Loading...
02.18.2025 PC Minutes with public comment emailsCHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 2025 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Eric Noyes, Edward Goff, Steve Jobe, Jeremy Rosengren, Perry Schwartz, and Ryan Soller. MEMBERS ABSENT: Katie Trevena. STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Jeske, Planner; Eric Maass, Community Development Director; Mackenze Grunig, Project Engineer; Joe Seidl, Water Resource Engineer. PUBLIC PRESENT: Russell Holmes 1635 Hemlock Way Erin Wong 1674 Hemlock Way Geoff Wong 1674 Hemlock Way Ryan Bauer 1675 Mayapple Pass Lindsey Button 1655 Hemlock Way Glen Shoenberg 1665 Hemlock Way Natania Schoenberg 1665 Hemlcok Way Holly Wilde 1685 Hemlock Way Kristie Habermaier 1664 Hemlock Way Jeff Habermaier 1664 Hemlock Way Jason Besler 1704 Hemlock Way David Grover 2565 Highcrest Court Maureen Homa 1545 Hemlock Way Ted Homa 1545 Hemlock Way Nataraja Nallathamby 1661 Mayapple Pass Christina Graese Brandl Anderson Christopher Contreras Brandl Anderson Nancy Gilmore 1705 Hemlock Way Dan Gilmore 1705 Hemlock Way John Anderson Brandl Anderson Becky Fluegge 1671 Mayapple Pass Holly Hanson 1725 Hemlock Way Kristyn Vickman 1535 Hemlock Way Christopher Juulke 1778 Marigold Court John Santini 1625 Hemlock Way Cathy Santini 1625 Hemlock Way Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Consider an Ordinance Rezoning Property from Right-of-Way to R-8 Mixed Medium Density Residential District and Request for Preliminary Plat and Site Plan Approval for a 60 Unit Townhome Development (Planning Case #2025-01) Eric Maass, Community Development Director, introduced Mackenze Grunig who is the new Project Engineer. Mr. Maass introduced the project with a rendered site plan of the initial proposal, which includes 60 attached townhomes. Mr. Maass said that the city requests applicants to hold neighborhood meetings, which was done with this project. At the meeting, attendees were asked to write down feedback on small pieces of paper. Mr. Maass presented slides to review what residents were hoping to learn about during the neighborhood meeting. After the neighborhood meeting, the residents were able to share what they were still nervous about in regards to the project and what they were happy to learn. Mr. Maass said that the property is currently designed by the city’s comprehensive plan for Medium Density Residential development. He explained that municipalities are required to update their Comprehensive Plan every ten years based on different factors involving growth forecasts provided by the Metropolitan Council. The Comprehensive Plan is reviewed by the Planning Commission, adopted by the City Council, and approved by the Metropolitan Council. The current Comprehensive Plan in effect is the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. He stated that both the 2030 and 2040 Comprehensive Plans gave the site a mixed land use designation of office or residential medium density of four to eight units per acre. Mr. Maass said that the plan did not have a zoning designation, since it was MnDOT right-of-way for transportation projects before MnDOT deemed it as excess and put it up for public auction. Mr. Maass stated they received questions about areas where attached townhomes were backing up to single-family detached homes. Mr. Maass provided examples of similar layouts in Chanhassen, including Mission Homes Townhomes, Powers Place Townhomes, Lake Susan Townhomes, and Prairie Creek Townhomes. Mr. Maass reviewed public feedback about the development, including concerns about the shared boundary with the Pioneer Pass neighborhood to the north. Mr. Maass said that the plans were updated to provide more buffering through the new street becoming a private street which reduced the right of way requirement from 60 feet to 40 feet. He stated that there is now a proposed 80 to 105 feet distance between the detached rear of the single-family homes and the rear of the townhomes. Mr. Maass reviewed the two different product types proposed and said that the applicant needs to provide at least 20 percent of accent material to meet the required threshold outlined in city code. Additionally, Mr. Maass said that there needs to be more variety for architectural differences. He said that if the area is deemed to be critical bat habitat that any tree removal would need to take place prior to April 14, unless the site was reviewed by a qualified inspector and the area not deemed suitable bat habitat. Timelines regarding bat habitat are established by the United States Fish and Wildlife. Mr. Maass showed the original landscaping proposal. He said an additional 84 trees would need to be planted to offset the tree removals. The landscaping plan proposed 217 Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 3 trees. There would need to be plant diversity to meet the city’s plant diversity requirements. Mr. Maass said that this information was added to the plan. Mackenze Grunig, Project Engineer reviewed the proposed street layout, public and private utility plans, as well as proposed location of parking spaces provided in the development. Joe Seidl, Water Resource Engineer, said that the wetland delineation was completed in May 2024. The technical evaluation panel and the City of Chanhassen reviewed and approved the delineation. He stated that two small wetlands were determined to be incidental and created from other roadway projects. Since the wetlands were created incidentally, they can be graded and filled without penalty. Mr. Seidl said that there was one watercourse located in the project. He stated that permitting requirements for the water course required the city, Watershed District, and possibly the Army Corps of Engineers. He reviewed the existing conditions, such as the large hill in the middle of the site. He said that the water runoff on the east side of the site would go down to Bluff Creek, areas to the northwest would drain to the city-owned and maintained wet pond, and drainage to the southwest would drain to the existing drainage ditch system. Mr. Seidl said that there would be more volume created by the storm sewers, which could be mitigated through stormwater best management practices. Mr. Seidl proposed two options for the plan, including a stormwater wet pond reuse system that would capture stormwater and be used to irrigate the site. Mr. Seidl said that the applicant would need to complete additional permitting to ensure they meet regulations. He stated there was a stormwater wet pond located on the northeast of the site to meet water quality and rate control. He said that there would be buffers for the watercourse to meet additional rules and regulations. Mr. Seidl noted that the applicant proposed to outlet the storm sewer down the water course. The water course is highly eroded, so there were concerns that it would be exasperated if it were to take more water. Mr. Seidl said that the city will work with the Watershed and the applicant on the design. He stated an additional concern was at the southwest corner of the site, where there might be a need for some grading or water best management practices to ensure that there will not be excess water. He stated that the stormwater best management practices would be private and need to be maintained by the developer and the Homeowners Association. Mr. Seidl stated that there were standard engineering conditions to implement to address concerns. Mr. Seidl reviewed a concern discussed at the open house about drainage and flooding issues associated with the city-owned wet pond and the adjacent ditch. He reviewed previous aerial photos, which showed water saturation and that there could be potential for subsurface water interactions; the area is encompassed by a drainage and utility easement. The wet pond is on a city-owned outlot and the drainage and utility easement exists in portions of the backyard of the development to the north. He stated that when a development goes through and if there is an area that is known to be wet, the city would include a drainage and utility easement. He commented that a new development could not dump a lot of water there to make the situation worse. Mr. Seidl reviewed hydraulic and hydrological modeling to understand the drainage and reviewed stormwater events. He had a conversation with the developer’s engineer to highlight the concern and mitigate the problem in the final design to make sure the situation would not worsen. Chairman Noyes invited the developer forward to answer questions. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 4 John Anderson, Project Manager for Brandl Anderson, stated that Brandl Anderson purchased the site from MnDOT at public auction. He reviewed the original anticipated plan. He commented that they held a public meeting a few weeks ago and afterward adjusted the plan set to address neighborhood concerns. The adjustments included moving from a public street layout to a private street layout to push the units adjacent to the neighborhood further south for a larger setback and to plant trees for a buffer along the property line. He stated that the water would not touch neighbors’ property, but instead go into the swale which would drain the water west to the pond. He said that they would increase the pond size, which would increase the overall level and help things from a drainage standpoint. Their engineers were trying to figure out how to best address stormwater issues at the watercourse. The existing drainage channel might need upgrades, which would be addressed in the final plan. He stated that the site meets all the required zoning requirements. He commented that the existing power line on the site would be relocated to the very south property line. He said that they received comments from the watershed district. He commented that they wanted to start work on grading, streets, and utilities in the spring, and start house construction in the late summer. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the Homeowners Association’s responsibilities of maintaining the stormwater ponds. Mr. Anderson said that there was a maintenance agreement that would require the Homeowners Association to maintain the pond. He said this typically includes requirements that the ponding does not fill up with sediment and that appropriate vegetation is planted. The Homeowners Association would also be responsible for maintaining the private streets. Commissioner Schwartz asked about marketing terms they planned to use to describe the wetland and the pond. Mr. Anderson answered that the two wetlands on site will not exist when the project is complete since they were deemed incidental. He said that they would describe the stormwater pond as a best management practice. Chairman Noyes asked for a description of the swale. He asked if it presented an elevation change and if it provided an optical or physical buffering between the development to the north and the proposed development. Mr. Anderson answered that the swale would be grass or sodded and could be mowed. He said the elevation change would be less than two feet from the normal landscape to the swale. He stated it would not create a buffer and it would be approximately twenty feet from the property line. He said that the trees would be the buffer. Commissioner Jobe questioned the design and if they accounted for a 50-year flood or 100-year flood with water run-offs. Mr. Anderson said that he did not know the answer and asked Mr. Seidl. Mr. Seidl answered that the standard regulations when designing stormwater best management practice would be two-year, ten-year, and 100-year storm events. He said that there were accepted models that differed based on your location and how much water they conveyed. He provided an example of a 100-year event in Chanhassen, which would be 7.5 inches of stormwater in 24 hours, and how the stormwater runs over that period. He explained that the calculations are standard wastewater engineering and they utilize data from Atlas 14. He said Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 5 that the stormwater system would be designed for a 10-year event and best management practices would be designed for a 100-year event. Chairman Noyes stated that he reviewed 517 pages regarding the proposal. He said there was a huge concern about traffic. He requested information about the findings of the traffic study and how it might mitigate resident concerns. Mr. Anderson answered that the study found that Bluff Creek Drive and Pioneer Trail can handle the additional traffic loads. He stated that a comment was that the southwest corner of the site has a hillside, so they would need to regrade this so people can see traffic coming down the hill. Mr. Grunig clarified that the access proposed onto Pioneer Trail would be a right-in and right-out access only which would reduce the conflicts of the possible traffic issues. He said there was adequate capacity on Pioneer Trail and Bluff Creek Boulevard to support the homes. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the additional traffic generated by the 60 homes had been looked into with regard to adding to the existing traffic from the neighborhood to the north. Mr. Grunig answered that Bluff Creek Boulevard was designed to support the growth of additional developments. Commissioner Schwartz asked if there was a way to objectively identify the discrepancy between what he said and the comments from the neighbors about the safety issues with additional traffic regarding the development. Mr. Grunig answered that he would have to discuss the information with the Engineering Department to understand the best response. Mr. Maass said that Bluff Creek Boulevard and Pioneer Trail were collector streets. He said that collector streets are designed to absorb traffic flows from neighborhoods as cities utilize the land use plan. He said that as they anticipated growth, roads needed to be built to support the growth. He said that Bluff Creek Boulevard was built to accommodate the anticipated traffic generated as land was developed in accordance with the city’s Comprehensive Plan land use designations. Commissioner Schwartz said that the neighbors to the north said that there are current safety issues regarding traffic in the neighborhood and that this development would add additional safety issues. Although Bluff Creek Boulevard is a collector road, the residents believe there are current traffic safety issues before the added development. The development could increase the issues. He asked how to resolve the discrepancies between the complaints and the information provided. Mr. Maass responded that the applicant would need to address the grading of the hill to help with the visibility to help with safety. He stated that the perception of a safety concern is not the same as a traffic study which uses accepted engineering standards to identify safety issues that require mitigation. Commissioner Soller asked if there were any changes to prevent left turns out of the neighborhood onto Pioneer Trail. Mr. Anderson answered that there was a median in the center of Pioneer Trail to help with this concern. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 6 Commissioner Soller asked if it was a single-stop sign for exiting traffic but remained a through- road for north and south traffic on Bluff Creek Boulevard. Mr. Anderson confirmed this information. Mr. Anderson noted that there was a private overhead streetlight proposed at that intersection for nighttime driving and lighting purposes. Chairman Noyes asked if the wet pond expansion would be a city pond. Mr. Seidl answered that this decision was not sorted out. He explained that when you mix public and private stormwater it becomes public. The pond expansion would benefit residents. Commissioner Rosengren asked if there was a necessity for a fence or a barrier for road noise on the east side of the development since it appeared to be close to 212. Mr. Maass said that they sent the plans for MnDOT for review, but a barrier was unnecessary. Commissioner Rosengren asked if there would be new trees planted on the east side that might help with the noise. Mr. Maass confirmed this information. Commissioner Schwartz asked how the city would implement their maintenance easement if the plans were private. Mr. Seidl answered that if the ponds were private, the city would not have an easement over them. He said that they would have a stormwater operations agreement that gave similar rights as an easement to inspect best management practices, but the city would not need to have an easement over it. Mr. Seidl said the city found that maintaining easements over a stormwater infrastructure made it complicated to figure out how they would be maintained. There is a standard template agreement that explains how the best management practices would be maintained. He stated that he spent a lot of time reviewing and making comments because he wanted to make sure that a future person in the water resources engineer role would understand what the city owns and maintains and what the private owner owns and maintains. Commissioner Schwartz asked if they anticipated a check and balance or an oversight on the maintenance of these ponds. Mr. Seidl answered that there were requirements with the permitting from the MPCA. The permitting process requires a program that checks in on private best management practices. He stated that the city is working on collecting data and building out a database. He commented that the general idea is in the future, the city would be auditing and doing inspections. He said that the inspection form that is standard with the agreement requires that the private owner completes an inspection every year and submits it to the city. Mr. Seidl said that he would link these inspections to the database and it would be clear what properties were not completing the inspections and the city would follow up. Commissioner Schwartz asked if there would be penalties. Mr. Seidl confirmed this information. Commissioner Schwartz provided an example of how his Homeowners Association has had many boards come and go, so the current board has no idea about their responsibilities for the maintenance of the stormwater pond. He stated that the developer sold homes with a water feature rather than a stormwater maintenance pond, and sold the houses for $10,000 more. He Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 7 said that residents feel confused and angry when muck appears on the stormwater ponds every year. Mr. Seidl said he would be happy to discuss this situation with him and answer questions about the maintenance of the stormwater feature in his development. Commissioner Schwartz thanked Mr. Seidl for the offer. Commissioner Goff said that the street moved from a public street to a private street, so there would be responsibilities for snow removal. He asked if any other services were impacted, such as fire. Mr. Maass said that since the width of the street was reduced, there would be no street parking to ensure that there would be access for emergency service vehicles in the event of an emergency. He explained that the north corner and the eastern corner have turnarounds that the fire department reviewed. He stated that there is a twenty-foot front yard setback in the driveways to allow for parking. Commissioner Jobe asked how much public parking was available per unit. Mr. Maass answered that the city requires one guest parking stall for every four units. He stated that since there were 60 units, the City Code would require 15 parking stalls. Chairman Noyes asked if there was a plan to revisit the visitor parking stalls since it was centralized. Mr. Maass answered that the city recommended that the applicant move some of the parking to the corner so it would be more accessible to other units. Commissioner Soller clarified the zoning changes. He said that the Comprehensive Plan had guided the future of this lot for many years. He said that the Comprehensive Plan sets things in motion, but there might be flexibility in terms of what it allows. He stated that R8 was one permissible re-zoning outcome, but asked if other potential zoning outcomes were allowed within the available zones. Mr. Maass answered that the Comprehensive Plan establishes a range that densities had to fall within. He explained that the Residential Medium Zoning District requires between four and eight units an acre. He said the Comprehensive Plan identifies four zoning districts – RLM, R8, PUDR within the Residential Medium Zoning District. He said that the R8 was one of the zoning districts allowed. Commissioner Soller asked if the city was led by the interests of the land developer if it fell within the Comprehensive Plan requirements. He wanted to understand the confines of the Comprehensive Plan and submitted proposals. Mr. Maass answered that the Comprehensive Plan shows the zoning district options. Once the zoning district is selected based on which zoning districts are eligible, there are minimum standards that need to be met with the zoning district. Chairman Noyes asked if the bike path and sidewalks were being maintained in the plan. Mr. Maass answered that they were in the city’s right-of-way and being maintained. Commissioner Soller asked if the green area was zoned A2. Mr. Maass answered that the land was owned by the city and was a part of the Bluff Creek Overlay District. He stated it had an A2 zoning designation. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 8 Commissioner Soller asked if the other gray areas to the east were part of the MnDOT right-of- way. Mr. Maass confirmed that information. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the other parcels owned by MnDOT in the immediate vicinity could be sold. Mr. Maass said it was his understanding that those parcels were not intended to be sold. The other areas were not seen as developable with the interchanges and heavily wooded areas. Commissioner Soller said he wanted to understand the structure and the process behind the decision. He asked whether there were additional options or if it was a well-designed plan. Mr. Maass said that the project as proposed did not request variances, and it meets the land use parameters and zoning standards. He stated that the city staff prepared findings of fact related to the subdivision and site plan for approval. If the Planning Commission or City Council finds that there is a finding of fact that is inaccurate, they could provide concern. He commented that city staff work hard to ensure accurate findings of fact. Chairman Noyes indicated that there were sixteen letters from the public. Some of the letters were submitted before the changes to the site plan. He reviewed the themes of the letters, including tree removal, parking and traffic, potential declining traffic values, erosion, flooding, lack of a buffer, and removal of green space. He stated there would be a five-minute limit per person. He requested that they state their name and address and speak clearly in the microphone. He requested if the agreement is the same as one previously mentioned, to state the similarity rather than giving detailed information. He said if the information was new, it could be shared. Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. Geoff Wong, 1674 Hemlock Way, voiced appreciation to the Mayor for answering questions to understand the on-site concerns. He said he understood that growth was needed, but was concerned with how it was being done. He discussed the erosion concerns and echoed agreement on the comments from the commissioner. He said that there were a lot of kids in the neighborhood, so he had safety concerns. He stated that there was a huge park to the west of the neighborhood that was utilized by the kids for recreational needs, so the collector road is frequently occupied and crossed. He stated that the traffic was a concern since Avienda was brought to light. He commented that there were concerns about emergency services being able to access the road. He asked if taxpayer money is used to improve the current infrastructure to support this type of neighborhood. He said that the infrastructure or the strain on the city would be impacted, especially if additional neighborhoods like this come up. He suggested a Comprehensive Risk Assessment Plan for the commissioners to understand the uncertainty about who was responsible for different aspects of the drainage. He said a mitigation plan should be fully understood before the site plan was approved. He asked how the 2040 Comprehensive Plan aligned with the city. He commented that Chanhassen was voted as one of the most desirable cities to live in and there was a reason for that, so it would be important to consider what was best for the neighborhood. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 9 Erin Wong, 1674 Hemlock Way, voiced appreciation for the changes to the setback in some areas by Brandl Anderson. She said she did not see changes to the setback on the east side, so some homes are still pretty tight along the property. She proposed a solution to consider single- family homes against the existing single-family homes and then keeping the rest of the property of townhomes. She said that the road would be the buffer and it would be similar to the current neighborhood. She suggested they could also consider duplexes. She said these options would help keep greenspace and the feel of the neighborhood and mitigate the issues of reduced property values. She said that two neighbors moved and had to accept offers of $20,000 to $30,000 less than if the townhomes were not going to be placed in the backyard. She reiterated the traffic concerns by adding 60 townhomes and potentially 120 more cars. She often sees near- misses and has to wait often to cross the street when she is walking her dog. She commented that the trees would take twenty to thirty years for the trees to grow to provide a buffer to the townhomes. Lindsey Button, 1655 Hemlock Way, said that her property line sits approximately 20 feet from the back patio of the 290-foot proposed two-story multi-family housing structure. She commented that the structure was very different from the existing single-family homes. She said it was different to share backyard space with one family than with six families. She thanked Brandl Anderson for listening to their concerns and putting evergreens to create a buffer. She said that there was limited space and the townhouse residents could likely reach out from their patio and touch the evergreens. She commented that trees were too close and did not align with the Comprehensive Plan, which required transitions between different land uses. She said when these natural features were absent, the land use plan allowed for buffer yards with increased setbacks with landscaping and berms to improve the separation of incompatible uses. She said that there should be an orderly setback that makes sense and provided an example of the Lake Susan Development that provided 100 feet of separation between the low-density houses and medium-density houses. She asked for the same consideration when considering the development of their property. She reiterated the concerns of Erin Wong with the traffic. She commented that the road was icy and snowy in the winter and coming down the hill was dangerous, so it was a huge risk for young drivers. She said there was poor visibility on Hemlock Drive which provided additional risks for drivers. She voiced concerns about the influx of traffic with Avienda. She appreciated the discussion of the medium-density designation for the land and reviewed what the Comprehensive Plan stated. She said it would make more sense to be R4 rather than R8 when backing up to single-family homes. She commented that the land was 11.75 acres and 2.5 acres would be road and infrastructure and 2.5 acres would not be developed. She said there would be 10 dwellings per acre which far exceeded the amount allowed by R8 development. She requested to reconsider if it made sense to put 10 houses on one acre behind low-density homes. She requested that the land be redesignated to R4 to provide continuity with the other neighborhoods, provide a sense of order, and decrease traffic concerns to keep kids safe. Kristie Habermaier, 1664 Hemlock Way, stated that she was the original owner of her house and moved in in 2011. She said that she understood the need for growth in the community, but did not believe the current Pioneer Ridge proposal did not match the best interests of the neighborhood or the city. She voiced agreement with the previously stated safety concerns. She discussed the entrance added to Bluff Creek Drive. She said the hill prevented visibility, but the Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 10 trees also did. She commented that there was ice which provided concerns. She stated she was worried about the intersection with the newly licensed drivers and newly permitted drivers in the driveway. She commented that her daughter has an easier time pulling out of the driveway at nighttime since you can see headlights. She thought that the traffic would get worse, especially with the completion of Avienda. She said her house shares a backyard with Becky’s house on Mayapple. She appreciated that they measured her strip of Hemlock and Mayapple, but those were single-family house homes backing up to each other, not townhouses. She commented that the City of Chanhassen was voted as one of the best places to raise a family. She explained that her neighborhood acted as her village as she helped raise a family and was a tight-knit group. She commented that a few neighbors moved because of the development and other families were planning to do the same if the current proposal went through. She voiced devastation about the idea of the neighborhood being ripped apart. She said that a developer told her at a meeting that it could be worse and the townhouses could be three stories, but that did not make her feel better. She voiced appreciation that they listened to concerns and made some changes but expressed the need to consider other options such as what Lindsey Button mentioned. She asked that they reconsider the street that enters and exits on Bluff Creek Drive. She encouraged the Planning Commission to consider their own houses and neighborhoods and if this would be something that they would want. Tedd Homa, 1545 Hemlock Way, commented that his house did not back up to the proposed development. He shared the same concerns already mentioned by other neighbors. He also expressed concerns about safety westbound on Pioneer Trail, which was 50 miles per hour over the overpass. He said that the roads were not in good shape, and you could not be in the right- hand lane without sliding. He worried about increased accidents on Pioneer Trail which would be terrifying for new neighbors. He commented that he would be blocked from turning left on Hemlock Way. He said it would be necessary to consider the proposed traffic from the south to go to the industrial areas, especially the Avienda Group. Cathy Santini, 1625 Hemlock Way, said that she had three traffic questions and issues directed to the city. She asked as you are heading northbound on Bluff Creek Drive, if there would be a right-hand turn lane. She also asked if there would be a left-hand turn lane for southbound traffic. She thought a turn lane would be helpful for the traffic coming through the neighborhood. She discussed the iciness when coming south on Bluff Creek Drive and asked for the city to keep an eye on the intersection to see if it needed to be regraded. There has been a lot of snow and ice that gathered there in the past. She stated there were lights in four directions as you were headed eastbound on Pioneer Trail at the intersection. But if you were headed eastbound, you only get a yellow flashing arrow for turning and there is no green arrow. She suggested a green arrow to have the right-of-way would be helpful. Russell Holmes, 1635 Hemlock Way, commented that his property was in front of the water course. He agreed with the concerns discussed by his neighbors. He agreed with Cathy’s comments about adding turning lanes for traffic. He said that Bluff Creek has unregulated crosswalks and traffic circles, so increased traffic flow puts additional risks. He said Pioneer Trail had traffic lights, but Bluff Creek did not even though they were classified in similar ways. He thanked the Planning Commission for looking at the plan and their concerns regarding traffic and drainage. He stated he heard a lot about water drainage to the west. He said the watercourse Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 11 was horrendous with the erosion and the debris. He voiced concerns about relying on it as a major point of drainage but figuring out the details after the plan was approved. He asked who would maintain the watercourse long term and the agreements with the city to ensure it remains an open drainage site. He appreciates that the developer listened to concerns and added trees as a buffer, but the trees would be small for many years. Mr. Holmes suggested that the northern perimeter should also have trees so that those on the edge of the property would receive the benefit of privacy from the development. He said that the two outlots to the property should become a part of city land to ensure that they remain green space in the future. Glen Shoenberg, 1665 Hemlock Way, said that Chanhassen has had a lot of well-planned growth, but he did not think that this project was well-planned. He commented that the road came out on a hill, which made it difficult to make a left turn onto the development from the north if there was ice on the road. He said that there was a crosswalk further north up the hill to the park, but not everyone utilizes the crosswalk and choose to cross at Hemlock Way. He commented that kids do not understand the risks of crossing the road. He stated that there were sixteen guest parking spaces and no street parking, which was not enough. There was no street parking on Bluff Creek Drive or Pioneer Trail, so he voiced concerns about parking on Hemlock Way and people crossing through his backyard. He voiced concerns about safety such as trespassing. He said that people choose Chanhassen for the thoughtfulness of neighborhood design and green spaces. There was a lack of green, open space in this design. He commented that Chanhassen needed to maintain green space and environmental health and that the proposed development introduces a metropolitan atmosphere. He stated that other townhomes in Chanhassen have increased buffer spaces. He said that the 2040 Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan supports low-density residential development in appropriate areas of the community in such areas that maintain the aesthetic of single-family homes and to create new neighborhoods with similar quality. He said that the plan also requires increased buffer areas for neighborhoods of different densities. He commented that the city needed to ensure the landowner abides by these requirements and urged alternate solutions for the development of the land. He believes that the property met the zoning requirements but not the land-use goals in the Comprehensive Plan. Nancy Gilmore, 1705 Hemlock Way, said that her house backs up to the development. She agreed with the statements from her neighbors. She said today as she pulled onto Bluff Creek, she almost got into a car accident. She stated that the through traffic from Pioneer Trail to Avienda was ridiculous. She said it was difficult to cross the road to the park. She stated that the buffer of small trees would not make a difference. She said that they need to consider respect for the residents who have lived there for years. Christopher Juulke, 1778 Marigold Court, agreed with the statements shared tonight by other residents. He reiterated the safety concern and said that there were no places where the cars stop between the stoplight and the roundabout further down, so cars increase their speed while driving. He asked for additional ideas to slow the traffic and provide safe-crossing for children. Jason Besler, 1704 Hemlock Way, said the development did not directly impact his property. He stated that there were a lot of unanswered questions, so he encouraged the Planning Commission to call a time-out and hold additional discussions. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 12 Glen Shoenberg, 1665 Hemlock Way, spoke again. He said that the traffic proposal said that the grading won’t meet the recommended sight lines for the proposal. Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing. Chairman Noyes said that there were a lot of comments about the traffic study and residents provided valid comments. He recognized that both of the roads were collector roads and he asked what options there were on the roads as it related to safety, such as turn lanes or roundabouts. Mr. Grunig answered that turn lanes were not a part of the project right now, and it was not recommended based on the traffic study. Chairman Noyes asked how to separate the facts from fiction as it relates to traffic and whether there were actions that the city could take to improve the situation. He asked how they were evaluated and implemented. Mr. Grunig said he would love to hear about the safety concerns specifically from residents as he is the chair of the Traffic Safety Committee and can request more enforcement. He stated that Bluff Creek Boulevard was a collector road and is designed to receive a lot of traffic. He commented that there were different ways that the city could decrease speed or improve pedestrian safety. Chairman Noyes said it would be important to review the options based on concerns. Commissioner Schwartz commented on the high usage rates of the adjacent Pioneer Pass Park and said it was an everyday issue to have difficulties crossing the street to get to the park. He asked how someone doing a traffic study could not see these issues, unless they were not accurate. Mr. Maass answered that the traffic study did not make the lived experiences untrue, but the traffic study is a science-based engineering approach to analyze the roadway capacity and design solutions. He commented that proper grading can solve the sight distance issue. The analysis did not require turn lanes, but the neighbors expressed concerns about traffic issues on Bluff Creek Boulevard. He said that these traffic issues could be brought to the city’s Traffic Safety Committee for review. He said there were additional pedestrian safety issues that could be improved by the city that the city could improve when necessary. These improvements are not connected to the development or within the boundaries of the proposed plat. Commissioner Schwartz reiterated if residents follow up with Mr. Grunig, they can be sure that there concerns about traffic on Bluff Creek Boulevard are heard. Mr. Maass answered that he took extensive notes and would take the information to the Traffic Safety Committee to discuss additional improvements. Chairman Noyes asked if potential pedestrian improvements within the road would be a parallel or a serial process to the review of this project. He asked if they could put a hold on the project until the road improvements were made. Mr. Maass answered that the two projects would be separate and were not applicable to the rezoning or the site plan. Commissioner Jobe said if the setback was set, but people were asking to reduce the size of the housing unit or the angle, the Planning Commission could only put it as a request. Mr. Maass answered that they could make it a request but not a requirement. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 13 Commissioner Schwartz clarified that changing the configuration of the development, such as switching to single-family houses, would be outside of the Planning Commission’s role. Mr. Maass confirmed this information unless there were amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or a request by the property owner for a switch in which of the eligible zoning districts was being pursued. Chairman Noyes asked if they were providing feedback about zoning. Mr. Maass said they were providing recommendations on the rezoning, preliminary plat, and site plan. Commissioner Schwartz clarified that the plan meets the criteria, so the discretion to approve or not approve is based on whether it meets the criteria. He commented that since it meets the criteria, they have no choice but to confirm. Mr. Maass confirmed this information. Commissioner Soller asked about the exit onto Bluff Creek Drive and if it was required based on the flow of traffic and how people should enter and exit the new neighborhood, or if it was based on how the developers wanted to plan the neighborhood to meet market demand. He asked if there was an alternative to consider no exit onto Bluff Creek Drive since there were concerns about traffic on Bluff Creek Drive. Mr. Maass answered that access to Bluff Creek and Pioneer Trail was a recommendation of city staff. There was a limitation for cul-de-sacs of 750 feet for purposed of public safety. Anything in excess of 750 feet would require a variance and it was unclear if city staff would support such a request. Commissioner Soller clarified that the exits and entrances were for public safety. Mr. Maass answered that the recommendations for exits and entrances were a right-in and right-out on Pioneer Trail and access to Bluff Creek Boulevard. Commissioner Jobe asked if there was a 100-year flood and if areas were public, the city would service it, but if it was private, the Homeowner’s Association would be responsible. He asked about the triangle point and whether it could be made into public land for a playground or a nature preserve. Mr. Maass responded that the city would own a portion of the land for preservation excluding the pond and the best management practice area. Mr. Seidl voiced appreciation for the stance expressed for the plans to be fully figured out with no questions. He said the stormwater design was complicated and there were a lot of moving parts. He looks through developments through a specific lens to determine whether the plans are far along enough so that he can address reasonable concerns. He said during a preliminary plat review; he is conditioning things that need to be done before a final plat review. The designation of the water feature depends on the final design and if it would be considered private or public. He would not let things move forward from a stormwater perspective unless there were engineering solutions for any possible issues. Commissioner Schwartz asked if a Homeowners Association would be required to maintain a vegetative buffer around the ponds. Mr. Seidl answered that the City Code did not require a buffer around stormwater management features. He said that the wet ponds would not require a Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 14 native buffer, but there were rules and regulations on watercourses that the applicant would need to sort through. Commissioner Soller said that an unanswered question was about the language brought up when planning developments in the Comprehensive Plan, especially with the transition from one zone to another zone. He said that the plan felt slightly in contradiction to the language of the Comprehensive Plan about transitions from one zone to the next. Mr. Maass said that the Pioneer Pass neighborhood was zoned residential low-medium or RLM. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan looked to segmentally organize land use and that medium density residential adjacent to low density residential is an appropriate land use adjacency. He said that an example of an incompatible adjacent land use designation would be heavy industrial. He said that the modified proposal was aligned with the distances of the homes in the area, but recognized the differences between spacing with townhomes and single-family homes. He commented that the buffering area was appropriate and based on city code. Commissioner Jobe asked about privacy and separation. Mr. Maass answered that both evergreen and decisions trees were proposed for buffering and would be six-foot at installation and should grow one to two feet per year. He commented a six-foot tree was less susceptible to various issues when transplanted than larger trees. Commissioner Rosengren said he reviewed the Carver County Community Development Agency’s Housing Marke Study which was recently reviewed by the City Council. He said that the report stated that Chanhassen has a nine-month supply of land to build new houses. He said that the median cost to build a new house in Chanhassen was $800,000 and that 90 percent of the people who work in Chanhassen do not live in Chanhassen. He asked where houses would fit in Chanhassen to meet Carver County expectations. He stated that the concerns were valid and needed to be heard by the city staff, but they would need to consider how to provide different types of housing options for individuals who will move to Chanhassen in the future. He stated it was less of a concern about the zoning and whether it fit into the Comprehensive Plan, but there was a need to adapt and grow as a community while also properly addressing resident concerns. Commissioner Soller stated he questioned whether the City Code made appropriate requirements and whether the design was considered when two different zones were next to each other. He asked if the City Code considered transitions between different districts. Mr. Maass answered that the city had buffer yard requirements and design guidelines for multi-family housing. Commissioner Soller asked if the buffers and setbacks required in an R8 do not change based on the zone it is next to. Mr. Maass indicated that city code outlines the buffering requirements based on adjacent land use. Commissioner Soller said maybe the idea was unheard of in City Planning. Mr. Maass said that the downtown zoning district required a high-density residential adjacent to detached single- family homes, the rear yard setback must match the setback for single-family homes even though it is zoned for downtown designation. He explained that the downtown designation and detached single-family designation were opposite ends of the zoning ordinance in terms of density. He stated that the city could add one between R8 and RLM, but it is not in the City Code today so it Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 15 could not consider that as a variable applicable to the project. He stated that R8 and RLM zoning districts were similar to each other, so it might not be appropriate to mandate the same rear yard setback. He stated that they were not far off from meeting the comparison. Commissioner Schwartz said that Chanhassen has developed the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance appropriately which could be built on in the future. Chairman Noyes said he was not sold on the traffic study. He had trust in the city and that they would investigate issues and consider resolutions. He understood that people had concerns about erosion. He said that he was confident between Mr. Seidl’s team, the developer, and the DNR, the concerns with erosion and water would be addressed. He stated that the builder proposed an adequate buffer. He said that the buffer was not the issue, but that residents did not want townhomes in the area. He stated that the decrease of property values was not because they were townhomes, but because of the loss of green space in the backyard. He commented that the green space would go away no matter how the land was developed. He said that there needed to be further discussions about traffic and it would need to be a parallel process. They would not stop the project because of the traffic. He wanted the City Council to know that there were concerns with the set-up of the roads and there were some solutions that could mitigate the traffic and safety concerns expressed. He said that collector roads were designed to have a lot of traffic on them, but high-volume streets could still be made safer and fit the needs of residents. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the property values go down because the green space was being developed and if the property value differences would be offset since the townhomes would be fairly expensive. Chairman Noyes answered that he was not sure, but it was a good question. Commissioner Soller said that the City Council would need to review the concerns since they have a wider purview. He encouraged them not to stigmatize individuals moving into the townhomes. People tend to treat the neighborhood as their own and treat it respectfully. Chairman Noyes commented that the residents in the townhomes would have common goals of safety for their families. Commissioner Schwartz asked if they wanted the City Council to see their concerns and if they should change the motion or provide comments. Mr. Maass responded that he took copious notes from the meeting tonight and there would be no need to amend the motion. He said that the comments from the public meeting and the meeting minutes would be provided to the City Council. The concerns had been noted and would be addressed at the City Council. Chairman Noyes said the Planning Commission’s job is to make sure the proposals met the land use and zoning designations. The Planning Commission was a recommending body based on those factors. He wanted residents to understand that the commission could not vote no to a project just because of other merits. Commissioner Jobe moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the requested rezoning of the property to R-8 Mixed Medium Density Residential District and recommending Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 16 preliminary plat and site plan approval for a 60-unit townhome development subject to the conditions included in the staff report dated February 12, 2025. The motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1 (Noyes voted Nay) GENERAL BUSINESS: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JANUARY 21, 2025 Commissioner Goff moved, Commissioner Jobe seconded to approve the Chanhassen Planning Commission summary minutes dated January 21, 2025, as presented. All voted in favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Eric Maass, Community Development Director, updated the Commissioners, noting the City Council interviewed architecture firms for the Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center and would make the decision tomorrow. They would then notify the selected firm to move forward. Chairman Noyes asked if anything changed on Avienda. Mr. Maass responded that they were identifying the acreage that the city would buy and platting it out to leave useable outlots on either side for a future hotel. He said he had no other pending applications within Avienda to share at that time. Commissioner Schwartz asked when demolition of the hotel downtown would commence. Mr. Maass answered that the site owners received approval from the Watershed District with conditions. They are working on those conditions for final approval from the Watershed District until they move forward. There were a few things that needed to be done before taking down the building, but the building would be demolished into itself and then debris cleared. He stated that the cinema demolition would take a month and then they would move forward to the hotel. Commissioner Jobe asked if there are any changes planned for the transit facility. Mr. Maass said he was not aware of any changes to the transit facility. Commissioner Soller asked if there was a specific date for the removal of the cinema so residents could pay final respects. Mr. Maass answered they made the public aware of the project via communication channels several times, but they do not have a specific date, but it is likely soon. Commissioner Schwartz suggested sharing the demolition date with the local media and the museum to capture the last hurrah of the mural and structures. Mr. Maass responded that the Historical Society already removed items from the hotel and High Timber Lounge. Planning Commission Minutes – February 18, 2025 17 Commissioner Schwartz suggested that the Paisley Park museum could do photography for historical purposes of the mural. Chairman Noyes asked if there were any agenda items for the next meeting on March 4. Mr. Maass responded that the Comprehensive Plan allows for density bonuses for the development of affordable housing. The attorney said that there needs to be specific parameters in the code for this to be utilized. The City Council would discuss this in their work session and then the Planning Commission would review the rough draft and provide feedback. Commissioner Soller asked about the current state of the cannabis ordinance. Mr. Maass said that it was on the City Council agenda for Monday evening on February 24. The City Council was discussing buffering of cannabis, alcohol, and tobacco sales from residential treatment facilities and schools. The City Attorney recommended having a baseline ordinance in place. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the Civic Campus construction. Mr. Maass responded that city staff were on the second floor of the new building for a tour, and it was moving along well. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION: None. OPEN DISCUSSION: None. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Schwartz moved, Commissioner Soller seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Eric Maass Community Development Director From: Laurie Ambrose Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 9:11 PM To: McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov> Cc: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Concerns about Pioneer Ridge Development Dear Jerry, Haley, Mark, and Josh, I hope this letter flnds you well. I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed construction of Pioneer Ridge in Chanhassen. While I appreciate the city’s dedication to providing diverse housing options, I believe that this development confiicts with Chanhassen’s vision and poses signiflcant challenges to the community, environment, and overall character of the area. The City of Chanhassen’s Comprehensive Plan sets a clear vision for maintaining low- density residential developments in appropriate areas. It emphasizes preserving the aesthetic of existing single-family homes and creating new neighborhoods of similar character and quality. Squeezing these townhouses in right next to existing single family housing neighborhood would contradict this vision and introducing medium-density housing that is incompatible with the surrounding area disrupts the community’s established identity. As I understand it, the city also highlights the importance of creating transition zones between land uses, “using natural features or buffer zones with increased setbacks, landscaping, and berming.” No such transition is planned for this project, further highlighting its inconsistency with the city’s stated goals. I can’t imagine the view the people who back up to this area would have and the detriment it would bring to the value of the homes in the Pioneer Pass neighborhood. It is hard to understand why the city would approve a re-zoning request that would immediately decrease the value and enjoyment of the homes of several Chanhassen residents who have been homeowners in the community for over a decade. One of the most troubling aspects of the proposed development is its environmental impact. The site in question currently serves as a sanctuary for wildlife, including deer, pheasants, foxes, turkeys, and coyotes. This area is a vital corridor for wildlife, with animals frequently seen crossing the land in the mornings and evenings. Destroying this habitat would not only displace these species but also erode the natural beauty that Chanhassen has committed to preserving. The Comprehensive Plan explicitly states that housing developments should respect the natural environment and strive to preserve wooded areas, existing vegetation, and wildlife habitats. Proceeding with this project would directly violate those principles. Especially when you take into consideration that Avienda and the newly approved community center have/will displace wildlife from a large space on the immediate other side of this area. Traffic concerns also cannot be overlooked. New developments should avoid funneling high traffic volumes through residential neighborhoods. The addition of an R-8 medium- density development alongside Avienda and a new community center will undoubtedly increase traffic through the existing neighborhood and next to Pioneer Pass Park, posing safety risks to the many children who enjoy this area. As a resident of Pioneer Pass, it is already mind-blowing to see how hard it is to safely cross the road from the park to Mayapple Pass as drivers consistently pay no attention to pedestrians and drive well above the speed limit. I know we both have goals to maintain the community’s character and preserve its natural assets. Allowing this project to proceed would set a troubling precedent that undermines the very principles guiding Chanhassen’s growth and development. In light of these concerns, I urge you to reconsider approving this development or the re- zoning of this land. It is essential to prioritize projects that align with the city’s long-term vision and respect the environment, wildlife, and character of existing neighborhoods. I trust that the City of Chanhassen will honor the commitments outlined in its Comprehensive Plan and seek alternative locations or solutions that better serve the community as a whole. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I appreciate all you do as a representative of the members of our community! Sincerely, Laurie Ambrose - 1515 Hemlock Way, Chanhassen Laurie Ambrose From: Nathan Button < Sent: Friday, January 24, 2025 4:19 PM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com <lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com> Subject: Pioneer Pass Chanhassen City Council – I live in Pioneer Pass neighborhood near the proposed new development, and would like to express my deep concerns about this project as it’s currently laid out. Currently, the back of our house overlooks a beautiful, wooded area, which would be eliminated by this project. Although I hate to lose my view, this is not my biggest concern. Moving into this house, we understood that the land behind us could one day be developed, and I work for Caterpillar, so I understand the need for development and progress. However, when we moved here (about 1.5 years ago), we chose Chanhassen after hearing so many great things about the town and seeing how well the town has been planned and the care that’s been taken to maintain the feel and atmosphere. We’re originally from Iowa, but have lived in many places around the world in the past 20 years, and one thing we really appreciate about the Midwest is the intention that goes into city planning. For instance, in many parts of the South, zoning appropriately isn’t the priority that it is in the Midwest, and the look and feel of many towns there suffer as a result. Moving here and exploring Chanhassen, it was apparent that this is not the case here. Although there are medium and even higher density areas in town (which is important), there are appropriate transitions between them which helps the town feel organized and maintains the value of the properties. In fact, in our own area of town, we have medium density housing across the park from us, but due to the park and the road the transition is reasonable and maintains an organized feel to the area. That leads into one of the serious concerns we have about this new planned proposal. Without any reasonable transition between them, this project would build medium density housing within a very short space from our house (nearest building will be 25 feet from our property line). This will lead to exactly the kind of disorganized feel that I described in other parts of the country and will certainly have a detrimental impact on our property values. I understand and believe that part of your job as the city council is to help grow this community, including a variety of housing types, but I also believe it’s a part of your responsibility to protect the property of the current residents. I don’t object to building on this land, but I do think it should be consistent with the current zoning since there is no natural transition between them (like a road, park, or some distance with forest). Secondly, the proposed project includes the construction of a new road that will fiow onto Bluff Creek Drive between Hemlock and Pioneer Trail. The position of this road is on a hill at a curve not far from a busy intersection. A quick drive up Bluff Creek would make it apparent that this is an unsafe place for a new intersection. Additionally, the number of proposed homes in this development will add signiflcant traffic to an already busy residential road with a lot of children in the neighborhood. Again, I’m not opposed to developing this land (though I’d love to see it stay undeveloped), but I would request that this land be zoned to something consistent with the adjacent zoning. Obviously, this will beneflt your constituents in my neighborhood, but I believe it beneflts the town as a whole. It maintains the sense of order and planning that currently exists and will help give confldence to other current and future residents that the city works to protect the community that they are investing in. Regards, Nate Button From: Lindsey Button Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2025 6:53 AM To: lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com <lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com>; Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Pioneer Ridge Proposed Development Dear Elise, Jerry, Haley, Mark, Josh and Eric, My name is Lindsey Button. I am a resident of Chanhassen and I live at 1655 Hemlock Way in the Pioneer Pass neighborhood. I am writing to you today to seek your help regarding a proposed development project that will occur within 20 feet of my backyard as well as many of my neighbors on our street. Our family moved to Chanhassen from out of state. We looked at many different towns in the area and settled on Chanhassen due to its’ national recognition as a great place to live. We have school aged children who have beneflted greatly from the excellent schools in Chanhassen. We appreciate many things about Chanhassen whether it be the small town feel, the vast network of parks and trails, the focus on preserving natural habitat, and we resonate with Chanhassen’s vision to be a community for life, a place we can call home and enjoy living in. When we heard about the development plans of Brandl Anderson to build Pioneer Ridge, a medium density development consisting of 60 homes on 11 acres of land, we were very concerned. This proposal is concerning for many reasons, which I will identify below. The City of Chanhassen’s comprehensive plan lays out in, great detail, the vision going forward for the city. It states, “Chanhassen desires to support low density residential developments in appropriate areas of the community in such a manner as to maintain the aesthetic of the existing single family homes and to create new neighborhoods of similar character and quality. The proposed plan of Pioneer Ridge is an R-8 medium density housing plan with a proposed 60 homes in multi-dwelling structures. The site map and initial layout plans indicate that there would only be a distance of 20 feet in some areas from current residents property line and the physical structure of the buildings. This does not meet the City of Chanhassen’s stated vision of “maintaining aesthetics of the existing single family homes” nor “create new neighborhoods of similar character and quality.” The City of Chanhassen’s comprehensive plan also states that, “Transitions should be created between different land uses. The more incompatible the land uses, the more important the transition zones. Natural features should be used to create transitions between incompatible uses. When these natural features are absent the Land Use Plan supports the creation of buffer yards with increased set backs containing landscaping and berming to improve the separation of incompatible uses. The Pioneer Ridge proposal does not have a transition zone between the two vastly different zoned neighborhoods, nor is there a natural feature, berm, or landscaping indicated on the current plans. The city has made it clear that there must be extra space between the buildings or another natural feature to maintain the aesthetic of the already existing single family homes. The ordinance states 20 feet set back but given the fact that these are two completely different Zones-R-8 vs R-4, it would beneflt both neighborhoods to have a larger transition space with landscaping to create privacy for both neighborhoods. Chanhassen’s comprehensive plan also states that development should be planned to avoid running high traffic volumes through residential neighborhoods. Bluff Creek Drive runs along the west side of Pioneer Pass (my neighborhood), a park, and many more houses before it reaches Audubon Rd. With an addition of 60 new homes, this would drastically increase the amount of traffic on Bluff Creek. The access road to the neighborhood is also concerning as it would intersect with Bluff Creek, an already busy road with many blind corners. This particular access road would come out on a hill, where visibility of oncoming cars would make it difficult to safely turn in and out of the development. With the park across the street, children from the neighborhood frequently cross at the cross walks to get to the park. With signiflcantly increased traffic, there would be increased risk to children and families. My flnal concern is environmental. I have always appreciated how Chanhassen has worked hard to create green space, preserve trees and habitats and maintained clean lakes and creeks. The city’s comprehensive plan states, “Housing development will respect the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate needs of variety of housing types.” “Chanhassen is committed to increasing the overall tree cover of Chanhassen.” “Chanhassen will preserve wooded areas and natural habitat, existing vegetation, and plant communities wherever possible.” Chanhassen’s commitment to preserving our green spaces and natural habitat does not seem in line with what the developershave planned. They plan to eliminate hundreds of trees of many varieties. They will also destroy the natural habitat for an enormous amount of wildlife that reside in this land, turkeys, foxes, owls, deer, just to name a few that I have seen. Whenever vegetation is destroyed, there is always an environmental problem of soil erosion and sedimentation which the city has stated they will work to minimize throughout Chanhassen. The land is on a hill and all of the erosion will fiow downstream to the creeks and lakes adjacent to the proposed development which will be harmful to both the environment as well as wildlife. I understand this is a lot, but our concerns are also many. Please understand we are not opposed to the city’s vision for development and providing homes of various price points and types for the many types of people who choose Chanhassen as their home. We have two main goals. 1)Approve the proposed development land for an R-4 Low Density Zoning (not R-8) which allows (according to City of Chanhassen Land Use) 1.2-4 units per acre. This would create more space to make a suitable transition spacebetween neighborhoods that would maintain the aesthetic of the current neighborhood, while also allowing opportunities for development of smaller multi family dwellings, and which would lessen the environmental and traffic impact. 2)We invite you to come see the proposed land and see flrsthand how the houses, neighborhood, and environment will be affected by the proposed R-8 development. We would warmly invite you at a time that is convenient for you to visit our neighborhood. I know many of us would really appreciate meeting you and showing you why we love Pioneer Pass and Chanhassen. I can be reached by my email: r or cell: ) to arrange a meeting. I thank you kindly for your time and appreciate your service to our city. I look forward to meeting with you at your convenience. Best Regards, Lindsey Button From: segroskreutz Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2025 5:13 PM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com <lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com> Subject: Pioneer Ridge Proposal I'm writing to express my concern about the proposed Pioneer Ridge development. You are seriously and negatively impacting the values of all homes in this neighborhood by adding rows of townhomes only 25 ft off the existing property lines. This is a family neighborhood where children run free. Property lines are blurred; especially in the backyard area. By adding this much new housing, safety will be a huge factor. There will be extra vehicles on the road and increased cars parked on the streets. Speaking of safety, there is already a blind curve on Bluff Creek. It is near an area where children cross the street to access the park. I fear that by adding more cars, especially with the Avienda development down the road, this will only get worse. And adding a driveway to access the new neighborhood off of Bluff Creek will only increase an already icy intersection. This is also a neighborhood full of wildlife. The location of the new housing will seriously alter the natural landscape. I understand that houses will be built no matter what the neighborhood thinks, but we hope you at least reconsider the placement and size of this development. Sincerely, Sarah Groskreutz 1615 Hemlock Way From: Kristi Habermaier Sent: Monday, January 20, 2025 3:01 PM To: Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Pioneer Ridge Development Hello, My name is Kristi Habermaier. I have been a resident of Pioneer Pass in Chanhassen since 2011. I am writing in regards to the Pioneer Ridge development proposal. I was not able to make the info session last week at the Rec Center due to my work schedule. My husband attended as well as many of my neighbors. After talking with my husband and neighbors, I have some concerns about the proposal. I understand the land has been sold to a developer and it's zoned for residential. However, I do not believe this proposal is in our neighborhood's best interest (or the city's for that matter). My main concern is safety. I have major concerns about adding an entry/exit point to the new development onto Bluff Creek Drive between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way. Bluff Creek Drive has seen way more traffic over the past few years than it used to, and it'll only increase once the Avienda construction area is complete. It can be quite difficult to take a left or right onto Bluff Creek from Hemlock as it is now. Many cars drive way too fast past the park and up the hill as well. Visibility is reduced due to the hill and also the trees planted along Bluff Creek. This intersection already scares me. I have a new teen driver and I worry about her being able to safely turn onto Bluff Creek. This is especially tough M- F in the morning hours and later afternoon/evening when kids and parents are commuting to/from school and work. There are also several bus stops on Bluff Creek. The hill heading up Bluff Creek also can get quite icy in the winter. I worry about cars trying to pull into/out of the new development in the winter. My house doesn't back up against the new development. I am on the opposite side of the street. I feel for my neighbors who will have a house that backs up to the townhouses. I don't understand why we need to pack in so many townhouses in such a small area other than to just make money. My neighbor was told by one of the developers, "It could be worse." Yes, it could be worse. I am happy three story townhouses aren't being built, but that doesn't make me feel better. Are there any other single family home developments in Chanhassen where single families (ranging from 500-700k) have townhouses that close in their backyard? It's not fair, and it's dropping home values. The plans I saw have minimal trees between the flrst row of townhouses and most of the Hemlock houses. Why can't we build less townhomes and give our residents on Hemlock the privacy they deserve? The city of Chanhassen has been celebrated as one of the best places to raise a family. I absolutely love living in Chanhassen, but every time I think about this new development it saddens me. It takes a village to raise a family, and my neighborhood in Pioneer Pass is my village. My neighbors are my family, especially the strip of Hemlock being affected. They've helped raise my kids (and continue to do so). We are a tight-knit group. One family, pillars of the neighborhood and original owners, have already sold their house and moved in November due to this new development. I know several more families planning to do the same thing if this proposal goes through. It's devastating and overwhelming to think about my neighborhood (my family) being ripped apart. The message I got from my neighbors who attended last week's information session was that the city "doesn't care." Again, I recognize this land has been sold and will be developed. I ask that you don't accept this current proposal. There needs to be less townhouses with more space between the houses that back up to the townhouses. The entry/exit points into the townhouse area need to be relooked at for safety. Adding a street that enters/exits onto Bluff Creek is not safe. Concerned homeowner, Kristi Habermaier 1664 Hemlock Way Original owner since 2011 From: Aaron Pierce Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 8:17 AM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com <lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com> Subject: Concerns regarding Pioneer Ridge development Dear All, I hope you are having a great week. My name is Aaron Pierce and my family and I live on 1695 Hemlock Way. I am writing to express my concerns regarding the Pioneer Ridge Development proposal in Chanhassen, MN. While I understand that development is essential for the growth of our city, I have several concerns about this speciflc proposal: Safety: •The plan to build 60 townhomes in a small area adjacent to existing single-family homes raises signiflcant safety concerns. •Increased traffic: The hill on Bluff Creek between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way is already busy and has a blind curve. Adding another intersection to this tight area (that also gets very icy in the winter) would be a huge hazard. •With the new Avienda development traffic also using Bluff Creek as an exit/entrance, there needs to be a much more thorough traffic study done. •Adding potentially 120 additional cars daily will signiflcantly increase the risk of accidents, both vehicular and pedestrian as there is a park across Bluff Creek from the Pioneer Pass neighborhood that sees many children and adults crossing daily. Parking: •There are already parking issues in the townhomes adjacent to Pioneer Pass, with insufficient parking spaces leading to many cars being parked on the street. •There is a potential for townhome residents and guests to park on Hemlock Way and walk through yards to access their homes. Land Erosion and Flooding: •This is already a problem in Pioneer Pass, with homes along the ridge experiencing erosion. •Water runoff from the new townhomes could exacerbate fiooding issues for existing single-family homes. Impact on Existing Home Values: •The proximity of townhome structures to existing single-family homes could negatively impact property values. •The current proposal of 3 story townhomes backing directly up to single family homes has signiflcant implications for property values. •The removal of trees that currently serve as a buffer between the townhomes and existing homes would further diminish the neighborhood's aesthetic appeal. I recognize that the land has been sold and will be developed, which is beneflcial for Chanhassen's growth. However, it is crucial to consider the impact on existing residents and maintain the character of our neighborhood. I propose that the development be modifled to include single-family homes or detached villas instead of rows of townhomes. This change would better align with the beauty and feel of our existing neighborhood. We would like to arrange a meeting with the developer, city council, city planner, and residents of Pioneer Pass neighborhood to discuss these concerns and explore possible alternatives. It would be helpful for the city representatives to see the site in person to really explain and demonstrate our concerns. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerly, Aaron Pierce From: Emily Newman Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 10:05 PM To: lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com <lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Concerns Regarding Pioneer Ridge Development Proposal Dear City/County Officials, I hope you’re having a great Friday! My name is Emily Newman, and I live on Hemlock Way. I’m writing to share my concerns about the proposed Pioneer Ridge Development. While I understand the importance of growth, I have several issues with this plan: Safety Concerns: • Traffic & Accessibility: Adding 60 townhomes near existing single-family homes could increase traffic and create safety risks. The hill on Bluff Creek between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way is already busy and has a blind curve. Adding another intersection in this area, especially one that’s icy in winter, could be dangerous. • Increased Traffic: With the nearby Avienda development also adding traffic to Bluff Creek, the area could see up to 120 more cars daily. This could increase the risk of accidents, especially with a park across Bluff Creek where children and pedestrians cross regularly. • Traffic Study: I recommend a more thorough traffic study to assess the safety impacts. Removing the Bluff Creek entrance from the development could help alleviate some of these issues. Parking Issues: • There is already a parking shortage in the townhomes near Pioneer Pass, and many cars are parked on the street. If more people park on Hemlock Way and walk through yards to access their homes, it could disrupt the neighborhood. Environmental Concerns: • Erosion & Flooding: Erosion is already an issue for homes along the ridge in Pioneer Pass. Runoff from the new townhomes could worsen fiooding problems for nearby homes. • Tree Removal: The removal of trees that currently serve as a buffer between the proposed development and existing homes could increase erosion and affect the neighborhood’s visual appeal. Impact on Property Values: • The proposed three-story townhomes backing directly onto single-family homes could lower property values and change the neighborhood’s character. • Losing trees and green space would further detract from the beauty of the area and likely harm property values. Proposed Solution: While I understand the need for development, I believe a better solution would be to replace the townhomes with single-family homes or detached villas. This would better match the character of the neighborhood. Request for a Meeting: I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with the developer, city council members, city planners, and other concerned residents to discuss these issues further. A site visit by city representatives would be helpful to better understand and address these concerns. Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you and working together to flnd a solution that beneflts everyone. Sincerely, Emily Newman From: Heather Wendt Sent: Sunday, December 8, 2024 10:00 AM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com <lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com> Subject: Pioneer Ridge Development Concerns Dear All, My name is Heather Wendt, and I live on Marigold Court in Chanhassen. I am writing to express my concerns regarding the Pioneer Ridge Development proposal. While I understand that development is essential for the growth of our city, I have several concerns about this speciflc proposal: Safety: • The plan to build 60 townhomes in a small area adjacent to existing single-family homes raises signiflcant safety concerns. • Increased traffic: The hill on Bluff Creek between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way is already busy and has a blind curve. Adding another intersection to this tight area (that also gets very icy in the winter) would be a huge hazard. • With the new Avienda development traffic also using Bluff Creek as an exit/entrance, there needs to be a much more thorough traffic study done. • Adding potentially 120 additional cars daily will signiflcantly increase the risk of accidents, both vehicular and pedestrian as there is a park across Bluff Creek from the Pioneer Pass neighborhood that sees many children and adults crossing daily. Parking: • There are already parking issues in the townhomes adjacent to Pioneer Pass, with insufficient parking spaces leading to many cars being parked on the street. • There is a potential for townhome residents and guests to park on Hemlock Way and walk through yards to access their homes. Land Erosion and Flooding: • This is already a problem in Pioneer Pass, with homes along the ridge experiencing erosion. • Water runoff from the new townhomes could exacerbate fiooding issues for existing single-family homes. Impact on Existing Home Values: • The proximity of townhome structures to existing single-family homes could negatively impact property values. • The current proposal of 3 story townhomes backing directly up to single family homes has signiflcant implications for property values. • The removal of trees that currently serve as a buffer between the townhomes and existing homes would further diminish the neighborhood's aesthetic appeal. I recognize that the land has been sold and will be developed, which is beneflcial for Chanhassen's growth. However, it is crucial to consider the impact on existing residents and maintain the character of our neighborhood. I propose that the development be modifled to include single-family homes or detached villas instead of rows of townhomes. This change would better align with the beauty and feel of our existing neighborhood. We would like to arrange a meeting with the developer, city council, city planner, and residents of Pioneer Pass neighborhood to discuss these concerns and explore possible alternatives. It would be helpful for the city representatives to see the site in person to really explain and demonstrate our concerns. Regards, Heather Wendt From: Kristyn Vickman Sent: Friday, December 6, 2024 11:38:59 AM To: Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com <lisa@lisaforcarvercounty.com> Subject: Pioneer Ridge Development Hello, My name is Kristyn Vickman, and I live on Hemlock Way in Chanhassen. I am writing to express my concerns regarding the Pioneer Ridge Development proposal in Chanhassen (adjacent to my neighborhood). While I understand that development is essential for the growth of our city, I have several concerns about this speciflc proposal: Safety: • The plan to build 60 townhomes in a small area adjacent to existing single-family homes raises signiflcant safety concerns. • Increased traffic: The hill on Bluff Creek between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way is already busy and has a blind curve. Adding another intersection to this tight area (that also gets very icy in the winter) would be a huge hazard. • With the new Avienda development traffic also using Bluff Creek as an exit/entrance, there needs to be a much more thorough traffic study done. • Adding potentially 120 additional cars daily will signiflcantly increase the risk of accidents, both vehicular and pedestrian as there is a park across Bluff Creek from the Pioneer Pass neighborhood that sees many children and adults crossing daily. Impact on Existing Home Values: • The proximity of townhome structures to existing single-family homes could negatively impact property values. • The current proposal of 3 story townhomes backing directly up to single family homes has signiflcant implications for property values. • The removal of trees that currently serve as a buffer between the townhomes and existing homes would further diminish the neighborhood's aesthetic appeal. • The proposed set-backs for the townhomes to the single family homes are far too short. The existing homes deserve to have a larger buffer in addition to landscaping between the developments. Land Erosion and Flooding: • This is already a problem in Pioneer Pass, with homes along the ridge experiencing erosion. • Water runoff from the new townhomes could exacerbate fiooding issues for existing single-family homes. I recognize that the land has been sold and will be developed, which is beneflcial for Chanhassen's growth. However, it is crucial to consider the impact on existing residents and maintain the character of our neighborhood. We would like to arrange a meeting with the developer, city council, city planner, and residents of Pioneer Pass neighborhood to discuss these concerns and explore possible alternatives. It would be helpful for the city representatives to see the site in person to really explain and demonstrate our concerns. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Kristyn Vickman Realtor® I Edina Realty 612.227.0009 From: Katie Newman Sent: Friday, December 6, 2024 10:31 AM To: lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com <lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Concerns Regarding Pioneer Ridge Development Proposal Dear City & County Officials, Happy Friday! My name is Katie Newman, and I am a resident of Hemlock Way. My family and I moved here from Eden Prairie in 2022 and have fallen in love with the Chanhassen community. I am reaching out today to share my concerns about the proposed Pioneer Ridge Development in Chanhassen. While I understand that growth and development are important for our city’s progress, I have several speciflc concerns regarding this proposal: Safety Concerns: • Traffic and Accessibility: The plan to add 60 townhomes near existing single-family homes raises signiflcant safety issues. The hill on Bluff Creek, between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way, already experiences heavy traffic and has a blind curve. Introducing another intersection in this area—especially one that tends to get icy in the winter—could create a dangerous situation. • Increased Traffic Volume: The nearby Avienda development is expected to increase traffic on Bluff Creek, which already serves as a primary route for local residents. With up to 120 additional cars daily, the risk of accidents, both vehicular and pedestrian, could increase, particularly with a park across Bluff Creek that is frequented by children and pedestrians. • Traffic Study: Given the anticipated increase in traffic, I believe a more thorough traffic study should be conducted to ensure safety for all. I see many of these issues resolving with the elimination of the Bluff Creek entrance to the planned development. Parking Issues: • Current Parking Shortage: The townhomes adjacent to Pioneer Pass are already experiencing parking challenges, with many vehicles being parked on the street due to a lack of available spaces. • Impact on Hemlock Way: There is concern that future residents and guests may park on Hemlock Way and walk through yards to access their homes, further disrupting the neighborhood. Environmental Concerns: • Land Erosion and Flooding: Erosion is already an issue in Pioneer Pass, particularly for homes along the ridge. The water runoff from new townhomes could worsen fiooding problems for existing homes in the area. • Environmental Impact: The removal of trees that currently act as a buffer between the proposed development and existing homes may exacerbate both erosion and visual disruption. Impact on Property Values: • Proximity of Townhomes: The proposed three-story townhomes backing directly onto single-family homes could negatively affect property values. The development’s height and density may also alter the neighborhood’s aesthetic appeal and overall character. • Loss of Green Space: The loss of trees, which currently provide a natural buffer, could further detract from the beauty of the neighborhood and potentially diminish property values. Proposed Solution: While I recognize the value of development for the city’s growth, it is important to balance this with the needs and concerns of current residents. I would like to propose an alternative to the current development plan—one that includes single-family homes or detached villas rather than rows of townhomes. This change would better align with the character and aesthetic of the surrounding area. Request for Meeting: I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with the developer, city council members, city planners, and other concerned residents to discuss these issues in more detail. It would be incredibly helpful for city representatives to visit the site in person so they can better understand and address the concerns raised by the community. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response and to the possibility of working together to flnd a solution that beneflts everyone. Sincerely, Katie Newman From: Katie Newman Sent: Friday, January 17, 2025 10:01 PM To: lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com <lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com>; Schubert, Haley <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; McDonald, Jerry <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; Kimber, Josh <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; von Oven, Mark <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Re: Concerns Regarding Pioneer Ridge Development Proposal Hi all - I got the opportunity to attend the meeting held by Brandl on Tuesday and it raised some new concerns we’d like you all to note: 1. they mentioned having to move the current sidewalk along Pioneer to make room for their development. This sidewalk is already quite close to the road and moving it even closer is bound to pose some safety risks. 2. Removing all but one existing trees between the proposed development and the current Pioneer Pass neighborhood is eliminating all sense of privacy. 3. Entrance off Bluff Creek to new development poses safety risks. They stated they did “traffic studies” but didn’t elaborate on how they will ensure safety. This road gets extremely slippery in the winter and with it being a blind curve, I am highly concerned for auto accidents as well as pedestrian safety. 4. The Pioneer Pass city park is already overwhelmed with traffic and adding another 120+ residence will further overwhelm this resource. 5. I understand this is land that will be developed on but it is sad to see a wildlife sanctuary get destroyed by this. There are many, many animals that use this space and we will be destroying their homes. I appreciate you hearing my concerns and look forward to continuing the conversation. Katie Newman From: Katie Newman < Sent: Friday, December 6, 2024 10:31:37 AM To: lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com <lisa@LisaforCarverCounty.com>; hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov <hschubert@chanhassenmn.gov>; jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov <jmcdonald@chanhassenmn.gov>; jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov <jkimber@chanhassenmn.gov>; mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov <mvonoven@chanhassenmn.gov>; eryan@chanhassenmn.gov <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>; emaass@chanhassenmn.gov <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Concerns Regarding Pioneer Ridge Development Proposal Dear City & County Officials, Happy Friday! My name is Katie Newman, and I am a resident of Hemlock Way. My family and I moved here from Eden Prairie in 2022 and have fallen in love with the Chanhassen community. I am reaching out today to share my concerns about the proposed Pioneer Ridge Development in Chanhassen. While I understand that growth and development are important for our city’s progress, I have several speciflc concerns regarding this proposal: Safety Concerns: • Traffic and Accessibility: The plan to add 60 townhomes near existing single-family homes raises signiflcant safety issues. The hill on Bluff Creek, between Pioneer Trail and Hemlock Way, already experiences heavy traffic and has a blind curve. Introducing another intersection in this area—especially one that tends to get icy in the winter—could create a dangerous situation. • Increased Traffic Volume: The nearby Avienda development is expected to increase traffic on Bluff Creek, which already serves as a primary route for local residents. With up to 120 additional cars daily, the risk of accidents, both vehicular and pedestrian, could increase, particularly with a park across Bluff Creek that is frequented by children and pedestrians. • Traffic Study: Given the anticipated increase in traffic, I believe a more thorough traffic study should be conducted to ensure safety for all. I see many of these issues resolving with the elimination of the Bluff Creek entrance to the planned development. Parking Issues: • Current Parking Shortage: The townhomes adjacent to Pioneer Pass are already experiencing parking challenges, with many vehicles being parked on the street due to a lack of available spaces. • Impact on Hemlock Way: There is concern that future residents and guests may park on Hemlock Way and walk through yards to access their homes, further disrupting the neighborhood. Environmental Concerns: • Land Erosion and Flooding: Erosion is already an issue in Pioneer Pass, particularly for homes along the ridge. The water runoff from new townhomes could worsen fiooding problems for existing homes in the area. • Environmental Impact: The removal of trees that currently act as a buffer between the proposed development and existing homes may exacerbate both erosion and visual disruption. Impact on Property Values: • Proximity of Townhomes: The proposed three-story townhomes backing directly onto single-family homes could negatively affect property values. The development’s height and density may also alter the neighborhood’s aesthetic appeal and overall character. • Loss of Green Space: The loss of trees, which currently provide a natural buffer, could further detract from the beauty of the neighborhood and potentially diminish property values. Proposed Solution: While I recognize the value of development for the city’s growth, it is important to balance this with the needs and concerns of current residents. I would like to propose an alternative to the current development plan—one that includes single-family homes or detached villas rather than rows of townhomes. This change would better align with the character and aesthetic of the surrounding area. Request for Meeting: I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with the developer, city council members, city planners, and other concerned residents to discuss these issues in more detail. It would be incredibly helpful for city representatives to visit the site in person so they can better understand and address the concerns raised by the community. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response and to the possibility of working together to flnd a solution that beneflts everyone. Sincerely, Katie Newman From: Wong, Erin < Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2025 10:51 AM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov> Cc: Hokkanen, Laurie <lhokkanen@chanhassenmn.gov>; Howley, Charles <chowley@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: RE: {External} Re: {External} Re: Pioneer Ridge Good Morning Eric and Elise, I hope you have/had a wonderful long weekend! I’m following up on this email chain as I attended the Brandl Anderson open house on Tuesday which I really appreciated them having, but I sense there is little room for community input or proposed changes (although I did appreciate Eric Maass providing the opportunity to list what we are concerned about and am hopeful the city will take our concerns into consideration). I am not happy with the current proposal and would appreciate your consideration of my concerns: When we voiced our concerns with how close the buildings will be to existing single family homes and asked if they could consider putting single family homes there, they said that it’s the city’s requirement they need to meet and wouldn’t be able to meet it if they moved the proposed rows of townhomes further from existing single family homes, and they deflnitely could not do single family homes and meet the requirement. From what I understand, this was zoned this way in 2020, but I don’t recall residents being made aware of this. Per your response below, they just need to have 4 homes per acre, but they pointed at the city requirement to say they couldn’t do it. They also said they could have packed even more homes in and they didn’t (which felt very dismissive of our concerns as if we should be happy with the current proposal as it could have been worse). •Is this truly a city requirement that Chanhassen is required to hold fast to, or is this something that could be revised? I also asked if there were any examples of rows of town homes built directly behind existing single family homes as I have been looking as I drive through Chanhassen, Chaska, and Eden Prairie and I haven’t seen any. They flrst said, there are townhomes everywhere in the city, this is no different, but I pointed out that I haven’t seen any single-family homes with townhomes in their back yard. They were unable to provide me with any examples. I am concerned that this will decrease home values signiflcantly, ruin the look and feel of our neighborhood, increase traffic signiflcantly, have the potential for visitors to park on our street (Hemlock Way) and walk through yards to get to the townhomes, and increase accidents (along with all the other concerns I have also voiced). I also asked how many renters will be allowed and they said 1 per building which means they could potentially have 25% renters. Renters are not permanent residents and typically do not care for their property the same as someone who owns their property, so I have concerns with this as well (I have personal experience with this from when I lived in a townhome for 7 years as well as my mom’s current experience in her townhome in Chanhassen as she has a rental unit next door. Her association actually dropped the number of allowed renters due to issues). •MAIN ASK: I would appreciate it if a representative from the City Council, or either of you would be willing to meet myself and potentially other neighbors to view the proposed development location in the next couple weeks so that we can show you our concerns visually and in person. How would I go about scheduling this? I assume the city council meeting will be too late to discuss concerns so I would appreciate if this could be scheduled before that meeting. Some other questions I have: •How will the citizens of Chanhassen know our concerns are being addressed? •What avenues of input do we have? •Would a petition be necessary in order to be heard? •Could we consider a similar zoning to the neighborhood off Pioneer Trail in Eden Prairie that faces Lake Riley? This is also a small sliver of land and has two rows of single family homes with plenty of room between. This could keep with the look and feel of this neighborhood and reduce the chance of lowered home values. I hope you have a wonderful day and thank you for your consideration. Kind Regards, Erin Merry Christmas and Happy Holiday to you and your families. Nancy and I live on Hemlock Way in Pioneer Pass. We are writing to express our concern regarding the Pioneer Ridge Development proposal in Chanhassen, MN. We understand the property has been sold to Brandl Anderson and a new townhouse development is proposed to be built soon. The Pioneer Pass homeowners, and especially those that butt up against the new development property, knew one day, this beautiful piece of land that buffers Pioneer Pass and Pioner Trail would be utilized. Our hope would be a peaceful new single row of similar single-family homes, not 60 townhouses in a small, condensed area. We decided to purchase our home on Hemlock Way in 2013 because of the spectacular view, the extended back yard (albeit state owned) and the peacefulness that my wife and I needed entering our senior years. We’ve enjoyed seeing the wildlife living, moving, and growing over the last 11 years and especially enjoy seeing the deer at dusk and dawn most days. While we understand that development is essential for the growth of our city, we have several concerns about this specific proposal: 1) We understand there is already a plan to build 60 townhomes. We’ve seen the layout, and quite frankly, feel the design is extraordinarily aggressive based on the space between Pioneer Trail and the homes on Hemlock Way. Have you walked the property? 60 townhomes, approximately 180 people, and approximately 120 cars plus traffic crammed in that small area? These townhomes would have to be small and the road(s) would be tight. Congestion and all of the negative factors that come with it will be visibly and audibly concerning to both new residents and the existing homeowners. 2) Smaller townhomes crammed in a tight corner would bring on unnecessary implications to the existing Pioneer Pass homeowners, including but not limited to reduced property values. We assume the developers are not concerned with this but feel the State, County, and City of Chanhassen would have substantial concern. None of the existing homeowners are in favor of any type of reduction of home values especially when this could be avoided by an upgrade from unwanted townhomes to similar single-family homes. 3) Under the existing proposed development, the townhomes are way too close to the houses they back up against. Forcing two rows of townhouses in that small area in order to maximize profits is foolish and unwelcome. A single row of single-family homes would not have the same negative aesthetic affect. An easement of at least 25 feet should be considered between the existing property line and the new property line. There are mature trees on the land now. The Developer wants to replace them with 3’ trees bordering the property lines. A berm or larger trees should be considered. 4) Adding 60 small unwanted townhomes and 120 cars, trucks, and SUV’s will introduce traffic not only in that small, condensed area but will add traffic concerns to an already dangerous intersection entering the neighborhood on the Bluff Creek side. Blind spots due to hills and curves will provide higher potential for vehicle and pedestrian accidents. 5) Not only would we project 120 cars to be in constant motion throughout the day and night, but visitor parking would complicate matters even more. More traffic, more noise, more safety issues. Additionally, there are more potential safety concerns between 60 crammed townhomes and the existing Pioneer Pass homeowners. If you have not walked the area, I encourage you to do so. It’s a beautiful piece of property that aligns Pioneer Trail to include wildlife and children’s activity in both the winter and the summer. The residents of Pioneer Pass can accept this loss, but this is an extremely tough pill to swallow hearing that this great piece of land will be replaced by 60 townhomes and 120 people. This letter, and I am sure many more, recognize that this development is crucial to the City of Chanhassen’s growth. No argument. However, utilizing this space for rows of unwanted townhomes doesn’t seem to be the best choice here. A single row of similar single-family homes with similar values would be beneficial to the city and the current taxpaying residence of Pioneer Pass. In summary, we hope the City and this committee would consider the negative impact for this development: increased safety issues, lower values of existing homes, preservation of existing mature trees, distance between the proper lines, and the impact on wildlife. This proposed development has already caused some families to list their homes and to sell due to the issues pointed out above. Please reconsider the effect of an abundance of townhomes versus a row of similar single-family homes. Thank you for your consideration. Dan & Nancy Gilmore 1705 Hemlock Way From: Chanhassen Website Team <webmaster@Chanhassenmn.gov> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 6:08 PM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Concerns with development at Pioneer Pass and Bluff Creek Blvd Message submitted from the <Chanhassen, MN> website. Site Visitor Name: Zhexin Zhang Site Visitor Email: Hi Eric, I'd like to raise my concerns about the density of the townhouse development at Pioneer Pass and Bluff Creek Blvd. With a high density development, I am concerned about the traffic along Bluff Creek Blvd, as well as the sight lines for safe turning in and out of the proposed development due to significant gradient of the street. Also, Bluff Creek Blvd is already a busy street so limiting additional traffic will be beneficial for existing residents in the area. This is especial important considering the children foot traffic for crossing the street to Pioneer Pass Park. Thank you for reading and if this could please be passed on to the Planning Commission and City Council, it will be much appreciated. Best, Zhexin From: Glen Schoenberg Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 3:13 PM To: Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Proposed Pioneer Ridge Development Dear Mayor Ryan, Thank you for coming out to the proposed development site on February 6th! My name is Glen Schoenberg, and I have been a proud resident of Chanhassen since 2011, residing at 1665 Hemlock Way. I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding the proposed development of Pioneer Ridge. For nearly 14 years, my family and I have cherished our life in Chanhassen. My oldest boys, who were just two years old when we moved here, are now sixteen and sophomores at Chanhassen High School. My youngest son, born here, is nine years old and a fourth grader at Bluff Creek Elementary. We have loved living in Chanhassen for many reasons, but none more important than the strong sense of community and neighborhood feeling that deflnes our city. I have several concerns about the proposed development, and I would like to address three of them here. 1. Safety Concerns: The proposed road leading to Bluff Creek Drive and the lack of parking in the development raise signiflcant safety issues. The road connecting this development to Bluff Creek Drive is on a hill and curve with limited sight lines, which become extremely slippery during winter. The traffic study conflrms that even with excavation and grading, the recommended sight lines for an intersection cannot be achieved. The Hemlock Way intersection, which is closest to this proposed road, already has limited sight lines due to curves, making it dangerous. This new intersection would be in an even worse position. Additionally, the limited visitor parking spaces in this proposed development will lead to illegal parking on the development streets and overfiow parking in the Pioneer Pass neighborhood, congesting the intersection and creating a more dangerous situation for children crossing the road to go to the park. The lack of parking may also result in Pioneer Ridge residents and visitors parking further down Hemlock Way from the intersection at Bluff Creek Drive and then cutting through yards to access the townhouse development. With my 30 years of experience in the physical security industry that including my military background and certiflcation as a Physical Security Professional through ASIS International, I can attest that this scenario poses a signiflcant safety and security risk for existing residents. 2. Lack of Green Space: Chanhassen residents have chosen this city for its thoughtful neighborhood design and incorporated green spaces. The proposed development of 60 townhouses on this narrow piece of land, which includes undevelopable areas, lacks any signiflcant green space. Over the years, Chanhassen has seen a signiflcant increase in applications for zoning permits for new infrastructure. This rampant growth is pushing nature out and reducing the open spaces that our community holds dear. According to respected urban planners, cities should retain a balance between architecture and green spaces to maintain environmental health and residents' quality of life (Johnsen, 2018). 3. Impact on Neighborhood Character: Building a townhouse development so close to a single-family neighborhood disrupts the quaint environment and introduces a metropolitan atmosphere, I would have parts of six dwelling looking into my property, with an average of six dwellings looking into two properties in the back along the property lines. While I understand that this land will be developed, I am opposed to building a townhouse development here without a reasonable transition from the existing single-family neighborhood. I have not found any examples of such a development in Chanhassen. Even the developer admitted during the neighborhood meeting that they have never seen or done a townhouse development so close to a single-family neighborhood. One of the qualities that attracted us to Chanhassen when we moved here from the Washington DC area was the city's quality layout of residential areas. Chanhassen has set a precedent for preserving neighborhood appeal and ensuring respectable transitions between different types of neighborhood densities. This proposed development contradicts every neighborhood in Chanhassen and sets a dangerous new precedent for future development. Chanhassen’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan supports the standard we are used to, speciflcally in Land Use section 1.7.1, Goal 1, which states, “Support low-density residential development in appropriate areas of the community in such a manner as to maintain the aesthetic of existing single-family areas, and to create new neighborhoods of similar character and quality.” The plan also calls for transitions and buffer yards with increased setbacks between neighborhoods of different densities. This proposed development directly contradicts both statements. I have heard it stated that since this area is guided for medium density in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the landowner has the right to build what they want. I challenge that statement, as the 2040 Comprehensive Plan has confiicting statements about the la nd's use between the Land Guide and Land Use Goals. The Comprehensive Plan states that it is designed to serve as a guide for local decision-making and is a fiexible tool that can be adapted to new policies to attain stated goals. With these concerns in mind, and the recent announcement of the Met Council scaling back on density requirements, I urge you to consider alternate solutions for the development of this land. A couple of options could be: • Amend the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to designate this area for low-density housing that would integrate into the existing neighborhood and uphold the precedent Chanhassen has set over the years. • Change the design from townhomes to duplexes or small lot single family homes that would better transition from the existing neighborhood to this development. • Reduce the number of houses being built to increase the transition area and create a respectable buffer between neighborhoods, even if that means granting the developer an exemption to the zoning requirements. • At minimum: o There needs to be a 6-foot berm with evergreen trees along the border between the neighborhoods to create a year-round buffer to help alleviate drainage from the proposed development into the existing properties and help with noise and light pollution. o Remove the Northern most set of 6 townhomes that have the closest setback from the existing houses to create additional green space, parking spaces and room for a respectable buffer. As a citizen of Chanhassen, I implore the city council not to approve the pending zoning permit application for new construction. This decision will help preserve natural elements, ensure our green spaces are protected, and maintain our city's character rather than transforming it into a concrete jungle. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. Sincerely, Glen Schoenberg From: Matt Wilde Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 3:18 PM To: Maass, Eric <emaass@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov> Subject: Re: Pioneer Ridge Development Concerns Mayor Ryan - Thank you again for coming out to our neighborhood to walk the proposed property a few weeks back. Hope you warmed up by now… I’m unable to attend the upcoming planning meeting because of work travel, but wanted to re-emphasize my main concerns. I included my original e-mail below that goes into greater detail, but here’s my biggest concerns: 1. Lack of distance and transition from existing single-family homes. (My home is the closest of all homes, even with the updated setback). 2. The developer purchased a very small parcel of land, especially when considering the slopes that make the majority of space unusable. While I understand the need for the developer to be profltable, it should not happen at the expense of existing homeowners. Under the current plan, that’s exactly what is happening. 3. I have signiflcant concerns around the future drainage issues. We already have water issues because of the clay soil and that problem will only be increased with an additional 60 homes and roads. For years, we tried to put in a pool in our yard but was not approved by the city because of non-permeable surface concerns. Now, the city is allowing acres of buildings. I worry about the repercussions of this building on both my home and yard and how that will be handled in the future if there are issues. Lastly, I’m not sure how the calculation is made, but the developer purchased 12 acres of land, but not all of that purchased land is usable, or even included on the updated plan. (A large portion of the land they bought is on top of the hill to the easy of the proposal) Those 60 homes are put on a very small portion of the 12 acres, making the density higher than stated. As you drive up and down Pioneer Trail throughout all of Chanhassen, there are trees, wetlands, and prairie from Eden Prairie all the way to Chaska. This will be the one place on Pioneer Trail that has higher density homes. I appreciate your attention to an important matter, both for current neighbors, but also the precedent this sets on future Chanhassen growth. Thanks Matt Wilde 1685 Hemlock Way On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:16 AM Matt Wilde < > wrote: To all interested parties - I’m writing with concerns about the proposed development of Pioneer Ridge, as a direct neighbor. Many of my neighbors have sent a list of concerns that has been drafted cooperatively, so I won’t re-send those, although I share the same concerns. I want to highlight a few of my biggest concerns about the proposed development: • Proximity to existing homes and related issues: The proposal by Brandl Anderson places a signiflcant amount of medium density homes directly behind existing low- density homes with no buffer. Other developments in Carver County have included some sort of buffer, whether it be trees, berms or other natural transitions. Examples include a berm with tall trees that was built in the Avienda border, maintaining trees and more space in the new development on Audubon in Chaska and many others. Section 1.7.2 of the Chanhassen 2040 plan cites “The city will promote the mixing of housing densities…. Such mixed densities must provide appropriate transitions for existing development. • Flooding concerns: When Pioneer Pass was built, the backyards on the south side of the development were essentially swamps. Additional drainage was added after the project (by the developer) was completed but when heavy rains occur, backyards are wet for extended periods. In addition, the area that is being developed is often plagued by water, even from the lightest rains. There has been signiflcant settling and I worry that not only will the additional homes and changed drainage will cause additional impacts to my property, but also impacts to the newly developed structures. When asking Brandl Anderson about the issue during the open house, they essentially said that if the development results in additional fiooding, we will need to work with the City. • Destruction of property value: No matter what, this development will result in lower property values. When my home was purchased, I paid a premium for the unobstructed view. Construction of structures in such close proximity to existing developments, speciflcally with the planned height, will considerably decrease property value. • Traffic: There is so much growth in the area, between Avienda, the proposed development to the south of Pioneer Trail, and the future light commercial on Pioneer Trail, that putting two new entrances to the neighborhood combined with this new traffic is likely to cause congestion and backup issues. • Tree removal: The property that is being developed has signiflcant amounts of mature trees that will need to be removed. These trees provide shade (another goal of the Chanhassen 2040 plan) as well as habitats for bald eagles, owls and many other birds. The proposed trees that are to be conserved are entirely on non- buildable portions of the property. Instead of just bringing up issues, I want to propose some ideas to help with the issues: • Instituting a solution to follow the 2040 Plan of providing transitions for existing developments. This could include berms, trees or other separation ideas. • Larger set back from the existing neighborhood to help protect property values and simultaneously maintain/create more of a buffer between development types through existing trees that would no longer be removed and new features to separate housing. • Pushing the development closer to Pioneer Trail to alleviate the overlapping of the existing and proposed development. • Measuring the density requirements only using the true buildable space on this property. • Decreasing the number of units and only putting homes on the southside of the proposed road parallel to Pioneer Trail. • Imposing size restrictions of the new homes, speciflcally height of new homes. Brandl Anderson bought a parcel of land that is extremely small in terms of buildable space. The lack of buildable space on this land results in concentration into one area to meet the zoning requirements. I understand the need for them to be profltable in this development, but the profltability should not be at the expense of current residents, both in quality of their property or real value decreases. I am aware that Chanhassen will continue to grow and that it can beneflt all residents, I’d ask the City Leadership to consider some of the issues that have been brought up both in this message and in the broader Pioneer Pass communications from the community. Would be happy to discuss or expand on any of these issues. Appreciate your attention to an important issue. Matt Wilde