Loading...
4bCITY OF PC DATE: CC DATE: CASE #: Sept. 1, 1999 Sept. 27, 1999 SPR #99-11, PUD #95-2 PROPOSAL: LOCATION: APPLICANT: Site Plan Review for a 5,223 square foOt restaurant on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2na Addition (Building 3) Southwest Comer of Hwy. 5 and Great Plains Blvd., Outlot C, Villages on the Ponds Alliant Engineering, Inc. 212 2nd Street SE, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Attn.: Maleah Acosta (612) 676-2745 Ruby Tuesday 8391 West Lake Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn.: Guerrino A. Ruta, Jr. (612)949-1392 PRESENT ZONING: PUD ACREAGE: 0.941 Acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - BH, Highway 5 S - PUD, Villages on the Ponds E - BN, Great Plains Boulevard W - PUD, Villages on the Ponds WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site has been prepared for devel6pment as part of the Villages on the Ponds development. Abutting the site to the west is the Village pond which wraps around the site to the north. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Mixed Use: Commercial, Institutional, Office, and Residential State Lake Susan 1 Mayfield 2 Mission Hills 3 Frisco Crt Mi / /// / ? ///~ Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 2 This application was submitted on May 14, 1999. The 120 days will expire on September 11, 1999. The applicant has given the city a letter granting a 30 day extension. The decision by the City must be rendered by October 11, 1999. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant made some changes to the plans. All new information will appear in bold. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting site plan approval for a one story, 5,223 square foot, single tenant, commercial building. It is proposed to be occupied by a restaurant (Ruby Tuesday's). The building is located immediately east of the Village pond which is at the heart of the Villages on the Ponds concept and overlooks the wetland environment. This area is highly visible from Highway 5 as well as from the northern tier of the development. This site was originally approved for Famous Dave's Restaurant which was never built. Staff has been working with the applicant for several months and we have gone through many revisions. When we initially met with the applicant, we explained that~.u~.t~9 tli6~.i~, lt.~ple frontages on this building, it was essential that none of the elevations g.~tlg: impr~ss~bn-~ "- ~' of a rear of a building or service area. The east and north elevations are well designed and were able to achieve this objective. The south and west elevations give the appearance of a service area or back of a building. All elevations must be designed with architectural relief. Awnings over walls are not an acceptable form of relief. We recommend the applicant add windows below the awnings to give them a functional appearance other than providing shade to the landscaping adjacent to the building. We note that this was a requirement of both AmericInn Hotel and Houlihan's Restaurant. Both buildings have actual windows in addition to false windows to meet the Villages on the Pond PUD standards and the same should be expected of the current proposal. These two elevations that are of concern to staff face the interior portion of the village and the pond. East bound pedestrians, as well as vehicles on Pond Promenade will be looking at large expanses of brick walls. The EIFS columns add some relief to these walls but the design can be improved drastically with minimum added cost. The applicant submitted revised elevations that eliminate the middle awning along the south wall, adds two awnings on each side of the middle wall, and a fake window on one side of the middle wall. This is a step in the right direction, however, there is still room for improvement. (The colored renderings in the City Council packet do not reflect the changes made along the south elevation, however, Sheet A6.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS, show these changes). The main building material is face brick. Columns utilize EIFS and the rosettes at the base of the columns are painted wood. Diamond shaped tile medallions, columns, and awnings wrap around the building. The applicant submitted colored elevations, howe-v~, and actual materials have not ~ to our office witk t*'e ..... ,;~., ^~-**,~ ~.~;~. ~-~ .... ~:~., ,.~o ~. .... ~..:~ ~^ Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 3 will be available at the meeting. Rooftop equipment is screened by a mansard roof as well as parapet walls. Two types of light fixtures are used on the building. The first is a gooseneck and the second is a surface mounted down light (refer to exterior elevations). Staff counted 45 goose neck and 33 down cast light fixtures on the building. The number of fixtures is of concern to staff and the applicant is aware of that. It is our understanding that both the color of the awnings and the light fixtures are a requirement by Ruby Tuesday. (If these lights resemble those used on Ruby Tuesday in Edina, then they will not emit high glare, however, 78 light fixtures is excessive and the number must be reduced). With changes recommended by staff, the design will become compatible and meet the intent and criteria for Villages on the Ponds. Trash enclosure is located in the parking lot, east of the building and will be shared between the subject building and a retail building to be located east of the subject site (the trash enclosure was approved as part of a previous application). Wall mounted signs are proposed on three walls. The sign criteria for this PUD permits signage on street frontages and main parking lots only. The sign facing the pond must be removed. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff was directed to process a variance to allow the sign facing the pond. This variance is scheduled for the October 20, 1999, Planning Commission meeting. A clear red neon band in 3 inch channel with clear plexiglass appears on four elevations. The sign ordinance treats neon bands as signs. The maximum allowable sign area for the front elevation is 156 square feet. The proposed sign have the following area: Elevation Sign Neon Band East 23.25 sq. ft. 8.75 sq. ft. South 0.5 sq. ft. North 23.25 sq. fi. 13 sq. fi. West 23.25 sq. ft. 1.25 sq. ft. The landscape plan meets minimum ordinance requirements, however, improvements could be made by varying the locations and species of plants to create a more interesting landscape design around the building and pond. The applicant is showing a potential future patio along the northwest comer of the building. We strongly encourage the applicant to construct the patio concurrently with the construction of the building. The pedestrian movement/circulation is well thought out and is consistent with the overall concept for the PUD requirements. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 4 On November 24, 1997, the City Council approved Site Plan #97-11 for a 5,300 square foot building (building 3) on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, for Famous Dave's. The building was never built and the Ruby Tuesday building is proposed to replace the Famous Dave's Restaurant. The Famous Dave's site plan must be officially withdrawn. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan subject to the conditions of approval. BACKGROUND On May 11, 1999, the City Council approved the final plat for Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 3rd Addition subdividing Outlot D and part of Outlot E, Villages on the Ponds for Houlihan's. On May 11, 1998, the City Council approved Site Plan 98-5 for a 7,443 square foot Houlihan's Restaurant. On November 24, 1997, the City Council approved Site Plan #97-11 for a 5,300 square foot building (building 3) on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, for Famous Dave's. On September 23, 1997, the city granted approval for a 14,849 square foot retail building on Lot 2, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, (Building 4). Building 4 is a one story, 14,849 square foot, multi-tenant, retail building. On September 23, 1997, the city granted Final Plat approval for Outlot C into Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition. On August 11, 1997, the City Council approved the proposed 30,000 square foot office building (building 17) on Outlot K, Village on the Ponds (#97-9 SPR), plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, dated 6/13/97. On December 16, 1996, the City Council approved Site Plan 96-13 for a 45,505 square foot Americlnn Motel and Suites facility. On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (final reading); and final plat dated "Received September 19, 1996" for two lots and ten outlots and public right-of-way. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 5 On September 9, 1996, the City Council approved Site Plan 96-11 for a 96,288 square foot school church facility for St. Hubert Catholic Community. On August 12, 1996, the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD #92-1 including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from lOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (first reading); Preliminary plat for 13 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-way; Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) findings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Villages on the Ponds project. Sector II has a 47,200 square foot motel and is proposing a 14,849 square foot retail building and a5,300 restaurant. In addition, a future building 2, west of the Village pond, is proposed for a 7,500 square foot commercial building. Sector II was allocated a total of 60,000 square feet for commercial/retail space. In order to accommodate all of this potential commercial space in sector II, 14,849 square feet of retail space must be transferred from Sector I. GRADING The proposed grading plan matches fairly well with the approved grading plan for Villages on the Ponds. The site has already been rough graded in coordination with Phase I of Villages on the Ponds. Only minor grading is anticipated to prepare the parking lot and building pad. Staff recommends the applicant consider raising the comer of the northwest parking lot a minimum of one foot to match existing grades better, reduce 4% cross slope in parking lot and provide adequate build in catch basin No. 5. EROSION CONTROL In conjunction with Phase I, some erosion control fence is still in place as part of the overall site grading. The plans propose new silt fence around the perimeter of the site. A rock construction entrance ~will need to be employed at the access off of Great Plains Boulevard. The rock construction entrance shall be maintained until the site is paved with bituminous. The proposed catch basins will need to be protected during construction. Once the parking lot and/or drive aisles are paved, there should be provisions for protecting the catch basins until all disturbed areas have been revegetated. Temporary protection for the catch basins could include rock filter dikes or other measures approved by staff. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 6 UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water is not directly available to the site. Sanitary sewer and water will need to be extended from Main Street to connect to Great Plains Boulevard by the developer of Villages on the Ponds. All of the utilities proposed will be constructed and privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City; therefore, detailed utility construction plans will not be required. However, a utility plan sheet extending the utilities from Main Street to Great Plains Boulevard will be required with the building permit application for City approval. All utilities shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant and/or contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer and water permits from the City's Building Department. Since the parcels will be sharing the utility improvements, cross-access easements will be required and dedicated over both lots. Upon completion of the utility improvements, mylar as-built construction plans of the utilities will be required by the City. DRAINAGE Overall, the site drainage conforms with the comprehensive drainage plan for Villages on the Ponds. Stormwater runoff from the parking lot will be conveyed via storm sewers to an on-site pretreatment basin prior to discharging into the wetlands off site. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations (Rational method) for each segment of pipe including a drainage area map for a 1 O-year, 24-hour storm event for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to issuance of the building permit. PARKING LOT CIRCULATION Overall, the parking lot and drive aisles appear to function well. None of the drive aisles or parking lots have been constructed yet. The plans also indicate a trail system to/from Outlot B to the site which has not been constructed yet. The applicant should coordinate with the developer for the installation of this trail/walkway segment. It will be necessary to have an all-weather access (paved or gravel) extended to Ruby Tuesday to meet requirements from the development contract. At this point, Lot 2 is not built upon and depending on timing, may not be built on prior to issuance of a building permit for Ruby Tuesday. Therefore, the applicant will need to provide Lot 1 with a temporary drive aisle from Great Plains Boulevard that meets fire code requirements, i.e. 20-foot wide paved with bituminous and/or Class 5 gravel section which meets a 7-ton per axle design prior to issuance of a building permit. The developer of Villages on the Ponds will be required to extend a permanent driveway in accordance with the approved plans for Villages on the Ponds from Great Plains Boulevard to Lot 1 in conjunction with development of this site. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 7 WETLANDS The issue of wetland impacts and wetland mitigation have already been addressed in the overall Villages on the Pond PUD. The applicant has already been approved for wetland impacts and mitigation. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land .use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of $2.75 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. The proposed SWMP water quality charge for commercial developments is $5,909/acre. The applicant has designed storm runoff (NURP) ponds for the entire Villages on the Ponds site, and therefore, water quality charges will be waived. Storm Water Quantity Fees The~SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-Wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Commercial developments will have a connection charge of $4,360 per developable acre. The total area of'this portion of the Villages on the Ponds proposed development is 2.13 acres. Therefore, the applicant would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of $ 9,287. These SWMP fees will be due payable to the City at time of final plat recording. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed development must comply with the Villages on the Ponds Design Standards, Sector II (see attached Exhibit C) for the PUD. The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office, and residential Uses. The use of the PUD zone :is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined inthe design standards. The design criteria cover all aspects of the development including lighting consistency, signage requirements, uses, building materials, design and architectural detailing, site coverage, and building square footages Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 8 LANDSCAPING Minimum requirements for landscaping include 983 sq. ft. of landscaped area around the parking lot, two landscape islands and four trees for the parking lot. The applicant's proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table. Vehicular use landscape area Trees/parking lot Required 983 sq. ft. 4 overstory 2 landscape islands IProposed >983 sq. ft. 4 understory 2 landscape islands The applicant meets minimum ordinance requirements for number of trees and landscape islands in the parking lot. Staff recommends that the applicant increase the island width to ten feet or install aeration tubing in the islands. Landscaping, such as shrubs or ornamental trees, would be appropriate at the north end of the parking lot to provide some screening from Highway 51 Plant materials chosen should tie into the pond landscaping located directly r~..~ ~f t~i .~. ~,i~ Landscaping around the building meets ordinance requirements, however, a more interesting design could be achieved by varying the locations and species of plants. Since the pond is a focal point, landscaping could be designed to complement this feature as buildings such as Houlihan's have done. This should not be a substantial increase to the cost of landscaping, yet, it could greatly enhance the area. Additionally, shrub sizes should be increased in order to create more of a visual impact around the building. Minimum size for container should be no less than 24 - 36 inches. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 9 general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: ao An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; Co Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d° Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed site plan is consistent with all plans and specifications with the exception of the development design standards for the Village on the Ponds Planned Unit Development. The applicant must revise the south and west elevations to more accurately reflect the intentions of the development. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. The intent is to create a pedestrian friendly, "traditional" village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper midwest and the atmosphere within this development, yet with the amenities and technological tools of modern times. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 10 PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On September 1, 1999, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved this application. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves Site Plan #97-12 for a 5,223 square foot building (Ruby Tuesday's) on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, dated received August 16, 1999, subject to the following conditions: 1. Landscape islands will need to be increased to ten feet wide or aeration tubing will be required to be installed. 2. The applicant shall vary the locations and species of plants to create a more interesting landscape design around the building and pond. 3. The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the necessary security required by the agreement. 4. Add planter boxes to west side of building. 5. All roof top equipment shall be screened from views. 6. The Famous Dave's site plan shall be officially withdrawn. 7. TF.e applicant sha!l reduce the number of light fix~:res. 8. The west and south building elevations shall be revised by adding windows or other architectural details, under the awnings. 9. The proposed commercial development of 2.13 net developable acres is responsible for a water quantity fee of $9,287. This fee is due payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. 10. The wall mounted sign along the west elevation shall not be permitted. 11. Building Official Conditions: a) The building is required to have fire sprinklers. b) The utility plan was not reviewed at this time. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 11 c) The floor plan was reviewed for exit separation only. d) I recommend that the building owner and or their representative meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 12. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All storm sewer inlets shall be protected with erosion control measures until all disturbed areas have been revegetated. A rock construction entrance shall be maintained until the parking lots and driveway have been paved with a bituminous surface out to Great Plains Boulevard. 13. The sidewalks on the site shall be constructed in conjunction with the overall site improvements and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless inclement weather conditions prohibit. The applicant shall coordinate installation of the proposed trail/walkway along the west side of Lot 1 through Outlot B, Villages on the Ponds with the developer of Villages on the Ponds. 14. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water and plumbing permits from the City's Building Department. Cross-access easements for the utilities and driveways shall be dedicated over the lot. 15. Mylar as-built construction plans of the utility improvements will be required by the City upon completion of the site improvements. 16. A building permit shall not be issued until the access driveway meets fire code requirements. The driveway may be constructed with a bituminous and/or Class 5 gravel section, 20 feet wide which meets a 7-ton per axle design. 17. Staff recommends the applicant consider raising the curb elevation/parking lot grade in the northwest comer of the site a minimum of one foot. 18. Construction plans for utility extension to the lot from Main Street and Grandview Road shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. All utilities shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. 19. The applicant shall provide parking lot and building lighting plan i.e., light fixture design and height, location, photometrics, etc. for review and approval. Ruby Tuesday's Restaurant September 27, 1999 Page 12 20. Shrub sizes shall be increased in order to create more of a visual impact around the building. Minimum size for container shall be no less than 24 - 36 inches." ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter and Development Review Application 2. Memo from David Hempel dated June 10, 1999 3. Memo from Steve Torell dated June 8, 1999 4. Exhibit C - Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards 5. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 6. Site plan reduction 7. Planning Commission minutes dated September 1, 1999. 8. Plans dated received August 16, 1999. g:\plan~saXruby tuesdays.sep l.doc R T I'11 t'qI".IEAPOL I S P. 02/'E12 August 6, 1999 Sharmin AL-Jaff City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive P0 iBox 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Sharmin: I hereby grant the City of Chatfl~assen a thirty day extension to the required one hundred twenty days lbr processing an application. Sinc_.er. cly, /~'-}e, A. President, CEO ~ RT Mi~meapolis Franchise, LLC 83g 1 WeSt Lake DrN'e - Clqarlt]assen, MN 5531 ? * Office: 612-g4g- 1:392 · Fax: 612-94.9-0327 TOTAL P. t32 May14,1999 Ms. Sharmin AL-Jaff Senior Planner City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Ms. AL-Jaff: I am pleased to present to you the site plan for Chanhassen's newest restaurant, Ruby Tuesday. Located in Villages On The Ponds, the site plan being presented is based on approved plans and is an exciting addition to the project. The Ruby Tuesday restaurant will employ approximately 65 team ~}~n~er[ ~',a.' .~. ~t 206 guests. As a resident of the City of Chanhassen, I am very prou~ me oPpc;rtuhity to build and operate a restaurant here. To be associated with a project such as Villages On The Ponds is quite exciting and I am looking forward to working with you to secure all the necessary approvals. Should you have any questions concerning the site plan, please contact Maleah Acosta of Alliant Engineering at 612.362.0432. Also, please contact me directly at the number listed below should you need additional information. Sinc~ze, ly, ~ /~r e~n°t ,~ ER(~ta' Jr' /~_~/ c/ RT Minneapolis Franchise, LLC 8391 West Lake Drive · Chanhassen, MN 55317 · Office: 612-949-1392 · Fax: 612-949-0327 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: Alliant Engineering, Inc. Attn.: Maleahi:~ Acosta 212 2nd Street SE, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55414 TELEPHONE(Daytime) 612-676-2745 OWNER: Ruby Tuesday - Guerrino A. Ruta, Jr. ADDRESS: 8391 West Lake Drive Chanahssen, MN 55317 TELEPHONE: 612-949-1392 __ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* . Zoning Appeal __ Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits , Sign Plan Review __ Notification Sign Site PJan Review* $302 Subdivision* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** $50 ($50 C U P/SP FUVACNARANAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ 352 A list Of:all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. ~rwenty-six full size folded copies of the'plans must be submitted, including an 81/2'' X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. '* Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application· NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. ~ROJECT NAME Ruby Tuesday .OCATION Hiqhway 5 and .EGAL DESCRIPTION Part of Great Plains Boulevard Outlot Cf Lot 1 Villaqes on the Pondsf Second Addition Carver Countyf Minnesota :RESENT ZONING PUD ~EQUESTED ZONING N/A ~RESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION ~EQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION ~EASON FOR THIS REQUEST To construct a Ruby Tuesday "his application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information nd plans required by applicable C~ Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should, confer with the =lanning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requiremerrts applicable to your application. Fhis is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible fo~'complying vith all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party ~vhom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application, i have attached a copy of proof of ,wnership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of matedal and the progress of this application. I further ~nderstand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any ?,uthodzation to proceed with the study. The documents and information ! have subm~ed are true and correct to the best 3f my knowledge. also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded ,gainst the title to the property for which the approvaVpermit is grarited within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's ~ice and the original document returned to City Hall Records. ~ignature of Applicant Date Date Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be avallable on Friday prior to the neeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. MEMORANDUM CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 Cio, Center Drive, PO Box I47 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phone 612.937.1900 General £ax 612.937.5739 E, gineering £4x 612.937.9152 ?,b/ic SafeO, £ax 612,934.2524 l~b www. d.chanhassen, mn. us TO: FROM: DATE: SUB J: GRADING Sharmin A1-Jaff, Senior Planner Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer June 10, 1999 Review of Site Plan for Ruby Tuesday Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds Second Addition Land Use Review File No. 99-20 The proposed grading plan matches fairly well with the approved grading plan for Villages on the Ponds. The site has already been rough graded in coordination with Phase I of Villages on the Ponds. Only minor grading is anticipated to prepare the parking lot and building pad. Staff recommends the applicant consider raising the comer of the northwest parking lot a minimum of one foot to match existing grades better, reduce 4% cross slope in parking lot and provide adequate build in catch basin No. 5. EROSION CONTROL In conjunction with Phase I, some erosion control fence still is in place as part of the overall site grading. The plans propose new silt fence around the perimeter of the site. A rock construction entrance will need to be employed at the access off of Great Plains Boulevard. The rock construction entrance shall be maintained until the site is paved with bituminous. The proposed catch basins will need to be protected during construction. Once the parking lot and/or drive aisles are paved, there should be provisions for protecting the catch basins until all disturbed areas have been revegetated. Temporary protection for the catch basins could include rock filter dikes or other measures approved by staff. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water is not directly available to the site. Sanitary sewer and water will need to be extended from Main Street to connect to Great Plains · Boulevard by the developer of Villages on the Ponds. All of the utilities proposed will be constructed and privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City; therefore, detailed utility construction plans will not be required. However, a utility plan sheet extending the utilities from Main Street to Great Plains Boulevard will be required with the building permit application for City approval. All utilities shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant and/or contractor will be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer and water permits from the City's Building Department. Since the parcels will be sharing the The Gty of Clmnhassen. A ~rowin~, community with clean lakes, (wality schools, a cham~in~ downtown, thrivin~ businesses, and beautiful ~arks. A ~reat Idace to live, work, and Sharmin A1-Jaff Ruby Tuesday Site Plan Review June 10, 1999 Page 2 utility improvements, cross-access easements will be required and dedicated over both lots. Upon completion of the utility improvements, mylar as-built construction plans of the utilities will be required by the City. DRAINAGE Overall, the site drainage conforms with the comprehensive drainage plan for Villages on the Ponds. Stormwater runoff from the parking lot will be conveyed via storm sewers to an on-site pretreatment basin prior to discharging into the wetlands off site. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations (Rational method) for each segment of pipe including a drainage area map for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to issuance of the building permit. PARKING LOT CIRCULATION Overall, the parking lot and drive aisles appear to function well. None of the drive aisles or parking lots have been constructed yet. The plans also indicate a trail system to/from Outlot B to the site which has not been constructed yet. The applicant should coordinate with the developer for the installation of this trail/walkway segment. It will be necessary to have an all-weather access (paved or gravel) extended to Ruby Tuesday to meet requirements from the development contract. At this point, Lot 2 is not built upon and depending on timing, may not be built on prior to issuance of a building permit for Ruby Tuesday. Therefore, the applicant will need to provide Lot 1 with a temporary drive aisle from Great Plains Boulevard that meets fire code requirements, i.e. 20-foot wide paved with bituminous and/or Class 5 gravel section which meets a 7-ton per axle design prior to issuance of a building permit. The developer of Villages on the Ponds will be required to extend a permanent driveway in accordance with the approved plans for Villages on the Ponds from Great Plains Boulevard to Lot 1 in conjunction with development of this site. ,,RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All storm sewer inlets shall be protected with erosion control measures until all disturbed areas have been revegetated. A rock construction entranCe shall be maintained until the Shannin A1-Jaff Ruby Tuesday Site Plan Review June 10, 1999 Page 3 parking lots and driveway have been paved with a bituminous surface out to Great Plains Boulevard. The sidewalks on the site shall be constructed in conjunction with the overall site improvements and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless inclement weather conditions prohibit. The applicant shall coordinate installation of the proposed trail/walkway along the west side of Lot 1 through Outlot B, Villages on the Ponds with the developer of Villages on the Ponds. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water and plumbing permits from the City's Building Department. Cross- access easements for the utilities and driveways shall be dedicated over the lot. Mylar as-built construction plans of the utility improvements will be required by the City upon completion of the site improvements. A building permit shall not be issued until the access driveway meets fire code requirements. The driveway may be constructed with a bituminous and/or Class 5 gravel section, 20 feet wide which meets a 7-ton per axle design. Staff recommends the applicant consider raising the curb elevation/parking lot grade in the northwest comer of the site a minimum of one foot. Construction plans for utility extension to the lot from Main Street and Grandview Road shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. All utilities shall be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates. c: Anita Benson, City Engineer g:XengMave't~c~uby tuesday.doc ClTYOF CHANHASSEN City Center Drive, PO Box I47 hanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phone 612.937. i900 General?ax 612.937.5739 ~gineering Fax 612.937.9152 bbc Safety Fax 612.934.2524 '/eb www. ci.&anhassen, mn. us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUB J: Sharmin AI-Jaff ~~' Steve Toreli, Building Official June 8, 1999 Site plan review for: Ruby Tuesday, Planning Case 99-11 SPR I have reviewed the site plans for the above building and offer thq fol.[owing comments and recommendations: ~i'~.:~[~ ~I~I .~ 1. The building is required to have fire sprinklers. 2. The utility plan was not reviewed at this time. 3. The floor plan was reviewed for exit separation only. 4. I recommend that the building owner and or their representative meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. g/safety/st/memos/plan/rubytuesday e Cin, o£Chanhassen. A e~vwin¢ communin, with clean lakes, aualit~, schools, a cham~in~ downtown, thrivine businesses, and beautiful oarks. A ereat olace to live. work. and olae VILLAGES ON THE PONDS CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office, and residential uses. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to uses as defined below or similar uses to those as listed in the Standard Industrial Classification. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall make that interpretation. No single retail user shall exceed 20,000 square feet on a single level of a building. A maximum of thirty- three (33) percent of the square footage of the retail users within the development may be ora "big box" category. The intent of this requirement is to provide a variety of users, including small retail shops, service providers, coffee shops, cabarets, etc., for residents of the Villages as well as the community as a whole, rather than typical suburban type large, individual users dominating the development and detracting from the "village" character. Retail users should be those that support and compliment the residential development located within the development, providing goods and services which enhance residents of the village and the community. Office. Professional and business office, non-retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. bank/credit union finance, insurance and real estate health services - except nursing homes and hospitals engineering, accounting, research management and related services legal services Personal Services. Establishments primarily engaged in providing services involving the care of a person or his or her personal goods or apparel. dry cleaning beauty or barbershop shoe repair photographic studio tax return preparation laundromat health club optical goods computer services day care center copying mail stores Institutional. Establishments that are public/semi-public in nature. church library education services day care art gallery dance studio cultural facility Commercial/Retail. Establishments engaged in commercial operations including retail sales and services and hospitality industries. Apparel and Accessory Stores shoe stores electronic and music store and musical instruments restaurant - no drive through restaurant - fast food only if integrated into a building no freestanding fast food and no drive through drug store/pharmacy book/stationary jewelry store hobby/toy game gift novelty and souvenir sewing, needlework and piece good florist camera and photographic supply art and art supplies, gallery sporting goods video rental food stores including bakery and confectionery hardware store computer store hotel/motel entertainment 2 liquor store pets and pet supplies home fumishings Residential. Residential units shall be provided as upper level units above the commercial/office uses within the village core and as stand alone units. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be rental units. Of the rental units, the city has adopted a goal of 35 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. For the ownership housing, the city has adopted the goal of 50 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. Prohibited Uses: auto related including auto sales, auto repair, gas stations c. Setbacks In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Building Parking Great Plains Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback C, 0' 0' Market Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback C, 50' 20' Hwy. 5: Buffer yard & Setback B, 50' 20' Interior Side Lot Line: Buffer yard & setback NA, 0' 0' East Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to D, 50' 50' residential): Buffer yard & setback West Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to B, 50 20 industrial): Buffer yard & setback Buffer yards are as specified in the City of Chanhassen Landscaping and Tree Removal Ordinance, Article XXV. No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height o The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent/ 5. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. o The maximum building height shall be Sector I - three stories (with residential loft)/50 fi. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to two stories/30 feet), Sector II - three stories/40 fi., Sector III - three stories/40 fi., exclusive of steeples and bell towers, and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet The maximum building footprint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL sq. ft. Retail (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units Sector I 114,500 70,500 ~ 0 154 185,000 Sector II 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 32,000 ~ 0 112 ~ 32,000 TOTAL 174,500 116,500 100,000 266 391,000 ~ As an alternative, the office/service could be increase by 13,000 square feet in Sector I if the 32,000 square foot office building is deleted in Sector IV and replaced with 56 additional dwelling units. * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors subject to approval by the Planning Director. Building square footages may be reallocated between uses subject to approval of the Planning Director. However, the reallocation of building square footages between uses shall only be permitted to a less intensive use, i.e. from commercial to office or institutional, or from office to institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. e. Building Materials and Design (Staff will be working with the developer to provide pictures to further articulate the design standards and definitions.) The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. The intent is to create a pedestrian friendly, "traditional" village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper midwest and the atmosphere within this development, yet with the amenities and technological tools of modem times. The village elevations shown on the PUD drawings are to be used only as a general guideline and the reflection of the overall village image including the north- midwestem architectural vocabulary, village like human scale and flavor, and variety in design and facade treatment. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass, stucco, architecturally treated concrete, cast in place panels, decorative block, cedar siding, vinyl siding in residential with support materials, or approved equivalent as determined by the city. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Bright, long, continuous bands are prohibited. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors may be used only for accent purposes and shall not exceed 10 percent of a wall area. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. Metal siding, gray concrete, curtain walls and similar materials will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials, or as trim or as HVAC screen, and may not exceed more than 25 percent of a wall area. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal or accessory structures. There shall not be underdeveloped backsides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. 10. 11. 12. The materials and colors used for each building shall be selected in context with the adjacent building and provide for a harmonious integration with them. Extreme variations between buildings on the same street in terms of overall appearance, bulk and height, setbacks and colors shall be prohibited. Slope roof elements shall be incorporated in all structures: Sector I - minimum 70 percent of roof area shall be sloped, Sector II - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, Sector III - minimum of 30 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, and Sector IV - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped. An exception to this requirement are roof areas designed for human use such as decks, garden areas, patios, etc., which will not be counted towards flat roof area. The following design elements should be incorporated into individual structures: Building Accents Towers, silos, arches, columns, bosses, tiling, cloisters, colonnades, buttresses, loggias, marquees, minarets, portals, reveals, quoins, clerestories, pilasters. Roof Types Barrow, dome, gable, hip, flat .... ;'*:~ Roof Accents Cupolas, cornices, belfries, turrets, pinnacles, look-outs, gargoyles, parapets, lanterns. Accent elements such as towers, turrets, spires, etc., shall be excluded from the sector building height limitation. Window Types Bay, single paned, multi-paned, angular, square, rectangular, half-round, round, italianate. 13. Window Accents Plant boxes, shutters, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. Street level windows shall be provided for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground level wall area. 6 f. Site Landscaping and Screening All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping being required ahead of individual site plan approvals, but we believe the buffer yard and boulevard plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces, except for plaza areas, shall be landscaped, rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. Tree wells shall be included in pedestrian areas and plazas. 3. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited. Undulating or angular berms 3' to 5' in height, south of Highway 5 and along Market Boulevard shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of grading and utility construction. The required buffer landscaping may be installed where it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. o Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. 6. Native species shall be incorporated into site landscaping, whenever possible. g. Signage One project identification sign shall be permitted for the development at each end of Lake Drive and at the south end of Main Street. Project identification sign(s) may also be located at the entrances to the development(s) in Sector IV. Project identification signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. One project identification sign, with a maximum height of 20 feet, which may be increased in height subject to city approval based on the design and scale of the sign, designed as a gateway to the project shall be located at the north end of Main Street. Individual lots are not permitted Iow profile ground business sign. Within Sector III, one sign for the church and one sign for the school may be placed on streetscape walls. The top of the signs shall not extend more than eight feet above the ground and the total sign area for the signs shall not exceed 64 square feet. Pylon signs are prohibited. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. ge Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. Projecting signs are permitted along Main Street and Lake Drive and along pedestrian passageways subject to the conditions below. Signage Plan and Restrictions Wall Signs The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. In Sector II, sign height may be increase based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. If illuminated, individual dimensional letters and logos comprising each sign may be any of the following: a. Exposed neon/fiber optic, b. Open channel with exposed neon, c. Channel Letters with acrylic facing, d. Reverse channel letters (halo lighted), or e. Externally illuminated by separate lighting source. o Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign. Within Sector II, architecturally, building-integrated panel tenant/logo sign may be permitted based on criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building design and architecture. 5. Back lit awnings are prohibited. Projecting signs 1. The letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign area. All wooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall be an integral part of the building's architecture. o o o Signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered and such minimal messages such as date of establishment of business. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band or within the projecting sign :and do not occupy more than fifteen (15) percent of the sign display area. Projecting signs shall be stationary, may not be self-illuminated but may be lighted by surface mounted fixtures located on the sign or the adjacent facade. Projecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant on street frontage and pedestrian passageway and my not exceed six square feet. Letters shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. Projecting signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and shall not project more than six feet from the building facade. Plastic, plexi-glass, clear plex, or similar material projecting signs are prohibited unless used in conjunction with other decorative materials. Projecting signs may be painted, prefinished, or utilize exposed metal. Any exposed metal shall be anodized aluminum, stainless steel, titanium, bronze, or other similar non- corrosive or ono-oxidizing materials. Window Signs Window signs shall not cover more than 25 percent of the Window area in which they are located. 2. Window signs shall not use bright, garish, or neon paint, tape, chalk, or paper. Menu Signs Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries and shall not exceed 4 feet in height. o Shall be used only to convey daily specials, menus and offerings and shall be wood framed chalkboard and/or electronic board with temporary handwritten lettering. No paper construction or messages will be permitted. 3. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet. Festive Flags/Banners 1. Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting. Plastic flags and banners are prohibited. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric. Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or products. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two feet. Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet. Flags and banners which are torn or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the city. o Building Directory_ 1. In multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet. Pole Directory_ Sign 1. Pole directory signs consisting of single poles with individtml nameplate type directional arrows may be located within the development. 2. Pole directory sign shall not exceed 15 feet in height. 3. Directory signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk. 4. A maximum of eight directOry signs may be provided per pole. 5. The maximum size of an individual sign shall be 18 inches long by four inches wide. 6. Poles shall be a minimum of 10 feet behind the curb. h. Lighting 10 3 o o 4 Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous developments, the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. A shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with decorative natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the project perimeter property line. This does not apply to street lighting. Light poles shall be limited to a height of 20 feet. Parking Parking shall be provided based on the shared use of surface parking areas whenever possible. Cross access easements and the joint use of parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. A minimum of 75 percent of a building's parking shall be located to the "rear" of the structure and in underground garages. The development shall be treated as a integrated shopping center and provide a minimum of one space per 200 square feet of commercial/retail area. The office/personal service component shall be treated as an integrated office building and provide 4.5 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 49,999 square feet, four per thousand square feet for the second 50,000 square feet, and 3.5 per thousand square feet thereafter. Residential uses shall provide 1.5 spaces per unit as underground parking with visitor spaces provided as part of the commercial/office uses. Within sector IV, visitor parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.5 stalls per unit. Hotel/motels shall comply with city ordinance. Churches/schools shall comply with city ordinance, however, a minimum of 50 percent of the parking shall be shared. 11 ~,;~/ ~/~/~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE PROPOSAL: Request for Site Plan for Ruby Tuesday Restaurant APPLICANT: LOCATION: Alliant Engineering, Inc. Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicants, Alliant Engineering, Inc., are requesting Site Plan approval for a 5,223 sq. ft. restaurant, Ruby Tuesday, on property zoned PUD, and located on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds Second Addition. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. make a recommendation to the City Council. TIj(~ rn~'[.s~, j~w I then Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937-1900 ext. 120. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on August 19, 1999. Smooth Feed Sheets~*M Use template for 5160® 79TH STREET CENTER % B.C. BURDICK 684 EXCELSIOR BLVD EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 HOULIHANS RESTAURANT 530 POND PROMENADE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL RAMSEY 6362 OXBOW BEND CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 AMERICINN - GENERAL MANAGER 570 POND PROMENADE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHURCH OF ST. HUBERT 7707 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN INN 531 WEST 79TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHURCH OF ST. HUBERT 8201 MAIN STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TIRES PLUS GROUP 701 LADY BIRD LANE BURNSVILLE, MN 55337 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC 551 78TH STREET W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 APPLEBEE'S #95198 1025 WEST EVERE'I-]' ROAD LAKE FOREST, IL 60045 GREG & MARY LARSEN 8151~GRAN DVIEW ROAD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 BLUE CIRCLE'INV COMPANY 6125 BLUE CIRCLE DRIVE MINNETONKA, MN 55343 LOIS SAVARD 8080 MARSH DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 KAROL A. GILMAN 8090 MARSH DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PARK PLACE PARTNERS 7801 PARK DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ! SQNOcl gILL NO S::lDYqqlk 9 ~ CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 Vice Chairman Joyce called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison Blackowiak, Matt Burton, LuAnn Sidney, Deb Kind, Kevin Joyce, and Ladd Conrad MEMBERS ABSENT: Craig Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Sharmin A1-Jaff, Senior Planner; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A 5~223 SO. FT. RESTAURANT~ RUBY TUESDAY ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD~ AND LOCATED ON LOT 1~ BLOCK 1~ VILLAGES ON THE PONDS SECOND ADDITION~ ALLIANT ENGINEERING~ INC. Public Present: Name Address Bob Savard 8080 Marsh Drive Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Joyce: Any questions for staff?. Kind: Sharmin you recommend putting, or removing the signage on the pond. Could the applicant choose to remove, which one would be not the from of the. A1-Jaff: Highway 5? They don't have. Kind: Which way do the two that you're recommending keeping face? AI-Jaff: The one that faces the...and the one that faces the parking lot. Kind: So they could for instance give the parking lot one and keep the one that faces Highway 5 or the pond? AI-Jaff: No. Because the ordinance, well they could apply for a variance and you would have to grant a variance. The parking lot is their main entrance. Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 Kind: Okay, so they could keep the parking lot and the one on Highway 5 and get rid of, could they pick whatever two they want? A1-Jaff: They need two. They could keep two. Kind: But the pond, Highway 5 one would require a variance? A1-Jaff: Correct. Kind: I can just understand why they would want a sign on Highway 5 so I'm trying to figure that one out. Blackowiak: Mr. Chair, Sharmin I've got a question about the trash enclosure. Was this approved as part of the Famous Dave's or part of the retail? Al-Jarl.' It was done with both applications went through at the same time. Blackowiak: And are you comfortable with what is being proposed and it still seems to serve the needs of both lots? A1-Jaff: Yes. We looked at that in depth when Famous Dave's came in and we looked at two separate trash enclosures, one for the retail building and another one for Famous Dave's and after a lengthy discussion everyone agreed that a shared trash enclosure Would be the best solution. Burton: Mr. Chairman. Sharmin, can you give us a little more background on your discussions with the applicant regarding the west and south elevations and what you're recommending and what their responses have been. AI-Jaff.' Our understanding is that one of the major issues that they would be facing would be cost associated if they were to add windows to the building. Meanwhile staff has to enforce the requirements of the planned unit development. And we went through three revisions. With the first proposal they were proposing to paint the columns. It would be painted brick and we told them that that wasn't an acceptable solution. Painted brick is not permitted in the PUD. They eliminated that. The paint. And the revisions basically showed brick only. Well, the building looked very plain. The awnings were still there. With the third revisions, which is before you today, they came back with the EFIS and the awning. They included tile for the diamond shaped accents on top of the building. We're also running against a deadline for the 120 days and we basically had to bring this before you. Sidney: One more thing Sharmin. In the development design standards, point 11 it talks about slope roof elements... A1-Jaff: It's a combination of a pitched element that they have on the building and staff added to that the awnings as sloped element as well. They need to meet a 70% slope. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 Sidney: The awnings... A1-Jaff: One other thing. The only thing we have as far as samples is the brick. We don't have the colors that will be used on the awnings or the roof or. Thank you. Joyce: I do have one question. I do concur with you that this seems like an awful lot of light fixtures. Condition 9 we have the applicant shall reduce the number of light fixtures. Should we be a little more specific like right now so that they understand how they need to reduce so they can comply to that? Do you feel comfortable putting a guideline in there? A1-Jaff: They feel that that is a trademark part of the corporate logo for Ruby Tuesday. It's very important for them to keep those fixtures. Again, we haven't received a photometrics for the lights but I went and visited other Ruby Tuesdays, specifically the one in Edina in Southdale. There is no glare whatsoever. Joyce: Are you going to need a photometric for both this and the parking lot, correct? A1-Jaff: Yes. The light fixtures are shielded.' Joyce: I understand but I just think that that condition, because it's very open ended and I'm just feeling that it might be...process we should close it up a little. With that said, atn, y,~l~her questions? ~i~.~ "~!i~. ~ Conrad: Just one Kevin, or Mr. Chair. I mean when you talk about adding windows, are they fake windows? A1-Jaff.' We looked at the interior plan for this side and the areas, the problem areas are where they have their storage coolers so my guess it would have to be fake windows. It's something that Houlihan's did. They added three windows and the hotel, they added six windows. Conrad: Real or fake? Aanenson: Fake. Al-Jaff.' We're trying to maintain the same standards and requirements of all applicants within the PUD. Conrad: The hotel it's relatively easy to do. With rooms on all sides. Restaurants it's tough but we're talking about, and detail wise you've recommended like on the south elevation one or two fake windows? What have we recommended? I'm going to have a tough time voting for the staff recommendation because I'm not sure what it really is. AI-Jaff: Basically where you have the awning, underneath that. You may have a window. Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 Conrad: Okay. So the full awning, and why. Visually that doesn't bother me personally. Visually it seems if they put another column like their green and yellow columns to the left of the awning, there would be some interest to this. But it is your recommendation that a fake window that you can't see through is a better architectural detail? And you know I don't like, I don't want to be involved in architectural things but it's going to be hard for me to swing with the condition here if I don't understand what we. Aanenson: This is the third draft and the problem was the articulation on that facade so Sharmin was working to try to get some additional articulation. They came back with the canopy and we thought well, that makes you believe there's a window under it. So if you have a concern with putting a window there, then we would suggest they do something else to make that not along, unadorned wall. That was the concern that Sharmin was trying to resolve. That was our response. I'm certain they can... Conrad: I'll reinforce the Chairman's comment about the light fixtures. I think we'd like the flexibility to review what they could bring back, is the way I'm reading your conditions. Is that what you're looking for is the ability to look back? We don't really have an ordinance that says you can't have 72 fixtures? AI-Jaff: As long as they meet the requirements of the photometrics. Conrad: Yeah, okay. And they're way under in terms of signage square footage, so and they certainly could put signage on TH 5, right? A1-Jaff: Right. Conrad: We want them to actually. Yeah I think that's, we want to help them promote themselves and not putting it on TH 5, I'm just making sure that, if that's where they want it but boy, we don't want to restrict Highway 5 visibility. We want them to be successful. Okay, thank you. Joyce: Okay. If the applicant would like to address the Planning Commission at this time, please step forward and state your name and address please. Gerry Ruta: Good evening. My name is Gerry Ruta. I'm the President and CEO of RT Minneapolis. I live at 8391 West Lake Drive in Chanhassen. My family and I moved to Chanhassen about two years ago and I'm excited to talk to you tonight about Ruby Tuesday. I'd like to give you a brief overview on the restaurant and my colleague tonight, Scott Nelson will talk to you about the architecture and address some of the questions you may have. Ruby Tuesday is a restaurant that's been in business since 1972. Most of the restaurants are east of the MississipPi and south. There are 385 restaurants nationwide. My company bought the three existing restaurants in the Twin Cities, Southdale, Rosedale, Mall of America October of 1998. So we've been doing business as an entity for approximately one year. We have plans on building six, I'm sorry, 9 more restaurants within the next 5 to 6 years within the Twin Cities. Most of these restaurants will be free standing restaurants as you see today. We have been 4 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 working, as Sharmin has said, for the past several months on presenting a building that will be acceptable to the PUD requirements of the Village on the Pond plan. We're excited to be a part of the vision of this development. The staff recommendations are very good ones and we've made quite a number of changes to our prototypical building. As we build our brand in the Twin Cities, it's important to us that when building a brand you address service, great food, and of course the image that you project. Part of that image is the prototype for the building. So we've been working within the PUD requirements as well as our Ruby Tuesday incorporated requirements as far as prototypical design goes. We think we've come up with a design that should address most of those, and Scott can talk to you more about the architecture of the building. And I'd like to bring Scott up right now. Scott Nelson: Good evening. My name is Scott Nelson. I'm the project architect from DGR Architecture and we've been working with Gerry and the staff here for several months and as Sharmin has indicated, done several revisions in listening to the concerns of staff and in trying to address the concerns and respond with some new ideas. Just say a couple things. Our company does a lot of work with prototype restaurants and I won't name them all but I think in doing those we've really begun to appreciate what Ruby Tuesdays does in their brand identity and their enforcement of the prototypical standards. I think that as a prototype restaurant, as opposed to several, this is not a box design, as many are of a 60 x 100 box. The building itself, the floor plan itself is a very well articulated thing with ins and outs. Changes in height. It also uses some very traditional brick detailing. Corbels, soldier coursing, diamonds that we've added tile to and with the pilaster design we've gone through a couple revisions. Have changed these to an EFIS which brings some color and texture to the building and their basic prototype design is made to fit into small towns, urban centers, some of the neotraditional design type of ideas. We've reviewed the conditions of approval I believe that number 20 on here and we really don't have issue with any of them but two that I'd like to discuss and review and you've actually touched on a couple of these already if I might. And we're more than willing to work with, continue to work with the staff on a couple of the landscaping issues. I think a number of these have already been addressed and we'll be happy to work with the building department as it goes through to the code issue. You touched already on the issue of the fake window I'll call it, and we've discussed in looking at a couple of possibilities, ifI could refer to the plan here. Refer to the elevations. The reference was made in the revisions that additional windows should be added to the south and west elevation. Actually the way the building... The south elevation is really an articulation of steps that doesn't really show well...but this first piece right here we could add a window that cOuld be a real window...we've added the awning in the center in response to some of the staff comments to provide some additional color and some texture out there. We also in the initial...added a number of additional pilasters at all the comers, not just what's inside... We've added them basically around the whole building. Added some additional canopies for it, and light fixtures. Actually added a number of light fixtures so that it would look like one of the, one that is typically the front and the side. We'd be more than happy to work with staff on...a dozen or more light fixtures. Anyway, our hope was to get... The west elevation is a little more trouble because all of that area back there is cooler, restrooms and service area that would be impacted by windows... Especially at night to seeing through or seeing... The other condition that we have some issue with is the signage on the west elevation which Sharmin pointed out .... area plan here that shows where our site sits relative to the pond. Right across the pond from Houlihan's. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 Their building, because of the atrium inside, they're able to mm their building slightly such that they can actually get the three signs and have all of them facing TH5 and the parking area. We think that the vision of the building coming from the west on Highway 5 is very important...believe that we still need the one on the north side. Of course on the... We're more than'willing to continue to work with staff...couple of issues but those are the key... Joyce: Commissioners have any questions for the applicant? Conrad: Yeah...elevation, which is the side closest to the road? To Highway 5. Scott Nelson: That would be this one. Conrad: Okay. And so it was kind of, but you put the signage on the end away from the highway. Scott Nelson: Oh I'm sorry. A1-Jaff: The only elevation that doesn't have any signage is the south elevation which faces the Villages. Conrad: Sharmin, that doesn't help with my question. So on the elevation I'm looking at, Ruby Tuesdays is on the west elevation, the name you've put away from Highway 5 or, which is north on that elevation? On this particular schematic, which direction is north? Scott Nelson: It is the one with the entry. Conrad: Okay. Scott Nelson: See how the canopies cluster...and we've added light fixtures over... Ideally we'd put our sign as far north... Conrad: No, I think it would benefit you by putting it closer a little bit. Scott Nelson: I think one of the reasons we looked at that there were some landscaping elements...application. They're really kind of clumped around the comer. They've actually... Joyce: Anything else? The comment I'd like to make is we like to have live samples of the materials and I'm sure that City Council would probably like to see those...samples of the, what do we have just the brick here tonight? Aanenson: The colors. Scott Nelson: Stucco, the canopy. Joyce: I would highly recommend that. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 Scott Nelson: Okay. But they are very close to what you see here. Joyce: Considering that this is part of a PUD, we like to... Scott Nelson: We'd be happy to do that. Joyce: Okay. Alright, could I have a motion to open this up for a public hearing please. Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Joyce: This item is open up for a public hearing. If anyone would like to address the Planning Commission on this topic, please step forward. Bob Savard: Good evening, my name is Bob Savard and I live at 8080 Marsh Drive and I'm the closest current residential neighbor to this development. My concern is particularly with the addition of a patio at some time. Noise. We already have a development in Villages on the Pond that has a patio and I have a problem with the noise. My concern is what will we do to try to prevent extreme noise. I can stand in my bedroom and recite the words to the music that's coming from the current live entertainment on the patio at Houlihan's and I certainly don't want that to happen again. I'd like to make it clear though that I've been a strong supporter of the development of Villages on the Pond, but in this particular case I'm concerned about that issue. And secondly, I look at the south elevation of this building from my home. And I would be concerned about how that appears aesthetically to me. Personally so thank you. Joyce: Anyone else like to address the Planning Commission? Seeing none, could I get a motion to close. Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Joyce: Back to the commissioners. We'll start off and put on this item. Burton: Al~ight Mr. Chairman I'll venture forth here. I think it's'basichlly a pre[ts; nice.project, .... I do agree pretty much right down the line with the staff recommendations. I looked at the PUD standards and it says that there shall not be undeveloped back sides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities, and I guess it's subjective but I don't believe that they've met those standards and I don't think that the staff is trying to address that with their recommendations. So I pretty much agree with the staff and then since the applicant is willing to put a window on the south side there by the entry, I think we should require that they do that. Joyce: Anyone else have any comments on this project. 7 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, I'll jump in. I agree with Matt. I also feel that the south and west elevation needs some further interest. Specifically on the south, that is what many of the 'pedestrians and a majority of the people who are going to be walking and doing business in the Villages will be seeing. So I think that that is as important an elevation as the north almost. I mean there might be granted more traffic per se. More cars per day. Whatever, but the south elevation is going to be very important to the bulk of the Villages and to leave it totally brick, I mean although brick is nice. I'm not saying it's not but I think we need a lot more interest there because by itself it's just not going to do it. I feel that the applicant should consider a west sign. I feel that the staff needs to really work with them on getting a western sign. I would encourage, strongly encourage the applicant to do a patio right away, and although Mr. Savard was worded about noise, I feel that this patio is on the northwest comer of the building and pretty much screened by the entire building itself so I don't feel that noise would be, I could be wrong. I don't think it would be a real major at this point because of how the building is placed. The fact that it probably will project more towards Highway 5 than towards the southeast. And again, if noise is a concern I'm assuming we have a noise ordinance. If they're exceeding some type of decibel threshold we have, that that can be looked into but that I guess is another issue. And then finally just make sure that we get a little more interest of whether it's a false window or whatever it may be. More columns or something but don't leave the south and west elevations blank because that.just doesn't quite make it. It's not a complete building in my mind then. I need to look at all four sides equally... Burton: Mr. Chairman, can I follow up on one thing? A question for staff. Is the sign issue the same issue we had with the Chinese restaurant that was across the way? Is it any different? Weren't they looking for an extra sign and we wouldn't let them? Aanenson: Yes. Burton: Isn't this the same? Aanenson: ...that would be frontage, correct. Joyce: I'll ask a similar question...do you know? A1-Jaff.' Technically, as the ordinance reads you would need to give them a variance to put a sign facing the pond. Joyce: So in essence they'd have to come back to us? Did I open up a can of worms here? Kind: Mr. Chairman, I didn't hear the answer. How many signs does Houlihan's have? AI-Jaff: Three. One facing TH 5. One facing the interior of the development, Pond Promenade, and the third one is facing the parking lot, which is permitted by ordinance. Kind: They have signs on three sides of every building? Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 A1-Jaff: Correct. That is permitted by ordinance. Under the PUD requirements. Kind: I don't get how this is different. Blackowiak: Yeah exactly. Why does this need a variance as opposed to Houlihan's? AI-Jaff: Houlihan's, signage on Houlihan's faces Highway 5, which is a street frontage. Pond Promenade which is another street frontage. And the parking lot, which is also another permitted elevation under the PUD requirement. With this application, with Ruby Tuesday, they have one sign facing TH 5, which is okay, under the requirements. One facing the parking lot, which is also okay. The third one is facing the pond, which is not permitted under the PUD requirements. It could face south which is Pond Promenade and then they would have a similar situation to what Houlihan's has. Kind: How would you make the argument that the one facing the pond is also facing Highway 5? A1-Jaff: They have one on Highway 5. Kind: You can only count Highway 5 once? ...got it. Mr. Chairman, I'll just speak to my points. I would like to be able to see them to have a sign on the west elevation., It2s_important. I would also encourage them to move ~t towards H~ghway 5. Do &ffere~!/'ll~rttlsc~apl'~g.i~' whatever. And I agree with everything else that was said .... Joyce: Anything else? Conrad: Well I like this. It's got some life to it and it's probably not Chanhassen. This has got more character and color and it's kind of fun. I think you've all said the right stuff. Their signage is real understated and therefore I guess I'd like to figure out how we could help them. I don't want to break the rules however. There's no point to break the rules but their signage is really understated and that's kind of neat so I'd like to make sure they have the right visibility so staff that's, everything I've said is a contradiction. I don't know that you can do that. I think if we can, a couple architectural details are going to solve some problems, especially on the south elevation. If they can put a window in there. If they could put one more column or...or whatever, boy that's going to solve it. I thinl~ it's real close and if they want to reduce the, if they feel that they have too many lights, it looks fine to me but if staff wants to reduce it. It adds character to the building and again, I don't know how we figure out what the right number is but they seem to be willing so I think we should leave that in there and give staff flexibility but on the other hand I don't think I want to say strip out, it does add character and we're not, I'm not trying to reduce it by 50% by any means so that's clear. I think it's a nice building. Joyce: Yeah. I'd have to echo everything else that people said. I would like conditions, if we can make a motion to enter a photometrics study for the light fixtures and if that's okay, I'm going to back off on how many light fixtures there are. I just want to make sure that we're not exceeding anything. But after your explanation I can see they are kind of more decorative than 9 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 intrusive so as long as there's a, the photometrics comes back okay, I personally don't have any problem with the lights. As far as the other condition about the windows under there, the south elevation is what really what I'm concerned with and I just think a little bit of tweaking with some articulation, that's to your benefit obviously. I think Houlihan's did a good job on all four sides of their building and you're 99% of the way there. I hope you can work out with staff...I think that can be resolved. With all those comments said, can we get a motion for this. Blackowiak: Well I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #97~12 for a 5,223 square foot building, Ruby Tuesdays on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Pond 2nd Addition, dated received August 16, 1999, subject to the following conditions, and I'm going to renumber slightly. The little glitch here. 1 through 5 stand as written. 6 and 7 aren't there so let's renumber 8 through 22 to read 6 through 20. And therefore it will be conditions 1 through 20 and Kevin, photometrics is addressed in the final condition so if you want to just take a brief look and see if you're satisfied with that. Joyce: That's parking lot. That's what I was concerned about. Blackowiak: Okay, then I'll revise renumbered condition 20. The applicant shall provide parking lot lighting plan, light fixtures, design height, location photometrics, etc for review and approval. The applicant shall also provide similar information for the building lighting as a whole. Does that do it? Okay. Kind: I was going to suggest another way to rewording that is just to delete parking lot. Aanenson: Put them both in there. Parking and building lighting photometrics. Joyce: ...friendly amendment for your condition. Blackowiak: Sure. Parking lot and building. Kind: I'll second that. Joyce: Alright. Is there any discussion? Conrad: Ah yeah, on condition 10. Staff has said adding windows so are we saying, do we like fake windows? Kind: I prefer the real one if they want to add them. Conrad: Well yeah. It still has some merit. The fake thing, you know why do we want to do that? Kind: You could just have it be adding windows period. Get rid of the last part of the sentence, under the awning. 10 Planning Commission Meeting- September 1, 1999 Conrad: That might be more flexible. I think it's phony adding fake windows. It's a personal deal and I'm not into architecture on this but maybe we could. By adding windows or architectural detail, that might be a better way to let staff negotiate or revise it a little bit, if we could do that. Joyce: I'll entertain another friendly amendment. Would anyone like to make that friendly amendment? Kind: Did somebody make it? I'll make it. Number 10, which is actually number 8 will read the west and south building elevation shall be revised by adding windows? Conrad: And other architectural details. Kind: Or other architectural details. Blackowiak: Okay, I will accept that friendly amendment. Kind: While we're into amending conditions, I'm wondering about number 9. If we should just get rid of it. Because I think it's addressed on number 20. Joyce: It's Alison's motion. Kind: What do you think Alison? Blackowiak: You know, I don't have a strong feeling either way I guess. I mean we could leave it in. I mean this is a recommendation so. Joyce: That sounds good. Motion made, do we have a second? Kind: I seconded it. Joyce: Thank you. Discussion we've had. Are we done with discussion? Good. Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #97-12 for a 5,223 square foot building (Ruby Tuesday's) on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2no Addition, dated received August 16, 1999, subject to the following conditions: Landscape islands will need to be increased to ten feet wide or aeration tubing will be required to be installed. The applicant shall vary the locations and species of plants to create a more interesting landscape design around the building and pond. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1, 1999 The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the necessary security required by the agreement. 4. Add planter boxes to west side of building. 5. All rooftop equipment shall be screened from views. 6. The Famous Dave's site plan shall be officially withdrawn. 7. The applicant shall reduce the number of light fixtures. The west and south building elevations shall be revised by adding windows or other architectural details. The proposed commercial development of 2.13 net developable acres is responsible for a water quantity fee of $9,287. This fee is due payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. 10. The wall mounted sign along the west elevation shall not be permitted. 1 I. Building Official conditions: a) The building is required to have fire sprinklers. b) The utility plan was not reviewed at this time. c) The floor plan was reviewed for exit separation only. d) I recommend that the building owner and/or their representatives meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 12. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All storm sewer inlets shall be protected with erosion control measures until all disturbed areas have been revegetated. A rock construction entrance shall be maintained until the parking lots and driveways have been paved with a bituminous surface out to Great Plains Boulevard. 13. The sidewalk on the site shall be constructed in conjunction with the overall site improvements and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless inclement weather conditions prohibit. The applicant shall coordinate installation of the proposed trail/walkway along the west side of Lot 1 through Outlot B, Villages on the Ponds with the developer of Villages on the Ponds. 14. The sanitary sewer and water lines and storm sewer on the site will be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and not the City. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate sewer, water and plumbing permits from the City's Building 12