The URL can be used to link to this page

10a. McDonalds Corp. Preliminary Plat i I Y a OF CITY P.C. DATE: 4/4/90 _ i t . CHANHASSEN C.C. DATE: 4/23/90 CASE NO: 90-4 Site 90-4 SUB II Prepared by: Olsen/v I STAFF REPORT . I I PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for Expansion of McDonalds and Preliminary Plat kilo ty G,~ „,{'n'-.r r I Z o-d�;�,a_V Q �,e_'a .�_._�__■• __ ILOCATION: Hwy. 5 and Dakota Avenue JDett ScCa I. -,«Cl illW I 04E APPLICANT: McDonalds 1650 W. 82nd Street, Suite 900 Bloomington, MN 55431 IAttn: Ray Schleck I PRESENT ZONING: BH, Highway and Business 9 Y IACREAGE: 99,804 s. f. DENSITY: IADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- Hwy. 5 IS- RSF; single family E- BH; -vacant I1111.1 W- BH; Sinclair IP.m WATER AND SEWER: Available t� iPHYSICAL CHARAC. : Site has existing restaurant with the remainder of the site undeveloped. I2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial I �Rr�a \ ' ;4'■ � v —_ , ( � — i-;-. 7000 R -ate ,� Al . ;�„il 10E- ■ . � ' ■ � ► ISIV Ea �` s. \ . 10��C` --7100� _44.6, 4 1 * ,,� ' • "Ii SMADOWNERE� h worm I_tiin► ,+ t 111 i� +�'�II...�►►!`. O�� , am) 7200 %A 01%. INgrv� ' L A NE. � � l o n oP ys, aila ..Mr. ■�iii yopoSCLI Ari MOO _ _ .. ._ LJ 2 04100 Li. matisaviJirigir.,,- rire.--411:0. .... 0 0 0 si.36.:: a. 1111 1.11■111111" diassis • „, \x,,,r- - \, , kftl,,,,.. 4...14 tor-, t.• le, . 14141:0)1` o ro pai: Vi2, 4.11P47":if-Angi Cil r____ VA I .wal,,it.,-4 '4(tt; -"-. i 0_4 , ,-12 _LI1 1 .1 ,a,mi■g-w--i.-ii j ts. . Aiiik il. 1 sitto--24; I, , :./ . , _ lik,...1- ---OI i ' ii1F1yA J13 / ,1,'4 - it ..►-10111G1 "“-• / Mir- .4.3 �ii a,� illifil !!'4:�•I..111 , 7T1M ST Et miji.-- inagm 1 i 11: ■111111 11i111p- A ��i.: .111111 � ,�....__ , "--- -:".T..N ■i : iilq .'� - 0m Agra ti De "P----- OE P -------waTigli fti;iii 40% i cm" • 0 10P ‘ r....... ... ..iim- ,-.-.------ 1 1, .. la-. "1; itir Mr . 44-e- / ■ a , - --TY r� _ - . .. .. 4, ` ' o g■01 . te � 'w it i - k a : 't 1 P' 8100- W • : a �`Y - a i ` la ill A II gin c i i�e�---------- •,r- 0200 I..) ffl33 I - ifr"ti# Ili — -- - •-• . _ , ., e3oo SUSAN 4)4,1 :— �1 _ • . e♦� R/C E M SN LAKE ip 1 �! r 1 IF McDonald's Restaurant IF April 4, 1990 Page 2 ' PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicants are requesting approval to expand the existing ' McDonald's Restaurant located at the intersection of Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive East. Plans call for an expansion of approximately 850 square feet on the south side of the building to accommodate an expanded seating area. The parking lot will also be expanded 90 feet to the east to accommodate additional parking and circulation. Most of the parking lot expansion will be for trucks that currently stop at the restaurant but which cannot be accommodated on the site at present due to restricted turning movements and lack of appropriate parking. The restaurant was originally approved in 1982. At that time, the proposal generated significant neighborhood opposition resulting in a lawsuit wherein the City's interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance was questioned. The suit was ultimately won by the City and the restaurant was built under the old C-2 zoning. This district no longer exists. The site is presently zoned Highway Business (BH) which lists fast food restaurants as a permitted use. Staff has worked with the applicants to develop and refine the expansion plans. The site has several inherent, grandfathered variances under current regulations. While these could not be eliminated due to site constraints, attempts were made to minimize them. In addition, staff envisions there being something of a trade-off in exchange for improved site design, most notably in landscaping. The site plan is reasonably well designed and represents only a minor departure from the existing one. Internal circulation and site entrances remain largely unchanged. The site plan is designed to accommodate and provide right-of-way required relative to the upgrading of Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive. The Hwy. 5 improvements will have the effect of moving the traffic lanes much closer to the north property line, an area that currently has a setback of only 5 feet from the right-of-way. The drive-thru remains in the same location but it has only a 7 foot setback from the Dakota Avenue ROW. Due to the limitations of the site, its proximity to adjacent ROW and a desire to maintain, and if possible, improve buffering for the single family neighborhood to the south, a sensitively designed landscaping plan is required. The current plan serves as a good starting point but in our opinion is inadequate to meet the goal. A number of improvements have been proposed including the use of more coniferous trees and berms along Lake Drive, more screen plantings around the drive-thru lane and around the trash enclosure. In addition, road construction will result in the need to relocate impacted trees and to reconstruct a retaining wall that was built in the public right-of-way. .1 1' McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 ' Page 3 No new city utility service will be required. Original plans called for directing site drainage into two low areas that will be located largely off-site to the east. Staff is recommending that catch basin be utilized instead to direct drainage into the city storm water system. ' During review of the plans, it bacame apparent that the parking lot expansion was going to impact the low area near Lake Drive, which staff has determined to be a Class B wetland. Given the nature of the site plan which provides little design flexibility and of the wetland, staff is proposing that the developer be allowed to relocate and enhance the wetland and is further recommending that an appropriate conservation easement be provided over it. However, no wetland alteration permit has yet been requested for the project and one must be approved to allow work to go forward. Due to ' public hearing requirements we could not get this request on this meeting. We are recommending that the project be allowed to proceed conditioned on the applicants obtaining a wetland ' alteration permit and completing the work prior to requesting a certificate of occupancy for the new building addition. Work on the wetland would also be covered under the landscaping financial guarantees. IThe preliminary plat request is fairly simple. Staff has no problem with the request conditioned on provision of necessary easements and right-of-way. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending the site plan and subdivision requests be approved subject to appropriate conditions. ' BACKGROUND ' Plans for the restaurant were submitted to the City in 1982. Staff recommended its approval under the C-2 zoning that was then in force. Local residents raised objections to the request due to traffic, noise and related considerations. The Planning Commission recommended denial on April 8, 1982, and on April 19th, the City Council failed to approve it on a 2 to 2 vote. On April 30th, McDonalds initiated a suit against the City. On May 3rd, ' Councilman Geving, who was not present at the City Council meeting, moved reconsideration of the item and on May 10th, the McDonalds proposal was approved. Area residents brought suit against the City on a series of procedural grounds including inappropriate motions leading to project approval and interpretation of the ordinance by the City. They requested monetary damages. ' The case was taken up to the Minnesota Supreme Court who ultimately found the residents position to be without merit and dismissed the case. II McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 4 ARCHITECTURE/GENERAL SITE PLAN The proposed site plan extensively utilizes the existing structure ' and layout to minimize costs. This is cost effective but does not allow most of the sites current limitations to be adequately resolved. The building is wedged into the western side of the parcel with the drive-thru located in a narrow area adjacent to the property line. The drive-thru is lane located only 7 feet from the property line while parking stalls adjacent to Hwy. 5 are located 5 feet from the right-of-way. Relocation and expansion of the road will make these undersized setbacks much more visible. Current ordinances require a 25 foot setback for parking and drive aisles. The western curb cut is uncomfortably close to the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection and results in a difficult internal circulation pattern. However, short of a complete redevelopment of the site, these concerns cannot be fully addressed. The current proposal will utilize the underlying site plan, maintaining building location, curb cuts and internal circulation pattern. Staff views this situation as a trade-off where we work with existing business to allow expansion while requiring site improvements instead of full ordinance compliance. We believe that this goal has largely been achieved. Under the plan the City and State will acquire the ROW necessary for the proposed road improvements. Parking stalls along Hwy. 5 are being relocated to increase the setback. Lastly, in light of the trade-off, limited setback areas and a desire to provide buffering for the adjacent residential neighborhood, we expect an above average landscaping plan. The building architecture is designed to match the existing structure. If this was a new building we would probably request improved architectural treatment but under the circumstances we are satisfied with the proposal. PARKING/INTERNAL CIRCULATION/ACCESS ' Site access will remain unchanged and the two curb cuts on lake Drive will continue to be utilized. The eastern curb cut is "in- only" while the western cut is an exit only. Staff would normally , recommend a single curb cut or at least a relocation to the east away from the corner to improve traffic safety. Lake Drive is going to be upgraded this summer and will carry significantly more traffic after it is connected to Dell Road. However, given the underlying site plan, it is not possible to make drastic changes. We note that the curb cuts have been revised to better accommodate turning movements from the relocated street. The revised alignment of Lake Drive will reduce the magnitude of the curves in front of the site which will help improve sight distance and safety. .1 ' McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 5 Internal circulation on the existing site is poor, particularly at the exit. Turning movements are too restricted. The site also c -:root now accommodate trucks that frequently stop at the Restaurant with the result that they have parked on the street and ' use unsafe turning movements to negotiate the area. The first problem cannot be resolved given the site limitations. The new site plan does resolve the issue of truck movements and parking quite well. Parking is provided for up to 8 trucks and internal circulation has been improved to allow them to exit the property. The trucks cannot use the drive-thru lane. 1 City parking requirements are exceeded. Code requires 64 parking stalls where as 78 will be provided. ' Given the limitations of the site, staff finds internal circulation, parking and access to be acceptable with several relatively minor alterations. On the attached plan we have illustrated modifications to two traffic islands that we believe ' will improve traffic safety while expanding internal green space. We have also illustrated removal of the remaining 3 parking stalls located west of the trash enclosure. This will provide the 25 foot setback that is required in this area. Lastly, we are proposing that the parking stall nearest the exit be eliminated to minimize turning conflicts, increase the setback from 3 feet to 13 feet and allow for additional screening for the residential area. With ' these revisions, the site will lose 5 parking stalls but will still provide 73, 9 in excess of the required 64. ' GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site plan shows a retaining wall on the westerly lot line. Upon field inspection it was shown that the retaining wall actually is 3 feet outside of the property line and therefore, should be re,:ccated onto the lot at the owner's expense. Relocation of the wall is required to allow road construction to go forward. The ' wall is also in poor condition and is in need of repair. Original plans called for directed site drainage overland into two ' low/wet areas located to the east. Staff has since determined that water should be directed to catch basins and run into city storm sewer in Lake Drive. This will avoid over land flow and flow out ' into the public right-of-way. Appropriate plans should be provided for approval by the city. Project approval by the Riley-Purgatory- Bluff Creek Watershed District is required. Site grading is minimal due to the developed state of the area. An erosion control plan should be provided for approval. I. McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 6 I LANDSCAPING Given the site's limitations, a well designed landscape plan is the I primary tool for resolving the issues that have been revised pertaining to screening and buffering the site. The proposed landscaping plan attempts to respond to these concerns but in our opinion it falls short. We are proposing several modifications to resolve these issues including: 1. Provide a 2-3 foot high berm along the Hwy. 5 frontage in those areas where it is possible to do so. Landscaping materials, which are for the most part shrubs, would be placed on the berm to screen the lower portions of the parking area. Coniferous trees should be placed around the trash enclosure. 2. The most critical landscaping problem occurs between Hwy. 5 ' and Lake Drive along the drive-thru lane. Green space is extremely restricted and the problem will be exacerbated by roadway and retaining wall construction. At the same time we believe this area should be highly screened to avoid visual impact and prevent car headlights from shining into the adjacent streets. We believe that the ash trees located along Dakota Avenue and the 3 conifers at the Hwy. 5 intersection will need to be relocated. The applicants landscape architect should seek to use a combination of relocated and new plantings along with some sort of dense, conifers shrub that grows to a 5-6 foot minimum height, to screen this area. 3. Use berming and additional shrubs along the Lake Drive exposure. Add coniferous trees to reduce headlight glare from the cars in the drive-thru which will otherwise shine into the residential area. The applicant should be aware that under current ordinances financial guarantees are required for landscaping improvements. LIGHTING/SIGNAGE No changes are proposed to site lighting or signage. ' COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - BH DISTRICT Lot Frontage Depth Hardsurface Parking Area Coverage Stalls Ordinance 20,000 100' 150' 65% 64 ' Proposed 96,479 165' 340' 65% 78* J I ' McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 7 Parking Building Setback Setback ' Ordinance 25' exterior 25' Proposed N-10** E-22 ' N-100' E-180' S-13 ' W-7** S-71' W-30' * 74 when 4 stalls are deleted according to staff ' recommendations ** Existing variances ' *** 13 ' setback will result from staff modifications. Current plan has 4 foot setback PRELIMINARY PLAT - CHAN HAVEN PLAZA 2ND ADDITION ' To accommodate the revised site plan an additional 91 foot of property is being acquired from the parcel located to the east. The parcel to the east is currently vacant. ' In our opinion, the subdivision request is fairly simple. The remaining undeveloped lot which is 7.96 acres, will exceed all minimum district requirements and can accommodate future ' development. RIGHT-OF-WAY/GRADING/DRAINAGE/EASEMENTS The City is in the process of upgrading Lake Drive East. The widening of Lake Drive East will require acquisition of additional right-of-way that directly affects the plat. The preliminary plat ' reflects the future alignment of Lake Drive East as "proposed public utility and roadway easements". Staff is recommending that the easement be dedicated as right-of-way along Lake Drive East. In addition, the typical front, rear, side and utility and drainage easements shall be incorporated into the final plat with the exception of the east line of Lot 2, Block 1, where a 10 foot wide ' easement is recommended instead of the typical 5 foot. There is a need for additional right-of-way to be dedicated along Dakota Avenue for its future expansion. Exhibit 2 of the Engineering memo illustrates the additional right-of-way which should be dedicated as part of the final plat. i 1 I I McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 8 WETLAND There is a Class B wetland located in the southeast corner of the McDonald's site. This wetland was also one of the wetlands involved in the City's wetland alteration permit application for the improvements to Lake Drive East. The McDonald's site plan will be impacting the wetland by the expansion of the parking lot. The southeast corner of the expanded parking area is located just within the edge of the wetland. The plans that were provided by the applicant indicated that the wetland area was not going to be impacted by the development of the site. Staff overlayed the plans by OSM who prepared the plans for the City's wetland alteration permit which included on-site surveys of the wetlands existing on the site. The OSM plan shows that the actual location of the wetland is such that the parking improvements do impact the westerly edge of the wetland. Therefore, a wetland alteration permit is required. Staff was originally under the impression by the applicants plans ' that the wetland was not impacted and a wetland alteration permit notice has not been processed. Staff has published a public hearing for a wetland alteration permit and will be processing such at the next Planning Commission meeting. Since a wetland alteration permit is required, site plan approval will be contingent upon receipt of a wetland alteration permit. Staff will be recommending that a certificate of occupancy for the expansion to the McDonald's building will not be issued until a wetland alteration permit is received and any recommendations of the wetland alteration permit have been met. I RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following 1 motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Request ' #90-4 without variances subject to the following conditions: 1. Apply for, obtain and complete a wetland alteration permit as outlined in the staff report. 2. Revise parking and internal circulation plans to improve circulation and provide increased setbacks as outlined in the staff report. 3. Revise drainage plans to utilize catch basin and storm sewer. 1 Utilize concrete curbing in the parking lot. Provide an erosion control plan. Project approval by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District is required. , 11 I McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 9 ' 4. Revise landscaping plans as outlined in the staff report. A financial guarantee for site improvements is required. An addition $10, 000 guarantee for completing required wetland improvements will also be required. 5. Relocate the retaining wall onto the McDonalds site, providing ' a minimum of 1 foot clearance from the right-of-way. 6. Approval and filing of the plat is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Staff recommends approval of Preliminary plat #90-4 without variances subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide the easements outlined in the staff report and ' described on the attached illustration. 2. Dedicate illustrated right-of-way to the City. ' 3. Enter into a development contract with the City and provide necessary financial guarantees prior to having the City sign off on the final plat. ' ATTACHMENTS ' 1. Proposed changes 2. Memo from Sr. Engineering Technician dated March 28, 1990. 3 Memo from Building Official dated February 23, 1990. 4 . Letter from Steve Kirchman dated January 24, 1990. 5. Letter from MnDOT dated March 21, 1990. 6. Reduced copies of plans. 7. Application. ' STAFF UPDATE ' The Planning Commission discussed the proposal extensively at the April 4th meeting. The commissioners generally agreed with the conditions of the staff report. One neighbor residing on Hidden Lane raised objections to the proposal due to increased traffic, lighting and experience of having trash blow from the site onto his property. Staff noted ' that traffic increase on Lake Drive is more a factor of its reconstruction and connection to Dell Road with construction planned for later this summer. It was also noted that the ' reconstruction would have the effect of pushing the road farther to the north away from the homes. Lighting and visual impacts were discussed with the Planning Commission ultimately requiring improved landscaping similar to what had been proposed in the staff I II McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 10 ' report. As to the trash concern, the McDonalds operation indicated that they regularly police the area and would continue to do so. 11 If there is a problem, the resident was invited to contact the manager and it would be quickly rectified. As to the wetland alteration permit, McDonalds representative thought that the site plan could be modified to completely eliminate any direct impact. Staff agreed that if this could be done, the need for the wetland alteration permit could be eliminated. The Planning Commission recommended that the site plan and subdivision be approved subject to the conditions of the staff report modified to include a condition proposed by the Fire Marshal relative to handicapped parking, having staff confirm the lot coverage requirements and compliance with the wetland alteration permit if necessary. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the developer has cooperated with staff to resolve the issues that were raised. Site landscaping has been greatly improved and currently, in staff's opinion, represents a state-of-the-art proposal, off-site buffering of direct views of the site are greatly improved. Internal circulation and parking lot design have been revised according to staff's recommendations with the result that safety will be improved and the amount of green space has been increased. Storm drainage has been revised to utilize a catch basin connecting to the city storm sewer allowing the elimination of a spillage into an adjacent wetland and direct flow into Lake Drive from the eastern curb cut. The applicants have cooperated in agreeing to provide all necessary easements and right-of-way necessary for improvements to Lake Drive, Dakota Avenue and Hwy. 5. Architectural plans have been provided and are acceptable. We want to stipulate that no new signage is being authorized by this approval. Revised drainage plans are also acceptable. The storm pipe size should be increased to 12" and erosion control established to protect the wetland. , Staff has calculated the impervious coverage to confirm the percentage as requested by the Planning Commission. Staff has found that, using the lot area provided by Schoell and Madson as part of the plat submittal, the impervious lot coverage is at 66% with a maximum allowed at 65%. Therefore, the applicant must further reduce the impervious lot coverage. As will be seen further in this report, the site improvements are within the 75 foot wetland setback and staff is recommending that the removal of some of the truck parking stalls. By doing this, the lot coverage will meet the zoning ordinance requirements. A new concern has arisen relative to the wetland located southeast of the parking lot. The actual location of the wetland was not accurately illustrated on the original plan submittals. The actual location , I I 11 McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 11 ' was determined during the wetland alteration permit review for Lake Drive improvements that was recently considered and is accurately ' illustrated on Sheet SP-2/Grading and Drainage Plan at the 934 foot elevation. The low area illustrated on previous plans was inaccurate. Staff had attempted to have this matter resolved earlier but was unable to. ' Upon review of the current plans we noted that there is an existing 55 foot setback from the identified wetland while the current Iproposal would offer a 10 foot setback. Staff believes there is sufficient reason to support a wetland ' setback variance. Our reasons include: 1. The site was initially developed before the wetland ordinance was in place. Given the existing site plan there are few if ' any opportunities to eliminate the variance. We note that the existing eastern entrance would have to be eliminated to maintain a 75 foot setback. 2. There is an existing variance for wetland setback on the site. 3. This is not a high quality wetland. It is a marginal Class B. At such time as a Comprehensive Storm Water and Wetland Plan is in place we envision being able to base wetland protection and enhancement on wetland quality. Unfortunately, the present ordinance offers no such flexibility. 4. The McDonalds site plan will result in two significant wetland ' enhancements. Storm drainage from the existing parking lot flows directly into the wetland. This type of flow typically carries debris and oils that impact water quality. The current plan will redirect the flow into a catch basin where ' it will flow into the City storm sewer, avoiding the wetland entirely. The second factor is that landscaping will be installed that has the benefit of screening the wetland from the parking lot where as today it is open. While we support the variance in concept, the magnitude of it is a ' concern. We note that if the southern two truck parking stalls are eliminated, the setback is increased to 37 feet and if three parking stalls are removed, the setback is increased to 50 feet. In light of the factors mentioned above, staff supports removing some of the parking stalls and the resulting variance (see Memo to Board of Adjustments) . One last is_suewarrants discussion. This concerns the retaining wall along Dakota Avenue. The wall is located in the city right- of-way and will need to be relocated to allow construction of the street next year. Staff and McDonalds representatives have agreed I II McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 Page 12 ' that McDonalds is obligated to relocate the wall. However, it makes sense to undertake this next year in conjunction with the street reconstruction program. Therefore, we are proposing to add a condition that will require McDonalds to relocate and reconstruct the wall when requested by the City. Staff would also allow landscaping in the area to be delayed until that time. Efforts will be made to save existing trees but if this proves to be infeasible we will work with McDonalds to have them develop an acceptable alternative plan. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves Site Plan Request #90-4 with a variance to decrease the wetland setback from 55 feet to 44 feet subject to the following conditions: 1. Receive a variance to the 75 foot wetland setback and meet any ' conditions of the variance. 2. Revise plans to increase the size of the storm sewer to 12" . Provide an erosion control plan for the site. Project approval by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District is required. , 3. The owner shall be responsible for relocating the retaining wall one foot outside of the right-of-way when requested to by 11 the City in conjunction with Dakota Avenue improvements. The applicant will revise landscaping improvements as necessary in this area due to the relocation and present a plan for staff approval. ' 4. Provide financial guarantees for landscaping improvements as required by the zoning ordinance. I 5. No additional signage is authorized by this site plan approval. 6. Provide required handicapped parking stalls and curb cuts along with appropriate identification signage. 7. Approval and filing of the plat is required prior to the issuance of building permits." PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT 1 The applicant is requesting preliminary and final plat approval. The final plat is being completed by the applicant and is providing II McDonalds Restaurant Proposal March 27, 1990 ' Page 13 the conditions as required by staff. Staff is allowing the final plat to be considered at this time to allow the City to obtain ' right-of-way necessary for the Lake Drive East improvements to proceed as scheduled. Staff recommends that the City Council also adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves preliminary and final plat for Chanhassen Haven Plaza 2nd Addition subject to the following conditions: ' 1. Provide the easements outlined in the staff report and described on the attached illustration. 2. Dedicate illustrated right-of-way to the City. 3. Provide a final plat consistent with these conditions. ' 4. Enter into a development contract with the City and provide necessary financial guarantees prior to having the City sign off on the final plat. " ADDITIONAL ATTACHMENTS ' - Planning Commission minutes dated April 4, 1990 Revised site and building plans I I I Planning Commission Meeting April 4, 1990 - Page 3 Erhart moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend " approval of Conditional Use Permit *90-2 for an Italian Restaurant to be located at Seven Forty-One Crossroads Center as shown on the plans dated March 29, 1990 and with the following condition: ' 1. The applicant shall provide its own trash enclosure at the rear of the restaurant which shall be enclosed with the same materials as the I exterior of the shopping center . All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: MCDONALD'S CORPORATION, LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE EAST AND DAKOTA AVENUE, ZONED BH, HIGHWAY AND BUSINESS DISTRICT: A. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOTS 1 AND 2, CHAN HAVEN PLAZA FOR THE EXPANSION OF PARKING AREA. ' B. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR EXPANSION OF RESTAURANT. Public Present:_ ' Name Address ' Gene Borg 6897 Chaparell Lane , Owner/Operator Ray Schleck Construction Engineer for McDonald's Tom ' Paul Krauss presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad called the publill hearing to order . Gene Borg: I 'm Gene Borg. I live at 6897 Chaparrel Lane . I 'm the owner' operator of McDonald's . Ray Schleck: I 'm Ray Schleck. I 'm a construction engineer . I work for McDonald 's Corporation. ' Gene Borg: I guess what we'd like to do is go through it one at a time. That seems like the easiest way on any problems that may develop instead of talking about it all . Just go through like maybe start with landscaping since it's on the screen. However you'd like to do that. Can answer any questions and stuff like that. Conrad: If you had something to talk to us about, go ahead . Usually we'll go through and every one of us will have a specific question and we'll ask you directly later on so it's up to you. If you'd like to talk, about what staff recommended or have any problems with it, you could do • that. Otherwise you could wait for our comments later on. Gene Borg: Okay, on wetlands for example. I guess I was misinformed. I, didn't think we were encroaching on that. II Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 4 Ray Schleck: That was kind of new news to us . Krauss: Well , Ray during the course of the meetings that we had with you , I/ we asked on several occasions for more detailed information on where that feature was. Ultimately we figured it ourselves when we had the final plan set in here and where the grading limits were . Mr . Hempel over there figured it out and we realized at that point that there was encroachment ' into that area . Gene Borg: You said something, I forget what it was a little earlier ' about . . . Ray Schleck: Wetland enhancement? ' Gene Borg: Yeah , what is that? Krauss: Well basically your going to be filling a portion of the wetland ' over here . What we were asking is that a commensurately sized piece of area on that side be excavated and that the wetland bottom be sculpted a little bit and that the wetland vegetation be established there . . . ' Gene Borg: What about if we took those parking stalls out of the corner there? How about if we pulled those out and changed the line? ' Krauss: If you could avoid filling into the wetland, sure . Gene Borg: And then avoid filling here? ' Ray Schleck: The other question I had was on drainage . Can we in lieu of installing a catch basin to tie into the storm sewer system , the only area of the parking lot that is draining toward that eastern curb cut . It 's not a very large area . I 'm wondering if we can 't adjust the grades there to drain into the wetlands . Hempel : Additional runoff into the wetlands , I guess there is no outlet for that wetland . As the site develops and additional runoff is contributed to that area , it will increase in size I guess over it 's size right now and there 's no outlet for it to go so eventually if we do have rainy seasons someday hopefully, it could get us back up and innudate the parking lot to a point . Ray Schleck: Yeah, you can see the area that I 'm talking about. It 's not a very large area that will be draining into that wetland. I 'm asking if it's going to impact , if we can adjust the grades to less impact the wetlands as they are now and also adjust the site plan as Gene said to eliminate some of the stalls. We're willing to work that out. ' Hempel : We looked at a more permanent solution I guess . We looked at installing storm sewer to the property line with the Lake Drive East project and letting McDonald's hook onto that and just install catch basins for the drainage situation out there would be. . . 1 Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 5 1 Ray Schleck: It will be a short run from the catch basin to the storm II sewers or how far of a run is it about? Just guessing . Hempel: I would guess 25 feet. I Ray Schleck: Is there an opportunity though? Right now the plan does show a spillway into that lower area . Is it feasible at all? Is it worll pursuing? Hempel : I guess Ray, with some modifications to your parking lot grade. Changing the drainage pattern out to the access onto Lake Drive East woul' shorten your storm sewer connection. Ray Schleck: Because now , more than half the lot drains to a low area o1 the northeast corner of the plan that 's up on the screen. That does hay an outlet . Hempel : That 's correct . Out into MnDot 's right-of-way . So the remaininj half of the parking lot would then drain south towards the wetland or you modify it out onto Lake Drive . Ray Schleck: Right . There still would be some drainage out to the eastern curb cut . Not much but some . I 'm not sure if we 're going to adjust the grades that much to accommodate that . ' Hempel : I think it 's something that could be worked out I guess between us . ' Ray Schleck: As far as landscaping and screening, I think the site plan or the landscape plan that was submitted and it's probably the third or fourth plan that we submitted to you , and each time was increased a littl' bit . On the northern side of the , on the TH 5 side of the plan , that obviously has been beefed up quite a bit from what's there now. As a matter of fact , I think most of the shrubs that are shown are not there II now. I would say probably all of them. There are a few coniferous trees , pine trees . Those three on the corner . On the corner of Dakota and TH 5. Those are there and those, Gene and I were looking at those tonight and with the salt spray from TH 5 in the winter , those trees, two of those trees are pretty well stunted. They were all planted at the sam time and the one in the middle is the only one that 's really done anything . We're a little hesitant to plan a species of tree that may not' thrive in that location. Gene Borg: I had a landscaper out and mainly I was talking about what we could do with those trees on the west side but I mentioned what was wron g! with these couple that are back here and he said it was the salt spray from TH 5 that 's stunting them and the one doesn't do that well . It's bee holding on over 5 or 6 years now but it's still not doing that well . He says it 's the salt spray. When you go to 4 lanes, the salt spray will be worse and it will be closer so I 'm not opposed to the plantings there. I would like to plant something maybe other than a bunch of evergreens that could be proposed to die in the future. Because salt and evergreens don', get along. II Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 6 Conrad: Are you talking about the west side or are you talking about the north side? ' Gene Borg: The TH 5 side . Conrad: There's some logic to that . Ray Schleck: We are interested in landscaping. Don't get us wrong at all . That 's not our , we are interested in landscaping with plants that ' are going to thrive and do well and logically putting in things that are going to make a difference and not, and I 'm not saying that staff 's recommending things that aren't going to work either but we 're trying to work it out with them . Gene Borg: Then I 've got a question . We don 't have much room on Dakota , but not Dakota , after they put the sidewalk in on Lake Drive and put in a retaining wall there . There 's only a few feet left . It was recommended for berming and planting of shrubs and different things up there . We can plant some shrubs and stuff but I don't think it 's hardly , it 's a little ' tough to berm and expect anything to live there . Krauss: The recommendation was to install berming at those points where you are able to do it . One of those points would be in this vicinity here . We had recommended that this end parking stall be taken out . . . .we have then probably enough depth around here . Here I would agree , that 's a real tough area . . . You 've got a very tough situation. There just isn't a whole lot of flexibility on that site . Gene Borg: I guess I 'm intersted in having real nice landscaping. I ' think when the McDonald's came in here, I wasn 't the owner at the time but it was probably the best landscaping this town had at that time. Since then , landscaping around town's a lot better and I want good landscaping . I 'm an operator and I want good landscaping and we 'll have good ' landscaping . My concern is , based on the last couple years of drought , is keeping this stuff alive. That 's my main concern. I have a sprinkler system and I 've been sprinkling and everything is green. . . There have t been drought seasons, I don't know if we're out of it now or not. It doesn 't look like it. If you berm around, it's the first thing to dry out. If you put plantings on that berm, they're the first ones to die. ' Then if we have a restricted watering schedule, and I don't need to water everyday . I don't need to water every other day but I want to keep it alive . A couple years ago we had a total watering ban and we were informed at that time that . . .would go dormant and live. Well , I have ' $5,000.00 that says it didn't because I replaced all that sod at McDonald's so it concerns me now we 're going to spend, I don't know, a lot of money in landscaping. I just want to keep it alive . If we're going to spend the money and keep it alive, I want to keep it alive to make it look nice . That 's my concern. And bermings don't help that in a drought . Conrad: So your concern is the berming on the southeast section? I r t II Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 7 1 Gene Borg: Well berming all over really in a drought because those are II the first things to die . If you drive around town here , a lot of things that are bermed are dead. If you go down on Kerber on those developments , all those trees are dead. They have no way of watering them so they rely' solely on rain but if we have an all out ban,and I understand that we need water for fires and stuff like that. I understand that but berms don't help that situation is all I 'm saying. And we can plant stuff in that , hedges that will grow. Grow higher and offset a berm. My main thing is to keep them alive . Or else if you can guarantee me that I 'll b able to water and keep them alive and I think if you water every fourth day you could keep something alive. 1 Krauss: We discussed that item with Mr . Schleck . . .and the last few years have been tough and when you do plant on berms , you do run more risk . I mean there are ways to stick plant material in the berm so it catches the water that runs off . Put a pot around it but there's no question that stuff dries out quicker on a berm . At the same time , we don 't have a lo of room to work on this site. We 've got a site that doesn't come close complying with current standards and we 're not asking that it comply wit current standards . What we 're asking is that they make some accomodations to the restricted nature of the site and the fact that we have homes across the street and that we have a major intersection adjacent to it all do the best job we can do . The drought that we 've had in the last 3 years is the worse one we 've had in the last 50 years. I don't know if it 's ii going to continue . I 'm not God , I can't tell you but if the drought continues , we 've indicated to Mr . Schleck that we would not require the installation of the material this year . We would have a landscape bond outstanding . If we have a severe drought again this summer , it 's fine II with us to install the material next year . Gene Borg: . . .long term landscaping because as time goes by, it should 11 look better . We 've got to plant someday and I don't want black dirt around there . When we go and do this, I want to plant landscaping . That 's what I want to do . I don't want black dirt . Conrad: Okay, when we go around the Planning Commission, we 'll get II reaction to berming versus planting or whatever . Did you have anything else? 1 Ray Schleck: On the staff report also, you sketched on some islands and I had a question on that. I think the islands that were sketched on. You 've got a larger island here and also, there is one here now but we 're, proposing to take that out. Also, finishing off this. This area right now has parking stalls to this point here. We've eliminated. . .compromise to eliminate some of that area to. . . What happens here is that this area' is restricted to truck traffic turning. The only way a truck can get out is to come back through here. This existing island. . .to allow for a large turning radius to allow a truck to make this turn. Having an island therll I think is going to restrict that . . . Krauss: Then the car that is parked there will get crushed? IIRay Schleck: Exactly. II Planning Commission Meeting April 4, 1990 - Page 8 ' Gene Borg: We get semi 's in there now that park on that edge . We 've never had an accident there and I tell you what . It 's tough in there . Those ' semi driver 's got to know what they 're doing in there . Really know what they're doing. But so far we haven't had an accident and I think with our plan, it 's a lot better than it ever was. Ray Schleck: As far as green , percentage of green area , we comply with that . ' Krauss: You're right on the numbers. Conrad: Is that right? See that doesn 't even look close visually . So ' what 's the lot coverage? Ray Schleck: There 's a 20 foot setback area in here that 's all green. ' Gene Borg: And there will be more green area when we pull out those stalls to accommodate for wetland . ' Krauss: The allowance is for 65% and that 's what they're going to be at . Conrad: Boy , that 's just hard to imagine . Simply because your setbacks ' are so minimal . In fact I really don 't believe it . I think that 's my biggest problem and again, I want to hear you talk but there 's sure a lot of asphalt there and staff is saying greenery . There 's got to be because you 're really, there 's a lot of asphalt in that and we're not trying to have Chanhassen have a lot of asphalt . We like to break it up . We like to buffer and I hear you 're sensitive to that but still , that does not look like our 65% coverage . Ray Schleck: But there are a lot of additional areas out in here . . .along here as well . Every square inch of course is counted so I can understand where, but this area here . . . ' Krauss: That would be fine. The primary purpose of that island is to protect the cars that are parked adjacent to it . ' Ray Schleck: This area here. . .just asphalt for asphalt sake . ' Conrad: Okay, anything else? Ray Schleck: What did we touch on Paul? ' Krauss: I don't know. Ray Schleck: I think we're all set. Is there anything else in here Paul that I might have missed? Krauss: There's e s been some question about the retaining wall along Dakota but that 's a matter that's being worked out between the owner and the City Engineer . The question becomes one of design of the road improvement iself . The existing Mc0onald's retaining wall is built in the city I II Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 9 I right-of-way. The City needs almost every square inch of that to widen I Dakota and put the sidewalk back in so there's some fine tuning of the design going on right now to see whether or not those trees that are the right now can stay with the newly located middle . I don't have the answers yet . Ray Schleck: Yeah , I talked to the Barton-Aschmann engineers that are ji designing that Dakota , widening of Dakota and basically he said, well th State 's not requiring a sidewalk. The City wants a sidewalk and I can understand why you need a connection over to the, whatever that greenwayAl is or what do you call it? That 's fine. I couldn't find any record tha we built it . I don 't know who built it . I assume we did. I don't know what contractor did it but how it got where it is, that I don't know either . How it got snuck past the City or if it was just put in because the sidewalk was there and it was why not make it look better or whateve at the time . So we 'll have to work something out with that . I think that 's it . Can you think of anything else Gene? ' Conrad: Okay , thanks . I 'm sure we 'll have questions later on for sure . Any other public comments? Yes sir . Tom Kursonas: My name is Tom Kursonas and I live in the residential area right behind McDonald 's and I thought I 'd register my objections to the increased size of that parking lot . The amount of traffic that I and my � neighbors see right now is not something that we desired when we moved i , before McDonald's came . At nighttime the way McDonald's is laid out right now with my house being in direct headlight range , I get to look at the II headlights and during the summertime in my backyard coming out of McDonald's . The amount of trash that gets blown into my yard and down the street and down Lake Drive East . If anybody would ever take a walk to g down there and look . We were told at the time it was coming in that they would pick it up and get out and take care of that. Nobody comes around and picks up the trash. I can pick up during the 1ummertime trash bags in a week. Maybe they pick up around their property but we get the rest of it. Now I 'm looking at semi-trailer trucks coming in and having a huge parking lot further on down which means increased traffic and noise in the evening. Dinner time especially when people come in there . We get all kinds of automobile traffic noise now. All and all it does not, in our area , it does not look like something that's beneficial to our residentia neighborhood. I listened to the Planner talking about what's good for McDonald's or for the semi-trailer drivers so they can come in and buy II their burgers. I didn't hear one thing concerned about the residential area . So thank you very much. Conrad: Thanks for your comments. Other comments? , Emmings moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All vote in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Ellson: I started getting a little confused. There 's no outdoor dining is there? 1 Gene Borg: No. 1 Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 10 Ellson: When this originally came in in '82, I don't know how thoroughly we went through the thing . I know some people when they propose something to us and say you know , additional expansion someday. Was that proposed originally back in '82 that there was the possibility of an expansion someday? Krauss: I read through the file. I guess I wasn't specifically looking for it but I don't recall there being a concept showing the expansion . Ellson: I don't know that we can prevent them from doing that but I agree with staff that they 're on the border of even meeting a lot of the things and I think we should be able to ask them for the berming . We ask an awful lot of people for berming and I know that everybody 's intention is to have all the plants live and things like that so I think he 's in the same situation that we've put a lot of other people that are developing in asking for a berm and I agree that in some of those areas it might not be worthwhile but I think in the corners especially , maybe that would protect the trash from flying out if we had more barriers or something like that . I can see changing the landscaping plan to your approval . If it 's not pine trees , if it 's something else that accomplishes what staff would want , I 'm not opposed to allowing the landscape plan to be modified as long as staff 's in accordance with it . But nothing else . Emmings: If they modify the parking lot in that corner by the wetland , would they still need a wetland alteration permit because they 're doing work close to the wetland or not? Krauss: It 's a Class B wetland so they would not . • Emmings: They would not . Well , there 's a lot of things that have gotten changed as we sat and discussed this here so it 's a little hard to know exactly what we 're doing . I suppose the thing to do maybe is to leave the language in for the wetland alteration permit and then if they change the plan, you can drop that as a requirement . Is that the way we should do it? Krauss: Yes sir . I would hope that all these issues should be resolved, would be resolved prior to going to the City Council . Emmings: When you look at page 6. At the top it talks about the proposed parking setbacks. It says that there's 25 feet exterior . I 'm not sure what exterior means. Krauss: There is a separate setback standard for interior parking . On this east side over here, there's another parking lot on the other side I believe. It goes down to 10 foot . Emmings: Alright . Then underneath where it says proposed, in all four directions it does not meet the ordinance . Is that right? Krauss: It meets it on the east side which is that reduced standard . Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 13 effectiveness. There are a number of situations where property owners I developing sites have been required to put some landscaping on somebody else 's property because that 's the only effective spot for it to go. You may want to consider requiring installation of some trees on the back lines of those home sites as well . Particularly where the drive-thru comes through. Erhart: Let me think about that one a bit . That isn't where I was goincl but you brough it up , I don 't know . Where's the trash coming from? Where's the trash coming from? Is it people throwing stuff out? Not using the trash bins inside? 11 Tom Kursonas: We get a certain number of walkers in our area plus we get people that drive out of the drive-thru and it takes them how long to get their stuff unwrapped and it goes out the window . Where it comes from , i1 comes out of McDonald 's . It 's their stuff . It comes out of cars or anybody walking. There aren 't that many walkers there to . . . but it 's the drivers . If you go down Lake Drive East , like I said , it 's loaded and it � gets into our yard and you get tired of picking the stuff up. Erhart: Gene , what do you do now to try to control that? Gene Borg: We do send people out to pick up garbage . Somebody called a couple weeks ago . We were picking up along the trees there . . .and we got call from someone who lives down further . We didn't go down far enough . She called us and said , I seen your guy out there and he didn 't come down far enough so we went down and picked up the rest of it . I don't know if_ we could do more . Erhart: I was wondering , is there like, when you go out of the post office you 've got a place you put your envelopes in and you don't have toel leave your car . Would it make sense to have a trash bin at the exit of of the drive-thru? Gene Borg: Well we could. When McDonald's was first built , they had somIl sort of thing that came up. People could throw their garbage in . At that time it. . .It served it's purpose. The problem you've got is the reason why McDonald's doesn't have them anymore, people would be not paying I attention, get too close to their cars and scrape up their cars and run things over and things like that . So which problem is worse , I don't know. el a Ray Schleck: Most people miss those things. Erhart: Make the problem worse huh? Conrad: Well they were always on the right hand side and the driver 's on the left hand side so as you exit, you can't get it there . You know you 're flipping it over your car trying to. But that is a unique situation here . That is an exit only so the trash container could be on the left hand. The other side . 1' r f Planning Commission Meeting IIApril 4, 1990 - Page 14 IGene Borg: We have trash containers on the parking, physical but there 's none right at the exit . I Erhart: Well I tend to think whoever , someone made the statement that they miss, I tend to think that there's as good a probability that you 'd contribute to the problem than solving it. I think at a minimum though Iyou could put some signs out that . I don 't know if there's any signs now . Gene Borg: There's a $500.00 fine for littering in this state. I Erhart: What , putting the signs out? We have a sign ordinance that wouldn't allow it probably. Do not litter sign. What I was thinking was adding . . . IGene Borg: We could put a sign up . I 'm not opposed to that . I Erhart: I agree with the comment that I think additional landscaping probably would help with the trash. Regarding the berm, we 've committed a lot to landscaping on top of the berm in the City now for a lot of years and boy, you bring up a valid point . Yeah, berms tend to dry out faster I than level ground but if we 're going to react on this site to that potential problem , we have a much bigger problem to deal with . I guess maybe what we ought to think about , the whole problem on a bigger scale if I that is a problem , particularly if we have one more year of drought I suppose . Let 's hope that we don 't so I guess I 'd prefer not to respond to that particular problem and assume that we aren't going to have a drought . I But if we do , I think it 's everybody 's having the same problem Gene . The other thing is , I 'm a little relunctant to switch to deciduous trees along TH 5 without exploring a little bit the various types of evergreen tree 's tolerance to salt spray. Have we don't any of that? Do you know Iwhat species is up there now? Probably a Norway Pine. Gene Borg: Norway? Because I was talking about Blue Spruce and they said I they wouldn 't do well . I also have a limit on trees there . The variance on that power line to come through, I can't plant anything that will grow 15 feet tall . . . IErhart: Well Norway Pines will grow a lot taller than 15 feet. ' Gene Borg: Most pines will grow 15 feet tall . IErhart: Well that adds another piece of data . IEmmings: How about arborvitae? That will stay around 15 feet? Ellson: I 'm sure they can figure out one. I Erhart: Well I was going to suggest Austrian Pine but they've obviously bigger too. Anyway, my point is, I 'm reluctant to switch to something without exploring some kind of evergreen that would. . . IKrauss: We are too because clearly , I mean you 're talking about the most intensive part of the site and not screening it for 6 months of the year Planning Commission Meeting II' April 4 , 1990 - Page 15 I is an issue . But these are the kinds of things we can work out or will I work out with them prior to going to the Council . Erhart: Another thing is , it would seem to me that , was it your request Paul to remove the end of that island? Is that what the dot 's there? , Krauss: Which? Erhart: You interjected the dots? To remove the north end of that II island. Emmings: He wanted it back in. I Erhart: Oh , you wanted to put it back in? Krauss: This thing? I Erhart: Yeah. Krauss: We wanted to restore the traffic island there for the reason , as trucks went through there , if you park there , you should have a reasonabl expectation that your car 's going to be there when you get out . Erhart: Well my point is that we ought to take that parking lot out as opposed to saying at your own risk . I mean they can still put their car there even if the line 's not there at their own risk but it doesn 't make ' lot of sense to encourage that activity. I 've got one last point , are we going to remove , are we going to put in real curb cuts here as opposed to these jawbreakers that you 've got now? If you answer yes, I won't even ' ask you about it . Gene Borg: Whatever the City puts in there . That 's a rolled curb . . .city' standard . Erhart: Well we torn them out on West 79th Street and put in real curb ' cuts, thank goodness. Can we do that here too? Hempel: Yes. As a part of the Lake Drive project we are going to provid a concrete apron, typical industrial apron into the site. Both of them s it will be much smoother . Erhart: Great. How many trucks come into this place now? I Gene Borg: I 'd just be guessing. We'll get 3 or 4, maybe 5 a day. Sometimes more. Sometimes less. I think we only had 2 of them today. 0 course I 'm not watching every minute. Erhart: You're expecting then that by putting this in you're going to increase that volume? I Gene Borg: I don't know if it will increase it or not. . . I was doing this to pull them off the road. I II Planning Commission Meeting ' April 4, 1990 - Page 16 Erhart: But right now they 're parking along . . . Gene Borg: They 're parking along the edge . Erhart: Along Lake Drive East? ' Gene Borg: Well no, they're parking. The guys that don't feel confident about coming in there , park over there. The guys that feel confident about it , they park right on the bottom side of that semi parking where the existing curb line is and it doesn 't leave a lot of room for cars to ' back out . We haven't had any accidents but it has potential . Erhart: Okay , that 's all the points I had. Batzli : Jo Ann, do you have an overhead of the preliminary plat? Can you show me on there what is the piece that they 're adding on to the 79 feet or the 90 feet or whatever the heck it is they 're adding? Why don 't you ' trace the whole piece there . Olsen: Is this right? ' Krauss: Yep . ' Batzli : Okay , so it 's the dotted line on the map there? Olsen: Yes . Batzli : So the current solid line on the map shows what 's existing and the dotted line is the addition which will then form Lot 1? In the staff report it talks about the sizes and the development of those particular ' lots . On the plat it indicates that both Lot 1 and Lot 2 together are 7.9 acres . Is that right? Here 's where I 'm going with this . On page 6 you indicate that the remaining undeveloped lot is 7.96 but it shows on the plat map that both of them together are 7 .96 acres . My concern is that ' Lot 2, it looks big but if part of it is a Class B wetland, you're not going to be able to develop that portion without significantly affecting that Class B wetland and it would be nice to know what portion of Lot 2 is ' really buildable or excluding that wetland. The second thing that I would like to know is why are they only adding that portion which it seems to me that , I 'll take your word for it that there's enough green space on this thing but it doesn 't look like it . Why can't they move that line over further into the wetland so at least they have more green space there on an area which isn 't developable in any event? ' Krauss: The answer to your second part of your question is, they could push the line theoretically wherever they wish. Clearly they had a balance for themselves the cost of additional property with the need to ' meet city ordinances . McDonald 's staff knew that we had a 65% hard surface coverage max . They pushed the line apparently exactly far enough out to achieve that number . Ray Schleck: Plus a little . ' II Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 17 Emmings: No. Not a little bit because you hit 65 on the button accordin' to their plans . Batzli : Is the plat correct that the remaining acreage is 5.7 acres rather than the 7 .96 in the staff report? Obviously it still exceeds the minimum but then the question is , how much of that is a Class B wetland? Krauss: I think you can outline it right there. It 's a very small area .' Batzli : Just that portion there? Olsen: It 's also part wetland that we were looking at with the tracks . I Where the new storm water 's going . They still have all . . . Batzli : If you required , initially there 's talk of requiring the catch II basin or something and I didn 't really understand what happened to that exchange here . If they put in the catch basin , would that affect the green space and would they not then have 65%? ' Krauss: Catch basin wouldn 't have any bearing on that . Batzli : Where would you put it? , Krauss: You 'd just set it in the parking lot . Put a grate over it . If . they went with their alternative proposal that they made tonight to ' eliminate 3 or 4 parking stalls to avoid impacting that wetland , you 're green coverage would increase commensurately. Batzli : My only other question , other than the, I think the issue of ' landscaping can be handled between staff and McDonalds to find something that 's going to grow with salt and adequately screen the site. I do thin several parking stalls should be eliminated for safety sake and I also think the internal traffic pattern, I agree is, I think I agree with the staff report that it 's very poor . Just by looking at it , it seems that you 're going to get people during busy periods when there are fewer I parking spaces. They will be parking in the truck only area . I don't know how you're going to restrict them out of that area. Gene Borg: As far as the parking/seating ratio that the City has , that I coincides with McDonald's users. We've actually, I never ever had that parking lot full as it exists today. Batzli : No, and I 've never seen it full but I think during heavier lunch, hour periods which I think is the peak time there. Gene Borg: It's my peak time but it's not even close to being full . ' Batzli: I think you're going to get some people in any event and if you've included some spots out towards where the wetland is, I think you 're going to get people backing up into the entrance. Perhaps trying to exit out that area and it would be interesting to know why, at least those particular ones are there . • IIPlanning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 18 Gene Borg: We just put them in there just to put them in . That 's why we can just pull them out easier . It 's not a big deal . Batzli : Well yeah, unfortunately they 're still on the map here that we 're ' looking at . But I think those things need to be looked at and it 's unfortunate that we're really not looking at the map that probably the City Council 's going to look at . That 's all I have . Wildermuth: The other area that is labeled as a low area , is that a wetland? That one . ' Olsen: We had. . .we did the Lake Drive and the wetland that they defined was low area . ' Ray Schleck: That area does have an outlet to the TH 5 drainage . Wildermuth: I 'm very sympathetic to the property owner across the way and the trash problem , although I don't know what can be done about that other then possibly to have a fence installed across the street in the city levard which might also serve to block the headlight problem at night . 4 would be in favor of the applicant installing a fence across the way ' both to contain the trash problem and to act as a barrier to light . Conrad: Fence where Jim? ' Wildermuth: Across the street . Across Lake Drive from McDonald's . It could be something like a 4 foot high or 4 1/2 foot high fence . That would be in the city boulevard that we were talking about correct? ' Krauss: Mr . Wildermuth , if you wanted to go with something like that , if that was acceptable , I would strongly advocate that you ascertain if it was possible to put it on private property so after it 's constructed, it would be privately owned and maintained . The City 's not in the business of maintaining fences in the right-of-way and those things tend to need ' maintenance from time to time. Wildermuth: That 's true but you were just talking about applicants being required to put plantings on property other than their own. ' Krauss: On private property, yes. ' Wildermuth: Right . And I think the same issue applies there. Maintenance and so on. Krauss: Well in my experience , when trees are in essence given to adjoining property owners, after they're installed they become the owner 's property responsibility . ' Wildermuth: Yeah, but if it's City property. If the boulevard belongs to the City then, you 're saying that the City would be responsible? Krauss: We would be responsible . Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 19 II Wildermuth: Okay. Regardless of whether it 's a fence . What about makin' the applicant responsible? No precedent huh? Krauss: I 'm sure it 's possible but it's rather clunky . I Wildermuth: In a way I 'm kind of surprised that you 're willing to spend all this money to expand your parking lot for 4 or 5 truckers in a day . Gene Borg: Well that 's not the reason. We're buying the land because th land is there. We'll maybe build on it someday. . .and I just want to make some use of it as long as I pay for it. And I see the semi 's parking , II since I have enough other parking, the semi parking seems like the thing to do because it serves to take care of some of the problems that I have with semi 's and they're problems for me . If I don't have any semi 's , I not going to go broke over it because I don 't get that many . The cost o material . . . Wildermuth: Right . I Gene Borg: It serves to get the semi 's off the streets when they park out there . I Wildermuth: What can you do to help your neighbor 's concern about the trash? Gene Borg: Pick it up more , you know. I haven't had a call that I 've II heard of . Maybe somebody has called and said something but I 've never h a call that I 've heard of . Wildermuth: Any ideas Paul? Ellson: Not that we could enforce but maybe you can just have a routine " maintenance . • Krauss: This is a common problem with fast food establishments . 1 McDonald 's is usually more conscientious than most as a corporation for maintaining property. Wildermuth: Well I guess it isn't practical but I still like the idea of a fence. When TH 101 is upgraded or the intersection of TH 101 is upgraded, Dakota Avenue will remain open to TH 5, is that correct? I II agree with the recommendation that you made to divert parking lot water run-off into the storm sewer system. I don't think it's a good practice to drain a parking lot into the wetland. Other than that, I guess staff can work out the details in the landscape plan and can work out the isla details . Just one more question. Why wouldn't we have one large cur cut rather than 2 curb cuts with a separate entrance and a separate exit? Krauss: If we 're working with a clean sheet of paper? I Wildermuth: Yeah. 1 II ! , Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 20 Krauss: Because at one point, you can have two exit lanes . One in . Focus all the turning movements at one spot . Here we 've got two curb cuts in relatively close proximity to one another . Also very close to the ' corner . It 's not an ideal situation . Wildermuth: Why don't we close one off and open one up? IIKrauss: Well we looked at that early on in working with Mr . Schleck . In fact we looked at a number of options but the changes are so drastic and the internal circulation just doesn't allow you to . Wildermuth: It doesn't improve . ' Conrad: Why not? Krauss: Well basically you 'd have to tear down the restaurant and move it . If the drive-thru was coming through right here , what you 'd then have ' to do is come out this way and come further down which really boxes up the internal circulation . I 'm not saying it couldn 't be done but it 's a pretty drastic change . ' Conrad: That 's the logical thing to do from a planning standpoint . Trom a neighborhood standpoint . Closing the west curb cut . Berming it or ' whatever , which is really where we care about . I 'm not too concerned about the appearance on TH 5 . I think traffic should see McDonald 's there. That 's what brings them in . I 'm not too interested in blocking off view there but I am interested in how we abut the neighborhood ' property . Without a doubt that would solve the problem . We 'd lose some parking stalls but boy , you berm that and you immediately solve a lot of little problems. ' Gene Borg: The semi 's have a hard time negotiating that turn. Conrad: You know , I 'm sure they do . It 's a real lousy site for semis to ' begin with you know. It 's like I don't even know I want to encourage that and you 're not . It doesn 't say semis welcome out front and they'll go where they want to but the turning into McDonald's there is not an easy turn . It 's more than a 90 degree turn. It's probably 120 degree turn. That 's really, the way it is today, it's just not a good entrance and it just seems like at the time, with more space available , it seems like it 's ' a time that we could solve some of the problems but I don't know that we're solving any problems. Erhart: What problems do you eliminate by eliminating one of the curb cuts? Conrad: You 're moving traffic away from the intersection for one. You're ' basically having another way of putting a barrier up between the neighborhood and McDonald's. ' Erhart: I know but you 're moving the headlights from here to here . They're still going to shine over here. Planning Commission Meeting 9 April 4 , 1990 - Page 21 Conrad: There 's going to be one focus yeah , you're right . They're still going to come out . Erhart: Yeah. Conrad: It 's primarily the barrier . One barrier , visual barrier between . Maybe it 's a wind barrier for trash. It 's a green space . The other thing. I still have a tough time Tim with the fact that this is 65% coverage . I just can't , and I know these are deceptive , but it still looks like we've got a real big asphalt piece of land here which is not, it's not real appealling . Erhart: Add that as a condition that staff checks that . Conrad: For sure . We 'll have to . But primarily what I don't want to di is restrict the parking and I 'm not trying to say we should restrict the parking in there . I want it as convenient as possible . And they 're not coming in asking for a different curb cut . They're trying to keep the II costs down a little bit but you know , it just seemed like routing everybody out of the same intersection and improving the far away intersection in the long run has a lot of merit . If you've driven in there, you know that that 's not an easy turn coming in no matter what . you 're driving a semi or a car , it's more than a 90 degree turn . Erhart: You mean the entrance? , Conrad: Right . Because the angle is going away from, it 's not perpendicular at all . ' Krauss: Ladd, that 's going to get straighten out a little bit . The entrance issue anyway . The new alignment is coming through here whereas "' the old one 's tailing away. Conrad: Okay . That will help won 't it . Ray Schleck: The traffic flow, we did look extensively at trying to clog" off one of the curb cuts . Not only the truck , what I like to call truck, RV, boat , trailer , camper . You get cars with boats and trailers coming 111 through and they can park in these stalls as well but besides the truck traffic, you 've a got a few that come in right now, they're coming in the east curb cut and you 're parking where the parking's directed to direct the traffic that way and you have one curb cut, people are going to try go out that way . If you try to back, those stalls then should be drawn 90 degrees. We don't enough aisle width there to do that safely and you 're double loading that aisle which is primarily to direct traffic around drive thru . . .without causing too much confusion. The more decisions you force a driver to make, the more dangerous the parking lot becomes. This way it keeps the traffic flow simple and they won't have any decisions to make . The Lake Drive, the new direction of Lake Drive drastically helps the situation with the businesses up there. . . Conrad: So basically you can't make a total counter clockwise flow work " with only one entrance and exit. You can't make it work. Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 22 ' Ray Schleck: You can make it work . You can't teach every driver how to do it . That 's tough . ' Conrad: So it 's unsafe. Ray Schleck: That 's why we try to make the lot as simply as possible . This plan works the best for that . There are other ways to do it but . . . Conrad: Is the easterly entrance still an in only? ' Ray Schleck: Yes. Conrad: Okay . ' Wildermuth: In any event , that 's all I had . Conrad: Oh , it wasn 't my turn . Joan? Ahrens: I 'm abstaining on this . ' Conrad: I probably took my turn . I think just some quick additional comments . I don't think we want drainage going into the wetland do we? Hempel : No . From a water quality standpoint also . Conrad: I just don't think that 's the way we want to do it so we toyed with that a little bit but it seems like there are other ways to drain 1 this that makes sense . The trees on TH 5, they do get salt burn so I guess , you know it 's an absolute . That's what does happen . We 've got to be able to come up with some kind of tree and if we don't , there 's no ' reason forcing them into something that 's going to die . Paul , if you could work with them on that . I guess my intent is not to, I like the small berm that you proposed on the north . I don't want to hide McDonald's at all . I think that 's not your point but if we can hide a ' little bit of the dark, the asphalt which really bothers me a whole lot in this one. The asphalt is just not pleasing to me so if we can, if that berm helps and if the greenery, if we can work out some kind of greenery ' that works for you . It 's going to attract them as much as anything and I know that you care about that but hopefully you can work with staff on that . I guess I still , Paul , if you'd check out the impervious surface. It 's not to say I don 't trust our friends from McDonald's but dog gone that looks like, that's just visually amazing that that's 65% coverage so if you could follow up for me on that Paul . let's see . I guess that 's all my comments. Any other comments? Anything else? Is there a motion? Erhart: I 'll give it a try. I 've been writing. Probably get as close as anybody. I 'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the site plan request 490-4 as shown on the plan stamped Received March something, 1990 with the staff recommendations except that item 1 will be changed to read, apply for , obtain and complete a wetland alteration permit if required and as outlined in the report . Add item 7, something to do with handicap parking . Do you have some wording? 11 Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 23 II Emmings: Well yeah . I Erhart: To include required handicapped signage and curb cuts that are currently now shown on the plan and item 8 that staff will check the 65% coverage before and do their own calculations before this goes to the Cit Council . I guess that 's it . Conrad: Okay, is there a second? I Elison: Second. I Erhart moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Request #90-2 stamped 'Received March , 1990 without variances subject to the following conditions: I 1 . Apply for , obtain and complete a wetland alteration permit, if required, and as outlined in the staff report. I 2. Revise parking and internal circulation plans to improve circulation and provide increased setbacks as outlined in the staff report. 3. Revise drainage plans to utilize catch basin and storm sewer . UtiliJI concrete curbing in the parking lot. Provide an erosion control plan. Project approval by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed Distrill is required. 4. Revise landscaping plans as outlined in the staff report. A financi guarantee for site improvements is required. An additional $10,000. guarantee for completing required wetland improvements will also be required. 5. Relocate the retaining wall onto the McDonald's site, providing a I minimum of 1 foot clearance from the right-of-way. 6. Approval and filing of the plat is required prior to the issuance of !' any building permits. 7. Include required handicapped signage and curb cuts that are current" now shown on the plan. 8. Staff will check the 65% coverage and do their own calculations befor' this goes to the City Council. All voted in favor except for Batzli who opposed and Ahrens abstained an the motion carried. Batzli : I would table it until a lot of these issues can be resolved so that we 're looking at what we're actually approving. 1 1 Conrad: And Joan you abstain? Ahrens: Yes . I II IIPlanning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 24 11 ' Conrad: The motion passes on a 5 to 1 vote , 1 abstention. And the issues that you 're interested in really is dealing with wetlands . Dealing with berms. Dealing with curb islands or whatever we would call them . Any other specific issues? Batzli : No. I 'm concerned with the 65% mostly as well as there 's a lot of little issues that seem like they 're resolvable and I think they should be resolved. Conrad: This item goes to City Council on April 23rd. Thanks for coming in. Krauss: Mr . Chairman, two things . We have the preliminary plat tacked on Also , we would intend to keep the schedule for the City Council men° if , that 's contingent on the applicant 's ability to resolve these issu ,: nd work with us to resolve those issues in time for that meeting . Otherw:v ,.e it would have to be delayed. ' Conrad: Is there a motion for the plat? Emmings: I 'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of ' Preliminary Plat #90-4 with the conditions contained in the staff report . Erhart: Second. Conrad: Any discussion? 11 Batzli : Yeah . Should we include the wetland type of thing in this one as well? Do we normally do that in the plat? Do we include that as a condition usually Steve? ' Emmings: Well , let 's do something there . Let 's add as a condition 4 that they comply with all conditions of the Site Plan and Wetland Alteration Permit if required . I 'd amend my motion to that . ' Batzli : Did you include the, as shown on the plans stamped Received March 19. 1990 to your motion? ' Emmings: No . Batzli : Is it? Nothing as shown in the plans is in the motion. Emmings: The preliminary plat that we're looking at is dated March 19, 1990. ' Batzli : Right . Conrad: Whoever seconded it . Erhart: Okay, I 'll second Steve 's amendment . Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat *90-4 as shown on the plans stamped 'Received 11 Planning Commission Meeting April 4 , 1990 - Page 25 March 19, 1990' without variances subject to the following conditions: 1 . Provide the easements outlined in the staff report and described on II the attached illustration. 2. Dedicate illustrated right-of-way to the City. ' 3. Enter into a development contract with the City and provide necessary' financial guarantees prior to having the City sign off on the final plat. 4. The applicant shall comply with all the conditions of the Site Plan II #90-4 and Wetland Alteration Permit, if required. All voted in favor except Ahrens who abstained and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT OF ARTICLE IV, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND II ARTICLE XXVII , EXCAVATING, MINING, FILLING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES. Public Present: , Name Address Tom Zweirs 9390 267 Street West , Lakeville ' Jerry Rypkema 18601 Panama , Prior Lake Mike Dwyer 1600 TCF Tower , Minneapolis Terry Beauchane 240 Flying Cloud Drive Leon & Delores Messenbrink 250 Flying Cloud Drive Richard Vogel 105 Pioneer Trail Willard Halver 470 Flying Cloud Drive Paul Krauss presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad called the continuation of the public hearing to order . Terry Beauchane: Maybe before you start, this proposed ordinance that you 're talking about , all you people have up there have a copy of it but II we don't . We have no idea what you're talking about. Krauss: We would have been happy to have supplied it to anybody that wail interested. We have developed a special mailing list for the area aroun Moon Valley and we've notified them of each meeting. Terry Beauchane: Well we were notified of the meeting but we didn 't know, that there was a draft proposal already drawn up. Could we possibly see it so we know what we're talking about? Conrad: Are there any comments? 1 Willard Halver : I live in the very close vicinity. I 've been absent for 3 months. I 've been getting mail in regard to these meetings . Now why I Nrw w 1 s�j�� Ham..... � i e i , �lEq v10131MMq'N3118WINVM0 i'W'1 i i!Li I I V i 1 sr ammammomm I - JSaPIBU0a3IAI7■ : _ J i__. ,_1 . _ mmry 1 . 1 I ! 1 1 I; 1j1J 1- 1 ;l ' l 1.I I.1 1 a$I:; 1 i ® I I 11 i 01 / 1 � I 1 :, i 1 'I 11' 11 : ; '� Pi' ,1 0 Ile I ! 1" ' 1b 11i.i, 1 1, 1 — tI1iil1 II011IJ11 1 ' ;— 1 IIIIiI i ' 0 }31 f; 11 11, I1 Ili ia 1i}�i 1 ' I111 �� !! :11 Js �� Hill li� 1! : Oa 1111 k I A ' lit 1111 8 1 1 11 t I trUt -1 I , ,ii■ 3 Pet• �� 1 ,.'"1_.,,.,i„,I t ■ 3 I ` v It i 1 �� S\ ,_ i 1 11 I , ,, , _ liii 0111 �{ 1 t \\ i /.741 s 1 . ' C 0 - id�. ©o_ 1 , i / i , • / , ,11 iti I WI V \‘: 1k e/1 I ! .e i! a/ I� d1 i 1 ;t ti 1 V r I 1 i^—-�` r a it • 1 \ `,� i `� : iI ; 3 1 \, --= ,r/ fit _ . �t w..: `� •/' 1 1 .!' • _ . .v '�'...2.. -• i ■ M _ :,- - ,�♦ 1 I I TT T II• • — ..r.—_.�.yl I -I-1. ,,i,,a_ 1 1- j , ...............■...•.,100 • 1 ,, ` \ r�t�- L X11 ..1'. -I* w -,, POP ipg 4. 711' i .r,♦.l•f 11N. 'N•tar _ fir, _ i • • iN /• /./ frfitirrat !F If/////:‘" 'f1U111 itIA I i•'. t Arommommi gammon=nil , \ no . I qii i I DAKOTA AVE. i....r.1.••.i•/•w..ss.••4 p.•rau•11..A.�.,w •.• 1° i r•.n.s r•4.•aw r s...n..r,OT•■••.r•4..n.r I • • AW.••M..OM hl.rull. IUII•M I if,i Y Mil /11,.y1��'�rj�•�•f�. , 1•��.�. Z-0•10••••�•••11 1 r+r'M v��w� f••• .ri,rr GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN r 011•••••• 01101111. an NO 011ouf • (3) • to •• •• SOU ..0•00 MOM • SP-2 - - I MO - - - - - - - - - - i - - - I 44: k5 ,h V10113101111 713ssv►»1v110 -7 s.- _•,.• s ►v V 1 0 1 1 1,0*s A W N S }}! k i E 1-:::---r", I ;I 0 0 I .• 1 Ii• ; i;I i: Il'I 1 i. III illIIiIII ii r: 1 # iI j ill I 1 fc i 1 �� I� ail i'� '1 i!llt! 3+ j. �/ ..,0,..),,--j• 0 J ' `''may - Ill Ii 'i _' iI �Ii a 1 y - � .. dal; Sit III •_1J • i 0 . . ` «+■iii■■;` 3 1i!-`"-ma ve ;ate. - •: J1L1.., 3 1111/ -I 1 I 1 4) , i .1, .. - . �il` W I CI .. . u. IP 11 .. . i _4s,...„ ,;;;.-i';-.,.:• i • . i 4' 00 1 V .. 1 i 4) . .1 aillik I CI I • _ II _ /\ II � N -I I , , 1 Nil IAA 't y,.,r i.Lt ri- t it •- � ti CI, %Iii 0 . - 1 , Chi! M a � •.11 I •`C a +, IV• it • ,�,C�•- .4,_ _ LI , ft:0 . 40 _. - 7-.. ) _tk i CO . ‘ - e I WNW, n.�;�i 3��;, ; ;;I jj ;ir ►1T w. �y 1 - 1 � a: tes -itU► k....�, . •--' -" , ,.�„ ..1 M1#,. z.... [SNOLL03S '' SNOLLVA313 1 r: • ="11.2-w•--..= r _ • V1OS3NNIW'N9SdVHNVHO I •1 r 0 11 , dfN3AY,Y10)1VV0 R S AYMIH 31V13 I Lc H.M f.-1.M N.U•.Ileif W+•/1-/f./.I — _ El ©IM W th 1 , I..V,tl YW_N/FYI_ � • lap. 1 / ' n - I iii L i$t? I -v iirnoll, z` �r •r- z4/ k`r,�h jKj r •. i IEEE 1 _ I .:iii Ilia, I it gl li 4.- di : Ili , I V;i iiiiMiTiWt z (.4 1 .,,L........e._ 1/41 - 1 p mii -4 11111 ,-.,-,i a m .... , , _i_ii , ,, ,...- .„,; kk . .i. . / % �.� .--- is __I 1 : ; 1, I. 1: \ 1 1 Imo / 9 .;. , r� ii ;; . • = 1. , • . 1 . . I-Ii 1 It 13 el' I# il ii ill 1111 .__Ili il if,4s� i Ili Ilm 11�' s r 1 Ila—, ER m. i . 1 . at ii a an -77 &q, 111 , . $ -R-�---�- 11- i' 1 1 1 1 wit 0.1....1 --7 , Is_ ...._ pi .. • 8 k lig - 1111k1 ino 4 IA (- oi t 1 1 gr-V,It-• f . r--- . i4i .1 . I 0.1 ii tt t il. g • r — . •.a.,-,...1 „„r1 ," ",... •0341t Nrld DNIVIVIJI.IOOU! 'P NOLLYONfiOd i , , sll.111. A 101•I111630 u`q A•0 :12.4"41.2 w w ••.•_ • - V10S3NN111 aos.vHNYHo - , III r) ...t..1 '3. . . VlOHVa.!9 A1,..... _.. . '� 1 • ©DpCaoQaUg P 1' -ow 1R�'..s aY AFK, r4•j _ , I r ( NP"'9•4•19./.•11.9.9.r G' 'll . I,r ..shcp .'n *:Ir-, '•.' • 117 .t t ip ,i_ r , ,, (3 II; 1 111111 I 111W i ) Ida as td U ;� I —If Sa 171 -i6 Z It :I 1 fo if if i i;� } 3j S �1 i I :lit:. Ili • , 1. • �,;; I t • 3 • t _ ii t IPA tie gs y $ Y9 Is i•I�at9 }S4 r0 a - till -; II a Z . . e., led III El as A Cr). if $ I4 f.; IP di id Ix $ I"s V s I -� R$ reL9 E ai=C' [Q "� !J jig ^ .,,\,`\\\A `.\.„„, \\\ •„..,„\\\\l,\\\\\♦ ∎f\V V Is !t ii. le gI 98 -1 lit'L'a- file - r• w�;■�i• ',:t it I ib O _i �” 'iii:�i n as wtuIlcsn u.o nw _ _. .. fr.....,. .., , • VJ S3NNIW'N3SSVHNVHJ _ I �A\\\ 4 'N' . 3t1N3A'�Yv''�1Y'i(by/OO'''J�[•C 4 S AVMIH.31ViS .. ' , lw...q/w.u1 W514 V O O �1.J`/ a {�y/''�y('�� r i ."+no aNwauw taw wlw w• Nu, {'A'I h l- 41M. �+.LL,id�•IL•Mi.l.91•+.d vtthl - � lJ1J I !i e i t I 1 p , r- - _ ,' ,..,, T'f ,., r�,I f,., 10..� :T 1 11► .• 01/41.0...4.1.1.b MA/ r\l� 1� 't VII 11 d i�ti -.��<v — �.�‘�� (."7.r..,.l 1 U ii' Ai.12 _ ak'AI lSIf V61151 ti __ - I i ; ?I i i _ I i,. 14 t i , . >1 III 4 ii x =` I 4. " s 114 a .,I 1.1 Is sl — i 1 r i 1- �.: -- -Z i i __ --: - - _ ==a 1 .�.�.."., .. �,.�...' WW1 ..11.:,fit -B._-sIi1 ---F--' 1. T i.1 I hiiT . -col 31 tb '�� - i�0 11'J i .". ill I I I +i 71 i7 ;?I, T I ' iiilligill 1 ,i I r ` 5 �i i'l ak I i— Ht_...../ L> L., , ' SC\E ` _ 111ts1I ° .i , t .s valet lit! E idyl If nit 11 . i t z • ifI • 1 1 1 I • _ 7 i 1. =-n 1 L I 11 .. mi • . ...,_. 112_ , „,-.... '0 0 I , I .l _, 4. ___ =t') 1 • I I I ORIGINAL ATTACHMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . . I --,r=—. NVld 31.1S '1,1- .; I 4E, \ ,,_ ! IL! --e_, _,-) ----- osNr 4 C.- I k 1.4.. id:l...7.i3: !-4) fl: • 3*, -- ' ' 51'i ,1-7-7't":7717'! !j,I alo,......,,, -1 illjli VIOSaNNM't.13SS41-1NVilf) .■1■i 0: 311N3AV 410440 4 S AVMIH alvis I IA' * 01 A.,T,r,111,1 .e.1 .......2 '.'..... .... .'.' ...t... _...,. ...4.••••■•1.•••■••••••....KW V.•■••••••.0*am 0.....•ft*•••■••••••• +- ''..T.: 0 FO[i p, au 0 E 3 Li\d _ 0....3...Id . I 1 ........ i f , . .............. *"..;." [ ."' •••....•^'^‘. 1 6 u 1 1 ........ . --4 -7.,. --_,....6-- 1 1 ri. g t 7 4 , „ - ----- I i 1 ! if! 1 !! Il] 1 1 q . i • .1 4 !`gial I 1 'jai I, `I il.1 'd • • • • frik:gag jil )241 I ) J! ‘1° g i:::1.! a °ti10 I i I i 0 II 1 !1`, I ail ZIP 1.1 I id I sil 1 1st v 1 , a d ii II] ii II pi' ii 1 PI ! 1 i , r I I! . lit ! .. 1 11 fi iii il :11 WI II i Of 1 ; I. ii If! i it ri, 1. 11 la ; ti ti It 13 111111 Hi Iiill ill 1/ in ! I I ii...:1:4 J 1 . et , i ft 0,4o .,1; i oll f "" " I i •a a 42.1 il - .l.. i . ; I , 111 111,1% ;;: iltvi 1 ' 1111 : t 4 i 1 I k ii Wiet: iI:1 '.; !If:. ; law i g• • • : i fi Oiel fil; i itill I i u t 4 ' j II NIT: 1;14 i i i eat: it il - goll -,1 goi 9 I. •tli* 1 11441 f S j I 1 I -. - i 1 1 1 1 4 1 i I i . a ^ 1 1 hill I I isil 4 , 4 I 4 • 1 :17 :11! ti ist tl. 4 „.---- -.. I -i-{ -„.„,, oe 1 I , - .;.., , . I I 1 ___i•.s ,,, . _ _ .. 1 kPlil°ii 111 • - . i it •/ i ),Z , • , ., , .....'''................ .14:240/ 1•04Ve ; —: 11 n ,1-: / --• , ,,, ■ 11 N., , 1 ''.--"-•-• 4 JiVett•.41i _, / A , /b ' V ■••., . ' P./ ----;*--- . .___ 4.1.i a ' / • \-_,s____ :,,2.s‘ tiiiii,Itiv ss 4 -- . • ,0,1111 'll It //-; a 4 ••■ _ ''.-. .4 e 11 1 . - '.1 I iii > < < I-. 0 3L lkik tilil1 1 '1!t. U 11 . ei 1 . ....„:1 ,...„ I! ( 1. 1 , ....6..„_ 1, .. 1: //,' 1 ‘ ,, ., __ --, , • ..- ....,....:, ',sc.:. ".. I , g I ( a 7) kl,q • 14 lid- , • 111,i : 1 EM At III n ) 1/ ju:771: 4 II 1 11 I WZJCL.-j< I . it k • b. -----...-- _, 1 • te i A it At, .-',..s s g i 1 .4iik FY' ,I oa ,I .. ■ 1 u I 41, ---- I Sti Si 3 A ■ I i 1 I , ■ a % \ \ ,.. , /._._,, t.., w .2 ...--- 4 ■ ■ s-""" i j .. N , 1 I .. '---r'' 74------1- 1:1/1, 70 IF: .. / ..../.....' ....." _ t 4 .- —1 ----T.' — .4 ti ,..../"------- 1 -- 1 I .-----:-7"----; 4'-------41.------------' -----" • . I 1 CITY OF 1 „„,„„ A :';._4% -' : .-' CHANHASSEN I . . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 II MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Paul Krauss, Planning Director FROM: Dave Hempel , Sr. Engineering Technician 4 1 DATE: March 28, 1990 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Chan Haven Plaza 2nd Addition and I McDonald' s Site Plan Review File No. 90-6 Land Use Review 1 Upon review of the above-referenced preliminary plat dated March II 8, 1990, I find the plat generally acceptable with the following comments and recommendations. Right-of-Way 1 As you are aware, plans are underway for the upgrade of Lake Drive East. The improvements that the City proposes include widening II and realigning Lake Drive East, sidewalks, and storm drainage improvements. The widening of the street will require acquisi- tion of additional right-of-way that directly affects this plat. Staff has worked with the applicants to develop a site plan that II accommodates the expansion of Lake Drive East. The preliminary plat reflects the future alignment of Lake Drive East as I "proposed public utility and roadway easements" (see Exhibit 1) . It is recommended that this easement be dedicated on the final plat as Lake Drive East right-of-way. The upgrading of Lake 1 Drive East will benefit these parcels by exposing them to additional pedestrian and vehicle traffic generated from the new through street and new intersection at Trunk Highway 5 and Dell Road. Dakota Avenue is proposed to be widened along the west side of 1 the plat in order to accommodate the expanded intersection and channelization with MnDOT's Trunk Highway 5 improvements II scheduled for construction in 1991-92. This improvement will also impact the plat but in much less fashion. The widening of Dakota Avenue will require additional right-of-way to be acquired 1 from Lot 1, Block 1 (McDonald' s site) of approximately 0.02 acres near the intersection of Trunk Highway 5 and Dakota Avenue (see Exhibit 2) . It is also recommended that the final plat dedicate the additional right-of-way required for Dakota Avenue. I II Paul Krauss March 28, 1990 Page 2 1 Easements Approximately half of McDonald's existing site (Lot 1 , Block 1) currently drains into Lake Drive East and the other half drains ' easterly into proposed Lot 2, Block 1. This eventually drains into MnDOT's ditch along Trunk Highway 5. The proposed grading plan for McDonald' s maintains the drainage pattern and only ' increases volume slightly into Lot 2, Block 1. In addition, this plan reduces the amount of runoff out into Lake Drive East, and redirects the remaining runoff into a wetland situated in the southeast corner of proposed Lot 1, Block 1. Regarding the ' runoff into the wetland, we believe a better and permanent solution to the drainage situation is for the runoff to be conveyed through storm sewer to the City' s storm sewer in Lake ' Drive East. In conjunction with proposed Lake Drive East improvements, a storm sewer stub will be extended to the property line for the McDonald' s site to connect into, thereby eliminating this wetland spillway. Recommended Conditions tor Preliminary Plat Approval 1 . The final plat shall show the "proposed public utility and roadway easements" for Lake Drive East right-of-way. 2 . The typical front, rear and side utility and drainage easements shall be incorporated into the final plat with the exception of the east line of Lot 2, Block 1 where a 10-foot wide easement is being required to better accommodate the City' s storm sewer. 3. The final plat shall dedicate additional right-of-way ' required for future expansion of Dakota Avenue (Exhibit 2) . 4 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract and ' provide the necessary financial securitys before the City signs the final plat. MCDONALD' S SITE PLAN REVIEW - SITE PLAN SP-1 The plans reflect a retaining wall on the westerly lot line. ' Upon field inspection it was revealed that the retaining wall is actually three feet into the City's right-of-way. This needs to be relocated by the owner onto the McDonald' s property, set back a minimum of one (1) foot from the property line. The relocation ' of the retaining wall will require moving five ash trees, three to six inches in diameter , that also encroach upon the City' s right-of-way. The owner has plans currently underway to transplant these trees between the drive-thru lane and the pro- perty line. We feel as these trees mature their root systems could negatively impact the retaining wall which would require 11 . Paul Krauss ' March 28, 1990 Page 3 , future maintenance by the owner. It is recommended that the trees be removed from this narrow 6-foot green area and be replaced with shrub type landscaping similar to what is proposed along the north property line. With the acquisition of right-of-way along the west side of the , plat, two existing pine trees will be located on or slightly over the new property. These pines should be relocated to accommodate 11 future expansion of the intersection at Trunk Highway 5 and Dakota Avenue. It is therefore recommended that these pines be relocated further back on the lot or replaced with other landscaping. ' Grading and Drainage Plan ( SP-2) The overall plan is acceptable with the aforementioned drainage , recommendations and revisions. The Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District Engineer, Mr. Bob Obermeyer, has reviewed the site plan and indicated storm runoff control (on-site storage) would not be necessary. The downstream drainage system has been designed and built to handle the developed runoff rate from the area. I Erosion Control The plans do not indicate provisions for erosion control . It is , recommended that the wetlands in the southeast corner of the lot be protected with Type II erosion control fence. Recommended Conditions for Site Plan Review 1. The applicant shall relocate the existing retaining wall off Dakota Avenue right-ot-way back a minimum of one (1 ) foot onto the site and restore the boulevard with 2 . The existing ash trees planted along the Dakota Avenue right-of-way shall be relocated by the owner as a part of the retaining wall relocation. The boulevard area behind the retaining wall shall remain clear of trees. I 3 . The applicant shall protect the wetlands in the southeast corner of Lot 1 with Type II erosion control fence as directed by the City Engineer prior to construction. 4 . The applicant shall install catch basin(s) and storm sewer to redirect the parking lot drainage from the wetland spillway area into a storm sewer stub being provided with the City's storm sewer improvements in Lake Drive East. I II 1 IIPaul Krauss March 28, 1990 II Page 4 5. The pine trees planted along Dakota Avenue shall be relocated II further onto the lot or removed and replaced with landscaping approved by the Planning Department. II ktm Attachments: 1. Exhibit 1. 2. Exhibit 2. II II I II II II II II I 11 II 11 11 . t I ' 8 I H )( 3 . •. • pi, :,. 1 ;a1 . VL_i \;-pia�` ...\ --oe ass— ,„'� �: . PL ssk oi- 1 i ' I % N 1 1 .1 I ; i; :, 111 .E-- co t cc I f ..\ i,. W I r� n II a 1 1 I I ��-=1 = �w I I i ribi \ t\ 'cl,il E. W am, i 111 .A- --. .. .:.. , i 1k- `;:. -- ----T------..7 _ -- r�,:�'""_%'/ ( i ,•- Z :CC W C 1 ‘� Ste` �__.Y��L �•/�/, • ~ 1 I lW CI• 0 ' 1 & IQ ..-- ..1.14: . 1 I 0 < w v , i i //Zs, 1 • ••••••••• ••• • tie 1 l• 1.1. ...1 i /7-- • v. •• •• 411.".vs• Z■Z‘.7.• -;:: i q .S% • I t { i i i %. • . • 0. ‘Iff k:. I O. 0 § . u I R R^f1RR 1 J Q ( I ,k .., • oee, ,_ % 4%. *ii /NI • 'ie. 1 ......— / ••• iii., ri. -..... • • ,Ailial. ,,y4•••• -4'...* // Z /4 /% •� __ -- i 2.. \\\:' I 40 ruomsd --- —"' (*', • . 1 - ', I i 7.-- ... .4.... ' - • • -- : .- • • • • ow North Arrow. Outline and Location of all buildings and improvements. Street or highway frontage. iSh S.P. 1O17Z-St- (17 14' 5) COUNTY, GARNER PARCEL NO. 3140Aa OWNER MC-tON d DS P Scale 1" (.oD ft. WIA > ZD •... / I . ES REF Lam // • .. 4. •. i . i . - . .. 4,t , bma•rt) t AYW _h � � • 4 I v IA AV A . . . . . dccrJ.-S CaJ.„. . . . . . _ ... i • \\TO I 1 1 1 i ILdr I , etcx.x. l , 0444 gkkler4 ilAzak ILayout sketch by fit``_ Date �-t(-410 Parcel No. 51io� 1 . /"30/ i oSE.o 771--,64/4. 0. 0 z4le. EXHIBIT 2 I i CITY of 1 i) 1;.ro , CHANHASSEN 1 y ''iNitlf _ , .,....., i )1'6,,, ,JOr''' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ' (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 I MEMORANDUM I TO: Jo Ann Ot4en, Sen,4..o4 PtanneA. I FROM: Steve A. K,i 4chman, 1 12 ...n.g O4 4,i,c i.aL K DATE: Fetoca,a�.y 23 , 1990 �� I S U B J: P tarn-i,ng Ca-ee: Site Plan 90-4 1 ) Recta-by-out hand4co.p 4J.gnage and cu'cb ca,t.b not 4hown on p.2an. I I I I I I I I . 1 II• 4),, s CITYOF i CHILNBASSEN . . . . , „ „ - =690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 .' (612)937-1900 • FAX (612)937-5739 1 January 24, 1990 II Ray Schleck, Construction Engineer McDonald's 1650 W. 82nd Street, Suite 900 IBloomington, MN 55431-9888 RE: Chanhassen McDonald's Addition IIDear Mr . Schleck, II The purpose of this letter is to confirm results of our meeting on January 23, 1990. The building, with a seating capacity of 138, will be classified I as a A-3 occupancy. The State Building Code Chapter 1305.6905 does not require A-3 occupancies of less than 300 accumulative occupant load to be sprinklered. IIThe building with addition as shown at our meeting will not be required to be sprinklered. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. II Sincerely, • ' Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official II SAK: laf c: Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director I Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Gary Warren, City Engineer Paul Krauss, City Planner .. 1 '1 1 . a NESOq Minnesota Department of Transportation I e(pt Metropolitan District Transportation Building I cir St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 sill*OF TO- Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 I March 21, 1990 Reply to Telephone No. 593-8523 1 Ms. JoAnn Olsen I City Planner City of Chanhassen R`r„:; , - .' I690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 MAR 221 J Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 In Reply Refer To: 315 �ITYDFCHANMA55u� I 111 C.S. 1002 (T.H. 5) I S.E. Quadrant T.H. 5 and Dakota Ave. McDonald's Addition, Sec. 13, Twp. 116N, R 23W, Chanhassen , Carver County Dear Ms. Olsen: I We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance with I Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find the plat acceptable for further development with consideration of the following comments: - Any new right of way would be acquired in fee. You should contact I Gary Warren, City of Chanhassen, for copy of plan. The right of way authorization is not final at this time. - Runoff should be controlled from the 100 year storm pre-development I rate in accordance with the City of Chanhassen requirements. Plat should be reviewed by the Riley-Purgatory Watershed District. I If you have any questions in regard to our review of the plat please call me. Sincerely, I iet.:VL. gli, ----- Rick Dalton, P.E. I Project Manager cc: Steve Keefe I Metro Council Roger Gustafson I Carver County Engineer 1 S-1-0114t4P, _jr-lx .kNNESOTa o f 1990 An Equal Opportunity Employer :i+p.. t'+v`$,,„...,-a. A, 454 trinTte, P III if • _ i 12 01111511 111/11111 ` it , , / � _ ► 1 1 r ._ _ . , , __ :� g, a i� i- j • e I \ 1 /3 to ;T_ i £ • - / ' 4 -•D , ‘-...t. - 1 i , I `Ii IEi i ,»— 11D% p j —aco.I • !■.•1 s. 4) itibiw,., o , t , , ,/ 1 1 ! , ;;.....,, vt .0 +••• g 1 -'e I: ,11 I / ,� Y zI ► / /i 8i • i 111 Cy C 11 U I i q r mat ,II / Of li ,im I * - 411 - n r I t•� i I l i 0 I 14111 41 i 0i.1 1 • J I - ..r,,.}-k a `r” 4II i Mr jj I,. Nir /// r\- Wf , ii, i / r� II/ !te ii !"1 fib: t ;at t SOUTH /t. s I �f;f! Eiii ;ti -II; 3 gO I _ itIt !_ ,��r -: it. i!I E t; ��• ..�E r_• !i 1 ii I4 :is - ..--. , :, E, =fit if •-\ i I = E _ E • i Ej i is = t. tp +E • st t' Ij �€ tlt !� I E 1 iE `� I ti h ti tit 1 PE t1 !I E { n STATE MWAY S Z DAKOTA AVENUE ��'• 1 ac CO .K�: if i CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA III f17 I I w t� S �At10fCA/E RAMr ip 3 ' II t ( r i.7_;.{14 - IT `\\ \1 1 `\ I Ii-V ttl ti 1----• t too C ,i ]y I ■ j `♦ _�` I I t '1 E /I'r. / %r i ....0■.= ',/,...............H)'-'4: • iL•44,' ar'NN,, I ! D )'.c! �• . 41441 r i "' �b. F z i\ i it �; 5. It ft It .tii a e —(Ili; st' rn F I, at ; / 77jj !pp t ! V it ! WI, X �k o�a`�FFE ; t .---1....—,_.„...... p9 1 I ?ii c3 Ja s;'1 "t 1 ikkaPt:0,1 Is mil. ! It Fri. = ,! s St' jai°' L V j I j ► }eg• . �f rip E tip € �� `(� � � i' {j Ix e i I _� a Ili: � 'Io�` i f fit at <<< f { tjf I , fir a " ' _ Litt I i , III 1411 _ III �: 11 (f � ��t �� I !•i= r p I I s p F,�,t a wi:i8 - II �iR i ill `• } , (f� �1� # [[r ©jI j •� �:�� [ � '�� i j T' ftt�p II iri a tr i 1 s0as lit P'' ! j j t tt}1 fi E elt j 1 4. I ,w wrw.�1■ wrnwra ' McDonald's ------ --1 ".- ' . ! , . ...we.ow i i . or - - WI; .1 "°"` �. ;Q s STATE HIWAY 5&DAKOTA AVENUE �r�' �� OINImino ! * CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA ..�... . E I — s SITE PLAN �/y 9 t ' 1111111 - - MI NO r - MI MS MN — MN MN — MN 1 \, 1- 1 ��+-/ ...... CI 11L./l�.l� c=ra=-P / / 4� 2 i o4 ' I r \ .16-•;"4 „...//A .4.1(4. . . . I�i6� . lv` . • 2 S • / IIII�.rW..�aF�iY� aUIP►.aa. • �� EIS . �'`��' is . t '� /•1 t ,1 1 Pill. • . / 1 !!Iu ! N 1 /..1.1“.1-a CCty 'e I a�__�� _ .per,E r�..+�. r lid f-y 1•, n e. 1107 f'iv �QU I i. •• n it . ft i i 1 4 1. 8 _ 1 DAKOTA AVE. <p r w 1ac■ ■4•. • 4 n.r..v, 06..,•w.�1.+,w AAA,...•1' Oorkr..ouw P.suy■ F '� •, .pa N..-G-»v..T e'- '1,OBI♦ ..y(v,..Trw 1 p �f!iH.s w O,n.r.u•o,w .Y W IN•.0 R. rMa 1- 1 M . .____. _._ N epM •' uw+ b r..( . E•tvT,w+r _---1 ICI 111 0 1 Isa K...IwNI tsar .oa�o -f f�•a4,�•s5, tl!0 - MI _� !M b C..•.P4a• ••••■ GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN 0 rimilmormilimml DM-.~ fMHSI.OF ' W.. It M.pi a S. 1. .. .f Ma II 011111 We SP-2 t k1jiJ! 114111. jp;:-‘.. 115.115- .7.•.,,i) %� 111 o �� _2:" \2.4 ig . .8 ' r- . e \1 S[\ ziii Nis nap; .Jsii • ap . , 314 Ng R Cr 11;s f.isig tq-V F...10, . Via? F1/4,p L 7 p Eli i�r _ �� t}�ij= Q i Ft p fit[ a;FLa s pi s_-� 44f F t_Is It r ` 3 PI E �_ • F €€€( . c i� �'1 w vl•- , ,. yr Z.l r ii� 0 I i � Sb � d i 1 Li ,:. ~ i j A. 6 3 iv �- u v S 1 'i 4447 TOO i i OTM l i it a$ sF! __ gi s? ✓n��:ANN\ter��:NrMN SVrNM•:`,rNN,,NN ,.c v \NZ:Os,r..` , R a 111 E_e €€RC l sas yz C t:ft . 1` , 1 1 1` ! _ii t` tt '4 ;•°-L:ilk w.=-.1,....714_ _'E _ski p N I Hit Y-i I r j If 1 __ — —�- I1,s � --!•II Ill yLL V /w .-; yiir j -ii !I lit..! I- - • 1 i. . 1. lit.i , . hi gli i. 1 s . . R a. I D lit •• 4 ► STATE NNWAY S 1 DAKOTA AVENUE • . _�_-- `.. •.., CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA l �_ Iry a+. aRrRri •• sa ad FOUNDATION &ROOF FRAMING PLAN i .°`+a("' °' a ' - • • , • , 1, –1---„,,,,--....._____r_ () 7 10, --11, I . / 0 ..i, .iitF, ci, 7.1c* „ I. 1 1 , ,, " In— I I a-J-7 11,7 . :: tii• 114.1.7.., E - - ; , 11 1., I i 11 ----u,7773-1T7A .-..,..1 ,\..........._ [--, ,, - --. r-- 7----'-'1 - , I - I ,I ... IF- 'L `, 11• r.iii ,j r i 1 .„..,. --......_ I .--/ IP ■ • 41 1) • • I I i ev 4 A I .. . , , „..._....,i , t i , 17.111 .,„ , ,.. I c , 1-- , i -_L L..• ; • s.t F• i t-Ili 91 --, '. ' •••\ '''••\ I ii) q 11 - I it V 4 1 , \ 1"---,‘ . ,i• 11. tt 1 1 in ii A- --t rt , ..;\ PH pi in I r, I PI: 14 I i IT 11P ........„ , .- . . 4 I 1 i "....._, $ • I . r..., nim_i 4. 3, pIl ! I .... , .ti I •4.: - 4" * I 1 '41'1 1 4 1 WINNE • 1••••••••rn • ■•■■•11. ___2..■ ...: , ------..„k •. 1-91 I. z•s• , , ,. ,...t.-,.... . T i . 1 i I t i 1--, Tip . 1 i . ' 1::. :,; -% \ .k ■• r ., i ;i ir 11% . . i At. i ; II 1 i • I • ;:• Ma)11,1 %V ',7 a w , ,..1 ..i. IC i• ' 11 i rm 1.1• it i f----4, 1..... • . 3 - t l t t rill it I k i . • •. P D I _,.. 1 -4 I; f.4 _ g, P 1 it 1 i ft , I I .,- • - 0 „.. rt # 1 $ II , I i 6....6:a.-.4"-L"--.L--.,-- •...... , .\ : , 1 1 i .1 i! 1 , -,..... 4: . -. ! .4. .i it i it• 1, 0, ii ,, - ......., -- _.... _........,_: __...........,,,. cro....agel ,..T t t 4 Is 1, .. s. I ..., ... .,,, 1,..,1 — - 14,..1 ..... 11, ,,,,.• . . ! . 4 11 r! If I ' 14 11. I i ,.. •i k 4 It goez 1 1 1 ....,_ -. - ...i.,,q ......, ir tz. - war. P•o4•11.Rawit.nosa AIMPamal 011. f bn@D©IRgOC:rg )04 STATE HIWAY 5&DAKOTA AVENUE • . ro 111 c-i\iN ' CHANHASSEN.MINNESOTA • :.••••Ir.':re:'1,""•• es■-•ale' ' SY Ort immttyrtesi r lira WI . II' FLOOR PLAN ,-.... ..eri _ T--- i• - --- • _—......Li _ is ;f.,. f M • i fIf C ` i q 1 1 ' - ' • -I--'t- VI ---1--: if 1 ill Ii/:,1 t. CM.: ti 1 1 -I -, . 1 i 11 El I IV i 3 :■._, nt MI I 1/ 1 i s, ! i) I'i Hill 1 i, t I 14 --�LA j # NT iiii 11 P , „, S 1 :1! .r- 1 . I, ,_— ,., III 1 i..� 1 1 j j,l W� �� 1 : I 7 i h T -- ■ iS( =s I ., y i i i vt i .• z it ■ tt xa i -,11 I j 1 it € LIII 6„ _ 41 if 1 Ij - R ,, 1 1 imE 1 ,:: i iii 11° Ell I% = 01 Jr! is_ ill 11111 I t 1111.1110i it 1 . ______T____,/ in . . A t # oh.” 4itI .r._ . - , ..,. ....� ...- .> Q W STATE irwAr S a DAKOTA AVENUE c....-- _ __ 1 CHANHASSEN.S MESOTA : • - -•� ■. an ew»nlr n ,w.r. ELEVATIONS,SECTIONS ""°'""" (.'" J""' . 1 F • e, jtk LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION le V' • Of CITY OF CIIANUASSErz \ 690 Coulter Drive k\. �� • Chanhassen, MN 55317 • (612) 937-1900 IAPPLICANT: McDonald's Corporation OWNER: Chanhassen Holding Company .ADDRESS 1650 W. 82nd St. , Suite 900 ADDRESS 14201 Excelsior Blvd. - : - Bloomington, MN 55431 . pp Code . . Minnetonka, MN 5545 TELEPHONE (Daytime) 612/884-4355 Zip Code TELEPHONE REQUEST: . . ' = :=- - -=. :4444, •: I Zoning District Change - - .�._ _ planned Unit Development • Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan I Zoning Variance Preliminary Plan • Final Plan - Zoning Text Amendment —>- Subdivision • N I • Land Use Plan Amendment Platting • I Conditional Use Permit Metes and Bounds __ Site Plan Review Street/Easement Vacation Wetlands Permit - PROJECT NAME • McDonald's Restaurant Development of Additional Property IIPRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION ' Vacant Land REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Parking for existing restaurant 1 PRESENT ZONING Commercial • II REQUESTED ZONING Commercial Parking • • USES PROPOSED rking for existing restaurant IISIZE OF PROPERTY Proposed 94, 973 sq. ft. or 2.1803 acres LOCATION 90 Lake Drive East, Chanhassen, MN I • REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST Replat Lots 1 and 2, Block i ck 1, khan Haven I Plaza to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza,all in Carer Count . � Minnesota. y' LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary) See above "Reasons for This Request" City of Chanhassen 11 ' Land Development Application Page 2 - • FILING INSTRUCTIONS: This application must be completed in I clearly printed and must be accompanied by all informationtan ° plans required by applicable City Ordinance d ` filing this application, Provisions. Before 1 to determine the specific ordinance and fprocedural erequi Planner applicable to your application. 4 rements FILING CERTIFICATION: IThe undersigned representative of the applicant hereb that he is familiar with the procedural requirements o certifies applicable City Ordinances . ' McDonald's• Corporation Signed Bya I ppl Cant Date March 9, 1990 • . IF • 1 The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been authorized to make this application for the property herein ,. ' • described. y II4 . Signed By Fee Owner Date II • I Date Application Received I • Application Fee Paid • I City Receipt No. II This Application will be considered b Board of Adjustments and Appeals h tre Planning . ' meeting. PPeals at their g COlssion/ I • . 1 • ... . LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHENEMS 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: M tOO4a./' S Cone OWNER: can 'S 41°01C4,770 oK..�Otil ADDRESS nesa W, $2y° ST. sut$ 90 ADDRESS 11.50 ►J. B200 Sr, Su in 900 I L.40 1)4.41o4 � MA), 5g-41Z I 114021-40441104 . M4• d31 Zip Code Zip Code I TELEPHONE (Daytime)(G 1?) 434-43SS TELEPHONE 6,I2 4-4 UT REQUEST: Zoning District Change _____ Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan I Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance _ Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision ' Land Use Plan Amendment ___ Platting Conditional Use Permit - Metes and Bounds Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review ' Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME HCOokiAt.0'S A00mot.14-1_. Pita. !f✓I..afNA.Jf Asedt, Qa Ica•44 rno PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION VAGitaJT Paor / EEtJrbuA QEJ1 tits If REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION • I►,ML &! f%i4v Aga tttdri4uKht,1r/rya PRESENT ZONING Gerstr►6,rr�� REQUESTED ZONING CeMt- ' USES PROPOSED ,SArME A S Ex M V J D SIZE OF PROPERTY Ewen Ast. Stn 54,891 sir, £OO tub 44,91s si Tofu, 44i,404 LOCATION 40 L.eIct D2tvE 'AST ' REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST ADD)Mu lb BLIG, dsJd 1344),44 vJ/,m, PEOP4+L1Y LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary) SutvrY 67Th .MAO 1 FEB 2 0 199 ' CITY OF CHANHASS N II City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS: This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or ' clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the City Planner to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements 1 applicable to your application. ' FILING CERTIFICATION: The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies ' that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all applicable City Ordinances . Signed By 4Adoei cow n04 Date Lf i 19/90 Applicant StAia —' 1 ' The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been authorized to make this application for the property herein described. 1 ' Signed By Gam/ XiCodgel Date Zip?* 1 Fee Owner 1 1 Date Application Received 0%16--90 Application Fee Paid .- " - 9v 41� a 1 ' City Receipt No. 5D�(pt' 1 • * This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/ 1 Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their meeting. 1