Signed FOF - Cafe Zupas 11.27.23CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COLTNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RE,:
Application of Caf6 Zupasfor preliminary and final plat, site plan, conditional use permit, and
variance review.
On June 6,2023,the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Cafe Zupas for a preliminary and final plat, site plan,
conditional use permit, and variance review for a proposed Caf6 Ztpas restaurant for the
property located at 800 W 78th Street. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on
the proposed preliminary and final plat, site plan, conditional use permit, and variance was
preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all
interested persons wishing to speak and recommended approval of the requested preliminary and
final plat, site plan, conditional use permit, and variance request based upon the city ordinances
in effect at the time. On November 13,2023,the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly
scheduled meeting to consider the applications referenced above and based upon the ordinances
currently in place the City Council makes the following:
1 . On May 5,2023, the City received a land use application for property legally described as
Lot 4, Block 1, West Village Heights Second Addition ("Property") for the following:
A. a preliminary and final plat application for a2lot subdivision for West Village Heights
4th Addition;
B. a conditional use permit for a drive-through for the restaurant proposed on the Property;
C. a variance for a sign; and
FINDINGS OF FACT
D. site plan approval for a 3,050 square foot restaurant building with drive-through prepared
by Westwood and dated }llay 2,2023.
2. The Property is currently zoned Central Business District (CBD).
3. The Property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Commercial Use; Central Business
District Category.
Preliminary and Final Plat Request
4 The subdivision ordinance directs the City to consider seven possible adverse effects of
the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) effects and our findings regarding them are:
a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance including the
Central Business District lot standards;
Finding; The proposed subdivision proposes lots which adheres to the minimum
requirements required by the Central Business District zoning standards.
b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional
plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan;
Finding: The proposed subdivision as shown complies with the city's comprehensive
plan as well as applicable city plans
c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm
water drainage are suitable for the proposed development;
Finding: Based upon plans submitted to the city, the site charocteristics including but
not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, erosion andflooding susceptibility and
stormwater drainage are suitable for the proposed development
d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by the
subdivision ordinance, Chapter 18, and Water, Sewers and Sewage Disposal, Chapter
t9;
Finding; The subdivision as proposed has adequate provisions for water supply, storm
drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required
by chapter 18, subdivision ordinance, and Water, Sewers, and Sewage Disposal outlined
in chapter 19.
e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage;
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts causing significant
environmental damage.
f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and
Finding: The proposed subdivision does not create conflicts with existing easements of
record.
g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
i. Lack of adequate stormwater drainage, which are available and being installed
with the development.
ii. Lack of adequate roads. Access is to an existing, collector public street
iii. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems, which is available to the development.
iv. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
Finding: The proposed subdivision is not premature as it provides adequate stormwater
drainage, adequate accessibility ond availability of roads and sanitary sewer systems to
the development as well as offsite support systems.
Site Plan Request
5. Applicant has requested approval of the site plan dated May 2,2023, prepared by Westwood.
6. The zoning ordinance directs the City to consider nine possible adverse effects of the
proposed site plan. The nine (9) effects and our findings regarding them are:
a) [s consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides,
including the comprehensive plan, offrcial road mapping, and other plans that may be
adopted.
Finding: The site plan is not consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's
development guides specifically Chapter 20, Article 20-XXII-7, Section 20-7064 Srze,
Portion, and Placement, Chapter 20, Article 20-XV[, Section 20-734 Conditional Uses,
and Section 20-737 Setbacks and Height Restrictions as follows:
1. Section 20-1064(a) Entries. The main entrance should always face the primary
street with secondary entrances to the side or reqr. In the case of a corner
building or a building abutting more than one street, the planning commission
will determine which street should be considered "primary" based on the
visibility and access patterns. The site plan as proposed shows the main entrance
not facing the primary street.
2. Section 20-734 Conditionol Uses - The site plan as proposed includes a drive-
through component. Drive-throughs are not allowed as a conditional use within
the applicable zoning district.
3. Section 20-737(l) states a required "build to zone" of 5'-25' from the property
line adjacent to 78th Street W. The site plan as proposed has a front building
setback of 72.27'which is outside of the "build to zone".
4. Section 20-737(l) states a maximum height of l5 feet for the first story of
buildings located within the downtown west character area. The building
elevation as proposed has a maximum height of 26 feet.
b) Is consistent with the site plan review requirements.
Finding: While the site plan does not adhere to City code requirements as outlined
above, the application has followed required procedural site plan review requirements.
c) Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and
soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general
appearance ofthe neighboring developed or developing or developing areas.
Finding: The site is curuently a paved surfoce parking lot with minimal vegetation. The
site plan as proposed will minimize tree and soil removal as well as changes in grading
to avoid excessive negative impact on the general appeorance of the neighboring
developed oreas.
d) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with natural site
features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the
development.
Finding; The proposed site plan does not create a harmonious relationship of both
existing andfuture buildings hoving o visual relationship to the development as the site
plan shows a building which does not adhere to the required build to zone established by
the applicable zoning district whichfuture buildings would adhere to.
e) Creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with
special attention to the following:
i. 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;
ii. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
iii. 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
iv. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and
parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets,
width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation
of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking.
Finding: The proposed site plan does not create an internal sense of orderfor the
buildings ond uses on the site as it does not adhere to the required build to zone. The
proposed site plan does provide for required landscaping, materiols, textures, colors and
details of construction as well as vehicular and pedestrian circulation as required by
ordinance.
Protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface
water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those
aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have
substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Finding; The site plan as proposed does protect adjacent and neighboring properties for
surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air that
could have substantial fficts on neighboring land uses.
g) Within the HC districts, consistency with the purpose, intent and standards of the HC
districts.
Finding: The proposed site plan is not within the Highway Coruidor District.
h) Within the BCO district, consistency with the purpose, intent and standards of the
BCO district.
Finding: The proposed site plan is not within the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
i) Maintain an acceptable road system level of service.
Finding: A traffic impact study prepared by Westwood dated December 9, 2022 was
provided as part of the application materials. That study indicated acceptable road
system level of service would be maintainedfollowing development of the site plan as
proposed.
Conditional Use Permit
6. Applicant has requested a conditional use permit to allow a drive-through facility in
connection with the proposed restaurant on the Property.
7. Ordinance No. 715 adopted by the City of Chanhassen on September 25,2023 amended
Section 20-753 of the City Code to remove "drive-throughs" as a conditional use within the
Central Business District. Thus, a conditional use permit is not allowed for the Property.
Variance
8. Applicant has applied for a variance to Section 20-1303 of the City Code to allow more than
one wall sign per building elevation:
0
g. Under Section 20-1253 of the city code and state statute 394.27 a variance may be granted
if all of the following conditions are met:
A. The city council, upon the recommendation of the planning commission, may grant a
variance from the requirements of this article where it is shown that by reason of topography
or other conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of this article would cause a
hardship; provided that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely
affect the spirit or intent of this article.
Finding: The planning Commission recommended approval of the requested variance. Strict
compli-ance with the riquirements of this article would cause a hardship. The development is
tryiig to introduce an artistic expression to the buildingfor the community which is
precluded by City Ordinonce. The variance does not adversely affect the spirit or intent of
this sign ordinance.
10. The staff report presented to City Council on November l3th, 2023, and prepared by Eric
Maass is incorporated herein.
DECISION
The City Council approves the proposed preliminary plat, final plat, and variance
requests and denies the requested site plan and conditional use permit based on the findings of
fact included herein, and subject to the conditions of the staff report.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council tf,i, -\3\y 208of
CHANHASSEN CITY COI.]NCIL
BY:
Its Mayor
BY:_
Its City Manager
:---':---4\.-"
-^^-: t-:--"