PC Minutes 03-05-2013CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 5, 2013
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Kathleen Thomas, Kim Tennyson and Bill
Colopoulos
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Lisa Hokkanen
STAFF PRESENT:
Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior
Planner; and Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Jack Appert, Kraus-Anderson, Inc. 4210 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington
Dan Parks Westwood Professional Services
John Hagen Westwood Professional Services
Scott Paulson 634 Summerfield Drive
Jeffery Hahn 622 Summerfield Drive
Mike Helland 351 Parkland Way
John Holland
PUBLIC HEARING:
CROSSROADS RETAIL BUILDING 4B: REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE
CHANHASSEN GATEWAY PUD-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW A FAST
FOOD DRIVE THRU; AND AMENDMENT TO THE CROSSROADS OF CHANHASSEN SITE
PLAN FOR A 13,871 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING (BUILDING 4B) ON PROPERTY
ZONED PUD-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATED ON THE EASTERLY
PORTION OF 9871 CROSSROADS BOULEVARD (LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CROSSROADS OF
CHANHASSEN). APPLICANT: KRAUS-ANDERSON REALTY COMPANY, PLANNING
CASE 2013-06.
Al-Jaff: Chairman Aller, members of the Planning Commission. The subject site is located at the
northwest corner of the intersection of Highway 101 and Lyman Boulevard and southwest of Highway
212. The 2013 Land Use Plan for this site is guided mixed density which allows for high density
residential units and neighborhood commercial types of uses. The commercial use is intended to support
or compliment residential development. Commercial uses may include convenience stores, grocery
th
stores, daycare centers. Those uses that meet the daily needs of residents. On January 4 of 2005 the
Planning Commission reviewed and approved the Concept Planned Unit Development for this site, and
this is not to be confused with the site plan approval. This plan was later approved by the City Council on
January 24, 2005. The final concept layout reflected a residential component to the north of Highway
212 and a commercial component to the south of Highway 212. The majority of the density for the
residential was intended to be concentrated along Highway 101. So the site plan request is for the
construction of a 13,871 square foot multi-tenant building with a drive thru. The drive thru is intended to
be located along the northwest corner of Building 4B and the building intended to be built is shown with
the red circle around it. The overall hard surface coverage permitted for this entire development is 70%
and the applicant is showing a 48.1% hard surface coverage. Basically the hard surface coverage can be
averaged over the entire site which is permitted under the Planned Unit Development ordinance. This
building is being, or this overall development is being built in phases so the first thing that was built was
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
the Kwik Trip site which was a convenience store, a gas station, and a car wash. The following
development was Primrose, which is a daycare center and now the third building is before you which is a
one story, multi-tenant building. With this phase you will see a portion of the parking built as well as a
two-way access into the site off of Crossroads Boulevard. The materials that will be used on the building
are all of high quality. The design is very attractive. The materials will include brick and block. So these
were the materials that were initially approved with the overall development of Crossroads of Chanhassen
and with this overall plan one of the new elements that the applicant is introducing is a lighter shade of
brick which is, it will blend perfectly with the rest of the development and it will match the, it will match
the beige that is already used as an accent on the building. Back to the site plan itself, we have sidewalks
and trails that allow connection between the subject site and the surrounding buildings. It also separates
pedestrians from vehicular traffic. That is something that came as a concern from the neighbors in several
emails and during phone conversations that we’ve had with them and we’ve worked with the applicant to
try and address as many of these concerns as possible so there will be different locations where the
sidewalk will connect to the building itself. Another concern that we heard from the neighbors was
location of the drive thru and the screening of it. The drive thru initially was approved with this
development to serve coffee only and when we first began conversations with the applicant one of the
things that they wanted to do was locate a free standing building where the bank was proposed to be
located and staff was opposed to a free standing fast food restaurant. One of the things that we started
working on was could they accommodate a fast food restaurant to the northwest corner of Building 4D.
This building is referred to as 4D throughout the Planned Unit Development. So one of the things that we
attempted to do was we asked for landscaping to screen the drive thru as well as any headlights of cars
that are coming through the drive thru and insure that there are no lights shining into oncoming traffic off
of Highway 101 as well as any passers by off of 101. It is as far as possible from the residential
neighborhood located to the southeast portion of the, of this development and just a distance, from a
distance standpoint rough calculations measured about a little over 850 feet from the closest property line.
Not house but property line. We asked the applicant to provide us with renderings that show views of the
building from different locations so this is a view of the building from, looking toward the southwest
portion of the site. This is a view toward the northeast. And finally we asked the applicant to provide us
with a rendering that shows us the perspective from the, toward the northwest. Basically what are the
views that the neighbors will be seeing and as you can see the drive thru is, cannot be seen from this
location mainly because the building is tilted. One thing we do need to point out with this phase only, the
one story building is being built. The two story is a future phase. To accomplish this development the
current language in the City Code, in the Planned Unit Development Ordinance that governs this
development limits drive thru’s to coffee shops only. We need to amend the language to allow fast food
and staff is recommending that this would be the only building that would be permitted to have a drive
thru for a fast food restaurant. As a result of this amendment, one of the things that will change is the size
of the building. The currently approved building area is 11,000. The applicant is requesting that they
increase the area to 13,871 square feet. There has been multiple changes within this development and
usually if the change is small enough this is something that we can process administratively. The overall
area that was approved for this Planned Unit Development was 71,500 square feet. With, including this
change the overall area will be 67,171 square feet which is still below what was permitted on this site.
Staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Planned Unit
amendment to the existing standards and a site plan amendment for the construction of a one story multi-
tenant building with a drive thru to allow fast food and adoption of the Findings of Fact and
Recommendation and I’ll be happy to answer any questions.
Aller: The initial plan that was approved, did that allow for a three story? Or two story?
Al-Jaff: No, one story.
Aller: So it’s always been one story.
2
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Al-Jaff: It was always one story with the exception of the building to the south of, if you give me one
second.
Aller: The office building.
Al-Jaff: There. The office building located to the south of the site was to be two story.
Aller: So that hasn’t changed.
Al-Jaff: That has not changed.
Aller: And the total square footage, does that include all the hard space that they’ll be using to keep that
at the 47%?
Al-Jaff: Can you repeat this?
Aller: Are we going to, because of the reduction from 71,000 to 67,000 or whatever it is now, are we
picking that up as open space or is it hard cover?
Al-Jaff: No we’re not. It will be parking because as the uses change.
Aller: So it’ll be used for the 250 slots?
Al-Jaff: Correct. Yes.
Aller: Will that allow for larger parking spaces as opposed to a bunch of cars that are crammed in there?
Is that?
Al-Jaff: No. All the parking spaces were 19 feet by 9 feet which is what the ordinance requires.
Aller: They’re standard, okay. Commissioner.
Colopoulos: Okay thank you for the complete report that staff provided. That was, I found the history of
this both interesting and confusing at the same time as far as the different stages of application that has
transpired dating all the way back to 2005 if I’m reading the report correctly. During that chain of events
there was obviously discussions with local folks and a lot of different people were made aware of the plan
to develop that area. Not just this particular parcel but also the area now where the existing Kwik Trip is,
etc. I’m assuming that’s all been part of this plan to develop that area. Was there ever any specific
mention of a coffee shop drive thru being part of the plan or was that just the way the rules read?
Al-Jaff: No.
Colopoulos: There was.
Al-Jaff: That was an in depth discussion.
Colopoulos: Okay.
Al-Jaff: And it was always part of the plan.
3
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Colopoulos: Where did the change to fast food occur in the timeline? How recent is that I guess is my
question.
Al-Jaff: We began discussions with the applicant probably about 6-7 months ago but it was when they
approached staff and said they wanted a free standing building and we were opposed to the request and
we recommended that they basically abandon this request.
Colopoulos: Okay. I was just trying to get some feel for the chain of application. Details.
Al-Jaff: The one thing that I forgot to mention, if I may, the applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting
to just introduce the neighbors to the project as well as gather their feedback and I believe he will be able
to address this portion of it.
Aanenson: If I may Commissioner.
Colopoulos: Thank you.
Aanenson: Can I just give a little bit more background?
Colopoulos: Sure.
Aller: I’m also interested in the traffic studies.
Aanenson: Yep, we’ll have Alyson go through that. I just want to give a little bit more context for the
change. You know when this project was approved, we originally had a lot more housing on this in the
2005. Significantly more and things were moving in that time, the 2005. The market changed. Again
part of this property has also sold off. The property to the north so when the Kwik Trip came in they
were kind of at a standstill. You know we anticipated a daycare but not the site that we had another user
on that site so and again trying to keep true to the original vision of the property. The concern that we
had with, we envisioned a bank on the one property. We put in a larger drive thru, which was more
square footage. Significantly more square footage than where we put it. We tried to put it on an end cap
making it smaller. Try to contain that. Spent a lot of time and Kraus-Anderson did a good job working
through all the different design iterations trying to adopt that. Make the user, the fast food user integral to
it instead of a free standing with their own separate architecture and that’s really where a lot of the back
and forth was but again some of the market changed over time. Again trying to stay true to what we
envisioned. Again not all, everything comes to be but we tried as best to withhold that so we stuck,
because we always envisioned this area as having a drive thru. That was our guiding principle to keep it
back in that area. Screen it from the neighbors and that was the goal and I think it really turned out pretty
successful in the design so, but I’ll let Alyson answer the questions on traffic.
Thomas: Alyson, I want to hear about the traffic study.
Aller: Traffic.
Thomas: Please. Just to hear how it’s, how traffic’s going to flow through the development please.
Aller: And how it’s changed between the two studies. The old study and the new study.
Thomas: Yeah, the coffee shop with morning rush and maybe fast food of unique different kinds of
rushes.
4
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Aller: And the daycare.
Thomas: Yes.
Fauske: Okay. I can go broad brush with, to cover some of your questions and I believe the applicant is
here with probably some more detailed information with the traffic. As Kate had mentioned when this
proposal came through in 2005, in conjunction with that we took a look at the traffic and a traffic study
was generated based on the uses that were anticipated for the site and based on that they came up with
traffic volumes. You’ll see on this particular slide where Crossroad Boulevard intersects 101, also where
it intersects Lyman Boulevard, we wanted to look at those two locations. Public street to county road.
On impacts, traffic, turn lanes that would be required at those intersections. Discussions with MnDOT as
that north intersection kind of T’s up with the ramp for 212 so we looked at those intersections. We
looked at the function. The width of Crossroads Boulevard. We had quite a lengthy discussion in fact
about the access to Kwik Trip. That access shifted so there was a lot of focus on that and looked, again
looked at it broad brush. There was one user identified at that time. As Sharmeen indicated in her
presentation there’s, as they’ve gone through the daycare came in. We now have this proposal in. Things
have changed and that happens and the diligent thing to do at that point would be to revisit the traffic
study. Look at what the original projections were for traffic and update those numbers and again take a
step back with those numbers and take a look at the impacts to the intersection and potential conflicts and
the applicant’s worked with both the City, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Carver
County to make sure that the assumptions used in the traffic study were, that everybody was comfortable
with that. All the regulatory agencies were comfortable with that. There was some feedback from
MnDOT that they did want to look at the 2023 volumes so I know the applicant’s been working with
them on that and based on that, you know we do see some increases in traffic which is conducive to a
coffee drive thru versus the proposed restaurant drive thru but also interestingly with the daycare and the
size of the building there. You know certainly your a.m. and p.m. peak volumes do increase with a
daycare as one would imagine so I hope I have addressed all of your questions regarding traffic and as I
mentioned I know the applicant has some more detailed background.
Thomas: That works for me. Thank you Alyson.
Aller: Okay. Let’s ask the applicant to step forward and do a presentation if they decided to do so.
Please state your name and address for the record.
Jack Appert: Yeah, Jack Appert. I’m with Kraus-Anderson, 4210 West Old Shakopee Road,
Bloomington, Minnesota 55437.
Aller: Welcome sir.
Jack Appert: Thank you. Chairman Aller and members of the Planning Commission, I want to thank you
all for being here tonight and hearing this proposal. I also want to thank Sharmeen and all the members
of staff for playing an integral part in what I think we’ll all see as a proposal that’s generally consistent
with the 2008 approved PUD. The reason it’s changing a little bit, there’s a number of them and I think I
can let you ask those questions specifically, whatever may come up with. I’m here with Kathy Anderson,
our architect. Dan Parks and John Hagen from Westwood who will be able to answer traffic questions
pretty thoroughly I think. More so than I would understand, and also Cindy McDonald our property
manager who will be the property manager of this development so I will I guess just open it up to any
questions.
Aller: Well first of all I’d like to thank you for having the meetings with the public, general public to get
their feeling and feedback and it sounds like you’ve been working with them for a number of issues and
5
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
towards resolving a number of issues before it’s even come forward so thank you for doing that because
it’s a good thing for us to hear and as a community to have happen in that working relationship with
developers. In that meeting apparently there were some things, and the feedback that I’ve seen in the
report it looks like they were happy with the fact that you were meeting with them too but they’re
concerned about, for example the additional trash aspects. The additional traffic concerns so could you
talk to the issues that were raised in your meeting so we can hear it from you firsthand in how that’s
working out.
Jack Appert: Yeah, absolutely and we did have the neighborhood meeting and then also I’ve met with
members of the HOA separately to go over some of these things and they’ve done a good job of kind of
expressing the concerns to me so I can try my best in answering them and these guys might have some
more insight into it but as far as trash goes, Cindy might be able to speak better to that but you know we’d
have trash receptacles strategically placed around the site that would hopefully minimize a lot of that.
And also our property management that’s out there on a daily basis keeping the site clean and you know
I’m sure we can get examples of other properties we have that kind of show that. You know there’s no
way to eliminate it completely but we do do a pretty good job of minimizing it. Traffic, I think John you
might want to speak to this but the way the site’s designed and how all the auto oriented uses are in that
one where you have the drive thru and then the gas station and the car wash in that one corner to kind of
limit that to that part of the site and everything, the rest of it becomes a lot more pedestrian friendly and
the pedestrian connections and what not so, and also the islands in the parking lot that are all landscaped
that tends to slow traffic down in the front end parking. I mean there’s just a lot of different things that
were done to help with that as we knew it was a concern.
Aller: What is the plan to protect the roadway from the lights of the cars as they come around? Is it all
shrubs and trees or is there any fencing? What’s involved with that?
Jack Appert: I’m going to let Dan Parks or John come up here and talk to that.
Don Parks: Are we good right here with?
Aller: Absolutely. And feel free for any number of your representatives to come forward so that we get
questions answered is more important than standing on ceremony.
Jack Appert: Great, thank you.
Don Parks: Hi, I’m Dan Parks with Westwood. I’m a professional engineer with the company. I
actually worked on this project back in 2005-2006 so it’s nice to see it move to the next phase. The
concern about the drive thru is in this area here. When the project was originally approved there was a
drive thru that was approved in this project and as part of the site grading that was done when Kwik Trip
was done, there was actually a berm constructed out in the right-of-way. There’s a couple 3 or 4 foot
berm that’s out there presently. That berm is being maintained with this project as well as shrubbery,
evergreens as well as a variety of trees and plantings around the drive thru so we think there’s going to be
a fairly effective protection of headlights at least to that area. I think we received a staff comment that
suggested also maybe some additional evergreens in that location so we’re going to have a color full year
round so we can definitely incorporate some additional evergreens on that berm as well but the plan is
there is to have the cars be below the berm and then they have a variety of vegetation on top of the berm
to effectively screen headlights.
Aller: Okay. Is there any information that you have that would lead you to believe that McDonald’s
would leave any more trash on the property than a coffee manufacturer for instance? And I’m using
6
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
coffee only because it was designed or there was a plan for coffee before but of any restaurant or any
business in that area.
Jack Appert: I guess other than, I mean I can’t speak too well to that but I know that they do, that is part
of their employee responsibility is to make sure that the area outside of it is clean and that you know
whether or not there is more trash because of it, we still have our property management out there daily so
whether they’re picking up A amount or B amount, it’s still getting cleaned up and you know the hope
would be to minimize. I know that the concern as part of the drive thru trash where you know the, relying
on the good nature of people I guess not to be littering but no indication that I have of why there would be
any more with this than something else I guess.
Colopoulos: There’s also been the thought expressed that having a fast food establishment like
McDonald’s in that location would cast an odor that would extend into neighboring areas. What plans
does McDonald’s have for mitigating that factor?
Jack Appert: Well we, since we’ll own the building and you know I know a limited amount about this but
we do the build out and what, we’ve addressed this question because it was a concern and what it is, it’s a,
they call it a high efficiency hood and how it works I’m not too sure. I know it does something where the
grease and the associated odors with that grease goes up into it and gets caught in the ductwork and
essentially knocked down so any exhaust that comes out is clean so it’s not your McDonald’s of 1950’s or
whatever where you’re smelling that. And then the ductwork gets cleaned out and so the majority of it, if
any never makes it out into kind of the environment I guess so it shouldn’t be, these hoods that they have
are quite a bit more expensive than your traditional ones so it shouldn’t be an issue I guess is what I’m
saying.
Dan Parks: Mr. Chair can I answer a question?
Aller: Absolutely.
Dan Parks: There was a comment earlier about the trash enclosure and just so we all understand this
picture. There’s actually a trash enclosure that’s shown kind of hidden inside of the drive thru area that’s
depicted in this drawing here. It’s going to be surrounded with plant materials. The original plan that
was approved also included a trash enclosure in the same general area by the drive thru so I can’t frankly
recall whether or not we go back to 2006, whether or not we had a, whether or not we had a volume that
was really depicted. I don’t know if we looked at what this building plus the coffee would generate for
trash versus what’s being generated now with the fast food and the new retail users but the trash
enclosure’s in the same general vicinity. It’s generally the same type of volume but I can’t really tell you
that we ever said one’s going to generate 100 pounds a day and the other’s going to generate 120 pounds
a day. We haven’t run that analysis.
Aller: Similar question, probably more on point to what you might have information on is the traffic
involved in a coffee versus a McDonald’s. Is it similar? Is it more? Is it less?
Dan Parks: Missy, can you answer how often you’ve had comments on, do you know how often you
have trash pick-up’s for a typical McDonald’s restaurant?
Aller: And it wasn’t necessarily to trash pick-up’s. It was to traffic going through and the.
Colopoulos: Traffic, yeah.
7
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
John Hagen: Commission members, I’m John Hagen. I’m with Westwood Professional Services. I did
the traffic study for this version of the project. One of the things that we did do is compare what a coffee
shop drive thru would generate for an average sized coffee shop versus the proposed fast food restaurant
and essentially on a daily basis they generate approximately the same traffic, within 5%. In the morning a
coffee shop generates considerably more which you would expect because coffee is generally more of a
morning type thing. In the afternoon the fast food restaurant would generate more and so that’s why
when you have morning, the coffee shop generates more. Afternoon fast food does on a daily basis they
generate about the same traffic.
Colopoulos: But the crunch with the coffee shop would be in the morning basically.
John Hagen: Correct.
Colopoulos: Like during rush hour.
John Hagen: That’s correct.
Colopoulos: Okay.
Thomas: Actually I do have one more question.
Aller: Sure.
Thomas: Did you guys look at the stacking at all with the drive thru and how, I mean looking at the
picture and then just looking at the plan, where people would order and then waiting in line to then circle
through the loop and stuff. If you get to the point where it is a crunch and they start pulling, being
backing up out into the parking lot, has that looked at as I don’t know, how long? I mean we’re looking
at it, I know the applicant can possibly be a McDonald’s but in all actuality we’re looking at it as it could
be anything. We’re applying a, doing a permit for any type of fast food restaurant so I was just more
looking at you know is McDonald’s quick, faster. Maybe another fast food restaurant is slower. You
know what is the traffic pattern going to look like in that development if people are trying to get out while
they’re blocking off the entrance to place their order.
John Hagen: Yeah, as far as vehicle queuing, our traffic study didn’t specifically look at vehicle queuing.
We have on other occasions looked at you know queuing of a coffee shop versus a fast food restaurant
and often times you know fast food, or I’m sorry coffee shops in the morning can generate considerably
longer queues in the morning than say a fast food during their peak lunch time. I think one of the reasons
for that also is that often times coffee shop, you know service might take a little bit longer for some of the
more exotic drinks.
Thomas: Advanced, yes.
John Hagen: So that might have something to do with it but the proposed drive thru actually is one of the
dual drive thru concepts.
Thomas: Okay, is it? Okay.
John Hagen: You know so where there’s actually two.
Thomas: Options.
8
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
John Hagen: Order locations that then merge into one.
Thomas: One, then you feed into one. Okay.
John Hagen: Yeah, and my understanding is that the proposed queuing meets the City’s standards.
Thomas: Okay, that helps yeah because it helps understand you know how the queuing would look in
there and to your point, I mean coffee shops do take longer and it’s just, because it does take longer.
They’re not base their pay off of how long, you know how many cars they can get through so makes
sense.
Aller: Thank you. Thank you for now. Okay, I’m going to open the public hearing portion of the
meeting. Anyone wishing to speak for or against can step forward. State your name and address for the
record and make any comments that you’d like to and hopefully we can address them by the end of the
meeting.
Scott Paulson: My name is Scott Paulson. I live at 634 Summerfield Drive in Chanhassen.
Aller: Welcome Mr. Paulson.
Scott Paulson: Thank you. I guess is there any way to go back to the plan view or the, I should say the
drawings?
Aanenson: Sure. The site plan?
Scott Paulson: No, the renderings of.
Aanenson: This one?
Scott Paulson: No.
Aanenson: This one?
Scott Paulson: Yeah. Okay, first of all you can see the drive thru the way this is laid out from the
neighborhood I live in. I mean that car’s in the way. It’s the only thing blocking the drive thru. You can
see that specifically from the houses that are backed up to Lyman and 101 so that is a concern. A 4 foot
berm is not going to cover the drive thru. You’re going to see the drive thru. Second of all they lost all
credibility with me when they said that there was no significant difference in traffic with a McDonald’s
versus a coffee shop. Are you kidding me? I mean nobody here believes that. And we’re going what’s
always been sold to us is neighborhood friendly community businesses to McDonald’s. That’s a huge
leap. A quantum leap. To McDonald’s and a double drive thru is what I’m hearing now all of a sudden.
This was never intended to be, this is a community based business. Now we’re all of a sudden leaping to
something that there’s going to be a sign on the freeway. You know they’re not, we’re not allowing them
to put up giant golden arches but there’s going to be a sign at the exit that says McDonald’s and that is
going to generate a huge amount of traffic. That’s not community based business. Thank you.
Aller: Thank you Mr. Paulson: Anyone else wishing to speak?
Scott Paulson: Oh I had one more comment, sorry.
Aller: Sure. We don’t want to cut you off.
9
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Scott Paulson: The prevailing wind is from the west and they said that it should take care of it, these
scrubbers. That didn’t instill a lot of confidence in me when they say should. The prevailing wind is
going to go right over the neighborhood.
Aller: Thank you. Name and address for the record please.
Jeffery Hahn: Hello. I’m Jeffery Hahn, 622 Summerfield Drive.
Aller: Welcome.
Jeffery Hahn: Thank you. So quick question. This traffic study, was this done with the expansion of the
101 because I know we’re looking to straighten 101 to expand it down to the river.
Aller: My understanding is it was done specifically for this project as an addition but…
Jeffery Hahn: Because once that’s done I mean I think it’s a straight shot from Shakopee right up 101 to
212 and having a McDonald’s there I think will, this traffic study would be worthless. I mean that is a
major proposal right now. I get letters on it on a pretty much daily basis. Re-doing the park. Re-doing
the 101 all the way down to the river. Shakopee has you know expansion of the bridge. I think that’s
going to cause a significant increase in traffic. I mean it’s going to be increased regardless but having a
McDonald’s there, it’s going to increase it even more. Next, the last time I checked McDonald’s does sell
breakfast. They sell coffees. They are trying to get into the gourmet coffee business to compete with
Starbuck’s so to say that the traffic’s going to be later, I think it’s going to be all day. It’s going to be
breakfast, lunch, dinner. We have a neighborhood of a 154 homes. We have 300 students under the age
of 16 that live in our neighborhood. 2-3 kids per home. This isn’t what we want 100 yards from our
homes is a McDonald’s and kids constantly wanting to go there. It’s not exactly the most healthy food on
the planet. You know we’re again, what Mr. Paulson said. This was supposed to be community based
businesses. You know we were told deli’s. Potential like a Haskell’s with a deli. You know deli
sandwiches. That you know, that’s agreeable but McDonald’s, far stretch. But again I mean there’s a
McDonald’s 2 miles away. If somebody wants to go find fast food, there’s plenty of it in downtown Chan
with Wendy’s, McDonald’s, Culver’s. You know I already have to make enough trips downtown to
indulge the children every now and then. I don’t want to drive by it every day. Property value’s already
down enough. I don’t think McDonald’s is going to do anything to raise my property value. That’s for
certain. So thank you.
Aller: Welcome, name and address please.
Mike Helland: Hello. Okay, my name is Mike Helland. I live at 351 Parkland Way. Also in the
Springfield neighborhood. I’m not going to add onto what Scott and Jeff already said. I mean they’re on
that part of the neighborhood and I think their concerns are very legitimate from a smell, traffic. People
coming through the neighborhood. We added in the Frisbee golf last year. We saw a big influx of people
just walking through our neighborhood. Trash, vandalism already increasing so just want to make sure
people are aware of that and this can only help it. I would think…more. I will also say I met with Jack
and I think Jack has been great. He’s been very receptive to us. I’m also on the Springfield Board. I’m
not speaking for the Springfield Board but he’s given us great answers. He’s met with us after hours.
Kind of answered our questions so beyond what they’ve talked about, on the circle. I don’t know if we
can go back 2 pictures. This is the one from, right now we’re on, kind of on the bridge is what I’m
guessing here. We’re on 101. That’s the exit ramp that they’re coming off of. The road that currently
circles Kwik Trip and goes by Primrose is already pretty busy. It often is hard in the morning to get, you
know it’s a single lane. I worry when we put in a fast food, and I mentioned this to Jack, put in a fast
10
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
food, put in a bank, 250 parking stalls, it’s going to get really congested. People already come down 101
to cut through there so they don’t have to go through the lights so how are we going to handle the speed
and the volume of traffic coming through there at, I think as Jeff said, you know there’s going to be more
than one peak. There’s going to be 3 peaks a day with a McDonald’s. There’s a breakfast, lunch and
dinner so that’s question one. This was something we asked of Jack. Lyman right now, I’m on the
second entrance to the Springfield neighborhood. The rest of these gentlemen are at the first entrance.
We just had the Reflections come into the, right across from us, which is great. Love having new houses.
Good property values. It’s very hard already in the morning to start taking left’s out of there. Especially
there’s a big drop off on the hill so after a snow like today, I can’t see to the right so I have to kind of
nose myself forward and slowly, slowly, slowly, and then go for it and hope someone’s not coming up
over that hill. The speed limit is 35 right now and it’s 50 when you get on the other side or 45 when you
get on the other side of 101 so what are we going to do to make sure that traffic stays reasonable on
Lyman for both of our entrances. I think it’s, I would think that they have a hard time coming out, taking
left’s sometimes in the morning. There’s a lot more traffic starting to come on Lyman so I think we need
to make sure we address that in some way. And then the last, I’ll speak more for the neighborhood,
because I’m on the other side but I want my value to go up too. If we go to slides forward. This is the
view from our neighborhood. It’s a berm there’s not a tree there because we can’t put a tree there because
there’s a gas line but we found out today, Jack worked with, is it Westwood?
Jack Appert: Yes.
Mike Helland: That that is owned by what, the County or the State? All that land so they had agreed to
maybe help us with some landscaping. Some bigger screening. Can we get a commitment from the City
that we’ll at least work with the State, the County, whoever it might be to put up more screening no
matter what goes in here? As I said the neighbors that are right there, if they’re sitting in their upstairs
bedroom, they’re looking down on this and it looks pretty bad. I don’t care what it is you know. If
you’re at a Walgreen’s across the way it looks pretty good but if I’m in a home that’s not the view I want
to see out my back yard so if we can get some type of commitment to at least explore additional
screening on the corner of 101 and Lyman for our neighborhood. Maybe 50 to 75 yards down from each
corner so those houses have a little bit of protection. Things we’d like to look at.
Aller: Thank you.
John Aho: Hello. My name is John Aho at 625 Summerfield Drive and we moved here about 6 months
ago from southwest Minneapolis and so this is fairly news to me. This wasn’t brought up at all when we
were searching for a home. Still don’t know if that would change our decision as we love the
neighborhood and the community and Chanhassen, everything it has to offer. We came from southwest
Minneapolis where you know walking to businesses was very important to us as part of our lifestyle and
that was something that we missed by selecting Chanhassen so I’m for development. Our family’s for
development and I think it’s great to have that and I think it will be nice to have something so close by
for the community. I just don’t understand, I guess because this is more of a for the community to enjoy a
selection of a McDonald’s or a fast food and what the drive thru can bring for that. I don’t think this is
going to take any of our neighbors together for us to go meet there as a place, a destination place to enjoy
an afternoon or a dinner out so very disappointed that a McDonald’s is an option that would be so close,
and with the drive thru, with the lights kind of turning into the neighborhood, I think there are already
some fairly good comments about lighting but I’m concerned with our bedrooms, I do have a bedroom
that would oversee you know the lots here that the screening wouldn’t be high enough for us to get
appropriate coverage to help us out so I think any screening, even down Lyman Boulevard on the
Hummel Hertz property side would be beneficial regardless of what goes in.
11
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Aller: Thank you. Any additional comments from the public? Seeing no one coming forward, I will
close the public hearing at this time and open up for comments and discussion.
Colopoulos: I was concerned enough about the comments that we saw in our package today that when
my meeting in Rochester was postponed today I took it upon myself to drive down there and take a look,
take a drive through the neighborhood and to look at the different areas and I think one of the gentleman
mentioned trees and there’s a berm that’s there on the corner that could be supplemented very nicely there
with trees. You’re right, it is a little sparse right now.
Audience: I don’t think that can happen.
Colopoulos: Well there’s a few evergreens there but not many.
Audience: No, there’s a gas line that goes through there.
Colopoulos: Oh, well that would be, obviously I couldn’t see that one when I did my site inspection. But
you know that aside, you know there is a light of sight question here that affects at least half a dozen
homes. There are also on the other hand the rights of the property owners and developers. But I am
concerned that for years this was served up as being, heading in one direction and then in the last 6
months suddenly it’s taken a turn in another direction and during that period of time up to that point there
were a lot of meetings. A lot of support garnered. A lot of communication, and I’m not suggesting that
there hasn’t been good communication but why was the original plan abandoned in favor of a fast food
drive thru? That’s, I’m still having a hard time getting around that.
Thomas: I think we have to talk about this.
Aller: Yeah.
Thomas: Because most of us on the council have been, were here when we did this originally. Perhaps
maybe we should talk about it. I don’t know but, if I should really be the one to talk about it but.
Aller: I wasn’t here.
Thomas: I mean there was lots of options when we started to look at this development originally. There
was originally we were going to be put Haskell’s in there. That was an option in the beginning but that
got a lot of push back from the community. They didn’t want it in there. I read that in my packet. I
remember that. There was the bank but then does Chanhassen need more banks I believe is what
someone told us but there’s lots of, there was lots of things that the development was set to do but it
wasn’t, never is it every finalized when we put together a plan for a development unit. Things change.
The market changes. Things happen and by putting in a fast food restaurant, I’m not, we still need to talk
about it and everything but it’s not about McDonald’s. It’s about approving a fast food drive thru. You
know anything could go in there is what I’m, you know ultimately can happen. Things could change
again with this development and they could have a fast food but it could be Jimmy John’s. It could be,
you know I’m not one to say what it could be but it could technically be anything. We’re here to talk
about how the plan develops and we were here. Mark was here. I don’t know if you want to talk about it.
I’m just going to keep talking.
Aller: Well I just look at it as, and that’s why I directed my question surrounding the difference between
the coffee shop and it sounds to me like most of the objections are the type of business or the business
that’s coming in as a tenant itself as opposed to the structure and the type of business that’s going in so it
12
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
could be Ole and Lena’s Swedish Meatball Shop and have the same traffic flow. I’m more concerned
with the traffic and the impact on that area because it’s already zoned.
Thomas: For what it is.
Aller: For office, commercial so businesses will go there. Growth is going to occur there. Cars are
going to come there. 101’s coming through. What we need to do is just make sure that when this is
developed it’s developed properly so we don’t have problems for the community later on. That’s the way
I’m gearing my view of it so when I look at this, I look at a developer that’s working very hard during
those changes. Has listened to the community and is continuing to do what they need to do to try to make
sure that this is a very good project and that’s what I’m seeing so far. Not to say it’s perfect, because it’s
not. It probably never will be and that being said, when I look at the questions that I had, it was more
towards the fact that it’s a McDonald’s really doesn’t concern me. I might not like McDonald’s. I might
not want to eat McDonald’s but that’s my choice to try through and eat it or not. The question is whether
or not when we have a drive thru there, is it going to create a traffic problem? A noise problem. A trash
problem that’s going to impact the greater community so I would hope that we look at it that way.
Aanenson: Chairman Aller, I just wanted to add. If you go back to your permitted uses in the PUD again
I think you did a good job summarizing it. Kind of the issues there and we put together that list of
permitted uses because you can’t time date something. Things change. Market changes. Things happen
in the marketplace that make alterations so there was intended to be a restaurant and we capped that at no
larger than 8,000 square feet. Again we didn’t…who that restaurant in. Some people in the
neighborhood might not like that. Some people in the community might not like it. So it kind of depends
on what the difference is as you said is now we’re making that drive thru different but it was always
intended to be some sort of restaurant there. If this came in, if McDonald’s came in without the drive
thru, then as long as they stayed within the, not over 8,000 square feet they could go forward. We do
have other kind of more that convenience type food in the city that does not have a drive thru. You just
mentioned a few of those now so I think back to your point Chairman Aller is really the question is the
drive thru portion change.
Al-Jaff: A taco shop was approved with a drive thru.
Aanenson: Yes, we did have a drive thru.
Aller: Right.
Aanenson: Right, so we’re changing that from the coffee shop and just reorganizing. Yes we know
there’s going to be more traffic on 101. We have a potential for a regional mall in the southern end of the
city. Things are going to continue to change and we’ve tried to anticipate all that in the plans as we’re
going forward so again we tried to put it in a place that we thought would be the less amount of impact as
far as circulation. Visibility. So now we’ve had, we’ve addressed that smell issue before in the city. I
think we handled that pretty well with the, with the scuppers so.
Aller: Questions or comments?
Undestad: Yeah I’d like to just throw one thing out there and you know having sat through one of our
other little bring your sandwich shop through for a drive thru, you know I mean I give them credit for
putting McDonald’s, for letting us know that here, here’s who we’re bringing in and not bring in your
sandwich shop and everybody smiles and then McDonald’s shows up so thank you for being upfront
there. But again it is, I mean as we looked at these developments things are always changing. We always
knew there was retail. There’s going to be activity going on. Everything changes. There is enough
13
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
room, you know I’d like to add, I mean there’s a 20 foot buffer between the right-of-way and their own
site on there. There’s plenty of room to put some big pine trees and really make that, that drive in
disappear back in there. Yeah I think overall I mean it’s, you know they’re getting penalized for telling
us who they want to bring in there right up front. I think it’s a good project.
Aller: Oh, and I don’t believe that the City will always work with the County and the State I’m sure. I
mean it’s not my place to speak for the board at this point but I have seen it occur where it comes before
us and they are constantly working with the State and the County and making sure that we obtain funding
and we obtain the appropriate buffers for traffic and I don’t see why that wouldn’t occur here.
Undestad: And to that, is that on the, would it be the southeast corner of 101 and Lyman on there? On
the Springfield side?
Aanenson: It’s where the Springfield, yeah.
Undestad: The MnDOT and County so when 101 and all that takes place there’s a prime opportunity.
Aanenson: Yeah we can look at, there is some impediments but yeah.
Al-Jaff: And we’ve sent copies of these plans to the County. They are fully aware of what’s going on
and we talked to them about some landscaping in the right-of-way and they said they do have an approved
list that they will forward to us at some point in the future.
Aller: And then MnDOT had also looked at not needing a stop light at this point but timing, there was
timing issues that might be corrected and assist in the traffic flow?
Fauske: Certainly. At the original plan, and the way the off ramp to 212 is striped right now, it’s a
through and a left turn lane. Let me make sure I’m speaking to this correctly. It’s a through right, thank
you. Through right lane stripe there currently so that when you have traffic coming off the ramp, those
folks going straight and those turning right are in the same lane. So when MnDOT first started looking at
this they said well, when we start looking at the traffic volumes, has this changed? Is there an increase in
a through movement from the intersection? I’m speaking specifically to right here. You can’t see it
specifically striped right now but there’s a through movement and there’s a right turn movement and so
they were, they had contemplated well should there be a dedicated right turn lane here so that the through
traffic would not impede the right turn lane. The applicant’s engineer did talk to MnDOT and they
worked through the issue and MnDOT has not listed that as a condition of approval.
Aller: But that is, I guess another question would be then my understanding is it certainly doesn’t stop
MnDOT from doing that in the future should it become an issue.
Fauske: It doesn’t and they just, they wanted to look at the immediate impact and the applicant has
worked with MnDOT and I believe one of the residents brought this up regarding the increased traffic.
The traffic volumes from the 101 improvements and such. The applicant has worked with MnDOT and
Carver County to ensure that the scope of the traffic study including volumes was to their satisfaction so
they’re on the same page so to speak as far as what the traffic volumes were used in their staff report and
their analysis so they’re not underestimating traffic volumes.
Colopoulos: Plus I would think that the traffic of a voluntary nature, quote unquote, would sort of work
itself out. I mean people aren’t going to you know wait in line to buy gas when they can go down the
road to a place where they don’t have to or they, and the same thing would apply to their use of other
14
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
facilities there too so there must be some maximum level of traffic anticipation connected with the use of
those facilities.
Fauske: Right, and John could certainly speak to this more intelligently than I can but when you do
traffic analysis there is a certain percentage of capture traffic that they, and I don’t know if that’s a right
term but people that would already be on the road and will stop in out of a convenience and other folks
where it’s called a destination. Where that’s where we’re going so it’s an additional volume and again the
traffic engineers have their models based on real world observations and come to, it’s a forecast to that
extent. There is, I have some notes from the public hearing if the commission would like me to clarify
some of the questions that I took notes on during the public hearing.
Aller: That’d be great. Yes.
Fauske: One was being the 101 improvements that are proposed to the south. Those improvements
include realignment, turn lane construction. The majority of them are safety improvements. They’re not
intended to, you know there will be some increased volume but if we’re familiar with that section of 101,
there’s some turns in there that are reduced speed advisories. They’re looking at some widening through
there. There’s some trail construction. Again like I said, turn lane construction. Those are the
improvements that are proposed on there that the neighborhood has been hearing about. I already spoke
to the scope of the traffic study. Another one was discussion about the back up at the existing intersection
at the Crossroads and the daycare. I believe the traffic study looked at, I know they looked at the
intersection of Lyman Boulevard and 101 and they look at what’s called a level of service and level of
service is based on driver delay when they’re looking at it and they look at existing and I believe they
look at 2014 and 2018 volumes and when you see a level of service A being no delay. F being you’re at a
stopped condition for a certain period of time and again I would encourage John to jump in here if he has
some clarification but they look, when they looked at the intersections they saw a level of service that was
acceptable for the delay. Regarding the turning movements and the traffic and the speed on Lyman
Boulevard, we can certainly start taking a look at Lyman Boulevard and that section. Unfortunately there
is driver delay increases as traffic comes through, particularly for a left turn movement. We’ll put that on
our list of things to look at. See if there is, you know is there some landscaping? Is it, you had indicated
that there’s, it’s the elevation change from a hill. We can certainly take a look at that and see if there’s
some modifications or some recommendations that we can make to make that a little bit of an easier
turning movement. The speed limit, it does go from 50 on the west side of 101 to 35 miles an hour on the
east side. The City put up a speed limit sign with the orange placards at the top and bottom to increase
visibility of that. Our street departments will be putting in a Reduced Speed Ahead sign just east of the
intersection at 101 to try to get drivers to slow down. It’s a posted speed limit. We have had enforcement
out there in the past and the sheriff’s department is aware that this is an area to keep under, keep
monitoring speeds so they will continue to keep that on their list.
Aller: Great, thank you.
Fauske: Thank you.
Aller: Further comments? Questions? And then just, the lighting and the signage, their request in here is
to follow our code, correct? So they’re following code. Anything further? Anyone wish to make a
motion based on communications, conversations, questions and answers?
Thomas: Last chance.
Undestad: You missed it.
15
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Thomas: I know.
Undestad: I’ll make a motion. I’ll make a motion.
Thomas: Go ahead.
Undestad: Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve a Planned Unit
Development amendment to the existing standards, a site plan amendment for construction of a one story
multi-tenant building and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
Thomas: Second.
Aller: I have a motion and a second. Any additions? Deletions? Discussion.
Undestad moved, Thomas seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council
approve the Planned Unit Development amendment in the attached ordinance for Chanhassen
Gateway allowing fast food restaurants with a drive thru window (amendments are shown in bold
and strike thru), and including the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
CHANHASSEN GATEWAY
PUD DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS
a. Intent
The purpose of this zone is to create a MIXED USE PUD including a Neighborhood Commercial,
Office and Residential. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards
while creating a higher quality and more sensitive development. Each structure proposed for
development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined
below. The Neighborhood Business District regulations shall apply to Lots 1-3, Block 1 and
Outlot A, Crossroads of Chanhassen, except as modified by this ordinance. The R-16 District
, as revised
regulations shall apply to Outlot C, except as modified by this ordinance.Exhibit A
herein to reflect the changes to the commercial portion,
reflects the site layout and buildings
as referenced herein.
16
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to appropriate commercial and service uses
consistent with meeting the daily needs of the neighborhood. The uses shall be limited to
those as defined herein. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition,
the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. The type of uses to be
provided on these lots shall be low-intensity neighborhood-oriented retail and service
establishments to meet daily needs of residents. Commercial and office uses shall be limited
to the area located south of Highway 212. Residential uses shall be located north of Highway
212 and along the western portion of the southern half.
. Fast food
Small to medium-sized restaurant not-to-exceed 8,000 square feet per building
restaurants with a drive thru are limited along the north end of Building 4B. It must be
part of and attached to the multi-use building.
(no drive-thru windows except drive-thru
windows are allowed for tenants whose primary use is the sale of coffee. The drive-thru lane
shall be screened and the exterior wall of the drive-thru shall contain the same level of
architectural detail as any other elevation visible by the public.
Banks with a drive-in service window
Office
Day care
Neighborhood scale commercial up to 8,000 square feet per tenant with the exception of
building 4C. A tenant may occupy up to 10,000 square feet of said building and building 4G
for a daycare to occupy 12,000 square feet. No individual service component of a retail
building shall occupy more than 8,000 square feet of a building.
Convenience store with or without gas pumps and car wash.
17
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
Specialty retail (Book Store, Jewelry, Sporting Goods Sale/Rental, Retail Sales, Retail Shops,
Apparel Sales, etc.)
Personal Services (an establishment or place of business primarily engaged in providing
individual services generally related to personal needs, such as a Tailor Shop, Shoe Repair,
Self-Service Laundry, Laundry Pick-up Station, Dry Cleaning, Dance Studios, etc).
Residential High Density (8-16 units per net acre). The total number of units for the entire
site may not exceed 150 units.
c. Building Area
Commercial/Office – Not to exceed 75,000 square feet for the entire development
Maximum Commercial/Office lot usage is a Floor Area Ratio of 0.3
Maximum office/commercial building area per tenant may not exceed 8,000 square feet
Maximum residential units may not exceed 150 units.
d. Prohibited Ancillary Uses
fast food restaurants
Drive-thru Windows except banks, coffee shops, or pharmacies.
Outdoor storage and display of merchandise such as propane, salt, window washer fluid,
etc. except on the sidewalk surrounding the convenience store 4A. The outdoor display of
merchandise shall not impede nor interfere with pedestrian traffic.
e. Setbacks
The PUD ordinance requires setbacks from roadways and exterior property lines. The following
table displays those setbacks.
Building/Parking
Boundary
Setbacks (feet)
Lyman Boulevard 20/20
Highway 101 North of Highway 312 212 50/50
Highway 101 South of Highway 312 212 20/20
Highway 312 212 50/50
Northerly Project Property Line 50/20
Westerly Project Property Line 50/20
Internal Project property lines 0/0
Internal Right-of-Way (Crossroads Boulevard) 20/20
Hard Surface Coverage-Residential 50 %
Commercial and Office Hard Surface Coverage 70 %
Maximum Commercial (Retail) Building/Structure Height 1 story
Maximum Office Building/Structure Height 2 stories
35 or 3 stories, whichever
Maximum Residential Building/Structure Height
is less
f. Non-Residential Building Materials and Design
There shall not be underdeveloped backsides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly
equal treatment and visual qualities. Buildings and site design shall comply with design
18
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
standards outlined in Article XXIII. General Supplemental Regulations, Division 7 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
g. Residential Standards
Buildings and site design shall comply with design standards outlined in Article XXIII. General
Supplemental Regulations, Division 9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
1. All units shall have access onto an interior private street.
2. A design palette shall be approved for the entire project. The palette shall include colors for
siding, shakes, shutters, shingles, brick, stone, etc.
3. All foundation walls shall be screened by landscaping or retaining walls.
h. Site Landscaping and Screening
The intent of this section is to improve the appearance of vehicular use areas and property
abutting public rights-of-way; to require buffering between different land uses; and to protect,
preserve and promote the aesthetic appeal, character and value of the surrounding neighborhoods;
to promote public health and safety through the reduction of noise pollution, air pollution, visual
pollution and glare.
1. The landscaping standards shall provide for screening for visual impacts associated with a
given use, including but not limited to, truck loading areas, trash storage, parking lots, Large
unadorned building massing, etc.
2. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan
review process.
3. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces, except for plaza areas, shall be landscaped,
rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. Tree wells shall be included in
pedestrian areas and plazas.
4. Undulating berms, north of Lyman Boulevard, north and south of Highway 312 and west of
Highway 101 shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of grading and utility construction. The
required buffer landscaping may be installed where it is deemed necessary to screen any
proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded.
5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where
deemed appropriate.
6. Native species shall be incorporated into site landscaping, whenever possible.
i. Street Furnishings
Benches, kiosks, trash receptacles, planters and other street furnishings should be of design and
materials consistent with the character of the area. Wherever possible, street furnishings should
be consolidated to avoid visual clutter and facilitate pedestrian movement.
j. Signage
19
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
The intent of this section is to establish an effective means of communication in the development,
maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment and the business’s ability to attract sources of
economic development and growth, to improve pedestrian and traffic safety, to minimize the
possible adverse effect of signs on nearby public and private property, and to enable the fair and
consistent enforcement of these sign regulations. It is the intent of this section, to promote the
health, safety, general welfare, aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating signs that
are intended to communicate to the public, and to use signs which meet the city's goals:
a. Establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise
their name and service;
b. Preserve and promote civic beauty, and prohibit signs which detract from this objective because
of size, shape, height, location, condition, cluttering or illumination;
c. Ensure that signs do not create safety hazards;
d. Ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed and maintained in a manner that does not
adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists;
e. Preserve and protect property values;
f. Ensure signs that are in proportion to the scale of, and are architecturally compatible with, the
principal structures;
g. Limit temporary commercial signs and advertising displays which provide an opportunity for
grand opening and occasional sales events while restricting signs which create continuous
visual clutter and hazards at public right-of-way intersections.
j.1. Project Identification Sign
One project identification sign for the commercial portion of the development located at the
entrance off of Highway 101. Project identification signs shall not exceed 80square feet in sign
display area nor be greater than eight feet in height. The sign shall be setback a minimum of 10
feet from the property line.
As an alternative, the project identification sign may be located at the southeast corner of Lot 2,
Block 1. If the sign is located in the right-of-way, an encroachment agreement must be obtained.
Otherwise, the sign must maintain a 10 foot setback from property lines and may not exceed 24
square feet nor be higher than 5 feet.
j.2. Monument Sign
One monument sign shall be permitted at the entrance to the development off of Lake Susan
Drive. One monument sign per lot shall be permitted for the commercial portion of the site. One
multi-tenant sign shall be permitted at the entrance into the development off of Highway 101 and
two signs off of Lyman Boulevard. These signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display
area nor be greater than 5 feet in height except Kwik Trip, located on Lot 1, Block 1, shall be
permitted a 48 square-foot, 8-foot high monument sign. These signs must comply with all
ordinances pertaining to size and percent of sign area dedicated to gas prices as well as any other
20
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
applicable regulations.These signs shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the property
line.
j.3. Wall Signs
a. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building
sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend above parapet height. The letters and logos
shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos
comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, ortranslucent facing.
b. Second story illuminated signs that can be viewed from neighborhoods outside
the PUD site, are prohibited.
c. Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to
the tenant’s proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems
and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage
band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign.
d. Wall signs are limited to two elevations per building.
j.4. Festive Flags/Banners
a. Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building
facade and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting.
b. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric or vinyl.
c. Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or
products.
d. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two feet.
e. Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet.
f. Flags and banners which are torn or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the
city.
j.5. Building Directory
a. In multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be
permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet.
j.6 Directional Signs
a. On-premises signs shall not be larger than four (4) square feet. The maximum height of the
sign shall not exceed five (5) feet from the ground. The placement of directional signs on the
property shall be so located such that the sign does not adversely affect adjacent properties
(including site lines or confusion of adjoining ingress or egress) or the general appearance of
the site from public rights-of-way. No more than four (4) signs shall be allowed per lot. The
city council may allow additional signs in situations where access is confusing or traffic
safety could be jeopardized.
21
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
b. Off-premises signs shall be allowed only in situations where access is confusing and traffic
safety could be jeopardized or traffic could be inappropriately routed through residential
streets. The size of the sign shall be no larger than what is needed to effectively view the sign
from the roadway and shall be approved by the city council.
c. Bench signs are prohibited except at transit stops as authorized by the local transit authority.
d. Signs and Graphics. Wherever possible, traffic control, directional and other public signs
should be consolidated and grouped with other street fixtures and furnishings to reduce visual
clutter and to facilitate vehicular and pedestrian movement. A system of directional signs
should also be established to direct traffic within the commercial area and away from
residential areas.
j.7.Prohibited Signs
Pylon signs are prohibited.
Back lit awnings are prohibited.
Window Signs are prohibited except for company logo/symbol and not the name.
Such logo shall not exceed 10% of a window area.
Menu Signs are prohibited.
j.8. Sign Design and Permit Requirements
a. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the
development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height
throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's
entrance monument and will be used throughout.
b. All signs require a separate sign permit.
c. Wall business signs shall comply with the city’s sign ordinance for the Neighborhood
business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on
the “street” front and primary parking lot front of each building.
k. Lighting
1. Lighting for the interior of the development shall be consistent throughout the development. High
pressure sodium vapor lamps or LEDwith decorative natural colored pole shall be used throughout
the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in
plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas.Parking lot light poles may not
exceed 25 feet in height.
2. Light fixtures in areas other than parking lots should be kept to a pedestrian scale (12 to 18
feet). Street light fixtures should accommodate vertical banners for use in identifying the
commercial area.
3. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than ½ foot
candle at the project perimeter property line. This does not apply to street lighting.
22
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
4. Lighting for parking areas shall minimize the use of lights on pole standards in the parking area.
Rather, emphasis should be placed on building lights and poles located in close proximity to
buildings.
l. Non-Residential Parking
1. Parking shall be provided based on the shared use of parking areas whenever possible. Cross
access easements and the joint use of parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded
instrument acceptable to the city.
2. The development shall be treated as an integrated shopping center and provide a minimum of
one space per 200 square feet of commercial/retail area. The office/personal service
component shall be treated as an integrated office building and provide 4.5 space per 1,000
square feet for the first 49,999 square feet, four per thousand square feet for the second
50,000 square feet, and 3.5 per thousand square feet thereafter.
m.
Residential Parking shall comply with city code requirements.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Undestad moved, Thomas seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council
approve the site plan consisting of a 13,871 square-foot multi-tenant building with a drive-thru to
allow a fast food restaurant (Building 4B), Planning Case 2013-06 as shown in plans dated received
January 23, 2013, and including the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation, subject to the
following conditions:
Environmental Resource Conditions:
1. All existing boulevard trees along the west property line must be protected during construction or
replaced after construction if damaged or dead.
2. The selections of Norway maple and Colorado spruce must be removed from the plant schedule.
Hackberry may be selected to replace the Norway maple, other selections as suggested by the
applicant and approved by city staff.
3. Staff recommends that recycling containers be place alongside trash containers in public spaces.
4. Staff recommends that evergreens be located near the drive-thru area to block headlight glare into
the neighboring use and Highway 101 traffic.
5. The required number of overstory trees in the south and east bufferyards is 8. The applicant shall
convert understory selections to overstory species in all locations where they are not in conflict
with signage.
Fire Marshal Conditions:
MSFC sec. 508.5.4.
1. A three-foot clear space shall be maintained around fire hydrants.
SFC Sec. 503.1.1
2. Watermains shall be made serviceable prior to combustible construction. .
23
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
3. Fences, posts, landscaping, storage and other materials shall not be placed near fire hydrants, Fire
Department sprinkler connections that would prevent such equipment from being immediately
MSFC. Sec 508.5.4.
discernible.
No Parking Fire Lane
4. “” signage and yellow painted curbing will be required. Have developer
MSFC Sec. 503.3.
contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact locations and sign requirements.
5. An addition fire hydrant fire will be required. Contact Fire Marshal for location.
Engineering Conditions:
1. Upon completion, the applicant shall submit a set of “as-built” plans signed by a professional
engineer.
2. All of the maintenance for landscaping, and irrigation within the right-of-way must be maintained
by the developer.
3. The applicant shall work with staff on minor plan modifications.
4. The phase line must be shown on all plans.
5. The applicant must work with the City to provide assurances that the edge of pavement and
drainage patterns can be adequately maintained given the proposed phase line.
6. A stop sign must be installed at the end of the drive-thru.
7. Site detail "21" in front of the retail building must be included in the site notes.
8. The traffic study must be updated to include an analysis of traffic volumes to the year 2023.
9. The developer shall comply with any additional conditions of approval resulting from the 2023
traffic volumes.
10. The applicant must obtain a MnDOT drainage permit.
11. Spot elevations must be shown on the grading plan to confirm that the site meets the following
minimum grade requirements: 0.5% along curb lines, 1% on pavement, and 2% on turf.
12. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plans.
13. The finished floor elevation of each building must be minimum one foot above the emergency
overflow.
14. The proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer shall be privately owned and
maintained.
15. All utilities must be installed and tested in accordance with City standards.
16. The rim and invert elevations of manholes must be shown on the utility plan.
17. Provide a detail of each utility crossing to ensure that there are no conflicts.
24
Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2013
18. The storm sewer design must be modified to provide sufficient inlet capacity for drainage area 20.
19. Add the storm sewer schedule to the utility plan.
20. The power to the Crossroads Boulevard irrigation system must be removed from the City supply
and connected to the development's system.
21. Identify the utility line between the entry monument at Lyman Boulevard and the southern retail
building. This utility shall be relocated within the right of way and/or drainage and utility
easements.
22. The plan set must include a detail sheet.
23. City of Chanhassen Detail Plate 5215, Pedestrian Ramps, must be included on the detail sheet.
Planning Conditions:
1. Encroachment agreements are needed for any structure located in the drainage and utility
easements.
2. All rooftop and ground equipment must be screened from views.
3. Approval of the site plan applications is contingent upon approval of the PUD amendment –
Planning Case 2013-06.
4. Sign illumination and design shall comply with ordinance.
5. The exterior material for the trash enclosure must be of the same exterior material as the building.
Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the same
enclosure.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Aanenson: Chairman Aller I just want to remind anybody that’s following this item, this item is going to
th
the City Council on March 25 so anybody that wants to follow it, there’ll be a new staff report to track
that item.
Aller: Thank you.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Thomas: I want to note the Minutes but I don’t know who Tim is. I believe it’s Kim.
Aanenson: Oops.
Aller: With that amendment.
Thomas: With an amendment that Tim is now Kim I note the Minutes. You’re welcome.
Commissioner Thomas noted the summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated
February 5, 2013 as presented and noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting dated February 19, 2013 amended to change Tim to Kim Tennyson.
25