's different from what's trying to be achieved from the
applicant. They're looking for a successful commercial building. They're going to have
flexibility. They're going to rent to a tenant that's going to be in and maybe out in 3 to 5
years and so somewhere in the middle there is, it seems to me from experience here, is what
will go up there. The question is, how you can critique it. This is a specific plan or you
could say show me another building. I happen to feel that maybe we could get, maybe look
59
t
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
at another concept on that particular—but I'm comfortable with passing this on and letting that
discussion take place at the city level because it seems to me the comment that Ladd made is
correct. This is part of a PUD that's been in place for 5 1/2 years and there already is some
commitments laid out here and how those are hashed out, it seems to me maybe it should be
hashed out with the owners of the property and the applicant. Of how they wish to pursue
that. '
Mancino: So you don't see it our responsibility. You want to see a second rendering of the
different style building, doing it here. '
Farmakes: I would recommend that but I would not, I think that this issue of this application,
the fact that it's an old zonement and an old agreement, that that should be probably dealt
with first as to what direction we should get back from that. I would recommend that the
city make that as part of their discussion of what type of quality building they want to see
there and I think that if the flexibility that it's going to be commercial is not good enough.
It's going to be business retail or retail business, that that flexibility's going to be there. If
it's going to be more retail, you're going to have less of a square foot because you're not
going to get retail in there that's paying $1,000.00 a square foot for rental space. So those '
are hard questions to ask and we can sit here and discuss whether or not we're getting
houndstooth brick or flat brick or something, that's a little bit more detailed than the
fundamental question that's out there. ,
Scott: Ron, do you have a comment?
Nutting: Were there any bets as to when I'd say my first words?
Scott: You're on the spot now.
Nutting: I haven't had the benefit of the previous discussions and I can't say whether this
looks better than the last time. I do like Option A better than Option B. I think the issue, r
echoed by Ladd and Diane and I'm hearing it in different pieces and different approaches of
philosophies but I think we need to deal with what's here on the table as opposed to deferring
to the Vision 2002 and looking for something that may not be out there. For some period of
time. We've got to deal with what's on the table.
Scott: I think we've heard from everybody. You're welcome to make the.
Mancino: I just have one last comment, and it's not a big deal. This is for Vision 2002.
This is for HRA. This is for City Council. And I won't, and I couldn't articulate as well as
Jeff just did so I agree with him on the office retail building. I would love to see a second
60
li
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
option and see actually different architectural options for that building. On the fast food, the
Wendy's. I think Wendy's has been just great. I don't feel that the traffic circulation is
worked out. I just don't see a drive up window or a fast food being there for land use
purposes. I think well have terrific traffic problems there so I am not for that at all.
' Scott: Okay. Can we have a motion?
Ledvina: I'll give it a shot here. I recommend that the Planning Commission approve the
site plan for the Edina Realty and Wendy's Case No. 89 -2 PUD as shown on the site plans
dated December 6th. Well that's not correct. Can you help me with that Sharmin?
' Al -Jaff: The date is March 2, 1994.
Ledvina: Okay, dated March 2, 1994 subject to the conditions identified in the staff report
with the following additions. Adding number 7(e) as it relates to the signage. The cost for
relocation of the utility boxes for signage shall be paid by the applicant. Adding a 7(f). No
wall signage shall occur over the pitched roof element of the office retail building. Adding
' 7(g). No window signage is allowed for the north and east frontage of the office retail
building. And the rest of the conditions as per the staff report.
' Farmakes: Can I make an amendment on 9?
' Ledvina: Sure.
Farmakes: To the last one on 9. South elevation of Wendy's building shall incorporate metal
' trim and... Can we incorporate the trim as specified in the notes by the applicant for the
buildings. I believe it's bronze...
' Ledvina: Okay. I would also revise number 9. The last point of number 9. South elevation
of the Wendy's building shall incorporate the trim components as discussed in the meeting
this evening.
Scott: And I just want to ask you a question. Do you want to specify which roof option, A
or B?
Ledvina: Well we could do that certainly.
Scott: No, that's up to you.
Ledvina: Well okay. And adding a condition 17. Identifying the preference for Option A as
1
61
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
it relates to the architecture for the Wendy's building. I
Scott: Can I have a second? I
Conrad: Second.
Scott: Okay, it's been moved and seconded that we accept the staff report with the. '
Farmakes: Can I ask a question of Ladd before we vote? '
Scott: I was going to say, just make it part of the discussion. But you can take it now.
Farmakes: If we forward this or approve this as it is, based on the recommendation, how do ,
we add to it some of the issues that I talked about in discussion? Do we make that part of
the ordinance? Do we do that as a separate issue? '
Conrad: I think you make the motion and then you add on some comments. Direction that
you give staff to communicate.
Farmakes: Do we do that as a separate motion then? ,
Conrad: You could do it as a motion or just as a footnote. I guess what you're trying to do
is make it a significant comment, so however you want to do that. '
Farmakes: Well I do think that there's some significant things that have to be answered here
from the Council in direction. We can evaluate this plan and I'm not quite sure how I'm '
going to vote on this just yet. I'm racing in my mind. Philosophically I'm not sure if we're
going beyond what the contractual agreement is on that if they develop that at that use. As
that use. So I've read the lawyer's interpretation of where that property is at. I'm not sure it ,
quite answers my question other than to say who owns the property. And it kind of seems to
me that that's an answer that has to come back down if we want to get into further discussion
or—something that we're not seeing at this point.
Scott: Is that the discussion of the motion? Is that acceptable? I should say it's been moved
and seconded that we accept the staff report recommendation with the conditions as so stated.
Is there any additional discussion?
Mancino: So everybody's willing to accept the traffic circulation?
Farmakes: I was willing to support your motion of revising the traffic issue. I'm not sure if
62
L 17
0
�
J
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
I have enough expertise to know what the alternative is.
Mancino: I just know it doesn't work the way it is and I wouldn't pass it the way it is.
Ledvina: Do you want to add a friendly amendment to stipulation resolution of the traffic
circulation? I mean you're delegating that, if you.
Mancino: Well my recommendation would be to not have the drive up window and not have
the problem with the traffic circulation because they tried it 2 or 3 different ways already and
unless they can come up with, I don't know how. So my recommendation would be not
having a drive up window.
Scott: Would you accept that as?
Ledvina: No, I wouldn't accept that.
Harberts: Call the question.
Scott: All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye? Could we have a roll call vote
on the aye's please.
Mancino: He would not accept the friendly amendment.
Farmakes: Before, I didn't hear the.
Farmakes: So it's parking as it stands now.
Scott: With drive up. We can just have a show of hands so we can get it on the public
record then.
Ledvina moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to approve
the Site for Edina Realty and Wendy's (#89 -2 PUD) as shown on the site plan dated
March 2, 1994 as amended. Ledvina, Conrad and Nutting voted in favor. The rest
opposed. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
Scott: The motion does not pass, 4 to 3.
Harberts: I just want to go on record, my problem is the traffic pattern. So that's what my
problem is.
r-k
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
Scott: So, I'd like for another motion P lease. '
Harberts: Well, I don't know. Do we need another motion or does it just go to City '
Council?
Scott: It goes to City Council, okay. '
Conrad: No, no. The motion failed. We need a motion that passes. ,
Scott: Okay. A motion please.
Harberts: I'll make a motion that we deny the Site Plan Review and Subdivision application '
for the purpose of constructing a Wendy's and an office retail building based on traffic
pattern configuration needs to be improved. I think we're setting ourselves up for a big '
failure there.
Scott: Well I won't make a motion here. Are we looking, perhaps would we do something
that is very surgical as that we, the Planning Commission denies this particular application. It '
will then go to the City Council and then the application can follow the issue. Does that
work?
Harberts: Yes.
Farmakes: That's fine with me. '
Mancino: It works with me.
Scott: Okay. Can I have a motion please? '
Harberts: I think I did. I
Scott: Well, do it again.
Mancino: I heard that we deny. '
Harberts: Well I move that we deny the application for the purpose of constructing a '
Wendy's and an office retail building based on the site plan presented and I'm qualifying that
by saying, I have a, I'm very uncomfortable with the traffic pattern. That's what my key
element is.
Scott: Okay.
64
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Farmakes: Should we add our other concerns to that? In the form of a communication or?
Scott: I think that'd be appropriate. If we're recommending denial based upon these issues.
That's direction to city staff and the applicant as well as to the City Council.
Mancino: And I would just add to that, to Diane, to clarify created by I think the drive up
window.
' Harberts: Well and I don't know. I couldn't agree to the drive up window because is there
an opportunity to reconfigure or reduce or something that could still incorporate the drive up
window but it's the access points.
' Mancino: I'm just saying right now it's created by that. Now whether they.
n
fl
1
1
Harberts: Well I don't know if that's true or not.
Mancino: Oh, okay.
Harberts: I don't know if that's true. I'm just looking at the, I recognize from staff's
perspective, lining exits up. Entrances up but I just think, that was my previous comment at
the last meeting that I just thought there was too much going on in that small area and so I'm
just, that's why I move denial. And as I said, I certainly support what's being proposed but
it's just the traffic patterns.
Scott: Okay.
Al -Jaff: Could we throw a suggestion out here? Dave just suggested that maybe what we
could do is.
Scott: No. I think what we'll do is let's vote on this motion and we'll move it along. I
don't think we can be traffic experts in 15 seconds. So would you mind restating your
motion please. At least for me, if for no one else.
Harberts: I move denial of the site plan and subdivision application for purposes of
constructing a Wendy's and an office retail building and I'm qualifying that motion based on
I'm very uncomfortable with the traffic pattern circulation. And I'll see if there's a second
and then I'll add some discussion.
Scott: Okay. It's been moved that we deny the site plan. Is there a second?
65
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Farmakes: I'd like to add to that motion if I could. A couple of the issues that I think
should be added to that for response from City Council. The issue of should that property
have one or two buildings on it. Should the issue of fast food area coming into the
downtown, on 78th and Market. Is that the correct position for that sort of thing. The other
is the quality of the building architecturally on the corner of Market and 78th. At what level
does that leave retail and enter business use and the viability of that to the Market Square
development.
Mancino: I second.
Scott: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we deny the site plan due to traffic
circulation. The question of whether or two buildings should be on the site. Whether fast
food should be located there. Architectural quality and then a feeling of not being quite sure
when it's retail and when it's commercial. As to exactly what the use of that property is
going to be. You could probably do a better.
Farmakes: I think that says it. If you're looking for clarification. I think that it needs to be
clarified in discussion. There's a point where they leave viability. Where it's no longer
viable as a retail. They can't rent out the spaces for that. And it becomes an office building.
Are we looking for more architecture. In other words, they're going to pay more for square
foot for it. It seems to me that that's something that has to be harangued between the owner
of the property and the person who's putting up the building. And I'm not sure we have
the...
Scott: Okay. SO it's been moved and seconded and discussion. I'll open discussion.
Harberts: My understanding is that the applicant will have the opportunity to perhaps work
with staff and take a new suggestion, a new plan for traffic circulation to the Council.
Scott: Correct. They can, that will be following their issue. Any other discussion? Okay,
can I have a motion to close discussion please?
Mancino moved, Harberts seconded to dose discussion.
Harberts moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission recommend denial of
the Site Plan for Edina Realty and Wendy's (#89 -2 PUD) as shown on the site plan
dated March 2, 1994 due to poor traffic circulation, whether there should be one or two
buildings on that site, architecture, and retail and commercial use questions. All voted
in favor of the motion, except Conrad, Ledvina and Nutting who opposed, and the
motion carried with a vote of 4 to 3.
..
I JAI
1
u
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994
Scott: Okay. The site plan has been denied. This goes to the City Council.
Al -Jaffa On the 14th.
Scott: 14th? Perhaps that's not enough time for the applicant.
Al -Jaff: Well Vernelle...
Vemelle Clayton: That's plenty of time.
Aanenson: There's still another.
Scott: I'm sorry, you're right. The oudot. The replat of Outlot A, Market Square to Lot 1,
Block 1, Market Square 2nd Addition. 41,193 square foot lot.
Mancino: How does that happen? What do we do with this?
Scott: Yeah, is this one from column A and one from column B? Are they both a package?
I would think if we denied number 1, that acting on number 2.
Aanenson: They're making a formal replat so you have so many days to process that
application...
Scott: Okay. Is this something that we can make a motion on right now?
' Ledvina: I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the replat of Outlot
A, Market Square to Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square 2nd Addition as shown on the plat
subject to the conditions identified in the staff report.
Harberts: Second.
' Scott: It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Harberts seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval
' of the replat of Outlot A, Market Square to Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square 2nd
Addition, as shown on the plat with the following conditions:
1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at the time building permits are requested.
2. Provide the following easements:
67
H
Planning Commission Meeting - March 2, 1994 1
a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the lot. '
b. Cross access easements need to be provided over the northeasterly driveway.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. '
Mancino: I don't think I understand what you just did. Does that have anything to do with if
you want to put one building on both lots? I mean let's say the City Council decides they
want, well it doesn't matter. They can change it anyway.
Scott: Yeah the only omment I would have is if the most important of the two is obviously
'
Y P Y
number one and if denial of number one makes our approval of number 2 insignificant for
some reason, which may be that's what happened, I think the direction is, the only reason we '
had acted upon this is that your suggestion.
Harberts: And I had understood that it was kind of an administrative oversight.
Aanenson: The first time.
Scott: But this in no way should lessen the impact of our action on the first item. I don't
know how it would but. '
Al -Jaff: When you approve the subdivision, now if you wanted one building on both sites,
you're going to have to replat this into a single lot. '
Mancino: Okay than I don't, excuse me I withdraw my. I won't.
Audience: Too late.
Vernelle Clayton: This already is two parcels. You're just ...the one. '
Harberts: I think we've made the motion and it's been seconded and it's passed.
Mancino: I was just getting clarification on what we did pass. '
Harberts: I think it moves up to the Council at this point.
Scott: Yeah, correct. Let's take a 5 minute break.
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE REGARDING THE SIGN ORDINANCE
SECTION.
68
1
0
0
1
u
F
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Hempel: Once we review the final parking lot grading plan from the applicant here, we'll
determine whether or not the velocity of runoff is enough to require rip rap. We may be able
to maintain a ... area for the runoff to go through. Kind of sheet drain it through the parking
lot similar to what we've done in the Industrial Control out on Park Drive. Their parking lot
sheet drains...
Scott: Drains to the creek, yeah.
Hempel: ...so we'll be looking at that in detail ... We recommended to the applicant that
they—to minimize runoff in one direction...
Scott: Okay. Any other questions or comments? Okay. Seeing none, this item will be
continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. Thank you very much for coming in.
PUBLIC HEARING:
LOTUS REALTY SERVICES FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 9,660 SQUARE
FOOT OFFICE RETAIL BUIDLING (EDINA REALTY) AND A 2,533 SQUARE FOOT
FAST FOOD RESTAURANT (WENDY'S) TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 4 AND
OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE.
Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Scott: We'll probably do questions and answers of staff and then have the applicant make
their presentation. Do that.
Farmakes: The contractual agreement the city has on a PUD, what is the time line in effect?
Does it go on ad infinitum?
Krauss: To the best of my knowledge ... determination basically what you did back in '89 was
dropped the underlying zoning of the property and substituted the PUD ... I know there is some
language that was implemented in the Lake Susan Hills.
Mancino: So many years.
Krauss: Yeah. That was an uncommon stipulation and I don't believe they put it here.
Farmakes: How do we apply, what if anything, has been changed in the interim of time to
consideration of this development? What was appropriate?
16
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Krauss: Well, this goes into one of those grayer areas where you know, I mean this is a
PUD. I can remember sitting in this chair 5 years ago arguing in front of the City Council
and the developer that a PUD was a contract and established obligations of both the city and
the developer, which the developer objected to strenuously. This was one of the first that
established some criteria in that regard. Relative to new criteria that's been developed since
then, there's certainly been a lot, from the strict standpoint of the PUD itself, you probably
don't have a lot of leverage. From the aspect of any HRA financial supports they may be
receiving... leverage in that area.
Farmakes: Is the Highway 5 Task Force recommendations, how do those interplay with this
PUD?
Krauss: The Highway 5, I guess we haven't reviewed it in detail... Highway 5 district would
establish the downtown ... to the best of my knowledge consistent with the general parameters
of that. But in essence we have a PUD in place that supercedes it, it's, I don't, the term
grandfathered in...
Farmakes: And that includes four outlots that haven't been built upon yet?
Krauss: Yes.
Mancino: My question on that is when is an outlot, what's the reasoning for making it an
outlot at the time of the PUD versus a lot?
Al -Jaff: We speculated that possibly taxes but we really didn't find anything.
Mancino: I mean a lot of times we make things an outlot that we're not going to build on.
Krauss: Well a lot of times you make things an outlot that will be platted at a future time.
All the future phases for example in Hans Hagen's development are platted as outlots and
when they're ready to plat homes on them, they come in and review the outlot status and do
final plat.
Harberts: There's a tax advantage to outlots versus...?
Krauss: I don't know if there is or isn't but you can bet if there was, that developer would
find one.
Mancino: And I mean who owns right now the land here? I mean who owns Outlot A and
Lot 4? Who has ownership?
17
�I
J
�1
t
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Krauss: At the present time, you know it's my understanding that the city owns it and we
have a purchase agreement in place, a standing agreement that we will sell it back to the
developer for a given price ... and that purchase agreement has existed for a number of years.
Mancino: Now we own it, the city owns it. And we have a purchase agreement with another
party. What if we don't want to sell it?
Krauss: What the City Manager's told me is that the city has the potential of exercising an
option to keep it. There are additional funds that need to be paid in that circumstance and it
was his impression—the agreement that obligates us to buy all four lots uniformally
throughout this site, the office site and the two unbuilt lots closest to the Subway restaurant.
We would then own all of those.
Mancino: We would own them and could we at a later date then sell them to another party?
Krauss: I honestly don't know and there may be some burden placed upon the city if we
foreclose upon development. There may be some limitations ... I don't know. If you'd like...
Mancino: I'd like to know our options as a city, what we can and can't do.
Harberts: Is there potential for funding from the HRA involved with this project?
Krauss: Yes. I do know that we do not have the ability to elect to just buy for example
Wendy's.
Mancino: Part of it.
Krauss: Right.
Farmakes: What's the zone. Has the zoning changed in regards to office retail since '89?
Krauss: Well, some of the PUD conditions have.
Farmakes: Is the PUD in regards to the office retail differentiate? That was before my time
here. Are we looking again at a similar situation as down the street here where it's listed as
an office building but primarily the lower level, in this case, it's a one story building, is
essentially retail. Is that a fielder's choice situation here with this particular development?
Or I understand one is a major tenant, is a realty company.
Krauss: That's true but I think you're right. Your characterization as some kind of an
18
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
inbetween type of animal is probably accurate. As I recall, parking will allow some retail use
in that building. It probably is going...
Farmakes: So we potentially could be looking at retail signage adjacent to 78th, facing the
city?
Krauss: No. What you're going to get there. The signage is regulated by the overall PUD
agreement. That sign allocation was established 5 years ago and they can't deviate from that.
Now I don't, and maybe Sharmin can expand on what...tenant.
Al -Jaff: It would allow two signs on two of the...
Farmakes: So I assume north and south.
Al -Jaff: Correct. Or east and west.
Farmakes: So there would be individual tenant signage facing the city and the park.
Al -Jaff: The more I read the covenants, the more I was picturing the Medical Arts buidling.
As far as signage.
Harberts: That would be an example.
Al -Jaff: Yes. The covenants ... or the existing signage on the Market Square.
Farmakes: And the use would be subject to change as the tenants would change, between
business and retail.
Al -Jaff: But then if they change, they would have to meet all the parking criteria and if they
can't meet that, then we won't allow the occupancy to take place.
Krauss: But that wouldn't preclude retail use. It would preclude say a restaurant going up
with a liquor license...
Farmakes: The monument signage that we're looking at, are you recommending that it be the
same height as the existing monument signage currently in Market Square?
Al -Jaff: As well as design.
Farmakes: Is in '89 the agreement, that agreement was included in '89 in the PUD?
19
u
n
i
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Farmakes: On the height restriction. How tall are those signs currently?
Al -Jaff: I believe they are 8 feet high.
Farmakes: 8 feet. I saw in the agreement that it was higher than that on the report. Maybe
not.
Mancino: We don't have any signage...
Scott: No, but we have pictures there.
Farmakes: 14 feet?
Al -Jaff: Well that's what it says in the.
Farmakes: PUD agreement.
Al -Jaff: In the PUD agreement.
Farmakes: Which would be substantially higher than any other monument signage that we
have.
Al -Jaff: Correct. There is one monument signage that is at that height. However, it faces.
Farmakes: The highway.
Al -Jaff: The corner...
Scott: Are you talking about Center Drug?
Al -Jaff: Pardon?
Scott: Are you talking about the tenant in the corner of.
Al -Jaff: Right next to Center Drug.
Farmakes: Lawn and Sports?
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Al -Jaff: Yes. Lawn and Sports. There's a 14 foot high monument sign.
Farmakes: That's a part of the building though isn't it?
Al -Jaff: Yes and no really.
Farmakes: That's the overhang coming off that's attached to the structure of the building.
Al -Jaff: Yes. And I think that's what this clause was for. But none of the other signs reach
that.
Farmakes: So the clause envisioned it being attached to the building? The structure itself?
So sort of a connected skyway to the pylon sign.
Al -Jaff: That's how I interpreted it. Because otherwise there's really no need to have the
clause in there. That would be the only structure that would meet this criteria. 14 foot high.
But in speaking of the applicants, they indicated that the signs that they are proposing will
be ... signage that it is out there. The monument sign that is out there. And that's why we
requested that they submit a plan that can be approved by Planning Commission and City
Council and we make sure that they are identical to what's out there.
Scott: And we'll see that on the 2nd?
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Mancino: I think when we get these developments, to see the signage at the same time that
we look at the site plan would be very advantageous so we can look at the materials. We can
look at everything as a unit. I mean as a whole. See how it works together.
Harberts: And when you're talking about the materials Nancy, you're also talking colors,
things like that?
Mancino: Right. The real thing.
Farmakes: It would be advantageous to it to look rather than typically how we get a signage
direction. We will see a schematic or an elevation drawing and we will see an example on
one tenant. Truly how you see each, potentially each minimum tenant has a sign so the
accumulation of that should be part of that, even if it's fictional. It should show what the
maximum extent of that package would be.
21 1
u
F7
�J
1
t
fl
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Harberts: This is a pretty focal point for the community so I have to agree with those
comments.
Al -Jaff: It would be an anchor building for that comer ... Market and West 78th. That's going
to be a prime area in Chanhassen.
Scott: Any other comments or questions? Okay. This is a public hearing so if anyone
would like to address the Planning Commission, please step up. Identify yourselves and we'll
be interested in your thoughts.
(The following discussion did not get picked up very well on tape as people were not
speaking loud enough or directly into the microphones.)
Vemelle Clayton: Since I recognize the rest of the people as being part of our group...
Vernelle Clayton. I'm representing Lotus Realty here tonight. Rather than a free Willy
montage of facts and figures that you usually get from Brad, he had to be out of town
tonight, I'll present the project. However less colorfully but hopefully I'll be able to give you
some background. Explain to you all, try to get a little bit—and how it got there. And I'm
saying that because I understand, although I wasn't there, that that very question was, has
been posed to Council and staff by the Council. By legal counsel and staff. By the
Chanhassen Council because there is some confusion I think and lack of understanding on
how we did get to where we are with the project. Partly because the project took so
incredibly long to get off the ground. Phase I did. The plan and the Planning Commission
stage I'm sure, although I wasn't involved at that point, took place long before probably
everybody except Ladd was on the Planning Commission and I guess if you're not on the
commission or ... HRA, you probably weren't involved ... of what went on. I would like to say
also that I don't want to spend all evening with you reviewing what—thank heavens it's over
and ... breathe a sigh of relief but one of the things that occurred was that there was a change
in the attitude of lenders and financing. And in fact we experienced a change in a lender.
One of the other things that happened, thankfully, the city was extremely cooperative and
helpful in filling that gap because they recognized the need for a shopping center and
particularly a grocery store and it was a high priority item at that time. So in a nutshell, to
summarize what happened in several months and many meetings here, the city, as a way of
infusing the necessary additional equity that the more stringent lending requirements ... are
dictated, purchased this particular piece of land which is now comprised of two separate
parcels from the Bloomberg Companies. But unlike other purchases that the city, that the
HRA. It was at the HRA... but this was the HRA that did it. Not the city itself. The HRA
in other cases had purchased land outright and just plain owns it and uses it for development.
For example there's ... that the HRA owns that and can sell it or do whatever they want. They
could I suppose if they chose build something on it and manage it and operate it. This is
22
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
different. This was purchased. They agreed to purchase the lot and in return for Bloomberg
agreeing to repurchase it. So there was at the time the purchase agreement was signed, an
option that was also an option to repurchase by Bloomberg... simultaneously. And attached to
that document is the purchase agreement that spelled out the terms under which Bloomberg
'
will close on the land. So that explains where we got, how you got to where you are. How
some people say gee, the HRA owns this land. Why is development being proposed on our
land perhaps? I don't know what all the decision might be but it was always planned that
,
this project would be developed as a part of Market Square and that Bloomberg would
exercise their option when a purchase agreement came, when a purchaser came along for
them such as Wendy's. And that's what's occurring now. There is a different agreement on
,
Lot 2 and 3 where unlike Bloombergs having an option to purchase, they didn't...2 and 3 but
I didn't want other misunderstandings going on here. That agreement is with Market Square
Associates Limited Partnership which is the owner of Lot 1, which is Market Square. Under
'
that agreement there is no option. There is a requirement that they, the partnership purchase
it. So they're not connected and they're separate agreements with separate entities. Now
because Paul remembers it one way and I went ... not having a million other transactions flow
'
across my desk. I can certainly understand how people coming on the Planning Commission
who may not have had a, may not have even lived here for all I know at the time this was
going on, would not have a clear understanding of what those documents say. They are in
'
addition to that, a little more complex. There is a possibility that the city could find a third
party offer and in that case Bloomberg has the right to meet that offer. Practically speaking
Wendy's wanted to be there and is offering a whole lot more than the city's contract with
'
them says, there is no apparent reason to me why if they came up with a third party offer that
Bloomberg wouldn't say yeah, I'll match it.
'
Farmakes: Can I ask you a quick question?
Vernelle Clayton: Sure.
Farmakes: Wendy's has a contract with the city? I
Vemelle Clayton: Wendy's has a contract with, actually Lotus Realty who is coordinating all
of this. Bloomberg is the one that has the option that can be exercised but in order to
transfer all of the ... deeper, we determined it would be wise to present one site plan for this
because two small site plans could lend to not a very good flow of the site. Not coordinated
landscaping. Not coordinated construction and we wanted it all coordinated. So to
coordinate it we, Lotus has a purchase agreement with Bloomberg. Bloomberg will exercise
their option and then Lotus plans to transfer title to Wendy's as well as to a partnership
which will be comprised of largely the same partners that own Market Square I. '
23
r1
I
'J
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
' Harberts: Vernelle, you commented that when Market Square was being developed or
proposed or whatever, that this was always the intent. This project with the intent of going
forward but because of financial difficulties or whatever, that's why it's so slow. When you
commented that this was going to, this was the intent, did that intent mean a fast food
restaurant and this type of other building that's being proposed or just that some type of
development would occur?
Vemelle Clayton: I said that there were financial problems. It was the whole world you
know fell apart for financing any kind of real estate and we had not intended at that point to
be developing these parcels along with Market Square. So they weren't, it's not true to say
that these parcels weren't developed then because of lack of financing. It was kind of an
extraordinary effort on Brad's part that he was able to fill 80,000 square feet at the time it
' opened. Any more than that is typically planned when you do, most shopping centers of this
size, and particular those that are larger, have a major center and 2 or 3 other lots which—to
Nancy and that we apparently call them all outlots and we refer to all of these lots, whether
' they're legally Lots 2, 3 or whatever we call them outlots. And maybe I'm wrong. Maybe
it's not ... I may have misunderstood your question. But in any event, to answer your question,
yes. We thought there was a great likelihood that there would be a fast food restaurant here.
' We also thought always that there'd be some kind of additional retail. We didn't think there
would be whatever might be proposed on Lots 2 and 3 because at that time, at the time that
the whole process was approved, the Council and the Planning Commission also approved a
f vetrinary building and a drive thru for that site. So you'll see those on old plans when you
see old plans...
Farmakes: Wasn't there also another proposal of a bank building?
1 Vemelle Clayton: I'm sorry.
Farmakes: Wasn't there also another proposal of the Americana Bank building?
Krauss: Several years later.
Vemelle Clayton: Right. That was several years later. They proposed and that's how this
little snaffu with the outlot came about. They originally this whole area was called Outlot A.
Everything we're talking about tonight was called Oudot A. And they went at the time the
Americana Bank wanted to be here, they only wanted half the site so they went through most
of the approval process for platting that. The Minutes say it was going to be divided into two
lots. Somewhere along the line somebody instructed a surveyor to label it Oudot A. And
that's the best that we can, Sham and I have gone through ... and can't quite figure out what
happened but it was apparently the intent from the dialogue that's recorded that they be two
24
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
lots. It simply was split into two lots.
Harberts: He didn't mention how Southwest Metro had control over the old...
Vemelle Clayton: Diane and I got to know each other by phone before we met.
Harberts: I think I was on board for 2 days. Interesting project...
Vemelle Clayton: So anyhow, that kind of gets to how we got part of the way to where we
are. As to why the HRA ... fact that the Bloomberg Companies has a legal interest in the
property and—exercising it's option. Under our proposal for Wendy's as I said will be
owning a parcel and a partnership, pretty much the same partnership as the one for Market
Square will own the Lot 4 and as I said ... As to the proposed development... one of the ways to
control property is to have or influence development on property is to have a PUD. This is
not a bad PUD from your perspective... And we have always gotten into the fact that we as a
developer and those folks that drafted the PUD agreement as well as other agreements
anticipated that there would be additional retail development on that site. And let me say
there's a need for additional retail. There's a need for traffic ... for Market Square. I don't
mean to imply that there are a lot of people that are close to going out of business. That
things are so tough down there but there are a lot of people that go to bed worried every
night I can tell you that. These people are all ahead of the time just a little bit. Everybody
that's moving into Chanhassen is ahead of time. They're positioning themselves because they
want to be here when we are fully developed and when the market catches up with what
we're doing here. There are probably a couple people in Market Square that can't wait that
long but it needs the synergy of newer folks out there that generate traffic. We've spent a lot
of money out there generating traffic ... that we have just to get people on site and Wendy's
will do a lot of that for us. We don't care particularly... that they all go to Wendy's and
immediately hop over and ... or drop in at the hardware store but we care that they see it and
they see what's there and they can come back and support it. So, there's a development
agreement. There's a PUD. A development agreement. A redevelopment agreement.
There's a repurchase agreement and even restrictive covenants that restrict the height of
buildings...All of those have a lot of little things that limit what we can do and provide you
control for what we can do. It was drafted that way so that this project would be consistent
with what already existed in Market Square and we think that the project that we're bringing
in is consistent with those anticipations. As we go through the presentation there may be
references to those. I think that Sharmin has already made some reference to various
requirements that set forth for example signage, parking, access ... As to the use of the
property, as I mentioned, it was rezoned PUD and the PUD agreement contains standard
language that the standards of the BG, general business district apply to this as if they ... Uses
are of course retail as we mentioned but we have proposed office and among... Getting at
25
11
1
11
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
' uses a little more, we screen uses probably as stringently as anyone there because of, although
it might be from a different perspective. We're concerned with respect to the mix of tenants
at Market Square. We have turned down several proposals from folks who want to be in the
' area and possibly in the building because a similar use already exists in Market Square. For
example we've had—uses which under the ordinance would be permitted. I really don't think
you'd like very much and we would not like very much either on the site. We, in deference
to Guy's, although unbeknownst to him, we turned down Taco Bell on the same site that
' Wendy's is now going on. Even though his lease has no provision to that affect. I
understand that he sent you a letter saying a couple things and I'm paraphrasing if you
' haven't seen the copy. One of the things he said ... is not true and I trust you understand that
now that you understand... ownership of the parcel became vested in the HRA and then the ... I
need to say also that it is our intent to continue to protect, to protect him and others based on
' what they were doing when they moved there ... and he didn't ask them about changing his
venue ... that became that grill after we were already...
' Farmakes: Excuse me. When you're referring to he, you're referring to Guy's?
Vernelle Clayton: I'm referring to Guy's. And I don't like any of those tenants over there
' to be unhappy with what we're doing. I work with them on practically a daily basis. I talked
with Guy about this and he just sort of shrugged his shoulders. Apparently he didn't think I
was in any position of authority to do anything about it so he wasn't going to complain to
'
me—with respect to this particular project. Wendy's began discussions with us last March
and one of the specific elements that was important to them was a site plan so we met with
staff and reviewed various alternatives and—which was recommended by the staff. In the
next few months ... and then we prepared some more formal renderings of the site plan and
elevations and presented them to the HRA and the comments with having preliminary
discussion with them—prior to bringing it to Planning Commission and Council and that was
' in late September. September 23rd I believe. We then were ... and so the site plan and
specifically the landscaping plan was used ... Kevin Norby prepared the landscaping plan ... as
' well as through the Tree Board. At the same time this was going on, we were finalizing
elevations and in the case of Wendy's making—elevations based on projections by the HRA.
We presented the—roughly in December. Anticipated Planning Commission public hearing in
January. We all know that the schedules were changed due to the accommodation linked to
the Highway 5 study. We thought.-perfect presentation and before I introduce the folks that
are going to come up and make the presentation, because it is less than perfect, it's because
we were trying ... but in any event, I think what we have, it might not be perfect or as perfect
and colorful in quality and visible ... less than 24 hours really to get the new site plan attached
to your packet together. He has not spent, that was at 3:45... Since then he's had a chance to
fine tune it a little bit and you'll see a fine tuned version here which incorporates a few
things ... by Friday afternoon. Then on Monday we learned that ...The other thing that Bill had
1
F�
26
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
to do was ... Sharmin decided that she wouldn't, suggested we add some relief to the front in
the form of bringing forward the gabled portion a foot and that meant that Bill had to go back
to the drawing board ... Monday morning on the elevations. Now all this time Bill had planned
to be doing a really nice computer presentation of...the building and so we're without those
tonight but thankfully we do have the most recent response to the most recent suggestions and
this also left Kevin in a little bit of a lurch since he had only I think today to do the revised
landscaping... It's my thought that, since you've already seen the site plan, we might then
,
look at the landscape plan next since you kind of have those around in front of you and then
we'll talk about the buildings. And so, unless you want to see it in a different order.
,
Scott: Go ahead.
Vemelle Clayton: I would like to introduce Kevin Norby who I think all of you have met in
,
the past and he will make ... Thank you.
Kevin Norby: Again, I apologize for not getting a copy of this to you but I do have copies I
'
can distribute to you.
Scott: If you want, if you can stick that in front of the podium. For the folks at home.
,
Kevin Norby: I guess what we've done here, I thought maybe Bill would be going fast and
have an opportunity to explain what changes were made on the site. Staff suggested that this
'
area, which was previously shown and I think is on your copy, shown as 6 foot wide and
suggested that that be widened to 8 feet to accommodate the planting of additional green
space. We've actually widened that to 10 feet feeling that we probably needed that extra 2
'
feet to insure that those trees would continue to thrive.
Harberts: Kevin, can you just kind of give us a point of reference where West 78th Street is?
,
It's kind of hard.
Kevin Norby: Yeah, this is West 78th and north. This would be Market here and of course
'
Festival would be down in here. So this is I guess one of the changes that Sharmin had
suggested of this being widened to 8 feet. We've widened that to 10 feet and incorporated
,
some trees in there. Sharmin had actually asked to have 5 trees planted in this median and I
was somewhat concerned about salt tolerance and the amount of traffic that runs through here
splashing up on the trees so what we've done is provided 3 trees. We've changed the species
'
a little bit to provide some additional salt tolerance. We've landscaped that area with lower
growing, ground cover type material that will take the snow loads and the salt tolerance.
'
Mancino: What is that?
27
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Kevin Norby: In this case we've used fleece flower, the ground cover. The trees are
hackberry and ash and off to the ends we've got maple and linden where we think there's a
little more space to accommodate those. We've also got this sidewalk that continues around
' the site. Part of it exists. That will be extended across West 78th here and the city currently
has as part of their West 78th Street project 5 trees which are proposed there. We have a
total of 32 trees shown on the site, 15 of which are required. 15 trees are required as part of
' your landscape ordinance. Your parking lot ordinance.
F
11
U
Mancino: That's the minimum.
Kevin Norby: The minimum. We've got 17 shown in the parking lot. We've got another 10
down there provided as far as buffering, screening. Quite a bit exceeded that in an attempt to
hide things like the trash enclosures, soften the building architecture and so forth. Again the
trash enclosure is located here. Bill will explain why that is there. It was the request from
staff to consolidate the two enclosures and ... will be accessed from both tenants buildings. I
guess in general I'll let Bill cover that sort of stuff but in general what we've done is tried to
soften the architecture. Tried to provide some green space. There will be some berming and
that sort of thing to help break up some of these views along here along West 78th and
Market. And then we've used again extensively ground covers and shrubs for both buffering
and for landscaping around the buildings.
Mancino: I have a question for you. If I'm over at Country Suites and I want to walk across
the street and go to Wendy's, and I get on the sidewalk on Market, how do I get to Wendy's
in a pedestrian friendly way that I don't go around cars? Is there a pathway?
Kevin Norby: The hotel over here?
Mancino: Yeah.
Kevin Norby: You either walk the sidewalk which will take you to Wendy's ... allow annuals
around the buildings. Around the signs we've got more perennials. It will be both colorful
and it will provide a lot of canopy cover.
Mancino: Is there the use of brick pavers for sidewalk or are we all cement or have we
upgraded up to some sort of a brick walkway around the buildings?
Kevin Norby: I haven't been involved in those discussions and I'm not sure it's reached that,
quite that level of detail here but at this point what we're representing is concrete. Maybe I'll
let Bill kind of touch on some of the other changes here.
28
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Vemelle Clayton: ...so do you want to explain more about the site plan? '
Bill Brisley: Most of the changes were driven by planning staff which you see there. I'm
sure there's a lot of rationale that they have that I'm not privy to that ...but I certainly would '
answer any questions on the site plan.
Harberts: Well one of the questions I have is with regard to the trash. And maybe it's just
my not understanding the total use of the other buildings but it would seem to me there's
more traffic generated potentially by Wendy's so why wouldn't the trash be located in the
other parking lot where I would think there would be less traffic to deal with. But then .
maybe I'm just. ■
Bill Brisley: Well here's where Wendy's collects their trash in this area and then directly out I
that door. And then a hauler would come in here—pick up this dumpster.
Harberts: Oh because they generate more trash? ,
Vemelle Clayton: Right. They generate more and plus we have several experiences in
Market Square where anytime you have large dumpsters, which you want, because you don't
want—The hauler has to head in directly back.
Harberts: They have to back up. ,
Vernelle Clayton: Right. And up here they'd have trouble...
11 me how a trash hauler would o in there and do a 3 point turn?
Harberts: So to g
Bill Brisley: This is all one way. r
Harberts: So tell me how. I
John Milga: We arrange the time for trash pick up so it just doesn't come in the middle of
the day or when it's busy and quite easily what happens is the trash backs in this way, pulls
up here and...
Mancino: Are you open 24 hours a day? I
John Milga: No we're not. And we wouldn't anticipate trying to be open 24 hours a day.
Harberts: Can you describe that location where they collect the trash. Is that like an '
29 1
1
Ll
[1
t
�
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
enclosed room or something?
John Milga: Well first of all we compact our trash before we take it out to the dumpster.
Harberts: And that's done in that little room.
John Milga: Pardon me?
Harberts: That's done in that little room that you pointed out?
John Milga: This one here? This is a cooler and freezer and that's all enclosed. And then
when they would bring out the trash, they would bring it out here.
Harberts: And is that somehow screened? That trash ... or whatever it's called back there?
John Milga: Yes. There's very heavy screening all around the trash, except for this little
sidewalk here where the office people can bring trash in.
Al -Jaff: We're also requesting that there would be berming to create an impression... from
Market Boulevard as well as...
Bill Brisley: What happens is this site steps down—and so where we take up some of the
changes...
Harberts: That answers my questions.
Vemelle Clayton: I'd like to bring, before we get off the site plan I'd like to bring up one of
the...Council and you should know about it too. These don't exist down here. They live
currently up in here and if you haven't noticed them, please drive out and take a look at
them. They're inconsistent with any kind of building design ... so we're proposing that they be
moved. And one of the reasons we're proposing that they be moved, the screen is
obviously—and the other is that there's a requirement that there be nothing planted within 10
feet and they're closer than 10 feet to the sidewalk. You can't shield them from the
sidewalk. So we need to address, I don't think you'll find any arguments from anybody that
they're ugly but we might find an argument that ...so we're going to have to work on that. So
I just wanted to explain that and this will be able to provide screening...
Farmakes: What was your motivation in changing the roof line? What was it originally?
You discussed some of the changes you made to the main structure here.
30
l_
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Vemelle Clayton: To this one?
Farmakes: Yeah.
Vemelle Clayton: Bill, well we were going to have Wendy's go on next but if you want,
why don't you talk about it.
Farmakes: That's fine if you want to come back to that.
Bill Brisley: Yeah, I guess I'm...
Vemelle Clayton: Okay. I think it would be nice if we did allow John Milga to talk a little
bit about Wendy's and he and...
John Milga: Well first of all Wendy's is kind of an upscale hamburger chain and most of our
customers fit the profile of Chanhassen's population base. Where it's a little more upscale.
A little more office related. People are a little more interested in salad bars. They're good
for your product and we kind of emphasize that. Emphasize the adult seating with the
movable chairs and tables. One of the things we have to consider is in trying to develop
here, what they have a plan that our building would match with the Market Square building
as well as with the Edina Realty building. So one of the considerations was to try and get a
dormer type roof on top of the building and also to match the brick. Now this artist has
shaded it in kind of a beige but we're going to match the same color as Market Square
building which is kind of a grayish color. And at the time we'll use the same materials so
we'll have the same brick materials as Edina as along with matching the colors of the Market
Square building. Now our logo colors are red and you can use this a little bit because we had
the rendering done before we had to make some other changes that Vernelle eluded to but
you can see the dormer treatments here ... Gary, you know all the colors a little better than I
do.
Gary: Well we're effectively going to compliment the colors of the shopping center. This
dormer treatment—and add some red striping to compliment to the canopies used in the
shopping center, which is a burgundy. And brick treatment, as I mentioned being kind of a
grayish ... This is what you call...
Harberts: Is this a, and I don't know if I'm...is this like a franchise store or is this like a
corporate store?
John Milga: This would be a corporate operated store. However that doesn't mean that it
would always be a corporate store. We do have flexibility that we can sell stores to
31
!I
11
L
F�
t
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
franchisees and buy franchise stores.
Harberts: Do you have any Wendy's that do not have drive thru or do all your Wendy's all
over the place have drive thrus?
John Milga: The only place that we don't have drive thrus is if we're in a downtown area
' like in downtown Minneapolis. Or inside of a shopping center mall. Other than that they all
have drive thrus. And the reason for that quite frankly is, about 30% of the business comes
through a drive thru. Today people do their banking through drive thrus. In fact women are
the primary users of drive thrus because when they drive home and they have little lids, they
don't have to take the kids out of the car, or out of the van today. Bring them in someplace.
Worry about them running around and so they can have them all contained where they can do
' their banking and...
Farmakes: Your elevation drawing is showing burgundy striping on the building and your
sketch drawing is showing a matching red to the sign. What, do you have a sample of what
that would be or do you, any exterior samples?
Gary: ...on the site?
Farmakes: Yes.
Gary: This is just a paint that's painted on. The top of the parapet is treated with ... What we
have shown right now is green ... red and beige.
Farmakes: So when you're referring to red, I'm looking and I'm seeing almost a burgundy
red and in the drawing I'm seeing bright red. What is the color?
Gary: It's red.
Farmakes: The red I see in the Wendy's sign?
Gary: Yeah.
Mancino: ...fire engine red, not burgundy?
Gary: Right. No.
Harberts: I thought I had heard the comment of your corporate logo colors would be.
1 32
F+
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Did I
'
Farmakes: I heard the awnings that are currently on the Market Square development.
hear that wrong?
Gary: Not a burgundy. It's kind of burgundy red. Sort of...
Farmakes: Well signage reds are color coded. They're specific. The red that you're using in
Wendy's I'd say is a 185 red.
Gary: ...Yeah. The signage in the shopping center are red.
'
Mancino: But I mean it's not going to be a subtle burgundy?
'
Gary: No. Right. No, it's going to be red. And this...
�' g
Mancino: Where else are their signage up on the mansard or whatever you call that part of
the roof? I mean you have a drive up area.
Gary: Right. We have.
'
Mancino: In your other Wendy's you have a fair amount of signage.
John Milga: ...ongmal pictures of our standard building " may g ive a better idea. You can
see there we usually use a brick similar to the brick that you have in civic center...
Scott: And then all your rooftop, your HVAC and all that kind of stuff is going to be
screened? Actually contained underneath so it won't be visible at all.
'
Gary: Right.
Farmakes: Will the stone and brick that you're using is accented by a rougher stone in the
detail work?
,
Gary: Yes...
Farmakes: And this is the bronze metallic that you're referring to?
Gary: Yes.
Harberts: And this site is supposed to have two drive thru windows? Is that right?
33
L 17�
fj
11
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
John Milga: Yes. That's the standard ... and we are changing our signage. We're not going to
have Wendy's Old Fashion Hamburgers. Wendy's is Wendy's...
Farmakes: Okay, so on some of these other buildings where you see chili and frosty, all this
auxillary signage that you're talking about is restricted then to your...
Mancino: And is it lit, back lit?
Gary: Yes. It's lit. Basically this is one of our, what do you want to call it...
Vemelle Clayton: When you're talking about Wendy's signage ... but each building is allowed
signage on two sides...
Mancino: And that includes the pick up window?
Vernelle Clayton: Right. They might choose to have a sign on the side.
Mancino: But that's then 3.
John Milga: No, we'll have 2 signs and basically the way we go about our signage...
Farmakes: I think you're talking about an auxillary sign for the pick up window here or pick
up here.
John Milga: ...directional sign for example, we'll probably have a sign on this side which...
Farmakes: Sharmin, could I ask you something in regards to the fast food restaurant that has
a drive up and in many of these such as McDonalds and so on and essentially they're a
monument sign onto themselves. How do we treat that issue in relationship to signage
limitations in that PUD? ...we're talking about a limitation of 2 signs, building signs on two
sides. We're talking about auxiliary signs. Pick up window here. Typically in a fast food
there's also a drive up collection. I'm assuming you have a drive up type situation where
there's a menu and usually colored pictures and so on.
Mancino: Yeah ... and also signage in the windows. 99 cents huge which is also signage.
Al -Jaff: Currently the ordinance does not allow ... I looked at the McDonalds and we did not
include that as a part of their signage...
Farmakes: I guess my question is, we do have criteria then that regulates the signage and the
34
J
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
placement for auxiliary signage that buildings like these require other than the fact that we do
have restrictions when we're talking about the building signs themselves. For additional
obviously signage, do we have criteria that we use for that? I don't recall that...
Al -Jaff: ...that band then wraps around the building...
Scott: So you're saying if the corporate color is utilized as an accent on the building, which I
remember from the... corporate accent colors count as signage.
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Farmakes: We talked about that fairly extensively... how you determined that. How either
aesthetically or in ordinance you determined what effect it has...
John Milga: For example Super America likes to use a huge America flag to the point it
becomes when you see that on the highway, you know it's a Super America. I don't know of
anyone that counts that as a sign.
Farmakes: Particular fast food franchises, we could argue that at length but obviously Taco
Bell, Amoco, I can list off where the striping is an intricate part of their franchise building.
No question. A part of the signage. It's used to catch the eye. But I've seen it done
tastefully. I think Embers does a pretty good job of tastefully doing it. I've seen it done
pretty garishly.
John Milga: Then on the other hand, you take for example McDonalds has the golden arch.
Just because they use the yellow color, you couldn't say well, we have to use blue arches.
You're causing the corporation then to...in some cases when you start getting into this, you
start violating other trademarks and...
Farmakes: I think the argument can be made though that red trim on a building is not a
corporate ID. It's not a trademark. The Wendy's logo and the fact that you're using and so
on, that could be...
John Milga: I'll give you an example of one that is a trademark...McDonalds ... lights on the
roof. Their roof design with ... lights. That is a trademark by McDonalds...
Farmakes: I think the McDonalds was built many, many years ago. I don't think that would
fly any longer.
Harberts: The question I have is with the stacking of cars as they go through the drive thru...
35
t
u
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
n
fl
1
1
Do you have a standard procedure where they stack up...
John Milga: Okay first of all there's a by -pass lane to get around the drive thru so if
someone was parked in say this parking space, if they want they could have two options ... or
they could back out and go around the drive thru ... Some companies do not have that but we
provide for a by -pass lane. Stacking wise you know, the reason we have the double window
is to move the cars through faster. They can pay while they're waiting for the pick -up and
then they move on to the pick -up window and ... One takes the order and one takes the ... so the
goals it always to keep ... and you could stack up all the way to here. That was one of the
features your planners came up with and the way we had it set up before didn't really provide
for an emergency that could happen. That wouldn't be an ideal from our perspective to have
a situation like that. But could that happen? Yes, that could happen so we provided for...
Harberts: Have you done that type of design before where there could potentially be stacking
up in that same place...
Scott: Yeah, what's the distance there?
John Milga: I think it's 24 feet.
Scott: Okay, and then cars are typically how long?
Gary: They're typically 20 foot ...A Suburban might be about 20 feet long.
Scott: I'm just thinking if you've got 26 feet across that lot and you have two 15 foot cars
that are supposed to be parked, and maybe you're not measuring the distance this way but I
think if you have a car parked there and you have a car parked there, and your stacked 7 or 8
deep, those people are going pretty much going to be immobilized. I mean if you take the
length of two cars and the width and you don't have that much space in that parking lot...
Gary: ...26 feet but the cars are only say 7 feet wide. That's the width that a car would...
car was standing here, you still have 19 feet for a park to back out...
Mancino: I'm sure you said this before but I can't remember. How does the brick get to be
gray? Is that, do you impregnate the color of the brick ?...
Harberts: Did Public Safety look at the traffic flow?
AI -Jaff: Well it was between...Dave, and myself. We looked at the flow of the traffic and
we have not studied this specific plan in detail but this was...
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Fanmakes: It's not restricted to that?
Bill Brisley: No it's not.
Farmakes: It could be Block Buster Video.
Bill Brisley: Right.
Harberts: Is there a, if the parking lot at Wendy's gets full, will people have the option of
parking over in the other side then?
John Milga: Well in fact this parcel, and Vernelle you can help us out on this if you want,
there is parking on this side. This is parking that belongs to this land. However we're not
even counting that as part of our required parking. But there was overflow parking calculated
way back when, when it was thought of this as being retail then. Possibly a in service
restaurant.
Vemelle Clayton: We intend to have cross parking easements. There already are cross
parking easements in place...
Harberts: Would a pick up, no. Let's start over. Would a Suburban with a 16 or 18 foot
boat be able to go through that? I mean realistically.
John Milga: But the question you raise is the same you have to ask in a bank. If someone
were imprudent enough to come with a Suburban and a big boat, and that could happen in
this area. Someone could be that imprudent to do that, do go into a bank, they're going to
tear up everything on it just like the church. They did the same thing. If they pull in there.
Harberts: So I take it the answer is no.
John Milga: No. Probably wouldn't. They probably could get through here because it's
wide enough but.
Gary: If there were no cars.
John Milga: Because with 22 feet, it would work but you know...
Harberts: Well we have Lotus Lake right there. We have a lot of traffic on 78th Street and I
37
r
i
r
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
think it's very conceivable and unless this person is smart enough to park their vehicle
outside of that area, I'm just wondering what kind of traffic tie up you could have in there,
into the stacking, things like that.
Farmakes: Is the street lighting for Market II going to match Market I?
John Milga: Yes, it is the same street lighting.
' Al -Jaff: We did discuss this at a meeting with the applicant and we suggested that they use
the same ornamental lighting that exists at Market Square right now, and we're hoping with
their next submittal that that shows on there.
Farmakes: And that will be part of any lighting situation within the lot also?
IPA
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Harberts: I'd like to just reinforce Nancy's comment earlier about seeing the colors and the
materials at the next meeting.
Mancino: And signage and where any accessory signage will be.
Al -Jaff: Do you want them to bring in examples? I mean actual pieces.
Mancino: Yes.
Conrad: Staff report took out sidewalks. I'm curious why we did that.
Hempel: Actually the site plan showed taking out the sidewalk with the grading of the site
and did not propose putting it back and that was one of the recommendations staff has, to
make sure that sidewalk on Market Boulevard is put back in place. And in fact the West
78th Street sidewalk.
Vernelle Clayton: If it said that, it was a mistake. It was never intended that we take out the
sidewalk...
Bill Brisley: We're not taking out any sidewalks. They're adding, or the city will be adding
the sidewalks...
Hempel: Let me clarify for the record as far as the city is going to be extending the sidewalk
along West 78th Street only. Nothing along Market Square or Market Boulevard. There's a
38
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
small segment of the sidewalk that was left out of the original Market Square development.
We're waiting for the city to put the turn lane in and move the electrical boxes that were on
the corner. We've moved them back for a second time now. The location is far enough back
to facilitate the extension of that sidewalk and development of the parcel.
Conrad: One thing that we hear on this Vision 2002 is, it's always interesting what people
focus on and we're trying to figure out what we look like in 10 years or 5, or something like
that. We talked about pedestrian traffic and although if Brad were here he'd be telling us
how the car moves us around, which is true. But on the other hand, the people that are
looking at the city are real concerned with pedestrian traffic. Staff, you did not want the
connection, as originally in our plans, made to these sidewalks on West 78th and Market Blvd
based on the staff report saying eliminate them. Is that correct?
Al -Jaff: No. Actually...
Bill Brisley: The sidewalk comes here.
Conrad: I'm not talking about those. I'm talking about the connectivity between the Edina
and the sidewalks that I perceive to be coming from the sides going out to the, right there.
Yeah. Now my understanding was staff said these pedestrian ramps should be eliminated.
Bill Brisley: Those were ones going across the street.
Hempel: Right. If I could clarify. There were previous on the landscape plan showing two
pedestrian crossings or access points out to West 78th Street and Market in this location and
another one out here to promote crossing mid block and ... We did request that they give us
some continuity between the sidewalk on Market and Edina Realty and Wendy's.
Conrad: Okay. Then I understand. And we're going to look at connecting Wendy's to that
same Market Blvd sidewalk, right?
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Conrad: I'm really interested in connecting everything together. This is a PUD you know
and I think that's what everybody has to really refocus on. This is not just a subdivision or a
site plan. It's really fitting everything together. I'm concerned with sidewalks and accesses
to get a, I think the parking lot at Market Square has been a bone of concern for a long time.
I hope we're taking that opportunity. I'm not going to get into the business of being an
engineer but I really hope we're taking the opportunity to make sure that this thing all fits
together, and I'm not smart enough to critique it right now but I trust staff will do that. I
39
f
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
also trust staff will do that in terms of the sidewalks. Even though this little group that's
trying to figure out what we look like in 2002 has not come to conclusions yet, there's sure
some solid indication of what they're looking for and that should be wrapped into this. We
shouldn't have to wait for this document to come forth. I think there's some clear directions
on that and this impacts it a little bit. So again, I just really hope between now and then that
staff has thought of those issues and making sure this all fits.
John Malga: Any other questions in regards to Wendy's?
Al -Jaff: I just wanted to add something in regards to the sidewalks. It's true as
Commissioner Conrad states that one of the main concerns of the 2002 Vision commission
' was to connect the sidewalks and we did look at this site and what we had suggested was that
the sidewalks. This is where Edina Realty is. The sidewalk would continue along West 78th
but at the same time go along the interior and then go to the west until it reaches Subway.
The sidewalk that's right in front of Subway and I think that would complete that sidewalk
connection.
Mancino: But you still can't get to Wendy's on a sidewalk. I mean it's not pedestrian
friendly.
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Mancino: You cannot get from a sidewalk to Wendy's without going through a parking lot
and I'm thinking small kids. I'm thinking bikes and all sorts of things. So it doesn't meet
those pedestrian friendly requirements.
Scott: Well another comment too with the Vision 2002 that's very obvious in the statement
that we all received is one of a civic center and obviously we have a civic center beginning
with City Hall. Potential City Hall expansion. Library relocation. Post Office. City Center
Park and so forth and perhaps in this particular area, because the ownership, at least at this
point in time seems to rest with the HRA, you know they also put some interesting
opportunities there to further enhance our civic center. So I had the opportunity to go to a
couple of the meetings. I know Nancy's probably, I think Nancy and Jeff went.
r Mancino: In fact I just got a mailing from the last meeting and I would urge everybody to
attend on the Planning Commission and one of the things that we're looking at as an ad hoc
committee for 2002 is making this area, the city center, and I mean it was even brought up
maybe in this particular site is a public library. That may work out. I mean obviously the
committee has not come to any conclusions or recommendations but they are in the middle of
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
doing this. So it might be wise to listen to those much like the Highway 5 task force. To
wait until the Vision 2002 committee gets done and makes recommendations to the Planning
Commission and City Council because they're going to take the whole central business
district as a whole and look at it and do some site analysis.
Scott: And also too to say, here's something that's on the table for this particular site.
Mancino: Well there are lots of citizens involved. There are professionals involved and I
think that the HRA is the one that's funding Hoisington to facilitate all this. So it's a very
real thing that's going on right now and it's addressing a central business district as a whole.
Scott: And I think we've got a very strong tradition of taking our ad hoc committees, citizen
committees extremely seriously. But then again what we have to do, what I've seen too as
when there's an ordinance in the works, we always have worked with our applicants to say,,
it's not here today. We don't know precisely what it's going to be but these are the things
we can count on for sure and guide them that way. Any other, anybody else from the
audience wish to speak on this particular issue?
Vernelle Clayton: Did you want to see the elevations?
Bill Brisley: Do you want to see something about the other building?
Farmakes: Yes.
Harberts: But we're done with Wendy's at this point right?
Scott: Yes. Okay, let's move on to Edina Realty.
Harberts: Well it's coming back on March 2nd?
Scott: Oh yeah. We're not going to be making any recommendations this evening anyway.
Bill Brisley: ...I'm an architect employed Amcon Corporation—and specifically tonight for
the proposed development by ... I was charged by the developer to create a modular, highly
flexible and—rental space to accommodate different combinations of retail and office service
businesses over the useable life of this building. Lease terms are relatively short in this
market, 3 to 5 years so the design of the building must accommodate frequent changes as
they inevitably occur. At the same time... aesthetic influences in the context of this downtown
area, my mission was also to create an architectural link between the shopping center, of
which this lot is a visible and legal relative, and an emerging Chanhassen city image defined
41
ILD
L
J
1,
1
1
J
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
by the new project such as the Country Suites, Medical complex, the apartment building
behind that, the bank across from Festival Foods, Brooks, and the older traditional landmarks
such as the steeple church and some of the main street homes further east. The PUD
agreement governing this lot also stated that the building should be compatible with the
Market Square shopping center which, from a massing point of view, was a combination of
gable and flat roof systems. What has emerged as a result of these ingredients is a small
Chanhassen compatible building with a moderately high pitch, being 8 1/2 to 12. 8 1/2 to 12
pitch hip roof or main roof with 6:12 12 gabled gables punctuating that roof for visual relief
and aesthetic interest. The shingles are asphalt type and as used on most of the buildings or
pitched roofs in downtown Chanhassen and are to be a green color to match the green used in
the shopping center coping metal. Samples of the actual shingles will be submitted to staff at
the time of construction to verify compliance with expectations of this concept. The gabled
dormers... adjacent shopping center details. The gray lapped siding, white with trim around
the windows and dark gray rock face foundation block sills under the windows came directly
from the ... and are specified to match the materials and colors of Market Square directly.
Square punched, four pane horizontal and vertical—windows on all four sides of the building
help to create a shop like vernacular as opposed to the typical linear store front kind ... of most
commercial strip shopping centers ... On Monday of this week Chanhassen staff requested that
the longitude in the walls be further broken for visual relief and the aesthetic interest by
offsetting them outward 2 feet is actually what we came up with. Not one. The corregation
with the gables. This effect is apparent in the enclosed computer model of the building. If
the Planning Commission's reaction is positive to this, I will be rendering a larger version of
these pictures with trees, people and cars for the subsequent meeting. Can I answer any
questions?
Scott: Any questions or comments?
Farmakes: What is the darker gray on the illustration that you passed out is the masonry?
Bill Brisley: That's the rock faced masonry.
Farmakes: And the lighter gray is the clapboard?
Bill Brisley: The clapboard and the white verticals are the 6 inch trim that goes around all
the windows.
Mancino: Windows are all the same size?
Bill Brisley: They're the same size.
Farmakes: If we were looking at this building then in it's true form, on two sides of the
42
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
building then would be the sign runners as per tenant, correct?
Bill Brisley: Right.
Farmakes: In the smaller area between the roof and the windows?
Bill Brisley: Right. That might be Edina Realty ... Right now we're looking at about three
tenants.
Harberts: For the whole building?
Farmakes: In your revised perspective detail, this would be on both the north and the south
part of the building that we would be looking at or would it also be on the cast and west
section?
Bill Brisley: The signage you're talking about?
Farmakes: Where it comes out a couple of feet?
Bill Brisley: No, no. On the end it cannot do that because we don't have that kind of slope.
Farmakes: Okay. So this would be on the north and south end of the building?
Bill Brisley: North and south. More of the gables... Actually the gables themselves could
protrude on the end. It's just that the wall can't go out because we're tight against the
setbacks.
Farmakes: When the PUD from '89, was the overall covenant that was in place for
downtown development, where the ... line, I think it was consistent or ... There's a line where the
development has to be, I'm forgetting the catch word that's used.
Al -Jaff: Compatible?
Farmakes: Compatible, yeah. Is that it? Besides this PUD, isn't there also an overall
downtown development ordinance that also uses that word?
Al -Jaff: Yes. And it's basically downtown architecture is what it uses.
Farmakes: Okay, but in the terns then of Market I and the PUD out of '89 for Market I,
ignoring the overall ordinance for downtown, compatible would be same as then as Market I,
43
E
1
t
I
n
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
I right?
1
1
1
1
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Farmakes: Okay. So the intent here was to replicate some shape or form of Market I? To a
certain extent you're nodding your head. Was that as part of the assignment?
Bill Brisley: That, was I intending to do that? No I wasn't. I was trying to pull parts.
Ingredients as I described from Market I and downtown. Market I details are kind of difficult
to put on a very small building. Market I, a lot of the expression on Market I came from the
fact that they are very large squares. Large boxes. And flat roofs. It would be easy to do if
it were a flat roof, just pitch up...entryway but.
Farmakes: In '89 was the interpretation of that line, that the building should be of a like
quality within a development or that they physically should represent one another.
Al -Jaff: We wanted architectural elements that were similar to the overall PUD agreement.
The standards that were set for Market Square.
Farmakes: Okay, so similar in detailing. Similar in not just cost per square foot but similar
in, it looks like an extension of the building in other words?
Al -Jaff: Yes. It looks like an extension. It doesn't have to be a duplicate of the existing
building but would have to have some similarities.
Mancino: Then you're just talking about compatibility.
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Mancino: So you're talking about compatibility. It doesn't have to be similar in the
materials you use or anything but it has to be compatible with what's in Market Square I?
Okay. So we could go to full brick here and not clapboard or etc? I mean we have some
versatility?
Al -Jaff: Yes, you do.
Mancino: Okay.
Vernelle Clayton: Do you want the language? "Designed with proper building materials so
as to be architecturally compatible with the shopping center."
44
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Mancino: So we get compatibility.
Richard Wing: What was the date on that?
Vernelle Clayton: All of these documents were executed on February 28, 1992.
Farmakes: Now is that the ordinance for downtown that you just read or is that for Market,
the PUD for Market Square?
Al -Jaff: This is Market Square.
Farmakes: Okay. Why is that dated '92 and not '89?
Al -Jaff: That's when those documents were recorded at Carver County.
Farmakes: Oh I see. So the ordinance was recorded at that point, okay.
Scott: Any other questions or comments? Okay. Would anybody else like to speak about
the Edina Realty portion? Okay, thank you very much. Yes sir.
Richard Wing: Can I just make?
Scott: If we can hear you. I want to make sure we get you as part of the public record.
Richard Wing: Richard Wing, 3481 Shore Drive, Chanhassen. The only thing I wanted to
just comment on, as I listen to the last couple of seconds of this was tying this into the
existing Market Square. And I remember vividly, not only here but at the Council and
particularly HRA, that Market Square caught some real heated demand and we had just
started to move into the thinking of the 90's and new development standards and new quality
standards and HRA took some heat for just simply running this thing through. There was I
think some talk at the very beginning of scrubbing it because let's not make a mistake. And
in fact Market Square was built and some of the design standards such as the little parapets
and so on were added at the last, the last second as a knee jerk reaction to try and get this
thing through and the developers were concerned about dollars and we couldn't redesign it
but yet we knew we really wanted to redesign it. I remember distinctly those discussions
here. Towards the very end and it went in but the thinking of the 90's started to take over
and that's been well represented by what's occurring in the city now and our standards are
increasing dramatically and we're not even close to being finished yet. We should have
ordinances on line where we don't even have to discuss these issues. They're just so
demanding that as people come into Chanhassen, in this growing market, they're pretty clear
45
r
t
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
cut. Like Highway 5's going to demand glass, brick or better. So I'm very concerned that
there's discussion of trying to tie this into what I believe, and I think we documented it, was
thought to be a mistake. The old school. The old thinking. It's colors. It's architectural
style. It's roof lines, etc. To tie these buildings into that existing Market Square to me is
another mistake that I don't think we need to make so I guess I hope you can start to discuss
this as a separate entity that has quality and architectural standards and design that far exceed
what's there at Market Square now. I don't want more buildings that look like that and I'm
going to be very sensitive to those issues. So I think we're on the wrong track design wise
for that corner and it's premiere position. But just the history I think on the record with, I
think I'll hold my comments. I hope I'm not I may be talking off the record but nonetheless
from the heart and to the best of my judgment that those comments were pretty prominent at
that time. But I think on the record, I think everybody involved said, well if we could just do
this again or if it wasn't so far along ... and put a little different coloring on it. A little
different architecture and protect it from the highway a little bit more. Bill Monrish kind of
came in and went ooh. Just what we're trying to get away from you're doing, but it was
done. So let's not do it again.
Farmakes: What I was trying to determine here Dick is what commitments the City made in
'89 to this particular PUD development as an outlot or extension before we critique what's
before us here. As I understand it, the city owns the property and there's a contractual
purchase agreement of some sort.
Richard Wing: To the best of my ability, from what I've been able to learn, I think there's
some knowledge that there was considerable concern at the end of the last Council meeting.
And basically what's going on and who's driving and who made these decisions and where
are we going and this is our pivotable corner. I tried to get that out 5 times ... had to spell it.
Pivotable corner. Premiere corner. Extremely sensitive comer. City Hall. City Park. Well,
you spelled them all out. So you're talking colors and parking lots and whether a boat trailer
will fit in there. We're talking land use ... who owns it. What's going on and where do we
want to go with it. And I think those will be real significant issues coming up on the 28th at
the City Council and probably part of the planning, a separate plan meeting to discuss these
issues. So am I for or against, I wouldn't address that other than there's some very sensitive
issues here and it's kind of an all or nothing situation. Either we let this go and develop the
way it is, or we buy it for public use. I guess as far as, to answer your question Jeff. To my
knowledge right now, we have an option. They have an option or they have a purchase
agreement to buy for a private use. If they can find a private use for that land, they have first
option, first order to purchase that property. However, if the city should elect to take it for
public purpose, non - defined public purpose, we then would have to come up with another
$1.00 a square foot and buy it back, which I believe we have the option to do. There's a
major escape clause there for the city to take it for public use.
0
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Farmakes: Some of these issues, I'm sure you may know, are covered in some of the work
that was done for Highway 5. How they interplay with this particular application I think is
pretty significant and I'm fairly comfortable that my questions have been answered with
regards to what was committed in '89 versus now. Although you may take that up in more
detail with the Council.
Richard Wing: Another option you have is to buy the property so that it's all or, we win.
You know we want it all and then say we have a little higher standards than we thought.
We're willing to renegotiate this and we own the land now. Very valuable land ... for
something better or more significant. I guess before I'm willing to get excited here about this
issue one way or the other, I really want to know for sure who owns it, where it's going and
are there options and what are the land use, the best land uses there. I'm not real impressed
with what's being offered considering the importance of that corner and the value of that
corner. I'm not real impressed with the quality of the buildings, the design of the buildings,
and I guess the other issue that came up at Council is fast food locations. We've discussed it.
We've been worried about it. We just got done with the automotive issues. So there's a lot
of wheels turning here and it's really unfortunate. I think that these people certainly have
some rights ... I don't want to see this tied into what I feel is sort of a haphazard occurrence
that occured in the 70's and 80's when we got Market. I don't like...
Vernelle Clayton: I need to respond to a couple things because he has stated he doesn't like
gray. I mean I can say I don't like brown but at this point here ... when it gets to the Council
it makes a difference... We get a lot of comments, very favorable comments of what Market
Square looks like so while there was—example the back side in terms of how that might look
and we added extra trees to hide it, we made some accommodations to the city and the lot
and so forth which everyone, including in the city would know ... but we've gotten a lot of
very favorable comments on how Market Square looks. And a lot of people really like the
gray. The other thing is, I think before we start using the argument that we can do this with
the property, meaning the city, or not, you must get clarification from the attorney because
it's very clear in the documents. It specifically says, if the HRA gets a third party offer. In
other words, you decided to put something else on the property...Bloomberg can match it. So
it isn't, you can't just say hey, we're going to change our minds here and tell these people
they can't do what they want to do with their property. It's not that simple. The other thing
is, you do have to be careful these days that ...do constitute takings and so you need to be
thinking about that and you don't, because you don't make that decision. I had a third point.
Oh, the other thing is is that, I guess I find it a little offensive to say that we had knee jerk
reactions. I wasn't directly involved in the architecture. Bill was and he was just shaking his
head back there that the parapets that we added were not added at the last minute and were
not knee jerk reactions and they were part of what people seemed to like about Market
Square. The other thing, and then I won't say any more, is that Paul mentioned to you earlier
47
I t
t
11
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
■
with respect to the use of the property and the architecture ... were governed by the PUD is a
contract. You have a contract with us and we have a contract with you and that contract says
that these buildings will be compatible. So we have to try to do the best we can under the
circumstances and we, I think demonstrated that we're willing to make changes and that sort
of thing. All and all, it all comes down to what the public can bear. If you add things that
end up costing thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars to the building, either it won't
be built or it will be built and tenants will come there ... and they'll have to pass onto, it's
not... economics but it's very real. If a building costs more, the rents are higher and the ... We
all want something nice here but we also want it to be ... impact on Market Square. A library
just doesn't cut it. You can say for example, you can look, if you don't believe me, that it
doesn't bring the traffic that it needs. Or frankly ... I don't think the city, people in
Chanhassen are very excited about coming to a city park that is no activity. If you wanted a
park without activity, you go to the country. If you go to a city park, you want activity. You
want people. You want lights. You want action. That's what we're trying to provide, not
only for the whole synergy of the downtown but also for Market Square—but we think this
can be done well. We'd like to work with you and cooperate with you. Oh I know the point
I lost. That I share the ... library. It doesn't bring traffic. It's quiet, somber and the proof of
the putting is, look at the State ordinance and look at the parking requirements. The ones with
the most traffic have the most stringent requirements ... I car for every 50 square feet. Retail
is 1 for every 200. Office is 1 for every 250. I can't remember library but it's less than all
of those. So that kind of makes that point. We need to have a viable downtown and just
because... we'd like a library on our most important corner doesn't mean that that's what the
city should ... Well I've worn out my welcome so.
■ Scott: Why don't we in the next 10 minutes maybe give general comments for the applicant
and then we continue this public hearing. Then we can go from there but at least give them
■ some formal feedback. Who'd like to start? Well I can. In my mind, as I mentioned before,
■ I think I'll just quickly summarize some of my thoughts. In my mind, having gone through
the Highway 5 task force, I felt that was city non - government at it's best where you have a
group of non - elected, non - appointed people in an ad hoc type situation, take an extremely
weighty task and coming up with some very viable and well rounded standards that quite
frankly, as a Planning Commission we passed on to City Council with a few minor changes
but nothing major. I think we have a similar situation with our Vision 2000 and I think it's
important because of there's the viability of the downtown. There's the view of it, and we all
understand what Vision 2000, or at least those of us who are in the city and have been
involved with the process. That's something that I personally take very seriously and paying
close attention to that over the next 3 weeks because obviously we're going to see this again
so. I have questions about the property and what it should be used for. I would also want to
go on record personally, and if any of the other commissioners would like to second this, is
that if the, if indeed the HRA does own this property, which I believe they do, that we would,
48
1
r
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
I would personally be very upset if it changed hands within the next 30 days. And that's my
personal opinion. Anyway, next.
Harberts: Are you insinuating that if there's elected officials on the HRA that they may not
want to consider running again?
Scott: No. I have nothing to do with that. I'm just saying that because of the sensitivity of
this particular property and the ownership position that the city has in it right now, that I'd be
very upset if it changed hands.
Farmakes: I'll make a couple of comments. The reason I was again asking questions in
regards to ownership of this property. Whether or not HRA was making a commitment to it.
The city's been a partner, maybe not in the legal sense but. I shouldn't say partner. I should
say catalyst would be maybe the correct word to this development from it's inception. As
one of the applicants said, the city in a way took the place of a bank getting this thing off the
ground, as a development. Market one. And obviously there are some self interests to
redevelopment of downtown at that time. Trying to bring Chanhassen into some form of
viable downtown. In doing that I guess obviously the city becomes a direction or force
within that. It seems that at times when necessary, the city's a welcome partner and at other
times, they seem to be accused of interfering. I don't think they're interfering with this
situation. I think that this junction that we have here is the pivotable area in the city. If the
city makes an investment to pilatzo or city square or whatever this is in the back yard here of
the City Hall area. It's obviously going to be a gathering place. A center to gather for
whatever city functions we have here. The property that we're talking about, as far as the
office building will be adjacent to that. When I saw the Byerly's development that came in
here, and I looked at the square foot type of development that was proposed there. I had to
say that I had hoped that that would be the type of quality building that we would see
adjacent to that property. Something with stone and something that followed along the lines
of what we had been working on the Highway 5 task force with architectural requirements
and that would be part of that ordinance. I find this particular building lacking in that. I find
these gables way disproportionate to the shape of the building. I can see, it seems as if it's
again thrown out as a problem to a solution perhaps in negotiations talking about the function
of the building. If I take the dormers away, coincidentally enough, it looks very similar to
the church that was proposed for the industrial building. Or industrial zone. Obviously per
square foot cost is the way you start out a retail building and the problem I've always had
with what we do is our office buildings are quasi retail buildings. There's not much of a
difference between the two. It could be a doctor's office and it could be a video, it seems to
me as an issue of planning that that's very convenient for the developer but it's not very
convenient to plan a city and it seems to me we plan a city beyond 3 to 5 years that was just
mentioned for the expectation of a retail tenant. We have to plan for beyond that and
49
[i
1
n
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
although I think that it's true, what we add to these buildings by demanding these things is
going to cost money. In the end in any business, that expense is returned to the consumer.
That's true. I feel that in the end that's a good investment. It's an investment in our
community here. I don't think that having basically an extension of the strip mall adjacent to
that corner is what we should do there and I'd recommend that the city not pursue that and
that they pursue a quality building on that comer. And if that means 5 years from now, that
means 5 years from now. In going over to the Wendy's building, actually I have to say I was
more impressed with the Wendy's building than I was with the office building, which is a
surprise that I saw a fast food building that impressed me more than the office building
adjacent to it. There are a couple of things that I would make comments on in that building.
The red striping I think is inappropriate and is not compatible with the surrounding
development as far as accentuating the architecture with it. Right attractive. I understand the
reason for it. In a competitive situation where you were surrounded by 12 other fast food
franchises, as they are in the Prairie mall over in, down the street here. You've obviously in
a different competition for sight from the streets and from potential consumers. You don't
have that problem here. You've got no competition. You've got cars that are going by at 25
mph and they have stop lights in front of you, or by your operation or where it's proposed. It
would seem to me very sad for us to get into a fast food franchise here that would pursue
bright garish colors as part of the architecture. It would seem to me to be incompatible. I
know as a citizen I wouldn't want to see that in our downtown. Now there may be issues of
legality here of the gray area between what is signage and what is architectural taste. Again,
the Highway 5 ordinance deals with some of that as an ordinance in defining the difference
between them. The actual signage package that you're proposing, it seems to me to be fine.
It's a moderate package is what we're looking for here. We're not trying to exclude
businesses from having packaging for signage. But we want a moderate proposal. We think
that's sufficient. If everybody has a moderate proposal, we think that you'll be seen.
Nobody's going by at 50 mph through here. Your position is too far away from the highway
to have a reasonable expectation that that brightness is going to be seen from the highway a
couple blocks away. So I certainly think, if you relooked at that, either as carrying the green
to the trim from the gabled or from the pitched roof, or picking up burgundy or something
from the Market Square development on it, that would be far more palatable to me. I like the
use of your stone and that looks quite good. So I'm trying to be constructive here with this
plan. I'm not sure that that's the location for a fast food development, although I am not sure
also, and the Council may want to look at this, of the viability. That if it's not a small
business, what small free standing business outside of that lot is going to be viable. If an
office building goes in there, is it going to take up the entire lot versus the split and I'm not
sure that that's a feasible market situation. But the city being the owner, they may want to
decide whether they want to put their money where their mouth is. I'm trying to come up
with something constructive to the office building here. I can't. I think it's, originally the
Americana Bank building was proposed for that area. I thought it looked like a prison. I
50
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
think this looks like the guard barracks, and I'm not trying to be facetious but I think the
same things are in place. It's not trying to be anything more than what it is. It's trying to be
a retail extension that could be used as office and that's what we've got here. We've got a
square foot cost for a strip mall extension. And I think that that's not what that site calls for.
That's it.
Scott: Okay. Ladd.
Conrad: Just two comments. One, I think the area does need, or Market Square needs more
additional support in terms of retail or office. I think that just creates, I think that's important
for this area. And the other thing is, I just want to make sure we handle this like a PUD.
And I made those comments already. I want to make sure we're connected. I want to make
sure staff has really thought out all the problems that we've heard of over there in terms of
traffic, and I assume they have but I just need that sense that we're solving problems. Not
creating more problems. That's all.
Harberts: Well I would basically concur with the comments of Jeff and Ladd and I have to
agree too with regard to, I think I'm hearing there needs to be some kind of traffic generator.
I'm having a real hard time though seeing the, I like Wendy's but I'm just, I'm just not very
comfortable that it fits in what's being proposed with this and it's just the whole traffic
circulation and I think I would encourage staff also to the pedestrian elements here. That
came through loud and clear with the citizen input. But I'm just uncomfortable from that
traffic flow so I'm not very content that it's, maybe it's too much with what's being done. I
have to agree with Ladd that I think there needs to be another traffic generator there and it's
going to certainly enhance the mall but I'll just leave my comments at that for now.
Mancino: And I don't have too many new ones. I just want to say again how much 1100%
support, I mean I don't know what needs to really go at this corner. I mean I can't tell you
whether a Wendy's or an office building does. I do know that I do support what the Vision
2002 is doing and I would like to keep them focused on looking at the downtown as a whole
and getting back to us with their recommendations and that is from the citizens that are on
there, from professionals that are on there and I just know how important it was for me, what
I learned on the Highway 5 task force, and it's a lot of people putting in valuable time and
it's not citizens just listening to professionals. It's them asking the good what if questions
and saying what they want to see in their downtown and having some input. And if we cut it
off now, it's kind of like you know, here you've got me on this committee. I'm giving all
my volunteer time and yet you're going to go ahead and just continue developing the
downtown. Can't you wait for us to get done and make recommendations and whatever those
recommendations area I don't know what they're going to be but at least it gives us, the
Planning Commission, which we are supposed to do is planning and we can look over their
51
1
f
t
1
I
l
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
recommendations and then go further. So I would, I'm just 100% in support of that.
Farmakes: I forgot to mention one thing in my comment. I want to make a constructive
criticism on the office building and I forgot to do that Burnet Realty is building a free
standing building on Highway 5. The quality of that building stands out greatly from those
around it. I think that the buildings around it are very typical of strip mall type buildings. I
think that the Burnet Realty building that they're building there is not and that's my example
of, you know it's kind of quasi Georgian, classic design. Nice materials. When you look at
that building, it stands out. I think that that's what we're looking for here. That's what I
think belongs there.
Scott: This item will be continued at our next meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Scott: Can I have a motion to approve the Minutes of the last meeting?
Mancino: So moved.
Scott: Can I have a second please?
Harberts: Second.
Farmakes: I have Minutes of the old meeting. I do have a correction. They had me saying
it cost $18.00 to house an institutionalized ... situation. It should be $18,000.00.
Scott: That was $18.00 a minute.
Farmakes: That's on page, I don't have pages numbered. If you could amend that from
$18.00 to $18,000.00.
Scott: So noted.
Mancino moved, Harberts seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting dated February 2,1994 as amended by Jeff Farmakes. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Scott: Excuse me Sharmin, do we have a City Council update? Councilman Wing gave us a
bit of an update but I understand that we have a new commissioner, Ron Nutting. I did speak
with him last night and invited him to come to our. Yeah, he was the fellow with the finance
background and who had some, actually worked for Trammel Crow for a number of years
52
1
CITY O ;,Jr
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II
DATE: February 24, 1994
SUBJ: Site Plan Review and Subdivision application for the purpose of constructing a
Wendy's and an Office Retail Building
On February 16, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed the following application:
1) Site Plan Review for a 9,960 Square Foot Retail/Office Building, and a 2,533
Square Foot Wendy's Restaurant
2) Replat of Outlot A, Market Square into Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square Second
Addition, 41,193 Square Foot Lot
As an oversight by staff, the application was published in the newspaper but a notice did not get
sent to property owners within 500 feet. Consequently, the public hearing was not closed, and
the decision was tabled until March 2, 1994. Notices for this meeting have been sent to
neighboring property owners, and the Planning Commission can continue discussion of this item
and vote on it.
The applicant has not submitted any revised plans, therefore, staff's recommendations remain the
same. The applicant indicated that revised plans will be delivered by March 1, 1994, addressing
concerns raised at the Planning Commission meeting.
Since the February 16, 1994, Planning Commission meeting, staff had some in -house discussion
with a few members of the Planning Commission and City Council. It was suggested that a
unified building which would house the office(retail as well as the Wendy's facilities should be
studied. Staff has not had time to develop designs, however, we find merit in this suggestion.
A unified comprehensive and compatible architectural style could be developed and we
recommend the applicant investigate this possibility.
Attachments
1. Staff report dated February 16, 1994.
2. Planning Commission minutes dated February 16, 1994.
3. Market Square II Subdivision.
0
MEMORANDUM
r
To: Planning Commission '
From: Vemelle Clayton
Date: February 24, 1994
Re: Plans for Market Square II ,
This memo is to inform you that the revised site plans and Office/Retail elevations for Lot 4, '
Block 1, Market Square, will be delivered to your homes by Tuesday, March 1, 1994.
n
7
1 CITY OF PC DATE: 2/16/94
CC DATE: 3/14/94
r
CASE #: 89 -2 PUD
STAFF REPORT
1
I �.
' U
�a
l
a
1 PRESENT ZONING: PUD, Planned Unit Development
ACREAGE: 79,946 Sq. Ft. (Wendy's Site 41,193 s.f. - Office/Retail Site 38,753 s.£)
DENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N - OI
S - PUD, Market Square
E - CBD, Filly's and Country Suites Hotel
W - PUD, Market Square
Q WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
W PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: A level parcel.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
-.a
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 2
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY '
On October 8, 1990, the City Council approved the final PUD plan for the Market Square '
Shopping Center subject to conditions described in the attached report. The site included 4 lots
and one outlot. Market Square Shopping Center occupies Lot 1. Lots 2, 3, 4, and Outlot A are
vacant. The current request is for the construction of a 9,960 square foot office /retail building '
(Edina Realty) on Lot 4, and a 2,533 square foot restaurant building ( Wendy's) on Outlot A.
The site plan is well developed, however, in some respects it does not meet all current standards.
'
The PUD it is regulated by is almost 5 years old and while it was considered progressive at that
time, newer standards have since been put into place. This request is subject to regulations under
the existing PUD plan. Staff is recommending some changes that will allow the overall plans
'
to work more efficiently. The architecture of the office /retail building attempts to reflect the
existing use of light grey 4" lap siding and rock face block foundation to match the shopping
center. Diamond shaped louvers accent the gabled roof. This type of architecture is consistent
with the rest of the shopping center. Staff is recommending the gabled roof sections be extended
out to resemble entry ways and break the box shape look of the building. The Wendy's
Restaurant building is proposed to have brick veneer exterior. The color of the brick should be
'
of a tone that blends with Market Square. A pitched roof and a parapet wall screen all the roof
top equipment. It also adds an attractive architectural element.
'
Site access is provided via existing shopping center curb cuts on Market Boulevard and 78th
Street. Internal access is a somewhat more complicated situation. There are two internal access
points onto Market Square's north drive. Once on the site, however, there are serious conflicts
'
between the Wendy's drive through circulation and other parking for both structures. Turning
movements are difficult, stacking space is inadequate and one -way directional parking is required.
'
A simple solution for the stacking and the interior vehicular circulation issues would be to rotate
the Wendy's building counter - clockwise. Another advantage to rotating the building would be
additional green space, additional parking, better design elevations and the addition of a plaza.
'
Staff discussed this option with the applicant at length and an agreement was reached to make
these revisions. At the time of writing this report, the revised plans were not available. These
revised plans will be available at the Planning Commission meeting. Attachment #1 is a sketch
'
of the revisions staff is recommending.
The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue
by staff and the applicant. Additional landscaping is being requested south, east, and north of
the site, as well as between the two buildings.
subdivision request, the outlot is being re
In an accompanying su q t, g Tatted into a lot. Due to an p
oversight by staff, we failed to publish the replat for the February 16, 1994, meeting. Staff is
making the approval of the site plan contingent upon the replat of Outlot A. The Planning
Commission will review the replat at their March 2, 1994, meeting. The only change taking
f
n
L
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 3
place with the replat is the change of status from an outlot to a lot. The replat request is a
straight forward action.
Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site
plan request for this proposal with appropriate conditions.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
General Site Plan/Architecture
The applicant is proposing two buildings. The first building is a 9,960 square foot office /retail
building (Edina Realty), will be located on Lot 4 and situated at the southwest corner of West
78th Street and Market Boulevard. The second building is a 2,533 square foot restaurant building
( Wendy's) and will be located on Outlot A, south of the future Edina Realty. Access is gained
off of a curb cut on West 78th Street (right in/out only), and via Market Boulevard. Parking is
located to the west, south, and between the two proposed buildings. Vehicle stacking is located
south and east of the site and the Wendy's building so that direct distant views from West 78th
Street to the north of the site will be minimized. Direct views of the stacking lanes will be
screened by the two buildings and landscaping from the north of the site. The architecture of
the office /retail building attempts to reflect the shopping center's use of light grey 4" lap siding
and rock face block foundation to match the existing shopping center. Diamond shaped louvers
accent the gabled roof. This type of architecture is consistent with the rest of the shopping
center. Staff is recommending the gabled roof sections be extended out to resemble entry ways
and break the box shape look of the building. The Wendy's Restaurant building is proposed to
have brick veneer exterior. The color of the brick should be of a tone that blends with Market
Square. A pitched roof and a parapet wall screen all the roof top equipment. It also adds an
attractive architectural element. As was mentioned earlier in the Proposal Summary, staff has
recommended the Wendy's building be rotated counter - clockwise. This will result in the south
elevation facing Market Boulevard. The applicant is in the process of revising this elevation by
adding the metal trim. The architecture is consistent with the shopping center through the use
of columns of metal trim. The applicant is showing the trash enclosures screened by masonry
walls using the same materials as the buildings. Wendy's trash enclosure is proposed along the
south of the site and Edina Realty's is proposed to be located on the east side of the site. Staff
is recommending the two locations be consolidated as shown in Attachment #1. The applicant
is in the process of making this revision as well. Three electric boxes (transformers) operated
and maintained by NSP, as well as a traffic controller unit, are located at the southeast corner
of the site. These units will be screened by landscaping to the north, west and south. A 10 foot
clearing must be maintained around the units for maintenance purposes.
While we are generally satisfied with the two building's architecture and note that the applicant
has worked extensively on this project, we do have some concerns. The site on which Edina
Realty's building is situated is a highly visible one at what is highly likely to become one of the
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 4 ,
most important intersections in the Chanhassen CBD. We appreciate the fact that the building
is situated to maintain the West 78th streetscape by its close proximity and orientation. There '
is no parking between the street and the building, only landscaping. Setting an architectural
standard for this building is difficult in part due to its location. The PUD approval requires
architectural consistency with the main shopping center building. However, at the same time, '
this site is essentially the transition point from the shopping center site into architectural styles
found elsewhere in the CBD. Therefore, we believe that the architect's intent to combine the
style of the shopping center building, along with other downtown buildings such as the Country '
Hospitality Suites, is a sound one. We have some concerns over the visual massiveness of this
building. The inclusion of dormers break the massiveness of the roof. However, we would
propose that the dormers be carried down along the facade of the building to detract from the box ,
like shape.
The second concern pertains to the Wendy's building south elevation. An enclosed indoor '
storage area is located behind this elevation. When the building is rotated as staff is proposing,
it will face Market Boulevard. In discussions with the applicant, we requested that the service
door be moved to the side, and detail similar to the north elevation be carried onto the south ,
elevation. Due to the lack of time, we have not had an opportunity to explore this more fully
with the project architect but are certain that this matter could be resolved in the final plans.
Parkin tenor Circulation '
The city's parking ordinance requires one parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area '
for retail buildings. Edina Realty's building is proposed to contain 3,000 square feet of
office /retail space. The number of parking spaces required is 15. The office portion of the
building requires 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet gross floor area. The building is proposed to '
contain 7,000 square feet of office space. The number of parking spaces required is 31.5 spaces,
resulting in a total of 47 spaces. The applicant is providing 35 parking spaces. Although there '
is a shortage of parking on this site, the applicant is proposing to make up the difference on the
Wendy's site. The ordinance requires one parking space per 60 square feet of gross floor area
for fast food restaurants. The Wendy's building has a gross area of 2,533 square feet. The '
number of parking spaces required is 42 spaces. The applicant is providing 59 spaces which
exceeds the ordinance requirements and makes up for the extra parking spaces needed for the
office /retail building. This shared parking will require an agreement. Staff voiced some concern
over the two spaces located to the southwest of the site and recommended they be deleted as they '
could potentially conflict with vehicles using the southwesterly access into the Wendy's parking
lot. Although the number of spaces is reduced, the total shared parking will still meet ordinance ,
requirements.
The parking layout has been redesigned by staff, as shown in Attachment #1. This layout keeps
the drive through traffic out of the office retail parking area. It also provides them with an
additional five spaces. Traffic circulation within the two parking lots will be more functional.
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 5
' Traffic will be directed via West 78th Street running parallel to the westerly edge of the site then
headed east into either site. Traffic exiting the site would utilize the same two entrances located
to the west of the site. A stop sign should be placed at the exit points to regulate traffic. A
' cross access easement running in favor of both lots must be created over the northwesterly access
as it will be shared by both sites.
' The drive- through stacking is another issue that surfaced during the review of the plan. There
is space for one car at a time to read the menu board and place an order. Any additional cars
will block circulation. Staff recommends the menu board be moved further to the east.
' However, rotating the building will eliminate the vehicular stacking issue.
Access
Since Market Square has been completed, traffic circulation thr hout the center has had its
q p throughout
' problems. One such area is turning into the shopping center from Market Boulevard at the most
northerly access point. The driveway access is designed with three lanes of traffic; two lanes
outbound onto Market Boulevard and one lane inbound. A center median also exists dividing
' the inbound from outbound lanes of traffic. The problem exists on the inbound lane. The lane
is narrow and the turning radius is tight. Numerous vehicles have "jumped" the north curb line.
Staff believes by increasing the northerly radius to 30 feet it would improve turning movements
into the site. The City's Fire Marshal has also indicated that fire trucks heading south on Market
Boulevard to access the site are unable to enter the site without swinging far out over the
northbound lane of Market Boulevard. The inbound access driveway from Market Boulevard
' currently is constructed to 14 feet wide with a temporary bituminous curb on the north side. The
inbound lane of traffic was to be constructed to 14 feet wide; however, staff recommends that
the driveway access from Market Boulevard be increased to 16 feet wide face -to -face with
concrete curb and gutter (B612). This should provide adequate room for vehicles to ingress and
egress into the shopping center.
' The southerly access driveway into the Wendy's site needs to be increased to 26 feet wide face -
to -face to facilitate turning movements into the site. The west curb line in the parking lot lying
north of the northerly access should be posted "no parking" as well as the east curb line on the
' drive -up window lane to Wendy's.
Landscaping
Although the landscaping plan appears to be generally reasonable, we do have several revisions
to request. The first is that the plan shows the southern green space area having a depth of 6
' feet. This is an insufficient depth for plants to grow. We recommend that the depth be increased
to 8 feet. In addition, five additional over -story trees should be incorporated in this area.
Secondly, we recommend the two trash enclosures be incorporated into one as shown in
r
Market Square H
February 16, 1994
Page 6
Attachment #1 and the area to the east of the enclosure be bermed as well as the ro osed ,
P P
hedges be incorporated. I
The proposed staff layout will increase the green space area by adding a green space to separate
the two sites. The corner islands are increased in size and will be able to accommodate I
additional over -story trees.
The city's West 78th Street project also includes groupings of tree plantings along West 78th '
Street boulevard. The city's plans propose to plant five linden greenspire trees adjacent to the
sidewalk in front of the retail building. The applicant should incorporate these trees in the
landscaping plan and remove any of the proposed site landscaping from the city's right -of -way '
or easement areas. It appears it may be necessary for the applicant to convey to the city a
permanent landscaping easement over the trail easement in order for the city to plant the trees
previously described in this section. Additional roadway easements may also be necessary in the '
northeast corner of the site.
The landscape plan also indicates two pedestrian walkways onto West 78th Street and one onto '
Market Boulevard. From a traffic safety standpoint, these pedestrian ramps should be eliminated.
There is an existing pedestrian ramp at the intersection of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street
that promotes the safe and orderly crossing of pedestrians. Staff welcomes the idea of a ,
meandering sidewalk along the retail buildings but opposes the proposed pedestrian walkway
locations. Coordination between the city sidewalk construction and landscaping and these
proposed site improvements would be prudent to avoid unnecessary conflicts. I
Lightin
Lighting locations have not been shown on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the '
applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than .5' candles of light at the property line.
Plans should be provided to staff for approval. Fixtures should match those being used elsewhere '
in the shopping center.
Siana '
The applicant has not submitted a signage plan. One monument identification sign is proposed
at the northeasterly corner of the site. This location is in conflict with the existing NSP '
transformers and traffic control box, as well as being located with in the sight distance triangle.
The existing Market Square sign plan permits one monument sign only for the retail/office '
building site with the following conditions:
a. The height of the monument sign shall not exceed fourteen feet. '
b. The sign shall contain no more than 41 square feet of sign area per face.
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 7
' C. The sign shall be constructed to reflect the architectural style of the Market Square
shopping center. Staff recommends the sign design be identical to the existing Market
Square monument signs.
d. The owner of each monument sign shall be responsible for its construction, repair,
maintenance and/or replacement.
' Only one wall mounted sign is shown on the northern elevation of Wendy's building. Wall
mounted signs must meet the following criteria as identified in the plan:
a. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted.
b All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five
' inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination.
C The signage shall be located on a maximum of two elevations of the buildings to be
constructed.
'
Grading/Drainage
' The entire site is proposed to be graded to develop the building footprint and parking lots. Only
minor earthwork is anticipated since the site is essentially level. Catch basins and storm sewers
are proposed to convey surface runoff from the rooftops, lawn areas and parking lots. The runoff
will be conveyed into the city's downtown storm water pond located south of the railroad tracks
west of Market Boulevard (fountain pond). No additional ponding areas are required as a result
of this development. The proposed storm sewer system will be a private system and maintained
' by the applicant. The installation of the storm sewer will require permits from the city's
Building Department.
Utilities
Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site. These improvements were installed
as a part of the original Market Square development.
' Erosion Control
Erosion control provisions were not applied to the site plan. Erosion control measures should
' be in accordance to the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type I silt fence
should be employed along the southerly perimeter of the site at the construction limits.
Temporary construction entrances should be required at each entrance point to minimize tracking
' off site. Construction access points shall be limited to the existing parking lot and not from West
78th Street and Market Boulevard.
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 8
In conjunction with the storm sewer installation and prior to paving the parking lots, the storm
drainage inlets (catch basins) shall be protected with hay bales and/or silt fence to prevent
sediments from washing into the drainage system.
Park and Trail Dedication
Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid as part of this development.
COMPLIANCE TABLE WITH PUD ORDINANCE
As a PUD, most of the usual ordinance provisions pertaining to dimensional criteria are waived.
Required Proposed Staff Plan
Original Plan
Building Setback 25' 25' 25'
Parking Setback N -10', S -0 N -10', S -0 N -10', S -0
E -10', W -0 E -10', W -0 E -10', W -0
Hard Surface Coverage N/A not provided
Parking Stalls Combined 89 94 89
SUBDIVISION
The subdivision proposal is a simple request that will serve to change the status of Outlot A to
Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square Second Addition. Staff did not realize this parcel had an outlot
status until it was too late to publish the request in the newspaper as required by ordinance.
Consequently, the Planning Commission will review the subdivision request at their March 2,
1994, meeting. Staff has added a condition making the site plan approval contingent upon the
replat approval. The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be required:
1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of Lot 1.
2. Cross access easements need to be provided over the north driveway.
t
,7
F
u
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 9
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
Site Plan Review
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Site Plan for Edina Realty and Wendy's
( #89 -2 PUD) as shown on the site plan dated December 6, 1993, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The site plans, with the exception of the elevation plan sheet (Al), shall be redrawn at
an engineer's scale. The site plan shall be revised to show existing site topographic
features such as utilities, sidewalks and lot dimensions.
2. The northerly access to the shopping center from Market Boulevard should be widened
to 16 feet wide face -to -face. In addition, the northerly radius should be expanded to 30
feet to improve turning movements into the shopping center. The southerly driveway
access into the Wendy's site shall be increased to 26 feet wide face -to -face to facilitate
turning movements. "No parking" signs shall be placed along the west curb line of the
parking lot lying north of the northerly access to the retail site. In addition, "no parking"
signs shall be placed along the east curb line of the drive -up window lane to Wendy's.
3. The applicant shall work with the city in resolving final placement of the sidewalk along
West 78th Street along with the landscaping. Landscaping other than the city's boulevard
trees shall be prohibited within the city's right -of -way or trail easement area. The site
plan shall be revised to show replacing the sidewalk along Market Boulevard. Pedestrian
ramps onto city streets other than the existing one at West 78th Street and Market
Boulevard shall be deleted from the landscape plan.
4. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the
necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval.
5. The applicant shall grant the city the necessary landscape and street easements along West
78th Street.
6. The applicant shall incorporate the City's Best Management Practice Handbook to control
site erosion. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the southerly perimeter at the
construction limits. Temporary rock construction entrances shall be required to minimiz
off -site tracking. Construction access points shall be limited to the interior parking lot
and not on West 78th Street and Market Boulevard. After the storm sewer installation
and prior to paving the parking lot, the storm drainage inlets (catch basins) shall be
r
Market Square H
February 16, 1994
Page 10
,
protected with hay bales and/or silt fence to prevent sediment from washing into the
drainage system.
'
7. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. A sign plan
has not been submitted. One monument identification sign is proposed at the
northeasterly comer of the site. This location is in conflict with the existing NSP
transformers and traffic control box, as well as being located with in the sight distance
triangle. The monument sign shall meet the following criteria:
'
a. The height of the monument sign shall not exceed fourteen feet.
b. The sign shall contain no more than 41 square feet of sign area per face.
'
C. The sign shall be constructed to reflect the architectural style of the Market Square
shopping center. Staff recommends the sign design be identical to the existing
Market Square monument signs.
'
d. The owner of each monument sign shall be responsible for its construction, repair,
maintenance and/or replacement.
Only one wall mounted sign is shown on the northern elevation of Wendy's building.
Wall mounted signs must meet the following criteria as identified in the plan:
'
a. The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height and must be lighted.
b. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth
of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube
,
illumination.
C. The signage shall be located on a maximum of two elevations of the buildings to
be constructed.
'
8. The depth of the green space area along the southern edge of the site shall be increased
to 8 feet. Five additional overstory trees shall be added. A berm shall be incorporated '
into the plan to screen the trash location from views as shown in attachment C. The
applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in '
calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to
building permit issuance.
9. Revise architectural plans as follows: i
• The gabled roof section on the office /retail building shall be extended out to '
resemble entry ways.
• The color of brick on the Wendy's building shall be of a tone that would blend
in with the shopping center. '
• The south elevation of the Wendy's building shall incorporate metal trim and
resemble the north elevation.
1
1
Market Square II
February 16, 1994
Page 11
10. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon the replat approval from Outlot A to Lot 1,
Block 1, Market Square 2nd Addition.
11. The two trash enclosures shall be consolidated as shown in Attachment #1.
12. Stop signs shall be placed at the exit points of Wendy's and Edina Realty's parking lots.
13. Submit revised utility plans to reflect a fire hydrant location on the oval island directly
south of the retail office building.
14. The Fire Marshall will provide information regarding placement of "No Parking Fire
Lane" signage at the time of building permit application.
15. The office /retail building must be fire sprinklered pursuant to Chapter 38 MN Building
' Code.
� 1 1
16. Submit radius turn dimensions to Fire Marshal and City Engineer for approval pursuant
to 1991 UFC Sec. 10- 204(c).
Subdivision
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of the replat of Outlot A, Market Square to
Lot 1, Block 1, Market Square 2nd Addition as shown on the plat with the following conditions:
1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at time of building permits are requested.
2. Provide the following easements:
a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the lot.
b. Cross access easements need to be provided over the northeasterly driveway "
ATTACHMENTS
1. Layout developed by staff.
2. Memo from Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, dated February 3, 1994.
3. Project statement.
4. Staff report dated October 8, 1990.
5. Plans dated December 6, 1993.
WEST 78T14 STR
EET
Ci
4
. EDINA REALTY ~ G� V
17
I
i�
A�
t► �
Q J/
cc
� N v P ��i
Cam•
.V
Z:
W
t
1
MEMORANDUM
I
t
CITY OF
1. CHA-SHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II
FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
DATE: February 3, 1994
SUBJ: Site Plan Review for Market Square II - Lot 4 and Outlot A, Market Square
File No. 94 -3 Land Use Review
Upon review of the site plans prepared by AMCON dated September 21, 1993 I offer the
following comments and recommendations:
SITE PLAN - SHEET SD1
The site plans were prepared in an architect's scale and not in an engineer's scale as required.
The site plans, with the exception of the elevation plan sheet (Al) should be redrawn in an
engineer's scale, i.e. 1" = 50'.
The development is proposed over Lot 4, Block 1 and Outlot A, Market Square. According to
City ordinance, the outlot will have to be replatted into a lot and block subdivision prior to
becoming a buildable lot.
The site plans do not show existing site topographic features such as .utilities, sidewalks and lot
dimensions. NSP has three large transformers and the City has a tragic controller on the
northeast corner of Lot 4. All of these structures are in the general vicinity where the applicant
is proposing sidewalks, landscaping and a project sign.. These potential conflicts should be
further identified and shown on the site plans to avoid conflicts in the field.
Last year the City's West 78th Street Improvement Project added a right turn lane in front of the
proposed retail /office center. This will reduce the available green space between the curb and
building. The plans should be revised to accurately show the existing turn lane along West 78th
Street.
r
Sharmin Al -Jaff
February 3, 1994
Page 2 '
Since Market Square has been completed traffic circulation throughout the center has had its
problems. One such area is turning into the shopping center from Market Boulevard at the most
northerly access point. The driveway access is designed with three lanes of traffic; two lanes
outbound onto Market Boulevard and one lane inbound. A center median also exists dividing
the inbound from outbound lanes of traffic. The problem exists on the inbound lane. The lane
is narrow and the turning radius is tight. Numerous vehicles have "jumped" the north curb line.
Staff believes by increasing the northerly radius to 30 feet it would improve turning movements '
into the site. The City's Fire Marshal has also indicated that fire trucks heading south on Market
Boulevard to access the site are unable to enter the site without swinging far out over the
northbound lane of Market Boulevard. The inbound access driveway from Market Boulevard
currently is constructed to 14 feet wide with a temporary bituminous curb on the north side. The
inbound lane of traffic was to be constructed to 14 feet wide; however, staff recommends that
the driveway access from Market Boulevard be increased to 16 feet wide face -to -face with '
concrete curb and gutter (11612). This should provide adequate room for vehicles to ingress and
egress into the shopping center.
The southerly access driveway into the Wendy's site needs to be increased to 26 feet wide face -
to -face to facilitate turning movements into the site. The west curb line in the parking lot lying
north of the northerly access should be posted "no parking" as well as the east curb line on the '
drive -up window lane to Wendy's.
In conjunction with the City's West 78th Street Improvement Project, the existing 8 -foot wide '
bituminous trail will be replaced with a 6 -foot wide concrete sidewalk. The site plans propose
an interior sidewalk connecting the site to the City's sidewalk along West 78th Street and Market
Boulevard. The landscape plan, however, indicated a meandering 6 -foot wide sidewalk around
numerous landscape areas in the front of the retail building. The discrepancy between sidewalk
design should be resolved to avoid conflict in the future. The grading plan also proposes
regrading this entire area including along Market Boulevard which necessitates removing the '
existing concrete sidewalk. It may have been inadvertently overlooked, but there are no
provisions for replacing the sidewalk along Market Boulevard. The plans should be modified to
provide for replacing the sidewalk along Market Boulevard. '
Since there are some public improvements involved (sidewalk, boulevard restoration, etc.), the
applicant should enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security
'
to guarantee replacement of the sidewalks and restoration of all City boulevards. All of the
sidewalks located within the City's right -of -way or trail easements that are not constructed as a
part of the West 78th Street project shall be constructed in accordance with the City's design
'
standards.
'
The landscape plan also indicates two pedestrian ramps onto West 78th Street and one onto
Market Boulevard. From a traffic safety standpoint, these pedestrian ramps should be eliminated.
t
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff
February 3, 1994
Page 3
There is an existing pedestrian ramp at the intersection of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street
that promotes the safe and orderly crossing of pedestrians. Staff welcomes the idea of a
meandering sidewalk along the retail buildings but opposes the proposed pedestrian ramp
locations. Coordination between the City sidewalk construction and landscaping and these
' proposed site improvements would be prudent to avoid unnecessary conflicts.
The City's West 78th Street project also includes groupings of tree plantings along West 78th
' Street's boulevard. The City's plans propose to plant five Linden Greenspire trees adjacent to the
sidewalk in front of the retail building. The applicant should incorporate these trees in the
landscaping plan and remove any of the proposed site landscaping from the City's right -of -way
' or easement areas. It appears it may be necessary for the applicant to convey to the City a
permanent landscaping easement over the trail easement in order for the City to plant the trees
previously described in this section. Additional roadway easements may also be necessary in the
northeast corner of the site.
' GRADING AND DRAINAGE
The entire site is proposed to be graded to develop the building footprint and parking lots. Only
minor earthwork is anticipated since the site is essentially level. Catch basins and storm sewers
are proposed to convey surface runoff from the rooftops, lawn areas and parking lots. The runoff
will be conveyed into the City's downtown storm water pond located south of the railroad tracks
' west of Market Boulevard (fountain pond). No additional ponding areas are required as a result
of this development. The proposed storm sewer system will be a private system and maintained
by the applicant. The installation of the storm sewer will require permits from the City's
Building Department.
EROSION CONTROL
' Erosion control provisions were not applied to the site plan. Erosion control measures should
be in accordance to the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type I silt fence
' should be employed along the southerly perimeter of the site at the construction limits.
Temporary construction entrances should be required at each entrance point to minimize tracking
off site. Construction access points shall be limited to the existing parking lot and not from West
78th Street and Market Boulevard.
In conjunction with the storm sewer installation and prior to paving the parking lots, the storm
i drainage inlets (catch basins) shall be protected with hay bales and/or silt fence to prevent
sediments from washing into the drainage system.
r
Sharmin Al -Jaff
February 3, 1994
Page 4
UTILITIES
Municipal sewer and water service is available to the site. These improvements were installed
as a part of the original Market Square development.
'
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The site plans, with the exception of the elevation plan sheet (A1), shall be redrawn at
,
an engineer's scale.
i
2. The site plan shall be revised to show existing site topographic features such as utilities,
sidewalks and lot dimensions.
3. The northerly access to the shopping center from Market Boulevard should be widened
to 16 feet wide face -to -face. In addition, the northerly radius should be expanded to 30
feet to improve turning movements into the shopping center.
,
4. The southerly driveway access into the Wendy's site shall be increased to 26 feet wide
face -to -face to facilitate turning movements.
'
S. "No parking" signs shall be placed along the west curb line of the parking lot lying north
of the northerly access to the retail site. In addition, "no parking" signs shall be placed
,
along the east curb line of the drive -up window lane to Wendy's.
6. The applicant shall work with the City in resolving final placement of the sidewalk along
West 78th Street along with the landscaping. Landscaping other than the City's boulevard
trees shall be prohibited within the City's right -of -way or trail easement area.
'
7. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the
PP P ty P
necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval.
8. The site plan shall be revised to show replacing the sidewalk along Market Boulevard.
Pedestrian ramps onto City streets other than the existing one at West 78th Street and
Market Boulevard shall be deleted from the landscape plan.
9. The applicant shall grant the City the necessary landscape and street easements along
West 78th Street.
10. The applicant shall incorporate the City's Best Management Practice Handbook to control
site erosion. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the southerly perimeter at the
construction limits. Temporary rock construction entrances shall be required to minimize
L
t
1
1
1
1
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff
February 3, 1994
Page 5
off -site tracking. Construction access points shall be limited to the interior parking lot
and not on West 78th Street and Market Boulevard. After the storm sewer installation
and prior to paving the parking lot, the storm drainage inlets (catch basins) shall be
protected with hay bales and/or silt fence to prevent sediment from washing into the
drainage system.
ktm
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
gAeng\davelm arketh.spr
LOTUS
REAL Y SI;RV10ES
Based on prior review, we believe the landscaping complies '
with the new landscaping ordinance; the sizes of the islands
and choice of landscaping materials required by the new
ordinance, as well as screening of trash enclosures and HVAC
equipment have been addressed. The recommended relationship '
between the impervious and landscaped areas have been met as
well.
The Site Plan
indicates
MARKET SQUARE II
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
backs and
The proposed project consists of an office /retail facility
'
and a Wendy's restaurant located on the Market Square site
required
at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Market
Boulevard and W. 78th Street.
The land area consists of two parcels. However, a single
to the
site plan is being submitted.
'
The northern parcel will be owned and managed by Market
the Market
Square Associates Limited Partnership, the developers of
Market Square. The building to be constructed will be 9660
square foot single story designed for both office and retail
use. Edina Realty is expected to be occupying approximately
7000 square feet.
,
The southern parcel will be owned by Wendy's International
and a Wendy's restaurant will be constructed on its site.
'
Lotus Realty is acting as the developer and has coordinated
the preparation of the site and landscaping plans submitted.
Both plans have been reviewed by the Planning and
'
Engineering Departments and were used as a case study by the
Tree Board in connection with its deliberations concerning
the application of proposed changes in the landscaping
ordinance.
'
Based on prior review, we believe the landscaping complies '
with the new landscaping ordinance; the sizes of the islands
and choice of landscaping materials required by the new
ordinance, as well as screening of trash enclosures and HVAC
equipment have been addressed. The recommended relationship '
between the impervious and landscaped areas have been met as
well.
The Site Plan
indicates
two buildings each within the
required set
backs and
with parking for 94 cars, at least 2
more than the
required
number for retail and restaurant
uses. Entrances
to the
site have been aligned with the
entrances to
the Market
Square Shopping Center Site.
The construction design and materials for the improvements '
are dictated by the terms of the PUD Agreement of record for
the Market Square Development of which these parcels are a
part. The PUD Agreement specifies that "any buildings on
Lots ...4 and Outlot A shall be designed with proper
building materials so as to be architecturally compatible
with the shopping center."
545 WEST 78TH STREET ■ P.O. BOX 235 ■ CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ■ (612) 934 -4538 ■ FAX (612) 934 -1505 1
t
I Amcon Corporation is designing and will construct the
The traffic generated by Wendy's and the additional retail is
an important element in the success of the existing Market
Square Shopping Center. In addition we believe this project
is an important addition to the retail mix and density
identified as an important feature by the participants in
Vision 2002.
office /retail building. Their elevation plans submitted for
'
the proposed office /retail building show a hip roof with six
gabled dormers. Design elements in the gabled ends
coordinate with those of the adjacent Market Square Shopping
Center. Windows have been provided on all four elevations;
'
however neither pedestrian nor delivery entrances are
anticipated on the West 78th Street side. Construction
materials will be grey painted lap siding on the gables and
upper walls with grey rock face block base below the
windows, all to duplicate materials used in the Shopping
Center. Asphalt shingles on the roof will be dark green to
coordinate with the accent colors at the Shopping Center as
'
well.
Wendy's has modified its signature building to comply with
the requirements of the Market Square PUD. They have
changed their color scheme from beige to grey but have
retained their traditional use of brick and their
prototypical use of columns. The columns are consistent
with the column elements of Market Square and for additional
consistency, design elements of grey split face concrete
block have been added. Grey metal awnings over the windows
'
also serve as building sign bands. The HVAC will be
screened by a combination of parapet walls and green metal
roof. The roof is a two -level hipped design with gabled
ends at the north and south elevations, similar in material
'
and appearance to the pitched roof design elements at Market
Square.
'
The site is allowed one monument sign pursuant to the PUD
agreement. It will be the same design as the two existing
Market Square signs and will be located at the Market
Blvd /W. 78th Street corner of the site. Building signage
will also comply with the covenants of record.
Thus, the design and selected construction materials comply
'
with the requirements of the PUD Agreement. We also believe
that the design of the site, the landscaping and the
buildings to be constructed will not only complement and
'
enhance the design of the existing shopping center but will
also complement the overall look which Chanhassen has worked
to achieve. The pitched roof on the office retail building
will coordinate with existing Chanhassen architecture and
'
will accent the pitched elements of Market Square without
overwhelming it whereas the more subdued pitch at the
'
Wendy's building will provide balance at the corner and echo
the more subdued elements of shopping center.
The traffic generated by Wendy's and the additional retail is
an important element in the success of the existing Market
Square Shopping Center. In addition we believe this project
is an important addition to the retail mix and density
identified as an important feature by the participants in
Vision 2002.
I
It is important that the approval process be completed as
expeditiously as possible to allow time for completion of '
construction cost estimates and financing for the office
retail building in time to complete the grading and site
improvements prior to Wendy's early spring construction
start schedule. '
i
-3-
II
I
�-J i� 5 V /A T /oA.,!
k � , .1
r _ �:
� ,:,
� s
n t a
�''� -
�, 4�
�t � { � � �
�
�� 3 �- � � s' y �- a
I Z�
�
_
�. ��v�: �, mc�K![ �q!�Et'rnCe3��!1RF.'.?R6'�S�'�Y � — — r
- i:. ".:...L. ��
r
03
���
`` ' __ M
fly'" ;� "� . eh 9
.� _ �; ��,
i � .r���•. ..�
'�� �. � a
i r .7 �� Tie r � Ky,
G� Ica►- �cCut> 4 LeLP47z
rAlVA-17ra Lam,= S�e'rWA. -
/mil D Az- 7' A4 C L E7 \/,A T/ b /,/
M M = = = = m = m = = = = = = = =
" " = = m = = i = m = = m m = = = m
t
i
QTY OF
CHANHASS
'fit
l�-
Pt- DATE:
CC DATE: 10/8/90
CASE #: 89 -2 PUD
By'. fC
1�
i
PROPOSAL:
I �-
�a
U
�a
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
1
�Q
STAFF REPORT
Amended Site Plan for PUD Development Stage Approval
for Commercial Planned Unit Development, Market Square
Southwest Corner of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street
Market Square Partnership
5775 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 820
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
kli- by
' Nodif i'_d�.
PRESENT ZONING: PUD
ACREAGE • 12.1 acres Date Submitted to C:
DENSITY: Date S:^T:tn.:d t,
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N.- IO and CBD; Chan Bank, Realtor /Dr.Office
S - BG; vacant
E - CBD; Filly's and Country Suites Hotel
W - BG; Chaska Tool /Vernco
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site
H
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: Currently, a level parcel
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
Market Square
Site Plan Amendment
October 8, 1990
Page 2
'
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
On October 23, 1989, the City Council approved. the Development
,
Stage Plans for PUD #89 -2 for Market Square subject to the
conditions described in the attached report. Since that time, as
'
the Council is aware, development has not yet been initiated and
'
the project has gone through an evolutionary process which is
concluding with the amended site plan being reviewed in this
'
report. The site plan amendments is focused on the change from a
20,000 square foot Super Value with an 8,000 square foot expansion
'
to the present plan which proposes a 35,000 square foot Festival
Foods Market offering an additional 10,000 square foot building
'
addition. In the process of making these modifications, .the
ultimate size of the main shopping center building has increased
from 91,134 square feet to 97,954 square feet. Some. of the
original retail space offered for general tenants has been replaced
by the expanded market. The primary purpose for requesting an
amended site plan approval at this time is so that the developers
can concluded their final leasing arrangements with Festival Foods,
lock in their financing package and initiate construction within a
'
time frame acceptable to the City.
Most of.the changes to the site plan are relatively minor and for
the most part involve the area located in the vicinity of the
supermarket site. The general site plan layout, parking lot
design, and access provisions have not been changed in any
,
significant way by the proposed amendment. In a similar manner,
site grading, drainage and utilities remain unchanged. The parking
lot design has been revised to increase the number of parking
stalls commensurate with the increase in the size of the shopping
'
center. This was achieved by using 9 foot wide parking stalls
instead of the 10 foot wide parking stalls on the original plan.
Since this plan was originally approved, the City parking ordinance
'
has been changed to allow parking stall width down to 8k feet, thus
the revised parking plan exceeds City standards. All original
setbacks offered by the original plan are maintained by the current
proposal. In summary, it is our belief that the revised plan
'
results in no major new issues for consideration by the City
Council. If the revisions were more substantial, we would
recommend that this item be referred back to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration, however, we do not believe this is
the case.
There are, however, several minor issues that we believe should be
addressed in new conditions appended to the original conditions of
approval. These include the following:
,
1. A revised landscaping plan should be submitted illustrating
landscaping of the building addition area for Festival Foods.
1
Market Square
Site Plan Amendment
October 8, 1990
' Page 3
At a minimum, this area should be sodded" or seeded and
provided with sufficient trees to make this an attractive
' setting until it is built upon.
2. A raised concrete display platform has been incorporated in
' front of the Lawn and Sports Center. Staff objects to the
proposal to allow exterior display of merchandise for sale in
front of the shopping center believing that if such is
allowed, it would be very difficult to control it and limit it
' to this site. In addition, outdoor display of merchandise is
not permitted throughout the community in spite of two
existing examples that currently exist along West 78th Street.
With the opening of Market Square, the two businesses which
currently have exterior storage of materials for sale will be
moving into the shopping center and it is hoped that this
' problem could be eliminated. Therefore, staff is recommending
that the raised concrete display platforms be removed.
3. Revised building elevations should be submitted for staff
approval. A good deal of time and effort was expended by both
the Planning Commission and City Council to ensure that this
shopping center is an attractive addition to the Chanhassen
' .CBD. We believe that the approved architecture was of very
high quality and that this should not be lost through the
redesign process. The applicant has assured staff that it is
' their intent that the Festival Foods be designed to
accommodate the architectural theme that was adopted for the
balance of the center and similar to one which was used for
the previously proposed Super Value Store. However, they note
' that the final design has not been drafted and that the
elevations will need to be revised due to the different
building footprint and store entrance locations being proposed
for the gateway store. If staff is given the opportunity to
review these plans, we would do one of the following:
a. If the plans are believed to be consistent with the
' architectural themes approved with the original site
plan, we would authorize it's construction.
b. If, however, there is a substantial question as to
whether or not the architectural goals have been
achieved, we would return the building elevations to the
Planning Commission and City Council for review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
' Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the
amended final development stage site plan for Market Square subject
to the following conditions:
f
Market Square
Site
Plan Amendment
October 8, 1990
Page
4
,
1.
Submit a revised landscaping.plan illustrating plant material
in the future expansion area of the Festival Foods Store and
,
of the revised parking lot island configuration.
2.
Submit final building, elevations to staff for administrative
approval or, if determined by staff to be inconsistent with
the original plan, to be returned to the Planning Commission
and City Council for review.
'
3.
Eliminate the outdoor display area from in front of the Lawn
and Sports Center. All outdoor display of merchandise in the
shopping center is prohibited. Merchandise contained in
r:
screened outdoor storage areas is exempt from this
requirement.
4.
Enter into a PUD contract with the City that will contain all
of the conditions of approval and which will be recorded
'
against all lots platted in the project. The PUD agreement'
should provide for a landscape bond as outlined in the staff
report.
5.
The final plat shall reflect a 20 foot utility easement for
the proposed City water line over the southerly portion of the
site.
'
6.
The applicant shall enter into a development contract and
provide the necessary security.
'
7.
The applicant shall enter into a PUD contract with the City.
,
8.
Enter into a development contract with the City that required
financial sureties with construction plans to be approved by
the City Engineer and City Council for all public
improvements.
'
9.
Revise architectural plans as needs to:
'
- confirm that the Vet Clinic will have windows on the
north and west elevations;
- trash enclosures are to be constructed from rock faced
i
block compatible with the main building;
- relocated the trash enclosure serving the dry cleaner to
the west side of the building or incorporate it into the
structure;
,
- outdoor storage areas are to be enclosed by a rock faced
block wall;
I
- provide a triangular traffic island in the West 78th
Street curb cut;
- delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects
' to the sidewalk in front of the supermarket. A
pedestrian crosswalk shall be installed on Market
Boulevard at a location determined by the City Engineer.
The crosswalk shall be painted and signed in accordance
with the requirements of Minnesota Manual on Traffic
Controls.
- eliminate the nine (9) northern stalls located on the
east side of the supermarket expansion and modify the Vet
Clinic parking area to provide a turning space at the end
- of the aisle;
all leases for the main building should require that
employee parking be located at the rear of the center;
- any restaurants proposed in the center are subject to a
site plan review procedure. It will be the applicant's
responsibility to demonstrate parking adequacy if it is
to be approved. The restaurant spaces illustrated in the
two northern tenant spaces in the main building are
exempt from this requirement; and
' - all parking lot curbing shall be B -6/12 concrete.
�1
Market Square
Site
Plan Amendment
October 8, 1990
Page
5
the trash compactor is to be provided with a rock faced
block screen wall and relocated to the north to provide
'
a 24 foot wide drive aisle; and
- the addition of any drive -up windows will require site
plan approval wherein it will be the applicant's
responsibility to demonstrate that internal circulation
patterns and parking provisions will not be impacted.
'
10.
Outlot A is required to have buildings designed to utilize
architecture compatible with the shopping center. No
additional access will be provided to serve outlot A. Only
one additional monument sign is to be allowed with the outlot
is developed. The site must be identical to monument signage
allowed elsewhere on the PUD. Until development occurs, the
owner shall establish ground cover over the site and keep it
'
in a maintained condition. Parking requirements for the
outlot should be satisfied on it.
'
11.
Modify and /or regulate access parking as follows:
- provide a triangular traffic island in the West 78th
Street curb cut;
- delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects
' to the sidewalk in front of the supermarket. A
pedestrian crosswalk shall be installed on Market
Boulevard at a location determined by the City Engineer.
The crosswalk shall be painted and signed in accordance
with the requirements of Minnesota Manual on Traffic
Controls.
- eliminate the nine (9) northern stalls located on the
east side of the supermarket expansion and modify the Vet
Clinic parking area to provide a turning space at the end
- of the aisle;
all leases for the main building should require that
employee parking be located at the rear of the center;
- any restaurants proposed in the center are subject to a
site plan review procedure. It will be the applicant's
responsibility to demonstrate parking adequacy if it is
to be approved. The restaurant spaces illustrated in the
two northern tenant spaces in the main building are
exempt from this requirement; and
' - all parking lot curbing shall be B -6/12 concrete.
�1
Market Square
Site Plan Amendment
October 8, 1990
Page 6
12. The landscaping plan should be modified as follows:
- increase the size of conifers along the south property
line from 6' to 10 -12
'
- remove the snow storage area along Market Boulevard and
landscape the space; and
- cooperate with City staff in providing a relocation plan
r
for the existing landscaping along Market Boulevard and
West 78th Street.
13. Provide final grading and drainage plans for approval. The
plans should incorporate the following:
- storm sewers shall be sized for a ten (10) year storm.*
Revised drainage calculations shall be submitted to the
City Engineer for approval;
'
- the 72" storm sewer is to be installed by the developer;
- installation of the line should be covered by the
development contract. The City can reasonably allow
building permits to be issued with the understanding that
the 72" storm sewer, together with other public roadway
and utility improvements, will be installed
,
simultaneously with the construction of the buildings;
- the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole #21 in
'
Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb
radius;
- project approval by the Watershed District is required
'
prior to building permit issuance; and
- an erosion control plan acceptable to the City should be
submitted prior to requesting building permits.
14. Provide final roadway and utility plans for, approval The
existing 10" PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an
oversized ductile iron casing acceptable to the City.
Existing watermains to be abandoned shall be removed. The
applicant will submit detailed construction plans and
specifications for approval by the City Engineer and provide
as -built mylar plans upon completion of the construction.
'
15. Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with the
description in the October 23, 1989, staff report. The
covenants will be filed with the Planned Unit Development
P1
I1
1
d
ii
1�
J
l
F1
Market Square
Site Plan Amendment -
October 8; 1990
Page 7
Agreement.
16. Review (OR REVISE ? ?) the site lighting plan to use the
ornamental fixtures east of the supermarket and between the
two Market Boulevard curb cuts.
17. All conditions must be completed as a part of the general
construction of the project and shall not be left to tenants,
i.e. rear outdoor storage areas, etc.
18. The bus shelter and concrete curb located on Market Boulevard
should be changed /moved to another location in order to
accommodate future traffic on Market Boulevard. The
developer, at it's expense, shall acquire and convey to the
City a perpetual easement for a bus shelter along Market
Boulevard. The location of the bus shelter shall be
determined by the staff of the Southwest Metro Transit
Commission.
19. The developer shall construct and dedicate trails /sidewalks
along West 78th Street and Market Boulevard in accordance with
plans and specifications approved by the City Engineer. The
trails /sidewalks shall be constructed when street improvements
are constructed."
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Council minutes dated October 23, 1989.
2. Original staff report for Market Square.
3. Amended site plan.
:-a
3.
CITY OF �
CHANHASSEN ;
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900
�l
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ,,..
r.,
FROM: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning
DATE: October 18, 1989
SUBJ: Rezoning to PUD #89 -2 Development Stage Approval, Det: s:_.� -'"
Preliminary Plat for Market Square
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
,
The applicants are requesting approval to construct a 94,158
square foot shopping center at the intersection of West 78th
Street and Market Boulevard. The Center would be anchored by a
Super Value supermarket. The PUD contains a two acre outlot that
would ultimately contain additional development that is planned
in a manner consistent with the balance of the PUD.
The City Council last reviewed this item on September 11, 1989
when it was submitted for concept review. The Planning
Commission reviewed plans for the PUD Development Stage on
'
September 20, 1989. Staff supported the proposal and had recom-
mended approval subject to a number of conditions and modifica-
tions. The Planning Commisssion discussed the plan extensively
and ultimately recommended approval with several revised con-
,
ditions. Since that time the plans were extensively revised to
respond to the issues that were raised. Many of the revisions
were minor plan details but the most significant changes were to
architectural design, building placement and access along West
78th Street. The Planning Commisssion had raised concerns
regarding the projects lack of consistency with the balance of
the CBD with regard to building placement and questioned the lack
of compatible architectural design on the northern end of the
site. The project was focused internally rather then having an
orientation along West 78th Street. At the same time staff
'
wanted to restrict Outlot A to use of existing curb cuts to pro-
vide adequate levels of traffic safety on surrounding streets.
by
The revised plan addresses and responds to these concerns
relocating the Vet Clinic to the northwest corner of the site and
creating a new free standing building to house a dry cleaner.
Both buildings have frontage along West 78th and will help to
provide consistency with other development along the street. The
�l
MEMORANDUM
I
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 2
West 78th Street curb cut is adjacent to Outlot A and provides
s improved access and internal circulation. As a result of these
changes the size of the center has decreased slightly to 94,158
square feet but the size of the supermarket has been increased to
20,000 square feet with an 8,000 square foot expansion area.
Staff is satisfied that the current plan is well designed and is
acceptable subject to appropriate conditions detailed in the
balance of the report.
The project is being reviewed as a PUD which offers the developer
a relaxation of normal development standards in exchange for a
higher quality plan. Staff supports the use of the PUD noting
that normal ordinance requirements are aften inadequate in
dealing with large, multi- tenant projects such as this. We note
that the plan takes advantage of the relaxation of normal
district standards in several areas including hard surface
coverage, parking and setbacks. The current plan offers much in
exchange including higher quality architectural design,
landscaping and signage. It also provides for consistent and
' well planned development of two free - standing buildings and
ultimately of Outlot A. The PUD plan also offers the City addi-
tional control over the site since it is applied as a zoning
district and any significant change requires that the City
Council approve a rezoning.
Based upon the foregoing Staff is recommending that the PUD be
given Development Stage Approval subject to appropriate
conditions.
' The Preliminary Plat is in the process of being revised to
account for the final site plan. Consequently, staff is recom-
mending that the City Council table acting on the plat until it
1 can be reviewed at an upcoming meeting.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Section 20 -518 defines the development stage of a PUD. Following
general concept approval of a PUD the applicant shall submit the
development stage application, preliminary plat and fee. The
' development stage shall include but be limited to preliminary
plat, site plan information including location, type and size of
all graphics and signage and any additional information requested
by staff, Planning Commission of City Council.
BACKGROUND
On August 2, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed the con-
cept plan for the Market Square commercial shopping center
(Attachment #1). The Planning Commission agreed that the site
should be developed as a PUD and that the concept plans were
Rezoning for Market
October 18, 1989
Page 3
moving in the right
be provided to the
landscaping, etc.
Square
i
direction but that more amenities needed to
site such as additional architectural design,
The City Council reviewed the concept plan on August 28, 1989
(Attachment #2). The City Council also agreed that the PUD was
the proper way to review the site. Since the August 28, 1989,
Council meeting, the applicant presented a revised set of plans
for staff review to proceed with the development stage (plans
dated August 17, 1989). Staff had several concerns with the
revised plans and met with the applicant to review the issues
(Attachment #3). The applicant has submitted another revised set
of plans dated September 11, 1989. Although there are still some
issues unresolved, the plans are complete enough to proceed with
the development stage.
The Planning Commission reviewed the PUD for Development Stage
approval on October 9, 1989 (minutes attached). Staff had recom-
mended approval subject to 26 conditions. The Commission indi-
cated some initial concern over the number of stipulations.
Staff stated that the number of stipulations did not reflect fun-
damental problems with the proposal but were rather indicative of
its complexity and handling as a PUD.
The most significant conditions included:
- limitations on additional access to Outlot•A.
- rejection of a drive -up window at the north end of
the building due to traffic safety conflicts.
- clarification that the developer is responsible for
the cost of installation of a 72 inch storm sewer over the
south edge of the site and improved screening and
landscaping around the rear of the building.
The Commission discussed the proposal in great detail. They
generally agreed at staff's recommendations but added several
modifications and new conditions including:
1. The design and materials used on any structures on Outlot A
will be compatible with the shopping center building and the
veterinary clinic.
2. The development contract will require financial sureties and
construction plans to be approved by the City Engineer and
City Council for all public improvements.
i]
[7
iJ
u
3. The developer shall provide the additional width for the
entrance lanes off of Market Boulevard as required by staff.
1
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 4
i
4. Outlot A, until it is developed, should be planted in some
kind of a ground cover and maintained so that it has a good
appearance.
5. Revised architectural plans shall be submitted to reflect
the design that was shown at the Planning Commission meeting
tonight should be submitted to the City.
6. No regular display or sale of merchandise outside will be
permitted.
7. The retail store on the northwest end of the center shall be
architecturally designed to have three fronts.
r
1
The Planning Commission also proposed allowing an additional
monument sign for Outlot A, and asked the Engineering Department
to assess exactly when the 72 foot storm sewer must be installed
and to equip the outlot with a skimmer device. In addition,
while they understood staff's concerns regarding the proposed
drive -up window they were willing to allow the developer to make
his case through a formal site plan submittal.
GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE
The site plan and architectural design have undergone extensive
changes as a result of reviews by staff and the Planning
Commission. Size of the center and accessory buildings has been
decreased slightly, from 99,416 square feet to 94,158 square feet
including future expansions of the super market (8,000 square
feet) and drug store (2,500 square feet). At the same time the
initial size of the super market has grown from 16,000 to 20,000
square feet.
The most significant revision of the site plan occurs at the
norther exposure along West 78th Street. The Planning Commission
had raised concerns regarding views of the site from West 78th.
The concern was that the site plan turned away from the street
for an inward focus that did not fit well into the balance of the
CBD's streetscape. The lack of architectural detailing on the
north elevation was also questioned. At the same time, staff
raised significant concerns with the future access to Outlot A.
We believed that the outlot should be accessed internally and
that additional access points on West 78th or Market would be
hazardous.
To respond to these concerns the Vet Clinic has been relocated to
the northwest corner of the site. In addition to the size of the
main building was reduced and a second free standing structure
has been proposed along West 78th. This will be occupied by a
dry cleaner and contain a covered, drive -up /drop -off area. The
1
t
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 5
two buildings would become a part of the CBD's streetscape since
their visual orientation is toward the street even through the
are accessed internally. Sidewalks are incorporated to invite
pedestrians to enter from West 78th.
The north end of the main shopping center building will become a
three sided space with windows facing north, east and west. It
is designed to be occupied by a restaurant or frozen yogurt
stand. This avoids the visually "dead" elevations of the origi-
nal plan. Staff raised concerns with a drive-up window that was
illustrated on the original plan. It is not now shown although
the applicants have indicated their desire to keep open the
option to have one. Staff cannot support the request since we do
not believe it can be accommodated safely. Turning movements and
stacking areas related to the window would cause a traffic hazard
and contribute to confused access and parking provisions. The
Planning Commission recommended that any drive through be subject
to the site plan approval. Staff is not opposed to this although
we doubt that we would ever be able to recommend its approval.
The West 78th Street entrance has been realigned slightly to the
east. It now offers improved access into Outlot A and actually
provides for a cleaner traffic flow through the site.
We believe that the proposed revisions have accommodated staff's
concerns in this area. A draft of the revised concept was also
informally shown to the Planning Commission and they were recep-
tive to the concept.
Architectural plans have benefitted from continued refinement.
Detailing has been revised since the City Council last reviewed
teh plan with additional improvements incorporated since the
Planning Commission hearing. The main building now incorporates
highly detailed gable sections over major entrances. These
gables are used to provide detailing to break up the roof line
and to conceal HVAC equipment. The balance of the HVAC equipment
is buried behind a 3 foot high parapet. Smaller and less
detailed gable sections are found on the rear of the building to
help improve off -site views. Staff had hoped that the gables
could be connected to avoid creating false fronts similar to a
movie set. However, the architect does not believe this is
feasible. Instead, the front gables will be 24' deep while the
rear will be 12' deep. New elevations have been prepared for the
building. After reviewing them we are satisfied that the
building offers a high degree of architectural design. These
are large enough to be architecturally significant but the large
gap between the gables will be visible from some elevations
(refer to attached illustrations). Exterior materials include
rock faced block base with single score block walls. Wood siding
will be used above the smaller tenant spaces with stucco used on
the gable sections. The rear of the building will utilize rock
faced block and single score block with additional rock faced
detailed.
u
!:l
t
i
I
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 6 "
The Vet Clinic remains architecturally identical to the original
proposal with a rock faced block base and brick walls. Details
are not provided on the northern and western elevations. We want
to confirm that they will be built of similar materials. We also
believe it is important to have windows along West 78th Street
and along Monterey Drive since blank walls are not consistent
with the CBD's streetscape.
The new free standing cleaners building is an attractive struc-
ture that utilizes a rock faced block base with wood siding walls
and a standing seam metal roof. Architectural detailing promotes
a visual identification with the main shopping center building.
1
No details are provided for buildings on Outlot A at this time
although it is a part of the PUD. Staff expects to use the PUD
designation to insure that when a building is proposed, it is
architecturally compatible with the shopping center. An
appropriate stipulation is provided.
Staff had requested additional trash enclosures to facilitate
ease of usage. The plan has been revised accordingly. In our
experience wood trash enclosures are often difficult to maintain
and rapidly require repair. We are recommending that they be
made out of rock faced block to be similar to the main buildings
on the site. In additional the trash enclosure that serves the
cleaners.is inappropriately located in a highly visible area near
the West 78th Street entrance. It should be relocated to the
west side of the building or preferrably be contained within the
structure.
As requested by staff, the outdoor storage areas located at the
rear of the main building are to be built of rock faced block.
We are also requesting that the trash compactor for the super
market be provided with a rock faced block screen wall of suf-
ficient size to eliminate all views of the compactor. In addi-
tion the entire compactor and screen wall should be shifted to
the north to provide the required 24 foot wide drive and to allow
for two way traffic.
ACCESS /PARKING /INTERNAL CIRCULATION
As we noted earlier access provisions have been revised from the
original City Council presentation with the most significant
revisions occurring with the relocation of the West 78th Street
curb cut. A deceleration lane and right turn lane from West 78th
Street to Market Boulevard that were requested by staff have also
been incorporated. Staff has also requested that a triangular
traffic island be installed in the curb cut so that traffic
exiting the site is oriented in the correct easterly direction.
The north entrance from Market Boulevard has a single lane in
with two exiting. We believeothat this will probably work in the
The PUD ordinance allows the city to create standards suitable
for the individual project, thus no variance is required. The '
real issue is not one of code compliance but rather of satisfying
actual demand. Staff has done extensive research into shopping
center parking demands and found that a ratio of 4.5 stalls per
1000 square feet of gross floor area is adequate to accommodate
centers of this size. Under this guideline, a requirement for
424 stalls results which is in keeping with the 471 stalls that
will be provided.
for Market S
Rezoning uare q
October 18, 1989
Page 7
'
short run but when Outlot A is developed a second entrance lane
will probably be required. Access to Outlot A has been the sub-
ject of a good deal of discussion. Staff believes that addi-
tional access points would represent a traffic hazard on adjacent
streets and should be prohibited. With the realignment of the
West 78th Street curb cut, Outlot A has direct frontage on the
two main site entrances and can be served very adequately from
internal drives. A stipulation prohibiting additional access
points has been provided.
Pedestrian circulation has been revised in accordance with
staff's recommendations with sidewalks extended around the entire
West 78th Street and Market Bouldevard frontages and with connec-
tions to internal walkways. The Engineering Department has re-
evaluated the Market Boulevard sidewalk issues and now believes
that the sidewalk should terminate at the crosswalk over the
parking lot that connects into the sidewalk in front of the super
market. A painted and signed pedestrian crosswalk should be
installed. The goal is to bring the sidewalk over to the east
side of the street to require only one pedestrian crossing of the
,
railroad tracks. The development contract should clearly state
that construction of the sidewalks and crosswalk is the developer's
responsibility. In the long term, the Engineering Department
believes that a pedestrian activated flashing signal may be
required to maintain safety.
Internal circulation has been improved. The south drive aisle at
the rear of the building has been widened and adequate truck
turning areas are now illustrated. The realignment of West 78th
curb cut improves internal circulation by straightening a main
'
drive aisle. Circulation patterns at the north end of the site
are a little confusing due to merging traffic. Staff has worked
with the applicant to redesign parking lot islands to better
,
direct flow and to incorporate stop signs as needed. Each site
exit is also requipped with a stop sign.
Due largely to the redesign of the northern end of the site,
M
there are now fewer parking stalls being proposed then would nor-
mally be required by typical ordinance standards. The code nor-
mally requires one stall for every 200 square feet of gross floor
area in a shopping ecenter resulting in a need for 471 stalls
when both expansion areas are included. The present plan will
ultimately provide only 454 stalls.
,
The PUD ordinance allows the city to create standards suitable
for the individual project, thus no variance is required. The '
real issue is not one of code compliance but rather of satisfying
actual demand. Staff has done extensive research into shopping
center parking demands and found that a ratio of 4.5 stalls per
1000 square feet of gross floor area is adequate to accommodate
centers of this size. Under this guideline, a requirement for
424 stalls results which is in keeping with the 471 stalls that
will be provided.
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 8
However, we are concerned with several aspects of the center with
regards to parking for several reasons as follows:
- grocery stores can generate unusually high parking demand.
- if restaurants occupy signficant areas of the building,
parking requirements could also jump, and
- there are two areas where the parking provisions should be
revised in a way that will unfortunately eliminate several
stalls. The parking area serving the Vet Clinic is a dead
end aisle that requires provision of a turn around area
' that will eliminate two stalls. Most of the 13 stalls that
are illustrated on the east side of the future grocery expan-
sion are hazardous. Cars backing out of them will back into
drive aisles that have several turns and poor sight lines.
While staff believes that parking provisions could be made to be
adequate, we feel that several conditions are required to provide
adequate assurances. These include:
1. All leases should require employee parking to be located at
the rear of the building.
2. Site plan review should be required for any restaurants pro-
posed to be located in the center. A parking analysis will
be required before approval can be required. The 2,284
square foot restaurant space located at the north end of the
center is excluded from this requirement.
Parking calculations do not include requirements for Outlot "A"
since no uses have been proposed. It is expected that parking
provisions for Outlot A will be consistent with ordinance
requirements whenever a site plan approval is requested. For the
center to function properly, cross access and parking easements
should be filed over the shopping center parcel and Outlot A
running in favor of each lot.
LANDSCAPING
The landscaping plan has been revised extensively to comply with
previous recommendations and is generally acceptable. Staff has
' only two modifications we would like to see incorporated.
1. A continuing concern throughout the design process has been
the rear view of the center from Hwy. 5. The rear elevations
have been improved but we remain concerned with the level of
screening provided to avoid direct views of loading docks,
truck parking and trash storage areas. While the landscaping
plan has been improved in this area, we believe that the
installation of 6 foot high conifers in this area is inade-
quate. We are recommending that the height at installation
should be 10 -12 feet.
t
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 9
2. A snow storage area is illustrated at the southeast corner of
the site along Market Boulevard. We believe this is
inappropriate considering that the first view many people
would have upon entering the city is a pile of dirty snow.
The designation should be deleted and the area filled with
compatible landscape material.
Unlike most metro area communities, Chanhassen does not now have
a requirement for financial guarantees for landscaping improve-
ments. Staff has raised this concern to the Planning Commission
who indicated a desire to have the ordinance amended to cover'
this omission. Staff is recommending that the PUD agreement
include a requirement that a financial guarantee be provided to
insure that landscaping is properly installed in a timely manner.
The guarantee should equal 110% of the estimated cost of the
material and be valid for one full growing season past the date
,
of installation.
GRADING /DRAINAGE
The site will drain into a storm sewer system that outlets into
a city owned pond located to the south. The 72" storm sewer will
be installed by the developer and the development contract should
clearly state this requirement. The pond was designed to perform
as a retention pond for the downtown area. Thus a skimmer device
as requested by the City Council is not required. Drainage calcu-
lations have been provided and are currently being reviewed by the
City's consultant. The existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole
#21 in Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb
radius. Project approval by the Riley Creek Watershed District is
required.
Prior to issuance of any building permits, a detailed erosion
control plan acceptable to the city and the Watershed District
shall be prepared.
UTILITIES
Final utility plans should be prepared for approval by the city.
The sanitary sewer plan requires that an existing 10" line that
bisects the site be located under the new building. Staff will
support the proposal only if it is constructed as follows:
a. The existing 10 inch PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in
an oversized ductile iron casing which clearly extends 10
feet beyond the limits of any building footings or sidewalk
with manholes built at each end of the casing to provide
access. The sewer main must be properly blocked and encased
in the ductile iron casing, i.e., grouted or pea rock.
Water plans are generally acceptable with some modifications.
The existing watermain to be abandoned should be removed from the
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 10
site. Since the existing public utilities are proposed to be relo-
cated and turn lanes constructed, the applicant shall submit
detailed roadway and utility construction plans and specifications
for approval by the City Engineer. Roadway utility specifications
should comply with the City of Chanhassen's specifications. As-
built mylar plans will also be required upon completion of the
construction.
' SIGNAGE /LIGHTING
As with other aspects of the proposal, signage has been modified
from the original plan. The current plan calls for a total of 3
monument signs. One on West 78th, one on Market Boulevard and,
based upon Planning Commission recommendation, a third monument
will be reserved for Outlot A. Although no details are provided
for the Outlot A sign, it should be identical to the others. The
monuments are 14' tall with 41 square feet of sign area per face.
The signs are attractively designed to reflect the architectural
design of the shopping center.
All other site signage is to be located on the buildings. Front
elevation signs use 2 foot high lighted letters with similar
signage in the rear elevations and both ends of the building.
Staff has discussed allowing larger signage of similar design for
major shopping center tenants. We believe it is reasonable to do
so and are recommending that letters up to 5 feet in height be
allowed on these stores having gabled entrances and rear eleva-
tions. These stores should have their sign boards restricted to
the gable areas with signs on other elevations prohibited. No
details are provided for the free standing Vet Clinic and dry
cleaner buildings but they should be restricted to 2 foot high
lighted signs on the north and south elevations. Super Value has
separate sign provisions in recognition of their being the major
tenant.
The ordinance does not provide standards for PUD signage as such,
however, it allows the city to establish suitable requirements.
We believe the illustrated site plan is acceptable with the modi-
fications proposed above and are recommending that they be prepared
as sign covenants that will be attached to the PUD agreement.
Lighting details were recently provided for staff review and area
acceptable with some modifications. Staff's original intent was
to have the lighting be as compatible as possible with other CBD
lighting. Two types of fixtures are proposed. The first is a 17
foot high ornamental type offering an antique appearance. The
second is a 321 foot high box fixture designed to light large
areas. It is our desire to have lighting on the project's
exterior use the lower scale, more compatible fixture. Thus we
are recommending that the 3 fixtures located east of the super
market and one located between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts
be exchanged for the ornamental lights. We believe that the
1 revised overall lighting scheme will provide adequate coverage.
Rezoning for Market Oquare
October 18, 1989
Page 11
SUBDIVISION /EASEMENTS /RIGHT - OF - WAY V A C ATION
The applicants are requesting subdivision approval and vacation
of excess right -of -way along West 78th Street and the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat.
However, the plat is being revised to comply with previous
stipulations and and is not available for eview at this time.
Staff expects to bring the revised plat to the City Council at an
upcoming meeting.
The plat will illustrate the following:
- West 78th Street vacation of excess right -of -way. The city
will seek to maintain an 80 foot wide right -of -way.
- Easements for:
° public utilities and drainage improvements
° public sidewalks
° cross access and parking for all lots, and
- Division of the site to separate lots and Outlot A. r
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that PUD Development Stage approval for Market
Square be approved subject to teh following conditions:
1. Enter into a PUD contact with the city that will contain all r
of the conditions of approval and which will be recorded
against all lots platted in the project. The PUD agreement
should provide for a landscape bond as outlined in the staff
report.
2. Obtain final plat approval for the site prior to requesting
building permits.
3. Enter into a development contract with the city that requires
financial sureties with construction plans to be approved by
the City Engineer and City Council for all public improve-
ments.
4. Revise architectural plans as need to:
- confirm that the Vet Clinic will have windows on the north
and west elevations;
- trash enclosures are to be constructed from rock faced
block compatible with the main building;
- relocate the trash enclosure serving the dry cleaner to the
west side of the building or incorporate it into the struc-
ture;
- outdoor storage areas are to be enclosed by a rock faced
block wall;
- the trash compactor is to be provided with a rock faced
block screen wall and relocated to the north to provide a
24' wide drive aisle; and
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 12
the addition of any drive -up windows will require site plan
approval wherein it will be the applicant's responsibility
to demonstrate that internal circulation patterns and
parking provisions will not be impacted.
5. Outlot A is required to have buildings designed to utilize
architecture compatible with the shopping center. No addi-
tional access will be provided to serve Outlot A. Only one
additional monument sign is to be allowed when the outlot is
developed. The sign must be identical to monument signage
allowed elsewhere on the PUD. Until development occurs, the
owner shall establish ground cover over the site and keep it
in a maintained condition. Parking requirements for the
outlot should be satisfied on it.
6. Modify and or regulate access and parking as follows:
- provide a triangular traffic island in the West 78th Street
curb cut;
- delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects to
the sidewalk in front of the super market. A pedestrian
crosswalk shall be installed on Market Boulevard adajacent
to the bus shelter. The crosswalk shall be painted and
signed in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota
Manual on Traffic Controls;
- eliminate the 9 northern stalls located on the east side of
the super market expansion and modify the Vet Clinic
parking area to provide a turning space at the end of the
aisle;
- all leases for the main building should require that
employee parking be located at the rear of the center; and
- any restaurants proposed in the center are subject to a
site plan review procedure. It will be the applicant's
S responsibility to demonstrate parking adequacy if it is to
be approved. The restaurant spaces illustrated in the two
northern tenant spaces in the main building are exempt from
this requirement; and
- all parking lot curbing shall be B -6/12 concrete.
7. The landscaping plan should be modified as follows:
- increase the size of conifers along the south property line
from 6' to 10 -12 and
- remove the snow storage area along Market Boulevard and
landscape the space.
8. Provide final grading and drainage plans for approval. The
plans should incorporate the following:
the 72" storm sewer is to be installed by the developer;
Installation of the line should be covered by the develop-
ment contract. The city can reasonably allow building per-
mits to be issued with the understanding that the 72" storm
sewer, together with other public roadway and utility
improvements, will be installed simultaneously with the
construction of the buildings;
r
Rezoning for Market Square
October 18, 1989
Page 13
- the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole #21 in Market
Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb radius;
- project approval by the Watershed District is required
prior to building permit issuance; and
- an erosion control plan acceptable to the city should be ,
submitted prior to requesting building permits:
9.
Provide final roadway and utility plans for approval. The
existing 10" PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an over-
sized ductile iron casing acceptable to the city. Existing
watermains to be abandoned shall be removed. The applicant
will submit detailed construction plans and specifications for
approval by the City Engineer and provide as -built mylar plans
upon completion of construction.
10.
Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with
the description in the October 23, 1989, staff report. The
covenants will be filed with the PUD contract.
11.
Review the site lighting plan to use the ornamental fixtures
east of the super market and between the two Market
Boulevard curb cuts.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
Market Square Plan Package - Sheets P -1 - P -C dated October
2.
13, 1989
Market Square Site Phasing Plan - P -8 dated October 17, 1989.
3.
Update Market Square Rendering.
4.
Updated memo from the Engineering Department dated October 19,
1989.
5.
Planning Commission minutes dated September 20, 1989.
6.
Previous staff reports.
L
1
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
I ---,Iq
------------ - - - - - - - - - -
er�rs�r
- -- - ---------------- - - - - --
a
a i
i
s eon glen 4 0 5
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
;7u•":: -
� �� I� a,l,��•�I ' � I I_
1 .i �� 1 �1 // �•�� //■ /1 1! 1111-1_.111_
— - -- -- _
III� Iolt'; = _ 11 11 • ! 11_11 1 ! !• /e ■• 1116 /• // i,.� 1
Bills ._ 11_11 1.__
-
.r, _
- r
,U► 1, �����u �� _ /��� \ \� \� \ \ \ \�
1• 1 �
WOR���� \���
1 _
l lull 11
Own
oot"IL MaM
am
Mww
1
i
� I
fmdmTm"
WWTSAW MeM "W"DAVMMOI
m r m r == m m i= m m i m m m m m m
.ATM.
FRONT ELEVATION
lw.,'T
w
a
a
y
0.�
YM CM.k
r..
d
o�
I�r
IK!
DN
:r.
__j
arm p
_
• » CZD . -J=.
j .......... 4?
1. .............. Y'rt� —�--
I'
. ... . ......
�..� Now*
iF
uGH tiILKM r • r• -•
wlrr wr.l�l
sr� /Y• 44.
rINIMIr� •� 11
. = 1
• �. -
I • : N . -• MIY•rIM.N
••1•I••N rl�.
tw• wY.. Mr
.YYrY• •
•.W MM IYW.
mom
♦W...••r M,IN
161• •mwn..11 r
tw -• '
/Y � • �ww N � .
. !.• YY.41y YYI 4w /A
tN111 I - r•Y.
Ir• f� Yr
• ♦
1 • 1• •
s OP law
all (1•IIr•1 /d• Y•IMIM
m W W
slam we
IW ♦r(. rrr
' ...Irw w�+11r •
wl•...w rr
•r w..Y.... r.Y.1.1• B••�
•� :Y�. . N
I .•. �1••NY•. Y.Y
•r •W.M.r; M Y•«• Nrr1..•
•w.0 rr.
•W ww••...w. .n. Y••• I/•
�Ni .rN•••r. r
i i i i i i
1�
al .
Irrrr .rtw wYrrlr r14+♦•t
o►
i.
.uw o rs.r
wlrM /Y/- wlr.rl wN./M/
• • Y••» • ..
• 1N.w I,•.r
• • M•.w IY.r
• M. -« Iw.M
• IN« 1M ...
• .• INN 11. -�•
• t1 •.... I•. -«
• 1. N�w Iw.«
• •� .r.M Y•.M
• o • ».« us..r
• . I M•» 1N�«
N.r ws
N -r •M.•
N•M •N••
• w..
M w..
•t.M .N.•
•1 -M •w.•
t1.r w -.
II.M ••�
N.r :L':.
N.Y •�•
e• W.r • .r .w •.r •
•.• N.r IY.r .•• 1•r •
..• Y.•w N••M •.r I.r •
•.• YI.r IM.r .•r /•r • •i.l•�
. .w -r • .r •.r 1•Y •
.•• 4 IN . -r ••r /
... M.w Iw•r ••M I.r •
.•. IMI••-Y M�M �.M 1•M
••• I.•.M ••• M ..� • ••
♦ .�:w
..• Iw. • . r •.r .. l
f
w r. 1 w on.. t1.. • ••.I_• tl- "I ow
I�I.rw-
' ..:r�.•�: MN.1fl�r..r_li
•rr/r
. Y ..... M. t i... i. o•... �
::
O � / �i• /:I..NM �••.�
+...«
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Hempel: Once we review the final parking lot grading plan from the applicant here, we'll
determine whether or not the velocity of runoff is enough to require rip rap. We may be able
to maintain a...area for the runoff to go through. Kind of sheet drain it through the parking
' lot similar to what we've done in the Industrial Control out on Park Drive. Their parking lot
sheet drains...
Scott: Drains to the creek, yeah.
Hempel: ...so we'll be looking at that in detail ... We recommended to the applicant that
they ... to minimize runoff in one direction...
Scott: Okay. Any other questions or comments? Okay. Seeing none, this item will be
continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. Thank you very much for coming in.
' PUBLIC HEARING:
LOTUS REALTY SERVICES FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 9,660 SQUARE
FOOT OFFICE RETAIL BUIDLING (EDINA REALTY) AND A 2,533 SQUARE FOOT
FAST FOOD RESTAURANT (WENDY'S) TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 4 AND
OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE.
' Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Scott: We'll probably do questions and answers of staff and then have the applicant make
their presentation. Do that.
1 Farmakes: The contractual agreement the city has on a PUD, what is the time line in effect?
Does it go on ad infinitum?
Krauss: To the best of my knowledge... determination basically what you did back in '89 was
dropped the underlying zoning of the property and substituted the PUD ... I know there is some
language that was implemented in the Lake Susan Hills.
Mancino: So many years.
1
r
r,
Krauss: Yeah. That was an uncommon stipulation and I don't believe they put it here.
Farmakes: How do we apply, what if anything, has been changed in the interim of time to
consideration of this development? What was appropriate?
16
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
Krauss: Well, this goes into one of those grayer areas where you know, I mean this is a
PUD. I can remember sitting in this chair 5 years ago arguing in front of the City Council
and the developer that a PUD was a contract and established obligations of both the city and '
the developer, which the developer objected to strenuously. This was one of the first that
established some criteria in that regard. Relative to new criteria that's been developed since
then, there's certainly been a lot, from the strict standpoint of the PUD itself, you probably '
don't have a lot of leverage. From the aspect of any HRA financial supports they may be
receiving — leverage in that area.
Farmakes: Is the Highway 5 Task Force recommendations, how do those interplay with this
PUD?
Krauss: The Highway 5, I guess we haven't reviewed it in detail... Highway 5 district would
g Y g
establish the downtown—to the best of my knowledge consistent with the general parameters
of that. But in essence we have a PUD in place that supercedes it, it's, I don't, the term ,
grandfathered in...
Farmakes: And that includes four outlots that haven't been built upon yet? I
Krauss: Yes. ,
Mancino: My question on that is when is an outlot, what's the reasoning for making it an
outlot at the time of the PUD versus a lot? '
Al -Jaff: We speculated that possibly taxes but we really didn't find anything.
Mancino: I mean a lot of times we make things an outlot that we're not going to build on. '
Krauss: Well a lot of times you make things an outlot that will be platted at a future time.
All the future phases for example in Hans Hagen's development are platted as outlots and
when they're ready to plat homes on them, they come in and review the outlot status and do
final plat.
Harberts: There's a tax advantage to outlots versus...?
Krauss: I don't know if there is or isn't but you can bet if there was, that developer would
find one.
Mancino: And I mean who owns right now the land here? I mean who owns Outlot A and '
Lot 4? Who has ownership?
17
[
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Krauss: At the present time, you know it's my understanding that the city owns it and we
have a purchase agreement in place, a standing agreement that we will sell it back to the
developer for a given price ... and that purchase agreement has existed for a number of years.
Mancino: Now we own it, the city owns it. And we have a purchase agreement with another
party. What if we don't want to sell it?
Krauss: What the City Manager's told me is that the city has the potential of exercising an
option to keep it. There are additional funds that need to be paid in that circumstance and it
was his impression... the agreement that obligates us to buy all four lots unifonmally
throughout this site, the office site and the two unbuilt lots closest to the Subway restaurant.
We would then own all of those.
Mancino: We would own them and could we at a later date then sell them to another party?
Krauss: I honestly don't know and there may be some burden placed upon the city if we
foreclose upon development. There may be some limitations ... I don't know. If you'd like...
Mancino: I'd like to know our options as a city, what we can and can't do.
Harberts: Is there potential for funding from the HRA involved with this project?
Krauss: Yes. I do know that we do not have the ability to elect to just buy for example
Wendy's.
Mancino: Part of it.
Krauss: Right.
Farmakes: What's the zone. Has the zoning changed in regards to office retail since '89?
Krauss: Well, some of the PUD conditions have.
Farmakes: Is the PUD in regards to the office retail differentiate? That was before my time
here. Are we looking again at a similar situation as down the street here where it's listed as
an office building but primarily the lower level, in this case, it's a one story building, is
essentially retail. Is that a fielder's choice situation here with this particular development?
Or I understand one is a major tenant, is a realty company.
Krauss: That's true but I think you're right. Your characterization as some kind of an
18
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
inbetween type of animal is probably accurate. As I recall, parking ill allow some retail use
YP P Y P g w
in that building. It probably is going...
r signage '
Farmakes: So we potentially could be looking a t retail g na a g adjacent to 78th, facing the
city? ,
Krauss: No. What you're going to get there. The signage is regulated by the overall PUD
agreement. That sign allocation was established 5 years ago and they can't deviate from that. ,
Now I don't, and maybe Sharmin can expand on what ... tenant.
Al -Jaff: It would allow two signs on two of the...
Farmakes: So I assume north and south.
Al -Jaff: Correct. Or east and west. ,
Farmakes: So there would be individual tenant signage facing the city and the park. I
Al -Jaff: The more I read the covenants, the more I was picturing the Medical. Arts buidling.
As far as signage. '
Harberts: That would be an example.
Al -Jaff: Yes. The covenants ... or the existing signage on the Market Square. 1
Farmakes: And the use would be subject to change as the tenants would change, between ,
business and retail.
Al -Jaff: But then if they change, they would have to meet all the parking criteria and if they
can't meet that, then we won't allow the occupancy to take place.
Krauss: But that wouldn't precluse retail use. It would preclude say a restaurant going up
with a liquor license...
Farmakes: The monument signage that we're looking at, are you recommending that it be the '
same height as the existing monument signage currently in Market Square?
Al -Jaff: As well as design. ,
Farmakes: Is in '89 the agreement, that agreement was included in '89 in the PUD? '
19
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Farmakes: On the height restriction. How tall are those signs currently?
Al -Jaff: I believe they are 8 feet high.
Farmakes: 8 feet. I saw in the agreement that it was higher than that on the report. Maybe
not.
Mancino: We don't have any signage...
Scott: No, but we have pictures there.
Farmakes: 14 feet?
Al -Jaff: Well that's what it says in the.
Farmakes: PUD agreement.
Al -Jaff: In the PUD agreement.
Farmakes: Which would be substantially higher than any other monument signage that we
have.
Al -Jaff: Correct. There is one monument signage that is at that height. However, it faces.
Farmakes: The highway.
Al -Jaff: The corner...
Scott: Are you talking about Center Drug?
Al -Jaff: Pardon?
Scott: Are you talking about the tenant in the corner of.
1 -Jaff: Right next to Center Drug.
Farmakes: Lawn and Sports?
20
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 ,
Al -Jaff: Yes. Lawn and Sports. There's a 14 foot high monument sign. I
Farmakes: That's a part of the building though isn't it? '
Al -Jaff: Yes and no really.
Farmakes: That's the overhang coming off that's attached to the structure of the building.
Al -Jaff: Yes. And I think that's what this clause was for. But none of the other signs reach '
that.
Farmakes: So the clause envisioned it being attached to the building? The structure itself? '
So sort of a connected skyway to the pylon sign.
Al -Jaff: That's how I interpreted it. Because otherwise there's really no need to have the ,
clause in there. That would be the only structure that would meet this criteria. 14 foot high.
But in speaking of the applicants, they indicated that the signs that they are proposing will
be ... signage that it is out there. The monument sign that is out there. And that's why we
requested that they submit a plan that can be approved by Planning Commission and City
Council and we make sure that they are identical to what's out there.
Scott: And we'll see that on the 2nd?
Al -Jaff: Yes. '
Mancino: I think when we get these developments, to see the signage at the same time that ,
we look at the site plan would be very advantageous so we can look at the materials. We can
look at everything as a unit. I mean as a whole. See how it works together.
Harberts: And when you're talking about the materials Nancy, you're also talking colors,
things like that?
Mancino: Right. The real thing.
Farmakes: It would be advantageous to it to look rather than typically how we get a signage '
direction. - will ne a schematic or an elevation drawing and we will see an example on
one tenant. Aruly how you see each, potentially each minimum tenant has a sign so the
accumulation of that should be part of that, even if it's fictional. It should show what the
maximum extent of that package would be.
21
LJ
I Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Harberts: This is a pretty focal point for the community so I have to agree with those
comments.
Al -Jaff: It would be an anchor building for that corner... Market and West 78th. That's going
' to be a prime area in Chanhassen.
Scott: Any other comments or questions? Okay. This is a public hearing so if anyone
' would like to address the Planning Commission, please step up. Identify yourselves and we'll
be interested in your thoughts.
' (The following discussion did not get picked up very well on tape as people were not
speaking loud enough or directly into the microphones.)
Vernelle Clayton: Since I recognize the rest of the people as being part of our group...
Vemelle Clayton. I'm representing Lotus Realty here tonight. Rather than a free Willy
montage of facts and figures that you usually get from Brad, he had to be out of town
tonight, I'll present the project. However less colorfully but hopefully I'll be able to give you
some background. Explain to you all, try to get a little bit ... and how it got there. And I'm
saying that because I understand, although I wasn't there, that that very question was, has
' been posed to Council and staff by the Council. By legal counsel and staff. By the
Chanhassen Council because there is some confusion I think and lack of understanding on
how we did get to where we are with the project. Partly because the project took so
' incredibly long to get off the ground. Phase I did. The plan and the Planning Commission
stage I'm sure, although I wasn't involved at that point, took place long before probably
everybody except Ladd was on the Planning Commission and I guess if you're not on the
commission or ... HRA, you probably weren't involved ... of what went on. I would like to say
also that I don't want to spend all evening with you reviewing what ...thank heavens it's over
and ... breathe a sigh of relief but one of the things that occurred was that there was a change
' in the attitude of lenders and financing. And in fact we experienced a change in a lender.
One of the other things that happened, thankfully, the city was extremely cooperative and
helpful in filling that gap because they recognized the need for a shopping center and
' particularly a grocery store and it was a high priority item at that time. So in a nutshell, to
summarize what happened in several months and many meetings here, the city, as a way of
infusing the necessary additional equity that the more stringent lending requirements ... are
' dictated, purchased this particular piece of land which is now comprised of two separate
parcels from the Bloombet, Companks. But unlike other purchases that the city, that the
HRA. It was at the HRA... but this was the HRA that did it. Not the city itself. The HRA
in other cases had purchased land outright and just plain owns it and uses it for development.
For example there's ... that the HRA owns that and can sell it or do whatever they want. They
could I suppose if they chose build something on it and manage it and operate it. This is
22
Ll
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
Farmakes: Can I ask you a quick question? I
Vernelle Clayton: Sure.
Farmakes: Wendy's has a contract with the city? '
Vemelle Clayton: Wendy's has a contract with, actually Lotus Realty who is coordinating all '
of this. Bloomberg is the one that has the option that can be exercised but in order to
transfer all of the ... deeper, we determined it would be wise to present one site plan for this
because two small site plans could lend to not a very good flow of the site. Not coordinated
landscaping. Not coordinated construction and we wanted it all coordinated. So to
coordinate it we, Lotus has a purchase -agreement with Bloomberg. Bloomberg will exercise
their option and then Lotus plans to transfer title to Wendy's as well as to a partnership
which will be comprised of largely the same partners that own Market Square I.
23
'
different. This was . urchased The agreed to purchase the lot and in return for Bloomberg
P Y St' P
agreeing to repurchase it. So there was at the time the purchase agreement was signed, an
option that was also an option to repurchase by Bloomberg... simultaneously. And attached to
that document is the purchase agreement that spelled out the terms under which Bloomberg
will close on the land. So that explains where we got, how you got to where you are. How
some people say gee, the HRA owns this land. Why is development being proposed on our
land perhaps? I don't know what all the decision might be but it was always planned that
this project would be developed as a part of Market Square and that Bloomberg would
exercise their option when a purchase agreement came, when a purchaser came along for
,
them such as Wendy's. And that's what's occurring now. There is a different agreement on
Lot 2 and 3 where unlike Bloombergs having an option to purchase, they didn't ...2 and 3 but
I didn't want other misunderstandings going on here. That agreement is with Market Square
'
Associates Limited Partnership which is the owner of Lot 1, which is Market Square. Under
that agreement there is no option. There is a requirement that they, the partnership purchase
it. So they're not connected and they're separate agreements with separate entities. Now
because Paul remembers it one way and I went ... not having a million other transactions flow
across my desk. I can certainly understand how people coming on the Planning Commission
who may not have had a, may not have even lived here for all I know at the time this was
going on, would not have a clear understanding of what those documents say. They are in
addition to that, a little more complex. There is a possibility that the city could find a third
party offer and in that case Bloomberg has the right to meet that offer. Practically speaking
'
Wendy's wanted to be there and is offering a whole lot more than the city's contract with
them says, there is no apparent reason to me why if they came up with a third party offer that
'
Bloomberg wouldn't say yeah, I'll match it.
Farmakes: Can I ask you a quick question? I
Vernelle Clayton: Sure.
Farmakes: Wendy's has a contract with the city? '
Vemelle Clayton: Wendy's has a contract with, actually Lotus Realty who is coordinating all '
of this. Bloomberg is the one that has the option that can be exercised but in order to
transfer all of the ... deeper, we determined it would be wise to present one site plan for this
because two small site plans could lend to not a very good flow of the site. Not coordinated
landscaping. Not coordinated construction and we wanted it all coordinated. So to
coordinate it we, Lotus has a purchase -agreement with Bloomberg. Bloomberg will exercise
their option and then Lotus plans to transfer title to Wendy's as well as to a partnership
which will be comprised of largely the same partners that own Market Square I.
23
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Harberts: Vernelle, you commented that when Market Square was being developed or
proposed or whatever, that this was always the intent. This project with the intent of going
forward but because of financial difficulties or whatever, that's why it's so slow. When you
commented that this was going to, this was the intent, did that intent mean a fast food
restaurant and this type of other building that's being proposed or just that some type of
development would occur?
Vemelle Clayton: I said that there were financial problems. It was the whole world you
know fell apart for financing any kind of real estate and we had not intended at that point to
be developing these parcels along with Market Square. So they weren't, it's not true to say
that these parcels weren't developed then because of lack of financing. It was kind of an
extraordinary effort on Brad's part that he was able to fill 80,000 square feet at the time it
opened. Any more than that is typically planned when you do, most shopping centers of this
size, and particular those that are larger, have a major center and 2 or 3 other lots which ... to
Nancy and that we apparently call them all outlots and we refer to all of these lots, whether
they're legally Lots 2, 3 or whatever we call them outlots. And maybe I'm wrong. Maybe
it's not ... I may have misunderstood your question. But in any event, to answer your question,
yes. We thought there was a great likelihood that there would be a fast food restaurant here.
We also thought always that there'd be some kind of additional retail. We didn't think there
would be whatever might be proposed on Lots 2 and 3 because at that time, at the time that
the whole process was approved, the Council and the Planning Commission also approved a
vetrinary building and a drive thru for that site. So you'll see those on old plans when you
see old plans...
Farmakes: Wasn't there also another proposal of a bank building?
Vernelle Clayton: I'm sorry.
Farmakes: Wasn't there also another proposal of the Americana Bank building?
Krauss: Several years later.
Vemelle Clayton: Right. That was several years later. They proposed and that's how this
little snaffu with the outlot came about. They originally this whole area was called Outlot A.
Everything we're talking about tonight was called Outlot A. And they went at the time the
Americana Bank wanted to be here, they only wa, :d half the site .3o they went through most
of the approval process for platting that. The Miu.,tes say it was going to be divided into two
lots. Somewhere along the line somebody instructed a surveyor to label it Outlot A. And
that's the best that we can, Shamtin and I have gone through—and can't quite figure out what
happened but it was apparently the intent from the dialogue that's recorded that they be two
24
P�
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 I
lots. It simply was split into two lots. I
Harberts: He didn't mention how Southwest Metro had control over the old...
'
Vernelle Clayton: Diane and I got to know each other by phone before we met.
,
Harberts: I think I was on board for 2 days. Interesting protect...
Vemelle Clayton: So anyhow, that kind of gets to how we got part of the way to where we
are. As to why the HRA ... fact that the Bloomberg Companies has a legal interest in the
property and... exercising it's option. Under our proposal for Wendy's as I said will be
owning a parcel and a partnership, pretty much the same partnership as the one for Market
Square will own the Lot 4 and as I said ... As to the proposed development... one of the ways to
control property is to have or influence development on property is to have a PUD. This is
not a bad PUD from your perspective... And we have always gotten into the fact that we as a
developer and those folks that drafted the PUD agreement as well as other agreements
anticipated that there would be additional retail development on that site. And let me say
there's a need for additional retail. There's a need for traffic ... for Market Square. I don't
mean to imply that there are a lot of people that are close to going out of business. That
things are so tough down there but there are a lot of people that go to bed worried every
night I can tell you that. These people are all ahead of the time just a little bit. Everybody
that's moving into Chanhassen is ahead of time. They're positioning themselves because they
want to be here when we are fully developed and when the market catches up with what
,
we're doing here. There are probably a couple people in Market Square that can't wait that
long but it needs the synergy of newer folks out there that generate traffic. We've spent a lot
of money out there generating traffic ... that we have just to get people on site and Wendy's
'
will do a lot of that for us. We don't care particularly... that they all go to Wendy's and
immediately hop over and ... or drop in at the hardware store but we care that they see it and
they see what's there and they can come back and support it. So, there's a development
agreement. There's a PUD. A development agreement. A redevelopment agreement.
There's a repurchase agreement and even restrictive covenants that restrict the height of
buildings ... All of those have a lot of little things that limit what we can do and provide you
1
control for what we can do. It was drafted that way so that this project would be consistent
with what already existed in Market Square and we think that the project that we're bringing
in is consistent with those anticipations. As we go through the presentation there may be
,
references to those. I think that Sharmin has already made .cnie referetice to various
requirements that set forth for example signage, parking, access ... As to the use of the
property, as I mentioned, it was rezoned PUD and the PUD agreement contains standard
language that the standards of the BG, general business district apply to this as if they ... Uses
are of course retail as we mentioned but we have proposed office and among... Getting at
25
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
uses a little more, we screen uses probably as stringently as anyone there because of, although
it might be from a different perspective. We're concerned with respect to the mix of tenants
at Market Square. We have turned down several proposals from folks who want to be in the
area and possibly in the building because a similar use already exists in Market Square. For
example we've had ... uses which under the ordinance would be permitted. I really don't think
you'd like very much and we would not like very much either on the site. We, in deference
to Guy's, although unbeknownst to him, we turned down Taco Bell on the same site that
Wendy's is now going on. Even though his lease has no provision to that affect. I
understand that he sent you a letter saying a couple things and I'm paraphrasing if you
haven't seen the copy. One of the things he said ... is not true and I trust you understand that
now that you understand—ownership of the parcel became vested in the HRA and then the ... I
need to say also that it is our intent to continue to protect, to protect him and others based on
what they were doing when they moved there—and he didn't ask them about changing his
venue ... that became that grill after we were already...
Farmakes: Excuse me. When you're referring to he, you're referring to Guy's?
' Vernelle Clayton: I'm referring to Guy's. And I don't like any of those tenants over there
to be unhappy with what we're doing. I work with them on practically a daily basis. I talked
with Guy about this and he just sort of shrugged his shoulders. Apparently he didn't think I
was in any position of authority to do anything about it so he wasn't going to complain to
me ... with respect to this particular project. Wendy's began discussions with us last March
and one of the specific elements that was important to them was a site plan so we met with
' staff and reviewed various alternatives and ... which was recommended by the staff. In the
next few months ... and then we prepared some more formal renderings of the site plan and
elevations and presented them to the HRA and the comments with having preliminary
discussion with them ... prior to bringing it to Planning Commission and Council and that was
in late September. September 23rd I believe. We then were ... and so the site plan and
specifically the landscaping plan was used ... Kevin Norby prepared the landscaping plan ... as
' well as through the Tree Board. At the same time this was going on, we were finalizing
elevations and in the case of Wendy's making... elevations based on projections by the HRA.
We presented the ... roughly in December. Anticipated Planning Commission public hearing in
' January. We all know that the schedules were changed due to the accommodation linked to
the Highway 5 study. We thought—perfect presentation and before I introduce the folks that
' are going to come up and make the presentation, because it is less than perfect, it's because
we were trying ... but in any event, I think what we have, it might not be- L.fect or as perfect
and colorful in quality and visible ... less than 24 hours really to get the new site plan attached
to your packet together. He has not spent, that was at 3:45... Since then he's had a chance to
fine tune it a little bit and you'll see a fine tuned version here which incorporates a few
things—by Friday afternoon. Then on Monday we learned that ...The other thing that Bill had
26
F1
F]
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
to do was...Sharmin decided that she wouldn't, suggested we add some relief to the front in ,
the form of bringing forward the gabled portion a foot and that meant that Bill had to go back
to the drawing board ... Monday morning on the elevations. Now all this time Bill had planned '
to be doing a really nice computer presentation of...the building and so we're without those
tonight but thankfully we do have the most recent response to the most recent suggestions and
this also left Kevin in a little bit of a lurch since he had only I think today to do the revised
landscaping... It's my thought that, since you've already seen the site plan, we might then
look at the landscape plan next since you kind of have those around in front of you and then
we'll talk about the buildings. And so, unless you want to see it in a different order.
Scott: Go ahead.
Vernelle Clayton: I would like to introduce Kevin Norby who I think all of you have met in
the past and he will make ... Thank you.
Kevin Norby: Again, I apologize for not getting a copy of this to you but I do have copies I
can distribute to you. '
Scott: If you want, if you can stick that in front of the podium. For the folks at home.
Kevin Norby: I guess what we've done here, I thought maybe Bill would be going first and '
have an opportunity to explain what changes were made on the site. Staff suggested that this
area, which was previously shown and I think is on your copy, shown as 6 foot wide and ,
suggested that that be widened to 8 feet to accommodate the planting of additional green
space. We've actually widened that to 10 feet feeling that we probably needed that extra 2
feet to insure that those trees would continue to thrive.
Harberts: Kevin, can you just kind of give us a point of reference where West 78th Street is?
It's kind of hard. '
Kevin Norby: Yeah, this is West 78th and north. This would be Market here and of course
Festival would be down in here. So this is I guess one of the changes that Sharmin had
suggested of this being widened to 8 feet. We've widened that to 10 feet and incorporated
some trees in there. Sharmin had actually asked to have 5 trees planted in this median and I
was somewhat concerned about salt tolerance and the amount of traffic that runs through here
splashing up on the trees so what we've done is provided 3 trees. We've changed the .,pecies
a little bit to provide some additional salt tolerance. We've landscaped that area with lower
growing, ground cover type material that will take the snow loads and the salt tolerance.
Mancino: What is that?
27
L�
F,
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Kevin Norby: In this case we've used fleece flower, the ground cover. The trees are
hackberry and ash and off to the ends we've got maple and linden where we think there's a
little more space to accommodate those. We've also got this sidewalk that continues around
the site. Part of it exists. That will be extended across West 78th here and the city currently
has as part of their West 78th Street project 5 trees which are proposed there. We have a
total of 32 trees shown on the site, 15 of which are required. 15 trees are required as part of
your landscape ordinance. Your parking lot ordinance.
Mancino: That's the minimum.
Kevin Norby: The minimum. We've got 17 shown in the parking lot. We've got another 10
down there provided as far as buffering, screening. Quite a bit exceeded that in an attempt to
hide things like the trash enclosures, soften the building architecture and so forth. Again the
trash enclosure is located here. Bill will explain why that is there. It was the request from
staff to consolidate the two enclosures and ... win be accessed from both tenants buildings. I
guess in general I'll let Bill cover that sort of stuff but in general what we've done is tried to
soften the architecture. Tried to provide some green space. There will be some berming and
that sort of thing to help break up some of these views along here along West 78th and
Market. And then we've used again extensively ground covers and shrubs for both buffering
and for landscaping around the buildings.
Mancino: I have a question for you. If I'm over at Country Suites and I want to walk across
the street and go to Wendy's, and I get on the sidewalk on Market, how do I get to Wendy's
in a pedestrian friendly way that I don't go around cars? Is there a pathway?
Kevin Norby: The hotel over here?
Mancino: Yeah.
Kevin Norby: You either walk the sidewalk which will take you to Wendy's ... allow annuals
around the buildings. Around the signs we've got more perennials. It will be both colorful
and it will provide a lot of canopy cover.
Mancino: Is there the use of brick pavers for sidewalk or are we all cement or have we
upgraded up to some sort of a brick walkway around the buildings?
Kevin Norby: I haven't been involved in those discussions and I'm not sure it's reached that,
quite that level of detail here but at this point what we're representing is concrete. Maybe I'll
let Bill kind of touch on some of the other changes here.
28
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
Vemelle Clayton: ...so do you want to explain more about the site plan? 1
Bill Brisley: Most of the changes were driven by planning staff which you see there. I'm '
sure there's a lot of rationale that they have that I'm not privy to that ... but I certainly would
answer any questions on the site plan.
Harberts: Well one of the questions I have is with regard to the trash. And maybe it's just
my not understanding the total use of the other buildings but it would seem to me there's
more traffic generated potentially by Wendy's so why wouldn't the trash be located in the
other parking lot where I would think there would be less traffic to deal with. But then
maybe I'm just.
Bill Brisley: Well here's where Wendy's collects their trash in this area and then directly out '
that door. And then a hauler would come in here—pick up this dumpster.
Harberts: Oh because they generate more trash?
Vemelle Clayton: Right. They generate more and plus we have several experiences in ,
Market Square where anytime you have large dumpsters, which you want, because you don't
want—The hauler has to head in directly back.
Harberts: They have to back up.
Vemelle Clayton: Right. And up here they'd have trouble... ,
Harberts: So tell me how a trash hauler would go in there and do a 3 point turn?
Bill Brisley: This is all one way.
Harberts: So tell me how. '
John Milga: We arrange the time for trash pick up so it just doesn't come in the middle of ,
the day or when it's busy and quite easily what happens is the trash backs in this way, pulls
up here and...
Mancino: Are you open 24 hours a day?
John Milga: No we're not. And we wouldn't anticipate trying to be open 24 hours a day. 1
Harberts: Can you describe that location where they collect the trash. Is that like an
29
u
ri
t
1
I.
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
enclosed room or something?
John Milga: Well first of all we compact our trash before we take it out to the dumpster.
Harberts: And that's done in that little room.
John Milga: Pardon me?
Harberts: That's done in that little room that you pointed out?
John Milga: This one here? This is a cooler and freezer and that's all enclosed. And then
when they would bring out the trash, they would bring it out here.
Harberts: And is that somehow screened? That trash ... or whatever it's called back there?
John Milga: Yes. There's very heavy screening all around the trash, except for this little
sidewalk here where the office people can bring trash in.
Al -Jaff: We're also requesting that there would be berming to create an impression—from.
Market Boulevard as well as...
Bill Brisley: What happens is this site steps down ... and so where we take up some of the
changes...
Harberts: That answers my questions.
Vernelle Clayton: I'd like to bring, before we get off the site plan I'd like to bring up one of
the ... Council and you should know about it too. These don't exist down here. They live
currently up in here and if you haven't noticed them, please drive out and take a look at
them. They're inconsistent with any kind of building design ... so we're proposing that they be
moved. And one of the reasons we're proposing that they be moved, the screen is
obviously ... and the other is that there's a requirement that there be nothing planted within 10
feet and they're closer than 10 feet to the sidewalk. You can't shield them from the
sidewalk. So we need to address, I don't think you'll find any arguments from anybody that
they're ugly but we might find an argument that ...so we're going to have to work on that. So
I just wanted to explain that and this will be able to provide screening...
Farmakes: What was your motivation in changing the roof line? What was it originally?
You discussed some of the changes you made to the main structure here.
30
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 I
Vernelle Clayton: To this one.
Farmakes: Yeah. '
Vemelle Clayton: Bill, well we were going to have Wendy's go on next but if you want,
why don't you talk about it.
Farmakes: That's fine if you want to come back to that. ,
Bill Brisley: Yeah, I guess I'm...
Vemelle Clayton: Okay. I think it would be nice if we did allow John Milga to talk a little
bit about Wendy's and he and...
John Milga: Well first of all Wendy's is kind of an upscale hamburger chain and most of our
customers fit the profile of Chanhassen's population base. Where it's a little more upscale.
A little more office related. People are a little more interested in salad bars. They're good
for your product and we kind of emphasize that. Emphasize the adult seating with the
movable chairs and tables. One of the things we have to consider is in trying to develop
here, what they have a plan that our building would match with the Market Square building
as well as with the Edina Realty building. So one of the considerations was to try and get a
dormer type roof on top of the building and also to match the brick. Now this artist has
shaded it in kind of a beige but we're going to match the same color as Market Square '
building which is kind of a grayish color. And at the time we'll use the same materials so
we'll have the same brick materials as Edina as along with matching the colors of the Market
Square building. Now our logo colors are red and you can use this a little bit because we had
the rendering done before we had to make some other changes that Vernelle eluded to but
you can see the dormer treatments here ... Gary, you know all the colors a little better than I
do. '
Gary: Well we're effectively going to compliment the colors of the shopping center. This
dormer treatment... and add some red striping to compliment to the canopies used in the
shopping center, which is a burgundy. And brick treatment, as I mentioned being kind of a
grayish ... This is what you call...
'
Harberts: Is this a, and I don't know if I m...is thts like a franchise store or is this like a
corporate store? '
John Milga: This would be a corporate operated store. However that doesn't mean that it
would always be a corporate store. We do have flexibility that we can sell stores to
31
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
franchisees and buy franchise stores.
Harberts: Do you have any Wendy's that do not have drive thru or do all your Wendy's all
over the place have drive thrus?
John Milga: The only place that we don't have drive thrus is if we're in a downtown area
like in downtown Minneapolis. Or inside of a shopping center mall. Other than that they all
have drive thrus. And the reason for that quite frankly is, about 30% of the business comes
through a drive thru. Today people do their banking through drive thrus. In fact women are
the primary users of drive thrus because when they drive home and they have little kids, they
don't have to take the kids out of the car, or out of the van today. Bring them in someplace.
Worry about them running around and so they can have them all contained where they can do
their banking and...
Farmakes: Your elevation drawing is showing burgundy striping on the building and your
sketch drawing is showing a matching red to the sign. What, do you have a sample of what
that would be or do you, any exterior samples?
Gary: ...on the site?
Farmakes: Yes.
Gary: This is just a paint that's painted on. The top of the parapet is treated with ... What we
' have shown right now is green—red and beige.
Farmakes: So when you're referring to red, I'm looking and I'm seeing almost a burgundy
red and in the drawing I'm seeing bright red. What is the color?
Gary: It's red.
Farmakes: The red I see in the Wendy's sign?
Gary: Yeah.
Mancino: ...fire engine red, not burgundy?
'::ar Fight. No.
Harberts: I thought I had heard the comment of your corporate logo colors would be.
32
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
Farmakes: I heard the awnings that are currently on the Market Square development. Did I
hear that wrong?
Gary: Not a burgundy. It's kind of burgundy red. Sort of...
Farmakes: Well signage reds are color coded. They're specific. The red that you're using in
Wendy's I'd say is a 185 red.
Gary: ...Yeah. The signage in the shopping center are red.
Mancino: But I mean it's not going to be a subtle burgundy?
Gary: No. Right. No, it's going to be red. And this... ■
Mancino: Where else are their signage up on the mansard or whatever you call that part of
the roof? I mean you have a drive up area.
Gary: Right. We have.
Mancino: In your other Wendy's you have a fair amount of signage.
John Milga: ...original pictures of our "standard building" may give a better idea. You can
see there we usually use a brick similar to the brick that you have in civic center...
Scott: And then all Y
our rooftop, our HVAC and all that kind of stuff is going to be
Y P
screened? Actually contained underneath so it won't be visible at all.
Right.
Ri
Gary. g
Farmakes: Will the stone and brick that you're using is accented by a rougher stone in the
detail work?
Gary: Yes... ,
Farmakes: And this is the bronze metallic that you're referring to?
Gary: Yes.
Harberts: And this site is supposed to have two drive thru windows? Is that right? '
�
33
I
I Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
John Milga: Yes. That's the standard ... and we are changing our signage. We're not going to
have Wendy's Old Fashion Hamburgers. Wendy's is Wendy's...
Farmakes: Okay, so on some of these other buildings where you see chili and frosty, all this
auxillary signage that you're talking about is restricted then to your...
Mancino: And is it lit, back lit?
I Gary: Yes. It's lit. Basically this is one of our, what do you want to call it...
Vernelle Clayton: When you're talking about Wendy's signage ... but each building is allowed
signage on two sides...
Mancino: And that includes the pick up window?
Vernelle Clayton: Right. They might choose to have a sign on the side.
Mancino: But that's then 3.
John Milga: No, we'll have 2 signs and basically the way we go about our signage...
Farmakes: I think you're talking about an auxillary sign for the pick up window here or pick
up here.
John Milga: a: ...directional sign exam n for le, we'll probably have a sign on this side which...
Farmakes: Sharmin, could I ask you something in regards to the fast food restaurant that has
a drive up and in many of these such as McDonalds and so on and essentially they're a
monument sign onto themselves. How do we treat that issue in relationship to signage
limitations in that PUD? ...we're talking about a limitation of 2 signs, building signs on two
sides. We're talking about auxiliary signs. Pick up window here. Typically in a fast food
there's also a drive up collection. I'm assuming you have a drive up type situation where
there's a menu and usually colored pictures and so on.
Mancino: Yeah ... and also signage in the windows. 99 cents huge which is also signage.
Al -Jaff: Currently the ordinance does not allow ... I looked at the McDonalds and we did not
include that as a part of their signage...
Farmakes: I guess my question is, we do have criteria then that regulates the signage and the
34
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
placement for auxiliary signage that buildings like these require other than the fact that we do
have restrictions when we're talking about the building signs themselves. For additional
obviously signage, do we have criteria that we use for that? I don't recall that...
Al -Jaffa ...that band then wraps around the building... I
Scott: So you're saying if the corporate color is utilized as an accent on the building, which I
remember from the... corporate accent colors count as signage.
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Farmakes: We talked about that fairly extensively... how you determined that. How either
aesthetically or in ordinance you determined what effect it has...
John Milga: For example Super America likes to use a huge America flag to the point it
becomes when you see that on the highway, you know it's a Super America. I don't know of
anyone that counts that as a sign.
Farmakes: Particular fast food franchises, we could argue that at length but obviously Taco
Bell, Amoco, I can list off where the striping is an intricate part of their franchise building.
No question. A part of the signage. It's used to catch the eye. But I've seen it done
tastefully. I think Embers does a pretty good job of tastefully doing it. I've seen it done
pretty garishly.
John Milga: Then on the other hand, you take for example McDonalds has the golden arch.
Just because they use the yellow color, you couldn't say well, we have to use blue arches.
You're causing the corporation then to ... in some cases when you start getting into this, you
start violating other trademarks and...
Farmakes: I think the argument can be made though that red trim on a building is not a
g g
corporate ID. It's not a trademark. The Wendy's logo and the fact that you're using and so _
on, that could be...
John Milga: I'll give you an example of one that is a trademark ... McDonalds ... lights on the
roof. Their roof design with—lights. That is a trademark by McDonalds...
Farmakes: I think the McDonalds was built many, many years ago. I don't think that would
fly any longer.
Harberts: The question I have is with the stacking of cars as they go through the drive thru...
35
I
r
I
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Do you have a standard procedure where they stack up...
John Milga: Okay first of all there's a by -pass lane to get around the drive thru so if
someone was parked in say this parking space, if they want they could have two options ... or
they could back out and go around the drive thru...Some companies do not have that but we
provide for a by -pass lane. Stacking wise you know, the reason we have the double window
is to move the cars through faster. They can pay while they're waiting for the pick -up and
then they move on to the pick -up window and ... One takes the order and one takes the ... so the
goals it always to keep ... and you could stack up all the way to here. That was one of the
features your planners came up with and the way we had it set up before didn't really provide
for an emergency that could happen. That wouldn't be an ideal from our perspective to have
a situation like that. But could that happen? Yes, that could happen so we provided for...
Harberts: Have you done that type of design before where there could potentially be stacking
up in that same place...
Scott: Yeah, what's the distance there?
John Milga: I think it's 24 feet.
Scott: Okay, and then cars are typically how long?
Gary: They're typically 20 foot ... A Suburban might be about 20 feet long.
Scott: I'm just thinking if you've got 26 feet across that lot and you have two 15 foot cars
that are supposed to be parked, and maybe you're not measuring the distance this way but I
think if you have a car parked there and you have a car parked there, and your stacked 7 or 8
deep, those people are going pretty much going to be immobilized. I mean if you take the
length of two cars and the width and you don't have that much space in that parking lot...
Gary: ...26 feet but the cars are only say 7 feet wide. That's the width that a car would...
car was standing here, you still have 19 feet for a park to back out...
Mancino: I'm sure you said this before but I can't remember. How does the brick get to be
gray? Is that, do you impregnate the color of the brick ?...
Harberts: Did Public Safety look at the traffic flog?
Al -Jaffa Well it was between... Dave, and myself. We looked at the flow of the traffic and
we have not studied this specific plan in detail but this was...
36
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Farmakes: It's not restricted to that?
Bill Brisley: No it's not.
Farmakes: It could be Block Buster Video.
Bill Brisley: Right.
Harberts: Is there a, if the parking lot at Wendy's gets full, will people have the option of
parking over in the other side then?
John Milga: Well in fact this parcel, and Vernelle you can help us out on this if you want,
there is parking on this side. This is parking that belongs to this land. However we're not
even counting that as part of our required parking. But there was overflow parking calculated
way back when, when it was thought of this as being retail then. Possibly a in service
restaurant.
VemeIle Clayton: We intend to have cross parking easements. There already are cross ,
parking easements in place...
Harberts: Would a pick up, no. Let's start over. Would a Suburban with a 16 or 18 foot
boat be able to go through that? I mean realistically.
John Milga: But the question you raise is the same you have to ask in a bank. If someone
were imprudent enough to come with a Suburban and a big boat, and that could happen in
this area. Someone could be that imprudent to do that, do go into a bank, they're going to
tear up everything on it just like the church. They did the same thing. If they pull in there. I
Harberts: So I take it the answer is no.
John Milga: No. Probably wouldn't. They probably could get through here because it's '—
wide enough but.
Gary: If there were no cars.
John Milga: Because with 22 feet, it would work but you know...
Harberts: Well we have Lotus Lake right there. We have a lot of traffic on 78th Street and I I
37 1
I Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
a think it's very conceivable and unless this person is smart enough to park their vehicle
outside of that area, I'm just wondering what kind of traffic tie up you could have in there,
into the stacking, things like that.
Farmakes: Is the street lighting for Market Il going to match Market I?
John Milga: Yes, it is the same street lighting.
Al -Jaff: We did discuss this at a meeting with the applicant and we suggested that they use
the same ornamental lighting that exists at Market Square right now, and we're hoping with
their next submittal that that shows on there.
Farmakes: And that will be part of any lighting situation within the lot also?
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Harberts: I'd like to just reinforce Nancy's comment earlier about seeing the colors and the
materials at the next meeting.
Mancino: And signage and where any accessory signage will be.
Al -Jaff: Do you want them to bring in examples? I mean actual pieces.
I Mancino: Yes.
Conrad: Staff report took out sidewalks. I'm curious why we did that.
Hempel: Actually the site plan showed taking out the sidewalk with the grading of the site
and did not propose putting it back and that was one of the recommendations staff has, to
make sure that sidewalk on Market Boulevard is put back in place. And in fact the West
78th Street sidewalk.
Vemelle Clayton: If it said that, it was a mistake. It was never intended that we take out the
sidewalk...
Bill Brisley: We're not taking out any sidewalks. They're adding, or the city will be adding
the sidewalks...
Hempel: Let me clarify for the record as far as the city is going to be extending the sidewalk
along West 78th Street only. Nothing along Market Square or Market Boulevard. There's a
38
i
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
small segment of the sidewalk that was left out of the original Market Square development.
We're waiting for the city to put the turn lane in and move the electrical boxes that were on
the corner. We've moved them back for a second time now. The location is far enough back
to facilitate the extension of that sidewalk and development of the parcel.
Conrad: One thing that we hear on this Vision 2002 is, it's always interesting what people
focus on and we're trying to figure out what we look like in 10 years or 5, or something like
that. We talked about pedestrian traffic and although if Brad were here he'd be telling us
how the car moves us around, which is true. But on the other hand, the people that are
looking at the city are real concerned with pedestrian traffic. Staff, you did not want the
connection, as originally in our plans, made to these sidewalks on West 78th and Market Blvd
based on the staff report saying eliminate them. Is that correct?
Al -Jaff: No. Actually...
Bill Brisley: The sidewalk comes here.
Conrad: I'm not talking about those. I'm talking about the connectivity between the Edina
and the sidewalks that I perceive to be coming from the sides going out to the, right there.
Yeah. Now my understanding was staff said these pedestrian ramps should be eliminated.
Bill Brisley: Those were ones going across the street.
Hempel: Right. If I could clarify. There were previous on the landscape plan showing two r
pedestrian crossings or access points out to West 78th Street and Market in this location and
another one out here to promote crossing mid block and—We did request that they give us
some continuity between the sidewalk on Market and Edina Realty and Wendy's.
Conrad: Okay. Then I understand. And we're going to look at connecting Wendy's to that
same Market Blvd sidewalk, right?
Al -Jaff: Yes. I
Conrad: I'm really interested in connecting everything together. This is a PUD you know
and I think that's what everybody has to really refocus on. This is not just a subdivision or a
site plan. It's really fitting everything together. I'm concerned with sidewalks and accesses
to get a, I think the parking lot at Market Square has been a bone of concern for a long time.
I hope we're taking that opportunity. I'm not going to get into the business of being an
engineer but I really hope we're taking the opportunity to make sure that this thing all fits
together, and I'm not smart enough to critique it right now but I trust staff will do that. I
39
i�
I
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
also trust staff will do that in terms of the sidewalks. Even though this little group that's
trying to figure out what we look like in 2002 has not come to conclusions yet, there's sure
some solid indication of what they're looking for and that should be wrapped into this. We
shouldn't have to wait for this document to come forth. I think there's some clear directions
on that and this impacts it a little bit. So again, I just really hope between now and then that
staff has thought of those issues and making sure this all fits.
John Malga: Any other questions in regards to Wendy's?
Al -Jaff: I just wanted to add something in regards to the sidewalks. It's true as
Commissioner Conrad states that one of the main concerns of the 2002 Vision commission
was to connect the sidewalks and we did look at this site and what we had suggested was that
the sidewalks. This is where Edina Realty is. The sidewalk would continue along West 78th
but at the same time go along the interior and then go to the west until it reaches Subway.
The sidewalk that's right in front of Subway and I think that would complete that sidewalk
connection.
Mancino: But you still can't get to Wendy's on a sidewalk. I mean it's not pedestrian
friendly.
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Mancino: You cannot get from a sidewalk to Wendy's without going through a parking lot
and I'm thinking small kids. I'm thinking bikes and all sorts of things. So it doesn't meet
those pedestrian friendly requirements.
Scott: Well another comment too with the Vision 2002 that's very obvious in the statement
that we all received is one of a civic center and obviously we have a civic center beginning
with City Hall. Potential City Hall expansion. Library relocation. Post Office. City Center
Park and so forth and perhaps in this particular area, because the ownership, at least at this
point in time seems to rest with the HRA, you know they also put some interesting
opportunities there to further enhance our civic center. So I had the opportunity to go to a
couple of the meetings. I know Nancy's probably, I think Nancy and Jeff went.
Mancino: In fact I just got a mailing from the last meeting and I would urge everybody to
attend on the Planning Commission and one of the things that we're looking at as an ad hoc
committee for 2002 is making this area, the city center, and I mean it was even brought up
maybe in this particular site is a public library. That may work out. I mean obviously the
committee has not come to any conclusions or recommendations but they are in the middle of
40
1
n
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
I
doing this. So it might be wise to listen to those much like the Highway 5 task force. To
wait until the Vision 2002 committee gets done and makes recommendations to the Planning
Commission and City Council because they're going to take the whole central business
district as a whole and look at it and do some site analysis.
Scott: And also too to say, here's something that's on the table for this particular site.
Mancino: Well there are lots of citizens involved. There are professionals involved and I
think that the HRA is the one that's funding Hoisington to facilitate all this. So it's a very
real thing that's going on right now and it's addressing a central business district as a whole.
Scott: And I think we've got a very strong tradition of taking our ad hoc committees, citizen
committees extremely seriously. But then again what we have to do, what I've seen too as
when there's an ordinance in the works, we always have worked with our applicants to say,
it's not here today. We don't know precisely what it's going to be but these are the things
we can count on for sure and guide them that way. Any other, anybody else from the
audience wish to speak on this particular issue?
Vernelle Clayton: Did you want to see the elevations?
..r
Bill Brisley: Do you want to see something about the other building? s
Farmakes: Yes.
Harberts: But we're done with Wendy's at this point right?
Scott: Yes. Okay, let's move on to Edina Realty.
Harberts: Well it's coming back on March 2nd?
Scott: Oh yeah. We're not going to be making any recommendations this evening anyway.
Bill Brisley: ...I'm an architect employed Amcon Corporation—and specifically tonight for
the proposed development by ... I was charged by the developer to create a modular, highly
flexible and ... rental space to accommodate different combinations of retail and office service
businesses over the useable life of this building. Lease terms are relatively short in this
market, 3 to 5 years so the design of the building must accommodate frequent changes as '
they inevitably occur. At the same time—aesthetic influences in the context of this downtown
area, my mission was also to create an architectural link between the shopping center, of
which this lot is a visible and legal relative, and an emerging Chanhassen city image defined
41 A
1
t
h
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
by the new project such as the Country Suites, Medical complex, the apartment building
behind that, the bank across from Festival Foods, Brooks, and the older traditional landmarks
such as the steeple church and some of the main street homes further east. The PUD
agreement governing this lot also stated that the building should be compatible with the
Market Square shopping center which, from a massing point of view, was a combination of
gable and flat roof systems. What has emerged as a result of these ingredients is a small
Chanhassen compatible building with a moderately high pitch, being 8 1/2 to 12. 8 1/2 to 12
pitch hip roof or main roof with 6:12 12 gabled gables punctuating that roof for visual relief
and aesthetic interest. The shingles are asphalt type and as used on most of the buildings or
pitched roofs in downtown Chanhassen and are to be a green color to match the green used in
the shopping center coping metal. Samples of the actual shingles will be submitted to staff at
the time of construction to verify compliance with expectations of this concept. The gabled
dormers... adjacent shopping center details. The gray lapped siding, white with trim around
the windows and dark gray rock face foundation block sills under the windows came directly
from the ... and are specified to match the materials and colors of Market Square directly.
Square punched, four pane horizontal and vertical... windows on all four sides of the building
help to create a shop like vernacular as opposed to the typical linear store front kind—of most
commercial strip shopping centers—On Monday of this week Chanhassen staff requested that
the longitude in the walls be further broken for visual relief and the aesthetic interest by
offsetting them outward 2 feet is actually what we came up with. Not one. The corregation
with the gables. This effect is apparent in the enclosed computer model of the building. If
the Planning Commission's reaction is positive to this, I will be rendering a larger version of
these pictures with trees, people and cars for the subsequent meeting. Can I answer any
questions?
Scott: Any questions or comments?
Farmakes: What is the darker gray on the illustration that you passed out is the masonry?
Bill Brisley: That's the rock faced masonry.
Farmakes: And the lighter gray is the clapboard?
Bill Brisley: The clapboard and the white verticals are the 6 inch trim that goes around all
the windows.
Mancino: Windows are all the same size?
Bill Brisley: They're the same size.
Farmakes: If we were looking at this building then in it's true form, on two sides of the
42
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
building then would be the sign runners as per tenant, correct?
Bill Brisley: Right.
Farmakes: In the smaller area between the roof and the windows?
Bill Brisley: Right. That might be Edina Realty ... Right now we're looking at about three
tenants.
Harberts: For the whole building?
Farmakes: In your revised perspective detail, this would be on both the north and the south
part of the building that we would be looking at or would it also be on the east and west
section?
Bill Brisley: The signage you're talking about?
Farmakes: Where it comes out a couple of feet?
Bill Brisley: No, no. On the end it cannot do that because we don't have that kind of slope.
Farmakes: Okay. So this would be on the north and south end of the building?
Bill Brisley: North and south. More of the gables—Actually the gables themselves could
protrude on the end. It's just that the wall can't go out because we're tight against the
setbacks.
Farmakes: When the PUD from '89, was the overall covenant that was in place for
downtown development, where the ... line, I think it was consistent or ... There's a line where the
development has to be, I'm forgetting the catch word that's used.
Al -Jaff: Compatible?
Farmakes: Compatible, yeah. Is that it? Besides this PUD, isn't there also an overall
downtown development ordinance that also uses that word?
Al -Jaff: Yes. And it's basically downtown architecture is what it uses.
Farmakes: Okay, but in the terms then of Market I and the PUD out of '89 for Market I,
ignoring the overall ordinance for downtown, compatible would be same as then as Market I,
43
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
right?
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Farmakes: Okay. So the intent here was to replicate some shape or form of Market I? To a
certain extent you're nodding your head. Was that as part of the assignment?
Bill Brisley: That, was I intending to do that? No I wasn't. I was trying to pull parts.
Ingredients as I described from Market I and downtown. Market I details are kind of difficult
to put on a very small building. Market I, a lot of the expression on Market I came from the
fact that they are very large squares. Large boxes. And flat roofs. It would be easy to do if
it were a flat roof, just pitch up...entryway but.
Farmakes: In '89 was the interpretation of that line, that the building should be of a like
quality within a development or that they physically should represent one another.
Al -Jaff: We wanted architectural elements that were similar to the overall PUD agreement.
The standards that were set for Market Square.
Farmakes: Okay, so similar in detailing. Similar in not just cost per square foot but similar
in, it looks like an extension of the building in other words?
Al -Jaff: Yes. It looks like an extension. It doesn't have to be a duplicate of the existing
building but would have to have some similarities.
Mancino: Then you're just talking about compatibility.
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Mancino: So you're talking about compatibility. It doesn't have to be similar in the
materials you use or anything but it has to be compatible with what's in Market Square I?
Okay. So we could go to full brick here and not clapboard or etc? I mean we have some
versatility?
Al -Jaff: Yes, you do.
Mancino: Okay.
Vemelle Clayton: Do you want the language? "Designed with proper building materials so
as to be architecturally compatible with the shopping center."
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
Mancino: So we get compatibility.
Richard Wing: What was the date on that?
Vemelle Clayton: All of these documents were executed on February 28, 1992.
in for downtown that just read or is that for Market, y ou j
Farmakes: Now is that the ordinance y �
the PUD for Market Square?
Al -Jaff: This is Market Square.
Farmakes: Okay. Why is that dated '92 and not '89?
Al -Jaff: That's when those documents were recorded at Carver County.
Farmakes: Oh I see. So the ordinance was recorded at that point, okay.
Scott: Any other questions or comments? Okay. Would anybody else like to speak about
the Edina Realty portion? Okay, thank you very much. Yes sir.
Richard Wing: Can I just make? ,
Scott: If we can hear you. I want to make sure we get you as part of the public record.
Richard Wing: Richard Wing, 3481 Shore Drive, Chanhassen. The only thing I wanted to
just comment on, as I listen to the last couple of seconds of this was tying this into the
existing Market Square. And I remember vividly, not only here but at the Council and
particularly HRA, that Market Square caught some real heated demand and we had just
started to move into the thinking of the 90's and new development standards and new quality
standards and HRA took some heat for just simply running this thing through. There was I
think some talk at the very beginning of scrubbing it because let's not make a mistake. And
in fact Market Square was built and some of the design standards such as the little parapets
and so on were added at the last, the last second as a knee jerk reaction to try and get this
thing through and the developers were concerned about dollars and we couldn't redesign it
but yet we knew we really wanted to redesign it. I remember distinctly those discussions
here. Toward'stxhe very end and it went in but the thinking of the 90's started to take over
and that's been well represented by what's occurring in the city now and our standards are
increasing dramatically and we're not even close to being finished yet. We should have
ordinances on line where we don't even have to discuss these issues. They're just so
demanding that as people come into Chanhassen, in this growing market, they're pretty clear
45
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
cut. Like Highway 5's going to demand lass, brick or better. So I'm very concerned that
g Y g g g ry
there's discussion of trying to tie this into what I believe, and I think we documented it, was
thought to be a mistake. The old school. The old thinking. It's colors. It's architectural
style. It's roof lines, etc. To tie these buildings into that existing Market Square to me is
another mistake that I don't think we need to make so I guess I hope you can start to discuss
this as a separate entity that has quality and architectural standards and design that far exceed
what's there at Market Square now. I don't want more buildings that look like that and I'm
going to be very sensitive to those issues. So I think we're on the wrong track design wise
for that corner and it's premiere position. But just the history I think on the record with, I
think I'll hold my comments. I hope I'm not, I may be talking off the record but nonetheless
from the heart and to the best of my judgment that those comments were pretty prominent at
that time. But I think on the record, I think everybody involved said, well if we could just do
this again or if it wasn't so far along ... and put a little different coloring on it. A little
different architecture and protect it from the highway a little bit more. Bill Morrish kind of
came in and went ooh. Just what we're trying to get away from you're doing, but it was
done. So let's not do it again.
Farmakes: What I was trying to determine here Dick is what commitments the City made in
'89 to this particular PUD development as an outlot or extension before we critique what's
before us here. As I understand it, the city owns the property and there's a contractual
purchase agreement of some sort.
Richard Wing: To the best of my ability, from what I've been able to learn, I think there's
some knowledge that there was considerable concern at the end of the last Council meeting.
And basically what's going on and who's driving and who made these decisions and where
�i are we going and this is our pivotable corner. I tried to get that out 5 times ... had to spell it.
1� Pivotable corner. Premiere corner. Extremely sensitive corner. City Hall. City Park. Well,
you spelled them all out. So you're talking colors and parking lots and whether a boat trailer
will fit in there. We're talking land use ... who owns it. What's going on and where do we
want to go with it. And I think those will be real significant issues coming up on the 28th at
the City Council and probably part of the planning, a separate plan meeting to discuss these
issues. So am I for or against, I wouldn't address that other than there's some very sensitive
issues here and it's kind of an all or nothing situation. Either we let this go and develop the
way it is, or we buy it for public use. I guess as far as, to answer your question Jeff. To my
knowledge right now, we have an option. They have an option or they have a purchase
agreement to buy for a pri,.: use. -- they can find a private use for that land, they have first
option, first order to purcha.e that property. However, if the city should elect to take it for
public purpose, non - defined public purpose, we then would have to come up with another
$1.00 a square foot and buy it back, which I believe we have the option to do. There's a
major escape clause there for the city to take it for public use.
46
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
Farmakes: Some of these issues, I'm sure you may know, are covered in some of the work
that was done for Highway 5. How they interplay with this particular application I think is
pretty significant and I'm fairly comfortable that my questions have been answered with
regards to what was committed in '89 versus now. Although you may take that up in more
detail with the Council.
Richard Wing: Another option you have is to buy the property so that it's all or, we win.
_
You know we want it all and then say we have a little higher standards than we thought.
We're willing to renegotiate this and we own the land now. Very valuable land ... for
something better or more significant. I guess before I'm willing to get excited here about this
issue one way or the other, I really want to know for sure who owns it, where it's going and
are there options and what are the land use, the best land uses there. I'm not real impressed
with what's being offered considering the importance of that corner and the value of that
corner. I'm not real impressed with the quality of the buildings, the design of the buildings,
and I guess the other issue that came up at Council is fast food locations. We've discussed it.
We've been worried about it. We just got done with the automotive issues. So there's a lot
of wheels turning here and it's really unfortunate. I think that these people certainly have
some rights ... I don't want to see this tied into what I feel is sort of a haphazard occurrence
that occured in the 70's and 80's when we got Market. I don't like...
Vemelle Clayton: I need to respond to a couple things because he has stated he doesn't like
gray. I mean I can say I don't like brown but at this point here ... when it gets to the Council
it makes a difference—We get a lot of comments, very favorable comments of what Market
Square looks like so while there was ... example the back side in terms of how that might look
and we added extra trees to hide it, we made some accommodations to the city and the lot
and so forth which everyone, including in the city would know ... but we've gotten a lot of
very favorable comments on how Market Square looks. And a lot of people really like the
gray. The other thing is, I think before we start using the argument that we can do this with
the property, meaning the city, or not, you must get clarification from the attorney because
it's very clear in the documents. It specifically says, if the HRA gets a third party offer. In
other words, you decided to put something else on the property ... Bloomberg can match it. So
it isn't, you can't just say hey, we're going to change our minds here and tell these people
they can't do what they want to do with their property. It's not that simple. The other thing
is, you do have to be careful these days that...do constitute takings and so you need to be
thinking about that and you don't, because you don't make that decision. I had a third point.
Oh, the other thing is is that, I guess I find it a little offensive to say that we had knee jerk
reactions. I wasn't directly involved in the architecture. Bill was and he was just shaking his
head back there that the parapets that we added were not added at the last minute and were
not knee jerk reactions and they were part of what people seemed to like about Market
Square. The other thing, and then I won't say any more, is that Paul mentioned to you earlier
47
J
I
1
r
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
with respect to the use of the property and the architecture ... were governed by the PUD is a
contract. You have a contract with us and we have a contract with you and that contract says
that these buildings will be compatible. So we have to try to do the best we can under the
circumstances and we, I think demonstrated that we're willing to make changes and that sort
of thing. All and all, it all comes down to what the public can bear. If you add things that
end up costing thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars to the building, either it won't
be built or it will be built and tenants will come there ... and they'll have to pass onto, it's
not... economics but it's very real. If a building costs more, the rents are higher and the ... We
all want something nice here but we also want it to be ... impact on Market Square. A library
just doesn't cut it. You can say for example, you can look, if you don't believe me, that it
doesn't bring the traffic that it needs. Or frankly ... I don't think the city, people in
Chanhassen are very excited about coming to a city park that is no activity. If you wanted a
park without activity, you go to the country. If you go to a city park, you want activity. You
want people. You want lights. You want action. That's what we're trying to provide, not
only for the whole synergy of the downtown but also for Market Square ... but we think this
can be done well. We'd like to work with you and cooperate with you. Oh I know the point
I lost. That I share the ... library. It doesn't bring traffic. It's quiet, somber and the proof of
the putting is, look at the State ordinance and look at the parking requirements. The ones with
the most traffic have the most stringent requirements ... 1 car for every 50 square feet. Retail
is 1 for every 200. Office is 1 for every 250. I can't remember library but it's less than all
of those. So that kind of makes that point. We need to have a viable downtown and just
because... we'd like a library on our most important corner doesn't mean that that's what the
city should ... Well I've worn out my welcome so.
Scott: Why don't we in the next 10 minutes maybe give general comments for the applicant
and then we continue this public hearing. Then we can go from there but at least give them
some formal feedback. Who'd like to start? Well I can. In my mind, as I mentioned before,
I think I'll just quickly summarize some of my thoughts. In my mind, having gone through
the Highway 5 task force, I felt that was city non - government at it's best where you have a
group of non - elected, non - appointed people in an ad hoc type situation, take an extremely
weighty task and coming up with some very viable and well rounded standards that quite
frankly, as a Planning Commission we passed on to City Council with a few minor changes
but nothing major. I think we have a similar situation with our Vision. 2000 and I think it's
important because of there's the viability of the downtown. There's the view of it, and we all
understand what Vision 2000, or at least those of us who are in the city and have been
involved with the process. That's something that I p.- rsonally take very seriously and paying
close attention to that over the next 3 weeks because obviously we're going to see this again
so. I have questions about the property and what it should be used for. I would also want to
go on record personally, and if any of the other commissioners would like to second this, is
that if the, if indeed the HRA does own this property, which I believe they do, that we would,
!-3
t
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994 1
I would personally be very upset if it changed hands within the next 30 days. And that's my
personal opinion. Anyway, next.
Harberts: Are you insinuating that if there's elected officials on the HRA that they may not
want to consider running again? I
Scott: No. I have nothing to do with that. I'm just saying that because of the sensitivity of
this particular property and the ownership position that the city has in it right now, that I'd be
very upset if it changed hands.
Farmakes: I'll make a couple of comments. The reason I was again asking questions in
regards to ownership of this property. Whether or not HRA was making a commitment to it.
The city's been a partner, maybe not in the legal sense but. I shouldn't say partner. I should
say catalyst would be maybe the correct word to this development from it's inception. As
one of the applicants said, the city in a way took the place of a bank getting this thing off the
ground, as a development. Market one. And obviously there are some self interests to
redevelopment of downtown at that time. Trying to bring Chanhassen into some form of
1�
viable downtown. In doing that I guess obviously the city becomes a direction or force
within that. It seems that at times when necessary, the city's a welcome partner and at other
times, they seem to be accused of interfering. I don't think they're interfering with this
situation. I think that this junction that we have here is the pivotable area in the city. If the
city makes an investment to pilatzo or city square or whatever this is in the back yard here of
the City Hall area. It's obviously going to be a gathering place. A center to gather for
whatever city functions we have here. The property that we're talking about, as far as the
office building will be adjacent to that. When I saw the Byerly's development that came in
here, and I looked at the square foot type of development that was proposed there. I had to
say that I had hoped that that would be the type of quality building that we would see
adjacent to that property. Something with stone and something that followed along the lines
of what we had been working on the Highway 5 task force with architectural requirements
and that would be part of that ordinance. I find this particular building lacking in that. I find
these gables way disproportionate to the shape of the building. I can see, it seems as if it's
again thrown out as a problem to a solution perhaps in negotiations talking about the function
of the building. If I take the dormers away, coincidentally enough, it looks very similar to
the church that was proposed for the industrial building. Or industrial zone. Obviously per
square foot cost is the way you start out a retail building and the problem I've always had
with what we do is our office buildings are quasi retail buildings. There's not much of a
difference between the two. It could be a doctor's office and it could be a video, it seems to
me as an issue of planning that that's very convenient for the developer but it's not very
convenient to plan a city and it seems to me we plan a city beyond 3 to 5 years that was just
mentioned for the expectation of a retail tenant. We have to plan for beyond that and
49
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
although I think that it's true, what we add to these buildings by demanding these things is
going to cost money. In the end in any business, that expense is returned to the consumer.
That's true. I feel that in the end that's a good investment. It's an investment in our
community here. I don't think that having basically an extension of the strip mall adjacent to
that corner is what we should do there and I'd recommend that the city not pursue that and
that they pursue a quality building on that corner. And if that means 5 years from now, that
means 5 years from now. In going over to the Wendy's building, actually I have to say I was
more impressed with the Wendy's building than I was with the office building, which is a
surprise that I saw a fast food building that impressed me more than the office building
adjacent to it. There are a couple of things that I would make comments on in that building.
The red striping I think is inappropriate and is not compatible with the surrounding
development as far as accentuating the architecture with it. Right attractive. I understand the
reason for it. In a competitive situation where you were surrounded by 12 other fast food
franchises, as they are in the Prairie mall over in, down the street here. You've obviously in
a different competition for sight from the streets and from potential consumers. You don't
have that problem here. You've got no competition. You've got cars that are going by at 25
mph and they have stop lights in front of you, or by your operation or where it's proposed. It
would seem to me very sad for us to get into a fast food franchise here that would pursue
bright garish colors as part of the architecture. It would seem to me to be incompatible. I
know as a citizen I wouldn't want to see that in our downtown. Now there may be issues of
legality here of the gray area between what is signage and what is architectural taste. Again,
the Highway 5 ordinance deals with some of that as an ordinance in defining the difference
between them. The actual signage package that you're proposing, it seems to me to be fine.
It's a moderate package is what we're looking for here. We're not trying to exclude
businesses from having packaging for signage. But we want a moderate proposal. We think
that's sufficient. If everybody has a moderate proposal, we think that you'll be seen.
Nobody's going by at 50 mph through here. Your position is too far away from the highway
to have a reasonable expectation that that brightness is going to be seen from the highway a
couple blocks away. So I certainly think, if you relooked at that, either as carrying the green
to the trim from the gabled or from the pitched roof, or picking up burgundy or something
from the Market Square development on it, that would be far more palatable to me. I like the
use of your stone and that looks quite good. So I'm trying to be constructive here with this
plan. I'm not sure that that's the location for a fast food development, although I am not sure
also, and the Council may want to look at this, of the viability. That if it's not a small
business, what small free standing business outside of that lot is going to be viable. If an
office building goes in there, is it going to take up the entire lot versus the split and I'm not
sure that that's a feasible market situation. But the city being the owner, they may want to
decide whether they want to put their money where their mouth is. I'm trying to come up
with something constructive to the office building here. I can't. I think it's, originally the
Americana Bank building was proposed for that area. I thought it looked like a prison. I
50
r
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
n
think this looks like the guard barracks, and I'm not trying to be facetious but I think the
same things are in place. It's not trying to be anything more than what it is. It's trying to be
a retail extension that could be used as office and that's what we've got here. We've got a
square foot cost for a strip mall extension. And I think that that's not what that site calls for.
That's it.
Scott: Okay. Ladd.
Conrad: Just two comments. One, I think the area does need, or Market Square needs more
additional support in terms of retail or office. I think that just creates, I think that's important
for this area. And the other thing is, I just want to make sure we handle this like a PUD.
And I made those comments already. I want to make sure we're connected. I want to make
sure staff has really thought out all the problems that we've heard of over there in terms of
traffic, and I assume they have but I just need that sense that we're solving problems. Not
creating more problems. That's all.
Harberts: Well I would basically concur with the comments of Jeff and Ladd and I have to
agree too with regard to, I think I'm hearing there needs to be some kind of traffic generator.
I'm having a real hard time though seeing the, I like Wendy's but I'm just, I'm just not very
comfortable that it fits in what's being proposed with this and it's just the whole traffic
circulation and I think I would encourage staff also to the pedestrian elements here. That
came through loud and clear with the citizen input. But I'm just uncomfortable from that
traffic flow so I'm not very content that it's, maybe it's too much with what's being done. I
have to agree with Ladd that I think there needs to be another traffic generator there and it's
going to certainly enhance the mall but I'll just leave my comments at that for now.
Mancino: And I don't have too many new ones. I just want to say again how much I 100%
support, I mean I don't know what needs to really go at this corner. I mean I can't tell you
whether a Wendy's or an office building does. I do know that I do support what the Vision
2002 is doing and I would like to keep them focused on looking at the downtown as a whole
and getting back to us with their recommendations and that is from the citizens that are on
there, from professionals that are on there and I just know how important it was for me, what
I learned on the Highway 5 task force, and it's a lot of people putting in valuable time and
it's not citizens just listening to professionals. It's them asking the good what if questions
and saying what they want to see in their downtown and having some input. And if we cut it
off now, it's kind of like you know, here you've got me on this committee. I'm giving all
my volunteer time and yet you're going to go ahead and just continue developing the
downtown. Can't you wait for us to get done and make recommendations and whatever those
recommendations are. I don't know what they're going to be but at least it gives us, the
Planning Commission, which we are supposed to do is planning and we can look over their
51 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - February 16, 1994
recommendations and then go further. So I would, I'm just 100% in support of that.
Farmakes: I forgot to mention one thing in my comment. I want to make a constructive
criticism on the office building and I forgot to do that. Burnet Realty is building a free
standing building on Highway 5. The quality of that building stands out greatly from those
around it. I think that the buildings around it are very typical of strip mall type buildings. I
think that the Burnet Realty building that they're building there is not and that's my example
of, you know it's kind of quasi Georgian, classic design. Nice materials. When you look at
that building, it stands out. I think that that's what we're looking for here. That's what I
think belongs there.
Scott: This item will be continued at our next meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Scott: Can I have a motion to approve the Minutes of the last meeting?
1
1
Mancino: So moved.
Scott: Can I have a second please?
Harberts: Second.
Farmakes: I have Minutes of the old meeting. I do have a correction. They had me saying
it cost $18.00 to house an institutionalized ... situation. It should be $18,000.00.
Scott: That was $18.00 a minute.
Farmakes: That's on page, I don't have pages numbered. If you could amend that from
$18.00 to $18,000.00.
Scott: So noted.
Mancino moved, Harberts seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting dated February 2, 1994 as amended by Jeff Farmakes. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Scott: Excuse me Sharmin, do we have a City Council update? Councilman Wing gave us a
bit of an update but I understand that we have a new commissioner, Ron Nutting. I did speak
with him last night and invited him to come to our. Yeah, he was the fellow with the finance
background and who had some, actually worked for Trammel Crow for a number of years
52