PC Staff Report Avienda Amended PUD 22-12Planning Commission Item
August 16, 2022
Item Avienda: Consider a Request to Amend Planned Unit Development-RC
File No.Planning Case No. 2022-12 Item No: B.2
Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS
Prepared By Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director
Applicant
Kendra Lindahl
Landform Professional Services, LLC
105 S. 5th Avenue, Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Present Zoning Planned Unit Development District (PUD)
Land Use Mixed Use
Acerage 118+/- net acerage
Density Assumes 55% of commercial and 45% of site residential of net acreage.
Applicable
Regulations
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has
a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezoning's, PUDs and
amendments to PUDs because the City is acting in its legislative or policy-
making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be
consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. A Comprehensive Plan
amendment is required to permit the additional units.
167
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve amending the
Planned Unit Development, PUD-RC, Ordinance 657 for Avienda."
or
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council [deny or amends] amending
the Planned Unit Development, PUD-RC, Ordinance 657 for Avienda."
The Planning Commission should consider if the revised plan meets the intent of the Regional
Commercial/Lifestyle Center.
SUMMARY
The developer is requesting to amend the PUD. The zoning for the development is guided by the PUD-
RC ordinance. This report summarizes the requested changes from the developer and staff
recommendations. The proposed changes will be incorporated into the PUD.
At this time, there are no site plans being approved. This application amends the framework for
Development District and the PUD-RC (uses and development guidelines). Any proposed
developments will have to come back through the City process for approval.
Details of Requested Changes
1. Adding 53 row homes between the townhomes and the apartments
2. Increasing the number of apartments from 250 to 417
3. Combine the 150-unit senior housing development to one 300-unit building at the southwest
corner
4. The northerly senior housing is now a retail use
5. Shows potential locations for three to four additional drive-throughs, but does not seek approval
at this time
6. The district plan may be fluid as future users are identified
BACKGROUND
June 30, 2020, the City Council approved the Rezoning to PUD-RC and amended Subdivision
Preliminary Plat.
July 12, 2021, the City Council approved the Final Plat for Avienda creating five outlots and
dedication of public right-of-way.
October 25, 2021, the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of 40+
acres into 39 lots and six (6) outlots, Avienda Townhomes.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission should consider if the revised plan meets the intent of the Regional
Commercial/Lifestyle Center.
168
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission should review the Avienda PUD-RC (Ordinance #657), hold the Public
Hearing, and make a recommendation to the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS
Staff Report
Findings of Fact and Recommendation
Development Review Application
Planned Unit Development Ordinance
Narrative
Development Plan 8.1
Engineering Comments
Toole Design Updated Trip Generation Memo
Carver County Engineering Comments
Affidavit of Mailing
Email from Residents
169
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: August 16, 2020
CC DATE: September 12, 2022
REVIEW DEADLINE:September 13, 2022
CASE #2022-12
BY:KA
LOCATION: Southwest corner ofPowers Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard
APPLICANT:Landform Professional Services, LLC Level 7 Development
105 South Fifth Avenue, Suite 513 4600 Kings Point Road
Minneapolis, MN 55330 Minnetrista, MN 55330
PRESENT ZONING: PUD-RC
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Office or Regional Commercial
ACREAGE:Approximately 118 +/-acres
DENSITY:Assumes 55% of commercial and 45 % of site residential of net acreage.
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has a relatively high
level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUDs and amendments to PUDs because the City is
acting in its legislative or policy-making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto,
must be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. A Comprehensive Plan amendment is
required to permit the additional units.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The developer is requesting to amend the PUD. The zoning for the development is guided by the
PUD-RC Ordinance. This report summarizes the requested changes from the developer and staff
recommendations. The proposed changes will be incorporated into the PUD.
At this time there are no site plans being approved. This application amends the framework for
Development District and the PUD-RC (uses and development guidelines). Any proposed
developments will have to come back through the city process for approval.
Details of Requested Changes
1. Adding 53 row homes between the townhomes and the apartments
2. Increasing the number of apartments from 250 units to 417 units
3. Combine the two, 150-unit senior housing developments to one 300-unit building at the
southwest corner
PROPOSED MOTION:
“The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Amending the
Avienda Regional Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (PUD), Ordinance 657.”
170
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 2 of 9
4. The northerlysenior housing is now a retail use
5. Shows potential locations for three to four additional drive-throughs (beyond the four
already approved) but does not seek approval at this time
6. The district plan may be fluid as future users are identified
BACKGROUND
November 1, 2016: The Planning Commission recommended conceptual approval of the
PUD.
November 28, 2016: The City Council gave conceptual approval of the PUD.
February 27, 2017: During its Work Session, the City Council reviewed the significant
issues of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR).The AUAR included traffic
modeling.
February 28, 2017: An open house was held.
March 7, 2017: The Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the proposed
update to the AUAR document. The Planning Commission forwarded their comments to the
City Council.
March 13, 2017: The City Council authorized publication in the Environmental Quality
Board (EQB) Monitor for April 3 and closed the AUAR comment period on April 17.
May 8, 2017: The City Council adopted a final resolution for the updated AUAR and
Mitigation Plan.
May 6, 2017 and June 6, 2017: The Planning Commission held pubic hearings on the plan.
June 20, 2017: The Planning Commission recommended preliminary plat approval.
July 10, 2017: The City Council approved Preliminary Plat creating 17 lots, three outlots and
dedication of public right-of-way for public streets; and rezoning the property zoned
Agricultural Estate District, A-2, to Planned Unit Development-Regional Commercial District
(PUD-RC). Design Standards: and a Conditional Use Permit to encroach into the primary zone
and required buffer for development in the Bluff Creek Corridor; Wetland Alteration Permit to
4.897 acres of permanent wetland impacts as shown in plans dated April 14, 2017 and June 13,
2017, to request to construct into the primary zone and required buffer for development in the
Bluff Creek Corridor.
June 25, 2018: The City approved the final plat and grading permit.
April 8, 2019: The Chanhassen City Council approved the extension of the final plat and
grading permit to December 31, 2019 and extinguished the final plat for Avienda but allowed
for grading.
December 9, 2019: The Chanhassen City Council approved the extension of the preliminary
plat until June 30, 2020 and permitted grading as stated in the conditions listed below and in
accordance with the preliminary plat approvals.
June 30, 2020 the City Council approved the Rezoning to PUD-RC and Amended
Subdivision Preliminary Plat.
July 12, 2021 the City Council approved the Final Plat for Avienda creating five outlots and
dedication of public right-of-way.
171
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 3 of 9
October 25, 2021, the City Council approves the Preliminary Plat for the Subdivision of 40+
acres into 39 lots and six (6) outlots, Avienda Townhomes.
Avienda Townhomes
172
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 4 of 9
Development Plan
2020 Approved 2022 Requested
Land Use by Category
Category Approved Proposed Change
Res (all)24.88 21.27%36.27 30.75%9.49%
Com 42.95 36.71%34 28.83%-7.88%
Office 12.87 11.00%10.89 9.23%-1.77%
Preserve 22.53 19.26%22.53 19.10%-0.16%
ROW 13.76 11.76%14.25 12.08%0.32%
Total 116.99 100.00%117.94 100.00%0.00%
VISION (from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan)
The land use change to either Office or Regional Commercial District as a part of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan was based on the City’s vision for a lifestyle center. The Comprehensive
Plan states:
2.7.4 Regional/Lifestyle Center Commercial
Definition/Vision: A mixed commercial district with retail and entertainment uses of a scale and
function that serves a regional market. The physical environment emphasizes an attractive,
comfortable walking experience for shoppers and visitors and is designed to serve trail users and
173
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 5 of 9
mass transit as well as automobile traffic. Centers of this type have at least two major retail
anchors and are characterized by the diversity and mix of retail and service uses within their
boundaries. Uses within this district should complement existing retail users in the other
commercial districts. Development of these centers shall be planned as a group of organized uses
and structures to accommodate a sensitive transition between commercial activities such as
loading, parking of automobiles, lighting, and trash collection, and surrounding residential uses.
Such centers shall be designed with one theme, with similar architectural style, similar exterior
building materials, and a coordinated landscaping theme. Vehicle and pedestrian access is
coordinated and logically linked to provide a comprehensive circulation system.
Goods and Services Examples
• Entertainment
• Department Store
• Comparison Shopping
• Specialty Retail/Boutique
• Restaurants
• Hotels
• Residential
Developer’s District Master Plan
2020 Approved Plan 2022 Proposed Changes
The development Master Plan identifies five distinct sub-districts within Avienda. Each of
these sub-districts (outlined on the plan above) is defined by specific site development
patterns and perhaps a distinctive character or image.The sub-districts complement one
another as part of the overall plan.They include:
The applicant’s narrative is attached. An overview of the requested changes and
responses/considerations is outlined below:
174
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 6 of 9
1. Expand the uses permitted in the different districts to allow the developer to bring new
uses like the regional recreation uses. (Section C (7))
2. Clarify that the district boundaries are fluid in nature and can be adjusted to
accommodate the uses that ultimately come to Avienda.
3. Modify Section C (6) of the ordinance to allow the option for the two approved senior
housing developments (which were limited to two buildings with 150 units per building
to be combined into a single building (up to 300 units) in District 3 and District 4 to
accommodate a Senior Housing Project. Staff is supportive of the two senior housing
developments combined into one building but the City wants to ensure a retail or
entertainment use in the northwest corner.
4. Change the NW area previously shown as District 4 for senior to District 1 to
accommodate additional retail. The change would have all of the frontage along Lyman
Boulevard planned for retail uses. Staff is supportive of the two senior housing
development combined into one but want to ensure a retail or entertainment use is in the
northwest corner.
5. Allow row homes in District 2 (Village Retail District) to provide another housing
option in the lifestyle center. This change would require a Comprehensive plan
amendment to allow the additional density. The row homes would be an urban-style
townhome that meets the city’s goals of lifecycle housing. The 2020 request did not utilize
the maximum density of 16 units an acre. Based in the Comprehensive Plan the maximum
number of units allowed at the site is 768 units; they are requesting 809 units. If the
requested changes are approved, the Comprehensive Plan could be amended to permit up to
18 units an acre, thereby permitting the additional 41 units.
Revising the number of units in the apartment from 250 units to 417 units. The acreage
now attributed to residential increases from 28.88 acres to 36.27 acres. The increase in land
dedicated to housing reduces the land available for retail/entertainment use.
6. The applicant has stated that the retail environment has dramatically changed and will
continue to change. They believe that there is increased market demand for drive-
through locations. The approved plans allow for a total of four drive-throughs. The plans
depict an additional 3-4 drive though locations for marketing purposes. No additional
approvals are being sought or granted with this amendment. The developer is advising they
may make future requests based on uses/tenants. The PUD as approved allows for two drive-
throughs north of Bluff Creek Boulevard for a grocery, pharmacy or bank and two south of
Bluff Creek Boulevard likely for coffee or similar type use.
7. The developer has submitted an updated Trip Generation. This study states that the
proposed land use would experience a decrease in anticipated traffic volumes. (Attached)
8. Entertainment Use.The plans show a reduction amount of entertainment use. The movie
175
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 7 of 9
theater use (60,000 sq. ft.) in District 2 is eliminated based on current market conditions. To
ensure that an entertainment use(s) is built as part of the development, Staff is proposing a
requirement for a minimum square footage of 25,000 square feet of entertainment in Districts
2 and/or 3. The developer has indicated agreement with this condition.
2020 Plan
2022 Plan
176
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 8 of 9
9. Open Space/Plaza. The total area and configuration has changed. See above for depictions.
Developer will provide total square footage comparison at the meeting. The proposed plaza
will be privately owned, programmed, and maintained. The intent is to have shared space for
the development and the retail/restaurants around the plaza with programming and use that
is open to the public.
10. Parking.A significant amount of the parking is on now the south side of Bluff Creek
Boulevard serving the entertainment retail area to the north. The Planning Commission may
consider/discuss the impact on the walkability of the area.
11. Intent.The Planning Commission may consider/discuss if the revised plan meets the intent of
the Regional Commercial/Lifestyle Center.
Development Master Plan Revised Districts
Proposed changes in uses are provided in the attached PUD Ordinance.
Sub-District 1 -Retail -Provides a location for larger-scale in-line and stand-alone retail
and entertainment uses. The district has been expanded to include the area that was
intended for 150 units of senior housing.
Sub-District 2 -The Village -Provides the broadest variety,highest density,and greatest
intensity of development,encouraging both vertical and horizontal mixed-use.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment would allow up to 18 units per acre and includes 417
apartments and 58 row homes. The row homes provide a transition between the low-
density townhomes and the apartments while increasing the land area for housing and
total number of units.
Sub-District 3 - Mixed Use - Provides a location for smaller-scale retail, service, and other
auto-oriented uses as well as hotels and medical/technology-related uses. The District area
has been reduced to accommodate the senior housing (300 units) in one building. A hotel
and office use as well as two drive-through uses are in this District. A significant amount of
the overall parking is in this District. A full-service car wash is proposed to be added as a
permitted use in this district.
Sub-District 4 -Multi-Family-Provides opportunities for high-density senior or rental
apartments.This District has been expanded to have all the senior housing, 300 units, at
one location.
Sub-District 5 – Low-Density Residential - Provides opportunities for small lothomes. This
District has a preliminary plat approved for 39 lots.
177
Planning Commission
Avienda: Amendment to PUD
August 16, 2022
Page 9 of 9
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendments to the Avienda PUD-RC
(Ordinance #657) subject to the approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and adoption
of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
Findings of Fact and Recommendation
Development Review Application
PUD Ordinance
Narrative
Development Plan 8.1
Chanhassen Engineering Comments
Toole Design Updated Trip Generation
Carver County Engineering Comments
Affidavit of Mailing
g:\plan\2017 planning cases\17-10 avienda preliminary plat & pud\2022 amended avienda pud\pc staff report 081622.doc
178
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE: Application of Landform Professional Services LLC – Planning Case No. 2022-12,
Avienda
Request for amending the Planned Unit Development of 118+/- acres of property zoned
Planned Unit Development-Regional Commercial District (PUD-RC) including Exhibit A
Avienda Design Standards for the property located at the southwest corner of Powers Boulevard
and Lyman Boulevard.
On August 16, 2022, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Landform Professional Services LLC to amend the
Planned Unit Development-Regional Commercial (PUD-RC) zoning. The Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed
notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development – Regional Commercial
District (PUD-RC).
2.The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Office or Regional Commercial uses.
3.The legal description of the property is:
The plat of Avienda, Carver County, Minnesota.
4.REZONING
The proposed amendment meets the required standards for approval:
a. The proposed zoning has been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City of Chanhassen
2040 Comprehensive Plan subject to the amendment of the comprehensive plan
permitting additional density within the regional commercial land use area.
b. The proposed zoning is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the
area.
c. The proposed zoning conforms to all performance standards contained in the Zoning
Ordinance.
d. The proposed zoning will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is
proposed.
179
e. The proposed zoning can be accommodated with existing and planned public services
and will not overburden the city's service capacity.
f. Traffic generation by the proposed use within the zoning district is within capabilities of
streets serving the property.
g. The planning report #2022-12 dated August 16, 2022, prepared by Kate Aanenson, et al,
is incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Amendment of Planned
Unit Development – Regional Commercial, PUD-RC as shown in plans dated July 15, 2022, plan
8.1.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 16th day of August, 2022.
Chanhassen Planning Commission
BY:___________________________________
Mark von Oven, Chairman
180
181
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation
Name Landlorm Prolossional Services, LLC Contact:Ken t.e I indehl
(612) 638-0225Address:105 S slh Avenue, Suite 513 Phone:
City/Statezip:
Email:
Minnoapolb, MN 55401
Kl-indahl@Landlotm.n€t
Cell:(612) 29G.8102
Fax:
Signature . Kendra Lindahl, AICP ffi,?,ii*ffi'*Date:7t15t2.
PROPERTY OWI{ER: ln signing this application, l, as prop€rty ownsr, have tull legal capacity to, and heleby do,
auttorize ne ning ot tris afotidtion. lunderstand lhat conditions of approval are binding and_agr€o to be bound by lhose
conOitions, suUje& only to ihe right to obiect at the hearings or during lhe appoal port ds' I will k6€p mysef infomsd of
G O""Otin"" t& *bniission of
-materiatlnd tre progress of this applicaton. I turther unde6tand that additonal f€€s may
L" "ford for -"sulting fees, foasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any aulho.lza$on to proceed with lhe
study. icertify that the i;fomation and exhlbils submitted aro tus and conec't'
Name:Level 7 Development LLC Contact:
Phon6:
Bahram Akradi
ls52lw74nAddress:4600 Kings Point Road
city/statezip:Minnetrista, MN 55331 Cell:
Fax:
(612181z-',t212
Email
Signature:Date:
PRqTECT ENGINEER (if aPPlbable)
Stev€n Sabraski
(612) 638{2€
Iandlorm Prolessional Servic€s' LLC Contact:
Phone:IOS S sth Avenue, Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401 Cell:
Fax:Email:SSabraski @ Landform.nst
Who ahould racslve coPies of staff rePorts?
!tr Email
Email
Email
Email
E Mailod Papsr CoPY
E Mailed Pap€r copy
E Mailed Paper CoPY
fl Mail€d PaP€r CoPY
Nam6:Mark Nordland, Nordland Partnors
Property Owner Vla:
Applicaril Vta:
Engine€r Vb:
Ottq' Ma:
Addrass:
city/staterzip
This application must be comPlet6d in full and must be
aoplicable City Odinanc€ provisions. Bofore filing this
airi confer witr me Planning Departrnent to determine
acco.npanied by all information and plans tBquirsd by..
applicition, refer to the appropriate ApPlicatDn Cheddist
thC specific ordinanco and aPplicable proceduEl
aoolication shall b€ made lvithin 15 businsss da)'s of aPdication submittal A
;h;ll b€ mailed to the applicant within 15 busin6ss days of application'A determination of completoness of the
writtsn notico of application deficiencies
r€quirsments and fsss
tf
Section 4: Notification lnformation
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT
device. PRINT FORM and deliver
: Complete all necessary lorm fields'
!o city along wilh t€quired do€uments
copy to the city for Procossing.sAvE FOnu
then selecl SAVE FORM
and p€yment. SUBMIT
PRINT FORII
to save a coPY to ),our
FoRM to s€nd a digital
SUB IT FOR
tr!Email:mnord @ nord rs.com
APPUCANT OTHER THAN PROPERW OWNER: ln signing this application, I, as applicant, repressnt to have obtain€d
authorization frcm the pmperty ownor to file this applicalion. I agre€ to b€ bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
th6 right to objeci at the hearings on the applicatbn or during the appeal p€riod. lf this application has not b6en signed by
lho prop€rty owner, I havs attach€d soparate documentation of full legal capadty to file th€ application. This application
should be process€d in my name and I am the party whom the City should contac{ regarding any matter pertaining to this
application. I will keep mlrsef infomed of the deadlin€s for subrnission of mawid and ths Progross of this apPlication. I
further understand that additionalfs€s may b€ chargpd for consulting feos, feasibility studies, etc. with an €stimate Prior to
any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and conec't.
Name:
Address:
City/Statezip:
'Othor Contact lnformrtlon:
tr
Dtr
D
182
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 657
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY
REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is amended by
rezoning the following described propertybelow from Agricultural Estate District, A-2, to PUD Regional
Commercial Avienda.
Legal Description
THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (S 1/2 OF SW 1/4), SECTION 23,
TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 23, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA, EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING 2
DESCRIBED TRACTS:
LINE 1. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116,
RANGE 23; THENCE RUNNING NORTH ON SECTION LINE 30 FEET; THENCE IN A
STRAIGHT LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION, 30 FEET
EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE WEST 30 FEET TO SAID
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AND PLACE OF BEGINNING, BEING A THREE
CORNERED PIECE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116,
RANGE 23; AND 2. THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER AND THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER, BOTH IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116 NORTH, RANGE 23 WEST, CARVER
COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHICH LIES EASTERLY OF LINE 2 DESCRIBED BELOW.
LINE 2. BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE
RUNNING WEST ON AN AZIMUTH OF 271 DEGREES 56 MINUTES 13 SECONDS ALONG THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 23 FOR 1634.23 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE ON AN
AZIMUTH OF 00 DEGREES 43 MINUTES 24 SECONDS FOR 500.11 FEET TO A POINT;
THENCE ON AN AZIMUTH OF 91 DEGREES 56 MINUTES 13 SECONDS FOR 1173.46 FEET TO
A POINT; THENCE ON AN AZIMUTH OF 29 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 18 SECONDS FOR 152.11
TO A POINT; THENCE ON AN AZIMUTH OF 352 DEGREES, 57 MINUTES 23 SECONDS FOR
709.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE ON AN AZIMUTH OF 91 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 02
SECONDS ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER FOR 475.37 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THERE TERMINATING.
183
Page | 2
ABSTRACT
TOGETHER WITH
PARCEL 1
THE NORTH 420.00 FEET OF THE EAST 414.86 FEET OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF
SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 23, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
PARCEL 2
THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 23,
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA EXCEPT FOR THE SOUTH 658.24 FEET THEREOF; AND
ALSO
EXCEPT THE NORTH 420.00 FEET OF THE EAST 414.86 FEET THEREOF.
PARCEL 3
THE SOUTH 658.24 FEET OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116,
RANGE 23, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
TOGETHER WITH
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (NE 1/4 OF SW 1/4) OF
SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116 NORTH OF RANGE 23 WEST, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA,
EXCEPT THAT PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER
(NE1/4 OF SW1/4) OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 116 NORTH, RANGE 23 WEST, SHOWN AS
PARCEL 64 ON MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT
NO. 10-19, FILED 10-19-2004 AS DOCUMENT NO. 39930.
DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS
A. Intent
The use of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) for regional/lifestyle center commercial purposes should
result in a reasonable and verifiable exchange between the city and the developer. This district is
intended to provide for the development of regional and community scale integrated retail, office,
business services, personal services, and services to the traveling public near freeway interchanges. It
shall strive to create a self-sustaining pattern of land uses with cultural, employment, entertainment,
housing, shopping, and social components.
The regional/lifestyle center commercial district is a mixed commercial district with retail and
entertainment uses of a scale and function that serves a regional market. The physical environment
emphasizes an attractive, comfortable walking experience for shoppers and visitors. It shall be designed
to serve pedestrian and mass transit users as well as automobile traffic. Centers of this type, generally,
have at least two major retail anchors and are characterized by the diversity of mixed retail and service
uses. Uses within this district should complement existing retail users in the other commercial districts.
Development of these centers shall be planned as a group of organized uses and structures to
accommodate a sensitive transition between commercial activities such as loading, parking of
184
Page | 3
automobiles, lighting, and trash collection, and surrounding residential uses. Such centers shall be
designed with one theme, similar architectural style, similar exterior building materials, and a
coordinated landscaping theme, but shall avoid monotony in design and visual appearance. Vehicle and
pedestrian access are coordinated and logically linked to provide a comprehensive circulation system.
B. Design Standards
Unless otherwise provided in the PUD, the design standards shall follow the Chanhassen City Code
Chapter 20, Article VIII Division 1. 20-509. - STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR
REGIONAL/LIFESTYLE CENTER COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS and
Article XXIII, DIVISION 7. - DESIGN STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND
OFFICE-INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS. Applies to District 1, 2 and 3.
Chapter 20 DIVISION 9. - DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS and the
Avienda Development Design Guidelines. Applies to Districts 4 and 5.
185
Page | 4
The Master Plan identifies five distinct districts within Avienda. Each of these districts
(outlined on the plan below)is defined by specific site development patterns and perhaps a
distinctive character or image.The sub-districts complement one another as part of the overall
plan.The districts are shown on the attached District Map above. They include:
District 1 - Retail – provides a location for larger-scale in-line and stand-alone retail
entertainment uses.Could also include a 150-unit housing in the north west corner.
District 2 - The Village – provides the broadest variety, highest density, and greatest intensity
of development, encouraging both vertical and horizontal mixed use.Including 58
rowhomes and 417 Apartments, with a minimum of 25,000 square feet of entertainment
shall be included in this district.
District 3 - Mixed Use – provides a location for smaller-scale retail. Service and auto-
oriented uses (full service car wash)as well as hotels and medical/technology-related
offices.
Sub-District 4 - Multi-Family – provides opportunities for high density senior or rental
apartments.Includes 300 Senior Housing units.
Sub-District 5 - Low Density Residential – provides opportunities for small lot homes.
Includes 39 townhomes.
C. Development Plans and Regulations
The PUD must be maintained in accordance with the following development plans which are on file
with the city, and which are incorporated herein:
1. Preliminary Plat dated May 1, 2020
2. Development Plan dated July 15, 2022
3. Avienda Design Guidelines dated May 1, 2020
Permitted Uses
1.Entertainment:
Amusement and recreation services or substantially similar as reviewed by the Design Review
Committee (DRC) and the Community Development Director.
2.Retail sales:
a. Department stores not to exceed 25,000 square feet per store, stores that carry an
assortment of merchandise from all the other categories. Such establishments may
include but are not limited to department stores, discount stores, and similar
establishments.
b. Supermarkets and other food and grocery stores such as butcher shops and fish markets,
fruit and vegetable markets, dairy products stores, candy, nut, and confectionery stores
and retail bakeries not to exceed a total of 98,000 square feet.
c. Apparel and accessory stores not to exceed 20,000 square feet per store.
d. Home furnishing stores selling interior decorating supplies, such as paint, light fixtures,
and décor. Such stores may not exceed 40,000 square feet for any single store.
e. Clothing and apparel stores, including shoes, jewelry, accessories, etc.
f. Drug stores and pharmacies.
186
Page | 5
g. One home and furniture store which includes furniture store, home improvement center,
electronic store, appliance store, and similar establishments not to exceed 50,000 square
feet.
h. Farmers market.
3.Hospitality and food service establishments including:
a. Bars and taverns.
b. Cafes, delicatessens, food catering establishments.
c. Coffee shops and cafes.
d. Patio/al fresco dining facilities; Accessory to a principal use.
e. Restaurants.
4.Hotels:
a. One hotel is permitted in the Mixed Use District.
5.Services:
a. Personal Services
i. Professional offices: banking, insurance, legal services, and real estate, etc.
ii. Financial institutions.
iii. Health and recreation clubs, industries, and services.
iv. Health services: Offices of doctors, dentists, optometrists, etc.
v. Dry cleaning, laundry, and garment services.
b. One daycare center, childcare centers, preschools and Montessori school, not to exceed a
total of 16,000 square feet for all such uses.
6.Housing:
Residential development in the regional/lifestyle center commercial PUD may only occur in
multiple-family dwellings.
a.Senior housing developments are limited to two sites and are not to exceed 150 units per
building. Senior housing (55 Plus) includes owner, rental or service enriched.
b.Low Density Residential homes, District 5, shall be a Density of 3-6 units an acre and can
include detached townhomes and twin homes.
c.Fifty three (53) townhomes density of 8 units an acre are part of District 2.
d.Maximum housing units shall not exceed 768 units.
7.Other uses:
a. Retail businesses or service establishments that generally provide commodities or
services and that are judged by the Community Development Director (1) to be similar in
character and operation to the permitted uses described above; (2) to be closely
complementary and to enhance the permitted uses; and (3) to be compatible with the
intent and purposes of the Avienda Village Regional Lifestyle Center PUD.
b. Drive-through accessory to a permitted use. (A maximum of four shall be permitted in
Avienda.In District 1 the two permitted drive-throughs can be associated with the
supermarket grocery or pharmacy or bank. In addition two drive-throughs in District 3
the Mixed Use District and includes a full service car wash.)
187
Page | 6
8. Prohibited Uses
a.Auto related including gas stations, tires, repair etc. except for one full-service car wash
in District 3.
b. Truck, motorcycles, boats, etc. sales.
c. Club warehouse including wholesale.
9. Other comparable or superior materials may be approved by the DRC and the Community
Development Director.
D. Minimum Setbacks
Building setbacks shall follow Chapter 20, Article VIII Division 1. 20-509. - STANDARDS AND
GUIDELINES FOR REGIONAL/LIFESTYLE CENTER COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTS. Setbacks may be waived by the City Council when it is demonstrated that
environmental protection and design will be enhanced.
E. Development Site Coverage and Building Height
1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots
may exceed this threshold.
2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot.
3. The maximum building height shall be:
a. Retail District - 1 story
b. Village District
Apartment - 5 stories (excluding underground parking)
Retail - 1 story
Restaurants - 1 story
Entertainment - 1 story
c. Mixed Use District
Hotel - 3 stories (excluding underground parking)
Retail - 1 story
Offices - 3 stories (excluding underground parking)
d. Multi-family District –4 the combined senior housing shall not exceed five (5) stories
in height. 40 feet (excluding underground parking)
e. Low Density Housing District - 35 feet
F. Parking Requirements
1. Parking shall follow Chanhassen City Code ARTICLE XXIV. - OFF-STREET PARKING AND
LOADING.
2. There is no minimum parking setback when it abuts, without being separated by a street, another
off-street parking area.
3. Code Drive-Through Facilities. Drive-throughs must comply with the standard of the City Code
20-963 and where appropriate, the city and developer may prepare a vehicle stacking study to
determine whether more of less stacking shall be required for a particular use.
G. Landscaping Plan
188
Page | 7
An overall landscaping plan is required. The plan shall contain the following:
1. Boulevard plantings. Located in front yards shall require a mix of over-story trees and other
plantings consistent with the site. Landscaped berms shall be provided to screen the site from
major roadways, railroads, and less intensive land uses. In place of mass grading for building
pads and roads, stone or decorative block retaining walls shall be employed as required to
preserve mature trees and the site's natural topography.
2. Exterior landscaping and double-fronted lots. Landscaped berms shall be provided to buffer the
site and lots from major roadways, railroads, and less intensive uses. Similar measures shall be
provided for double-fronted lots. Where necessary to accommodate this landscaping, additional
lot depth may be required.
3. Foundation and yard plantings. A minimum budget or plan for foundation plants shall be
established and approved by the City. As each parcel is developed in the PUD, the builder shall
be required to install plant materials meeting or exceeding the required budget or prior to
issuance of certificate of occupancy or provide financial guarantees acceptable to the City.
4. Tree preservation. Tree preservation is a primary goal of the PUD. A detailed tree survey should
be prepared during the design of the PUD and the plans should be developed to maximize tree
preservation.
5.No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector
roads.
H. Signage
189
Page | 8
The intent of this section is to establish an effective means of communication in the development,
maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment and the business’s ability to attract sources of economic
development and growth, to improve pedestrian and traffic safety, to minimize the possible adverse
effect of signs on nearby public and private property, and to enable the fair and consistent enforcement
of these sign regulations. It is the intent of this section, to promote the health, safety, general welfare,
aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating signs that are intended to communicate to the
public, and to use signs which meet the city's goals:
1. Establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise
their name and service.
2. Preserve and promote civic beauty and prohibit signs which detract from this objective because
of size, shape, height, location, condition, cluttering or illumination.
3. Ensure that signs do not create safety hazards.
4. Ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed, and maintained in a manner that does not
adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists.
5. Preserve and protect property values.
6. Ensure signs that are in proportion to the scale of, and are architecturally compatible with, the
principal structures.
7. Limit temporary commercial signs and advertising displays which provide an opportunity for
grand opening and occasional sales events while restricting signs which create continuous visual
clutter and hazards at public right-of-way intersections.
8. All signs shall comply with the city sign ordinance ARTICLE XXVI. – SIGNS unless otherwise
permitted in this document.
190
Page | 9
1. Project Identification Sign A
Six project identification signs shall be permitted for the development. The location of the Project
Identification signs shall be as follows:
a. Southwest and southeast of the intersection of Sunset Trail and Lyman Boulevard.
b. Southwest of the intersection of Powers and Lyman Boulevards.
c. Northwest and southwest of the intersection of Powers and Bluff Creek Boulevards.
d. The most southeasterly corner of the development facing the Highway 212.
The design and dimensions of the sign shall be identical throughout the development with exception of
the larger sign facing south on to Highway 212.
2. Off-Premise Directory Sign B
191
Page | 10
Three off-premise directory signs shall be permitted for the development. The location of the off-
premise directory signs shall be as follows:
Southeast of the intersection of Avienda Parkway and Sunset Trail.
Northwest and southwest of the intersection of Bluff Creek Boulevard and Sunset Trail.
The sign architectural structure shall not exceed 19 feet in height and shall be built in accordance with
the dimensions and design shown and labeled below.
1. The individual tenant sign panel area shall not exceed eight (8) square feet, six (6) feet wide and
1’ 4” high, no more than three panels per off-premise directional sign.
2. The overall sign area shall not exceed 58 square feet.
3. The sign shall be located outside of the sight triangle and shall not interfere with the driver’s
intersection sight distance.
4. The sign shall maintain a minimum of 10 feet from the back of the curb.
5. The sign shall maintain a 1.5-foot separation from trails/sidewalks.
6. The sign shall not interfere with snow removal operations.
7. The sign shall only include the names and logos of the businesses.
8. The sign design shall compliment the design and materials of the proposed buildings.
Project identification sign area shall not exceed 80 square feet in sign display area nor be greater
than eight (8) feet in height. The sign shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the property line
and be located outside the sight distance triangle.
3. Monument Sign C
a. Each lot shall be permitted one monument sign. One monument sign shall be permitted per
lot with the exception of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2. These signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in
sign display area nor be greater than five (5) feet in height. If more than one building is on a
lot, the sign must be shared.
192
Page | 11
b. All monument signs shall maintain a uniform architectural design that complements the
architecture of the buildings.
c. These signs shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the property line and be located
outside the sight triangle.
d. All monument signs shall face the internal streets (Avienda Parkway and Bluff Creek
Boulevard).
4. Wayfinding Signs D
Wayfinding signs shall be permitted along the internal street located within Lots 1 and 2, Block 5.
a. The sign shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height.
b. The sign area shall not exceed 32 square feet.
c. The sign shall be located outside of the sight triangle and shall not interfere with the driver’s
intersection sight distance.
d. The sign shall maintain a minimum of 10 feet from the back of the curb.
e. The sign shall maintain a 1.5-foot separation from trails and sidewalks.
f. The sign shall not be illuminated.
g. The sign shall not interfere with snow removal operations.
h. The sign lettering shall not exceed six inches and shall have a uniform style.
193
Page | 12
i. The sign shall only include the names and logos of the businesses and a directional arrow.
j. The sign design shall compliment the design and materials of the proposed building.
k. The sign shall not obstruct drivers’ views of any city-owned street signage or railroad
signage.
l. The sign will be owned and maintained by the developer.
m. The applicant shall construct the sign.
5. Wall Signs
a. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the
tops of which shall not extend above parapet height. The letters and logos shall be restricted to
a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall
be constructed of wood, metal, ortranslucent facing.
b. Second story illuminated signs that can be viewed from neighborhoods outside the PUD site,
are prohibited.
c. Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant’s
proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems, and similar
identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do
not occupy more than 30% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign.
d. Wall signs are limited to two elevations per building unless the area of square footage
exceeds 25,000 or above in a single use.
e. Single tenant buildings shall be permitted wall signs on two elevations only unless the area of
square footage exceeds 25,000 or above in a single use. The size of the sign shall be based
on Table 1.
f. Halo Lit signs are permitted consistent with the wall area criteria, including maximum nits
and only white.
194
Page | 13
6. Projecting Sign (Wall)
a. Shall be limited to the Village Retail District.
b. Sign area shall not exceed two (2) square feet and not project more than
two (2) feet from the building.
7. Festive Flags/Banners
a. Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade
and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting.
b. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric or vinyl.
c. Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or products.
d. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two (2) feet.
f. Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet.
g. Flags and banners which are torn or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the
city.
8. Building Directory
a. In multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign
shall not exceed eight square feet.
9. On-Premise Directional Signs
a. On-premise signs shall not be larger than four (4) square feet. The maximum height of the
sign shall not exceed five (5) feet from the ground. The placement of directional signs on the
property shall be so located such that the sign does not adversely affect adjacent properties
(including site lines or confusion of adjoining ingress or egress) or the general appearance of
the site from public right-of-way. No more than four (4) signs shall be allowed per lot. The
City Council may allow additional signs in situations where access is confusing, or traffic
safety could be jeopardized.
b. Bench signs are prohibited except at transit stops as authorized by the local transit authority.
c. Signs and Graphics. Wherever possible, traffic control, directional, and other public signs
should be consolidated and grouped with other street fixtures and furnishings to reduce visual
clutter and to facilitate vehicular and pedestrian movement. A system of directional signs
195
Page | 14
should also be established to direct traffic within the commercial area and away from
residential areas.
10. Prohibited Signs
a. Pylon signs.
b. Back lit awnings.
c. Window signs are prohibited except for company logo/symbol and not the name. Such logo
shall not exceed 10% of a window area.
d. Menu signs.
e. Signs on roofs, dormers, and balconies.
f. Billboards.
g. Interchangeable letter boards or panels.
h. Flashing signs.
11. Sign Design and Permit Requirements
a. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the
development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height
throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's
entrance monument and will be used throughout.
b. All signs require a separate sign permit.
c. Wall business signs shall comply with the City’s sign ordinance for the neighborhood
business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on
the “street” front and primary parking lot front of each building.
I. Public Realm, Streetscape
The site development, streetscape character, building placement, pedestrian realm, material expression
and color, stormwater utilization, building interest, lighting and walking paths shall be consistent with
the Avienda Development Guidelines Dated May 1, 2020.
J. Engineering Requirement
1. The traffic analysis for the 2016 AUAR Update shall be updated based on the approved
land uses for the development.
2. Each subsequent plat and/or site plan will be required to complete a Traffic Impact Study
for the abutting local road network to identify capacity deficiencies at affected
intersections and to help identify feasible solutions to identified deficiencies. This shall
also include: an assessment of internal circulation for vehicles and pedestrians; the
interface between public and private streets and trails and their respective maintenance
operations; and emergency service access and circulation.
3. The access point east of the most eastern round-a-bout on Bluff Creek Boulevard, as
depicted in Development Plan 8.1 dated July 15, 2022, is not approved.
4. An updated capacity analysis for municipal utilities shall be provided based on the
approved land uses to determine if the municipal utilities to service the development are
adequate.
196
Page | 15
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this the day of September 12, 2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on )
g:\plan\2017 planning cases\17-10 avienda preliminary plat & pud\amended pud and concept 2020\pud ordinance amended 2020.doc
197
Narrative
Avienda PUD Amendment
Prepared for:
Level 7 Development, LLC
July 15, 2022
SUBMITTED TO
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PREPARED BY
Landform Professional Services, LLC
105 5th Ave S, Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC 198
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Amendment Request .................................................................................................................................... 1
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 2
Contact Information ...................................................................................................................................... 3
199
Avienda, Chanhassen, MN July 15, 2022
SCD1400.LEV.003 1
Introduction
On behalf of Level 7 Development, LLC, Landform is pleased to submit this application for an amendment to the
Avienda PUD to allow us to better respond to demand in the evolving marketplace and create the mixed use
regional/lifestyle center envisioned for our site. We have been working with staff to discuss the proposed
modifications that were presented at the June 27th Council Work Session and look forward to approval of the PUD
modifications. We have prepared an updated development plan (DP 8.1) and district plan (below) that show the
current master plan concept. We are very excited about the changes proposed and the development planned.
Figure 1: July 15, 2022 district map
Amendment Request
Our proposal remains consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal to create a regional destination with a walkable
commercial core, residential and office uses. The five districts in the previous master plan approvals remain
unchanged with high-quality building architecture, streetscape and amenities as a foundation. Avienda will provide
places to dine, converge and socialize around an active open space area. The development team is continuing to
refine the details and we have provided renderings to show how this village center could be programmed. The mixed
use development will offer a variety of retail, restaurant, office, entertainment and housing options.
200
Avienda, Chanhassen, MN July 15, 2022
SCD1400.LEV.003 2
We have been working with a variety of users who have expressed interest in Avienda, including some recreational
uses that were not previously anticipated. We are requesting some modification to the PUD to allow us to quickly
respond to bring quality uses to the project. Specifically, we ask for the following:
1. Expand the uses permitted in the different districts to allow us to bring new uses like the regional recreation
user that we discussed at the Council work session. This could likely be addressed in Section C (7) of the
PUD ordinance.
2. Clarify that the district boundaries are fluid in nature and can be adjusted to accommodate the users that
ultimately come to Avienda.
3. Modify Section C (6) of the ordinance to allow the option for the two approved senior housing developments
(which were limited to two buildings with 150 units per building) to be combined into a single building (up to
300 units) in District 4 (Multi-Family Housing District). We have prepared a new district plan that shifts the
boundary between District 3 and District 4 to accommodate a senior housing product.
4. We would proposed to change the NW area previously shown as District 4 for senior housing to District 1 to
accommodate additional retail. With this change, all of the land along Lyman Boulevard would now be
planned for retail uses.
5. Allow row homes in District 2 (Village Retail District) to provide another housing option in this lifestyle center.
This may require a modification of the language in Section C (6) and Section E.3.b of the ordinance, but
remains consistent with the urban core concept. These rowhomes would be an urban-style townhome that
meets the City’s goal of providing lifecycle housing options by providing a housing option that is not currently
available. The density of the rowhomes will support the commercial uses in Avienda as well.
6. While we don’t believe it requires a change to the PUD, we ask for the ability to construct a larger apartment
in District 2 (Village Retail District) than previously shown. We are working with developers to provide a
high-amenity housing product with first floor retail/office space.
7. In the post-COVID era the retail environment has changed dramatically and will continue to change. One of
the primary outcomes was a desire for more drive-through services. We ask that the PUD allow us to offer
additional opportunities for businesses to provide a drive-through option by modifying Section C (7)b of the
ordinance.
When the project was first proposed in 2015, we noted that a project of this size would continue to evolve. The
“Avienda Design Guidelines” we created and the City approved will ensure that Avienda be developed as a high-
quality lifestyle center as envisioned.
Summary
We respectfully request approval of the requested PUD amendment and look forward to working with staff to finalize
the language to ensure a viable mixed-use lifestyle center on the Avienda site.
201
Avienda, Chanhassen, MN July 15, 2022
SCD1400.LEV.003 3
Contact Information
This document was prepared by:
Kendra Lindahl, AICP
Landform
105 South Fifth Avenue, Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Any additional questions regarding this application can be directed to Kendra Lindahl at klindahl@landform.net or
612.638.0225.
202
US Hwy 212Lyman Boulevard
Powers BoulevardBluff Creek BoulevardB
e
t
h
e
s
d
a
C
i
r
c
l
e
Lyman Boulvevard
River Rock Drive NJersey Way
RIVER ROC
K
D
R
S
Degler Circle Sunset
Tra
i
l
Mills Drive
Jeurissen LanePowers BoulevardOUTLOT E
OUTLOT A
OUTLOT C
13,000 S.F. x 3 STORIES6,000 S.F.73,500 s.f.
25,000 S.F. X 3 STORIES
OFFICE
OFFICE
RETAIL
RETAIL
RETAIL
10,000 S.F.
35,000 S.F.
RETAIL
RETAIL ANCHOR
RETAIL
HOTEL10,000 S.F.
8,000 S.F.
RETAIL
RETAIL
3,000 S.F.
25,000 S.F. X 3 STORIES
6,000 S.F.
8,000 S.F.
5,000 S.F.
15,000 S.F.
6,000 S.F.
7,000 S.F.RETAILRETAIL
RETAIL
REST
REST
13,000 S.F.
SENIOR
30,000 S.F.
RETAIL
CHILD CARE
10,000 S.F.
REST
10,000 S.F.
8,000 S.F.
RETAIL
8,000 S.F.
RETAIL
7,000 S.F.
REST
125,840 S.F. x 4 STORIES
APARTMENTS
Bluff Creek Boulevard
Avienda Parkway
U
R/W
R/W
A
T
D
F
G
H
I
J
K
P
Q
PR 1
PR 2
30
115
92
917
54 103
76
67
213
O 869
36
47 168
23
70
82
85
108
131
R/W
L
M
N
S
R/W
R/W
R/W
Mills Drive
R
B C E
R/W
Landform and Site to Finish are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.R R
in collaboration with: LEVEL 7 DEVELOPMENT
NORDLAND PARTNERS · RSP ARCHITECTS
ESG ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN
AVIENDA · Chanhassen, MN
Regional Map
Legend
Stall
Future Traffic Signal
Existing Traffic Signal
Stall Count
Public Right Of Way
Regional Commercial
Office
High Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Preservation
Ponding
NORTH 0 150 300
Wetland and Buffer
PR
R/W
12
494
10
394
169
5
169
55
62
100
62 MISSISSIPPIRIVERBLOOMINGTON
MINNEAPOLIS
35W
SITE
94
94
694
35W
35W
35
35E
494
494
94
94
35W
212
169
169
100
12
MINNESOTA
RIVER
CHANHASSEN
MAPLE
GROVE
DP8.1
DEVELOPMENT PLAN 8.1
JULY 15, 2022
Development Data
Section
Gross
Area
(Acres)
Net
Developable
Area
(Acres)
Building
Area (S.F.)
Parking
Stalls
Units/
Beds
Parking
Ratio
(Stalls per
1,000 S.F.
or per Unit)
1.91 1.91 6,000 36 6.0
1.66 1.66 10,000 47 4.7
3.76 3.76 35,000 168 4.8
2.26 2.26 10,000 23 2.3
1.27 1.27 13,000 70 5.4
1.75 1.75 15,000 82 5.5
1.46 1.46 5,000 85 17.0
1.48 1.48 6,000 76 12.7
1.62 1.62 7,000 67 9.6
1.06 1.06 7,000 30 4.3
6.10 6.10 45,000 239 5.3
6.60 6.60 93,227 n/a 53
2.74 2.74 24,632 n/a 8
9.27 7.35 95,449 n/a 31
12.51 12.51 461,089 869 417
4.48 4.45 30,000 115 3.8
7.07 7.07 73,524 213 300 1.2
1.92 1.92 10,000 54 5.4
1.78 1.78 6,000 92 15.3
1.52 1.52 39,000 103 100 2.6
10.89 10.89 225,000 917 4.1
14.25 0.00 n/a n/a
20.87 0.00 n/a n/a
1.66 0.00 n/a n/a
Total 119.89 81.16 1,216,921 3,286 909 n/a
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
PR 1
R/W
PR 2
Q
R
Notes
Development plan shown for schematic
purposes only and subject to change.
S
T
U
203
Memorandum
To:Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director
From:Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer
CC: Charles Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer
George Bender, Assistant City Engineer
Date:8/4/2022
Re:Avienda PUD Amendment – Planning Case #2022-12
The Public Works and Engineering Department has reviewed the PUD Amendment submittal for
the Avienda development. These comments are divided into two categories: general
comments and proposed conditions. General comments are informational points to guide the
applicant in the proper planning of public works infrastructure for this project, to inform the
applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings. Proposed
conditions are requirements that Public Works and Engineering recommend be formally
imposed on the development in the final order. Note that references to the “City Standards”
herein refer to the City of Chanhassen Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
General Comments/Findings
1. Any and all utility and transportation plans submitted with this application have been
reviewed only for the purpose of determining the feasibility of providing utility and
transportation facilities for the project in accordance with City Standards. A
recommendation of approval does not constitute final approval of details, including but
not limited to alignments, materials and points of access, connection or discharge, that
are depicted or suggested in the application. The applicant is required to submit
detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. The
City of Chanhassen Engineering and Public Works Department will review plans, in
detail, when they are submitted and approve, reject or require modifications to the
plans or drawings based upon conformance with City Standards, the Chanhassen Code
of Ordinances and the professional engineering judgment of the City Engineer.
204
2. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the proposed amendment can be
developed in accordance with the requirements of the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances
(as it pertains to Engineering and Public Works requirements) and City Standards,
provided it fully addresses the comments and conditions contained herein.
3. The applicant is proposing to amend the Avienda PUD ordinance by changing and
combining senior housing to one building located in the southern portion of the site,
increasing the multi-family building (apartments) by 167 units, changing and relocating
the entertainment use area, increasing the number of medium density units
(townhouses/villas) by 53, and adding more drive throughs. The applicant has submitted
a plan sheet titled “Development Plan 8.1” dated July 15, 2022, which is an illustrative
depiction of the site’s layout based on the proposed amended PUD land uses. Staff has
concerns regarding how the proposed land uses will alter the ultimate build-out, as
depicted by Development Plan 8.1, and its impact on the surrounding public street
operations along with the traffic circulation within the site. These concerns also include
the interface between publicly owned and privately owned facilitates and their
maintenance activities (e.g. snow removal). In order to assess any potential traffic
deficiencies that may arise such as impacts to traffic safety, intersection operations,
street capacity, etc., an update to the existing traffic study associated with the 2016
AUAR Update should be provided based on the newly proposed uses. Additionally,
upon submittal of each subsequent plat and/or site plan within the Avienda
development, a Traffic Impact Study should be performed for the immediate road
network (Bluff Creek Blvd, Avienda Parkway, and Sunset Trail) which will also include the
internal circulation of the site based on the proposed plans. This traffic impact study
will be updated and build upon each approval for the development to ensure that the
abutting public streets and internal site circulation meet acceptable levels of service and
maintain safe and sustainable traffic operations. See proposed conditions 1 and 2.
4. The Development Plan 8.1 provided depicts an access off of Bluff Creek Blvd just east of
the most eastern round-a-bout. Due to the anticipated volumes and it’s proximity to
the round-a-bout there are serious concerns regarding traffic operations and potential
safety issues. While Development Plan 8.1 is illustrative in nature, this access point as
depicted is not approved. See proposed condition 3.
5. Public utilities to the development were originally designed to meet the needs of the
development based on the original PUD land uses approved in 2020. The newly
proposed land uses will impact the utility needs of the development, as such the
applicant shall provide an updated capacity analysis to determine whether the public
utilities installed have sufficient capacities to meet the needs of the usages proposed.
See proposed condition 4.
205
Proposed Conditions
1. The applicant shall update the traffic analysis completed for the 2016 AUAR Update
based on the approved land uses for the development.
2. Each subsequent plat and/or site plan will be required to complete a Traffic Impact
Study for the abutting local road network to identify capacity deficiencies at affected
intersections and to help identify feasible solutions to identified deficiencies. This shall
also include; an assessment of internal circulation for vehicles and pedestrians; the
interface between public and private streets and trails and their respective maintenance
operations; and emergency service access and circulation.
3. The access point east of the most eastern round-a-bout on Bluff Creek Boulevard, as
depicted in Development Plan 8.1 dated July 15, 2022, is not approved.
4. An updated capacity analysis shall be provided based on the approved land uses to
determine if the municipal utilities to service the development are adequate.
206
MEMORANDUM
July 26, 2022
To: Steven Sabraski, Landform and Mark Nordland, Level 7 Development, LLC
From: Toole Design
Project: Avienda Final Roadway Plans
Re: Updated Avienda Development-Driven Trip Generation
The purpose of this memo is to compare the results of the initial trip generation analysis to the results of the
updated trip generation analysis. This memo also lists the assumptions made when calculating the updated trip
generation totals.
Updated Trip Generation
Introduction
Trip generation estimates were prepared for the Avienda development based on the latest site plan 8.1 and have
been compared to estimates from the 2017 Chanhassen Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The 2017
AUAR used the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition to calculate trip
generation rates for two different development concepts: Concept A assumed wetland mitigation, while Concept B
assumed wetland preservation. In this updated analysis, the 10th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual was used
to calculate trip generation estimates for the actual land uses being developed, which include a day care center,
retail, restaurant, office, residential (apartments, senior living, and townhomes), and hotel components.
2017 Trip Generation
Table 1 shows the 2017 trip generation estimates for Concept A. Only the estimates for the northeast quadrant
(Avienda development) are shown. Concept A traffic volumes were used in the Intersection Control Evaluation
Report (ICE Report) for T.H. 212 North Ramp at Powers Boulevard prepared by Toole Design Group, dated May
18, 2022. The Specific land use codes (LUC) from the Trip Generation Manual used in preparing the trip
generation estimates from 2017 were provided in Appendix B of the AUAR report and are included in Table 1.
207
2
Table 1: 2017 Trip Generation Estimates (Concept A)
Land Use LUC
Intensity
Trip Generation Values
Daily AM Total
(In/Out)
PM Total (In/Out)
Day Care Center 565 16,000 SF 1,185 195 (105/90) 195 (90/105)
Retail 820 393,000 SF 16,780 375 (235/140) 1,460 (700/760)
Restaurant 932 26,500 SF 3,370 285 (155/130) 260 (155/105)
Office 710 150,000 SF 1,655 235 (205/30) 225 (40/185)
Residential-
Attached
(Apartments)
220 407 DU 2,590 205 (40/165) 240 (155/85)
Residential-
Attached
(Townhomes)
230 38 DU 125 10 (0/10) 10 (5/5)
Hotel 310 100 Rooms 520 55 (30/25) 60 (30/30)
Total Site Generated Trips 26,225 1,360 (770/590) 2,450
(1,175/1,275)
Internal Capture Reduction 6,448 295 (150/145) 660 (330/330)
Total Driveway Trips 19,777 1,065 (620/445) 1,790 (845/945)
Pass-By Reduction 5,512 -- 460 (230/230)
Total Net New Trips 14,265 1,065 (620/445) 1,330 (615/715)
2022 Trip Generation
Table 2 shows the updated trip generation results for the proposed Avienda development based on Development
Plan 8.1 dated July 15, 2022. Land use codes (LUC) from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual, 10th Edition are included in the second column. The methodology in NCHRP Report 684 was
followed to obtain the internal capture reduction rates, and the pass-by tables from the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 11th Edition were used to obtain the pass-by reduction rates. Specific assumptions for each part of the
trip generation process are listed below.
Trip Generation
When using the Trip Generation Manual to obtain the number of daily, AM peak, and PM peak trips, the LUC from
the 2017 AUAR were replicated to make a fair comparison of vehicle trips. There are some variations within the
residential uses. LUC 230 (townhomes) does not appear in the newest edition of the Trip Generation Manual, so
LUC 220, Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) was used instead. LUC 221, Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) was used
208
3
for the four-story apartment building, and LUC 252, Senior Adult Housing-Attached was used to generate trips for
the senior living facility.
Table 2: 2022 Trip Generation Estimates
Land Use
LUC
Intensity
Trip Generation Values
Daily AM Total (In/Out) PM Total (In/Out)
Day Care Center 565 10,000 SF 476 110 (58/52) 111 (52/59)
Retail 820 167,000 SF 8,521 235 (146/89) 794 (381/413)
Restaurant 932 28,000 SF 3,141 278 (153/125) 274 (170/104)
Office 710 150,000 SF 1,572 167 (144/23) 167 (27/141)
Residential-Attached
(Apartments) 221 417 DU 2,271 139 (36/103) 174 (106/68)
Residential-Attached
(Senior Living) 252 300 DU 1,181 60 (21/39) 74 (41/33)
Residential-Attached
(Townhomes) 220 92 DU 655 44 (10/34) 55 (35/20)
Hotel 310 100 Rooms 702 45 (26/18) 49 (25/24)
Total Site Generated Trips 18,518 1,078 (595/484) 1,699 (837/862)
Internal Capture Reduction 1,798 270 (137/135) 714 (360/362)
Total Driveway Trips 16,721 809 (458/348) 985 (477/500)
Pass-By Reduction 4,031 -- 397 (206/190)
Total Net New Trips 12,690 809 (458/348) 588 (270/310)
Internal Capture Reduction
When calculating the internal capture reduction rate, it was assumed that all trips would be made by motor
vehicle. As a result, the mode split accounted for 0% transit trips and 0% non-motorized trips, as well as a vehicle
occupancy of 1.0. Land use interchange distances were omitted from the calculation.
Pass-By Reduction
The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition only provided pass-by reduction tables for PM peak traffic. Table 2
shows the PM pass-by reduction rates applied to the total daily trips as well.
Summary
Comparing the total net new trips in Table 2 with those in Table 1, overall vehicle trips are expected to be less
with the new composition of land use of the Avienda development. The ICE analysis performed for the
intersection of T.H. 212 Ramp at Powers Boulevard assumed higher vehicle volumes and can be considered
209
4
conservative in its recommendation; proposed signal modification and intersection geometry will be suited to
accommodate actual development-driven traffic.
210
Carver County
Public Works
11360 Highway 212, Suite 1
Cologne, MN 55322
Office (952) 466-5200 | Fax (952) 466-5223 | www.co.carver.mn.us
CARVER COUNTY
Review comments from the July 2022 Planned Unit Development Amendment submittal are made in
blue italic font. Comments updated August 5, 2022.
City of Chanhassen
c/o Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
952-227-1139
kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
May 9, 2018
City of Chanhassen
c/o Paul Oehme
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
952-227-1169
poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
Re: Development/Access Review Comments: Avienda – Progress Set Plans dated
4.25.2018 (Preliminary Plans) – CSAH 18/Lyman Blvd and CSAH 17/Powers Blvd/
US 212
Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject development plans in the City of Chanhassen.
Consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and County Codes, the following are comments and
recommended conditions of approval and as potential requirements for any necessary permits to be
issued for the project:
1. As an overall comment, prior to the next stage of plans and plat / site plans approval, the
County would like to review and approve plans of detailed intersection and related segment
geometric design plans with phasing and planned implementation steps and schedules. If the
opportunity is not allowed for a reasonable review of such, this could lead to delays in the
permitting process and potential major revisions to plans and right of way. The County is
available to meet on project management or design meetings.
a. Information
2. Plans for Bluff Creek Blvd at and from CSAH 17 / Powers Blvd look adequate as long as 2-
lanes are maintained on the ingress side to the local roundabout, and 3-lanes are maintained
on the egress side to Powers Blvd and the traffic signal intersection there. The exact width
for the ingress should be a minimum of 28-ft face-to-face and preferably closer to 30-ft to
accept dual LTs in. A cross-section detail should be provided for Bluff Creek Blvd as well as a
plan and profile showing the vertical profile from the center-line of Powers Blvd to the
internal roundabout.
211
a. Coordination of specifications of plan set to be approved as part of permit approval.
3. As a note, the geometric design of the internal (City) roundabout (ICD=125 ft) could be (or
should be) improved—contact the County if the City would like additional feedback.
a. Coordination of specifications of plan set to be approved as part of permit approval.
4. The Bluff Creek Blvd connection to the existing traffic signal at Powers Blvd/ CSAH 17 and US
212 will require traffic signal modifications and upgrades. Some form of contract / permit
and surety with the County will be required for design, construction, re-timing / re-
programming, and final inspection for the traffic signal and roadway approach and loop
detection facilities. Striping and restriping of lanes and/or crosswalks may be needed to be
incorporated into the project. The modification of the existing pedestrian push buttons / APS
system may also be needed. Please contact the County and MnDOT to set up a scoping and
design meeting. In addition, an intersection detail and traffic signal layout and wiring plan
will be required to update the current record traffic signal plan.
a. See item #14
5. The intersection of Sunset Trail / Lyman Blvd will need to be reviewed in detail for
intersection control alternatives. Intersection traffic operations at this location are a concern
and it may be that access needs to be restricted to right-in / right-out until such time that
higher order intersection facilities are available and/or provided for.
a. See item #14
6. The proposed cross-section of Sunset Trail from Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18) to the south will
need to be widened five (5) feet to account for this access condition as well as for two turn
lanes out and enough space for truck turning movements in. The cross-section should be 22-
ft in; and 27-ft out (10-17-ft). A cross-section detail should be provided for Bluff Creek Blvd
as well as a plan and profile showing the vertical profile and alignment plan from the
development’s internal street intersection to the far side of Lyman Blvd intersection, to
include the existing street on the north side of the intersection. Further changes to Sunset
Trail and its alignment may be required.
a. Condition applies, see item #14. Coordination of specifications of plan set to be approved
as part of permit approval.
7. A full right of way intersection detail of the Sunset Trail and Lyman Blvd will need to be
provided to show plans for a future traffic signal layout, wiring, loop detection, and corridor
interconnection plan. In addition, numerous utilities are in place in the NW quadrant and
some are being looked at to be relocated, such that a utility plan may also be required.
Pedestrian ramps and other improvements will be required including pedestrian push buttons
/ APS systems. In addition, intersection lighting will need to be reviewed and included if not
adequate as determined by the County. Contract / permit and surety with the County will be
required for design, construction, and final inspection for the intersection connection, and if
approved traffic signal and roadway approach facilities. Striping and restriping of lanes
and/or crosswalks may be needed to be incorporated into the project.
212
a. Condition applies, see item #14. Coordination of specifications of plan set to be approved
as part of permit approval.
8. The proposed vertical profile of Sunset Trail from Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18) to the south looks
overly steep and will need to be revised to provide 100-feet of 2% max profile and match to
the existing Lyman Blvd grade. A check for future loops and/or video camera signal detection
may also be required.
a. Coordination of specifications of plan set to be approved as part of permit approval.
9. The contour and grading of the site will need to factor in additional roadway width to
include a right turn lane from Lyman Blvd to Powers Blvd. with the existing right turn lane
converting to a through lane in future plans. The plat and the separate site plans’ final
grading plans and right of way along both CSAH 18 and CSAH 17 will need to be reviewed
and approved to show how this is set up for the planned future CSAH 18 future plans.
Prior to next stage grading and plat approval, the County would like to review and
approve an exhibit drawing showing a cross section of Lyman Blvd on both ends of the
plat edges. The cross sections would show the future road improvements and how these
improvements might affect the subject lots and any other plat or lot proposed
improvements. The two cross sections should be referenced to a plan view at 1:40 scale
from center of existing ROW and existing grade, with notes on proposed grades for the
roadway and subject lots.
a. Information, see comment #15.
10. The field entrance on the south side of Lyman Blvd approximately 400 ft. east of Sunset
Trail must be removed and replaced with full B curb.
a. Condition applies
11. As part of our review of the preliminary plans, the following are also noted: the City stubbed
in a new water main at the SW quadrant of Powers Blvd and Lyman Blvd (NE quadrant of
the property). County has fiber conduit and vaults along the south side of Lyman Blvd the
entire length of this property. Utility plan shows the casing outside of the roadway on
Sunset Trail. Proposed grading plans and utility plans will need further review to show and
resolve these conflicts.
a. Condition applies
12. Prior to any work affecting or on County highways or in County right of way, the applicant
shall coordinate plans with the County Engineer and obtain a Utility or
Excavating/Filling/Grading Permit(s) from Carver County Public Works:
(http://www.co.carver.mn.us/how-do-i/apply-for/a-permit). Final details of locations, grades,
and profiles affecting County roads as well as any utility connections will need to be reviewed
and approved prior to any permits.
a. Condition applies
13. Any damages, modifications, or changes incurred on County highways from current or
approved conditions will need to remedied or updated at development expense, including
213
costs incurred by the County.
a. Information
Update:
14. With the increase in number of housing units on the subject site, the following are needed:
a. A new ICE report for the intersection at Lyman Blvd & Sunset Trail.
i. With the information available to the County to date, a signal would be required.
If the ICE report determines that a signal is required, this would be at the
developer’s expense.
b. An update to the ICE report for the intersection at Powers Blvd & Bluff Creek Blvd.
15. Regarding final approvals and required permits -
a. The County will need to review and approve the final grading plans for properties
adjacent to CSAH 18 and CSAH 17. A grading permit will be required for grading work
within the highway right of way.
b. An access permit will be required for accesses onto CSAH 18 CSAH 17 due to this change
in use and connection of the site improvements to both CSAH 18 and CSAH 17.
c. The technical details of any final plat, its boundaries and form(s) will need to be reviewed
and approved by the County Surveyor.
2018: These are comments at this time. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact me at dmccormick@co.carver.mn.us or by phone at (952) 466-5208.
Sincerely,
Dan McCormick, P.E. PTOE
Transportation Manager
Carver County Public Works
2022:
These are the County’s comments, updated as of August 5th, 2022. If you have any questions or need
further assistance, please contact staff noted below:
Jack Johansen
Transportation Planner
Carver County Public Works
952.466.5283
jjohansen@co.carver.mn.us
Angie Stenson AICP
Sr. Transportation Planner
Carver County Public Works
952.466.5273
astenson@co.carver.mn.us
Darin Mielke PE
Assistant Public Works Director
Carver County Public Works
952.466.5222
dmielke@co.carver.mn.us
214
215
216
217
218
From:Erin <erinmichelle13@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 13, 2022 7:01 PM
To:Public Comments <publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Subject:Avienda Public Comment
Hello,
I would like to provide some feedback on the proposed amendment to the Avienda plan. I have lived in
Chanhassen for over 11 years now. I attended the earliest meetings about Avienda (previously called The
Quadrant) and have been following the progress and changes. I attended the informational session on
Thursday, and after looking over this proposed plan more, I wanted to provide my input. Originally, this
was supposed to be a neighborhood gathering place for people to hang out and spend time, get
groceries, go shopping, eat dinner...the entertainment, shops and restaurants were the anchor and center
of the project with everything else surrounding that. From this new schematic, I see a humungous
apartment complex now the center of the project with everything else worked around "it." I feel this 5 story
complex made to be 6 stories with the parking garage is going to be an eye sore in our community. It
reminds me of the apartment complexes in Eden Prairie by the transit station which fit well there right off
the freeway, but I don't see them fitting well smack dab in the middle of beautiful landscape in
Chanhassen. They mentioned there will only be 1.75 parking stalls per unit (and there will be up to 417
units now) and they mentioned there would be roughly 100 outdoor parking spots for the apartments. This
doesn't seem like enough parking for the apartment owners and their guests and I can see them taking up
a lot of street parking. Another thing to mention, is a huge apartment complex like this is typically seen
near a transit station or public transit, and there isn't one here. The closest one is off 101 and 212. I do
not want to see a transit station move out here to accommodate this apartment.
As I was driving around running errands this weekend, I made a point to look for 5 story apartments
around the area in Chaska and Eden Prairie, and they are HUGE. They don't look good. They completely
change the appearance of a neighborhood and I didn't see any directly around houses (this apartment will
be stacked in with row houses and butting up to another neighborhood).
Also, what is going to happen if there isn't enough interest in these expensive luxury apartments...will they
sit vacant? Will they be changed to low income housing? Has a study been done to determine if there is
enough demand for apartments in this price range in our community? I realize if there is, it would bring a
lot of tax revenue, but if there isn't, this could be a drain financially on the community. I highly recommend
the council think this through and do the adequate research before approving this change of nearly
doubling the number of apartments.
The other concerning thing I heard the presenter say is he doesn't expect families with children will be
moving into these new housing units and that there wouldn't be kids...the original plans were inclusive of
families and children. When did this change? So this won't be a place to gather and hang out with families
anymore? What is the point of the ice skating rink and gathering area? Everything surrounding this area is
single family homes, why are we trying to completely change this demographic?
Thanks for considering my input/comments. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Kind Regards,
Erin Wong, Chanhassen resident
219
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin's E-Mail <rmspevacek@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2022 6:03 AM
To: Public Comments <publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Subject: Avienda Village open spaces
I am interested in knowing what the plan is for tree and shrub cover and open spaces for wildlife and
pollinators.
I am also interested in knowing how much consideration was given to energy efficiency with regard to
the use of water, natural gas and electricity in the complex.
The city has a unique opportunity here to set an example for not only the community but for the region!
Rochelle Spevacek
Sent from my iPhone
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Swanson <swanels@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2022 12:36 PM
To: Meuwissen, Kim <kmeuwissen@chanhassenmn.gov>; Hokkanen, Laurie
<lhokkanen@chanhassenmn.gov>; Potter, Jenny <jpotter@chanhassenmn.gov>; Ryan, Elise
<eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>
Cc: Ryan, Elise <eryan@chanhassenmn.gov>
Subject: Avienda Development
Planning Commission / Mayor Ryan,
It was my understanding that the project was approved to address the retail needs that were addressed
in the comprehensive plan. It looks like the project continues to be more aligned toward housing and
moves further and further away from what was proposed. The city is once again pursuing changes to
accommodate the developer and current market dynamics and moving away from the original goals of
the project and compliance with the comprehensive plan.
My question is this, do we feel the comprehensive plan no longer addresses the long term needs of the
residents of Chanhassen and therefore changes need to be made to address the needs of the residents?
Or rather are we making amendments to the comprehensive plan to address the ever evolving needs of
the developer. The lack of movement on the project and continued public meetings seem to indicate
the later.
Eric Swanson
1440 Bethesda Cir
Chanhassen, MN 55317
220
From:tburnsfam <tburnsfam@yahoo.com>
Sent:Friday, August 12, 2022 12:56 PM
To:Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@chanhassenmn.gov>
Subject:Submitting Written Comments for Aug 16th Meeting
Kate, please let me know if this is in proper form to share copies with the Commission for
Tuesday's meeting, or if I need to drop off or mail. Thank you! -Cathy Burns
To: Planning Commission Staff
RE: Avienda Application consideration, August 16
th, 2022
I have several concerns about the recent proposal for Avienda, but cannot attend the city
meeting. My concerns are about consistency with the original plan; homebuyers vs. renters;
density; traffic; and blending with the neighborhood.
The Plan
Initially, the physical center of the project was retail. It’s understandable & practical to move
retail to the roadway. However, from the site map, it looks like section 2, now dedicated to
apartments, is a much larger area than what was initially allocated to all multi-unit housing. For
someone who has not looked closely at the project for a couple of years, it seems like a dramatic
departure from the original mission. I ask you to consider not only the project and density vs.
code, but also vs. the original and earlier revised proposals—as many people in the abutting
neighborhoods bought homes and settled in Chanhassen based upon earlier approvals, on
descriptions of an upscale retail and office development with about 20% residential, and a small
portion of a subset section being apartments.
As a layperson who read the Avienda mission statement and prospectus years ago with faith that
the developer and city will largely follow that mission, it did not occur to me that so much – 80%
-- of the residential area would be apartment rentals. I did not know that “Multi-density” was a
euphemism for “High-density.” I naively assumed that the development would mirror the
current composition of Chanhassen, which is a mix of single family, townhome, twin, senior, and
apartment housing, seemingly in that order. As someone who has not followed the project
closely, but trusted when I bought my home that the interests of existing taxpayer / residents
would be considered equally to a reasonable developer profit and the city’s desire to increase the
tax base, I feel blindsided by how much the project has deviated from the original.
Home-Owning Affordability
Housing affordability is not just about subsidies. It flows from a balance of supply and
demand. Currently there is an historic low in housing inventory. There are available apartments
in and around Chanhassen, even in newly-built developments. Adding > 400 market-rate
apartments will only exacerbate the problem—pricing out first-time homeowners, forcing them
to continue renting, and making it difficult for seniors to downsize. As a parent of three young
adults who rent apartments in other cities, rent because historic high prices stemming from low
221
inventory of for-sale property hinder buying, I see downsides to increasing rentals vs. affordable
townhomes, twins etc.
Market-rate rentals, at $2000-$2600 per month, equate to a mid-range $2300 mortgage
payment on a $400,000 home (at 20% down, 5% interest, $200/month property tax, $100
insurance). Developing to increase available residential property for sale will increase
supply and might lower our existing property values, but at least there is a societal
benefit, in that increased supply should help young & lower-income people to become
homeowners, invested for the long-term in our community.
Density & Traffic
At the Avienda presentation last night, the speaker estimated that 50% of the project was
residential. And despite the fact that Avienda has been billed as an “Upscale Retail
Development,” the speaker called the proposed 400+ apartment complex “The center of the
project.”
The original Development Design Standards (attached, p. 3) for Avienda proposed no more than
20% residential. In those standards, the following types of residential were outlined:
Multiple-family dwellings
Senior housing independent living and assisted
Single family homes (Density of 3-6 units an acre)
Townhomes, including detached townhomes and twin homes.
The single-family and twin homes, which would mirror the existing area, as well as mitigate high
density, are notably absent from the current proposal.
Given three entrances/ exits to Avienda, and over 3000 parking spots, the high-density
installation at Avienda could add 1000 cars--likely more than doubling the traffic along Bluff
Creek Boulevard. There is already concern among neighbors about the safety of bicyclists,
pedestrians, and kids at play along that street, where people access two stairways to the below-
grade trail, as well as walk down the sidewalk to the park at Pioneer Pass.
Will there be access, and even better, some kind of encouragement through signs, sidewalks, or
trail connectors, for Avienda residents and visitors to access the city trail from Lyman
Boulevard? Accessing the stairways on Bluff Creek Blvd and River Rock Dr S is already
dangerous given the current amount of vehicular traffic. Further down the trail toward the high
school, many people cross Lyman against traffic, with no crosswalk, at the intersection with
Audubon at the Water Pump Station, instead of continuing down the sidewalk to the underpass
that connects to the trail across Lyman. Would a connector from Avienda to the Water Pump
area entrance to the trail and accentuating the section to the underpass help alleviate both the
danger of crossing Lyman and the congestion along Bluff Creek Blvd between River Rock and
Bluff Creek Dr.?
222
Did the recently done traffic study include counting cars at various times of day and days of the
week? I have not seen a tracking cable across any of the local streets.
Fitting in with Existing Neighborhood
Four hundred apartments in one portion of the Avienda lot represents a huge deposit of a new
type of housing. It does not fit or integrate with the developments to the west: The Preserve at
Bluff Creek; Camden Ridge; Pioneer Pass; Liberty on Bluff Creek. How many homes/units are
within those four developments? Five hundred? Six hundred? These existing developments and
their publicly-accessible amenities (such as the park at Pioneer Pass) are spread out across much
more land than proposed residences at Avienda. The large complex of apartments does not fit
the area and could overwhelm existing resources and infrastructure.
Those existing developments west of Avienda have substantial green space such that they
integrate with the wetlands and the rural/suburban feel that drew many of us to
Chanhassen. Liberty on Bluff Creek, the highest-density of the neighborhoods along Bluff
Creek Blvd & Drive, has a lot of green space around and between the rows of townhomes. What
is the hard-surface coverage percentage proposed at Avienda? Will it integrate with the
neighboring area?
Did the developer, at the outset, do field testing and canvas neighbors? Is there a point where the
project has so veered from the original mission that this needs to be readdressed? (Beyond the
mid-summer presentation given with one-week notice). Understanding that property owners
have rights to develop land that they own within the parameters of city needs and code, should
their developments not also be acceptable to the community? And integrate with, if not fit with
the feel of, the existing neighborhood? It would be different if Avienda were just abutting our
neighborhood, with no access. However, because one of the three main arteries through the
development continues through our neighborhood, it would be nice to see as seamless an
integration – not just transition – as possible.
I understand the goals to make Chanhassen more walkable and bring in more
residents. However, apartments are more transient, not as invested in the community as are
homeowners. And higher density scale increases congestion and hinders walkability. Finally, is
the revised Avienda project so huge that it could draw away from Chanhassen city center? Is a
goal to develop a second city center, a Chan South? (An urban area abutting a single-family
residential area and wetlands?)
Thank you for considering my concerns!
-Cathy Burns
River Rock Dr. S, Chanhassen
Carver County Housing Study (shows 590 market-rate apartments need through 2040)
https://chanhassen.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&meta_id=12252
Avienda Development Design Standards (re: 20-30% residential)
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/1270/637863379814700877
223
From:Jon Gilbert <jgilb.raca@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 15, 2022 10:44 PM
To:Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@chanhassenmn.gov>
Subject:Questions/comments re Avienda plan 8.1
Dear Ms Aanenson -
I have some concerns/comments about the proposed Avienda plan, 8.1.
Density
The developer has not attempted to design within the current Chanhassen 2040 Comprehensive Plan;
exceeding density standards for both the 2040 plan as well as the PUD. An excess of 41 units is noted. If
the developer maximizes density without needing a ‘variance’ to the current 2040 plan or the PUD
standards, this might open up space for ‘retail and walkability’ described below, e.g. decrease row
homes or number of apt units. My preference would be to see fewer / no row homes and increased
area for Chanhassen residents, not just for new apartment or Avienda housing residents.
Please do not move forward with updating the 2040 plan solely to accommodate an overreaching
design. Additionally, the ratio of commercial:residential has shifted and no longer represents what was
originally proposed to residents/City as a destination center for the SW metro.
Please also refer to EXHIBIT A, AVIENDA CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT DESIGN
STANDARDS item 6. Housing for more information about density expectations per -
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/1270/637863379814700877
Traffic
The previous traffic study to support the updated 2005 AUAR evaluated various quadrants, whereas the
developers analysis focuses only on the NE quadrant and does not take into account additional traffic
from other recent housing developments (west of Audubon, between Autumn Woods Drive and
Butternut Drive). Additionally, the developers traffic study does not appear to make consistent
comparisons of retail, commercial, housing, restaurants, etc, among proposed plan 8.1 and previously
approved Concepts A & B. There appears to be some bias in the choice of concepts to make the traffic
count look favorable. Overall, it appears the updated 2017 traffic study conducted by Kimley Horn
presents a more thorough review of potential impacts to traffic, not just the change in square footage of
the elements changed by plan 8.1
Retail and Walkability
While the updated plan still shows some walkability, the entertainment area has been reduced and
appears to be driven by retail adjacent to the newly defined open area. Concept drawings show
options, such as pickle ball, ice skating, concerts that would have to be either accessed via the retail area
or be available for a fee to attendees. If possible, can the City work with the developer to provide
alternative space for residents that would make amenities available at no or little cost? The City offers
adequate pickle ball space at the Recreation Center. Could the City or developer consider adding two
platform tennis courts in areas that are potentially freed up by adhering to density requirements?
Senior housing
224
The concept seems acceptable. There is a previous Maxfield report,
https://chanhassen.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&meta_id=12252, which suggests that
the market demand for Chanhassen senior housing after 2020 would be 316 units. The number of units
proposed in plan 8.1 did not details the ratio of units for full care, assisted living and independent living
for senior housing. Is there an updated senior housing market study that supports the design proposed
for plan 8.1? Also, a holding pond or water feature seems to have appeared south of the proposed
housing (in exchange for the water previously shown in the NE corner of the plat which is now shown as
a Child Care Center). Does the AUAR or other impact studies need updating to address changes in
location of drainage basins?
Kate, I understand that each step for Avienda will need to go through the various approvals. In the case
of plan 8.1, it seem some aspects might proceed if they can be carved out, however, the addition of 53
row houses has offset the balance the prior plans once had. Increasing apartments seems reasonable as
the building footprint remains relatively similar, however, the center stage of the apartments seems to
have overshadowed what Chanhassen residents were expecting of the development, based upon public
comments during the ’neighborhood meeting’ last Thursday.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
- Jon
P.S. While I have enjoyed pickle ball in the past, I think Chanhassen residents would benefit from a
couple of paddle tennis courts (either within the space of Avienda or near the tennis courts at the Rec.
Center).
From:Z Zhang <zhexinzhang@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 15, 2022 9:55 PM
To:Public Comments <publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Subject:Avienda feedback from Aug 2022 open house
Hello,
I want to pass along some feedback to the Planning Commision around the Avienda development since
I'm not sure now if I will be able to attend the planning commission meeting itself due to a potential
conflict.
After attending the open house, I am both encouraged and discouraged by some of the changes.
I am supportive of creating a larger buffer zone between the existing neighborhood and the retail area
with additional row houses and townhouses. I also am supportive of creating that additional small open
field space for outdoor activities and the removal of the movie theater. I am supportive of the upscale
feel that the developer is trying to pursue for the development.
I am concerned, however, with the dramatic increasein apartment density that's being proposed. A
fellow attendee at the open house pointed out that this goes far beyond the allowances the city has and
225
I agree that we should not exceed those allowances any further than the original 250 units planned. At
the open house, the concerns brought forth by the attendees are exacerbated by increased density (lack
of parking to support, parking encroachment into existing neighborhoods, increased need for lawn
enforcement, etc). So it seems to make little sense to allow for such a large increase in density.
Thank you for taking my feedback,
Zhexin Zhang
G:\PLAN\2017 Planning Cases\17-10 Avienda Preliminary Plat & PUD\2022 Amended Avienda PUD\Email from residents
226