5 Site Plan Demolish Chan BowlCiTY OF
PC DATE: 7 7 99
8-4-99
CC DATE: 7 24 99
8-23-99
CASE #: 95-21 SPR
By: AI-Jaff/Hempel:v
STAFF
REPORT
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
1)
2)
3)
Site Plan Review to demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl/Filly's buildin
and construct 8 movie screens and a retail element
Variances to allow Non-Street Frontage Signs, Marquee sign, and
Surface Coverage
Preliminary Plat approval to replat two lots and three outlots into two lots
and one outlot, Cinema Addition.
North of the railroad tracks and Pauly Drive, East of Market Boulevard and south
Country Suites
Chanhassen Properties, LLC
5300 Highland Greens, Suite 200
Bloomington, MN55437
Attn.: Mr. Bob C0peland
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DENSITY:
BG, General Business District
Approximately 2.617 acres
N/A
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE:
WATER AND SEWER:
N - CBD, Central Business District
S - CBD, Central Business District
E - CBD, Central Business District
W - PUD, Planned Unit Development/Market Square
Available to the site.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.:
Generally a level parcel with an existing building and parking lot.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
'Drive
tare H
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 2
BACKGOUND AND ARCHITECTURE
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl/Filly's building and construct
eight movie screens and a retail element. The site is located north of the railroad tracks and Pauly
Drive, east of Market Boulevard, west of the Frontier Building and South of West 78th Street and
Country Suites Hotel. The site is zoned BG, General Business District and has an area of
approximately 6.3 acres including the existing Cinema and the parking lot surrounding the site
which is owned by the City (or 2.617 acres when calculating the cinema and retail addition and
parking area immediately adjacent to the proposed addition). The site is fairly level with an
existing building, parking lot, and bus shelter. It is guided commercial.
The City's vision for this area has always been entertainment. In 1996, the City reviewed a
proposal to remodel the Bowling Alley/Filly's building and the Frontier Building into an
Entertainment Center which was proposed to include eight movie theaters, Pauly's Sports Bar and
Restaurant, the bowling alley, some retail stores and restaurants. The project was proposed to be
constructed as an Entertainment Complex. Shortly after, the City approved phasing of the project
since not all parties were ready to proceed. The first phase included the construction of an eight
screen movie theater. The second phase was the remodeling of the Frontier Building. Since then,
the project has been at a stand still.
The applicant is proposing a new concept that has some elements of the original plan. The proposal
calls for demolishing the entire building located west of the existing Chanhassen Cinema,
expanding the number of movie screens to 16 and adding 9,000 square feet of retail space. Theaters
are a permitted use in the district and staff recognizes and supports the importance of bringing the
entertainment element to the downtown. We also recognize that an entertainment area needs more
than just the theater element; hence, the retail element. The original plan reflected a boardwalk
surrounding the entertainment center. This element has been modified by providing a plaza instead
of an elevated boardwalk. The boardwalk served two functions. The first was to allow pedestrian
traffic to move around the building without interference with vehicular traffic. The second purpose
was the fact that this boardwalk was elevated approximately six feet and helped disguise the height
of the building. A railing surrounds the existing cinema boardwalk. This railing is being
reintroduced along the south elevation. The theme of decorative light fixtures that are currently
being used at the cinema are carded into this portion of the project.
This item was proposed to appear before the Planning Commission on May 5, 1999. Staffraised
some issues such as alley design/fire code-exterior facade ~ materials-cinema entrance-site
access/Pauly Drive extension-parking lot drive aisle width-number of parking stalls during peak
seasons-landscaping-street furniture-building code as it relates to size ofbuilding-signage - (red led)
electronic boards-number of signs on marquee-color on marquee, and recommended tabling the
item. The plans have been revised to address these issues.
Ctmnhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 3
Materials on the building are comprised of painted precast panels, field brick, accent brick, stucco,
and rock face block. To adequately address this project, staffwill break down the site into three
portions (existing cinema, new cinema, and retail element.).
EXISTING CINEMA
The existing eight screen theater has a precast exterior finish. The applicant is proposing to paint
the existing precast a dark brown color to match the color of brick used on the new retail and
cinema addition. The existing marquee sign is proposed to be removed and replaced with an
awning. A windowsill is proposed to be added to improve the appearance of the existing light box
at the entrance of the theaters. Staff enclosed an attachment that illustrates our expectation of the
appearance and construction of a window with a windowsill. All windows, including those
appearing on the retail addition should follow that method of construction. The existing entrance is
proposed to be abandoned and the lobby space turned into a space for lease as office or retail. The
existing pilasters shapes are proposed to be modified by projecting them four (4) inches. There are
some rooftop equipment units that have been moved to the east of the building. This happened
af[er the City allowed the applicant to occupy the building. These units must be screened fi.om
views. Additional landscaping is proposed along the east sidewalk of the cinema (adjacent to the
existing alley). As a result of comments made by the Planning Commission on this
application, the applicant is proposing to cover the easterly wall, along the existing alley, with
EIFS material.
NEW CINEMA
The new theater addition is proposing eight additional screens to the existing eight screen theater.
The exterior material on this section of the building is field brick, accent brick and precast E1FS
accents. The building is capped by a forest green comice matching the existing theater. Below the
cornice is a "DENTIL BLOCK" imitation, which is an ornamental molding composed ora series
of evenly spaced small blocks usually placed under a comice or overhang. These squares have a
3'x2.5' dimensions. Staff expects this element, when built, to actually have a minimum
projection of one third the height of the block (1 foot). The applicant submitted a revised cross
section of the wall, cornice, dentil block, and EIFS detail. The plans have been revised to
reflect a 4inch projection on the top dentil block and an 8 inch projection on the lower row of
the dentil block. The pilasters have a projection of 4 inches.
The entrance into the theater is being moved to the south. This will provide for a prominent
presence for the theaters. The design of the marquee sign is festive and towering. The word
"CINEMA" appears in yellow letters with a forest green background on the main tower. The word
"CHANHASSEN" is displayed on the sides of the marquee. The from portion of the marquee sign
will advertise the names of the movies, rating, and time playing. There is a chasing light element
on the sign which will add to the festive component of the use. The rear of the marquee sign is
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 4
proposed to utilize the same forest green as the comice. The exterior material above the marquee
sign is precast EFIS. The glass doors provide an entrance into the theater lobby. The aluminum
surrounding the glass wall is forest green to match the cornice. The entrance is framed by to brick
columns. The base of the brick pilaster is concrete block to match the existing retaining wall south
of cinema. The entrance projects by 30 feet. The wall west of the entrance, which will house the
theaters, utilizes field brick, base concrete block, and precast EFIS accents. Columns similar to
those shown on the existing theater are shown on the addition. These columns will project by 4
inches. The coming attraction display windows are similar in shape and design to the light box
above the existing entrance into the theaters. Again, staff expects this element to resemble an actual
window, recessed into the wall. At the base of the coming attraction display windows are
landscape boxes, fenced by the same railing currently used at the existing theater. The metal frame
around the poster display area and the railing are forest green. Three light fixtures, identical to
those used at the existing cinema are located between the new attraction posters display windows.
At the base of the railing, the applicant is utilizing concrete block.
Separating the theater addition from the retail element is a 10 foot wide alley way. This alley will
serve as an exit way for the theaters and service doors for the retail. The walls are proposed to be
constructed of painted block. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant explained
that the walls on the theater side are actually EIFS and on the retail side are brick. Staff
expects the detail (dentil block, cornice, pilasters, etc. to continue along the theater side and
the accent bands be incorporated into the brick) along both sides of the alley. There is an arch
at both sides of the alley and is capped by a forest green cornice. Staff recommends the addition of
supporting columns below the arch. The alley is functional.
RETAIL ELEMENT
The retail element consist of 9,000 square feet building. The plans show 9 retail units however,
there is a possibility that one tenant could occupy three units. Some of the retail spaces have
awnings above the entrances, others are glass. All metal on the retail element (window frames,
doors, cornices, and pitched roof element are forest green. All windows on this building will have
to be constructed in a fashion that resembles windows as shown in Attachment 1. The exterior
material used on the retail element consist of field brick, accent brick, precast EFIS and base
concrete block. The four retail spaces labeled (BOOK WORM, ARTS SUPPLY, KIDS AND
COMPUTER WORLD), have a one inch reveal in their design.
In looking at the west elevation, a portion of the theater building can be seen. The material used on
this potion of the building, as well as the north (facing Country Suites Hotel) is painted precast to
match the field brick which is a dark brown. Again, at the PlanningCommission meeting, the
applicant explained that this material is actually EIFS. The trash enclosure is located west of
the retail element and is proposed to be constructed of concrete block with overhang doors. All
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 5
service doors are proposed to be painted to match the exterior of the building (brown or off white).
There is a plaza area west of the new main entrance into the theaters. It contains bike racks, and
outdoor seating area. Benches are proposed along the alley between the Frontier Center. Two
benches are also added along Market Boulevard and one along Pauly Drive. The new street
furniture makes the proposal more pedestrian friendly.
Overall, the project is designed as a typical suburban "strip mall". The Economic Development
Authority (EDA) during the January 28, 1999 meeting, reiterated that this project is receiving TIF
assistance. The site is located in the Highway 5 overlay district which requires higher
architectural standards and materials. The use of TIF should provide for standards beyond those
required by the Highway 5 overlay district (architectural design, materials, etc.). The city is
involved in the project and do expect it to meet the city's high quality.
ENGINEERING OVERVIEW
City staff met with the applicant back in mid-May to address several site plan issues and to look
at alternatives regarding the site plans, i.e. landscaping, hard surface coverage, number of
theaters, building features, parking and traffic issues. At that meeting, the City expressed the
willingness to evaluate proposed compromises on some issues and give direction on others,
however, never agreed to support them until we had a chance to review the revised plans.
Upon review of the overall parking layout, the plans indicate 539 parking stalls available.
However, only 487 are proposed/existing including handicap stalls based on staff's review.
There is a mathematical error in the tabulation of stalls on Sheet C l i Based on review of
Hoisington's study of the entertainment complex, 525 parking stalls were estimated to meet
demands of the complex for 2,400 seats. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant
supplied staff with a revised parking tabulation sheet that shows 593 stalls are needed for
2,800 seats, 6,000 square foot restaurant, and 6,000 square foot retail. On August 19, 1999,
staff spoke to Mr. Itoisington at length. Mr. Itoisington stated that the parking would
work if the following was available:
1. An unimpeded east west connection between Market Boulevard and Great Plans
Boulevard (no parking on either side of the driveway).
2. The number of seats in the theater is reduced to 2,600.
3. The restaurant element not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
4. The retail element not to exceed 6,000 square feet.
5. The applicant provide a minimum of 510 parking stalls.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 6
researched additional resources on parking requirements.
A Multi-Theater Parking study prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff dated February 26, 1998 was
used by the City of Plymouth to quantify the parking requirements of their 16 theater site. Staff
reviewed the study and used a conservative ratio of 4.3 seats to 1 parking stall which equates to
~<~..~., 651 parking stalls based on .., ' naa,~ 2,800 seats (16 theaters). This parking ratio does not
include the proposed retail aspect (9,000 S.F.) which would require another 45 parking stalls.
The total parking proposed (487) is 2-0 30% less than what is needed (~92 696) to serve the site.
A reduction of 440 seats in the theater complex would be necessary to coincide with the
proposed parking.
All of the entertainment complex parking studies Were based on shared parking between
all the users and cross access agreements. According to the applicant, the Bloomberg
Company is not willing to provide a cross access easement/agreement at this time.
Traffic circulation/parking lot layout was another contentious issue. Currently, Pauly Drive is
built as a city street halfway through the site. Ten year old trees (maple/ash, 6"-8" diameter)
exist along both sides of the street. An 8-foot wide trail/sidewalk already exists along the north
side of Pauly Drive with trees and green area. The plans propose modifying the
alignment/configuration of Pauly Drive to add more parking. This will result in retaining most of
'the south curb line and trees and provide 37 parking stalls. However, the north side would be
totally reconstructed to provide for an east/west street to connect Market Boulevard to Great
Plains Boulevard. This east/west street was recommended in the Hoisington report and the
applicant's traffic study. Staff also supports the traffic study to relieve traffic congestion at the
intersection of Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive from the entertainment complex. Staff has
concerns with the reconfiguration of Pauly Drive. The modifications to the bus turnaround area
is not supported by staff. The proposed plans do not allow enough room for bus turning
movements. The bus stop eliminates the plaza area which includes green area. The existing
trees and sidewalk along the north curb of Pauly Drive will be removed and replaced with a 10-
foot wide sidewalk. Most of the drive aisle widths in the parking lot are proposed at 24 feet
which is less than city code (26 feet wide).
In conclusion, staff believes that the parking area of the site is too small for this proposal to
adequately serve the parking needs. The number of theaters should be reduced to fit the site
conditions. The city has a vested interest in this site and should not compromise on city
ordinances.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 7
SITE GRADING
The plans propose to reconfigure portions of the parking lot as well as modify Pauly Drive from
the westerly access point to the site to the east. The existing Southwest Metro bus pick up/drop
offzone will be impacted by this proposal.
DRAINAGE
The site currently sheet drains to the south where the existing storm sewer system in Pauly Drive
conveys the parking lot runoff to the downtown regional stormwater pond for pretreatment prior
to discharging downstream. Minor adjustments to the existing drainage improvements are
proposed to accommodate the street reconfiguration. The City's Surface Water Management fees
would not be applicable to this development since the property has been previously platted and
all the stormwater improvements are in place.
UTILITIES
The City has sanitary sewer and water lines that intersect the site from east to west just south of
the entertainment complex. According to the plans, the building remodeling and expansion will
encroach into the City's drainage and utility easement and will actually build a portion of the
structure over the existing sewer and water lines. This encroachment would not be acceptable
without further modifications to the City's infrastructure. The water and sewer lines could be
relocated by the applicant to avoid the encroachment/conflict. A new drainage and utility
easement would have to be dedicated to the City as a result of this relocation. Existing drainage
and utility easements not being used could be vacated. An alternate option would be to leave the
existing sanitary sewer in place and add manhole structures on each side of the building and case
the sanitary sewer pipe so in the future if a problem arises, the sanitary sewer line can be easily
replaced without having to excavate underneath the building. The water line, however, will still
need to be relocated from underneath the building. Both the sewer and water lines are extremely
old and fragile.
In conjunction with the parking lot improvements and building expansion, the existing gate
valves, manholes, and catch basins on the site may require adjustments. The applicant and/or
contractor shall be responsible for all adjustments necessary. The City Utility Department will
require inspection of these adjustments as they occur. The applicant shall contact the City's
Utility Department to coordinate the appropriate inspections.
A security escrow in the amount of $25,000 shall be supplied by the applicant to the City to
guarantee utility relocation/adjustments in conjunction with site plan approval. The security shall
be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 8
ACCESS/PARKING
The site is accessed from Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive. There are two existing driveways
off Pauly Drive and one from Market Boulevard. Pauly Drive is still a city street with a 50 foot
right-of-way. PrevioUs application for the cinema complex requested vacation of Pauly Drive
back in 1996. The vacation request was approved, however, never recorded. The vacation was
contingent upon the applicant providing certain things to the City and entering into a site plan
agreement. Therefore, if Pauly Drive is to be vacated, it will need to go through the formal
hearing process again. Pauly Drive currently dead ends at the easterly curb cut to the
entertainment complex. At the east end of the cinema complex parking lot, there is a gravel
surfaced driveway which serves as another access route behind the dinner theater and scene shop
out to Great Plains Boulevard.
According to the traffic report generated by Benshoof & Associates, Inc. dated November 11,
1998 and supplementary comments to that report dated November 18, 1998, it recommended that
an unimpeded corridor (east/west) road be constructed to provide adequate traffic movements to
and from the site. Based on the traffic report with this type of use, traffic will experience
significant delays at the intersection of Pauly Drive and-Market Boulevard (Level F). The
supplementary comments to the traffic report indicated that a second option would be to provide
an east/west street with parking provided on one or both sides. The second option also indicated
the main benefit is to only increase the availability of parking stalls. This option does not
provide the level of traffic safety desired or necessary with this development. Staff strongly
recommends that an unimpeded east/west connector street from Market Boulevard to Great
Plains Boulevard should be required to adequately service the cinema complex as well as future
development east of the site. Attached is an example of staffs recommendation for an east/west
connection. Parking shall be prohibited on both sides of the east/west street. The minimum
drive aisle width should be 28 feet, face-to-face adjacent the building. Cross-access easements
and maintenance agreements for cross parking should be prepared by the applicant for each
business to access the site and utilize the parking lot. At this time, the Bloomberg Company is
not willing to grant a cross access easement.
According to City Code Section 20-1118, drive aisle widths between two rows of parking shall
be a minimum of a 26 feet. Some of the drive aisles proposed do not meet this and should be
modified to comply with city ordinance. Staff is also concerned about the turning radiuses for
emergency vehicles. The applicant's engineer/site planner may need to increase radiuses and/or
drive aisle widths to accommodate fire apparatus vehicles after further review with the Fire
Marshal. This may also result in the loss of additional parking stalls. Staff recommends that the
main drive aisle areas be 28 feet wide adjacent to the building with a minimum 20-foot wide
radiuses at the intersections.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 9
Traffic control will also be an issue. The applicant will need to prepare a revised traffic signage
plan for staff to review and approve prior to issuance of a building permit.
MISCELLANEOUS
Development is proposed over a number of outlots and lots. Replatting of the property into a
single lot and block or multiple lots and blocks will be required.
LANDSCAPING
Minimum requirements for landscaping include 8,144 sq. fi. of landscaped area around the
parking lot, 33 trees for the parking lot, and bufferyard plantings along Pauly Drive, Market
Blvd., as well as neighboring property lines. Applicant's proposed landscaping as compared to
the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table.
Vehicular use landscape area
Trees/parking lot
Market Boulevard trees
(1 per 30 feet)
South bufferyard A - 20'
(*75% of total shown)
West bufferyard B - 20'
(*75% of total shown)
Required
8,144 sq. fi.
33 overstory + 17 landscape
islands or peninsulas
7 overstory
4 overstory trees
4 understory trees
8 shrubs
5 overstory trees
8 understory trees
13 shrubs
North bufferyard B [ 2 overstory trees
(*75% of total shown) I 4 understory trees
I 6 shrubs
*According to city bufferyard ordinance, the project developer is responsible for only 75% of theI
may plant the remaining 25% on their property.
Proposed
approx. 9,150 sq. fi.
25 overstory + 13 landscape
islands or peninsulas
7 overstory
No plantings proposed
No plantings proposed
No plantings proposed
-equired plantings. Abutting property owners
The applicant has a deficit of plantings in the buffer yard areas and parking lot landscaping.
Staff recommends that the applicant increase plantings in order to meet minimum ordinance
requirements. The proposed islands appear to be less than 10 feet in width and therefore will
require aeration tubes, however, a better solution would be to widen the island to allow for better
growth. A few of the large, overstory ash trees are proposed to be planted in spaces no wider
than 4-5 feet. This is insufficient to support a large tree. Staff recommends that the applicant
reconfigure landscape islands to increase planting space.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 10
As this development will be a focal point for the city and for downtown in particular, landscaping
will be important. The design and materials will have a major impact on the overall quality of
the development and in turn of Chanhassen itself. It is the city's responsibility to see that all
landscaping ordinances or suitable alternatives are met. As it is now, staff finds the proposed
landscaping plan unacceptable and recommends that the applicant revise the plan to reflect more
clearly the expectations of the city.
LIGHTING
There are three light fixtures shown on the plan along the south elevation that match those on the
boardwalk of existing Chanhassen Cinema. The plan also shows 8 parking lot light fixtures. These
fixtures are shoe box shielded fixtures.
SIGNAGE
Signage is intended to advertise as well as enhance the architecture of the building. The
applicant is proposing a sign band with wall mounted signs or projecting signs. The wall
mounted sign will probably be back lit channeled letters. Ail letters are proposed to maintain a
consistent bronze metal surrounding color. The proposal does not address logos. The city can
apply the logo criteria outlined in the ordinance. Also, Section 20-1303. states "Highway,
general business districts and central business districts. Wall business signs. Wall business
sign shall be permitted on street frontage for each business Occupant within a building only."
Staff is in favor of approving the variance. We strongly believe that the applicant should be
able to advertise the business. The applicant is also requesting projecting signs to advertise the
retail shops. This element can be highly attractive and staff is attaching examples of projecting
signs. The size of the projecting sign should not exceed three feet in height and 6 square feet.
Illuminated letters may be attached to the exterior of the projecting sign as shown in attachment
#2. Projecting signs may not be illuminated from within.
The entrance into the theater is being moved to the south. This will provide for a prominent
presence for the theaters. The design of the marquee sign is festive and towering. The wording
"CHANHASSEN" and "CINEMA" appears on the main tower. The letters are yellow against a
forest green background. There are chasing lights on the sign. Movie names, time showing, and
rating is proposed on the marquee below the tower. This sign is constructed of electronic static
reader board material with the background being black and the words of yellow light. The sides of
the marquee sign adjacent to the building will have a forest green background.
Motion Reader Boards require a conditional use permit. The applicant explained that these letters
will be motionless. The reader board will be updated once a week. Under this description, it can be
classified as a changeable letter sign, eliminating the need for the conditional use permit.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 11
The westerly portion of the proposed cinema expansion incorporates wall signs that advertises
coming attractions. This element is utilized as an architectural feature to break up the wall. It
mimics the window located above the entrance into the existing cinema building. Staff has always
encouraged the display of coming attractions and movie titles on the exterior of the building.
The narrative states that the use ofbacklit awnings or vinyl awnings are prohibited; however, the
landlord encourages unique canopy styles and colors for variety. Signage may be located in
designated facade areas only.
SIGN AND HARD SURFACE VARIANCE
The intent of the sign ordinance is to establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and
equitable oppommity to advertise their name and service while promoting public safety and
enhancing the image of the community. In addition, the ordinance provides standards to ensure that
signage is an integral component of the building's architecture. Granting variances should only be
permitted when it enhances the image of the building.
The ordinance allows a maximum hard surface coverage of 65%. The applicant is proposing 95%.
FINDINGS
The Planning Commission shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance
unless they find the following facts:
ao
That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship
means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical
surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majorityof
comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a
proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this
neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing
downward from them meet this criteria.
Finding: Granting the variance for the sign will allow the businesses to advertise their
products. The design and location of the sign should become an integral part of the
architecture.
The hard surface coverage hardship stems from the fact that the applicant is attempting to
build too large a building on the site.
The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to
other property within the same zoning classification.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 12
Finding: The conditions upon which the variance is based are not applicable to other
properties with the BG, General Business District. The location of the building is driving
the request for the sign variance. As to the hard surface variance, all buildings within a BG
district are required to provide a minimum of 35% green space.
Co
The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel of land.
Finding: The purpose of the variation for the sign does not appear to be based upon a
desire to increase the value of the parcel. The hard surface coverage will increase the
buildable area which will increase the value or income potential of the complex.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The alleged hardship for the sign is not a self-created hardship, again, it is the
location of the building. The hard surface coverage stems from the fact that the applicant is
building too large a structure on the parcels of land.
eo
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located.-
Finding: The variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land or improvements. Steps will be taken to ensure that the appropriate size and type of
fasteners are used to attach signs to the building.
The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger
of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
Finding: The proposed variation will not significantly impair light and air to adjacent
property. Granting the variance will not increase congestion of public streets or endanger
public safety.
Based on the findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval of the non street
frontage sign variance and denial of the hard surface coverage.
The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the sign area shown on the plan. The letters
and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each
sign shall have a minimum depth of five inches and shall be constructed with a translucent facing
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 13
over neon tube illumination. Tenant neon illuminated signage shall consist of store identification
only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and logo. Corporate logos, emblems and
similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and
do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area.
SITE PLAN FINDINGS
In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance
with the following:
(1)
Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides,
including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may
be adopted;
(2) Consistency with this division;
(3)
Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing
tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the
general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing
areas;
(4)
Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site
features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the
development;
(5)
Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with
special attention to the following:
ao
An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community;
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
Co
Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of
the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and
neighboring structures and uses; and
Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives
and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public
streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 14
circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement
and amount of parking.
(6)
Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light
and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations
which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Finding: The proposed development is generally consistent with the comprehensive
plan. It requires variances to meet the zoning ordinance, and the site plan review
requirements. The site design as it relates to architectural design, could be improved as
recommended by staff.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
The subdivision includes the replatting of two lots and three outlots into two lots. Lot 1, Block 1,
CINEMA ADDITION will contain the retail building and Lot 2, Block 1, will house the Old and
new theaters. The reason for replatting is to create separate lots for the Cinema and retail
element. Both lots will have access to Pauly's Drive and Market .Boulevard via cross access
easements.
CONCLUSION
This proposal is a definite improvement over the existing building. However, it requires numerous
compromises of the city ordinances. The Planning Commission and City Council should determine
if the project is worth these compromises based upon staffs analysis. We have attempted to work
with the applicant to improve the plans and compare them to city standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
At the July 7, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, the Cinema expansion project was reviewed
and action was tabled. There were a number of issues raised by the commission. The main issue
for tabling the application dealt with traffic issues (access from the cinema site to Great Plains
Boulevard). It was discovered at the meeting that the Bloomberg Company did not wish to grant
a cross access easement for the construction of a driveway through the dinner theater property out
to Great Plains Blvd. All the traffic studies assumed and/or recommended that this connection
would take place. The Economic Development Authority approved TIF for the project
contingent upon approval of the architecture and an east/west access road. The following is a
summary of outstanding site plan issues or issues raised by the Planning Commission and staff's
response to them:
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 15
Parking/Pedestrian circulation: The Planning Commission directed the applicant to show
where overflow parking spaces are located. The applicant provided staff with a written
response listing a number of parking lots within the surrounding area.
Finding:
Staff has put together an aerial map with actual walking distances to the proposed cinema from
off site parking areas. This provides perspective of the distance movie going would be required
to walk from the proposed off site parking areas (Attachment # 10). Staff is concerned with
parking in Festival Foods. Pedestrians will be forced to negotiate crossing Market Blvd. which is
a 4 lane undivided street without any traffic control, i.e. a crosswalk. Combined with the turning
movements of vehicles to and from Pauly Drive to Market Blvd. pedestrian safety will only
decrease. Warrants for a crosswalk can and should be reviewed if this site is developed with this
or a related land use with shared parking at Festival Foods.
Traffic: A cross access easement to provide the connection between Market Boulevard and
Great Plain Boulevard, through the Bloomberg Property, is not available at this time. The
applicant is offering the use of an off duty police officer to regulate traffic.
The east -west connection through the site was originally recommended by the City's planning
consultant (Hoisington - Koegler) back in July 1992 with anticipated development of an
entertainment complex on the site. The applicant's traffic consultant, Jim Benshoof, initially
recommended an unimpeded east-west street to alleviate traffic congestion along Pauly Drive at
Market Blvd., improve traffic safety through the site and effectively accommodate traffic
generated from the site. Supplementary comments from Mr. B enshoof dated 11/18/98 indicated
an impeded east-west street would only improve parking and overall decrease traffic/pedestrian
safety. However, with both east-west options, impeded and unimpeded, the intersection of Pauly
Drive and Market Blvd. and the intersection of Great Plains Blvd. and the new access road are
expected to provide adequate operation assuming an east-west connection.
Comments from Mr. Benshoof dated 8/4/99 suggests possible interim traffic solutions to :
alleviate traffic congestion at the intersection of Pauly Drive and Market Blvd. without the east-
west connection by staggering movie times and by using a police, officer to manage traffic control
will provide a much higher level of safety and efficiency than without one. Staff concurs
somewhat with this statement; however, believes that this interim solution is not appropriate for
dealing with a long term problem. The proposal raises some additional concerns such as who
determines when, if and how long the police officer would be required? What are/is the criteria
for using the police officer? These specifics all need to be determined in conjunction with site
plan approval. If the City Council determines that the east-west connection is not needed at this
time, then a condition needs to be added to the site plan approval regarding this issue.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 16
On a related matter, without the east-west connection required now, it may pose additional
problems as it relates to future development of the adjacent parcel (dinner theater) and this site.
The proposed parking lot layout (Cinema) may not be compatible with a future east-west
connection. Staff has concerns with the possibility that the parking lot may have to be
reconfigured in the future to make the east-west connection which in mm may reduce the number
· of parking stalls available on this site thus creating additional parking concerns. Staff believes
that a conceptual east-west route should be determined and incorporated into this site plan to
reduce the potential of having future parking issues. Staff is recommending an east-west
connection as shown on the report prepared by the city's consultant Hoisington-Koegler which
basically follows parallel to the railroad tracks. The applicant should be required to be
responsible for modifying their parking lot to be contiguous with the future access road through
the Bloomberg parcel (dinner theater) when it develops. A financial security to guarantee future
reconfiguration of the parking lot to meet this condition is also recommended.
The east-west connection and required drive aisle widths are very important for the adequate
operation of the overall site development as well as development of the adjacent parcel. Without
proper site design, traffic and pedestrian safety will be compromised. Site plan approval with
staff's recommendation for an east-west connection will eliminate the need for interim traffic
control, avoid parking issues in the future and reduce 'traffic congestion.
On August 19, 1999, staff spoke to Mr. Hoisington at length. Mr. Hoisington stated that the
parking would work if the following was available:
a) An unimpeded east west connection between Market Boulevard and Great Plans Boulevard
(no parking on either side of the driveway).
b) The number of seats in the theater is reduced to 2,600.
c) The restaurant element not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
d) The retail element not to exceed 6,000 square feet.
e) The applicant provide a minimum of 510 parking stalls. Allowance of 50 parking spaces are
possible if the above conditions are met.
These 5 points are not reflected in the conditions of approval. The Citw Council can use
these conditions to replace condition number 6.
3. Hard surface coverage of 95%: The Planning Commission directed the applicant to
investigate options to see if the hard surface could be reduced.
Finding: There is no update on this issue.
4. Pedestrian circulation, board walk, and materials on the building.
Finding: There is no update on any of these issues.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 17
If the City Council wants to modify the site plan to ensure these items are addressed, staff would
recommend the conditions of approval be amended. Based on the application time limits, staff is
requesting that the City Council vote on this application to ensure the timeframe is being met.
RECOMMENDATION
Should the P!ar_n':ng Cm:'.'.2ss'.'on City Council recommend approval of this application, we
recommend the following motion:
The P!ar-n:.ng Cmm,2ssicn City Council recommend approval of Site Plan Review 95-21 to
demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl/Filly's building and construct 8 movie screens and a retail
element, Variances to allow Non-Street Frontage Signs, Marquee sign, and hard surface coverage
and Preliminary Plat approval to replat two lots and three outlots into two lots and one outlot,
Cinema Addition as shown in plans dated received June 23, 1999, with the following conditions:
The applicant shall redesign the building plans to avoid conflict with the City's sanitary
sewer and water lines. The applicant shall have the option to relocate the sanitary sewer
or add additional manholes and case the sanitary sewer line underneath the building. The
water line shall be relocated a minimum of 10 feet away from any building structure. The
applicant shall also dedicate all new drainage and utility easements to encompass the
relocated utility lines. All utility construction shall be in accordance with the City's latest
edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant shall be responsible
for all adjustments to existing gate valves, manholes, and caich basins on the site. The
City's Utility Department will require an inspection of these adjustments. A security
escrow in the amount of $25,000 shall be supplied by the applicant to the City to
guarantee utility relocation/adjustments in conjunction with site plan approval. The
security shall be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction shall be restored with sod and/or
landscaping materials within two weeks of completion of the parking lot improvements.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the
necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
compliance with the conditions of approval and to guarantee restoration of the city
boulevards and adjustments to the city infrastructure. The plans shall be redesigned to
incorporate the following items: A) Incorporate an unimpeded street from Market
Boulevard easterly to Great Plains Boulevard. The minimum drive aisle width shall be 28
feet, face-to-face of curb. Parking shall be prohibited on both sides of the street. B) All
drive aisle and parking lot stalls shall be redesigned in accordance with City Code 20-
1118. C) The applicant shall prepare a revised traffic control plan for city staff to review
and approve prior to issuance of a building permit. The plans shall include placement of
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 18
stop signs and pedestrian crossings.
o
The applicant shall report to the city engineer the location of draintile found during
construction. The city engineer shall determine whether or not the draintiles can be
abandoned Or reconnected.
o
The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory
agencies such as the Health Department, Watershed District, and the City of Chanhassen's
Building Department.
o
Seating capacity of the theater complex shall be a maXimum of 1,959 2,8~0 2,600 seats
for both the first phase and the new addition collectively. (Approval of this number
of seats will result in a 35°/$ variance in the required parking spaces; 745 required -
487 provided based upon one stall per 4 seats as required by ordinance).
o
The applicant shall provide a cross access easement 30 feet wide over/through the
Dinner Theater site out to Great Plains Boulevard and construct a bituminous driveway
over the easement. The applicant and staff will work together to provide an
acceptable location for the east/west connection that will be constructed in the
future. The driveway shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide and constructed to a 7 ton
street design. The alignment of the driveway shall be subject to staff approval.
o
The building owner and/or their representatives meet with the Inspections Division as
soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
o
The applicant shall increase plantings for buffer yard areas in order to meet ordinance
requirements.
10.
The applicant shall increase plantings for parking lot trees in order to meet ordinance
requirements.
11.
The applicant shall increase landscape island width to a minimum of 10 feet or install
aeration tubing.
12. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted for city approval.
13.
Fire Marshal Conditions:
a. Fire lane signage and yellow curbing will be determined by the Chanhassen Fire
Marshal. Contact the Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and
curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904-1 1997 Uniform Fire Code.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 19
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps,
trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to
ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters.
Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1.
Co
Submit radius mm dimensions and parking lots to determine fire department
vehicle access. Submit turn dimensions to Chanhassen City Engineer and
Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to Section 902.2.2.3
1997 Uniform Fire Code.
In the proposed alleyway between the Cihema and the proposed retail there will be
absolutely no storage of combustibles allowed at any time. Appropriate signage
will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact wording of signs and
location.
The hard surface coverage shall be ~t~aeed-t~6~ 95%. This coverage will exceed the
maximum hard surface coverage permitted by ordinance by 30%.
Dedicate the typical utility and drainage easements on the plat.
Meet with the building official to address building issues at the applicant's earliest
convenience.
The "DENTIL BLOCK" imitation,, when built, shall have a minimum projection of c, ne
fzdt 8 inches.
All windows shall be constructed in a fashion that resembles the attached illustration of
windows with a windowsill.
All new painted precast field material shall be upgraded to a better material.
The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the sign area shown on the plato
The letters and logos shall be restricted to 30 inches in height. All individual letters and
logos comprising each sign shall have a minimum depth of five inches and shall be
constructed with a translucent facing over neon tube illumination. Tenant neon illuminated
signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper
name and logo. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted
provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of
the sign area. Projecting signs are permitted. The size of the projecting sign should not
exceed three feet in height and 6 square feet. One sign is allowed for each tenant. All signs
shall be doublefaced and have a decorative hanging bracket. Illuminated letters may be
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 20
attached to the exterior of the projecting sign. Projecting signs may not be illuminated from
within. All signs will require a sign permit.
21. Both the cinema addition and the retail building shall be built concurrently.
22.
All roof top and ground mounted equipment shall be screened from views. The existing
rooftop units above the existing theater shall also be screened.
23. Columns shall be added below the arch at the entrance and exit points of the alley."
24.
The applicant will provide a long term parking plan the to City Council showing
locations justifying seating capacity. Also present to the City Council why the 5.88
ratio should be accepted.
25.
Review the concerns that the Planning Commission had with the alley between the
retail and the cinema in terms of screening, lighting, presentation, and gating.
26.
The applicant review and recommend any facade changes possible to the old part of
the cinema to make it reflective and consistent with the new cinema.
27.
The applicant show the City Council pedestrian circulation flow coming from any
off site locations and also internal pedestrian flow."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Architectural Detail exceptions.
2. Examples of projecting signs.
3. Letter from Vicki Nelson, Country Suites, dated May 18, 1999.
4. Application and Project narrative.
5. Memo from Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, dated April 28, 1999.
6. Multi-Theater Parking prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff dated February 26, 1998.
7. Traffic review of proposed expansion for Chanhassen Cinema, prepared by Benshoof &
Associates dated November 11, 1999 and an update prepared on November 18, 1999.
8. Memo from Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal, dated April 26, 1999.
9. EDA minutes dated January 28,1999.
10. Aerials prepared by staff.
11. Hoisington Koegler Group revised parking worksheet.
12. Letter from Bob Copeland dated August 17, 1999.
13. Wall detail cross section.
14. Planning Commission minutes dated July 7, 1999 and August 4, 1999.
15. Vision 2002.
Chanhassen Cinema
August 24, 1999
Page 21
16. Section of Theater Poster Cabinet.
17. Colored rendering.
18. Marquee Sign Design.
19. Sign Criteria.
20. Lighting detail.
21. Site Plan and plat.
g:\planXsa\chan cinema2.doe
DENTIL BLOCKS - An ornamental moulding composed
of a series of evenly-spaced small blocks usually placed
undcr a cornice or overhang.
CORNICE- (,cncrall5 refers to a horizontal, projccting
moulding that crowns thc top of a wall. In classical archi-
tcctt,rc, it is thc uppcm-~ost part of the cntal)laturc.
TYPICAL WINDOW PARTS
1. GI,ASS
2. FILh,.ME
3. SASI 1
4. \\'00I) SII,L
5. SI'ONF, SII,I.,
PILASTER - A square or rectangular representation of a
column that projects from a wall surface.
ay-18-99 IO:llA P.O1
A ('ozy Stay At A
Comtbrta~ble Prk'c
I,',~l N I'1<~'' :¢L:l'l't;s
M~y lg, 1999
'1'o: Sha~
1 fi Shm~, as I ~ going to be ~ mee~ ~e rest of the ~y. I thoughl il might
bc caster to t~ you lbr now, and we can touch b~rse at the end oflhe Week. I will
bc out of town mlfil Thursday, and won't be in until ~urs~y eve~g4 So, Friday
would be lhe next ~ I would be av~able. ~yway ........... 1 had a f~w o~jcctions
and cotmem~ about thc const~cfi~ to take place behind ~e Count, guiles.
3.
I do not want a garbage disposal area outside our back door and by our
coun~.,ard. This is an entrance for our gut:sis, and also a nice al'ca ibr them
to walk through, sit, eot, I don't think it would be approlniat¢ tbr our
walkway to bc blocked for the dumpstcrs 1° bc emptied. I do rlot w,'mt thc
smell of garbage to llow into our ¢our~_'ard or Ibc hotel, Thc 0Un'¢nt
disposal ama they use, thc doom are left open 24hfs etc.
Thc existing wall bem/¢¢n their building and ours rcmaim "unlm[shcd.-' ' "
This wall is not attractive and I would like to sec it replaced. [ Wotfld I/kc a
chance to rc,~4ew whatever plans are made regarding this wall,
[ am concerned about thc alley way that appeat,'s on Ih~ prints I have seen.
It they must have something of the sort, I stmogest cabbie stone, ::and large
attractive cit3.' lanterns, not a drive tlu'ough area but a Well lit w~lk~¥ay area.
If it is kepi well Iii clean, we can keep it a safe area and nol a h2jng-out area.
(Who would bc responsible for keeping this area clean and conlrollcd.)
Another oplion would be controlled (locked) entrances and all dumpsters
could be kept behind the retail section.
.I.
Iatn cmious as to th~ nzcd tbr more theaters, ffth¢ current on~s are busy I
guess that's great. I just wonder what thc/}, will do for the bu.sinesses of
Chanhass~,m,
I have worked in Chanhassen for over Jive years now. ()ne of the biggest
requests we get I?om our guests is a location for se,'ttbod dining.i Has
ti,fy ever been approached tbr something like that? We have ~o send om'
guests lo Itloomington to file Red Lobster Ibr this. With all thc !new places
to eat coming in, I hope we are getting a variety-. I Ii:el this _typd would bc
bringfing many new people to our area.
May-18-99 10:11A P.02
'[l~ank you Sharmi~ fbr y~ur time, I will bc in touch with you Friday.
FRDN CITY OF CHRNHRSSEN 04.02.1999 14:45 P. 2
~ CHANHASSEN~ MN 65317
I (612) ~37-1900
DEVELOP~g~T ~EVI~W APPLIOATION
~PHDNE (Day time) G t ~ m .-~ ~ [-, [ ~ '~ . TELEPHONE:
ComPrehensive Pier, Amendment
. .. Tempora~Salos Pormlt
Condltl~nal Use Por~~lt __ Vacation of ROW/E~soments
Interim'Use Permit _ K. Variance
Non-~formln~ O~{ permit -- Wetland Alteration'Permit
R~o~lng _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits ,
Sign Plan Revl~w Notification Sign
~,~ .. . . .
Site Pl~ Review' ~ Escrow for Filing Fees/A~orney Cost"
($50 CUPISP~ACNA~AP~etes
and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB)
Subd)~]~lo9' TOTAL FEE $ g C >~ o'0
A ~,I ~f all proper yownors wlthln 500 feot of fha boundarlos of the propo~y must
appll~tlon.
g~lldlng material ~amplos must bo submlttod with slto plan
- ~ wildly-slx iptl sl [e ~ [ g
tran~j3arenc~, for {~ach.plan sheet.
'" Eeqrow will be equlred for other applications through the development contract
1DTE-When multiple apf ications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
F~OM CITY OF CH~HH~SSEH 04.02.1999 14:45
'* NOTE - When mu~lple
PROJECT NAME_ O H
LOCATI ON P~ ~'~,~-
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ppflcations are processed, the appmprlata foe shall be oha,'ged for each a~rloatlon.
, m m m mJ m _
~p~eO In full and ~ ~pew~,en ~rclearly ptl~ed and ~ ~ a~anled
[[c~ble C~ Ordinance provisions. Before filing this appil~tion, you s~uld. ~er w~
ermine the spec,tO ordinance and p~dural re4ulrem$~ ~pllc~le to ~ur
~aklng application for the ~es~lbed a~ton by the C~ and that I am ras~nslblo
Ih regard to thls requesl. T~Is appfl~tlon s~uld be processe~ in my nama
a~ regarding any ma~er pe~alnlng to this ~tlon. I have affache~ a ~py of
~wner's Duplicate Ce~Elcate of T~le, ~stra~ of T~le or ~rchase agree~nt), or !
this appll~tlon a~ the fee owner has also s~ned this ~l~tlon.
of the deadflnes for aubm~sslon of material aM the progress of thls ~pllcatlon. I
ees may be charged for tonsuring feel feaslbll~y ~udles, etc. w~h an
h the study. T~e ~cume~s and I~o~atlon I ~ve subm~ed are l~e and mne~ to the
[he approval or gra~lng of the ~, ~uch ~ s~ll ~ i~al~ unlaas they are
~ for which the ~rovaV~ Is gm,ed w~hln 1~0 days w~h the Ca,er
me~ returned to C~y Haft
Data
...... Dste '"
.... Fee Pa~ Re~lpt No ....
o(:nla~ ~aff for e ~py of the ~aff re~ ~loh ~I! be awllable on Friday prior
PRESENT ZONING ~
REQUESTED ZONING _
'PRESENT LAND USE DE.
REOUESTED LAND USE
,REASON FOR THiS
This ts to certify that i
with all Cl~ r~{:iulremehts
whom the C!I~' should con
ownership (e'lt,her coPY Df~
aulhodze~ per, on Io ~ke
I wlll keep my,self Info,rmec
understand that additi0n'alt
authorizatlon:l~ pr0ce6d w~
of my knowle,,l:f~e. ,
I also underst, anc~ that after
against ~he t~le to the ~rope
~lce and the ~orlglna~.d0c~
$iiinaiJre of ~p~toant
$1.gna~ure of Fee Owner
Application Received on
· Tha appllcaht shouid
meellng.
CHANHASSEN ENTERTAINMENT RETAIL COMPLEX
PHASE III June 18, 1999
BACKGROUND
A. ENTERTAINMENT RETAIL COMPLEX
1. A three phase redevelopment was presented in 1994 and eventually approved in 1996.
a. Phase I was the eight screen cinema which opened in March, 1998.
b. Phase. II is the Frontier building redevelopment which just opened.
c. Phase III originally consisted of the bowling alley, a new restaurant
and approximately 5,000 sf of retail shops. Phase III now consists of an
eight screen addition to the cinema and approximately 9,000 sf
of retail shops.
B. The Phase III project was approved by the Chanhassen Development Authority
in January of this year.
GENERAL
A. This Phase III project consists of an addition to the cinema and about
9,000 sf of new retail shops which face Market Blvd. on the west.
B. The existing bowling building will be demolished leaving just the cinema building.
The existing marquee over the existing entrance to the cinema will be removed.
Ce
The addition to the cinema will contain a new main entrance and lobby on
the south side. The addition will have eight more screens bringing the
total number of screens to 16. These eight new auditoriums will contain
about 1,400 seats bringing the total number of seats to about 2,800. All new seating
will be stadium seating. One new auditorium will have 350 seats with
a 60 foot wide screen which is twice the width of today's screens.
'1. The expanded cinema will be entered at grade on the south side with
stairs inside to bring patrons up to the higher floor level inside.
Wheel chair access will be in the main entrance on the south side and up to the
lobby floor level via an elevator.
D. The retail shops will be on the west side and will face west and south.
The 9,000 sf will be divided into three to six shops. So far, a Dairy Queen has
expressed strong interest.
1. The new shops will be entered at grade on the west side as well as possibly
the south side.
Page 1
CHANHASSEN ENTERTAINMENT RETAIL COMPLEX
PHASE III June 18, 1999
Ee
The existing parking lot will be reconstructed with new islands, striping and
landscaping. The parking lot will be made pedestrian friendly by adding
striped cross walks to the sidewalks.
We plan to start construction of the cinema addition in October 1999
and open in May, 2000. Construction of the new retail will coincide with the
cinema addition.
i11. APPLICATION INFORMATION
A. APPLICANT
1. The applicant is Chanhassen Properties, LLC at 5300 Hyland Greens Dr., Suite 200,
Bloomington, MN. Telephone is 612-832-5302. The property owner is currently Dan
Dahlin. We have a purchase agreement with Dahlin to purchase the property.
B. FEE
1. Delivered with application:
Subdivision Replat
Site Plan Review
$10/1,000 SF X 39,000 SF =
Variance Fee
Total Fee
$150.00
$250.00
$39O.00
$75.OO
$865.00
C. NAME
1. Name of project is Chanhassen Entertainment Retail Complex, Phase III
D. USE
1. The cinema addition will be used to house a new lobby and eight movie auditoriums
with about 1,400 new seats. The retail building will house three to six new retail tenants.
E. ZONING
1. The property is zoned General Business and is being used as a bowling ally.
Page 2
CHANHASSEN ENTERTAINMENT RETAIL COMPLEX
PHASE III June 18, 1999
F. PROJECT DATA
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. Building Height:
Parcel Size:
Floor Area: Cinema Addition
Retail Building
Building Coverage
Impervious Surface
Parking Area
Number of Employees (mostly p.t.)
Number of New Seats
Parking Required by City Consultant
Parking Provided
Cinema Addition 38 feet
Retail Building 23 feet
114,000 SF
30,000 SF
9,000 SF
34%
95%
61%
5O
1,400
~3g
G. Roof Top Equipment
1. Roof top equipment will be screened by the parapets Surrounding the buildings
H. SIGNAGE
1. Movie Marquee:
2. Retail Building:
see attached details
see attached narrative by KKE & Sign Criteria
!. AWNINGS
1. See attached narative by KKE
J. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. None involved
K. FIRE PROTECTION
1. Both buildings will be fully protected by a monitored, wet fire sprinkler system.
L. PARKING
1. The Hoisingt.On Koegler Group's report commissioned by the city and dated
July 27, 1998 found that there is sufficient parking for the entire entertainment block
including the cinema addition and a 6,000 sf restaurant. Based on the staff's
recommendation, we have deleted the restaurant and added 9,000 sf
of retail. This change of use improves the parking situation.
Page 3
CHANHASSEN ENTERTAINMENT RETAIL COMPLEX
PHASE !11 June 18, 1999
Using Hoisington's findings, the supply and demand for the 2,800
seat cinema, the new 9,000 sf retail and the 11,000 sf Frontier retail
is as follows:
USE SIZE
PEAK
RATE
PEAK ~DJUSTED
DEMAND I DEMAND J
Cinema 2,800 0.17 477 · 477
NeTM Retail 9,000 4.0 36 29
Frontier Retail 11,000 2.0 24 19
TOTAL DEMAND
TOTAL STALLS AVAILABLE
525
487
3. This is 52 stalls less than previously submitted because the east/west traffic
connection has been widened at the request of the city staff.
4. Our own independent researCh supports Hoisington's findings.
o
Further, there are approximately tWo hundred city owned parking stalls
across West 78th Street from the entertainment block. These stalls would
be available at peak times.
M. TRAFFIC
We retained the firm of Benshoof & Associates to study the effect
of the proposed project on traffic in the area. A copy of Benshoof's
report dated November 11, 1998 is attached for your review.
. o
In short, Benshoof recommends an east west connection from Market Blvd.
to Great Plains Blvd. We agree to make this a condition of approval.
Further, the connection is 30 feet wide as requested by the staff.
Page 4
KKE
Korsunsky Krank Erickson
Architects. h~¢.
300 I:i~sl A~cnue North
FAX 5 ~-?'92
CHANHASSEN ENTERTAINMENT/RETAIL COMPLEX
The proposed expansion of the existing eight (8) screen theatre to sixteen (16) screens and additional
9,000 SF of small retail will complete Phase III of the Entertainment/Retail Complex. The intention
of the design is to create an entertainment/shopping atmosphere that does not look like an addition,
but reflects a sense of permanence and character that is historically established in the unique charm
of downtown Chanhassen. The design team spent much time walking the site and the surrounding .
area to better understand the issues and character that this unique site entails. The relationship of the
theater and shops to the rest of downtown is critical in maintaining the pedestrian atmosphere.
Special attention was paid in addressing concerns of the view from the existing hotel. The same
quality of details, colors and materials on the theatre are consistent on the back side.
The existing Bowling Alley will be demolished leaving just the Cinema. The addition to the cinema
will contain a new main entrance and lobby on the south side. The eight (8) new auditoriums will
contain approximately 1,400 seats bringing the total number of seats to about 2800. All new seating
will be stadium seating. One new auditorium will have 350 seats with a 60 ~foot wide screen which
is twice the width of today's screens. The expanded cinema will be entered at grade on the south
side with a grand staircase and elevator to bring patrons up to the higher floor level inside. The
existing ramp on the east side will be used for exiting the cinema as well as handicap access to the
abandoned existing lobby which will be converted to office or retail. As part of this project, certain
improvements will be made to the original cinema such as aesthetic facade upgrades. The retail
shops offer excellent opportunities for small cafes and shops that can take advantage of the theatre
traffic.
Building Orientation:
The Cinema's new lobby is oriented for better visibility of the marquee from main roadways as well
as better distribution of parking stalls overall on the site. The retail shops are oriented to the west
and south to protect retail parking stalls crossing over from the cinema parking, and to take
advantage of views to the storefronts from the major roadways. Service for the retail is handled
through the corridor that is formed between the shop space and the cinemaexpansion. Deliveries
and trash are serviced from the north end of the retail. The service corridor is also functioning for
deliveries to the theatre and for exiting the Cinema. The close grouping of the two buildings create
short distances for pedestrian movement to and from the Cinema and shops.
KKE No. 99-08-1035-01
April 1, 1999
Revised June 17, 1999
Page -2-
Site Amenities:
An outdoor eating plaza.is provided at the southwest comer of the retail building. Umbrella tables,
benches and planters are encouraged in the plaza. The east side of the theatre is enhanced with
increased landscaping and seating to create a more friendly environment for pedestrians an'iving
from the east. Streetscape elements such as bike racks, benches, ornamental lights and paving
patterns in the sidewalks are incorporated to enrich the pedestrian experience. Benches have been
added along Pauly Drive and Market Boulevard for the community to use for resting and viewing the
area. The benches are to be wrought iron with wooden backs for comfort and the historical
character.
Building Design:
Building Mass:
The Cinema addition is designed with a higher height than the existing Cinema in order to
accommodate the stadium seating. The entry lobby and marquee are intentionally proportioned with
increased height in order to integrate the two masses together.
The existing light colored precast will be painted a darker, more reddish color in order to de-
emphasize the mass both on the south facade as well as the west facade. The upper portion of the
cinema will be a light color to give the scale of the Cinema a lower profile. The new entry lobby is
angled and much attention to form is given to the marquee sign to add interest to the flat backdrop of
the Cinema. The retail shops have varying roof lines for interest, and special architectural tower
forms at the ends of the building help in the transition of heights from Cinema to shops. The use of
canopies and undulated facade fronts help to add shadow and diminish the strip effect.
Facade Design:
The Cinema addition facade will incorporate E.I.F.S. to match the existing precast texture and colors
in order to integrate the building as one. The existing facade and addition will be enhanced by
applying 4" thick pilasters to the flat design in order to add shadow and interest. The light color will
be painted a brick color to warm the facade and make it less dominant. The existing "window"
above the original theatre entry will have a cornice and sign protrusion to give a better integration
and appearance as a true window. Canvas awnings will be added over the windows of the entry
where the marquee will be removed to enhance the leaseability of the space and soften the comer.
Details such as the metal cornice, patterns in the precast, metal railings, and rock-face block base
will be repeated in exact colors, profiles and details in order to integrate the theatre addition.
KKE No. 99-08-1035-01
April 1, 1999
Revised June 17, 1999
Page -3-
The new Cinema entry lobby will incorporate brick columns with brick detailing and upper c0mice
to match existing. The brick will continue along the sides to maximize a brick appearance. Brick
will be incorporated surrounding the Cinema poster windows to increase the precent of brick on the
new Cinema addition facade. Glass curtainwalls are maximized to create an exciting atmosphere
when viewed in the evening. The movie poster announcements will be located on the south facade.
Recessed, operable windows will accommodate the announcements. These signs are surrounded in
E.I.F.S. mouldings with upper spandrel windows above to give-the appearance of turn of the century
grand lobby openings.
The retail shops have varying facade designs to give the appearance of old "Main Street" shops that
have evolved over time. The use of several brick colors and E.I.F.S. colors help to bring the scale of
the facades down to a pedestrian level. The use of transom windows, decorative lights, cornice
shapes, canvas awnings and block sills combine to add detail and charm to the shopping experience.
Individual tenants will be encouraged to use unique styles, design and colors of canvas awnings to
promote a more dynamic, less uniform facade. The final selections will be subject to Landlord
approval. The key comers feature tower forms with upper windows to imply a two-story character
reminiscent of the turn-of-the-century mainstreets. The standing seam metal roof form helps to call.
attention to the comer tower as a focal Point.
Screening:
Mechanical equipment and rooftop units will be screened by parapet. Rooftop units that are visible
on the existing Cinema will be painted to match the adjacent facade in order to diminish the
appearance. Trash enclosure will be made of integrally colored rock-face block to match the
building. The trash enclosure will be fully enclosed with a roof, and two sheetmetal overhead doors.
The view through the services corridor from the south side will be screened somewhat with
landscaping in the foreground to draw attention away from the corridor, yet not to create a security
problem. An upper archway will help to tie the buildings together, and screen the corridor.
Landscaping:
Plant materials are selected in regard to interesting structure, texture color, seasonal interest and its
ultimate growth characteristics. Landscaping has been added at the east end of building to soften the
area and heighten the pedestrian activity. Landscape opportunities have been maximized throughout
the site including boulevard drives down main entrance and throughout parking lots. The sidewalk
areas along the buildings have landscaped beds that create interesting outdoor "rooms" for
comfortable outdoor eating opportunities.
KKE No. 99-08-1035-01
April 1, 1999
Revised June 17, 1999
Page -4-
Si~nage:
Signage for retail shops are to maintain a consistent metal surround color (bronze). Individual letter
style and color is encouraged, yet controlled and reviewed by Landlord's discretion. All wall
signage shall be individually mounted letters. Maximum sign area for wall signs shall be of eight
percent (8%) of wall area not to exceed 60 SF or four percent (4%) of wall area not to exceed 200
SF. The use of backlit awnings or vinyl awnings are prohibited; however, the Landlord encourages
unique canopy styles and colors for variety. Building signage should not overpower the architectural
character, but serve as identity. Signage may be located in designated facade areas only. The new
theatre marquee is a unique design that creates a bright, colorful, festive statement reminiscent of
historical marquees of the 20's. Neon and tivoli lights are incorporated throughout. The underside
of the marquee and the back side will be finished with the same metal panel and colors as the front.
Movie titles will be located on the marquee using black background reader boards with gold letters.
The reader boards are motionless, and are the latest technology for a cleaner, easier wa3' of changing
titles.
KKE flROHITEOT$ FAX NO, 61234292~ r.u~/u~
~¥-21-1999 FRI 11:51
CHANHASSEN THEATRE
LANDSCAPING NARRATIVE
This site planning concept is based on principles of urban planning where shared parking, dcnsified
development, pedestrian fricndly environments, and buildings instead of parking dominate the
almosphere. Because of the urban nature of this development, the typical zoning code standards for
landscaping are contradictory to the desire for this "Main Street" appearance. As a trade-off for
meeting thc standard suburban green area calculation, we propose allowed crcdits for the following
street.scape clements in lieu of green space:
Outdoor eating pla?_~ at southeast corner
Umbrella tables
Bike racks
Benches
Addition of searing area and landscape on east side of theatre
Ornamental light fixtures in sidewalk area
Sidewalk patterning
Trees in planters in sidewalk areas
Pedestrian sidewalk connection through parking lot
Hedging added along parking lot as a buffer
Boulevard trees at main entries
CITYOF
CHANHASSEN
690 Ci~, Center Drive. PO Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Phone 612.937.1900
Ge,emi £~x 612.937.5739
£~gi,eeri,g ?ax 612937.9152
Public Sajqty Fax' 612.93(2524
I~b www. ci. cha,hasse,, mn. us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin A1-Jaff, Senior Planner
FROM: David Hempel, Assistant City Engineer }.'-~-/(~
DATE: June 30, 1999
SUB J: Site Plan Review for Cinema Expansion - Land Use Review No. 99-11
Upon review of the plans prepared by KKE dated April 2, 1999, revised June 16,
1999, I offer the following comments and recommendations:
PROJECT OVERVIEW
City staff met with the applicant back in mid-May to address several site plan issues
and to look at alternatives regarding the site plans, i.e. landscaping, hard surface
coverage, number of theaters, building features, parking and traffic issues. At that
meeting, the City expressed the willingness to evaluate proposed compromises on
some issues and give direction on others, however, never agreed to support them until
we had a chance to review the revised plans.
Upon review of the overall parking layout, the plans indicate 539 parking stalls
available. However, only 487 are proposed/existing including handicap stalls based on
staff's review. There is a mathematical error in the tabulation of stalls on, Sheet Cl.
Based on review of Hoisington's study of the entertainment complex, 525 parking
stalls were estimated to meet demands of the complex. This proposal is different than
what was proposed in the Hoisington study and therefore staff researched additional
resources on parking requirements.
A Multi-Theater Parking study prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff dated February 26,
1998 was used by the City of Plymouth to quantify the parking requirements of their
16 theater site. Staff reviewed the study and used a conservation ratio of 4.3 seats to
1 parking stall which equates to 558 parking stalls based on 2,400 seats (16 theaters).
This parking ratio does not include the proposed retail aspect (9,000 S.F.) which
would require another 45 parking stalls. The total parking proposed (487) is 20% less
than what is needed (603) to serve the site. A reduction of 440 seats in the theater
complex is necessary to coincide with the proposed parking.
Traffic circulation/parking lot layout was another contentious issue. Currently, Pauly
Drive is built as a city street halfway through of the site. Ten year old trees
(maple/ash, 6"-8" diameter) exist along both sides of the street. An 8-foot wide
trail/sidewalk already exists along the north side of Pauly Drive with trees and green
area. The plans propose modifying the alignment/configuration of Pauly Drive to add
Sharmin A1-Jaff
June 20, 1999
Page 2
more parking. This will result in retaining most of the south curb line and trees and
provide 37 parking stalls. However, the north side would be totally reconstructed and
provide for the east/west street to connect Market Boulevard to Great Plains
Boulevard. This east/west street was recommended in the Hoisington report and the
applicant's traffic study which staff also supports to relieve traffic congestion at the
intersection of Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive from the entertainment complex.
Staff has concerns with the reconfiguration of Pauly Drive. The modifications to the
bus turnaround area is not supported by staff. The proposed plans do not allow
enough room for bus tuming movements. The bus stop loses plaza area which
includes green area. The existing trees and sidewalk along the north curb of Pauly
Drive will be removed and replaced with a 10-foot wide sidewalk. Most of the drive
aisle widths in the parking lot are proposed at 24 feet which is less than city code (26
feet wide).
In conclusion, staff believes that the parking area of the site is too small for this
proposal to adequately serve the parking needs. The number of theaters should be
reduced to fit the site conditions. The city has a vested interest in this site and should
not compromise on city ordinances.
SITE GRADING
The plans propose to reconfigure portions of the parking lot as well as modify Pauly
Drive from the westerly access point to the site to the east. The existing Southwest
Metro bus pick up/drop off zone will be impacted by this proposal.
DRAINAGE
The site currently sheet drains to the south where the existing storm sewer system in
Pauly Drive conveys the parking lot runoff to the downtown regional stormwater pond
for pretreatment prior to discharging downstream. Minor adjustments to the existing
drainage improvements are proposed to accommodate the street reconfiguration. The
City's Surface Water Management fees would not be applicable to this development
since the property has been previously platted and all the stormwater improvements
are in place.
UTILITIES
The City has sanitary sewer and water 'lines that intersect the site from east to west just
south of the entertainment complex. According to the plans, the building remodeling
and expansion will encroach into the City's drainage and utility easement and will
actually build a portion of the structure over the existing sewer and water lines. This
encroachment would not be acceptable without further modifications to the City's
infrastructure. The water and sewer lines could be relocated by the applicant to avoid
the encroachment/conflict. A new drainage and utility easement would have to be
Sharmin A1-Jaff
June 20, 1999
Page 3
dedicated to the City as a result of this relocation. Existing drainage and utility
easements not being used could be vacated. An alternate option would be to leave the
existing sanitary sewer in place and add manhole structures on each side of the
building and case the sanitary sewer pipe so in the furore if a problem arises, the
sanitary sewer line can be easily replaced without having to excavate underneath the
building. The water line, however, will still need to be relocated from underneath the
building. Both the sewer and water lines are extremely old and fragile.
In conjunction with the parking lot improvements and building expansion, the existing
gate valves, manholes, and catch basins on the site may require adjustments. The
applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for all adjustments necessary. The
City Utility Department will require inspection of these adjustments as they occur.
The applicant shall contact the City's Utility Department to coordinate the appropriate
inspections.
A security escrow in the amount of $25,000 shall be supplied by the applicant to the
City to guarantee utility relocation/adjustments in conjunction with site plan approval.
The security shall be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow.
ACCESS/PARKING
The site is accessed from Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive. There are two existing
driveways off Pauly Drive and one from Market Boulevard. Pauly Drive is still a city
street with a 50 foot right-of-way. Previous application for the cinema complex
requested vacation of Pauly Drive back in 1996. The vacation request was approved,
however, never recorded. The vacation was contingent upon the applicant providing
certain things to the City and entering into a site plan agreement. Therefore, if Pauly
Drive is to be vacated, it will need to go through the formal hearing process again.
Pauly Drive currently dead ends at the easterly curb cut to the entertainment complex.
At the east end of the cinema complex parking lot, there is a gravel surfaced driveway
which serves as another access route behind the dinner theater and scene shop out to
Great Plains Boulevard.
According to the traffic report generated by Benshoof & Associates, Inc. dated
November 11, 1998 and supplementary comments to that report dated November 18,
1998, it recommended that an unimpeded corridor (east/west) road be constructed to
provide adequate traffic movements to and from the site. Based on the traffic report
with this type of use, traffic will experience significant delays at the intersection of
Pauly Drive and Market Boulevard (Level F). The supplementary comments to the
traffic report indicated that a second option would be to provide an east/west street
with parking provided on one or both sides. The second option also indicated the
main benefit is to only increase the availability of parking stalls. This option does not
provide the level of traffic safety desired or necessary with this development. Staff
strongly recommends that an unimpeded east/west connector street from Market
Sharmin AI-Jaff
June 20, 1999
Page 4
Boulevard to Great Plains Boulevard should be required to adequately service the
cinema complex as well as future development east of the site. Attached is an example
of staffs recommendation for an east/west connection. Parking shall be prohibited on
both sides of the east/west street. The minimum drive aisle width should be 28 feet,
face-to-face adjacent the building. Cross-access easements and maintenance
agreements for cross parking should be prepared by the applicant for each business to
access the site and utilize the parking lot.
According to City Code Section 20-1118, drive aisle widths between two rows of
parking shall be a minimum of a 26 feet. Some of the drive aisles proposed do not
meet this and should be modified to comply with city ordinance. Staff is also
concerned about the turning radiuses for emergency vehicles. The applicant's
engineer/site planner may need to increase radiuses and/or drive aisle widths to
accommodate fire apparatus vehicles after further review with the Fire Marshal. This
may also result in the loss of additional parking stalls. Staff recommends that the main
drive aisle areas be 28 feet wide adjacent to the building with a minimum 20-foot wide
radiuses at the intersections.
Traffic control will also be an issue. The applicant will need to prepare a revised
traffic signage plan for staff to review and approve prior to issuance of a building
permit.
MISCELLANEOUS
Development is proposed over a number of outlots and lots. Replatting of the
property into a single lot and block or multiple lots and blocks will be required;
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The applicant shall redesign the building plans to avoid conflict with the City's
sanitary sewer and water lines. The applicant shall have the option to relocate the
sanitary sewer or add additional manholes and case the sanitary sewer line
underneath the building. The water line shall be relocated a minimum of 10 feet
away from any building structure. The applicant shall also dedicate all new
drainage and utility easements to encompass the relocated utility lines. All utility
construction shall be in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard
Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant shall be responsible for all
adjustments to existing gate valves, manholes, and catch basins on the site. The
City's Utility Department will require an inspection of these adjustments. A
security escrow in the amount of $25,000 shall be supplied by the applicant to the
City to guarantee utility relocation/adjustments in conjunction with site plan
approval. The security shall be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow.
Sharmin A1-Jaff
June 20, 1999
Page 5
All disturbed areas as a resuk of construction shall be restored with sod and/or
landscaping materials within two weeks of completion of the parking lot
improvements.
o
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the
necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to
guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval and to guarantee restoration
of the city boulevards and adjustments to the city infrastructure. The plans shall be
redesigned to incorporate the following items: A) Incorporate an unimpeded
street from Market Boulevard easterly to Great Plains Boulevard. The minimum
drive aisle width shall be 28 feet, face-to-face of curb. Parking shall be prohibited
on both sides of the street. B) All drive aisle and parking lot stalls shall be
redesigned in accordance with City Code 20-1118. C) The applicant shall prepare
a revised traffic control plan for city staff to review and approve prior to issuance
of a building permit. The plans shall include placement of stop signs and
pedestrian crossings.
The applicant shall report to the city engineer the location of draintile found during
construction. The city engineer shall determine whether or not the draintiles can
be abandoned or reconnected.
o
The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory
agencies such as the Health Department, Watershed District, and the City of
Chanhassen's Building Department.
6. The applicant shall replat the outlots and Lots 1 and 2, Block I, Chanhassen Mall
into lots and blocks pursuant to city ordinance.
7. Seating capacity of the theater complex shall be a maximum of 1,950 seats.
o
The applicant shall acquire a cross access easement 30 feet wide over/through the
Dinner Theater site out to Great Plains Boulevard and construct a bituminous
driveway over the easement. The driveway shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide
and constructed to a 7 ton street design. The alignment of the driveway shall be
subject to staff approval.
jrns
Attachment: Hoisington Koegler Group Parking Lot Layout dated April 28, 1999.
c: Anita Benson, City Engineer
\xc fs l\vol2Xeng~dave'xocXcinema expansion2.doc
2:7' 9.B (FR[) 14:30 PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF
TEL:612 378 0019
NO. 146
g17
When the specifications for the proposed Regal Clnern~s' Minnetonka cinema
aJ'e eYmluated against the seven (7) methods of paddng a,qalysis contained in this
rep~.rt, the following results are obtained:
Number cf Se~.~s: 3,212
Number of Parking Spaces: 80;3 ~'
~arkino_ Adeq~acv
City Requirements: 1,071 spaces
Method 1: (Natl(:nsl Norms) 803 spaces
Method 2: (LocsJ Norms) 803 spaces ~¢, o
Method 3: (ParkJnQ Generation) 834 spaces
Method 4.. (Parking Generation> 627 spaces
Method 5: (Local Observallon) 783 spaces
Method 6: {Mature Market) 668 spaces ~,~
Method 7: (Regal S~le~) 706 sD~ce~
Average Ratio ~ space per 4,31 ~eat=
Based on the results of these ~alyses, a standard of 1:4 seats Is a reasonable
stand~d tc a~¢ly to the proposea theater, la cniy cna instance, (Method 3) did the
estimate exceed a startled cf 1:4 s~ats (by a 6mall margin) a~d that is the method
that uses ITE s~dards which the ITS considers to be unreliable when utilized on multi-
screen projects. None of the methods of analysis support a st~nd~rd ~
several Indicate that In [he long run, the standard of 1 ,.Z seats may prove t~ 5e ~
consecutive figure.
RA 14
RSON$
INCI(E.qHOFF
~4~22~98 07: 54
PARSONS BRINOKERHOFP
TEL:612 378 0019
NO. 146
P. O0$
~02
MULTI-THEATER PARKING
Mlnnetonka, Minnesota
Submitted to
Centres Group, Ltd,
Submitted by
Parsons Brin=kerhoff
Minneapolis, Mlllllel~a
February 26, 1998
PARSONS BRINOKERHOFP ?E~:612 ~?~ 0019
No. z46
P. O04
TABLE OF C ONTENT$
2.
3.
4,
5,
6,
7,
8.
g.
Introduotion
Method 1: National Norms
Method 2: Lo~l Norms
Method 3: ITE Parking Generation
Method 4: ITE Journal Trip Generation
Method ~: Local Parking Studies
Method 6: Mature Market Parking Studies
Methocr 7: Sales Based Parking Generation
Conclusion
Appendix
1
2
3
4
5
7
11
12
14
15
YEARS
~4x2~2/98 07: 54
PARSONS BRIffOKffRffOFF
TEL:612 378 0019
N0.146
?, 005
1784
I~tl'Od.aion
Regal Cinemas./no, is planning to open several multi-screen theaters In the
Twin Cltles at~, Thes~ multi-screen theater c~mplexe$ are relatively new to the Twin
Cities area and therefore, it is likely that some of the cities where Regal Intends to
locate may have dated parking requirements In their zeroing ordinances that were not
developed to regulate theater complexes of this type, The purpose of thls report lo to
provide inf~3rrnatlon that may be useful In evsluatlng the adequacy of a local parking
standard for multi-theater complexes. Several different methods of multl4heater
parking estimation have been included in order to give a bread representation of
technical analysis,
,.Smaller theater complexes (2-4 screens) generally maintain their profitability by
running top grossing films for a short period of time in order to ensure that the theaters
are kept near full occupsncy at peak periods. In contrast, large multi-screen tl~eater~
generally maintsin their profitability by utilizing staff more efficiently, This is possible
because multi-theater complexes continue to show films for a much longer time p~riod,
even when they are not drawing the crowds of the new releases, By staggering start
times and balancing new releases with 6glng films, the flow of customers csn be mere
efficiently managed, although overall theater occupancy is reduced.
The net effect of these operational differences on p~rktng demand, as stated In
the Urban Land Institute (UU) report, Shared Parking, 1983, Is Bat the prob;~bility of
achieving full seating eapacib/at all screens decreases as the number of screens
increa~;es. This observation has been noted in many other technical reports as welt as
in Studies of existing multi-theaters in operatic)n, some of which are included in this
report.
BFIINGKERHOFF I
F'E~3.-]?' 98(FR{) 14:28
PARSONS BRINGKERHOFF TEL:6]2 ~78 0019
P. O06
C~oml~ari~on to Hatlanal Norms - Method 1
The American Planning Association (APA) I~as produced a pt~blieatlon entitled
Off. treat Parklllg Reclulrem~nta (May, 1991) Mat is generally viewed as one of the
best sources of unbiased information on national standards for parking requirements,
In '.ha report. APA reviewed 127 zoning ordinances from ~crosa the oount~/t~
determine the mlnlmum and m~x[mum parking requirements for each land use
category. APA ohose a broad sample that iht;furies juriscllctlons trom sg states and
h~s communities wlth populations under .~0,000, suburbs, and even larger cities such
ss Dallas and Honolulu (Attac~hment A),
The APA re,oor~ Indicates that the minimum requirement in Its sample for movie
theaters is one Sl3aCe per five seats and the m~Imum requirement is one space per
four seats. (Note: the report Indlc.~tes that these standards do not t~ke into account
that parking requirements are often reduced because theaters near shopping centers
often receive a reduction in required parking due to shared perking previsions in the
city's zoning ordinance,)
Additional information on natlonat parking Standards was provided by the City of
Apple Valley, which is one of the latest cities to approve a multi-theater I~roject
(Attachment B). AI3ple Valley had a d~ted parking standard of one parking space per
three seats, h~wever, after a review of current Infcrm~tlen, Appte Valley has chosen to
apply a standard of one parking space per four seats, In line with national standards.
CK~RHOFF
,]4×22×98 07: 54
?E8.-27' 98(FRI} 14:29
PARSONS BRINOKERHOFF
TEL;612 ~78 O01g
N0.146
P, 007
{3oral. risen te Local Neem8 - Method ~
Centres' Group, Ltd, performed a telephone survey of metro area Jurisdictions to
determine the prevailing etendarda In the Twin Cities area (Attachment C). As might be
expected from an area with few multi-theater complexes, the aurvey.indlcated that
there were still almost 47% of the .rnunblpalltles with dated standards (more stringent
than 1:4). (Note: Apple Valley, Eagan, and Maple Grove are listed {ia having
standa~'0s more stringent than the national norms, however, all three have apl~roved
p~rldng ratios cf one ped'l<lng space per four seats or more In their most recent
approvals.)
84~22x98 07: 54
PARSONS BRINBKERHOFF TEL:612 ~78 0019
008
Parking Generation - Method {
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (IT£) ha8 published a documen!
entitled Parking Generation (1~87) which Includes movie t~eatera as a land use. The
peak parking spaces occupied on a weekday (Attaohment D) Indloates an average
rats of 0.19 Sl:)aoes occupied per seat (5,26 seats per spate). The Saturday peak
parking generation rate (see Attachment E) is 0.26 spaces o~up}ed per aG{at (3.85
seat6 luer
(Note: Application of the ITE st. endards to large m[,iltl-theater project.s is not
advlsec2. The ITE data is basecl on observations at only nine sites and both {ts
publication date (1987) and the average number of seats In the studies (1,562) indicate
that the ITE studies were conducted on the older, limited screen theater type. ITE does
recognize this shortcoming and lnc~lu~ie~ text in Parking Oeneratlon that ~autions,
"more data are needed to reflect the recent trends towar~{$ multi-screen
Since the probability of sol, laving full seatl~g ca~)aclty at ail ~creens decreases
as the number of screens increase; t{~e ITE Parking Gelleratlon standards should be
cc)ns]dared conservative,
~IJIINC~KEflHOFP 4
PARSONS BR{NOKERHOFF
TEL;612 378 0019
~08
PaFklng Generation - Method 4
A more detailed movie theater analysis has been produced that examined 6
theaters (57 total weeks of data) covering both Iow-attendance per{ods and high
attendance periods of the year, Seating capacity of.the theaters studied ranged Eom
162 to 625, Thi~ analysis provides separate analysis of suburban mall theaters and
urban theaters, wi'deb la significant since they tend to have c~{fferent parking generat{or~
rates due to the modal apE{t, Saturday peak data Is Illustrated since It Is the weekly
peak generat~°n day,
?able t
Movie Theater Trip Generation
Suburban Location (Modal.SPlit)
Saturday Peak - Per $oreen
~Time 'in Out.
12:00 1.19 0.04
1:00 1.11 0.33
2;00 9,71 1,19
3:00 15.4 11.1
4:00 8.32 ...... 9.11
5:09 ...... lP..3 1.6.40
6:00 25,4 8.32
7;00 19.0 12,30
8:00 39.2 25.40
9:00 24.9 19.00
10:00 7,24 39,20
11:00 .... 37.1 24.90
Source; ITEJ~urnaf, 'Movie Theelar Trip Generation Rates," June 1985
FEB.-27' 98(FRI) 14:29
PARSONS BRINGKERHOFF TEL:612 ~78 0019
P, OIO
The movie theater trip generation rates can be used to determine the folk3wJng
parking generation rates:
Table la
Movie Theater Parking Generation
l~uburban Location (Medal 8plit)
6aturday Peak- Per $ofeen
12:00 1,19
1:00 1,11
2:00 9.11
,3:00 1,5.4
4:00 8.32
5:00 12,3
6:00 25.4
7:00 19.0
8:00 3g,2
g:O0 24,9
10:0o 7,24
11:00 37,1
(Note; This method of analysis w{{I a{so zend to overstate the need for parl<ing
since the study utilized theater complexes with ~ average of only t~o screens per
complex, As stated previously, since the probability of achiev{ng full seating capacity
at all screens decree, see us the number of screens Increase, this sfandarct should also
be considered to be conservative.)
g R iRi~KIIE R N O F i: 6
:EB.-27 98(FRI] 14:29
PARSONS BRINOKERHOFF
0019
P, 011
Local Paddng 8tudle~ - Method
A telephone survey was ~ndu~-tad of the following communities with muM.
screen theater exper{once, The Plann{n.g Department {n eaoh city was eont~cted and
the project manager for the approval of the muM-screen cinema was requested for the
interview.
Table
Survey Oltle6
Cji,/ '--'l'he-~;~" ,~,eati,llg _
CoOn Ral:)ids Showplace 16 Theatres Stadium
Eagan. Eagan Cinema 9 Stand~rd
Lakevllle Laker{Ilo Theatre Stadium
Maple Grove Maple Grove Cinema lO Standard
~Whlte Rear Tow_ns_hip__...Wh, Ire, Bear Township Theat.re- ...... ~t_an0arfl .... .=
With the exceptlon of Coon Rapids, all Interviewed clty officials indicated ~1o
problems with parking at the theaters. Parking requirements ranged from I space per
3 seats to 1 space per 4,2.
The planning official in Coon Rapids indicated that his opinion was that the
parking situation at the theater was generally acceptable, however he admitted that
when the facility opened, the success was "beyond hie wildest exoectatie)n". When
asked about ~he source of any problems, the official Indicated that s traffic signaJ had
not been installed prior to opening as Intended; the novelty of having the first stadium
seat. lng In the area attracted theater customers fr<3m a great clistance; and fine.y, the
impact of the opening of the movie Titan/c. When asked about the present status, the
official indicated that it was "c;~{ming down by
Based on the results of the telephone survey, It was decided to perform on-sits
observations of two theaters, Lakevilie and Coon Rapids. These two sites were chosen
PJLFI$OM$ 7
IBRIN¢;Ir.~RflQFF
FE, B.-27'98(FRIl 14:29
PARSONS BRIN~KERHOFF TEh:612 ~78 0019
N0.~46
In an effort to be conservative, Occupancy re, tee at these two theaters eon be
expected to be higher than national norms due to the followi~g factors:
· These two theaters have eta~llum seating which shoul¢l attract a significant
number of customers from a greater distance In the Twin Cl~tles since It Is_.~..Q¢~
.y. at._a._~g.~._pe~tive stadium ~e~t '"- '
· Coon Raplcle' recent opening should generate ~ignificantly more customers
~ due to the "novelty" effect that occurs with the opening of any new fa,~llity
, The current movie season la the strongest in three ye~rs ~
Data Col!e~.tlon Proc~es~
Observatlons were taken on Friday, February 7, 1998 a~d Saturday, February 8,
1998 In order to assess the operation of each theater's parking lot at peak periods.
Weather condltlons were unseasonably warm and travel conditions ware very good for
the time of year. Each technicfan performed an Initial survey of the faclllty In order to
become acquainted with the area, During this off-peak survey period, ~ ~ccurate
count of available pa, rklng spaces was obtained. Beginning at 6;20 p,m,, each
technician surveyed the parklng area end observed the number of available pa~king
spaces. This count was recorded, Every 20 minutes, the technician repeated this
process, being careful to follow the same route In order to maintain uniform temporal
spacing of each parking space's observation. This process was repeated until 10:00
p,m. (12 periods per day), Each teohlll¢la, n recorded any significant observations,
including a large amount of drop-off traffic, use of non-theater parking facilities, etc.
Any t~eater customer vehicles observed parking In non-theater parking spaces were
subtracted from the observed available spaces in the theater parking lot since they
would have occupied one of the available sp~ces if the driver h~d p~rked correctly.
The parking count data I~ contained In 1he A~achment F.
MIiiNG~H~ilHOFF 8
14:30
PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF
0019
NO.14B
?. 013
Lakevllle R~$ult~
No parking problems were observed'at the Lakevllle theater parking lot. Tho
Saturday peak of 4,1 seats per occupied space indicates a higher occupancy rate than
has been identified in studies from other parts of the country, however, It ls stil~ In line
wlth national ~,onlng requirement norm's of 4 to 5 seats per pad(lng space.
The Friday peak was much lower th~n the Saturday peak which is to be
expected (weekday peaks should be even lower than Friday peaks). Weekend peaks
and the late peak periods (9;20 P.M. ~d 7;40 P.M,) would make this theater Icleal for a
shared parklng uso (which la generally the case with all theaters).
Table 4
Lakeville Theater Peak Parking
Date of ...... '~eak ........ Se a-t~-I~-L
..O..beewatlon .period O_Cc. Space_.
2,/7J98 (Fridey) 9:20 P,M. 6,3
~0_/~8.(_Saturday). _7._:..4.0 P,M, 4,1 ,,
Coon Rapid6 Resu!ta
As expected from the telephone survey, occupancy Ievels at the recently
opened Coon Rapids theater are still elsva[ed, On Saturday night, 32 vehicles were
observed using the parking lot of a nefghboring business rather than the theater
parking lot (although 56 empty spaces were still located In the parking lot).
Table $
Coon Rapida Theater Peak Parking
Date of ....... -'Peak Period .... lS~StS"~'~
Obese, ,~vatla.n' ........ .-.. _. ..... 0~, Spaoe
2.f719B (Friday) 8:40 P.M. S.B
2/a/98 (Saturd.ay) 8:00 / 8:20 P.M. _3,.2 .... _..
-27' 98{PRI} 14:30
PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF TEL:612 578 0019
P. OI4
(Notes; ,Some of the difficulties observed with t~e Coon Rapids slte appe~ to be
related to design ~md operational issues rather than the number of parking spaces
provided, A large number of the parking spaces ware Iocatsd behind the faolllty where
an unfamiliar customer might overlook them, In addition, the rear of this building could
be intimidating to agree customers, particularly since the parking lot is not olose to or
within view of the maln entrance, The off-site location where customers were purldng
had full view of the main entrance. Over '130 parking spaces were observed to be
either covered wi.th ice and snow banks, a construction trailer, a storage trailer or
construction debrls. Customers did 13~rk In or in front of the snow banks, however, this
greatly reduced the number of spaces available and obstructed driving lanes In the
lot.)
PARSON8
PARSONS BRINCK~RHOPP
TEh:612 ~?~ 0019
NO.14B
P. OI$
Matgre MaHmt Lo~ll P~rklng ~tudles - Method
SinGe the local p~ne studies and Inte~ie~ wl~ oI~ officlai~ I~dic~to them
may be ~ overestimate of Iong.te~ p~ng needs due to ~e ~m~l number of
stadium seat theaters ~d 'novel~' factor, It ~y be appropriate to examine mom
mature marke~s, pa~bularly given the large number of stadium seating multi-theater
~roJacts that ara in the process of ~alng developed In the Twin Cities ~e~ over the ne~
12 mon~s.
The consulting firm, K~mley. Horn and ~soclates, Inc. pede~ed local p~klng
studies at four cinemas in South Flotid~ (a more mature multl,thaetat m~ket) on Friday,
July 25, 1997 end 9aturd~y, J~ly 26, 1997. ~esa theaters were:
Cobb's Shorewood 16, Boca R¢t~n,
Regal's Derby lB, De~ray Beach, Rorida
, Cobb's Oakw~od 15, Holl~ood, Reticle
~bb's Sawgrass 18, Sunrise Florida
The average peak parking rate was 4.81 seats per parklng space. The r~ge w~ 4.~
- 5.02 (see A~achment
~RSON8 ·
iNCK~,RHOFJ~ 11
PARSONS BRINGKERHOFF
TEL:S12 ~78 0019
NO.146
P. OI6
8ales I~aimd Parking Clen~ratlon - M~hod ?
Occup,an_,~/~ate~
Regal Cinemas, Inc. oi3erate~ over 200 theater~ nationwide and al~Droximately
100 could be considered to be multi.theater coml3lexes, The multi-theater ¢omple×as
have the following seat occupancy characteristics:
Table 6
Wogal Cinemas Occupem:y Rathe
..Y,e. af_Round Average ....... 20%~
Peak Summer (5 clays)_ 48%
Peak Winter (Under 5 days.) 46%
Oc_C~13.encv > 25% 5 - 7%
Source: Reg~,l Ctnema~, lng,
Vehicle OccuoanOy
Mgvie attendance is a social activity and therefore it Is not surprising that
vehicle occupancy rates tend to be relatively high. Vehicle occupancy rates for movie
theaters 9enarally range from 2,0 to 2,7 persons per vehicle, Vehicle occupancy varies
throughout the day with the largest occupancy occurring earlier in the day when
[heaters are most likely to have a larger number of families.
PAR~IONIJ
I~RINCKBRHOFF 12
6~4×22×~8 07: 54
,:IZB.-~7' ~8(FRIJ N:30
PARSONS BRINUK£RHOFF
TEL~612
0019
NO.l~6
P. O17
Teble ?
Vehicle Oceupanoy
Period
Eai~y Af~moon'(hioon to 3 P.M.)
Late Aftem{3on (a P,M. to 6 P,M,)
Early Evening (6 P.M, to 9 P.M.)
Late Evening (9 P,M. to 12 Midnight)
Vehlole
Oq,oupnn~¥.,
2,56
2,2.3
2,42
2.07
Total Wel,qht_ed Average .....
Souroe: ITEJourna/, 'lVlovle Theater Trip Generation Flatas," June
Regal'e sales data for multi-theater complexes indicates that the national norm
for parking (1 spa~ per 4 seats) should be more than adequate to handle pe~
occupancy periods,
Number of seate: 3,1S00
Peak Occupancy: 1,680
Pea/< Parking (2.4 Veh. Oc~:.): 700 cars
",gafety Factor" (10%): 70
Implied Seat-baaed standard: 4.55
~RIC}NS 13
IN(~KIIILHOFF
04/22/9B 07:54
~-27'9~{FR11 14:30 PARSONS BRINGKERHOFF
TEL:612 ~78 0019
N0.146
018
When the specifications for the proposed Regal Cinemas' Minnatonka cinema
are evaluatecl against the seven (Ti methods of parldn9 analysis contained in this
report, Me following results are obtained:
Number of Seats: ;~,212
Number of Parking Spaces: 803
,,P. ark{nO Ade,q~lsc_v
City Requirements:
Method 1:
Method 2:
Method 3:
Method 4:
Method 5:
Method 6:
Method 7:
(Nationsl Norms)
(Local Norms)
(Parking Generation)
(Parking Generation}
(Local Observation)
(Mature Market)
(Regal Sales)
Avow'ago Spaces Requit, ed
Ave~,aile Ratio
1,071 spaces
803 spaces
803 spaces ,t, o
834 spaces
627 spa~e$
68B spaces ~,~
706 spaces
space per 4.31 ~oat~
Based on the results of these analyses, a stands, rd cf 1:4 seats Is a reasonable
standard to alul3ly to the proposed theater, in only on{{ instance, (Method ~{) did the
estimate exceed a st~nciard of 1:4 seats (by a seal{ margin) and that {s the method
that uses ITE standards which the ITE considers to he unreliable when utilized on multi-
screen projects. None of the methods of an~,lysls support a standmrd ~
several indicate that {n the long run, the standard of 1:4 seats may prove to be a
conserver{va figure.
~4/22×9@ 07: 54
PARSONS
8RINPKERHOFP
T£L:612 378 0019
N0. i46
~ ...... I ..... II I
M£MORAN
DUM
OA'rG: September 8, ltt7
.1{3: Kaare Btrkelan~i
~'~OM: Denise Mazone
ia.e; City Pa~'klng Ratlol
Anoka 1:4
~'i;;lale:~gailay 1:~, ..........
E~et'.i .... ~'- ...............
I
Blaine 1;4 ,
Bloomington 1;4
B~o~yn Cente¢ 1:~ Ftees~dl~g
1:4 If over ~0,000 If ihop~l~
~;nter
aumsville' ' 1:4 and I I~ace ~ee a~:~Jayee'6'n ...... ' '
lerge~ wa~ sh~
Chen~a'ss~ .... " 1:4........... ~_ .......
__: ........... ~,4 ....
Chaska no Co
Cl~e Pines n0~'~d~; n~ thei~es
Columbia Heigh~ 1:~
Caen Rapids
I;3,1~ Multiplex
c~stal .... 1:2 11~
Eagan 1;3
East ~'~1 1:4 end 1:2
Eden Prairie
E~ina ~;~ a~ 1:1
major ~hlE
~EIK R~ver 1:3
-27' 981PRI) 14:~2
PARSONS BRINCKERHOF¥
?EL:612 $78 0019
?.
Golden Valley 1:4 er 1:400 sq,
greeter
Ham Lake no code
Hemal no
indePendenCe ...... ~_- ....
~i-k~ville 1 :S
U~o Lake~ 1;4
Long ~ake ~ q :4
Ma;le Grove 1:3
Medina t ,.~
Mlnnea~otia t:~ first' 400
1:4 ~v~r 400
' M[n.etonka~ ~ ~R~ail
Frels~andlng~
Mlnnetdsta no code
new ~eatre
New a~ghton ...... 1:3 .......... ~ .................
New Hope 1:~
Omno 1;e no
OsSeo 1;3 1/2
~lymo~{h 1:4
Princoto~ 1:3 us 1:2 em
P~ot Lake 1:4
t :3 ~hop~lng c~ntor
1:2 1/2 FrceatanOing
PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF
TEL:612 378 0019
[~20
~ Roc~UrO 1 ;4 and 1:2 employles .
8L Antony
St, Paul 1:4 OU~e o~ aownmwn
~h~kop e :
S~orewoo~
~b~nO La~e Pa~ ~ :~........... ~ .... n6~ea~' {n cl~ ....
~Pr~g ~ .......... no ~.a~r~:, n° space, no
~ode
~q, ~ g~ss ~oor ama
3
NOU-11-1998 15:31 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 612 832 9564
BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS ANDPLANNERS
7301 OHMS LANE. SUITE 500 / EDINA, MN 554,.,'.3~ / (612} 832-9858 / FAX (612) 8;32-9564
P.02/09
November 11, I99g
R~F~R TO FILE: 9g-79
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Robert Copeland, Chanhassen Properties, CLC
James A. Benshoof and Bryant J. Ficek~,~~'
Traffic Review of Proposed Expansion for Chanhassen Cinema
PURPOSE
This report is to present the resuks oft. he tr_~c analysis we have performed for the proposed
expansion of the Chanhassen Cinema in Chanhassen, Minnesota.
The analysis began with consideration toward all roadways and intersections that serve the
development site, The three main intersections of interest are Highway 5/Market Boulevard,
Pauly Drive/Market Boulevard, and West 7ga' Street/Market Boulevard. The Highway
5/Market Boulevard and West 78e Street/Market Boulevard intersections have multiple lanes
in each direction and are controlled by traffic signals to allow consistent movement in every
direction. With signal control and sufficient geometries a/ready in-place at these two
intersections, the additional volume generated by the proposed development is expected to
have little impact on traffic operations at either intersection. Therefore, no additional
anatyses were performed at those intersections. The remainder of this report focuses on the
operation of the intersection of Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive. This intersection is
analyzed in detail because it is the main entrance and exit for the Cinema and therefore
contains the highest concentrated volume from the proposed development.
The analysis concentrated on the peak period for a typical Friday evening.
BACKGROUND
Proposed Development CharacterJgies
The proposed development will remodel the existing buildings located in the northeast
quadrant of the Market Boulevard/Pauly Drive intersection. The current theater will be
expanded to 16 screens with approximately 2,800 seats. Entrance to the cinema will be
located on the south side of the building. A new retail use will also occupy the building. The
size of thls retail store will be about 9,000 square feet and its entrance will be on the west
side of the building. The current bowling alley, nightclub, and bar would all be removed to
NOU-1Z-Z~B ~5:3~ BENSHDOF & ~SSOC. G~ B3~ ~564 P.03/0~
Mr. Robert Copeland
-2-
November 11,199g
make room for the enlarged cinema and new retail store. Retail uses with a total size of 6,000
square feet are planned to occupy the lower level of the nearby Frontier Center.
~Existing~:onditions
The Cinema currently ¢ontain~ eight screens with 1,400 seats. The remaining area,
approximately 39,000 square feet, is presently occupied by the Chanhassen Bowl/Sports Bar
& C. rrilI, Filly's Nightclub, and Backstretch Bar & Grill. For the purpose of this report, these
existing uses in the 39,000 square feet space will collectively be referred to as the bowling
alley. The 6,000 square feet in the lower level of the Frontier Center are currently vacant.
Three access points provide access to the parking lots around the buildings. An alley runs
between the Cinema and the Frontier Center, connecting with West 78th Street via parking
lots north of the buildings. Another access point is located directly west of the buildings
connecting to Market Boulevard. This study focused on the third access point, the
intersection of Market Boulevard/Pauly Drive, which is the primary access location for the
Cinema.
The intersection of Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive is unsignalized and is controlled by
signs stopping traffic on Pauly Drive. The northbound approach consists of two lanes, a
througMeft turn and a through/fight turn. The southbound approach consists of one lane
accommodating through, right, and lef~ tums. This lane is 20 feet wide, which provides
sufficient space for through motorists to maneuver around a vehicle stopped to turn leR onto
Pauly Drive. The eastbound approach also consists of one lane that accommodates through,
right, and lei~ tums. The westbound approach consists of one lane for right tums only and
one lane for througMef~ tums.
Turn movement volumes were collected for the Friday evening peak period on Friday,
October 23, 1998 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. The existing volumes are presented later in
conjunction with the traffic forecasts.
NOV-11-199B 15:31
Mr. Robe~ Copeland
BENSHOOF & ASSOC.
-3-
612 832 9564 P.04/09
November ll, IBgg
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Trip Generation
Trip generation rates were estimated for the current and proposed development using
information from two sources. Generation rates presented in the Institute of Transportation
Engineers CITE) publication Trip Generation, 1997, were used for the bowling alley, retail
store, and frontier center. An article entitled "Movie Theater Trip Generation Rates" by
William E. Baumgaenner, which appeared in the June 1985 issue of the ITE Journal,
provided the generation rates for the theater. These calculated rates were correlated with
. existing volumes at the Market Boulevard/Pauly Drive intersection for reasonableness
purposes.
Based upon the data collected and prior experience, we determined traffic analysis needed to
be performed for the following two hours on a Friday evening: 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. and 8:15 to
9:15 p.m. The first hour experiences the highest overall intersection volume. The second
hour was the peak hour for exiting traffic from the Cinema.
Table I presents the trip generation calculations for the existing uses, and Table 2 presents
trip generation projections for the proposed development. Subtracting the existing from the
proposed, the net effect of the proposed development will generate an additional 387 trips
during the 7:00 to $:00 p.m. hour and an additional 481 trips during the 8:15 to 9:15 p.m.
hour.
In addition to presenting total trip generations, Tables 1 and 2 also indicate the expected
proportion of trips entering and exiting the development. These in and out proportions are
based on ITE data and our experiences.
TABLE 1
FRIDAY EVENING TRIP GENERATION FOR EXISITING SUBJECT PROPERTY
Time Trip Trips Entering l~xRi~g
Period Use / Size Rate Generated Trips .... Trips
7:00- 8:00 Cinema/8 screens 53.92 431 250 181
Bowling Alley / 24 lanes 4.5 10g 90 I8
Totals 539 340 199
8:15 - 9:15 Cinema / g screens 67.4 539 242 297
Bowling AlI,ey, / 24 lanes 4.5 108 90 18
Totals 647 332 315"
Mr. Robert Copeland
BENSHOOF & ASSOC.
612 8~2 9564 P.05;/09
November l 1, 1998
TABLE 2
FRIDAY EVENING TRIP GENERATION FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
Time Trip Trips Entering Exiting
Period Use / Size Rate , Generated Trips Trips
7:00 - 8:00 Cinema / 16 screens //3.92 863 501 362
Retail / 9000 sq ff 4.93 44 25 19
Frontier Center/6000 sq ff 4.93 30 17 13
Totals 937 543 394
Multi-Purpose Reduction 11 fi 5
Net TriEs ........ 926 537 .... 389
8:15- 9:15 Cinema/16 screens 67.4 107g 485 593
Retail / 9000 sq f[ 3.94 35 11 24
Frontier ¢.enter/6OgO. s.q_fl ...... 3.94, . 24 7 17
Totals 1137 503 634
Multi-Purpose Reduction 9 3 6
Net Trips 1128 500 628
Trip Distribution
To determine directional distribution of traffic movements through the intersection of Market
Boulevard and Pauly Drive, we correlated the existing intersection volumes to the population
distribution in the market area for the Cinema. Specifically, we expect that about 60 percent
of the development trips using the intersection of Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive will be
oriented to and from the south on Market Boulevard. The remaining 40 percent are expected
to be oriented to and from the s_cffie-, do~r,~ ,~
Traffic Volume,~
The Market Boulevard/Pauly Drive intersection traffic volumes for the two p.m. peak hours
were developed for the 1998 existing levels and the post-development levels. All scenarios
are based on the traffic counts recorded at the intersection. The 1998 existing levels are
taken dkectly from the traffic counts. The expected development traffic was added to the
existing counts to produce the post-development traffic volumes. The resultant traffic
volumes are shown in Figure 1.
III II III I I I II
i
NOT TO SCALE
BENSHDDF & ASSOC.
7:00 - 8:00 PM PEAK HOUR
612 B32 9564 Po06/09
PAULY DRiVE
0/9
'"'! t I"
I II
· 1/1
8:15 - 9:15 PM PEAK HOUR
LEGEND
~ 1998 EX]STING
POST-DEVELOPMENT
4/4 ·
~ 47/92
· 4/4
PAULY DRIVE
CHANHASSEN
PROPERTIES, CLC
,~ BENSHOOF & ASS~IATE$, INC.
TRAN a P~RT~TIOI~ E~GIKEERE~,kND pLilJ(I~ER~
TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR
CHANHASSEN
CINEMA DEVELOPMENT
JRE 1
EX]STING AND POS'T-
DEVELOPMENT 11:iAFFIC
VOLUMES FOR INTERSECTION
OF MARKET BLVD/PAULY DR
NOU-11-1998 15:32 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 612 832 9564 P.07/09
Mr. Robert Copeland
-6-
November lI, 199g
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
The Market Boulevard/Pauly Drive Intersection was analyzed to determine the effect of the
proposed development on traffic operations. In order to better understand how the
intersection operates bom an overall traffic capacity standpoint, a capacity analysis was
performed using the methodology presented in the Highway Capacity Manual. A capacity
analysis is a way to determine how well or poorly an intersection is operating. Capacity
analysis results are presented in terms of level of service, which ranges from A to F. Level of
service A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle
using the intersection. Level of service F represents the worst intersection operation, with
excessive delay and large queue lengths.
Peak Hour of 7:00 to 8:00 PM
Under existing conditions, all movements, except the westbound through/left turn, at the
unsignalized intersection operate at a level of service B or better during this p.m. peak hour.
The westbound through/left turn movement operates at a level of service C with minor
delays.
Using existing geometries under post-development volumes, all movement, except the
westbound througMef~ turn, continue to operate at a level of service B or better during this
time. The westbound througMef~ turn movement falls to a level of service F. This means
excessive delay and vehicle stacking for these movements during this time period.
After determination of the level of service F for the westbound througMeR turn movement,
the post-development traffic volumes were compared to the peak hour signal warrant volume
thresholds. The peak hour signal warrant compares the major street and minor street
volumes with a set volume level, which is based on the number of approach lanes provided.
If the volume level is met, a signal may be considered for the intersection. In this case, the
volume level for the peak hour signal warrant is not met.
~Peak Hour of 8:15 to 9:15 PM
Under existing conditions, all movements, except the westbound through/left turn, at the
unsignalized intersection also operate at a level of service B or better during this p.m. peak
hour. The westbound through/left turn movement operates at a level of service C with minor
delays and a small amount of stacking.
Using existing geometries under post-development volumes, ali movements, except the
westbound through/lef~ turn movement, continue to operate at a level of service B or better
during this later peak hour time period. The westbound througMef~ turn movement drops to
a level of servlce F with the extra volume. This, once again, means excessive delays and
vehicle stacking for these movements during this time period.
As before, the post-development volumes for tkis time period were checked against the peak
hour signal warrant volume. The warrant requirements are not satisfied in this case either.
NOU-11-1998 15:33 BENSHOOF & ASSOC.
Mr. Robert Copeland -7-
612 832 9564 P.08/09
November 11, 1998
CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the analyses presented in this report, we have developed the following
conclusions:
All movements at the intersection of Market Boulevard/Pauly Drive, except the
westbound through/left mm, operate at an acceptable level of service (B or better) during
both time periods for existing and proposed developments.
· The westbound through/left mm movement operates at a level of service C for existing
traffic volumes during both time periods.
· The westbound through/lef~ turn movement falls to level of service F under post-
development volumes during both time periods, with considerable congestion expected.
To help alleviate the high volume and poor level of service for the westbound through/left
turn movement, a continuous link from Market Boulevard to Great Plains Boulevard is
necessary. This link should be flee of conflicts caused by parking maneuvers and
therefore should have no parking spaces immediately adjacent to the drive aisle. This
roadway could be established in one of the following two ways:
a) A private drive that would connect to the Chanhassen Dinner Theater access and
continue to Great Plains Boulevard.
b) 3, public extension of Pauly Drive that would connect directly with Great Plains
Boulevard.
The City of Chanhassen is considering development of the area east of the subject area
and south of the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. The public drive would serve any new
development as well as the Cinema and the Frontier Center.
As shown in Figure 2, the current plat drawing for the subject area indicates that the
Pauly Drive right-of-way comes to an abrupt end near the east edge of the Cinema
building. If true, this is an awkward, non-standard situation. It is understood that the
Pauly Drive right-of-way may not extend as far east as shown in Figure 2, rather, it may
terminate at the east edge of the bus turnaround on the south side of Pauly Drive. This
latter situation represents a normal type of termination for a public right-of-way.
The analyses presented in this report indicate that the westbound through/left turn movement
would be expected to fall to a level of service F during peak hours. We recommend an east-
west link from Market Boulevard to Great Plains Boulevard to avoid this problem. If the
Pauly Drive right-of-way terminates at the bus turn-around, then either option for extension,
as described above, would be sufficient. If'the right-of-way extends to the abrupt ending, as
shown in Figure 2, then a public extension is desked to correct this awkward situation. The
extension would preserve the operation of the Pauly Drive and Market Boulevard
intersection. Furthermore, we are confident that the intersection at Crreat Plains Boulevard
serving the new link would operate at an adequate level of service.
NOU-11-1998 15:33 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 612 832 9564 P.09/09
=>
_oo~->
I--- w
TRT~I P ~q
11/15/95 l%~D 14:$1
.NOV-18-19gB 09:~4
612 832 $301 COPELAND BUILDING
BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 612 B32
BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS
7301 OHM~ LANE. SUITE SOO / EDINA. MN 55439 / (61 ~) 832-PS, S8 / FAX (6~ 2) 638.9~64
~564
~OOL
P,0~/0~
M~. Robert Copela~d
Copela~d Build[ag Co~oratioa
5300 I-Iyl~d C~=ns Drive, Suite 200
Bloomington, lV~ 5S437
Supplementm'y Commenl~ to ;November l ~, 1998 Tra.~e Report ofth~ ProPosed
Ctmnlmzseu Cinema ~xpamion
Dear Bob:
As indicated in our November l 1~ memorandum, we suggested an eas~-west corridor along Pauly
Drive that ultimately eormeets Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard. Thig traffic
cormection would alleviate the e~ma~ed high volume~ and poor level of service during peak
times at the Pauly Dfive/Mark~ B~ralevarfl intersection. We ~urther recommended ~h,t this
connection be free of conflicts, with no ~ljacent parking ~uall~, along the length of the corridor.
An alternative to thi~ sugge~ion is tO establish an ea~-west ¢on'idor with pm'king provided on
one or both sides or,he roadway. UMer both option% the inter~ection of Pauly Drive and Market
Boulevard and the intersection oFGreat Plain~ Boulevaxd and the new access road are expected W
provide adequate operation. Thus, either option would provide ~£ac~ry operation relative m
the public roadway system.
The principal advmatage of the first Mtematl've, with an unimpeded corridor, is ~ increase in
ovcralI s~t'ety. Without the parking .,pace% traffic is fre~ from dlsr~pfion by backing vehicles or
unexpected pede~fians walking into the road from behind parked vehicles. Also, vehicles
waiting for o~er vehicles m exit pa~ki~g ~mlls would not cause tragic delay and obstmction.
From a traffic standpoint, tkis is the mort desirable option for vehicle and pedestrian safety and
for the ability o£tra~e to flow w/thout the prcvlously mentigned delays.
In the second option, with parking provided on one or both sides, the main benefit is greater
availability of parking ~.~l!~_. Though specific layout plan~ have no~ at present been prepared for
both options, we expect that ~e second option would provide more parking sp~c~s than with the
unimpeded roadway corridor.
I tru~ tMs clavff~estion will ~sist further co~ideradon o£Zhc proposed cinerr~ expansion by Ciey
o~clMs and yourself. Let me know if you need any further ~ssistance,
Sincerely,
BENSHOOF ~ ASSOCIATES~ INC.
CITYOF
5HANHASSEN
MEMORANDUM
~o, Center Drive, ?O Box147 TO:
:nhassen, Minnesota 55317
Phone 612.93Z I900
meM Fax' 612.93Z5739
;neering Fax' 612.937.9152
ic SafeO, £ax' 612. 934. 2524
, www. ci. chanhassen, mn. us
Sharmin AI-Jaff, Senior Planner
FROM:
Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
DATE:
April 26, 1999
SUBJECT:
Chanhassen Properties LLC, request for subdivision and site plan review to
demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl and Filly's Bar and replace it with
eight additional theaters with a seating capacity of 1,400 seats with an area
of 30,000 square feet and 9,000 square feet of retail space variances for signage
hard surface coverage and parking require~nents on property zoned BG,
General Business district, located north of the railroad tracks and Pauly Drive,
East of Market Boulevard and south of West 78th Street.
Planning Case: 99-4 site plan.
I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen
Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the fpllowing fire code or city
ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at
this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items
will be addressed.
Fire lane signage and yellow curbing will be determined by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal.
Contact the Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted
yellow. Pursuant to Section 904-1 1997 Uniform Fire Code.
A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire
hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to
Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1.
3. Submit radius turn dimensions and parking lots to determine fire department vehicle access.
Submit turn dimensions to Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for
review and approval. Pursuant to Section 902.2.2.3 1997 Uniform Fire Code.
4. In the proposed alleyway between the Cinema and the proposed retail there will be
absolutely no storage of combustibles allowed at any time. Appropriate signage will be
required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact wording of signs and location.
g:\safety\ml\plrev99-4site
h' of Chanhassen. A .~rou,i,~ co,mm,in, with e/ean lakec attafin. ~chaah. a eh,,,i,a d,u,nto,,n, tbri,,ina &,6ne~e~. and hea,tiful
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Mancino: Well we appreciate that. At the TIF seminar I went to, there were a lot of cities there,
and Councilman Senn was there, that they did say that a lot of the cities hadn't figured out yet
you know what the deficit would be and the League of Minnesota Cities really hadn't heard
much yet. So you're being proactive in bringing us there. Thank you.
Boyle: Thank you.
CONSIDER TIF ASSISTANCE FOR PHASE IlL ENTERTAINMENT PROJECT.
Boyle: Todd, are you going to brief us on this one?
Gerhardt: Sure. Mr. Chairman, EDA members. At our last meeting there were several questions
brought up. Staffput an emphasis on that meeting to give you a background on what I would say
are the planning type issues. Architectural style, parking layout, traffic, and uses. At this
meeting we're going to concentrate on the numbers so what I'd like to do is to answer your
questions that were raised at the last meeting. Give some history on how this project all got
started, and then take some time and use the big board and show you the numbers that staff has
come up with in this proposal. At our last meeting there was a question regarding the breakdown
of ownership for the proposed movie theater development. The ownership is Bob Copeland, Ray
Mithun, Jr and Mike Delaney. There was also a question that Mr. Copeland had marked the TIF
application incorrectly and that the applicant had filed for bankruptcy and Mr. Copeland and his
partners have never been involved in a bankruptcy or loan default. As to the third question, I
explained in detail the public purpose of why the EDA should consider giving this project. In
your packet under Attachment # 1, Mr. Copeland has gone through his analysis of why TIF
assistance should be used for this project based on the public purpose guidelines under TIF laws.
Staff had also completed the advantages and disadvantages of the project. Some of the
advantages that staff had highlighted was the improved overall aesthetics of this area. Currently I
have laid out a couple of pictures of how the area looked here in the last couple of weeks and for
EDA members, if you haven't driven by there lately. Entrance to the city's night and weekend
activity and drawing over 250,000 patrons each year. You know with over 6,000 employees in
our business park, our restaurants and businesses do a very good job during the noon hour in
servicing, or being serviced by those employees in our business park. At night our downtown
area is a little slower and putting in additional theaters that would provide additional night
activity and drawing patrons to our downtown businesses. With the proposed project you would
see an additional 10,000 square feet of additional retail that the city currently doesn't have and
would provide services to our residents and businesses. Providing TIF assistance may provide
for a higher quality building than what our existing codes may provide. And improve the
utilization of the property. Currently right now it's used as a bowling center and bar and with the
additional 10,000 square feet of retail and the additional movies, there can be a question that we
already have 8 and 8 more you know, what benefit does that have besides bringing more people
to the downtown. So that's kind of an advantage/disadvantage but definitely the 10,000 square
feet of additional retail would be an advantage. Each project would be a pay as you go without
sharing the tax increment from the Timber Lounge and hotel expansion. I'll explain that in more
detail as I go up to the board and who how that can work. Some disadvantage to the project. It
does need a substantial amount of economic investment on the EDA's behalf. A loss of bowling
13
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
in the community as a recreational activity. There's no question in the original plan that having a
restaurant and a bowling center and a little bit of retail, it really lent itself to a true type
entertainment situation. Increase in traffic can be good for the patrons. Can be bad if this pr°Ject
is really successful and that we may have to put a signal out onto Market, additional costs
associated with that. That's it. That's all I could come up with for advantages and disadvantages.
Right now I'd kind of like to go through the numbers unless the EDA members have any
questions on my preliminary report.
Boyle: Any questions at this time or should we let Todd go further?
Gerhardt: How we got to this point, started back approximately 6 years ago when we started
with the Highway 5 corridor group. The Highway 5 corridor group...to look at how can
Highway 5 develop in this community. What sites should we preserve and with the assistance of
Bill Morrish from the University of Minnesota Landscape School, he came out and assisted us in
windows in the rooms and corridors to preserve along that highway and the group got on a bus
and drove up and down the corridor. They could see which of those creeks and tree lines that
they wanted to preserve. And one of the other things that that group highlighted as they were
driving up and down the corridor and as they sat out here at the intersection of Market and
Highway 5 was how unattractive the bowling alley and the back of the Dinner Theater and the
presence that showed to individuals sitting at that intersection. SO through the efforts of
Bloomberg Company, Dan Dahlen, Lotus Realty and the HRA at that time, we sat down with the
owners to try to work out a deal where we could come in and pay for the necessary parking lot
improvements and facade improvements on the bowling alley...retail center. Frontier Building.
And as we moved along, this was all going to be one project. And with that, as we got into it
deeper and deeper, the bowling center with some of the issues of changing ownership and filing
bankruptcy led to, we had to start separating the projects individually. Bloomberg wanted to
work his... The movie theater wanted to get going right away and Dan Dahlen...was working
with Pauly's in trying to get his package together. So everybody wanted to kind of be treated
separately and we brought it back to the HRA and City Council and said yes. We Could separate
these. Well, what also got separated in that process is that we got away from the original
architectural treatments that were originally approved. And everybody else thought that they
needed to do the improvements that would work for the tenants that they were working with and
that would fit in their budget. So where we're at now is, as you drive by out there, you can see
Bloomberg's retail space is starting to take shape. They've got the brick out there. They've got
the new windows in and starting to see the mansard go up and it's to me...The movie theater is
open. It's operational.
Mancino: It's got a sign.
Gerhardt: It has a sign.
Engel: Does it have all the letters working?
Gerhardt: It has the letters on the sign and Mr. Copeland feels that for him to stay a vital part in
the downtown area for the long term, he feels he needs 8 more theaters to stay up with what the
14
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
market is doing. I don't know if that's correct or not but Mr. Copeland feels it's important. And
with that we encouraged Mr. Copeland to include retail as a part of it. This is a mixed type use.
It's a mix proposed and we asked him that he include that and he has agreed to do that and that
he would do the retail out front with the...in concert with the movie theater. Now with that,
what I'd like to do is just explain to everybody that hasn't been here since the beginning of kind
of how tax increment, how this tax increment district got created. How the money flows from
there and also how Mr. Copeland and I have talked over the last couple of months of how we
kind of changed the deal and how he wants to stand alone and take his own increment from both
of those.
Mancino: Todd could you include, Mr. Chair if this is okay. Could you include one other thing.
Could you talk a little bit about two things that I guess I'm getting old but a little bit about
parking and the, you know what we have done as a city to increase the parking and about the road
that would continue over the Bloomberg property and how that would flow. Okay. At the end of
the money, the fiscal part if you could also talk about parking and kind of, I get very mixed up
who owns what as far as the parking part and improvements that have already been made just at
the end. Thank you.
Gerhardt: Well back in 19, I think it was 95. The HRA at that time agreed to create a new tax
increment district. When you create a new tax increment district, you first have to decertify the
bowling center, the movie center phase I, hotel expansion, Timber Lounge and Bloomberg retail.
All those properties were included in the original downtown tax increment district and...we're
dealing with so what happened is that...took those parcels Out of that original downtown tax
increment district. What happens when you do that is these properties in 1995, you established a
new base value. What that base value does is Timber Lounge in 1995 was paying $19,000.00,
no. Timber Lounge was $6,000.00... The hotel expansion, before the hotel was here there was a
vacant piece of land and they were paying $2,901.00 in taxes. The retail, Bloomberg Companies.
This property was paying $49,669.00 in taxes. The bowling center was paying $67,000.00 in
taxes. The movie theater was paying $19,000.00... And so these dollar amounts were coming to
the downtown TIF district and that totaled $146,175.00. When we decertified that district this
money is now going to the school district. It's going to the county. It's going to the city. And
it's going to other. This $146,000.00 is now being paid to those jurisdictions. Now what's
happened since then is the Timber Lounge has remodeled and they are.
Mancino: Under percentages for school, county, city is what the normal percentage is. It's just
regular tax, property taxes?
Gerhardt: 50% school. County, 30%. City, 18%...and then 2% other. Timber Lounge is now
creating $19,057.00 in increment. Hotel expansion is creating $64,904.00 in increment.
Bloomberg Companies will be creating $30,927.00. And movie theater Phase I will be
$40,458.00. The old plan the bowling center was going to create $30,927.00. So that's a grand
total of $186,273.00. And with Mr. Copeland's proposed development, that has intensified the
use of that than what was originally proposed with the restaurant, bowling center and little bit of
retail. He will now be creating $105,000.00... so with that $105,000.00 would, if he was to
receive the $105,000.00 to write down. What we're trying to accomplish here is the
15
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
improvements that are proposed for Bloomberg Companies. What we're trying to pay off is the
$360,000.00 worth of improvement for parking lot, landscaping and facade treatment for
Bloomberg. On the movie theater portion it was $540,000.00. And the bowling center it's
$665,000.00.
Senn: Well stick the other two in too. Hotel expansion and conference rooms. So you have the
whole picture.
Gerhardt: Well, okay. Theirs are, it's three years of this. At this time it's three years.
Bohn: From '95.
Gerhardt: This times three years. This is roughly $60,000.00.
Engel: 58. 57,000.
Clayton Johnson:
Gerhardt: Yes.'
Clayton Johnson:
Are you on the Timber Lounge?
What were you showing for that?
Mancino: Increment of 19.
Gerhardt: That has gone up this year.
Senn: What we're talking about is the incentive that went back to each project and it's three
years worth of increment which is approximately $60,000.00.
Mancino: ...60 for the Bloomberg was for what?
Gerhardt: It was to offset the facade improvement here along the front, and the parking lot
improvements here.
Mancino: So 540.
Gerhardt:
lot.
Mancino:
Gerhardt:
Senn:
540 was for facade improvements here, boardwalk. When I say facade...and parking
And parking lot. And 665?
665, facade, boardwalk, parking lot improvements.
That was in the original plan.
16
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Gerhardt: In the original plan.
Mancino: Alright, thank you.
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Mancino: . ..so we get that increase from the 18 to the 25%.
Gerhardt: The increase referendum dollar amount would go to the school district...
Mancino: Okay. Let me ask you another way. If somebody came in, a different applicant came
in and developed the bowling center privately. Didn't want any money. How would that, the
taxes generated, would they be any different? Would the market value be any different than what
we're seeing here? I mean does that make sense?
Gerhardt: Does it intensify it more?
Mancino: Yeah. To intensify the use more.
Gerhardt: Yeah, I mean if you put some AAA office stuff in there, you could get the price up
there. You know some real class A office space would pay probably more than a movie theaters.
Retail space maybe like Byerly's would probably pay more.
Mancino:...trying to understand that.
Ashworth: If that were to happen then you'd have two choices. You could take those dollars
because you'd still be collecting them, and pay off any existing loans, notes that you have and
therefore collapse those early. Or take that particular parcel and decertify it and put it right back
on the tax role immediately.
Gerhardt: Your two choices here...take these guys out of the equation and you take the
increment from here and here and you pay Bloomberg off earlier, you could do a couple of
things. You could take this and pay Mr. Copeland off earlier or you could take this and there's
two little buildings over here on the back side of the Dinner Theater that you haven't dealt with
yet. And do something over there and try to encourage an office building to come in there. Or
you could just put these on the tax rolls is another option... So what we do is come in, number
one we decertify this district and everything came back on, you would come in here and say,
Laurie down at the auditor's office, we've decided to decertify these three properties and we'd
like them back on tax rolls again.
Mancino: Does it cost us to keep decertifying?
Gerhardt: Just attorney fees...
Mancino: That costs us.
17
Economic Development Authority- January 28, 1999
Boyle: A portion of that 25%.
Gerhardt: Yeah a portion. Not all of it.
Senn: Why would you ever decertify it when you could use that money and go back into District
1 where you took it out of in the first place to help solve the deficit problem?
Gerhardt: Yep, you could do that too.
Senn: I mean by the first decertification and taking it out of the district in the first place, if you
hadn't done that, right now a majority of the $2.5 problem wouldn't exist. So I mean it's just, if
you want the whole history.
Mancino: That's water over the dam. Hey, the 25%, are we limited?
Gerhardt: Then you don't have problem in the future.
Mancino: The 25%, do we, are there any limitations on where we can use it? The money that we
make in the administration fee, the 25%, does it have to stay in the district? I mean.
Gerhardt: Yes.
Mancino: Okay.
Gerhardt: 10% can be used for administrative costs. The other 15% can be used anywhere
within this red line.
Mancino: And only there.
Gerhardt: Only there.
Boyle: It's very thorough. Thank you.
Mancino: Very good. Thank you. Oh! ...can you talk a little bit about, Todd I'm concerned
about a couple things. And the road. The road going through and you know will we be at some
point down the road, will the city have to 6ome into play and upgrade the road? I mean what
improvements are going to again fall back as part of this project and all that kind of stuff?.
Gerhardt: ...needed to work that out an issue regarding...I know we had to deal with the access
issue here. But how this wasn't included as a part of the project.
Mancino: That's just a dirt road now. Can we keep it the way it is, all the way through there?
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Ashworth: . ..this type of a cul-de-sac fashion and we did it in such a fashion so that the road
came in. You come back up in here. IfBloomberg wanted to take and improve these, they could
have access off of that roadway because...
Clayton Johnson: No, a little history there was that we originally wanted...first attempt to
develop the property and put the road through and the previous HRA didn't want to put the road
through. So when we came with the plan that we're currently working on, it's intended that
everything would be served off Market Boulevard...
Bohn: That's not true. We wanted the road through but we didn't want to pay for it.
Vemelle Clayton: ...
Mancino: So where are we now with the road? I want to explain the road because I think it's
important.
Gerhardt: Our road right-of-way stops right at the entrance, the first entrance into the parking lot.
The City Council as a part of the approval of this vacated the road, we had road right-of-way up
here. They vacated so we could expand the parking. But we never had, we never had right-of-
way that would take us all the way over here.
Clayton Johnson: For one thing the Dinner Theater's not...The Dinner Theater's still in District
1.
Gerhardt: Right, the Dinner Theater isn't but the two smaller buildings and see the PID number
for this goes all the way over here. It's like an upside down Florida.
Mancino: But Todd, what you have told us, I again it's my memory but is that the road will go
all the way through.
Gerhardt: Will go all the way through once this property is developed.
Mancino: Oh, okay. So you're saying with this new development adding, and I'm just going to
call it bowling because we've already done movie phase I. The bowling part that you will not be
able to, there will not be an improved road whatsoever going out to the east?
Boyle: Not as a result of the improvement of the bowling alley.
Mancino: We will not be paralleling those two things?
Gerhardt: I think that's going to be an issue as this thing goes back through planning
commission and city council process through this because we did talk about there would be
another potential access, if I remember right, when we talk about traffic that we needed, we
needed something to go through here, be it a paved drive or something to allow a...access
19
Economic Development Authority- January 28, 1999
because of the amount of traffic generated from these people to go out. We didn't want them all
to go out one way. We wanted it to be diverted to a second alternative so.
Mancino: Public safety concern, etc.
Gerhardt: Well for engineering, yep. Everybody.
Mancino: Yeah, and will there, I'm sorry I don't want to get into too much detail but I just want
to make sure that all these things are out in front and who is going to end up paying for
improving that road and etc because again that may be added cost due to improving the bowling
alley. And just everybody needs to know that.
I think it's already included in these figures here.
But the 665 has jumped to $1.3 million.
Well that's interest. That's with the interest. The $1,390,000.00 is interest. That's the
The $1,390,000.00. That includes all the interest that...
That was 14 years.
Okay.
I just want to know how much we have to pay. Okay.
Well if it's over the 14 years, including the interest and everything, it's $1,390,000.00.
Because it's not really 665 because we're goingto end up paying 1.3.
Gerhardt: With interest.
Mancino: Yeah, that's what I'm saying. That's what our obligation as a city will be. Not
$665,000.00. It will be $1.3 million so when that bowling alley is improved we will have paid
$1.3 over 14 years. Okay.
Interest and principal.
And we don't know yet who has responsibilitY and haVen't talked about the east
Gerhardt:
Mancino:
Gerhardt:
total payments over the 22 years.
Mancino:
Gerhardt:
Mancino:
Gerhardt:
Mancino:
Gerhardt:
Mancino:
access.
Bob Copeland: The private parties have responsibility. We'll be responsible for...
Mancino: For not only the easement but the upgrade and everything.
Bob Copeland: Right.
2O
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Mancino: Okay.
Bob Copeland: It'd be a private paved access.
Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Senn: Say Todd if there's any additional infrastructure such as semaphores or anything like that
are required in any of the connection points here or anything else like that, there's absolutely no
money.., for that?
Gerhardt: Well you could use the excess increment for the 15%...
Se~m: I'm not talking about the upper. I'm talking about now what you're talking about down
here. Down here there's basically no dollars in anywhere there to fund any infrastructure
improvements if they're necessary or semaphores or whatever.
Gerhardt: Nope. It's parking lot improvements, facade and boardwalk and sign.
Bob Copeland: We hired a traffic engineer who determined that a stop light would not be
required.
Gerhardt: And that was with the east access though right? I've been working numbers the last
two weeks. I haven't been thinking traffic.
Boyle: Well let's, thank you Todd. Let's continue with questions then at this point. Linda, do
you have something?
Jansen: ! don't have any questions, no.
Engel: I don't have any. You got them. Good job.
Boyle: Nancy.
Mancino: My only other one about parking. I just want to make sure that park and ride will stay
there and that the work that's been done to date and looking at it that we have no problems
keeping the park and ride there and co, you know both uses work out.
Gerhardt: Park and ride has a permanent easement that.
Mancino: How much of the parking lot does the city own? Can you kind of show that?... You
mean they get to go to the, if the movie theater goes in there, they get to go to the movie free?
Gerhardt: Well...Here's Market. Here's the entrance to the bowling center. This is that long
entrance here. And so they have an easement that runs...the last three rows of the parking.
21
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Mancino: And that easement is because we as a city own that land or Southwest has bought it?
Gerhardt: HRA owned it.
Mancino: HRA still owns that. We own that land, okay. Okay.
Gerhardt: Right now Southwest Metro, which will be an issue when this retail comes in.
They've been parking like this. And so they're supposed to be parking outside this line so we've
had discussions with Southwest Metro...to basically renegotiate some of the parking in that area.
Retail may want some of the parking over in this area and we'll... Once we have an approved
project and know what the uses are, we're going to sit down with Southwest Metro and try to
work out this parking scenario.
Mancino: Thank you.
Boyle: Jim, questions.
Bolm: Yes...part of that building going to stay or is that going to be torn down?
Gerhardt: I understand the entire building will be torn down.
Boyle: Steve.
Labatt: My only question was that road and the cost...
Boyle: Mark Senn, I didn't mean to pass you. You had already asked some questions but let's
come back, I'm sure you have some more.
Senn: Not in terrns of the parking. Does this project as it's now configured meet or not meet
parking requirements?
Gerhardt: I believe we are short by, I don't remember the number offhand. But we are short, I
know it's less than 100.
Senn: But it's around 100 though ifI remember correctly.
Gerhardt: Yeah. Somewhere around there, yep.
Boyle: Didn't we address that last time? I thought we were .... I was under the impression we
were not short.
Sram: We were short according to parking requirements.
22
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Mancino: Yeah because Sharmin said her figures were wrong and she came back to us and gave
us a sheet Councilman Senn that said that her, it was in the Minutes that I read that were
attached. That her first calculations were incorrect. I don't have that sheet though but I think in
the Minutes I can't remember where. Let's see.
Engel: You mean 700 rather than the 900...
Mancino: There you go. But again we can kind of address that and make sure that that's.
Gerhardt: Yeah, I mean the parking, we decided, I thought at the last meeting that the parking
issues, you know a lot of the architectural style and things were going to be more addressed at the
planning commission level. I'm sorry that I'm not up to date on the parking.
Boyle: At the beginning of your presentation, Todd you had recommended that we focus on the
numbers tonight. The economic portion of this recommendation and I think that's a very good
recommendation and I think we probably should stay in those guidelines and focus towards that
arena as it applies to our authority.
Mancino: ...
Boyle: And that's in the ballpark.
Gerhardt: Well I won't bring back anything that moves these numbers up any higher.
Boyle: Promise? Has the tape run out?
Gerhardt: Probably.
Boyle: Mark, were there further questions before we? If there are no further questions we'll
move on to comments then. Or discussions, excuse me. Go ahead. Bob, would you like to come
up and?
Bob Copeland: Well Vernelle and I...
Boyle: Okay, excuse me. Vemelle.
Vernelle Clayton: I just have to make one comment on this sheet. It ties in with this project.
There are good things on this sheet as well and as you beat your head against the wall, there's one
that Don handed out earlier, go out and stand out in the street and look up and down. Check
what we have out there. Main Street is something I think we're all proud of and it wouldn't there
if you didn't have this problem. Also want to point out that we've never had enough chance to
toot our horn here, and I'm wearing a different hat now. I'm wearing a Market Square hat. You
have a million two that came in in 1997 and that was a result of the courageous effort on the part
of the former HRA's to lend those folks 700 some thousand dollars to correct the problem at
Market Square which was partly due to the fact that a bridge had been buried there and it was
23
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
returned to you at a million two which I think is about as good an investment during that period
of time that the city made. It was basically 10% per year and it paid cash then since. So there are
good things with TIF. There are lots of mysteries with TIF. There are complexities with TIF and
basically it comes down to how can we serve best the economic welfare of the city of
Chanhassen. Todd explained a lot of things that I thought I might explain and so I certainly am
not going to go back over it but there are a couple things that I just want to mention. When the
district, when the old district was decertified and we created this new district one of the things
that we had to do was prove that it warranted being created and to do that a certain percentage of
the buildings had to be in a sense sub-par. That's an abbreviation or summary of various criteria
that you have to go through to see just exactly what you have to have a redevelopment district.
One of the buildings that was sub-par and helped the district become qualified was, and I haven't
seen the wonderful picture but I think you have a picture of the problem we're trying to correct.
So to some extent it would be somewhat incongruous at this point, having used that building as a
reason for creating the district in the first place, not to give TIF to this particular project to in fact
correct the problem for which we created the district. We have had explanations of pay as you
go. I think it's fairly clear. I think you've done a good job of explaining that. I had meant to
explain it because it's not really pay as you go from a developer's perspective. It's go, pay and
then get. You go with the project. You pay for the project, which is one of the reasons you have
more interest than you might have if you just went out and bought a house. Bought a house for
$100,000.00. You pay off what? 200 some thousand. Here you pay a little more because there's
a lag time. He's going to pay his taxes. The first year he'll pay taxes on the old rate. The next
year he'll Pay taxes on the new rate from which the TIF is extracted and the following year he'll
get the money. So they're filling that gap. You have a little more interest on this than you
otherwise would have. The city on the other hand has very little risk in what it has to pay out. It
doesn't pay out anything that it doesn't get. It only pays what it gets. It passes it through. So
with that I think that I want to talk a little bit about how we came, we've been on the...ofa
dilemma a little bit with this project, and what we've talked to you folks about. The first meeting
we came to you with plans and with a plea and with an explanation as to why we needed the TIF.
How we met the but for. We had planned then for the next meeting simply to answer the
questions that were left when the request was tabled. In the meantime we have a couple new
folks on the group here and so we felt we needed to go back over a few things, but we're still
taking to heart the comment and the general agreement and understanding that we're focusing on
economic issues and we aren't so much focusing on the architecture as Todd and you folks just
discussed and so while the plans are here, are they here where they can see them. I don't know
what's up here. I don't know what they're looking at... So we have the plans so you can see
what will be proposed. You see it in it's form as it will be presented to the planning commission,
but not necessarily as things go from time to time as it will be when you come out of the planning
commission. So that is the direction that everyone has decided to take here to go through
planning...you folks first see frankly what kind of building these folks can afford. The but for,
so while to some extent we thought well okay we've had the project approved before. We're not
asking for any more money. Perhaps this is kind of an easy task. And perhaps it should be since
we are meeting what the goals of the district were to create, to clean up this awful looking
building. On the other hand we do recognize, and it's reasonable for you to revisit the issue
because there has been changes. Some of the changes have somewhat clouded the vision. Some
of them are reasonable to explore more thoroughly. The question though that we have to ask for
24
Economic Development Authority- January 28, 1999
is if it's going to be built without TIF, what is the but for. Part of the but for is very easy to
answer. Bob has put together a list of, an analysis of the numbers. How it works. How it
doesn't work. The rest of the but for though is a little more subjective and it's one that does
affect the overall economy of what happens here in the city because but for the TIF Bob has two
choices. He can cancel the purchase agreement and go with his eight screens and we've left at
the city with the ugly building for, in my judgment, at least another couple of years. That's
because of the time it takes to get another group put together. Invariably the other group that we
get put together, they put together, the other, whoever puts together, will come back to you and
say, okay. We want to do this now and but for the TIF, we'll not do it. So you might find
yourself right back where we are today if the TIF is not given to these folks, on a plan that we can
have in place. Get the taxes paid sooner. Speaking of paying taxes, one of the risks here is that
this particular building that we're dealing with at the moment has been the one that's been the
least reliable for paying taxes period. The other alternative is that, that Bob has, is to go ahead
but with a lesser building. Lesser in intricacy of design. Lesser in quality. And something that
probably would not be as aesthetically pleasing and therefore would not have as good an impact
on our downtown as a TIF sponsored building would have. So let's discuss a few of the other
issues then that have clouded the issue. First of all, on the project that you were originally
providing the TIF it was to redo the parking lot, redo the facade, add a boardwalk and there was a
mixed use of retail, bowling and restaurant. The current use is retail, a little bit more movie and
at the request of the city I should remind you, no restaurant. So the question is, is this a viable,
economic development that should be supported? The question is not, did we support the prior
plan because there was a restaurant and now there is none because the restaurant was removed at
the request of the city. The question is not did we support it before because there was a bowling
alley and now there is none because the city's files and ours is full of reasons why the bowling
alley is not a very good, an economic investment. While there have been several offers that have
come forward with a thought they might take a crack at managing a new bowling alley, each of'
them has come away saying it would take more money than you could recover in any reasonable
period of time to bring the bowling alley up to speed. They also come forward with the response
that 24 lanes, which this is, is the bare minimum that you can have in one facility and expect to
be a success. Even if it were a success, the value of the rents that a successful bowling alley can
pay are so low that it does not enhance the value of the building. If you know buildings value in
commercial, commercial buildings values are determined by the amount of rent that is paid. The
question is not either did we split the prior project because the retail, of the retail component
because now we have something that in fact has more retail. And so to the question is this a
viable economic development that should be supported when comparing it with a prior proposal,
the answer is yes. Some other questions have come up and this has come to where there is
difficulty on our part in trying to answer questions because we can only respond to what we've
heard. We haven't heard a whole lot of questions but we have heard a couple of questions. One
is math and we will deal with that when we get to the planning commission unless someone has a
comment and a reason to talk about it tonight. We'll respond to that at the planning commission.
The other is use and we've heard a variety of reasons why romantically.we'd like to stay with
what we have. But that's sort of a, and I too went through that with this project. We've all gone
through a period of what one experiences is somewhat like a death in a family. First you're sad.
Then you're mad. And then you get to the part where okay, let's get on with life. So we all went
through a period of okay, this isn't quite what we had in mind before. We don't have...up front.
25
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
We don't have the cute boardwalk. We don't have all the little things that we planned to have
inside. But we don't have that because it wasn't economically viable and we won't have it
because the folks that do those sorts of things need more space than would be available if it were
left that way and I just talked about how a bowling alley is not very economically viable. True,
it's one less thing you can do in downtown Chanhassen but it's not economically viable. The
other area is, the other thought that we've heard and someone else is going to talk a little bit
about that but I would just mention a little bit...as Bob told you last time when we were here,
they are closing eight screen movie theaters in many locations because they are too small to
compete. Sixteen screens do lots of little things for us, in addition to making sure that we have
an investment that has already been made more secure. We will see better movies. There is a
thing going on I understand in the movie industry where if you have fewer than 20, you don't get
some of the first run movies. But if you have 20 and you can consistently assure that vendor that
you'll be taking those movies, they put you on the list for all the good movies. The other issue
on the regional draw is one that I love to talk about but I think Steve wants to talk about it a little
bit and so I will just say, in my summary on that, that we are a regional draw. Steve can talk
about some of the institutions that we have here in town. Some of the businesses that we have
here in town that are regional draws and I can only say to you from my experience that I would
hope that you would take the same approach as I do in my business which is I'm responsible for
bringing a fairly large number of businesses and tenants to this town. I feel responsible for their
success. We as a city are responsible for encouraging and bringing these folks to town and we
need to follow through to make sure that they succeed. It's not known to most people that most
businesses here in town are not making a whole lot of money. They knew that, most of them.
The ones that don't know, we counsel with them and tell them that I hope that you have a reserve
so you can live through the lean years until you get to the point that you want to be. But most
folks here in Chanhassen are positioning themselves. They're positioning themselves for our
future growth and they're positioning themselves for the growth from around the region that will
come from them. And you'd be surprised how many folks in town here rely on a region and not
just Chanhassen. In fact there are more people in town doing business that rely on more than
Chanhassen, and always will, than rely on just Chanhassen. If we had businesses, only
businesses in Chanhassen that relied on Chanhassen businesses, we would get by with strip
centers. One of the businesses that I just learned of and it's kind of interesting so I'll pass it on is
a business that moved here from Excelsior and that's the Sampler. She has people coming here
from Japan. If they are in the United States, they come to her store. And that is truly a regional
shopping center so, first they don't have any money anywhere to spend so I don't know why we
care about that. But so in summary I do think we do have to think of a broad view. Not short
view. Commitments that are previously made to folks-and just what this will do economically
for our city and I think it's exciting. You all know I worked on the other plan. I liked that plan
but I think it's terribly exciting to put Chanhassen on the map with a 16 screen theater.
Boyle: Thank you Vernelle. You commented, Steve did you have some comments?
Steve Berquist: I'm Steve Berquist. I live at 7207 Frontier Trail. I really didn't know I was
going to be introduced, nor did I know for sure that I was going to make comments. I thought
perhaps that I would and I have made some notes. Not necessarily in any particular order so
you'll have to bear with me as I go through them. The first thing I want to tell you, I want to be
26
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
completely up front about this is, and I'm not here as a former councilmember or EDA member.
I'm not here as a mechanical contractor, the HVAC contractor that did the original theater,
although we did. I have no idea whether we've even looked at anything regarding the tear down
and the rebuild. I'm not here in that regard. You'll have to just weigh in my comments
accordingly and if you think I'm biased, you're certainly welcome to discard them. But I assure
you I'm up here as a citizen. The first note that I made, oh the other thing I wanted to do. I really
wanted to bring a piece of a computer paper with the fold out so I could...have them all fold out
like I did at the original, at the State of the City thing. Everybody just groaned... Anyway, the
regionality.
Senn: I'm kind of glad you didn't do that.
Steve Berquist: Well it would have been funny. But that's alright. Vernelle talks on the
regionality issue. We are a regional draw. We have the Target. We have the Byerly's. We have
other draws, the Dinner Theater. Many, many reasons for people in all areas of this part of the
suburb ring to come to Chanhassen. The decision regarding our regionality was made far before
I sat there or you sit there. Now, in my opinion, the question is how do we insure the vitality of
our, of what we have created as our regionality. So I'm worried about that. I'm concerned that
the multiplexes of commercial theaters, I've got to make sure I read my notes here. I'm
concerned that in the event that this project does not go forward, that what could happen, again as
a citizen, is that 4-5 years down the road that we'll be sitting here, you'll be sitting there talking
to some other developer about the redevelopment of not only the bowling alley, but also what is
currently the existing 8 screen theater. And from a citizens point of view, I would hate to have to
look at that reinvestment again. I don't want that to happen. I don't look at this as corporate
welfare. I know at some point somebody had made that comment. This is not corporate welfare
in my opinion. Again, increment is only returned to the developer if the valuation per tax dollars
are generated. Do we got an eye sore there? This is, Jim you're nodding your head. You know,
everybody knows what that place looks like. I mean to us, who drive it every day, who look at it
every day, we have a tendency to look right past it. But believe me the people that come through
Chanhassen that live in other areas and look at that building, don't look right past it. It's an ugly
eye sore and it needs to be cleaned up. Let's see my starred items here. I want to talk very
briefly about other communities continuing to offer incentives, and other communities even
looking to annex land for the enhancement of their commercial, industrial tax base. I think we're
foolish if we don't believe that they're going to be offering tax increment to, on that land. To
help themselves remain economically viable. Now I say that not only with this project in mind,
but this is a comment that I thought of when you were talking about the original proposal with
Eden Trace. Not that I don't think affordable housing is a very important component to include
with the project but I don't want to sell the tax increment tool short. I'm afraid with the hot
button, the hot phrase being affordable housing, that that may happen. I look at this project that's
before you as a movie theater expansion and the retail component and I think back on the original
project that we all looked at and fell in love with. The Frontier Building, the movie theater, the
Pauly's restaurant. We all loved it. We all thought it was a great thing for Chanhassen. We
looked forward to how much it was going to draw our downtown together. How many people it
was going to bring to our downtown. How it was going to affect our economic vitality. I look
now at this project and I really believe that this is a better project. This is a superior project to
27
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
what we agreed to back in 1996 but never came to fruition. And I would urge the commissioners
to work towards an agreement with the developer and get this thing going. Lastly, two quick
points. Three quick points. The Mayor mentioned the revenue. Tax revenue flow into the city,
and I just wanted to, I'm sure it's all on the forefront of your minds but you need to keep in mind
the other benefits associated with the vitality of that area. We have a significant piece of land on
the other side of Highway 5 that is largely at this point undeveloped. We have the CR James
piece that for lack of investment is just sitting there vacant currently. Nobody wants to take the
risk to put anything on it. We've got the Boston Market piece that went down, for whatever
reason. It's down. With the enhancement of this particular area, there's my phone, pardon me.
Engel: Now that's staying in touch.
Steve Berquist: I told him to call me if he needed me, and he just sounded like he wanted to hear
me say hello. Anyway. It's kind of nice when a 12 year old calls his dad, isn't it?
Boyle: Especially when he's at the podium.
Steve Berquist: There will be other activities and values received by the citizens of Chanhassen
with this project, in my opinion. They won't necessarily be tangible, and I know you all believe
that. I simply bring it up. The other thing is that $1.3 million is a case scenario which from what
I heard represents a lot of very conservative or worse case criteria. Is that right? $1.3. That $1.3
million represents a lot of worse case stuff. And lastly, and partly leastly, the park and ride. You
talk about the park and ride. There was no benefit to the park and ride with the old proposal. We
simply had a restaurant there in the existing building and a movie theater. This park and ride,
again if you look at the retail element of it, that is a component of it, stands to benefit. It will still
be there number one, and the services that typically will serve a park and ride, and Mark you're
very privy to those being on the Southwest Metro Council down there for the development on
Highway 5. We stand a good chance of going in that retail and being benefited by the park and
ride as well. So that wasn't part of the original concept. I think it's a superior project to what we
had originally, and I would urge you to strongly consider supporting it.
Boyle: Steve, I think there's a couple questions. Nancy.
Mancino: Yeah I just wanted to draw from you. You said, you thought it was a superior project
than the original one in '96 and you just said one of it's due to the retail on the west side being
close to the park and ride, I understand. And I didn't get your other key points on why you think
it is better than the original one.
Steve Berquist: One of the big reasons is that we get a new building out of it. You know the old
thing, while made out of, you know built like a bunker, comes down and gets replaced by
something that's new.
Mancino: I just wanted to make sure I got your key points on why you think this is better than
the other one.
28
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Steve Berquist: Well the other thing that I thought about mentioning that I didn't want to
necessarily. I think Vernelle mentioned the fact that there was some discussion regarding the
loss of a restaurant. To me that's not a bad deal. If you look at the restaurants we have in town
now. Adding one more, I don't necessarily think that's a good deal for us. Any other questions?
Thank you for your indulgence.
Boyle: Thank you Steve.
Clayton Johnson: For those who are new, I'm Clayton Johnson with the Bloomberg Companies.
And the next door neighbor to this project. And Todd I want to compliment you. That was a
great presentation and I think it was very helpful, particularly to the new members and it's
helpful even to us who have been through the whole thing. But I think we support the project
obviously because we're the next door neighbor. We've been active in the development of all of
downtown since 1986, but also in this whole site. The original hotel, the hotel expansion, the
meeting rooms and so on and we're currently wrapping up the Frontier improvement. I don't
know if you've been back there in the last few days but it's actually starting to look like
something. But the other reason that we support it is that we are very interested in taking this
thing to the next step, which is the area behind the Dinner Theater which we know is everybody's
concern and Brad, from Lotus' office and myself have continued to work with a major developer
and a major tenant on a large office building for that spot and we are encouraged by them to
continue, and we're going to probably be at the next meeting to make a preliminary presentation.
So we're actively pursuing that and we hope that your support for this project continues.
Boyle: Thank you.
John Rice: I didn't plan on saying anything.
Boyle: Well everybody else has, you might as well.
John Rice: Let silence be taken as objection. My name is Jolm Rice. My office is in the Frontier
Building, 551 West 78th Street. As some of you may know I'm the attorney for Bloomberg
Companies and I've been here before on various projects. I have some other history which Don
might or might not remember. I sat in the closing on the first development and sale of the
bowling alley, representing one of the parties in there. And it has, it needs some help now. But
anyway, it would be a vast improvement on that building. That building and it's current use is a
drag. The taxes itself are, the usage has demonstrated that it's not going to be economically
viable. Mr. Copeland here has already made a substantial investment in the first stage of the
cinema. He's made a substantial investment and he chooses putting his own money in to expand
that same investment in the downtown to make that improvement next door to his own building.
And I would think that that would be a significant factor indicating that there's some good faith
work and investment to be done by him and merits your approval. Besides that it's going to
work favorably for the overall improvements of the entire south side there that faces on Highway
5. Thanks.
29
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Boyle: Thank you. I think at this point, let's open it up now for questions please. And again,
let's focus on the economic portion if we could please. I'll start on my right side, Mark. Engel.
Or Senn, if you'd like to begin.
Senn: I'll have you come back to me...
Boyle: Alright, Linda.
Jansen: I have one question. In mention to the eight screen theaters actually being closed down
and that they can't compete. When did that trend start? I'm looking at the cinema just having
opened and now it's not viable.
Bob Copeland: When we started to plan the cinema there in about 1994...
Boyle: Bob, it might be best so this gets on. Thank you.
Bob Copeland: When we started plamfing the existing cinema there in 1994, eight screens was
kind of a big deal. At least we thought it was. But since then there is a national trend that is
towards larger and larger complexes. More and more screens. And what's happening is that 16
has somehow become sort of a magic number that if you're smaller than 16, you're in jeopardy of
not surviving. The 8 screen cinema down in Bumsville is closed. There's one in Edina that will
be closed in the coming year. It's an 8 screen cinema. And we're hearing about this and we're
seeing it all around the country and 8 just is not a viable number any longer and so this is just a
development that's happened I'd say in the last 3 or 4 years, but it's accelerating. And there are
going to be fewer movie theaters with larger numbers of screens at those fewer theaters.
Jansen: And so as we're looking at some of the smaller markets, and of course trying to
familiarize myself with your business I was going through the paper. As I'm looking at all of
these smaller theaters in smaller communities, and meaning even our size, you're forecasting that
those will be closed because our population will be traveling into say an Eden prairie where
maybe they would put 16 screens. Making us less viable:
Bob Copeland: Well that's right. There Probably will be a 16 screen plus cinema in Eden Prairie
in the coming years. I think that's inevitable. But what we're concerned about is that in the
coming years there may be a 16 screen at some other community that would be closer than we
could withstand. And the smaller numbers of screen cinemas in smaller communities will
probably survive. We have a 7 screen cinema in Buffalo that we think will do fine. But at the,
this, Chanhassen is closer in to where the population is and the smaller ones that are where the
population are are not going to survive. The Brookdale Cinema just closed this month. Four
screens. It's going to happen. And it's a national trend and it's not something that we relish. It's
not something that we, you know anybody's promoting but that's you know the way it's going.
Mancino: What's a single reason for that? I mean why would I want to go outside of my own
city of Chanhassen that has an 8 screen theater to go to a 16 one 10 miles away? I mean what do
3O
Economic Development Authority- January 28, 1999
they say is the draw? Is it because everybody in my family can go to a different, yOu know go to
a different movie in the same building?
Bob Copeland: That's one of the things. But even with 8 screens here in Chanhassen, we can't
play all the movies. We can't get them all. You know there are you know a handful of movies
that we don't have right now because we only have 8 screens so we can't show all the movies.
So there might be some movies that you want to see that we don't have.
Mancino: You mean I have to wait a week to see before you get the new ones?
Bob Copeland: Well no, but we won't be getting them.
Mancino: Oh! You won't be getting them at all?
Bob Copeland: Right. For example if you want to see Waking Ned Devine. I mean you have to
go down to some other place to see that. And if you want to see Life is Beautiful.
Mancino: I have to go to the Lagoon.
Bob Copeland: Or some other place. But the big reason though is that the larger, newer cinemas
with stadium seating and in some cases bigger screens which we would intend to have here is
have one big auditorium with a very large screen, they are drawing people. People are driving by
the smaller ones and they're going to those.
Mancino: Yeah, no. I can understand that...
Bob Copeland: And it's not everybody's taste. Some people say well that wouldn't be for me. I
wouldn't do that but people are doing that.
Jansen: The theaters that are open now, and you have to forgive me. I'm not a big movie goer,
but don't I recall seeing, don't you have the stadium seating in the existing cinema?
Bob Copeland: In 4 of the 8 auditoriums we have stadium seating, yes.
Jansen: Okay. And are they the oversized screens or the big screens?
Bob Copeland: Well I would say no. They're just average size screens,
Jansen: Okay. Thank you.
Boyle: You ready Mark? Excuse me Bob. Does anybody else have any questions for Bob while
he's at the podium. Questions of Bob? Okay. I had one but I forgot what it was.
Engel: I don't have questions. Just a few comments but I'm going to wait until, are you ready to
go Mark?
31
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Senn: No.
Engel: No?
Boyle: Go ahead.
Engel: Well, I just watched this for a number of years before I got on council or EDA and to me
the gain from the commercial viability of just our core downtown, in and of itself, is probably
enough reason for me to approve it. Just that. And I think it's very pretentious on our part to sit
here and think that under market conditions that property is going to redevelop, given it's
demonstrated staying power to not do so. And it's certainly been uglier than the amount of years
I've just been here but I've about had it with that place myself. So I don't believe there's any
market condition that says that's going to change. If that's the case, I believe it would have
happened by now and I don't see anybody else stepping up to the plate and I know it may not be
perfect but it's not our property. We've got to deal with what we get and it's better than anything
we've gotten so far. I think if we get this, we get closer to that office building, tower, center,
complex, whatever you want to call it behind the Dinner Theater. Again it's that incrementalism.
We're sneaking up on it. But we're not going to get it with this there, in my opinion. You
wouldn't get me to build an office building there with that thing around. And it's all better than
the existing use. It just is. That's not even debatable. It's not cash out of pocket. We're not
being asked for a loan. It's incremental tax dollars. It's a win for us. It may.not be a win for
everybody but it is a win for the city so I'm going to approve it.
Boyle: Thank you. Right to the point. Appreciate that.
Jansen: Can I ask yet another question? It actually came up from something Mark said. I'm
recalling, and I spent two days going through the history on this project and Mr. Gerhardt was
wonderful. This is my second presentation of the numbers so he made sure I understood them
perfectly clear. But one of the things I recall reading was, at least one other approach to the
project that seemed to stall and then fail because of the existing financial situation of the bowling
alley owners. Wasn't there a whole complicated process where the purchase just couldn't be
made and the project stalled and stopped because of that? Or we would have something there
now?
Gerhardt: One of the deals was that Pauly would be included in on it. Dan Dahlen would be
included in it and Dan would rent back basically from himself the bowling element and it wasn't
a marketable deal. You couldn't take it to a bank and it failed.
Jansen: So it was more the financial situation of the property that stopped the deal or we'd have
something there now?
Gerhardt: ...
Jansen: Okay.
32
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Gerhardt: Bowling is difficult, it's difficult to get a bowling alley to survive and pay over $2.00
a square foot in taxes. $3.00 a square foot in taxes. And for them to survive there. And the
amount of space that you need for a bowling alley. There's 24 lanes and then the space in-
between. You just have way too much square footage to really afford to pay $15.00-$12.00 a
square foot in a lease and still make money.
Jansen: So is the first project that's come before the EDA or the HRA as far as demolishing the
building completely and putting up a new business? Okay. So it's really the first time it's been
looked at that way. Okay. And then the other part that of course I keep reading and we keep
mentioning is the eye sore of the existing building and taking a good look at it and your pictures
show it beautifully with the paint peeling off of the facade. I brought the question up and it was
with staff as to whether or not there is an ordinance that, in place that actually addresses those
things because if we're actually coming at it and saying you know this thing is an eye sore.
detracting from being able to bring businesses into the downtown. If we weren't replacing it...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Ashworth: ...passes that referendum, these businesses will be taxed for that. And the money
will go directly to the school district. Or it would go directly to us.
Boyle: Well does the 25% remain? I mean the 25% is there year after year after year, right?
That goes right back to the city, is this correct? Where does the 25% come?
Ashworth: I think that Todd had mentioned, the 10% can be used for any type of purpose
whatsoever. The 15% has to kind of stay within that boundary area that is totally up to us. In
other words it doesn't have to benefit these particular owners.
Boyle: Okay. As long as that district is, okay I understand.
Mancino: So I think what Councilman Senn is saying that the 15% has to stay within the district.
If it were regular property taxes, it would not have to stay in that district. It could be used over
all in the city anywhere and so that it wouldn't have to just stay in the district. We could use it
anywhere you have a little bigger universe to decide whereas this has to stay just right there. Is
that what you're, part of your point?
Senn: Only 10% of the revenues coming off this project can go outside of this very small district
area. 10%. Okay. So what I was saying was not relating to capital referendums or whatever.
What I was saying was normal ongoing city operating needs as the city grows, whatever. As our
infrastructure ages, as it requires more maintenance and everything else as we have more needs
developed because of our population growth, okay we have increased services. We have
increased operating costs. Okay our percentage of the overall tax rate will probably increase. As
it increases, okay you will not recover any increase off these properties. So they will not be
paying their fair share towards any of those future increases in relationship to stress or
33
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
infrastructure maintenance and...whatever within the city so when the area is not doing that, or
bigger properties end up doing that, that means the other properties pay more.
Gerhardt: ...
Mancino: The original base value. The blue numbers.
Gerhardt: ...that will continue to...
Mancino: And if there is a school referendum that does go to the school district, but there is no
money, no green money that goes to the county. So the people who really lose out as it were I
guess, from the tax increment districts, and actually in the latest newsletter from the county, the
people that actually lose out or the agency that actually loses out is the county. And then they
come back to us as the city and say, we lost all this money. How will you make it up to us? I
mean using numbers...other side of that.
Senn: Well it's more complicated than that. Much more complicated. The county's not the only
negative you know.
Mancino: But I mean then we enter into agreements on county roads, etc. Again, just
everything.
Boyle: Mark, you still have the floor if you would like.
Senn: No, I'm done.
Boyle: Linda.
Jansen: I guess tagging onto what Councilman Senn said when he's saying the right project.
And again not thinking of the cinemas as being the wrong type ora business or project, but when
I look at that property and realize that for the 14 year period and the 22 year period that it won't
be on the tax rolls. That yes, we'd like to get it on as soon as possible. In 14 or 22 years, is there
a possibility that there will be a business or a developer that would come in and not need the TIF
to develop the property? Might there be an opportunity for there to be a development that could
go in and that could immediately get onto the tax rolls? Maybe I'm reacting a little bit more in
that direction having just come ttu'ough the whole election and the campaign process and hearing
over and over again, you know taxes, taxes, taxes and wanting to bring that number down on the
property owners. TIF definitely is one of those issues that you end up having discussions on and
watching where the EDA is taking the funding and going more towards the affordable housing to
get workers into town. It's not that we're needing, we don't have enough workers. It's not that
we're now needing to attract businesses. Though I'm not saying you know no to commercial.
I'm saying if we're at a point in the development of Chanhassen that businesses are coming into
the community, and especially into our downtown area because of the way it's developed with
you know all the hard work that all of you have gone to, we've got this property. We're limited
in the amount of property that is available for development now in the downtown. Do we want,
34
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
should we be taking public money to help in the expansion of the business when what the
community and the vision has been for this property is multi-use. And again I realize that we
don't dictate what businesses go in there. That that's not what we're here for but it's what are we
going to take the public dollars and use them towards. So as I read through all of the TIF
information and policy information, this being a redevelopment district, we're looking at an
expansion of an existing business which is exciting for the community. Is that the right place for
public dollars and TIF dollars. It's not within that realm of redevelopment. We're looking at an
ugly building that's sitting here. If we step up to the plate and do something with that versus
feeling that we have to commit to a 14 and a 22 year commitment of the one chunk being the
$665,000.00, and the $1.4 million, that's an extravagant investment of public money into an area,
but that's not what the public has had the vision for it. We're straying from that. We're
spending their money on something that wasn't envisioned for. Just some of the questions that
came up as I was comparing TIF policies, this area, the vision of Chanhassen. Maybe I'm less
impatient because I haven't been sitting up here seeing this property. I wasn't involved in the
first one and looking at the downtown area, I'm looking at all the things that this community
needs, wants, should have that TIF could go to because they're not here, and we're looking at
should we be making the business decision to finance the expansion of a business? That's not
what we're here for either. We're not to be making those types .of entrepreneur type decisions.
But again, just a few of the things that I hit as I was going through that. They seem in conflict.
You know definitely wanting businesses in town to succeed. But that's a business purpose.
That's private, not public.
Boyle: Some good points. Thank you.
Mancino: Well I kind of want to build on that and I'm not really...just because I think I feel like
a lot of the other members on the commission and that is that, I really do believe in
redevelopment and I believe in the very first point that we have in the new TIF policy which is
compatibility of the proposed project with the city's overall development plans and objectives.
And there's no question that this area has been a focus for the Highway 5 and for the city council.
As we on the planning commission saw this project in '94, so it has been a focus for
redevelopment and committing dollars for the project. So I am not philosophically opposed to
using TIF for some particular spot redevelopment. At all. Although I want to caution us from
what something that Councilmember Jansen just said. And I kind of smiled because I hadn't
thought about it and that is in this area, and this is a major redevelopment area that Clayton has
talked about and that we can see is, and if you don't mind I'm going to get up, ...to make sure
that we understand that as we...that hopefully the rest of this will be developed too. Soon. And it
is...are we ready to be committed to take the same thinking and philosophy over to this area too.
Boyle: Do we dare not do that?
Mancino: So you know I just want to put that on the table that that is something that you know
hopefully in the next few years that we'll be looking at too and philosophically where do we
come down as an EDA as far as using TIF.
35
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Boyle: In other words you feel maybe we're setting a precedent on this one? For let's assume an
office building does come, and they come in and they want TIF. Well you gave TIF here. You
give here. Hey, each issue is new. I don't believe this sets a precedent. I think the past comes
more to this.
Senn: ...from what she said, you have to listen to what she said. On a pure premise,
philosophically is redevelopment, okay. If that's the premise that you're deciding this on, then
you are philosophically saying that you're going to continue this...
Boyle: I don't agree.
Senn: ...for redevelopment purposes...
Engel: A person can change their mind.
Mancino: That's what I'm asking because.
Boyle: Philosophically you're saying.
Mancino: Yeah, philosophically and again I'm not trying to, if this is an eye sore, you know
these two buildings are eye sores because now we've got, we've got everybody down here.
We're using this road, etc. I just want to make sure that we thought about it and we all feel
comfortable with it because again the same argument for the eye sore could be down here.
Engel: I think that goes without saying.
Boyle: Can I just make a comment there? Let's just assume that this doesn't go in and another
use comes in and they request some assistance. Do we say oops. I'm sorry. We're going to wait
another two years because you can't afford it. We're going to hold tight. We're going to hold
tight because we're not going to give TIF assistance any more for commercial development. And
we don't care what kind of business you got in here, we're not going to give it. Is that a fair
philosophical assumption?
Senn: Well there is a philosophical assumption that says development will occur regardless of
what you throw at it, yes. But it's a matter of time. I mean Byerly's wanted to be in Chanhassen
regardless of whether we subsidized it or not. They got kicked out of several other sites. It was
the only one left, okay. So you're kind of kidding yourselves if you think it wouldn't be, okay.
But I mean essentially you have to ask yourself the question what's the premise you're doing it
on and how big, or how deep are you digging your hole? If you go with a project like this on a
pure premise of effectively redevelopment, which is the only premise that appears to me you can
go on. Then you go down the way and you say but we're going to look at this one differently. I
don't know how you're going to do that because (a), it's going to be redevelopment and in all
probability it's going to be something other than something that's going to produce nothing more
than a bunch of minimum wage jobs. Which this project's only doing. There won't be a single
job in that place that's not minimum wage probably.
36
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Mancino: Well I just want to make sure we don't go from one extreme to the other. Say no
redevelopment that we're using TIF or all redevelopment that we're using TIF.
Engel: I want every project on it's own.
Mancino: And every project on it's own and talk about that for a few minutes because I don't
want us to get into again going to the extremes on either. I mean I think that's a good
conversation to have .... those things that it must bring the city that we feel TIF should be used
for. And again, because this is going to come up again, whether it's just, you know we're talking
about extremes right now so I'd like to talk about some of those gray areas and why even this one
in particular is important.
Engel: And I just wanted, this body by it's very nature is fluid. It is going to change so whatever
long term policy we would put in place is really going to be subjected to the thinking of the
people sitting in these chairs the next time one comes up. So by default they almost live in a case
by case basis. So philosophically I love that. I think the long term vision, something for the city.
That's great. But the fact is everybody that moves into these seats is going to look at what
they've got and they're going to decide based on the way they feel about it right now. Regardless
of what the policy is.
Jansen: Making comment to that, as one of the new kids sitting up here. Prior to this meeting
the reason that ! went back on all of the history and went back to the Vision 2002 was to make
sure that I don't want to implement a major change. That's not why I'm here. I'm here because
there's a vision and there's a course that's being gone down and I need to make sure that I'm on
board with that and one of the things that as an EDA that you've done recently is you've changed
your focus and so I'm getting on board with a new focus and now this project's coining along
and to me it's out of sync with where your new focus is. I'm trying to get myself onto the new
course and you've got a transition going on here. Because I'm looking at these 2, 3 year projects.
The hotel expansion and the Timber Lounge and those to me are a better comparison to this
project. So I look at the 3 years and the amount of money that went into those compared to 14
years and 22 years and it's wow.
Engel: See and I look at it, and I don't want to use the word utopian because that denigrates it
but it's the only word I can think of for now so I'm going to leave it there but it's not that bad
when I use that word. I mean I look at it from a reality perspective. Is it better or is it worse?
And regardless of what we think, we might wait another year. We might wait two years. The
next one doesn't quite do it for us. Maybe it's three years. How many years has it been there?
20? 25? I don't know. And I've watched these guys come up here over the last couple years, I
don't see anybody nipping at their heels to grab this parcel of land out from underneath their feet
and snap it up and do a better deal. I'm kind of waiting to see the next drawing. I haven't seen
one yet. It tends to tell me that there's some reality as to what that thing can viably support and
what people are willing to put into it. If somebody had another deal on the table and was coming
right on the door behind him, I'd be willing to look at it. I've been waiting two years, I haven't
37
Economic Development Authority- January 28, 1999
seen it. They don't own exclusive rights to redevelop in Chanhassen and I don't see anybody
stepping up with another offer.
Senn: Mark they haven't been able to develop in two years because of bankruptcy...
Engel: You know what, that's all part of the deal Mark. That's what I was saying.
Senn: That's not part of the market. When you're asking $2 million from each property trying to
bring it down and then...
Boyle: Vernelle, you have some comments. Would you like to?
Vernelle Clayton: ...the bankruptcy that has kept this from being sold. Lots of reasons, mostly
economic and.
Senn: Vernelle, okay. If you want to get up then let's debate it because when a thing's tied up
in bankruptcy, when there's judgments against it, when the. security position for closing on it, you
can't sell a piece of property. If you can tell me any differently there as a professional real estate
person I'd like you to put that on the record...how much you know about the real .estate
profession.
Vernelle Clayton: I'll put it on the record. I'll speak slowly enough so that what you say can be
on the record too. But I'll be happy to put it on the record. This property has not been in
bankruptcy that long. We spent a lot of time before it went into bankruptcy trying to get it sold.
We had problems getting enough money generated on an income stream on the...to get any kind
of a loan. That was a problem.
Senn: ...security interest. They were in default on. That Was the problem.
Vernelle Clayton: That's not true. He had the money.
Senn: We were the one who had the security interest. The City. They were in default.
Vemelle Clayton: We can go back and go through all the agreements that we had and what
you're saying isn't true. Plain and simple.
Gerhardt: Mr. Chairman I'd just like to add one other point. I'm not trying to skew anything
here but you know there is, could be other potential users that you might not want there other
than movies. There are other permitted uses in the area that might go in there that are less
attractive than a movie theater. So that is also a gamble. I just want you to make sure that you
understand that. It could be a lawn and sports shop. It could be a big tobacco store. You know
other things like that. Just so you understand that you're weighing what you see here against
something in the future which might be something that you don't like. Okay. Or worse than
what this is, okay. You know just don't think the next project will be better than this. You've
got to keep that in the back of your mind.
38
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Engel: Todd, and I'm going to answer that. I mean you're going down a path there that I think is
in response to sort of a premise that's being said here that we're analyzing this use. That doesn't
make it to my radar screen. This debate about a movie theater and whether we need it or not and
whether we should subsidize the expansion of an existing business. That doesn't make it to the
radar screen in my opinion. It is a gigantic, it is a huge improvement over what we presently
have. That's the bottom line, in my opinion. Again I guess I'm preaching a choir already. We
know where we stand on this. It's a huge improvement over what we already have. I don't think
we should be debating the uses because we're getting into that slippery, that's a slippery slope.
What's next? We can't make that call.
Boyle: Yeah, excuse me Jim.
Bohn: We created this new district with the idea of redeveloping it and that's what we were
going to do. Redevelop it. Regardless if it's a movie theater or another bowling alley or what it
was, but we were going to rebuild. That's why we created this new district and that's what we
should be doing is redeveloping. Saying that we're just adding onto the movie theater.
Redeveloping the bowling alley that's going down the tubes. We are redeveloping and that's
what our job is as a HRA or EDA, is to redevelop that area. And taking it from a bowling alley,
an addition to a movie theater, that's what we're supposed to be doing.
Boyle: I guess I would like to take, excuse me Nancy just a minute, take that just a little bit
further because at the time, the purpose was designated and at one point in time there were other
people sitting here that says yeah, we think that a restaurant and a bar and a bowling alley
combined is ideal and we're willing to help in the financing of that. 'Now the fact that that's not
part of the mix, you have now a movie theater with 10,000 square feet of retail space, which I
think is a big plus by the way that hasn't been mentioned before and I think it adds to it. It
doesn't change the scenario from where we were four years ago, or five.
Mancino: Well Jim just answered one of the points that I was trying to make when I was
standing up there and that is, if we as an EDA, I mean to again be proactive and decide
philosophically that we want to go in and redevelop a place, let's be, and I'm talking about it for
Don and Todd, let's be very proactive and say here is the area we want to redevelop it like has
been done here. We haven't moved on into the next area.
Gerhardt: At the next meeting I will bring.
Mancino: Okay. Let's be proactive and say where it is we want to redevelop it and then counter
to Councilman Engel, because I'm probably 360, I'm the opposite end of Councilman Engel. I
do think that use is important. We spent lots of time talking about use and what kind of use we
want in our downtown and what kind of services and the mix of uses, etc. It is extremely
important to me along with the redevelopment and focusing in on that. So as an EDA we should
make sure that we are proactive if there is an area that we want to focus in and say with some TIF
dollars we will go into partnership and be again very proactive about that and spend some time
doing that and say you know why is it important to us. Don?
39
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Ashworth: In going along, I totally agree with you. And I also agree with Councilman Senn in
that some of these things could have happened privately because I was part of the negotiations on
Byerly's, the Chanhassen State Bank, Festival Foods. I can guarantee you if they would have
come in, in each and every case, they wanted to be out on the highway. They had already, not
purchase agreements but what are the initial agreements you enter into. It was because of our
efforts to say we want you in downtown that we brought Byerly's downtown. Because of our
efforts we could put Chanhassen State Bank who also had an option on property out there.
Similar with Festival Foods. So I agree with you, we could take and ensure that this property
gets developed in the way that we want it developed.
Mancino: Then, may I ask more? Did you want to go on?
Boyle: No, but what helps us assure that that happens the way we want it to happen, and that's
utilizing TIF, is that correct? Excuse me, now you can.
Mancino: Let's figure it up front. One of the very important reasons that I think we use TIF in a
redevelopment is for the quality of the facility to be built, etc, and I have concerns about that I
want to make sure that if we do go ahead with this, that the planning commission and some
conceptual concerns that I have with one, quality of materials. I have some very big concerns
about when the movie theater stops there, that there is, in the original on the east side of the
movie theater there were supposed to be two retail. That Was original, original of '94. So again
it brought energy around that comer and again wouldfocus it in going up the alley way into the
hotel and Timber Lounge. It would be, bring energy around the Bloomberg retail. So I'm very,
very concerned with that comer and I think a big lesson that we've probably all learned is doing
these things in phases and not knowing what's going to go on next. Because I think that the
boardwalk just stopping now from what I can see is a concern again in materials and then how
we deal with that whole eastern part is a very big concern for me. And it to me doesn't have the
quality. I don't see it meeting that quality test which again if it goes through I would like to see
come back to the EDA to make sure that it does do that. After going through planning. I don't
think we need to sit here and do that at all but after going through planning.
Boyle: Do you feel Nancy then that there is more control if there is TIF involved than if there is
not TIF involved?
Mancino: Well you know.
Boyle: Control meaning we have more control of the quality and the appearance, etc.
Mancino: Well we can decide to have that or not to some degree. This is in the Highway 5
corridor so there is a lot of control because it is in the Highway 5 corridor already. I mean
architectural materials, etc. So as far as I look at it is the use of TIF goes even over and above
the Highway 5. But then again I don't think it's fair for an applicant to then go to planning and
say, don't worry about TIF. They do need to know that we are involved with the project and that
we do expect and we have it right down here, that it has to meet our high quality.
40
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Boyle: Could we assume that the quality of the materials and the appearance might not be as
good if it does not have TIF?
Mancino: Well you know, I don't know. Obviously, and I said to Bob...you know he did not
want to use EFIS because he didn't think that the material would hold up and then we did the
precast and now we're back to EFIS and so I'm kind of, you know we went back and forth on
that. So I'm concerned about quality of materials, etc and that's something that I want the
planning commission to look at.
Jansen: And Mayor and Chairman, I did ask that question of staff as one of my concerns,
realizing that there was a vision for the entire project and they did go and they referred to the
Highway 5 corridor study and in getting back to me said, that because of the parameters within
that study they felt confident that however this project comes to them, they will be able to guide
it because there does need to be the consistency. And that in fact it would give the, if they went
with the Highway 5 corridor ordinances, it would give more green space to that area so it changes
it some. It actually in some of the ordinances it's a titch stricter than we're actually applying
with the current facade, parking and boardwalk parameters. That was staff's feedback to me.
Mancino: Well I would like to make sure that it at least, you know it fulfills the Highway 5
corridor and then builds upon that. And I think that that's how we, and I think a lot of us saw
and still feel that the Richfield Bank that Bob was involved in and the new, the Byerly's
complex, and the Chanhassen Bank are just...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Mancino: ...I mean I think that that's a key component of it. I kind of feel like we have, we're
pretty sure about parking but we'll want to make sure that that happens too.
Engel: My understanding was that they were prepared to go to that route anyway but if you want
to.
Senn: We probably should put it into it.
Engel: That's fine. I don't think they have any problem with that. I'll add that.
Boyle: How would that be worded again, I'm sorry. Why don't we.
Gerhardt: The tape wasn't on so if you could just repeat it one more time.
Engel: Again huh. Okay, I'm going to be briefer this time. Move approval of private
redevelopment agreement for Phase II per staff's details with Chanhassen Cinema, modifying
existing private redevelopment for Phase I and add that it's contingent on architectural approval
by the EDA and road and access approval as well. Access from the east per Mayor Mancino's
request. And the retail is included with the movie as one development, not phased. Period.
41
Economic Development Authority - January 28, 1999
Boyle: The motion has been redefined. May I have a second to the revised motion? Jim
continues to second. Is there further discussion?
Engel moved, Bohn seconded that the Economic Development Authority approve the
Private Redevelopment Agreement for Phase II (Movie and Retail as one development, not
phased) with Chanhassen Cinema, LLC and their request for $1,389,854 in city assistance
and modify the existing Private Redevelopment For Phase I (existing movie) with
Chanhassen Cinema, LLC and reducing the Limited Revenue Note to $1,066,319
contingent approval of the architecture and access from the east by the EDA. All voted in
favor, except Senn and Jansen who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 2.
APPROVAL OF BILLS:
Boyle: That brings us up to the bills. Time to pay the bills. May I have a motion to approve the
bills as listed? I don't have it.
Labatt: I'll make a motion to approve the bills.
Boyle: Before that, are there questions regarding the bills to staff?.
Engel: None here.
Boyle: Linda, Mark, do you have any questions on the bills that you'd like to address with staff
at this time?
Jansen: No.
Boyle: Steve? Jim?
Bolm: No.
Labatt: No.
Boyle: May I have a motion to approve the bills as presented.
Labatt: I'll make a motion to approve the bills as presented.
Mancino: Second.
Labatt moved, Mancino seconded that the Economic Development Authority approve the
bills as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
42
PROPOSAL:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 5, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
690 CITY CENTER DRIVE
Request Site Plan Review for APPLICANT: Chanhassen Properties, LLC
Additional Theaters and Retail
Space LOCATION: Pauly Drive; east of'Market
Boulevard -
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The
applicant, Chanhassen Properties, LLC., request for subdivision and site plan review to
demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl and Filly's Bar and replace it with eight additional
theaters with a seating capacity of 1,400 seats, with an area of 30,000 sq. ft. and 9,000 sq. ft.
of retail space, variances for signage, hard surface coverage and parking requirements on
property zoned BG, General Business District, located north of the railroad tracks and Pauly
Drive; east of Market Boulevard; and south of West 78th Street.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the
meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The. Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then
make a recommendation to the City Council.
Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City
Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to
someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937-1900 ext. 120. If you choose to
submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting.
Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on April 22, 1999.
tDrly!
TIONAL LODGING COMPANIES, INC
;5 WEST 78TH STR.
=N PRAIRIE, MN 55344
AXEL'S OF CHANHASSEN
ATTN: CHARLIE BURROWS
1318 SlBLEY MEMORIAL HWY
MENDOTA, MN 55150
3OMBERG COMPANIES
BOX 730
"~NHASSEN, MN 55317
WEIS ASSET MGMT INC
CHANHASSEN RETAIL LTMD PARTNERSHIP
PO BOX 386056
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55438-6056
CHANHASSEN BANK
WEST 78TH STREET
~.NHASSEN, MN 55317
MARKET ASSOCIATES II
C/O LOTUS REALTY
P.O. BOX 235
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
~TIVAL FOODS
0 MARKET BLVD
~,NHASSEN, MN 55317
BLOOMBERG COMPANIES INC
P.O. BOX 730
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
={KET SQUARE ASSOC
· BOX 235
~NHASSEN, MN 55317
TIRES PLUS
A~-~N: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
600 WEST TRAVELERS TRAIL
BURNSVILLE, MN 55337
~IDY'S INTERNATIONAL
'N: ANGLE LEWIS
WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE RD
3LIN, OH 43017
APPLEBEE'S #95198
1025 WEST EVERETT ROAD
LAKE FOREST, IL 60045
~NHASSEN BOWL
WEST 78TH STREET
NHASSEN, MN 55317
TOM-DON REAL ESTTE HOLDINGS
600 WEST TRAVELERS TRAIL
BURNSVILLE, MN 55337
JNTRY SUITES
WEST 78TH STREET
~NHASSEN, MN 55317
CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES LLC
5300 HYLAND GREENS DRIVE
SUITE 200
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55437
~OMBERG COMPANIES INC.
BOX 730
~NHASSEN, MN 55317
=_RICANNA COMMUNITY BANK
WEST 79TH STREET
BOX 790
,NHASSEN, MN 55317
Market
~, ,-,
'~1
t~
0
X ~
~ o
0
Z ~ 000 000 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0
~ ~00 0 ~ ~0 ~
~ 0
08/18/99 gED 08:42 FAX 612 832 5301 COPELAND BUILDING ~002
Chanhassen Properties, LLC
5300 Hyland Greens Drive, Suite 200
Bloomington, MN -~5437
832-$$02
$32-5301 fax
August 17~ 1999
Sharrnin AI~Jaff
City of Chanhassen
690 City Center Drive
Chanhassen~ Mn 55317
Re: Chanhassen Cinema Addition and Retail Phase III
Dear Sharmin:
This letter is to address the i~sues discussed by the Planning Commission on August
1999.
1. Number of seats: One of the conditions of approval recommended by the Planning
Commission was to limit the number of seats to 2,600 unless we could do a better job of
verifying that there would not be parking problems.
The Holsington par-king study commissioned by the city last summer showed that the
parking would work. Hoisington used a ratio of I stall to 5.88 seats for the cinema. Using
Hoisington'$ ratios for the 2,800 seat cinema and the retaiI, the peak demand is 525 stalls.
We had 539 stalls but lost 52 stalls providing a 30 wide foot drive aisle required by the
staff. We now have on the site 487 stalls or 7 % short of the number suggested by
Hoisington. This does not count hotel, 78th Street retail or the dinner theater parking
stalls.
With the 8 screen cinema now in operation for 1 g months, our actual parking experience is
the very best predictor of the future parking required for the 16 screen cinema since half of
it is in place now. Our busiest times are Friday and Saturday evenings for the showings
that start around 7:00 PM. Our busiest time ever was Friday evening on August 6, 1999.
The count of the cars in the parking lot at 8:00pm was 261. Subtracting 15 cars for dinner
theater employees and 5 cars for the bowling alley leaves 241 cars associated with the
cinema.
8/18/99 FED 08:43 FAX 612 832 5301 COPELAND BUILDING ~003
Page 2 of 3
We sold 717 tickets that evening which means we had an occupancy of 50%. If we are
permitted to double our seating capacity to 2,800 seats, the absolute best we can hope for
is to achieve 50% occupancy on our busiest nights which happen 10 to 12 weekends a
year. This means that the peak parking requirement for the 2,800 seat cinema would be 2
time 241 or 482 stalls, Depending on what might be going on with the retail, the 487 stalls
we have on site, will satisfy or come very close to satisfying the peak demand.
If the parking demand should exceed the 487 stall available on the site, there are additional
stalls available w/thin walking distance. The owner of the medical arts buildings I and II
and Colonial Square has agreed to permit use of the over 200 stalls they control. Festival
Foods has agreed to permit use of 30 stalls and we are trying to obtain permission from
the Americana Bank to use their lot. To acquaint customers with these overflow parking
areas, we will show a map along w/th the slide advertisements before each movie.
We will also stager our movie start times and allow a minimum of 30 minutes between the
end of a movie and the start of the same movie. This means that customers from the
approximately 7:00 PM showings will be gone from the lot before the cust°mers for the
approximately 9:30 PM showings arrive.
Based on our own experience and the availability of overflow parking, should it ever
become necessary, we are confident that the parking will work.
2. East-West Connection: The east -west connection was originally suggested by our
traffic consultant Jim Benshoofto make it easier for our customers to exit the parking lot.
Our plan provides the western half of this connection. Bloomberg will provide the eastern
half of the connection when he develops his property belfind the dinner theater.
When Bloomberg develops, we agree to modify our lot if it becomes necessary to have
our half match up with the eastern half.
In the meantime, until Bloomberg develops, we agree to provide an off duty police officer
at the intersection of Market Blvd and Pauly Drive. The traffic control person will be
provided from 6:00 PM to 10:00 PM on Friday and Saturday evenings on the 26 busiest
weekends of the year. Jim Benshoof feels this is an excellent solution to any traffic
problems that might occur. (See his attached letter dated August 4, 1999.)
This traffic control person will be at our expense and if the pay as you go TIF is not
enough security for the city, we will provide additional security to insure our performance.
This should satisfy concerns about traffic.
3, Retail/Cinema Alley: We are w/lling to screen offthis alley from view bur the
Chanhassen police department has determined that they want to see down the entire alley.
We will make sure that it is well lighted and kept clean.
05/15/99 BED 08:44 FAX 612 832 5301 COPELAND BUILDING ~004
Page 3 of 3
4. East Elevation of the Existing Cinema: The east side of the existing cinema is painted
block which admittedly looks rough. We agree to cover the painted block with stucco to
appear similar to the EIFS proposed on the cinema addition.
5. Pedestrian Traffic: We have modified the site plan to show a ~nore pedestrian friendly
situation. We added striped cross walks, benohes and bike rakes.
I hope this addresses thc issues discussed by the Planning Commission. Please call if you
have any questions.
Sincerely~
Robert R. Copeland
~005
5301
COPELAND
BUILDING
,/15/99 ~ED 08:44 FAX 612 $32
A~G-04-1S99 10~0 BE~HO0~ & ~SSOC. ~12 238 1~?~ P.02/03
BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, 'iNC.
TRANSPORTATION £NGINE.'EBS AND PkANNERS
10417 EXCELSIOR BOt. JLEVARD, .SUII1E TWO / HOPKINS, MN ,5EG43 / i612) 1~-1687 / FAX (412} __m~_. 1671
1999
~ ra ~ 98 - 79
Chaa~s~n l:!'o, perties, T-!.C
· 5300 Highland Greens Drive, Suite :200
Bloomington, MN 55437
RE: Corr., ents, on Possible L-~cim Traffic Plan fbr Chaahasser~ Ciaema
Dear Bob:
One element'oft, he '~Permanent",trm~i¢ plan for you. r expaitded.ciaema is to provide an
access connection between your property and Great.PlainS,Blv,d. This' access connection
would hav. e to traverse property to your east ttat is ownid by anofli.'er party. This access
connection and the associat~ cross-easements would s6rve two principal purposes:.
Provide an oppc~'tunity for cinema customers in enter to and fi'om Great Plains
Blvd. "
b) .Enable persons..tra~ling to and ~rom ..'~e property to your. east to ,tr~. ver~ your
protmrty'h order to'ga!.n' .direct acc.~s to MS.,-kei Blvd. - ,
W'rth'this access ,t, onne~tion, we have ¢9n¢lude21'that the truffle needs of your cinema will
be effectively accommodated. This conclusion is d6cument~ in our. rep~.ct dated
November 11, 1998.
As,we understatl, do the owner of.~e ptope~ to the east will' not allow an access
connectioti to. Great Plains'Blvd. until their pml~tty i.~ develgped. 'Tim. s, a ne~ has
arisen for ~n interim traffic solution that will provide mtisfa~r~ operations until the
other property owner will allow construction ofthe access conne~-tion to Great Blains
Blvd.
You indicated to mo your intention to take twd steps to p~o~de ~.~sfad-tory traffic
opera. 'ohs during thi~ interim period: 1) stagger the'mo~o start and end times lo
minimizo overlaiapifig peaks and' 2) utilize poli~e officer control to matmg~ traffic
0peaxtio. ns on Mark~.BIvd, during peak times. You then asked me to respond whether
these m~azut~ would adequately fulfill the traffic needs and would avoid traffic
problems for cinema ctistoM~r$ or other motorists in the area.
o~/ls/99 wg~,_O.~ :...4,~. FAX..612
832 5301 COPELAND, BUILDING
B£NSHOOF g ASSOC.
~ 00~
P.03/03
Mr, .I~bert ,,q~pelan. d'. 2 August 4, 1999.
llagarding.th¢.fa'st poi,at.it has bc~a' d'ur.expeaier~ that,fire traffic, peMcs .for. oinemaa
typically ocea~r' in thc p. efi. 'od between ~o ,wing~ cu~tomcr~ are arriving at flie'same Omc
as other customers re'e-leaving. Major improvemems in tra~_ C operafiom could be
· experienced if you are' able to stagger movie stag and end times t6 reduc~ this typical
overl.applng pe~c · " ,
Regarding ~e second point, we have had numerous positive,~pefiencea v~th the benefits
of police office- traffic control to ~ffectivel~ manage, traffic 6pe~tions.during peak traffic
demands for special events. Tl~ree major entertainment venues for wMch we have had
such positive exp~ences are:, fenner Mgt Center, TarS~ C~n.ter, and' San Io'se Arena in
San Jose, CA. h~ ~dition, we have explicit the use'o£police office~ control to
manage ~raffic operations on' Sufiday momj'nS~ a~ ~he. en.tr~ce on ?0~ Street serving the
Chri~ lh'~byterian Church irt the City or.ma. The tr c centre! at
effc~'tivoly accommod~es motorists entering and gxJthng'the ,c-hurch,.a~ well as other
traffic on 70~ Street'. A much higher'I~vel of safety ~d efficiency is l~ro.vid~.' compared
to tM situation that wouId exist without th~ officer traffic control.
Bas~ on the p .r~ceding cons!derations, we are.highly confident that tM.tv)o measures
you have sugg.e, steA will effectively accommodate motorists traveli~ig to and Fromthe
clnem~ as well as oth~ tra~c on. Msrkct'Blvd,, until ap access connection to
P~n~ Blvd, can be conkl~.,, ctS. ·
'Let me 'know i~you have any questions,aSoU~ it~ms'ad&es~l in this l~er.
FAX NO, 612342926? P; 02
~UG-18-1999 WED 02:06 PM
KKE hROHITEOT$
4
'._~ T.O.B~.ICK
EIF$ "I2",
~ ~':-TAL PAN~.L ,i~.:ll
H I N~I~
FO5 ~'¢BR CAI~,i NF--T
~OLOR
.... METAL PANEL
[ n[
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
14.
Exporting of material from the stockpile area in conjunction with the landscape business
may require the appropriate traffic control signage along Audubon Road. The City shall
determine when traffic signage is needed."
15.
The stockpile should be limited to 30,000 cubic yards of compacted topsoil brought in
from the neighboring property.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEMOLISH THE
EXISTING CHANHASSEN BOWL AND FILLY'S BAR AND REPLACE IT WITH
EIGHT ADDITIONAL THEATERS WITH A SEATING CAPACITY OF 1~400 SEATS
WITH AN AREA OF 30~000 SQ. FT. AND 9~000 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SPACE~
VARIANCES FOR SIGNAGE~ HARD SURFACE COVERAGE~ SUBDIVISION
CREATING LOTS WITH NO DIRECT FRONTAGE ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY~
HWY 5 OVERLAY DISTRICT~ PITCHED ROOF ELEMENT REQUIREMENT AND
PARKING REQUIREMENTS ON PROPERTY ZONED BG~ GENERAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT~ LOCATED NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND PAULY DRIVE;
EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD; AND SOUTH OF WEST 78TM STREET~
CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES~ LLC.
Public Present:
Name Address
Gerald Rummel
Vernelle Clayton
Bob Copeland
2300 Firstar Center, 101 E. 5th Street, St. Paul
422 Santa Fe Circle
570 Pauly Drive
Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Joyce: Before we ask questions I want to make a note that the application time limits are up so
we have to make a decision. Do we have any questions for staff at this time?
Conrad: Yeah. Why have you recommended approval with conditions versus denial? Is there a
reason?
Aanenson: Well the conditions in the staff report reflect changes that we think make it
acceptable. Our policy is that we like to...if modified... We did recommend approval with the
cross access agreement. There is another way to meet the reduction of parking. The issue is the
parking. The significant deficiency in parking. The only other way to resolve that issue would
be to reduce the square footage or the number of theaters. That would also solve the problem.
So that is another alternative.
Conrad: But you didn't recommend reduction.
12
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Aanenson: No. We said the cross access agreements. But that certainly is an option that you
could, you could also propose that option. We can't force a cross access agreement, but we can
enforce that they have the required number of parking stalls. The two ways to resolve it is cross
access agreement, which we verified through the parking study, or reduce the amount of square
footage. Those are the two ways to solve the problem.
Conrad: Do we have a vision of how the Bloomberg property will be developed?
Aanenson: When we did the parking study, there were some assumptions made as possible
locations for buildings. That information was shared with the EDA. In part because they funded
that parking study that was done last April of '98. So we did look at some options of circulation,
build out.
Conrad: What could it contain? What's the potential of the balance of that property?
Aanenson: It could be office. It could be retail. Both of those are permitted uses.
A1-Jaff.' Any of the uses that are permitted within the central business district.
Aanenson: Most intense retail, office district so. Again it's being driven by parking. No matter
what goes in there it's going to have to accommodate parking. A parking ramp was also talked
about as part of that parking study.
Conrad: Under good planning practices, could you see the theater developing separately from
Bloomberg property? Could there be a separate parking that goes to each without a?
Aanenson: No. We're deficit 400 parking stalls. That doesn't work. And the whole premise
was based on shared parking arrangements because there' was going to be peak times. I mean
that's their answer is that they'll manage it by the time showing and by having a police officer
controlling those peak traffic times. And it's our opinion that that's too significant an amount of
deficiency without allowing the cross parking.
Conrad: How many parking stalls does Target have? I mean any guess. Okay.
Aanenson: 65,000. We could do the math really quick. 65,000 times.
Conrad: In your memory bank Kate you would just have that automatic. I'm looking for
comparatives and that's why. Has a case been presented to you that shows we need less parking
for the theater?
Aanenson: Right. We acquiesced on that already. They've come back and said that they're
using a different ratio as far as seating to cars and I think we agreed that we would accept some
of that based on what our parking standard is. They're using a higher number and we agreed to
that.
13
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Conrad: So a case has been made for a different ratio than what we use?
Aanenson: Correct. Didn't they use 5.7 or.
Al-Jaff.' 5.9 or 5.7.
Aanenson: 5.7 or 5.9. So we conceded on that. We would go with the higher number but we're
still short. We just think the gap is still too big without that share.
Conrad: So you would be willing to accept the, whatever the case was for the ratio.
Aanenson: Yep.
Joyce: Any other questions?
Kind: Not right now.
Sidney: Well I guess I have one question for staff Mr. Chairman. Maybe you could just review
when this went before the EDA, you mentioned TIF was approved based on architecture and also
they had an understanding there would be an east/west access point.
Aanenson: I mean that's also going to be an issue for the EDA to resolve. I guess the role of the
Planning Commission is to say does that meet the standards of the district. As Sharmin's pointed
out in the staff report, there is a significant number of deficiencies. The position the staff's taken
is, we want the entertainment component but at what price? And that's the balancing act we're
trying to come forward. We're just saying right now, based on the parking study that was done in
1998, it was always assumed that while we would accept the deficiency, that it could be picked
up somewhere else and we believe that gap is too great. The architecture, I mean the impervious
surface issue. And landscaping. Some of those things we're saying okay, if we want this to
happen we have to acknowledge that and be willing to say this is an important element of the
downtown and we would forego those and give those variances because we feel strongly about it.
But the counter balance is, is it architecturally pleasing? Does it merit those variances and are we
creating additional problems by having, by not having enough parking? Staff's position is right
now that without the cross access agreements or without the reduction of the building, there's too
big ora gap.
Conrad: Mr. Chairman?
Joyce: Yes sir.
Conrad: The cross access agreements could pertain to Market Square? Could pertain to
Americana across the railroad tracks.
14
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Aanenson: The only thing I think at this point that we studied was, and I would guess we looked
at what the people as a net study of that center. Off the top of my head would there be less at
Market Square at certain times of the night? Yes. On a Saturday afternoon? I'm not sure. You
know I feel more comfortable what we studied to say that we recognize the numbers were there
on a certain square footage. We didn't study the peak demands over at Market Square and how
that relates to the operations so I'm a little less comfortable speaking to that but off the top of my
head, at night there probably is some additional parking over there.
Conrad: So they could go. There are other places other than Bloomberg property to get these
spaces.
Aanenson: Sure. I mean we looked at the hotel. I mean we included that whole area in the
interior of that super block.
Conrad: But not across the railroad track?
Aanenson: Correct.
Conrad: And maybe not at Market Square?
Aanenson: Correct. That was not a part of the study. Yeah we did look at peak times.
Conrad: Does the railroad let you put pathways acrOss the railroad track for pedestrians? Is that
an issue? Dave?
Hempel: Mr. Chairman, commissioners. It's an expensive permitting process to get a street~
across railroad tracks. I'm unfamiliar with a pedestrian crossing to be honest. I would assume
though that it would be pretty difficult.
Aanenson: I'm sure that'd be in conjunction with a street. Unbarricaded and a liability issue.
Kind: I don't know if we'd want to encourage that anyway.
Conrad: Well there's only one train a day, or two trains a day. There is parking over there. I've
counted. I've asked the tenants, I've asked the owners has anybody approached them. Nobody
has so we haven't really explored that opportunity. There's probably 100 spots over there.
There's probably some at Market Square. If they want to give themup. It's a pain in the neck
but nobody's asked at this point in time. They're there. You talked about, the last time we were
here we were talking about making people walk. Kind of neat if you can. If you take a look at
that area, you can bring them across. Is it dangerous? Yeah, there's a train now and then but
man, it's just. But again there are the rules and I don't know what they are but it's relatively ea. sy
and they're relatively, there are pathways that are relatively easy to cultivate right now to get
people across. But anyways I'm just looking. If we want people to walk in town, this is one way
to do it. You know we don't need more parking. Well we do here. We've got to find where it
is, and I don't think we've really explored those avenues. And I'm not pointing at staff.
15
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Aanenson: We talked about that as an option and I think that's a possible option. We'd have
some concerns about if we approved it over there, and not checking with the railroad,
encouraging people to come across and liability of approving that. But certainly there are
probably, and we talked about the city as one of, that that'd be a possibility.
Joyce: I can think of one example right now is over in Chaska...over by the library. That's kind
of a discussion and I hope I'm not screwing up the agenda but I'm saying someone had to get
permission there in our neighboring village. They made it pedestrian friendly.
Conrad: How nice would it be to park at a restaurant and walk to a movie theater. Now the
restaurant wouldn't like the parking because they want to turn traffic and they only have so
much, so you know we're talking philosophy but that's how you really do get pedestrian flow.
Some of the stuffthat we talk about is real artificial. It doesn't work. You know people won't
park 3 miles away and walk. But if you park at a restaurant, park at a shopping center, you may.
You're doing multi things and that's kind of cool. Those are the things that get people walking
downtown and this is an opportunity but I don't think we pushed it. I don't think the applicant
has pushed it yet.
Joyce: Other questions of the staff?. Kate, I just want to understand from my point of view, in
essence we've changed a couple of these conditions. One of...that yoU're accepting the fact the
95% impervious surface. Correct? The City's basically fine with that, correct? Condition
number 147
Aanenson: Yes. But again I guess I'd like to frame it in the fact that we're saying we feel that
we want the theaters but based on the design that we're willing to give up some things to make
that happen because we feel it's important. What we're saying is there were some changes that
needed to be made, even in the architecture to get to that point and that's reflected in this
condition. Our recommending approval we think entertainment is an important component but
...balance act to say.
Joyce: Your problem is the seats, right? What it boils down to.
Aanenson: And architecture were still some of the issues. Those are the two issues .... do we
want it to look like one big building. The two different segments and was there enough on the
back of the building. But the architecture. And the use. Do we feel that strongly about it that
we're willing to, we don't feel comfortable waiving that much parking. I mean Ladd's come up
with another suggestion that we talked about too. You've got to somehow solve that. We
agreed, even with the shortage and there's going to be times that, Christmas break, whatever, that
they're going to be short and that's going to happen and that's okay. We'll accept those times
that's going to be really busy. But as a general operating practice, unless they can resolve some
of those.
Joyce: Getting back to the seats. Let's say you keep the building. Configure it somehow so
there are less seats. Is that kind of what we're looking at here as far as options? Less seats. I
16.
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
don't know. I mean I don't know...but if there's less seats there less need for parking and as far
as bodies.
Aanenson: That's one option. Also get more cross access agreements when you can.
Joyce: You're saying that the size of the building...if they could address the parking situation.
Aanenson: Our ordinance does allow off site parking. Proximity but you have to get those
agreements and demonstrate that through a parking study that you're not creating like Ladd said,
the restaurant problem somewhere else. That's why we feel more comfortable with the study that
was done in '98 because it did look at the mix and different times and demonstrated how that
worked.
Conrad: Mr. Chairman. Last time we were talking, we had some concerns with the little alley.
Anything change on the alley since the last? Did staff, the old part of the building really didn't
change too much. And it still hasn't.
Aanenson: That is one of the recommendations that we have in here.
Conrad: Okay.
Joyce: Have you taken the situation out of those conditions? I just thought of it now... So if we
pass this we're saying, kind of putting the onus on them to get, figure out a cross access is what
you're saying, correct? Alright. Anyone else?
Kind: I do have one question Mr. Chairman. On number 19, condition 19. All new painted
precast field material shall be upgraded to a better material. Do you think that we should specify
what we mean by better material?
Aanenson: Sure. If you want to give him some direction.
A1-Jaff: They could use brick or EFIS or.
Kind: Is that pretty clearly understood in the builders terms that that's better than precast?
AI-Jaff: What they have on the existing cinema is precast and there.has been numerous negative
remarks regarding that facade. We didn't want to see a duplication of that. And that's why this
condition is in here.
Kind: But you feel there's room if we did decide to specify what that material might be.
Aanenson: The Council would appreciate that.
Joyce: Okay. Would the applicant like to address the Planning Commission at this time, please
step forward.
17
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Bob Copeland: Good evening. My name is Bob Copeland. I know you're all tired of talking
about this project so let's get right into it and I'll be as brief as I can. What I would Suggest
doing is .just running down these conditions and then try to hit the highlights or the points that
are, have the most discussion about them. First of all condition number One, putting the, or the
concern about the utilities underneath the building. We will comply with that condition. That's
no problem. Item number 2, restoring the disturbed areas. No problem. We'll do that. Item
number 3(a) has to do with this east/west connection. Now we commissioned the study with
Benshoofand Associates that brought up this east/west connection. And maybe that was a
mistake to hire those folks to bring this up because this thing keeps coming back to haunt us in a
way. But we agree that the east/west connection is a good idea and I'm confident that it will be
done. The difficulty we have is that Bloomberg won't grant a connection across their property to
the east of the cinema at this time. Now they've indicated that they expect the city will dictate
such a connection across their property when they redevelop that property. And they expect that
they will have to do it at that time. And they also anticipate there will be cross parking and cross
access agreements. Formal agreements at that time. But the, we were never going to have
parking there until they redeveloped. The EDA never envisioned that we would have parking
there until they redeveloped. Nobody anticipated that so in terms of parking, now I want to
separate traffic and parking. But in terms of parking, there's no change. In terms of traffic, there
is a slight distinction now in that Bloomberg will not permit access across their property at this
time. So what we did is we went back to Benshoof, who originated the idea. He's the one that
came up with this idea of this east/west connection, and we, I talked to him about it and I said
Jim, they won't grant access across their property at this time. And i said, what can we do you
know to deal with the traffic in the meantime. And it might be 6 months, it might be 6 years.
You know none of us know when that's going to take place. And we came up with the idea of
two things. One is staggering movie starts and ending times to spread out the traffic load, which
we are willing to do. And the other one is to hire off duty police officers to direct traffic at
Market Boulevard and Pauly Drive. And I have a letter that Jim Benshoof wrote to me that states
that, this is the next one...and I've highlighted his conclusions in the back and I don't think I'm
mischaracterizing his feeling about it when...he's recommended he's strongly in favor of it and
he says it will take care of the traffic situation. And remember, he's the one that originated this
east/west connection idea. And I also went to a different traffic consultant to get a second
opinion on the issue. We hired BRW and Harold Preston over there to take a look at this
situation also and to get a second opinion. And he concurs that the combination of these
staggering these start times and the off duty police officers will work. It's a good solution to the
traffic congestion and they both concur. These two experts concur that this will work. And that
it's really not something that any of us need to be concerned about if we follow this strategy.
Now also we are willing to, you may wonder well how can you be assured that this would take
place. Well, you really have two things that we would offer. One is that assuming the EDA
continues to have TIF involved in this project, that TIF is a good lever. In other words, twice a
year they have to rebate the taxes and so if we're not in compliance with everything, they Can just
choose not to rebate the taxes. So we would have of course a financial incentive or you'd have a
lever on us twice a year. The other thing is if that's not a satisfactory, we will agree to give the
city a check to, up front to cover the cost of off duty police officers for this purpose. We feel that
this might be an issue as many as 12 weekends a year. 12 out of 52 weekends. But we're willing
18
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
to say let's be conservative. Let's double that. In other words, we're willing to commit to have
people there 24 weekends a year. The top 24 weekends that we expect to be doing the most
business. So I think that will, you know should be, provide ample comfort to all of you that this
is a very workable situation. We're willing to step up and do this and guarantee the city that it
will happen. Also I think that we all need to keep this traffic issue in perspective. It's an
internal, within the site issue. It all has to do with here. It doesn't have anything to do with any
public roads. And further, what we're talking about is in the worse case an annoyance to our
customers. So all this discussion is about an annoyance and trying to avoid an annoyance to our
customers. Now we're of course very concerned about annoyances to our customers and we
don't want to have annoyances and we want people to be happy with their experience when they
visit the theater and we want them to come back. So we don't want to propose a solution that we
have any doubt at all that is going to work because this is a very big investment. This is probably
the biggest single investment in downtown Chanhassen. So we aren't going to proceed with
something that we're not very comfortable with. And so keep all those things in mind about
traffic and I'll just stop there with traffic. Now are there questions that I can answer for you
related to the traffic or anything that I've said about it so far?
Joyce: Well I think this might be the time to...probably the biggest issue we have.
Bob Copeland: I'm going to go onto parking soon but just talking about the east/west
connection.
Joyce: Well I appreciate you, I think we should, are there any questions regarding traffic?
...okay.
Conrad: Well the issue is having an access point to the site obviously. There's going to be
another one with the east/west and now you're solving it through, you don't know when... I
don't know how you can answer that traffic question. You're going to put peoplein the place
and say to us well, the problem will exist until Bloomberg decides to develop.
Bob Copeland: But that isn't the traffic problem. That isn't the traffic problem that Benshoof
discovered when he did his traffic study. The traffic problem was taking a left turn from Market
Boulevard, I'm sorry, from Pauly Drive onto Market Boulevard. When it's busy. That's the
issue. In other words right here. There is a right mm lane. I don't know if you can see this.
There is a right turn lane here turning onto Market Boulevard. And there's also a left turn lane.
What his concern was is that the cars could stack up here. It might be difficult to make a left turn
onto Market Boulevard. Now this is something that's very easily solved by an off duty traffic
person.
Joyce: Dave Hempel, is there any... I see that, we're not going to get the cross easement.
Talking about traffic stacking up, and I don't know what the implications it would have into
Highway 5 or whatever we're talking about.
Bob Copeland: Our traffic expert says there aren't any onto Highway 5 or West 78th.
19
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
document. It's a four page narrative that we prepared and you probably got it a month ago or
whenever you got the initial package. It's got a little table of parking requirements. The demand
and the stalls available. The ratios that are there are the exact same ratios that Hoisington used in
his study. And what it showed was that there is a demand of 525 stalls.
Joyce: What's the ratio please?
Bob Copeland: The ratio for the cinema for seats was 1 to 5.88. He used the inverse of that. He
used...calls for 1,000 square feet for a retail and so on. And he came up with using those ratios,
you come up with 525 parking stall requirements. Now we had 539. When we submitted our
documents originally. But the staff determined that it was important to have a 30 foot wide
east/west connection. In other words this connection across the cinema-retail site. The staff felt
it important to make that 30 feet wide. As opposed to 24 or 26. And so we complied and we did
that and we told the staff well if we do that we're going to lose stalls and they said well it's still
more important that we have that 30 foot wide drive aisle and so that's what we did and we took
out 52 stalls. So now with this plan that is before you for your approval we have 487. So we're
38 short of the number that would be required by Hoisington's study and that's about 7%. So
from our standpoint we'd be happy to put the stalls back in and shrink that drive aisle but that's
not what the staff thinks is best. Another point about all this is that people talk about shrinking
the building and so on. Our preference would not be to have the retail building. If that solves the
parking problems in people's minds, let's do away with the retail building. We'll be able to park
more cars here and there will be less demand. Now we've talked to the staff about that. They
don't like that idea. They feel that it's important to have the retail building there. That it
provides additional things happening on this site and they think that it breaks up the view of the
building from the west and it does do those things. And so we have gone along with it but keep
in mind that we've been guided here along the way and we've responded and we've done what
we thought we were supposed to do. What we were being asked to do. So are there any
questions about parking? That I can answer.
Joyce: Let's do it this way so we don't have to complicate...are there any questions about the
parking?
Burton: I want to back up.
Bob Copeland: I'm sorry for interrupting you sir. There's one other point that I failed to make
and I want to make it before I forget and that is that some people said well where would cars park
if this parking lot was full? Well there's a city owned parking lot right across West 78th with
over 200 stalls that are available every evening and so that's why we didn't go to private
neighbors and ask them for permission to park in their parking lot because there are city owned
stalls right across West 78th. Right on the other side of here. There are over 200 stalls there.
Where the so called Medical Arts buildings are. And the city owns that property. The city put in
that parking lot and it's available to the public. And no easements are required. So I'm sorry for
interrupting you.
21
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
people would like. Items 9 and 10, we will put more plantings on the property as long as the
.space permits. We would prefer not to lose any additional stalls. Item 11. I can only find one
item that, or one island that is less than 10 feet. It happens to be right here. This one right here.
All the others are 11. This one is 7 feet and the reason it's 7 feet is it provides this 30 foot width
across this drive aisle. We will redo the landscape plan as item number 12. Item 13, we will
comply with all the fire marshal's conditions. Item 14. This hard space versus green area. Let
me just clarify one thing and that is that with just the 95% hard surface coverage refers to the area
in pink here. This area that I'm tracing with my finger now. This is the area that we would be
buying. This is the property that we own. The rest of the property is either owned by others or
it's owned by the city. So you can, if you can the area in pink there, you can see why there isn't
any more space to do anything to have anything other than hard surface. If you look at the whole
thing, the entire cinema site, which I think is maybe possibly what should be looked at more than
that particular land locked piece of property, the parking ratios are somewhat better. Or I'm
sorry, the hard surface coverage and that green area. Actually now instead of just 5% green in
this whole site, we have 15%. Now that still doesn't meet the technical standards of the
ordinance but it's three times as much percentage wise than this particular parcel. Item 15.
Dedicate the easements. We'll do that. Item 16 is meeting with the building official again.
That's done or we'll do it again. Item 17. This dentil block projection. I believe our architect
adequately addressed that last time and hopefully you'll agree that that should not-be a 1 foot
projection. Item 18. Apparently the issue there is just will the Windows be set into the walls and
we will do that. 19. This upgrade new precast. We are not proposing nor have we ever actually
proposed any precast. The city has made it clear to us that they don't like theprecast so we have
not even proposed any new precast so I don't think there's, there isn't any precast on the new
structures so it's all brick and EFIS. And item 20. The sign restrictions, we'll agree to those.'
21. Build the retail and the cinema concurrently, we would agree to that. Item 22. Screen
rooftop equipment, we'll do that. And item 23. Add columns at the arches at the alley, we Will
do that. So those are my comments on the recommended conditions of approval and with that
I'll answer any other questions that you may have.
Joyce: Any other questions? Thank you very much.
Bob Copeland: Thank you.
Joyce: Appreciate your plan.
Kind: I did have a questiOn.
Joyce: Mr. Copeland, could you answer a question please.
Kind: Sorry. I flipped back my page. Sorry about that. On number 7 you just kind of zipped
right by condition number 7. Are you willing to build a driveway across Bloomberg property?
In your letter it stated you felt that they would be agreeable to such a driveway.
Bob Copeland: Well, number 7. They will not permit a driveway at this time. And so we were
agreeable to do that but we cannot do that. We don't have permission to do that. But
23
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Bloomberg, Bloomberg's attorney and their representative Clayton Johnson have told me that
they fully expect that there will be a requirement placed on them by the city to do that when they
come in with their plans to redevelop and that they are resigned to doing that. And they also
understand that there will be cross parking easements and access agreements and so on at that
time. They don't want to do it now for a couple reasons. One is they think it will tie their hands
in terms of where they position their building or just how it's configured and so on. And then
number two, they have mortgages on that property and they think their lenders won't approve an
easement or something that they might perceive reduces the value of the property.
Kind: Thank you.
Joyce: Okay, this item's open for a public hearing. Can I get a motion?
Kind moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
Joyce: This item's open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning
Commission at this time, please step forward.
Vernelle Clayton: [ just want to clarify something. I'm Vernelle Clayton. Just that you looked
perplexed when he mentioned that there's parking on the north side of the street so I just want to
explain where it is. Basically it's everything from the Oasis Market'to the end of Colonial
Square. And it was done on purpose. The plan was that even way back then, we always think
that nothing was done right that was done before something that we had something to do with,
but that is one thing that was carefully thought out and the idea was that that way there could be
cross parking and more density downtown. And I should also point out that in older, or earlier
traffic studies done for this project, that parking was taken into consideration. So there's some
historical precedence for considering that for this site.
Joyce: Anyone else like to address the commission at this time?
Kind moved, Burton seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Joyce: Anyone like to take a stab at this? Don't all go at once.
Kind: I'I1 go.
Joyce: Great.
Kind: I like the idea of having something on this site and I like this project. There's some
issues .... my point of view. However I feel that part of my wanting to like this so much is
determined by my loathing of what's there right now. And I don't want to be twisted, be arm
twisted into approving something that compromises too many of our codes or variances or
whatever because I don't like what's there. Regarding the thru street and the solution of having
an off duty police officer. I think that's an excellent idea. The church I go to has used this
method for 40 years. It's a long term solution to their every Sunday problem and I think that's an
24
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
excellent idea. I applaud your creativity for coming up with it. The no cross access agreement
with parking, I think Kevin spoke to this in our last meeting. I don't know if cross access is the
right term for it. I don't know, I think of it as joint use parking. ! don't know if that's the correct
term for it but Kevin touched on this at our last meeting that parking...over rated and I am un,
I'm asquirm a little bit at the lack of parking but Vernelle's comments about that public parking
across West 78th and Ladd comments about available parking all around have swayed me to be a
little bit more comfortable with that aspect. So I'm okay with that..My biggest problem is the
95% hard surface coverage and I know the existing occupant had the same problem. That they
are 95%, if not 100% surface coverage and I think this may be an improvement by adding those
islands with trees and such so that part is probably an improvement over what we have. I still
feel though that the 95% is a huge number and I can't help by feel that this is over building for
that site. Pedestrian circulation. To me yeah, we could justify that it's no different than Target
or Byerly's as far as getting around in the parking lot but yet I kind of hoped for a little bit better
solution for this site. The original vision, the way I understand it, allowed for a plaza area to
encourage people to linger and I don't see any of that in this plan. As well as streetscape kinds of
items with benches and those sorts of things. I'd like to see that included. And then the
landscaping issue overall. I think Mr. Copeland hit on the point which is they would be willing~
to add if there was any place to put it. But since the parking is so short, I don't know that they
could really meet those requirements so I'm torn. I like the idea of seeing something there but
right now I guess I feel like we're compromising...
Joyce: Anyone else like to address this?
Conrad: Sure. I think that the 95% is okay. After touring the site, that was the big issue that I
had and I tell you I think, I agree with the staff report. That says let's go with it. I think that is
not an issue anymore in my mind. I never said that before on any project. And overall I like the
project. And the landscaping can be taken care of and issues but, but. I heard some good
comments tonight on things. Things I hadn't heard before but it's, we're supposed to be planners
and it's sort of non statistical stuff. Well we can get them there or it might be someplace. I don't
have, it's real uncomfortable because our job is to plan and the City Council can figure out if
they want to loosen some of the standards because they want this project in. But right now I'm
not persuaded on the parking. I think some cases are being made. I think we've compromised on
ratios that's of interest. It sure, and there may be spots. I haven't seen that presented, other than
the last few minutes and I guess I'd really like to know if there was a plan, I'd expect somebody
to show it to me. Here are 20. Americana has 26. Colonial whatever has 200 and here's our
signage that will get people there. And here's our advertising program that will be included in
our ads. And here's our agreement with Market Square because they are really right there so
they're going to be, so there are, I think we can possibly solve the problem. I just haven't been
shown that. I think there's hope tonight. The first time in the last 10 minutes I think this
probably, some potential. But it's not, it's words right now. So I think there's some potential but
there's'not, it's just words and I don't know how to make a motion. Not a clue how to make a
motion to get us out of tonight that's positive, aggressive. I'll let somebody else do it. I think we
do need a design, in front of us with an east/west, we're planners. We need to see the east/west
design going through here. It may stop at the Bloomberg property but we are planners. We're
supposed to figure this out how it works. I had some other smaller issues. The alley stills
25
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Joyce: That makes my job easier because...you guys figure it out. And I don't envy you. But
you've got to do it and I guess that's a little bit of my disappointment is that, just from a personal
standpoint, I think we tabled this kind of expecting to see...and it seems like he is over here and
the project's more over here and their idea of putting the traffic officer there really hasn't
changed anything. There are some issues here. And my disappointment is I think I really feel
we're close here. I really feel that for one, I've said this all along. Personally I'm not a big
proponent of parking. I think we can get around the parking issue. I don't know. It's Thursday
night. Beautiful night. Probably people aren't going to the movies but that part...tonight. I
don't know what's playing. We all know it's going to be a Friday, Saturday night parking
problem. Maybe a Thursday night during the holidays or other nights during the holidays but I
feel that that is manageable. I think with some effort, I like the idea of using traffic officer. I
think Ladd hit on a good point. I mean in that business but marketing sure could help. Showing
where there are additional parking areas. I don't think parking's an issue here. I really don't, but
I do think something like pedestrian circulation is an issue in the parking scheme and I think if
there was some discussion on that or some sort of improvement on that, it would have pushed a
couple of us maybe further along. And there was absolutely no change in any sort of pedestrian
circulation. I felt uncomfortable after hearing about pressing that cross easement. I'm in
agreement with Ladd. I think that should be part of a plan but not part of a condition. I can
accept that as part of a planning process but not a condition. That's back there to the developer
to force your hand to try to get access so I think that's a problem in the conditions here. The
street width, you have to abide by that. That's 26 feet. And as far as the impervious surface,
once again this is a downtown project. That's what we have... I think with a little bit of
imagination this thing can work. I guess the biggest question, you know really the question is
this a premature development? I mean isn't that the question? Is this premature or not? Can
Chanhassen handle this development? I think it can. I think with a little imagination it can.
That's my opinion and, but we have to make a decision tonight and then somehow give him
some sort of direction.
Conrad: Mr. Chairman, could I ask staff a question? Is there a seating capacity that would
justify what has been presented? We changed it from 1,950 to 2,800 and then there was a 2,400
number in there. I'm just curious, is there based on the plan that has been presented, parking
plan, is there a seating capacity that we would feel would utilize?
A1-Jaff.' It depends on the parking ratios that we're willing to accept and at this point we said we
would accept the applicant's, which is 5.9.
Conrad: which would give us how many? Which would give them how many seats?
Hempel: 475. Plus retail.
AI-Jaff.' 475 times 4.0?
Hempel: Oh I used 5. 5.8.
Joyce: That's the question. 5.8...
27
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Hempel: 483 plus the 30. 45 for the retail is 528.
Conrad: So what's the grand total of seats that they could have? Based on 5.8 and 487 parking
stalls.
Hempel: Right.
Conrad: What's the grand total Dave?
Hempel: And the retail was another 45 staffs for a total of 528.
A1-Jaff.' Number of seats in the movie theaters. Grand total.
Conrad: How many seats could they then have in the movie theater?
Hempel: Based on the available parking now?
Conrad: Yeah.
Hempel: I'm sorry.
Conrad: That's presented.
Hempel: Minus 45 gives you 442, by the 5.88. I came up with 26, 2,599.
Conrad: Based on the new ratio and based on parking stalls that they can put in, they can have
2,600 seats. Okay.
Kind: Are you formulating a motion?
Conrad: Yeah, well I'm trying to. It seems, it's obviously something we can't dictate to you but
it's a way to get the motion out of here so Bob you can go on and talk to City Council. But at
least there's a standard for, we need something to justify. We need ratios we feel comfortable
with and capacities we feel comfortable with and allowing a capacity that we don't know where
that people are going to park. This is pretty bad planning and at this point in time nobody's told
us really in a good comprehensive parking plan where they would park. I think that's an
opportunity for the applicant but at this point in time we haven't seen it so we could table it and
wait for him to come back but that's not an option so we can either vote it down and say no or we
can vote it positively so anyway, do we have other comments? Otherwise I'll just make a motion
and run with it. I would make the motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval
of Site Plan Review #95-21 to demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl/Filly's building and
construct eight movie screens and a retail element. Variances to allow non-street frontage signs,
marquee sign, hard surface coverage and preliminary plat approval to replat two lots and three
outlots into two lots and one outlot, Cinema Addition as shown on the plans dated Received June
28
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
23ra still, 1999, with the cOnditions in the staff report with the following changes. Condition 6,
that the maximum seating capacity will be 2,600 seats. I'm going to make the rest of the
conditions but I'm going to stop and come back and ask staff a question before I get a second.
That condition 24, that a long term parking plan be provided to City Council, excluding the,
showing locations and justifying seating capacity. And also presenting again to the City Council
why the 5.88 ratio should be accepted. Condition 25 is to review the concerns that the Planning
Commission had with the alley between the retail and the cinema. In terms of screening,
lighting, presentation, gating. Condition 26. The applicant review and recommend any facade
changes possible to the old part of the cinema to make it reflective and consistent with the new.
Condition 27. That the applicant show City Council pedestrian circulation flow coming from any
off site locations and also the internal pedestrian flow. That's the end of my motion and now I'm
going to ask staffa question. Have you seen a street design that's acceptable on any plan
presented? The east/west corridor, have you seen it on any plan that is the way we'd like it.
Ending where we'd like it.
Hempel: The plan that's been submitted is I believe the east/west street is limited to the property
itself. It doesn't show anything off the property limits through the Dinner Theater.
Conrad: And that's where it curved up and out?
Hempel: Right.
Conrad: Now is that what you envision as a visionary Dave for streets connecting to the
Bloomberg property? Is that what you envision as this east/west street? Being hooked like that.
Hempel: Our first preference was for a more parallel east/west street with the railroad tracks to
provide less turning movements with the parking lot. That's our first preference. It's really
difficult to say without seeing the other site, the use on the Bloomberg property.
Conrad: But we only have, again if we're positively passing on this and you know, it's hard to
say. But then again that's what we. So we haven't seen really an east/west corridor on any plan
that we feel pretty good about at this point in time? One that shows'at least it goes there but none
that we've seen. So again that would give us great cause to turn this down until we found one
that was acceptable but we don't want to do that. So the leverage, by us approving the plan as it
stands, does this give us the applicant the feeling that we like what the traffic. We're saying we
want an east/west but what's the leverage to say we're not, we don't like the way we see it right
now.
Aanenson: Can I make a suggestion on number 7. Originally in number 7 we had that the
applicant acquire a cross access agreement. If you describe in there what type we want.
Something to the effect, my concern is that if we don't make it onerous on this application and
the next project says well I'm not going to give it back the other way. I guess we would like to
have some language in there that, assuming that, yeah. Well the way you've written it now will
solve the problem. You've reduced the parking or he's got an opportunity to solve it by
demonstrating he can get it off site. But I guess we still want to provide the cross access. We
29
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Joyce: Unimpeded access.
Aanenson: It should be subject to staff approval. I mean that pretty much says it right there.
Staff approval and but somehow we're going to put some language in there between now and
council. Whether we need to say that there needs to be escrow. Whatever we need to do to
insure that that comes about. We'll work on that betWeen the attorneys and them between now
and council to somehow resolve that quick language on that but I'm in concurrence on what you
want.
Joyce: Okay Ladd? We have a motion... Do we have a second?
Burton: Second.
Conrad: That takes a lot of guts to second that. Nann, what did we say?
Joyce: Any discussion?
Kind: I'm discussed out..
Conrad moved, Burton seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Site Plan Review 95-21 to demolish the existing Chanhassen BowFFilly's building, and
construct 8 movie screens and a retail element, Variances to allow Non-Street Frontage Signs,
Marquee sign, and hard surface coverage and Preliminary Plat approval to replat two lots
and three outlots into two lots and one outlot, Cinema Addition as shown in plans dated
received June 23, 1999, with the following conditions:
The applicant shall redesign the building plans to avoid conflict with the City's sanitary
sewer and water lines. The applicant shall have the option to relocate the sanitary sewer
or add additional manholes and case the sanitary sewer line underneath the building. The
water line shall be relocated a minimum of 10 feet away from any building structure. The
applicant shall also dedicate all new drainage and utility easements to encompass the
relocated utility lines. All utility construction shall be in accordance with the City's latest
edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant shall be responsible
for all adjustments to existing gate valves, manholes, and catch basins on the site. The
City's Utility Department will require an inspection of these adjustments. A security
escrow in the amount of $25,000 shall be supplied by the applicant to the City to
guarantee utility relocation/adjustments in conjunction with site plan approval. The
security shall be in the form ora letter of credit or cash escrow.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction shall be restored with sod and/or
landscaping materials within two weeks of completion of the parking lot improvements.
The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the
necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
31
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
compliance with the conditions of approval and to guarantee restoration of the city
boulevards and adjustments to the city infrastructure. The plans shall be redesigned to
incorporate the following items: A) Incorporate an unimpeded street from Market
Boulevard easterly to Great Plains Boulevard. The minimum drive aisle width shall be 28
feet, face-to-face of curb. Parking shall be prohibited on both sides of the street. B) All
drive aisle and parking lot stalls shall be redesigned in accordance with City Code 20-
1118. C) The applicant shall prepare a revised traffic control plan for city staff to review
and approve prior to issuance of a building permit. The plans shall include placement of
stop signs and pedestrian crossings.
o
The applicant shall report to the city engineer the location ofdraintile found during
construction. The city engineer shall determine whether or not the draintiles can be
abandoned or reconnected.
The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory
agencies such as the Health Department, Watershed District, and the City of Chanhassen's
Building Department.
Seating capacity of the theater complex shall be a maximum of 2,600 seats for the both
the first phase and the new addition collectively. (Approval of this number of seats
will result in a 35% variance in the required parking spaces; 745 required -487
provided based upon one stall per 4 seats as required by ordinance).
o
The applicant shall provide a cross access easement 30 feet wide over/through the
Dinner Theater site out to Great Plains Boulevard and construct a bituminous driveway
over the easement. The applicant and staff will work together to provide an
acceptable location for the east/west connection that will be constructed in the
future. The driveway shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide and constructed to a 7 ton
street design. The alignment of the driveway shall be subject to staff approval.
The building owner and/or their representatives meet with the Inspections Division as
soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
The applicant shall increase plantings for buffer yard areas in order to meet ordinance
requirements.
10.
The applicant shall increase plantings for parking lot trees in order to meet ordinance
requirements.
I1.
The applicant shall increase landscape island width to a minimum of 10 feet or install
aeration tubing.
12. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted for city approval.
13. Fire Marshal Conditions:
32
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
shall be double-faced and have a decorative hanging bracket. Illuminated letters may be
attached to the exterior of the projecting sign. Projecting signs may not be illuminated from
within. Ail signs will require a sign permit.
21. Both the cinema addition and the retail building shall be built concurrently.
22.
All roof top and ground mounted equipment shall be screened from views. The existing
rooftop units above the existing theater shall also be screened.
23. Columns shall be added below the arch at the entrance and exit points of the alley."
24.
The applicant will provide a long term parking plan the to City Council showing
locations justifying seating capacity. Also presenting to the City Council why the
5.88 ratio should be accepted.
25.
Review the concerns that the Planning Commission had with the alley between the
retail and the cinema in terms of screening, lighting, presentation, gating.
26.
The applicant review and recommend any facade changes possible to the old part of
the cinema to make it reflective and consistent with the new cinema.
27.
That the applicant show City Council pedestrian circulation flOw coming from any
off site locations and also internal pedestrian flow.
All voted in favor, except Kind who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Joyce: One nay. Would you like to?
Kind: I think I can go on my former comments.
Joyce: Former comments.
Conrad: Which was? I think it's good. You know I read the Minutes and when people say,
when the question is asked in those Minutes and the City Council is reading them and you just
say well I've already said it. They've probably forgot what you said so it's probably good that
you would reflect one or two things that made you say no. Nay on this one.
Kind: Okay. I'm concerned about over building the property. 95% hard surface coverage is too
much. And...better here with more landscaping opportunities because I don't think there's going
to be any chance that they'll be able to meet those requirements. The parking requirements. And
I hope for more pedestrian friendly streetscape, plaza area kinds of places. Those are my main
ones. And that we're making too many compromises.
Joyce: But we did pass the motion. It will go on to City Council on the 23rd.
34
Planning Commission Meeting - August 4, 1999
Aanenson: Correct.
Joyce: Vernelle, did you want to mention something?
Vemelle Clayton: Yeah maybe for the record since it deals with the last thing you talked about,
just for clarification here so we're not off track. And I don't know why I'm doing this because
every time Minutes I can never figure out what I said so I'm sure nobody else can either. But this
particular property, as I recall, the condition of approval of the Frontier Building was that there
be cross access easements. So there is that condition this property is required to have them.
What you did though tonight is something that this fellow can't quite comply with because he
doesn't own this. Just so you know. The part that has this come up here is owned by the same
people currently that own this. If that gives you some comfort unless, until they should sell this
to someone before they develop it. The reason this...right now is because they'd like to have
people get out of here right now before this is built and there's a building right there. So those
are the...
Aanenson: We'll look at that before City Council. Issues understood.
Vemelle Clayton: Just so everybody knows...
Joyce: Kate mentioned she's going to contact the attorney...
Vernelle Clayton:...
Aanenson: On items 5, 6 and 7, Craig had mentioned last time since not everybody's here he
wanted to wait so I guess I'd recommend that again. What I think I'd like to do is at the next
meeting, we just have one variance and then we have Ruby Tuesdays, which we're making
progress on. That's the only things on. I think we'd like to discuss, we talked about taking some
time to go through the variance criteria so we'll do that and then we'll discuss these, if that's
okay.
Joyce: So that was, scratch open discussion. Kind of our ongoing items, correct?
Aanenson: Correct.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Kind noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting
dated July 21, 1999 as presented.
NEW BUSINESS:
Conrad: New business?
Joyce: That's what we were just talking about wasn't it?
Aanenson: Well yeah, Ruby Tuesdays.
35
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Blackowiak: They have that chain link fence with that slate stuff in it.
Kind: They can come out...small feet with those chain link fences. Adults can't climb them but
little people can.
Conrad: Did you leave that out of your motion?
Kind: I can leave it out of my motion.
Conrad: Second.
Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Other discussion?
Kind moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Conditional Use Permit #99-2 to allow a daycare center in an IOP District subject to the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with conditions of site plan and plat approval.
2. Obtain all applicable state, county and city licenses.
3. Show type of fence and landscaping for the outdoor play area.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES~ LLC~ REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN
REVIEW TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING CHANHASSEN BOW AND FILLY'S BAR
AND REPLACE IT WITH EIGHT ADDITIONAL THEATERS WITH A SEATING
CAPACITY OF 1~400 SEATS~ WITH AN AREA OF 30~000 SQ. FT. AND %000 SQ. FT.
OF RETAIL SPACE~ VARIANCES FOR SIGNAGE~ HARD SURFACE COVERAGE~
SUBDIVISION CREATING LOTS WITH NO DIRECT FRONTAGE ON PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY~ HWY 5 OVERLAY DISTRICT PITCHED ROOF ELEMENT
REQUIREMENT AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS ON PROPERTY ZONED BG~
GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT~ LOCATED NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS
AND PAULY DRIVE; EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD; AND SOUTH OF WEST
78TM STREET.
Public Present:
Name Address
John D. Rice
551 West 78th Street
26
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Ron Krank
Bob Copeland
Gerald Rummel
KKE Architects
5300 Highland Greens, Suite 200, Bloomington
Representing Chanhassen Bowl
Sharmin AI-Jaff and Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item.
Peterson: A couple questions for you Kate. On the impervious surface. I mean I don't recall
seeing 95% before. That's an overwhelming number when you look at a percentage standpoint.
Have we don't other similar projects with that high of a ratio?
Aanenson: The only place would be more downtown. Medical Arts. Again this is a unique
thing to do. You'd be actually adding landscaping to it but they are doing, providing additional
trees and they are providing additional green space but they are providing additional landscape.
There will be some parking lot...
Peterson: You referenced a couple of the variances and I was trying to pull all of them out that
we will be affecting with this. Over and above the ones you just mentioned, are there additional
ones that you can see that we can see in the summary of really what we are granting.
Aanenson: It's on the, Sharmin has it on the front page of that cover proposal. The non street
frontage signs. Again, because it's an anomaly, it's a theater. It's a different type use. We
would support that. Cinema in itself is, the only one in town.
Peterson: Based on the ones you mentioned?
Aanenson: Yeah. There was one other one and that was the parking drive aisle. Where the
Hoisington-Koegler study included an unobstructed drive aisle entrance going to Pauly's Drive,
which we want to have the continuity so not all traffic will be exiting out onto Market. It gives
you...to go out the other way onto Great Plains. We see that as an advantage, especially if we'll
be doing shared parking. Not congesting that intersection. The engineering department's
recommendation to have an unobstructed drive aisle. What that does is it takes away
approximately 50 parking.
Hempel: I believe 37.
Aanenson: Excuse me, 37 parking stalls. So that's some of the loss so it would be our
recommendation to have it unobstructed. The applicant is proposing, was showing the
Hoisington-Koegler study to leave the drive. They would prefer to leave the parking in the drive
aisle and slow the traffic down.
Peterson: A couple more questions.
Aanenson: That's one of the variances. The drive aisle was, or...
Peterson: Is there a style Sharmin that, on the recommendation you say should the Planning
27
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
A1-Jaff: Right now what you have on the existing movie theaters is precast and it's painted and
we've heard numerous negative comments regarding that material. It could be upgraded into...
Sidney: More texture is that?
A1-Jaff: Something with more texture. Something that's more appealing than what you have on
the existing precast building.
Conrad: Do you like the design?
Aanenson: It's a large building. A lot of discussion was held about trying to make the building
look like one theater. The theaters, retail space look different. Than going back to...kind of
reduce the scale. Comparing the 50,000 square feet, comparing it to Target. 100,000... It's
going to be imposing so some of the...make it look like it's not one building. Some of the.., as
far as the material use on the existing building. How do you make some of the same... It's going
to walk and talk like a theater in scale but...
Conrad: In your staff report the window issue. In your recommendations you resolved your
concerns with the architect?
Aanenson: Yeah, I think for the most part. We went through a lot of iterations on the sign.
...material and tried to, if going through the attachments... I think that's what happened on the
first page. What was done wasn't what we understood...and modify that which has been
accomplished. The green line running along the top, there was a lot of discussion on that...Up or
down the scale of the building. Little details like that. Then we go back to the...expertise on
that.
Conrad: So you're comfortable?
Aanenson: Well I think we can certainly resolve... I think if you listen to their explanation...
Conrad: Do you like the marquee? Is the marquee as spectacular as we'd like it to be? And
maybe that's me and not you. Is it.
Aanenson: Again that's been a moving target too. I think we're getting close.
Conrad: I'd rely on you to tell me. It should be spectacular, and again I'm probably the Lone
Ranger here. It should be spectacular. It should be very good.
Aanenson: Yep.
A1-Jaff: It will be a very festive look and that's the look we would like to achieve.
Conrad: Some things that I don't understand here and I've got to go back to where Craig started
30
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
on the impervious surface. Your staff report, did you change condition 14 Kate?
Aanenson: Correct.
Conrad: To 95%
Aanenson: Right. That's what's out there now. It's all, pretty much all. They are taking out
some additional green by providing the unobstructed drive aisle. That takes out additional.
Conrad: Market Square impervious surface?
Aanenson: 55% Festival...
Conrad: Condition 6. You're addressing the parking issue backwards by limiting the seat size?
Or maybe that's forward.
Aanenson: No. No, actually we modified that condition to say that we are recommending that
but you have to accept that there will be times when there will not be enough parking. And that's
why I showed the overall, there may be places that you'll have to walk further to get there, but.
Conrad: What is the parking capacity that you're comfortable with?
A1-Jaff.' Seating capacity.
Conrad: Now I'm off. Give me the parking capacity.
Aanenson: I think we're relying on, we've got a standard. Is that the best number 4? 4 per.
A1-Jaff: One stall per 4 seats.
Aanenson: That's the number. Is that the best number? That we allow proof of parking. That's
what this... 1 per 5.9 seats. We're saying that number...and it may be, they've been trying to
track what the use is. Again, going by the Hoisington-Koegler study with the shared parking,
that was that 525 number so we're not that far off. We may be again...with unobstructed drive
aisle.
Conrad: And they're providing 487?
Aanenson: Correct.
Conrad: Are there opportunities in softening that parking area that we have?
Aanenson: That's what we talked about with the applicant. You know we want to make sure
that it is pedestrian friendly. Have street furniture. Have an easy access. If you're going to walk,
you've got a ways to go across the parking lot and to make it human and you're going to have
31
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
kids walking through that parking lot.
Conrad: And what do they walk on? Are there sidewalks that are natural that get you to the
theater? I don't see them.
A1-Jaff: There's a sidewalk that surrounds the theater itself.
Conrad: Yeah, once you get there you're fine.
Aanenson: We talked about...then we end up giving away additional parking but that...talk
about stripe and painted walking paths.
Conrad: So they have proposed more vehicular use, landscape area than is required based on.
They've put more green space in the parking lot than our ordinance requires?
A1-Jaff: No.
Aanenson: They're putting in additional landscaping. There's minimal there now .... there is a
sidewalk Ladd that's going.
Conrad: Yeah, show me that.
Aanenson: Here's a sidewalk...
A1-Jaff: It's an extension of the sidewalk by the bus shelter.
Conrad: Okay. So that's on Pauly Drive.
Aanenson: Right, so if you get off the bus and you want to walk that. Or walk to the bus.
Conrad: And your chart on page 8, it's vehicular use landscape area. Required 8,144. Proposed
9,150. Help me with that. That's what I would interpret the green space in the parking lot.
They're exceeding our ordinance.
Aanenson: It is to fit the buffer yard to your parking lot...
Conrad: Can I tell that staff feels uncomfortable with the interior landscaping in the parking l°t
or is staff comfortable with it? The staff report says increase, and I'm not sure, that's all it says.
To meet ordinance. And I'm not looking for thc ordinance.
Aanenson: Right. And that's when I say that they're putting additional landscape and going over
towards Market. Green space...the sidewalk along the south side of the building.
Conrad: Pauly Drive. The vision for extension through the Dinner Theater, is it, what is the
vision for Pauly Drive? How does the rest of it play out? I probably should know but I don't.
32
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Hempel: Mr. Chairman, the Hoisington-Koegler report showed one alternative. Basically
running parallel to the railroad tracks. North of the railroad tracks. I think the applicant is,
through negotiations with the Dinner Theater, we'll maybe let him address that future.
Conrad: Is it an asset right now or is just a way to get out of the parking? Is it just a second way
to unload this parking lot at peak time?
Hempel: Essentially yes.
Conrad: Is it easy to get, who owns the right-of-way for that right now? The balance to the
Dinner Theater property. Would it have to be condemned or is it, who owns it?
Hempel: Who owns it right now, I believe the Dinner Theater owns it and the applicant probably
will address this but I believe that he would be negotiating with.
Conrad: Is that a condition of approval?
Hempel: Yes it is.
Conrad: That's all.
Peterson: I'm starting to feel as though, I think it may be good for us to go onto the applicant
presentation if there are no other specific questions. Hearing none, would the applicant like to
address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please.
Ron Krank: Good evening again. My name is Ron Krank. You've probably seen me here many
times through the years. And you probably have seen me here with this project, which we've
been working on for the last year, year and a half. We are very aware this is a very important
property and project in your community. We are aware of that through dialogue we've had with
the staff. Through the past history that we've studied and numerous discussions with a lot of
people in the community. We know that this is a very important entryway to the site so as such
we appreciate the fact that staff has spent a great deal of time with us and they have given us a
great deal of direction and we've tried to be responsive to that and frankly we feel that we really
have, I hope Mr. Conrad, this will be a spectacular project. That is our goal. We want this to be
a project by which you can measure other projects in the community and tell them to look at what
we've been able to accomplished. I'm going to show you some pictures here in a minute of
projects that we have designed. Similar scope. Similar character. Similar importance. Give you
an idea of the kind of care and quality that we're talking about in terms of proportions, materials,
detailing, signage, canopies. All the things that are so important here. But those are other
communities and we just want you to know that we have walked the streets here. We have
looked at the details of the surrounding buildings which we have tried to use in terms of bringing
some of the historical character and detail and main street theme and character that you have in
your community. You're a very charming community. I know you and many others before you
have put a lot of effort into that and we're here to tell you that our program, dictated to us by our
33
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
client, as well as the city, has been through a really excellent job with this project. We also are
aware of the past history and that the building that's there right now hasn't necessarily met your
expectations originally. We were not a part of that. Can't comment on that. All we can do is tell
you we're taking this existing building and we're doing a lot to it to change it's character, it's
quality, the detailing. Everything we possibly can to change it so that it will tie into what we're
proposing and be a better building than it is. We're basically in agreement with most of the staff
report. There's some minor details and some things that we'd like to bring to your attention.
And I'd like to maybe begin by showing you some photographs, if I can use this and if it will
work. Projects that are very similar in quality and character of what we're proposing here. It's
very hard of course, even though it's a large scale elevation, to really get the three dimensional
character so if you would indulge me, I have nine photographs I'd like to show. Is it possible to
zoom in? This project is in Golden Valley. It's called Golden Valley Commons. It's at the
intersection of Winnetka Avenue and Highway 55. It's about 43,000 square foot project...coffee
shop. Small restaurant...and it truly is a gathering area. Even though it's small, we hear from
people that they will travel great distances just to go there because of the environment. And
because of the design and that's what we're trying to achieve here in terms of the character we're
proposing. This is another view of that. This is a little closer detail. Gives you an idea of the
kind of streetscape that we provided there and what we intend to provide also in this project that
we're doing here in this community. Showed in the plan. What you see here are some roof
details. We have some peaked roofs. Metal roofs. There's again some awnings. They're
textured with sidewalk. There's street furniture and that's the general character again of what
we're trying to achieve. Next project that I want to show you is a project called the Plymouth
Town Center. This is on Highway 55, near the Plymouth City Hall. It's a small project. Only
about 15,000 square feet and it has an Applebee's. It is a double loaded restaurant and small
shops and it serves a lot of...Large Cub Foods across in that area. This is a view of it at night
time. We think it's spectacular. We do pay very careful attention to lighting. Not just lighting
of the parking lot but lighting within and lighting...building and copings and other locations on
the building. This is a photograph of a project called Plymouth... Also in Plymouth. When you
go past City Hall on Highway 55. View of the sidewalk and...architectural sidewalk with
brick.., and concrete rock face... Again we have a roof form, architectural... Another shot of
that. A building that undulates several feet...the roof height varies somewhat and this is a view
of it at night. You can get an idea of... internal proportions and details and things of that sort. So
this is the character that we're trying to achieve and we believe that the project we're proposing
here is going to have, is similar to kind of Main Street schematic here with a...give you more
information about those. In terms of the plan, there was some questions on that the alley way or
walkway between the cinema and retail building, this is just a portion of it but remember there is
a walkway and that's between the two buildings. 10 feet wide. Required by code. The cinema
has screens or theaters on this side here. They have to have a second exit. There's a required
exit. You cannot block it. The Fire Department would issue a citation. It can't be blocked.
There are service doors. Trucks are expected to either park on the side or in front because these
are very small shops and you would service through the front or through the, call this an alley
way. An arch and columns which staff recommended on the side... It has to be nice. You can't
have trash. You can't have it because the building code requires, the fire marshal require it.
We're not going to let it happen. That's why we have an enclosed roofed over, trash enclosed
area. On the other side of the buildings so anybody in the area can go out the front door or the
34
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
back door down there and dump their trash. That exposure has an overhead door so that a truck
can come up, back up to it. Open the door. Take their trash out and close it. Somebody that
wants to put trash in there will have a manned door and at the end of this corridor where... So
hopefully that answers your questions in terms of what that's all about. Another question was on
the side of the building, the side facing the, this would be the west side. I think there's just some
misunderstanding what the material is. The existing building up to this point...precast concrete.
The rest of the building...is all masonry. Concrete block with material added to it. Brick, drivit,
brick, concrete block. A beige which I'm showing you on some of these details. This is also
masonry with drivit over it. This is, it's hard to read. There are so many things happening out
here. We can understand that. I have to look at this continually myself frankly to be able to tell
you where all the pieces are. It starts here with the existing cinema. You might recall that this is
all like fairly flat...is what's flat. We're taking that surface. We're adding to it. Columns that
are a little different location than you see now. We feel the proportions to be changed a little bit.
These are forged projections. We're adding a drivit cap which right here is a stucco like material
that allows you to do a lot with it. So we're creating this dentil kind of detail. We're taking
existing roof flashing and moving it out so that we can in effect have the same detail. It will be a
dark green or having the coping underneath it or the horizontal band. We're having dentil,
this...in-between will be set back in probably a couple inches set back in from that space and
then the brick beyond that. There's some comments in the report that these should be 12 inches
out. I have to disagree with that because here's what happens. We're starting here with a
comer...flashing. It comes doWn three steps. 2 inches is what we have there now. Also
we...detail on the building to the west of us which has a hair salon and coffee shop. It's the same
detail, same proportion...steps in. If we then take that, we're out 6 inches at the top. cOme back
to the stucco, the drivit, back 2 inches and then 2 inches more to the brick and then...if we make
that 12 inches high...I think it's going to be just huge and...so I show you these pictures of other
projects because that, they just have to trust us. We're not saving any money here by doing this.
We just want it to look right and our opinion is, if we had...dentils sticking out...just way too
much and we want to call attention to the building with pedestrian access. All this nice
detail...provide here. So that's one...we would have a diverge from the staff. Secondly, a very,
very minor but staff has indicated in the report the...and then recessed in. Wood window and
the...about 4 inches projecting out... I think what you saw in the other details, in photographs we
showed you, we can do it in rock face block to give the same texture as the rest of the, the old
part of the building. We can do it in brick to match the soldier courses of the brick we're doing
elsewhere. To me that's the right detail and again, that's what we would recommend very
strongly as opposed to what we believe is what we're being directed to have in stone... If it's just
meant that they're supposed to recess these.., give a sense of scale. You Walk by. It just kind of
feels right. That also is how we lined up the base of the windows with the 18 and the 24 inches
wide. We called it field brick but we're really saying it's the field, the background of brick that
is going to represent most of all of this new building except where we have drivit accents. On
the existing portion of the cinema, the remaining, the existing precast will be...this brown color
to match as close as we can to match the brick so that we'll have the same feeling here and here
where we're building the new building to add brick, to make it out of brick as well as this area.
And then we're proposing some accent brick so it will be soldier and/or roll off portions in
various points of the building. And that's the kind of detail that continues on obviously around
the side of the building or we continue to do the same thing. Have a soldier course here. A low
35
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
lot course there and then we have a series of different awnings that we encourage flexibility and
innovation with the various details and do some things that...given that it works with the general
colors we have. And this is the colors that we're proposing for the drivit. These services the
upper band. It's there and also here and here. Now what we've done with those details with the
band on top of the building is try to lower... We want people to realize...that's why we have
taken that and that's why we have these various levels of materials. That's why we track this line
down by having the dark base and a lighter band and same thing here. And of course this is a
transitional element in the middle. We don't need the height all the way to the top. We're doing
it as a transition. The lower portion of the existing building which is not... Anyway, we'll just
label it. It's intended, this is the original, new precast. We're not using any new precast
anywhere... Otherwise we concur with staff and...
Peterson: Questions of the applicant?
Joyce: Yeah I had two, just a quick question. You're disagreeing with the staff on the dentil
block and I'm sorry, the staff is suggesting a projection of one foot and you're suggesting?
Ron Krank: I'm suggesting that it is, well this is a section of the building here. That dentil block
is 2 inches beyond the face of the material...so we come down from this...we've got three steps.
Each one which are metal and...so we're already 6 inches down. Then we come vertically down
to this dentil block. Then we come back 2 more inches to a 4 inch column and then that returns
to the wall so it's hard to describe except that I know what we're doing here. Everything is 2
inches from the next surface except the column is 4 inchesup.. I'm just concerned sticking up 12
inches is just over power and the first thing you look at is the roof detail.
Aanenson: Can I ask a question of what's out there today on the cinema? As far as articulation
on that top. That's our concern. It's not enough.
Ron Krank: ...metal flashings...
Peterson: I'm getting more confused the more we talk.
Aanenson: ...
Bob Copeland made a comment from the audience.
Peterson: Other qUestions?
Sidney: Questions for the applicant. I guess I still am bothered by the painted precast... I'm one
who has a large aversion to it. Large spaces of painted precast concrete.
Bob Copeland: The reason we chose not to is...because it is concrete. It's not falling. We do
intend of course to go over...
Sidney: I guess I'd suggest that as something like personally I would think it'd be much more
36
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
appealing...putting the two buildings together. You know the old and the new rather than...
Peterson: Okay. Other questions? Kevin?
Conrad: The vision for the alley way between the cinema and retail,, is that really not a
pedestrian friendly corridor? Would you consider blocking that off?. What's the code for that?
There may be another way to... them out.
The applicant's comments from the audience were not picked up on tape.
Conrad: ...detailing is back there...I mean to the front. This diagram is labeled concrete
sidewalk through the parking. Is that just the island? Other than in front of the marquee?
Ron Krank: Yes.
Conrad: Right in front of your main entrance you've got some islands it looks like.
Ron Krank: ...
Conrad: And what's the idea of the horizontal sidewalk that you have? Is that really functional
or is, what are you trying to accomplish there? Are you trying to focus people on that to get them
through the center? Sidewalk.
Ron Krank: ...
Conrad: Okay, Pauly Drive is, okay it's in there. And the extension to the east of Pauly Drive is
where? Where does it exit?
Ron Krank: ...
Conrad: In peak periods you're asking for, the report says that based on other municipalities you
may need 745 stalls here basically. Almost 300 stalls short so where are those people parking
and how are they getting into the theater?
Ron Krank: ...
Conrad: But it's such a disparity. And I think we would endorse what you're saying. We're
trying to do that here. I don't see that many pedestrians walking. You're so far off. How can
you comfort, you're so far off. We're not talking about 20 stalls or 50. We're talking about
hundreds and how can we, how can I. I don't know where the planning, the rest of them are but
how can I say this is good planning? How can you sell us on that, and it's not new urbanism.
That's...
Ron Krank: ...
37
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Blackowiak: I'll piggy back on that too Mr. Chairman. You've been in operation for two years
but retail...buildings is relatively new. How can you assure us that their needs won't increase at
the same time yours do... further compound the whole parking problem.
Ron Krank: ...
Peterson: Tough one. Other questions of the applicant?
Sidney: One I was thinking, you don't show an east elevation for the existing cinema.
Ron Krank: The east elevation, right now it is precast with some brick tiers. It will be our
intention to keep that. It's sort of an alley way in effect. Concrete block I think on the Frontier
Building on their side. It'd be our intention to paint that so it ties in with the front of the
building.
Sidney: You know I was going to say. But I guess I'd suggest you have that for city council as
well.
Peterson: I have a question for you. On the west elevation, there's some overhead doors. Now
is that for the trash?
Ron Krank: Yes.
Peterson: And on the north elevation where you simply have block down the alley way. Where
does that wall come in, what's that made out of 7. Earlier you said you wanted the alley way all
the way through, yet on this side, the north elevation there's some kind of small...
Aanenson: Actually that's the...
Peterson: More questions?
Kind: I have a question about the trash enclosure. Is it totally enclosed on the top?
Ron Krank: Yes.
Kind: So odors will emit or anything like that?
Ron Krank: ...
Kind: And Kevin I think spoke to the fact that these doors tend to be left open all the time, and I
was over at Houlihan's too. Their trash enclosure doors are always open. Is there any assurance
that those will always be closed, because they're on a pretty prominent front, that west frontage.
And they tend to be left open I'm guessing just based on history of other places.
Bob Copeland: ...that's their job. They're supposed to do it...
38
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Kind: Could it be put on the north elevation along the side of the retail so that you're not seeing
if the doors are open?
Ron Krank: ...
Peterson: If no additional questions, thank you for your time. Is there a motion and a second for
Public hearing please.
Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was
opened.
Peterson: This item is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission,
please come forward.
John Rice: My name is John Rice. I'm an attorney here in Chanhassen. I'm the attorney for
Bloomberg Companies Incorporated. I have my office at 551 West 78th Street in the Frontier
Building. I'm here on behalf of Bloomberg Companies Incorporated. They request that the
Planning Commission adopt and approve and recommend that this project be approved with two
exceptions to the recommendations of the staff. Those two recommendations to which we take
exception are number 3(a), which is on page 14 of the staff report. It is the...28 foot unimpeded
street from Market Boulevard to Great Plains Boulevard. And the second one is paragraph 7 on
page 15 of the staff report which requires the applicant to acquire a 30 foot easement to Great
Plains Boulevard. An easement for a street is not acceptable to B10omberg Companies
Incorporated which owns the land to the east of the current cinema building over to Great Plains
Boulevard. Do not promise to deliver an easement for a street to Chanhassen Properties LLC.
There are other reasons I think not to include these two recommendations as conditions to the
approval of the project. One is that you are casting a burden upon the applicant that is uncertain
and asking for difficulty. In effect compelling him to acquire from someone else, from some
third party landowner that just happens to be my client., a 30 foot easement. I didn't measure out
the distance from the east end, east boundary line of the cinema property to Great Plains
Boulevard but I think it's something like 2,000 feet. That's... If you cast this burden upon the
applicant, what will happen is the project becomes in danger of withering and not going through.
...well all Bloomberg has to do is to agree to the easement. That's not possible. And this gets to
the third reason why I think this is an improvidence requirement to put on the approval of the
project and that is, we have gOt a large area which everybody has been talking about off and on
behind the Dinner Theater. East of Great Plains Boulevard. West of the Frontier Center and
west of the current cinema building. There probably isn't one of you who has seen that property
that doesn't say that eventually you want something to be done there. To ordain now that in
some place through that area there shall be a permanent street or easement of 30 foot width for
travel of vehicles, not counting the additional width that gets consumed to provide for the 30 feet,
is going to provide or is going to restrict what can be done in the future with that piece of
property which is not beneficial to Bloomberg Companies Incorporated that owns the land. And
it's not beneficial to the city. You folks who have got to decide and hope for and expect and try
to bring to the city the best possible project that can go in there. Both to provide some
39
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
enhancement of value. Enhancement of the city services and what can be dOne. There had been
talk, it never quite came to fruition but talk about an office building to go in there. Well right
now I don't think there's anyone here that can predict where is going to be the location of an
office building would go on that space and the parking space and how it would fit in and where
the streets would then go. And that is a far more important project to consider and to talk about
when you're talking about laying out the streets. To alleviate an egress problem for the cinema
parking lot. What really is apparently driving, and somebody asked the question what's the
reason for this street. Solely to provide access. The difficulty according to the traffic report
seems to be a stacking for left tums onto Market Boulevard off Pauly Drive. The solution to mn
to compel an easement or a street off of Great Plains Boulevard is totally disproportionate to
what that stacking egress problem would be. Solve the stacking egress problem. Work on that.
It seems to me that this report and I'm not going to claim to be a traffic expert. I have enough
trouble being a property lawyer. But that this solution, without considering whether or not
there's a way to create a stacking lane for left tums, without considering what are you going to
do? Just dump the problem on Great Plains Boulevard? Without considering there's a
significant business entity over there. Their theater patrons exit onto Great Plains Boulevard off
of that driveway and that's the Chanhassen Dinner Theater and there's not a mention of that in
those traffic reports. Just shifting it over there is not a solution to the problem when it's just even
putting that in as a condition, it seems to me is grossly disproportionate to the problem. There is
no mention that I, at least in my reading of the traffic report, about use of the northwestern comer
driveway for egress to get out of the parking lot when the movies are over. So that's why we
want this property, the bowling alley property developed. We think this is a great project. We
have worked with Mr. Copeland. I happen to live not in the city of Chanhassen and I go by that
Golden Valley Commons, not daily but 3 times weekly and I'm there at least twice weekly. I
didn't know that Mr. Krank's firm had done that but that is a beautiful project and what he says
about it, that it's both pedestrian friendly and effective and a beautiful addition to that city is tree.
So we can have confidence in what they are proposing. But we need to have this go ahead
without having this impediment of the mandatory easement for a street compelled to go across
the Bloomberg property. Questions if anybody has any.
Peterson: Kate, do you want to care to comment on that?
Aanenson: Yeah. With the condition of the staff report and Mr. Bloomberg, and I'll let Dave
speak to it but I see a big red flag and we've got to actually go back and do the traffic study
because everything is predicated on shared parking. The study that the city paid for, the shared
parking and all of a sudden I'm just shocked the roles have kind of changed. Caught me off
guard. I'd let Dave discuss that but I would recommend that you either go back and do the
traffic...I'mjust flabbergasted.
Peterson: Dave any comments?
Hempel: It's quite a surprise to me as well .... problem with the east/west connection out to
Great Plains. Traffic report indicates a vital connection to help alle-~iate the congestion that's
going to be created at the intersection of Pauly Drive and Market Boulevard. The left turn
movement out of the site. Left turn from Pauly Drive southbound on Market. I'm not a traffic
40
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
engineer either but a traffic engineer looked at it actually twice and that was a concern. An
additional report and an updated report. Both reports indicate the necessity to have an east/west
connection to alleviate the traffic congestion out to Market Boulevard. Now we can certainly go
back and revisit it again without this connection to Great Plains Boulevard to see what the traffic
study results...possible traffic signal on Pauly Drive/Market Boulevard .... if that's the way they
want to proceed, then we'll have to revise the.., and request an update of that study. Comments
as far as burdening the applicant to obtain the necessary easements...I agree it is a burden.
However it'd be a considered premature development of the site if you don't have...just like any
single family residential development. If you don't have adequate sewer and water and street
circulation to provide for a subdivision, it will be premature. The city could certainly go ahead if
we want to see this happen and City Council could order a condemnation proceedings to acquire
the necessary easements...but I guess I would encourage leaving those conditions as they are or
adding another condition that the applicant's engineer go back and prepare another study without
an east connection off of Great Plains Boulevard and recommend the appropriate traffic
mitigation measures on Market Boulevard.
Peterson: Are we asking for more work than, it's more work but is it logical? We've already
been there twice and it's clear. I mean going back there again and spending additional time and
money doesn't seem prudent.
Hempel: I agree and at some future point the Dinner Theater, behind the Dinner Theater will
develop. If this is an interim connection, it's an easement. An easement can be vacated to
facilitate future development of the Dinner Theater property. It's flexible.
Peterson: Can I have a motion to close the public hearing.
Kind moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was
closed.
Peterson: Who wants to tackle this one?
Blackowiak: Well I'I1 jump right in. I saw the surprise on Kate's face when the east/west
connection street issue came up and that makes me think maybe staff needs some time to take a
look at this and prepare some options. I think one over riding concern is, from my point of view
that the city is pledging $1.3 million of TIF funding to do this. I think the city has every reason
to make sure it's done right and every obligation to make sure it's done right. If that means an
east/west connection, then so be it. We have to do it. I certainly wouldn't want to spend my
money on something that's going to snarl up traffic for who knows how long. So if we need to
look at it, no east/west connection and doing a traffic study, well maybe we need to do that. But I
certainly am not comfortable going forward with spending that kind of money on a project that's
going to effectively block a lot of people in a parking lot for an awful long time. I don't think the
parking is sufficient. I'm really worried about the numbers. We're talking about a 35% variance
in the required parking spaces. The idea that it's going to be pedestrian friendly and people are
going to walk from location to location is great but I don't think Festival's going to want people
parking in their lots to go over and use the theater. I don't think pedestrian circulation is
41
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
adequately addressed, and I wonder what happened with the boardwalk on the initial proposal
that we did see on the theater Phase I. We were supposed to have boardwalk and streetscape and
all this wonderful stuffand it's not there. I don't see it here. I don't see anything that encourages
pedestrian movement. I'm worried about the hard surface coverage. 95% is amazing. And also
I'm worried about materials. We need to have high quality materials. We have every right to
demand them and I'm not sure that I've seen them here tonight. I'm not seeing a cohesive
package yet. So I would certain support a motion to table so we can resolve those issues as well
as specifically the street connections and traffic issues.
Peterson: Do you still recommend tabling if east/west wasn't an issue?
Blackowiak: I believe so, yes.
Peterson: Other comments?
Joyce: Well I'd have to disagree with Alison, except for the point that I think the east/west thing
has to be resolved. But I've heard a couple of commissioners worry about the parking. I don't
have that feeling about the parking. I think parking's over emphasized. I think there's an ability
to share parking here. I think there'd be adequate parking in front of the Frontier and retail. 'So
up until 5 minutes ago I was very much in favor of this project..I think it's a good project. But I
feel the development is premature if they can't figure out the traffic situation.
Peterson: ...can't be done.
Joyce: Well I think you're subjecting it then to being, if it was tabled it might be worked oUt
where we can get a better feel for what exactly is going to happen. I have a feeling that there's
some negotiations that have to be taken place here. That's a good point. I don't have any
problem. My opinion is I don't have any problem with the, what's being presented. I guess I
would have to leave in those, I'd like to leave...
Peterson: Other questions?
Kind: I have a question I think of staff. I'm wondering if somebody could speak to the parking
that's proposed along Pauly Drive. How that compares to the on street parking that's in Village
on the Ponds and why you like it in one area and not in the other?
Aanenson: That is a goOd question because... It is a private street. As far as traffic, slowing
traffic. Forces safety.
Kind: You like it? You don't like it?
Hempel: They like it, we don't.
Kind: That certainly adds parking spots.
42
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Aanenson: Right.
Kind: And then the turning radius for the bus, that doesn't, to me it .looks like you can avoid
being there. I'm talking about this spot right here. It would be left the way it is. It doesn't have
to be realigned with the...20 degree radius.
Hempel: I would concur. I think there's some slight modifications that could be done to that
intersection to accommodate the bus radius.
Kind: I'm sure that's the issue with that turn around there.
Sidney: Mr. Chairman I guess a question of Dave. About a traffic study, if that were to be done
about the east/west connection. The east connection. How long would that take? Could it be
completed before council?
Hempel: That's a very good question. I'm not comfortable, I'd estimate 30 days.
Sidney: Really? Okay.
Peterson: I've just got a couple. I think that I still am not comfortable with the alley way. Part
of it maybe I just can't picture it other than an eyesore. Doors being traditional, very dark metal
doors and over lighted it's going to attract more eyes to something that I think is a negative.
...lighted you've got safety issues .... like the first time, I guess I don't like it now. I don't have
an alternative. As it relates to the parking, I feel like Kevin to some degree. I don't think
parking, the number of spots is as much of the issue as the impervious surface is an issue to me.
I don't think we should lower the parking. That says lower the number of cinema's. And I don't
want it to look like Target parking lot that it's one big, wide area of people walking down the
blacktop .... usage and quality of the structure that the parking lot is speeding to. Lastly, I'm a
little bit concerned about the, if you look at the old entrance to the theater, you've got an area up
there that is pretty big as far as the "boardwalk" in that area. Essentially it's going to be vacated.
It's going to look like something that was meant to be pedestrian friendly but is never going to be
used by pedestrians in all probability. Nothing other than exiting the theater that you're going to
want to walk up those steps in one area. That part doesn't fit. Other than that, it gives me the
feel that I was hoping for. I haven't got a problem towards for the recommendation for approval
this evening.
Conrad: I would recommend we table Mr. Chairman to get a traffic review of the impact of not
having an east/west corridor through this site.
Blackowiak: Second that.
Aanenson: Point of order. We're at the end of the 120 days so if you are going to table, I'd like
to have the applicant's consent. Otherwise...talking to Sharmin. We're at the end.
Peterson: Hearing that, would the applicant agree to that or not?
43
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Aanenson: We're at the end of the 120 days so we have to have a letter, write something, a letter
for the extension.
Bob Copeland: ...
Peterson: Based upon Dave's comments earlier, I don't really see a compelling reason for
another traffic study. If it's that obvious that it won't work, why go through hoops?
Blackowiak: But then this will go to council before the traffic study's back and they won't
know.
Peterson: I'm saying we already know about the east/west... It wasn't a question.
Aanenson: I guess the point was maybe put a signal or something like that... There may be other
ways to mitigate it.
Hempel: Maybe some traffic mitigation measures along Market Boulevard that could be
incorporated.
Peterson: Okay. Point noted. We have a motion to table and a second. Any discussion on that?
Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission table the Site Plan
Review #95-21 to demolish the existing Chanhassen Bowl/Filly's building and construct
eight movie screens and a retail element, variance to allow non street frontage signs,
marquee sign, and hard surface coverage and preliminary plat for the Cinema Addition
and direct staff to prepare a traffic study regarding the impacts of not having the east/west
connection to Great Plains Boulevard. All voted in favor, except Peterson who opposed,
and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1.
Peterson: For the reason I noted. I don't think it's necessary.
There was a question asked from the audience that was not picked up on tape.
Peterson: Dave.
Hempel: I would use the existing traffic engineer that you retained previously. He's got all the
data.
Conrad: Mr. Chairman could I comment?
Peterson: Yes.
Conrad: I don't think, until you solve the parking issue and make it clearer for me, you're going
to have a hard time persuading me. I think it's a pretty project .... that point. I want it here.
44
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Until you can tell me where those excess cars are going to park, and until you can somehow
significantly tell me that they're not ever going to be needed. I know I'm talking about hocus
pocus. You never know. You have to assure me there's a place for them. It can't be across the
street until you get, if you get a commitment from other merchants that said it will happen, I
think I can start buying some of the building. I think you have to also solve some of our, the
impervious and landscaping issues. The staff report, I'm still not, the staff report was in conflict
with what I heard. Staff has, there's a lot of reasons this should be tabled. It's not just one. I'm
hoping you're hearing some of the things that we said and come back. I don't want it to
just...with one issue here. There are several. It's a good project. We'll try to make it happen if
it's justified but... 95% impervious surface, there has to be something that resolves some of what
impervious surface is meant to accomplish. That's either take out concrete. We've got to do
something.
^anenson: What I heard is the east/west, number of parking stalls. Particularly how that works.
Landscaping. Hard surface coverage and the quality of materials. I think what we had asked in
the report is to show a cross section articulating, see how much back and forth.
Conrad: Did you hear pedestrian circulation as a concern?
Aanenson: Yes, and I also added to what Craig said is that boardwalk. What happens over at
that other end when it's no longer the emphasis and how that works. And the alley way.
Conrad: Yeah, the alley is a big deal.
Peterson: Talk myself out of my nay. One of the things about traffic you may want to do, With
Mr. Copeland leaving but I think I'm sure he's done proforma's on percentage of vacant seats in
the theaters at any time. I think show us those. You know they're not going to be full 100% of
the time, if ever. So that can be very compelling to us too as far as the number of people,
Aanenson: Okay I've got a, we're in a legal bind here and I'm not sure how to resolve it. If you
want to call the City Attorney. We need a letter tonight to keep, I mean you've recommended
tabling. The applicant is not going to give us a letter to keep the contract with the timeframe.
Bob Copeland: ...
Aanenson: What happens if you don't get the letter then I would recommend denial or approval
with conditions. That's what I would recommend. Otherwise.
Peterson: Then it moves on. Otherwise it's not going to move on.
Aanenson: It exposes us to the possibility of getting it approved because we passed the time
frame. I don't have a letter that's existing in the file in front of me.
Al~Jarl: I haven't either.
45
Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999
Ron Krank: ...we would like to work...
Peterson: Let's do that tonight. Sharmin, do you want to do that?
Gerald Rurnmel: My name is Gerald Rummel...and my comment here about...and he's in limbo
with what's going to happen. If it's going to be extended for 30 days...get the traffic study done
and bring it back...
Peterson: Kate, when will that start? The 30 days? 30 days is a maximum. It won't necessarily
be extended the full 30 days.
Aanenson: It's all predicated on their traffic studyl The next available planning commission, it's
not going to be until the first one in August. I don't think they can get the traffic study done, so
that would put you to the first one in August. We've got a full agenda. I don't know how we'd
get it on. Then we would go to.
Peterson: I'm willing to dedicate 20 minutes to a half hour to it... If we can work towards that
and let's do the 30 day letter and see it signed and move this out.
Aanenson: Even if you get...
Peterson: Everybody comfortable? Okay. Let's take a 5 minute break.
PUBLIC HEARING:
STEINER DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE PUD FOR
ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK TO PERMIT CHURCH ASSEMBLY WORSHIP AS
AN ANCILLARY USE IN THE DEVELOPMENT.
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item.
Peterson: Could you explain, I did not get the City Manager's cover memo as to what he's trying
to say.
Aanenson: That we can't require that.
Peterson: The part I didn't get was specifically that.
Aanenson: The applicant can speak to that but they are leasing the space so it's really moot.
It's a non issue because they're leasing the space so the underlying property owner is paying
taxes. They are leasing as a tenant. So they are paying taxes.
Peterson: Paying the prorated portion of the expenses.
Blackowiak: I kind of like that idea though. I mean theoretically that, I mean there's a PUD
47