CC Staff Report 11-14-05
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM:
Josh Metzer, Planner I
DATE:
November 14, 2005
SUBJ:
Spalon Montage – Planning Case #05-33
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a request for a Site Plan Amendment to place an illuminated sign on the
second level of Market Street Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band
on property zoned Central Business District (CBD) at 600 Market Street, Suite
200.
ACTION REQUIRED
City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present.
PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL SUMMARY
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 18, 2005, to review
the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to approve the
request.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission recommends adoption of the motion as specified on page
8 of the staff report dated October 18, 2005.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 18, 2005.
2.Planning Commission Minutes dated October 18, 2005.
g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-33 spalon montage site plan amendment\executive summary.doc
PC DATE:
October 18, 2005
2
CC DATE:
November 14, 2005
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
REVIEW DEADLINE:
November 15, 2005
CASE #:
05-33
BY:
JM
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL:
Request for a Site Plan Amendment to place an illuminated sign on the second level of
APPLICANT
Market Street Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band on property zoned
Central Business District (CBD).
LOCATION:
600 Market Boulevard, Suite 100
Chanhassen, MN 55317
APPLICANT:
Kraus-Anderson Realty Company Spalon Montage
c/o Michael Korsh 600 Market Street, Suite 200
4210 W. Old Shakopee Road Chanhassen, MN 55317
Bloomington, MN 55437
PRESENT ZONING:
Central Business District (CBD)
2020 LAND USE PLAN:
Commercial
ACREAGE:
N/A
DENSITY:
N/A
SITE DATA
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing to install an illuminated sign on the second
level of Market Street Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band. The placement of the sign will
require a Site Plan Amendment because the site plan approved by City Council did not allow signage to be
placed at the proposed location. Staff is recommending denialof this request.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The City’s discretion in approving or denying a Site Plan Amendment is limited to whether or not
the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a Site Plan Amendment. The
City has a relatively high level of discretion with a Site Plan Amendment because the applicant is
seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 2
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Amendment in order to place an illuminated sign on the second
level of Market Street Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band. The purpose of placing the
sign on the second level would be to create visibility to traffic along Market Boulevard.
SIGN BAND AREA
Proposed Wall Sign
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 3
Construction Drawing
APPLICABLE REGUATIONS
ARTICLE XXVI. SIGNS
Sec. 20-1267. Uniformity of construction, design, etc.
All permanent signs shall be designed and constructed in a uniform manner and, to the extent possible,
as an integral part of the building's architecture. Multitenant commercial and industrial buildings shall
When buildings or developments are presented for site plan review,
have uniform signage.
proposed signs for the development should be presented concurrently for staff review. All planned
centers and multitenant buildings shall submit a comprehensive sign plan for approval by the
Planning Commission and City Council.
Sec. 20-1251. Purpose and findings.
(Attached Below).
Sec. 20-1303. Highway, general business districts and central business districts.
(Attached Below).
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 4
BACKGROUND
th
The site is located north of Highway 5 and south of West 78 Street along Market Boulevard. Access to the
site is gained via Market Boulevard and/or Market Street. 600 Market Street was created with Site Plan
#2003-09, known as Market Street Station and was approved by the City Council on October 13, 2003.
The subject property, Lot 1, Block 1, Market Street Station, is owned by Kraus-Andersen LLC. Spalon
Montage occupies the second level of the east wing of 600 Market Street Station.
ANALYSIS
Sec. 20-1251. Purpose and findings.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this sign ordinance is intended to establish an effective means of
communication in the city, maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment and the city'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:
(1) Establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity to
advertise their name and service;
(2) Preserve and promote civic beauty, and prohibit signs which detract from this objective
because of size, shape, height, location, condition, cluttering or illumination;
(3) Ensure that signs do not create safety hazards;
(4) Ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed and maintained in a manner that does
not adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists;
(5) Preserve and protect property values;
(6) Ensure signs that are in proportion to the scale of, and are architecturally compatible with,
the principal structures.
(b) Findings. The city finds it is necessary for the promotion and preservation of the public health,
safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community that the construction, location, size and
maintenance of signs be controlled. Further the city finds:
(1) Permanent and temporary signs have a direct impact on, and a relationship to, the image of
the community;
(2) The manner of installation, location and maintenance of signs affects the public health,
safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community;
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 5
(3) An opportunity for a viable identification of community business and institutions must be
established;
(4) The safety of motorists, cyclists, pedestrians and other users of public streets and property is
affected by the number, size, location and appearance of signs that unduly divert the attention
of drivers;
(5) Installation of signs suspended from, projecting over, or placed on the tops of buildings,
walks or other structures may constitute a hazard during periods of high winds and an
obstacle to effective fire fighting and other emergency service;
(6) Uncontrolled and unlimited signs adversely impact the image and aesthetic attractiveness of
the community and, thereby, undermine economic value and growth
Spalon Montage is proposing the placement of an illuminated sign on the second level of Market Street
Station. The north elevation does not have street frontage. However, there are tenants whose individual
entrances are located at this elevation. Therefore, these future tenants will be permitted wall signage on
the north elevation. The applicant is requesting wall signage on the north elevation where their entrance
is located (Picture A). Site Plan approval for Market Street Station did provide for wall signage to be
placed on the north elevation of the building; however, signage was limited to the first level sign band.
Proposed Second
Picture D
Level Wall Sign
(Picture A)
Spalon
Montage
MARKET
nd
2 Level
BOULEVARD
Picture B
Picture C
MARKET STREET
Market Street Station Site Plan Layout
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 6
ILLUSTRATION OF GABLED MARKET STREET STATION ROOFLINES
(Sign band represented by black line)
Proposed
Spalon Sign
Spalon
Location
Montage
Future Bebi
Wall Sign
Bebi Baby Common Entrance
Store (Spalon Access)
Picture A
(Spalon Montage Entry on Right)
Spalon
Americana
Montage
Gable Sign
Picture B
Spalon
Montage
Picture C Picture D
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 7
Market Street Station has the potential to lease an additional nine individual units to future tenants. It is
assumed that along with these future tenants will be future signage. Four vacant units are available on
the first level; three on the south elevation and one on the east elevation. Five vacant units are available
on the second level; two on the south elevation and three on the north elevation.
Spalon Montage cannot locate their wall sign on the first level sign band directly above the entrance to
access the second level, on which they’re located, because it is a common entrance for multiple tenants.
Chanhassen City Code states:
Sec. 20-1303. Highway, general business districts and central business districts.
(3) Wall business signs. Wall business signs shall be permitted on street frontage for each business
In multitenant buildings where individual entrances do not
occupant within a building only.
front on a public street, a wall sign may shall be permitted on the entrance facade if the
following apply:
a. The entrance is a unit entrance and not a common hallway,
b. The entrance is not an emergency exit or "exit only" for the unit.
Reference Picture A. If Spalon Montage were to locate a wall sign on the first level sign band below
their space they would have to place it on Bebi’s store front. The same is true if Spalon Montage were
to locate wall signage on the east or south elevation sign band; and this will also be the case in the event
that the two second level units on the south elevation request wall signage. The three second level units
on the north elevation could place signage on that elevations first level sign band.
Americana Community Bank has a wall sign in the gable roofline and was permitted signage at that
location through provisions made in the original site plan. This was the only gable allowed to have
signage in such a location. The gables shown in Pictures C & D are not permitted signage by code
because they do not have street frontage and are not main entrances to tenant space. However, staff is
concerned that permitting Spalon signage outside of the approved sign band will set a precedence
opening the door for other tenants to request signage on the gabled rooflines on the south elevation of
Market Street Station (Picture B) which has street frontage. In addition, the proposed sign is not placed
in a location that gives patrons a visual cue to the entrance to access Spalon Montage. While it is on
Spalon Montage’s leased space it is over the entrance of another individual tenant. Kraus-Anderson
stated in their letter that the owner is willing to provide assurance that there will be no additional
requests for second level signage. However, this statement holds no weight in that the City would not be
able to enforce such a restriction.
The City Building Official does not have an issue with the proposed placement of the wall sign. If the
Site Plan Amendment is approved the City will need to review and approve engineered drawings
showing how the sign will be constructed before a sign permit will be issued. Any proposed signage,
regardless of location, must comply with all sign code requirements.
Planning Case #05-33
Spalon Montage Sign Site Plan Amendment
November 14
October 18 , 2005
Page 8
FINDING
In evaluating a site and building plan, the planning commission and city council shall consider its
compliance with the following:
(5) Creation of a 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 uses on the site and provision of a desirable
environment for occupants, visitors and general community;
c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept
and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and
Finding:
The proposed amendment is not consistent with the design requirements for Market Street
Station signage in that the proposed location is outside of the approved sign band. Based
upon the foregoing, staff is recommending denial of the site plan amendment.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission City Council
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
following motion:
“The Planning Commission recommends City Council deny Site Plan Amendment #05-33 to place an
illuminated sign on the second level of Market Street Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band
based on the findings of fact in the staff report.”
Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of this request staff recommends the
Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
“The Planning Commission recommends City Council approve Site Plan Amendment #05-33 to place an
illuminated sign on the second level of Market Street Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band
based on the findings of fact in the staff report with the following conditions:
1. The applicant must submit engineered drawings showing how the sign will be constructed before
a sign permit will be issued.
2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site.
3. All signage must meet ordinance requirements.”
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact.
2. Development Review Application.
3. Letter from Michael Korsh of Kraus-Anderson stamped “Received September 16, 2005”.
4. Letter from Cindy McDonald of Kraus-Anderson stamped “Received October 5, 2005”.
5. Proposed wall sign graphic submitted by applicant.
6. Site Plan Elevations of Market Street Station illustrating sign plan.
7. Potential Proliferation of Signage.
8. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing List.
g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-33 spalon montage site plan amendment\staff report.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND ACTION
IN RE: Application of Spalon Montage/Kraus-Anderson for a Site Plan Amendment to place
an illuminated sign on the second level of Market Street Station, outside of the approved
first floor sign band on property zoned Central Business District (CBD) – Planning
Case No. 05-33.
On October 18, 2005, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly
scheduled meeting to consider the Application of Spalon Montage/Kraus-Anderson for a Site
Plan Amendment request to place an illuminated sign on the second level of Market Street
Station, outside of the approved first floor sign band. The Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on the proposed Site Plan Amendment that was preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons
wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Central Business District (CBD).
2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Commercial.
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 1, Block 1, Market Street Station.
4. Section 20-110:
In evaluating a site and building plan, the planning commission and city council shall
consider its compliance with the following:
(5) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features,
with special attention to the following;
a. The proposed amendment does not create an internal sense of order for the
buildings and uses on the site and provision of a desirable environment for
occupants, visitors and general community because the proposed sign is
located outside of the first level sign band.
5. The planning report #05-33 Site Plan Amendment dated October 18, 2005, prepared
by Josh Metzer, et al, is incorporated herein.
ACTION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the Site Plan
Amendment.
th
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 18 day of October, 2005.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY: ___________________________________
Uli Sacchet, Its Chairperson
g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-33 spalon montage site plan amendment\findings of fact.doc
Planning Case No. Os - 3:3
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
PLEASE PRINT
Applicant Name and Address:
"t-{~ ~t...k ({v (\'\Ic:.t\Itt.""L ~"S.t'\
LillO L.J \" ()L.\1) t;K1\'-c>pa:- ~
(?LOOV,,"wVb lb'V t1'IN S-S"4~-'
Contact: y\'\\L~ ~Q.St1.
Phone:<1SZ -~4'6""..~'(z...( Fax: ~S2 JZrOt"it1 &6
Email: mto~c;.t'\.t2 ~ e.&tI-ry. C:O~
Owner Name and Address:
~rn~c:a- SHta-1"'" SM'ho....J ,~
Contact: l"" \I..tV~l!:'L ~~t\
Phone:<t5tA.cl",j\t-1l.\').\ Fax: tfs",- - g'6\- t\l\.J
Email: ~\!\j:;.,c~~l.-j cJ ,,,fA f...[~\:\:\'1 ;C(':dY')
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements
Interim Use Permit
fi
i
Variance
Non-conforming Use Permit
Wetland Alteration Permit
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
itl' Sign Plan Review
Notification Sign** - $75 + $100 Damage Deposit
Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost***
- $50 CUP/SPRNACNARIWAP/Metes & Bounds
- $450 Minor SUB
TOTAL FEE $rk S-(), O()
x
Site Plan Review*
Subdivision*
An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to
the public hearing.
* Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W' X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet
along with a diclital copy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format.
** Applicant to obtain notification sign from City of Chanhassen Public Works at 1591 Park Road and install upon submittal of
completed application. $100 damage deposit to be refunded to applicant when sign is returned following City Council approval.
*** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME: l1":1#'<eT S'f'tZa:T" SP1--ifo.J
LOCATION: 0.> \,vVt-ll..'<.€:\ S~l
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
TOTAL ACREAGE:
WETLANDS PRESENT:
YES
NO
PRESENT ZONING:
REQUESTED ZONING:
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION:
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION:
REASON FOR REQUEST: 11-1e:- OE:VE:Lc:>~~ ~,~.-vo\ Z:,.{JEz...T" Tt(E:'" 2"0 F(OCrI1.. lb \N(..t..V~C
t\tVy ~'" '- ~N"""",,T'5. We I\O.~ VN~LC ~ pPov \ C>C ~'('t"'. ON \1'\E" \~r L~ ~
~t:Nl"c~e t\S nHS ~p~ W\l.t.. 8e: V~~ 8y I~r f{~ ~L \e^""tV~. )"O(hT1otv~C. y r .pVtc.lN6
~(;.tV~~E Foa. It..w; ~~ flo~ \e;^,,~-,\ ON Tl'E: \c,r floo-<L. WOVl.-\l) t!:>e ~k,,>vvv To THf:tL
bUeC;1S . THe- ~t~Ve~T'l::..-.o S\b~ I~ ~'CfT2.e~€"L'( Ci2\'nU\L IV"n\C ~vc..'-€$S of SPI"!;'-c:>^-"
~ "r Tl"\\') ~()<J. Ir\C O'-JNf;:.--A. \s W,L.L\,vc';' U:> PyZov\v)e- A.NY l'\~SV>fU\NL.E"
Ne:'-E'.;s~:i i1'\~\ "'rt\t::'(l.E" WILL.. &- NO ~ \ nClVkl..... ~Q.u€:"'\r~ FC;ia.... '2"'0/) Fcot.XJ.... SIC..vI"tC>E""'.
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.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of 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. .
I 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.
/llll1IIL-
9-(2.0S-
Date
Signature of Applicant
1If#$~
Cf-f?oS-
Signature of Fee Owner
Date
C:\Documents and Settings\KorshM\Local Settings\Temporary Internet, Files\OLKA3\Development Review Application.DOC
Rev. 4/05
10'
~
22"
lOI
\ ~.'
~ .~ . .
THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS
ARE THE PROPERTY OF ATTRACTA SIGN.
To distribute these drawings to anyone for the purpose of receiving bid6. or the
manufacture of a sign similar to the one represented here is expressly forbidden.
BLACK RETURNS
WHITE FACES
BLACK TRIM CAP
WITE LED LIGHTING
RACEWAY MOUNT COLORS TO
MATCH BACKGROUND GRAY ON ROOF
AND WHITE ON BUILDING
WHITE LED
UGHTlNG
3/16" PLEX /
FACE '"
TRIM CAP ~
~TI!ACTA
= .{iN
14680 .JAMES Rd.
ROGERS MN 55374
~
~
o
-l
5
ill
W
U
iL.
LLb
06
z~
0,
F~
~
-l
W
I
f-
:J
o
(f)
W~
00'
""
u.J
llJ
::E:
u.J
u
u.J
Cl
Cl
u.J
::::l
>
u.J
""
c.:
-.i
-.i
~
:J:
V1
""
u.J
:z~
O~
1--120
~8
=--~
~V1
V>8
""
~tn
u.JG:;
u.Jiii
o::::~
~u.J
V>~
>-
~~
u.J~
~~
O::::s
<t:~
:E~
~
o
0:
W !J.
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
Z...JO:
<(<(>-
::;;()...J
u.ia:~
~~~
~::ro
m~~
~m~~
~~lI;~
~~~i
u.OC
OW
o~
o:W
w...J
::>l::
0...J
<(>::
o..()
0<(...J
~~~
ji:m~
~3...r
zfQ~
~~~
~~!z
~oo
ul~[
~QZ
Zo:O
<("'0
CJl1:~
it
0:
o
3
00
ci
Z
Ii:
o
o
0:
W-
...J...J
~t3
~~
':;-
<(0:
:z:0
0.....J
~8
'"
Z
ii'
w
>-
>-
W
...J
...J
Wo
Zz
:;;0
:z:>-
()W
0'"
WOO
~~
~(j)
::;0
::>0
;1g
o
o
o
...J
W
...J '!: ~
() gfa~u1
~ ~~5~
.... o.:s~~::l
8 ~~@~
0:: (J!::C:::O
~ Lt~~t3
z ::J~B~
~ ~WCk:Cf)
13 wSo.~
:J zo..:~~...J
.J ~~wU)C3
;:: (l)OZO::-
Z Ozo:wg,
~ ~~8~'-
~ ~uj~8~
gj ::>~~oo
~:;;~
...J 0
<( 0:
() <(
~~ ~
~1 ~
>-w "
>-z Z
m8: ~
::;::; 0
~~ ~
ffi~ z
~3 ~
~~ ~
ww
:z::z:
0000
ZZ
~~
0:0:
0..0..
::; 0
g~wg
~~~~~
-.iOO~O:
;;;!~:l!ji:~
~~~~~
ZQ::>WO
~J:u~co
(j)!::O:::O<(
05:0U...J
~~~~~
::>ww<~
~~~mj
o~u~~
(!J
Z
o
..J
5
[J]
w
o
[[,
LL9
00
01
ZII
0'
i=~
~
W
..J
W
I-
~
(!J
Z
o
:::!
::>
[J]
w
o
[[,
LLO
06
z~
0,
~~
W
..J
W
I-
(fJ
W
S
::;
::>
Z -
~f:3
3~
<(W
~~
>-0
~~
w,!:
()...J
o:W
w>
"'W
~ffi...J
Wo..<(
:z:o..()
~=>O:
~t<~
w::; ,
g:~~
w~~
mg~~ ~
<(Q)~u:f "
coomZ ~
<9~w8: (J)
Bffig:1 ~~
lf~(J)~ a:~
~E~8 ~~
'!:;s:::>()
wz~~
zo:::::lOO
QWO:c
tiiS~~
fil~u)U)
~offiffi
~ozz
5:;;~~
UO::::()0
...J
fn~
<(0..
~~
g:uS
~~
_0
'!:z
wji:
~~
w...J
ZW
0'"
>-...J
oood
000
~~
~g
::>0
()()
o
o
g
.'!:
gs
Z_
<(:z:
cr:!::...J
O'!:<(
CHI) Q
OWo..
O::;~
'!:~U;
~~~
()00
~~fa
~;s:~
@~~
J:~Z
00::;-
~3~
u.<(W
u'.JO...J
o:W()
a..~~
[u
:z:::;
~~
::;-
W
~S;;;!
000:0
OUa:
d~~
~w=i
ooW
W<(>-
::;",00
<(0:>-
o:woo
u.>-'!:
:z:OOO
E!1:)0
~~~
8~~
0.::>
~WO
(/)g:~
W
0:
::>
(f)
o
...J
()
m
o
Z
::;
()
b
W
0:
...Jw
w::;
~g
0>-
()z
()W
::>()
>-()
(f)<(
~~
<(.
"'~
ZW
",0:
cng
(f)()
gg.J
~~<3
~E~
();s:>;-
(f)
w
()
Ii:
u.
o
0:
o
u.
Z
o
::;
~
0..
1;:
>-
Z
W
o
8
::>
>-
(f)
o
W
>-
Z
g:
"
0:
~
Z
~
...J
;:;
Z
W
::;
<(
Z
~
>-
::;
"
~~~
~ ~~~
a::: owt-
~ E3~~
t5 5:~8:
~ U~
~ ~~~
~ ~~~
(f) ~o::C)
~ d>~~
:z: ~u.ffi
~ ~8w~
<{ 00:::-1
~
0:
>-
(f)
<(
()
W
0:
0..
:z:
(f)
Z
u:~
~~
::>>-
>->-
~ui
!::~
:z:'"
()o:
O:w
<(>-
(!J
Z
o
..J
5
[J]
w
o
[[
LL
o
Z
o
~
~
w
I
tr
o
Z
z
o
I-l
~~
~;::;
, ^ Vl
v,tw
I-~
LUVl
I-
LU~
e::::~
1-::<:
l/')~
>-
1-10
LU!z
~~
e::::~
<(g
:E~
<(
POTENTIAL PROLIFERATION OF MARKET STREET STATION SIGNAGE
South Elevation
North Elevation
East Elevation
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING CASE NO. 05-33
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in
Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for
a Sign Variance for Spalon Montage to place a wall sign outside of the approved sign band area
on property located at 600 Market Street. Applicant: Kraus-Anderson Realty Company.
A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review at City Hall
during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and
express their opinions with respect to this proposal.
Josh Metzer, Planner I
Email: imetzer@ci.cnanhassen.mn.us
Phone: 952-227-1132
(publish in the Chanhassen Villager on October 13, 2005)
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
October 6, 2005, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing for the Spalon Montage Site Plan Amendment - Planning Case 05-33 to the persons
named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to
such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail
with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those
appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by
other appropriate records.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this ~ day of ex --k.be r ' 2005.
~l~ T~i';IIY'f.<:=
) Notar ic
\ ',.
KIM T. MEUWISSEN I
Notary Public-Minnesota
My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010
0)
c
~
a,)
a,)
:E
o)s
I: .-
.- en
... en
CO._
a,)E
:E:E
.2 0
:ao
::::so)
Q.c
..... .-
o I:
I:
a,) co
u-
~Q.
Oc
Za,)
en
en
co
J::
I:
co
J::
o
0)
c
~
a,)
a,)
:E
c
0)0
1:'-
._ en
... en
CO.-
a,) E
~E
._ 0
-0
.c
:::::sO)
Q.c
.....c
o C
a,) co
u-
.- Q.
-
o C
za,)
en
en
co
J::
I:
co
J::
o
o
-
0) ro
O>Ol
ro .....
"Ero
0"0
~c
. c~
"O.Qc
..2:ro
co 0..-
_roen
Ol....."O
E~OOl
Cii :: 6
~c.....
00(1)
<:=!oEro
1'--1'--"'00)
Cil 1'--. 5i -E
It)~E-
OOl<(O
0..0 Ol
C\JEC"O _
ex) ro Ill'en ca
.cii:"5 Ol
.....0(1)0 a:
~.-:t:: c c
oUCf) 0
_ c ro'en en
U 5 CD
C::ooca "0
_ :::?: <(c
rocaenro ,
"'5lI~OlC')~
Ol O"UC?ro
:J .- Ol ro It) .....
I-oa:-o~
ai
I.>
~
o
c:
Ul
:c
-
-
o
Gl
'C
'w
Gl
Ul
...
Gl
ai
...
Gl
.c:
-
-c:
Ol 0
~ Ul
U5 '0.
_co
OlE
~c:
ro,2
~1V
01.>
0.2
(0<(
CD
E
j::c
-'" .2
.......
sB
III 0
O..J
o
-
Ol ro
0>0)
<<l .....
"E <<l
0"0
~c
c ro
-do..c
..2:cac
co 0..-
_Cf)en
Ol....."O
E~oO)
Cii:: 6
~c.....
00(1)
<:=!oEro
1'--1'--'00)
Cil 1'--. 5i -E
It)~E-
OOl<(O
0..0 Ol
C\JEC"O _
ex) ro .!!! 'en ca
,.....ca."5 0)
.....0(1)0 a:
~'o:t:: c c
occn 0
t5 :J ro'en ~
C::8.E~ ~
ro~1iiro 4=
"'5lI~OlC')~
0) O"UC?ro
:J .- Ol ro It) .....
I-oa:-o~
CD
E
j::e
.2
~...
S B
III 0
o..J
ai
I.>
~
o
c:
Ul
:c
-
'0
Gl
'C
'w
Gl
l!!
Gl
ai
...
Gl
.c:
-
-c:
0)0
~Ul
U5 '0.
_co
OlE
~c:
ro.2
~1V
01.>
0.2
(0<(
O)-g~
.c0-
::::-E-g
5..8~
..0 .c _
ro 0>=
:J'(ji ?:
o c.:
>'Olro
E.c.c
.....-0
oEO)
'Eo.ciJi
.- L. ... a.
.8::: 0),$
:Jcen
.!2 0.:;::: 0>
0>.S: ~ .S:
'E.S: E ~
ro1!!Ol=
~.g-E.8
.9 0 0> ~
:0 ; 'E -
:Jc:J.c
0. ro 0 0>
en :J
.- 1ii ,0
-EOlt5l:
_:JOl_
o O".~ 0>
O)O)E!c
en ..... o.'C
o _en en ro
0. - .- 0)
:s~-E.c
o.g "5 g
Ol a. 0 ..0
.c 0...0 :J
I-roroo.
O)-g~
.c0-
-.c"O
-.....ro
5..8~
..0 .c _
ro 0>=
:J'G) ?:
o c.:
>'Olro
E.c.c
.....-0
o E Ol
'Eo.ciJi
.- '- ... c..
0:: ,..;.,$
- :J e'en
en 0..- 0>
.~.s: ~ .S:
.S: c E ?:
......- 0
ro1!!O)=
~.g-E.8
.9 0 0> ~
:0 ; 02 +J
:JC:J.c
0. ro 0 0>
en_ :J
.- en . 0
-EOlt5l:
_:JOl_
o 0"'0' 0>
OlO).....c
en ..... o.'c
o .en en ro
e-"E:c~
:Jro-
o.g "5 g
Ol 0. 0 ..0
.c 0...0 :J
I-roroo.
en
Ol
en
en
.,...; 6
~ en
'0''''''; '0
..... U c
o..~ 0
"0 E! 'en
5l 0. ..!2
oO)gE
g--E -g E
.....co.O
o.oOlo
Olen.cOl
.cc-.c
::J!!E;
Oo.oc
?:"E~ro
.~ Ol -g "0
~ ~.~ 5l
> Ci.Ol.Q
0= ~ U
C'~ ......!2
ro Olo>
Ol"ECiic
> ro 'C_'
'61 U .!1 ro .-
_=cO)(j)
= o.Ol.c.
?: fa- E .9 E!
1ij Ol E :0 Ol
U5~8~-E
,....C'\icrj..,t
CIlel
5i.5
0.'G)
0.(1)
~:i:
...(1)
Ill.s::
.s::'"
3:i
en
0)
en
en
.,...; 6
~ en
'0""'; '0
..... U C
0. Ol 0
"O'e 'en
5l 0. ..!2
oO)gE
o..c ..0 E
O-:Jo
Ci. C 0.0
o 0)
Olen.cOl
.cc-.c
::J!!E;
Oo.oc
?:-~ro
.~ ~ "0 "0
2: en 0) 0)
Ol Ol.~ en
6 Ci.25~
c:=~en
ro ?: Ol'~
O)"ECiic
> ro en'C .
'61 U _ ro t5
:= '6. ~ ~ .Ol
?: fa- E.9 E!
1ij 0) E:o Ol
U5~8~-E
C'\icrj..,t
CIl ..
eel
(1).5
0....
0.(1)
cu(l)
:z::i:
...(1)
cu.s::
.s::'"
3:i
,
0. ~ ~ E ';:
~ .g~.g O)E
Ol .OlC')en :QS(l)c
en . c,.... oOl>'-:5;:
roEo'7-.cOCll CI)
~ ci. OlE ~ 5l ~ Ci.:c S;: (I)
0.0 C\J 0 - - ... C E
.C') 0 I 0 >.3:~::
0).. en C\J .c 0.:> 0 ,g C
.S: """ 0 It) U 0 ~ t: (1).2
CD.8~~:JU1!!o~~
Ol .-rooOlroo.co,-
EE1!!.....>.e (l)ctiE
. Ol_O.~ E
OlroO - 0> .....
.c _N Ol:I::'
- 0 .c CD en ~.s: III 0 00
Ol<:=!en~:J.cCDUj"":
ooo'~.ccoOl ~
Q5~:J ~~::: E~~.5
..c:Jo""")c:JO)I-":':c
eno~_O)c..-E ._~
c.c-u~Q)_c..._
J!! Ol . 1!! ro .c 0 .2 .s:: a.
0. U >. C .c Ol en ... (I)
0):;:: ro 0 c .!2 U en Ill.s::
.c 15 :Q U ro :!::: S 'E- (I) ...
- .....Ol.c.w CO
Ol g>LL en ~ .!1 -6 E:: ...
5l 'C -s, ~ '0 ~ ro 8 5 0
:J:J-@ c .-
.8 "0 0 0...... E .- Ol (I) ~
"Ecal:t5~Ec-E:C
roI-O)_OOlOIllIll
?: >"0' 0) U E - == '0
>.ro.....EctenIllCll
:J :!::: "0 0.' Ol ro 0) > ~
o 0 c en = :::: 0.'0.. III :J
>. >. 0._ ro'c 0) 0 (I).s::
:!::..c~-EE?:"Ou,g~
~
CIl.:!!
C e
o (I)
;:E
l<< E
:J 0
00
I
0. ~ ~ 'E ';:
.8 ..00..0 OlE
en ro C\J:J "0 (I) (I)
0) - Ol C') en .- ... .s:: C
en . c""'oOl>'-...;:
roEO'7-.cE!CIl",,--(I)
Ol . 0) I'-- 0) - .- ,- (I)
- 0. E C\J en 0 o..s:: ~ E
0.0 0 C\J 0 - := -: .5
o)~ en c\i ,g ~?: o:c C
.S: """ 0 It) U 0 ~::: (I) .2
CDO-(J):Juro~==CIl
0) +-: ~ Cil 0 Ol U5 8. U5 .!!!
E~1!!CD~a . ecti EE
~ ro .8 N Ol 0>= "'::
- 0 .c CD en ~ .S: III 0 0
Ol<;:!enOO:::::J.cCD"''''':o
..... 00 .-..:::. Ol CIl U)
o ?:.ccoE(I)o
Q5ui:JenE- .s::~.5
..c:so.55c'SOl~":':c
eno~_Olc..-E ....~
c.c-u~Q)_c..._
J!! 0) . 1!! ro .c 0.2.s:: a.
o.u >'c.c Ol en... (I)
0):;:: ro 0 c .!2 u en III .s::
.c15:Q u <<l:!::: c'E- (I)'"
- .....Ol.c.ro co
Ol g>LL en ~ .!1 -6 E:: ...
Ol 'C .c ro '0 c ro 0 C ~
en:JO>Ol 0) 000
.8 "0 5 0.. ~ E .S: 0) (I) '':
"E~l:t5~E"E-E:C
roI-Ol_oOlOIllIll
?: >''0 Ol U E - == '0
>.ro.....EctenIllCll
:J:!:::"O 0.' Ol ro 0) > ~
o 0 c en = :::: 0.'0.. III :J
>. >. 0 .- ro'c Ol 0 (I).s::
:!::..c~-EE?:"Ou,g~
~
CIl.:!!
e e
o (I)
;:E
l<< E
:J 0
00
w -0 0 ~
._~ ~ ~~t .~! m ~ u~
ns 0 .Q CD [ ~.:::: c >>:!: ~ Q) ffi .g
Q; ~ "C :rg'~ ro c: ~ ~ ~ ~ .Q :5 c ~ C
~_Q) cCJ)W Q)_ = ~ ~~ CD._o
~f!?~ Q)E;~:5~ 8:~n; ~.~> s~~
coEr: E(ij~co~>. a:s~C> Q) Q)O~
~ ~ Q) ~ -e 8.~ 1:: ''E ~ ~ a.!: $ ~ ~ ~:g
Q)O)~ frl~2as['~:E-;555 0- ~-c:
~~- ~~o.E~EwwuE ~ s~!
CfJ"(ij2 cu OJ Q)"C Q)-5.!EBt ~CU c: g-
Q)m'- "c>~~~-cc cu .-= ._~C
W..c w C'5 - (5 a.s =s ~ 0. U ctI :E 0 0
~ou Cll_~E~E~w-m m> u~
E :..= .~ C ~ 0 S ;:'(i).o >- 5 0 ~ cu c5 >- Q)
.~~~ 8 i'~~m~~Eg ~g c~E
sa.CfJ ca:;;~..c:OQ)Eo-,- -Cij CfJU~
ECUQ) E1iim;O~EU)e:!~ 13.~ 8!c
"'O~-E 0 ~o.CfJE+-'0.5~cu .2J:z:: "'0+-'0
~'s~ ~.~~~~~~~~~ g.2J ~B~
- ~- . 'E1i)+-'.!a E Q)+-';: Q) Q) UC/) ct
~~Q)~Q)Q)u"'O~E~"'O~~ ro. =SO:z::
gm~~.5E~~~~~~$s ~~ 8~$
;g ai 8 m a; c: 5. Cll . m m lfl ~"~ 'S: 0 Z' m en
5E~E~~Q)~~~~gE~ e~ OSc
u~~~~~~.~~~~~~! ~~ !~~
~E~~lflES!~oEm=o -~ ~i~
~ <( >- ~ -g 0 -0 0 >-~ g ~ a.~ --g = g-g a..
.~Q)i~~u~~~cm+-'Eo ~~ .~~~
Q)"'O ~UC~Q)=S cacCfJO..c ~c cuc_
a: 8 g..s :: .5 0. 0.13 Q) Q) g ~ UJ 5 E ~ .- 13
c ~ mCOQ)cOOE~'-CfJ om Q)cu
~~~~S~~5g~~~~~o~~ ~~'E
~cuca.~c~-Q)UCQ):..=-O~oo~ ~.~o
2 ~ ~.5 8 Q) ~ 00 >- ~ E 8: g ~ 1i) .- "'0 a. 0
.- C'- 00 ca..c .Q - ~ cu ctI Q) 0. Q) Q) 0 Q) 5 ~
~Q)~.-~=E~OaQ)=~~E~2 5~CU
ooEQ)>-a<(Q)=Q)COOctI-o_-ctl~ ctlQ)
E"'O~ia. ~~..c'2=SooOO..c'OEB ~.Y-
Q)~mo.~~!c~o~.~~g~~..c .(5~~
KEg~~~~~~~~~~e8~,~..cmo
~~~1ii~i~~ga:~~~5>-ic~~~~
~~E;~~jEggctl~~~B~~~~~~
O~O'EQ)D~OO~a~ ~Q)0..cQ)E.5-
~Q)b,-S.!EcO~~.5~~cS~=o.EE.5
c.~o ~ CD ~ Q)O C c: lO 0 C'tS ~ 2i;:~ 0 CU-o
~~i '<~~E~Q)~2~00~~mQ)1iiog~
....~..c5 'o~o .5E~.a"'ci=g~~~g';U=s
~c~'(i)ga.cu~~oo-S~S:..=R 2'EU~
~ia.OOE~~~Q)-U~(/)~o-5ooS~cc:.5
g~~.~.ctlctlctI~~~~li~!~i~~~!
~~O~.5m!~a.ctI~!m1ii~~g~ctlQ)00
a: 5 ~o C ~ Rea g>-g.Q.u CU.~:~"'O C5 5:2;; g--
~:~~~8~~~'~~.~~~S~i~8;:~~~
~2c:~~~mimEE8mlfl~w~c:u~B.
~E~~~~~~~8~~~.~~i~:.~~>-E
~~~~~m~55~oo~~2i~<~~mffi~
u .
~ 0 Ol ~
C ~ ~t .5m ~ ctI
o _ g:!:co c..c _""'-.~ Q) -g..c
~ 0 .- Q) 0. ~ = C c: en a. Q) ctI .9
~~~ Cii.~ctI o:~ ~<(.5 ~: c..c~
<( .- ~~o~ ~~ ~.E ~~ ~.~g
-0 ~ ~ E - - > 0.$ ctt "'C.~ .s::J ~
~~g E~~ctt>->- ctlQ)~ c~ Q)O~
- .D (1) 0 -e R~ t =E . ~ a.E ~ .m 0 ~~:g
Q) .D uQ)octl&.g~- ~ - oo-C
~g>.s ~~o.E'-E~~8E o~ ~:-o...:~_m
u)'~2 <<SQ)Q)-g~Q).g~.9t ~~ Cc
~~~ -g.~Sctt=a~~ooctl u~ ~=S5
~gi ~:~~~~~~t! !~ ~~i
'C ~ :0 g ~ .g .~ ~ co Q> {g E g ~ ~ C ~ E
2a.~ ctlctI~~~Q)Eo-'- -ctI ~~~
CctI E-ctt-o~Em~c QOO ~~
;~~ ~~~~Emo~~~ ~~ ~sg
C.-_ ccnOO::J~So..cQ)~ Cm -000
~~~ .~i.9~oiSj:Q) 8~ .~~Q>
ctt~Q)gQ)Q)u"'CEE~-o~5 co. =So=
.~S~~~E~~E~~~$S Q)Cij 8~$
~~8Q)ig&ctI~Q)~~~'~ ~~ ~Q)(/)
c: E l{) E ~.- m Ol 5l E"w 0 E -'" 0 g. G ~
8-g~!~~s'~~:~K>-~ o.~ Q)~'~
~~j;m~~m~~EQ)~~ .9~ S~~
~ <( >- ~ -g 0:;; ~ ~~.g ~!~ i 5 g>.g ~
'5Q)i~~O~~Ecm-Eo ~Ol 'c~~
~ -g g. 0 .5 g> 2i 5.== ~ ffi ~ 8 ~ 5:g m .5 =
cO~-Cii.EoQ)gOOE2.~w 8(ij ..cQ)~
~-g~j-5i2sg~-g~~~oi~ g~E
~coctl'~cO:_Q)ocQ):..=-g.5oo'- ~'Io
2 S ~.5 2 Q) ~ 00 >-~ E 8:.9 ~ Q)'- -0 a. u
.-C'-CJ)ctI..c .Q.~ ..ctlctlQ)a.<l>Q)O Q)5~
C/)Q)~'-.Y=E~OOOQ)=::JQ)E~~ ..c~ctt
~EQ)>-~<(Q)=Q)gCJ)ctI"'C=-cu~ -COQ)
~-o~to. =~..c~=SooOO..c.5~B ~g-
Q)i~[~~~c~2-g.~~g~~..c .~~~
KEgi~~~'~~Q)~~~e8~'~~..cctlo
.Q<ca1iiErr~~g~"'CQ)gs>-o.c~gQ)Q)
Q)C~Q)=S~oE::J .C~a. ~~Q)O'~S~
~~~~OO>-~Eogctt~a.EO~5~.~~Q)
O~OE!D~OO=~~:iQ)~..c~E.5S
:t:: ~ ~.- - ~ c 0 .~{g.5 ~ E c:6 ~.'!: E "E .5
C:~G~c:~mEmuc:c:l{)oCll~R;:iom~
..::> c <C oEl ..c Q) Q) 0 200~.E oo1i)u; 0 ~Q)
~i~~ .~.~~~:6E~.a .g~~Q)~~~-g
~cQ).Q~o.cttO~o~_S~o.5REID~~~
i~~.;E~~~I-oiOO~~~CfJS~cc.5
g~EE~ctlctlctlg5~~2c~Q)-o"'O~~~~
~ oE OOoo"'O~~OOQ)roctlc..cOIDC~C
Q. ~u 0.5 ~ "E ~ ~{l ~c: == m 1;):E ~ ~ g> ~ ~ 8..9
~ .2 go g [a. t:: .S 53 .~ g ~ ~ .!a -g <5 ::;:=: - ~ C
~.~c~~~~0~E.~~g-~ctI~8~~~:E
~~'~.E~a.~~!EEo~~g~.~~~i8~
~~~~ai~IDID8~~~'~~~!~.~~~~
Z'en~~~en~==~OO~;:~w<~~ro~w
(3 . .
STATE BANK OF CHANHASSEN
C/O KLEIN FINANCIAL INC
1550 AUDUBON RD
CHASKA , MN 55318 -9508
CHANHASSEN RETAIL LTD PRTSHP
C/O BROOKSTONE INC
810 LILAC DR N
SUITE 212
ROBBINSDALE , MN 55422 -4673
TWO GREEKS AND A GEEK LLC
1318 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY
MENDOTA, MN 55150 -1414
NATIONAL LODGING COMPANIES INC
C/O CHANHASSEN COUNTRY SUITES
591 78TH ST W
PO BOX 1010
CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -1010
BLOOMBERG COMPANIES INC
PO BOX 730
CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -0730
MARKET SQUARE ASSOC L TO PTRSHP
C/O AMCON CONSTRUCTION CO
1715 YANKEE DOODLE RD #200
EAGAN, MN 55121 -1698
CHANHASSEN SUITES LLC
C/O CHANHASSEN COUNTRY SUITES
591 78TH ST W
PO BOX 1010
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -1010
MARKET SQUARE ASSTS II LLC
470 78TH ST W
STE 260
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -4547
WENDY'S INTERNATIONAL INC
PO BOX 256
DUBLIN, OH 43017 -0256
CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES LLC
570 MARKET ST
PO BOX514
CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -0514
MARKET STREET STATION LLC
4210 WOLD SHAKOPEE RD
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55437 -2951
79TH STREET CENTER PARTNERSHIP
684 EXCELSIOR BLVD
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -1935
MC CROSSROAD PROPERTIES LLC
40 SUNNYSIDE LN
SUNFISH LAKE, MN 55118 -4718
TOM-DON REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS
C/O DONALD M GUILLETT
13679 DUNBAR WAY
APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124 -5245
NET LEASE DEVELOPMENT LLC
50 SOUTH 6TH ST
#1480
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 -1589
APPLE AMERICAN LP (APPLEBEE'S)
C/O FINANCIAL PACIFIC LEASING
ATTN: GARY BERGSTROM
PO BOX 4568
FEDERAL WAY, WA 98063 -4568
Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet)
Spalon Montage Sign
Site Plan Amendment
Planning Case No. 05-33
600 Market Street
City of Chanhassen
o
en
c:
a
:J
N0-~O
f3o\.j.\e
p,sbO{e\\.j.{(\
State \-\\1\1')' 5
~
iD
rn
c
'itj
a:
:c
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Jennifer Hurt: Even if we cut the sport court in half it’s still going to be a sport court…
Sacchet: Yeah, I would have to refer, I mean you’d have to take up discussion like that with
staff. I mean we’re not in a position here to counsel you on that. It’s, I mean as you well know
with complaining, everybody’s allowed to complain and that’s the purpose of the public hearing
so that everybody can come and make their statement and we try to listen to everybody to the
best of our abilities to try to make everybody happy. But that’s only possible to a certain extent,
and I would encourage you to discuss this further with staff as to how can you reduce the
infringement or maybe eliminate it ideally and if there’s some type of variance you need, you
can appeal our decision to City Council. Or alternatively if the situation gets enough changed,
you may want to start a new variance process, but that’s something you have to discuss with
staff. I mean that’s where you have to go with that, okay? Wish you luck.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR SPALON MONTAGE TO PLACE
A WALL SIGN OUTSIDE OF THE APPROVED SIGN BAND AREA ON PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 600 MARKET STREET, APPLICANT KRAUS-ANDERSON REALTY
COMPANY, PLANNING CASE NO. 05-33.
Public Present:
Name Address
Cindy McDonald Kraus-Anderson Realty
Mitchell Wherley 600 Market Street
Josh Metzer presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Jerry, go ahead.
McDonald: I have some questions for you. Okay, currently Americana Bank has got a gable
sign and I read in here that the developer did that in the beginning. That was part of the
negotiations. As far as building the building. Is that correct?
Metzer: That’s correct. If you were to zoom in right here. This is on page, well it’s one of the
attachments to the report.
McDonald: Well the question I’ve got then, why wouldn’t we allow signage in the gables? Was
the plan from the beginning that there would be signage there and we gave in for some reason
when the developer first came through?
Metzer: Well I guess we consider this a change to what was approved. If you notice on the
north elevation, actually you can see it on the west or the north elevation, there was no provision
for a sign on the second level. Only on the south elevation with the bank. I guess it was felt to
go outside of that would be over stepping our authority.
15
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
McDonald: Well when the office building was first built, what was the intent on the second floor
then? What was going to be going up there? That wouldn’t require signage.
Metzer: I don’t believe it was known as any specific tenants. I believe it was thought that all
tenants would have, whether it’s first level or second level, would have signage on the first level
sign band.
McDonald: Okay, so the original intent was the first level was always pretty much going to be
retail space and the feeling was that that second level space there would be sufficient for signage.
We wouldn’t have to elevate things up and have a signage kind of in a big see saw pattern going
across the building. That there would be some uniformity. Was that the intent I guess to try to
control that a little bit?
Metzer: As far as I know, yes.
McDonald: Okay. And I’ll save the other questions for the applicant. I’m done.
Papke: Couple questions. This is the same building that we denied the sign variance for
Americana a couple weeks ago?
Metzer: On the north elevation canopy, yes.
Papke: Okay. What are the alternatives for Spalon Montage? Where else could they put a sign?
Could they put one in the sign band on the first floor? Next to the Bebi, however that’s
pronounced.
Metzer: It’s actually pronounced Bebi, but yeah.
Papke: Bebi, okay. So it could be on the first floor, over the door or over the window to the
right of the door?
Metzer: Right, yes.
Papke: And those spaces are available. So they actually have a viable Plan B if this is denied?
Metzer: As far as the city’s concerned, yes.
Papke: Okay.
Sacchet: Debbie.
Larson: Well, maybe I read this wrong but I thought that it said in here, and I’m not finding it at
the moment, that the sign wouldn’t be really where they’re renting their space.
Metzer: Well it’s, go ahead.
16
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Larson: Well it just seems to me like that was very poor planning for the second story of this
building and the signage. I mean from the get go, if they’re going to rent out, they’re going to
build a second story that would accommodate a salon, a lovely salon might I add, I think they
should be able to have some decent signage for this. Signage. If they’re just required to have a
little sign downstairs and the property isn’t even down there, I think that’s very detrimental to
their business and I think that would be considered quite a huge hardship because it sounds like
they’re going to have quite a large rental space in there, and I guess you know if you’re going to
allow the gable sign on the other end, why won’t you allow it? The difference of why we denied
the Americana is because they had 3 signs already and that was going to be an additional one.
But this is, this is like their major sign for the business so people know they’re there and I guess
I’m at a loss why, how did it get this far?
Metzer: …staff did not feel they had the authority to allow signage up there so at that point…
Larson: I think as a business, I’d be angry if I couldn’t put a sign up.
Papke: I’m getting confused now because on page 7 of staff report, when I asked before could
they put it up on that sign band, it says Spalon Montage cannot locate their wall sign on the first
level sign band because of city code.
Metzer: Directly above the common entry.
Papke: So their only option is in the sign band area right where it says area? Is that their only
option?
Metzer: Right. Well I mean it’s not, you know. Anywhere on the sign band other than directly
above that main entry.
Papke: But it sounds like the Bebi store is the one on the left. They’re going to take the spot on
the left, yes? I’m trying to understand what the plan is here.
Sacchet: There’s a couple plans is the problem.
Papke: Yeah. Because it says on page 6, future Bebi wall sign and the arrows points to the left
panel of the sign band. They can’t put it over the center one so that only allows the panel to the
right side of the sign band and is there going to be a business that’s going to go in on the right
side of the door?
Metzer: No, that whole area right here is Bebi. This whole first level.
Sacchet: So technically they would get those three signage spaces?
Metzer: The place where this marks the X is where they cannot place the sign because it’s
common entrance for.
17
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
McDonald: Okay, could I ask a question because I’m confused too, and maybe you answered it.
My approach was to the left of that X, couldn’t they put their sign there? Right there.
Larson: Which page are you looking at?
Sacchet: It’s page 6 Debbie.
McDonald: Okay, so that space would be available?
Metzer: Right.
McDonald: Okay. Now the other thing too when I went out there today, all 3 of those panels
again to the left are going to be taken by Bebi? Or why do they need 3?
Metzer: No, they have one panel.
McDonald: Okay. And then the other 2 panels there would also be available.
Metzer: Right, except the one in the middle directly above Bebi’s main entrance. The one to the
right of it, certainly another option.
McDonald: Okay.
Sacchet: So really if the Bebi guys would have 2 to the left, Spalon could have the next 2.
Metzer: Sure.
Sacchet: I mean that’s an alternative.
Papke: The one to the left and the right of the common.
Sacchet: Yes, two in the corner. Is that a corner there? So they would be to the right of the
entrance. And I don’t know whether that, I think…right of that entrance too. We can ask the
applicant.
McDonald: Well when you drive up there and you park, you’re parking over in the right. You
get out. You come down and you see that sign. That side to the left of where your X is at
anyway. There is no parking in front. So the signs lined up toward where people would park
anyway. That directs them into the common entrance and from there you’ve got signage. Tells
you to go upstairs. Of course at that point you could find it no problem. But okay. So there are
alternatives.
Larson: I’ve got one more.
Sacchet: Yeah, you’re still alright.
18
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Larson: Look at the amount of space they’re renting, come on.
Sacchet: It’s huge.
Larson: I know. And they get one little sign at the bottom? It just doesn’t make any sense.
Sacchet: Well they do go all the way across actually.
Undestad: I think something else you need to consider too though is Bebi, or whatever you say
move out and then all of a sudden you get 2 or 3 tenants taking up their 1 spot, and they don’t get
a sign down there on the lower level where they’re at so.
Larson: I don’t know, it makes sense to me to have it right by.
Metzer: I really don’t know how much extra space there would be in Bebi’s space because on
the opposite elevation, where I’m pointing, this is the east elevation directly on the west side
which would be right here. That’s Bebi on this other east elevation. That’s a totally separate
tenant space.
Sacchet: There’s going to be different ones there. Do we know how far down Spalon Montage
is going to go? If you don’t know we can ask.
Metzer: It’s the entire second level on that wing.
Sacchet: But how far, how far to, I guess that would be to the west. I mean I understand it’s the
whole width of the building.
Undestad: I think they come down to that next peak.
Metzer: My understanding it’s just this area here.
Cindy McDonald: It starts at the back end and it’s that whole east side and then it goes to the
other side. It’s almost 8,000 square feet. They’ve got the majority of that second level.
Metzer: To about here, was that correct?
Larson: Women will find this place, trust me.
Sacchet: So that would be somewhat consistent with this alternative. Alright, we’re still there.
Mark, did you want to add anything from your end more? We’re actually in questions. Just to
be clear, we’re not commenting yet. We’re still asking questions from staff as a matter of fact.
Undestad: Is, I mean the upstairs, the upper level, is that all, do you know if that’s all leased out
now?
19
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Metzer: No. Americana occupies a portion on the west end, and then Spalon on the east. The
area in the middle there’s a potential for 5 separate units. Whether or not 1 or 2 come in there
and take up the entire area, I don’t know yet.
Undestad: So those in the middle then, that small little gable peak in the middle, I think where
Spalon ends, maybe between there and Americana you can get, you’re saying it might be 3 or 4
tenants…
Metzer: As many as 5.
Sacchet: So that would be to the right of the main entrance there.
Undestad: I mean if you look at that, that area there could be as many as 5 upstairs and who’s
downstairs and then you have 3.
McDonald: Actually right now on the south end of that it is occupied by Metz Law Firm. So
they have most of that all the way down to the Americana.
Undestad: On the bottom floor?
McDonald: No, on the top floor. On the south side of the building down here and it’s the north
end that’s totally open at this point.
Sacchet: Interesting. Now, yeah I mean, I’m struggling with the same thing that keeps coming
out. I mean was this just not thought of? I guess that’s an applicant question. Not a Montage
question but the people that thought how these people would be in there. Let’s bring up the
applicant. Let’s hear from you guys.
Cindy McDonald: Cindy McDonald, Kraus-Anderson Realty, 4210 West Old Shakopee Road,
Bloomington, 55437.
Mitchell Wherley: Mitchell Wherley, President of Spalon Montage and I office in our current
Chanhassen location. I have no idea what the address is. Moving 600 Market Street.
Cindy McDonald: To answer a couple of the questions that were brought up. The Market Street
Station was thought of to be retail on the first level with office on the second level. Then we
came upon a great opportunity to relocate Spalon to our property, which is great for our property.
Great for all the tenants and to draw traffic to that building. There is Americana signage on the
second level, the gabled area. I wish we would have thought of Spalon, that they would be at the
second level so we could have put that on the original plan but we didn’t know that then. We’ve
asked for this amendment so we can accommodate their needs, so people can see them when
they come in and I know the signage criteria is strict but I’m pretty picky. All the tenants have to
send their signage criteria to us first to take a look at it. We usually kick it back a few times to
make sure it’s going to look right for the building, and when we asked for this amendment, we
have no intentions of putting any additional signage on the second level. You know were it not
for Spalon, we wouldn’t be putting signage up there but they are retail tenants. They do need
20
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
that signage so people can come in and see them. So we will give you whatever assurance or, in
writing you’re looking for. There will be no more signs on the gabled areas. We want the
building to look attractive as well.
Sacchet: Let me just clarify because I think it’s an important point. You’re saying since
originally it was viewed more office space, you don’t have the same signing need.
Cindy McDonald: No. We told all the office tenants too that have looked, that there is no
signage on the second level.
Sacchet: Okay. So how do we know who’s up there? I mean it’s kind of you have to know
because you’re going there or for the offices.
Cindy McDonald: Oh, there’s a directory inside and there’s a monument sign.
Sacchet: There is a monument sign, that’s what I wanted to know.
Cindy McDonald: They’re for the office tenants, so that’s kind of you know, and one of the first
questions is we want signage. We want signage…monument sign. The Americana doesn’t get it
because you know as you said, they have 2 great permanent signs and people see them when
they’re coming in. And yeah, Chadwick and Americana are there now and Spalon is under
construction and we have 3 other tenants that are looking at the space, all office tenants.
Sacchet: Okay. Anything else you want to add from your end?
Mitchell Wherley: I think from the beginning working on this project signage was an issue for
me as a retail business in general and so we look at what’s been proposed as sort of the most
minimum signage we would need. When we were looking at sort of the rotunda area that is the
entrance to the office facility, I believe you were suggesting a portion that is actually common
area, so the only other option, that I think Josh pointed out, was to the right would be, we’re
concerned going in. We are a destination so that helps but our being able to identify where we’re
at is hugely important to us. We’ve always been concerned about how to portray that message
and we just feel that it’s critical that it’s upstairs so that you know we’re not letting the neon
arrows pointing so…
Cindy McDonald: You know the sign that they’re proposing, they worked very hard in putting it
together. It’s a very, it’s a very tasteful sign. It looks very nice with the building. To put it on
the first level I think would be confusing because it’s going to be right over the retail locations
and this really does designate where they are in the project. They’re estimating to bring in 400
customers on average per day to this building so again this signage is very key to them. And to
us.
Sacchet: Any questions? Let’s start with Debbie this time.
Larson: Is it a lit sign?
21
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Cindy McDonald: It is.
Larson: Okay, that’s all.
Sacchet: Jerry.
McDonald: Okay. I have a number of questions for you. First of all if we put the sign in the
gable and we go back to the picture that you just, yeah that picture right there that you just put
up. It appears to me like it looks like, as you come in that door that’s almost directly below it.
So while it does give you some visibility, I’m not sure that it takes care of the problem of how do
I get there. The other question I’ve got is, what harm would it do to go into that second level to
the left of the main entrance because again in the parking lot, as people go in, you get out of your
car, that’s the direction you’re facing and it sends you into the common door, and as I said once
you get in there, you know where you’re at.
Mitchell Wherley: I couldn’t agree with you more. The challenge is, you’re looking at about a
section that wide facing a hotel room that I don’t think there’s a ton of visibility right there. I
think that’s a really challenging, you know it would be sort of in the shadow facing the wrong
way. If we could have it, the best world for us we’d put it above the office entrance. I mean
there’s no question I’d love to drive the traffic in that door but I know it doesn’t work for the
landlord. It just, it’s not fair to the other tenants. They walk in our signage. I just think that this
section, this right here is pointing to the direction that.
McDonald: But that’s out toward the parking lot where everybody’s going to be parking and as
they come in they’re going to see that first.
Mitchell Wherley: There is, the majority of the parking for this particular project is out in front
here.
McDonald: But then in that case it doesn’t make any difference where you put the sign then
because now you have nothing on that, on the south end to point you towards you building. I
understand your frustration and everything but let me ask you another question. What are the
alternatives in your view? If we were to deny the signage on the gable, have you looked at any
other alternatives?
Mitchell Wherley: This was a deal breaker for us. We’re way beyond, I mean we’re, and I
apologize for I guess I’m after the fact as well but signage was an issue going into this project..
We’re a million dollars in reconstruction and I don’t see another option for us.
McDonald: Well let me go back to their real estate company.
Larson: I have a question too.
Cindy McDonald: You know when you’re coming in off Market Boulevard where the sign is
proposed, you’ll see it and that’s how you’re going to get the customer into that parking lot and
if it was on that other spot, that’s really part of the three door common area entry way to the
22
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
office. Once they see that sign, they’re going to park in the parking lot. They’re going to go in
those 3 doors because we feel that it’s pretty prominently marked that that’s the entrance to get
in. Once they get in, there’s a directory internally to the right that will say Spalon Montage,
Suite 270. So the stairs are right there. It takes them right up there.
McDonald: Okay, well you realize you’re making the same argument the bank tried to make to
us about the gable sign down at the other end as far as pointing people to the bank and it didn’t
quite fall on the receptive ears.
Cindy McDonald: Yeah but they have adequate signage where people can see them from two
directions. We’re asking for you know a prominent spot for Spalon so people can see where they
are and get to them.
McDonald: Well that is a mitigating factor and that’s why I’m trying to get at, okay what are the
alternatives and are they going to be viable but what I wanted to come back to you about was,
when the building was put up and you went and you got a gabled sign for Americana, why
Americana and why not try to do something so that the rest of the building at some point could
have the gabled signs. I don’t understand the deal that was, you know what was the
understanding there? You know the problem that I understand the city, we’re trying to get things
architecturally so that they don’t look like retail spaces and gawdy and you know lots of lights
and all of this kind of stuff. It should be kind of understated and the building seems to fit that the
way it is but just explain to me a little bit about how the gable signs got down at the Americana
end.
Cindy McDonald: You know when, I can’t, the developer unfortunately is not here but when
they had the vision of putting the building together they thought you know a bank would work.
Again they weren’t planning on any office tenants for the second level and in keeping with the
look of the building, we wanted to limit the signage to have a nice ambience to the property but
yet identify the tenants. So we didn’t want to add all this signage up and down. So yes, it was
put in that one gabled area. If we could go back it would be put in you know a couple areas for
that flexibility. But we really feel it’s important for the Spalon in this location.
McDonald: You know as we said, one of the things we try to do is treat everybody equally.
What’s going to happen if you rent out, you’re right now at 8,000 square feet roughly? What
happens if they rent out 10,000 square feet? Are you going to come back and say you know we
need something over at this gable because this is a big client? I mean where does it stop? It
looks as though when the original development was put together everything was thought out as
to how this was going to operate. I’m having trouble coming up with a reason of why should we
deviate from what we have originally put in place here.
Cindy McDonald: Well besides the fact that Mitchell has told me he’s going to stay forever at
the property, you know this is.
Larson: That’s what he told the last tenant.
23
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Cindy McDonald: I know. If they left they would probably be replaced with an office tenant
thereby no signage. So we are asking not for a sign in that particular gabled area. We are asking
for the Spalon sign in that gabled area. And again any assurances that we can give you in writing
or what not, if we have to say that if Spalon vacates there’s no sign in that gabled area, we are
more than willing to do that.
Undestad: The intent was the office space upstairs.
Cindy McDonald: Right.
Undestad: The bank…signs over the bank. You didn’t want any other gable signage because
you were renting out to office tenants. Now you have a retail tenant in there.
Cindy McDonald: A fabulous one.
Undestad: Obviously I mean retail survives off of signage.
Cindy McDonald: Correct. And you know also the entry area works with the retailers. It’s open
and people, you know they’re counting on Spalon being there and that synergy between
customers coming in and going up there and going down to CPA’s and.
Undestad: How many square feet do you have left upstairs for lease?
Cindy McDonald: We have, it’s about a little less than 10.
Undestad: And do you have people looking in those now?
Cindy McDonald: Yes, office tenants. Accounts primarily. There’s a lot of accountants have
come forward lately.
Undestad: Got to stay close to the money.
Cindy McDonald: I know. So we’re trying to wrap up those deals as well but they all know
there’s no signage.
McDonald: Okay. What other alternatives are there for signs out front on Market Street? I
noticed that there’s a memorial sign that goes there. What kind of play would Spalon Montage
get on that?
Cindy McDonald: They will get a panel.
McDonald: Just a panel.
Cindy McDonald: Just a panel.
McDonald: Okay. I have no more questions.
24
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Sacchet: Any other questions from the applicant? No? Not at this point, no. Thank you very
much.
Cindy McDonald: Thank you.
Sacchet: Now this is a public hearing. So I open the public hearing and since there’s nobody
here to stand up I close the public hearing. And we had a public hearing and bring it back to
commission here for discussion and comments about this. And I do like to point out a comment
first in this particular case. I like to point out what in the findings of fact it states that, actually
the staff report. The findings of fact which I think is kind of fulcrum what we’re asked to look at
as a commission. We’re asked to look at the creation of the functional and harmonious design
for structures and site features with special attention to the following. The proposed amendment
does not, and that’s the finding, does not create an internal sense of order for the buildings and
uses on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community because the proposed sign is located outside of the first level sign band. Now I have
a definite comment to make about that but I just want to point this out before I make a comment,
and then I want to hear from you a little more. Any, I mean we already had some discussion so
far.
Papke: I’ll start. Oddly enough I find myself in support of this one. This is different than
Americana. Americana, and correct me if my memory of this is wrong but I thought one of the
sticking points for that one was, that was a sign on a canopy which was against city code.
Sacchet: It already had 3 or 4.
Papke: And they already had 3 or 4. This is not a sign on a canopy so we are not, this is not
asking for a variance from a safety perspective or something of that nature. Americana clearly
had tons of signage there. There was no question that they had plenty of visibility. This one,
boy if I was the applicant, I would want something other than a tiny little sign on the sign panel
there and the fact that the occupy such a huge piece of that second floor. I think this is a
reasonable request. It does not, if we were looking at, if the planning department and they could
say I’m all wet here. If they were planning this building right now and Spalon Montage said we
want this whole corner of the building on the second floor and we want a sign on the gable just
like Americana Bank, I suspect we wouldn’t be here tonight. Okay, this would have been in the
design from day one. So I think this is clearly in the best interest of the city and the applicant so
I support this one.
Sacchet: Who wants to go next? Jerry.
McDonald: I’ll go. We’ll go down the line. Okay, I’m having a lot of trouble with this one.
You know I supported the Americana sign because of advertising and I felt that on that elevation
they had a problem. Evidently that you didn’t care but I guess I can kind of understand why
we’re trying to have consistency. We’ve now fallen back to where, okay if we put one in here,
who’s to say next month another tenant that’s fairly big comes down and wants one on the other
and we’re faced with it. So does this come down to how much square footage you take up is the
25
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
way we end up voting? Shouldn’t be that way. I’m a little concerned that in the beginning you
know some of this wasn’t looked at. That down the road maybe I’ll get somebody big on the
other side because at that point this was totally open. This was not divided space. You know all
of this was set up for you know, we’ll sell to whoever comes. We’ll custom build it. Put the
walls up where you want it so there’s a little bit of short sightedness there and it’s, did they only
do the deal down at the other end just to get the bank? So I’m having a lot of problems with this.
I understand that Spalon Montage needs signage. You’ve got, you know fairly decent signage
where you’re at now. It points to where the location is. Because of the size of it, yeah I lean
towards well maybe you ought to get a little bit bigger sign than what Bebi gets. You are
different. So I’m really having a problem deciding which way to go on this but you know, I did
go to the site today. I looked at it. I do think that some of the alternatives provide you with the
signage needed because even back in that corner people have to know where you’re at anyway
because they can’t see you from the road so this has no effect on Market Boulevard. It has no
th
effect on anybody driving down West 78 Street. They can’t see it from there. So it’s not to me
th
the same as what the bank was trying to do was to get visibility on 78 Street. Even if you put it
th
up in the gable they’re not going to see it on 78 Street. That’s why I asked the questions about
the parking lot and where people are going to park. You tell me everybody’s going to be out on
kind of the south side. There’s no signs there. There’s nothing there to point you to where
Spalon Montage is going to be. How they going to find it? Are they going to have to walk all
the way around the building? So even if you do that then all the parking over there on that side,
once you get out of your car and you start walking toward the entrance, you see that side panel. I
mean it jumps out at you so that’s where I come back and say, no we ought to stay within the
guidelines because really we’re not buying anything and all we’re doing is we’re going against
what evidently the agreement was. What we’re trying to achieve you know with this property as
far as it’s an architectural look. I’m still undecided. No matter what I say it’s, and I don’t know
which way I’m going to vote at this point. I’ll wait and listen to everybody else but I probably
am leaning against it but I could be swayed.
Sacchet: Who wants to go first here? Mark.
Undestad: Well I think the comments about agreements and what was agreed to, what was not
agreed to. I think the space was built out or was originally designed for an office use, which they
don’t need that type of signage. Circumstances change. Tenants come in. Spalon Montage has
been in Chanhassen. They’re a nice tenant in the neighborhood. They’re a retail tenant. They
need that visibility. Whether it brings you right to their front door, or to their building, it’s more
signage that’s going to tell people, here we are. Once you get there, they’ll find them. I think in
the future you know their comments are, you know what if somebody comes in and takes your
other 10,000 square feet you know or it sounds like you’re talking office users that are going to
be in there but I think even at that, again from the beginning they had anticipated office space out
there. I wouldn’t be surprised if they get a tenant on the opposite side of the building that comes
in and might be retail. May need some signage on the canopy on that side. I don’t think the
building is designed and set up so that we’ve got just one after another after another where
they’re going to be annoying. Too many lights. Too many signs. Too much stuff going on. So
I think just the fact that from the retail standpoint and what’s going on upstairs, I guess I would
support it. I’m in favor of putting the signage up there.
26
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
Sacchet: Debbie.
Larson: Ditto. The way I see it too, I mean you’ve got 8,000 square feet. That’s considered,
what I would consider anyway an anchor store. You need signage and to have just a small panel
is just, I think it was just poor planning, you know. You didn’t necessarily have the foresight to
think that somebody was going to go take it. I think it’s wonderful that they have because you
know as Mark pointed out, they’re a nice tenant to have in Chanhassen and I’d like to have them
stay. The sign they’ve designed is tasteful and I hope if somebody else were to go in and take
the other 10,000 square feet we’d reconsider for them too. To have a tasteful sign and I would
probably support that one also so my stance is, I would certainly support it. I don’t think it’s a
big deal.
Sacchet: Well I don’t know whether I have too much to add. I mean I want to go back to this
statement in the findings and that our responsibility is to create a functional, harmonious design
of the structures, the site features in compliance with the city guidelines, and then the findings
say the proposed amendment does not create an internal sense of order. Well as a matter of fact I
think it creates a sense of internal order. As a matter of fact without the sign of a major retail
tenant I think we create disorder. I think putting that sign there does create order and it creates a
desirable environment. That’s another thing we have to look at. Does it create, I can’t see why
we would say this does not create a desirable environment. I mean this is Market Square. This
is, there is no residential anywhere surrounding. I mean if you want to put up a sign in the city
of Chanhassen, let’s put it up in Market Square. That’s kind of where I’m coming from. That’s
the use of that. That’s the desirability of that spot. That’s why we have that part of town that we
call downtown and we want to denote, that we want to have business and I think that in this
sense we have to adjust a little bit our criteria. Desirable in this sense. It’s slightly different
desiring in the sense is to have visibility to make the business prosper. To have good business
want to be there. To have this place be successful as a whole combination of businesses. And
then desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community. Well, desirable for
the occupants and visitors is that they know where to go. That people can see where it is so I
really think that we would be cutting ourselves short by getting hung up over it was only the first
band in the first place. Well, there’s the Bebi store downstairs to put a sign up in the same
magnitude of Bebi store, I don’t think is fair. That’s not supporting the business and I think as a
community, as a city we have the responsibility to support the businesses in this town to prosper.
So that’s where I stand with that one so I’m definitely in favor of this. I do think, as Kurt you
pointed out, this is very different from what we looked at with Americana Bank. Americana
Bank has I think 4 signs or 3 signs and a monument sign. And we ask them well, do you want to
give up one of those and you can have the other one. And they decided well, I don’t really want
to do that so then we denied it because we didn’t want an additional one. They already had
plenty signs. Spalon doesn’t have really any viable signage as it is, to put like those two panels
and then I find that would actually be confusing. Maybe the one panel on the left part of the
door could be also small Spalon sign that kind of leads people to the door, and then the big one
would be that makes people know there it is. That’s what I would do personally, and I think that
is within the framework that we’re working with. Basically I do not agree with the finding of
staff that this particular proposal does not create an internal sense of order and desirability. I
think it’s the opposite. I think putting that there does create an internal sense of order for that
type of a building. For that type of setting. That type of use and it definitely creates a desirable
27
Planning Commission Meeting – October 18, 2005
environment for the business, for the visitors and for the community. That’s my position on that.
Unless there’s more discussion or comments I’d like to have a motion.
Larson: Okay, where is it?
Sacchet: It’s on page 8.
Larson: What do I read?
McDonald: You want the second paragraph Debbie.
Larson: Read this?
Sacchet: Yeah.
Larson: The Planning Commission recommends City Council approve Site Plan Amendment
#05-33 to place an illuminated sign on the second level of Market Street Station outside of the
approved first floor sign band based on the findings of fact in the staff report with the following
conditions.
Sacchet: 1 through 3.
Larson: 1 through 3.
Sacchet: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Undestad: Second.
Sacchet: We have a motion and a second.
Larson moved, Undestad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends City
Council approve Site Plan Amendment #05-33 to place an illuminated sign on the second
level of Market Street Station outside of the approved first floor sign band based on the
findings of fact in the staff report with the following conditions:
1. The applicant must submit engineered drawings showing how the sign will be
constructed before a sign permit will be issued.
2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site.
3. All signage must meet ordinance requirements.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Larson noted the verbatim and summary minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 6, 2005 as presented.
28