PC Minutes 02-17-2015
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 17, 2015
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Lisa Hokkanen, Kim Tennyson,
Maryam Yusuf, and Steve Weick
STAFF PRESENT:
Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Alyson Fauske,
Assistant City Engineer; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner
PUBLIC PRESENT:
th
Darren Lazan 105 50 Avenue No, #513, Minneapolis
Rod Franks 1675 Hemlock Way
Yuching & Erin Wong 1674 Hemlock Way
Stephen Silverman 18519 Pathfinder Drive, Eden Prairie
P.J. Degane Reflections Road
Joseph Shamla 1691 Mayapple Pass
Becky Fluegge 1671 Mayapple Pass
Charles Gust 1941 Commonwealth Boulevard
Toby Collador 1833 Cottongrass Court
Sylvia Deyoung 9220 Allendale Lane
Andy Kim 9070 Degler Circle
Brad Sundstrom 1808 Marigold Court
Zhexin Zhang 1455 Bethesda Circle
John Gilbert 1641 Jeurissen Lane
Jeff Franz 8950 Sunset Trail
PUBLIC HEARING:
REGIONAL LIFESTYLE CENTER, PLANNING CASE 2015-05: REQUEST FOR A
CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL,
COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE USES ON TWO PARCELS TOTALING 78 ACRES
ZONED AGRICULTURAL ESTATE (A2) WITH A LAND USE DESIGNATION OF
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL OR OFFICE USE. PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LYMAN AND POWERS BOULEVARDS. APPLICANT:
LEVEL 7 DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
Aller: The presentation of a concept plan allows for an applicant/developer to receive direction
from the Planning Commission and the City before incurring additional expense and putting
together more detailed proposals required to actually move a project forward at a later date. So
tonight’s hearing is basically so that we can receive input from you the citizens and residents and
we can provide our comments and pass that input up to the council for further action. With that
we’ll open up with item 1 on our agenda which is the Conceptual Mixed Use Planned Unit
Development, a PUD of two parcels on approximately 78 acres of land and that is Case 2015-05.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Aanenson: Thank you Chairman Aller, members of the Planning Commission. As you stated
this item is for concept PUD, mixed use retail. It is scheduled to go to the City Council on
th
March 9 so anybody that would care to follow this item to the City Council, that would be the
date. I also want to point out, did receive some comments, some emails. Those were forwarded
to the Planning Commission. Also to the developer. Those have been added to, if you go to the
City’s website, those are all available as far as the public record. In addition there was a traffic
study that was completed by Carver County for the upgrade of Lyman Boulevard. That also was
given to the developer as well as part of the public record as well as some water resources
comments with the Assistant City Engineer will just briefly touch on today too but those now
also a part of the record. So with that start with the location of the project. This project is
actually located at the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Powers Boulevard. It would have
access off of 212. The property in consideration today, the 78 acres includes 76 acres under
Parcel 1, which is this parcel right here. And then Parcel 3 which is 1.66. This parcel here has a
different land use designation as Parcel 3 and I’ll go into that in a little bit more detail. The
current guiding of this property is actually dual guided. The 76 acres is actually, could be
regional commercial or could also be office. The parcel on the other side of Powers on the west
side of Powers is actually guided for medium density. The zoning map currently shows this area
in agricultural land use so when it would come before you it would have to be compliant with the
land use recommendation. Either commercial, office or the medium density. The applicant has
shown commercial on this parcel and I’ll go into a little bit more detail on that in a minute. I did
want to point out back on this parcel, Parcel number 2 is 40 acres and that is not included with
this project. That property is LCR Holdings, LLC and they do not want to be a part of this
application. So the medium density piece, that’s actually 1.66 acres is currently zoned
agricultural and is guided medium density. MnDOT bought all the access right-of-way on this
property so it’d be difficult to get to. There’s a wetland complex here and steep slopes. We are
not recommending changing. There was a correction that has been made to the staff report since
this went out. We are recommending commercial for that at this time. One of the things that we
talked about previously on this site would be this might be appropriate area even for additional
stormwater which would allow maximizing some of the property on the other side and putting
stormwater onto this site but again there’s no access. MnDOT has bought those access rights on
this piece of property there. So I’d like to go back, we talked about the Comprehensive Plan.
What it was guided for and just take a few minutes to talk about when we updated the plan in
2008, what we’re operating under now which is the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. When we
updated the plan we spent a lot of time, there was a developer that had interest in this property
for city and actually they came to quite a few meetings. They were at all the open houses for the
Comprehensive Plan representing kind of what their desires were. Included in the packet a
survey that was conducted with the study, how residents felt about a regional mall because at that
time we had never contemplated a regional mall. You know our strength and if you look at
Money Magazine and some of the awards we’ve got is our nice downtown and we never
contemplated that so at that time the City spent a lot of careful consideration and deliberation on
what we would do if we considered a regional mall. So we spent some time on that and felt
comfortable with the desires that was stated in the Comprehensive Plan and this quote here, I
know it’s difficult to read. It’s in the packet but I just want to reiterate what the City’s vision
was at that time. Again dual guiding it so if it didn’t come in commercial or things changed over
time that office would also be acceptable. The City had the discretion of which land use they
2
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
wanted to choose. But in the bold part there is you know we talked about the scale and the
function of regional market. This would service a different than kind of the downtown area.
Kind of serving the daily needs and we talked about that the center of this type of would have
two major retail or anchors and characterized by the diversity of mix of retail services within the
boundaries. So some of the examples that we talked about was entertainment, department stores,
comparison shopping, restaurants, hotels, specialty boutique and potential residential. I think
there was a lot of discussion about not wanting big box and we’ve had some applications here
recently where people have asked for variance to try to get a big box but that was some of the
things that at that time were not necessarily desired. So the purpose of, as the Chairman stated,
of doing the concept plan is that to make sure that we’re all going down on the same path as the
developer would work more detail on the specific plan. So once we put the Comprehensive Plan
in place and the implementation tool then becomes the zoning ordinance. So what the staff did
was created, so you saw this zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission and the City Council
adopted the, after you get the Comprehensive Plan done then this tool then becomes the
implementation so we created this regional commercial district and we stated that our intended
purpose is that it should result in you know a verifiable exchange between the City and the
developer. That we work together to try to come up with what we think are the uses on this site.
To date one of the things that we’ve shown a lot of commercial but there’s not a lot of specificity
and we’ll talk about that a little bit more when we talk about the retail study exactly what some
of those uses might be and how they would relate to what we have in the current downtown. So
under number 2 one of the main things is the centers of this type generally, again as we took in
the vision statement, have the two major retail anchors. Again the mixed retail use. Again that
was our intent statement of what we expected to see there with that. Again working with the
landscaping. Avoiding that we’d have some harmonious design within the development itself.
So that was the regional commercial district. We also placed it within the PUD and the reason
we put it within the PUD would allow for us to put together the list of uses that seem acceptable
and we’ve done this in other projects. If you remember what we did on 101 and Lyman across
from the Southwest Transit Park and Ride. We took that neighborhood, underlying
neighborhood commercial zoning district and then we modified that and put it into a PUD and
adapted the uses that we felt worked better within that neighborhood so we didn’t just say
whatever you want in the neighborhood district. We did a PUD and we kind of shorten the menu
of uses that would fit in there that we felt working with the neighborhood. We had a focus
group. We hired a consultant to work with that neighborhood to kind of come up with, not to
kind of but to come up with that list of uses that seemed to work and once it’s in that PUD, if
another use comes up that maybe wasn’t on that list and somebody wants to do it, then it requires
a public hearing to amend it. So you can go back and see what the feeling is. Maybe the
feelings have changed. Maybe people understand how that market, how that center works and
may do that but that’s again the reason why we put this is a PUD too. To be more prescript and
the size and the types of uses and then put those in the PUD district and if they wanted to change
they’d have to come back through a public process. Planning Commission and City Council
with a public hearing allowing for input from the residents to make those changes. So that’s how
we got to the PUD. And now we’re at the concept part of it and the concept plan is very
generalized but in this circumstance it’s very generalized as far as the types of the uses. Now we
were given a market study that showed a lot of the uses that could go in there and while a lot of
those uses could go in there that doesn’t mean that that’s something that’s desirous of everybody
and that’s kind of the challenge here to figure out how we would work on that. If the developer
3
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
has certain expectations and wants to come back and do that, you know if we wanted through
this process hopefully direct the developer what we think is realistic, expectations or working
together. That we’re not going down, going down a path where they’re spending a lot more
money. Coming back and saying that’s not even what is desired so the biggest thing here for the
planning staff is that the intent of the PUD is that we’d have a master plan and not all parties are
involved in that. As I mentioned the LCR Holdings don’t, that have the 40 acres. Kind of the
donut there. They’re wrapped around that and don’t want to be a part of this project so it’s hard
to say that well this applicant feels comfortable moving forward it’s hard for the residents to
understand exactly how that all balances out. Because there’s wetlands on some of those
properties. There’s tree conservation. As you balance all those things out, hard cover it works
better to develop at a holistic fashion which is one of the reasons why we said, if it’s going to
come in as a regional commercial it has to come in as a PUD and we want to see a master plan.
It doesn’t have to be under one ownership but it needs to be master planned and right now it
doesn’t meet that criteria so that’s one of our biggest concerns. So again you know the purpose
of this is to give some direction so I think it’s important that we hear from residents and
members of the community to see what their concerns are or ideas are as well as the Planning
Commission. So again we’re going to formulate recommendations. You’re going to formulate
those and send those onto the City Council who also give feedback. So again the intent of the
process is that we hear from the residents. That our expectation is the development be of higher
quality. A PUD. Sense of community. Place identity and the development should provide
regional and community scale and we talked about before, complimenting the existing
downtown uses and provide shopping opportunities not currently located in the community. And
also be sensitive to some of the environmental features in the area. So with that, that’s, this is the
specific plan that was, the conceptual plan that was put forward. Again the concern that the staff
would have is the 40 acres that are left out of the site. In looking at how we connect the roads.
How we provide for traffic calming with roundabouts and some of the curves and designs of the
road would be some of the concerns that we would have. There’s some minor things in here
regarding the higher density and a calculation of our 16 units an acre. How that would match out
and some of the transitional zones and uses here. The city staff had worked with the underlying
property owners trying to move the project forward. We came up with some scenarios. Those
were never vetted. Those were internal documents. We did share them with them to give them
some sort of range. We recognize the commercial study says that they can have over a million
which the community would support. Or this area would support based on their trade area and I
put the trade area in your packet. I didn’t put them on here would support closer to a million
square feet. That’s a question to say is that still what the community wants to see that size
square foot and what would those uses be and how would they fit into the community. So with
that you can look at the, kind of the devil’s in the details here when you look at the convenience
goods and what those actually translate to. You know they said in their marketing study that
they certainly believe a supermarket of 90,000 square feet would fit in this area. This is one of
the things when we first met that I had told them that one of the things that we weren’t
supporting. Then they have other things that fit in here on this list and again this is what I’m
talking about when we kind of narrow down in that PUD some of those uses that would be
desirable. Whether on this list is, they have restaurants. Gas stations. So what I’m saying is
some of these may be more or less desirable. Department stores. Warehouse club.
Supercenters. Furniture and home furnishing. Electronics. Sporting goods. Building supplies
stores. Home centers. Personal services and physical fitness so I’m saying there’s a large range
4
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
within there and some of those things may be more or less desirable as the community looks at
what uses should go in there and how much commercial is the right amount of commercial.
Again discretion within that regional commercial because what we saw is mixed use. Like I say
we also talked about housing and office and some residential within that and there’s a big range
within that residential. Types of residential also. So in looking at some of, these were in the
packet too. Kind of looking at the Shadow Lake Towne Center. Kind of looking at kind of the
bigger box sort of thing. Obviously the Home Goods showed up pretty high as far as demand
and then looking at again this was Forest City who was looking at the project before. Kind of
looking at what we saw as a more traditional. The smaller scale. Obviously this one too does
have a Super Target but that would be something you know you don’t always get to pick the type
of coffee shop. Type of super store. The discount stores so that’s something to give some
careful consideration too. Also wanted to share with you, this was also put in when we did those
3 illustrative drawings to show kind of how that would look. This was also a draft that showed
more footprints because I think that was the one thing that was a little concerning. Looking at
the square footage of retail it’s hard to always translate that. What does that mean in size? As
far as building size. Walkability. Some of those things that you know I think would be attractive
to the neighborhood being able to walk to some of these things and not necessarily cross a large
parking lot. Again this was heavy on the office on the buffer and certainly all that is not decided
yet. Again this parcel would be, it’s not part of the discussion tonight. So with that I was going
to let maybe Alyson talk a minute about the water resources comments.
Fauske: Thank you Kate. Chairman Aller, members of the Planning Commission. Included in
some of tonight’s handouts is a memo from our Water Resources Coordinator and in it he
outlines some of the, the wetland criteria that’s set forth for this development just so that the
developer is aware of what the regulatory agencies with regards to wetlands. So the first two
pages just go over some of the known, for example some of the basins that show up in our, in a
wetland delineation that wasn’t noted on the plans and then the second part he just goes through
some of the water, stormwater management requirements that this site would be subject to.
Particularly with the watershed district rules coming into effect now with providing some
impervious, the first 1.1 inches of runoff being abstracted from the site so it’s just more of a, just
keep this in mind as you move forward through with your development. For the developer and
then he also touches on the Bluff Creek Overlay District at the end of the memo. Just going over
some of those requirements as well. Thank you.
Aanenson: Then finally I just wanted to say in the staff report we included, we send this out for
what we call jurisdictional review so we got comments from others. Carver County talked about
the need to update the AUAR. Again the AUAR covered the environmental assessment for the
entire property. It’s dormant right now. Any project going forward would have to update that.
Then in addition to that I shared with you the County’s study. Traffic study that they did for
Lyman Boulevard. Again for your consideration the environmental resources, Alyson talked
about the wetlands on the site but there’s also a heavily wooded area that has some of those
slopes are over 30 percent which doesn’t allow building which means they can include it in their
green space and that’s another reason to do a PUD so you can share that green space over the
entire 118 acres. That’s why you know we would be concerned with just doing the one portion
there. 78 acres or 76 acres. To look at that holistically. How you would manage those
environmental features so again that significant stand of trees. The Park and Recreation
5
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
department also talked about trails on site. In addition some of the outdoor features that would
make sense on the property. Park dedication would be required in the form of land or payment
of park and trail fees so that would also have to go, be considered as a part of this project. And
then planning I guess what we’re really here to talk about tonight is to get your input on does it
make sense to go forward with the regional commercial? If it’s regional commercial, what, do
you have specific goals and desires that you think make sense before this would go forward?
Types of uses. Limitations. Square footage. That sort of thing. Obviously there’s discretion on
saying it could be office. It can be regional commercial. Want additional information. And then
there’s some other comments in here too but again those are really things we move from other
departments within the city that really are more parochial to once the project moves along further
so really what we’re here tonight is to get comments from you. Not a formalized motion but
comments and hear from the residents so we can forward those comments onto the City Council.
So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Aller: Questions at this time from commissioners. Not at this time. So proceed with the
applicant’s presentation.
Aanenson: I’ll pull it up here just a second.
Darren Lazan: Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Darren Lazan. I’m with
Landform Professional Services. I represent Level 7 Development, the applicant on the item
before you tonight. First I want to thank both the commission for taking the time tonight so we
can get your feedback and for staff. They’ve been tremendously helpful. Both planning staff
and the water resources group as we’ve moved through the beginning stages of this project and
we appreciate all their work to date. As Kate mentioned, and I appreciate her introduction. I
walked through and scratched a lot of my items off so I hopefully can shorten the presentation
now that she covered it so well but I guess we’re here for concept review. This is, as staff
pointed out in their report, an optional step. We think it’s an important project for the city and
recognize that. There’s been significant work done for date and it’s important to get this early
feedback so as we talk about this project we, as we said in the open house is we want to be clear.
We are at the very beginning of this project. We drew very conceptual bubbles to have early
discussion. Sometimes we get into a trap where we draw too much and people say well you
already know what’s going there. You drew it all in here. Well we drew bubbles so we could
get this feedback. That’s why we’re here and that’s what we have in front of you today. Brief
introduction of the team. Level 7 Development will act as the applicant and master developers
on this project. Scott Carlston’s local presence, has substantial real estate experience. Also on
the team, Tom Palmquist from Welch Colliers. Over 20 year career in retail commercial. Over 5
million square feet of projects to date. RSP Architects will be serving as the project architects on
the project. Significant national retail, mixed use experience. Most notably West End, Calhoun
Square, Woodbury Lakes, and etc. Current work includes Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant
which is a very current large scale project right now and Landform Professional Services also
with significant national experience on retail and mixed use projects. From 1 acre to 250 acres
throughout the country so we’re a very experienced team. Been here. Seen these projects of this
scale. Understand the complexity. Certainly want to work with staff. You guys put a lot of
work into this site. Into this project and we want to make sure we compliment those efforts. As
Kate laid out, sorry about that. This site is roughly 75 acres within this RC District that the City
6
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
has outlined. It is at the southwest corner of Powers and Lyman Boulevards. It’s bound on the
north by Powers. Lyman on the east. Some DOT wetlands on the south as well as some
residential. Single family residential on the west. It’s also substantial relief on this site.
Roughly 30 feet from Powers down to those wetlands. Back up again 20 feet and then back
down to the wetlands on the far south side so that presents significant challenges on this site as
well. There has been some work completed to date that I wanted to outline for you tonight.
We’ve completed the boundary and topographic surveys so we can have a basis from which to
start our work. We have done the wetland delineation and inventory. You got a brief glimpse of
that. That was actually finalized after we made our application I believe or we’re just now
getting some of those lines finalized so there may be some updates to the work we’ve done
previously. We appreciate staff’s work on working through that. We also did the existing tree
inventory on the property. Identifying, tagging and marking all trees as significant as defined by
code. That portion’s complete so we’re starting to get a pretty decent basis for our analysis to go
through and do some preliminary grading and drainage analysis as well. We’ve established
social media for feedback from the residents and to keep folks up to date on the project. We had
two neighborhood meetings. We had good feedback. Definite likes and dislikes from the
neighbors. We heard both immediate to the site and throughout Chanhassen. We’ve also had
pretty significant attention through the Facebook page which has I think, when I last checked
almost 600 followers which is absolutely unheard of for a project site in my career. It just
exploded the day we opened it. I think I had 12 before I finished uploading the logo to the page
so substantial interest in the community on the project and that’s good to see. Probably most
important in our work to date is the market study and Kate hit briefly on that but I just want to hit
on a couple items. This was completed by Jim McCombs who is by most people’s account one
of the preeminent market analysts of retail work in the metro area. His business has been around
for 40 years. He’s seen ups and downs through that. Has a long history with the city. Has done
a lot of work for you folks along the way. We engaged him at the end of last year, in August of
last year to update the trade area and the demographics and if you’ve had Jim up here before and
he’s worked through this he can get extremely detailed. I will not drill down into those numbers
except to say that we have one significant component that’s guiding our efforts so far and that’s
the identification of a trade area that is roughly the shape here. Kate has it in your staff report
but it wasn’t up on the screen. Substantially west of the proposed site. Certainly regional in
context. There’s over 400,000 rooftops in that trade area identified and those 400 rooftops in
that trade area identifies a, a number of items through his work and the sales potential and that
sales potential numbers are essentially dollars that are not being spent in Chanhassen besides
those downtown. So those are lost dollars currently in the city today so we’re not talking about
dollars including what downtown would capture. These are dollars in addition to what
downtown would capture and if I break these 2 pages, 3 pages of uses down we really break it
into 4 sections. Shopping goods which are more regional in context. Convenience goods which
are regional and local. Services which are regional and local and other and those combined
represent roughly $700 million dollars annually. $700 million dollars annually that are not spent
in the city that could be spent in the city and that’s above and beyond what’s spent in downtown.
Through a long iteration you translate that to roughly 1.1 million square feet of potential retail
uses to capture that market. Those are those uses there. Sorry I’m falling behind on the slides.
So you translate that 705 million retail opportunity in dollars. You get about 1.1 million square
feet. The center that’s proposed today, just in massing for numbers and for purposes in updating
some of the environmental work is about 400 to 600 square feet so we really are proposing the
7
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
max on this site roughly half what we think the market can support. So it’s not as if we’re
building to 120 percent of a market study and hoping we grow. It’s not as if we’re building to
100 percent. We are proposing at a max roughly half of what a pretty substantial market study
shows is available dollars that would be spent in Chanhassen if this use was here. And that’s this
slide here that just shows that potential. So ultimately what we identify from that is there is a
market for a shopping center. The market includes both regional and local services beyond what
downtown offers and there’s a quote in Mr. McCombs study that I think is important. It says that
the Chan 212 convenience good shopping good trade areas have the potential to support much
more gross leasable area than can be accommodated on the proposed development. This creates
the enviable situation where a developer can focus on the center’s retail stores. Focus the retail
stores on the core customer. In other words we can pick and choose those nuggets out of that.
We can focus on the highest quality uses. We can work a very desirable market to get the
highest and best that’s out there. This of course is backed by substantial interest in the
marketplace that Tom and his team have seen a fair amount of interest that suggests the time is
right for this development. So there are a couple items I wanted to hit briefly. Kate hit the
zoning and that’s fine. The land use I think was well covered. I think the most important issue
today and we’re looking for feedback on is the continued development of the site plan. To
continue to develop the site plan to give the detail that folks want to see we need the additional
input from the AUAR and that includes continued studies so that we can develop that detailed
plan. The AUAR was done, sorry I’ll back up. The AUAR was done, as Kate outlined, in 2003
based on 2005 data. An update was due in 2008 and again in 2013. It’s not, to be fair it’s not
completely abnormal that these studies expire or lapse or have been dormant, especially during a
downturn in the economy. We have a number of sites that this happens so it’s not to say
anybody was dropping the ball in updating the AUAR. I think you have to have some interest in
the marketplace to drive that and I think that’s here today. And there have been some updates by
staff. As Kate mentioned we were provided the traffic update today. We look forward to
reviewing that information but without those updates it becomes difficult to determine what this
site can actually support. What can be built on this site. The AUAR was done with a couple of
the different scenarios showing this as single family residential. Ironically it shows the single
family residential as commercial or office so there’s been substantial change as you can see on
the right. There’s a lot of single family down in that pink and green and orange area so there was
kind of a shift through that comp plan process so we’d like to get this update done. We’d like to
pick up all those components. Traffic. Air. Noise. Utility services. Stormwater. Wetland. All
those so that we can accurately assess what the site can physically support. There’s been some
discussion on some terminology used and tossed around that I just want to walk through briefly
just to make sure we’re on the same page. Not that my definition is better than anybody else’s
but I want to make sure we’re on the same page. This is Riverdale in Coon Rapids. This is a
power center in my estimation and by some industry definition substantial amount of anchors.
Substantial amount of gross floor area. Very limited mixed use. It’s almost all retail. Very
limited, people call it a lifestyle component or village component. It’s predominantly big boxes.
There’s almost 400 acres, if you include the complex to the north and the home improvement
area and the areas to the south of Target. There’s almost 400 acres of big box retail on this so we
would call this a power center. There is an animal in the middle that we call affectionately a
hybrid for obvious reasons. This is some power around the outside. Some, a fair amount of
anchors and juniors around that outside. Still a pretty significant amount of square footage and
some lifestyle or village component with small shops and amenities in the center. This is
8
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Shadow Lake Towne Center in Papillion which Kate used in the staff report as well so there’s no
surprise there. Again we kind of call this a hybrid center. And this is what we call lifestyle or
mixed use center. This is Woodbury Lakes at Woodbury where it’s predominantly village.
Predominantly this component with 1, 2, maybe 3 anchors and this is the type of development we
seem to be landing on in the definition under the code. This seems to be what fits appropriately
on this site and this is roughly the square footage that we have identified and done the bubble
diagrams with the assumption that this is the product. It’s an upscale urban style. It’s meant to
promote cross parking. It’s meant to promote a mix of uses as Kate outlined and it is probably as
I said most closely where we’re at in our application. It’s important though that we, as we talk
about uses, we’re certainly interested in your feedback and we have an extensive record of the
residents feedback during the open houses. We have not dove that deeply into our users. We’ve
had some discussions about uses but it’s premature to do that absent your feedback. Absent the
documents from the AUAR. Absent an assessment of what can fit on this site so it’s very
important that we get that work completed. We get your feedback and we go back to work on
how we address those so we prepared a concept. I’m sorry. Jumping ahead of my own slides
again so this is some of the images of the, that downtown lifestyle component. Kind of the high
design, high amenity, smaller scale shops, so forth. These are several of the images that were in
our application as well. And again back to the, these are the AUAR concepts that Kate had
shared with you relative to our site plan which we’ll talk about in a minute. Maybe I’ll just go
back and forth between these so if that’s easiest. So again our application is a fairly straight
forward concept PUD. Looking for your feedback. It’s a complex project. We intentionally
have less detail because we would like your early feedback. We’ve addressed some of the major
issues that we think are out there as it relates to this. This parcel and this entire district. That’s
the east/west connection of the roadways which is prescribed by the City’s roadway plans.
That’s a mix of uses that prescribed by the PUD including high density and the regional
commercial and office. It addresses some conservation uses in the corner which are part of that
bluff overlay area but I think the comparison here I want to draw for you is to the concept that
was done in the upper left hand corner. One of the 3 concepts that was done for staff by
Hoisington-Koegler which showed roughly the same configuration. An east/west road
connecting Powers to the neighborhood. High density residential on the north side of the bluff.
Regional commercial roughly where we show it on the south side of that road. Extending to the
north side of that road and office on the north side. Again you can see our plan roughly emulates
that piece because it happens to work very well and we get the massing we need to do the
projects we need and move forward. Again we’re looking as a development team we want to
build on the tremendous success Chanhassen has seen in bringing residents to the community.
Growth numbers in the market study and otherwise support that. By fulfilling the vision of the
comp plan and developing a regional commercial center to provide these goods and services to
these new residents, and residents in general. We think the market study supports regional
commercial. The comp plan outlines providing goods and services beyond those offered
downtown. We’re very excited to get back to work on this exciting project and we respectfully
request that you work through the PUD concept. Kind of look for your feedback in there. In that
process and that we continue to council for further discussion and consideration of our request to
update the PUD. Appreciate your time and respectfully will stand for any questions.
Aller: Great, thank you. Any questions? Initially the feedback that you received from your
open houses and by the way I’ll go back and say initially thank you for taking the time to meet
9
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
with our residents because we really appreciate that. Our staff has done that on a number of
occasions and we always appreciate when they do that and by opening your doors and letting our
residents in to see how this process works and your thoughts as you move forward is invaluable
to not only you but us so thank you for doing that.
Darren Lazan: Sure, you’re welcome.
Aller: With that in mind you’ve received a lot of feedback that we haven’t yet received.
Darren Lazan: Sure.
Aller: We might receive tonight. It might be different than that you’ve already received. Have
you provided that feedback to the City and will you provide that feedback to the City?
Darren Lazan: Sure Mr. Chair. Great question and we absolutely will. We have, we did a
number of things. We took comment cards, which were very rich with feedback. We took, we
did a, we went through a process we call dotmacracy where we had examples. It’s a, kind of a
visual amenity survey where people put dots on items that they have the most interest in or that
seemed to be the most appropriate for this project. Those are very telling. We had a lot of
feedback on those as well. These open houses were last week so we just literally have scanned
those but we would be more than happy once we compile that to provide that to staff so that gets
back again and those meetings are always challenging. We have a predominant mix of folks that
live immediately next to the site which are obviously are usually the case. They’re most
interested in local issues but we had a fair number of folks that came from further away from the
site that gave tremendous feedback as to the types of uses and what they look forward to and
where they’d like to be so we will certainly provide those to staff.
Aller: Thank you, we appreciate that again because we’re working again on a concept tonight.
We’re not going to make Findings of Fact on anything. We want to make sure that we receive
all that information so that everybody’s on the same page as this process moves forward
hopefully to the conclusion that everyone will be happy with so.
Darren Lazan: Sure.
Aller: Any additional questions?
Undestad: I just have one quick one. On the land, initially I think this came through or was
presented as the entire parcel and at some point now the 40 acres dropped off on there. Do you
know why or can you help me with that one?
Darren Lazan: You know I’m not in the ownership group so I can’t give you a definitive answer
and I certainly don’t want to speak for the folks that own the 40 acres. As I look at this right
now I think that video might just stretch that 40 acres. It looks like about 60 to me right now but
that 40 acres was originally part of the application. Signed the application and we were working
together. At some point along the way they expressed a preference to be left off the application
and let us proceed without their parcel. This is something that we have discussed quite a bit
10
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
internally from a planning perspective and we respect and understand staff’s position that they’d
like to see the whole thing come in at once and who wouldn’t but planning around these types of
issues. Ghost platting. Ghost planning. Accounting for the rest of the property to develop and
showing how that can happen is a pretty industry typical situation and we stand ready in our next
phase to be able to show how the roadway, how the stormwater, how some of those pieces can be
served into that 40 acres and how they can continue to develop in accordance with the PUD.
We’re very confident we can do that.
Aller: Okay. Anything at this time?
Weick: I do.
Aller: Mr. Weick.
Weick: Can you define, you use the term anchor. Can you define anchor for me?
Darren Lazan: Sure, the one definition I didn’t copy and bring it here. So in the industry the
anchors are just that. They’re usually larger components or drivers. Ones that either have a
substantial size that direct a number of people or they could be, they’re not necessarily relative to
size. They could just be a traffic driver. A theater is one just randomly but for no reason is one
that drives a lot of traffic so folks that have shops or small stores next to those look to those
anchors to drive the traffic to increase their sales. So an anchor serves to drive traffic to a center
so that the small shops, which everybody loves, are viable and can continue.
Aller: Mr. Carlston at one of the meetings that I attended where he was making a presentation
indicated that the definition of big box of lifestyle might be different depending upon who we’re
talking to which I totally agree with.
Darren Lazan: Yeah.
Aller: So I’m wondering for purposes of this hearing, for the people that are going to come
forward and talk and give their opinion on things, what do you define as big box?
Darren Lazan: So we go back to Riverdale and in Coon Rapids, we could look at a Menards.
We could look at a Costco. We could look at a JC Penny’s. Those are certainly big boxes.
Super Target that was in the Shadow Lakes, ah I’m sorry. That was in Kate’s other example. Is
certainly a big box. Those are probably more likely franchises. Probably more large retail
format. You know they have some definition but I think there are probably 4 or 5 groups that
define them slightly differently but I think if you look at, if you’ve been to Coon Rapids or any
of the other power centers you’ll know the big boxes. They’re the big name brand drivers.
Aller: Do you have in mind an amount of square foot per box that you would consider to be a
small box versus a big box?
Darren Lazan: Well I can tell you that when we lay these centers out we start with the bigger
boxes and those are the you know hundred and hundred plus down. The juniors are the ones that
11
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
you like to see, the Bed, Bath and those for. Those are mid teens. You know 17,000-20,000
square feet and then the B shops or the small shops are usually the, you know 1,300 to 5,000
square feet so it kind of gives you an order of magnitude that I can’t tell you that 50,000 is a
cutoff for a big box. It’s very arbitrary.
Aller: Thank you. Anyone else? Alright. That’s it, thank you.
Darren Lazan: Thank you.
Aller: Alright, we’re going to have a public discussion now. So in the interest of open
communications the Chanhassen Planning Commission wishes to provide an opportunity for all
of our public citizens to address the commission. Anyone indicating a desire to speak in favor
of, in opposition of the concept presented tonight, or just wants to comment on the presentation
may do so. When called upon please come to the podium. State your name, address, position
and then comment. All remarks should be addressed to the Chair and not to staff or any other
individual and then we’ll try to get them addressed and have a dialogue in an informal fashion.
In an effort to respect everyone’s time please limit your comments to 3 minutes. Additional time
can be granted if it looks like we need to respond to something or there is additional information
so that we understand the comment that you’re attempting to move forward. We’ll ask those
questions at that time. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal
nature directed at any individual by name or inference will not be allowed. And with that I’ll
open the hearing for comment. So any individual wishing to come forward may do so at this
time. Please sir, come forward. State your name and address for the record.
Stephen Silverman: Okay, good evening. My name is Stephen Silverman. Actually I’m not
from Chanhassen. I’m from Eden Prairie. 18519 Pathfinder Drive in the Settlers Ridge
development.
Aller: Welcome Mr. Silverman.
Stephen Silverman: Thank you. I read about this project just a few weeks ago and it happened
to occur at a time when my wife and I are looking at options for retiring. Down sizing our home.
Moving in the next probably 2 years, maybe 3 years and we’ve been doing some research on that
around the Twin Cities and we really didn’t want to leave the southwest but we’ve looked
downtown. That, we’re really not urban people. We’ve looked at some other centers in different
parts of the city and realized that there really aren’t very many options for residential that has
this kind of village concept where you can walk to pick up your coffee. You can walk for
entertainment and all of those other purposes and that’s really what we’d like to see so when I
saw this concept and said gee this, to move into a center like this keeps us close to things we
love. The Arboretum. We primarily shop in the Chanhassen area living very close so we’d like
to see this type of development go forward and having been around the Twin Cities looking for
something similar, there really aren’t very many. Aren’t very many options. My community,
Settlers Ridge with our neighbors, many of us who built our house about 15 years ago. The kids
are moving out or about at that point where we want to consider options for retirement and other
housing. This would provide a great opportunity and we’re not alone. The whole area has a lot
of us that are about at this point so we would welcome a development of this type. That’s it.
12
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Aller: Thank you.
Stephen Silverman: Thank you.
Aller: Yes sir.
P.J. Degane: Good evening. My name is P.J. Degane. I live off Reflections Road in
Chanhassen. Moved here about 3 years ago. We actually left Uptown to come here so we miss
all the amenities and frankly I’m tired of driving to Eden Prairie every time I want to go to a
good steak joint. I also work in Chanhassen so we get a lot of business, visitors in town. Tired
of sending them to Eden Prairie for a hotel or Minnetonka. Taking them to dinner out there so I
think this would be a great amenity, both the office. The possibility for a restaurant and just a
bigger variety. As I look around Chan development is coming. You know you look, I’ve been
in real estate development for the last 10 or 12 years. I have absolutely nothing to do with this
project but if you look at everything that’s come recently from the Noodles and Company that’s
coming. The Potbelly. The Smashburger. Things are coming to Chanhassen because we’ve
reached a certain demographic. We’ve reached a certain population size and development’s
coming and if you look at this particular location right off of 212. Everyone loves to worry
about traffic and all that. You’re right off of 212. It’s an easy movement. I see, I can’t read the
number of acres but a huge conservation area which is I think really well located as a buffer to
the residential. You know I understand the staff’s comment about the 40 acres. I personally
wouldn’t like to be told what to do if I owned the 40 acres and I don’t think that that should stop
this kind of development. Spend 90 percent of my time in Chan. I would love to see something
like this go forward. I don’t know the details of who’s coming. Maybe a competition to my
company but it is what it is. Development’s coming into Chan. It’s a great location. 212. Huge
market. I look at my property values. I don’t want my taxes to go up and if you’ve got 600
square feet of retail that’s going to help my taxes stay down. I want my property values to go up
in 10 years. This is going to help that so I strongly recommend working closely with these guys.
It sounds like a reputable bunch of people and you know I welcome it so that’s my comments.
Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward? To save some time, if someone else
wants to speak and wants to just form a little line behind that’s fine. Sir, state your name and
address for the record. That’d be great.
Joseph Shamla: Joseph Shamla, 1691 Mayapple Pass.
Aller: Welcome.
Joseph Shamla: I live in the Pioneer Pass development. I’m concerned about the amount of cut
through traffic that’s going to be using Bluff Creek Drive to get to this mall. In order for the
residents of Pioneer Pass to get to the park. We have a brand new park that’s about 8 acres, they
must cross Bluff Creek Boulevard. The neighborhood has had concerns in the past with speed
and with the safety of the crossing at Bluff Creek to get to the park. In my opinion adding the
amount of traffic that a regional mall will generate will make a safety concern for us. I agree
with the planning department recommending that the 40 acres be master planned. When it’s
13
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
going through an AUAR I believe the residents of the Preserve should be aware of what will be
the future of their backyard. I think the commercial piece is a lot for the residents that live real
close to this area and that’s it.
Aller: Great, thank you sir.
Joseph Shamla: Thank you.
Aller: Anyone else wishing to come forward, please do so. If I could have your name and
address for the record, that’d be great.
Becky Fluegge: Greetings. Yeah, Becky Fluegge, 1671 Mayapple. Two doors down from Joe.
We’re in Pioneer Pass. I think you’ll see a lot of us here tonight mostly because we’re directly
affected by this. It’s a mixed blessing. While I’ll be the first to say I’m a proponent of this
because we moved out here for not only the small town feel, to be a part of an up and coming
suburb. That’s kind of what we’re excited about. We would much rather spend our money in
the backyard and like a lot of people we go down the corridor. We’re in Chaska. We’re in Eden
Prairie. I still go to Edina, Bloomington. Shopping all over the place. I’d love to pump it back
into our community that we’re invested in and we’re starting a family here in. While it is a
mixed blessing I think the concern, I’ll echo exactly what Joe said. The concern is safety. Our
neighborhood put sweat equity into that park and it’s, it’s a concern that families and kids cannot
cross that street so that’s something that we’d put the faith in the City to come back with a proper
solution and plan to alleviate or try and mitigate that increased congestion. I think a second
concern is that if done well this would be an awesome amenity for us. The fear is that it ends up
being something, while I trust that the developer listened to all of our feedback, the fear is that it
ends up being and I’ll quote a neighbor, that it’s a bunch of better cul sul kind of office space so
we are not looking for, you know while we’d love a mix of boutique. I don’t think we’re looking
for the big box type of stuff. We’re looking at places where people can bring their kids. Bring
their families. Get their things done, go home but also be walkable and be safe so thank you.
Aller: Thank you.
Weick: Can I just have a quick clarifying, if we’re going to have a lot of people from Pioneer
Pass.
Aller: Absolutely.
Weick: Where is that on there?
Aanenson: I’m sorry…
Weick: Okay.
Aanenson: I’ll show you. This is Pioneer Pass right here.
Weick: Yeah, okay.
14
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Aanenson: This is the park. Community park.
Charles Gust: Charles Gust. New resident. 7 or 19, I don’t even know my address. 1941
Commonwealth Boulevard.
Aller: And that was Mr. Gust?
Charles Gust: G-u-s-t for the record.
Aller: Thank you.
Charles Gust: Thank you. I’m kind of a simple guy here and I hear a lot of technical language
about you know footprints and what the heck and I think before you go any further you’d really
have to know what exactly was going to be going in there. I’ve heard things flying around the
neighborhood, everything from a 5 star motel to high density housing to, now I hear big box.
Whatever your definition was. You’ve got to look at what impact it’s going to have on the
existing businesses. I’ve got really, I’ve got a you know a dog in the fight here but it’s a pretty
quaint area here. That’s why we chose it. You go to main street. You can go to a movie. Go to
Axel’s for dinner and you start bringing in competition for the existing businesses that have been
the pillar of this community, you’re either going to put those people out of business or at the very
least split your retail. You know pick your poison. You’d also have to say that you know, the
other gentleman back here said the taxes would, you know keep taxes down. You bring in new
businesses, you bring in other people, what’s the impact on law enforcement going to be? That
could be cause an increase in your property taxes for adding more police officers. Pro-con. Con.
I think there’s an awful lot of thinking to be done here before a final decision be made. Thank
you.
Aller: Thank you sir.
Toby Collador: Toby Collador, 1833 Cottongrass Court. It’s also part of the Pioneer Pass
Addition.
Aller: Welcome.
Toby Collador: I just, I have two points and one is that I really support bringing some additional
retail to the 212 area in Chanhassen because we travel along 212 when I’m coming home from
work. I work in downtown St. Paul. I don’t want to go down Highway 5 because then I have to
go even further to get back home. I’d love to have more stuff that’s along the way. As it is right
now I spend a lot of my money in Edina, Eden Prairie, Richfield, Bloomington because it’s along
my way home. I feel like there’s a lot of people in the community and a lot of people even
further west. When you start talking about you know Mayer and those other cities that are out
west, that will bring a lot of their money to Chanhassen that’s currently being spent you know
maybe in Hennepin County or in other places. I also wanted to illustrate the safety concerns on
Bluff Creek Drive a little bit more. My house actually backs up directly to Bluff Creek Drive so
we’re very concerned about the increased traffic potential on there, especially people coming
15
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
down from Shakopee and using that street that’s zoned, you know is 30 south of Pioneer Trail
but It’s 35 up where we live. That they’re really using that as a cut through in our back yard.
Just to illustrate the issue with the park a little bit clearer, right now there are no controlled
crossings where people from Pioneer Pass can get across the street to that park. If I wanted to
cross the street at a safe intersection I would have to walk all the way down to Pioneer Trail from
my house, which is probably about a half a mile and there are no other controlled intersections to
get across the street safely to that park so thank you.
Aller: Thank you. Coming forward?
Sylvia Deyoung: Hi.
Aller: Hi.
Sylvia Deyoung: Sylvia Deyoung, 9220 Allendale Lane.
Aller: Welcome.
Sylvia Deyoung: So I live kind of in that Bluff Creek development. I second a lot of the
concerns that a lot of my neighbors here I see tonight have. My husband and I moved back to
the metro area after living in San Francisco 5 years ago and my husband works in downtown
Minneapolis. We could have chosen any area we wanted to live in when we came back and I
was pregnant with my first child. We chose Chanhassen because it’s adorable. It’s a perfect
place to raise our kids. We do want to see something come in that would be convenient for us to
walk to with our kids but safe like our neighbors are saying and I think it needs to be done in a
way that’s respectful to those around us. I did go to the neighborhood meetings and I didn’t see
pictures of what I saw all the dots next to up here. I saw pictures of things that did not have dots
next to them so I think you need to keep that in mind as you move forward. And again the traffic
and the safety, the crime that would be increased as a result of this development I think all need
to be more thought about as already else was said but we’d just like to keep it, the small town
feel but have something that we can go to and have something close versus having to drive all
the way into town. Thank you.
Aller: Thank you.
Andy Kim: Good evening. My name is Andy Kim. I live at 9070 Degler Circle which is very
close to the site.
Aller: Welcome Mr. Kim.
Andy Kim: First of all say I moved to Chanhassen 6 months ago. I lived in Eden Prairie for the
last 10 years and my wife and I, I told the councilmen as I sat down that we weren’t even
thinking about moving and we took a look at the neighborhood and there were kids playing
everywhere and we’ve got 2 little boys and we, as soon as we got home sat in our driveway and
two elderly couples walked by so we thought okay, you know it’s a sign. It’s just such a great
neighborhood. So I did a lot of research about this project before we moved. Before we built
16
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
because I knew it was coming and we were excited. We thought it’s going to be so great to have
you know some amenities to be able to save about 3-4 minutes you know on my commute. The
one thing I asked during the meeting, I went through the emails that some of the citizens had sent
to the council and I thought they were all very good points. I guess I ask that, and I don’t know
what the impact of this project is going to be 3 to 5 years from now and I think that’s the job of
the commission and the city to protect us, you know the citizens that live here so I guess I ask to
you guys please take the time to read those emails. I think they’re all valid points. I don’t need
to reiterate them so I guess my last thought is, you know it’s great potential but you know we’re
relying on you guys to really make sure it gets done right.
Aller: Thank you.
Brad Sundstrom: I’m Brad Sundstrom, 1808 Marigold Court so Pioneer Pass.
Aller: Welcome Mr. Sundstrom.
Brad Sundstrom: Certainly understand the concerns about increased traffic on Bluff Creek
Drive. On the other hand I certainly welcome the completion of the section between Bluff Creek
Drive and Powers that will shorten all of our commutes. I’ve been looking for to that for a
while. As far as the use for the life, or the lifestyle center concept, I can’t think of a much better
case or situation for that to be used. I mean I think of real big offices. That doesn’t seem ideal to
me. Huge, just a big Walmart or Target is kind of like a nightmare. This kind of seems like a
pretty good use of the land to me so that’s all I’ve got.
Aller: Thank you.
John Gilbert: Hi, my name’s John Gilbert. I’m at 1641 Jeurissen Lane. It’s the southwest
corner of the wooded lot there so I’m about 500 feet from where the proposed medium density
housing would be. Unless my neighbor gets up and he’s about 400 feet from that. My wife and I
moved here last year. I looked at many houses in the area and, hundreds and I decided to build
in this location. I was well aware of the development plans and the rezoning that was going on
and I believed it was thoughtful. I still think it is thoughtful and I believe there’s a benefit to
have some planned development there. I do have some questions about the 40 acre lot. Have
questions about the AUAR. I have questions about the survey that was taken before any of the
homes were built in our neighborhoods and I have questions about not necessarily the support
from the other towns but some of the activities, the development activities in the adjacent towns
which the developer believes will be pulling revenue from, or from that southwest location. The
number $705 million I think is the first time that I remember seeing it. It may have been
presented at the first meeting, and I’d like to thank those members who were able to attend some
of those sessions for being there. I question whether or not that takes into consideration the 40
acres and the additional potential developments in the adjacent regions, Chaska, Carver and
further southwest so I’d ask the group to look at that. To consider the impact and one area that I
don’t have an answer to and I don’t know if it’s in any of the packets yet, there’s plenty of
information for us to read. I appreciate that. I wonder about the, I forgot my thought. With all
the information that’s out there I think we need to consider the economic impact. The tax impact
and whether or not residential development is a better tax base than the commercial. I’m not
17
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
arguing for one or the other. I think we need the services that have been described here but I
would just ask that everybody be thoughtful about the choices that we make so thank you.
Aller: Thank you sir.
Jeff Franz: My name is Jeff Franz, 8950 Sunset Trail. I maybe represent the people on the north
side of that boundary because I’m right across the street from it. Excuse me. One of the
concerns I’ve got, Mr. Gust said some things too that I would, you could put my name on as well
but the traffic on Lyman right now was 2 lanes and 50 miles an hour. It’s going to be 4 lanes,
50-55 miles an hour. During the high school day the traffic, you really can’t get on the road and
you’re going to have people going 55 miles an hour to, you’re going to have to enter onto that
traffic going in either direction. I don’t see an entrance on this one but as part of that project I
was told Sunset Trail was going to be a stop light for the people that are south of us which I think
are the people that are representing Bluff Creek or what have you, development area so I don’t
know that the traffic is set up that well to handle this, from what I was told and the traffic study
was referenced here, that it was used. I was told that the road was upgraded in order to bring the
people in from Victoria because Lyman was going to go all the way through so has that been
added into the plan that there’s going to be retail development here? And finally I personally
don’t mind driving 2 to 3 miles to get groceries or if I want to go to a movie or not watch it on
TV or the computer or something. I don’t like having to look at the lights from another business
during the day or in the evening. I like kind of living in the country. That’s why we picked
Chanhassen and since 1987 I’ve lived there so, or lived here so I appreciate the concept or the
thought that the developers put into it but I saw mostly kind of what maybe benefitted them but I
don’t see a benefit to me personally for it. Thank you.
Aller: Thank you.
Zhexin Zhang: My name is Zhexin Zhang. I’m on 1455 Bethesda Circle so really close to
where the new development is going to be. So I have, I mirror the residents concern here and it
really involves I think, we have so many young families here with so many little kids and I think
that was one of the big draws, at least for my family to move into this area where there are so
many little kids around for my little ones to play with and other families as well so definitely one
of my concern is the safety with Bluff Creek Boulevard. I think it’s, we have a unique situation
here where basically with the Bluff Creek extension it will connect directly to an off ramp to 212
and so potentially we would have a lot of traffic coming through as again cut through traffic so I
would love to have the council keep that in mind that we have a very unique situation here in
terms of traffic. I don’t want to see a point where it’s difficult to cross Bluff Creek because there
are so many families with friends across the street right now already and potentially more so in
the future with little kids crossing back and forth. It’s definitely a concern for me. My second
concern is with the proposed high density residential area. Personally it’s, I mean we have single
family homes right across the street from this proposed area that are quite high in home value
and to put in high density apartments to me it’s aesthetically unpleasing and it’s a very unnatural
transition. Aren’t many places in the Twin Cities area, especially in the suburbs where you see
apartments directly across the street from very expensive single family homes. And then my
third concern is the proposal of a hotel to go into this area. During the townhouse meetings with
the developers it sounded like pretty much everybody who went to the first one that I was at
18
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
opposed having a hotel due to various reasons. Due to demand. I think there’s 5 other hotels sin
the area already. I don’t understand why we would need another one unless those 5 are being
booked solid every night which I find challenging to believe. And also I think some residents
had some concerns with having strangers basically staying within such proximity of parks again
with the little kids and also with the high school just a few, I think about a mile down the street
so urge the council to please take the, these considerations for future planning. Thank you.
Aller: Thank you Mr. Chang. Anyone else wishing to come forward to speak for, against or just
comment upon the proposal? Again this is a concept proposal. Welcome sir. Please state your
name and address.
Rod Franks: Welcome. Thank you Chair, members of the commission. Rod Franks, 1675
Hemlock Way. I would like to have some comments either for or against but I don’t know if we
have enough detail yet to really give those kinds of comments except to comment on the bubbles.
I like bubbles. Multi-colored bubbles are especially nice so, but I think just some comments may
be in order. As we look at flushing out this type of development as you provide guidance to the
applicant on what kind of development would be appropriate, I think it’s important to consider
what we already have as resources here. We have a very vibrant downtown area that’s really
focused on our daily needs and services. We have a great downtown. You can go to the bank.
You can stop by the library. You can pick up your dry cleaning. You can get your groceries.
Your day, go to the hardware store. We have a destination center for taking care of your daily
needs. I would really hate to see that replicated a mile and a half away from downtown. I think
it would detract from the sense of community that we’ve developed here. A place where we go.
Where you just don’t go shopping for groceries but you get stopped in the aisle to talk to your
neighbors. It’s you know picking up your kids and your neighbor’s kids from the library. It’s
really building that sense of community. However, developing a center that compliments what
we already have here I think is a great idea and I think it’s important that you do that with
forethought. With planning. With insight. And thoughtfulness about really what compliments
what we have already done well here in our town. Not that’s going to take away. Not that’s
going to compete with our movie theaters and compete with our grocery stores and compete for
trips into our central core but how is it we’re going to bring additional trips, additional dollars,
additional shoppers who you know are looking at two different types of destinations. I’m also
interested in what anchor actually means. I love the idea of a lifestyle center where people come.
They drive. They park once and they visit multiple types of retailers and vendors instead of the
big grocery store or Super Target or Costco where you drive. You park. You go in. You get
back in your car. You drive out. I mean this is something that avoids big parking lots.
Something that fits in with this rural sense of our community. Kind of the small town feel. So I
think it will be important to work closely with the applicant to provide lots of guidance and
really to consider all the feedback, not only what you’ve heard tonight but what’s been through
email and what the applicant will provide to you from the town hall meetings. Thanks.
Aller: Thank you.
Darren Lazan: I’m not sure if that was the end of the public comment. I certainly don’t want to
pre-empt anybody.
19
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Aller: Well let me ask. You can certainly speak as a member of the public as well.
Darren Lazan: Okay.
Aller: But does anybody else wish to speak at this time? Because if not what I’ll do is I’ll close
the hearing per se. So let’s do that and then we’ll ask the developer to come up and comment
upon what he has heard. Some of the questions that have been asked and perhaps attempt to
respond to some of them.
Darren Lazan: Sure. Mr. Chair, appreciate that opportunity and again we took, we all took
copious notes. Went through that. Nothing there is all that surprising. I think it’s a general mix
of sport and concern we faced and seen and we’ve heard throughout the 3-4 months we’ve been
working on this project. I just really had a couple notes that number one, any uses that are out
there or tossed around that people have heard, I want to remind everybody that any uses we’ve
discussed really come from the AUAR or the PUD or the guiding documents that the City has
prepared. The definition of mixed use. Examples of those are really in there. We’re looking at
that as a starting point. We’re looking at the market study that tells us what can be supported
here and we’re taking everybody’s feedback and then we’re going to come back and take a look
at those. More importantly all these uses have to be synergistic. We have to have you know not
anchors just because they’re an anchor and we can check the box. Anchors that support the other
users and even residential components that support those shops that everybody put dots on that
everybody loves. Those have to have drivers to help support and help them survive so again any
uses that are out there really have come from the City’s guiding documents and definitions that
we’ve pulled through. And one of the overriding concerns I want to just very briefly address is
the traffic. Not only on Bluff Creek but on Lyman and Powers as well. We’re excited to get to
the AUAR process to have that addressed. Certainly we don’t want to be adding to the neighbors
concern. We have adequate service from Powers and the 212 exit. The connection to the
neighborhood is really a community component that we will certainly respect your direction and
your wishes on that and we’ll work with you on any calming techniques that we can work
through on our side but we again are picking up cues from your Comprehensive Plans and
guidance on that front. We’re anxious to work to help resolve that as well. And then the last
item I had for a note is the 40 acre parcel in question. When the original AUAR was done and
the studies were done and the site planning was done, that was all done on over 600 acres
including our parcel when we were not in for an application. I think the City through the AUAR
has every opportunity to look at not only our site. Not only what’s been constructed but what’s
to be constructed on our’s and on the 40 acre piece and look at that holistically so we have that
opportunity to look at the 110 acre regional commercial center as one through the update in the
AUAR and we look forward to participating and supporting that effort. With that if there’s any
questions we’ll stand.
Aller: Any additional questions?
Aanenson: If I may Mr. Chair, I just want to clarify one thing. The issue that the staff had with
the 40 acres that’s not included in the project. What the PUD says is to do a master plan would
be including that. Certainly we can shoot the moon and say we’re going to study this and if
anything falls under that it would be okay. We could do that. But that’s not the, to get regional
20
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
commercial PUD says it should be master planned. That’s the disconnect. I just want to make
sure we’re clear on that for the residents and for you. Then also I’m not trying to put words in
your mouth but I think what might be helpful is, since we do do verbatim Minutes that all the
spoken comments here could be part of your record then as we forward those to the Planning
Commission. We would just make all those comments and forward those and they get the
verbatim Minutes but make sure that those are specific comments to be addressed and we can
attach those with our’s to the staff report. That would be helpful.
Aller: And that’s the intent in their request at this point. Okay, any additional comments before
we go ahead and we want to discuss the matter now because the hearing is over so comments on
the concept.
Undestad: Yeah I’ll start. I think the number one, the residents you know. I mean we always
want to hear the input and you know we have concerns over the 40 acres. Is it in? Is it out? Can
we go around it or not? I mean that’s something we still have to work through but just listening
to everybody in here, you know words like quaint. Adorable. Family friendly. You know this is
what everybody is coming out to Chanhassen for, and I think I just want to make sure that the
developers understand this. That there will be some scrutiny, some detail maybe. You know
when we talk about what is a lifestyle center or how many square feet can this box be, you know
the bubbles are going to get, you know if this goes anywhere the bubbles are going to get pretty
detailed on this. But it sounded like people were generally like the idea. The concept. Again if
it was following these guidelines. And I think that we definitely have to keep that in mind.
Again we live here. You know it’s our back yard so they want to know what’s going to happen
as do everybody else so. I think it’s a good idea to have some of that again complimentary retail
out there to help the neighbors and things. You’re close but again it’s got to be really worked
through. Really thought out and very detailed and I use that word a lot but that’s my opinion in
there. That’s it.
Aller: Anyone? Commissioner Weick.
Weick: Yeah, just a couple of comments in general again. I would thank everybody for coming
forward and providing really great feedback and I know, I know everybody will take it to heart
including the developers, City Council as we move forward with this process. I do know in the
packet it was noted the Planning Commission should give feedback on the types of uses and
square footage they would support so I would only illustrate in, you know in my opinion what a
center like this looks like and certainly in listening to people who live in the area, there was a
quote in the packet. It’s less like a mall, more like a city. Outdoor lifestyle centers you know
often do not have department stores, things like that. I would echo that. They have appealing
public spaces and reasons to linger and I think someone mentioned that. It’s not about in and out
daily needs. It’s about reasons to linger so can we create an area that students and elderly and
stay at home parents and you know stay at home workers feel comfortable going and hanging out
and being there and doing things there. I think that’s important. I think someone mentioned the
inevitability of development in the area and I think that’s true but preserving the uniqueness of
Chanhassen I think is also very important and so I hear that. You know we often, we hear that a
lot every other Tuesday about why people live here. And not just the people tonight have shared
that with us but every time we meet people remind us about why they live in Chanhassen and
21
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
there is a uniqueness to living in Chanhassen and it would be not just my hope but my
expectation that a development like this would preserve that feeling as well. Thank you.
Aller: I was going to say that I believe Chanhassen in the new normal presentation that we
received a little while ago talked about one of the best parts about Chanhassen is we had a very
centralized community or downtown was one of the prime factors that they looked at in
determining that we were one of America’s finest cities. We were a great place to live and we
have an aging community. We have a very diverse community. We’re developing in different
areas where we had never believed we were going to have these little outcrops of communities
and what we don’t want to do is isolate them and create a new downtown. And what I’m hearing
is that there is major concerns about safety and traffic involved in the community that’s already
there so I think we have to look at those. I think that’s our obligation to make sure that we
expand we seriously consider those impacts. We look at maintaining what has made us one of
those places where people come, where I came with my family to live because it had connected
trails. Because it had open space. Because it had parks and I think we need to, as we look at this
development, almost look at it in the reverse as it moves forward so I would recommend to the
City Council that they take the AUAR and the studies and the information and almost look at it
to see where we shouldn’t build. And then when we’re left with a certain square footage of
space that we can deal with or acres, then we should look at what should we build on there that
will allow for a community to thrive but still maintain it’s connection to downtown. To
Chanhassen, the greatest place to live so I would encourage them to take to heart all the
comments and I do adopt the comments of the, and ask that they, the citizens and residents that
have come forward and ask that they be provided to the City Council for their review along with
the additional comments. Anything further?
Undestad: I just want to add one more thing. There’s a lot talked about the McCombs study and
you know they are, it was a very detailed study. There’s a lot to it but again it was a study based
on what could happen. Not necessarily that this is what needs to be there so I don’t want people
to get lost in the McCombs study that you know we need all this retail put right there and types
of retail and whether it’s big box or what goes in there so it still comes back to the I think the
residents to decide on what they want to see in there.
Aller: Great. Alright we’ll close this item with those recommendations moving forward to the,
I’ll accept a motion that those recommendations move past to the City Council.
Aanenson: Here I’ve got it.
Hokkanen: I can do it. The Chanhassen Planning Commission provides the City Council with
comments and feedback on the Concept Planned Unit Development along with the staff’s
proposed comments listed in the staff report along with those comments here today.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Yusuf: Second.
22
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Aller: Having a motion and a second. Any further comment? I would just like to again before
we vote on this thank the applicant for it’s efforts and working with the City and listening to the
residents and taking these matters to heart which I know that they are and I look forward to
hearing about the City Council and staff working with you in the future to move this forward in
an appropriate fashion.
Hokkanen moved, Yusuf seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission provides the
City Council with comments and feedback on the Concept Planned Unit Development
along with the following staff comments:
1. If the Planning Commission supports the concept plan, the Regional Commercial Zoning
District shall be followed.
2. To receive Regional Commercial zoning, the ordinance requires that the property be
under one owner and be developed under a Planned Unit Development. The developer is
required to demonstrate that they are meeting the vision of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
as well as the intent of the zoning district.
3. The AUAR will need to be updated for the entire 118 acre site.
4. As part of the AUAR update the developer shall provide a full Traffic Impact Analysis
(TIA) based on the proposed land uses. The study shall include the following:
Updated current and 20 year projected traffic volumes
Analysis of turning movements
Level of service analysis, including recommendations for improvements should
the projected level of service fall below the acceptable level
Analysis of existing and proposed turn lanes to the development and
recommendations for stacking lengths
5. Landscaping requirements shall be as follows:
In Commercial/Office areas:
Parking lot landscaping requirements
Bufferyard landscape requirements
Foundation plantings
Boulevard trees along public streets
In Residential areas:
Tree Preservation/Canopy Coverage requirements
Bufferyard requirements
Foundation plantings
Boulevard trees along public streets
In the Bluff Creek Overlay District:
23
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 17, 2015
Entire wooded area in southwest corner within Primary Corridor therefore should
be identified for preservation
6. Future right-of-way needs for Lyman and Powers Boulevards will need to be addressed,
especially in the areas of the intersections.
7. Walk and trail locations need to be determined and accommodated along the roadways,
adequate right-of-way or easements need to be preserved.
8. Utilities will need to be addressed during design.
9. A park dedication requirement either in the form of land dedication or the payment of
park fees, or a combination of both will be a component of any agreed upon conditions of
approval for the proposal. Park fee credit is not granted for the inclusion and/or
construction of private recreation amenities.
10. All proposed structures and spaced within the PUD need to be connected by a
combination of pedestrian walkways, sidewalks and trail to these existing pedestrian trail
corridors. Existing trail improvements include the Lyman Boulevard Trail, the Powers
Boulevard trails and the Bluff Creek Boulevard trails. Consideration should be given to
providing a pedestrian connection through the preserved woodlands to the Camden Ridge
development via Miranda Way.
11. The buildings are required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems.
12. Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State
of Minnesota.
13. Soil evaluation (geo-technical) report required.
14. Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a
permit must be obtained prior to construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Chairman Aller called a recess at this point in the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Weick noted the verbatim and summary Minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting dated February 3, 2015 as presented.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
th
Aanenson: Yes, thank you Chairman. On Monday, February 9 they approved the site plan
extension for the specialty grocery story that’s on Villages on the Pond. Working through some
issues there. And then also they approved a variance for Lake Riley Boulevard. I think that was
the one that there was a split vote. We didn’t have a super majority so it had to go to the City
24