5. Site Plan for West Villager Center PC DATE: 12/1/93
....5'
1 C T Y F
CO NTINUE D: 12 /4193 r
� � , CHAH
CASE #: 93 -7 Site Plan
93 -1 CUP
1
STAFF REPORT
1 .
1 PROPOSAL: Site plan approval for a commercial development consisting of a 64,132 square foot
Byerly's, a 35,700 square foot retail center, and a separate 7,000 square foot
commercial/office building; and conditional use permit approval pursuant to Section 20-
' 902 to permit the grouping of buildings on a single building lot. The project is named
Z West Village Center. 1 By pt, mougstrita!
•
< LOCATION: Northwest corner of Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street. %
I CO Lot 4 and part of Lot 3, Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition t
..= ....--
1 0. APPLICANT: T. F. James Company (612) 828 -9000 j Submitted to Commission
6640 Shady Oak Road
Cl. Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Submitted to Council
i
I •
PRESENT ZONING: General Business, BG
1 ACREAGE: 13.11 Acres
INTENSITY: Floor Area Ratio 0.19
II ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - R -12, High Density Residential, Proposed Oak Pond
Townhouses and West Village Townhouses
I S - BG, General Business; Target Store; West 78th Street
E - 01, Office & Institutional; City Hall; Kerber Boulevard
Q W - BG, General Business, vacant lots; Powers Boulevard
1 ~ WATER AND SEWER: Available
• Li
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
W The site is being graded pursuant to Interim Use Permit #93 -2. This grading will create a gradual slope from the
northeast to the south and west. A steep slope (212 : 1) approximately 50 feet in depth separates this property
1 (n from the properties to the north. The project is bordered on the east and south by collector roadways. An
abandoned farmstead exists on the eastern third of the site.
1 , 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
•
1
1 West Village Center
November 23, 1993
' Update December 7, 1993
Page 2
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
1 The site is located at the northwest corner of West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard and has
an area of approximately 13.11 acres. This lot is one of four platted lots on Block 1, West
Village Heights 2nd Addition. The development consists of a 64,132 square foot Byerly's, an
1 attached 35,700 square foot commercial/office center, and a detached 7,000 square foot
building anticipated to be leased to a service -type company with primarily office uses. The
total development consists of 106,832 square feet of building which represents 19 percent of
the total site area. Thirty percent of the site will be open space including landscaped buffers,
perimeter landscaped areas, interior parking lot landscaping, and an open area west of the
retail center. Entrance boulevards are provided from West 78th Street into the site. These
' boulevards separate the parking area from the heavy traffic areas. A separate truck entrance
is provided to the rear of the site away from the pedestrian and parking areas. Pedestrian
areas and small "gathering places" are provided along the entire length of the center.
The overall design and architectural theme for the development is established by Byerly's and
' consists of brick exterior walls with "classical" uses of arches, arcades, barrow vaults, radius
windows, recessed areas, and varied building facades. Soldier courses will accent all vaults,
recesses, and arches. The applicant proposes to incorporate design references to the
' Chanhassen gateway monuments and towers to integrate this project as part of the downtown
area. The development embodies many of the design elements specified in the Highway 5
Corridor Study including a well designed and varied building facade, appropriate building
' scale and proportion, harmonious colors and building accents, appropriate screening, screening
of mechanical equipment located on the roof, and the use of high quality building materials.
' This site serves as an gateway for people entering the central business district from the north. .
As such, its aesthetic and architectural features are an important component of the image the
city wants to create for the downtown. This corner serves as one of four significant corners
' in the downtown area, and it is important that an anchor for the development be of a high
quality, and have an exceptional design. In designing the project, the applicant has
incorporated design references to the Chanhassen gateway monuments and towers;
' specifically, the clock tower incorporated in the retail section of the main building and the use
of arches in the facade design. The brick exterior is compatible with buildings within the
immediate area, such as City Hall, the Fire Station, and the Chanhassen Bank. In the
1 developments relationship to City Hall, the applicant has held discussions with the city
regarding the potential use of Lots 1 through 3, Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition.
Lot 3 is being discussed as an expanded post office location. Lots 1 and 2 are being
1 discussed for a potential senior housing development. Included in the packet is a preliminary
conceptual plan for how these elements would fit into the design of this project. This project
1
1
West Village Center
1
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 3
is within the Downtown Redevelopment District and the applicant has approached the HRA
requesting tax increment funding revenues.
Access to the site is provided via two collector roadways, West 78th Street and Kerber
Boulevard. West 78th Street has recently been realigned and expanded to a four -lane cross
section. Curb cuts have been established as part of the reconstruction of West 78th Street and
are being utilized for the project entrances. A total of five driveways are provided to the site
as discussed under the access /parking section of this report. Drainage for the site is provided
through the city's storm drainage system; therefore, no on -site pretreatment is required of the
development. However, the developer has been assessed for his share of these improvements.
The proposed final grading of the site suggests raising the building pad for the detached
commercial/office building approximately 10 to 15 feet higher than the existing ground
elevation. This will result in the first floor elevation of the building being 18 feet higher than
the intersection at West 78th Street directly to the west. Staff is concerned about this
elevation and is proposing that the building pad be lowered.
The landscaping plan submitted, while generally meeting code requirements, was only
preliminary in nature. Staff has enlisted the advice of a registered landscape architect, .
Michael Schroeder, to review the landscape plan and provide appropriate recommendations to
enhance this development. Staff has included these recommendations as part of the
1
conditions of approval.
Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit and site plan for the West
1
Village Center with the condition that the landscaping plan be revised to include landscape
massing, perimeter and boulevard median shrubs, the use of alternate ground cover for the
steep slopes to the north, and interior parking lot landscape islands. The open area west of
the retail center shall be provided with picnic tables and benches to enhance the enjoyment
opportunity of site visitors and workers. The grading and building elevation shall be reduced
by a minimum of five (5) feet for the detached commercial/office building in order to be less
significantly elevated from the roadway and to improve site lines and development massing.
Finally, a sidewalk shall be required to connect the retail center to West 78th Street along the
western access boulevard into the site.
BACKGROUND
1
In November 1986, this property was approved as part of a mixed use subdivision (West
Village Heights 2nd Addition) including five commercial lots, one multi- family lot, and the
realigned right -of -way for West 78th Street. In addition, this property was rezoned from R-
la, Agricultural Residence, to C -3, Service Commercial. In 1987, the lot was rezoned to BG,
General Business District, as part of the revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. Prior to the
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 4
redevelopment of the downtown and the finalization of the West 78th alignment, the western
portion of Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition was rough graded in anticipation of a
' PDQ center. This center and other commercial uses were never built, although all of the
residential acreage north of the project has either been developed or is currently being built
out. The West 78th Street alignment was modified and a revised road section employed
concurrent with the approval of Target. Roadway improvements are nearing completion.
On November 8, 1993, the Council approved an Interim Use Permit #93 -2, permitting the
' rough grading of the site in preparation for the commercial development of the property.
FINDINGS
In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the developments
' 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;
' Finding: The property is designated for commercial development in the
City of Chanhassen 2000 Land Use Plan. Development of the site helps to
achieve a mixture of land uses which will assure a high quality of life and
a reliable tax base. This development is located at the fringe of the central
business district and promotes the economical and efficient infill
development of the community.
(2) Consistency with this division;
1 Finding: The proposal is consistent with the requirements of City Code.
(3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by
' minimizing tree and soil removal, and designing grade changes to be in
keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or
developing areas;
'
Finding: Except for the trees immediately surrounding the farmstead,
P Y g ,
there are no significant natural features present on the site worth
preserving. The proposed development should make the site more
aesthetically pleasing as well as being compatible with the commercial
corridor developing along West 78th Street. The steep grade separation to
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993 1
Page 5
the north and the proposed landscaping of the site should minimize off -site 1
impacts of the development.
(4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural 1
site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship
to the development; 1
Finding: The proposed development logically and efficiently utilizes the
site to accommodate buildings, open spaces, and vehicular circulation and 1
parking. The layout of the development should effectively match any
future commercial development to the east. The steep slope and extensive
landscaping along the perimeter of the site provides a transitional buffer 1
to other uses and developments.
(5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, 1
with special attention to the following:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site, and 1
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community; i
Finding: The site design provides an internal sense of order and place by
creating vistas and entrance ways to the interior of the site. Pedestrian ,
ways, landscaping, and architectural features provide a pleasing
environment for users of the site.
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; 1
Finding: Open spaces are provided internally and around the perimeter of
the site. The development complies with city standards for the provision
of non - impervious surfaces.
c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression 1
of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent
and neighboring structures and uses; 1
Finding: The brick exterior with its many architectural details provides a
conservative yet comfortable sense of place. The extensive use of 1
landscaping, walkways and the interplay of height and building lines create
an inviting identity for the site.
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 6
111 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.
Finding: The two main entrances into the site from West 78th Street
provide a feeling of arrival through the use of internal, treed boulevards
' separating parking areas from access isles. The three customer driveways
and the shared access with lot 3 along with a separate truck entrance
provide sufficient and convenient access to the project. Pedestrian access
is provided to the site from Kerber Boulevard and internal walkways and
small plazas are provided immediately adjacent to the building.
(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 site is serviced by the recently completed drainage
improvements on West 78th Street. The steep grade separation to the
north should maintain some of the views for the multi - family development.
Extensive perimeter landscaping including tiered and massed trees provide
natural buffering around the site.
' When approving a conditional use permit, the City must determine the capability of a
proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the
conditional use Section 20 -232, include the following 12 items:
1 1. Will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience
or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
Finding: The proposed development is located in a planned commercial area
serviced with urban infrastructure and shall not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, comfort, convenience or welfare of the community. The
development enhances the appearance and convenience of community residents
through the provision of shopping and employment opportunities.
2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this
chapter.
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 7
Finding: The site is designated for commercial use and is located in the
�
commercial center of the City. This development proposes an upscale, quality
shopping center for community residents. This development will enhance the
City's tax base. The steep slope and extensive landscaping provide a transition to
the multi - family development to the north.
3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in
appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not
change the essential character of that area.
Finding: The proposed development provides a varied and well designed
appearance and it is consistent with the existing and proposed development in the
area. The character of the area is commercial and is the commercial core of the
community. This development will provide a quality addition to the downtown. 1
4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses.
Finding: The development is located in the central business area and is consistent 1
with existing and proposed development in the area. A transition to the multi-
family to the north is provided by a landscaping and sloped buffer area. 1
5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer
systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services
provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed
use. 1
Finding: This development is located in the commercial center of the city and is
served by adequate urban infrastructure and services. 1
6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be
detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
1
Finding: The development of the site as a commercial use has been anticipated
and planned by the city in the design and construction of public improvements.
In modeling of West 78th Street traffic, it was estimated that the West Village
Heights 2nd subdivision would have approximately 125,000 square feet of
commercial uses as well as office uses. This development is well below this
estimate and will permit additional commercial development on the remainder of
1
1
I
I West Village Center
November 23, 1993
1 Update December 7, 1993
Page 8
the ro i s. The commercial '
p pert e e co mercial development of the site will improve the city's
economic welfare as well as provide for the convenience and comfort of residents.
I 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of
operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare
1 because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents,
or trash.
i Finding: With the appropriate controls and conditions, as recommended by staff,
the development of the site will have minimal impacts to persons, property, and
the general welfare of the community. This area has been planned and designed
1
as the commercial center of the city.
1 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion
or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
I Finding: With three main entrances, a fourth shared entrance and a separate
truck entrance, the development provides ample opportunity to adequately move
traffic. The development of the site as a commercial use has been anticipated and
I planned by the city in the design and construction of public improvements. In
modeling of West 78th Street traffic, it was estimated that the West Village
Heights 2nd subdivision would have approximately 125,000 square feet of
I commercial uses as well as office uses. This development is well below this
estimate and will permit additional commercial development on the remainder of
the properties. Appropriate traffic controls will be employed for the
1 development. .
9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or
1 historic features of major significance.
Finding: There are no significant natural, scenic, or historic features present on
I the site.
10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
I Finding: The brick exterior with its many architectural details provides a
conservative yet comfortable sense of place. The extensive use of landscaping,
1 walkways and the interplay of height and building lines create an inviting
identity for the site. Perimeter and internal landscaping will provide a softening
of the commercial aspects of the development.
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993 1
Page 9
11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
Finding: This area is planned and zoned for commercial development. 1
Surrounding property values should be enhanced with the completion of this
development.
12. Will meet standards rescribed for certain uses as provided in this article.
P P
Finding: The developer has complied with all requirements of City Code and will
comply with any conditions of the development approved by the city.
COMPLIANCE TABLE GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
1
Ordinance West Village Center
Building Height 3 story/40 ft 2 story/40 ft
Building Setback N -50', E -25' N -85', E -115' 1
S -25', W -10' S -42', W -60'
Parking Stalls 532 542 ,
Parking Setback N -50', E -25' N -50', E -25' '
S -25', W -0' S -25', W -75'
Hard Surface Coverage 70 percent 70 percent '
Interior Parking Lot
Landscaping 8 percent 8.5 percent 1
Lot Area 20,000 sq. ft. 13.11 acres
Variances Required NA None
GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE ,
The site is located at the northwest corner of West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard and has
an area of approximately 13.11 acres. The development consists of a 64,132 square foot 1
Byerly's, an attached 35,700 square foot commercial/office center, and a detached 7,000
square foot building anticipated to be leased to a service -type company. The total
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 10
1 development consists of 106,832 square feet of building which represents 19 percent of the
total site area. Thirty percent of the site will be open space including landscaped buffers,
' perimeter landscaped areas, interior parking lot landscaping, and an open area west of the
retail center. Entrance boulevards are provided from West 78th Street into the site. These
boulevards separate the parking area from the heavy traffic areas. A separate truck entrance
is provided to the rear of the site away from the pedestrian and parking areas. Pedestrian
areas and small "gathering places" are provided along the entire length of the center.
' The overall design and architectural theme for the development is established by Byerly's and
consists of brick exterior walls with "classical" uses of arches, arcades, barrow vaults, radius
windows, recessed areas, and varied building facades. Soldier courses will accent all vaults,
1 recesses, and arches. The applicant proposes to incorporate design references to the
Chanhassen gateway monuments and towers to integrate this project as part of the downtown
area.
' ACCESS/PARKING
1 The entire site proposes five access locations, three existing off of West 78th Street, and two
new ones off of Kerber Boulevard. Information from a traffic review completed by Strgar-
Roscoe - Fausch (SRF) dated November 18, 1993, indicated that the proposed development is
consistent with the land use assumed for this area in there most recent traffic forecasts and
therefore should not represent a significant increase in traffic impacts to the subject area. The
1 recent roadway improvements made to West 78th Street should accommodate this
development proposal.
The site plan proposes a parking area where vehicles would be required to back out into the .
main circulation aisle, particularly in front of the retail space west of the supermarket. This is
not a desirable condition. These fourteen stalls should be removed.
1 The city assumes that the developer will also be furnishing and installing the appropriate
traffic control signs and pavement markings throughout the site. Stops signs and stop bars
1 should be provided at each exit onto a public right -of -way.
In the future, Coulter Drive may be closed or relocated in conjunction with future City Hall
expansion. The northerly access on Kerber Boulevard would most likely line up with future
proposed street alignment to City Hall. The proposed turning radii at each driveway access
along Kerber Boulevard, in staffs' mind, appears to be too narrow (15 feet). The turning
1 radius along Kerber Boulevard is recommended to be a minimum of 20 feet. To
accommodate large semi - trailer combinations, the turning radius for the service drive around
1
1
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 11
the building in the northwest corner of the site should be expanded to account for a 50 -foot
wheelbase.
The parking lot is proposed to be graded in a southwesterly direction. The parking lot grade
is approximately 4 %. This is the maximum grade that city staff recommends.
Access to the site is provided from West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard. Both streets are
shown as collector streets on the City's Comprehensive Plan. The driveways on West 78th
Street were established as part of the road widening and realignment project. The most
easterly driveway shall permit only right in/right out turning movements. The second
driveway is aligned with a median opening on West 78th Street and will be signalized when
traffic warrants are met. The conduit for the signalization is already in place for this light. A
shared access with Lot 3, Block 1 is proposed at the existing signalized intersection which
services the Target Center. An access easement between these two lots will need to be
recorded. Additional access is provided from Kerber Boulevard. A truck access is provided
in the northeast corner of the site providing separate access to the loading and docking areas.
A customer access is provided directly in front of the buildings via Kerber Boulevard. 1
Access aisle boulevards are utilized to separate heavy traffic areas from the main parking
areas. Four distinct parking areas are provided including an employee parking area east of
Byerly's, two customer parking areas to the south of the building, and a separate self -
contained area for the outbuildings.
UTILITIES 1
Municipal water service for the site is proposed to be extended from an existing 18 -inch 1
watermain located along the west side of Kerber Boulevard via a 6 -inch waterline through the
site and reconnect to the existing 18 -inch watermain along West 78th Street. It is assumed
that the utilities within the subject property will be owned and privately maintained. Fire
hydrant spacing and location requirements shall be determined by review of the City's fire
marshal. Since these improvements will be private, the City's Building Department will be
performing the necessary plan and specification review as well as inspections. The applicant
will be responsible for applying for and obtaining the necessary building permits through the
City's Building Department.
Sanitary sewer service to the site is proposed to be constructed along the southerly side of the
main building and the proposed retail office space. The main building will connect a 6 -inch
sanitary sewer to an 8 -inch sanitary sewer on site. The 8 -inch sanitary sewer will then be
connected to the city's existing 8 -inch sanitary sewer at the southeast comer of the site
adjacent to Kerber Boulevard. The retail office space will connect a 6 -inch sanitary sewer to
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
1 Page 12
1 the city's existing 8 -inch at the southwest corner of the site on West 78th Street. This line is
anticipated to serve only the proposed site. Therefore, as with the waterlines, it is assumed
that these utilities will be privately owned and maintained.
1 The applicant is proposing earthberms and landscaping along Kerber Boulevard over the
City's sanitary sewer. Staff recommends that the applicant be required to enter into an
encroachment agreement with the city to indemnify and hold the city harmless from any
damages caused to the property including landscaping as a result of performing necessary
maintenance on the utility lines. In addition, these berms will result in adjusting the sanitary
1 manholes which the applicant should also be responsible for.
LANDSCAPING
' The applicant meets or exceeds the minimum standards for landscaping quantity for trees.
Approximately 30 percent of the site is reserved for open space and landscaping. The parking
1 lot area contains approximately 8.5 percent landscaped areas. However, the uniform spacing
does not account for boulevard plantings completed or planned around the perimeter of the
site that are being done by others; nor does the landscaping design provide sufficient interior
1 parking lot landscaping; nor is perimeter low level screening provided in the form of shrubs
or bushes; nor are tree massings or groupings included to provide definition and character to
the development. Staff is proposing that the landscaping plan be revised to incorporate the
1 massing of plant materials in appropriate locations throughout the site to add to the visual and
aesthetic quality of the development. To this end, the city has contracted with Michael
Schroeder, RLA, of the Hoisington - Koegler Group, Inc. to perform a landscape design
analysis for this development. The recommendations of this analysis are included as
recommendations for approval.
1 The applicant shall be required to provide interior landscape islands in the parking lot areas.
In particular, landscape islands measuring at a minimum 15 feet by 38 feet (approximately
1 two parking stalls wide by two deep) shall be provided for every other aisle of face -to -face
parking (minimum of three interior planting islands). These islands shall contain a minimum
of three overstory trees and they shall alternate with the tree groupings to be provided at the
perimeter of the site. Trees and shrubs shall be grouped rather than spaced at regular
intervals to enhance their visual effect. The Hackberry trees proposed for the northern
perimeter of the site shall be replaced with oak trees (either White Oak, scientific name
Quercus alba, or Bur Oak, scientific name Quercus macrocarpa) in order to continue the tree
planting theme begun in the Oak Ponds townhouse development located north of this
development. Tree spacing for buffer evergreens along the north perimeter shall be reduced.
Perimeter and parking lot boulevard medians shall be provided with low level shrubs to help
soften the appearance of the parking area. Alternate ground cover such as sumac shall be
1
1
1
West Village Center 1
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 13
used along the steep grade to the north. The steepness of the grade precludes the mowing of 1
a sodded area. Ornamental trees should be interspersed within the landscaping boxes located
in front of the building to provide architectural highlighting and to enhance the facade of the
structure. Finally, a landscape box with shrubs shall be provided to the north of the trash
enclosure located adjacent to the detached commercial building to screen this enclosure from
view. 1
GRADING/DRAINAGE
The applicant was previously granted an interim use permit (Grading Permit No. 93 -10) for
grading the entire site. The entire site is proposed to be regraded to create the desired
development topography. The building pad located in the southwesterly corner of the site is
proposed to be raised approximately 10 to 12 feet higher than the existing ground elevation,
This will result in the first floor elevation of the building be approximately 18 feet higher
than the intersection at West 78th Street directly to the west. Staff believes that this portion 1
of the site can be lowered to improve sight lines. If the building is left at this elevation, it
may look similar to the Rapid Oil Change building located on Highway 5.
The site is proposed to drain to three separate drainage basins. The easterly portion of the
site will drain to the southeast corner of the site and connect to the existing storm sewer at
the intersection of Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street. This storm sewer eventually 1
discharges into the city's stormwater retention pond south of Market Square. The central
portion of the site will drain into two existing 15 -inch storm sewer lines which then connect
to an 18 -inch line along the southern portion of West 78th Street. This storm runoff
eventually discharges into a NURP basin behind the Target site. The western portion of the
site will drain into a 15 -inch line and discharge the storm sewer runoff into the newly created
stormwater pond located west of Powers Boulevard on the Eckankar site. The site's
stormwater is being pretreated in the City's stormwater retention basins therefore no on -site
stormwater retention ponds are being required. The parcel has been or is being assessed for
these storm drainage improvements.
It appears that additional catch basins may be necessary to accommodate the stormwater
runoff from the expansive parking area. The double catch basins near the West 78th Street
access points may be more efficient if they are moved north near the landscaped islands. A
small drainageway may have to be cut through the southern corner of the access road islands
to effectively drain the stormwater runoff that could potentially pond within the L- shaped
curbed island.
The developer's engineer shall provide the city with detailed storm sewer drainage
calculations and discharge rates for the entire storm sewer system on the site. The storm
1
1 West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 14
1 drainage calculations should verify that the existing storm sewer system will accommodate the
additional runoff from the site. The main drainage area in question is the capacity of the
1 Target pond. All storm sewer lines should be designed for a 10 -year storm event.
MISCELLANEOUS
1 The development utilizes a part of Lot 3 and all of Lot 4, Block 1, West Village Heights
2nd. The west line of Lot 4 is proposed to be altered. The westerly access to the site will be
across Lot 3. A cross access or driveway easement should be prepared to maintain ingress
and egress to both lots.
I Staff recommends that the applicant provide the city with a security deposit in the amount of
$10,000.00 to guarantee boulevard restoration as well as the curb cuts onto the city streets.
This security could be included with the security deposit for the landscaping items. On
another note, the retaining walls along the rear of the building will most likely need a
separate building permit.
1 EROSION CONTROL
An erosion control plan is required and should be incorporated on the site plan and submitted
1 to the city for review and approval prior to construction commencement. Staff recommends
the applicant use the City's Best Management Practice Handbook for erosion control
' measures.
All disturbed areas are to be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to
' prevent erosion and sedimentation. The back slope of the site lying north of the building
appears to be approximately 3:1. Staff recommends a wood fiber blanket to inhibit erosion
while the seed is being established. Protection around catch basins such as hay bales or silt
fence is also required until the pavement is installed. If at all possible, construction of the
site in stages is highly recommended to help reduce sedimentation into the city's
infrastructure. The applicant should be aware that they will be responsible for cleaning the
1 city's storm sewerlines if erosion control measures fail to act properly.
LIGHTING /SIGNAGE
1 The development shall comply with City Code in the provision of site lighting. Lighting
shall use shielded fixtures and be directed away from public right -of -way and adjacent
residential property. Sufficient lighting shall be provided to illuminate all areas of the
parking lot to provide adequate levels of safety. To minimize off -site impacts, light levels as
measured at the property line, shall not exceed one -half foot candle.
1
1
West Village Center 1
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 15
The development shall comply with City Code (section 20 -1303) in the installation of 1
development signage. One ground or pylon sign shall be permitted per street frontage. One
wall business sign is permitted per street frontage. Wall signs shall not exceed fifteen percent
(15 %) of the total area of the building' wall on which it is located and shall not exceed a
maximum of eighty (80) square feet. The applicant is proposing that they come back for city
review and approval a complete sign package for the development to be incorporated into a
sign covenant to include such items as size, type, and lighting of signs and any deviations
from Code.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
•
1
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 1, 1993. After closing the
public input section of the hearing, the Planning Commission continued its discussion to
Saturday, December 4, 1993. After discussion of the item, the Planning Commission
recommended approval, with modifications and additions to staff recommendations, of the
Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for the T. F. James Company by a vote of four (4) in
favor, zero (0) opposed, and one (1) abstention. The Commission was very impressed with
the design and incorporation of so many architectural details. They were also impressed with 1
the willingness of the developer to work with the city in the final design of the project.
Planning staff prepared a review of the issues brought out at the December 1, 1993, Planning 1
Commission meeting and has prepared the following:
Issue: View of the project from the north. 1
Staff has requested that the applicant provide additional cross sections of the view of
the project from the property to the north. This detail, as well as examination of the
site plans and building elevations, should assure the Planning Commission that all
efforts have been taken to minimize visual impacts of this project from the property to
the north including the screening of roof appurtenances and dumpsters. The developer
has provided parapet walls to help screen roof elements from view, providing
landscape screening compatible and complementary to landscaping proposed for the
townhouses to the north, and enclosing some mechanical equipment completely within
the building. To further reduce potential negative impacts from this development on
the townhouses to the north, staff is adding conditions regarding the parking of
refrigeration vehicles overnight, trash collection hours, and trash compaction
equipment use.
Issue: Relationship of development plan to Vision 2002.
1
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
1 Page 16
Vision 2002, currently in its initial stages, is an attempt to provide a sense of
community and direction for the future development of downtown Chanhassen.
Elements of this Vision include the desire to develop a sense of identity and
connectiveness for development downtown, making the downtown more pedestrian
friendly, and relating the various uses and projects together in a cohesive manner
based on a consensus of residents, property owners, and elected and appointed
officials. All would agree that the most important desire is to assure that development
in Chanhassen is of the highest quality. Secondly, we can agree that the various
developments should be compatible: physically, functionally, and aesthetically.
' Finally, we can agree that development in downtown Chanhassen should answer to
community needs and desires.
The West Village Center development, we believe, responds to this direction. The -
overall development is of the highest quality and incorporates many design details that
are not commonly provided in commercial buildings: varied facade treatments, use of
1 unique and high quality building materials, provision of site landscaping above Code
requirements, inclusion of pedestrian walkways from the perimeter of the site,
separation of buildings to bring the development closer to West 78th Street, and the
' screening of undesirable but necessary features of the development, e.g. loading areas,
dumpsters, roof fixtures.
1 The development orients itself to the downtown and incorporates many design features
found in downtown development. If the buildings were moved adjacent to West 78th
' Street, while meeting some goals of the Vision 2002 such as breaking up the expanse
of parking lots, aiding in pedestrian access (at least from West 78th Street), and
providing greater identification with West 78th Street. There are also some negative
' consequences such as orienting the rear of the structure to the rest of downtown,
creating long blank views to the east, creating a "dead zone" from Kerber when
heading south, reducing visibility of retail establishments not near the street, and
increasing traffic directly in front of the building, posing greater pedestrian and vehicle
conflicts.
1 Issue: Relationship to Highway 5 Corridor study and pitched roofs.
The development of the site incorporates almost all the elements specified in the
l Highway 5 study: well designed and proportioned building treatment, quality building
materials, colors and building accents, varied building facade, harmonious building
relationships and unified site design, extensive landscape treatments, and appropriate
1 screening. The one element that is missing is the use of "one or more pitched roof
elements."
1
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 17 1
While pitched roofs are important to the City and are an element of the Highway 5
study, there is no standard design theme in the central business district nor is it the
intent of the City to require every development to incorporate all the same design
features. It is even more important that development in Chanhassen be of high
quality. This development is definitely a quality development. There have been other
cases within the corridor where it has been infeasible or impractical for the use of
pitched roofs, especially on large buildings. In these instances, the City has permitted
minimal pitched roof elements. The question that needs to be answered in this case is
whether the quality and design of the development as proposed is such that the use of
a pitched roof element is not necessary, or is it more important that the City require
every development to incorporate pitched roofs, whether they work in the design or
not.
Issue: Bus shelters. 1
The applicant has proposed a transit drop - off/pick -up area. However, this was not 1 •
highlighted at the meeting. Staff will be adding a condition that the developer work
with Southwest Metro Transit in determining the location for the bus stop.
Issue: Pedestrian and traffic circulation,
�
The developer has agreed to many of the concerns that staff has raised regarding these
issues. Separate pedestrian access is provided from both Kerber Boulevard and West
78th Street. The sidewalk location from West 78th Street was chosen because this 1
driveway serves as an entrance for this development and for Target and because it will
be signalized. The developer has also revised his plans to create an entrance
boulevard from West 78th Street into the project directly in front of Byerly's. This
change eliminates backing movements from a major drive aisle. Parking areas are
being proposed that provide convenience and accessibility for site users and customers.
Truck traffic has been segregated from the main customer parking area. 1
Issue: Interaction of truck traffic with park users.
While there is always some potential for trucks to impact park users, this interaction
should be minimized due to primary times of truck deliveries, primarily morning and
evening hours, and the fact that trucks will generally access the site from the south
and west. No matter what is developed on this site, commercial users will generate
truck traffic that may impact the park use.
1
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
' Update December 7, 1993
Page 18
' RECOMMENDATION
(Note: Recommendations added by staff for the 12/4/93 meeting are in bold, additional
recommendations by the Planning Commission are in bold and underlined.)
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves the Site Plan #93 -7 dated December 7, 1993, and the Conditional
' Use Permit #93 -1 to permit the grouping of buildings on one building lot, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The applicant shall be required to provide a revised landscape plan for City approval.
The plan shall include the following:
a. The applicant shall provide interior landscape islands in the parking lot areas.
In particular, landscape islands measuring approximately 20 15 feet by 4 38
feet (two parking stalls wide by two deep) shall be provided for every other
aisle of face -to -face parking (minimum of three interior planting islands).
These islands shall contain a minimum of three overstory trees and they shall
be alternated with the tree groupings to be provided at the perimeter of the site.
' An aeration/irrigation system consisting of perforated PVC pipe or other
flexible tubing in a looped system with at least two risers extending above the
' planting surface shall be designed and installed as part of these planting islands
(see attached Figure 11 -3).
b. The Hackberry trees proposed for the northern perimeter of the site shall be
replaced with oak trees (either White Oak, scientific name Quercus alba, or Bur
Oak, scientific name Quercus macrocarpa) in order to continue the tree planting
1 theme begun in the Oak Ponds townhouse development located north of this
development. In order to more effectively screen the development from
residences to the north, the trees should be placed closer to the top of the
slope, as opposed to near the bottom of the slope where they have virtually no
effect on screening. Spacing of conifers should be ten (10) feet to allow them
to grow together in a more solid mass at a younger age. As at other areas of
the site, these trees should be placed strategically in groupings to increase their
effectiveness as a buffer and to lend a more natural feel to the planting. The
use of more but- smaller planting materials may be warranted to achieve better
long -term screening for the development.
1
1
West Village Center 1
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993 I
Page 19
c. Perimeter and parking lot boulevard medians shall be provided with low level 1
shrubs and other plant materials to help soften the appearance of the parking
area. Evergreen shrubs are great for winter and also add to summer landscape,
but use of more flowering shrubs in combination with the evergreen shrubs
would be appropriate. The plan should consider the use of more shrubs and
perennials (such as daylilies) in important areas of the site. These plants could
I
be used as accents at site entries or pedestrian areas.
d. Alternate ground cover such as sumac shall be used along the steep grade to
I
the north. The steepness of the grade precludes the mowing of this sodded
area.
e. Ornamental trees should be interspersed within the landscaping boxes located I
in front of the building to provide architectural highlighting and to enhance the
facade of the structure. Adding ornamental trees (crabapple, hawthorns or 1
japanese tree lilacs) in planting areas near the building would add interest and
color to the expanse of wall, especially at the front of the building. Care
should be exercised in selecting plants that do not set fruit (which can be very
I
messy in the case of some crabapples) for areas close to pedestrian ways.
Areas near the building would benefit from the introduction of more colorful
planting materials in the form of flowering shrubs and perennials.
1
f. A landscape box with shrubs shall be provided to the north of the trash I
enclosure located adjacent to the detached commercial building to screen this
enclosure from view.
g. All landscaping areas shall have the proper soil preparation to ensure the 1
viability of the vegetation to survive. The landscaping plan shall provide
specifications for proper soil preparation.
h. Consideration should be given to placing plant materials together to create a
bolder, more interesting landscape, without excessive alternation. Plantings I
shall be massed, creating a more diverse and dynamic landscape. Within
massings, similar species should be used to ensure the greatest effect from the
individual specimens. Consideration shall be given to maintaining views to the
I
building when placing tree groupings in the perimeter areas.
i. The plan does not recognize the street tree plantings at West 78th Street and
Kerber Boulevard where the City has installed, or has planned, for trees at 50
feet on center (West 78th Street) and 35 feet on center (Kerber Boulevard).
I
I
I West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
1 Page 20
I The City's plans for West 78th Street show a permanent landscape easement
(eight foot typical) at several locations along West 78th Street. The landscape
plan for the project should start with the pattern of street tree plantings at the
1 streets, allowing these trees to provide continuity between this site and other
developments. Trees for this project can then be placed in groupings within
the setbacks or berm areas of the site.
I j. The more formal placement of trees along the entry drives works to continue
the feeling established by the City's tree plantings at the street. Tighter
1 spacing of trees along the entry drives is desirable. Shrubs along the entry
drives would reinforce views of the building and obscure bumpers and hoods
of cars.
I k. Entries could be marked at the streets with more colorful lantin s, creating g g a
break in the rhythm of street tree plantings and providing emphasis for site
1 entry points.
I 1. Care should be exercised in spacing shrubs to ensure that complete cover of the
planting bed is achieved at maturity.
I m. At the perimeter of the parking areas, the large expanses of sod from the back
of the curb to the property line should be planted with trees and shrubs in
significant groupings. This should also occur between the westerly entry drive
I and the east side of the detached commercial building and at the area west of
the retail building. Conifers in these areas would be useful for the winter
landscape.
1 n. Financial guarantees shall be provided to insure installation and maintenance of
landscaping.
I o. All planting areas must have an irrigation system installed.
I p. Benches and picnic tables shall be provided in the landscaped area west of the
retail center.
1 2. The screen wall located at the eastern rear of the building shall be extended to the
beginning of the radius of the curb.
1 3. A sidewalk shall be provided from West 78th Street to the retail center along the
western entry drive, east of the commercial /office building, into the development.
1
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 21
1
4. As a condition of site plan approval, the applicant shall be required to 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 be responsible for applying and obtaining the necessary permits for
the City's Building department for the installation of the site improvements.
6. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for berming
and landscaping over the City's drainage and utility easement along the west side of
Kerber Boulevard. The applicant will also be responsible for adjusting the existing
sanitary manholes to the new grades. 1
7. The applicant shall remove the fourteen parking stalls in front of the retail site directly
west of the supermarket. In order to make up for lost parking stalls as a result of
changes to the site plan, compact parking spaces may be used.
8. The applicant will be responsible for furnishing and installing the appropriate traffic
control signs and pavement markings throughout the site.
9. The turning radii at the driveway access points along Kerber Boulevard should be •
expanded to 20 feet. The turning radius for the service drive located in the northwest
corner of the site should be expanded to accommodate large semi - trailer
accommodations with a wheelbase of 50 feet. 1
10. The applicant's engineer shall supply City staff with detailed storm drainage
calculations for the entire site. Storm sewers shall be designed to handle a 10 -year 1
storm event. Additional catch basins may be needed after review of the storm water
calculations.
i site located in southwest corner of the site plan should The retail building s to loca ed the e o p oul d be
lowered by a minimum of five feet.
12. The applicant shall provide the City with a $10,000.00 financial security to guarantee
installation of the curb cuts and boulevard restoration. The security may be included
with the security requirements for the site landscaping.
13. An erosion control plan shall be developed and incorporated into the site plan and
resubmitted for City staff review and approval. Staff recommends implementing the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook for the plan design as well as site
restorations. The northerly back slope behind the building should be restored with an
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 22
' erosion control blanket. Plans should also employ erosion control measures around
proposed catch basins with hay bales or silt fence or other approved measures in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
14. The final site grades shall be compatible with the final grade of the Oak Pond
development directly north of this development.
1 15. The entry drive from West 78th Street in front of Byerly's shall be revised to a
boulevard type separating the major traffic aisle from the parking area. (Note:
' The developer has already agreed to this and revised the plans, however, since
they are different from the ones initially submitted and provided to the
Commission, I thought that I should add this as a condition.)
1 16. The applicant shall work with SW Metro Transit to locate a bus transit stop area
on -site.
17. There shall be no outdoor storage of goods or materials after construction is
completed.
18. There shall be no trash pick -up between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
111 19. No overnight parking of refrigeration unit trucks and/or trailers.
20. No use of trash compaction equipment between 10:00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
21. A sidewalk is to be provided from West 78th Street to the detached building.
The appropriate location of this sidewalk is to be worked out with staff.
' 22. The applicant shall be required to match detailing work for the detached
commercial building with that of the main building. Prior to development of the
outbuilding, the applicant shall come back to the Planning Commission for
architectural review of the building's design.
23. Applicant shall work with staff on the site lighting. Parking lot ljghting may be
no higher than the main building.
1 24. The signage package for the development shall come back to the Planning
Commission for approval.
1
1
1
1
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 23
1
25. The Public Safety Director is to provide specific comments to the City Council on
the curb cuts and truck traffic on Kerber Boulevard. Particular mention should
be made of the truck impacts on park use between the hours of 4:00 and 9:00
P.M. 1
26. The applicant is requesting to revisit the handicapped parking with staff.
Specifically, the applicant is to look into the opportunity of providing sixteen (16) 1
foot handicapped parking stalls.
ATTACHMENTS
1
1. Development Review Application
2. General Location Plan 1
3. Site Plan B, Preliminary Concept Plan for Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition
4. West Village Center Site Plan
5. West Village Center Landscape Plan
6. West Village Center Grading and Utilities Plan
7. Memo from Dennis R. Eyler, P.E. dated November 18, 1993 I
8. Memo from Dave Hempel and Diane Desotelle dated November 22, 1993
9. Memo from Michael Schroeder dated November 23, 1993
10. Tree Planting Plan for West 78th Street III 11. Tree Planting Plan for Kerber Boulevard
12. Landscape Plan for the southeast corner of Oak Pond Townhouses
13. Figure 11 -3, diagram for aeration/irrigation system for tree islands I
14. Letter from B.C. (Jim) Burdick dated December 1, 1993
15. Letter from L.A. Beisner dated December 3, 1993
16. Response to L.A. Beisner dated December 6, 1993
17. Letter from Bradley C. Johnson dated December 2, 1993
18. Memo to Charles Folch & Scott Harr dated December 8, 1993
19. Planning Commission Minutes December 1, 1993
Il
20. Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 1993
1
1
1
I
1
FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN 11.02.1993 14:10 P. 2
111
i
1 } CITY OF CHANHASSEN
660 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 66917
1 (612) 687.1000
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION _
1 APPLICANT: T F- JA S GO OW 5/4.44E
1 ADDRESS:, (2640 S11k`r &,Act- �-5,kP ADDRESS: SAME _ .
- SUi'E 560
1 ..... R 4 iiNjj. �. ,
SS 3 ,
1 TELEPHONE (Day time) . 2 g 1 ,app •, TE. NEt: ....E6 x (a 29 — 7 S 3 S
1 I. 4mp !ehenslvePanAm.ndment 11. . .� Subdivision
1 E. 4ndllionai Use Permit 4 q in 19. 'vacation of ROW/Easements '
3, *di 9/Excavation Permit • . 13. -- , `Variance
4. _ I , eri Use Permit • 14. Alteration Permit
•
5: N tifi dation buns 16. :Zoning Appeal •
�.. - .. -
1 • a. P i nn ,d Unit Development 16. - iZonirp Ordinance Amendment
I 7. ROzor inp ' : 17. - !Filing Fees/Attomey Coat • (Collected after
1 approval of Item)
... ��Y . r�.N•.wr
6. 6 n permits 16. =consultant Pees
1
0. _ 6 n Plan Review
1 10._4 4tePIaflRevIew * 125D tdTAL
•
i Aisio....o..w.mm mo .ml,, mm , F .,m m p o pimpnopmm•mp...wmmamiwm•smim.•ma•••.■■■•••.mb,
I A it of stt.property owners within S00 feet of the boundaries of the property must
inclined with the application.
Twenty's, x full size WOO copies of the plans must be sUbrhItted.
I 6W' it 11" Reduced Dopy of transparency for each plan *heist.
i
1 I
FROM CITY OF CHRNHRSSEN 11.02.1993 14110 P. 3
i '
•
•
• ` •
1
'NOTE - 4en iple applications are groomed, the appropriate fed ahal be oharged for each application.
PROJECT NAM ktq EST V I LLA&E G 1TE-2 1
LOCATION ' V EST - 761 - }A sr Aa ass ppom '(. --� _
LIGAL DI$ $ , ON , LOT y i $ tJtx•-K 1._ _ 1
. • EST V t U ME Ft 16f-t 2ND ANN
kre-v c-g_ a nQ 1
. ` • AiR _ : i 25.8790040
Pl1ESENT'•N1 0 SE -- 1
If1EQUEST4 1 INS ■••131m&awallm. .-•...1 _••••■011110..SAM
•
RESENT r.ruv • USE DESIGNATION Co M A' eC,A Al— 1
REQUESTED ( ND USE DESIGNATION .. _ t 2CJ `". .,�^
REASON Ft* IS REQUEST d 13•T hl N By l —b) P E i T FD2 APP �X • 1
- .0osi•SQ•PT.' ' i.- ;AU U .
I applost • n ust be complete • n a • • e typewritten or &Nary • • ed and mutt be accompanied by all information
and pima r - • ulr - d by epptlOebie Ctly Ordinance provisions. Before fling this application, you thouid. confer with the
Nanning De • rt ens to determine the spoilt ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
This is to ce Hy hat I am making applcation for the desorfbed aotbn by the City and that I am responsible lot complying
I
with an OW qu , Men% with regard") the request. This appibatbn sh$ uid be processed In my name and t am the party
whom the y • Id contact regarding any matter pertaining to this applioatbn. 1 have attached a Dopy of proof of
ownerehtp { tine copy of Owners Duplicate Oentlioate of Tole, Abstract of Title or purohate agreement), or 1 am the I
authorized rso to make title application and the fee owner has also Signed this appilication.
1 will keep se 1 informed of the deadlines for submlubn Of material and the progress of this application, 1 further
understand at • • Itionai fees may be charged for oonsWting teas, telabillty studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorizatio to • • • sect with the study. The documents and kttonnatlon I have submitted are true and correct 10 the best
alt my faro . no
1 alto uncle!�e • that after the approval or grw1ing of the perm, woh,permile shall be inva0d unless they are recorded
against the le • the property for which the approvaVpem* Is granted *het 120 days with the Carver Courtly Reorders I
Otfloe and the • ; •rat document returned b Glty Nall Records.
'•' ' .,.� NO / - / 9 93 1
$iQnature Of ; A Uoani w� -"P' es . De b p
T , ' J C a iiv r 6411/4) mow- caepom -ra
Signature ot,Fe Owner Dste
Appiication flee wed on Fee paid • Receipt No. 111
• The eppliOant; should Oonlsot staff for a copy M the staff report whloh will the available on Friday prior to the
meeting. 11 not conteoted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applioent'$ address.
1
. I . . . . . .
***END***
1
1
1
JAMES
1
' DATE: November 1, 1993
PROJECT: West Village Center
' LOCATION: NW Corner Kerber and West 78th Street
1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION; Lot 4, Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition
ZONING: BG General Business
' LAND OWNER:
T.F. James Company
1 DEVELOPER /LANDLORD: T. F. James Company
6640 Shady Oak Road Suite 500
Eden Prairie, MN. 55344
828 -9000 FAX 829 -7535
Representative: Charles Wm. James
ARCHITECT: Timothy McCoy and Associates
1944 Cedar Lake Parkway
Minneapolis, MN. 55415
927 -8546
1 CIVIL ENGINEER: James R. Hill Inc.
2500 West Cty. Road 42 Suite 120
' Burnsville, MN. 55337
890 -6044 FAX 890 -6244
' COUNSEL: Bob Levy
Parsinen Bowman & Levy
100 South 5th Suite 1100
Minneapolis, MN. 55402
333 -2111
1 GENERAL CONTRACTOR: To be determined from a final list of:
Mortenson
1 Adolfson & Peterson
Kraus- Anderson
ESTIMATED CONTRACT: $6 MILLION
1
1
L
JAMES
November 1, 1993
Page -2-
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1
West Village Center is a retail shopping facility consisting of 3 major elements which, in
aggregate, total approximately 100,000 sq.tt. 1
The "anchor" tenant will be a Byerly's supermarket, employing nearly 300 people in the deli,
bakery, restaurant, wine & spirits dept., and general grocery operations. 1
Adjacent to Byerly's will be approximately 30,000 sq.ft. of retail/office space.
The hird component of the project is a detached building which the developer anticipates
t p o p � g p p
will be leased to service companies e.g. financial, medical, and /or real estate brokerage.
* **
The overall design of the project will be cohesive and consistent with the themes and motifs
utilized in the architectural plan for the Byerly's supermarket. The design will include brick
exterior walls with "classical" embellishments such as arches, arcades, barrel vaults, radius
windows, etc. 1
All the buildings in the project will have an identical brick color, and this brick will be
utilized elsewhere for such items as monument sign pedestals etc. 1
Further, we propose to incorporate design references to the Chanhassen gateway
monuments and towers, as a method of integrating this project into the fabric and "feel" of
the downtown district.
* **
Byerly's has granted a budget of nearly twice the cost (per sq. ft.) of a more typical discount
or warehouse grocery. It is anticipated that this project will incorporate a higher degree of
quality and finishes than one might expect in a typical suburban shopping center. 1
The landscaping, as designed, exceeds the current City codes and to the best of my
knowledge, no variances will be required for construction. 1
* **
The entire project will be constructed on Lot 4, Block 1- a legal lot of record. Lot 1,2,3 are 1
also owned by T.F. James Company and we have given the City the opportunity to study the
acquisition of these lots for a possible post office, library, and or senior housing. In any
event, site plan review will be requested for these adjacent lots as uses are identified,
whether public or private, by the City or by James.
1
1
.1 ;►
�
JAMES
1 November 1, 1993
Page -3-
The supermarket m e B r ' organization for fixturin and stocking
must be delivered to the ye ly s orga g g
by August 1994. It is imperative that construction commence as soon as possible, and
therefore we expect to proceed with the supermarket portion 30 -60 days before the working
drawings are completed for the retail segment. But then the retail portion should take less
time to construct than the supermarket. The retail segment may include a split level or two
story element to allow for a more aesthetic "massing" of the architectural design of this
component in relation to the much larger Byerly's facility. In any event, parking ratios and
open space as mandated by City Code will not be exceeded.
The detached building is currently the subject of lease negotiations with a single, full
' occupant. If these negotiations are unsuccessful and a major change in the site design of
this area is contemplated, James will re-visit this aspect with appearances before the
Planning Commission and City Council.
The tight, fast track schedule for Byerly's mandates that we start construction on their
building before the project is 100% leased. However, we fully expect the entire project to be
' completed in 1994.
* **
' The project will be owned and managed, in its entirety, by the T.F. James Company. Our
firm was incorporated in 1946. We currently own and manage a portfolio of nearly 100
retail properties in 9 states that include such tenants as Wal -Mart, Super Valu, Nash-
1 Finch, Holiday, Scrivner, Fleming, Associated Grocers, Buttrey Food & Drug, as well as
numerous restaurants, banks, convenience stores, and many small retailers.
1 We are striving to develop a project of unusual quality, in both design and materials, that
will be a long term asset for its owners and for the community of Chanhassen.
1 Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
I 71/ �
/ _ 7
Charles Wm. James
1
1
1
__ 445
�ii•o•••.•••••••••••••••• •• o•• ;
s. -2
111.
1 - - _ oo'
7„..w, a
.,..... ... 1 �: . s o — _-...j =•r a —
la • • iii ii %•iia•i% -- - - - - -- — "'� - -- -- -- �1 _ . 11 l ••• *se •4At•,••��•tt•.te•� ••• ,•••..Aril? -_ • _ iii ♦yy .- - -- ... - - i -- -� SUPERMARKET • -- « lit
1 SENIOR HOUSING I I X11 3 SO FT
tititi ///111 1 a a ®aa (30 p — '° i - ► I
S I RETAIL 'I`
m I Ai i aa SPoSo.ToWI : 16 = , Li 3 • ..d.1 «. , 4 a 1.; 0 �' I .o ne.ra 1 t I 1 00 TOTAL PARKING SPACES (3A /1000) -I. 390 TOTAL PARKING SPACES (f 0/7000) R 1 11
• • • • • • • • • •I I mo c01.) ierl0, , o of la I• o
..K. < a w (MO .o III 0 . . I w cm .o L _
p `w,• • • • • 40,•1' >a •�•�•a0 �..�.. -. • /� w ... . 3:1� - 11 J
II W
X • {�.0 0 _. ,. • • �• _ ' I I I I u n - 1 11 ) W co
• • .r9�,; oo a = ill►
•' r O n _ = p al
w SJ � eJ ,100 047 I. • • , o!•. I.8• .o8• ono, • • ID 01 � = r ; j
e .., , 1 ( II I I
Iw « �S • O • , ,_- - -- . v l 111111 lim I_ f ' • %
WEST 78TH STREET
1 ( ----- )
p - :( 71 "j! ,1 � , n4 .; /
1
SITE PLAN B.
REVISED: 9 -15 -93
FRONT DRIVE THRU T ARGET
REVISED: 9 -13 -93 (ADQWEST SITE DEVEI9PMPNT1
-
• T. F. JAMES PROPERTY ' ;� . ).P. CHANHASSEN MINNESOTA 0 20 50 100 200 400 NORTH �[� ��p�, �
1. 50 -0' JAMES ko.i" T"`.MM.EAP F E .` •.l•
MN iii iiii in NM iiiii OM MON iiii Mi ii. MB NM iiiii MO ME n MN MI
D i
w o r . , fq S 6 o
Y.
9, 8
L-
g. (� -
li Z ; , �-- - -_- -
El /
/ / co
p // j V� � J a
SP C c / o W 0 .. ,_____ __
1 44 .„
9 /
..„, a
,I . i
.4 , 0
?‘
i / 1
I 8a ' oQ
/ \i`
/ y r y 1 ' 1
A' f "
I _ _ _ - - -- r - -- � I
� I i, I
1 , 1
MONTEREY pFrvE \ LLJ
I KERBER DRIVE
MARKET SQUARE , I I I
' i r OHO c I
i -, � �OpO o F - - - - Z
� I
I I O H O
�: ° opo ° � I Op0
r
1 I L J
S ' V
' SAN VII W
� i 6 M spKET BIVO. Al �1
4.
� I 0 � � Q
1
I m a o0
O
= H O o
M
V
P
I / N
it i ri
1 I, ...REDO D. vE
8
6 III
1 9
1 ,.\ .
C.S.AH ,00.17 ( PpWERS 1
BLVD)
a 2 m i re 1 :: =•
Z L m• �1
_> >AW� r ,�
• I
/I" 3 Sc %-' t . � 00t I ? lir fp% 1
Z � � ( � � Off. •s••s .' J.).
E xi r •
♦ O`
4 •1
`-
I --4 110
Z RI -,•..
M XI ...1 0' ' _ 111111111H o ` - 1 ll1 S
O o -- Caen k• 1
mm l
Y 0 111 I m ' •` •
0.0 . 6 0 q _� i ' 1: 7 : : . 1 .i
0 L
° •
I
o ■ oaoeco . 1
. o g
ij
1 1 1 , 1 Q4000O Oi �+ »a :"..::::„:„,„ N 8�` 8 \ N - I IIIIIIIIIIITliil 11 �� i . i 1 ( 1
om p �l• • ; — e i %
ii ,o D s. i ♦
s
B111111111 --'- 111111 8 6 — •
H ; • I
• 8111111111=111Ilibi 1 • gilllllllll(IIIIIIII y ;3 1 141 111 1111111111111111111 • a o r
i am •
m ��� r. _ II11EI1IIilllllllll t • I
`n 1
A • e 1111111111111111111 � - • 1 1
o-
Yr. 1 i o 8{11{11111 °{111110 •
N a; i _ "" • 1 i
(`0� ( I`{ o0 1111111111111 11111 •
q
ii RI • N tl { { { { { { I { { 1 { { { { • *PAM. SAWS SAWS o •
ti
�1i 1 I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I � 11 I IIII� Y
' 4 111111111111111111111 In_ ! _if
' 1_ – KERBER BLVD.
• 'MI 4 1
r• % /
. , •___ it: ..,- , 1
...
/ g 1
o
• r . — ..• • . i s 1.1 fl * a sa; tiff r , I 1 --.
--- - moss so ssAsso oss. •
010.111.s.
IIMIMllrll.=1.111 Ma
di 1
t r IIIIIg 4 1
6
il
. 4
. — 1
1 • “, • :J.
RETAIL i =
i
2 ,
: •
. , i ...--.—
.6.100 so n fl
88.011•1. I ---
--. a
'1 4 i
r
MM. ' '
. e mom, • • , el • / e1=3 . 4 ' ' '----- a
.,
i 1
••• MU, Pala. 111,6“11 1 r
0 L___ . .. •
..... ..... ...... . . , . . ...... . il I 12212 i.
u 1r) Fill,
--_____ • - e
I .
---_,....., : 4, 1111 k • M ' _17 _
NIONio•Num.antre i ! -- i - ;
1 _
___
4441 0iiiimmiriiiiiimmiiiiimwmi TREE T ' . jo
-.............„...
I I I I - I -
. , I
1 1 1 . . 111 1
...,
SY SW MO y•
............ anal SEEM L _ SIM; 111111113 - 0 11110
\ \
''---"-"---...."'"'""'""........"'""'"..."'"s"........%%%.......''. • \ \ ti i 0 i I ii i i i i i 1 i I l a, . . , ,. . a. Ir i is i ow le I • ...
-
3.4
....
•-. 0 VA. .
WEST 78TH STREET
--.._.
PROJECT DATA
BUILDING AREA •
SunRAmAKET AREA 101.00 'Al 04,132 Son
mENAL *100 (6000 V/ 26.310 Son
CONmENCIAL A6EMBU30 * C1 2000 SOFT
TOTAL. SUILOING AIWA •7.312 SO.
SITE
SITE COVERAGE.
REEKARED 01.06 SPACE AIWA 171,347 son 103.0000 LOT 4, BLOCK 1, WEST VILLAGE
OPEN SPACE 141330060 '71.052 SOFT 1300050
HEIGHTS, 2ND ADDITION, CARVER
Sat AAEA
171,223 son
COUNTY. MINNESOTA
USE PARCEL NO. 25.0790040
NMI/ • 033.04363. DAPLOyEES MOVEIMINCD
SUPENNARKET 04pLOYEES 7S 000 PEAK/ SITE AREA IS/B4[010 SuRvEv vEINFICAtiONI
sunlowAKET IsTsmunArn SEATING (00 SEATs 13.11 ACRES
pARKiNG SPACES REQUIRED
OWNER/APPLICANT
SUIFIMARIM /no.. 034.0(01541E) 417 SPACES (5.00000)
7F JAMES COMPANY
commEnCw. (I1.00.r) 32 sPACES 14.5(1000)
6640 SNAIDY OAK ROAD
PARKING SPACES PRovocc3 EDEN PRAIRIE, miNNESOTA 55344
sunlImARKO/AnAK (114.241574 505 SPACES (5.4/*000) (012) 1126• 9000
C0mmEncLuN4.I30 . C1 37 SPACES (5.3/1000)
EXISTING 2011400 DO ZONING GENERAL auTJNESS
SITE PLAN
1n.! I FA2
Sig
0 20 50 100 250 NORTH
REVISED:NOVEMBER 8,1993
SCALE •-• $0-0 DATE NOVEMBER 1 1993
WEST VILLAGE CENTER -‚. MCCOY ARCHITECTS
1 ■ cwr,p, , ...,T TN,S PLAN REPCBT C
SPEOFICAIIM wAS Kt F.REO EP ME
TRET S' AR 'E Ch as :TE tS'C" C.T ON T
e=_Mr- ‘.._ 194 4 CEDAR LAKE PARKWAT
2 CHANHASSEN MINNESOTA
9 V i mINNEAPOLiS IA , mINNESO 55416
O (6 9i7-8546
cr LAwS OF THE S1ATE OF 611NNESOTA
- JAMES i E, tantraumrsviagrea.... 4 L , 0Art 0. s • 93 1.....4%. A 61. 4,
QI AS0 No 113 711
MI IIIIII IIIIII 111.1 IMO Eli OM I= MI OM NM MN NM • IIIIII 11•11 • NM RIM
1
W ! C.SA NO 17 (POWERS BLVD
o 7 t 1
.H
Z'1 o 0 ' l3: s £f 1a §! QQ fit gl,so4 1 N i F. 2 0 . $ t^ 3g 04 C g = i� n 1
D∎ n it $:t; n i 8 1 14 ; 1 oY
�- iR • � � 41 1Y I
Z
. 1
— n : : ;
Zz $A' Z I {a Rif SCR ;' RtR::: � 6 I
M.4 lal 1 fte E" VI ?
NOm _s €_ .
A ` 1
t
1 1L 1
1 1 V 1 ,.. . 0 :1 6 : .
M
I. I .
x.t 6b ,i Q' o e a
1 ; i'8
I ' c i' i__--
1 s: m 5 i,. ,, c:=, & :: ..
p 1
.' ! y lAI I .R i i ..
, ■ i re
arcHrtECT s° °•' 51 o (n ,m - i i r' 1
EjgtZ $
J
€Ln m w' >_ > 1 > r , m ri l''; m m I x31Ill1IT ,111 111118' .. , §
ZZ s
e ;^n O a < ^� .y �ror — 1 It
'� ?o`i lit; . i Q — Z V�I 111 II�IIII .._.a,..� -... ..
s2 ..m g .. 9 S ®_ ..
r op _ ( r. f r 7
' �q�_ Hill i! °... 1 a= Ei�li!�li 1}� I __
P V 1 - - i f i t _ _
CERTIFKATON
KERBER BLVD
g pi
1
1
I! SyiT
'
W NO
hi WE'EV
1 . , ■ I . g§
wb
find
• ...R.,
t 'g§iiY4
I 4....,,= . % v , ....__.'
4 - ;I — - .. - k -.- % "' ...
• .le
z i , toboutlem
: .,,=11! Mi.',11 ..
::-..--..7,---.,......-----------;-.. =
1 - ,.. . ----..,...-- =.,„-- ...,---1.• al
MO& 1 E 12
,-"
i i lir _..1.=..-,._-...--...._:. (.,.. Aar .-
1
... t'i.
1 ilf
1 , . 1 : ii. ,•: ,,.. -
—'-- lit - , •
t ,1
) I 1 ' • _I ,! , I lig 161. 1 .'
I
t lymnb .. i.o. iligid
I ..
;1'
' * I ' - , nizaz,_ A
I 1 ft! I
P: 1 i:
t 1.03.1.1HDev
.--....._
11 (....
41 ,
,, ir,
1 ,
A AIL
t
--- r._ '■ . I ,
1 - 't • ' -' ) t ..: 4, -.•: .. ....• ya....,•. ' ' il i I I I
7 '4 tk- -1 • ' •' 11 / 1 10
at: 1
4 7
T iAl I
1 . •
t , '•
I: • r
. I
rail 1 '
1 1.1 I
. fi 1,./ 1 illi lilt
+I i
;low i ll fri f II:
Eiiiiiii 4r)
IAJ
g i ......../w.
it;; 1 rg mailitikm FIN . 11 1:1"1 I
11 • M. ''''• " '''' -41 3' '
f r. 4 . 1
, i I ,..........._ ii , . IF E q 4 l 1
U . ...■amp F
.411 • 1 . 1 I '
li I li I 0 ..—...
1
lii IT - 11
•It i t
lir ' ;11F 1 /011 '' I . - - 7 . ' ' • ,..2 , 1 I I
, . ...,
1 _ et' 11.04g-1 . -' . ,
_____
. .
_________ 1 i.., „ i .,. „,:, „, . al •f.
...!:, 2 g
qi■ ','
magritairAcks■*/1047 .
-
.... Pali iiii: i pili: ,
!:, ,..,:niitil
,i!liE it . :Alp ,i 11 IV! ! i
I .
. =, i it ; :
- tl •
i I - ' . •
ii!!; !1;9 1 . I s" T hr i :1
Ee El
II OVA l f 4 I PI . . i 1 ,1_.111!!!!!! illii..i .1
ill 1 - 1 l id " i 3 i li lia•
1 :
_ . I/
,,,
, i ii iii iii w e l
• ii .1.;1„.11:..m:a„,i, .,.....„ 1 is
V11;1011E1 ilniii-.- i , 3 1, po & .:
i W Iiiii'Itill= 4 : I 1 3 1 iii't ill .—..--..,
3 / / 1 • Elfir.iiiii:/ i
1 t j 7 I i . • ,f 33 %ii 1 te
•
I 0/
/ /
://r
I; I V' ill
. i l E 3 si
Exiti.iitEli • :, .1. .., Lii litrii
.iki ilititilliti g i ...; F.1. :bit i 11 01C
CC
LUR
l••...
.'
1
,
r , 4 ..■._ ,
ii k.
i , , $ , 1 —
ILIZ
........,
• i s 1
1 1111=1 i
' i IP! i i i i 1.1 11.1 ,, t III
1 t W
'
i
:
Iii: i jet ii, h 1,1 1, ,=I. o
Ili in! I li i i il , i. :IL! 4
.11,1P11! . lit Yi 0 - -Oft 1 t il,1
=:„ ,s, 1, ii ii ii i il ....
1-, I-„ 1, .111,1—, ,, 1 . ;
,e1 1, .., r , ,... F. „,,
, ,.., ., ..._
,---.__•:•.......) " k _, , , ....
1 .....,
,... i •
• c„.,...,_,_-,-./_ , & , ...., ,, , 1 ..„.,„, .,
.. ,, 4' • Ili .1 1 1 . 1 11; . ii i
s ii kr si i i Iliii !if: t: ..id.i ii
1 I ifi i!. I iii: IP it! i! NTH il iliil R
.A. : 02
* 4-
e• . 1 giii! 1 I , r i MI ilk 1 ilqii:.1 i 1 111 . g 0
g ,
..2-V-L-• • J
-' ---- jr iMii i:1 ii ii iii,iili
• 777----- i'll';1 NJ
1 .,....,, ON NVS 0 , ,
C ------------- It46, ' f/ iitti- ii 1-,1 iili It ti; .. ti ti pl.:
I itinili :1 i Nit iili III: II iiiiii ii ti
. 2
iiaat: I
1
..
...,
I
R STRGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS &PLANNERS
TRANSPORTATION ■CIVIL ■STRUCTURAL ■ENVIRONMENTAL ■PARKING
1
SRF No. 0921635
MEMORANDUM
1
TO: Paul Krauss, AICP 1
Planning Director
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1
FROM: Dennis R. Eyler, P.E., Principal
DATE: November 18, 1993 1
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF WEST VILLAGE CENTER
TRAFFIC IMPACTS
I
As you requested, we have completed a review of the subject proposed development
and associated traffic impacts. Based on this review we offer the following comments I
and recommendations for your consideration:
1. The proposed retail development consisting of about 98,000 square feet of
I
space is consistent with the land use assumed for this area in our most recent
traffic forecasts. The March 1993 update to the Chanhassen Central Business
District Traffic Study assumed this subject site would support up to 125,000
I
square feet of retail /shopping development. This assumed land use would
include the specific mix of development currently proposed for this site.
2. Since the proposed development building area is Tess than that assumed in the 1
most recent traffic study, it is concluded that the proposed development would
not represent a significant increase in traffic impacts to the subject area.
Therefore, the roadway improvement snow being completed on West 78th Street
(which were based on these most recent traffic forecasts), should accommodate
this current development proposal.
3. A cursory review of the site plan faxed to us reveals no significant problems I
related to site circulation or access. However, we would reserve our final
comments until we have an opportunity to review a more detailed site plan. It
does appear that the site plan would result in some parking spaces located such t
that vehicles would be required to back into main circulation aisles, particularly in
front of the retail space west of the supermarket. This would not be a desirable
condition.
1
Should you have any questions or comments concerning this review, please contact us.
DRE:bba
RECEIVED 1
NOV 191993
Suite 150, One Carlson Parkway North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447 -4443
(612) 475 -0010 FAX (612) 475 -2429 :a Y OF CHANHASSEr
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
' MEMORANDUM
TO: Bob Generous, Planner II
1 FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
Diane Desotelle, Water Resources Coordinator,
�✓"
DATE: November 22, 1993
SUBJ: West Village Center Site Development
93 -7 Site Plan Review
In review of the West Village Center site plan submittal dated November 1, 1993, revised
November 18, 1993, prepared by James R. Hill, Inc., we offer the following comments and
1 recommendations:
' UTILITIES
Municipal water service for the site is proposed to be extended from an existing 18 -inch
1 watermain located along the west side of Kerber Boulevard via a 6 -inch waterline through the
site and reconnect to the existing 1 8 -inch watermain along West 78th Street. It is assumed that
the utilities within the subject property will be owned and privately maintained. Fire hydrant
1 spacing and location requirements shall be determined by review of the City's fire marshal. Since
these improvements will be private, the City's Building Department will be performing the
necessary plan and specification review as well as inspections. The applicant will be responsible
for applying for and obtaining the necessary building permits through the City's Building
Department.
1 Sanitary sewer service to the site is proposed to be constructed along the southerly side of the
main building and the proposed retail office space. The main building will connect a 6 -inch
' sanitary sewer to an 8 -inch sanitary sewer on site. The 8 -inch sanitary sewer will then be
connected to the City's existing 8 -inch sanitary sewer at the southeast corner of the site adjacent
to Kerber Boulevard. The retail office space will connect a 6 -inch sanitary sewer to the City's
existing 8 -inch at the southwest corner of the site on West 78th Street. This line is anticipated
to serve only the proposed site. Therefore, as with the waterlines, it is assumed that these utilities
will be privately owned and maintained.
1
1
1
Bob Generous 1
November 23, 1993
Page 2 1
The applicant is proposing earthberms and landscaping along Kerber Boulevard over the City's I
sanitary sewer. Staff recommends that the applicant be required to enter into an encroachment
agreement with the City to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any damages caused to
the property including landscaping as a result of performing necessary maintenance on the utility I
lines. In addition, these berms will result in adjusting the sanitary manholes which the applicant
should also be responsible for.
1
STREET /ACCES SPARKING
The entire site proposes five access locations, three existing off of West 78th Street, and two new 1
ones off of Kerber Boulevard. Information from a traffic review completed by Strgar- Roscoe-
Fausch (SRF) dated November 18, 1993 indicated that the proposed development is consistent
with the land use assumed for this area in there most recent traffic forecasts and therefore should
not represent a significant increase in traffic impacts to the subject area. The recent roadway
improvements made to West 78th Street should accommodate this development proposal. 1
The site plan proposes a parking area where vehicles would be required to back out into the main
circulation aisle, particularly in front of the retail space west of the supermarket. This not a
I
desirable condition. These fourteen stalls should be removed.
The City assumes that the developer will also be furnishing and installing the appropriate traffic
I
control signs and pavement markings throughout the site.
In the future, Coulter Drive may be closed or relocated in conjunction with future City Hall
expansion. The northerly access on Kerber Boulevard would most likely line up with future
proposed street alignment to City Hall. The proposed turning radii at each driveway access along
Kerber Boulevard, in staffs' mind, appear to be too narrow (15 feet). The turning radius along
I
Kerber Boulevard is recommended to be a minimum of 20 feet. To accommodate large semi-
trailer combinations, the turning radius for the service drive around the building in the northwest
corner of the site should be expanded to account for a 50 -foot wheelbase.
The parking lot is proposed to be graded in a southwesterly direction. The parking lot grade is I
approximately 4 %. This is the maximum grade that City staff recommends.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE 1
The applicant was previously granted an interim use permit (Grading Permit No. 93 -10) for
grading the entire site. The entire site is proposed to be regraded to create the desired
development topography. The building pad located in the southwesterly corner of the site is
1
Bob Generous
November 23, 1993
1 Page 3
' proposed to be raised approximately 10 to 12 feet higher than the existing ground elevation. This
will result in the first floor elevation of the building be approximately 18 feet higher than the
intersection at West 78th Street directly to the west. Staff believes that this portion of the site
' can be lowered to improve sight lines. If the building is left at this elevation, it may look similar
to the Rapid Oil Change building located on Highway 5.
1 The site is proposed to drain to three separate drainage basins. The easterly portion of the site
will drain to the southeast corner of the site and connect to the existing storm sewer at the
intersection of Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street. This storm sewer eventually discharges
1 into the City's stormwater retention pond south of Market Square. The central portion of the site
will drain into two existing 15 -inch storm sewerlines which then connect to an 18 -inch line along
the southern portion of West 78th Street. This storm runoff eventually discharges into a NURP
1 basin behind the Target site. The western portion of the site will drain into a 15 -inch line and
discharge the storm sewer runoff into the newly created stormwater pond located west of Powers
Boulevard on the Eckankar site. The site's stormwater is being pretreated in the City's stormwater
1 retention basins therefore no on -site stormwater retention ponds are being required. The parcel
has been or is being assessed for these storm drainage improvements.
It appears that additional catch basins may be necessary to accommodate the stormwater runoff
from the expansive parking area. The double catch basins near the West 78th Street access points
may be more efficient if they are moved north near the landscaped islands. A small drainageway
may have to be cut through the southern corner of the access road islands to effectively drain the
stormwater runoff that could potentially pond within the L- shaped curbed island.
The developer's engineer shall provide the City with detailed stormsewer drainage calculations
and discharge rates for the entire storm sewer system on the site. The storm drainage calculations
should verify that the existing storm sewer system will accommodate the additional runoff from
the site. The main drainage area in question is the capacity of the Target pond. All storm sewer
lines should be designed for a 10 -year storm event.
1
MISCELLANEOUS
The development utilizes a part of Lot 3 and all of Lot 4, Block 1 West Village Heights 2nd.
The west line of Lot 4 is proposed to be altered. The westerly access to the site will be across
Lot 3. A cross access or driveway easement should be prepared to maintain ingress and egress
to both lots.
1 Staff recommends that the applicant provide the City with a security deposit in the amount of
$10,000.00 to guarantee boulevard restoration as well as the curb cuts onto the City streets. This
security could be included with the security deposit for the landscaping items. On another note,
1
1
Bob Generous
November 23, 1993
Page 4 1
the retaining walls along the rear of the building will most likely need a separate building permit. 1
EROSION CONTROL
1
An erosion control plan is required and should be incorporated on the site plan and submitted to
the City for review and approval prior to construction commencement. Staff recommends the
applicant use the City's Best Management Practice Handbook for erosion control measures.
All disturbed areas are to be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to prevent 1
erosion and sedimentation. The back slope of the site lying north of the building appears to be
approximately 3:1. Staff recommends a wood fiber blanket to inhibit erosion while the seed is
being established. Protection around catch basins such as hay bales or silt fence is also required
until the pavement is installed. If at all possible, construction of the site in stages is highly
recommended to help reduce sedimentation into the City's infrastructure. The applicant should
be aware that they will be responsible for cleaning the City's storm sewerlines if erosion control
measures fail to act properly.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The applicant shall be responsible for applying and obtaining the necessary permits for 1
the City's Building department for the installation of the site improvements.
2. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for berming and
landscaping over the City's drainage and utility easement along the west side of Kerber
Boulevard. The applicant will also be responsible for adjusting the existing sanitary '
manholes to the new grades.
3. The applicant shall remove the fourteen parking stalls in front of the retail site directly ,
west of the supermarket.
4. The applicant will be responsible for furnishing and installing the appropriate traffic
control signs and pavement markings throughout the site.
5. The turning radii at the driveway access points along Kerber Boulevard should be
expanded to 20 feet. The turning radius for the service drive located in the northwest
corner of the site should be expanded to accommodate large semi - trailer accommodations
with a wheelbase of 50 feet.
1
1
1
1 Bob Generous
November 23, 1993
Page 5
1
6. The applicant's engineer shall supply City staff with detailed storm drainage calculations
for the entire site. Storm sewers shall be designed to handle a 10 -year storm event.
Additional catch basins may be needed after review of the storm water calculations.
1 7. The retail building site locatedin the southwest corner of the site plan should be lowered
by a minimum of five feet.
1 8. The applicant shall provide the City with a $ 10,000.00 financial security to guarantee
installation of the curb cuts and boulevard restoration. The security may be included with
1 the security requirements for the site landscaping. - - -
•
9. An erosion control plan shall be developed and incorporated into the site plan and
1 resubmitted for City staff review and approval. Staff recommends implementing the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook for the plan design as well as site
restorations. The northerly back slope behind the building should be restored with an
erosion control blanket. Plans should also employ erosion control measures around
1, proposed catch basins with hay bales or silt fence or other approved measures in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
1 10 The final site grades shall be compatible with the final grade of the Oak Pond
development directly north of this development.
1 jms
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
RECETrkl 1 Lid
H K N` 1993
g ' O
?? S S A . ►�.
I
MEMORANDUM
Date: 23 November 1993
1
To: Robert E. Generous, Planner
City of Chanhassen I
From: Michael Schroeder •
RE: Review of West V a e Center Landscape Plan
Chanhassen, Minnesota
I
As requested, Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. has reviewed the Landscape Plan for the West
Village Center (Byerly's) in Chanhassen, Minnesota (dated November 18, 1993, as prepared by
I
McCoy Architects). Our review is divided into general comments, which reflect concern for
landscape issues throughout the site, and specific comments dealing with concerns at individual
locations on the site.
1
1 General Comments
1.1 Design
I
1.1.1 The pattern of planting seems to be one of alternating species, both in perimeter planting
and buffer plantings. The resulting landscape will likely be static and monotonous. Consideration
I
should be given to placing plant materials together to create a bolder, more interesting landscape,
without excessive alternation.
1.1.2 Most plants are planted in straight lines -- great for mowing, but hardly reflective of the I
surrounding landscape. It would more appropriate to use plants in massings, creating a more
diverse and dynamic landscape.
1.1.3 Within massings, similar species should be used to ensure the greatest effect from the
individual plants. Plants typically work better in large groups than as individual specimens.
1.2 Street Trees 1
1.2.1 The plan does not recognize the street tree planting at West 78th Street and Kerber
I
Boulevard, where the City has installed, or has plans for, trees at 50 feet on center (for West 78th
Street) or 35 feet on center (for Kerber Boulevard).
1.2.2 The plan should start with the pattern of street tree plantings at the streets, allowing these
I
trees to provide continuity between this site and other developments. Trees for this project can
then be placed in groupings within the setback or berms areas of the site.
1.2.3 The plans for West 78th Street show a permanent landscape easement at several locations 1
along West 78th Street. If this site were planted according to this plan, it would result in tree
spacing that is too close for the health of the plants.
Land Use / Environmental ■ Planning / Design 1
7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 0 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 a (612) 835 -9960 ■ Fax: (612) 835 -3160
1
' West 'Village Center Landscape Plan Review
Chanhassen, Minnesota Page 2
1.3 Species
1.3.1 The variety of species indicated is generally adequate, although it would be appropriate to
include higher value species such as oaks and sugar maples where appropriate and where space is
adequate (north of the building in the buffer area or west of the retail section of the building). Both
are native to Chanhassen and would better reflect the landscape character of the area.
1.4 Shrubs
1.4.1 The groundlayer seems to be neglected, for there are very few shrubs on the site, and those
1 that are used have little color to add to the landscape.
1.4.2 Evergreen shrubs are great for winter and also add to the summer landscape, but use of
' more flowering shrubs in combination with the evergreen shrubs would be appropriate. Even if
their bloom time is limited, their effect when flowering is significant.
1.4.3 The plan should consider the use of more shrubs and perennials (such as daylilies) in
important areas of the site. These plants could be used as accents at site entries or pedestrian areas.
1.5 Turf Areas
' 1.5.1 Sod areas should be irrigated; there was no indication as to whether this is planned.
' 1.5.2 For maintaining sodded areas, it is reasonable to mow slopes no greater than 4 horizontal to
1 vertical. Large areas of the site, including berm areas, show sodding on fairly steep slopes,
some approaching or exceeding three horizontal to 1 vertical.
2 Specific Comments
2.1 Site Entries
' 2.1.1 The more formal placement of trees along entry drives works to continue the feeling
established by the city's tree planting at the street. Tighter spacing of the trees along the entry
' drives is desirable.
2.1.2 Entries could be marked at the streets with more colorful plantings, creating a break in the
rhythm of street tree planting and providing emphasis for site entry points.
' 2.1.3 Shrubs along the entry drives would reinforce views to the building and obscure bumpers
and hoods of cars.
' 2.2 Building
2.2.1 Although the building is well articulated to break up its mass, adding ornamental trees
(crabapples, hawthorns or japanese tree lilacs) in planting areas near the building would add
interest and color to the expanse of wall, especially at the front (south) side of the building. Care
should be exercised in selecting plants that do not set fruit (which can be messy in the case of some
' crabapples) for areas close to pedestrian ways.
2.2.2 Areas near the building would benefit from the introduction of more colorful plant
r
1
West Village Center Landscape Plan Review
Chanhassen, Minnesota Page 3
1
materials, in the form of flowering shrubs and perennials.
2.2.3 Care should be exercised in spacing shrubs to ensure that complete cover of the planting 1
bed is achieved at maturity.
2.3 Parking Areas ,
2.3.1 Overstory trees within the parking areas would reduce the amount of paving and provide
some shade in an otherwise large expanse of parking. Plantings could be grouped in larger
islands near the center of the parking area without significantly decreasing parking opportunities or
increasing maintenance concems.
2.3.2 At the perimeter of parking areas, the large expanses of sod from the back of the curb to the
property line should be planted with trees and shrubs in significant groupings. This should also
occur between the westerly entry drive and the east side of the small commercial building, around
the commercial building itself and at the area west of the retail building. Conifers in these areas
would be useful for the winter landscape.
2.3.3 Consideration should be given to maintaining views to the building when placing tree
groupings in perimeter areas.
2.4 Buffer Areas
2.4.1 Plantings, as shown, will do little to buffer the residential uses to the north of the site. In
order to more effectively screen the new building from these residences, the trees should be placed
closer to the top of the slope (as opposed to near the bottom where they have virtually no effect on
screening).
2.4.2 Spacing of conifers should be 10 feet to allow them to grow together into a more solid
mass at a younger age. As at other areas of the site, these trees should be placed strategically in
groupings to increase their effectiveness as a buffer and to lend a more natural feel to the planting.
Depending on planting requirements to meet city standards, the use of more but smaller materials
may be warranted to achieve better long -term screening of the new building.
1
2.4.3 The use of oaks, a more valuable species than hackberry, would be reasonable as space is
available. Oaks would also be more consistent with the surrounding landscape.
1
2.4.4 The slope in the buffer area is shown as sod, which is reasonable for slopes that require
maintenance as long as they do not exceed a 4:1 slope. If slopes are steeper, the use of a
groundcover should be considered. A good choice would be sumac, a plant that is native to the
area, which helps to hold slopes by virtue of its root structure and growth habit.
Please call me if you have any questions or require clarification of any of these comments. 1
1
-A
111
• . - YLNW.N J T. 4. (1r EASUIn° Cr u • •i :i1� I . :n_T_. 9. I Nn 1.
■
r : i - r: r: • : r. �y • ' ci peck rA c°L°p
r (TV .r_.2- 2 r. :11:4 : • s at ?maw 6ASKEr
{ fi - � ` \ 171171 I II- tl..�IPII• I:: _ -, ,.r£/CaLOn 2.
��� . i 660 i =i ii % ` :111 • i i i i E . r • ` r m A c accE"'
7 111+ mat
%s_ -__ �� 1 " ' •��r \_, w_ 0 r • i� , c. o air SEWN aoa '�
5 �1 11r -� =. X711
� . � •m� iI_u_ . n.n.
`�
- _ i. 0 91 V - n SE E p£fAtL E. SNE to fOR 1 '•.•r ; :
.�27 s oraEm.sE t71 ; s. ..
' Jr
_� • .0 •, NE vAWtCAnErot $T1All
i 1 Lta ro � v � - J ��<� ti \ � atsawwKr As SWAN CPI w t ° ."s a
:: '�A = e'�- j T ' O'r' t ?�`\_ ` \ � O ` BRIO< PAVING PATTER
gi 0064 I 9 -M0. - - e .. . - .: . SEE OEV AL 2
H / 1 ' ..'��►.� wss. Y So
3 , �i � ` f� v SE E OEfAL , 1 ' E ` 3-KO. 7-AOO LhAte
/ _
- -- - -- - -- - -- -
`� A - ,
A 0 csla AND GOTTEN "r 4111111111P11111, BMOC PANNG - ME/0C.s01.014.02.4s 5-NO. -400 Qom=
t Oi CURL OWNER AS NEEDED 3 ----
2 -270 70-N0. 5 -790
le _„11. a ac s/wue �culm oan ccum � /� - -- ' DAVISON ION JOINT WICN
,i4. OA 1111741AUctlf , a 1' i " ig E
. 1 .i,. A• mat PAN9K: - MIT/COLON 2 ' �� - °� �
;' i', 1 �. f CUT ma, ACCENT Y.G'i
U
11 .
D BRICK Su
_ taus TREA Off Cm)
1
J I
O7 I
5-N0. 2-500 I 0: I
1 W 1 4-140. _.00
UN { _rq. 2 -.00 2 -N0. 2 -570 POWANEM LANDSCAPE 1 K 1 ' -.
IL•,1111'� pauper (119) 0 MP.)1 1 Y 1 °
a EE m _ / �_ _
is y/ • 78TH S TR �� !�E - Su
Is
o so
,9 �fT► ^ i •j:I� , I. - :I..I:I.•I.•I:I
'. 1 AL +'s5 - - --
.7 1 .- _.:•r- 1��lIt11.����� 1 ��i!.!jC ° ----00 0 —
SEE OWL V Q V
a�- ww•.v..'�.• i i iaa. - 1T6 a - ,ny a "AC fTR )
- - - EEO. Y orr ? NC
MAD. 10 CURD
90-NO. 5- 790 IV IP IP IP „No. 600 °
Anrc
1
7 - NO. 2 - 270 5-90. 2-400 1 - -- -- --
5,m .c DNA 95 oAIE SHEET 63
C HANHASSEN v.o+ w S. KOSKELA 1 97 79
r . - ..•.... lo
CITE OF L p[paCE {V
sA.. lo- - r MORSON 1 a
- FAUSCH INC. "=�M° • r LANDSCAPE PLAN aE «in.. 3 _ 9 3 wW.�
STAGAR- ROSCO t ,T• 4004 a � _
WEST 79TH ST. / POWERS BLVD. - ov2� _
CONSULTING E • ■ LAND SURVEYORS •T_3
R. F
S
R£9190
1963 ,NC 11:32 W ....... . � .. '` . - `wr`'..,.... : . . -,
EMI OM MI MI MI OM 1 111 1 11' MI INA 1111111 ON -, 111111 IIIIII IIIIII 1111111 Mill 111111 ME
— _
_ MI _ MI _ NM _ MI MI 11M IIIIII MI 111111 1111111 1111111 Mil _ VI_E _
WEST TOWNHOUSES
i in • o,
Q;
z f I —Fd — lze f; l71 _ �, - 3 `, lal Z1
Q f di itl.s
01
N t' 1 -10 U I O p. ) w �
A ly, / l U P I �I rwl �
•,:,...iLl? i •._. ;If ••• ';.. : 1 - WI IZ'
r r - 35,1S/1•0 -. - -- - -- C+IIIiUG n r',c • :] :CNER — — _ - —
IN- - - - . -...s + ` 4 _. �! "_ ew _ +;_�,��:_, ,;.e � �.]r . � . my- -rrn� . f - �I�1— AI. _ .+ ft - -44 _ - _. ..� o •
_ _'- x - - c a coo ED � • - - - - - +su
— -
_ -- I =j •�! 1 % A 3 •
_ _ _. _ _ 3 • - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ i_ EaISTING 34 BITUMINOU1 STREET 10 T 9 • 9 1 �i
- --•� O• Y-' • --« KERBER BOULEVARD ' ' ' ' ' {
' uT � -- -T U7 T• '..".'"..."..."--
1 ',ZI • _ ; ,� 7 - -e i _ -. _ - -- `' \, .' --- -. • — --- -s a —i 7- V_IIETE S'LTA3 - • I• ...................... - + .
I io — !!! + + 1 - C- � i - � v cI P .1 __ -- -• J POw .C� • .B' A = .w .3 is v • ► .
: /41 �� l i: A -zo G/ o o ROw g =' TS" o o l L G G A O
I I' I IT-- I I I 1 I' ' 0,
l' - O -
e W 1
: n I
� IN - I ' I . '�. c ^ �. iEI All nrwr and bench marks are 10 Tap
'0), IOV a a ` •
_ I, I li a„ el nut e1 Maracas.
1 ~ • W i° k I 11 1 I 2 cr l ; I I I
+ INI o� r - SCHNEIDER tW ' P I SCHNEIDER CITY INDEPENDENT .SCHOOL
' - 11 ( PARK 1 i I' PARK OF DISTRICT N O 112
i ; 3 ; "I I I I 1 1'
1 o , I�, CHANHASSEN
BENCH MARK NE CORNER _ _ " .I :"'•
W 78THST. 6 KEREER BLVD "i -
TOPHYD ELEV.974.37 1 III _
1 11 \ C
1 \
•
-- -, SADDLEBROOK 1
7
OUTLOT B ,NV 1117i TT 9
\ EIIISTIN6 1 • 6.-6. I STA 21.00 BEGIN
11 I ' \ \ YNLERPAS B BITUMINOUS
i WALKS/AT
VILLAGE
tilti �;,�. -a_ _ - `_ i , P / BITUMINOUS WALK War
WEST TOWNHOUSES _ _ - - - - �r .81,-.-...
•.1 ••• tea% _ n - - - _ •••• �l ��
�� - O 'I 111 z 2 --- _ _ ` ±``
'j ' fl 2 ,6% Ids a TYP. -
' - _ - 1 19 -� _ - a-UT -_`�_ ? � -• ,
•�= _ —(- , 0vIt-VvADD i. , s : fi r ° _ ��= \ al /_ _ r' ' _ ' ap- .rs. \ '� I 9 60 0 eux
__ w•N• • Ex
4 � � _ - y : � - I S ' ! ...... ...MT r , ti - TOP OF SI)PE \ % m RCP ` -
+��r' - - - - - T,3 e , Cf / ' E CURV OAT \ `� ��
- 1 � ► . , I ri�Y- /./' .� R • • 761 �� %
ill -� - - r - �''_ . I _ � - i , � 1+1 . mac e • .. 00 0 �
.� ,- OT .......--•-•______-
`r� `ii/ ' '� ' • � i • • Sof 33 CITY PARK
�+ -� ' wP- '�� / ,1 •: -.Iq�� C • • 05990 00- Fir
- ,LL.
at
1 - . ' - 1114
k VINO v 1,
1 4; L!h i
I , hl% _ °
c .. ) - I 7,2 ,..., f
til
Z N
•a
Z 0 0 , i --- A
M
1 .
1 , . _
,.
y __ ma
......,
1 � •
or \ BE
I S''',i':.... t �:: - - ��
1 / Ei -x
�i�d �� � t � till'
• • if ,:';'e. * ri ll 11 1 .„
.!. 1 46 ,.....
£, C4 CO
0 0 . . C
1 "
MI 410
,1
0 40101 -- 4 II--, _ __
4
■ri / 111 i Si i ..c'
s r
. ....1
1 , �, co CO N
; 4111, X. .. ‘ 1 ,it t f i IS
I j i.
� f
i t la I
11 ts:\
32 t
ftp 0 . 4
:
etk
I • . ili P ,,,,_. . , \ s, ,:.....;,, A
:I . 110010 " 4.010 •
WEI allW,I, AL& :"' e ,, gal ,_.... A
A: - , 1 - . or - . +' � w� y S�
1 TI ��CR a(Thw:
1
: t :
j j ,r.
yl i 1 i r
Ls t ,.
i 1 ;'
ar 4,4 '
F _
• _ �
b �
ze -� i it � �
—^ "
I �I 1'r
r�� -�z:; •: � •• ;lam =rs�.. • I'll •
r� � y � i r w•l. �� i� =r f� : i ti
���J� =�, :1! \t��� .ti:.;: : 1 1 1 ' L.
as
1 . .F' t f 1 � .i .��•.:• ,�;`. 1. ?
r
1 t is ;•V• I" i.
i
�1� ��
z
1
I ,
� I ��
,, i 4
Figure 11 -3 Favorable soil conditions for pavement plantings can be ob- , Pc .
f "
rained by replacing 3.5 m (120 ft') of soil 0.6 m (2 ft) deep with coarse �'�
lava slag and soil mix before installing pavement. The shape of an excava- i '
'IS tion depends on the space available. Aeration can be further enhanced by � ' } 1;
placing an aeration system as shown; the horizontal portion can be either } z
�„ PVC pipe or flexible tubing. The risers are of heavy metal pipe with addi- #
,w tional support (not shown) to protect the tree and to withstand abuse. '! 'i i a ,
�:
: center of where the planter will be. The rock -soil mixture is lightly compacted to • i s .
give a solid surface of lava with soil filling the voids. The pavement can then be ;
I [;; /
installed. This provides a firm base for the pavement with no further compaction d . 1
and because of the porosity of the lava (about 48 -50 percent v/v) an optimal supply E
of oxygen for tree roots (Kopinga 1985, citing Terlouw 1981). Tree roots should ; j a l i'
grow out into the soil among the lava. Rocks other than lava could also be used 4c, ;
though the aeration would not be as good. i
Urban (1989) examined thirteen 11- to 27- year -old plantings in tree pits sur- m!'
rounded by pavement in locations from Boston to Virginia. One of his conclusions I if
It is that "any planting site with less than 100 cubic feet (3 m cannot sustain long- :'. � ' t '
'r term tree growth." Beyond a depth of 0.6 m (2 ft), increase in surface area is more if
td beneficial than increase in soil depth for all but large - growing trees. Depending on ,1? -
,
priorities and adequacy of summer rain, an irrigation system may need to be in- '
.s- stalled. Y. � 4
ii ° • Cluster and linear tree and shrub plantings are becoming more common along
m • .j center -city streets and in plazas (Fig. 11-4). These provide more shared rooting f : _k
�d = space and exposed surface for aeration and rain deposition. In Europe and America, -1 =
- ft " some planters are joined with channels of quality soil under the paving. For the soil ''r
t channels to be successful, i t wou be wise to have at least one perforated aeration ;~ , t , 1 wry
a - pipe in each channel which is connected to vertical risers in each of the planters. Ij
bit, sl_
to This is an extension of aeration system shown in Fig. 11 -3. :
4 - ..
ns - Planting Trees in Paved Areas 249 [ i •
_ 1' I 'd
t l 1 +�
'93-12-01 1113 F. 2
Principals In Minnesota's Fastest
Growing Area
' Brian H. Burdick
B.C. "Jim" Burdick
426 Lake Street Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 (612) 474.5243
December 1, 1993
Planning Commission
' City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, IN 55317
' -- - - - Ref: T.F. James Cargaany Property. - - — - - - - - -- - - -- - - - --
Lot 4, Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition
Gentlemen:
Unfortunately I can not be at the public hearing this evening.
&Never, I am familiar with the plans and with the T.F. James CarQany,
and speaking as a neighboring property owner, I strongly feel that this
development will. benefit Chanhassen. I am acquainted with many of the
other James properties and they most certainly do an excellent job of
maintaining their property and they are an asset to whichever area in
which they own property.
Therefore, Brian and I, wish to go on record as strongly favoring this
project.
Cordia ,y yours,
417 4
' = • (JIM) BURDICK
H. BURDICK
1
BCE/km].
1
1
1 •
I "Success in business is purely a matter of luck.
if you dot,'t believe us, just ask any of the losers."
•
•
December 3, 1993
Chanhassen City Council
and Planning Commission
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Members of the Council and Planning Commission:
It has just come to my attention that the City of Chanhassen appears to
be on the verge of changing its design standards.
As ynu know, 1 recently completed an extensive process with your City for
approval of Goodyear and Abra facilities. Because of delays in closing on
the land, construction of the site improvements have just begun. Construction II
of the buildings has not yet started.
During the process for approval of a Conditional Use Permit for my sites, '
my plans were thoroughly scrutinized by staff, by the Planning Commission
and by the Council. At each step many changes in design were made to ac-
cnmmodate your wishes for i'he buildings to comply with a design standard
which included pitched roofs and the use of brick exteriors. We agreed to
e11 of the requirements and until now have intended to construct the build-
ings in accordance with the approved plans. ,
However, 1 now understand that serious consideration is being given to e
brick, flat roofed facility that will house a grocery store, several retail
shops and a free - standing building. (Although I have not seen the elevations
for the free - standing building 1 assume it will match the proposed architecture
for the grocery and retail strip building.) Among the design elements I
noticed is a straight, flat roofed wall of over 150 feet immediately adjacent
to Kerber Blvd. and which is shielded only by deciduous trees.
Given the concern that was expressed over the relatively short span of
building walls which were perpendicular to Highway 5 in my project, I have
to say that I am also wondering if your standards with respect to this
aspect of design have changed as well.
F3EISNER LTD.
6100 Summit Drive North
8iooklyn Center, MN 55430
(512) 560 -0246
Fax 580-5089 -.r
1 '
Chanhassen City Council
December 3, 1993
Page Two
1
1
Since construction has not yet started on my buildings and assuming the
' above - referenced project is approved, 1 am currently giving serious con-
sideration to a request of a review of the requirements imposed upon my
development. The cost savings to me would be considerable if I too could
comply only with the requirements imposed on this development.
Yours truly,
6
L. A. 8eisner
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CITYOF
i
olor
0 CHANHASSEN 1
6 90 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
P - - mber 6, ```- i
Mr. Al Beisner
Beisner, Ltd.
6100 Summit Drive North
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Dear Mr Beisner. 1
I received a copy of your December 3 letter where you raised concerns with the proposal to build a flat- roofed 1
building for the Byerly's store. You indicated that you may want to come back before the City Council to have the
condition waived that you install pitched roof sections on the Abra and Goodyear Buildings you are constructing.
First of all, the proposed Byerly's building will be constructed of several types of brick, and incorporate extensive 1
detailing, varied roofline, screen walls for loading areas, and an enclosed mezzanine for HVAC equipment. The
proposal also has a very extensive landscape plan and meets the criteria of the new parking lot ordinance and
proposed Highway 5 Corridor Overlay District. Additionally, as a builder, I would expect you to understand the 1
impossibility of putting a pitched roof on a large box building such as this. In my opinion, the quality of
construction is, without a doubt, far beyond anything you proposed on your site and the Byerly's was held to a higher
standard.. I am fully comfortable with the design, as was the Planning Commission who recently recommended its
approval. 1
As for your coming back to the City to request a review of your approved architecture to eliminate the required roof
systems, you are of course permitted to do so. I can schedule you for one of the Council's January meetings. I 1
assume that you would also propose to upgrade your building materials and site plan accordingly. Additionally, since
you have put us on notice of the proposed change in your building design, I cannot in good conscience authorize
the release of any building permits beyond the foundation stage. I have directed the Public Safety Department that 1
no further permits are to be released until this matter is resolved.
Sincerely,
1
Paul Krauss, AICP
Director of Planning 1
pc: City Council
Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner
Steve Kirchman, Building Official 1
plan\plcsbeisner 1
1
1
LOTUS
1 December 2, 1993
1
Chanhassen Planning Commission
1 City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Concerns - West Village Center
1 Ladies and Gentlemen:
The King Family, - Gateway Foods - and Market Square Associates
Limited Partnership wish to thank you for listening.to our
concerns at last night's Planning Session. We agree that
the project is of high quality construction.
1 However, the King Family and Gateway have many concerns
regarding the project's impact on the success of their store
' and the Market Square partnership thus has concerns about
the domino effect on the entire shopping center. Because we
were responsible for bringing the Kings and Gateway as well
as the other tenants to Chanhassen and Market Square we
' feel a great deal of responsibility to them. Because there
has been so little time since the project's first
announcement and the developer's requested timetable for
' final approval, we posed economic questions to you, many of
which I recognize are outside your purview. For that, we
appreciate your indulgence. We did so, however, for the
' record and so that some of the issues can be addressed prior
to the Council's review.
We do, however, have some additional planning- related requests.
' Having been involved in over $30,000,000 in development in
downtown Chanhassen recently, we have become familiar with several
standards that have evolved in the plan approval process.
' (Without suggesting that these same questions may not have
occurred to each of you) we therefore ask that you address
the following planning questions:
1 1. Does the project's architecture meet the requirements
which Target, Abra, Goodyear, Country Suites and the
various Lotus developments (Town Square, Ridgeview
Medical, Heritage Apts.) have had to meet, i.e. the
pitched and gable roof look? If not, are you setting a
new standard? (Allowing flat roofs if the construction
material is brick.)
1
" f CT -3T 1 t ST TIFF 1 t ro Bo) ?;T, ■ CHANT1 1"t!, MINNrSr 55317 • (512) 934.4538 • FAX (612) 934 -1505
1
1
2. Does the sign plan meet both the Highway 5 Corridor
concept and the current zoning? Have the developers
presented sign covenants as part of the package?
3. How does the request relate to the W. 78th Site Plan
recommendations made as part of the Target Public Hearings?
Having been involved as the development coordinator for the
Oak Ponds housing development to the north of the project,
we also chose to focus attention to the effect of the
proposed project to that development. There was also some
input from a future resident (which we did not solicit).
Having approved that project only a short while ago, you are
familiar with its design and the process involved in its
approval. We have confirmed with the Dean R. Johnson sales
staff that all purchasers are being advised that there will
be commercial development on the James site; however, that
should not preclude concerns on their part nor should it
relieve the developer from addressing their welfare. To
that end, the following concerns should be addressed:
(which are in most cases no less than have been required for
other recent developments such as Target and Market Square)
1
1. What are the views from the two projects to the north?
(Graphic presentations of the view from the west
would also seem to be appropriate.) 1
2. How high is /are the parapet(s)?
3. Where will the TTVAr units be located? Will they be seen '
from the adjacent housing?
4. How much noise will the TTVAC create (noise rises)? How ,
will the noise he alleviated?
5. What will be done to eliminate the odors from the
restaurant? (They rise also.)
We recoani7e that a more thorough review of the project's
site and architectural plans will pose the potential of a
delay of construction start from the developer's present
plans and we are not unsympathetic to his concerns. How-
ever, our experience is that the review and revision
process does take some time - - -- usually several months - -and
we have never expected to receive planning, council and HRA
approvals in a span of 16 days. We too have been under time
and weather constraints and in addition to tenants Vho have
been pressing us we also have had owners and often lenders
pushing and threatening to go away.
Thanks again for the chance to provide input.
Sincerely
;; 1
')/
T�rad1g ' Q. ,Tohngon
r'r' rharl in •1 n s
�,.:�„ jrlhnct'n
CITY OF
-10‘ CHANHASSEN
690 COULTEI=R DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
I MEMORANDUM
TO: Charles Folch, City Engirt per
Scott Harr, Public Safety director
FROM: Bob Generous, Planner 11
DATE: December 8, 1993
SUBJ: Byerly's Site Plan
The Planning Commission at their Decerr
ber 4, 1993, meeting regarding the Byerly's site plan
expressed some concern about the impact of traffic at the northern driveway on Kerber Boulevard
1 with users of the City Park located nozp3th of City Hall. They requested that this issue be
reviewed and formal comments be provided to the City Council for their deliberation.
Specifically, the Planning Commission was concerned about traffic conflicts between the hours
of 4:00 P.M. and 9:00 P.M. when the pares is in use.
1 Please review the plans and provide any comments to Planning prior to the public hearing on
Monday, December 13, 1993. If you haves any questions or need additional information, please
let me know.
1
1 1 _
i
1
1
1
1 EXCERPT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DECEMBER 1, 1993
1
PUBLIC HEARING:
' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON A SINGLE
PARCEL AND SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 64,132 SQUARE FOOT SUPERMARKET,
A 26,100 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT
' COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON 13.11 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED BG,
GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED ON LOT 4, BLOCK 1, WEST
VILLAGE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION, T.F. JAMES COMPANY.
Public Present:
1 Name Address
Charlie James T.F. James Company
John Meyers Byerly's
Dan Beckman 6895 Chaparral Lane
Craig Hallett Future Resident of Chanhassen
Vernelle Clayton 422 Santa Fe Circle
Brad Johnson 7425 Frontier Trail
Lyle King 7629 Oakland
Bill King 4801 Minneapolis Ave, Orono
Tim Menning 980...Circle, Burnsville
Bob King 6122 Arctic Way, Edina
Arnie Privie Gateway Foods, Minneapolis
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Batzli: So do the plans that we're looking at have any rational equivalence to what's actually
going to go in there?
Generous: Yes. Except for the sidewalk and the reduced elevation. All the building
1 locations.
Batzli: And all of the landscaping?
Generous: Well, we'll have improved landscaping.
1 Batzli: Okay. Can you go back to the Rhorshak one you had up there. Can you explain
what that was supposed to tell us?
1 Generous: This is just that southwest commercial building. What they've done is reduce this
1 1
1
elevation by 5 feet. The ground floor elevation. 1.
Batzli: So this is just showing the new grade?
Generous: Yeah. What they've done is created a steeper grade from here to this parking area
and then this is just, it's 5 feet lower. The ground floor elevation.
Batzli: Okay, thank you. Thanks. Does the applicant have a presentation for the Planning
Commission? Yes.
Harberts: I'd like to ask one question. Is there any involvement by the HRA in this project?
With Byerly's or this first segment of the project.
Generous: I believe they've had discussion.
Krauss: Yeah, I don't believe they've come, and Charlie you can correct me if I'm wrong. I
don't think they've come before the HRA yet. It's been discussed at a staff level. I think
they're scheduled for Saturday?
Harberts: So there's an opportunity?
Krauss: Yeah, I think there really is, to be honest, there's almost nothing that I know of 1
that's being done in the downtown area in the last 10 years that didn't had some sort of TIF
package attached to it.
Harberts: Does that ro osal that will come
p p t co a before them include the whole plan or is it just
for the Byerly's, or that...?
Krauss: I assume it's the entire. It's based on how much taxes are going to be generated by
building a development in there so, and the HRA does have, it's kind of...they do look at the
quality of the project and would basically defer to you, the Planning Commission and the City
Council on the site plan issues.
Harberts: With regard to the proposed senior housing, is that just concept or is that perhaps 1
more than a concept in what happens?
Krauss: Well let me give a...of that. When we were at the Vision 2002 meetings, there were
comments pro and con about senior housing showing up on the corner and a post office site.
I even heard some accusations cast towards Charlie James for, somebody accused staff of
being in the hip pocket of the developer. That we had a deal on the side and really nothing
could be further from the truth. What's happened is we designated several sites for potential
senior housing and we've referred a number of developers who have come to talk to us about
senior housing, to go talk to Charlie James. Mr. James is aware that we're seeking a site for
senior housing. He's also aware that we may need to seek a site to relocate the post office.
2
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
In the interest of meeting the city needs and offering a proposal to the city in terms of
settling, we had...land acquisition for the realignment of 78th Street. Mr. James presented this
as something for our discussions and if it's, that's simply all it is. There's no deal. There's
no guarantees that that's to be decided. It was for illustrative purposes only.
Harberts: For discussion purposes only, with senior housing, who would be the owner or is
that part of the, does it generate taxes I guess? Or is this something that the city will own or
the HRA will lease out or what's the potential relationship there?
Krauss: I guess the answer is yes. We've discussed all those options...
Harberts: Just a question for Brian, or the commission here. When we look at this, are we
just looking at this tonight or are we in a sense looking at this?
Krauss: No, you are just looking at the Byerly's and the commercial strip component.
Scott: Can I ask a question? When was this, I see we have a site plan. When was this a
conceptual?
Krauss: It's not. It's not a PUD. I know you haven't seen it for a long time but this is
actually straight zoning. This is under the CBD district.
Scott: I see site plan approval and then for 100,000 square feet and I've got an 8 1/2 x 11
inch piece of paper that I'm supposed to use to do this. I mean that seems to me to be, when
we have a lot of.
Krauss: Didn't you get the full sized copy?
Scott: No. No. This is it and we have a guy who wants to subdivide something into 3 lots
and we have 3 or 4 pages.
Krauss: There was some error on our part because we had full sized copies and.
Scott: I'm not that good to be able to render an opinion on this based upon what I have in
my packet. I don't know about the other folks but I sure can't.
Farmakes: The elevation plan is illogical.
Krauss: That's real unfortunate because it's not the developers fault. We have those in our
office and we assumed they got distributed last week.
3
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
Charlie James: Well both actually but where we want to direct people.
John Meyers: Well there's no internal access.
Batzli: There's no internal walkway?
Charlie James: No. I mean people could go that way. There's nothing to prevent them from
walking along underneath here.
John Meyers: Not inside the store. There's a walkway, but it's a sidewalk from our door
underneath a canopy for the drive thru right down to there.
Charlie James: Okay, but yeah. And then all of us, from here all the way down is enclosed.
I mean the sidewalk in front of the shops. You have a.
Mancino: So at what point does the walkway, internal walkway start?
John Meyers: It starts at the retail. At the other end of the retail. 1 •
Batzli: Okay. So there's no internal access between the grocery store and the retail?
John Meyers: No.
Harberts: Mr. Chair. How tall is the canopy?
John Meyers: Which part? This?
Harberts: Where you drive thru or drive under or whatever?
John Meyers: Probably about 25 feet.
Charlie James: It's 25 on there now.
Harberts: From road surface to the...
John Meyers: Oh, on the inside?
Harberts: Yeah.
John Meyers: It's a minimum of about 18 feet I think on all our stores.
6
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1 Charlie James: This, I'll just have to hold this one up.
Batzli: Has our Fire Marshal looked at that?
Charlie James: Yes. There was a meeting with all mechanical and building inspection
1 people.
Batzli: Did we have a report from the Fire Marshal in the packet? Has he looked at this
1 stuff?
Generous: He said they have no comment at this time.
Batzli: Really? Okay.
John Meyers: I mean if it's an issue that we...we wouldn't get a permit obviously to build it.
I mean that's something we deal with.
1 Batzli: Okay.
Charlie James: This may help explain what's happening across the front of the building here.
1 This represents the edge of the Byerly's store here. So here you see the drive through
coming out and these are the covered walkways here. So there's a, when you're coming into
this store, you're walking through a planting bed and then you're in a covered walkway
1 situation and the grade drops occur at the building wall so there's a grade drop here and then
this is held at pretty much the same elevation for the sidewalk and this area is going down.
So at this point you're going down on the sidewalk into the covered area. The planting beds
in front and by the time you get down to this other end, you would be going up because
we're holding this, the elevation from here to here constant and the site is going down a little
bit. And then we have a covered walkway here and unfortunately this wasn't big enough to
fit on, all on one sheet but there's a projection out this way. Now the parking that staff was
concerned about is right here. That sounds like that was confusing to you folks earlier this
' evening. Staff had a concern that there'd be some traffic conflicts between people backing
out here and entering the center from the driveway so what has been suggested is that we
take this parking out of here and put a planting bed in front of this plaza area out here and
then take that parking, put it down here. There was also 11 parking stalls that functioned off
of this driveway and it was...to be combined.
John Meyers: It's shown on the plans.
Charlie James: What we're talking about is taking these out. Extending this planting bed all
1
7
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993 1
the way across. Removing this parking here and then orient the parking through here. 1
John Meyers: That was a request of the staff...confusion here. That was also a request asked
if we could drop this 5 feet. So the sketch drawing that you saw is just a result of meeting II
with staff on Monday. They asked, can you drop this 5 feet? We said we'll see what we can
do and dropped it 5 feet. 1
Charlie James: There was a concern here about, there was a reference made to Rapid Oil
Change and I'm not familiar with that but I'm not sure that we have the same situation
because we have over 200 feet from the center of the road back so I think we have maybe a
longer slope than we do out there. I don't know. But in any event, we can drop this and
there would be, the slopes would occur here and here within the green area. About the only
I
thing that happens is that this gets, this driveway becomes a little bit steeper in here so this
would be down. Held down a little bit from the rest of the project here. One of the things
that we're talking about is trying to create an amenity area down here with some picnic tables
I
and I just want, this looks like, maybe this looks like this is rather random but there's been
enumerable drawings to get to this point. You start first I guess along with the topography
and we have a situation here where we have a hill going up anywhere from 12 to 21 feet 1
above what our grade would be here. So it gives us the opportunity to take some of those .
areas of the loading areas and by having them at the toe of the slope, the people up here
wouldn't really see them, I mean they'd be down like this at the toe of the slope. So then
1
there were many refinements that we went through about experimenting with the drive thru
on this side. Drive thru on this side and there was just many permeatations before when you
combine with the need for parking and need for open space and you're trying to meet all of
I
these...to the code with no variance, which is what we have attempted to do. All those things
work to kind of push the site into a certain configuration.
Batzli: What is the impervious coverage on that?
Charlie James: Impervious would be 70 %. 1
Batzli: What's our maximum?
Generous: 70.
Batzli: So they're right at the maximum? 1
Generous: Yes. 1
Charlie James: I think we're half a percent.
1
8
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
John Meyers: There was a little margin. _
Mancino: There was interior landscaping...
John Meyers: Actually more interior landscaping than it looks...
1 Charlie James: I think there's 8 1/2. Well that was before the, then I guess staff was
requesting that we have some islands in here in addition so I haven't looked at those
calculations as to how that will increase the green but we started out in excess of the
1 ordinance and then in the process here of designing this, the ordinance was changed from 5 to
8 I believe. Is that right Paul? At 8 and I think we came in at about 8 1/2% before these
subsequent changes that are being suggested or recommended by the staff now. One of the
' things that came up at one point was the view from City Hall. I asked the engineers to come
out and get some elevations near your City Hall. Here's a cross section. We have your City
Hall building here and this is a YMCA and Kerber, there's going to be a berm along Kerber.
What Kerber is doing. What this drawing shows is, it shows the size of the trees at a certain
level of maturity in relationship to the building. The green would be the top of the berm and
the orange represents the center line elevation of Kerber and so the combination of Kerber
coming down would be the berm on top. And then rather than just indicate that the trees
would be placed directly on top of the berm, if they were off to one side or the other, that's
' why I mean if they were on top of the berm there'd even be more height here but I guess
what this shows is that the combination of the trees and the natural topography in the area
will serve to further screen this side of the building. This shows the trees that are, the
' ornamental trees that are proposed at the ends of these planting islands. This is overstory
trees that they had requested along the central access to the site. Again, here's reference to
the arched windows and those are set within a rectangular pattern. That's a repetition of this
1 pattern here up front. This is a design reference to your fire hall.
Mancino: I have a couple questions. Is the back brick also? Finished in brick...
Charlie James: We're proposing, let me get back to the site plan.
1 Mancino: And I love the mature trees that you're going to plant. Those are wonderful.
Charlie James: One of the reasons for this plan here is that you have an ordinance that says
the trees have to be planted every 30 feet so all we were trying to do here is show massing
and 30 feet but I mean obviously we'd like to do some groupings and do some other things
but all this plan was intended as is to show the quantity as required by code and that code
1 says every 30 feet and staff had a good idea back here. There will be a retaining wall
element in here someplace to keep the slopes down. We've got, we won't be able to make
1 9
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993 1
1
the final determination on the length and the height of that but what we intend to do is, rather
than go up in just one wall, we'd take it up in segments and we want to use the same
materials that Dean Johnson is using. The...block or.
John Meyers: The Keystone brick.
•
1
Charlie James: Yeah. So all of this would look tied in up here. And then staff suggested
that a lot of this plant material go up the slope rather than being on the base of the slope
because you've got a condition like this where it really doesn't serve to screen much being at
the toe of the slope. It'd be more effective and you could almost see some of it behind the
building too as it goes up. 1
Batzli: Where are your loading docks on that?
Charlie James: Here. And so what we've done.
John Meyers: Well here, here, here, and here. 1
Charlie James: There's a loading dock here, here, and here. Down here. And what we've
done. What we've shown on the plans. It's hard to pick out here but we have kind of 1
provided a brick screen wall that runs all the way down to the end of the building here and
it's hard to pick it out against.
•
Batzli: Which elevation is that? That's east?
Charlie James: Yeah, facing City Hall. And see there's a truck dock in here. So we've run 1
the, there's a line in here. That's the top of it. It starts at this point here and it runs all the
way over as far as it can to here. So it's like a 8 foot high wall here out of brick that screens
this loading dock here and we're showing how the topography would. 1
John Meyers: The site plan shows it.
Charlie James: It's not as red as it could be but that's a masonry brick wall. In response to
your question about materials. One thing that we would like to look at is we're trying to
make a determination whether this will be brick on masonry or brick on steel frame and that's
going to be a function of the weather and one thing that we're looking at is we'd like to have
the opportunity to consider some alternates in this area right here. Stucco that would be kind
of the same color as the brick and be virtually indistinguishable from it.
Mancino: On the front side?
10 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
1 John Meyers: No, just in back. Just the north side.
Charlie James: And this is a hill coming down here. There's quite a slope in the topography
so we're talking brick wrapping around the building here and Byerly's completely in brick
here. That's just a segment back in here. One of the reasons for that is, is that this is a
small tenants space and you don't really know some of these people in the future may have a
1 need for additional space. For instance it's nice to be able to have what they call a knock out
wall or something. This gives you more flexibility in the future but the tenant stucco would
be the same. If we went that route, it would be the same brown. It would only be putting
1 this segment and it would be visible from any direction. It'd be totally hidden from view
from all sides here. I guess one of the things that, if there was one area that we're trying to
come in under straight zoning and meet all the codes and ordinances. _ The one thing that
' seemed kind of problematic was the, was your sign ordinance. You have a sign ordinance
that says that no signs can exceed 15% of the wall area of the building and each individual
sign can't be more than 80 square feet in size. Well, for instance on a retail center here,
1 what we're proposing. This would be like maximum but this would be worst case scenario.
Batzli: Is that what we're going to get?
Charlie James: Well, what I mean by that is, we have a tenant that wants this whole space
' here now but it has the potential to become individual spaces so I'm going to show those
signs here but more than likely this is, from here to here is going to be one tenant. But in
any event, what we've shown here are eight 80 foot sign areas and two 48 square foot sign
' areas which is the maximum that's permitted in your code. That 80 square foot. With 15%
of the wall area here, we would be allowed 1,188 square feet of total signage. We're
proposing 736 which is 400 square feet below what your ordinance allows.
John Meyers: 60 %.
' Charlie James: It's 9% instead of 15%. And similarly on the west end of this building here, .
the code would allow 528 square feet and we're proposing 320. Or 9% instead of 15 %. And
all the signage on this project will be cut out letters. Individual cut out letters and so what
' I've done here. I don't want you to take this wrong here but the only way I could figure out
how to calculate that would was just to kind of draw like an imaginary rectangle around an
area that cut out letters might go in. So there isn't going to be any pan signs you know
' where they paint plexiglass. They're going to be individual cut out letters but I'm just trying
to give you an idea what an 80 square foot area might look like at the max. Where this gets
problematic for us, is with the Byerly's. Okay, now. On the Byerly's here, the total wall
1 area on the south elevation is 7,500 square feet. We would be permitted under your
ordinance 15 %, or 1,125 square feet in signage. We have shown 431 square feet, which is
1 11
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993 1
5 3 4% of we're we're
only / o the wall area. We're allowed 15% so we re about a third of what we re
allowed. The problem is that the ordinance says that no one sign can be any bigger than 80
square feet and we have 72 square feet total between these two here and 75 square feet here
but in order to get the signage here that would be visible from the street, we're at 304 square
feet for this element here. Now when you add all those up, as I say, you're at 431 feet total
which is a third of what would be allowed. But it's one of those areas where we could put, I
guess what I'm saying is, we could put.
Mancino: You want to do a total aggregate. What's that 80 square feet look like for 1
Byerly's? Did you do a rendering of it at the smaller size? The size that's allowable by
ordinance. I just wanted to see it proportionally. Proportionate to the whole wall. 1
Charlie James: Here's 72 square feet.
Scott: What about the one on the bottom?
John Meyers: It'd be about the size of this. 1
Scott: What about that Byerly's down there?
John Meyers: That's 304 also. Because that's the same size height.
Scott: Okay. • 1
John Meyers: Basically the same logic applies. We just don't want to get into an
interpretation problem. You know technically does it say each letter of the sign? I don't
1
know. Each one is 80 square feet and we still wouldn't exceed the 15% maximum. We're
just trying to give you, we're telling you this is what we'll do without trying to...If you've
seen our stores I think you'll, I don't know if you will, I think you'll agree that they're not
overly signed.
Farmakes: I didn't see any monument... 1
Harberts: You didn't see any what Jeff?
Farmakes: Monumenture. Is there monument signs involved?
Charlie James: Yeah. There'd be a pylon here and what that would look like, if you take 1
one of these arched elements and it would be out of brick that matches the building and.
1
12 1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
' Scott: How tall are the dimensions?
Charlie James: Well I guess whatever the ordinance allows.
Farmakes: Are we talking a pylon here or are we talking a monument?
1 Charlie James: Well we're talking about the brick going to the ground.
Krauss: The architectural monuments signs...
Charlie James: What we're talking about is not having to sign something, come out and stick
a pole in the ground and put a sign. What we're talking about is the architectural design and
' arch element that repeats this motif and we will have signage within that that meets the
ordinance.
1 Batzli: Okay. Any other issues?
Charlie James: Well, I'm sure I probably forgot something here but maybe I should just field
1 some questions.
Batzli: Alright. I think we're going to have a lot of questions. What I'd like to do is hear
1 from the other people that showed up here tonight to make sure that they didn't show up in
vain, or that we start losing them due to the lateness of the hour. So unless you are taking
issue with other conditions in the staff report, we should know that but otherwise I think
1 you'll probably field some questions as we all talk about the project.
' Charlie James: Okay.
Batzli: This is a public hearing. Are there other people here that would like to address the
' commission? If there is, please come up to the microphone and give us your name and
address for the record.
' Brad Johnson: My name is Brad Johnson, 7425 Frontier Trail. Mr. Chairman, members of
the Planning Commission. I'm here to speak probably on three different categories. As you
know I've been involved for a long time in the downtown planning and have gone through a
' number of planning processes with all of you in developing those sites. We're also a
developer, or co- developer in the project above the site call Oak Hills that looks down on this
particular site. I didn't see too much discussion about that so I'll pretend like I'm a resident
1 up there. And then also we represent Market Square, which is an investment that the city
has. First of all I'd like to deal with just the presentation that we've just seen and I'm going
1 13
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
to ask questions. I'm not going to expect answers but probably questions that you should
ask. And the first thing is that, from what I've seen so far, this does not conform at all to any
of the requirements that we've been asked to meet relative to a downtown plan. I see no
peaked roofs. I see nothing that I'm being real constantly...as far as the architectural style.
This is a complete change in style from what we're being requested to do and currently the
three projects that we're going through the city with, all of which we'd love to have it be
only a flat roofs and types of things but I know that were not going to be accepted. So I
think we were listening but I think that's a really major deviation. The second thing is that 1
there was a number of hearings that were held at the time the Target store evolved and I
think for many of the Planning Commission people participated in that and the number of
different type of site plans that were prescribed for that particular site and as they were with 1
the Target site and as Target was developed, you adhere pretty much to that particular site
plan that was requested as a part of those hearings. There was a site plan proposed for this
side of the street. One of the major objections that you all had was the parking that would be 1
out in front of the store. Currently I think this violates all of the issues that were addressed
by the public at that time and I think you should at least revisit that in question. As far as the
view from the north. I would think that you'd require the developer, just as you did. I guess
'-
there's somebody living in City Hall so somebody did ask what it would look like from City
Hall. It'd be interesting to see what it would look like to look down from above onto this
roof. What type of parapets. Target was required and I think we did a good job on Target.
You can drive just about any place and because of the height of the parapets and the siding
of that, you cannot see any roof units. And I'm sorry to say with Market Square we weren't
required quite to do that and you can see some roof units over there. It does cause some
problems so I think those are three of the issues that I perceive as far as the plan is concerned
and the primary one is I don't think it fits any of the architectural requirements that you're
currently requiring ourselves as a major development in downtown to meet. The rest of
probably our discussion, I'm going to ask the folks from Gateway Foods who are here and
also the owners of the store, Festival Foods to comment. These are probably not so much
issues that have to do with planning as much as we have to get it as part of the record as we
go through this process. They have requested additional TIF assistance from the city and we
might as well start now addressing the issues that we're going to have to address as we go
through this process. So I'm going to introduce two people. One is Arnie Privie. He's been
in the food business for some time and he has some concerns about this particular project.
Arnie is the Vice President in sales and marketing for...
1
Arnie Privie: Good evening members of the Planning Commission. My name is Arnie
Privie. I'm with Gateway Foods. I've been up in front of you before. I'm not too sure if it
was the Planning Commission or probably the City Council about 2 years ago and 2 years
ago we had been requested to look at the project here as far as putting a Festival Foods store
in town. A major supplier, and when I say major supplier...probably one of the largest
1
14 1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1 wholesalers had turned the project down and then they came to us and we looked at the
project and I can truthfully tell you that we had an awful hard time of getting the project
approved by the company I work for from the standpoint of us being able to lease and
guarantee a lease on this project. Because when we did do a survey of the community, the
numbers just didn't come out to where if we put an independent retailer into here, would it be
feasible that he'd get a return on his investment. Fortunately Brad Johnson worked out some
things with the City of Chanhassen that made it a little bit more palatable to go ahead with
the project and I guess the only thing I want to express this evening, and I'm kind of
1 mystified right now as to how the city of Chanhassen is going to support another
supermarket. I certainly have nothing against competition. Competition is very healthy but at
1 the time of getting our project off the ground, and in looking where our retailer is today. We
supply the King family that owns the Festival Food, we supply them with their grocery
products. So I have a couple concerns. Number one I have the King family who owns the
store. There are primarily our concern for their well being. Also I have the concern that we
1 are on this lease. I guess I just want it to be known at this particular time, and as Brad
Johnson said, there's certainly going to be more meetings in the future. I can guarantee I'll
attend every one of them but I just want it to be known up front our feelings from Gateway
Foods distributor with people who have guaranteed the lease on this project, Festival Foods.
And I thank you for your time.
1 Batzli: Thank you.
Brad Johnson: We do have the person then that co- signed the lease I guess, Lyle King.
Lyle, do you want to come up and say a few words?
' Lyle King: Good evening. I'm Lyle King. I'm not a public speaker. I'm a butcher by
trade. First of all I wanted to say that the plans that were introduced here tonight I think are
beautiful. And I think would be a real asset to your city. But I'm going back to 3 years now
and Super Valu was the one that was asked for a store in here for Cooper's and I know Gary
very well. A friend of our's. I was with Super Value for 20 years. And Super Valu
wouldn't go on it because there was no way that they could get any projection to come out
and he was told at the time it'd be at least 5 years, even to 10 years before this city could
support a store that he wanted to put up. And so they dropped Super Valu and they came to,
Brad came to Gateway. It was Gary McCullough at the time. One of the developers. And I
worked with Gary McCullough at Super Valu so I knew him quite well. When they put this
plan together they told us it would be about a 3 year break before we would break the store
in black so we knew that the help that you had given the developer on their store, or the
development that he put up, which helped us a little bit. But the store's still in the red and I
do have a couple of other little businesses that are supporting it. And this store is not going
to be in the black within the next year when that help is stopped. And so I just want you to
15
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993 1
1
know that it's not I'm against competition because I think they're the best competition there
is for their price store and my price store, I think they go along and compliment each other
very well. So I'm not here to knock their business because I think they're good people. I'm
just saying right at this time that there's no way that if another store comes in here within the
next year, that I can be there 2 years from now. And I thank you for your time.
1
Batzli: Thank you.
Brad Johnson: Which brings me to my point. This is a conditional use?
Krauss: No it's not.
1
Brad Johnson: Why does it say in here it is?
Krauss: The store itself is not a conditional use. It's a site plan. What the conditional use.
Brad Johnson: What they're approving this evening is a conditional use. 1
Krauss: Yeah but you're insinuating that the store itself is a conditional use. The store itself
is a permitted use. What makes it conditional is the fact that they're asking for a free
1
standing bank building.
Brad Johnson: But that's the request this evening. Site plan approval for a bank plus a store.
Was there a public hearing called?
Krauss: Yes.
1
Brad Johnson: Did you send out notices?
Krauss: Yes.
Brad Johnson: Do you have a record of that? 1
Krauss: We should.
Brad Johnson: Okay. I'd like to have it. We don't remember receiving one. If it's a
conditional use, is that what we're approving? I see that in the Minutes. '
Batzli: We're looking at tonight a site plan and a conditional use for a free standing building.
We're looking at both. '
16 1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
Brad Johnson: For the site?
1 Batzli: Yes.
Brad Johnson: Two buildings.
' Batzli: Correct.
1 Brad Johnson: Okay. This is just technical from here on in. Number one is then, if you're
going to approve a conditional use, item 1 would be, will be not detrimental to the public
health,_ safety,_ comfort,_ convenience and general welfare -of- - the - neighborhood - of_ the -city. Our
issue with this is, the city currently has one million dollars invested in Market Square. We
have a very good chance that if this project is approved, we'll lose that tenant. That's just a
real. We don't think therefore that that's for the good, welfare, health of the city. Second
thing is, under the conditional use permit, item number 3, will be designed and constructed,_
operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended
' character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of the area. And
as I stated in the beginning, this is a complete change in the overall plan of the downtown
based upon every meeting I have ever gone to. Finally, item number 11. Will not depreciate
' the surrounding property values. I submit to you that if we lose our major tenant in that store
or if it goes black, we will have a significant decrease in property values in this particular
area. Now what you have before you, and again this is for the record. I realize a lot of this
' stuff doesn't pertain to what you're doing, is basically a development that makes no economic
sense to all the people that we have talked to, and we've gone out and talked to a number of
other managers. People are coming up to me and saying, what on earth are you doing?
' Wasn't there a feasibility study done. You know all that kind of stuff and I said, I really
don't know how it's going to go forward. The city has tremendous liability related to this in
money, and that's the money they've got invested over in Market Square. We would
' recommend, and I realize this is not your area but as you go through this process, and if you
want to consider a conditional use permit, that an economic study be done by the James
Company as to the financial liability of this particular product either at the stage of the
1 Planning Commission. It may or may not be your particular thing. But for sure by the time
it reaches it the City Council and by the time it gets to the HRA because I think we all
should be made aware of the financial impact of this particular proposed project will probably
1 have on downtown Chanhassen. What you have before you is the classic over development
of real estate and if you can look at, we've got an office tower over here somewhere that's
about half full, and that's Market Square. It looks full but we have about 40% of our tenants
are just getting up to the break even point. They require high traffic due to...as you just
heard, which we'll be happy to give you the records of. The Festival store is losing money,
as projected. Nothing new. And now we're going to build another office tower. And that's
17
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
exactly what's happened in most real estate. You get too much real estate and too much of
the wrong type of real estate in an area. Now that is the case we'll carry forward as we go
along. I have I wish, Byerly's sounds like a good idea. We have to protect our investment in
whatever way we have. We feel the city has a responsibility to our particular thing in some
fashion. And I know Mr. James has a job, he wants to develop his property and that's, I'm
not against development as you understand... We're just majorly concerned and I guess if
somebody came to us with a legitimate study that said these two stores will survive. Don't
worry Brad, we could care less, and I think the city should be in the same position because 1
they stand to lose a considerable amount of money. Potentially. Thank you.
Batzli: Okay. Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the commission? 1
Craig Hallett: Hi. My name's Craig Hallett. I currently reside in Richfield but hope to be a
member of Chanhassen soon. We purchased one of the townhomes that you discussed earlier 1
north of the property. I basically came here to see where Byerly's, where this proposed
development was going to lay in relation to that and I was wondering if I was going to be
cooking my hotdogs in the summer and watching people unload fruit. It doesn't look like it's
going to happen. Could you throw up the slide for the proposed development? I just want to •
point out a couple things.
Generous: The site P lan?
•
Craig Hallett: Yeah. I just had a couple questions and then I'll sit down. It's getting, it's 1
the first time I've been to one of these. It's amazing how long they go. My father used to
be on a planning and zoning board...and I remember him getting home.
Batzli: Did he get home before midnight?
Craig Hallett: No, I remember Monday nights usually went pretty late for him. We're 1
actually purchasing one of the first townhomes, if they ever start building them, right about
here. So I'm less concerned about the Byerly's from the selfish standpoint and more curious
going forward on the proposed senior development and things like that. So I'm curious how I
can keep in contact as those plans move along, if there's any projections for that.
Batzli: Give these guys your name and address.
Craig Hallett: Okay. The other issue I have, and question I have for the people developing 1
too, would be for the residents of that community I'm moving into that are not here to speak
and my main concern would be the people have the southwest facing units, or the southeast
facing units, there's some patios that are going to be abutting up against that land and I'm 1
18 1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
curious about elevations. Are those eo le going p g g to be looking at part of the top of a
building now or are their properties actually going to be...the roof so they will be looking
down. And you talked about trees and I read the plans. Spacing them every 10 feet and
things like that. How will that provide that buffer for those people, and when we moved in
' we, or when we signed the purchase agreement we knew that, I called anyway and...zoned
below us so we knew potentially what...30 or 40 foot building versus a 20 foot building.
How that...
1 Batzli: I'd rather have Dave answer. What's the difference in elevation there?
' Hempel: In -that particular -area I guess ..I - do - believe - there's a pretty uniform significant
difference in topography. I don't, we do have a site plan with grades...but I would say it's at
least...At the rear elevation of the Byerly's building...elevation is on the average of 983. And
the top of the slope, this would be at the easterly, southeasterly corner of the Oak Ponds
development. The top of the hill there is approximately 997. So that point there is
approximately 14...elevation difference. As we continue down towards the west...
•
1 Mancino: How far away are they from the back of the building ?...back of the building,
you've got the slope and then where does this development start? Is it 20 feet away? Is it?
Hempel: Well that scale...
1 Generous: About 110 to 120 feet from the building...
Mancino: Thank you.
' Batzli: 110 feet. Okay.
1 Hempel: Pretty close. Okay, as you extend westerly, at the very westerly edge of this
development, we have the parking lot elevation of 968 with an elevation at the top of Oak
Ponds there of approximately 978. More than 10 foot difference there.
Craig Hallett: That's a 10 foot difference from the base, is that right? Their building is
g g g
going to be 30 to 40 feet...
Hempel: Right but...
1 Batzli: Let's have, is there anyone else that would like to address the commission, while
these guys huddle.
1
19
1
-. n
1
1
Plannin g g Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
Dan Beckman: Good evening. My name is Dan Beckman. I live at 6895 Chaparral Lane. I
too would like to be kept informed as this proceeds forward...I guess, when does this go up to
the HRA for seeing if this TIF money is being given or not? Does anybody know that?
Batzli: I don't know that it will necessarily. 1
Charlie James: The next meeting is the 16th I believe.
Dan Beckman: Of December?
Charlie James: Yes. The third Thursday. 1
Dan Beckman: I guess I'm a little offended by Paul's comment earlier. I'm a little baffled
why a city would have to buy every business into the community over the last 10 years. If
the city is truly ready for these businesses, they should want to come in. They shouldn't have
to be purchased and I guess as a taxpayer and as a resident here, I'm really offended by that.
There was talk earlier about a traffic light. An additional. Is this in addition to what we
have up?
Hempel: The previous traffic studies for the downtown area, there's a series of traffic signals 1
were designed in the upgrade of 78th Street with this intersection in front of the Byerly's was
proposed for a signal when this site developed and conditions warranted based on traffic
volumes...78th Street. The wiring, the conduits with the posts was cut. They were all
installed so it would not be torn up and rebuilt. So it was always our intent to signalize the
intersection when traffic volumes warranted. So yes, there will be another traffic signal at the
Target entrance.
Dan Beckman: I really am in opposition to this. Do you people drive down main street?
Just a question. It's worst than driving into Minneapolis. I just don't see why we need
another stop light. Stop lights, in my estimation, will stop the traffic. Four way stops can
then be used efficiently I would think, and I'm not an engineer. I don't know. But I think
1
we're a little bit over kill on that. And secondly, who's paying for the stop light? Is the city
footing the bill on that?
Hempel: That is all a part of the downtown upgrade with West 78th Street which is a
P P P�'
combination.
Krauss: Maybe we can touch on the TIF for a moment and I feel no obligation and need to
defend TIF. I mean the city has been doing that for the last 14 years and Brad Johnson has
been the primary benefitter of the use of TIF.
t , 20 1
1
111
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1 Brad Johnson: The city has.
Krauss: I don't deny that Brad but the fact is, it's been used extensively and the policies that
have addressed TIF are set through the HRA and are not under the purview of the Planning
Commission, and I wouldn't ask you to get involved in the financial deliberations. I stay out
' of them. It's really a whole separate field of endeavor. As to the need to induce
development to occur downtown. You know there's been a, I think the HRA's talked about it
extensively. Market Square was very heavily subsidized. Target was less so. There's
' different levels of subsidy that fed back into it. But what's important to note is that the
money that's circulated in TIF is money that is paid by these projects. It's not money that's
being paid by any resident elsewhere in the city. It's the dollars being paid by Festival. By
' Target. By the bank. By Town Square. They're recycled back to pay for the improvements
and pay for basically the inducement to get them in there. All the improvements to the 78th
Street roadway, all the signals, all the storm sewer, everything that you see. All the
1 landscaping has been paid through TIF, which is essentially recycling those tax dollars.
Dan Beckman: Maybe I don't understand how this TIF money works but let me just interject
1 something here. If I...them right in my background that I've learned on this, is TIF money
not a speculation on developed property that you're going to have increased taxes that will be
paid on this property. Is that not how these things...?
' Krauss: I think the word speculation is wrong. I mean basically it's a contractual
P g Y
arrangement. If we have a Target signed up to go to a property. If Target is going to general
x number of dollars during the life of the district, the deals that the city with the HRA has
usually been made is that 3 years of the increased taxes goes back to offset the cost of the
' special assessments and improvements that the city has put in. But that's basically, that
project is paying it's own way essentially, if you understand that concept. It's not general tax
revenues of any sort. From any outside source coming into it.
1 Dan Beckman: But there are other problems that arise from having them there? Police
protection, this kind of stuff and for the years that we don't reap any benefits.
1 Krauss: Well there's all kinds of things that accrue but what also accrues is tremendous
increased tax base to pay for those things.
Dan Beckman: Down the road.
Krauss: Even during while it's happening. I mean right now TIF is paying, when you see
somebody mowing the lawn down medians of downtown, that's being paid through TIF.
When you see the signals going up, that's being paid through TIF. When the trees are being
21
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993 I
1
planted, that's through TIF. So it's not an easy issue to digest but it's being used solely to
benefit Chanhassen. It's keeping dollars in Chanhassen that would otherwise be distributed
outside the city.
Dan Beckman: Okay. And just for the record, I don't have any ties with Brad Johnson. 1
Okay. We're in Rotary together. That's how I know Brad. We don't have any business ties.
Batzli: Anything else? 1
Dan Beckman: I guess that's about all I have. I did have one other issue though. They
talked about the slope. The grade of this massive 500 and some car parking lot. Did I hear 1
that right, like 24 foot drop from the building to the street?
John Meyers: It's 2 1/2 %. It's less than what Target's lot is. 1
Dan Beckman: Okay. I'm just wondering what a parking lot of that size, at that angle, will
1 do...it might be something to check into. Thank you.
Batzli: Okay, thank you. Would anyone else like to address the commission?
I
Tim Menning: Good evening. My name is Tim Menning. I'm one of the partners in Market
Square Associates. I've always consider the city a partner with us in that project. Both due I
to their large investment in it. Of which we owe the city upwards of $800,000.00 and
depending on what happens with Lots 2 and 3, it's going to be closer to a million dollars. I
also consider them a partner from the standpoint that they participate in any profits that that I
center turns as long as there's debt outstanding on it. We pay not only a 10% interest on that
debt for the city or the HRA, whatever the case may be. But we also pay 25% of the
cashflow of that project. They are a partner with us. I realize that in the request for
I
developments such as this, particularly is TIF monies are looked for, and other...it does put
the city in a precarious position. It would be as if Brad decided tomorrow to build another
store and not bring us other partners along for example. Kind of equivalent to that. It is an
I
awkward position for the city but I think that before the city can move forward on this project
at all, it's got to request an economic study and if that study would not show that the
Marketplace would support, not only the existing businesses. Not just Festival Foods. The
liquor store. The center. The other commercial businesses in town. Not just in our center.
That if it can't support the existing businesses, plus what's proposed here, the city has
definitely got to rethink this issue. Maybe it may be in a position where if it meets all these 1
requirements, and no TIF money or assistance is asked for in some manner, they may not be
able to turn it down. We may have to accept that ourselves. But if an economic study shows
that it's going to be detrimental to the existing businesses in town, that the market can't 1
22 1
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
support both, the old and the city's an e new, the city s going to have to be very careful in moving
1 forward in this project at any point. Even on simply the Planning Commission approvals. I
don't think it's possible for that to be done before this economic study is done. Thank you.
' Batzli: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the commission? Let's see if anyone
else would like to first. Anyone else? Okay, go ahead.
' Charlie James: I didn't know if now was the time, that it'd be appropriate for me maybe to
respond to some of these concerns. Or would you like?
' Batzli: No. Why don't you - hold - off a little bit.
•
Harberts: I think Brian, excuse me, that we need to ensure that we are keeping in mind what
1 our scope here is tonight, given the lateness in the hour.
Batzli: Okay. Yeah. I think most of your response is going to be to economic issues, which
' is something that is with, it's not in our jurisdiction. It really isn't and I think that's what's
going to be what you're going to respond to, I would imagine.
1 Charlie James: Yeah, there were some other things but I'll.
Batzli: Okay, yeah. Let's wait for us to have questions on that. On those things. The TIF
money and things like that, that will be handled by Council and the HRA. We can espouse
personal views but as a Planning Commission, you know we really can't do anything on that.
If there's no one else that would like to address the commission, is there a motion to close
the public hearing?
Conrad moved, Harberts seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
111 the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Mr. Chairman, it is late.
' Batzli: Yes it is.
1 Conrad: And I think I have, I think there are going to be a lot of questions. We have a
choice, and I have another problem and that problem was that we really didn't get the
material for reviewing. It's just like I've only done part of the job and I really don't know
that I want to discuss this until we get the plans in front of us. And maybe all the
information was in the planning packet but for some reason when you have the real blueprints
1 in front of you, it triggers a lot of stuff. And I guess my preference Mr. Chairman is to table
1 23
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
this issue so that we can really look at the plans. And the other thing is that we probably
have an hour, hour's worth of discussion if I were to guess, and I'm, I'd prefer not to stay
here until 12:30.
Batzli: Okay. Took the words right out of my mouth.
1
Mancino: I'd like to second that.
Batzli: You wanted to be focused Diane. Did Y ou want to talk about certain issues? Did
you want to raise.
Harberts: I just wanted to raise one comment, and that is with regard to, you know I'm
J g Y
excited about developments in Chanhassen but given the participation that I had in that 2002
thing. Planning scope or whatever that was. When we talk about a downtown area that's
more pedestrian oriented, and this particular piece is right across from this concept of a
central park, community park that everyone was talking about that it should be more
pedestrian oriented. Is there an opportunity, was there some opportunity to look at this
project where this would be more pedestrian friendly? Less traffic friendly and it's just a
question I want to throw out. I don't know if I'm looking for an answer right now but I'm
just looking that when we're looking at this global picture and the amount of time that was
spent and the amount of input that was provided by a diverse group of people from residents
from Chanhassen, I need to understand. So I guess I don't know if I'm looking for the
answer but maybe it's something if this is going to be tabled that staff can address at the next
meeting. Or next review, if that's what happens.
Krauss: If that's what it takes. I guess again we have to apologize for the materials not 1
going out. We had a short week and my secretary was swamped but nobody told us that you
didn't get it either so. We don't know where they are. They're not upstairs. They're
missing.
Batzli: The Sheriff's got them in his trunk.
111
Krauss: That might be. Along with whatever else they picked up. In terms of your question
Diane. We heard through Fred Hoisington, some of you were concerned why wasn't this
1
brought up to the street frontage and that was something that we looked at very early on. We
didn't think it worked then and we played around with the design and we still don't think it
works very good. And we could show you why. Basically you've got a site that should be
buried on one or two sides and when you stick it out on a corner, there's no way to bury any
of it except for false walls and having a berm there and a lot of landscaping. So instead of
looking at a landscape parking lot from City Center Park, you'd be looking at a landscaped
1
24
1
.1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
blank wall from City Center Park. So there are pros and cons to it and we've got some
illustrations of how that might work. There really aren't that many options.
Harberts: Well and I just wanted to have at least the comfort that it was looked at, because I
' certainly look to staff for that type of review so, it's just maybe I'm the one that voiced the
question. But that was kind of my underlying concern with this project. And the fact that we
look at Kerber, and I drive down there and on Monday thru Thursday night there's all these
' cars in the community, for the community park there and then if we have semi's coming in
and out, how does this work? But I can certainly defer those questions if this project is going
to be tabled tonight.
Batzli: Okay. I know we have a couple other quick comments here before we talk about the
motion. I want to ask Paul about that.
' Farmakes: A couple of things. One is on the site plan. I would like to see a more detailed
signage, at least a comparison to what we're seeing rather than these blocked squares and so
1 on. And I don't think it's the correct forum for us to be deciding whether or not we're going
to take half an ordinance and discard the other half when we're talking on these square
footage issues. We have a signage ordinance in place. We have another one that's fairly
1 inclusive that we're talking about the corridor. This is in the corridor and some of these
issues pertain to what we're discussing here. I do think however, I was a bit surprised by the
quality of the building that I saw. Very nice. Now if we're talking anything about style,
1 talking about the elements that you had in the building. It's not something that you normally
see in a retail development and my compliments to that. Utilizing limestone in a building for
retail level is I think terrific. Very nice. Anyway, I agree that this issue of competition that
' seems to, trying to rear itself here is to me a bit disturbing and that seems in the realm of
politics and not in the area of planning and what we're doing here. Planning and
' development I guess we should say. Although it maybe sounds like a contradiction in terms.
It seems that the issue, if we're going to get into, we already have one liquor store.
Therefore we can't have another liquor store. Business is inherently a risk and the question
is, who risks? Three years ago Super Valu decided not to risk when they came in here.
Gateway decided through whatever incentives the city put forward, to take a risk. The city
had a risk. And the question with this stuff always becomes egg and chicken. Who's going
to take the first risk to build something that people are going to come to and the issue is
draw. And no matter what market or business you're in, if you're looking at a retail area,
you've got a draw situation from either the existing area or the surrounding community.
Some people take a risk that they're going to draw from the surrounding communities.
Target did and the question is, with these stop lights and so on. They may seem like a lot of
stop lights now but when there's 30,000 people here, it may not seem so many. And the
1 question again becomes, as you look into your crystal ball, where these businesses are going
25
1
1.
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
to draw from and I believe that, particularly with Target here now, that we're going to have 1
people drawing here from miles and miles away, outside of Chanhassen. When you look to
the west and where some of these opportunities to buy are, it really is a changing picture and
it's not even the place it was 3 years ago so I'll leave it at that.
Batzli: Did you want to say something?
Mancino: Yeah, I just wanted to add. I'd also like to have included in the packet a
perspective of the homes on the north, what they're going to see. Exactly what it will be.
Whether it's going to be the equipment on top, etc. And I'd also like to hear a little bit more
of what...Diane's question about the 2002, that we all participated in for the city because
when we were all asked what are the center's most significant weaknesses, it's major
problems. The first one was access, traffic, parking problems, traffic lights and number two
was lack of pedestrian routes accessibility. So I'd really like to hear a little bit more on,
because that's what we all as a group decided. Or felt...business district.
1
Farmakes: There's an inherent problem though with grocery shopping. You don't grocery
shop by foot, particularly in the suburbs. Chanhassen, we've had that discussion for
pedestrians here for a long time and it seems like the city's committed to the car.
Mancino: Well we have individual shopping centers now all in the city.
1
Farmakes: But I mean versus the old, say Excelsior where you can walk down.
Batzli: There's really wo issues, it's kind of interesting because, not to pick on Market
Y g P
Square but the biggest complaint I hear from people as I'm wandering around in those stores
and areas, is the parking lot and the access between, even the stores. You almost have to get
in your car to go from the hardware store over to the grocery store. That's their thought and
so we didn't make it, it seems to me very user friendly if people are getting in their cars to
go from the liquor store over to the grocery store. They're not walking. And they don't like
the way it's laid out and so it doesn't seem to me, something wasn't quite right there. Paul,
we cleared our December 15th meeting and we're going to interview people for at least an
hour or so. We have to look at this next time. I mean we can't sit on it. The only reason
we're not going to talk about it tonight is because we don't have the D sized plans here. I
think we need to talk about it. And what does that do to our schedule of looking at the
Highway 5 corridor that you've been ordered to clear everything out of the way.
Krauss: Well, more importantly what does it do to your schedule. I mean you were ordered
to get it to the Council by February 1st. We've only got three dates to do it on.
1
26
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
-
Harberts: Brian doesn't care.
Krauss: I know that Target has.
•
Batzli: I do too.
Krauss: I know that Byerly's has some very stringent time deadlines that they are working
with.
Scott: What are those deadlines?
Batzli: They want their store to be open by August of next fall, or something.
Krauss: I'll let them deal with that but the first open meeting you have is January 5th. Now
I suppose it's possible if you say you wanted to meet, I mean if we started at 6:00.
Batzli: He leaves. He leaves. We're talking about trying to cram it into our schedule and he
leaves. Unbelievable.
Krauss: If we wanted to get it on the 15th and devote the first 2 -2 1/2 hours of the meeting
to Highway 5 and the second you know, an hour to interview and then you had this on. I
think most of the questions you're raising in terms of the site plan, can easily be addressed.
They already have been addressed to a large extent, or can be provided in that time. We're
willing to stay. Otherwise this slips a month. Actually more than a month. It goes to the
5th.
Mancino: What time are we starting on the 15th?
Krauss: Nancy, I don't remember but I think it's 6:00. It's 6:00 and you get your bite to eat
and then we want to put in a good 2 hours on the Highway 5 plan. And so that makes it like
8:30 and you have until 9:30 for the interviews. So you're looking at tackling it at 9:30,
which I suppose is possibly better than doing it tonight...
Batzli: Yeah but that always, the interviews always seem to slip a little and then we have to
talk about it while it's still fresh. December's just a terrible month for a special meeting. I
was thinking more for the Highway 5 thing rather than this.
Harberts: What's the magic date with that February, first or 15th? Is there some priority
�'Y, P tY
from the Council in terms of why that's such a magic date?
27
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
tried to pull together a project here that has been anticipated for this piece of property. This
property is zoned. It's a permitted use. We're not requesting any variances. It's a first class
building. It's something that everybody can be proud of. The staff had Hoisington come in.
Look at our landscaping and said, Hoisington said, if you read your report, we'd do this, this,
this and of course as I said earlier this evening, our landscaping plan was merely intended to
be schematic. Ordinarily what you do is just hire a landscape firm and they kind of buff up
the final plan. But we were showing quantities and what was required. But when staff hired
Hoisington to look at the landscaping. Hoisington made the recommendation. I looked-at
staff and I called, I said I'll do whatever Hoisington wants. Whatever the city, they came to
that Vision 2000 and said that that fellow there, Schroeder or whatever his name was, was the
best landscape architect. I don't know if you were there when Mr. Hoisington said that. And
he looked at this and he said, this is what I recommend. We said, we'll do it. Now I'm
standing here tonight. It's taken us, from my perspective, I've been, it's taken'me 9 years to
get here. I was also the person who brought Target to town. I worked for 2 years. I was the
one that contacted Target. Ed Bierman who is Dick Brooks' boss. He used to work at Wal-
Mart. I've done 22 Wal -Marts and knew Ed Bierman from there. I was the one who went
down to Target's offices. Sat down with Ed Bierman and said you should look at
Chanhassen. Here's my site and then they got out here and decided, well we think we'd
rather be closer to Highway 5 and all the time they were stroking me, because they knew I
was...and they could go there but they wanted to be next to Highway 5. The City did a PUD.
Brad was part of that. They claimed in their PUD that they had the consent of all the .
property owners, written consent. They did not. They did not have my consent but I
acquiesce. Allowed that to happen. Allowed a road to get relocated through my strip center.
Allowed the city to come in and say Charlie. We need senior housing. I don't do senior
housing. We need a place for it. We like your site. So I draw it on there. I mean it seems
like the more I cooperate, the more obstacles I run into. I am frustrated ladies and
gentlemen. Now we have got a beautiful project here and you're telling me the hour's late
and we've got an hour's worth of questions. I mean I've been working on this from my
perspective for 9 years. Is it too much to ask of you to spend another hour with me?
Batzli: No. I think you're missing the point. We found out tonight that we don't have, we
didn't have the materials for our review prior to the meeting and that's why we're going to
delay it. It's not that we don't like the project. It's not that we're going to vote it up or
down. It's not any of that. It's the fact that we get in here and suddenly in the middle of
your presentation we're looking around and saying, well where's all this stuff coming from.
We didn't have the materials to review it prior to the meeting. And I don't think it would be
prudent for us to, you know without a little bit of study and, you know that may be fine for a
working session to be going over the plans and seeing this stuff for the first time but that's
not how we're going to operate. And I understand your frustration. Unfortunately, from our
standpoint we've seen it for 3 days. I understand that it's taken you a long time and if I
30
.1
1
.1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
would have had the material and had an opportunity to look at it, we'd stay. We do 1:00. I
mean we've been here before but I don't even know where to start because everything you've
shown me is new. I don't even know how to react. I don't know how to tie it together.
You know. I don't know what we, as a commission can do tonight. We could stay here until
6:00 in the morning going over your plan by the time we thought it all out, and I don't think
that will get us where we want to be. So I think the only thing we can do, and what
everybody has committed to doing is staying as late as it will take next time and go through
1 it.
Krauss: May I make a suggestion. We have not notified the planning commission candidates
' yet of when they might be on. In fact I told one or two of them it'd probably be the first
meeting in January before that occurred. If we did delay the interviews, you'd have to serve
another couple meetings. But if we did that, we'd spend the early part of the meeting on
1 Highway 5, from like 6:00 to 9:00 and then convene, the regular Planning Commission
meeting but that would at least give us a 3 week jump on bumping this to January which is.
1 Batzli: No, we can't bump this to January.
Charlie James: The reason that I'm, I mean I'm sorry that I'm getting out of joint here
1 tonight and kind of foaming at the mouth but I mean, it's been a long road.
Mancino: ,Paul, what you just came up with sounds fine to me.
Charlie James: But I want you all to be aware of, we're working on a construction schedule
here. Here's the issue is that you either open a grocery story before Thanksgiving and in the
1 fall. I mean there are certain times of the year you don't open it and if you can't get a
certain amount of business and you don't stock the special items for Christmas and the
holidays, then you don't open it until spring. I've got a situation here where Byerly's has
' another, they're building...their program to build a store in '95 in Chicago. We've got a
window of opportunity here for them to, what we're working against here and what we've
1 been struggling against all year is a very real construction schedule and outside date and
that's why I guess I'm babbling.
' Batzli: By doing this at our next meeting, this will go to City Council their first meeting in
January?
' Krauss: Yeah, on the 10th.
Batzli: Would it have gone any quicker if we acted on it tonight?
1
1 31
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
1
Krauss: Yeah conceivably. We talked to Charlie about trying to get...we talked about trying
to roll it over to the 13th. Now there is grading activity that's already been approved out
1
there. I don't know, I'm going to leave it up to...
Batzli: I can't see us approving it tonight. I can't approve it tonight. Okay. 1
Harberts: So the option that we discussed about the 15th, is that the likelihood?
Scott: Yeah. I think what we're going to do is have the working session from 6:00 until
9:00. Blow off the interviews until January and get on this item at 9:00 on the 15th.
Farmakes: I'd make a couple of comments if we're going to see this again to make them
useful in the presentation if it comes back. I would like to see the north elevation where that
grading is done, that we see a side cut. How that's being proposed. I'm having trouble
translating that from verbal into visual. And the sign issue. I'd like to see some more, I'd
like to see a worst case scenario as to what we're looking at and how that's going to be
coordinated with the building.
Batzli: From my standpoint, discussion on the architectural styles. Screening stuff on the
roof and /or in back. If they have trash enclosures. Wherever they're going to put it. The
issue of parking, crosswalks, cars, sidewalks. I don't think Byerly's does the parking lot but
the view from the north. We normally ask, and I don't think Byerly's does it but we
normally put conditions regarding outdoor storage for these types of things. Those are some
of the things that I found missing.
Scott: Interaction with semi traffic with the park traffic. Little League, etc, etc. People that
are parking up and down the street. I suppose that's a signage problem more than anything
else.
1
Harberts: I'd like to also see an element of how maybe a presence of a bus shelter and
public transit facility in this area.
Krauss: ...something in the order of what we have at Target?
Harberts: Yeah, that's what I was thinking.
Farmakes: And speaking of Target, their signage package also presented a monument design.
Krauss: I'm sure...Can we get a sketch of the monument...
32
1
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
Batzli: Is there a motion?
1 Mancino: I move that we table site plan approval for a commercial development consisting
of a 64,132 square foot Byerly's, a 35,700 square foot retail center, and a separate 7,000
square foot commercial office building and conditional use permit approval pursuant to
Section 20 -902 to permit the grouping of buildings on a single building lot until our next
meeting which is December 15th.
1 Batzli: Is there a second?
1 Scott: Second.
Batzli: Discussion.
Charlie James: Would the Planning Commission consider, if they're going to have...to have a
special meeting like next week or something that would allow us to.
' Mancino: We can't turn it around.
1 John Meyers: If I could just clarify something. My name is John Meyers. I'm the Vice
President...Byerly's. The schedule, so you know, we came into the hall and the City Manager
and everybody back in, on November roughly, and here's the schedule that we have. We
1 need to try to meet this schedule...I'm just going to be real frank...if we delay it past me
going to the City Council on the 13th, we'll have to sit down and...If you want to schedule it
for the meeting that you have the 15th, I understand that but I'm not sure...to the project.
1 We're trying to go to the Council on the 13th. The HRA on the 16th. That could possibly
be delayed to the first of January. That maybe we can deal with but we'll be done at that
point and we can start construction. We want to do this with Paul and the City Manager.
' Unfortunately it's a reality. I'm not trying to get you to come in on an extra day. We'll do
it anytime you want. We'll try to deal with all the issues that you've got inbetween now and
' then. Maybe get with Paul to make sure we do address the issues correctly...
Batzli: I won't be able to do it next week. If everyone else wants to come in next week. If
' they want to try and do it.
Krauss: Unfortunately I think the reality of it is, even if you did it next Wednesday, the City
1 Council packet will have gone out 3 hours before you would have met.
John Meyers: Meet Monday. Or Tuesday. I mean we'll crank it out in a day.
1
1 33
Planning Commission -
g ss Meeting December 1, 1993
1
Batzli: Why don't you have someone from the city call people tomorrow when they have
1 their calendars in front of them. See if it's even a possibility to do it next week.
Krauss: I suspect the legality of it is that.
Batzli: We'd have to notice everybody several?
Krauss: Well, I'm not sure that that's the case. I mean City Council can technically call a
special meetings but they have to call...while the floor is open.
Harberts: Well, point of order here. If we are to look at a meeting before the 15th. Rather 1
than table it, if we were just to, help me with this. Postpone or continue the meeting at a
later time, don't we get away from the notices?
Krauss: Yeah but.
Batzli: We closed the public hearing. 1
Harberts: But we haven't closed our discussion. That's what I'm saying. Couldn't we just
continue the meeting rather than adjourn the meeting tonight?
Krauss: You can do that but again, I'm not an expert on Robert's Rules of Order...but the
way the Council has to work is, the Council has to designate a special meeting date during
the Council meeting. They can't just say...
Farmakes: Well, I'm open to meeting whenever on this issue. I think it's a major issue
downtown. Perhaps the Council can also consider a special session or the HRA. But I'm
perfectly open to whatever's being suggested. We probably, you know we probably do have
1
an obligation not only this but the fact that we, there was a slip up here within the scheduling
and I'm not, being that it's the holidays, probably going to be quite difficult but I'm open to
suggestions.
1
Mancino: I'd rather do 2 hours on Saturday.
Farmakes: Suggestions. 2 hours on Saturday or something...
Scott: How many of us are going on Saturday? 1
Farmakes: Do we have a quorum going on Saturday?
34
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
Krauss: We're not sure about Matt but otherwise.
1 Scott: So we have four. That's a quorum so.
Harberts: I can do it Saturday. Monday or Tuesday night.
' Farmakes: I would refer actually, if it's p to y, we can do it Saturday, I mean rt s already a dead spot
' because of the other issue. I don't know if that works into the legality of notice.
Harberts: Well there's the options. If we can make it legal or otherwise show up here on the
' 15th.
Scott: Well how is this meeting, this meeting on Saturday is a work session. There's going
' to be a quorum of the Planning Commission in one place and from what I understand, an
open meeting rules and so forth, that carries some legal responsibility.
Krauss: Well you have a work session designated...
Scott: Well bearing the fact that we don't have legal counsel, I think we need to, because of
1 the nature of the issue, I think we need to continue it and deal with it on Saturday.
Krauss: But keep in mind, I mean hopefully we can find our plans but.you're still only going
to have a day to look at those. And we're really not going to have the opportunity to write
anything new.
Farmakes: I don't have a problem with that. I mean a day with plans is fine...
Harberts: Is the consensus here Saturday? I need to do a little rescheduling on Saturday.
' Scott: Drive fast. Tell your bus driver to be lead footed for this thing.
1 Krauss: So we're looking at?
Harberts: Saturday at 11:00.
' Krauss: That's when we're supposed to be back here right?
1 PP g
Batzli: I'm sorry, Saturday what day? This 4th?
' Scott: Yeah. This coming weekend.
35
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
Batzli: Okay well, I don't know. I don't know the legality of continuing versus tabling. 1
Harberts: I believe we can do it. I just don't know if we can do it as a Planning
I Commission. I know from a Robert's Rules of Order, I'm pretty confident that as long as
you continue the meeting you're alright.
Batzli: Well we have a motion on the floor right now to table. Are you withdrawing your 1
motion? Who made it?
Mancino: I made it. I'll move that we continue discussion. 1
Harberts: So are you withdrawing?
I
Mancino: I'm withdrawing my motion.
Batzli: Who seconded the motion? 1
Scott: No one did. '
Batzli: Yeah we did. We were discussing it.
Harberts: I think this one did.
Batzli: I think so.
•
Farmakes: Are we going to get a review whether or not this is legal?
Krauss: Well yeah. I mean we'll... I
Farmakes: Just so the time that we do spend on Saturday goes.
I
Batzli: Okay, since we're not sure who seconded the motion, we're going to call the question
on the motion to table.
1
Mancino moved, Scott seconded to table Conditional Use Permit #93 -1 and Site Plan 1
#93 -7 until December 15, 1993. All voted to deny and the motion failed.
Batzli: Motion fails. Is there another motion?
I
Harberts: I'll move that we continue discussions for Saturday the 4th. Let's begin the
36 1
.1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 1, 1993
meeting at 11:15.
Batzli: How about pending clarification that that is proper.
Harberts: Works for me.
1 Batzli: Is there a second?
' Mancino: Second.
Harberts: Oh, and the only item would be this issue right here.
' Batzli: Okay. Is there any discussion?
1 Y Y
Harberts moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission continue discussion
on Conditional Use Permit #93 -1 and Site Plan #93 -7 until Saturday, December 4, 1993
at 11:15 a.m. pending clarification by legal counsel. All voted in favor and the motion
1 carried.
' Batzli: Motion carries. This item will be continued on Saturday pending Roger Knutson's
review. Thank you all for coming in. We have new business but we'll put off our goals
again because we have no goals. We actually do have goals but let me put that off. Open
' discussion?
Harberts moved, Scott seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
' motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m.
Submitted by Paul Krauss
' Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
III
1
37
- n
1
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 4, 1993
Chairman Batzli called the meeting to order, and then turned it over to Vice -Chair Joe Scott
at 11:15 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Joe Scott, Nancy Mancino, Diane Harberts, Ladd Conrad and Jeff
Farmakes
MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Batzli, and Matt Ledvina 1
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; and Bob Generous, Planner 11
PUBLIC PRESENT: 1
Bob King 6122 Arctic Way, Edina
1
Bruce Mattson 2020 Crestview Drive
Dan Beckman 6895 Chaparral Lane
John Meyers 7171 France Ave.
1
Tony Olgh 5437 Grand Ave., Mpls.
Tim McCoy Byerly's Architect
Brian Burdick 1
CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON A SINGLE PARCEL AND SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A
64,132 SQUARE FOOT SUPERMARKET, A 26,100 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL
BUILDING, AND A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON A 13.11
ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED BG, GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND
LOCATED ON LOT 4, BLOCK 1, WEST VILLAGE 2ND ADDITION, T.F. JAMES
COMPANY.
1
Charlie James: ...Architecture and then went on to get a masters degree in architecture from
Harvard University. And I'd be happy to...your concerns and answe any questions. We w ,
prepared the cross section that you had asked for. I guess one thing that we've thought about
at this time is that we are going to, not going to see, we're going to show you how we would
propose to handle a pylon or monument sign but at this time we're not going to, we're going
to ask you to assume, and we're going to assume that we're going to meet the sign ordinance
and what we'd like to do is come back in with a contractural agreement. Set of covenants
and show you everything in infinite detail of what we would propose to vary from that
ordinance. At that point the decision is entirely your's whether you wish to do that at that
point in time or not. So we thought that might remove one more cloud of uncertainty plus it
gives you something in the future over which you have absolute control on that particular
issue. But we can show you the pylons and that sort of thing but at this point I guess I'd like
1 1
1
1
1 to have Mr. McCoy respond to some of the questions.
Mancino: Would that come back to us? If it won't come back to us.
I Krauss: Sign covenants, yes. That's not an uncommon condition for the Planning
�Y g
I Commission to do.
Farmakes: Does this also include the...that we're seeing here or the pylon or however. It
I looks like a monument sign.
Generous: Yes. It would exceed what the code would require.
1 Krauss: But if you would prefer to have the whole package come back before you...
I Farmakes: I would, I guess at this point, I'd rather see it piecemeal. I don't know about the
rest of you.
I Charlie James: I guess my thought in doing the sign, and correct me if I'm wrong Paul but I
read somewhere that aren't all pylons under the proposed ordinance going to be a conditional
use or something? I don't know, you gave me some handouts about your, one of the things
I that you're working on a new sign ordinance so we're kind of between the old and the new.
That was another reason that we decided, even if we get it approved now, you've got a new
ordinance coming in. By the time we get around to hanging them on the building, or
I whatever so, but I guess what we wanted to do is the same overall coordination of how we're
going to incorporate the same materials and the same design elements in the monuments and
pylons as we are in the buildings so the whole project has an integrated feel. We use the
same materials out there but as far as the height of the letters, we'll come back on that.
We'll have a legally binding contract between the city and our firm that you would be able to
use, if at that time you had decided that you would...that we were talking about. What we
1 were going to be looking for is to come in anywhere from a fourth to a third of what the
allowable area is but we just want one sign that's the Byerly's component to be larger than
the maximum. Everywhere else in the center right now we comply but it's the issue on the
1 Byerly's sign is larger than the 80 square feet that is allowed by code but you...a third or a
fourth of what's permitted so it's kind of, it's one of those kind of issues where it's how the
code was drafted perhaps and not...
I Tim McCoy: Good morning. Perhaps it'd be easiest if I set this up on here to show
Y g P P you.
Y
I Okay, what we have prepared here are three cross sections through the site in the north/south
direction. The first cross section shows the entry driveway at Byerly's as it goes all the way
through to the townhouse project. This is the property line at the south out at West 78th
I Street. And this is approximately the, I guess it's about a 2 1/2% slope up to the entry of the
Byerly's store. This is drawn at 1 inch equals 50 feet in this scale and I'll probably speak to
some of these issues from this lower section because that's essentially a blow up of this back
1 half. That indicates some of the grade elevations that were prepared by Jim Hill and
2
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
Associates and also show some of the relative floor and roof elevations as we've got them
designed in the "retail" portion and the Byerly's relative to what the elevations are at the floor
slabs of the townhouses. This particular section is through the center of the retail space. We
have a more severe situation to deal with here in terms of variation in grade. Our top of the
floor slab in here is at 977 in the retail. Up at the multiple family housing, we're up at,
that's 1005 in there so we're up about 30 feet from the floor slab in here. We're proposing
1
to carry the parapet wall at the back of the retail area up to the level of about 996, which is
still about 9 feet below what the floor elevations of the multiple family housing is up on top
of the hill. Now one of the potential advantages that we have in the retail space relative to
the Byerly's where we have less flexibility in terms of where we can locate those rooftop
mechanical type units, is that if we want to try to locate these, which we do, back towards
this parapet wall, it will be a more effective screening in here partially because we'll have
shorter rungs and more flexibility to locate those where we want. We don't have to service
freezers and coolers and all the various functions that they've got in the supermarket. So
that's one thing that minimizes this greater height differentiation between the retail space and
the townhouse area. And in the Byerly's store, once again we do have a less severe condition
in terms of grade variation to deal with. We're up at 996 at the first floor elevation of the
townhouses. We estimated in here that we would be up at about 1005 at the second floor.
Bob Generous gave us these floor elevations of the townhouse project. We're at 982.5 down
at the floor elevation of Byerly's but the most important thing here of course is the top of the
parapet elevation as we're proposing presently. That's at 1002.5, without getting you all
confused with all of the numbers here. The top of the parapet, at the back of the Byerly's is
about 6 1/2 feet higher than what the floor elevation is at the townhouses directly behind it.
A couple other things that we've tried to do to give us more flexibility in terms of where we
might locate rooftop mechanical equipment is that we're going to be developing a compressor
mezzanine enclosed, entirely enclosed over the loading projection at the back of the Byerly's
store. I mean that will have louvers which we're certainly going to try to put into the south
side of that for air circulation and so forth. The other feature that you probably saw the other
night in terms of the raised entry to the Byerly's...is something that we would like to develop
some mechanical...house also that would probably have louvers on the back or whatever but
nevertheless...a condition where you could enclose some of this rooftop mechanical equipment
and what would not be screened, and I don't know what that is right now. I mean it may just
be by necessity that we may have to locate some things towards the center of the roof that we
would certainly screen with a trellis and type of thing or whatever. And oftentimes the
conditions that we run into is that we'll propose certain equipment that we know is going to
have to be screened, will be visible from various surrounding site locations. But after that,
typically what we do is we go around with the building official and he says, oh. You'd better
take care of that one. You can see that one or there might be some condition on the job site
where we might relocate it slightly or make some modification relative to what was originally
proposed. But if you've got any more questions, which I'm sure you do, relative to this, I'll
3
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1 try to answer those. This, once again, is the top of that mechanical mezzanine that we're
proposing to develop on top of the rear loading area for the project.
I Scott: So that's a 50 foot wide section that's right inbetween the two rear most loading
areas?
1 Tim McCoy: This? .
1 Scott: That piece right there.
Tim McCoy: This piece?
•
I Scott: Yeah.
1 Tim McCoy. That's 26 feet wide and I think it's.
Scott: Oh, 26 feet deep and 50 feet wide, okay.
I Tim McCoy: Another thing that we've done and proposed on the site plan, after getting
g P P P g g
feedback from the staff, is to move the trees that were previously shown at the lower portion
I of the slope up to the upper portion of the slope so that they could be more effective in terms
of screening elements. And those are predominantly spruce trees and we do have some
I deciduous mixed in there also.
Farmakes: Is the staged area on the cut away, the side cut away, that's notched as it comes
I down, is this the retaining wall that they were discussing?
Tim McCoy: Right in this location?
1 Farmakes: Correct. So there'd be two walls then, is that what you're saying?
1 Tim McCoy: There will be probably two walls because you do not want to carry the walls
up themselves very high because then we start getting into reinforcing the retaining walls and
so forth and we try to limit those to about a 4 foot height each with a maximum of 3:1 slope
1 so it would require two walls.
Farmakes: So the raising of the...would be moved up then to the second tier or what's the,
1 what were you referring to when you're talking about pulling it up?
Tim McCoy: When I was talking about pulling up the screening?
1
4
i
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
Mancino: Yeah, according to this where are, in your original landscape plans, where would
the trees be on your...
Tim McCoy: Oh, the trees were right down at the bottom in here. In both of these locations.
Farmakes: I see. So the drawing is showing them already pulled up then? 1
Tim McCoy: Right.
Farmakes: I see. Is the indication that's shown on the right of the plans, is that the building
plan or the property line? To the adjacent property.
Scott: With the vertical line behind the last tree?
Farmakes: It's showing a person there that's shown out. Yes. 1
Tim McCoy: That's the base of the townhouse.
Farmakes: That's the face. So is that the actual extent that they can...if they have a deck or
is that the edge of the building?
Generous: They have a 30 foot setback and I believe they're at that.
Farmakes: So is that the line that we're seeing there? That's the setback that they cannot 1
build on? Is that correct?
Krauss: They also have landscaping up on top that doesn't show on this that's supplemented 1
too and in that 30 foot area.
Farmakes: In the 30 foot area between the tree and the little person there or to the right of
the individual that's sitting there in the drawing?
Krauss: Yeah. Well, it's in this area right in here. This area.
Mancino: Paul, is that the back of the townhouse? I mean I don't know how the townhouses 1
face.
Krauss: That's the back of some of them. It's the side of some of them. I don't have, some
of them are turned so that they face an internal courtyard so there's a side wall somewhere.
1
5
. 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
Charlie James: It's in the back of the staff report. There's a map on the second to last page
1 of the staff report.
1 Townhouse Developer: The building that you see, these are what you would call back to
back townhouses. So each side of the townhouse is a front face and the driveways go in on
that. This building here or that line that you're seeing there would be like the end of the
1 building.
1 Krauss: Yeah, they were designed for the most part to face on internal courtyards.
Farmakes: So we wouldn't have decks going out to the south?
Krauss: No, you're looking at the side wall...but the patio is facing east or west.
Farmakes: Not north or south? Okay.
1 Harberts: It seems dense.
Farmakes: Alright. I think I understand from this position.
Scott: Maybe you can go through. We have the addendum to the staff report. I think that
was very neatly, this issue number one. Second issue I think Nancy was one of your areas of
concern. About the Vision 2002.
Mancino: Yes, and I'm just...I haven't read this yet.
Scott: Is there any other discussion of the Planning Commission about the view from the
1 north? Has that been answered?
Farmakes: The landscaping plan for this. I know that the property changes somewhat, or it
raises as it goes to the west I believe. The height. This type of effect or this notched effect
would be continued then behind the property that's currently shows some drawings for
potential development?
Krauss: Oh you mean as far as...Powers?
Farmakes: Correct. They did a blank area that's to the left up there. The present drawing
that's there.
Krauss: Commissioner Farmakes, I mean we honestly don't know what's going to go there
but to the extent that this is in effect a...yeah, certainly. We'll try to do something similar. I
6
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
Mancino: We're going to have here?
an g g a e buses coming up
Tim McCoy: No. I should show you in the site plan. What you're seeing here would be
arches just at the face here. The face of this comes across and then this little flatter portion is
just over the driveway but here's the other covered area that I had indicated in here. And in
times of really severe traffic or whatever, the day before Thanksgiving or whatever, they
found it desirable to have something that might be a little bit of a pull off in stacking lane in
there. That's about...3 cars in there...but what's proposed is that the transit bus can pull off
the driveway that runs to the south, along the south of the center here and that people can sit
on benches in there.
Harberts: And the benches are covered.
Tim McCoy: Right.
Harberts: The waiting area's covered.
Tim McCoy: This area is about 18 feet deep and 50 feet long.
Harberts: And you see the transit bus...dropping employees off right here or waiting area
right over there...
Mancino: That concerns me. I mean...
Krauss: We're talking about circulator buses here. Like we rode around in this morning.
Tim McCoy: Yeah, we're not talking about MTC or anything. But one of the things that
we've done also, after consulting.
Harberts: We didn't tell P
ou about park and ride on here.
Y
Tim McCoy: We did have head in parking right in front of the center section of the retail
space that shows up here, which is desirable for running in and out of the video store or
whatever it may be but probably not the best thing when you've got a lot of traffic going in
there. So what we had done is combined the parking spaces that were located off the loading
zone here and taking...little drive thru at the west side of the building. And we're still
proposing to have some type of pull off lane up there where somebody can, whether or not
we've got when people stop and...
Mancino: Diane, do you have any concern? I mean I do, and I said it afterwards at the last
11
•
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1
meeting. I mean we have all this parking in the front and I'm going to walk from my car up
to the front door and not only am I going to have people driving up there to get the drop off
of their groceries but now we're going to small buses coming in through there.
1 Harberts: Yeah, I guess that's always part of the question. I guess what I look at, from a
public transit perspective, is that it's going to be signed. It's going to be designated in the
' sense that we've got where the bus will be laying over so people, when it's on a circulator or
somewhat of a schedule, people will start watching for it. Because you know people are
going to be exiting and entering out that same door where the bus is sitting. And so are they
1 going to be in the line of traffic, or cross traffic?
Farmakes: Well they do have the option of walking along the arcade.
Harberts: But if they're parked over here, I mean I can see people coming from this way and
pulling in here and then there. You know people that are coming from this way, maybe...that
1 I would be concerned with from a safety perspective.
Mancino: That's what I mean too.
' Farmakes: I know but you also have, you can go this way as well. You don't, yeah I see
what you're saying about not having sidewalks but.
Mancino: Because you cut, I mean I cut right through the parking lot to get to the front door.
I don't go up and.
Harberts: Well and with a bus too, Y ou know we're talking what maybe, we're probably
talking maybe a 2 minute, 3 minute layover depending if they're, you know if they're
someone in a wheelchair, then you're talking like 5 or 6 minutes to board them and strap
them in.
1 Farmakes: But in the course of the day, how many buses would show up there?
' Harberts: Well, if it's on a circulator schedule, it could be twice an hour. If it's demand
response, then it's based on the demand of the public.
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
Harberts: I'll take the plans back and sit down with my people.
1 Charlie James: We had a second place, excuse me for jumping up here but, on your site
1 12
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1
plan. We had a second place right here where we thought that this is kind of the entrance to
the shops and I guess... 1
Harberts: That's where I was looking at too the other night.
Charlie James: ...buses out here and aren't these big MTC things but they're more like a
little Metro Mobility, little short thing.
Harberts: Wash y our mouth out.
Charlie James: Is that a bad thing? Well I don't know.
1
Harberts: They're like a...
Charlie James: In any event what I'm saying is, we provided, when staff asked us to take
parking out of here, then someone had the idea well geez, maybe we should have a place out
of the traffic lane here where.
Harberts: But is it covered?
Charlie James: It's a drop off place but it's not a covered place to have them to wait. I
mean if they wanted, if the weather was inclement, they could wait under here.
Harberts: And I think at this point the best thing to do, the condition that's outlined in the
staff report is just to sit down and work with us and we can sit down and chat with these
folks and then also bring in public safety. So I think that the condition that's in there is,
there's opportunities that are workable.
Farmakes: As to the relative location to the grocery pick -up to the entrance. I know
Byerly's in Edina for instance has it on the side of the building which is away from it but
both our grocery stores, well one in Eden Prairie and the other one here in Shorewood that
both have similar type of pick -ups next to the entry point of the store. I don't really see any
danger problems there from a.
Mancino: Well I brought it up because I go to the grocery store on Highway 7 that has it
like this and I always feel when I'm going to pick up my groceries, that I have to be careful
of everybody going into the front door. 1
Harberts: And it might be just as simple as just signing on the pavement in terms of a
walkway. '
13
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1 Mancino: And it's usually at peak hours. I mean it's not at 11:00 in the morning. It's not
2:00 in the afternoon but at 5:00 in the afternoon you get a long load of people in their cars
1 waiting for pick -up.
Harberts: And from our perspective, the circulator would be there more during the non -peak
times. So like I say, the way it's written in the staff report, and the opportunities, it's just a
matter of sitting down and flushing out the details.
Farmakes: Well out of the lane of traffic there, the distance scale wise, how many cars
would that be? If they're backed up. If they were backed up.
1 Tim McCoy: It's about 130 feet. But we've got about 60 feet in here because I did scale
that. Well I've got a scale here. Why don't I try that.
1 John Meyers: Just so you know, you should mention that's double lanes through there also.
It's two wide.
1 Farmakes: So you're talking about 20 cars?
Tim McCoy: Yeah, we're actually only about 85 feet in from the curb there which is about 4
1 cars and I go to St. Louis Park also. As a matter of fact I will be stopping there today before
I go home.
1 Farmakes: The St. Louis Park location of Byerly's?
1 Tim McCoy: Right. On Highway 7.
Mancino: Well Highway 7 is a Lund's.
_1 Charlie James: Mr. Chairman, motion to strike that.
1 Harberts: Hey, I go to the Byerly's in Golden Valley. I'm sorry.
John Meyers: ...and we have some of them on the side and quite frankly they'll work either
way. The way it is here minimizes, we looked at all three sides. We looked at trying...a lot
of time and Charlie knows. We drove him crazy with it but we looked at trying to do it here.
We also looked at leaving some of the shops off. Pushing them down and putting one in
1 here. Quite frankly this creates, or allows for the least amount of cross movement between
cars, people and other cars. If you put it on this side, you're going to have cars stacked on
the wrong side of the road to turn in. This side, at least we're stacked on the right hand side
14
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
on the one or two days a year that it actually needs, they stack u T he majority of the time,
Y Y Y
even on a Saturday, you're not going to have the stack up. If you think of Edina or if you
think even of Ridgedale. The Ridgedale Byerly's. Even though the drive thru is on the right
hand side, to pick up the parcel end of it, where the kids stand when they load, will be right
at the end. So you really don't pick up substantially more stacking room by siding around to
the side of the building. That's effectively what we figured out. And if you put it on this 1
side of the building, they still have to cross through this traffic again. So quite frankly this
allows people to stay on the right hand side. Right hand lane. They pull in on the right and
they come out and they stay to the right. And so there's as minimal cross traffic as you can 1
get. So that was one of the reasons that ended up there.
Farmakes: Does that cover your concerns now?
Mancino: Yeah, that covers my concerns. And as long as they're going to work with Diane.
Scott: We'll see the signs again and we'll see the, also the plans...
Farmakes: I would like to talk a little bit about the outlot, or the commercial building that's 1
away from the rest of the development. Can you tell me at this time is there, what were the
restrictions then be on the lease for that building, since there isn't a current tenant. I know
the plans...Can you go over the zoning restrictions to that particular building?
Generous: ...commercial, I believe a retail or office.
Farmakes: We've had some cloudy interpretations of what retail and office has been in the
past and I'm wondering if we have some idea of what's going in there as far as signage
requirements. I know that we're not discussing that here and we'll do that at a later date but
what are we looking at there? Are we looking at an Arby's or are we looking at a bank
building? Are we looking a pair of eye glasses sticking out of the building? What are we
looking at there?
Charlie James: If I could speak to that a little bit. I guess one of the reasons again, that this
building ended up detached, was it's hard to say all this stuff without it just sounding...self
serving or something but I mean we have really tried to put our best foot forward here and
I...with John and particularly his, the CEO of Byerly's, this building for them represents 1
another step up for them and we had months of discussions on getting them to go with
anything that they, they're a very conservative company. So one of the things that we were
trying to address here is the idea of the 2000 thing and the pedestrian thing and that's why
1
this in essence, we had no idea that this was a conditional use when we went into this and
that, everything that we're doing here and have in front of you today is a permitted use on a
15
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
zoned lot and we're not asking for any variances. In the middle of this process we found
some, staff found some ordinance somewhere, buried back in that said you can't have more
than two structures on a lot. And what we were trying to do, by putting this building down
here. We could easily attach it up here but we think that what we're trying to do is respond
to that part of the discussions about the pedestrian element and bringing something down
towards the street and that was a trade =off. You know and that unfortunately got us into a
conditional use. But it was trying to, we've got a sidewalk going up here now and there's a
sidewalk running along here and it was trying to not have everything back from the street but
try to have something that's architecturally integrated with the same materials and the same
designs that will draw that project closer to the street. And we have two parties that we're
dealing with on this right now and one of them is a retailer that would take the entire space
and the other one is essentially a service type office user who would take the entire space.
As it happens, both of their space requirements are 6,500 to 7,000 square feet. So what we
were intending to show you here is this is how we had envisioned this coming in and if
there's any change to this, we'll come back to you and we'll say, you know if it's going to
have 3 doors or whatever but we felt that the intent here was to show you that we were
meeting the ordinance in parking and the setbacks and open space and green area and the
whole thing and if this is the best that we can say at this time, what this building's going to
look like. Again with the stone being brought in and the arches and this sort of thing. But
again, the reason for that was that it's sort of impractical. I think as one of the commission
members here pointed out, it's sort of a...people that go grocery shopping. They're not, .you
don't leave your house and say I'm going to walk up to the supermarket and get $200.00
worth of groceries. I mean people take their cars and so you know we all are automobile
oriented. Most of us I'm sure came here by automobile this morning but you know I guess
we're trying to give you something here you know. We were trying to pull something down
and bring an element closer to the sidewalk into the street.
Farmakes: My question wasn't in regards to it's location. My question was in regards to
what it's use was. Some of that you've answered. Maybe the staff can answer a question in .
regards to, whatever goes in there, are they looking at separate pylon signs because it's a
separate building now or?
Charlie James: No.
Krauss: No, we wouldn't even add that as part of the conditions. It's on a single lot...is
entitled to one pylon and that we would evaluate. In terms of uses though.
Mancino: Can it be...
Krauss: The building's not designed for that. I mean the building you're approving doesn't
16
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
Krauss: Well whatever it is, they've got to conform to the Uniform Building Code. I don't
know what the right dimension is.
Harberts: Well I guess from my perspective we certainly see 16 feet because if someone has
to transfer out of their car into a wheelchair. Can we just ask that you look at that? Look at
16 feet width parking stall for handicap. Otherwise you put 13 feet in and it gets totally
disfunctional.
Krauss: We can sure look at that. I honestly don't know what the appropriate dimension is.
Harberts: I recall 16 feet so...no it was just my sidewalk and the disabled parking spaces.
Conrad: Yeah, put that back up would you and I'll try to integrate this and be real quick.
The other profile of the main building is real pleasing. But then when you look, and this
when you look at it in relation, it looks great but it's kind of what we didn't want on 78th
Street. So I'm trying to just challenge you know everything that's come up to us that's had a
flat roof, we said go back. Now we have some nice building materials here but I guess I'm
real curious. We've turned down banks and we've turned down a lot of things that really had
a flat roof just like that so Paul, I'm curious. In your interpretation of, well we don't really
have architectural standards as such but how are you feeling comfortable with that design? •
Krauss: Well I think it was Commissioner Farmakes who continually pointed out that we do
not have, I mean Frank Lloyd Wright, the prairie design. There is no Chanhassen design...
desire not to see that. That there's a lot of architectural diversity. Now what you're talking
about specifically, with the pitched roof is a factor. And we have made developers put those
on rather uniformally on small buildings.
Conrad: And tell me why. Because it's an easy way to make it look better? Is that.
Krauss: Well it does make a building, well. This is subjective but I think there's a
consensus that it makes a building look classier but more importantly we have built, such as
in the St. Hubert's Church, such as the Dinner Theatre which is a plywood building but has
mansard. There are a number of significant buildings in town that have incorporated that as a
design entity. I think Bill Morrish pointed out that you look at Chanhassen from a distance.
You see the steep...pitched roof of the St. Hubert's Church sticking up above the oak trees
and it's the kind of thing that we push quite strongly. At the same time, we've acknowledged
that you cannot do a pitched roof system on a big box building. Market Square does not
have a pitched roof. Target does not have a pitched roof.
Scott: Market Square does...
19
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1
Krauss: No, Market Square does not either. Market Square has a few design elements that
1 mimic a pitched roof.
Farmakes: That's correct...isn't the real asset here, often for some reason we go to a pitched
1 roof when we're discussing these things. When we get a proposal of a square building. And
really the issue I think the people are talking about, when they glob onto that, they're talking
about issues of detailing. So many of the franchise buildings that we often see in retail, and
in franchise type of operations, are devoid of it. They have little or no detailing. It increases
the cost per square foot of putting up a building. It sometimes increases the maintenance
issues and they avoid it like the plague. And consequently we get cookie cutter type
' architecture and we seem to be reacting to that by saying, well put a pitched roof on.
Mancino: And it might be equipment on top.
' Farmakes: Well hiding equipment, sure. And a lot of the, I think the terms that we lock into
and when we talk about compatibility of architecture and so on, I get a little uncomfortable
when we use words like that because they're subjective to the person who's interpretting
them. What's compatible. Does that mean the same mass? Does that mean like it? Same
color. There is a tendency here I think even to, at one time every building in Chanhassen
was going to be gray.
Conrad: And western.
Farmakes: When �3' trying get ou locked into in to put down in words what we're trying to say
Y g
or think in our minds, we have a tendency to lock into sort of a tunnel vision that everything
comes out the same. I understand what you're saying here and interpretation of the out
building. It does not have the same architectural detailing that you're seeing in the larger
1 structure.
Conrad: And it's real clear that the main building is quite nice. It's like an immediate read.
You don't even need to play around with that. That is...really proud of that. But the out
building, boy we turned down a lot of stuff that looked like that.
' Farmakes: The...although you can go to Florence and see pitched roofs, some of the angular
detailing that they're using that conteracts some of that. And certainly the materials that
they're using where they, you don't have one building that's all brown. I mean you've got
' some natural differences of the material where you have a like color and a dark color and so
on. We've seen other retail areas out on the corner of 394 and 494. The Oxboro
development. The one in Edinborough. You're seeing some detailings. These are not
1 buildings necessarily that have pitched roofs. In the case of Oxboro, or Edinborough, they
1 20
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
actually did a little pitched roof coming. The building's flat but they have a little pitched 1
roof coming out from the side of the building. And these are things that create shadowing
different times of the day to give the building depth and.
Conrad: So what do ou think about the out building here Jeff?
Y g
Farmakes: I don't think that it's in line with the quality of some of the direction of the other 1
building. What they're trying to achieve there. I think it could be. Perhaps if they broke up
the tangent line across on the roof but again, they don't know who's going even in the
building. So that's why I was asking if this building, if we approve this, are we approving
this out building as well and not knowing what's going in there. They're going to come
back for the signage package but if we're looking at, you know your comments are valid.
It's a square, from the site but it seems to me that incorporating some of these other elements
that they have perhaps in the entrance or so on. That they could, some of the corbeling that
came out. They could conform that building with some minor alterations.
Scott: Are there some southern, do you have a southern and a western elevation of that small
building? '
Mancino: Can the builder respond to this? To Jeff's point of view.
Farmakes: Well actually it's Ladd's questions. 1
Charlie James: I guess I'd just say that I can't bring you a finished building on that because
we've got two parties that are vying for that right now. So what I was trying to say to you,
is look at this is my pledge to you. We're going to, this is what it's going to, we're trying to
show you that we're concerned. We're trying to get it down to the sidewalk. We're going to
try to incorporate the materials. We had a requirement from this one user where they had
two separate, they needed two separate entrances and they needed a certain amount of
program space, of offices and this sort of thing. So we drew that up but, and so the intent
isn't to say gee, this is absolutely, positively it. It's to say, whatever we do here is going to
happen to signs, to everything down to the level of the street is going to have the same
materials. The same design elements. The same references to the other part of town and I'd
be happy to come back to you and, if you have immediate comments right now, and say well
we like this or we don't like this or could you work on this or whatever, but I mean when we
get this thing nailed down, this is the part of the thing that's a conditional use. I guess is
1
there some, this is the problem that you get into when, I think you're so used to looking at
PUD's and we're probably the first project that you've looked at in a long time and a lot of
times in PUD's the city demands all these things and says we want this. We want this.
Because we're going to give you something here. Here we're coming in and we're saying,
21 1
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1 we meet all the codes. We don't need any variances and the only conditional use that we're
asking is one that came out of a result of us trying to please you with a detached building.
1 But if you have concerns, like this isn't all in one plane for instance. This pulls out just like
these pull out. It doesn't read that way but these are coming out just like. Let me take you
along here. On this building, this is in a plane and then this pops out. Goes across here.
I Goes back in. Goes here. Turns the corner. Comes out. This is all pulled away from the
building in different planes. This is recessed. Goes along. Comes back out this way. Reads
along this plane. This element steps out. Goes across. Steps back. Goes across. Goes back
I straight. Goes over here. Comes out. Over. Out. Across. Back. And we've got that same
thing happening here and on the corners.
1 Farmakes: I think that the issue that we're talking about was the tangent line on the roof.
1 Conrad: Yeah...Charlie, that's a little.
Charlie James: You'd like to see more of this?
1 Conrad: Probably, yeah. I think that would do it.
I John Meyers: ...out the entrances.
Conrad: Probably would do it yeah. Yeah. I think it's... •
•
I Scott: A pitched roof is going to look silly. I think by raising them up. Kind of following
along that line, it will tie the two structures together and I think you have a valid...
I Conrad: I really hate to play architect and I always have and I don't like Planning
Commissions to do that but on the other hand, we've gotten used to doing some of that as we
I monitor what goes in on 78th Street. The main building just looks terrific you know. As I -
said before, it's a quick read. The shadows, from a distance you've done all the right stuff.
It's just neat. But then there's the contrast, then all of a sudden I look at the building that
1 you're putting up to make it more of what we want but it's real plain in comparison. And
compared to the other stuff that we've tried to do in downtown, it's not there and it's really
dealing with the roof line and I really don't need to put on what we've been trying to do. I'd
1 just like to build a little bit more character in and some elevation changes in that roof line
and then I think you've got it. But my problem is, if I don't make those comments, I don't
know that it's coming back. Now you know I don't know that I get to see this again and
1 that's my problem Charlie.
I Charlie James: Well, here's what I would propose. We will, architects...you will respond to
22
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
all of this. We will make these entrances like this. We'll pull these elements up and it won't
just be a western face, store front either. Okay. But also, if there's anything that isn't the
same, I'll come back and see you again. It's kind of hard, it's a concept thing. I mean you
1
do concept things in PUD's but I'm trying to say to you, if I get these people in here and if
we pull this up, this is how it's going to look in the site plan and coverage ratio and
everything. We'll put the sidewalks in there and then I don't have to come back. But if we
change anything or if they say, no. We're only going to have one door or anything, then staff
is going to kick me back...
Well, and I want to reinforce you. I really like what you're doing and it's really
We y y '
y g Y
nice. Nice quality buildings and pretty and it's different than what we've been doing and I
like some of that. But again, I appreciate how sensitive you are trying to be to where we're
going Charlie in downtown Chanhassen. I appreciate that.
Charlie James: Well thank you very much and I want you to know that this hasn't been
something that we've thrown together in 2 weeks or whatever. I can tell you that for instance
on the issue of circulation here in Byerly's. When did we start that? June. I mean just that
issue. I've got a stack of reject drawings at least an inch thick, just on the issue of which
side of the building and how do we do that. And then we had to go back to them and say, to
John's boss and say, we'd like to do some things a little bit different here and so we have
been working on this, I first started working with Byerly's in January of last year. So this
hasn't been something that we've just kind of, you know thrown a bunch of stuff against a
wall. We've put a lot of thought and we're trying to put our best foot forward and sincerely
build something that we think is going to look for 50 years in this community. But as Tim
says, one of the things that he's always said to me, he says I'd love to buildings that would
be great ruins 2000 years from now. You know. And so we're... 1
Scott: Do we have any other questions from the Planning Commission?
Farmakes: I have a couple of questions in regards to the ordinance. We're talking about this
as a straight ap and I'm not sure that it is. This is in a downtown area correct? In the
business district? Do we not have an ordinance that discusses the issue...vague, discusses the
issue about compatibility issues? And issues of architecture.
Krauss: Well it's been a long time, and I think Charlie's right, since you've viewed a straight
1
subdivision. It's probably the Abra/Goodyear was the last one. There is an architectural
review. And it's fairly vague as to exactly what goals you set for...You are being asked to do
a CUP for that building. Now, as we pointed out, the CUP is not for any use, which is 1
typically the case. Uses are fully consistent and permitted. The CUP is the fact that you
have two buildings on one lot, which wouldn't have been an issue had it been a PUD but
23
1
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
didn't permit that. But it is a CUP and you know there's several, you do have some
timedi d p y ,Y
leverage. I think Charlie's indicated a willingness to respond to those issues. You know you
' can ask for that architecture to come back in front of you. If there's some acceptance
particularly that the space where the building is, the space. The location is okay but you
want to work out a condition on that particular aspect of the architecture. You feel
comfortable with the Byerly's and the adjacent building and that can go forward.
' Farmakes: You pulled the building down which made it a conditional use to create a
common areas to the left of the development. The retail development, is that correct?
Alright. And that would not be built on at a future date, correct?
1 Krauss: Right. They're...
Farmakes: So if that was at the city's request, I think we all kind of have that in our minds
so what happened there. The other issue of looking at this is, in the future, or in the
immediate future I believe that this will be going to, not only the City Council for review but
also the HRA. So we're not quite sure, usually when we talk about PUD's we know that the
city is investing, and we're not sure on that at this point because the applicant has not...the
same as we would any other type of development. Not granted there's different forms of
investment and different interpretations but I believe that the downtown, as I said, there is an
ordinance because there's some latitude and I think Paul's reaffirmed that for us to make
1 these comments. I fully encourage everybody to do that. And there is also the issue I
believe, in the earlier statement that you're talking about variances in regards to the signage.
So it's not like this is a straight application, and so it should be clarified.
Scott: Diane, do you have another question?
1 Harberts: I just noted in the staff report with regard to the discussion I had at the previous
meeting with oh, semi trucks. Are we guessing that the semi's will either come off of TH 5
on Powers onto West 78th and perhaps off of TH 5 onto Market? Is the turning radius on
1 Market onto West 78th adequate for large semi's?
' Audience: It is now.
Harberts: Okay. That's what I figured. Kerber, I don't have any problem with Kerber. I
1 guess overall, I know that some of the issues that you brought up Jeff. They certainly will
probably be discussed and I guess we're here as Planning Commissioners with responsibility
to look at this from codes and so on and then also we're here with our hats on as residents. I
1 guess overall I'm going to support the project. I think it's going to be a welcome addition to
' 24
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1
Chanhassen in terms of the way this community is growing. I think what, it makes me all
warm and cozy I guess to some extent you know with our last meeting with the willingness
of the developer. With the players involved with Byerly's. There certainly are issues for
discussion and I guess I hope that whatever level that those issues should be raised to, and
discussed at, that they look at, you know as we talked earlier, about the vision of what we're
trying to establish for our community. And I just offer those comments to my colleagues
here but I certainly like the project and what's really a welcoming feeling is the
responsiveness by the owner /developer to really work with the community. That carries a lot
in my feelings here.
Any other comments or questions?
Scott: y q
Mancino: I just have maybe one more comment and question about parking lot lighting. 1
Will we be seeing that? And my comment is, is that I would like to see the lighting in the
parking lot no higher than the roof line of the main building. And you're going to ask me
which roof line. I guess I would say the lower roof line. What I don't want to see is coming
south on, as I'm coming south on Kerber and I see some lighting higher than the buildings so
it becomes a beacon in the night of this lighting. I'd like to see a little, not like what we ,
have in front of Target.
Generous: You could make that a condition of your recommendation...the illumination off 1
site which is a half foot candle. There might be some building code.
Mancino: Well I want to make sure that it meets public safety, etc. but.
Harberts: Has public safety, did they comment on this? I don't have my packet.
Generous: They said no comment at this time. They're most concerned about their access 1
and...
Harberts: That's what my, yeah. 1
Generous: As far as the circulation, they didn't have a problem. 1
Farmakes: We're showing a flag pole out in the building. Where are those? Those don't
come under signage. I think those come under what? We're seeing flag poles... Well there's
one drawing that has flag poles on it.
Krauss: If there is, the position we've taken in the past, and this is somewhat clarified 1
hopefully in the new ordinance...is that if there's a sign up there that says Byerly's...or a flag
25 1
1
1
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1
up that says Byerly's, we would consider that to be a sign. If it's an American flag...Now
' this doesn't relate to this discussion here but we know that a Perkins is potentially looking at
the site across the street. And Perkins has a number of issues with their 50 foot flag and
most recently I think they turned one down in Minneapolis. I think they were taken to Court
and the city won. That that is an over representation. That's not necessary to represent the
nation and that itself was a sign. But that's not an issue here.
1 Farmakes: So we're talking a flag pole? It's not a line of flag poles?
Krauss: Well I guess I'd defer back to...
Farmakes: We're discussing on the drawing here they're showing flag poles. Is that?
John Meyers: If you go by every store that we've got, if you go by all the stores we've got
and all of them have...American flag.
Farmakes: So it's a singular? There's no several flag poles?
1 John Meyers: No. One flat pole. If you go back to our Edina store that's right out on the
corner. Ridgedale's...1 believe but all the stores have them and it's not something we started
in the last 5 years...If you go back to Golden Valley where a 9 inch flag pole has been there
1 forever. It's something that we've always done.
Farmakes: Okay. We'll be looking at the monument sign then at a later date, is that correct?
i
Krauss: Yes.
1 Conrad: We're not commenting. I'm real comfortable with signage as I see it. Jeff, I think
you brought that up. Should we talk about it.
1 Farmakes: No. No. I said they have a drawing here of, that they did for the monument but
that we can discuss at a later date when we discuss the signage at that point.
1 Conrad: My last comment, and this is one for staff and it's, it makes it tough for me to vote
on this conditional use permit. I wish it was just, I wish it wasn't. Because it gets into TIF
' and it's something that I don't even want to play with. It's not my job. But I'm curious. In
the CUP there are two points. It talks about will not create, and this is something that the
HRA has to deal with but two points. Will not create excessive requirements on public
1 facilities. And I'm not sure where that one really goes. And another one, will not depreciate
1 26
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
I
surrounding property values. I really do believe that two grocery stores can't survive in 1
Chanhassen based on all the stuff, you know over 10 years I've been around and we couldn't
get anybody in and now we have 2. So my perception is that Festival will go out of
business. My perception is that that will decrease the property value over there. Staff, speak
1
to me about that.
Krauss: Well, I think you're reading...something that we've been drafting up for the last 4 or
I
5 months with a couple of CUP's and there is some standard language to that effect. I guess
we need an interpretation from the City Attorney but honestly that language was supposed to
deal with things like a contractor's yard going up next door to somebody's house. You know 1
it wasn't any idea of guaranteeing a monopoly or some sort of business sphere of influence.
That's not the interpretation of that. We could ask for a clarification of that. The CUP itself
does not relate to the fact that there's a supermarket there. Doesn't relate to it in the least.
I
The only thing that the CUP is talking about is that there's two physical buildings of
whatever use on one property and the fact that you have two buildings doesn't do anything 1
good, bad or indifferent to Festival or anybody else.
Conrad: I think commission members, I don't think my comments should relate to what Il
we're voting on today actually. I'm just real interested in TIF money and, we've put TIF
money into Market Square. And we have. It's been rerouted to stay in Chanhassen. It's not
going to other places basically so we've earmarked it and so it is an investment in Market I
Square, right?
Krauss: Well if I could touch on that. Again TIF fmancing is the tip of the iceberg about... I
The City of Chanhassen has not invested a penny into Market Square or anything else. What
we've done is we've taken the taxes that Market Square would have paid and through TIF re-
invested that back in there to make it more attractive for development. 1
Farmakes: That's another way of saying the same thing Paul.
Conrad: Yeah, it's like. 1
Farmakes: It's money you would have gotten but they get to keep it. Or excuse me, it's
I
makes the...coming back.
Krauss: The only thing the city would have gotten if you assume that development would
1
have occurred irregardless.
Farmakes: In the first place. Egg and chicken. 1
27 1
i
I
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1
Krauss: Right. And the presumption is with TIF, is that Market Square wouldn't have
' happened. I mean you had this...This is a philosophical issue that the HRA is into more and
more. Just what level of assistance is actually validated to make things happen. And of
course the presumption is that in the interest of moving these funds back in, that the city is in
1 a much better position to get a much higher tax base in the long run, which benefits
everybody. So that's the simplistic version of TIF. It's also a fact that, and this gets into
probably more detail than you want to, but that Festival, the lease on the Festival store was
1 guaranteed by their parent corporation for 20 years. Whether it's empty or not. I think
everybody's hoping that we don't lose Festival. There's no intention to lose Festival and I
think the best of all possible worlds is if Festival decides to expand.
Conrad: Well, they're not going to survive. You know Paul, that's really naive. You know
they will not survive.
111 Krauss: Ladd, I honestly don't agree with that. But whether I do or not is indifferent to the
fact that you've got a site plan request for today.
'
Conrad: Ah, absolutely.
1 Krauss: The CUP that you're quoting, validly quoting, doesn't refer to the use. It just refers
to the fact that there's two buildings.
•
1 Conrad: Say that one more time.
' Krauss: It has nothing to do with the use. This is not a CUP for a church in a residential
district or a contractor's yard or gas station or fast food. This is solely a PUD because you
have two physical building footprints sitting on the same lot. That's the only aspect of this
1 that makes it a CUP.
Conrad: Right. I understand that.
' Farmakes: I think we touched on this at the last meeting. About being drawn into issues of
competition and risk when the city winds up making, or not TIF. Trying to originate some
1 destination for people to come to downtown. Particularly at the beginning. I mean to create
a reason for people to drive here. And the question whether or not it's something we should
be discussing here, in the issue of planning where it seems to me that this is somewhat more
1 of an HRA issue. Not to defer the responsibility but it seems to me that that's something that
we, that's not our charge.
1 Conrad: It's not our charge unless, unless point 11. If you agree with the CUP, you have to
1 28
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
know exactly what point number 11 really means and based on what Paul just said, he
probably is saying that we don't need to concern ourselves with point number 11 on the CUP. '
Farmakes: I'm not sure that this development needs to be a conditional.
Conrad: Oh, it doesn't. No, he's only doing it to, because that's how, that's what we want.
So you know, developer and Charlie, I'm not even, they're doing what we want in all these
cases. '
Farmakes: But the issue of property values I think is not necessarily the same as the value of
your business. The value of the building and the land that it's on. 1
Conrad: You know but really, if you can't fill buildings.
Farmakes: But then guaranteeing competition 're uaranteein and loss. There's no risk in being in
P
business. And again, it seems to me that it would be a bad thing for the city to get drawn
into that argument. That we are in fact business partners. That's, although it sounds good ,
it's not factual.
Scott: Are there any other comments before I ask for a motion? ,
Farmakes: I thought this was an open discussion, or we won't be making statements
afterwards as individuals then correct? For the record.
Harberts: That's the way I understood it.
111
Farmakes: Fine with me. Then I have a few more comments. A couple brief comments on
the architecture. I guess I feel a little uncomfortable, in particular with a development that's
usually considerably higher cost per square foot than what we're used to seeing on retail.
Making comments when we don't have the detail, and by the applicant's own admission,
those are yet to be worked out. I would like to see some of the details come back here again
but I don't think that I would at this point tonight I feel uncomfortable about voting on this.
And approving it based on some conditions that I've heard here. But what I would like to
see, I'd like the applicant to consider, rather than the smooth facing buildings that are a
majority of Byerly's, to cross over between the old and new in Chanhassen. Consider a
rough faced limestone.
John Meyers: The brick that's used...is a rough coarse brick...
Farmakes: The reason I bring that up...is somewhat of an identity crisis. It thinks of itself as '
29 '
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
a small town that's been here for 100 years, which in fact it has but there's unfortunately not
much left of the old town. So you have that mindset but you don't have the physical
representation that typically you'd have of an old village downtown. It seems to me that you
have an opportunity to do something different from your standard buildings which are very
conservative and flat glass coverage to mix this type of, I call it wainscoating or semi
' covering and get the contrast between the color of dark brown and the limestone. I know the
city has an existing structural limestone entrance for the Dinner Theatre and so on and it
would be nice for the city to work that color in. Chaska now has several buildings, and
' Shakopee also, with Chaska limestone. And Kasota stone also is different colorations. But to
work that in. I think it's perceived as a sign of quality and of heritage here. And I don't
know how much limestone they use in Florence but I know that it's...contrast here. I would
1 like to see you use more of it in the detailing that you're using rather than just adding a little
color. I don't know what that does to your cost per square foot but I'd also like for you to
' consider at the top of the building, on your capping and your corbeling to work some of that
in. Or at least look into it. It also would, I think break up the brownness of the building
overall and the flatness. It also, I think may be an argument to some of the proponents of
' pitched roofs and so on. Some of the PUD applications that we went ahead with. I think
some of the comments that were made by the people at the last meeting and issues of hey,
they've got to build the same building we had. Or that we did. So they're talking about
l physical representations of what they did when in fact those representations or things that
they did were actually trying to solve a problem, or visual problem. I'm not sure we have to
duplicate the same solutions to the problem. Although that problem exists there. There are
different ways to approach that and this is one of them. And again I come back to the issue
of detailing. It's not something that we see a lot of because of the cost of it. Although when
you look at percentage of the building, when you get into aesthetics, it's hard to justify cost
1 and I know we get this with retail buildings all the time. Particularly franchise buildings.
We ask for detailing. We ask for these things because it represents character. There's not a
lot of character that you're going to get with some of these, use the Goodyear building as an
1 example. You get Option A, B, C and D and the black asphalt roof and a plain sided back.
And they come up and they say hay, we don't want to put any more money into that because
we're not going to make any money off of it. Then the community sits back and says, well
we don't want a whole city of that. And this would really, this building would really change
that I think. It's a nice building. I'd like to see the details that you have in those insets up
above where you have little cross sections to the right of the Wine and Spirits. If you would
work in some of that detailing when you come into those tiles on your out building as well as
with the pieces that come up. It would take away some of the slab appearance of it and I
think again, the issue of slab is another one that keeps on coming back here and I think that
it's a reaction by the commission and I think some of the citizens in the city because they see
this slab thing over and over again. And since you're in the business I think you can see the
difference between an Oxboro and some of these, I'd say different retail applications. What
1 30
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
you have here and standard retail building that we often get. And I think you've designed a
1
pretty distinctive building and I don't know if my comments are constructive but, and I don't I
know how much that will cost you in additional funds but I'm glad that you preservered with
coming up with an innovative use for that particular piece of property. I think it will be a
nice addition to the city.
Mancino: Jeff, when you said you wanted to see more details, what does that mean? Does
that mean you want it to come back?
I
Farmakes: Well the applicant said that he'd be willing to bring the building back, or the out
building back again to show. I don't know how we work that in to the conditional use or if
the applicant wants that.
Mancino: But are you asking also for not just the commercial building but for the main 1
building also with some of the suggestions that you made?
Farmakes: I think we've made these points. I don't know if that's something that the HRA
and City Council can't hash out. I think what I'm talking about is basically how the
material's finished and where exactly it's applied and I'm just critiquing. I don't think, you
I
know unless the city starts investing in this building or so on that there's a question where
you draw the line on that. You know either if they built what's proposed here, it's certainly a
step up from what we've been seeing. I'm just talking about integration into other things that
1
are going on in Chanhassen. The contrast between the kind of clean linear look that they
have on all their buildings. Sometimes when you get an...mix going on with some of the
older materials and the newer facings, it comes out with a pleasant...I'll leave it at that.
1
Maybe we should clarify from Paul what's coming back and what isn't. Or what the
applicant is bringing back to us. I don't think that the intention is to hold up this from going
to the. 1
Scott: No, and I've noted a couple of conditions. One involving transit and one involving 1
signage. And another one, architectural detailing.
Harberts: I've got 5 conditions.
I
Scott: Well if you have some conditions, perhaps you'd like to make a motion.
Harberts: I will...if we're ready, let me take a crack at it. I'll move approval that the 1
Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit #93 -1 to permit the
grouping of buildings on one lot, one building lot and approval of a site plan #93 -7 dated
1
- r
31 1
I
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
November 18, 1993 subject to the following conditions. Item number 16. That the word bus
be struck and inserted with the word transit so it would read, locate a transit stop area.
Condition to be added would be 21. The addition of sidewalk connection between the out
building down to that sidewalk and staff would work with the applicant to work out the best
location for it. Condition number 22. That with regard to the out building, that the detailing
of that out building, is the word match the main building and that that detailing information
would also come back to the Planning Commission. Item number 23. That staff work with
the applicant with regard to the comments made by Nancy with the lights in terms of the
height. Condition number 24. That the signage package return to the commission for
approval. And condition number 25. That the Public Safety provide written correspondence
to the City Council specifically addressing the traffic impact with the new curb cuts that are
proposed for Kerber Boulevard, especially in the 4:00 to 9:30 p.m. times, Monday thru
Thursday because of the amount of parking and traffic generated by the park across the street.
They should specifically outline what they see, if there's an issue. What the impact is so that
the Council is aware of the impact because of the curb cut.
Scott: Diane, did you want to mention the 16 foot handicap parking space?
1 Harberts: Thank you. 26 is that the staff revisit with the applicant reviewing the opportunity
for a 16 foot disabled handicap parking spaces to provide more functional use by patrons that
1 require that type of special need. Is there a 27?
Scott: Just a point about, did you make sure the notes are very copious because we have no
idea whether, since you're undersupervised on setting up the video and the audio and these
comments may not be on the public record but if you could take very copious notes on that to
make sure that at least we know precisely what the conditions can be. Is there a second to
the motion?
Mancino: I second but I have a friendly amendment. On 1(b), last line. And this has to do
1 with the landscaping between, on the north side between the development. The last line. I
would like to read, the use of more planting materials may be warranted to achieve better
long screen planning for the development. I would like to delete the words, but smaller.
Scott: You'll accept that amendment?
1 Harberts: Yeah, I guess.
Scott: Okay, it's been moved and seconded that we accept the matter before us with
' conditions as stated and a friendly amendment. Is there a second to the motion?
' Mancino: Yes.
32
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
Scott: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? '
Harberts moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council approves the Site Plan #93 -7 dated December 7, 1993 and the Conditional Use
1
Permit #93 -1 to permit the grouping of buildings on one building lot, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The applicant shall be required to provide a revised landscape plan for City approval. The
plan shall include the following:
a. The applicant shall provide interior landscape islands in the parking lot areas. In
particular, landscape islands measuring approximately 28 15 feet by 40 38 feet (two
parking stalls wide by two deep) shall be provided for every other aisle of face- to-
face parking (minimum of three interior planting islands). These islands shall contain
a minimum of three overstory trees and they shall be alternated with the tree
groupings to be provided at the perimeter of the site. A aeration/irrigation system
consisting of perforated PVC pipe or other flexible tubing in a looped system with at
least two risers extending above the planting surface shall be designed and installed as
part of these planting islands (see attached Figure 11 -3).
b. The Hackberry trees proposed for the northern perimeter of the site shall be replaced
with oak trees (either White Oak, scientific name Quercus alba, or Bur Oak, scientific
name Quercus macrocarpa) in order to continue the tree planting theme begun in the
Oak Ponds townhouse development located north of this development. In order to .
more effectively screen the development from residences to the north, the trees should
be placed closer to the top of the slope, as opposed to near the bottom of the slope
where they have virtually no effect on screening. Spacing of conifers should be ten ,
(10) feet to allow them to grow together in a more solid mass at a younger age. As at
other areas of the site, these trees should be placed strategically in groupings to
increase their effectiveness as a buffer and to lend a more natural feel to the planting. 1
The use of more but-smailef planting materials may be warranted to achieve better
long -term screening for the development.
and parking lot boulevard medians shall be provided with low level shrubs
c. Perimeter a par g p
and other plant materials to help soften the appearance of the parking area. Evergreen
shrubs are great for winter and also add to summer landscape, but use of more
flowering shrubs in combination with the evergreen shrubs would be appropriate. The
plan should consider the use of more shrubs and perennials (such as daylilies) in
important areas of the site. These plants could be used as accents at site entries or
pedestrian areas.
33 '
1
1
1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
1 d. Alternate ground cover such as sumac shall be used along the steep grade to the north.
The steepness of the grade precludes the mowing of this sodded area.
1 e. Ornamental trees should be interspersed within the landscaping boxes located in front
of the building to provide architectural highlighting and to enhance the facade of the
structure. Adding ornamental trees (crabapple, hawthorns or japanese tree lilacs) in
planting areas near the building would add interest and color to the expanse of wall,
especially at the front of the building. Care should be exercised in selecting plants
that do not set fruit (which can be very messy in the case of some crabapples) for
areas close to pedestrian ways. Areas near the building would benefit from the
introduction of more colorful planting materials in the form of flowering shrubs and
1 perennials.
f. A landscape box with shrubs shall be provided to the north of the trash enclosure
1 located adjacent to the detached commercial building to screen this enclosure from
view.
g. All landscaping areas shall have the proper soil preparation to ensure the viability of
the vegetation to survive. The landscaping plan shall provide specifications for proper
soil preparation.
' h. Consideration should be gP
iven to placing plant materials together to create a bolder,
g P
more interesting landscape, without excessive alternation. Plantings shall be massed, •
' creating a more diverse and dynamic landscape. Within massings, similar species
should be used to ensure the greatest effect from the individual specimens.
' Consideration shall be given to maintaining views to the building when placing tree
groupings in the perimeter areas.
' i. The plan does not recognize the street tree plantings at West 78th Street and Kerber
Boulevard where the City has installed, or has planned, for trees at 50 feet on center
(West 78th Street) and 35 feet on center (Kerber Boulevard). The City's plans for
West 78th Street show a permanent landscape easement (eight foot typical) at several
locations along West 78th Street. The landscape plan for the project should start with
the pattern of street tree plantings at the streets, allowing these trees to provide
' continuity between this site and other developments. Trees for this project can then be
placed in groupings within the setbacks or berm areas of the site.
' j. The more formal placement of trees along the entry drives works to continue the
feeling established by the City's tree plantings at the street. Tighter spacing of trees
along the entry drives is desirable. Shrubs along the entry drives would reinforce
34
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
views of the building and obscure bumpers and hoods of cars. 1
k. Entries could be marked at the streets with more colorful plantings, creating a break in
the rhythm of street tree plantings and providing emphasis for site entry points.
1. Care should be exercised in spacing shrubs to ensure that complete cover of the
planting bed is achieved at maturity.
m. At the perimeter of the parking areas, the large expanses of sod from the back of the
curb to the property line should be planted with trees and shrubs in significant
groupings. This should also occur between the westerly entry drive and the east side
of the detached commercial building and at the area west of the retail building.
Conifers in these areas would be useful for the winter landscape.
n. Financial guarantees shall be provided to insure installation and maintenance of
landscaping.
o. All planting areas must have an irrigation system installed.
p. Benches and picnic tables shall be provided in the landscaped area west of the retail
center.
1
2. The screen wall located at the eastern rear of the building shall be extended to the
beginning of the radius of the curb. 1
3. A sidewalk shall be provided from West 78th Street to the retail center along the western
entry drive, east of the commercial/office building, into the development.
4. As a condition of site plan approval, the applicant shall be required to enter into a
development contract with the City and provide the necessary fmancial security to
guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval.
5. The applicant shall be responsible for applying and obtaining the necessary permits for the ,
City's Building department for the installation of the site improvements.
6. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for bunting and
landscaping over the City's drainage and utility easement along the west side of Kerber
Boulevard. The applicant will also be responsible for adjusting the existing sanitary
manholes to the new grades.
35
.1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
7. The applicant shall remove the fourteen parking stalls in front of the retail site directly
west of the supermarket. In order to make up for lost parking stalls as a result of
' changes to the site plan, compact parking spaces maybe used.
8. The applicant will be responsible for furnishing and installing the appropriate traffic
' control signs and pavement markings throughout the site.
9. The turning radii at the driveway access points along Kerber Boulevard should be
' expanded to 20 feet. The turning radius for the service drive located in the northwest
corner of the site should be expanded to accommodate large semi - trailer accommodations
with a wheelbase of 50 feet.
' 10. The applicant's engineer shall supply City staff with detailed storm drainage
calculations for the entire site. Storm sewers shall be designed to handle a 10 -year
storm event. Additional catch basins may be needed after review of the storm water
calculations.
' 11. The retail building site located in the southwest corner of the site plan should be
lowered by a minimum of five feet.
12. The applicant shall provide the City with a $10,000.00 financial security to guarantee
installation of the curb cuts and boulevard restoration. The security may be included
with the security requirements for the site landscaping.
13. An erosion control plan shall be developed and incorporated into the site plan and
' resubmitted for City staff review and approval. Staff recommends implementing the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook for the plan design as well as site
restorations. The northerly back slope behind the building should be restored with an
' erosion control blanket. Plans should also employ erosion control measures around
proposed catch basins with hay bales or silt fence or other approved measures in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
14. The final site grades shall be compatible with the final grade of the Oak Pond
development directly north of this development.
' 15. The entry drive from West 78th Street in front of Byerly's shall be revised to a
boulevard type separating the major traffic aisle from the parking area. (Note:
The developer has already agreed to this and revised the plans, however, since
they are different from the ones initially submitted and provided to the
Commission, I thought that I should add this as a condition.)
36
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993 1
16. The applicant shall work with SW Metro Transit to locate a bus transit stop area
on -site.
17. There shall be no outdoor goods a of oods or materials after construction is
completed.
18. There shall be no trash P
-
ick u between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
P
19. No overnight parking of refrigeration unit trucks and/or trailers. 1
20. No use of trash compaction equipment between 10:00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
he
21. A sidewalk is to be provided from West 78th Street to t detached building. d
The appropriate location of this sidewalk is to be worked out with staff.
22. The applicant shall be required to match detailing work for the detached
commercial building with that of the main building. Prior to development of the
outbuilding, the applicant shall come back to the Planning Commission for
architectural review of the buildings design.
23. Applicant shall work with staff on the site lighting. Parking lot lighting may be 1
no higher than the main building.
24. The signage package for the development shall come back to the Planning 1
Commission for approval.
25. The Public Safety Director is to provide specific comments to the City Council on 1
the curb cuts and truck traffic on Kerber Boulevard. Particular mention should
be made of the truck impacts on park use between the hours of 4:00 and 9:00
P.M.
26. The applicant is request to revisit the handicapped parking with staff.
Specifically, the applicant is to look into the opportunity of providing sixteen (16)
foot handicapped parking stalls.
All voted in favor, except Conrad who abstained and the motion carried.
o p exce
Conrad: Just for your note, I abstained. I didn't vote. '
Scott: And this is just a comment to the developer. We've had some background on the
37
1
Planning Commission Meeting - December 4, 1993
work that you've done with Super Valu and Wal -Mart and so forth. I think you're the type
of developer that we like to see in Chanhassen. You've been incredibly- patient with all of
the city staff and various commissions that you have to work with and I know personally
you've been through a lot in this project. I'm personally quite pleased to see it go forward so
thank you for your patience. I'm personally excited about seeing this. The impacts that it
may have on the existing uses, that's competition but thank you for your preserverance.
Charlie James: Thanks all of you for coming in today. I just wanted to say one thing Ladd.
I don't know if you, and I have to get this out just because you had to get it out. Did you
know that on my property that I'm paying taxes into a tax increment district and my money is
going to projects like Market Square. That money that I'm paying in taxes is going to other
projects in town and when Brad built Brooks, Kennys went out of business. And he built a
pizza place there and he put in a Brooks. Then he went across the street and put in a second
pizza place and put in a supermarket...and the pizza guy and Brooks said, what are you doing
1 Brad. You're using TIF money to build another pizza place for competition...
Harberts moved, Scott seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
' Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
1
1
1
1
38
1
1