6a. Replat Crossroads PlazaCITY OF
CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: 10/4/95
11/01/95
CC DATE: 11/13/95
CASE #: 95 -13 SUB,
95 -10 SP
By: Generous
1 -vim 1
1
STAFF REPORT
1
H
1 Q
U
IJ
a
1�
�
p
PROPOSAL: Preliminary and fmal plat to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition
into 4 lots and site plan review for a 7,742 square foot Tires Plus facility
LOCATION: 550 West 79th Street, north of Hwy. 5, east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Street
APPLICANT: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. Chanhassen Housing & Redevelopment Authority
701 Ladybird Lane City of Chanhassen
Burnsville, MN 55337 690 Coulter Drive
(612) 894 -2700 Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: BH, Highway Business District
ACREAGE: 3.78 acres (164,760.64 sq. ft.)
DENSITY: not applicable
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - railroad tracks, CBD, Frontier Center
S - BH, Highway 5
E - BH, West 79th Street Center (Cheers)
W - BH, Americana Bank
WATER AND SEWER: Available to site
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site is relatively flat with a six foot elevation change across the
entire parcel. A wetland area is located in the southeast corner of
the property.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
El r A -W" PF
fiffA I I$
•� Z
� ,w,
f/.ry
OA
MI
11LA ,
%I f►�rN��'�
IXAF" � "i. V -iv -SAW, r_i
F%QmF
I
' Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
' Updated November 1, 1995
Page 2
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The City of Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) is proposing the
' subdivision of a 3.78 acre parcel zoned Highway Business District, BH, into four lots ranging in
size from 0.6 acres to 1.24 acres. The rear two lots, Lots 1 and 2, will be accessed via a private
street that will serve as the access for the entire site. The proposed subdivision does require
' extension of public improvements from West 79th Street. A master site development plan,
grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been developed and submitted for approval. Staff
has worked extensively with the applicant to revise their site plan for the Tires Plus building to
comply with city design requirements. We are recommending that the applicant provide a
pitched roof, either gabled or hip, to comply with the Highway 5 standards and to be consistent
with the majority of development within the central business district.
Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision and site plan subject to the conditions of the
staff report.
' BACKGROUND
' On March 9, 1992, the Chanhassen City Council approved Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition which
replatted Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Addition, into two lots. Council also granted
site plan approval for an 11,468 square foot bank and office building for Americana Community
Bank.
On October 23, 1989, the Chanhassen City Council approved a site plan for a 14,000 square foot
bank and office building. However, the development was never undertaken and the applicant
withdrew the site plan.
On February 12, 1989, the Chanhassen City Council approved preliminary and final plat for
Crossroads Plaza Addition. The plat consisted of two lots and four outlots. Two of the outlots
were utilized for Highway 5 right -of -way. The other two outlots were used for drainage and
stormwater retention ponds.
SUBDIVISION
WETLANDS
' There is one large wetland on -site. The wetland is an ag/urban wetland located on the east third of
the property. The wetland is approximately 1.5 acres and is characterized as a type 1 seasonally
flooded basin. Since the wetland can not be avoided with development, the City will be seeking a
wetland alteration permit to fill the wetland and replace it south of West 79th Street (the property is
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 3
being purchased by the City). The wetland mitigation plan is still being formulated, but plans are to
create wetland where there is no longer wetland south of West 79th Street and may create wetlands
on the old Apple Valley Red -E -Mix site.
The City delineated the wetland south of West 79th Street since this information is needed for the
wetland alteration permit process and the wetland mitigation design. The wetland mitigation plans
will include the parcel south of West 79th Street and show wetland delineation, wetland mitigation,
and stormwater ponding before filling any wetlands. Peterson Environmental has completed a
wetland delineation report. The mitigation plans and the wetland permit application will be
processed shortly. Wetland buffer areas will be incorporated into the mitigation plan. Prior to
filling the wetlands on Lot 2 and 3 the City must receive all the necessary permits to complete the
project in accordance with the WCA.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP)
The site has been assessed for storm drainage improvements along West 79th_ Street and the
regional downtown pond. Therefore, SWMP fees are being waived.
1." �� I�[!'l :� 17.7_ 1►`/:�!'1 y
The site drains to the south. The stormwater runoff will be collected in the storm sewer system and
connected to the existing storm sewer on West 79th Street and discharged into the existing
stormwater pond on the south side of West 79th Street. Staff will require the hydrologic
calculations to verify water quality treatment and stormwater holding capacity.
EROSION CONTROL
The plans have provided, for the most part, erosion measures and site restoration in accordance with
the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). The final grading plan has incorporated
erosion control fence (Type 1) around the perimeter of the grading limits.
UTILITIES
The applicant's engineer has been working with City staff in preparing final utility and street
construction plans for the overall site. Staff has reviewed these plans and finds them in accordance
with the City's standards. The utilities from West 79th Street are proposed to be extended to the
common lot corner of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. This segment of utilities will be owned and maintained by
the City upon completion. The remaining site utilities will be considered private and not
maintained by the City. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the
necessary permits from the City's Building Department for the private utilities. Since there will be
1 Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
' Page 4
public improvements installed, the applicant will be required to enter into a development contract
' and provide the City with a financial escrow to guarantee the installation of the public
improvements and conditions of final plat approval. The necessary drainage and utility easements
' are being provided on the final plat for the public improvements.
STREETS
Access to the site is proposed from West 79th Street. The access driveway is proposed to be
constructed with the initial phase of construction. However, only the Tires Plus parking lot
improvements will be constructed initially. The entire site may be graded depending on receiving
the necessary wetland alteration permits. Otherwise, only the access drive and Tires Plus site will
be graded.
The site has an existing curb cut located in the southwesterly corner of the site. This curb cut will
be removed and the boulevard restored. The City has had a traffic study prepared to determine
' impacts to the existing roadway system. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. had prepared a traffic study
on June 28, 1995. The results of this study indicated that the West 79th Street and Market
Boulevard intersection and the existing roadway geometrics will continue to operate at acceptable
' levels of service. The overall master site plan/grading plan has also provided pedestrian access
through the use of sidewalks.
District Regulations (BH): Setbacks: front - 25, side - 10, rear - 20; Building height - 2 stories
LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION
Existing boulevard trees, planted by the city, are located along West 79th Street.
Additional trees
are located on the east and west sides of the site on
adjacent properties. Individual site plan
landscaping will be done on each lot.
AREA
FRONTAGE
DEPTH
BH District 20,000
150
100
Lot 1 30,589
230
133
'
Lot 2 26,274
208 I
133
Lot 3 53,900
280 I
209
'
I
Lot 4 53,996
262
228
District Regulations (BH): Setbacks: front - 25, side - 10, rear - 20; Building height - 2 stories
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 5
FINDINGS
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the BH, Highway
Business District.
2. 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 is consistent with applicable plans.
3. 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: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions
specified in this report.
4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this
chapter;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure.
While the parcel will be developed by the individual site users, a master
development plan for grading, drainage, and utilities have been developed.
5.
The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage subject
to conditions if approved.
Q
The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record.
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but
rather will expand and provide all necessary easements.
VA
The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
f'
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 6
Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure.
I SITE PLAN
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE
The proposed development is within the Highway 5 corridor and must comply with the design
standards established therein.
The standards of the overlay district include:
1.
a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
b. Lack of dedicated and improved public streets.
C. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
d. Lack of adequate off -site public improvements or support systems.
Parking and building orientation:
The site meets this standard. The parking setback in the HC -1 district are those
established by the underlying zoning. The site parking meets this requirement.
The building is oriented to West 79th Street. This orientation maintains the visual
concept which the city would like for the entire site. The development of the
entire Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition will locate structures to the periphery of the
site with the majority of parking located in the center.
2.
The architectural design standards.
The materials and details of the buildings are consistent with the Hwy. 5
standards. The project incorporates brick exterior with a well designed
landscaping plan. Building materials are of a high quality. The applicant has
provided the pitched roof element through the extension of the peaked signage
facade across the front of the building and through the incorporation of addition
roof over the showroom area.
The overall design and architectural theme for the development consists of brick
exterior walls, recessed areas, and varied building facades.
Building height is limited to three stories or 40 feet. The proposed structure is one
story of approximately 22 feet. The district regulations limit building height to 2
stories.
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 7
• The proposed development incorporates the use of high quality materials in both
building and landscaping elements.
• The site design is such as to avoid the accumulation of trash, leaves and dirt.
• The building components are proportional and relate well to one another.
• Building colors are harmonious and create a pleasant aesthetic experience.
3. Landscape Design and Site Furnishings
The applicant's landscaping plan is well designed and incorporates the use of
native tree species as well as extensive buffering materials. The plan reforests a
site devoid of vegetation. Minnegasco will not permit the placement of trees
within their 20 foot easement on the north side of the structure so the revised
building design will permit placement of trees on the north side of the parking lot
as well as to the north and east of the building.
ACCESS
Access to the site will be provided via a private street from West 79th Street into the site which
must comply to city standards. The existing curb cut will be removed in conjunction with the
site improvements.
GRADING/DRAINAGE
Grading of the site will be consistent with the master development plan. The entire site will be
graded in conjunction with site improvement installation.
LANDSCAPING
The landscaping plan exceeds the minimum requirements of code. However, Minnegasco will
not permit the planting of trees within their easement along the northern property line.
LIGHTING /SIGNAGE
The applicant is proposing 22 foot high parking lot light poles with wall mounted light fixtures
on the south, east and west elevations.
C
L
0
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 8
The applicant is proposing signage on the south, east, and west elevations. City code permits
signage on street frontage only. Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must
comply with city code requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit
will be required for signage.
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
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:
a. 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;
C. 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
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 9
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 development, as revised, does comply with the Zoning
Ordinance and the Highway 5 overlay standards. The applicant is proposing site
coverage of 66.5 percent. City code permits a maximum site coverage of 65 percent. An
additional 428 square feet of landscaped area would be required on the site to meet this
requirement. Originally, the applicant was proposing site coverage of 77 percent and was
short of landscape area by approximately 1,400 square feet. Staff has worked with the
applicant to revise the plans to reduce this deficiency. Staff believes that the revised
plans are acceptable and that the 428 square feet is not an issue. In order to meet this
requirement, the applicant could remove two more parking spaces if the Planning
Commission so desires. Alternately, the city could require the development as a whole to
comply with the 65 percent site coverage requirement which would require a minimum
landscape area for the entire plat of 57,666 square feet. The Highway 5 design standard
requires a pitched roof element. The proposed peaked sign area parapet wall on the
southern elevation of the building does not meet the intent of the ordinance. The
applicant shall incorporate a sloped roof on the structure.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 4, 1995 to review the proposed
development. The item was tabled to permit the applicant to provide a master development plan
for the site as well as incorporate staff recommendations in the site plan.
The Planning Commission held a second hearing on the development plan on November 1, 1995.
By a vote of 6 for and 0 against, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve the subdivision based on staff conditions with the addition of condition 17 requiring the
entire site to maintain a maximum 65 percent impervious coverage. The Commission also voted
6 for and 0 against to recommend approval of the site plan with the modification of Condition #6
to require the developer to incorporate Alternate C for the roof treatment as well as incorporating
additional cap treatments to the east, north, and west elevations, the modification of Condition #7
to ensure that the landscaping on the north side softens the building facade, and the addition of
Condition #13 requiring the applicant to submit building material samples for City Council
' Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
' Updated November 1, 1995
Page 10
' review and to specify that the roof, awnings, and doors be a natural reddish color rather than
bright red.
' The commission also held discussion regarding window signage. City code permits window
signage of not more than 50 percent of the window area. In addition, there is a cap on the total
amount of window signage which limits the amount of window signage to the amount of signage
' that would be permitted based on the wall area. The total window area on the south facade is
approximately 700 square feet. Fifty percent of that area is 350 square feet. However, based on
wall area of 2,288.8 square feet, the maximum amount of signage permitted is 206 square feet
(nine percent of the wall area). This 206 square feet equates to approximately 29 percent of the
window area.
In reviewing the signage issue based on Planning Commission concerns, staff noted that the
applicant is proposing to back light the awnings. As a condition of approval for other
developments in the downtown area, the city has prohibited backlit awnings. Therefore, staff is
recommending an additional condition prohibiting backlit awnings for Tires Plus.
Following are the conditions approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant has
addressed some of the issues and are noted below the condition.
1. Detailed eenstraefien plans as well as Mylar as -built construction plans will be required
upon completion of the public improvements.
* This condition has been modified.
2. The preliminary plat itself appears to be acceptable. The appropriate drainage and utility
easements will be dedicated with the plat.
* This condition has been completed.
3. Existing landscaping along West 79th Street will be in conflict with the proposed driveway.
These trees will need to be relocated.
* No longer applicable. This condition is being done as part of the site improvements.
4. There is an existing concrete driveway apron on West 79th Street located in the southwest
corner of the site that will need to be removed.
No longer applicable. This condition will be met. The construction plans show the
removal and restoration.
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 11
5. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan
requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and
formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be used adjacent the grading limits.
* This condition has been met.
6. 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.
* This condition is still applicable.
7. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of
the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed stfeet and utility plans and
spesifisations -oh,- _ b£ -sa - m i t .oa f . Mi -e.., and City Cetmeil a pprov a l-.
* This condition is being partially met with construction plan submittal.
8. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland
ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before accepting the utilities and will
charge the applicant $20 per sign.
* This condition is still applicable.
9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 2 -year, 10 -year and 100 -year
storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the
City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to
final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre - developed and post developed
stormwater calculations for 100 -year storm events and normal water level and high water level
calculations in existing basins and created basins. Individual storm sewer calculations between
each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being
utilized.
* This condition has been met.
10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary
financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract.
r_
H
I
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 12
* This condition is still applicable.
11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e.
Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval.
* This condition is still applicable.
12. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right -of -way.
* This condition is still applicable.
13. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend the wetland mitigation
areas into the surroundings is recommended.
* This condition is still applicable.
14. Prior to filling the wetlands, the City shall receive all the necessary permits to complete the
project in accordance with the WCA and Army Corps of Engineers.
* This condition is still applicable.
15. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during
construction and shall re- locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer.
* This condition is still applicable.
16. Erosion control fencing (Type I) shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior
to final plat approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the perimeter of the
site prior to any work commencing.
* This condition has been completed.
17. Overall within the subdivision, 65 percent impervious surface coverage will not be
exceeded."
* This condition was added by staff after review of the proposed signage and awning issues
discussed by the Planning Commission.
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 13
Following are the conditions for site plan approval recommended to the PlanninLy Commission:
1. Building is required to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13.
* This condition is still applicable.
2. Ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants.
* This condition is still applicable.
Submit radius turn dimensions for approval.
* This condition is still applicable.
3. Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code
requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit will be required for
signage.
* This condition is still applicable.
4. Grading of the site must be consistent with the master development plan that will be required
of the plat.
* This condition is still applicable.
5. The applicant shall incorporate roof alternate C. In addition, the applicant shall work
with staff to provide a cap treatment on the north, east, and west elevations.
* This condition was modified by the Planning Commission.
6. Revise the landscaping plan to locate all proposed trees outside the Minnegasco easement.
Staff and the applicant shall work together to ensure that the landscaping to the north
is sufficient to soften the building view from the north. Existing landscaping along West
79th Street will be in conflict with the proposed driveway. These trees will need to be
relocated.
* This condition has been modified and is still applicable.
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 14
u
C
n
7. 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.
* This condition is still applicable.
8. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan
requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to the city for review and
formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be used adjacent the grading limits.
* This condition has been met.
9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e.
Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval.
* This condition is still applicable.
10. The private utilities shall be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or
builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City.
* This condition is still applicable.
11. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement with the city and provide the
necessary security to meet the conditions of approval.
* This condition is still applicable.
12. Materials samples shall be submitted to City Council for review and approval. The
roof awnings and doors shall be a natural reddish color and not bright red.
* This condition was added by the Planning Commission.
13. Backlit awnings shall be prohibited.
* This condition was added by the Planning Commission.
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 15
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motions:
SUBDIVISION
"The City Council approves the preliminary and final plat for subdivision 95 -13, Crossroads 3rd
Addition, plans prepared by Peters, Price & Samson, date received November 7, 1995, replatting
Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots subject to the following conditions:
1. Mylar as -built construction plans will be required upon completion of the public
improvements.
2. 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.
3. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of
the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
4. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland
ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before accepting the utilities and will
charge the applicant $20 per sign.
5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary
financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract.
6. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e.
Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval.
7. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right -of -way.
8. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend the wetland mitigation
areas into the surroundings is recommended.
9. Prior to filling the wetlands, the City shall receive all the necessary permits to complete the
project in accordance with the WCA and Army Corps of Engineers.
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 16
10. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during
construction and shall re- locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer.
11. Overall within the subdivision, 65 percent impervious surface coverage will not be
exceeded."
SITE PLAN
'
The City Council approves site plan 95 -10, plans dated November 7, 1995, prepared by Yaggy
Colby Associates, for Tires Plus, on Lot 1, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, subject to the
following conditions:
' 1. Building is required to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13.
'
2.
Ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants.
3.
Submit radius turn dimensions for approval.
4.
Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code
requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit will be required for
'
signage.
5.
Grading of the site must be consistent with the master development plan that will be required
'
of the plat.
6.
The applicant shall incorporate roof alternate C. In addition, the applicant shall work
'
with staff to provide a cap treatment on the north, east, and west elevations.
7.
Revise the landscaping plan to locate all proposed trees outside the Minnegasco easement.
'
Staff and the applicant shall work together to ensure that the landscaping to the north
is sufficient to soften the building view from the north. Existing landscaping along West
79th Street will be in conflict with the proposed driveway. These trees will need to be
'
relocated.
8.
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.
�I
Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus
October 4, 1995
Updated November 1, 1995
Page 17
9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e.
Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval.
10. The private utilities shall be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or
builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City.
11. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement with the city and provide the
necessary security to meet the conditions of approval.
12. Materials samples shall be submitted to City Council for review and approval. The
roof awnings and doors shall be a natural reddish color and not bright red.
13. Backlit awnings shall be prohibited."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Development Review Application, City of Chanhassen
2. Development Review Application, Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd.
3. Letter from Ronald L. Fiscus to Todd Gerhardt dated May 16, 1995
4. Letter from Richard J. Pilon to Robert Generous dated September 7, 1995
5. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated September 21, 1995
6. Memo from Steve A. Kirchman to Bob Generous dated September 25, 1995
7. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List
8. Planning Commission Minutes of 10/4/95
9. Preferred Site Concept Plan
10. Roof Alternate A
11. Roof Alternate B
12. Roof Alternate C
13 Planning Commission Minutes of 11/1/95
14. Revised Plans 11/7/95
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937 -1900
' DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
APPLICANT: ►V/ �1G1SS OWNER:
ADDRESS: (0 CC L I 'I I r ADDRESS:
(1 C, „4.��55�� k �J -553is
TELEPHONE (Day time) q3 1400 TELEPHONE:
' 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW /Easements
2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance
3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit
4. Non - conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal
' 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
' 6. Rezoning
7. Sign Permits
' n Plan Review Notification S
8 S g a g
' 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost"
$100 CUP /SPR/VACNAR/WAP
' $400 Minor SUB /Metes & Bounds
10. Y� Subdivision TOTAL FEE $
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must
Included with the application.
' Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
8 %" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet.
NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
"' Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
PROJECT NAME ( ( t'041 Tlet� _ �L
LOCATION '5 Lo • 79 C�0_� '
LEGAL DESCRIPTION ]_Irc_� l�r'r✓SS�I��
Z"14 4-ildt
PRESENT ZONING ►,�} rn`7�� ,'y�eSS _I�� ��t� z� '
REQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION (.Ti.►�1 -�G,`C '
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION ie/k WW_�
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST < " L ' o Sti`�, �(�c �- ^�z�� -. � �� u `-� zt l
This application must be completed in full and b&typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specif ic ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am- responsible for complying
with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party '
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (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. '
1 will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best '
of my knowledge.
I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded
2g . nst the title to the property for which the approval /permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
f a and the iginaI document returned to City Hall Records.
r4� � - � I A5
Sij Oat of Applicant Date
Signature of Fee Owner
Application Received on
Fee Paid
Date
Receipt No.
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the
meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
' 690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937 -1900
' DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
I APPLICANT: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. OWNER: Chanhassen Housing & Rehabilitation
Authority
ADDRESS: 701 Ladvbird Lane
ADDRESS: City of Chanhassen
'
Burnsville, MN 55337
TELEPHONE (Daytime) (612) 894 -2700
TELEPHONE: (612) 937 -1900
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment
11. Vacation of ROW /Easements
2. Conditional Use Permit
12. Variance
3. Interim Use Permit
13. Wetland Alteration Permit
'
4. Non - conforming Use Permit
14. Zoning Appeal
5. Planned Unit Development
15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
6. Rezoning
7. Sign Permits
1
8. Sign Plan Review
Notification Signs
'
9. X Site Plan Review �-�
X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost"
$100 CUP /SPRNACNAR/WAP
$400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds
10. Subdivision
TOTAL FEE $ j (7
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must
Included with the application.
Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans
must be submitted.
8'h'* X 11" Reduced copy of transparency
for each plan sheet.
' NOTE - When multiple applications are processed,
the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
" Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
PROJECT NAME Tires Plus - Chanhassen
LOCATION Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition
LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Attached
PRESENT ZONING Highwav Commercial
REQUESTED ZONING No change requested
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Highwav Commercial
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION No change reouestPtl
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Site elan review
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying
with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (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.
1 will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge.
I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
Office and the original document returned to City Halt Records.
signature of Ap Date
Purchase Agreement Pending
Signature of Fee Owner Date
� 2
Application Received on 5 �7f �l S Fee Paid ��3E) .� Receipt No.
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the
meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be malled to the applicant's address. y p
1
I LAND DESCRIPTION
1 That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Second Addition according to the plat thereof on
file in the County Recorder's office, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence easterly on an assumed
azimuth from north of 79 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds along the north line of
said Lot 2 distance of 230.00 feet; thence southerly 169 degrees 04 minutes 54
seconds azimuth 133.00 feet; thence westerly 259 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds
azimuth 230.00 feet to the westerly line of Lot 2; thence northelry 169 degrees 04
minutes 54 seconds azimuth along said westerly line 133.00 feet to the point of
beginning.
I Said tract contains 0.70 acres.
L
I
I
u
717 THIRD AVENUE SOUTHEAST
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 55904
May 16, 1995
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
Assistant City Manager
City Hall
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(507) 288 -6464
FAX (507) 288 -5058
RE: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd., Proposal
Project Narrative
Dear Todd:
YAGGY
COLBY
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS
SURVEYORS • PLANNERS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd., proposes construction of a facility in the city's commercial
redevelopment project. The site, located in the northwest corner of the property, is 133' x 230' in
size. This allows ample room for the construction of a 7 -bay facility with internal circulation to
limit the number of overhead access doors. Ample parking was provided for the facility on site,
as well as attractive landscaping.
The landscaping is an important part of the proposal. The plant materials are arranged in such a
fashion as to provide a "development edge" to this multi -user commercial development. The
arrangement of the plant materials will provide both an element of screening from the railroad and
commercial properties to the north, as well as providing a focal end -point as the property is
viewed from the highway. A landscaped area forms the eastern boundary of the property
providing an attractive landscaped terminus to the entrance drive.
The building architecture makes use of brick and stucco materials and is a further variation and
improvement upon the award winning facility constructed in Apple Valley. This enhanced facility
has greater aesthetic appeal than the standard prototype building used by Tires Plus and is
commensurate with the "up scale" environment Chanhassen has sought to achieve.
Several elements regarding overall sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer service to the project
have yet to be determined. Therefore, Tires Plus has made several assumptions regarding
municipal utility services. It is anticipated that such services will be extended through the main
access drive into the property for centralized access. A 4" sanitary sewer and 6" water service is
proposed to connect with the main at the southeast corner of the property. This will provide
ample sanitary sewer service and water service for both domestic and fire control functions.
21 ; NORTH ADAMS (5 1 51 424-6344 EQUAL OPPORTUNIT) '
MASON CITY, IOWA 50401 FAX (5151 424 -o35 i EMPLOYER I
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
May 16, 1995
Page 2
It is anticipated that the storm water will be surface drained from this property to properties
adjoining to the south at which point it will be collected and piped to the storm sewer existing in
the street right -of -way south of the project. The general orientation of the site is to naturally
drain southward from the north portion of the property that is of higher elevation. An erosion
control plan is included for approval that will provide ample control during the construction
process. It is not anticipated that any particular impact will be placed on the existing utility
systems requiring any unusual accommodation by the city.
Tires Plus, although very successful, by their nature are low traffic generators as compared to
other commercial businesses. For that reason, this is a very attractive addition to the rear portion
of this project.
Tires Plus has developed an uncommon philosophy and strategy toward its sales and service
operation. They have, in effect, reinvented the process of tires sales and service. Their strategies
include attractive but serviceable buildings, a prohibition against exterior display of tires and a
prohibition of overnight storage of vehicles in the parking lot. This, coupled with lighting control,
excellent landscaping and reasonable operating hours, have combined to make them attractive
additions to other commercial neighborhoods. Since its founding in the Twin Cities in 1976, this
operating philosophy has allowed Tires Plus to expand to some 60 stores throughout the midwest
and achievement of its status as the premiere tires sales and service facility in the region.
Tires Plus looks forward to being an attractive addition to Chanhassen's redevelopment program.
If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please do not hesitate to call.
Yours truly,
YAGG COLBY ASSOCIATES
Ronald L. Fiscus
Director of Planning and Landscape Architecture
RLF /sm
#4246
Minnegasco®
A N0 P-AM ENERGY COMPANY
September 7, 1995
Mr. Robert Generous
Planner II
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re: 95 -13 SUB and 95 -10 Site Plan
Lot 2, Block 1,
Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Generous:
Enclosed are your prints for this project. Also enclosed is a copy
of our section map for the area showing the location of
Minnegasco's natural gas mains in the area. Some individual
services are not shown. Natural gas service is available to this
property from the main shown.
Minnegasco owns and operates a 6 natural gas pipeline in a 20
easement. This easement was granted to Minnegasco or a predecessor
for this pipeline. We have serious concerns about the grading and
landscaping for this project and therefore object to these portions
of the project until our concerns are resolved.
Enclosed is a copy of our guidelines for encroachments into
pipeline easements. If the developer follows these guidelines most
of our concerns will be resolved.
The developer /builder should contact Bryan Petrica, Minnegasco
Commercial Energy Services at 321 -4323, to make application for
natural gas service.
S31_cerely,
Richard J. i'I'on, P.E.
Senior Administration Engineer
Engineering Services
612 -321 -5426
cc: Oscar Juria
Dean Senne
Brian Petrica
Easement file 60 -93
700 West Linden Avenue
P.O. Box 1165
MINNEGASCO, A DIVISION OF NorAm Energy Corp.
GUIDELINES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND /OR
' ENCROACHMENT WITHIN GAS PIPELINE EASEMENTS
The following guidelines are general requirements only. Minnegasco may inspect the area and review
construction plans. Final construction plans must be aooroved by Minneaasco before anv construction
is beoun within Minneoasco's easement.
Soil shall not be removed or placed in a manner that will result in earth or pavement cover over the
pipeline of less than three feet or more than five feet. A level area of not less than six feet on each
side of the pipeline shall be maintained at all times. Slope beyond 6' from the pipeline shall not be
' steeper than 4 to 1, unless otherwise agreed. Any amount of cut or fill, within the 4 to 1 slope area,
shall increase the width of the level area on each side of the pipeline by that same amount of cut or
fill. The pipeline must be fully accessible at all times during and after the construction.
2. Landscaping over and within ten feet on each side of the pipeline is restricted to normal ground cover'
vegetation. Beyond ten feet on each side of the pipeline, upright plantings are restricted to (and shall
not exceed) six feet in height. No trees shall be planted or remain within the easement. Any trees,
1 removed within the easement while performing maintenance activities shall not be replaced by
Minnegasco or owner.
3. Any buried utility line installed across the inplace pipeline shall be placed with no less than one foot
of vertical separation (Federal Regulation), padded with well compacted soil (preferably granular
material) and cross at an angle less than 45 ° , from normal to the pipeline.
4. With prior Minnegasco approval, parking lots, perpendicular driveways or roadways of portland
cement concrete or asphaltic concrete (or similar materials) may be placed within the easement, but
shall be reasonably limited in width when crossing the easement to minimize the interference with
or access to the pipeline for inspection and maintenance. Permanent structures, including, but not
limited to, buildings, signs, screen walls, decks, tennis courts, and swimming pools are not allowed
under any circumstances within the easement. Installations such as retaining walls and fences that
may restrict longitudinal access require approval by Minnegasco before construction. All fences must
have a 10 foot wide gate centered over the pipeline.
5. Once Minnegasco and the Owner, Developer or Contractor have reached an agreement, Minnegasco
shall be given at least two working days advance notice of planned construction activity so
arrangements can be made for Minnegasco Personnel to monitor the construction. Minnegasco will
locate and stake the pipeline, but will not assume responsibility to expose or backfill the pipeline or
to determine the actual elevation of the inplace pipeline. Excavation to expose the pipeline shall be
parallel to the pipeline. Minnegasco Personnel must be present during this excavation.
6. Any subsequent damage or destruction caused by Minnegasco in the exercise of its easements
rights, of any and all of those certain foreign constructions (landscaping, driveway, roadway, utility
lines, etc.) which may be permitted within the easement area, will be permanently repaired or
replaced at the owner's or contractor's (not Minnegasco's) expense.
7. In accordance with Federal Department of Transportation Codes, Minnegasco must place markers
over the transmission line. These markers will always be placed behind both sides of the curb or
behind the driven roadway. All markers placed by Minnegasco will not be removed.
If you have any questions call: Richard J. Pilon, Engineering Services - 321 -5426.
Dated: January 6, 1995
CITY OF
�HANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE e P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Robert Generous, AICP Planner II
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
DATE: September 21, 1995
SUBJ: Tires Plus, Planning Case #95 -I SUB & #95 -10 Site Plan
I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the
Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or
city ordinance /policy requirements. The site plan review is based on the available
information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted, the
appropriate code or policy item will be addressed.
1. Building is required to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13
2. Submit master plan showing entire site plan with utilities. Fire hydrant
locations will be reviewed at that time.
3. Ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants.
4. Submit radius turn dimensions for approval.
ML:eb
g:Naafety4nN=spls
i
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Bob Generous, Planner II
FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official t a I <-
DATE: September 25, 1995
SUBJECT: 95 -10 SPR and 95 -13 SUB (Tires Plus Groupe, Inc. and City Of Chanhassen)
I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED,
MAR 16 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. I also
reviewed the proposed subdivision plans stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, JUL
12 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT."
I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time.
I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early
as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements.
g.'safety\sak \memos\planViesplus.doc
NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
Wednesday, October 4, 1995
at 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
Project:
Developer:
Location:
Site Plan for Tires Plus
Facility & Preliminary Plat
for Crossroads 2nd Addition
Tires Plus Groupe &
City of Chanhassen
l 99 L
LM
Jc
X11 PHAN
E
UE
No. of Hwy. 5, east of Market
Blvd. on West 79th Street
t
t
111111/'
Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your
area. The applicant, Tire Plus Groupe, Inc. , is requesting site plan review for a 7,742 square foot
Tires Plus facility and the City of Chanhassen is requesting a preliminary plat to replat Lot 2,
Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots and ocated on property zoned BH, Highway
Business District and located north of Hwy. 5, east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Street.
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 over view 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. The Commission
will then make a recommendation to the City Council.
Questions or 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 Bob at 937 -1900, ext. 141. 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 as been published in the Chanhassen Villager September 21 1995. ,
g p g p
4
lZ obert Dittrich
1827 Crestview Drive
New Ulm, MN 56073
Waterfront Associates
k 40 Union Place
xcelsior, MN 55331
Thaddeus Korzenowski
0645 Radison Road
xcelsior, MN 55331 -9181
t onald McCarville
3349 Warner Lane
f ound, MN 55364
L�
John H. Dorek et al
581 West 78th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Ralph Molnau
Ronald Dubbe
356 3 Street West
Waconia, MN 55387
Chanhassen Inn
531 79th Street W.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Bloomberg Companies
P. O. Box 730
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Estate of Martin Ward
c/o Jerome Raidt Pers Rep
930 Baker Bldg.
730 2nd Ave. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55402 -2475
B. C. Burdick
684 Excelsior Blvd.
Excelsior, MN 55331
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
PUBLIC HEARING:
A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CROSSROADS PLAZA 2ND
ADDITION INTO 4 LOTS AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7,742 SOUARE FOOT
TIRES PLUS FACILITY LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS
DISTRICT AND LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5, EAST OF MARKET BLVD. ON
WEST 79TH STREET.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Mancino: Any questions for staff at this time?
Mehl: Yeah, I've got a question. If, you know the rest of the two restaurants there and the
Tires Plus are going to generate a lot of traffic. My concern I guess would be is that
roadway going back there, is that adequate to deal with it? I guess the other thing too is that,
Tires Plus places I've been to have been very busy. A lot of things going on. And they deal
with a lot of used and new tires. How are they going to get those in and out of the facility?
Back a truck in off of West 79th into the area or is there enough room to maneuver once you
get down in their facility.
Generous: Well they would be able to drive on site. They're actually, I believe their storage
area for the used tires is up here where the ramp is so they would be able to pull off and back
into that driveway to access that area. As to the specific operation, maybe the applicant can.
Mehl: And then all the new tires, if I recall, were on the back wall. If they have problems
of trying to get them back there. They need a way to get a truck back into there. I don't see
any big doors for access. One thing I noticed on the prints there, there was a gravel surface
near the front, left front corner, or right front corner that looked like about 20 x 50. What is
that?
Generous: This area?
Mehl: No. It was actually a little farther, a little lower to the, yeah. In that area.
Generous: I believe that's additional landscaping. It used to be part of the sidewalk when
they had the handicap ramp on the eastern edge of the building. But to the revisions and the
need to shifting the building, they eliminated that space and moved it over right next to the
entrance.
Mehl: Just one other question too I guess. Again... there's going to be a lot of activity and a
lot of things going on and I believe the drawing that I saw showed, it must have been 7 or 8
17
I Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
stalls for working on vehicles. I also assume that there's going to be a big air compressor in
' there with a lot of impact wrenches and a lot of noise producing things and in the summer
time you're likely to have the doors open for ventilation and so on. I wonder, has that been
looked at for noise standards and that sort of thing?
' Generous: Well that's one of the reasons they only have two overhead doors on this building.
They really wanted to put all 8 bays with direct drive in and back out on the south elevation
' and we said that we didn't believe that was appropriate for this area. I haven't gotten into any
detail about looking at it as far as other standards for what it would be at the property line.
Could we request the applicant, if he has that information, to provide it.
' Mehl: Okay.
Y
Mancino: Thank you. Any other questions? Does the applicant wish to address the Planning
Commission? Thank you.
Ron Fiscus: I would be happy to. I'm Ron Fiscus with Yaggy Colby Associates representing
Tires Plus. ..for us to give you just a little more background on how far we have come with
this project since we first started talking with Todd Gerhardt and Kate about it about a year
and a half ago in fact. ...at that point was that Tires Plus had control of a piece of property
across 79th Street to the south that had a little bit of developable area and a lot of wetland.
The city had a piece of property that had a little bit of wetlands and a lot of developable area
so it seemed like a match made in heaven at that point. So we started working with staff to
find a way that Tires Plus might be included as a part of this city's redevelopment project.
' One of the first concerns was the appearance of the building and as we started talking about
that there was a Tires Plus project that went into Apple Valley in the area of County 42 and
Cedar which last year won the Minnesota Shopping Center Association award for a building
in the under 10,000 square feet. As staff had a chance to take a look at that and we supplied
them with some photos of that and they said well, that seems to address a lot of the concerns
we have. Some of those concerns being, getting the building mass to perform an end point.
An end to this piece of property to start screening some of the railroad right -of -way and the
area beyond from that Highway 5 and 79th Street corridor. So the building that's proposed on
the site, that's shown here, is that Apple Valley building with a couple logistic changes. One
' is that it has been lengthen by one stall. There are 7 stalls in there to provide more building
mass. There's a parapet wall up here that's elevated a little bit above that Apple Valley
facility. Once again to get the building up and to get more building mass in there. So we
' picked up that same clock tower, if you will, feature from the Apple Valley facility and it
coincides very nicely with the number of the other building features that you see in the
community like the Abra Auto Body. Market Square has that same sort of feature. They
pick up again and again with the Chanhassen downtown area. The issues, other issues that
18
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
we wanted to resolve at that point were the building locations and we recognized that we had
to deal with the easement across the back of the property and yet we wanted to bring the
showroom around in front so that's the front door to the face to 79th Street. Allowing to
minimize the number of overhead doors in compliance with the request of the staff.
Goodyear for example has direct access into the parking, into their service stalls. It was
thought that on this location that it wasn't the desired goal and both as an appearance concern
and a means to control noise, there are two overhead doors instead of seven overhead doors
were the direction that we went with. As we've gone through the developing of this process
with the HRA and Todd Gerhardt's office and have started working from a zoning approval
standpoint, site plan approval standpoint, three other primary issues have come up. One is
open space. The 35% open space requirement. That we worked very diligently with the
assistance of staff to balance the appearance concern and the operation of the building
concern with the need to get as close as we can to that 35% open space. Also recognizing
that the limits of that property have essentially been set by the subdivision plat that the HRA
has put together. And with Bob's help we have gotten very close to that and appreciate his
efforts in that regard. And it is a balancing act between the open space and providing
adequate parking. We would like to hold to the 18 stalls that are shown with this revised site
plan. 16 is what's required by city code. We had a concern that that may not be enough
based on ... experience in other communities with similar facilities. That 18 really fits that
facility much better. As I have acted as staff to planning commissions, as I've advised
planning commissions on preparation of zoning ordinances in evaluating the proposals from
the other side of the fence than I'm speaking to you this evening, one of the things I
continually encourage planning commissions to do is look at the reasons for the regulations.
Regulations are fine but you also need to look at the reasons behind those and the parking
requirements are frequently set as a minimum standard. You want to make sure that there is
adequate parking first and foremost. Beyond that, the number of stalls required in your
zoning ordinance are a guideline. Well our concern with Tires Plus, adjacent to Applebee's
that also, that has a much higher parking demand than the Tires Plus facility. Much higher
traffic demand ... is there going to be adequate parking for both of those so that we minimize
the need for parking across those property lines, even though there are cross easements in
place that will provide for the legality of cross parking. For the most part I think the Tires
Plus peak uses will happen at different times than Applebee's, but there is going to be some
overlap at peak use times and so we would like to go to the 18 stalls and ask for your
concurrence with the staffs evaluation. That that 33 1/2% open space, as it's represented with
a lot of landscaping, would satisfy that goal of what you're trying to accomplish from an
appearance of open space standpoint. The other item I want to address is that of the roof
structure. It was our hope as we worked with staff, with the city administrator's staff early on
in the project, that this building facade would be acceptable. Would meet all the
requirements of the city. So what I'd like to do is maybe have some dialogue as we get
farther into the discussion tonight about that roof situation. I would encourage that this
19
' Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
parapet with the clock tower sort of replicates that roof sort of feel. And as I talked with
' Todd about, where that roof requirement came from. Once again we get back to the reason
why. Todd's reaction to that was, one of the primary reasons for starting to look at roofs and
requiring those as a design element was that you were tired of looking at the HVAC systems.
' The air handling units that are frequently roof mounted and dot the landscape on the tops of
roofs. There are no rooftop systems with the Tires Plus building... so that's that screening is
not a concern because the roof wouldn't be solving that particular purpose there. But we
' would like to have some dialogue with you about that. We do hope that Tires Plus will be a
busy facility but frankly the traffic generated from the Tires Plus is on the very low end of
the spectrum as far as the number of trips generated per square foot, even with a very busy
' store. Our perception is that 79th Street is very adequate to handle the Tires Plus facility. I
think the HRA's direction to locate those high traffic generators at the front of the property
rather than driving all that heavy traffic through to the side is a very good choice and I'm sure
' 79th Street is adequate to handle that. One other point had to do with the staffs
recommendation that there be a grading plan as an overall site utility plan submitted for the
project. We have previously... the street and utility plans have been submitted for getting the
' utilities and the service street into the site. We've been authorized to prepare the overall site
grading plan...
' (There was a short break in the taping of the discussion at this point.)
Mehl: ..I guess my question was how you were going to physically do that. I assume drive
a truck up the driveway and maneuver it or turn it or something and back in.
' Ron Fiscus: Sorry, I forgot to answer that. There are two places tires are stored. The new
tires are at the back of the building. The used tires are in the ... in this location of the building.
So a truck coming in to deliver new tires or pick up used tires has two options. One is to
come into this parking lot that is basically vacant and they would do, they would back
directly into this area. The other is, and we've looked at the truck turning movements to
assure that that is doable. They can come into this location and then back into that space.
' The door to stock the new tires into the racks is back here and there's a walk. I think it's
back into it. One of the earlier concepts showed this, showed a more ample, a larger paved
area to provide better opportunity for that. A thought we've had is that in order to reduce the
' impervious surface, and yet to provide for that truck access back into there, might be to widen
this out slightly or to use some landscaping. The paver panels that you can plug grass into
that provides a useable surface but no more often than truck traffic comes in there to pick up
and deliver. The grass would be allowed to grow in that kind of a surface... opportunity to
solve the problem.
1 20
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
Mehl: Would you expect truck traffic in there daily or weekly or what would be the
frequency?
Ron Fiscus: Mike Diamond with Cardinal Development knows a little bit more about the
frequency of operations. Mike.
Mike Diamond: We are the developers for Tires Plus. I'll have to ask you to forgive my
voice tonight... Operationally, typically they bring in a truck once a week. In very busy
stores in the Twin Cities it's twice a week deliveries. For incoming. ...recycling is a similar
cycle. The used tires that you're speaking of, there is a typical trash that any retail
establishment has but the used tires are picked up and Tires Plus is very proud of their
environmental programs. They're used as fuel for a paper mill in—Wisconsin and so they're
picked up on a regular basis and taken to that...
Mehl: Okay, thank you.
Mancino: Any other questions at this point for the applicant?
Skubic: I guess I have one. The discussion about the air compressors. Where will the air
compressors likely be located and air conditioning equipment also? Will it might just be roof
mounted?
Mike Diamond: The air compressors are internally located and are actually back in the same
areas of the tire storage at the rear of the store. With it, they have mufflers for the air
compressors and this sort of thing and they're designed and used with the air conditioning
equipment, I'll let Ron address.
Ron Fiscus: The facility, customarily the standard Tires Plus facility has overhead doors for
each of the stalls and in the service area, the usual means of handling air is to open the door
and let the cool air blow into and circulate within the building. In this case, because we have
done the internal circulation and we have limited doors, the building is designed frankly to
operate more with the doors closed than the doors open and there is beefed up air handling
within the service area. The air conditioning unit for the showroom area is located within the
building also. So there are no compressors or air handling equipment that would create
noise...
Skubic: Thank you.
Mancino: Thank you very much for your presentation. May I have a motion to open this for
a public hearing please.
21
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to open the public hewing. The public hearing was opened.
' Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning
Commission on this issue, please do so. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the
' public hearing?
Meyer moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hewing. The public hewing was closed.
' Mancino: Commissioners. Don. Don, your thoughts.
Mehl: Yeah, I'm just putting them together here. Is there a, I wonder is there a physical
divider between the two parking lots? They could, can they easily come over and use the
' restaurants?
Mancino: Bob, is there a divider between Applebee's or what's ever will be there?
i Generous: The line will be approximately on the north side of Applebee's parking lot.
There's no berm or median or anything separating the properties. "
' Mancino: So someone could come in and just, if there wasn't anybody in the parking lots,
just make a beeline diagonally over to Tires Plus if they wanted to?
' Generous: Well, sure. Once you made the turn into the aisle.
' Mancino: Thank you.
Mehl: And the other thing I had a question about I guess or a concern about is the entrance
' into their 18 stall parking lot. Is that wide enough for two cars to pass or is it a single car
width?
' Mancino: Dave, could you address that? When you are in the parking lot on the west side of
Tires Plus, can you be coming in and coming out at the same time?
' Hempel: This would be the drive aisle between the parking stalls and the island should be 24
feet wide which would be adequate for two cars to pass.
' Mancino: We hope so because that's what we just approved for the last subdivision. 24 feet.
Okay.
' Mehl: That's all I have.
1 22
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
Mancino: Let me remind commissioners that I think that the applicant would also like to
hear some of our positions and comments on the roof. Whether it follows staffs
recommendation. Or the applicant would like to keep it as it is. A flat roof. Staff is
recommending something else and also on whether they are to comply with the zoning
ordinance which would mean that they would have to decrease the parking spaces by 2 to
meet the maximum site coverage of 65 %, which is our existing zoning. And they're only off
by 428 feet so I just, but if you could also speak to, I think those two. The Highway 5
ordinance. It is an ordinance now. The architectural designs has in it that within this district
that there be a pitched roof element on each building and that that is one of the conditions
that staff has recommended. So we can come back to you Don as you think about that.
Mike?
Meyer: Why don't you come back to me too.
Mancino: Come back to you too. Fine. Bob?
Skubic: Sure. First off on the false front there, I agree with the applicant. That frontal
geometry is. the same as we see on Market Square but the front on Market Square is also
much deeper than that and I think that gives you a much different appearance from the side
elevation. I don't know, I personally don't know if a pitched roof along the periphery is
something that I would desire but I certainly think something needs to be done with that front
portion there in some manner. Make it deeper or make it a little more robust. I appreciate
what staff has done to make some provisions for some trees or shrubs in the back side of the
building and I certainly hope something can fit in that 4 foot section area to block that off a
little bit. The Frontier development immediately to the north I believe is being redeveloped
and I think for appearances sake it would be nice to have some trees along the back side of
the building there. And the 428 square foot condition here. Man, that's about 1/4 of this
room. 20 feet by 20 feet. That isn't a large area. However it does preclude putting shrubs in
that area. So there's that trade -off there. But I think that by moving the building forward that
4 feet, that there certainly could be enough landscaping in that area. I don't think that 420
square feet is significant. Those are my opinions.
Mancino: Ladd.
Conrad: Two issues. Site plan. Or it's a subdivision and a site plan. Overall it looks nice.
I like it. I'm uncomfortable that we weren't given enough for the subdivision. It's like how
can I approve something that really wasn't given to me? It's bad. Site plan looks good. I
can slip the standards for impervious surface. I need a reason from staff because as you
know in this business, if we grant a variance or slip a standard, then the next developer says
well you did it there so I need a reason. And we probably can find one because probably
23
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
overall I'm guessing we can do that. Staff could say landscaping exceed the requirements.
I'm comfortable. But a couple things that the applicant didn't do. ...this is not a ranting and
raving deal. Really, we do have standards in our Highway 5 deal so that's sort of an absolute.
We're doing it. That's, we're doing it. Everybody that comes into Chanhassen does it so.
We received these, I see these were dated May 30th. That's a couple months ago so
obviously staff has told the applicant about them and they have chose not to give us anything
because they probably wanted to do this which is sort of in their corporate direction, which I
understand but like Bob, I think those are our rules and I'd like to see what we can do within
those rules. We've had some successes and failures. I'd sure like to see that. So again I
have a hard time passing this on. I haven't seen a good subdivision plan and the documents
that we normally require from anybody building in Chanhassen. And I haven't seen
elevations that sort of meet what we're looking for. Signage on this elevation, we don't really
allow advertising on the outside of the buildings so, and we've got some things that are
wrong, which are easy, real easy to correct so it's not a big deal but it's really not what I'm
looking for. But I'll end it. Overall this looks real good. I like the subdivision. It makes, I
just like how it works but you haven't given me anything. You haven't given me anything
like other people give us when we review this. And I think you're looking for feedback from
us in terms of changing your corporate direction and I guess my signal is, yeah. We can
probably slip our impervious surface but that sort of bothers me because we've got a huge site
here and usually you can, in a bigger site you can usually manage that so, and we'll figure
that out so that's not an issue. Signage is an issue so that's got to be worked and roof line's
got to be worked but I think Tires Plus is a reputable, real good company. I'd welcome them
to Chanhassen even though my comments don't seem like they're very welcoming but I just
want some stuff that we really, I just need some other paperwork before I.
Mancino: So you'd like to see this back?
' Conrad: I think so. Again, it's really tough to, it's tough to pass it on when you know I'm
sort of looking at the overall subdivision and it's real flimsy here so. I'm not comfortable that
we can do it.
Mancino: Thank you. Craig.
Peterson: I think not having been here for the first portion, I'll abstain for my comments.
Mancino: Okay. Don, did you want to add?
Mehl: I agree with Ladd. I think we have to maintain consistency and follow and work with
some of the things that have been established along the Highway 5 corridor. So I agree with
Ladd's comments.
24
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
Mancino: Okay, Mike.
Meyer: I'm in agreement with Ladd also. There's really nothing additional.
Mancino: Thank you. Would the applicant like to respond please?
Ron Fiscus: The two issues that are before you tonight are the subdivision plat and the site
plan. The subdivision plat has essentially been out of our control. It's something that the
HRA has been working through and we've been asked to provide some more information after
receiving the staff report and those things that are within our control, we certainly are rushing
to get into place... staff has encouraged. And Todd may want to speak a little bit more to that
subdivision issue as he represents the HRA. And the same point with the roof. Although the
plans that were submitted are dated back in May, we have been really waiting on getting the
staff review until the HRA took action in approving the development agreement. It seemed
inappropriate for the staff to spend a lot of time with all the other things that are going on,
reviewing the plans until we knew we had an agreement with HRA. So that reaction to those
plans has come fairly shortly and so we've been trying to wrestle with the initial reaction to
the building that we got from the administrative part of the staff said gee, this looks great.
And then wrestling with the different direction we're getting from planning staff saying, gee it
needs some roof. One solution that we'd like to suggest to you that would be in keeping with
some of the other roofs that have been acceptable, would be to pick up this line behind the
parapet and bring the roof straight back. There would be a standing seam steel roof that
would be like Market Square. It could come back to the end of this parapet so it would have
a little more, a bit more mass. Or frankly if you'd like, some of the other facilities in the
community that have used that have pulled that line clear back through to the back of the
building so we would offer either of those two suggestions today that would be very
acceptable to Tires Plus as a solution to that roof issue. The signage, we understand the
brand signs that are usually placed on the Tires Plus facility in the front would be deleted
from this project in order to comply with the city's requirements. We have been scrambling
to get through the development agreement with the HRA and to get to the point of being able
to get before you in anticipation that we might be able to get under construction yet this fall.
The land transfer is scheduled to occur, the first piece of it, sometime after October 23rd.
Tires Plus is in the position to move as quickly as you will allow them to, to get under
construction this fall so what we would like to do, if at all possible was to address the issues
that are outstanding issues tonight in hopes that we might be able to get a recommendation
from you so we can be in front of the City Council on the 23rd. As with the roof issue, with
the signage issue, with the landscaping issue, we hope that maybe we've addressed those
adequately at this point so that you can feel comfortable making a recommendation to the
Council.
25
I Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
Mancino: Thank you very much for responding to that. Now response of how we feel
' comfortable, what we want to do with this. Do I have a motion?
Conrad: A motion for what?
' Mancino: For what we would like to do. Would we like to table it and see it back again
with a new roof line? What do we feel comfortable with at this point as far as the applicant's
response?
Conrad: Madam Chairman, could I ask. Todd, representing HRA, could I ask you a quick
' question? Normally when we have a subdivision of a major plat we have traffic. We kind of
lay it out. We've got aisles. We've got different elements. We tie them all together. We see
where the traffic's going. How they feed the different things. You know if it's a one site
plan, then the applicant has total control. I'm getting the feeling the applicant doesn't have
total control here. Where do I see the site? The overall site development where we have
islands in the roads and where, who's doing that? Is that HRA? Are we asking Tires Plus to
' do that? I guess I'm a little bit confused Todd. -
' Mancino: When we'll actually see one and who's going to bring it to us.
Gerhardt: Bob, can you put up the overall development? To get this development, if you
' look at it closely, it can be done in two phases. Where you have Applebee's and Tires Plus
here and here, you physically can do that phase first without building the parking lots and
landscaping on the second half. We come in with a common driveway along the property
' line on both sides and when the HRA comes to fruition with two other users, then the overall
development would be continued. Staffs taken a look at this and feels comfortable that it can
be done in two phases. Am I answering your question?
Conrad: No. Well I kind of get it. I know where we're going. I'm just missing, who put
this together that we're looking at right there? Is that what you drew? City did that?
' Gerhardt: City staff is working.
Conrad: The city owns all the land Todd, right?
Gerhardt: Right. The parking and we sat down and knew that we had a restaurant and that
we had Tires Plus and potentially a second restaurant that was interested in coming into
Chanhassen. And with that we sat down with planning staff and Barton- Aschman to come up
with some concept plans and with those concept plans the planning staff came back with that
concept to Planning Commission I think this past summer and showed me this concept and
26
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
asked for your feedback. Is this something that you can support as a development in
Chanhassen? Not looking at details of roofs. Not looking at details of green area but as an
overall development. What do you think of this as a vision for this area? And from what I
was told, this had a positive feedback from Planning Commission. We accomplished the
Highway 5 standards of getting the green area and buildings between the parking lots and
Highway 5. Using the buildings to screen the mass parking that would go along with those.
Taking the restaurant element with the front lawn theme around the buildings, along West
79th Street and giving you that residential feel. As it goes to the pitched roof elements and
the green area and the plat, you know we'll work with the planning staff and Planning
Commission on their recommendations if you want to alter property lines to accomplish that
Conrad: Let me interrupt you Todd. My question, and I'm still confused. We got an
applicant in here that really has a site but we have an overall subdivision. Under the
recommendation by the planning staff it said, the applicant should submit a master plan
showing entire site plan. Now maybe I've just got some works mixed up here.
Aanenson: Can I answer that question very simply? There's two co- applicants here. If you
look on the top. City HRA and Tires Plus. So it should have been made more clear that the
HRA is obligated to do that portion. We have contracted with them, as long as they're going
first, they're carrying the ball, that they are going to accomplish some of that. The city's
doing the wetland portion of that. But yes, they are doing a portion of the plat. It was the
city's obligation to provide you a subdivision. What happened is Tires Plus came in in May.
they've been waiting for the negotiations. Todd has spent months trying to get the HRA
purchase agreements on this property so they've been waiting all this time so they're ready to
go. We're behind them. They're ahead of us as far as their time frame. They want to get
going. We feel, as Dave indicated, that we feel that, and Bob, that it's a flat piece of
property. We can accomplish that. It's just about there. You're right, it's not. We don't have
a subdivision in front of you but as Todd indicated too, we did bring that forward to show
you the direction.
Conrad: Well that's real general, yeah. And we're saying, hey generally we like this. So
that's a whole different deal. We're not getting specific and...
Aanenson: Right, but the city is the co- applicant so when we say applicant, that's onerous on
the city to be providing that information. Yes, we are amiss on not having all that
information in front of you.
Gerhardt: You do have the plat in front of you. The subdivision is.
Conrad: Well yeah, there's some lines here.
27
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
i
Generous: That's how the cities do it.
' Conrad: Seriously Todd, it's just not up to any standard.
Mancino: There's nothing to do with pedestrian friendliness. There's nothing.
Gerhardt: You're talking the grading plan and...
Conrad: Sure. Maybe a sidewalk in the front. We don't know anything.
C y
' Mancino: I mean if you wanted to walk back there and couldn't get there.
Gerhardt: There's sidewalks shown on this site plan and it has.
Mancino: Where?
' Conrad: Well Todd it's not.
' Gerhardt: Can I point it out?
Conrad: No, no. I take back some of the things that were said directed at Tires Plus. You're
running faster than we are so I understand the problem. I don't know how to solve it.
Gerhardt: Well I would suggest if you feel uncomfortable looking at this, I would table it
' until you have a full submission of grading plans and you know, it's not a substantial
document but as Ron has mentioned, he could have it completed by next week. I would say
table this for 2 weeks if you feel uncomfortable looking at this.
' Aanenson: Just for their edification. This is scheduled for the City Council on the 23rd. We
hate to do this. We're doing this tonight with Pillsbury. We're fast tracking these but if
' there's just a few issues that we're looking at next time, if we could turn this around, we can
maybe keep them still on track for the 23rd Council meeting, and that's an opportunity too if
we table it.
Conrad: You can do that?
' Aanenson: We'll try. You know we can't make a promise but we can sure try to do that. It
just depends on the level of dialogue that needs to take place at the next meeting. That will
' keep them on track at least for the 23rd meeting.
28
Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995
Mancino: If we can do that. If you can do that.
Aanenson: Well it's onerous on them and onerous on the city o accomplish that ,
ty p , sure.
Mancino: Okay. I mean we like to see drawings on the new roof line and then a complete '
subdivision. Pedestrian, traffic circulation.
Conrad: Yeah, we've got to. It's just a standard you know, and I appreciate the workings of
the HRA and government but we just have to apply the same rules to a government body as
we do to private businesses and that sometimes can come back and affect a private business '
but dog gone it, we just have to apply those standards to us.
Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion?
Conrad: I make a motion to table planning case #95 -13 Subdivision and 995 -10 Site Plan.
Mancino: Second? '
Mehl: I second. '
Mancino: Any discussion?
Com -ad moved, Mehl seconded that the Planning Commission table action on Subdivision ,
#95 -13 and Site Plan 995 -10 for Tires Plus and HRA. All voted in favor and the motion
caned. '
Bob Generous presented the staff mpoit on this item
Mancino: Any questions for staff at this time? Seeing none, does the applicant wish to
address the Planning Commission? ,
Ric Moore: Good evening. My name is Ric Moore. I'm with Pillsbury Bakeries and Food
Service and we've been out at this Chanhassen site since 1992. Over that 3 year period we've
been very successful. The business volume has grown about 35% and with that growth is
causing problems in our ability for loading and unloading products and so that's why we're
here tonight. We've worked with staff previously... take your recommendation to Council.
Again, this will help us solve our problem and also help get our trucks off Audubon Road
too. ...got our engineering firm here with us. We've got a lot of drawings and can answer
any questions you have. Thank you.
29 1
M
_= n
t
�o
m
P
V
%O
g s
4
d m
m
$ m
r
y
° e =A a
rq
o
W_ o
rq
s�5
c
a
u -4 0
`
w qu:
N
-+
- a ON n
44P
O
y
x4 a
t
u
A
NO D
f
4
o pp b
V WA
To o m
1
N V1 to
, Anw
M
_= n
t
�o
m
P
V
%O
g s
4
d m
m
$ m
r
3
1,1
r �
r
rn
z
NOV 01 '95 03:44PM YAGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES
0
m
r
m
K
z
a
N
A
m
P.3 1
I I
Z I
_ I
Y I
- I
i
'1
• �i
Iii I , f l l l
I i
1
NOV 01 '95 03:45PM YnOGY COLBY nSSOCInTES
m
r
m
U)
IV
i I I. I I I:
�i iii!
I@
(D
m
4
2
ol
P.
0
m
r
N
A
R
NOV 01 1 95 03:46PM YAGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES
i
I,
O
T
m
n
13
�� II
�I
7
\ l�
4
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 1, 1995
Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. and gave an introduction of
how the Planning Commission meeting would be conducted.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Mancino, Bob Skubic, Don Mehl, Ladd Conrad, Mike Meyer
and Jeff Farmakes
MEMBERS ABSENT: Craig Peterson
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Planner II; Sharmin
Al -Jaff, Planner II; John Rask, Planner I; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 2. BLOCK 1. CROSSROADS PLAZA 2ND,
ADDITION INTO 4 LOTS AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7.742 SOUARE FOOT
TIRES PLUS FACILITY LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED BH. HIGHWAY BUSINESS,
DISTRICT AND LOCATED NORTH OF HWY 5. EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD ON,
WEST 79TH STREET.
Bob Generous presented the staff mpoit on this item.
Mancino: Any questions for staff at this point, from commissioners? Okay, seeing none.
Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission?
Ron Fiscus: Yes. Good evening. Ron Fiscus... representing Tires Plus. As Mr. Generous
stated, I think the one issue that we would like some further guidance on and offer some
suggestions as to the condition we put on, is that roof. We're in concurrence with the staff on
the other issues and have worked very diligently with both planning staff and engineering
staff to resolve those issues, both on the subdivision that the city is putting together and the
site plan, building plans for Tires Plus. Perhaps some drawings that give some color to the
black and white transparencies that were shown can help provide some further input into that
roof issue. As we talked last time, we talked about some potential roof ideas. We raised the
issue of the type of roof style that's seen rather prevalently in Chanhassen, like on the Market
Square properties, where you take a portion of the front of the building and take it back to a
reasonable point and then cut off the roof feature at that point. So here we're suggesting that
maybe the end of the showroom area, this showroom depth is this face of the building. Take
it back to that point and cut the roof off at that point so it would just be a straight peak that
would extend back from the peak of the front parapet, clock tower feature and then go
straight back to this point. It's probably one of the more simple statements but we think it
would be in keeping with a lot of things that you already see in Chanhassen. Once again
there aren't any rooftop mechanical issues to try to screen on this building. Everything from
mechanical in nature is either on the ground outside the building or within the building. Two
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
alternative studies have been looked at. The other issue we talked about last time, which is
the possibility of extending what was shown on the first alternative clear on back to the back
end of the building. Having this peak ridge extend the full length of the building. Our
concern there is that at this point it becomes kind of massive and awkward looking as it
extends the rest of the area. So as we were looking at some other alternatives to share with
you here, to get some more guidance, actually what shows up here and the bottom piece are
two other alternatives. One being to take this highest point of the showroom parapet wall and
put a roof on top of that. And the other alternative being to step that roof down as it goes
over to this portion adjacent to that showroom and the piece that sticks out in front of the
building, right in this area where this ... wall steps down and then coming in there and then
putting another roof structure at the lower level there. I guess our reaction overall to this is
that perhaps it provides a better end point statement to this development. One of the things
that we were encouraged to do by staff, as we got into the beginning stages of this project, is
to provide some screening from the properties, the railroad track and properties to the north of
this project, and to really define an end point to where this project is that northerly edge of
this, and our sense is that by putting a roof like this on that building might really do a better
job of making that kind of a statement. Any of these alternatives are certainly acceptable to
Tires Plus. The preferred one would be the simplest statement that we had talked about last
time. That being this that does tie in so nicely to a number of the other roof features in
Chanhassen. Second choice would frankly be probably be this choice. So we would
welcome any insight into that that you can give us. Thank you.
Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Fiscus? I have one. On the north side, what
would be the treatment that you would see. I know that on the north side of this building the
elevation goes up. The grade goes up so you will be seeing down on the north side of this
building from those stores or that entertainment area that will be there. So on the north side,
it will appear flat until you get to the south side of the building?
Ron Fiscus: Much as the backs of a number of the other buildings in the downtown area.
Farmakes: We don't have any materials do we?
Mancino: Do you have materials with you?
Ron Fiscus: We do not. It's a brick exterior. Red brick exterior. Standing seam steel roof.
The awnings are a vinyl, red vinyl awning. And this is a tan drivit.
Mancino: Did we have them at our meeting, our first meeting?
Generous: No.
2
' Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
' Mancino: So we haven't seen materials?
Farmakes: I'm concerned about the red roofs and red awnings. How that fits into the
surrounding structures. What I hope we don't have happen here is the stuff we've got going
on at the end with the fast food. The buildings that we have coming up here follow fast food
color structure where we get our klaidescope of bright reds, yellows and greens and things
like that. If it's more terra cotta or it's more from an architectural nature color, it'd be better
' serving the city than some sort of bright red. Since you don't have the materials in front of
us, and obviously the roofing material is provided. Or the colors are custom colors it comes
in or you have to match a color, it would be nice for us to see that type of material. A magic
' marker drawing on a piece of architectural paper does not...
Ron Fiscus: I recognize that having the colors on a sheet of paper doesn't quite feel the
' same. Tires Plus has gone to a number of other communities that were rather restrictive or a
strong concurrence about the color representation. And ... provide some attraction to the area,
as they are occupying a back portion of this site, with the red can provide that ... Can actually
match into some other colors that you have ... in the area. And perhaps it's something, as we
were looking at alternatives prior to the last meeting and working the entire building, I guess
I would tend to agree with you that if the entire building had a pitched roof to it and that
entire thing was red, that might be a rather strong statement. Here it takes on more of a
character of an accent and the predominant, the over powering sense you're going to have is a
very high quality red brick facility. Light tan, lighter tan brick as an accent across here but
' all of those things going very nicely here.
Farmakes: We've run up against this over the years where we have operations that come in.
' They're looking for high visibility and they want the red striping. We had a few buildings
that have went up and we've tried to pass ordinances that try to give us what we want as far
as an end plan once the city's primarily up and running and completely filled up. I've always
' found that, or at least we have a couple of different ordinances. One is the PUD ordinance
that talks about the issues of building structures being overtly different from others in the
surrounding area and then we have the Highway 5 issue dealing with garish and bright colors.
' There are no other buildings that I know of that have red doors in Chanhassen and as I said, I
think the issue here is one of color and if you have a bright red and you're interested in being
some sort of stop sign from Highway 5, I don't think that would be best serving the city.
' We've asked other developers to be sensitive to that issue and I think we should be holding
any of the applicants that come in to the city to the same criteria that we try to come up with.
A sensible blend between stores that want to be seen by Highway 5 and some sort of tasteful
application of architecture in the city. We really are a fairly low impact city. Most of your
signage and so on is moderate and you can be seen from the street. It doesn't really require
' the overkill of dayglo awnings and roofs.
3
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
Mancino: That can certainly be put in a condition that we set forth and also with the
condition that for the City Council, all the materials be brought to show City Council on the
colors, etc.
Farmakes: I would however like to mention to some of the new members on the commission.
Preferably we like to see materials when we look at these structures because you're going to
find that you're going to be somewhat surprised, either pleasantly or unpleasantly when these
buildings go up. That gee, that wasn't quite what I thought it was. So hopefully, particularly
in this case, without having the materials in front of us, we're pretty much voting on things
that we don't really have the criteria to vote on.
Ron Fiscus: If I may offer one more comment. A year ago, a little over a year ago we
approached the City of Apple Valley, and Apple Valley as you know has gone through a
much needed change in what they define as their downtown area, which is the corner of
Cedar and County 42. They established some very stringent criteria for how they wanted this
area to appear and some of the comments as they were going through the planning process on
that downtown area came out was that they didn't like the constant change of one color to
another and the signage that the next person's sign had to be larger and brighter than the one
before it to attract attention. They had shared some concerns about Tires Plus standard
building prior to, or at the time we started opening discussions with them about whether or
not Tires Plus would fit into that kind of environment. As we got into it, Tires Plus agreed to
design a special building for that Apple Valley setting that would address some of those
criteria that the city had established and yet the city recognized the need for Tires Plus to
keep some of it's standard statement which is that red identifier. As we got into it, the Tires
Plus was very pleased with the facility. The Minnesota Shopping Center Association was so
pleased with the facility or how pleased Apple Valley was with it, that they gave that building
an award for the best building under 10,000 square feet last year. This is that building. This
is the building that as we started talking to the city administrative staff and ... process, they
said well our image of Tires Plus is this fairly plain, concrete block building that really
doesn't do anything for anybody witty a lot of overhead garage doors. What can you do
about that? At that point we directed their attention to this Apple Valley building and the
general reaction we got was that's a very nice facility and is something that would
compliment that redevelopment project very nicely so that's kind of where we've been coming
along in this project as we've been interacting with staff.
Mancino: Appreciate that. Appreciate hearing that. Any other questions?
Mehl: The blue areas that you're showing there I assume is glass.
Ron Fiscus: It's glass, right.
4
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
Mehl: Is that intended to be shaded blue in some way or are you looking at just clear glass?
Ron Fiscus: Clear glass.
Mehl: Okay. Any kind of a sun screen, a smoked appearance?
Ron Fiscus: It isn't intended to be.
Mehl: Okay. The other comment I would have I guess I agree with Jeff. I'm not sure about
the red roof next to the red brick are just a little off in color. We'd have to look at materials.
I think they're not, maybe not contrasting enough or, we'd have to see the materials.
Ron Fiscus: As we've gone into the Uptown area required brick. Maple Grove required
' brick. Apple Valley required it. Burnsville required brick on these facilities. The red
awnings, the red trim does blend very nicely with that red brick.
Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion to open this for a public hearing please.
Meyer moved, Conrad seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
' Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning
Commission, please come up now on this issue. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close
the public hearing?
Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Mancino: Comments and remarks from commissioners. Commissioner Skubic. Would you
like to.
Skubic: I really share Jeffs observation mostly. The concerns about the color. And I agree,
' without having samples in front of us, it's really hard to tell. I can tell what I like and
unfortunately by the time I see it, it's usually too late. Everything will be up. So I'm
sensitive that the roofline matches the, compliments the adjacent structures. I think this is
' something that staff can work out with the applicant. I like the number 3 roofline. The
pitched roof on number 3 by far. That's real nice and I think it's consistent with the strip mall
to the east that's being renovated and also consistent with one of the other plans we have
' before us tonight. The office industrial building. So I really like that.
Mancino: Commissioner Conrad.
' 5
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
Conrad: Well I appreciate the more data on the subdivision from staff. I think the applicant
has done, the subdivision looks good. The only thing that I would put in would be the
overall subdivision, you want to keep 35% green space so I'm real comfortable with allowing
this one to go over that but in total we just have to adhere to that. There's no reason we
shouldn't. The site plan looks good to me. I don't care. The applicant did a good job. I
appreciate what you did going back to two alternatives that I think are better than what I saw
before. I think they meet the intent, from what I can tell. I think Jeffs comment about a
bright red is valid. A rust. You know I don't mind what I'm seeing here but I think the point
is, I'd like to, we'd like to see the color. I certainly don't mind a reddish tone. Whether you
call it terra cotta or not, I think that's attractive. I'm looking at some colors that I think are
attractive. They may not be the real ones but I do agree with Jeffs point. We don't want a
typical McDonald's red type roof. I think that's the extent of my comments. I think it's much
better than what we saw before.
Mancino: Commissioner Meyers.
Meyer: Nothing additional.
Mancino: No additional? Commissioner Farmakes.
Farmakes: I agree with what's been said. Again I'd like to reiterate that when we see these
things, the materials would be extremely helpful. You can bet that when the architectural
firm is showing this to the client, that they are showing the materials. I don't think that it'd
be inappropriate for us to see those materials. In looking at the version that I've seen, I prefer
the one on the lower part of the screen, with the exceptions that we continue to see these
types of buildings say that this is very similar to Target. It would be helpful if, I think in
keeping more with the Highway 5 designs or the intent, is to try and do something about
some of the edges or the square. If you're looking at this building from the side. It isn't
necessary I think that you have to have a pitched kind of fake roof all the way around it but
even if there was more of a cap or an extended cap on the roof level so you don't have a box.
And I would throw that out as a comment for staff in discussing this issue maybe again with
a lighter color on the cap. Part of the roof with the staggered level of the roof, or excuse me,
the pitched roof that you've added to the front area. That would be enough, when you view
the two together and from the side, that you would, we'd be breaking this up somewhat. My
concern is that we kind of come up with a facade where it kind of looks like Frontier town.
You have a building in the front, all the rest of the buildings from the side look the same.
Mancino: It looks like a set.
R
I Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
'
Farmakes: Well like a set y eah. But again, if you can extend out a cap, there are thins that
, y g Y p g
you can do by extending out the cap that break up the square. And typical squares in nature
t are non - existent. We make them and a little bit goes a long way to break that up. Anyway,
if we continue to take the same solution over and over again with these buildings, we're going
' to create a very sameness to everything and that really, we need to be careful with that in one
way but again when we're trying to plan these things and come up with ordinances, hopefully
there's some variation that we get from the applicant. As it is right now, cities tend to look
very much dated by the materials that are being used currently in commercial construction.
You're seeing a lot of these metal roof structures now, particularly in the commercial retail
level of these buildings going up. And little extra details of stone details I think are going to
' be important that not everything look the same. Version 1. Version 2 ... character. The other
issue with regards to the windows. I'm concerned that we add on or we add in that if we're
not going to require smoke windows, reflective windows. If their intent is to advertise in that
' space, that we be cognizant of what that is or omit that. Because of the amount of glass
space that's facing to the south.
' Mancino: Omit what? Any signage?
Farmakes: In the glass. The tire places, if you're familiar with Rapid Oil Change and so on
' and a lot of them put up these temporary banners and so on in the window. My concern is
with that much glass, that we don't get an S in one window. A big A in another and then L
in another and an E in another. That's 8 feet tall or something. It's not again to restrict. I
' believe that you would use some allowance for square footage in window signage but again,
the distance, this is not a pedestrian area. The distance to the highway is fairly considerably
so to have workable signage and advertising will be an issue. And I think if they're allowed
' temporary banners and so on for opening and that type of thing, it still would be a concern.
They have clear windows.
Mancino: Staff, what is the ordinance for that? I mean we do most of the architecture in the
front is windows and what is our sign ordinance?
' Generous: 50% can be in temporary signage.
' Mancino: So that glass could be filled up with 50% signage?
Generous: Yes.
' Farmakes: Is there a square foot cap though? To that 50 %?
' Rask: No. There was not in the sign ordinance ... and we agreed on 50 %.
7
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
Farmakes: That's a lot of window space. Is your intent to utilize that? You say it's not?
You would not object to an ordinance, or an amendment being on there to limit that?
Mancino: A condition.
Ron Fiscus: If you wish to use that down ... for the people driving by right close... I would
probably object to restricting it ... so you don't occupy 50% of the window space you don't get
the big SALE letters that are visible from the highway, then I'm having a problem reducing
that down...
Mancino: Well that might be a good condition to let the applicant and staff work that
through.
Farmakes: The last issue on monument signage for this development. If we make it
architecturally compatible, with what architecture will we make it compatible?
Generous: Probably the front one but we don't know what that looks like yet. I meet Friday
with the architect.
Mancino: But that will still come through the Planning Commission.
Generous: Yes.
Ron Fiscus: If I may offer a little clarification of that. We are working with Applebee's
architect currently to resolve that and my sense is it will be more in keeping with Applebee's
architecture.
Farmakes: Alright. I don't have any further questions.
Mancino: Commissioner Mehl.
Mehl: I agree with Jeff that some type of a small inward beveled roof line around the
perimeter of the building could add some interest to the, what would be the east and west and
north. North sides. You tend to get rid of that upper square corner. It could make it more
interesting. And I agree with the advertising of the windows. Even with the large amount of
glass that's there, we really have to watch how much is going to be allowed in there. That's
all I had.
Mancino: Thank you. It's come a long way. I think it looks so much better. I have just a
couple concerns and a couple questions for staff. I see this building as having almost two
8
I Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
' fronts only ecause when the north side of the railroad gets developed as an entertainment,
y g p
they will be looking at this building and will be getting out of parking lots and going into this
entertainment complex. So that this building does not really have a back, or shouldn't
because of what's going to be developed on the north side. Am I correct in seeing it that way
Bob?
Generous: Yes, you will have the entertainment district if you will.
' Mancino: Right there and it will be looking onto this so I would like to make sure that both
landscaping wise and adding a new roof element will have the back also be aesthetically
' pleasing. Maybe not quite as much as the south side but that the north side have the correct
amount of landscaping too so it doesn't feel like the back of the building, because I do think
it has two fronts. My other question has to do with parking lot. Bob, could you put up the
' last overhead that you had up that showed where the parking lot for this subdivision may
have access on both the west and the east side.
Generous: On the west side, it would be looking along this... This is the bank's drive thru
with one way traffic going towards the west. The other one would be down in the southeast
corner of the development if they choose to make that connection for the second phase.
' Mancino: Okay. My concern is, and I read over the Chanhassen Vision 2002 newsletter that
we all received, was that one of the points that it made is that the foundation of the plan were
' talking about park once, shop twice. And what I found over at Market Square, parking in
Market Square. We parked at Wendy's. One of us went to Pet Jungle. One of us went to
Lawn and Sports and we had to cut through a huge parking lot and I found with children that
' is not pedestrian friendly. You can hardly park once and shop twice because the parking area
is so big and there is nothing that, for public safety, allows you to walk to all these different
places. I don't have the solution but I would like to see the city come up with one in these
' big parking lots that are going to be multi -use for 4 and 5 different retail spaces. Anybody
on the commission have any solutions to that?
' Mehl: I have one comment. I counted the number of parking places that were going to be in
the restaurant parking lot. I got 90 to 100. Is that what's required for that restaurant space?
' Or could some of those parking areas be done, or be rearranged in such a way to get them
better traffic flow. Maybe some additional landscaping. Maybe some pedestrian walkways.
This sort of thing.
' Generous: Well they have improved that pedestrian walkway. The first answer is, it's not
sufficient for the site that's specifically on the restaurant site. There will be cross access and
' parking agreements so there's shared parking within the development. And also with the
' 9
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
connection, the bank will be losing some parking spaces so they'll get shared parking with
this development also. This is a little too small to do it. Like I said, we have provided the
best pedestrian opportunities that we saw based on the layout on this site. With both ways of
the entrance boulevard, there will be sidewalks on both sides and then there will be these
connections to east and west.
Mancino: So there is perimeter pedestrian sidewalks?
Generous: Correct. And also...
Mancino: Okay, but we haven't come up with a solution to diagonally or once you're on the
east side, to get to the west side of the parking lot.
Generous: Not from internally, no.
Mancino: No internal sort of pedestrian sidewalk. I would like staff to work on that concept
as we get bigger parking lots. How do we allow people to some sort of an internal
pedestrian, whether it's even painted on the asphalt, etc.
Generous: Yeah, I don't know. Part of the problem is if they do that, they eat up their
impervious surface and we need so much landscaping in the parking lot so maybe it's a credit
along that line. Yeah, it's something we could look at.
Mancino: Yeah, I understand. Appreciate it. Thank you. Those are my only comments.
Do I have a motion?
Conrad: Sure. Just before I make a motion.
Mancino: For subdivision.
Conrad: The subdivision is neat. It's real simple. But it's really, the simplicity is almost,
you take it for granted but it's really quite nice. I don't think anybody has said that. When
you have the shared parking for four buildings, you get a couple buildings up front. This is
neat. It's also neat that we do have some accesses possibly going to the neighboring property
owner so in it's simplicity, don't ignore how nice this particular subdivision is. I like it very
much. A comment about the parking. We blew it when we built Target and you know, that
was a massive parking lot and we had opportunities galore there. This one's too small in my
estimation to really do something useful. That really functions. Tough to deal with this one
but those are some add on comments but I'll make the motion on the subdivision that the
Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of Subdivision #95 -13, Crossroads
10
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
Third Addition, plans prepared by Peters, Price and Samson dated July 12, 1995, if that's still
the right date. Is that the right date?
Generous: For the subdivision.
Conrad: For the subdivision, okay. Replatting Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd
Addition into 4 lots subject to the conditions in the staff report plus the deletions that staff
made that maybe I didn't get totally down. I know we deleted number 1 and we deleted
number 6.
Mancino: And 7.
Conrad: And 7, okay. And then there was an adjustment to, there were some wording
changes to 2, is that right Bob?
Generous: Yes. Delete all but the last sentence and then modify.
Conrad: Okay. But I'm not going to repeat that. I bought what you said and it made sense
so you can get that in. The only addition that I'd make to this would be point number 20.
The condition be that overall 65% impervious surface will not be exceeded. And that's the
extent of my motion.
Farmakes: Will you take an amendment?
Conrad: Maybe.
Farmakes: An addition. I asked that staff to work out the details from the architecture that
was discussed.
Conrad: This is just for the subdivision. Not the site.
Farmakes: Okay, I'm sorry.
Mancino: Second to the motion?
Meyer: Second that.
11
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
Conrad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends City Council
approval of Subdivision #95 -13, Crossroads 3rd Addition, plans prepared by Peters, Price &
Samson dated July 12, 1995, replatting Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4
lots subject to the following conditions:
1. Detailed construction plans as well as as -built plans will be required upon completion.
2. The preliminary plat itself appears to be acceptable. The appropriate drainage and utility
easements will be dedicated with the plat.
3. Existing landscaping along West 79th Street will be in conflict with the proposed
driveway. These trees will need to be relocated.
4. There is an existing concrete driveway apron on West 79th Street located in the
southwest corner of the site that will need to be removed.
5. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance
with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water
Management Plan requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to
the City for review and formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be used
adjacent to the grading limits.
6. 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.
7. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest
edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility
plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval.
8. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland
ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before accepting the utilities
and will charge the applicant $20.00 per sign.
9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 2 year, 10 year and 100
year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance
with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and
approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre - developed
and post developed stormwater calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water
12
I Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
' level and high water level calculations in existing basins and created basins. Individual
storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to
determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized.
10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the
necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development
contract.
t 11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health
' Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources,
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply
with their conditions of approval.
' 12. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right -of -way.
I 13. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend the wetland
mitigation areas into the surroundings is recommended.
I 14. Prior to filling the wetlands, the City shall receive all necessary permits to complete the
project in accordance with the WCA and Army Corps of Engineers.
' 15. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found
during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City
Engineer.
' 16. Erosion control fencing (Type I) shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage
plans prior to final plat approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around
' the perimeter of the site prior to any work commencing.
17. The condition be that overall 65% impervious surface will not be exceeded.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' Mancino: May I have a motion for the site plan.
' Conrad: Yeah I'd make that motion too. I'd make the motion that the Planning Commission
recommends the City Council approve Site Plan #95 -10, plans dated October 20, 1995,
prepared by Yaggy Colby Associates for Tires Plus, Lot 1, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd
' Addition, subject to the conditions of the staff report with the following changes. On point
' 13
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
number 6. That the Planning Commission recommends the third alternative as the elevation.
The third alternative provided by the applicant as being the design of choice by the Planning
Commission but with the one exception that the cap be placed on the top of the roof line on
the east, north and west. I'd revise number 7 to add that the staff will insure that landscaping
to the north is adequate to soften the hard view or to soften the view from the entertainment
center to the north. I'd add number 13. That the applicant be required to bring in the
samples of the roof and the brick to the City Council with the intent that the roof not be, the
intent that the roof be a more natural reddish color at most. Not a bright red and that will be
for the staff and the applicant to review before it gets to the City Council.
Mancino: Second please.
Farmakes: Can I make an addition to that or friendly amendment? When you say the roof
materials, can you also add the details and the structure, being the awnings and the doors and
so on.
Conrad: Yeah.
Mehl: One other thing too. Are we all clear on which is design number 3?
Conrad: Yeah. I think everybody here knows but it's the third, it's the bottom of the new
alternative.
Mancino: It's the double pitch.
Conrad: Good point.
Mancino: Thank you. And do I have a second to that motion?
Farmakes: I second.
Mancino: I'm sorry, any discussion?
Conrad moved, Farmakes seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City
Council approve Site Plan 995 -10, plans dated October 20, 1995, prepared by Yaggy Colby
Associates for Tires Plus on Lot 1, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Building is required to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13.
14
I Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
2. Ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants.
3. Submit radius turn dimensions for approval.
4. Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code
' requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit will be required
for signage.
5. Grading of the site must be consistent with the master development plan that will be
required of the plat.
6. The third alternative, which is the double pitched roof, provided by the applicant as
being the design of choice by the Planning Commission but with the one exception that
' the cap be placed on the top of the roof line on the east, north and west.
7 Revising landscaping plan to locate all proposed trees outside the Minnegasco easement.
' Staff will insure that landscaping to the north is adequate to soften the hard view or to
soften the view from the entertainment center to the north.
8. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance
with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water
Management Plan requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to
the City for review and formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be used
adjacent to the grading limits.
' 9. 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.
10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
' agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health
Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources,
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply
' with their conditions of approval.
11. The private utilities shall be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant
' and /or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City.
15
Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 1995
12. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement with the city and provide
the necessary security to meet the conditions of approval.
13. The applicant is required to bring in the samples of the roof, brick, awnings and
detailing to the City Council with the intent that the roof be more of a natural reddish
color than a bright red.
All voted in favor- and the motion carried unanimously.
Conrad: Madam Chair, can I make a comment? Can I make another comment?
Mancino: Yes you may.
Conrad: I did not address the window space. And I think City Council can. We have a
brand new ordinance in town. We just looked at it. I really hate to all of a sudden identify
this project as one that we're going to change that ordinance to because we see a few more
panes of glass so that's why I didn't bundle that in Jeff. I'm real nervous about doing that and
about setting individual window specifications. I did want to bring it up because I think City
Council should review it but I want them to hear my comments. We have a new ordinance.
It's there. We screwed around with it. We thought about it a long time. I don't really like to
get in and nit, I'm not sure it's nit picking because it's a valid concern but I don't know, I felt
uncomfortable.
Farmakes: You may want to review that ordinance because I'm not sure, we did at one time
have a...
Aanenson: There is a cap based on the wall area. It can't exceed the wall area for that
district.
Conrad: It may be okay but again, that's.
Mancino: And it's passed. When does it go in front of the City Council?
Generous: November 13th.
Mancino: Okay, thank you.
16