DOCS-#230374-v1-MEMO_TO_COUNCIL_CONCERNING_ROERS_DOWNTOWN_DEVELOPMENT_PARKING1
230374v1
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ANDREA MCDOWELL POEHLER
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: MARCH 18, 2024
RE: ROERS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT OFF-SITE PARKING
Background
The City is reviewing the preliminary plat and site plan for the Roers Downtown Development
that relies on shared parking agreements for off-site parking to meet city parking requirements.
The City has asked this office to review the applicability of the Minnesota Court of Appeals 2013
unpublished opinion in Crossroads Center Rochester v. City of Rochester (A12-21221) concerning
shared parking agreements in meeting city parking requirements. The court case was the basis of
an article discussed in a law firm’s website that was raised as an issue by residents.
The Court’s decision is an unpublished opinion by the Minnesota Court of Appeals, which may
not generally be relied on as precedential and is meant to be limited to the facts of the specific
case.
Discussion
Case Issue 1: Did the City of Rochester properly apply its ordinance in reducing the parking
requirements for the new restaurant to be built on property that was originally part of the Crossroad
Shopping Center based on the shared parking easement on property within the shopping center
development for off-site parking?
Court’s Decision: The Rochester City ordinance provided for lower parking requirements for
spaces designated as part of a “business center.” The city ordinance defined a “business center”
as “[a] building or group of buildings planned, constructed and managed as a total entity, with
common on-site parking for a group of commercial, office or service establishments.”
The shopping center was constructed in 1984. Thereafter, the restaurant property at issue was sold
to a separate entity apart from the shopping center ownership. The court found that the
replacement of a smaller restaurant with the larger restaurant on the property more than 25 years
after the shopping center was constructed, where the new restaurant required an additional 20
parking spaces within the shared parking easement area, did not qualify for the reduced parking
space requirement. The court found that the evidence did not establish that the new restaurant
development was planned or constructed as a total entity with the shopping center or managed as
a total entity.
2
230374v1
Application: This case is limited to the facts and City Code provisions in the case. The City of
Chanhassen does not have similar requirements for the off-site parking in Roers development and
the case is not applicable to the Roers development.
Case Issue 2: Did the City of Rochester properly calculate that the restaurant development would
have the necessary off-site parking spaces to satisfy the City ordinances by including the additional
20 off-site parking spaces provided for in a 1984 shared parking easement?
Decision: The Rochester City code required “evidence of ownership or control of the parking
facility, either by deed or long term lease” in order to use off-site parking spaces to meet code
requirements. The Court determined that the authority to use the parking provided under the
easement did not satisfy the City Code requirement for “ownership or control.”
Application: The City of Chanhassen’s code does not require “ownership or control, either by
deed or long term lease” for the use of shared parking. Rather, Section 20-1117 of the City Code
requires that “the use of the parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded easement, acceptable
to the City.”
The Roers development is granted a right to use a minimum of 25 stalls over the Market Street
Station, LLC property pursuant to a shared parking easement. In addition, the Roers development
is granted right to non-exclusive use of the existing parking on the Chanhassen Frontier, LLC
property through a parking easement agreement. This easement would need to be amended to
remove the restriction prohibiting overnight parking, in order for the shared parking on the
Chanhassen Frontier, LLC property to be considered as available off-site parking for the Roers
development.