10. Site Plan Review for Boston Chicken1
1
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: 1/18/95 ' Q
CC DATE: 2/13/95
CASE M 94 -8 Site Plan
t By: Generous:v
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for a 3,100 square foot building, Boston Chicken, to be
located on Lot 2, Block 1, Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition.
1z
Q
IJ
la
a
LOCATION: Southeast corner of the intersection of West 78th Street and Powers Boulevard
APPLICANT: City of Chanhassen Boston Chicken
690 Coulter Drive Northstar Restaurants, Inc.
Chanhassen, MN 55317 10925 Valley View Road, #100
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(612) 996 -6604
PRESENT ZONING: PUD, Planned Unit Development &Mm by City Adn 1drift
ACREAGE: 0.95 acres b6ors A-
Modifie
Rejects
INTENSITY: 0.7 F.A.R. Est . fi
00 Submitted to Commissiolt
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - General Business, BG, vacant, West 78th Street Date Sub rOtt d to Council
S - Highway 5, Perkins Restaurant (proposed) a - 13 -
E - PUD, Target, Taco Bell (proposed)
W - R12, ponding area, Powers Boulevard
�
0
W
H
N
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site
PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site is bordered by 3 major collectors, Hwy. 5, West 78th,
and Powers Boulevard.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
pi
�
!1e1_I d 54
swill
.
lQ [7M N
i�.v Mb
e im i
l �,.�
:0 ii Rant' -
r
INA 01 ,.,
D uane .
4 i
•.
I�n���Cra�r
�■ �cr� ter.
Ell
�i aka ■ull
q_
0
IIIiI t _�
..I•
II:
M
nm
:• , 1A A
milk
r , m ill
Fes= �11111� �
T ; 2 - 57 V
O now men
Boston Chicken, -
c en, 94 8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 2
' PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing a 3,100 square foot Boston Chicken restaurant on a 0.95 acre lot
in the Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition. The building orientation/entrance is to the south
facing the Perkins restaurant and Highway 5. The applicant believes that their primary
presence is on Highway 5. However, staff was concerned that the developer also provide
' some presence along West 78th Street. To this end, the developer has added windows and an
awning to dress up this facade. A drive -thru window is located on the western elevation of
the structure.
' The primary color of the building s Boston Chicken Gr color number . UT61- 54 -8 -2 -5
g Y( )
Accent bands are provided along the cornice of the parapet and at the bottom of the awning
' in Boston Chicken Red (color number UT61- 54- 8 -2 -6) and at the top of the awning elevation
in Boston Chicken White (color number UT61- 54- 8 -2 -4). The finished surface shall be a
' sand pebble textured stucco. Aluminum framing for windows and doors is in black. Red
gooseneck lighting fixtures shall be provided over the awning. The lights are similar to the
lighting with the Market Square project.
The applicant is proposing a fabric awning over the southern and portions of the western,
eastern and northern elevations. The awning is proposed to incorporate multicolored vertical
' banding with wide stripes of white and black separated by small red stripes. Staff believes
that the awning feature provides important architectural relief to the building, however, we are
concerned the awning color scheme may be excessive. The applicant has revised the building
' elevations from their original submittal providing a pitched roof element to screen roof
mounted equipment, providing architectural relief to the north elevation, and reducing the
amount of colored awnings, breaking it into two segments on the southern elevation and
' shortening the length of the awning on the east and west elevations. The applicant has
worked with city staff to create a landscaping plan that both meets code and is compatible
and enhances the landscaping of the surrounding development.
The finished floor elevation is approximately 2.5 feet below the elevation of West 78th street
directly north of the building. This difference in elevation should be minimal, but will permit
some screening of the utility structures located on the north of the building.
The project appears to comply with all applicable codes and guidelines for development
' within the PUD standards and the Highway 5 corridor design criteria. The roof treatment
being proposed by Boston Chicken is similar to that approved for both Perkins and
Taco Bell. While Perkins and Taco Bell's roof lines begin at the edge of the building
' and angle back to form a parapet wall, the Boston Chicken has provided a parapet wall
at the edge of the building and behind that has begun its pitched roof immediately
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 3
surrounding the rooftop equipment area. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan
for Boston Chicken subject to the conditions of the staff report.
BACKGROUND
At the time of conceptual review for the Target PUD, Ryan Construction had proposed 3
alternatives for Outlot B. Version 1A of Outlot B included 4 buildings and 26,000 square
feet. Outlot Version 1B included 5 buildings and 29,100 square feet of building. Outlot B
Version IC includes 6 buildings and 25,000 square feet. Numerous negotiations were held
between Ryan Companies and the city to review how Outlot B should be developed. The city
always intended to have some form of gateway on the property. In addition, the impervious
surface requirement was exceeded on the Target site and this would have to be balanced on
the remaining portion of the outlot. The city has decided to retain a larger portion of Outlot
B and sell that portion that can be platted into three lots. Staff is pleased with the results
considering where development of this parcel started.
At one time there was under consideration six building sites on Outlot B. The three lots that
were platted as part of the Taco Bell/Perkins project allowed the city to landscape the
perimeter of the development, lessen the intensity of development and meet the impervious
surface requirements. The Taco Bell - Perkins site plan was approved in September 1994.
Chanhassen Retail 2nd Addition
The city platted Chanhassen Retail 2nd Addition. This subdivision was the replat of Outlot
B, Chanhassen Retail Addition. Outlot B was created with the "Target" plat for future
development. The city created two outlots with the Chanhassen Retail 2nd Addition.
Outlot A was retained by the City for landscaping and gateway features. Outlot B was sold to
Ryan Companies. The platting of Outlot B established the development parameters for the
site.
Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition
Ryan Companies platted Outlot B, Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition, into 3 lots for a Perkins,
Taco Bell, and future restaurant. The Perkins on Lot 1, Block 1 is 1.37 acres and includes a
5,000 square foot building with 85 parking stalls and Taco Bell on Lot 3, Block 1 is 0.84
acres and includes a 1,800 square foot building with 34 parking stalls. The HRA is also
considering a gateway treatment on a portion of Outlot A, Chanhassen Retail Second
Addition.
it
C
1
C
u
C
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 4
The HRA has had Hoisington Koegler Group working to develop gateway treatments for three
entrance areas in the city. The city council is currently reviewing some cost and maintenance
considerations. When developed, these plans will be reviewed by the Planning Commission.
Since the approval of the PUD for Chanhassen Retail Center, the city has adopted the
Highway 5 Overlay District. The standards of the overlay district include:
1. Parking and building orientation:
The building setback needs to be 50 feet from Highway 5. The site meets this
standard. The parking setback needs to be consistent with the overlay district
which is a minimum of 20 feet. The site parking meets this requirement.
2. The architectural design is consistent with the overlay standards. The building is
stucco.
The materials and details of the buildings are consistent with the Hwy. 5
standards.
3. Landscaping around the perimeter will be done by the city including the gateway. The
interior landscaping needs to be revised per staff recommendations.
SITE PLAN FINDINGS
In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's
compliance with the following:
(1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides,
including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that
may be adopted;
(2) Consistency with this division;
(3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by
minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping
with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or
developing areas;
(4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural
site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship
to the development;
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 5
(5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, I
with special attention to the following:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community;
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
C. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression
of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent
and neighboring structures and uses; and
d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives
and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the
public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior
circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
arrangement and amount of parking.
(6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light
and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations
which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the City's Highway 5 corridor
design requirements, the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, the design
guidelines established as part of the Target PUD, and the site plan review
requirements. The site has few existing natural amenities due to previous development
in the area. The site design is compatible with the surrounding development and
enhances the open space and landscaping being established as part of the development
of Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition. The site design is functional and harmonious with
the approved development for this area.
GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The following development standards were approved with the first phase of the Chanhassen
Retail Center. These standards are to be used for the entire PUD or any additional phases.
' Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
' Updated February 2, 1995
Page 6
a. Intent
1
The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD commercial/retail zone. The use of the
PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher
quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed
underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan
review based on the development standards outlined below.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to appropriate commercial and
service uses consistent with the City's CBD development goals. The uses shall be
limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use
meets the definition, the City Council shall make that interpretation.
1. Day Care Center
2. Standard Restaurants
3. Health and recreation clubs
4. Retail
5. Financial Institutions, including drive -in service
6. Newspaper and small printing offices
7. Veterinary Clinic
8. Animal Hospital
9. Offices
10. Health Care Facility
11. Garden Center (completely enclosed)
12. Bars and Taverns
13. Fast Food Restaurants (Maximum of 2)
* Drive thru's should be buffered from all public views
FINDING: The use is permitted in the PUD district.
I c. Setbacks
1
In the PUD standards, the building setback for commercial is 50 feet from any public
right -of -way, parking along right -of -ways shall be set back 20 feet.
r
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 7
Street
Building Parking
Setback Setback
West 78th Target
55 feet
20 feet
Block 1
50 feet
20 feet
Powers Boulevard
50 feet
20 feet
Hwy. 5 Target
120 feet
20 feet-
Block 1
50 feet
15 feet
FINDING: The proposal meets these standards.
d. Development Standards Tabulation Box
USE Lot Area Bldgs Bldg Sq Ft Parking Coverage %
Target
10.29 ac
1
117,165
585
76.3
Outlot B 2nd Add
4.62 ac.
0
0
0
0
Outlot A
Landscaping
1.46 ac.
0
0
0
0
Perkins
1.37 ac.
1
5,000
85
Taco Bell
0.84 AC.
1
1,800
34
Boston Chicken
0.95
1
3,100
52
TOTAL
16.31
4
127,065
756
66
%- umuntuve i m 1, z, ana i, niocx i is oa percent impervious
FINDING: Complies with the development standards established as part of the PUD.
e. Building Materials and Design
The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural
standards and site design. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material
compatible to the building.
' Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 8
' 1. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be
used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels. Painted
surfaces shall be allowed on the Target store only.
2. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity.
' 3. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face.
4. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt -up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in
stone, textured or coated.
5. Metal standing seam siding will not be approved except as support material to
' one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components.
6. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary
' structure.
7. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by pitched roofs, except for the
' Target store shall have a parapet wall for screening. Wood screen fences are
prohibited. Screening shall consist of compatible materials.
' 8. All outlots shall be designed with similar material and colors as Target.
(Target will be the first store to build and they will establish or set the theme.)
r 9. All buildings on Outlot B shall have a pitched roof line.
FINDING: The development meets the building materials and design criteria established as
part of the PUD. The applicant has provided a cross section from Highway 5 and West 78th
' Street which shows the views of the rooftop equipment from the roadways. Trash enclosures
shall be architecturally compatible with and of the same materials as the principal structure.
Based on comments by the Planning Commission for the Perkins/Taco Bell site plan, staff has
' requested the trash enclosure be attached to the building. The applicant has provided this in
the northeast corner of the building. Trash enclosures shall also be vegetatively screened
from all right -of -ways.
' The applicant has revised the building elevations from their original submittal providing a
pitched roof element to screen roof mounted equipment, providing architectural relief to the
' north elevation, and reducing the amount of colored awnings, breaking it into two segments
on the southern elevation and shortening the length of the awning on the east and west
elevations. Section 20 -1454 (e) provides the following prohibition within the Highway 5
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 9
corridor: "As building element, combination of elements, or another site structure that acts as
a conspicuous building emblem or signature. Examples include garish elements (e.g., orange
roofs); use of bricks, blocks, or tiles to turn a wall into an outsized sign or logo; and other
attempts to use a building or wall as advertisement." This section would appear to prohibit
the use of the brightly colored striped awning as part of the building.
f. Site Landscaping and Screening
In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD
zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a
separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process.
1. All open spaces and non - parking lot surfaces (outlot) shall be landscaped, or
covered with plantings and/or lawn material.
2. Outdoor storage is prohibited.
3. The master landscape plan for the Target PUD shall be the design guide for all
of the specific site landscape developments. Each lot must present a landscape i
plan for approval with the site plan review process.
5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right -of -ways. Wing wall may be
required where deemed appropriate.
6. Outlot B shall be seeded and maintained in a weed free condition in all areas
proposed for future development.
FINDING: The applicant has prepared a landscaping plan for the development. Such plan
exceeds the minimum landscaping requirement for tree quantities. The landscaping plan
compliments the landscaping in the adjoining development and will be coordinated with the
entryway treatment for landscaping in Outlot A. In order to provide a seamless transition
between the city's landscaping and the development, staff has approved the placement of trees
within Outlot A. The applicant shall be responsible for providing irrigation to any
development trees located in the outlot. Such irrigation piping shall be located entirely on
Lot 2. The applicant shall install an aeration/irrigation tubing, see figures 11 -2, if separate
irrigation is provided, or 11 -3, if separate irrigation is not provided, in each peninsular or
island type landscape area less than 10 feet in width.
lI
u
J
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 10
g. Signage
1
t
L�
L
One freestanding pole sign be permitted for Target and one for the other buildings in
Outlot B. All buildings in Outlot B should be limited to monument signs.
1. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign located near the driveway
into the private site. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument
standards in the sign ordinance.
2. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages. The total of all
wall mounted sign display areas shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the
total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted.
3. All signs require a separate permit.
4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and shall tie the
building materials to be consistent with the signs. This includes the
freestanding wall and monument signs. Signs shall be an architecture feature,
they shall not be solely mounted on a pole of a foundation.
5. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights.
FINDING: The applicant has met the intent of the PUD standards for the site. However, the
applicant is permitted wall signs on only two walls per building up to a maximum of 15
percent of the wall area. The parcel may have an individual monument sign on their lot. The
applicant shall incorporate individual dimensioned letters within the development. The
monument sign shall be a minimum of 10 feet from the property line.
h. Lighting
1. All light fixtures shall be shielded high pressure sodium fixtures. Light level
for site lighting shall be no more than ;6 candle at the property line. This does
not apply to street lighting.
2. Glare, whether direct or reflected, as differentiated from general illumination
shall not be visible beyond the limits of the site from which it originates.
3. Lights shall be on a photoelectric cell to turn them on and off automatically as
activated by yearly conditions.
4. Light poles shall be Cortex, shoe box light standards.
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 11
FINDING: The development complies with the lighting requirements established in the
PUD. Lights shall incorporate photoelectric cells for automatic activation.
ACCESS
Access shall be provided via Target Lane. All internal streets and drives within the overall
development are considered private and shall be maintained as such. The developer shall
provide cross access easements for the use of the common driveways.
The site was first reviewed under the Chanhassen Retail 2nd and 3rd Addition preliminary
and final plat submittals. The proposed parking lot access appears compatible with the
previously approved site plans for Perkins and Taco Bell. Since these driveways /streets will
be private, the applicant should be aware that cross - access easements should be provided by
the property owner to provide access across the other two lots within the subdivision out to
Target Lane.
One of the Planning Commission's concerns was for pedestrian traffic through this
subdivision. A sidewalk is being provided on the east side of Taco Bell to connect with the
existing sidewalk along West 78th Street. Considerations for a sidewalk extension to this lot
from West 78th Street should also be explored.
According to our records, the final plats for Chanhassen Retail 2nd and 3rd Additions have
not been filed yet with the County and therefore a condition should be placed that site plan
approval is contingent upon filing of these plat documents. There does not appear to be any
public improvements to be installed as part of the site plan; however, the plans do propose to
connect to the City's existing infrastructures and some boulevard grading. Therefore, the
applicant should provide the City with a $2,500 letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
boulevard restoration in connection to the City's infrastructures.
According to the plans, it appears the trash enclosure is located within the drive aisle and the
drive -thru aisle. Staff believes it will be very difficult for a garbage collector to facilitate
access to the trash enclosure. Staff believes the trash enclosure should be relocated or the
median between the drive aisle and drive -thru aisle be depressed to allow for the garbage
container to cross the drive -thru aisle out to the main aisle where the garbage hauler is able to
access it much easier.
UTILITIES
The site does have municipal sewer and water available. Since all of the proposed utilities
will be private, inspections of these services will be performed by the City's Building
1
H
u
fl
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995
Page 12
Department. Appropriate permits will need to be applied for and obtained prior to
construction.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
As part of the final submittal for the Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition, a storm drainage and
grading plan was prepared. The applicant's plans need to be modified to incorporate the
storm sewer design which was approved for the Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition. Site grades
may also have to modified to accomplish drainage to the appropriate storm sewer system.
The applicant should also secure easement rights for use of the drainage system which serves
this site through the Perkins' site.
MISCELLANEOUS
According to the landscape plan, miscellaneous plantings are proposed outside of the lot
within the city's outlot. Staff does not believe this will pose a problem as long as the
landscaping materials are planted outside the city's drainage and utility easements in such a
way to avoid impacting maintenance to the city's utility lines.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
The Planning Commission met on January 18, 1995 to review the proposed development. By
a vote of 4 for and 1 against, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the
site plan to City Council subject to the conditions contained in the staff report and additional
conditions 16 and 17. The one vote in opposition was due to the roof line proposed to meet
the Highway 5 standards. The commissioner felt that a greater effort could be made to
provide a more innovative roof treatment.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves Site Plan #94 -8 for Boston Chicken as shown on the plans dated
January 11, 1995, subject to the following conditions:
1. Relocate fire hydrant approximately 90 feet south and 22 feet east.
2. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint yellow the corresponding curb. Contact
the Fire Marshal for specific location. See Policy #06 -1991. Copy enclosed.
Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan '
January 12, 1995
Updated February 2, 1995 '
Page 13
3. Address numbers shall be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention
Policy #29 -1992. Copy enclosed.
4. All internal streets and drives within the overall development are considered private ,
and shall be maintained as such. The developer shall provide cross access easements
for the use of the common driveways.
5. The applicant shall install aeration/irrigation tubing, see figures 11 -2, if separate '
irrigation is provided, or 11 -3, if separate irrigation is not provided, in each peninsular
or island type landscape area less than 10 feet in width. ,
6. The applicant shall be responsible for providing irrigation to any development trees
located in the outlot. Such irrigation piping shall be located entirely on Lot 2. '
7. The applicant shall supply the city with a $2,500 financial guarantee (letter of credit or
cash escrow) to guarantee protection of the existing public utility facilities and
guarantee boulevard restoration. The applicant shall supply the city with an $8,000
financial guarantee (letter of credit or cash escrow) to guarantee a minimum
landscaping budget for the project.
8. All internal streets and drives are considered private. The applicant should be aware
that they will need to enter into a cross - access easement for the use of the common
driveways with the other two property owners.
9. All proposed utility lines within the site are considered private and shall be maintained
as such. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining all of the necessary agency
permits associated with the site plan development including but not limited to the
Watershed District, Health Department, PCA, and MWCC.
10. Construction access to the site shall be from the existing Target driveway and not
West 78th Street or Powers Boulevard. The applicant and/or contractor shall install
and maintain a gravel construction entrance until the access driveway is paved with a
bituminous surface.
11. Landscaping materials may be planted within the city's oudot as long as the plantings
do not interfere with maintenance of the existing utility lines. The applicant shall
provide a revised landscaping plan showing the existing utilities in relation to the
proposed landscaping materials.
12. Site plan approval is contingent upon the recording of the final plat documents for
Chanhassen Retail 2nd and 3rd Additions.
' Boston Chicken, 94 -8 Site Plan
January 12, 1995
' Updated February 2, 1995
Page 14
'
13.
The grading and drainage plan should be revised to be compatible with the overall site
grading development plans for Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition. Detailed storm
drainage calculations for a 10 -year storm event shall be submitted for review and
'
approval by City staff.
14.
The developer shall enter into a site development contract with the City and provide
'
the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of approval.
15.
If permitted by the electrical code, the electric meter box on the north elevation shall
'
be lowered by two feet.
16.
The applicant shall delete the advertisements on the awning.
'
17.
The color scheme for the parking lot light poles shall be neutral colors."
ATTACHMENTS
'
1.
2.
Development Review Application
Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 12/29/94
3.
Memo from Bill Weckman to Robert Generous dated 12/30/94
'
4.
5.
Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 1/9/95
Letter from Richard Pilon to Robert Generous dated 1/9/95
6.
Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List
7.
Figure 11 -2
'
8.
Figure 11 -3
9.
Tree Guide, from A Guide to Field Identification: Trees of North America C. Frank
Brockman, Western Publishing Company, Inc., 1986
'
10.
Site Plan dated January 11, 1995
11.
Perkins Building Elevation
12.
Taco Bell Building Elevation
13.
Planning Commission Minutes of 1/18/95
0
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE '
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937 -1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION '
APPLICANT: Boston Chicken OWNER '
Nort star Restaurants, Inc.
ADDRESS: 10925 Va l l ey View Road, #100 ADDRESS:
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
TELEPHONE (Daytime) (612)996-6604
TELEPHONE:
1.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
11.
Vacation of ROW /Easements
2.
Conditional Use Permit
12.
Variance
3.
Interim Use Permit
13.
Wetland Alteration Permit
4.
Non - conforming Use Permit
14.
Zoning Appeal
5.
Planned Unit Development
15.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
6.
Rezoning
7.
Sign Permits
8.
Sign Plan Review
Notification Signs
9.
Site Plan Review
X
Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost"
$100 CUP /SPRNACNARIWAP
$400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds
10.
Subdivision
TOTAL FEE $ 4 8 0
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must
Included with the application.
Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
8%" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet.
• NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
l
r
1
F
PROJECT NAME Chanhassen Retail Center
LOCATION Southeast Quadrant of 78th Street East
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 1 Chanhassen Retail and Powers Blvd.
3rd Addition Carver County Minnesota.
PRESENT ZONING PUD
REQUESTED ZONING No Charge
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Commercial
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION Commercial
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specif ic ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
This is to cert'rfy that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying
with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the
authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
1 will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge.
also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records.
SignkW of ant Date
I
Signature of Fee Owner
Date
Application Received on f Z �' lei H Fee Paid Receipt No.
jqz-ijej4 5
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the
meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be malled to the applicant's address.
r �
I�
d
FI
C C 7 C T (7 9 I x y
w FZ A � p 3
tj
p r) fTl e Z t�
a�
9
p\ \`BOIi� eVq�O
8
r
rz
�p
x
�y
ti
1�
a
> /
I.
n A
AAA
o A l',
- M—,
. CID
a-,M ,
A
g
o)0
..+ ;U!:;
-
-I L.
b�AD
i. 0
= r -I by
N0�mz
BOSTON CHICKEN
oc�
D y
XX
XXXXz
E'
c
S
Wiz=
DESIGN Sr, EVICES
nnc ne
NO
+
CHANHASSEN
- a
It II
II tl If If I
t1 r < r
N
�'� dtd"
O
A <
W C -1 A
A
<
��0�
N r r <
-I
Ui UI o
NNf C
]C
-H
m bmp
-1
a, (
SITE PLAN
VI N In
,. v)! p
NOD Zp
:L7
A�
Cl
h
- f!!
�. 71�
�
C]
«mom
z
__
p r �
A
- ' Z 1'1
`
A
z 6 ��
r
C,
z
Il I '
i
c c, z 9
rl
y
0
D
w
N
Nn ~ �
ID
fp" N
to
W C1 D
Z
Z
V C
\
L11
V, L)
M o0
r r O II
rNO
.Z7
It In
vG1
m " o o
C-
f�Tl
cn w
3
A A L1 o
rI
m
W 'c oo
r ,;oo"
o
d
N
N y N V1
C
7
�' F
r
C�
T' r
y
/ e3
7 0
Z
C
m
Z
G)
Z
s;
3 §?
. 4
:
co _
o
-
o
g
3
-
Z
,PORTFOLIO
1
i� d�
d.s
8:
x :
BOSTON CHICKEN
_
Y
a_
••.
E'
c
S
DESIGN Sr, EVICES
nnc ne
■ 3><
r 9
+
CHANHASSEN
m r.'oeeuaa
�'� dtd"
f61LNee -elaC IAI(el e)Iee -eNe
a, (
SITE PLAN
J
SHOI1VA313 U01113IX3
t t
¢ �ti< � 1C
lS
zf�9 e�
�y !
yF Q[G.p
Je }[IlieS
mxt- iir(z�ulru za�u- iirlxie)
urw w. nr, v
rlr :) IC WlYL1f 'i u a
S3�IAt135 N lIS3
0110 I L2I O d ��
D
Y
a
m A
4
ry
s Z
H3SSVHHVH9
�d �l o�9O
N eke! °k - : w as £ o
_ 8
z Jill; JjW.1 U I, a ; il e� tt i—
N OE R fiy
Elf g>IS gf�; j C as 1c Y r
sp
.d
tit
id
j N
W of O
LL
ay
b l,
-- 3S ❑
i;
sd J LLJ
OF
e g��
r'nnti � - -ZJ
.g
11 ELL
J F F�
"
088
SPdOI1VA313 F! ®IF131M3 lit 99Y� sazv- w�(ziv�ar tDID-YDI(TID) m b
P135SVHPIVNJi �' D! "� "s L
1�8aM &�-0 Rfldy1 L �a�ls9t 4 a oil 0,4 L2I O d u o 1€ E \
V) 38 s a g ' b
ZVc'Di$ wY 8 i
o
z fill. Ii'° a
F
2i
it E
" ±e
a000 ® ®®
�a
®— -
m
/
1
z � �
W d $
N VW
Y i
�
U
Q
LJ
J
W
H.
U'
I I cn>
-z�
I
-z�
IN
z
a
J
d '
wx
Y-
g ' _ '
0 000
TO:
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
Robert Generous, Planner II
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
DATE: December 29, 1994
SUBJ: Site Plan review Boston Chicken
Planning Case #94 -8 Site Plan
I have reviewed the site plan in order to comply with Chanhassen Fire Department fire codes and
policies, and have the following requirements:
1. Relocate fire hydrant approximately 90 feet south and 22 feet east.
2. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint yellow the corresponding curb.
Contact the Fire Marshal for specific location. See Policy #06 -1991. Copy
enclosed.
3. Address numbers shall be installed per
Prevention Policy #29 -1992. Copy enclosf
g:\safety\mN4.8
Fire Department Fire
MEMORANDUM
4-
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18 ".
NO 2. Red on white is preferred.
PARKING
FIRE 3. 3M or equal engineer's grade
LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum
is preferred.
4. Wording shall be: NO PARKING
7'0"
6 FIRE LANE
5. S1 s shall be posted at each end
Qf _e fire lane and at least at
975 of intervals along the
;ff ire` an .
6 All s Nsh
facin 7. Post
minimum
36" from
'
8. A f ire
(NOT TO GRADE front of
SCALE) extendin
s shall be double sided
he direction of travel.
11 be set back a
6f 12" but not more than
he curb.
lane shall be required in
fire dept. connections
5;-feet on each side and
areas designated by the
ANY L)EVIATION FROM -THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE 'SUBMITTED IN
WRITING, WITH A SITE TtAN,;..,FOR APPROVAL BY ,THE -PYRE CHIEF. IT IS
THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT-"TO ENSURE CONTINUITY
THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF
FIRE LANES.
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #06 -1991
Date: 1/15/91
Revised:
Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1
11
If
ipwo PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
7�
General
1
0
7
CITY OF
CHANHASOrN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
PREMISES IDENTIFICATION
Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing
buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible
from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall
contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall
be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director,
Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal.
Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where
no address numbers are posted. Al
Other Requirement - General
1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color
2. Numbers shall not be In script
3. If a structure Is not visible from the s 1, et, additionak are required at the driveway entrance. Size
and location must be approved.
"entrance may be a minimum of 4 ". However, requirement 83 must still
4. Numbers on mall box at driveway
be met
S. Administrative authority may require additional numbers If deemed necessary.
RessldenM Requirements
(2 or less dweMnq unlq
'
1.
Minimum height shall be 5 1/4 ".
2.
Building permits will not be finaled unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department
Conuner+cia! Reguiranerrt
., •�<
1.
Minimum height shall =be 12'%
2.
Strip Malls
a. Mutt! tenant building will have minimum helght requirements of 6 ".
b. Address numbers shall be on the main enhance and on all back doors.
'
3.
If address numbers are located on a dlre tory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the
buildings main entrance.
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy 129 -1992
t
Date: 06/15/92
Revised:
Approved - Public SaWty Director Page 1 of.l
`4l PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
(612) 361 -1010
FAX (612) 361 -1025
COUNTY OF C�RVE�2
December 30, 1994
TO: Robert Generous, Planner II
FROM: Bill Weckman, Assistant County EngineerU 1
SUBJ: Northstar Restaurants, Inc.
Planning Case: 94 -8, Site Plan
CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE '
600 EAST 4TH STREET, BOX 6
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318
1
1
1
We have reviewed the information submitted by your memo dated December 19, 1994
1
for the Northstar Restaurants, Inc. site plan. The proposed development will not directly
impact the County Road system. The development occurring as part of this proposal
does not abut the County Road right of way. Considerations should be given to the
impact of this development on the CSAH 17 / 78th Street intersection.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal.
1
RECEIVED
} N �► w 1 99 5
,
Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on Recycled Paper CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Contains Minimum 10% Post Consumer Waste
r
1
J
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Bob Generous, Planner II
FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official
DATE: January 9, 1995
g:\ safety \sak \memos \plan \boschick.bgl
Minnegasco®
A ANOPN M ENERGY COMPANY
January 9, 1995
Mr. Robert Generous
Planner II
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re: 94 -5 Site Plan
Boston Chicken
Lot 2, Block 1,
Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition
Dear Mr. Generous:
Enclosed are your prints for this project. Also enclosed is a copy
of our section map for the area showing the location of
Minnegasco's natural gas mains. Some individual services are not
shown. Natural gas service is available to this property from the
main shown. No addition work is anticipated at this time unless
requested by a developer, builder or owner.
The developer /builder should contact Ron Hall, Minnegasco
Commercial Energy Services at 525 -7639, to make application for
natural gas service.
Minnegasco has no objections to this development proposal.
Sincerely,
Richard J. on, P.E.
Senior Adm�listration Engineer
Engineering Services
612 -321 -5426
cc: Mary Palkovich
Ron Hall
RECEIVED
JAN 1 ' 1995
CITY OF CHANHA66EN
7
700 West Linden Avenue
PO. Box 1165
Minneapolis, MN 55440 -1165
I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Wednesday, JANUARY 18, 1995
' 7:30 P.M.
City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
'
Project: Boston Chicken Restaurant
' Developer: Northstar Restaurants, Inc.
' Location: SE Comer of West 78th
Street and Powers Boulevard
u
1
U
Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in
your area. The applicant is requesting a site plan review for a 3,000 square foot building for
a Boston Chicken Restaurant to be located on Lot 2, Block 1, Chanhassen Retail 3rd
Addition. The property is zoned PUD and located in the southeast corner of the intersection
of West 78th Street and Powers Boulevard, Northstar Restaurants, Inc.
What Happens at the Meeting The purpose of this public hearing is to inform
you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this
project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing
through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project.
2. The Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The
Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council.
Questions or Comments If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please
stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you
wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937 -1900, ext. 141. If you
choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning Department
in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on January 5, i
1995. , �1
L J I
Dayton Hudson Corp T -862
Property Tax Dept.
777 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Eckankar
P. O. Box 27300
New Hope, MN 55427
Beddor Enterprise/E. J. Carlson
6950 Galpin Blvd.
Excelsior, MN 55331
i
T. F. James Company
Suite 500
6640 Shady Oak Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Beddor Enterprise/E. J. Carlson
c/o Victory Envelope ,
1000 Park Road, P. O. Box 159
Chanhassen, MN 55317
R
truck. Rock up to the bottom of the covers reduces debris collecting in the planter.
i Hardware cloth (coarse metal screening) under the covers has been used to keep rats
:. .
9 ;. out; but the wire must be inspected frequently to prevent girdling.
'+ Perforated PVC pipe (100- to 125 -mm, 4- to 5 -in. diameter and 0.6- to 1 -m,
2- to 3 -ft long) is commonly put in opening for
two or four corners of a planter
aeration and irrigation. dd -end
As the people in Europe learned, ea
aeration holes
in the soil are seldom adequate. Connecting the bottoms of two or more of the
vertical aeration pipes, however, allows air now through the tubes, greatly increas-
ing the oxygen concentration and aeration effectiveness (Kopinga 1985) (Fig. 11 -2).
Is
t..
,;, �� ,• • iii ; '� %' "' % J
,22'• :�.• s,• t;:'•• f is ' f A � ; �,;. '. a:% ;c:��Z: ;��e� ��l
Figure 11 -2 Aeration in pavement plantings can be increased by joining
two vertical aeration pipes across the bottom of the planting hole, one pair
each near opposite sides of the planting hole. Oxygen concentration in
,
the pipes will be ten times greater than in vertical pipes alone (Kopinga
shown in alto be furt
serve as e protec increased e stanchions for the tree.
sers as
x
1.•' If the soil is compacted around the planter opening and under the pavemea _
_. aeration may also be increased and roots directed downward by drilling or wat
"= jetting sloping irrigation and aeration holes under and out from the root ball an c
is
4r under the pavement. Within a year or two the holes are filled with roots. c �
Another pavement - planting scheme is also being used in the nga 1985 m . -
sentially, a planting hole is established within a planting hole (Kopi
fled by Urban's [1989) survey) (F 11 -3). Excavate a hole approximately 0 '
(2 ft) deep to a volume of 3.5 m' (120 ft') or more. The shape of the hole will d
to
on the space available. All but the finished planter opening (1 to 1.2`m, r . r
> ;.'J`' ': diameter or square) will be paved over. The outer portion of the hole is filled. '
a mixture of coarse lava slag (80 -150 mm, [3 -6n a 98�eA tree s ` planted in L r) and
ratio of about 2:1 (volume:volume, v /v)" (Kop g
`} Chap. 11 Special Planting Situetio
248
1
i
T.
is
a
3r
es
le
.S-
Figure 11 -3 Favorable soil conditions for pavement plantings can be ob-
tained by replacing 3.5 m (120 ft') of soil 0.6 in (2 ft) deep with coarse
lava slag and soil mix before installing pavement. The shape of an excava-
tion depends on the space available. Aeration can be further enhanced by
placing an aeration system as shown; the horizontal portion can be either
PVC pipe or flexible tubing. The risers are of heavy metal pipe with addi-
tional support (not shown) to protect the tree and to withstand abuse.
center of where the planter will be. The rock -soil mixture is lightly compacted to
give a solid surface of lava with soil filling the voids. The pavement can then be
installed. This provides a firm base for the pavement with no further compaction
and because of the porosity of the lava (about 48 -50 percent v /v) an optimal supply
of oxygen for tree roots (Kopinga 1985, citing Terlouw 1981). Tree roots should
grow out into the soil among the lava. Rocks other than lava could also be used
though the aeration would not be as good.
Urban (1989) examined thirteen 11- to 27- year -old plantings in tree pits sur-
rounded by pavement in locations from Boston to Virginia. One of his conclusions
't• is that "any planting site with less than 100 cubic feet (3 m') cannot sustain long -
r' term tree growth." Beyond a depth of 0.6 m (2 ft), increase in surface area is more
id beneficial than increase in soil depth for all but large - growing trees. Depending on
priorities and adequacy of summer rain, an irrigation system may need to be in-
s- _ stalled.
it- Cluster and linear tree and shrub plantings are becoming more common along
to center -city streets and in plazas (Fig. 11-4). These provide more shared rooting
id space and exposed surface for aeration and rain deposition. In Europe and America,
A some planters are joined with channels of quality soil under the paving. For the soil
th channels to be successful, it would be wise to have at least one perforated aeration
a pipe in each channel which is connected to vertical risers in each of the planters.
°0 This is an extension of aeration system shown in Fig. 11 -3.
•a
ns - Planting Trees in Paved Areas 249
c
_
s o
«
r� Y
or O
' E - O
C W
r �
0 c
o E
1 -.1
3 )z
' E ' a
N
c O
r O b e W
r N b
3v f� E o
o � o E 3
E of 1
I
r�
1,
v
a. y a�+s 9_'i.i O c y i:; a�i x'10' d �= =+ �
N a ~` 6 C g N a� Q M N E g 4~ C 0 Y
I V L co
� o v O o - , . A 9.2 o 0� «4 �►�'N o 0 -0 N a
4 204 r
p a y c u d> C c E &
. O a N
L O v e . a O o.� N `c:. au N d d °7• 0� d M
OYOp�
` z Yi C» •: � f E
O X E
a a N$ O N� •a a a
' o 0 u o u y N ;'- N o
v�.0 o o cY ° - 1 2 3 o p.0 u 0 os Q E c d 0
E ~ may �°,� u v Q- � r o c'• c u
' o s� o 0 o a`1 0� v ` c-0 o EZ� a 0 � ma Nr
/Y a NaV- a` - >. F'N _O> ;Nc-a V`r
... Z 0 rim c u� a >_ «� EL '6, o a a1 d c' v O•`L
>v g o ° o 6r a u° E 1rY = a oso c c , � o- `h o
O N C C S V Y L a s O. L� Q N O h O a j
a z!l g' 0 3 a =� E � E O
u s o V 3
X d L 'a 0 c 0 •a O N' O c '" � 0 3� W e 'a a1 W C O 0,
' T ~ •4 O m V c y •a O» 'a N = o c
•; > ° N 0 E S� ci` X E c'v o a_.
m�v a o,ar
' aa °' N a � c L D a �caa._c�
r.
no `Z c a gc o amn` r�
O "u-0NNNCLU. aENOeE a �
JU
1
Y
O
6
w
V
m
O
>. -0
0
00 d
y v
co 4, 2 C O yL aQL TO N
a C M p C a E "a C 0 F - , >.
`o ; N 3
N ' - E�rn'�c '"
S M C o • N N CI a^ v D a. 0 02
a oE Ew
uc�,00.�.�rf �•a� ps E
o a f �," -; d o o S.?`u3 a
occa� a N �c "a
N N C O O 0 3 N O a 2 0�
:. y u � g 'o'E >'�
a 'N O
(fN� a pL QO �.OG 0 -6 —
N00 Q• OH VY r
�C O E 01 y p` d O, y -
0 - 2 - 0
Q10 . . G � j C L a
O o h T N 0; 4: d h -E «O
�. >t W > 0 CL L
c.E�3o O e 3 a v'u 3
• \�. � •.ti \ `i ii ; `_' -
IL
i
W
m
O
IL
2
O
OC
t7
Y
a
O
O
W
OC
U
O
O
9
S
F
O
Z
n
Y
O
v
r
Y
ic
O
<
N
i 19
O FO
z 29
6 Z
7
3 ai 3 ar °D V
C ; ` d d •++ 0 0
N L L 'C N •°
o
- °�a ?u yr-
.� y c ar arM
N N > Y
c y O
0 - 0
CI �— T a V Y
o Cr ; -Q
L— o
a �.2 a" c
O c y 9 -on L O
O o�u
Zrn ate= o_v
• c O -0 o
W >
0 O H -O= Y to O
=~C v� N E- a
O c� w os
Z oo 3 RP. -PCB 3
• W
L 'a . -Cc
c `a c a o
c
$ o °
E
o
x
v c �omw 3
M � •- N Q
>^3oo ^u
0.2 ` h u d
h O.Q rQ c
O 0- a
C O C N N O
d L d OY oL_
u O C° C ; D
0 0 0 > -0 3:
NOQOE
a
�C� 3 V - - o
o 'a
O d�c > o c
Y� ° -.ter d
o
Q >L ar prM
-J w >- C 'O
m ono 0 0
-
� �
Me —ya vo,
vdv L =.:�„
-00 c O pr • y�
O 'o - « c d n
aZ°N „ — ° a o o,
L � - N � L �
a C
CI N ..� 'N d • „ • C
V�L ys__oca`
°
V aQc =h (93
u'H o O v ° -Q v w d
v as
c c c d
o`rCr` — E>. — E
cy E d O ov a
d Ma�� O , °"a
a -ham „ oY'v
O O L p r d'
M
c
o
W O ~ d ;
y N ` d Y v
a > Y 4
c or
w°/OaEa.E
r.�
't
l
M
0 c > 0
'O ° aNrnE
E . 0 8 N
�
d L C 0 3
' aF - a`eo
L 0
N
u ai -a r pt u `
C U 0 E
> 3 o a
° c o c° N a
ytL C- Cam°
v o•� o0o .-
C y
h O d �- O Cr Y
o
° N N '� w C V M C
Q"°
o
c u - 5
o o
cy o
-2
4, d> O
u d
0.E= ws N > .z ar
a a — •n .;:
h c
Z 2 -Cc�.2
d.�'Nv1--a rl�°
C
E o `o
° O
N Z
` L
0
o °Qv
C
° d do
ar p u of
u� as
c
Y�v
a
IC CL
O°;
Z C o
d
W 0 c 0
m
O Sc
O a
o�
J
f
x
v
W
m
•O
1
l J
ac E coo
N O u '• � 'j � 6� 'C
2 Y N • a '^
"� �. • 7 L Y r j Y
o
c o c R, c `o,
c rE a o v • � - o `c�
O c v u a 0 2 - N
O v o N d ).a c'c 0 c
d► qua °YYaY
n >
• O
.. - Y a cs E os O
V
• ° ` a o
v E 0 ;
Q w we r >•� c
EY'n o+
Y » a.
Y o. 3o•r a
a °, o ` c� Y o �n Q `�
O c p p�p�.^ a' O Y
W E
J
a.- Y p, O N C` Y c E
Q e ^ y o c Y
^ u a Y 1 a ` a a~ C
aE� »fix° ;O .0 oU
41 - 0 .ca .aE
at.` x d' 1 o c c«
0 0 4+ Y O O a « a. O
�Z «fm_ U o
N Q c
6
D
01
O
Lil
n- Y o, »= e a c »'p`Y Y° »'
C p" O a`rs c� N ° C
' O p Y E — c G u•- Y V
E » ; -ct a 0.
. 4rL o�N o+
Y -, - o� oa c a`F a`e a
W� °Y°E ° E 2 , ,O
p c d > » aZ p „ c .2,c
0 - oa duo
0 . c E-p `` - ero-o % 3
�r «U�. - „ „E
p ,T
„2 -2oo �: C
Y ° a 'o v pp Y c o d o E?° v
O O, O O. a h; c 3 a 0 y
�or «d0 u00 -aN
E
„ a p 't
> - °v c '3 c `o,` E - v o - o
u E c y u c y O O` M
61 .
6 c
e_ Y
Yom Y a3
w ° ° > 0
c 3
'
'N �— F� c
-
3 ` c
-
acaa
pp -O p
TO CN
° a u , o ,E ?
Y '^> X u Y »
u > Y N I
Y `
a
6
02- u o >
a , oar cr
.. o
CL 0
O Y Y E 0 0
i
t
' ( I
8 C u>cT
>'o -0
4n p d 0 Y
o N c ti
dv
N Y h p
6 TO Y
E o`n Em o
O
° c C 0Erud
. 3 51 .2 °
d a1 Y y W
Y N Y L -O .0
C Y
.a O Y C
CL 'o E
- E N
v
Y c Y
p a -
6 Y
W6 : OX O
Y
ui
6
o_
N
1
J
1
l )
M
ri - t o
W
O �
ac E coo
N O u '• � 'j � 6� 'C
2 Y N • a '^
"� �. • 7 L Y r j Y
o
c o c R, c `o,
c rE a o v • � - o `c�
O c v u a 0 2 - N
O v o N d ).a c'c 0 c
d► qua °YYaY
n >
• O
.. - Y a cs E os O
V
• ° ` a o
v E 0 ;
Q w we r >•� c
EY'n o+
Y » a.
Y o. 3o•r a
a °, o ` c� Y o �n Q `�
O c p p�p�.^ a' O Y
W E
J
a.- Y p, O N C` Y c E
Q e ^ y o c Y
^ u a Y 1 a ` a a~ C
aE� »fix° ;O .0 oU
41 - 0 .ca .aE
at.` x d' 1 o c c«
0 0 4+ Y O O a « a. O
�Z «fm_ U o
N Q c
6
D
01
O
Lil
n- Y o, »= e a c »'p`Y Y° »'
C p" O a`rs c� N ° C
' O p Y E — c G u•- Y V
E » ; -ct a 0.
. 4rL o�N o+
Y -, - o� oa c a`F a`e a
W� °Y°E ° E 2 , ,O
p c d > » aZ p „ c .2,c
0 - oa duo
0 . c E-p `` - ero-o % 3
�r «U�. - „ „E
p ,T
„2 -2oo �: C
Y ° a 'o v pp Y c o d o E?° v
O O, O O. a h; c 3 a 0 y
�or «d0 u00 -aN
E
„ a p 't
> - °v c '3 c `o,` E - v o - o
u E c y u c y O O` M
61 .
6 c
e_ Y
Yom Y a3
w ° ° > 0
c 3
'
'N �— F� c
-
3 ` c
-
acaa
pp -O p
TO CN
° a u , o ,E ?
Y '^> X u Y »
u > Y N I
Y `
a
6
02- u o >
a , oar cr
.. o
CL 0
O Y Y E 0 0
i
t
' ( I
8 C u>cT
>'o -0
4n p d 0 Y
o N c ti
dv
N Y h p
6 TO Y
E o`n Em o
O
° c C 0Erud
. 3 51 .2 °
d a1 Y y W
Y N Y L -O .0
C Y
.a O Y C
CL 'o E
- E N
v
Y c Y
p a -
6 Y
W6 : OX O
Y
ui
6
o_
N
1
J
1
l )
N
V
J
W
S
3
i
- Z Z V j 0 •6 r• E g Y Y O C
O z= o clF �0 o r c o ^ � o � y'a
- o o- u o «
�u,o 2 3 `b �L d `o a o+y 3 E sao I?- N c u
c0 Y. w - Et 2s =uf�aj, ooe. K °cc 50 .^a °o,aua
O0a ` N C L E c�� �.� o o ea Nv°c,�$ ° caa „
N— o -0^ u° g' C7 u p o O a� d-
O „ arp - c e 0 on Eac � > AO1.Q « cc d >
-C mc -
O eC= vN0 a - c ur NEN p C N� o
L o E a �i -; o o a .a- u� o o c ro 0 o u p'ncL u a
»�NtE`aa$ ° o ° x=E ^ moo a- = a`o'oE ° o.c- eEy
e -aco o -• $tl = a�v; «o - eu °
oc m o a =c3a• rn w.. rna• o
y . L . :L « —m .� C"f a1 9i .„. 0« V C j am^ y pp C a a — � Y N T w L C
— 0 -
N « -C C. — 3 —.f Y ; O
+ « E $ $ yo�o- c u $ °�� c � c =`o o `o � a » o er>�' cr! c � u °^ � � �.2
a d^ M Y C C N •a. CI •a Y'E ^„ O a C - p — a O„ Q•N p a C .D 6 0 .O C$^
M Y s c Q ,^ c► � e F A 'a „ p OIL C c u`° C! ^ Y c Y ' _a a !. . u«
-0 -';C $._N NL C —C N._ C = ycaa0 �2CO
j ° ao ; v �' E C V— N O Ta w.a C —01. -a 3 a ° c •�,c N= p �• `p a OC9L O
- �a �.n OO Cau p -Y j�YY`C� �'a O Nei CCC ° �_0. O�� E «CCGOI
E = 0 c -- f > E rn L ° p• �,co o Q S • °w - - ° `
F° E z 3 ._ m u «— a a y e u Y= M N a c u c °i « F• E t c = • O „
v L C a r W C u U
r of a N O. y O C „! - V E . - a a 3
v air 0.1 > a p Z p a p a c c ° O o .a._ „^ c 30� �L°-
c — 2 oe -nm a v W »„ -of — =N
I V u Q u 0— wL u o aUl.0 o 2 r
e Q amass �Q N o =S o'„ a,p �" o Im 0 C e, O �oL�3 a v V � o
Co N f O W L C a. r N 2 „ •- d-a „
•c -ate a.= c�� �!' ° a of �-a� o o� a ` r ° ~ e p a > ; �'W o o it o a ` $s'r, a — °
'- — N Z Y a E W ° j. C- ^ C ._ V O f Y .D'o W u Y O T O y
S owc« 'CD » «.°�n� �- u3 u ° ° c ;mom os� ea ° a: -+ ar�av rnum-.
Ii
J_
W
W
Co
r
1
1
°
O `
e
• E ;
..
r• c c � N c �• d�
c 0 .F • -" v y y p V N C
d '- G
a+d'ao�N ��o
E rnd•�
+:E C d J d 7 . Q O .
oa—a
y`c a
c °, L `o o
e 0 a o�Y Cp a
p E O M O d GZ 3 c a •a
L p 0`° T O C W
O d
Hr•L G
c �; o. ' o$ °oo.. e
°T o oNE O °—
N y ;= C �.` N O O d m d 3 �n u
d ai d O .- a O to 3r ;- o N
a N .a Q< d :a c- � 1 0 y>
O >> a a E! d O u a a E d C
M T 3 O O C 'a 6`
d a ` j `? o. C C a E �Ld. C R �) N o
d�.ddNaA �,. o c
' > aL '3 L �, > T O ui'a a y C
T 0- e � ° c o.. a'; E N v
a c d •Z a: •p Im d u a L
E''^ a d d c'"c C 0 —.E
'� C d; e s O O. d 0 a • „ a
a'oZ °o < >
Q,i o0• 0 O .cr»' =-oN3
N
f
x
�! O f h T-O r- m y O
c.
o a °- ° o o 3 - 0 , o
ao o N c c
0
e 0 M C d_ J C L 01 d
o a d
d L > L d c L C a
> W, 0
o r- o d rna+T N E
y M„ O c c o Q rn
d d o• N 5
u N N C; 7 • •C c
a Sd
o Eve`' - a` c3 0 •a,
0 o`oo p 3 `a-,
Et�e�
0 o ;.2 o,„ o+.
N - d E � o ; a•�
d
x T d C y'a N d
v1 u c d - a p 0
�a �•� 0 „s 00
o a rnf Mw
O E O d O c O- O
= d d p- o c c r
Q c rW -0p — a-- 0 m
—° o ; �• c °
N C _ +'
x r o c o c E t-L « -dp
d000• -
O , Im N N 0. -C ; O
x
:! o, ai ai E p
3 — ;M = a
- n E • p O
d t t d L L
u v O <
E •- •-
. O. in > •� C
.=po
d F E
ago o a
C a d 0 o c
a
= 000c «'
Z. o,° E 3O
y o d Ag O
c x
d
E d S�
_ O d
X- c o f u a
as a d . 2 -r-
O .
d
N � « d d >
Q s d o
Z � � c � 0
�-
� L L o d e d
t9< 3f► o a
in
r
O rc 21 Y1L
0
0.0 .-0
0.
N a1 y S C;
d' c o o —
a
u d; r O 0
�n " t �- c
r a c d o =o
d � L c
T� y ,
c
c ` +° C', d o °
p h E O c_
N •3
d
_ o
o
_ Y
X N +
N 01 O
� 0 � c c
Z r o c.Q y.«
Y ur ;-2rc
IL OO�°'�aoa
d- N- on. O E
a
1
O
,Y
C4
•
•
Jill i94
15 ;0^ DOOM -1x3 'Sd'I'3- N3HOi;H ON►'M t�.�ia
jS
EY
O
co i
�3 n6 3p 4 3
�I= I
e
0 0
I
TF
' u m
i ft , _ ( pet ® , r s ki
�ll� L II
;
ila
dd Qd Qd ad mad
N \
O
'
R
y
\
i
/
�!!! �Q
tJ •
iii
•
• •
,
e
0
.o
0
f
y f
f
a
3
II
C
rl
aR
� I
P�
E4
S f
a
®
'
I
I
n
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
>5D:
n3Z
MV1
0
; I
j
o '
>
Lu
Lu
LU
S2
U .
11
O eR
II
16
2 Z! , UJI 41
z
II
'A
H
I
i A W
-1 J
t : 9
ri
9
LML
I
W
I
ch
cr
LL'
LU
.3
W
g : 1
ii ael=
P.
W
I
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 18, 1995
Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad, Matt Ledvina, Joe Scott, Ron Nutting and Jeff
Farmakes
MEMBERS ABSENT: Diane Harberts and Nancy Mancino
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Planner II;
Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II, and Diane Desotelle, Water Resources Coordinator
PUBLIC HEARING:
NORTHSTAR RESTAURANTS, INC. FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 3,000
SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, BOSTON CHICKEN, TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 2,
BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN RETAIL 3RD ADDITION. THE PROPERTY IS
ZONED PUD AND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF WEST 78TH STREET AND POWERS BOULEVARD.
Public Present:
Name Address
Peter Hilger Portfolio Design
John Keogh Northstar Restaurants/Boston Chicken
Chris Lombardi Northstar Restaurants/Boston Chicken
Bob Generous presented the staff repot on this item.
Scott: Good, thank you. Any other comments from staff? Any questions from
commissioners? Okay, would the applicant or their representative choose to make a
presentation? If yes, please step up to the microphone and give us your name and
your address and let us know what you have to say.
Chris Lombardi: Hi. My name is Chris Lombardi. I work with Northstar
Restaurants. I live at 6471... Street in Eden Prairie. I really don't have any formal
presentation for you today. If the Planning Commission, I wanted to be here to
answer any questions that you may have. And also to thank the work of the planner
we've met on a few occasions and I think they did a good job in helping us to direct
some of our original plans and make some changes here. Give ... what you folks are
looking for. And we're looking forward to doing business here in Chanhassen and
'
Planning ommission Meeting - January 18, 1995
g g rY
we're more than happy to take any questions or listen to any comments you folks may
' have.
' Scott: I just have one question. I'm not real familiar with Boston Chicken, and that's
just more of a personal question. Where do you, is this like a national franchise or it
is not a franchise?
Chris Lombardi: Boston Chicken is a national chain. Northstar, we have 534
restaurants nation wide. Northstar Restaurants is the franchisee that has the rights to
Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, and the Dakotas. Our group currently has 12 restaurants
open. We opened our first one here in the Twin Cities in November. We have 5
open to date with a sixth one in the Twin Cities to open Monday. We're looking to
have, when we're done with our build out, approximately 35 units here in the Twin
Cities. It's a restaurant that is serving what's known as a new niche in the restaurant
business. Between a fast food and a casual diner. There's no deep frying or
microwave happening on the premises. Everything is made fresh daily. So we offer a
home meal replacement if you will. 50% of our business is folks taking home their
meals to have at home ... mashed potatoes, gravy, stuffing, creamed spinach... It's a
whole meal replacement that serves...
Scott: Okay. Any questions or comments? Do you have anything else you'd like to
mention?
Chris Lombardi: No.
Scott: Alright. Well thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Could I have a
motion to open the public hearing please?
Nutting moved, Ledvina seconded to open the public healing. All voted in favor- and
the motion carried. The public hearing was opened.
Scott: Would anybody from the public like to speak on this particular item? Let the
record show that we have no one from the general public who would like to speak.
May I have a motion to close the public hearing please.
Conrad moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public healing. All voted in favor and
the motion canied. The public healing was closed.
Scott: Ladd, you restaranteur you.
2
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
Conrad: I'm going to defer some of my questions. I'm curious what other Planning
Commissioners have to say. Bob, could you give me, the roof line you were
concerned with in the staff report. Is the representation in the elevations that I'm
looking at, is that what you have agreed is appropriate?
Generous: Yes, they have revised it to provide a pitched roof element for the
screening portion.
Conrad: Which is in the elevation that I have here?
Generous: Right.
Conrad: I guess the only other thing that would concern me, that I see, is the awning.
I like awnings. I guess I think because of our signage policies in Chan, some of the
specifics on the awning in terms of typography have probably got to go. Specifically
the Meals To Go. That type of wording. Those are my only questions. Just echoing
what I said before on this PUD. I really don't like it. It has nothing to do with this
particular project that we're looking at right now so my comments mean nothing. But
I really don't like how we've strung 3 restaurants together in a PUD. It looks like we,
I really think it's bad planning. But in terms of this specific project, I think I've made
my comments.
Scott: Matt.
Ledvina: Okay. Now as far as the pitched roof element, is this going to be similar to
like Wendy's then? Is that what we're looking at?
Generous: Except for it's not...
Ledvina: I'm sorry.
Generous: It's more like a parapet.
Ledvina: Okay. So it's not closed.
Generous: Not closed.
Ledvina: Okay. Because there's a lot of elevations. I mean that's a relatively low
elevation and Highway 5 is higher. Neighboring, is that Powers? Those are all higher
that I can see that. Just a parapet doesn't actually give you a pitched roof element. I
C
' Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
guess I don't know. I mean I see what you're saying. So essentially, well let me
' understand it. It's about, what is it? It's about 4 -5 feet tall?
Peter Hilgers: I'm Peter Hilgers with Portfolio Design ... how that all ties together color
' wise in terms of computer generated colors... Basically what we have, we don't have
an exact situation as you do with, at Wendy's. I looked at that particular project and
Wendy's is a much narrower building. Narrow and long. This one is almost perfectly
' square. So in order to get an identical image, if you will, this thing would go way up.
Much higher than the building would actually, so it's totally out of proportion. What
' we're proposing to do basically is provide some pitched elements in the center. Not
close out the edge of the parapet but provide that standing seam element all the way
around the building. Approximately I think that's 6, 6 1/2 feet tall.
' Ledvina: Above the parapet...?
' Peter Hilgers: Yes. Yes. Above the parapet line.
Ledvina: Okay.
' Scott: Image number 5, what is the elevation that that is taken from? I mean not
directionally but is that 10 feet above the level of Highway 5? I'm talking about
' picture number 5. Is that someone who is standing 50 feet over the intersection of
Powers and TH 5.
' Peter Hilgers: That's more than 5 feet. Quite a bit more than 5 feet.
Scott: Yeah, okay. But that looks like it's the rendering shows West 78th and the
' other two structures as they're going to be.
Peter Hilgers: Right, exactly.
' Scott: Thank you. That's very helpful.
' Ledvina: We're looking at, is this like a green metal and like a forest green? Is that
what we're getting at?
' Peter Hilgers: I believe it's like a darker color. Not necessarily green. Like a dark
orange.
' Ledvina: Okay. More to match the color scheme of the building.
t 4
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
Peter Hilgers: Right. The building colors are gray. We want to do something that
will tone that down just a bit. We're not proposing red.
Ledvina: Alright. Well, I don't know, maybe somebody else will have more
comments on that. But one of the items in the PUD was that these buildings shall be
designed with similar materials and colors as Target. I'm wondering what, if you
would Bob, if you would comment on what specific elements are tied in with Target
and the colors, etc.
Generous: Well the finish is, the red is probably the only one that is specifically tied
in to the Target building. They have a, what is it sandalwood brown I believe for the
other structure within the development.
Aanenson: I think we were looking at the more neutral tones as far as that and that's
kind of what we did with Taco Bell. Kind of more neutral. As Bob indicated,
sandalwood beige. And the top of the building itself, that parapet, that's a similar
feature that Target put on top of their's.
Generous: And then as another element, that canopy would be similar to what Perkins
is providing. As well they're providing their orientation towards the Perkins building
for the front entryway. And so they... sense of closure right in the middle of this
development. Outside of the building and then we have the landscaping plan
where... proposed to be provided on the Perkins. We're having another row of sugar
maples being provided between Perkins and the Boston Chicken. We're having red
oak put on the western side of the site that will tie into the city's landscape treatment
for the remainder of Outlot A. We did have the Hoisington group review this concept
and they told us yeah, it looks like that's what at least they're working towards.
Ledvina: You mean in terms of the landscaping.
Generous: Yeah, for the Outlot A. The gateway treatment.
Ledvina: Okay. But in terms of the materials and how the buildings look in their
architecture and their shape, was there specific efforts to do that or I mean like Target
has a rough block or whatever.
Peter Hilgers: I think I can clarify that. Basically from this red band down is rock
faced block, which is a pre - colored unit. It doesn't have to be gray. It's a standard
prototype material. And above that point is stucco which goes all the way around the
building. And the stucco is what ... all the way around the top of the building which I
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
believe is consistent with Target as well. They have stucco. So the two primary
materials are rock faced block, stucco and of course glass.
Aanenson: The rock faced block is what Target has.
Ledvina: Right. Okay well I guess, one of the things that we talked about in terms of
a PUD was with this tying things together. I don't know whether that's good or bad or
makes things boring or whatever but I just was wondering what the perspective was on
that. Have we looked at all the pedestrian considerations here in terms of where we
want to move people from the sidewalks and all of this.
Generous: Well they are providing one connection to West 78th Street in the
northeast corner. Internally they would have to use, you know walk across the parking
area but there is ways for people to go from one lot to the other. This lot was sort of
tied with the approval of the first two. The access points and how those are going to
lay out but we believe that it will work together. And of course traffic circulation,
they have extra wide drive aisles between adjacent developments.
Ledvina: I'm a little bit concerned about the signage. I guess the one thing that Ladd
mentioned that makes the description of the products, you know what they're selling.
Rotisserie meals to go. We've had quite a bit of discussion on that type of advertising
and I guess I would be, I would not like to see those specific items presented on that
awning. That's just a comment on that. The monument sign, essentially that's 50
square feet. Is that, does that track with what we, with what the PUD allowed? What
was the specifics on that?
Generous: 80 I think is what is permitted.
Ledvina: 80, is what they could do? Okay. How does it, in comparison to Taco Bell,
how many, do you recall how many square feet Taco Bell had on their monument
sign?
Generous: Not in particular.
Ledvina: I'm just wondering if they're going to be compatible. I know, I guess I see
this and it's further out toward Powers and it's further away from Target Lane and
maybe there's a different effort in terms of the sight lines so maybe that 50 square feet
is not that, won't be that bad but that's still a pretty big, big sign in terms of a
monument. But if you're comfortable with that, I guess that's okay. That's the extent
of my comments at this time.
R
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
Nutting: Question for staff on the, we believe the awning feature provides
architectural relief. However, we are concerned the color scheme may be excessive.
Was the color scheme discussed with the applicant? Did you indicate what you
thought was excessive and was there any discussion on moderating it or is that a more
direction to the Planning Commission who generally thinks most things are excessive.
Generous: It was from previous discussions at the Planning Commission we picked up
on this. They have moderated what was originally proposed and our question is, is it
sufficient for what the city is looking for quality. We did suggest some alternatives
but we left it up to them. It's very important for the applicant that they have these
colors. The color scheme in there.
Nutting: I guess the other issue, getting to the signage. I understand what the other
commissioners are saying. I also don't see, I'm just looking at one picture but I don't
see any window signs on this. I don't know if that's part and parcel of the way Boston
Chicken typically.
Aanenson: We...take them out.
Nutting: I'm sorry.
Aanenson: There was some in there.
Generous: They took them out.
Chris Lombardi: We'll be happy to put them back in.
Nutting: I maybe have less of an aversion to the awning signage. I know that's an
issue that we've gone back and forth on where the banding signage. I haven't heard
anybody address the square footage issue...
Aanenson: Just for your clarification, when this originally came in, it did have the
window signs and as Bob indicated, had a significant larger band wrapped around it
and they moved as far as they felt they could. They've got their franchise that they,
you know this is the same discussion we had with Taco Bell. So I guess we're saying,
it may be too loud still for the Highway 5 standards and we're kind of looking for
your direction as to what you feel is the standard. But I do want to apply to that. But
they have moved quite a ways as far as what they originally came in with in trying to
meet what we're, what direction we're giving them.
7
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
Chris Lombardi: I think it's important to note, if I might add, that the striped awnings
' are a very definite... That's an essential component of the trade...
Peter Hilgers: Staff mentioned the concerns and for lack of a better term, warned us
' that this would be an item of discussion this evening. The color scheme of the awning
to us is really vitally important, particularly at this stage of our growth and I realize
that that means a lot more to me than it does to you. You know we're trying to create
' a design pattern that will be recognizable to customers without being you know, our
building is a fairly simple building. It's retail in nature. There's nothing real
individual about the building. It's basically a square retail building and what we feel
internally is that the awnings provides a little bit of the older fashion deli or market
kind of an atmosphere and look to the building. So the color scheme really becomes
' real important to us. We did have, you know in our prototype drawings have a lot
more lineal square feet wrapped all the way around. I can understand your concern
but we said, you know what we'd like to do is back off of that presence but maintain
' our color scheme because that's real important to us but we want to work with you
guys to be consistent with what you're trying to achieve so this is the result of those
talks.
' Chris Lombardi: Also the awnings were, your standard prototype are back lit awnings.
These are not back lit. Your standard prototype for across the country is that those
' awnings are illuminated internally so they are lit at night as well as part of that... That
was one of the concessions we made as well.
Nutting: Okay. Appreciate your comments. I don't have any other issues at this time.
Scott: Okay, Jeff.
' Farmakes: The exterior lighting, are these going to be neutral poles or are you going
to continue with the red? Parking lighting.
' Generous: The parking lighting?
' Farmakes: The parking lighting that became sort of an add on to Target.
Generous: I didn't specify that. What color they were supposed to be. The only color
' that they did give me was for the goose neck lighting on the building itself.
Farmakes: The reason ... the Target decided to do red ... They decide to do red and
Perkins decides to do green and the Taco Bell decides to do magenta. Maybe you
1 8
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
wind up with something a little silly there. We may want to look at what those are
going to be. I would prefer that they be neutral and that we not carry on your color
schemes with outdoor lighting. But I believe the majority of outdoor lighting in
parking in Chanhassen is a neutral. I was surprised, actually the direction of the
building is quite buffered from the distance and the size that it would be. It's actually
facing towards the highway and not facing towards 78th or Powers Boulevard where
the traffic that would be going 25 -35 mph. It seems to be the view primarily from the
western direction and pretty low impact at a distance. I can see where they want the
awning. This has been defined here as some of the subjects that we talked about in
this type of addition to a building. And the reason I keep on bringing it up is not to
penalize or be punitive to the retailer but to bring up the point that this is a necessity
for them. They feel it's a necessity. In this case you have a building that's trying to
be seen from quite a distance. We're talking about rear lighting these awnings. These
things are not architectural elements, as the applicant says here. And we had, I
believe at a previous meeting we had somebody standing up from the Chamber saying,
hey they're architecture. Who's to say what it is. I think we ought to call it what it is
and define it. That doesn't mean to exclude it, but just to moderate it so that we don't
get a situation where we just have a box and then we say, we would like to see some
detailing. Oh, okay. We'll put an awning around it and we'll back light it. It's really
a sign but we'll put it on an architectural detail. ...we have something that's like this
when we don't moderate it. Fielder's choice. We get into a situation what guidelines
do we use. We're not even sure at this point whether it's a sign or not. I think in this
case it's probably appropriate but I'm trying to recall what types of conditions were put
on Perkins which typically also uses awnings situations and I cannot.
Aanenson: It couldn't be backlit.
Farmakes: Yeah. It couldn't be backlit. I was wondering, I missed, I wasn't here at
that meeting, the Perkins and I was just wondering this is, the situation that you
negotiated here is consistent with what was done with the other restaurant, correct?
Generous: I believe so, yes.
Farmakes: Okay. I look at the buildings and I look at it as a description. It's for
retail and basically a box. What I would like to see or try to add on to would be any
type of detailing, the ridge line of the roof, possibly the edges of the building. I think
that the awning situation, as long as it's not rear lit defines it more as an architectural
item than a sign, i.e. Blockbusters or some of the Wendy's operations. Not our's but
some of the other ones. I think that definitively makes it a sign. In this case I don't
see that. I would like to see just as a matter of consistency the additional type. To
E
I Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
begin with, this wouldn't be drive by type that would be readable from the highway.
' It's too far away so I see that as a minor concession. If somebody traversing the
parking lot in this situation, if they decided to go by your establishment so I don't see
that as being a heavily punitive thing there. That will be consistent with what we've
' asked other retailers to do. I'm not sure, the roof element is metal, is that correct?
Peter Hilgers: Yes, standing seam metal.
' Farmakes: Yeah. And that would be a black.
' Peter Hilgers: Like a dark brown. We have other dark brown colors on the building.
' Farmakes: Okay, so this would match some of the edge trim that you're doing around
the windows?
' Peter Hilgers: Around the windows, exactly.
Farmakes: The photograph that you provided shows the edging in white and only the
' center line in red. Does that change from store to store when you're talking about
prototypes? There are other established stores, from reading your perspectus. Is that?
' Peter Hilgers: Yes. As a matter of fact there was, one of the most recent stores, it
has changed somewhat. But one of the more recent stores that was done in ... the red
up on the top, the White Bear Lake store for instance has that. That can go white.
' That's not a huge issue to us.
Farmakes: ...consideration, and it might be nicer looking if something with that, the
' roof is continually flat, it might be nicer looking to provide some detail in there. On
that soffit area. I'm not sure if just making it wider or making it more substantial or
something.
' Peter Hilgers: It is a, it's not a single dimension on that. It's a parapet cap. It is
actually built element.
' Farmakes: Yeah, I can see that. It's sort of like two ridges but it's a minor.
Peter Hilgers: Right. It does provide minor shadowing.
Ledvina: Jeff, are you suggesting eliminating the red and going with a white?
1 10
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
Farmakes: I'll throw that out. A little bit more is built out, a bit more definition so
that, basically the building doesn't have a roof. It's another square, linear building and
the detailing that they're providing is for the fast food area and the entrance area.
They're building that out. Otherwise it's essentially a square with a flat roof again.
When we talk detailing, they add on the interior lighting or the awning and I'm just
looking for something maybe more architectural in detailing. For instance in Byerly's
we asked for some of the capping. It's different with the ... existing brick or something
other than the box. Like I say, in that particular area there's one provided a significant
additional cost to the retailers and trying to communicate some of the issues that we
talk about in detailing. And that they aren't always awnings. Actually I think the
signage is moderate to the ... that they have, based on how they positioned their
building. I'm assuming that the drive by situation will not be large enough. That it
has additional properties where it can be viewed from the street. The drive by menu
will not have the same kind of rules and regs that we have at the other drive by at
Wendy's?
Peter Hilgers: What rule are you referring to?
Farmakes: Is there a drive by menu that I'm not seeing?
Peter Hilgers: Oh the menu board and it's located right here. You can see that right
by the building.
Farmakes: Yeah, I didn't see a signage sketch of that so my response is that sizing of
that board, it's not to be read from the street in other words.
Peter Hilgers: No. The letter is an inch and a half high or something.
Farmakes: So it's just for the line of cars that's there.
Peter Hilgers: And there's also, we did the landscaping around the perimeter to try to
hide that as well. I think if you look at the landscape plan, we ... the landscaping in
this area here so that from Powers we're really looking to hide that. Quite frankly the
reason we didn't provide you with that is that we don't have the drive thru signage yet.
Our first one is opening on Monday and it's brand new to our...
Aanenson: Also Jeff, there is a change in elevation too. The building sits lower than
West 78th right there too so some of that will be recessed.
11
1
I Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
Farmakes: It's your thinking that because of the elevation that the equipment on the
' roof area isn't going to be seen primarily like it is here where you can see down into
it?
I I
�I
Peter Hilgers: Precisely.
Farmakes: Will that be up high enough?
Generous: That will be pretty close. I believe when we looked at it previously, from
the highest point on Highway 5, you might be able to see the tops of some of the
equipment. But from the majority of the area you won't be able to.
Farmakes: Well obviously from this side...
Peter Hilgers: I think we can provide, in the city submittal we provided a cross
section of the building showing the mechanical equipment and the screened...
Farmakes: Getting back to Ladd's comments about the PUD issue and, it was my
understanding at one time early on, that's going back what, 2 years now with Target.
That there was additional retail conceived for this area and 3 restaurants. What
happened to that?
Aanenson: Well when we looked at this originally, when it came in with the Target
proposal and the city was looking at how this should be proposed. The original
development plan showed a possibility of 6 users on this site. When we got down to
putting the PUD agreement together, we specified no more than 2 fast foods be
located on this site. And then we gave a list, a laundry list of other appropriate uses
in the PUD. As it came out we felt like based on the impervious surface, because
Target went over, that probably only four uses could fit on this site. As things
evolved and we got looking at it, we really felt in order to do justice, because this is a
gateway into the city, that we felt that the city should be in a position to probably not
sell as much of the property and hold some of it into a gateway so what we ended up
doing was only creating 3 lots. But there was a possibility of 6 when we originally
looked at it. I think what Ladd may be talking about, there was a couple of proposal
where we had all the buildings in a line. Some different configurations that we looked
at. I think some of that got, because Target wanted to maintain view corridors and the
like, and so it kind of ended up with the utility lines that went through there, there's a
fiber optic line that goes through there. It ended up putting footprints in certain
locations. There wasn't a lot of flexibility with some of those. But there was some
creative designs with how that could be laid out in a different, than the traditional way
12
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
of being split up now. I think that's what your comments were about some of the
Barton - Aschman drawings. There were some other creative designs.
Conrad: A little bit. I think if you look, there's been a lot of give and take and a lot
of changes in what this was going to look like, and overall because of the green space,
I think Chanhassen is making this part of the city acceptable. But if you take a look
at this footprint on the cover here, and of the three, and then you read one of our
criteria that says an internal sense of order for the buildings and use on this site and
provisions of desirable elements for occupants, visitors and general community. You
look at that and then you take a look at this, it's just hard for me to accept that. It's
not true. It's not true. But then you know as the commission agrees, there's a lot of
good things happening here.
Aanenson: I think that discussion came up too ... the walkway through the middle of
the parking lot and you end up fighting a lot of traditional things that they worry about
with carts and the like. But there is a walkway going up to West 78th. It doesn't
show up on, maybe you didn't see it but we did ask them and it is provided on the site
plan that you can walk directly from this site up onto West 78th. You don't have to
go all the way down to the service road that comes in. So we are trying to create
those pedestrian linkages. But you're right, this split the traditional way.
Farmakes: I'm going to close my comments off by, when we were talking about
garish colors. These are primarily as they'll be seen from the street are black and
white. Which will be absent of color. I don't consider that to be garish although in
all fairness... applicant and the commission, we haven't defined that particular item yet.
We discussed that earlier. I think it has to be, we've decided to define that outside of
the sign ordinance and backing up again and looking at that, just to be consistent...I
think what we're looking at is we don't want to wind up with boxes with signs
plastered on them that are... What we're looking for in essence is, we feel we have a
community a cut above and we're trying to get building a cut above what's established
here. And I think by putting up boxes and putting a couple of items that really don't
do anything, and letting them slide ... Retail can be nicer. It can be middle of the road
or it could be bad. The way this is laid out, it's fairly sophisticated. I don't think that
it's, garish would qualify. I'll leave it at that point.
Scott: Good. I don't have any additional comments so if someone would like to make
a motion, I'd be happy to accept it.
Ledvina: Well I would make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend to
the City Council approval of Site Plan #94 -8 for Boston Chicken as shown on the
13
' Planning Commission Meeting - Janua ry 18, 1995
plans dated January 11, 1995, subject to the conditions in the staff report. With an
' additional condition number 16 which states that the advertisement that's laid out on
the awning shall be deleted.
' Scott: So you want to have a condition in there that the parking lighting poles be a
neutral color?
' Ledvina: Yes.
' Scott: Do you accept that?
Ledvina: Yes. A 17th condition that the parking lot lighting poles have a neutral
' color scheme associated with them.
Scott: Can I have a second?
' Nutting: Second.
' Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we accept the city staffs recommendation
with 2 additional conditions. Is there any discussion?
' Ledvina moved, Nutting seconded that the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council approve Site Plan 494 -8 for Boston Chicken as shown on the plans dated
January 11, 1995, subject to the following conditions:
' 1. Relocate fire hydrant approximately 90 feet south and 22 feet east.
' 2. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint yellow the corresponding curb.
Contact the Fire Marshal for specific location. See Policy #06 -1991. Copy
Enclosed.
1
Address numbers shall be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department Fire
Prevention Policy #29 -1992. Copy Enclosed.
4. All internal streets and drives within the overall development are considered
private and shall be maintained as such. The developer shall provide cross
access easements for the use of the common driveways.
14
Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
5. The applicant shall install aeration /irrigation tubing, see Figure 11 -2, if separate
irrigation is provided, or 11 -3, if separate irrigation is not provided, in each
peninsular or island type landscape area less than 10 feet in width.
6. The applicant shall be responsible for providing irrigation to any development
trees located in the outlot. Such irrigation piping shall be located entirely on Lot
2.
7. The applicant shall supply the city with a $2,500.00 financial guarantee (letter of
credit or cash escrow) to guarantee protection of the existing public utility
facilities and guarantee boulevard restoration. The applicant shall supply the city
with a $8,000.00 financial guarantee (letter of credit or cash escrow) to guarantee
a minimum landscaping budget for the project.
8. All internal streets and drives are considered private. The applicant should be
aware that they will need to enter into a cross access easement for the use of the
common driveways with the other two property owners.
9. All proposed utility lines within the site are considered private and shall be
maintained as such. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining all of the
necessary agency permits associated with the site plan development including but
not limited to the Watershed District, Health Department, PCA, and MWCC.
10. Construction access to the site shall be from the existing Target driveway and not
West 78th Street or Powers Boulevard. The applicant and/or contractor shall
install and maintain a gravel construction entrance until the access driveway is
paved with a bituminous surface.
11. Landscaping materials may be planted within the city's outlot as long as the
plantings do not interfere with maintenance of the existing utility lines. The
applicant shall provide a revised landscaping plan showing the existing utilities in
relation to the proposed landscaping materials.
12. Site plan approval is contingent upon the recording of the final plat documents
for Chanhassen Retail 2nd and 3rd Additions.
13. The grading and drainage plan should be revised to be compatible with the
overall site grading development plans for Chanhassen Retail 3rd Addition.
Detailed storm drainage calculations for a 10 year storm event shall be submitted
for review and approval by city staff.
15
I Planning Commission Meeting - January 18, 1995
1
14. The development shall enter into a site development contract with the city and
' provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms
of approval.
0
C
15. If permitted by the electrical code, the electric meter box on the north elevation
shall be lowered by two feet.
16. The applicant shall delete the advertisements on the awnings.
17. The color scheme for the parting lot light poles shall be of neutral colors.
All voted in favor, except Comad who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of
4 to 1.
Scott: And your reasons?
Conrad: I don't like the roof lines. I think it really does, it doesn't meet the standards
that we've had for past projects. It still looks, it looks very squarish building. A flat
roof building to me, even though there's been some good attempts to try to hide the
mechanicals. It's not up to the standards that I thought we were setting.
Farmakes: Do you envision add on's or a redesign?
Conrad: It doesn't need to be redesigned. It's close but it looks like we're just
covering up the mechanicals Jeff. My perception. And that's not what we're trying to
do. We're trying to make the buildings look a little bit different other than flat top
buildings. They have some little bit different problem here because of the
squarishness of the restaurant but I think they could solve it pretty easily.
Scott: Okay, thank you. This goes to City Council on the 13th of February.
Generous: February 13th.
Scott: Thank you for coming in.
16
0
i�
0