PC Minutes 4-15-08
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 15, 2008
Chairman Papke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Kurt Papke, Kevin Dillon, Kathleen Thomas, Debbie Larson, Mark
Undestad and Denny Laufenburger
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Dan Keefe
STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; and
Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
WALGREEN’S/RETAIL BUILDING: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH VARIANCES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
TWO RETAIL BUILDINGS ON PROPERTY ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS
DISTRICT (BN), LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 41 AND HIGHWAY 7 (2499 HIGHWAY 7).
APPLICANT: ANXON, INC., PLANNING CASE 08-05.
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Papke: Okay, questions for staff.
Undestad: On that smaller building out there.
Al-Jaff: Yes.
Undestad: It shows like a loading area and the dumpster area and stuff out there.
Al-Jaff: Yes.
Undestad: …showing access to the building or no exterior enclosures out there? Is that coming
in with another building?
Al-Jaff: We would.
Undestad: On that sight line as I look at the trash enclosure area.
Al-Jaff: The trash enclosure.
Undestad: And then with the south elevation…
Al-Jaff: Sure, right here. Right here. Excellent comment. The exterior of this trash enclosure
has to match the exterior, the material used on this elevation.
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Undestad: Right. And then what about access into the building. They’re saying that it’s a
loading area or are you going to put open up doors down there or…south elevation it just shows
through glass…
Al-Jaff: I’m not seeing any.
Undestad: If you pull out the elevation, showing that small building. The south elevation you’re
saying 3 windows there where the loading would be.
Al-Jaff: Correct. It doesn’t match the.
Undestad: The driveway?
Al-Jaff: The driveway request.
Larson: So where is the door?
Al-Jaff: The only doors that they are showing are on along the.
Larson: Oh, those are all doors. Okay.
Al-Jaff: West elevation and then there are a couple along the east elevation. We will work with
the applicant to assure that these doors are corrected.
Undestad: Then the other question was on that truck access with the Walgreen’s on there. That
65 foot truck. Is that all, do they get most of their deliveries at night or are there going to be
trailers that drive in and out of the drive through doors down there?
Fauske: That’s an excellent comment Commissioner Undestad. Staff’s comment was, when we
started looking at the realignment of the parking lot islands through the site, we asked to see
tracker trailer turning movements to make sure that the tracker trailer could maneuver to make
deliveries to the site. The tracker trailer unit that they showed was a WBC65 which means 65
feet between axles which is an excessively long tracker trailer unit. We know that the site can
currently accommodate that WB40 and we feel that that’s more appropriate size delivery
vehicles so we just requested that they ensure that they show those turning movements to make
sure that the changes in the parking lot can accommodate that movement.
Undestad: That’s all I have.
Papke: Kevin.
Dillon: Yes. So, just two questions. Do you know what’s going to occupy this second retail
building?
Al-Jaff: No, I don’t.
2
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Dillon: Is the applicant here tonight? Okay, maybe we’ll ask him. So the other question I had
is, it looks like the architectural, the look and feel of the new Walgreen’s and the new retail
building and the strip mall, you know kind of all tie together. But then there’s the gas station
that’s on the same complex, and that is a Super America and they’ve got their own look and feel.
Is there any opportunity to you know work with the owner of that building to kind of get it to all
tie together so it’s more congruent?
Al-Jaff: We can talk to them but legally, and as the ordinances read today, there’s nothing we
can do to make them change anything.
Dillon: Because it goes without saying it’s going to take what looks like a real improvement to
that area and it’s going to be you know 25% short of being really nice.
Al-Jaff: The way that building will blend in with the use of brick right now, but the way the roof
system is built and the architecture of the overall building.
Dillon: Yeah, I understand.
Al-Jaff: And I hear and understand your concern, but again legally there isn’t much we can do.
Dillon: So even though there’s legally not, I mean you guys could give the old college try and
see.
Al-Jaff: Absolutely. Yeah, I’ll be more than happy to do something.
Dillon: That’s all.
Thomas: I have a question.
Al-Jaff: Yes.
Thomas: Regarding the trash enclosure on the Walgreen’s building. Didn’t you have a picture
of what it was going to look like? With the doors and black… Yeah, that one. Is that, that’s just
one. Is that one unit or I guess.
Al-Jaff: There are two units.
Thomas: Two units, okay. And then.
Al-Jaff: And then the third one is side access.
Thomas: That was my only question.
Larson: Sharmeen could you point to where that relates to the purple drawing?
3
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Al-Jaff: Absolutely. So basically.
Larson: Okay, that’s what I thought. Alright.
Al-Jaff: And then this side. This side is located right here.
Larson: Okay, thank you.
Laufenburger: Do I understand there’s a drive thru on this?
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Laufenburger: Is that correct?
Al-Jaff: Yes, there is.
Laufenburger: So how will the traffic flow approach the drive thru window? Can you just show
that.
Al-Jaff: Basically t hey will come around in this direction. Or the other option is to come
through here and then around. Was my hand in the way?
Laufenburger: No. I had another question. There was Sharmeen, in the discussion of storm
water management, and maybe this is, I need to do a better job of reading but there was
discussion about creating a rain water garden in the northwest corner of the site. I understand
where that will be. Then it said this feature is to be connected to the storm water system by a
drain tile where it will outlet to the pond south of the site. I see a pond north of the Super
America but I’m not able to see where a pond is south of the site.
Al-Jaff: Sure. The pond is located actually south of the trail that we looked at earlier.
Laufenburger: Oh, I get it. I see it, yeah.
Al-Jaff: It’s right here.
Laufenburger: Okay. That makes sense. Thank you.
Larson: My turn? Okay, I was just curious about the trees. The proposed 7 canopy trees and 1
island peninsula. Is that a problem because the required is 2? And then there was a notation on
the next thing here. The landscape plan shows extensive planting within the existing vegetation.
This is not acceptable. What, I was a little confused by that.
Al-Jaff: If we look at the landscape plan, one of the things that the applicant is proposing is
adding landscaping within areas that are already vegetated and what will happen is it will, the
trees will crowd.
4
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Larson: So you don’t want them to add any?
Al-Jaff: They will have to work very closely with our City Forester.
Larson: Okay.
Al-Jaff: And really figure out location of those.
Larson: So they can’t just go and go plunk, plunk, plunk here with their trees. You have to,
because there’s some nice trees in there already.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Larson: Okay. That’s all I have.
Al-Jaff: Yeah, this shows really what’s happening. If you can see this area is vegetated and then
additional trees are being added in that section.
Larson: Okay.
Laufenburger: Just one last question. What is the size of the building that is currently on that,
the building to be demolished? Just in spatial reference. I may have to defer that to the
applicant.
Al-Jaff: I want to say in the neighborhood of 11,000. I am not positive. It’s definitely smaller
than the building that you see on the site.
Laufenburger: Right now there is drive space to the west of the existing building.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Laufenburger: And in the demolition that drive space to the west will be eliminated, is that
correct?
Al-Jaff: Correct. There are definite improvements that are happening with this site plan. With
the drive thru because the building, just the overall feel is the upgrade of this development. They
intend to repave the parking lot which it desperately needs so there are a number of positive
things that will come with this.
Papke: Can we go back to the parking lot flow for the drive up. You had a color picture up
before. I’ve always found the entrance to this strip mall very confusing because you make the
zig zag there, but then when you come in, so as you come in from 41, you’re going to be able to
see the drive thru window off in the distance. You’ll zig zag in and if I was driving in here, I
would drive straight through and then try to make a 180 just as I come into the back side. I’d go
straight there and then try to make a 180. Is that possible? That would seem to be a pretty tight
turning radius but that’s what I would instinctively do would be that traffic pattern.
5
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Al-Jaff: Alyson?
Fauske: That’s an excellent comment and staff looked at that. They have taken a look at the
radius of the approach to the drive thru area there to accommodate a passenger vehicle. It looks
tight and you know certain vehicles won’t be comfortable making that movement but they’ve
accommodated that radius to, they’ve designed it to accommodate that movement.
Papke: So the Chevy Suburbans are going to have.
Fauske: The longer vehicles will have some difficulty. They might sway into the oncoming
traffic isle but when staff started looking at this, we look at the layout of the whole entire site and
once you approach that corner, there really isn’t a lot of traffic movement through that edge of
the site so our, we would have much more concern if it was closer to the main entrance.
Papke: Next question on the signage. What appears to be happening here is the applicant is
flattening out the awnings so they can then put the signage up above the awning so it’s much
more visible than it currently is and if I recall correctly, is it like a silvery metallic type of
signage or what is the current signage materials and do you know if they…
Al-Jaff: Currently they’re all back lit.
Papke: They’re back lit.
Al-Jaff: Yes. Every single sign that we have out there is.
Papke: And the artist, the renderings we have in the staff report don’t show any of the signage
above the awning.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Papke: I would think that’s going to make a substantial impact moving it up and above on top of
the awnings. It’s going to stand out a little.
Al-Jaff: It will stand out. It would still have to meet all of the ordinance requirements.
Papke: Okay. Okay. My only last question, we talk a little bit about the colors. I just want to
verify that the colors of the brick and so on of the new buildings, they match the existing strip
mall 100%?
Al-Jaff: Correct. So what they are planning on doing is painting the exterior of the mall the
same color as the brick. The brand new buildings that you see. The 4,500 square foot building
as well as the Walgreen’s building, and.
Papke: How well does that hold up?
6
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Al-Jaff: Pardon?
Papke: Painting the existing building. How well will that, how will that look after 10 years?
Al-Jaff: Under our city code it is permitted. It will require maintenance. There’s no question
about it. Just looking at how else can it tie in. That’s the only way.
Papke: It’s the only way to get there from here? Okay. Okay, does anybody have any other
questions?
Al-Jaff: Now one thing I need to point out. What they’re doing is they are painting the block
portion of the building and that’s the portion that is permitted. And then where we have brick
they’re adding the windows.
Papke: Okay.
Al-Jaff: I just want to make that part clear. And then where we have the pillars, those are going
to be painted the darker brown. And I’m holding this upside down.
Papke: That’s okay, we can’t read the lettering anyway. No problem. Okay, great. Any other
questions for staff? Okay, do we have an applicant here this evening? If so, can you please step
up to the podium and give us your name and address and see if you can color between the lines
for us.
Max Heitzmann: Certainly. My name is Max Heitzmann. I work with Anxon, 601 Marquette
Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota. And I think Sharmeen did a pretty thorough job so I
will just go ahead and answer any questions that you may have.
Larson: I don’t really have any.
Dillon: What type of tenant are you targeting for this other retail building?
Max Heitzmann: We have a variety of possibilities. We have some real interest from a, got a
medical clinic. And then we also have some more neighborhood, you know neighborhood,
restaurant, small you know restaurant. We have a small gym located. Just some, a variety of
you know small, what I would call neighborhood businesses looking there, and we don’t have
anyone pinned down at the moment but we have serious interest.
Dillon: So do you anticipate building that at the same time as the Walgreen’s or is that going to
follow? I mean what’s the timing?
Max Heitzmann: I fully expect to build it at the same time as the Walgreen’s.
Dillon; Okay. That’s all the questions I have.
7
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Papke: Okay, thank you very much. Alright, if there’s anyone from the public that would like to
step up and give their perspectives on it, we’d love to hear from you. Step up to the podium and
state your name and address. Okay. Hearing none, going once. Going twice. Close the public
hearing and bring it back to the commissioners for deliberation. So we’ll start with you Mark.
Any comments? Issues?
Undestad: No, I think pretty well covered it on there. I’m alright.
Dillon: I don’t have anything negative to say about this project. You know I think it’s going to
overall be a real upgrade to that corner of the intersection and as we heard Sharmeen, she’s going
to try to talk with the owner of the Super America because I mean, and you know I’m sure from
the applicant’s point of view, they probably wish they could make that happen too. I wouldn’t
be surprised because it does take a real lot of, it takes something that’s not so great now and turns
it into a very attractive thing and it’s still being held back a little bit by the architecture of the gas
station. It’s just not the same so, what are you going to do?
Thomas: Same kind of comment. I think it’s a good, much better use and it’s going to be
updated tremendously and it’s just going to make the intersection there look even more
spectacular so look forward to it.
Laufenburger: All positive. I concur.
Larson: Long overdue.
Papke: Okay. I’m fine with this one as well. The only thing I would appreciate is if when
someone makes a motion, I think it might be useful to introduce something here to make sure
that we get the southern elevation corrected. Obviously the current drawings are inaccurate so I
think that would be a good addition to the conditions. So with that I’ll certainly entertain a
motion.
Undestad: I’ll make a motion. That the Planning Commission recommends the City Council
approve two site plans consisting of 14,490 square foot retail building containing a pharmacy
with a drive thru and a 4,500 square foot retail building and upgrade the façade of an existing
strip mall, Planning Case 08-05 for Seven and Forty One Crossing as shown in plans dated
received March 17, 2008, and including the attached Findings of Fact and recommendations
subject to the following conditions, which are in 3 parts. Conditions common to both site plans,
items 1 through 26. Conditions specific to the retail building with an area of 14,490 square feet
located on Lot 1, Block 1, items 1 through 6. And the retail building with an area of 4,500
square feet located on Lot 2, Block 1, items 1 through 6, and I think there’s where we want to
add number 7. To clean up that south façade there. And that would be the conditions. And then
the Planning Commission recommends approval for Conditional Use Permit 08-05 to allow two
buildings on a single lot and including the attached Findings of Fact and recommendation with
condition 1.
Papke: Okay. Is there a second?
8
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Larson: I’ll second it.
Undestad moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City
Council approve the two site plans consisting of a 14,490 square-foot retail building
containing a pharmacy with a drive-thru and a 4,500 square-foot retail building and
upgrade the façade of an existing strip mall, Planning Case 08-05, for Seven and Forty One
Crossing as shown in plans dated received March 17, 2008, and including the attached
Findings of Fact and Recommendation, subject to the following conditions:
Conditions common to both site plans:
1.All site improvements, including the building pad for the future retail building and
remodeling of the existing strip mall, must be constructed concurrently.
2. If importing or exporting of material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant
will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes.
3.Work with staff to develop additional treatment of stormwater for this site.
4.Revise the drainage calculations. The drainage calculations state an assumption of off-site
runoff without information as to how the assumption was made. E4 is shown in the rational
method calculations but is not shown on the drainage maps. Darken drainage boundaries so
that the map is easier to follow. Also, the pond south of this site has an additional inlet and
outlet that are not shown on the plan. Hydrologic calculations are needed to determine pre-
and post-development runoff rates to the pond south of this site. The pre-development runoff
rates must be maintained post-development for a 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm event.
5.All of the utilities within the boundary should be privately owned and maintained. These
utilities must be covered by a cross-access agreement.
6.Utility plans shall show both plan view and profiles of all proposed utilities (sanitary sewer,
water, and storm sewer lines).
7.Determine actual elevations of existing utilities. A minimum vertical separation of 18 inches
is required at all storm, sanitary, and watermain crossings. Provide details of each crossing
to ensure minimum separation. The ductile iron watermain must be poly wrapped.
8.Each new building is subject to sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. Lot 1, Block 1,
Seven Forty One Crossing will get credit for three trunk sewer and water charges. The 2008
trunk hookup charge is $1,769 per unit for sanitary sewer and $4,799 per unit for watermain.
Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the
time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units
assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance.
9.All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant must also notify the
City after installation of the erosion control and 48 hours prior to the commencement of
9
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
grading. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required, including the
MPCA and the Dept. of Health.
10.The current 10-foot drainage and utility easement between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 must be
vacated. A 10-foot drainage and utility easement was proposed along the new lot line, which
is not needed. Submit revised drawing without the proposed drainage and utility easement.
11.Revisions to the site plan are needed to accommodate the appropriate size delivery truck for
Walgreens. Show turning movements for vehicles entering the drive-thru.
12.The construction details shown on the plan must be updated to the 2008 City of Chanhassen
Specifications. Show the location of the light-duty vs. heavy-duty pavement sections.
13.Upon completion of the public street, the applicant shall submit a set of “as-built” plans
signed by a professional engineer.
14.Fire Marshal Conditions:
a)A PIV (Post Indicator Valve) is not required.
b)As building plans are submitted I will review and comment on them as necessary.
“No Parking FireLane”
c)Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for location of signs and
Per MSFC Sec. 503.3
curbing to be painted yellow.
d)A 3-foot clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants except
Per MSFC Sec. 508.5.5
as otherwise required or approved. .
e)Posts, fences, vehicles, growth, trash, storage, and other materials shall not be placed or
kept near fire hydrants, fire department inlet connections or fire protection control valves
in a manner that would prevent such equipment or fire hydrants from being immediately
discernible. The fire department shall not be deterred or hindered from gaining
Per MSFC Sec. 508.5.4
immediate access to fire protection equipment or fire hydrants.
15.Building Official Conditions:
a)The buildings are required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems.
b)Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State
of Minnesota.
c)Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit
must be obtained prior to construction.
d)Of the 234 parking spaces proposed a minimum of seven must be handicap accessible
with two of the seven “van-accessible”.
e)Detailed occupancy related requirements will be addressed when complete building plans
are submitted.
f)The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
16.The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary
financial securities as required for landscaping.
10
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
17.The minimum depth of all recessed walls is four inches.
18.Rooftop equipment and mechanical equipment are not shown on the plans. All equipment
must be screened from views.
19.Approval of the site plan is contingent upon approval of the vacation, conditional use permit
and administrative subdivision.
20.All monument signs may not exceed 24 square feet in area and 5 feet in height. The logo may
not occupy more than 15% of the sign area.
21. Wall-mounted signs shall meet ordinance requirements
22.Sufficient lighting shall be provided to illuminate all areas of the parking lot to provide
adequate levels of safety. The ordinance requires no more than 0.5 foot candle at the
property line. Light fixtures and site lighting plans shall meet ordinance requirements.
23.Environmental Resource Specialist Conditions:
a.Applicant shall increase landscape plantings to meet minimum requirements. A
revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the City prior to final approval.
b.All landscape islands shall have a minimum inside width of 10 feet.
c.Approval of clearing limits along the west property line must be given by the city
before any trees are removed.
d.Existing trees on the west property line shall be removed only within the proposed
grading limits. No proposed landscape material will be allowed to be planted within
the existing wooded area unless approved by the City. Planting locations must be
field located.
e.A line of shrubs must be planted along the parking lot on the north property line. The
shrubs must have a minimum height of three feet at maturity. City approval of the
shrubs species and planting spacing is required before installation.
24.Water Resource Coordinator Conditions:
a.A rainwater garden shall be designed and constructed in the northwest corner of the
property. This feature shall be designed to drain within 48 hours and to not exceed 18
inches of inundation. The Erosion Control/SWPPP Plan and Landscape Plan shall be
modified per this requirement.
b.The swale proposed along the western property line shall be eliminated and the
existing vegetation shall be left intact. Protection fencing shall be installed around
those trees to be saved.
c.The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies and comply with their conditions of approval.
25.The applicant shall add a sidewalk along the easterly property line of Lot 2.
26.Upgrade of the building façade of the existing strip mall shall occur prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy of either of the new buildings.
11
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
Conditions specific to individual sites:
Retail Building with an area of 14,490square feet located on Lot 1, Block 1:
1.Remove the multiple tenant building to be demolished prior to commencement of grading.
2.The grading plan needs to be revised. Slopes west of the proposed Walgreens are 2:1 and
need to be revised to 3:1. Show more spot elevations in the parking areas to ensure proper
drainage. Normal water level of the existing pond should be shown on the plan. Existing
contour information should be shown 100’ north of the site. Show emergency overflows on
the plan. A benchmark shall be added to the grading plan. Keep a minimum 2% slope in the
grass areas, 1% in the pavement areas, and .5% along the curb lines.
3.The applicant shall provide the City the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of
credit or cash escrow in the amount of $12,000.00 to guarantee the installation of the
stormwater treatment, erosion control, and seeding.
4.The applicant shall revise the southern elevation of the pharmacy building (drive-thru area)
to incorporate windows similar to those shown on the north and east elevations. The building
shall maintain a minimum of 50%transperency along the south elevation.
5.Revise the plans to reflect a maximum hard surface coverage of 65%.
6.The exterior material on the storage building shall be revised to reflect the same treatment
used on the retail building, (block on the bottom 2 feet while the upper portion utilizes brick.
This area shall be redesigned to appear as an extension of the main building rather than a
storage area.
Retail Building with an area of 4,500 square feet located on Lot 2, Block 1:
1.The grading plan needs to be revised. Show more spot elevations in the parking areas to
ensure proper drainage. Normal water level of the existing pond should be shown on the
plan. Show emergency overflows on the plan. A benchmark shall be added to the grading
plan. Keep a minimum 2% slope in the grass areas, 1% in the pavement areas, and .5% along
the curb lines.
2.The retaining wall located east of the future retail building shall be constructed at the time of
the construction of the building. This will help minimize the size of the retaining wall if a
smaller building than proposed is constructed. Building permits are required for all retaining
walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the
State of Minnesota.
3.The applicant shall provide the City the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of
credit or cash escrow in the amount of $4,000.00 to guarantee the installation of the
stormwater treatment, erosion control, and seeding.
12
Planning Commission Meeting - April 15, 2008
4.The applicant shall revise the easterly elevation retail building proposed to be located on Lot
2 by introducing windows. The building shall maintain a minimum of 50% transparency
along the east elevation, facing Highway 41.
5.Approval of the site plan is contingent upon approval of Conditional Use Permit 05-05.
6.The turning movements for the future retail building site shall be revised to accommodate a
WB-40.”
7.The drawings for the south elevation of the building shall be corrected.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Undestad moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval
for Conditional Use Permit 08-05, to allow two buildings on a single lot, and including the
attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation, with the following condition:
1.Approval of the conditional use permit is contingent upon approval of the vacation, site plan
and administrative subdivision.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
CARVER COUNTY SERVICE CENTER: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR A 13,260 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON PROPERTY
ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND LOCATED AT 7808 KERBER
BOULEVARD. APPLICANT: CARVER COUNTY, PLANNING CASE 08-09.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Papke: Debbie, questions?
Larson: Yeah. What’s the drive thru for?
Generous: To pick up tabs. Things that you can do quickly.
Larson: Really? I’ve never seen that. A drive thru for that purpose I guess. Rather than having
to stand inside a building in line and wait and da, da, da, da. You can just drive thru, well there
you go. Slick.
Papke: Just like that.
Larson: Just like that.
Papke: Denny.
13