Loading...
9. Americana Bank C ITY OF 111 ` , I PC ..,ATE: 8/7/91 CHANHASSE ' 9 CC DATE: 8/12/91 il �k y CASE #: 91 -3 SITE 89 -2 PUD, 91 -8 SUB II S REPORT 1 Y PROPOSAL: 1 Site Plan Review for an 8,365 Square Foot Bank Building, . I 1—. 2) Replata Portion of Outlet A, Market Square into a 40,000 Square Foot Lot and a 39,600 Square. Foot Lot 1 . 3) PUD .Amendment to Add a Bank Building to Market Ds Square Shopping Center -r LOCATION: Southwest,corner , of the intersection of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street 4, APPLICANT: r KRJ Associates P 0 Box 635 Long Lake, MN 5 . - / II , r PRESENT ZONING: PUD, Planned Unit Development II ACREAGE: 40,000 square feet DENSITY: , II ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - OI and CBD S - BG, vacant Q E - CBD,. Filly's and Hotel • • 1/Z I he site. fir: WATER AND SEWER: Available to ti� --- ; :,cr , RecL _ PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: A level parcel Le :E. Sc:bm:1_ ....,;� ' — --.t.., -- ,---,,- v ! Oaitt Su II 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial .--- -E - ! L.."' 1 0 . • • II 11 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 1 Page 2 • PROPOSAL /SUMMARY I On October 8, 1990, the City Council approved the final PUD plan for a shopping center subject to conditions described in the attached report. The site included 3 outlots containing a proposed I veterinary clinic and a cleaners and one vacant outlot (Outlot A) with an area of 79,946 square feet. The shopping center remains undeveloped due to financing difficulties, however, these are in I the process of being resolved and construction is likely to start in September. The current request is for the construction of a 8,365 square foot bank building on the north half of Outlot A. I The site plan is well developed. The architecture of the bank building attempts to reflect the shopping center's use of stucco accent tiles, columns and gabled entries as well as the roof line I of the Country Suites Hotel. This type of architecture is consistent with the rest of the shopping center. Staff is proposing that the roof line of the bank be revised to accentuate I the gables and to ensure that the shingles are of the type used on the Country Suites Hotel which resemble wood shakes from a distance. One highly attractive feature of the site is the inclusion of a pedestrian plaza at the intersection of West 78th II Street and Market Boulevard. A four lane drive -thru is provided to the south of the building. Car stacking for vehicles waiting to go through the drive -thru will be on the south portion of the site I away from West 78th Street. The location for the drive -thru is appropriate as it places car stacking away from West 78th Street. The drive -thru is screened by the bank building from West 78th I Street. Upon review of the drive -thru by the Engineering Department, it was found that the proposed turn radius for the drive -thru exit was inadequately sized. Alternatives to address the problem and acquisition of additional land to the south or I reversing the turn lane direction of flow should be submitted. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. Additional I landscaping is being requested north and west of the site across from the parking area. II Site access has been a major concern of staff through the design of this proposal. The applicant originally requested two access points, one via Market Boulevard and the second through West 78th Street. Staff strongly opposed the Market Boulevard curb cut I noting traffic safety concerns and the fact that this entrance was specifically prohibited by the PUD areement. After a number of meetings with the applicant, the M:1'"ket Boulevard curb cut was II eliminated and the curb cut on West 78th Street was refined to allow a right turn lane only for traffic eastbound and a median cut allowing left turns for traffic westbound. A traffic study II conducted by Strgar, Roscoe and Fausch, Inc. has been submitted to 11 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 3 • 1 the City in support of this curb cut and new median cut on West 78th Street. The bank representatives believe that the West 78th Street curb cut is critical to their operation. From a design standpoint, we believe this change is not likely to undermine the effectiveness of traffic flow on West 78th Street. However, it is necessary to note that the City Engineering Department continues to have some reservations with the median cut. Staff notes that the West 78th Street curb cut does not specifically serve the bank but rather would connect to the main driveway for the shopping center. We would strongly recommend against any median breaks serving individual sites. Ultimately, the Planning Commission, City Council and HRA will need to make a determination if it is acceptable on aesthetic grounds. Since at least part of the landscaped median would be lost if the median cut is approved. If it is approved, the bank should pay for all associated costs related to studying, designing and constructing this curb cut. In an accompanying subdivision request, the outlot is being divided into two lots, one of which will contain the bank building and the second of which will be reserved for future development. The subdivision request is a relatively straight forward action. The plat should be corrected as required to reflect an additional 10 feet of right -of -way along West 78th Street that has been required by the City under the Development Agreement. 1 Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site plan, subdivision and planned unit development amendment requests for this proposal with appropriate conditions. SITE PLAN REVIEW 1 General Site Plan /Architecture The building is situated at the southwest corner of West 78th ' Street and Market Boulevard. Access is gained off of a proposed curb cut on West 78th Street. Staff will discuss in detail the access aspect later in the report. Parking is located to the west 1 of the proposed building. Vehicle stacking is located south of the site and the building so that direct distant views from West 78th Street, to the north of the site will be minimized. Direct views of the stacking lanes will be screened by the building and landscaping from the north of the s_ e. The architecture of the bank building reflects the shopping _ nter's use of stucco accent tiles, columns and gabled entries. Colors and material types need to be specified for staff approval. Low gabled roofs and a strong masonry base complete the bank's image for the prominent corner site. The applicant has failed to show a roof top equipment 1 1 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 ' Page 4 screening plan. Such should be submitted prior to the City Council meeting. The applicant is showing the trash enclosure screened by a masonry waJ 1 using the same materials as the building and located on the southeast corner of the building. Two electric boxes operated and maintained by NSP, as well as an air conditioning ' unit, are located to the southeast corner of the site. These units are screened by a berm and landscaping to the north, east and south. 1 While we are generally satisfied with the building architecture and note that the applicant has worked extensively on this project, we do have several main concerns. These include the illustrated building addition on the north side of the building paralleling West 78th Street, the incorporation of what appears to be an extended canopied entrance into the plaza area, and the building roof line. As to first issue, a building addition has been illustrated on the north side of the structure. This had been incorporated into earlier plans and was intended to represent potential future expansions of the bank facility. Upon review of ' the plans, staff concluded that there was insufficient parking to support a building addition on this site and believed we had come to an understanding wherein the addition was to be deleted from the plans. We wish to make it clear that this building addition is not supported by staff and we do not believe we will be in a position to recommend approval of it in the future. We are therefore ' recommending that it be deleted from final plans for the project. The site on which this bank is situated is a highly visible one at what is highly likely to become one of the most important intersection in the Chanhassen CBD. Setting an architectural standard for this bank is difficult in part due to its location. The PUD approval requires architectural consistency with the main shopping center building. However, at the same time, this site is essentially the transition point from the shopping center site into architectural styles found elsewhere in the CBD. Therefore, we ' believe that the architect's intent to combine the style of the shopping center building, along with other downtown buildings such as the Country Hospitality Suites, is a sound one. We continue to have some concerns over the visual massiveness of this building and its proximity to the street. In part, these concerns will be addressed by ensuring that the building maintains a 25 foot setback from the public right -of -way required elsewhere in the shopping center as well as by the taking of an additional 10 feet along West 78th Street which will be reserved for the inclusion of a second thru -lane when it is needed in the future. However, we continue to 1 be concerned about the massiveness of .the roof line and the inclusion of relatively diminutive dormers to break this up. We would propose that the dormers be increased in size to break up the roof line or that some other structural design for the roof be considered. We believe a peaked roof is essential on this 1 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 5 1 structure but are requesting that the applicant's architect be somewhat more creative in addressing this concern. How this concern is Pddressed will also have some bearing on our issue concerning the HVAC screening mentioned above as well. The third concern pertains to the.plans for a canopied entrance on the northwest corner of the building. Staff supports the inclusion of a highly accentuated main entrance but wants to ensure a 25 foot setback from the right -of -way is maintained from all structures and we define the canopy as part of the structure. The plans are somewhat misleading on this point since it appears as though the canopy would extend out over a portion of the patio area. Due to the lack of time, we have not had an opportunity to explore this more fully with the project architect but are certain that this matter could be resolved in the final plans. Parkinct /Interior Circulation 1 The City's parking ordinance requires one parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. The number of parking spaces required is 34 and the applicant is providing 35 parking spaces which satisfies the requirements of the ordinance. Traffic will be directed via West 78th Street running parallel to the westerly edge of the site then headed east into the bank site. Traffic exiting the site would either use an exit located at the southeast corner of the site or utilize the same entrance located to the east of the site. A stop sign is proposed at that location to regulate traffic. In general, the interior circulation and entrances are reasonable 1 in our view. The proposed exit along the south property line is intended to become part of the entrance /exit to whatever develops on the southern portion of Outlot A. The remaining area of Outlot A is unlikely to be able to support any other entrances and exits apart from this one. A cross access easement running in favor of both lots being created from Outlot A, over this driveway and over the northern 30 feet of the lot to be created south of the bank, will be required to ensure that this element can be incorporated. However, during review of the access proposal by the Engineering Department, a problem has surfaced. When turning templates were put on the drive -thru lanes, it became clear that cars exiting the site would be unable to complete the turn required to transition into the exit lane. Again, this problem surfaced too late to be able to discuss it more fully with the project designer. There are several possible ways of addressing this issue. The first would be to incorporate a larger radius turn which would require the taking of additional land off of the southeast corner of the site or the reversal of traffic flow through the facility. There may in fact be other alternatives and we would be open to suggestions from the project designer as to how to resolve this issue. ' 1 f Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 ' Page 6 Access There are two sets of access points requiring discussion. The first is the internal access onto the shopping center driveway system. The second concerns proposed revisions to the shopping ' center access from West 78th Street. As to the first question, there are two access points being proposed off the internal driveway system. The northern most access is the major site- ' entrance which will serve the parking lot and the drive -thru ' facilities as proposed. In discussions with staff, we found some difficulty in providing safe access to this site since we wanted to provide the maximum offset separation between this site entrance ' and the major shopping center entry point on West 78th Street. We believe the current proposal is acceptable and resolves this concern. The second entrance point is the proposed exit lying adjacent to the south edge of the site. As proposed, this will serve as the exit to the drive -thru lanes. In the future, this exit would be ' shared with a new entrance to serve whatever is to be located on the remaining undeveloped area on Outlot A to the south. Staff supports this option noting that, due to the relative limited size ' of the newly created lot on the south portion of Outlot A and its location adjacent to the main entrance to the shopping center from Market Boulevard, this future common entrance point, shared with ' the bank, is likely to be the only means of entering and exiting this site that can be allowed. Staff is recommending that cross access easements be established in favor of both the bank parcel and the future lot to the south to guarantee that the shared access ' arrangement can work in the future. One of the major points of discussion between staff and the ' applicant on this proposal concerned external entrances into the site. The applicant's original position was that they wanted entrances to the bank from both West 78th Street and from Market ' Boulevard. Staff noted that any additional curb cuts into the Market Square site are specifically prohibited by the approved PUD plan, however, at the applicant's request we did have the city's traffic consultant, Strgar, Roscoe and Fausch prepare an analysis of both proposed curb cuts. Their report is attached to the staff report. Essentially, they agreed with the city's original position that a Market Boulevard curb cut into this site is unacceptable ' from a traffic safety standpoint. There are simply too many traffic movements occurring with southbound cars on Market Boulevard attempting to decelerate and move to the right to turn into the main shopping center entrance and cars from making a left 1 turn to Market from West 78th Street accelerating. A final problem occurs with the proposed signalization of the intersection West 78th Street and Market Boulevard that is currently under 11 consideration by the HRA and City Council. The SRF study concludes 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 7 , that the stacking of vehicles waiting for the light to turn green would extend beyond the point at which the curb cut had been proposed. Discussion then focused on the proposed north median cut into the shopping center from West 78th Street. A right -in /right -out only entrance to the main shopping center drive had always been incorporated into plans at this point. The bank's request called for the inclusion of a median cut so that westbound West 78th Street traffic could turn into the shopping center site. Representatives from the bank believe that this entrance is vital to their operation. The SRF study indicated that this could be incorporated from a traffic safety standpoint. It became clear to staff that the only way we could support this was that the shopping center entrance continue to be structured as a right -in /right -out only, thus traffic would be unable to exit the shopping center site at this point crossing 78th Street median to make a left turn onto westbound West 78th Street. Westbound traffic on West 78th Street would, however, be able to turn into the Market Square site. Staff would never want to be in a position of recommending a median cut to serve a specific site. We believe it would be highly inappropriate to do so since this would in essence establish a new turning movement to the benefit of a single property to the detriment of all traffic flowing through the downtown. However, we believe this request is somewhat different. This median cut would not specifically serve the bank but would directly serve the main shopping center driveway system. From the studies that have been done, we believe that it could probably be incorporated in an acceptable manner from a traffic safety standpoint. We must point out though that in spite of the SRF study, the City Engineering Department continues to have some reservations with this request. The ultimate decision as to whether or not this should be included truly rests in the hands of the Commission, City Council and the HRA. Much of this decision will rest on an aesthetic determination as to whether or not the city wishes to see landscaping in the center median island and be compromised to some degree to support the turning movement. Final designs of this curb cut have not been developed and there is some expectation on the part of staff that we would be able to salvage much of the landscaping that occurs in this area. We are currently in the process of asking SRF to look at possible designs for this curb cut in conjunction with their work on signalization of the downtown intersections which is currently in process. Should this curb cut be approved, as called for on this site plan, staff is recommending that the bank be liable for all costs associated with the traffic study and construction of the curb cut. 1 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 8 Landscaping ' Staff worked closely with the applicant to design the landscaping plan. Berming is proposed along the northeast and westerly portion of the site. Staff is recommending additional screening along the ' northerly edge of the site to block the parking lot area from views from West 78th Street. Although the landscaping plan appears to be generally reasonable, ' we do have several revisions to request. The first is that the plan does not specify type or size of all materials: Final plans should be developed that incorporate this and the size of all ' materials must meet or exceed normal city standards. Secondly, a hedge and berm is illustrated along the West 78th Street exposure west of the building. Grading details do not show a berm in this ' area and staff does not believe a significant berm can be incorporated, given the limited size of this area. We are requesting that details of this area be provided for staff review. In addition, two additional over -story trees should be incorporated ' in this area. Lighting 1 Lighting locations are illustrated on the plans. Two light poles are proposed. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than .5' candles of light at the property line. Plans should be provided to staff for approval. Fixtures should match those being used elsewhere in the shopping center. 1 Signage The applicant has submitted a signage plan. One monument identification sign is proposed at the westerly entrance to the site. The area of the monument sign is 70 square feet. The applicant is also showing three 4 -foot high wall mounted signs on 1 each building elevation. Staff has some concerns over the signage proposal. Although it is attractive, we believe that the number and size of the signs are excessive relative to other buildings in the shopping center as well as other buildings in the CBD. The normal provisions of the sign ordinance are not applicable within the PUD and all development within it are subject to covenants approved by the city. We note that the 3 wall mou7 ; signs appear appropriate given the multiple exposure this building has but note that the Chanhassen Bank has one major wall mounted sign even though it occupies the entire south end of a city block. Having said that, we are not sure which sign to recommend be deleted since they each appear to be appropriate given the design and location of the 1 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 9 1 building. We are, however, going to recommend that the size of these signs be reduced to a maximum height of 3 feet which is consistent with approvals granted for the Medical Arts Building, which was recently considered by the Planning Commission and City Council. Given the number of signs on the building, we cannot support the currently proposed 4 foot height. There is an additional 70 square foot monument sign proposed at the southeast corner of the site adjacent to the internal shopping center driveway. We find no justification for this sign since the bank building and all wall mounted signage will be highly visible from this location. We are recommending that this sign be deleted. In its place, there should be directional signage clearly illustrating the appropriate bank entrance and drive -thru exit lanes. Grading /Drainage Specific grading and drainage plans were not prepared for this submittal. Given current conditions on the site and the proposed site plan, grading activity is expected to be minimal. Storm sewer connections into the shopping center system are illustrated in concept, but plans have not been developed. We do not anticipate any significant problems in this regard but final grading and drainage plans should be prepared for approval by the city, in addition to submitting storm water calculations for 10 and 100 year storm events. Watershed District approval of this plan may be required, although they have already reviewed the shopping center plans. , Utilities City utilities are available to the site. Final plans for utility 1 connection should be prepared for approval by staff. Park and Trail Dedication 1 The Park and Recreation Commission acted to recommend that the city accept full park and trail dedication fees as part of this development. Fees are paid at the time of the building permits are requested. 1 1 1 1 I Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 ' Page 10 COMPLIANCE TABLE WITH PUD ORDINANCE ' As a PUD, most of the usual ordinance provisions pertaining to dimensional criteria are waived. Required Proposed Building Setback 25' 25' ' Hard Surface Coverage N/A 73% Parking Stalls 34 35 ' SUBDIVISION The subdivision proposal is a relatively simple request that will serve to split the 1.6 acre outlot into two lots. The northerly ' lot will have an area of 40,000 square feet and will be occupied by the bank building. The southerly lot is vacant and there is no development proposed on the site at this time. The final plat needs to be revised to provide the additional 10 feet of right -of- way along West 78th Street that is being required by the City. The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be ' required: 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of both lots. 2. A utility easement running in favor of NSP, located to the southeast corner of the building, 10' x 30'. ' 3. The final plat for the entire Market Square shopping center must be submitted to staff for approval and filed with Carver ' County. The plat needs to be revised, as does this requested lot division to accommodate the additional 10 feet of right - of -way along West 78th Street that is being required by the city. ' 4. Cross access easements need to be provided over the south driveway and northern 30 feet of the newly created parcel located south of the bank on Outlot A. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT ' This application is consistent with the overall planned unit development concept for Market Square. The only change is the curb cut and median cut access point off of West 78th Street. As stated t 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 11 1 before, a study was conducted by Strgar, Roscoe and Fausch supporting this amendment. While we believe that this proposal is consistent with the PUD guidelines established, we note that at the time of writing the PUD agreement, development contract and final plat for Market Square, they have not yet been finalized or recorded. A condition should be added that no construction is to occur on the bank property until this documentation has been completed to the satisfaction of the city and a construction time table has been established for interior streets and utilities on the Market Square site that will be necessary to support the bank. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning- Commission adopt the following motion: Site Plan Review "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #91 -3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29, 1991, subject to the following conditions: 1 1. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Sign plans should be revised to eliminate the monument sign, reduce the wall sign height to 3 feet and incorporate requested directional signage. 2. Additional landscaping shall be provided along the north edge 1 of the site as proposed in the staff report. The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial 1 guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. Provide a plant schedule indicating the size and type of all plant materials for staff approval. 1 3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. If the West 78th Street curb cut is approved, the applicant shall be required to compensate the City for all costs related to its design and construction. 4. Revise architectural plans as follows: • Incorporate dormers of increased size or other acceptable measures to enhance the design of the roof line. • Provide details of HVAC screening. 1 1 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 ' Page 12 • Incorporate the use of Timberline or similar quality shingles provide image . 1 Provide details that of building an exterior of a treatment cedar shake indicating roof consistency with shopping center construction. 1 • Eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans since adequate parking cannot be provided on site. ' • Revise plans as necessary to ensure that a 25 foot setback is provided to all portions of the building, including the entrance canopy. 1 S. Revise the plans as required to ensure that room is provided for safe turning movements for cars exiting the drive -thru lanes." Subdivision ' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision #91 -8 as shown on the plat dated July 29, 1991, with the following conditions: 1 1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at time of building permits are requested. 1 2. Provide the following easements: a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the 1 perimeter of all lots. b. A 10' x 30' utility easement located to the southeast ' corner of the bank building running in favor of NSP. c. The final plat for the entire Market Square shopping center must be submitted to staff for approval and filed with Carver County. The plat needs to be revised, as does this requested lot division to accommodate the additional 10 feet of right -of -way along West 78th Street 1 that is being required by the city. d. Cross access easements need to be provided over the south driveway and northern 30 feet of the newly created parcel located south of the bank on Outlot A." Planned Unit Development Amendment 1 "The Planning Commission recommends approval of an amendment to PUD #89 -2 as shown on plans dated July 29, 1991." 1 1 Americana Community Bank 1 August 7, 1991 Page 13 PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission reviewed this item on their August 7, 1991 agenda. The applicants indicated that they were comfortable with the recommendations in the staff report. Most of the Planning Commission comments focused on two issues, including building architecture and the inclusion of a median break in West 78th Street. On the first issue, the Planning Commission addressed architectural concerns in detail. Staff had worked with the applicant extensively to revise architectural plans and a number of changes had been incorporated; however, we continued to be of the opinion that the roof line as presented gave a somewhat massive appearance. We noted to the Planning Commission that as an outlot on the Market Square site, a PUD condition for the Market Square development comes into play. This condition requires that buildings • constructed on outlots be architecturally consistent with Market Square. The bank attempted to achieve this goal while at the same time recognizing that it is across the street from other buildings such as the Hospitality Suites. The Commission's comments on the building were rather severe. They believed that the appearance was not generally one of "an inviting" type of structure and that there was a massive feel to it. Some suggestions included modifying roof lines, enlarging windows and altering color schemes. ' On the matter of the median break that is called for in the plans, staff indicated that in all honesty that there was some difference of opinion at a staff level as to whether or not this was reasonable. The City Engineer continues to have reservations with this proposal that are fully understood by Planning staff; however, at the same time we believe it is not unreasonable to think that there should be a northern entrance into the shopping center including a median break. As we indicated in the staff report, there is also a design issue in that median breaks such as this should be limited only to major site entrances for uses such as the shopping center and not individual buildings. The Planning Commission strongly agreed with us on this point. The current proposal complies with this standard since the median break serves the main shopping center driveway and not the bank site. The other design issue is that a median of this type is likely to compromise the landscaping theme on West 78th Street, and this is something that the City Council and HRA may want to evaluate this. However, the Planning Commission discussion regarding the median break was extremely favorable. Each of the members of the Commission voted to support it. • 1 11 Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 14 ' The Commission ultimately recommended that the plans be approved and sent to the City Council. The applicant was strongly ' encouraged to rework architectural plans to accommodate the concerns and issues that have been raised. ' This matter would normally have come before the City Council on August 26, 1991. However, staff is attempting to work with the time demands of the bank, who are under regulatory requirement to open before the end of the year. We spoke with them on the morning ' after the Planning Commission meeting and indicated a reluctance to take a plan containing unresolved architectural issues to the City Council. The bank's representative indicated a strong desire to work with the city to resolve these architectural issues. They believe that a plan could be presented to the City Council that would accommodate most of these concerns and if approved, final details could be worked out with staff after the fact. We agreed that if an acceptable plan could not be developed prior to the City Council meeting that this item would be deleted at the applicant's request and held over to August 26th. We regret that this puts us ' in a somewhat uncomfortable position of bringing to you a set of plans that have yet to be refined. However, we are trying to balance this by attempting to meet the bank's time constraints if ' this is at all feasible. The Planning Commission revised conditions pertaining to the architectural design of the building. These changes have been ' reflected below. However, pending submission of final architectural plans by the bank, staff believes that we may recommend further changes in these conditions based upon final plat. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 1 Site Plan The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve ' Site Plan Review #91 -3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29, 1991, subject to the following conditions: ' 1. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Sign plans should be revised to eliminate the monument sign, reduce the wall sign height to 3 feet and ' incorporate requested directional signage. 2. Additional landscaping shall be a,rovided along the north edge of the site as proposed in the vtaff report. The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building 1 1 11 Americana Community Bank 1 August 7, 1991 Page 15 permit issuance. Provide a plant schedule indicating the size II and type of all plant materials for staff approval. 3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. If the West 78th Street curb cut is approved, the applicant shall be required to compensate the City for all costs related to its design and construction. 4. Revise architectural plans as follows: • Incorporate dormers of increased size or other acceptable measures to enhance the design of the roof line. • Provide details of HVAC screening. • Incorporate the use of Timberline or similar quality shingles that provide an image of a cedar shake roof. • Provide details of building exterior treatment indicating consistency with shopping center construction. ' • Eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans in part because we would never be necessarily approving the proposed addition. • Revise plans as necessary to ensure that a 25 foot setback is provided to all portions of the building, including the entrance canopy. 5. Revise the plans as required to ensure that room is provided ' for safe turning movements for cars exiting the drive -thru lanes and submit the same for staff approval. 6. Parking stalls located to the south of the site shall be ' designated for employees only." Subdivision The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Subdivision #91 -8 as shown on the plat dated July 29, 1991, with 1 the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at time of building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements. a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of all lots. Americana Community Bank August 7, 1991 Page 16 b. A 10' x 30' utility easement located to the southeast corner of the bank building running in favor of NSP. ' c. ThL, final plat for the entire Market Square shopping center must be submitted to staff for approval and filed with Carver County. The plat needs to be revised, as does this requested lot division to accommodate the additional 10 feet of right -of -way along West 78th Street that is being 'required by the city. d. Cross access easements need to be provided over the south driveway and northern 30 feet of the newly created parcel ' located south of the bank on Outlot A." Planned Unit Development Amendment ' The Planning Commission recommends approval of an amendment to PUD 89 -2 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991. ' ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff report dated 10/8/90. 2. Memo from Park and Recreation Coordinator dated July 29, 1991. ' 3. Americana Community Bank Traffic Study dated June 5, 1991. 4. Project statement. 5. Plans dated July 29, 1991. 6. Minutes of the August 7, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. 1 1 C QTY QF PL DATE: \ CIIAI'HACEI CC DATE: 10/8/90 Y 1 �-� - CASE # s 89 -2 PUD By: O� STAFF REPORT 1 PROPOSAL: Amended Site Plan for PUD Development Stage Approval for Commercial Planned Unit Development, Market Square • Q LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Market Boulevard and West 78th Street U a! APPLICANT: Market Square Partnership 5775 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 820 Q St. Louis Park, MN 55426 .1 ..- `._.- - ✓ ? �__ PRESENT ZONING: PUD - - - 1 ACREAGE : 12.1 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND /a Q LAND USE: N - I0 and CBD; Chan Bank, Realtor /Dr.Office 1— S - BG; vacant E - CBD; Filly's and Country Suites Hotel W - BG; Chaska Tool /Vernco ' W WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site 1 PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: Currently, a level parcel 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial 1 Market Square Site Plan Amendment October 8, 1990 1 Page 2 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY 1 On October 23, 1989, the City Council approved the Development Stage Plans for PUD #89 -2 for Market Square subject to the conditions described in the attached report. Since that time, as the Council is aware, development has not yet been initiated and the project has gone through an evolutionary process which is concluding with the amended site plan being reviewed in this- .. report. The site plan amendments is focused on the change from a 20,000 square foot Super Value with an 8,000 square foot expansion to the present plan which proposes a 35,000 square foot Festival Foods Market offering an additional 10,000 square foot building 1 addition. In the process of making these modifications, the ultimate size of the main shopping center building has increased from 91,134 square feet to 97,954 square feet. Some of the original retail space offered for general tenants has been replaced by the expanded market. The primary purpose for requesting an amended site plan approval at this time is so that the developers ' can concluded their final leasing arrangements with Festival Foods, lock in their financing package and initiate construction'within a time frame acceptable to the City. ' Most of the changes to the site plan are relatively minor and for the most part involve the area located in the vicinity of the supermarket site. The general site plan layout, parking lot ' design, and access provisions have not been changed in any significant way by the proposed amendment. In a similar manner, site grading, drainage and utilities remain unchanged. The parking ' lot design has been revised to increase the number of parking stalls commensurate with the increase in the size of the shopping center. This was achieved by using 9 foot wide parking stalls instead of the 10 foot wide parking stalls on the original plan. Since this plan was originally approved, the City parking ordinance has been changed to allow parking stall width down to 81/2 feet, thus the revised parking plan exceeds City standards. All original ' setbacks offered by the original plan are maintained by the current proposal. In summary, it is our belief that the revised plan results in no major new issues for consideration by the City ' Council. If the revisions were more substantial, we would recommend that this item be referred back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration, however, we do not believe this is the case. 1 There are, however, several minor issues that we believe should be addressed in new conditions appended to the original conditions of approval. These include the following: 1. A revised landscaping plan should be submitted illustrating landscaping of the building addition area for Festival Foods. 1 Market Square ■ Site Plan Amendment October 8, 1990 Page 3 At a minimum, this area should be sodded or seeded and provided with sufficient trees to make this an attractive setting until it is built upon. 2. A raised concrete display platform has been incorporated in front of the Lawn and Sports Center. Staff objects to the proposal to allow exterior display of merchandise for sale in front of the shopping center believing that if such is allowed, it would be very difficult to control it and limit it to this site. In addition, outdoor display of merchandise is not permitted throughout the community in spite of two existing examples that currently exist along West 78th Street. With the opening of Market Square, the two businesses which currently have exterior storage of materials for sale will be moving into the shopping center and it is hoped that this problem could be eliminated. Therefore, staff is recommending that the raised concrete display platforms be removed. 3. Revised building elevations should be submitted for staff 1 approval. A good deal of time and effort was expended by both the Planning Commission and City Council to ensure that this shopping center is an attractive addition to the Chanhassen CBD. We believe that the approved architecture was of very high quality and that this should not be lost through the redesign process. The applicant has assured staff that it is their intent that the Festival Foods be designed to accommodate the architectural theme that was adopted for the balance of the center and similar to one which was used for the previously proposed Super Value Store. However, they note that the final design has not been drafted and that the elevations will need to be revised due to the different building footprint and store entrance locations being proposed for the gateway store. If staff is given the opportunity to review these plans, we would do one of the following: a. If the plans are believed to be consistent with the architectural themes approved with the original site plan, we would authorize it's construction. b. If, however, there is a substantial question as to whether or not the architectural goals have been achieved, we would return the building elevations to the Planning Commission and City Council for review. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1 Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the amended final development stage site plan for Market Square subject to the following conditions: • 1 Market Square Site Plan Amendment October 8, 1990 Page 4 1. Submit a revised landscaping plan illustrating plant material in the future expansion area of the Festival Foods Store and of the revised parking lot island configuration. ' 2. Submit final building elevations to staff for administrative approval or, if determined by staff to be inconsistent with the original plan, to be returned to the Planning Commission and City Council for review. 3. Eliminate the outdoor display area from in front of the Lawn and Sports Center. All outdoor display of merchandise in the ' shopping center is prohibited. Merchandise contained in screened outdoor storage areas is exempt from this requirement. ' 4. Enter into a PUD contract with the City that will contain all of the conditions of approval and which will be recorded against all lots platted in the project. The PUD agreement should provide for a landscape bond as outlined in the staff report. 5. The final plat shall reflect a 20 foot utility easement for the proposed City water line over the southerly portion of the site. 6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide the necessary security. 7. The applicant shall enter into a PUD contract with the City. 1 8. Enter into a development contract with the City that required financial sureties with construction plans to be approved by ' the City Engineer and City Council for all public improvements. ' 9. Revise architectural plans as needs to: confirm that the Vet Clinic will have windows on the north and west elevations; 1 - trash enclosures are to be constructed from rock faced block compatible with the main building; 1 - relocated the trash enclosure serving the dry cleaner to the west side of the build.I.Kg or incorporate it into the structure; - outdoor storage areas are to be enclosed by a rock faced block wall; 1 1 11 Market Square 1 , Site Plan Amendment October 8, 1990 II Page 5 - the trash compactor is to be provided with a rock faced block screen wall and relocated to the north to provide a 24 foot wide drive aisle; and - the addition of any drive -up windows will require site plan approval wherein it will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that internal circulation patterns and parking provisions will not be impacted. 10. Outlot A is required to have buildings designed to utilize architecture compatible with the shopping center. No additional access will be provided to serve Outlot A. Only one additional monument sign is to be allowed with the outlot is developed. The site must be identical to monument signage allowed elsewhere on the PUD. Until development occurs, the owner shall establish ground cover over the site and keep it in a maintained condition. Parking requirements for the outlot should be satisfied on it. 11. Modify and /or regulate access parking as follows: provide a triangular traffic island in the West 78th Street curb cut; - delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects to the sidewalk in front of the supermarket. A pedestrian crosswalk shall be installed on Market Boulevard at a location determined by the City Engineer. The crosswalk shall be painted and signed in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Manual on Traffic Controls. - eliminate the nine (9) northern stalls located on the east side of the supermarket expansion and modify the Vet Clinic parking area to provide a turning space at the end of the aisle; - all leases for the main building should require that employee parking be located at the rear of the center; any restaurants proposed in the center are subject to a site plan review procedure. It will be the applicant's 1 responsibility to demonstY parking adequacy if it is to be approved. The resta. nt spaces illustrated in the two northern tenant spacr.:. in the main building are exempt from this requirement; and all parking lot curbing shall be B -6/12 concrete. 11 II II Market Square Site Plan Amendment II October 8, 1990 Page 6 12. The landscaping plan should be modified as follows: II - increase the size of conifers along the south property line from 6' to 10 -12'; II - remove the snow storage area along Market Boulevard and landscape the space; and II - cooperate with City staff in providing a relocation plan for the existing landscaping along Market Boulevard and West 78th Street. II . 13. Provide final grading and drainage plans for approval. The plans should incorporate the following: II - storm sewers shall be sized for a ten (10) year storm. Revised drainage calculations shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval; II - the 72" storm sewer is to be installed by the developer; 1 - installation of the line should be covered by the development contract. The City can reasonably allow building permits to be issued with the understanding that II the 72" storm sewer, together with other public roadway and utility improvements, will be installed simultaneously with the construction of the buildings; II - the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole #21 in Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb radius; 1 - project approval by the Watershed District is required prior to building permit issuance; and 1 - an erosion control plan acceptable to the City should be submitted prior to requesting building permits. 1 14. Provide final roadway and utility plans for approval The existing 10" PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an oversized ductile iron casing acceptable to the City. II Existing watermains to be abandoned shall be removed. The applicant will submit detailed construction plans and specifications for approval by the City Engineer and provide II as -built mylar plans upon completion of the construction. 15. Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with the description in the October 23, 1989, staff report. The II covenants will be filed with the Planned Unit Development II . 1 Market Square Site Plan Amendment October 8, 1990 Page 7 Agreement. 16. Review tOR REVISE ? ?) the site lighting plan to use the ornamental fixtures east of the supermarket and between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts. 1 17. All conditions must be completed as a part of the general construction of the project and shall not be left to tenants, i.e. rear outdoor storage areas, etc. 18. The bus shelter and concrete curb located on Market Boulevard should be changed /moved to another location in order to accommodate future traffic on Market Boulevard. The developer, at it's expense, shall acquire and convey to the City a perpetual easement for a bus shelter along Market Boulevard. the location of the bus shelter shall be determined by the staff of the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. 19. The developer shall construct and dedicate trails sidewalks along West 78th Street and Market Boulevard in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the City Engineer. The trails /sidewalks shall be constructed when street improvements are constructed." 1 ATTACHMENTS 1 1. City Council minutes dated October 23, 1989. 2. Original staff report for Market Square. 3. Amended site plan. 1 1 1 1 1 1 E>, CITYOF Ii G CHANIIASSEN I \ 1 1 .__ - 11 ,.......\.„ A _ , 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 WI 2) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager I FROM: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning / / / / *`er DATE: October 18, 1989 r I SUBJ: Rezoning to PUD #89 -2 Development Stage Approval, yM Preliminary Plat for Market Square i, 1 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY The applicants are requesting approval to construct a 94,158 square foot shopping center at the intersection of West 78th I Street and Market Boulevard. The Center would be anchored by a Super Value supermarket. The PUD contains a two acre outlot that would ultimately contain additional development that is planned II in a manner consistent with the balance of the PUD. The City Council last reviewed this item on September 11, 1989 I when it was submitted for concept review. The Planning Commission reviewed plans for the PUD Development Stage on September 20, 1989. Staff supported the proposal and had recom- mended approval subject to a number of conditions and modifica- 1 . tions. The Planning Commisssion discussed the plan extensively and ultimately recommended approval with several revised con- ditions. Since that time the plans were extensively revised to I respond to the issues that were raised. Many of the revisions were minor plan details but the most significant changes were to architectural design, building placement and access along West I 78th Street. The Planning Commisssion had raised concerns regarding the projects lack of consistency with the balance of the CBD with regard to building placement and questioned the lack of compatible architectural design on the northern end of the 1 site. The project was focused internally rather then having an orientation along West 78th Street. At the same time staff wanted to restrict Outlot A to use of existing curb cuts to pro- w vide adequate levels of traffic safety on surrounding streets.. The revised plan addresses and responds to these concerns by I relocating the Vet Clinic to the northwest corner of the site and creating a new free standing building to house a dry cleaner. Both buildings have frontage along West 78th and will help to provide consistency with other development along the street. The II • 1 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 2 • West 78th Street curb cut is adjacent to Outlot A and provides 1 improved access and internal circulation. As a result of these changes the size of the center has decreased slightly to 94,158 square feet but the size of the supermarket has been increased to 20,000 square feet with an 8,000 square foot expansion area. Staff is satisfied that the current plan is well designed and is acceptable subject to appropriate conditions detailed in the balance of the report. The project is being reviewed as a PUD which offers the developer 1 a relaxation of normal development standards in exchange for a higher quality plan. Staff supports the use of the PUD noting that normal ordinance requirements are aften inadequate in dealing with large, multi- tenant projects such as this. We note that the plan takes advantage of the relaxation of normal district standards in several areas including hard surface coverage, parking and setbacks. The current plan offers much in exchange including higher quality architectural design, landscaping and signage. It also provides for consistent and well planned development of two free - standing buildings and ultimately of Outlot A. The PUD plan also offers the City addi- tional control over the site since it is applied as a zoning district and any significant change requires that the City Council approve a rezoning. Based upon the foregoing Staff is recommending that the PUD be given Development Stage Approval subject to appropriate conditions. The Preliminary Plat is in the process of being revised to ' account for the final site plan. Consequently, staff is recom- mending that the City Council table acting on the plat until it can be reviewed at an upcoming meeting. 1 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20 -518 defines the development stage of a PUD. Following 1 • general concept approval of a PUD the applicant shall submit the development stage application, preliminary plat and fee. The development stage shall include but be limited to preliminary plat, site plan information including location, type and size of all graphics and signage and any additional information requested by staff, Planning Commission of City Council. BACKGROUND - On August 2, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed the PUD con- 1 cept plan for the Market Square commercial shopping center (Attachment #1). The Planning Commission agreed that the site should be developed as a PUD and that the concept plans were 1 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 3 moving in the right direction but that more amenities needed to ' be provided to the site such as additional architectural design, landscaping, etc. The City Council reviewed the concept plan on August 28, 1989 (Attachment #2). The City Council also agreed that the PUD was the proper way to review the site. Since the August 28, 1989, 1 Council meeting, the applicant presented a revised set of plans for staff review to proceed with the development stage (plans dated August 17, 1989). Staff had several concerns with the revised plans and met with the applicant to review the issues (Attachment #3). The applicant has submitted another revised set of plans dated September 11, 1989. Although there are still some issues unresolved, the plans are complete enough to proceed with the development stage. The Planning Commission reviewed the PUD for Development Stage ' approval on October 9, 1989 (minutes attached). Staff had recom- mended approval subject to 26 conditions. The Commission indi- cated some initial concern over the number of stipulations. Staff stated that the number of stipulations did not reflect fun- damental problems with the proposal but were rather indicative of its complexity and handling as a PUD. The most significant conditions included: - limitations on additional access to Outlot A. - rejection of a drive -up window at the north end of the building due to traffic safety conflicts. 1 - clarification that the developer is responsible for the cost of installation of a 72 inch storm sewer over the south edge of the site and improved screening and 1 landscaping around the rear of the building. The Commission discussed the proposal in great detail. They ' generally agreed at staff's recommendations but added several modifications and new conditions including: 1. The design and materials used on any structures on Outlot A will be compatible with the shopping center building and the veterinary clinic. 2. The development contract will require financial sureties and construction plans to be approvec3 by the City Engineer and City Council for all public impr:. *`ments. 1 3. The developer shall provide the additional width for the entrance lanes off of Market Boulevard as required by staff. 1 11 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 4 4. Outlot A, until it is developed, should be planted in some kind of a ground cover and maintained so that it has a good appearance. 5. Revised architectural plans shall be submitted to reflect 1 the design that was shown at the Planning Commission meeting tonight should be submitted to the City. 6. No regular display or sale of merchandise outside will be permitted. 7. The retail store on the northwest end of the center shall be , architecturally designed to have three fronts. The Planning Commission also proposed allowing an additional , monument sign for Outlot A, and asked the Engineering Department to assess exactly when the 72 foot storm sewer must be installed and to equip the outlot with a skimmer device. In addition, while they understood staff's concerns regarding the proposed drive -up window they were willing to allow the developer to make his case through a formal site plan submittal. GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE The site plan and architectural design have undergone extensive changes as a result of reviews by staff and the Planning Commission. Size of the center and accessory buildings has been decreased slightly, from 99,416 square feet to 94,158 square feet including future expansions of the super market (8,000 square feet) and drug store (2,500 square feet). At the same time the initial size of the super market has grown from 16,000 to 20,000 square feet. The most significant revision of the site plan occurs at the ' norther exposure along West 78th Street. The Planning Commission had raised concerns regarding views of the site from West 78th. The concern was that the site plan turned away from the street for an inward focus that did not fit well into the balance of the CBD's streetscape. The lack of architectural detailing on the north elevation was also questioned. At the same time, staff raised significant concerns with the future access to Outlot A. We believed that the outlot should be accessed internally and that additional access points on West 78th or Market would be hazardous. ' To respond to these concerns the Vet inic has been relocated to the northwest corner of the site. Ir, addition to the size of the main building was reduced and a second free standing structure has been proposed along West 78th. This will be occupied by a dry cleaner and contain a covered, drive -up /drop -off area. The 1 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 5 two buildings would become a part of the CBD's streetscape since their visual orientation is toward the street even through the are accessed internally. Sidewalks are incorporated to invite pedestrians to enter from West 78th. The north end of the main shopping center building will become a three sided space with windows facing north, east and west. It is designed to be occupied by a restaurant or frozen yogurt stand. This avoids the visually "dead" elevations of the origi- nal plan. Staff raised qoncerns with a drive -up window that was illustrated on the original plan. It is not now shown although ' the applicants have indicated their desire to keep open the option to have one. Staff cannot support the request since we do not believe it can be accommodated safely. Turning movements and stacking areas related to the window would cause a traffic hazard and contribute to confused access and parking provisions. The Planning Commission recommended that any drive through be subject to the site plan approval. Staff is not opposed to this although we doubt that we would ever be able to recommend its approval. The West 78th Street entrance has been realigned slightly to the ' east. It now offers improved access into Outlot A and actually provides for a cleaner traffic flow through the site. ' We believe that the proposed revisions have accommodated staff's concerns in this area. A draft of the revised concept was also informally shown to the Planning Commission and they were recep- tive to the concept. Architectural plans have benefitted from continued refinement. Detailing has been revised since the City Council last reviewed teh plan with additional improvements incorporated since the Planning Commission hearing. The main building now incorporates highly detailed gable sections over major entrances. These gables are used to provide detailing to break up the roof line and to conceal HVAC equipment. The balance of the HVAC equipment is buried behind a 3 foot high parapet. Smaller and less detailed gable sections are found on the rear of the building to help improve off -site views. Staff had hoped that the gables could be connected to avoid creating false fronts similar to a movie set. However, the architect does not believe this is I feasible. Instead, the front gables will be 24' deep while the rear will be 12' deep. New elevations have been prepared for the building. After reviewing them we are satisfied that the building offers a high degree of architectural design. These are large enough to be architecturally significant but the large gap between the gables will be visible from some elevations (refer to attached illustrations). Exterior materials include rock faced block base with single score block walls. Wood siding will be used above the smaller tenant spaces with stucco used on the gable sections. The rear of the building will utilize rock ' faced block and single score block with additional rock faced detailed. 1 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 6 The Vet Clinic remains architecturally identical to the original 1 proposal with a rock faced block base and brick walls. Details are not provided on the northern and western elevations. We want to confirm that they will be built of similar materials. We also ' believe it is important to have windows along West 78th Street and along Monterey Drive since blank walls are not consistent with the CBD's streetscape. ' The new free standing cleaners building is an attractive struc- ture that utilizes a rock faced block base with wood siding walls and a standing seam metal roof. Architectural detailing promotes a visual identification with the main shopping center building. No details are provided for buildings on Outlot A at this time although it is a part of the PUD. Staff expects to use the PUD designation to insure that when a building is proposed, it is architecturally compatible with the shopping center. An appropriate stipulation is provided. Staff had requested additional trash enclosures to facilitate ease of usage. The plan has been revised accordingly. In our experience wood trash enclosures are often difficult to maintain and rapidly require repair. We are recommending that they be made out of rock faced block to be similar to the main buildings on the site. In additional the trash enclosure that serves the cleaners is inappropriately located in a highly visible area near the West 78th Street entrance. It should be relocated to the west side of the building or preferrably be contained within the structure. As requested by staff, the outdoor storage areas located at the rear of the main building are to be built of rock faced block. We are also requesting that the trash compactor for the super market be provided with a rock faced block screen wall of suf- ficient size to eliminate all views of the compactor. In addi- tion the entire compactor and screen wall should be shifted to the north to provide the required 24 foot wide drive and to allow for two way traffic. ACCESS /PARKING /INTERNAL CIRCULATION As we noted earlier access provisions have been revised from the 11 original City Council presentation with the most significant revisions occurring with the relocation of the West 78th Street curb cut. A deceleration lane and right turn lane from West 78th Street to Market Boulevard that were requested by staff have also been incorporated. Staff has also requested that a triangular traffic island be installed in the curb cut so that traffic exiting the site is oriented in the correct easterly direction. The north entrance from Market Boulevard has a single lane in with two exiting. We believe that this will probably work in the 1 I/ 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 7 short run but when Outlot A is developed a second entrance lane ' will probably be required. Access to Outlot A has been the sub- ject of a good deal of discussion. Staff believes that addi- tional access points would represent a traffic hazard on adjacent streets and should be prohibited. With the realignment of the West 78th Street curb cut, Outlot A has direct frontage on the two main site entrances and can be served very adequately from internal drives. A stipulation prohibiting additional access points has been provided. Pedestrian circulation has been revised in accordance with staff's recommendations with sidewalks extended around the entire West 78th Street and Market Bouldevard frontages and with connec- tions to internal walkways. The Engineering Department has re- evaluated the Market Boulevard sidewalk issues and now believes that the sidewalk should terminate at the crosswalk over the parking lot that connects into the sidewalk in front of the super market. A painted and signed pedestrian crosswalk should be ' installed. The goal is to bring the sidewalk over to the east side of the street to require only one pedestrian crossing of the railroad tracks. The development contract should clearly state ' that construction of the sidewalks and crosswalk is the developer's responsibility. In the long term, the Engineering Department believes that a pedestrian activated flashing signal may be ' required to maintain safety. Internal circulation has been improved. The south drive aisle at the rear of the building has been widened and adequate truck turning areas are now illustrated. The realignment of West 78th curb cut improves internal circulation by straightening a main drive aisle. Circulation patterns at the north end of the site ' are a little confusing due to merging traffic. Staff has worked with the applicant to redesign parking lot islands to better direct flow and to incorporate stop signs as needed. Each site exit is also requipped with a stop sign. Due largely to the redesign of the northern end of the site, there are now fewer parking stalls being proposed then would nor- ' maily be required by typical ordinance standards. The code nor- mally requires one stall for every 200 square feet of gross floor area in a shopping ecenter resulting in a need for 471 stalls ' when both expansion areas are included. The present plan will ultimately provide only 454 stalls. The PUD ordinance allows the city to create standards suitable ' for the individual project, thus no variance is required. The. real issue is not one of code compliance but rather �f satisfying actual demand. Staff has done extensive research into shopping center parking demands and found that a ratio of 4.5 stalls per 1000 square feet of gross.floor area is adequate to accommodate centers of this size. Under this guideline, a requirement for ' 424 stalls results which is in keeping with the 471 stalls that will be provided. 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 • Page 8 However, we are concerned with several aspects of the center with , regards to parking for several reasons as follows: - grocery stores can generate unusually high parking demand. 1 - if restaurants occupy signf.icant areas of the building, - parking requirements could also jump, and ' - there are two areas where the parking provisions should be revised in a way that will unfortunately eliminate several stalls. The parking area serving the Vet Clinic is a dead end aisle that requires provision of a turn around area that will eliminate two stalls. Most of the 13 stalls that are illustrated on the east side of the future grocery expan- sion are hazardous. Cars backing out of them will back into drive aisles that have several turns and poor sight lines. While staff believes that parking provisions could be made to be adequate, we feel that several conditions are required to provide , adequate assurances. These include: 1. All leases should require employee parking to be located at the rear of the building. 2. Site plan review should be required for any restaurants pro- t posed to be located in the center. A parking analysis will be required before approval can be required. The 2,284 square foot restaurant space located at the north end of the center is excluded from this requirement. Parking calculations do not include requirements for Outlot "A" since no uses have been proposed. It is expected that parking provisions for Outlot A will be consistent with ordinance requirements whenever a site plan approval is requested. For the center to function properly, cross access and parking easements should be filed over the shopping center parcel and Outlot A running in favor of each lot. LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan has been revised extensively to comply with previous recommendations and is generally acceptable. Staff has only two modifications we would like to see incorporated. 1. A continuing concern throughout the design process has been , the rear view of the center from Hwy. 5. The rear elevations have been improved but we remain concerned with the level of screening provided to avoid direct views of loading docks, truck parking and trash storage areas. While the landscaping plan has been improved'in this area, we believe that the installation of 6 foot high conifers in this area is inade- quate. We are recommending that the height at installation should be 10 -12 feet. i 11 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 9 2. A snow storage area is illustrated at the southeast corner of the site along Market Boulevard. We believe this is inappropriate considering that the first view many people would have upon entering the city is a pile of dirty snow. ' The designation should be deleted and the area filled with compatible landscape material. Unlike most metro area communities, Chanhassen does not now have a requirement for financial guarantees for landscaping improve- ments. Staff has raised this concern to the Planning Commission who indicated a desire to have the ordinance amended to cover ' this omission. Staff is recommending that the PUD agreement include a requirement that a financial guarantee be provided to insure that landscaping is properly installed in a timely manner. ' The guarantee should equal 110% of the estimated cost of the material and be valid for one full growing season past the date of installation. 1 GRADING /DRAINAGE The site will drain into a storm sewer system that outlets into ' a city owned pond located to the south. The 72" storm sewer will be installed by the developer and the development contract should clearly state this requirement. The pond was designed to perform ' as a retention pond for the downtown area. Thus a skimmer device as requested by the City Council is not required. Drainage calcu- lations have been provided and are currently being reviewed by the City's consultant. The existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole 1 #21 in Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb radius. Project approval by the Riley Creek Watershed District is required. ' Prior to issuance of any building permits, a detailed erosion control plan acceptable to the city and the Watershed District shall be prepared. UTILITIES Final utility plans should be prepared for approval by the city. The sanitary sewer plan requires that an existing 10" line that bisects the site be located under the new building. Staff will ' support the proposal only if it is constructed as follows: a. The existing 10 inch PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an oversized ductile iron casing which clearly extends 10 feet beyond the limits of any building footings or sidewalk with manholes built at each end c:. the casing to provide access. The sewer main must be properly blocked and encased 1 in the ductile iron casing, i.e., grouted or pea rock. Water plans are generally acceptable with some modifications. The existing watermain to be abandoned should be removed from the 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 10 site. Since the existing public utilities are proposed to be relo- cated and turn lanes constructed, the applicant shall submit detailed roadway and utility construction plans and specifications . for approval by the City Engineer. Roadway utility specifications should comply with the City of Chanhassen's specifications. As- 11 built mylar plans will also be required upon completion of the construction. SIGNAGE /LIGHTING ' As with other aspects of the proposal, signage has been modified from the original plan. The current plan calls for a total of 3 monument signs. One on West 78th, one on Market Boulevard and, based upon Planning Commission recommendation, a third monument will be reserved for Outlot A. Although no details are provided 11 for the Outlot A sign, it should be identical to the others. The monuments are 14' tall with 41 square feet of sign area per face. The signs are attractively designed to reflect the architectural design of the shopping center. All other site signage is to be located on the buildings. Front elevation signs use 2 foot high lighted letters with similar , signage in the rear elevations and both ends of the building. Staff has discussed allowing larger signage of similar design for major shopping center tenants. We believe it is reasonable to do so and are recommending that letters up to 5 feet in height be allowed on these stores having gabled entrances and rear eleva- tions. These stores should have their sign boards restricted to the gable areas with signs on other elevations prohibited. No details are provided for the free standing Vet Clinic and dry cleaner buildings but they should be restricted to 2 foot high lighted signs on the north and south elevations. Super Value has separate sign provisions in recognition of their being the major tenant. The ordinance does not provide standards for PUD signage as such, , however, it allows the city to establish suitable requirements. We believe the illustrated site plan is acceptable with the modi- fications proposed above and are recommending that they be prepared as sign covenants that will be attached to the PUD agreement. Lighting details were recently provided for staff review and area acceptable with some modifications. Staff's original intent was to have the lighting be as compatible as possible with other CBD lighting. Two types of fixtures are proposed. The first is a 17 foot high ornamental type offering an antique appearance. The second is a 32i foot high box fixtur s to light large areas. It is our desire to have ligr_;.ng on the project's exterior use the lower scale, more compatible fixture. Thus we ' are recommending that the 3 fixtures located east of the super market and one located between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts be exchanged for the ornamental lights. We believe that the revised overall lighting scheme will provide adequate coverage. I/ 11 Rezoning foi Market- � .ivare October 18, 1989 Page 11 SUBDIVISION /EASEMENTS /RIGHT -OF -WAY VACATION The applicants are requesting subdivision approval and vacation of excess right -of -way along West 78th Street and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat. However, the plat is being revised to comply with previous stipulations ?nd and is not available for eview at this time. Staff expects to bring the revised plat to the City Council at an upcoming meeting. ' The plat will illustrate the following: - West 78th Street vacation of excess right -of -way. The city will seek to maintain an 80 foot wide right -of -way. - Easements for: ' °public utilities and drainage improvements public sidewalks ° cross access and parking for all lots, and - Division of the site to separate lots and Outlot A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that PUD Development Stage approval for Market Square be approved subject to teh following conditions: 1. Enter into a PUD contact with the city that will contain all of the conditions of approval and which will be recorded against all lots platted in the project. The PUD agreement should provide for a landscape bond as outlined in the staff report. 1 2. Obtain final plat approval for the site prior to requesting building permits. 3. Enter into a development contract with the city that requires financial sureties with construction plans to be approved by the City Engineer and City Council for all public improve- ments. 4. Revise architectural plans as need to: - confirm that the Vet Clinic will have windows on the north and west elevations; - trash enclosures are to be constructed from rock faced block compatible with the main building; - relocate the trash enclosure serving the dry cleaner to the west side of the building or incorporate it into the struc- ture - outdoor storage areas are to be enclosed by a rock faced block wall; - the trash compactor is to be provided with a rock faced block screen wall and relocated to the north to provide a ' 24' wide drive aisle; and 1 • Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 12 1 - the addition of any drive -up windows will require site plan approval wherein it will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that internal circulation patterns and parking provisions will not be impacted. 5. Outlot A !s required to have buildings designed to utilize , architecture compatible with the shopping center. No addi- tional access will be provided to serve Outlot A. Only one additional monument sign is to be allowed when outlot is developed. The sign must be identical to monument signage- allowed elsewhere on the PUD. Until development occurs, the owner shall establish ground cover over the site and keep it in a maintained condition. Parking requirements for the outlot should be satisfied on it. 6. Modify and or regulate access and parking as follows: - provide a triangular traffic island in the West 78th Street curb cut; - delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects to the sidewalk in front of the super market. A pedestrian crosswalk shall be installed on Market Boulevard adajacent to the bus shelter. The crosswalk shall be painted and signed in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Manual on Traffic Controls - eliminate the 9 northern stalls located on the east side of the super market expansion and modify the Vet Clinic parking area to provide a turning space at the end of the aisle; - all leases for the main building should require that employee parking be located at the rear of the center; and - any restaurants proposed in the center are subject to a site plan review procedure. It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate parking adequacy if it is to be approved. The restaurant spaces illustrated in the two northern tenant spaces in the main building are exempt from this requirement; and - all parking lot curbing shall be B -6/12 concrete. 7. The landscaping plan should be modified as follows: - increase the size of conifers along the south property line from 6' to 10 -12'; and - remove the snow storage area along Market Boulevard and landscape the space. ' 8. Provide final grading and drainage plans for approval. The plans should incorporate the following: - the 72" storm sewer is to be installed by the developer; Installation of the line should be covered by the develop- ment contract. The city can reasonably allow building per- mits to be issued with the understanding that the 72" storm sewer, together with other public roadway and utility improvements, will be installed simultaneously with the construction of the buildings; 1 i 1 Rezoning for Market Square October 18, 1989 Page 13 - the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole #21 in Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb radius; - project approval by the Watershed District is required prior to building permit issuance; and - an erosion control plan acceptable to the city should be 1 submitted prior to requesting building permits. 9. Provide final roadway and utility plans for approval. The ' existing 10" PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an over- sized ductile iron casing acceptable to the city. Existing watermains to be abandoned shall be removed. The applicant • will submit detailed construction plans and specifications for approval by the City Engineer and provide as -built mylar plans upon completion of construction. 10. Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with the description in the October 23, 1989, staff report. The covenants will be filed with the PUD contract. 1 11. Review the site lighting plan to use the ornamental fixtures east of the super market and between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts. ATTACHMENTS • 1. Market Square Plan Package - Sheets P -1 - P -C dated October 13, 1989 2. Market Square Site Phasing Plan - P -8 dated October 17, 1989. 3. Update Market Square Rendering. 4. Updated memo from the Engineering Department dated October 19, 1989. 5. Planning Commission minutes dated September 20, 1989. 6. Previous staff reports. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ----._.____ j L--_=___ i 1129r1811/1 MET • Cffill"111111111111M.1.111W1 Mi . i 1 : "' 11== O. mi Ill _ 1 ., ."-- _.__ . - .,-,, 2:1 , Ai •-• swam 4,4r ,,,PiT-----Eirl , .. 1 Amy • r..... 4 lib,... ... , AM IA i ....., . ... ...... . .. .; II it t = 11111 + — . t✓O...E t ■ _ _ p I 11101F "" 1 MI r lif IIME �^',.... IIIIII41!: iii -J rt .I. . . . - ■ _. r _..) - -* s - • AIMRW 1 1 1 1 __., 1 1 - - 1 I I _ 1 _ . _ y It 1 ..'S'. Sr I I 1 "7 Ola - - i ' - I SNOW MIME ' 1 :: .... 1 \ • 4 / dm. \ I T i t - — -- 11111111 1 a�i 1 E llir WE KAN r = -r 1 1 1 1 • 1111. ■t. - - Ma al - r all NB - - - - r - - - all ` 1011•1111111 a t 1 oho �W 4 0164 o , o im o ! o ` • ei Cf 0, — — ' 1 17 1 1 1 — . ``j 9 1 --- Ci<, I 1 1 1 1 1 � © WG - /--'-- 1 06 . 0 .4 / An .a tts ..-4----"r*rabbrem .. 7/ _ _ m '� - q 1 1 �/ _ 1 to . 1 1 k'it‘ \ ;i t ' I. , C. • 1t« 1 $ Op ei L = — — 41.1i di il U • 1 f i` 1 , � , © M a a_ t!iii_. C 1 doll , w1Et�rs -- I i C -7"'.'""."---''' l . i . i. i ... ... 1 15 1 1 ■ i I ::- 1 1 1 1)1 Z .: IN 1 . • 1 a l ---- 1 WM 1 1 I ell 1 1 1 I ---'-' 1 11 o bi" NO 4 til i i • 2 1 ma 1 1 11.■ i• i I ,.-", 1 , = IF 11 111 in 1 i l i v _. 1 I 1 11 , _ . ji a 1 --,,,-..- ii 1 =I III ' 1 1 al 1... III III.3 NI -- .., --- ; •• II I I i I r, : i I l 1 vs a 1 1 ....._ ....,... .... i .... mu 1 :IN 1 1 , I 1 ■-■., - • es - , 11 1111:1 • "IMO I III am • INI 1 •-r-..-_ i IN I A . ._ l • .... 41. ei a r _ 1 HI I 1 !re 11 = NB 4 i IN li I = H • I vame , 1:- ---,...--- b . . 1 WI Jr I . J .. 1 I I 4:i 1 .. 1 2 , Li r1 i .. •. I 1 1 ,,, .- -e ■..r. 1'1 MI . • wf- _ ala ,, .---..- a .., es • 11 1 • I I ;4,......ie i • 11 ., . III 11. - , mlb IN 1 IC 1 I • .. 111 I • ' .11:1 , fr- . , -- A . ik kw . . --, • 4. , .. .. 1 .... • i 46 i I is 1 444.- I. 1 I mil .• I 1 I r•-9 liFi ,. ,..., ________ _ ..., ,•• II' 1 . • IC 111 • 1 P -,•• 1 , ., , , ,„.- ...moo a ! . , Ng a a ...„, , . i I 11: w _ •—.1. ., . 4 a ,, ,.. • 1 l -1 ,110.- MN IIC a Tr_ 1 I ial II •. ..i. I= ... I 11 : 1 T 1 1 1 I : t . A i ... . it 1-4 ral - _„d •-, „ i I ..... or , .....---. 1 1 1 1 T "i Y 111 i C I S — . � . mill ._ ; \ II ;1- i f =. .ri g 1.. 1 ; .. .,,, ..,.., § - 7 , 1 ,..... ' 111§ 1 ■' ' f 11 r i .; �� —1 0 . 1 ® . �' 1 ii 1 f _' F : • r le X . 7 i I == 7 i I - - - -. . '. -- iI 1 .4 i i. I iJ r 1 E I J 1 I! I \ • F !film /11•11 1 . _ I � 1 w.., . .. 1 1 I . E 1 i rt 111.1 —.0"_. \ I — Elg i 1 11. 1 c I -i M-- \ q i * __. i — k A./ ,1 1 ... 4 .\\v,, .gi I et I-. kt- \ MINI • 11, ir p,...._ ! � i ' ``.: -/ . � 1% S 4 lit, . ,L \ ,_, . ,:arri _ 1 rI _ z 1 _• V- . 4 :4 "0 f 1�/G� RKET SQUARE ♦ �'u Ca inn i= a " Co d L ow.usss+ MINNESOTA , V • •∎ .. :� ". � ... ii i i \ \, i . ............._...e., 1 1 1 1 1 � ' !'' 1 3 ■ II r { 1 1 • a !Ili ______ _.______ _ • ��IIII ! RI Im,����� _ �I,, r llllll .,.. 3 4 .. ..., .-- \, ,!,,„, .....:.0., 1 li 1 , r .,,„,,......,!,;.; , _,.,„, , ��� r_ � � .;11l 1 1 i i 1 � 1 1 i 1 1 1 . _. 1 I . i 1 I 0 ,e• , r— E4 11111: 2 i 1 i > '::• 1 I . ; i , i • - t . 1 , • . ,: ' 1 1 • t . . / . ,.,.- , . ,., 1 i ' Jo ..I II _ . • :i I , 1 . , 1 v _ _ . ______. \A Fk 1 - , - ..-.:, ----,-,=.--: I 1 , 4 _.,..\: ... , I ....._. , I i ; :, , • , • ,., in (4. I \ I i I ; .1 - 1 rNVE 1 a 1 I I ..i.1 Lill 1 i * I i ‘ ■i ali,/ . 1 , ha% q 1 11 \ I 1 . 7: I ! ■ i i 1 1 1 1 . .. 1 . N f' . 1 ''' ZOB V MARKET SQUARE 011A1411ASSEK mmessra . :: ~ • Al ATVICLIM , tr . .,!rt.t=1—' \ , 1 -- inimmumnimmummoun . iimmonumnimm.................................. •••• MITI 911101... . ----"--- i j *. ./ C-------------e I : Jur r . . —77 ....."----...:__.,`",,—• 1 l■ ....—... 'Ilk 4•;11401.. -'• 4011 dalii1A1111* , r 1111lk - 1 I -"'"'""•"----,....- ;03 0 - ---, , • /.... • / i ,:. /1 I 111 / t .... . ... , 1 .. ..... moor . . 1 minal t / . i r E mi. • Mr C----) • I F ....f 11 . 1 E ... 7 9t. t . e 0 % it mom ; 1 . .2/1•1•Wraw MOWS I • ■MI a W • * ._.._._.. ......._. . ............... , ......-......... . 11' A . M • -■•"N L .... ,-----) c:) (=g,---...-.:Li c i 1 . _-_-: c \ i I a., A r .., . , , , i I Sa 1 1 1 I . I , are"NiMPOM a 47 g ......, 1 ...1 1 1 ie'N L aire * ....LI L , . ....... _ _____ _AI ... ........ .. E 1 T r IIE IE I t 1 N /r ei t'Ams i I li ---- / I • i 111 \ow t I t I : I h I t Al . r , .1 \ _.....L. . . , sr ..,. ..- . ..• -.. sw, 717itila.7._' Ammh - • ! .0 1 I .......... . _. COSTIC7r NOM I — ......."..'''....'"."''""."""' '!•••01111.!._f__.„..... fararlErSTC."6". ..." _ • 111.2 _ ........ : iimmieworr ...1•• •• INGIC q11 e jogin wpill. _____ MY ■." 400......1411 GRADIN = wag souzil _ - — _---- ----"imoc 1 . 1 1 1 1 • I /1 • . .. fri Ann' 7r......1 1%44%1 4. • .) ill s j . d �i J.70 Il • • • i . • .. i.. —J�— ..ice _.--- �._.��. • a " I ' ��- I . ••' . 1 8 • 1 '� : • j j it ill : : i i : : N., • r.,,..: • • i L 1� �.e _ .y I III 1,[11 -- j 5 II P I= 1 ' iN .: . i r III A li t i �ii 9 t Iii_ . E rill E I ' - : qt.. i E F ii : {{ i E t ' =5l�E I ii = i (i ;i M [; =-i' • 4 i z i:i' • i i " t i 6 + 4 et iie 3. • j i t _ i =iitiF ii. i i t s 4 • 111 "iti ii: OHM ii: IN a RV iit eill 3, t i t; i li 'Ili s - ' I tij-- Itnil 1 i i P..: _ . }1111• •:tr: ..t: • t i - lEt:4's • .t:s SL": _ a j A 'iti €esssitiiiitttiii ; e: ittt4riiFittttitil i ;. F:::tr:rt:r:s:f _ : it. IIiI 4 i • ,iiiig€E;s�: :t :t: :s • i 1 1 it/mutt:I:tits:1st ii itititittitiiiiiti•1 f t ! il ' ititiiiitiitiitttlll iitiit6i6it4tiit: :t i . t }.si.:3ztt;Ftttrut . t: t . ..... - - -. :itt4sE a e • iTiill.iititaifti:'• -ti t ili:-:t is ; ttiiiitiittiitii ; ie4 <kE6B86iitiiititiii6 . -r, ._iirrrrsrrt: iit:t$Ft:tt:t::L:t + • i "� + : i:;esitiiiititeiiii:i r : i 1:�iaettttttttittii • " 11 = i t itisitiiiiiiiititii i i .44aitiitiittitiii it � t d "t esassiiittitiitiiii . . _ 88iitittit:itt:i . r J �... 1 I MARKET SQUARE A4 CON 1 `- CHOODA�t MIDOOM to K .b..CC.fTR.K7O�.L0.RLiKtpl WKt f F ` . i•. MM. O • R..MLL ...... Y! • .Vl Ff CITYOF ,\ \ tki CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Krauss, Planning Director 1 FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician DATE: October 18, 1989 SUBJ: Review of Revised Plans for Market Square File No. 89 -16 Land Use Review Upon review of the revised plans for Market Square development 1 dated October 13, 1989 prepared by AMCON, I offer the following comments and recommendations: Site Plan (Sheet P -1) 1 1. The plans propose a right -of -way of approximately 70 feet for West 78th Street and reducing down to approximately 60 feet at Monterey Drive. The City desires to maintain a uniform 80 -foot wide right -of -way throughout West 78th Street as pre- viously preserved in the downtown redevelopment project. 2. The plans shall include a concrete island median at the access point to Market Square from West 78th Street as pre- viously agreed to. 3. The location of the trash compactor behind the grocery store limits the traffic lanes behind the shopping center to 20 feet wide. The trash compactor needs to be moved towards the building to give adequate traffic lanes of 24 feet. 4. Appropriate traffic signage should be installed on the one- way streets together with island delineators at the access points to the shopping center. 1 5. This site will generate considerable pedestrian traffic to and from the site. From a traffic safety standpoint, it is desirable to install a pedestrian ^rossing on Market Boulevard in the area of the bus , elter. The pedestrian - crossing should consist of the tyr—cal signage and striping. In the future, when traffic volume dictactes, the City will need to address installing pedestrian- activated flashers at this location. 6. The plans shall include B -612 concrete barrier curb con- 1 sistent with City Ordinances. 1 Paul Krauss October 18, 1989 Page 2 ' Civil Plan (Sheet P -2) 1. The existing watermain to be abandoned shall be removed from the site. 2. The existing public utilities are proposed to be relocated and turn lanes constructed. The applicant shall submit separate from any building plans, detailed roadway and uti- lity construction plans and specifications for approval by the City Engineer. Rbadway and utility specifications should comply with the City of Chanhassen's specifications. As- built mylar plans will for all public utilities shall also be provided upon completion of the construction. 3. BRW will be reviewing the storm sewer calculations submitted to determine adequacy in the system and compatibility with the downstream ponding facilities. 4. The existing catch basin adjacent to manhole #21 in Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb radius at the ' entrance to Market Square. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial ' sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements. The 72 -inch storm sewer, together with roadway and utility improvements, shall be installed simultaneously L with the initiation of any building construction on the site. Erosion Control An erosion control plan for the development was not included for review. A detailed erosion control plan should be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 1 1. The applicant shall receive Watershed District approval before the issuance of any building permits. c: Gary Ehret, BRW Y � Gary Warren, City Engineer 1 1 1 1 CITYOF 1 i - , \ , \ 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �r (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 II MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Paul Krauss, Planning Director FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician /' DATE: July 31, 1991 11 SUBJ: PUD Amendment, Replat and Site Plan Review for 1 Americana Batik, Outlot A, Market Square File No. 91 -11 LUR Upon review of the site plan prepared by KRJ Associates dated June II 17, 1991, revised July 26, 1991, I offer the following comments and recommendations: II TRAFFIC The site does not promote a smooth transition for traffic exiting 1 the drive -thru to get back to the main thoroughfare. The radius is too tight to accommodate turning movements for passenger vehicles. An additional 15 feet would be required to accommodate vehicles II making such a turn. The plans propose a new curb cut to allow left turn movement from 1 westbound West 78th Street into this development. A recent traffic study prepared by the City's traffic engineering consultant reported such a curb cut could be accommodated; ' however, staff still has reservations allowing such an access point. Staff II recommends that this new curb cut proposal be deleted to avoid additional traffic congestion at this intersection. It is recommended that the right -in /right -out only be allowed along II eastbound West 78th Street as previously proposed with the Market Square plat. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 1 No plans or drainage calculations were submitted with this submittal. It is recommended that the applicant submit a grading II and drainage plan with storm water calculations for a 10 and 100 - year storm event. 1 1 1 Paul Krauss July 31, 1991 ' Page 2 UTILITIES ' Again, no utility plan was submitted for review. Municipal sanitary sewer and watermain intersect the plat of Market Square approximately 200 feet south of this site. Sanitary sewer and. } • water service would have to be extended from the trunk mains to 1 service this site. MISCELLANEOUS 1 The site incorporates an 8 -foot wide bituminous path along the northerly lot line of the site. A permanent trail easement over the proposed bituminous trail should be conveyed to the City to insure maintenance and usage rights for the general public. The site plan has been revised incorporating a 50 -foot wide radius ' along the northeast quarter of the site to accommodate future turn lanes along West 78th Street. However, the plat attached to the submittal package has not been revised to accommodate this 50 -foot right -of -way. In addition, the plat has not been revised to incorporate the additional 10 -foot right -of -way the City requires along the south side of West 78th Street to accommodate widening of West 78th Street. As a part of the downtown development, numerous trees and shrubs were planted along the southerly boulevard of West 78th Street ' within the City's right -of -way. The proposed development will required removal and relocation of these plantings. This landscaping relocation process will be incorporated into the City's West 78th Street Detachment project. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS ' 1. Delete the proposed left turn lane and curb cut on westbound West 78th Street and return the right -in /right -out only from the site. 2. The parking lot layout should be revised to accommodate turning movements from the drive -thru tellers. ' 3. The applicant shall submit a grading, drainage and utility plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. ' 4. The applicant shall convey to the City a trail easement along the northerly 10 feet of the site over the bituminous path. 1 1 Paul Krauss 1 July 31, 1991 Page 3 1 5. The final plat of Market Square should be revised to incorporate the additional 10 feet of right -of -way required along the south side of West 78th Street and the 50 -foot radius at the northeast corner of Outlot A. ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 , CITYOF cHANHAssEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �r (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I 4 1 FROM: Todd Hoffan, Park and Recreation Coordinator 1 DATE: July 29, 1991 SUBJ: Site Plan Review - Americana Community Bank On July 23, 1991, the Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the above mentioned PUD amendment /site plan review. The report 1 presented to the Commission is attached for your review. Upon conclusion of discussion that evening, the Park and Recreation Commission acted to recommend the City Council accept full park and trail dedication fees as part of this development. 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 ITY O F PF DATE: 7 -23 -91 I ,Y CUAAI CC DATE: HOFFMAN: k ✓ STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: PUD Amendment, Replat and Site Plan Review - Replat a portion of Market Square PUD and site plan for a 7,740 sq. ft. building on property zoned PUD and located in the southwest corner of the West 78th Street and Market z Boulevard intersection, Americana Bank Q LOCATION: Intersection of West 78th Street and Market Boulevard (w) (see location map) Cl. cl. APPLICANT: Americana Community Bank Q 300 Main Street West Sleepy Eye, Minnesota PRESENT ZONING: PUD 1 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - OI, Office /Industrial District S - BG, General Business District E - CBD, Central Business District W - BG, General Business District COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This property lies within the service area of I Q City Center Park. Acquisition of additional parkland from this parcel is not reasonable or 0 desirable. W COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN: This property lies within the downtown business district and, as in the remain:,- of the downtown, pedestrian (f) walkwa are to be installed. Walkways are depicted on the proposed plan; II however, bituminous material is specified. All walkways in the downtown district are to be constructed of • II concrete. Americana Bank July 23, 1991 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council accept full park and trail fees as part of this development. A trail fee credit for construction of walkways is not deemed necessary as no credits have been given in any previous cases of development in the tax increment district. Businesses locating in this district are to pay full development fees. ATTACHMENTS: • 1. Location map • • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �,�� 1 vi , NiAF iL0,- 1 E..EME.r =E. oo` ai � ', 1 . GIT`(� .:± t � 0 °l s 1 • r 1../: 't el ST. V .- 1 y 1 .111111 a 1 �� rE I "WY IGI s 1 0 , . 1 1- 1 1 1 . . . 1 1 . 1 —• —• — — c _o .0 J N CP 1 --..----.„ \ ........- ( ....•i i � 1 ' i k 1\ - 24' 6' 2_1! 2. 9. .a ' 4.1.1 1 ; O \ , `� C t : 1 _ _ . . 1 l \ r r�j � • c r � ' t II N y i -. . J c ` It J 1 a 1 _ 1 - 1 / I'' f ' ' 1 / / . ., . .&.. : 1 , o I 0 4. - 0 ,c 1••1■./n.I / I ' Z I1A.U11f /1 m z i ........... / _ • ,� 7- 77 E f , ../ •• I, y 1 1 i'-‘2 6 ik o ; 1 7 s ?)f, a'.e 45 I - ' Mill 25 • i is.' i5 ' • 8' P G 0 Z j • C — I 1 N 3. i k. ' ..) .. . I Z '- l 1 1 t� . 1. \ � � � ����i p♦� _ 1 • OE:: P . 0 tit' 4143 4 . • . t W:',.. , 1 Is — ir, '`' iW 47 .4 • • • 40 i • i • .a t .0 J MARK.T 3L' /D. 1 ----.....___________ -......_____________ - 1 S S TRGAR - RO FAUSCH, INC. CONSULTING E NGINEERS T ■ C IVIL ■ STRUCTU ■PARKING ■ LAND SU R V EYORS SRF No. 0911540 1 MEMORANDUM Paul Krauss, AICP 1 TO: , Planning Director City of Chanhassen 1 FROM: Dennis R. Eyler, P.E., Principal Jeffrey R. Bednar, Senior Traffic Specialist 1 DATE: June 5, 1991 SUBJECT: AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK TRAFFIC STUDY 1 As you requested, we have completed a traffic study and review of the proposed site plan for the 1 Americana Community Bank (see Figure 1). Based on this review and analysis, we offer the following comments and recommendations for your consideration: 1. Traffic forecasts used for this analysis are based on the forecasts developed for the City of 1 Chanhassen Central Business District Traffic Study, dated April 10, 1991, and prepared by SRF, Inc. (see Figure 2). 2. Peak period average queues were estimated for the Market Boulevard and West 78th 1 Street intersection approaches based on these traffic forecasts and assuming a traffic control signal would be installed at the intersection of Market Boulevard and 78th Street. 1 It was also assumed that both West 78th Street and Market Boulevard would operate as four lane roadways. . 3. The results of this queuing analysis (see Figure 1) indicate that the proposed site driveway 1 on Market Boulevard would be blocked on a regular basis by queues developing on the northbound Market Boulevard approach to West 78th Street. To prevent a traffic operations and accident problem from developing at this location, it is recommended that 1 no access from Market Boulevard be provided to the proposed site. 4. The queues developing on the eastbound West 78th Street approach to Market Boulevard 1 would not, however, block the access to West 78th Street which is west of the proposed bank site. 5. Since queuing will not be a problem on West 78th Street at the access serving the west 1 side of the bank site, consideration could be given to opening the median on West 78th Street and providing a westbound left turn lane at that location. This median opening and turn lane would allow left turns to be made from westbound 78th Street into the bank site, 1 and from the site to westbound 78th Street 6. Based on these findings, it is recommended that the City and developer consider 1 reorienting the site to emphasize the access on West 78th Street at the west side of the site. 1 Suite 150, One Carlson Partway North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447 612/475 -0010 FAX 612/475 - 2429 I OIrVt..o( j ptAil Ort.4,t►WGj A P Lep . '[URN lA1JR. 111 m W. 78TH STREET L FOTLIM MINI _OISE® ® —__ 61LOA- NM MMN N— C _ r ar ss_ �"i_s _ _ , .............. / � ADF�ii x w 11' ze PARKING STALLS L — - � 3�y, . �� . �j I I , I 1� b I �- . - E 1 , - - 11 7 T ' 1 0 DRIVE -TURD - 1 Nta!II'm,ilimelae:tel ' . _____,› It clli it ' 1 / 11" i / 1 1 1 [1 AvesALae 4L5we 1 1 c 1 1 C----) Source: KRJ Associates \ 1 STRGAR - ROSCOE - FAUSCH, INC. CITY OF CHANH SRF CONSULTWG ENGINEERS ASSEN FIGURE 1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN 1 SRF NO. 0911540 AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK TRAFFIC STUDY 1 .-- S W i.0. H'1 ' � N Hl.�lON ( r9t � C.7 3� w cn .. 8�,� H.. '8.1. 83111408A : -, t GR a s on CC AO ND Ri'�'' ` 0 .0 / u. ' ?7 z 4 W 2 W ~ . > U z 0 ¢ n$ t fw 6 X4-0 <1.) I} 'aa oa3at/l r z z Z iss Q z J 03 L 6Q► O 1.... Cr) X 4 1 . r } CC a •once 13�adw M...�_ -: M . t ti p ° O Q z9t —. `111 a W T N N ■ a, at .4.),t, 9z •aA18 83883N : r fa 0 z>z! a CC M 1- M U. LI z 8 OD o •GA18 Sa3MOd ,, - ° ,I, a zoo i- 0 l' On C y U en = C c z x y 1 0 KRJ ASSOCIATES II II II II PROJECT STATEMENT 1 July 28, 1991 I RE: Americana Community Bank West 78th & Market Boulevard Chanhassen, Minnesota 1 . The site for the Americana Community Bank is located at the 1 Northeast Corner of the proposed Market Square Shopping Center Development. The architecture of the Bank building reflects the shopping center's use of stucco, accent tiles, columns, 1 and gabled entries. Low gabled roofs and a strong masonry base y complete the Bank's image for the prominant corner site. In— tegrated signage, generous landscaping and a corner plaza visually and functionally integrate the bank with the Chanhassen Community. 1 The site access from the West lets traffic flow directly into the drive thru lanes without unnecessary turning and any potential stackup is handled on site. The common shared road on the South I of the site provides access to the lot to the South and and allows the drive thru traffic an exit. The building has been designed to accommodate the needs of the Bank today, and in the future through the proposed addition. 1 1 1 1 I II P 0 BOX 635 LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA 55356 612/473 -1208 r' Commission Meeting ' Planing Commi��i August 7, 1991 - Page 1 PUBLIC HEARING: KRJ ASSOCIATES FOR AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK, LOCATED ON OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE, PROPOERTY ZONED PUD AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST 78TH STREET AND MARKET BOULEVARD: A. REPLAT A PORTION OF OUTLOT A, MARKET SQUARE. 1 B. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7,740 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING. Public Present: Name Address ' Kim Jacobsen P.O. Box 635, Long Lake, MN Bob Dittrick P.O. Box 755, New Ulm, MN Randy Schultz 300 Main Street West, Sleepy Eye, MN Emmings: In view of thy- lateness of the hour, unless there's somebody I that's got a burning desire to have a staff report we'll skip it, assuming that everybody's read the staff report. Okay, what? Al -Jaff: I would like to add one condition please. ' Emmings: You're going to give it anyway. Go ahead. Al -Jaff: Just add one condition. Emmings: Oh, you want to add a condition? Where? Tell us the page number. Al -Jaff: Site plan approval. Emmings: So this would be number 6 on page 12? It would be number 6 under Site Plan Review? Al - Jaff: Yes. The condition would read that the parking stalls located to I the south of the site be designated for employees only. Emmings: Read it again. Al -Jaff: The parking stalls located to the south of the site be designated for employees only. The reason for this condition is to minimize conflict between cars that are heading towards the drive thru and cars that are backing out of those parking stalls. Emmings: This is a public hearing and are there representatives of applicant here who want to present something to us? • Kim Jacobsen: I'm Kim Jacobsen from KRJ Associates. I'm representing the II Americana Bank. I'll be brief. I think what we're looking at is we've worked with staff very hard. We've got a rendering behind us of what we feel the building is going to look like. I think the major issues that we've come up with have been mainly our cut from West 78th Street. I think Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 2 that would be one issue that we would like to discuss and that's our major I issue. Other than that I think that we've gotten most things under control through staff. They may tell us different but through the report there was not a whole lot that really stuck out at us. II Emmings: Maybe while you're up there I'll just ask you, staff seemed to be pretty strong in the report about wanting a little different roof line or dormers up there. What about that one? II Kim Jacobsen: Well, staff had not seen this sketch and I have not heard . • their latest response back. Earlier tonight I thought it was positive. I I'll turn it over to staff and ask them at this point. Emmings: Well is that plan different than the ones, the other drawings II that they've seen. Kim Jacobsen: They've never seen a rendering colored and it has changed slightly. It has been modified. It's now to it's final design form at II this point so this is the first that they've seen this sketch. Krauss: I. think in the past we've tried to get their rooflines to reflect II the roof that's typical in downtown Chanhassen. Our design studies that are starting along corridor of TH 5, we're looking back into doing that. There is no agreed upon standard here. I guess I'd really to hear II your comments. I would still prefer that the roof line was broken up a little more. It's not as massive a building as it was when our concerns were first raised so to an extent they've been partially addressed. We don't claim to be architects. We think we have some idea of design. I II think it could probably be refined a little bit but I'd like to see what your reaction is. II Emmings: Do you have an overhead of the site plan? Now on West 78th Street, the road that comes down from West 78th Street that enters into this property, that's not, there's a road to the left of that, or to the west of that that services the shopping center. Is that right? I Krauss: That is the main central drive aisle in the shopping center that you see there. Monterey which is a public street which borders the west II side of the shopping center. Emmings: I'm not thinking of Monterey. I couldn't picture this. Okay, so II the road that. That's Monterey. Now the road that we're looking at is going right down the side of that and that's the only entrance into that whole property from 78th Street? II Krauss: Correct. If I could have a pen. The internal driveway does something like this. It comes to the main entrance over there. There's a drive up that comes around in front of the shopping center. Comes back in II over here and then there's another access point up that way. Emmings: Okay. II Erhart: There's no plan for a median cut now at that entrance? II ,' Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 3 1 Krauss: At the north side, no there is not. Erhart: So it's a right in. If you're coming this way you have to turn at I Monterey? Krauss: Right. Or turn down on Market before you get there and make a decision. Emmings: Alright, now as far as that being an issue, you got up here and said that's your major issue. What do you want there? _ Kim Jacobsen: Well, we'd love to have a full right /left turn coming out. I I think what we're willing to settle for right now is coming out and having a right turn out but we want to have a left turn median cut so the traffic going west on 78th can access the site directly. Emmings: Alright. And that's the plan we have in front of us is wrong? Kim Jacobsen: Yes. ' Emmings: And the staff side of that argument is? Folch: I guess if I could address that. This issue was, as you can see from your staff packets, was given to the firm of Strgar - Roscoe - Fausch to basically evaluate whether that was a possibility there. From their conclusion it was that yes, you could have a curb cut there and that it wouldn't be a problem as far as cars stacking up eastbound on West 78th blocking that intersection. I'm not an expert in traffic engineering. I do have a basic knowledge of it. My gut feeling is, looking at how close I you're going to have. Ultimately you're looking at signal lights at both Market and Kerber which are a 400 foot distance between the two. My gut feeling is, having a left turn there when they're predicting ultimate I future traffic forecasts of 20,000 cars a day, that's typical to like a CR 42 through Apple Valley and Burnsville. That's going to be an awful bad location to have a left turn in. And this may be analogous to getting different opinions from different doctors. Things like that. I've also talked to the engineer who designed the downtown system and he doesn't think it's a good idea either. Looking at the dimensions from a technical standpoint. Looking at the dimensions for that turn lane, typically II they're substandard when you're designing urban situations but this one here is even further reduced in design. It's really shoehorned in there compared to the other left turn lanes throughout the rest of the downtown II area. It's much lower in dimensions. And if you look at the concept of where the left turns are located east of Market through the downtown, this doesn't seem consistent with the approach that's been used in the past. And that in a nutshell is where we have our concerns. Emmings: Now as far as the other conditions. I'm sure it's obvious to you that I'm trying to push this along but the last thing I want you to do is feel like we're giving you a short thrift here so if there's anything we're , not talking about that's important to you, just let me know okay? Kim Jacobsen: Okay. 1 1 II Planning: Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 4 II Emmings: But as far as the rest of the conditions that are contained II within thp staff report, do you have any problems with those? Would you like to address any of those? Kim Jacobsen: I think as far as we care, most of those are pretty much II workable. Emmings: As far as the signing. I Kim Jacobsen: Through the signing, everything else. We've talked to staff. We're ready to resolve it at this point. 1 Emmings: Okay. . Kim Jacobsen: I think one thing we should point out on West 78th Street I that I think is a good point is right now, if you look at it and if you look at access from public safety. Safety vehicles. Emergency vehicles. It's a tough center to get into. If you have a life threatening situation. I You're coming down West 78th and now you've got to bring your traffic'down through Market back in for a fire truck and ambulance. I think that a safety issue was there on West 78th that you need access. The center needs ' I access. The bottom line, the City owns part of that center. If you can't get customers to that center, if they're going to drive by on West 78th and there's 20,000 cars going by, that number I don't agree with but I'll give it. They're going to go somewhere else. And if the City's a partner in II the center, I would think you'd want to get people there. The number one thing you do in a development is make it accessible. I don't think Market Square right now is as accessible as it should be. So from our standpoint II we feel it imperative to keep number one, our customer coming in to the site. We also like it from a life and safety factor. That we do have protection if there is an accident. If there's an accident in the center, II it's easily accessible and I don't think it would be off of Market Blvd.. I think that the traffic, the number of turns the safety vehicles have to take, emergency vehicles are going to be prohibitive to get people in there. II Emmings: And the difference that they're proposing is, just so this is clear in my mind. The road coming in off of West 78th was originally going I to be a right -in /right -out and the wrinkle that we're adding here is we're adding in a left turn into it for traffic going west on West 78th Street. Krauss: Exactly so. That's the change. I'd also add too here that I I don't necessarily disagree with anything that the City Engineer's raising. We've talked about this quite a bit but there's a lot of other things that also factor into this. First of all it should be clear that we would never I recommend a median cut for an individual property owner. Emmings: That's not what we're talking '_.ut here. I Krauss: No. This is a main drive aisle to the shopping center. It happens to access the bank but it also accesses the dry cleaners across the way and everything else. And the second thing is that there's something of I a design situation here that I think the Council needs to evaluate and even possibly the HRA because we've asked Strgar - Roscoe to come up with a design II Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 5 of how this median would look accommodating the:turn. We're not sure how much of the landscaping we can save. Strgar seems to think we can save a fair amount of it but you clearly don't have the median that you have right now so there's a subjective design issue related to that as we'll. 1 don't know. We just wanted to bring it to you with all the facts and concerns 11 and have you and the City Council make that determination. Emmings: Okay. Anything else you want to add right now? Kim Jacobsen: I think that's, the issues like you say. We are in agreement to work on them. I think we can work and resolve those with no problem. I think that we need a resolve on West 78th because it is important to this project. Emmings: Okay, thanks. Kim Jacobsen: Thank you. Emmings:: This is a public hearing. Is there anybody else here from the public who wants to comment on this or has any questions they want to ask at this time? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Erhart moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in 1 favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Emmings: Joan, what do you think about West 78th Street? 1 Ahrens: Well at the last second here I was confused. Staff is recommending a curb cut right? Krauss: We have recommended approval of the site plan as you see it. That incorporates the curb cut but we've called out that curb cut as an issue that you may want to evaluate. Emmings: When you say curb cut you're talking about a median cut? Krauss: Median cut, yes. 1 Ahrens: Median cut. My personal opinion is even with a median cut that II street is, or the properties are inaccessible. The design of that street I think is terrible but aside from that.no one asked me before they built it. Emmings: Well they thought you'd want a berm somewhere. ' Ahrens: I did. I noticed a berm in here. I had a comment on that. There's a berm right here in the landscaping. It doesn't have a landscaped berm though but you're going to be requi a berm along the northeast and II westerly portion of the site. I assume = mean a landscaped one. Thanks for reminding me. Is that true? AI -Jaff: Yes it is. Ahrens: I'm going to go along with the staff report on this. I'm a bit confused about the issues concerning the architecture. I can't tell if Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 6 il that's what you were aiming at. Is this what you were aiming at? This 1 roof line in your recommendations? Al -Jaff: The building looked too massive as we were looking at it from the 1 plans that were submitted originally. Batzli: Does this look less massive? II Farmakes: Are you talking architecturally massive or more square feet? Krauss: No architecturally: The massing relative to the corner. 1 Farmakes: Just straight slab. 1 Krauss: Yeah. I mean clearly we want to get away from just one straight roof. I think if you look across the street at the hotel you'll see that the roof turns a couple of different ways. It has significant dormer type features that are built in it. I think there's a cupola on top. I wasn't 1 necessarily looking to Teplicate that but I guess we would have a preference 'that for lack of a better word, I don't know if it's accurate or not but these dormer features be somewhat larger. We were informed tonight 1 that the shingling on the roof that would be what we're looking for, matche, the hotel or possibly metal which sounds better to us but again, it's a subjective evaluation at this point. I don't have any specific design guidelines to base this on. II Emmings: You kind of want your bank to look massive don't you? I Krauss: Secure. Ahrens: So this is closer to the design you had in mind? The dormers are I the right size? Can you see it? Krauss: Yeah, I took a look at it before the meeting. I think we'd prefer that they be somewhat more accentuated and that the roof line be broken up 1 a little bit more if possible. Ahrens: Well, I'd like to leave that up to the applicant to work out with 1 you because I can't tell on that what that really looks like. I guess I don't really have anything else. Emmings: Alright. Jeff? 1 Farmakes: I realize that a lot of this is subjective when you talk about architecture. I really don't like this building but I'm just going to make 1 these comments just from a personal level. It's just another large slab building in our city here, a gray monolith that to me tends to make this city look like an army camp. I still can't figure out what that light I gray. Granted it's maybe in right now in the late 80's and early 90's but too much of that is a bad thing. We've already had some large oversized buildings for our city already in gray. I'd like you to look at that. I agree that, maybe that's nit picking but I'm going to say it anyway. The II issue of the building, what still bothers me is it's still massive. There's very little window space in it. I would look at that building and 1 Plannin3 Commission Meeting 1 August 7, 1991 - Page 7 I would not want to go in there. It's very unfriendly to me. It looks like a, it's either a skating rink or it just looks like something on the cheap. Emmings: Do you feel strongly about that? Farmakes: I'm not going to dig my holes any lower. It's subjective you know. We all have different colored houses and we all have different interior decoration but I guess I would go back and compare that with the other bank in town and say that there's a striking difference I guess here and I guess this looks, I guess that they'd be investing the money somewhere else other than the building. The next comment I'd like to make is on the signage. I agree with the staff in their comments. I think that the sign proposal is overkill. We talked about that before and I'm glad that this is a PUD so I can bring it up. I particularly, I'd like to see one sign on this building from the main entrance there on 78th because that'd be more than enough. That there is other examples of business buildings where that takes place. I know the one that you're referring to here in the report. I' s not quite sure whether we ever decided if that was II a business building or if it was quasi - retail or what it was but considering the size and where that is, if they don't access it from there, it's going to be darn hard to miss that sign. But if you feel, I guess if it's 3 feet on the other signage is appropriate. I'd rather just see one is my personal druthers. I think that that does the job. In fact, if you're not seeing that the Americana Bank from the parking lot in the back, so what? I mean you've got to drive by it to get out of there so. I like some of your comments going back to the issue of what you're trying to do with this building. I'm not sure, I guess I would ask you whether you feel that they've come back and improved from what you've asked them to do. I'm getting the impression that perhaps you're not 100% thrilled with this or am I getting the wrong impression? Krauss: Yeah, I think we have to emphasize that they have worked with us II quite a bit and the building design has changed quite a bit. It is significantly improved and we like the way that it picks up a lot of the architectural detailing on the shopping center which we've encouraged it to do and this is a requirement to developing on that lot. So there's a lot of elements on the building that I think are good and worthy. As far as the...goes, I mean we also noticed that the windows were small but I don't know how well I can comment on those kinds of detailing. I mean I'd be ,. happy to if that's the policy that we establish. Farmakes: But the lack of window space creates more mass on the building. 1 Krauss: It makes the building look bigger than it is. The windows are smaller and the ratio of the window to the building area is a lot different II than it is normally. Or appears to be anyway. Farmakes: Is the rest of the shopping center supposed to have the green roof and gray paint? 1 Krauss: They have green barrel roofs. In fact they picked up the detail of the shopping center. You can see it around the back part of the or behind the bank building. They picked up the tile detailing that comes 1 II Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1 ^91 - Page 8 II from there and the building materials are pretty similiar. II Farmakes: Well I've only been on here January but I think the City ought to look long and hard about painting the entire city of Chanhassen in gray. I don't know of any other precedent where the entire city is II basically painted one color. Emmings: Well Emerald City. - II Farmakes: Well Emerald City but maybe you can talk a little bit to the . . design center at the U. I don't know of any other place where conformity I or it just lends to boredom and counter productive I think. But I'll drop it at that. That's the end of my comments. Emmings: What about the road? Do you have any feeling about that up on I West 78th Street? Farmakes: I really feel that the road issue is one for city staff and I'll I back up whatever they want to do with that. I'm not going to play street engineer. II Emmings: So right now the position of staff on the median cut is to go along with it? Krauss: That's the recommendation with this site plan, yes. But at the II same time it has some reservations. Emmings: Yeah, and Charles has talked about his reservations. We II understand that. Folch: I guess from my perspective, I can't support the median cut. II Ahrens: You're not supporting it but they are? Emmings: And what we have in front of us, if we vote for it, we will be II approving that median cut. Just so evreybody's clear on that. Brian, how do you feel about the windows in this building? II Batzli: Hum. Emmings: Okay, Ladd. II Batzli: I would really like to know if staff thinks that this site plan is well developed since I counted 11 things that they didn't have or else we're still working on. 10 foot right -of -way. Additional landscaping. I Signage. Lights. Lighting plan. No grading plan. Canopy issues. Architectural issues. Expansion issues. Roof screening. Turn lane changes. Median cuts. Do you really think this is well developed? We I kind of talked about this on the last one. Krauss: The kinds of conditions we have on this are standard conditions virtually with every site plan. Not having a grading plan at this point is I no big deal because the site's perfectly flat and we know how it's supposed to grade anyway. We want it before a building permit is issued. Things II Planning Commission Meeting ~~ August 7, 1991 - Page 9 like that are minor detailing. Batz]l: Alright' You're comfortable with that then? Krauss: Yes. Batzli: I think the new cut is groovy. I can dig it. I want it'there' m� I don't care about the stuff down the middle of the road anyway. It's getting late' I think Z would like to see, I don't know how much has actually been done to the building to date and I'll rely on staff to continue to work with them to come up with something that's acceptable to them. I think there may be a couple of minor changes to the conditions but otherwise I think it looks pretty good. I'm done. N� �� Emmings: Alright' Ladd. Conrad: Are there two entry spots off of Market into the shopping center? m� Krauss: There is one. Wait' Before I say that, thare"s'''for trucks or not? Olsen: In the back. Krauss: Way in the back. But not off of Market. There's one main entrance ~~ on Market. Conrad: From a standpoint of running the shopping center, you've got to N� have an entry off of 78th. You've just got t�. Emmings: Well there is one. ' Conrad: A right-in/right-out. Emmings: Right. ' m� Conrad: Yeah. The quastipn is, we force the folks going from the east going west down Market. Emmings: Or around back. Conrad: Z guess I have to endorse the cut as the applicant has proposed -- it. If there's just absolutely concrete evidence that well, Charles has said that engineering wise it's not a smart move. Generally I would have N� just totally paid attention to that. I just really believe there should be =° an entrance from 78th to the shopping center. Not to the bank. To the shopping cnnter- Emmings: Or really to both. Because of the shopping center. Conrad: Yeah. I really don't like the drive thru and that curve. That N� total turn :around. There's some things here that just sort of bother me design wise. You have the drive thru and then the cut back. Obviously they'd like to get out on the road but I think staff's point was well taken II II Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 10 11 but c'eez, I don't know. How are we solving that? The turning radius. Does the applicant have to go and buy more property to have that happen? 1 Al -Doff: They're making the building smaller. Depth wise and then they . are acquiring an additional 10 feet I believe. 1 Kim Jacobsen: We aren't acquiring anything. We would have additional footage when it's replatted giving us 20,000 square feet. Give us a couple more feet north and south dimension just because of the shape of the site. 1 Conrad: Okay. I don't think I have, just.generally and I've never commented on design before of a building. This building just doesn't make I me feel comfortable. In 10 years here I don't think I've ever commented on design. I try to leave that out of government. This one bothers me. Could be the roof line. It just doesn't seem like, this is the key I intersection of Chanhassen and it's, as Jeff said, it's not a real friendly building so I don't know what it would take to make it warmer. I like the plaza out in front. I think that's terrific. I'm just not comfortable with the design of the building. 1 Erhart: Whit's the material in that exterior of the building? 1 Kim Jacobsen: We've been dictated that we're going to try to match whatever the shopping center has which is some sort of a dry...material. An arcylic stucco is the way they described it and I don't know if they 1 have a decision. Erhart: Who's dictating that? 1 Kim Jacobsen: The PUD development. Emmings Yeah, we did that. II Kim Jacobsen: That's what the staff has worked us on. The gray color... The roof colors. All of that has been dictated through staff to us. II Emmings: We said that whatever went into the outlot, because it was, we sort of saw somebody coming in with a Dairy Queen I think and we said whatever's going on that corner has got to be consistent with the shopping 1 center. That kind of fear. Now this may have snuck around and hit us in the back of the head. I Erhart: Well that's what I think. I don't think the building's necessarily that ugly but I do agree with Jeff in that to drive everything to look the same is crazy. My feeling is, when you get right down to the surface material in this building has to be the same as the center has gone I beyond reason. Farmakes: That building almost, from th.. perspective or from where you I come in, it's going to be far more predominant than the actual center itself behind it. 1 Emmings: Right. 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 11 1 Ahrens: Plug: the center behind it looks like, is more attractive looking than the bank. Farrrakes: A Dairy Queen's one thing but something that large in front of. it, I don't know if that was a good idea. Emmings: Well, we were scared of one thing I think. I don't know that this is what happened but this is the way I remember thinking about it. We were sort of scared of the unknown there so we said let's make sure that II whatever goes there is consistent with what's around it. I think that was as much to discourage McDonald's or whatever from being there as anything else and it's maybe gone too far. Erhart: So anyway, granite sheeting would be pretty good I think. Anyway, seriously though. Conrad: His little cut at humor. Erhart: I do really like the idea of using the Timberline roof. I think that'E one place where we've missed opportunities in the downtown. ...not require wocd shingles and a good compromise is the Timberline. It really has a rice effect when you talk about the big surface areas up there. 11 Regarding the median cut, my opinion is if we aren't willing to bulldoze the whole median out of downtown, we ought to put this curb cut in. Batzli: This is a start. That's how I look at it. ' Erhart: It's what I see as a start to what's going to ultimately get done becauso the logic I have is someone coming that way who misses the intersection. He then has to turn left at Monterey anyway. They're going to stack up. If you at least provide two cuts, you get less stacking because some are going to turn in here and some are going to turn at Monterey because in either case you're going to have, what you're ultimately have is stacking someplace on there. So that's that one. I agree, I think maybe Jeff, it seems to me like we have too many signs or the signs are too big. Help me with what does it mean that signs on each, II or 4 foot high wall mounted signs on each building elevation. What does that mean? Krauss: Well actually there's three wall mounted signs and there was also , a monument sign proposed. Emmings: Two. ' Krauss: One. Emmings: There are two on the plan aren't there? ' Krauss: There's one facing the drive ais and the shopping center. Emmings: I thought you were restricting them and cutting them down. I'm sorry. Ahrens: This only shows one in front of the building. 1 II Plane in.;> Commission Meeting August. 7, 1 ?()1 - Page 12 II Krauss: Wall mounted. You can't see the other two elevations. ' Erha„ t• Are those two other ones, are those on entrances or just on the s;ide4 of kuildings? II Krauss: One is on the drive thru and one is on the rear door. Erhart: My view of that would be, I don't mind the large sign on the front I entrance of the building but the other two ought to be substantially smaller. That's my opinion. And lastly is, does that exit road, once you go through the automatic teller, does that exit into the mass parking lot then or do they actually have to drive all the way up? II Krauss: What we're thinking on this is that you have the balance of Outlot A down here...over there. This lot is pretty constrained by the fact that I you've got Market on one side, the main entrance down here. There's really no other place to provide entry to this lot so what we're thinking of is here's the exit lane and then at some point somebody's going to build an entrance lane over there and then this would function as the exit lane for II both the bank and whatever happens down to the south. Erhart: Okay, but somehow traffic comes out of there and they're going to II have to drive through. They're either going to drive through and go all the way down here or they're going to have to go through up here. You're forcing all this traffic in front of the shopping center. Krauss: Yes. Erhart: You made a big todo about not giving a right - /right - out down II here. Krauss: Right. II Erhart: Is that a wise thing to do? I Krauss: Well, if I could touch on that. We felt very strongly about it when the shopping center came in because we didn't believe it would be safe at all to permit it. As time went on, we got much better traffic information now than we had 2 years ago when we first approved this and we II asked Strgar to take a look that. In your report there's documentation that says when we put a signal light up here, which the Council and the HRa are now looking at doing. When this thing is fully developed, the traffic is going to back up way down here and you will have no way to make a cut at this point or up here without cutting across traffic that's stalled on the other side. In addition, the ultimate development over here is a free right turn lane, two thru lanes and a left turn lane. What you're going to I have over here is, this traffic as it comes around the corner is accelerating. Some of it is slowing down to get into the shopping center. Some of this traffic may be turning at the same time and making a merged I movement. It's not really the place you want to throw in people turning back into traffic. Everybody's looking in the wrong direction at that time. II Erhart: You've got the two thru lanes there going to a single lane? 11 Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 13 II Krauss: Again, I said ultimately. Erhart: Cih, that's when you take the median out? , Krauss: Well, that's down the road. We think the median can stay if that's desired bu' at the present time there's only going to be this single" lane. The HRA wanted us though to reserve the right -of -way and that's why everything is shifting 10 feet to the south. Reserve the right -of -way so that if it's determined in the future that you need two lanes east of I Market Blvd., that we have the physical ability to do that and don't have to buy a bank and tear it down. Erhart: Boy I'll tell you, it's just awful to put all those cars backing II up in front of the shopping center. You can't bring it around the outside either because then how does it get... Krauss: Actually though, that's the safer place to be. It's an internal road basically and will have specific well defined egress points out onto Market and to Monterey .5nd 78th Street. ' Erhart: I'm just thinking about all the traffic and people trying to get in and out of the center with their cars. Krauss: Most of that should be focused, well the main entrance again is down here. In fact there's two exit lanes down there and that's where the people who are coming from Market are going. 1 Erhart: ...that's right. There's parking over here yet. Okay. I was thinking that the shopping center was right here. Okay. , Krauss: That's the shopping center. The bank building is sitting up in here. Here's the proposed curb cut. Here's the main entrance and exit. Erhart: And where does the return traffic... Krauss: The drive by wraps around through here and then it comes over out this way. Erhart: Okay...I think I've got it. Emmings: Are you done? I wonder if you would have proposed a different kind of bank with different kinds of materials if you hadn't been working II under the restrictions you were working under and I wonder if we wouldn't like to see it. But I guess I pretty much agree with all the comments that have been made about the building. The windows are too small. The roof, if you're going to keep the building like it is, it seems to me the roof I ought to have a little steeper pitch and there ought to be, those dormers ought to be more pronounced as staff has said. I agree with those comments. I think that taking into account the reasons that we wanted to I put some restrictions on what happened on that corner, some of those fears would be allayed by the fact that we know now that there's a bank developing on that corner. If that would mean that you'd want to make some proposals for, I still think that the bank has to somehow fit in some of it's design elements with the Country Suites across the street and the Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1 °91 - Page 14 li . shopping center but if you want a different exterior materials or wanted to 1 change some things on there to make it, to address some of the concerns you've heard addressed up here about it appearing to be an unfriendly building or too massive or whatever, I think that you might do that. I think that as far as West 78th Street goes, I absolutely agree there's got II to be a left turn lane there and that's all the comments I've got. Unless anybody's got anything else, let's see if there's any motions. We've got what? First one is site plan review, a subdivision and a PUD .amendment. . I Batzli: I move the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #91 -3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29, 1991 subject to the following conditions. 1 thru 5 as set forth in the staff report and the I following modifications. The sentence that reads, eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans. Is that still shown here? II Krauss: It's dashed in. Batzli: Okay. I would eliminate the word since and include the words, in 1 part because we would never be necessarily approving the proposed addition so I don't want it to look like that's the only reason we're not approving it. And at the end of number 5 insert, and submit the same for staff II approval. . Ahrens: There's a number 6 here. I I Erring,: Oh, you weren't here. Batzli: No, I wasn't here. Emmings: What you would be moving if you had been here. Batzli: Oh, and a new condition 6 that reads, parking stalls located to I the south of the site shall be designated for employees only. Emmings: I'll second the motion. Any discussion? 11 Batzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #91 -3 as shown on the site plan dated July 29, II 1991 subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Sign plans should be revised to eliminate the monument sign, il reduce the wall sign height to 3 feet and incorporate requested directional signs. I 2. Additional landscaping shall be provided along the north edge of the site as proposed in the staff report. The applicant -shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must I be posted prior to building permit issuance. Provide a plant schedule indicating the size and type of all plant materials for staff approval. I 3. The applicant shall eater into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. If the West II Plannin Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 15 II 78th Street curb cut is approved, the applicant shall be required to compensate the City for all costs related to its design and 1 construction. -- 4. Revise architectural plans as follows: il - Incorporate dormers of increased size or other acceptable measures to enhance the design of the roof line. - Provide details of HVAC screening. II - Incorporate the use of Timberline or similar quality shingles that II provide an image of a cedar shake roof. - Provide details of building exterior treatment indicating consistency" with shopping center construction. - Eliminate the proposed building addition from the plans in part because we would never be necessarily approving the proposed II addition. - Revise plans as necessary to ensure that a 25 foot setback is provided to all portions of the building, including the entrance II canopy. 5. Revise the plans as required to ensure that room is provided for safe II turning movements for cars existing the drive -thru lanes and submit the same for staff approval. 6. Parking stalls located to the south of the site shall be designated for' employees only. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 1 Batzli: This really gets back to what you just said and giving the I applicants direction on do they want to come back and look at something else. I think we would be willing and the Council would probably be willing to look at that condition we put on the PUD contract for this particular outlot for the development and I don't know. We talked a little" bit about changing it and I didn't really see any nodding heads or shaking heads back there as far as whether they would want to propose something new at this point. 1 Emmings: I look at it this way. This is an aesthetic issue. It's something we probably can get into trouble trying to dictate to some extent. I don't know. I don't know how much leeway we've got and I don't 1 know how much they bought into the plan. And if they want to take plan to the City Council, I guess they've got the right to do that. Batzli:' Oh sure I think so. I don't know whether they looked at this II building and thought this is it. This is our building or if they thought we really would rather do something a little bit differently. I Emmings: We don't want to go into that at midnight I don't think, do you? 1 Planning Commission Meeting i August 7, 1'91 - Page 16 Batzli: Well I don't know. If it was a 2 or 3 word sentence from one of I them, I'd lo, e to hear it. Krauss: A couple comments. First of all we're trying to expedite this for I the bank. The shopping center's supposed to break ground in early Septemh:er. The bank as I understood it is to open by a date certain under their State Charter... We were going to try and hussle this onto the I Council meeting for actually next Monday if possible. If you'd like them to work on this further, we could still get on the second meeting in August and give them a little more time to work. Relative to the condition in the PUD agreement, my personal response is I'd be hesitant to drop it. Whether or not this design meets your standards, I think the provision's a good one. I'd ask you to keep in mind that there are four additional out building sites. Well three additional besides this one that you're going I to be looking at and we keep hearing rumors that Hardee's and places like that are interested in it. I have been in meetings with Hardee's where they tell you that this is the building 49 -A with an orange roof and I want to be able to tell them to get lost when they do that. Farmakc Well is it possible to modify it rather than drop it? Putting . limitations °ay on the size of the building... Emmings: You can leave it in there and you can give them some leeway to do what we panted done. You can say, it has to be compatible with the other iI buildings there and what that means we can decide what that means. Farm.:tkes: Well compatible is different than conforming. Krauss: Well I think compatible was the work that was used. Also, to the architects credit, whether or not they achieved their goal, they did set out in mind with the fact that this is a corner property and that there I should, you can't make it look exactly like the shopping center but you've got to recognize that you've got Country Suites across the street and then there has to be some sort of transition. Again, I don't know if they I achieved it or not but that's why they're going with this kind of a roof which mixes in more with the hotel than the shopping center. Ahrens: You know Paul, to back up to the first thing you just said. I I don't think that whether or not we're trying to expedite this to get it to the City Council should, I don't think that should dictate any decision we should ever make. We live with these buildings for 20 -25 years. If we I think it's ugly now, it's going to be worse then. Emmings: Okay. Is there a motion on the subdivision? You didn't get an I answer to your question did you? Batzli: Well no. . I I Emmings: Why don't you ask a specific question. Batzli: How would you guys feel about doing some more design on the I building or don't you want to? Do you want to stick with what you've got and modify it slightly? 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 7, 1991 - Page 19 1 Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision #91 -8 as shown on the plat dated July 29, 1991 with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid at time building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements: a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of all I lots. b. A 10' x 30' utility easement located to the southeast corner of the I bank building running in favor of NSP. c. The final plat for the entire Market Square shopping center must be I submitted to staff for approval and filed with Carver County. The plat needs to be revised, as does this requested lot division to accommodate the 10 feet of right -of -way along West 78th Street that is being required by the City. d. Cross access easements need to be provided over the south driveway and northern 30 feet of the newly created parcel located south of tha hank on Outlot A. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Erhart: I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to the PUD #89 -2 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991. Emmings: I'll second the motion. Is there any discussion? Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of an amendment to PUD #89 -2 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991_ All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Batzli: Actually on that last one. Shouldn't that be with the changes reflected in the other motion? Emmings: What are you talking about? Batzli: I'm talking about the PUD amendment. We made changes to this. Then we were recommending it as shown on the plans. Emmings: No, the amendment to the PUD. What have we done in amending the PUD? Krauss: What have you done? Emmings: Yeah. Why do we have. to amend the PUD? Krauss: Because the PUD shows a blank spot where the bank is supposed to be. 1