Loading...
03-07-23 PC Agenda and Packet A.7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER B.PUBLIC HEARINGS B.1 Consider a request for an IUP for Oak Creek Wholesale Nursery C.GENERAL BUSINESS D.APPROVAL OF MINUTES D.1 Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated January 17, 2023. E.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS F.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS F.1 Year End Review and 2023 Work Plan F.2 City Council Action Items G.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION H.ADJOURNMENT I.OPEN DISCUSSION I.1 Discussion on Lot Cover Variances AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 2023 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m. as outlined in the official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If, however, this does not appear to be possible, the Chairperson will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. 1 If a constituent or resident sends an email to staff or the Planning Commission, it must be made part of the public record based on State Statute. If a constituent or resident sends an email to the Mayor and City Council, it is up to each individual City Council member and Mayor if they want it to be made part of the public record or not. There is no State Statute that forces the Mayor or City Council to share that information with the public or be made part of the public record. Under State Statute, staff cannot remove comments or letters provided as part of the public input process. 2 Planning Commission Item March 7, 2023 Item Consider a request for an IUP for Oak Creek Wholesale Nursery File No.2023-03 Item No: B.1 Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner Applicant Tim Erhart Present Zoning Agricultural Estate District (A2) Land Use Residential Low Density Acerage 75.6 Density NA Applicable Regulations Chapter 20, Article IV, Div. 5. Interim Use Permits Chapter 20, Section 20-232, General Issuance Standards Chapter 20, Section 20-269, Wholesale and retail nurseries Chapter 20, Article X, A-2, Agricultural Estate District SUGGESTED ACTION The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the Interim Use Permit for the operation of a wholesale nursery for a period of ten (10) years or the development of the site subject to the conditions of approval, And adopts the findings of fact and recommendation. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval of an Interim Use Permit for the operation of a tree nursery on the 3 The applicant is requesting approval of an Interim Use Permit for the operation of a tree nursery on the property. BACKGROUND On June 13, 2022, the Chanhassen City Council approved the Final Plat for Erhart Farm creating 19 single-family lots, eight outlots, and public right-of-way. The nursery stock will be grown on Outlots E, F, G and H, Erhart Farm. The applicant has been growing trees on the property since the 1980s. More recently, the applicant has applied for and received a nursery stock grower certificate from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. DISCUSSION Wholesale nurseries require interim use permit approval from the city. To allow for planned and orderly development, the city finds it necessary to regulate the expansion or intensification of these uses and to provide standards for any future retail nursery or garden centers. It is the intent of these standards to regulate the creation and the expansion of existing nurseries. The creation or expansion of these uses will be allowed only by interim use permit by the city council. The applicant does not intend to permit the general public to access the nursery. Rather, all trees are sold directly to tree spade operators who remove them on-site via their tree spade equipment and depart immediately once removed with ingress/egress being had from W 96th Street. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the interim use permit to operate a wholesale nursery (Oak Creek Nursery) for ten (10) years or development of the site, whichever comes first, and adoption of the findings of fact and recommendation. ATTACHMENTS Oak Creek Wholesale Nursery IUP Staff Report Findings of Fact Development Review Application Project Narrative Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List Carver County Comments 4 CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: March 7, 2023 CC DATE: March 20, 2023 REVIEW DEADLINE: April 4, 2023 CASE #: 2023-03 BY: RG, EH, MJ SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of an Interim Use Permit for the operation of a tree nursery on the property. LOCATION:775 West 96th Street APPLICANT:Tim Erhart 9611 Meadowlark Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING:Agricultural Estate District, A-2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density and Office ACREAGE:75.6 acres LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city has limited discretion in approving or denying interim use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the use standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable use standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant has been growing trees on the property since the 1980s. More recently, the applicant has applied for and received a nursery stock grower certificate from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. To maintain this certification, the applicant will need annual inspections of the growing operation by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. Nursery stock grower "Nursery stock grower" includes, but is not limited to, a person who raises, grows, or propagates nursery stock, outdoors or indoors. PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the Interim Use Permit for the operation of a wholesale nursery for ten (10) years or development of the site, whichever comes first, subject to the conditions of approval, And adoption of the findings of fact and recommendation.” 5 Page 2 of 9 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article IV, Div. 5. Interim Use Permits Chapter 20, Section 20-232, General Issuance Standards Chapter 20, Section 20-269, Wholesale and retail nurseries Chapter 20, Article X, A-2, Agricultural Estate District BACKGROUND On June 13, 2022, the Chanhassen City Council approved the Final Plat for Erhart Farm creating 19 single-family lots, eight outlots, and public right-of-way: 6 Page 3 of 9 On October 25, 2021, City Council approved a grading development contract for the project to permit the developer to initiate site grading and tree removal in preparation for the infrastructure improvements for the development. On August 9, 2021, City Council approved: The ordinance rezoning the development from Agricultural Estate District (A2) to Single-Family Residential District (RSF) (Blocks 1 and 2); Preliminary plat with variances for street width, front yard setback (Lot 1, Block 1), wetland setback (Lot 1, Block 1) and street frontages (Lots 3 thru 9, Block 1). On January 25, 2021, City Council approved the Interim Use Permit to allow site grading to create an open water wetland. The project began in 2021 winter, but due to warm weather, could not be completed until 2022. On August 14, 2020, the City Council approved the adjustment to the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) Primary Zone boundary to encompass the additional 3+ acre area adjacent to Highway 212 in Outlot H. (Planning Case #2020-13) On July 7, 2020, the City of Chanhassen received a complete Wetland Delineation Report for the property and a Notice of Application was sent on July 15, 2020. The on-site Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) was held on July 29, 2020 in order to review the wetland boundaries and types. The wetland types that were delineated on the property were Types 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. The TEP and Local Government Unit (LGU) concurred with the boundaries and types and the Notice of Decision was issued on August 8, 2020. As part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan adopted on February 10, 2020, the city approved a three acre Land Use amendment from Residential Low Density to Office in the western portion of the parcel encompassing the area adjacent to Highway 212 in Outlot H. In 2008, as part of the city’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the city approved a Land Use amendment of the westerly 10 acres of the property from Residential-Low Density to Office. On October 23, 2006, City Council approved Wetland Alteration Permit #06-32 for the construction of an access road and stormwater pond. The wetland mitigation for this is located in Outlot G north of the large wetland complex On July 10, 1995, City Council approved the preliminary and final plat of Butternut Ridge Addition, Subdivision #95-9, creating one lot and one outlot. This subdivision created the 2½- acre home site on the property and kept the balance of the site for the owner’s personal use, tree growing and future development. 7 Page 4 of 9 SITE CONSTRAINTS Bluff Creek corridor This property is located within the Bluff Creek Overlay District in the northwesterly portion of the property. At this time, no development is proposed near the Bluff Creek primary zone. The City of Chanhassen established the Bluff Creek Overlay District by ordinance in 1998 to protect the Bluff Creek Corridor, wetlands, bluffs, and significant stands of mature trees through the use of careful site design and other low-impact practices. This parcel is partially encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Section 20-1255 of the Chanhassen City Code requires a conditional use permit for all development within the Bluff Creek Corridor. The Bluff Creek Corridor primary zone is located on the property. The Primary Corridor is designated open space. All structures must meet a 40-foot structural setback from the Primary Corridor boundary as required by Chanhassen City Code. In addition, no grading is allowed within the first 20 feet of the Primary Corridor. Wetland Protection There are numerous wetlands located on the parcel. The proposed use of the property as a nursery should not impact these wetlands. Bluff Protection There are bluffs on the western portion of the property. The tree growing area along Powers Boulevard is separated from the balance of the parcel by a bluff and the Bluff Creek primary zone. 8 Page 5 of 9 Shoreland Management The property is not located within a shoreland protection district. Floodplain Overlay This property is not located within a federally designated floodplain. ACCESS Access to the property is primarily off Eagle Ridge Road and West 96 th Street. Outlot H is accessible via Powers Boulevard. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL There is no grading being proposed as part of the wholesale nursery. The Engineering Department has reviewed the Interim Use Permit (IUP) submittal for 775 W 96th Street (“Oak Creek Nursery”). 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 proposal, to inform the applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings. Proposed conditions are requirements that Engineering and Public Works recommends be formally imposed on the submittal 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 plans submitted with this application have been reviewed only for the purpose of determining their feasibility and providing utility and transportation facilities for the IUP in accordance with City Standards. A recommendation of IUP 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 updated plans for the project, as applicable. The City of Chanhassen Engineering and Public Works Departments 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. 2. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the proposed IUP 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 and can be approved. 9 Page 6 of 9 3. The applicant is applying to receive an IUP for a wholesale nursery as required under Section 20-269 of City Ordinance on the property located at 775 W 96th Street (“Oak Creek Nursery”). The applicant’s narrative states that tree growing operations and sales of trees have been occurring since the mid-80s on the property. All trees are sold directly to tree spade operators who remove them on-site via their tree spade equipment and depart immediately once removed with ingress/egress being had from W 96 th Street; staff recommends this route continue to be used. There is a well on site which supplies any needed watering to the growing areas so there is no need or request made for municipal water services. The applicant provided a site plan, dated December 19, 2022, which depicts the growing areas along with their proposed accesses. Based on the applicant’s narrative it would appear that the requirements of Section 20-269(b) are met, however additional details and construction plans are required regarding the accesses to Oak Creek Nursery and its growing areas. a. Section 20-269(b)(1) requires that wholesale nurseries be located on a collector or arterial road; the property meets this requirement as it abuts Eagle Ridge Road and Powers Boulevard, a city collector road and a Carver County minor arterial road, respectively. Eagle Ridge Road is planned to be extended as a result of the “Erhart Farm” subdivision approved on June 13, 2022, by City Council. The extension is tentatively scheduled to occur in 2023. The extension will provide connectivity between Eagle Ridge Road and W 96th Street, and eventually will continue west connecting to Powers Boulevard. The proposed access point to Oak Creek Nursery as depicted on the provided site plan would be had from the northwest leg of the future intersection of Eagle Ridge Road and W 96th Street. However, no further details regarding how the access will interface with the public right-of-way and future roadway extension were provided with the application. The city has standard details regarding typical accesses, e.g. commercial or industrial driveway accesses. These standards account for how accesses manage drainage, tracking of sediment and other materials out into the road, pedestrian safety, durability and approved material, etc. In order to ensure adequate management and interface with the public right-of-way is being had, the applicant must provide these details for review and approval to the city in the form of construction plans. See proposed condition 1 and 2. LANDSCAPING Nursery Stock Certification Requirements (a) All nursery stock growing at sites identified by nursery stock dealers or nursery stock growers and submitted for inspection must be inspected by the commissioner within the previous 12 months prior to sale and found apparently free from quarantine and regulated nonquarantine pests as well as significantly dangerous or potentially damaging plant pests. 10 Page 7 of 9 MISCELLANEOUS The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of 10 years from the date of City Council approval. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the interim use permit. The Interim Use Permit shall terminate on the happening of any of the following events, whichever first occurs: (1) The date stated in the permit; (2) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit is issued; (3) Upon change in the city's zoning regulations which renders the use nonconforming; (4) Upon the subdivision of the property or the alteration of the lot lines of the property.) Sec 20-269 Wholesale And Retail Nurseries 1. Intent. It is the intent of this section to recognize that preexisting retail nurseries and garden centers are located within the city and may be in conflict with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. These establishments predate current ordinance standards. To allow for planned and orderly development, the city finds it necessary to regulate the expansion or intensification of these uses and to provide standards for any future retail nursery or garden centers. It is the intent of this section to promote the health, safety, general welfare, aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating the creation and the expansion of existing retail nurseries and garden centers. The creation or expansion of these uses will be allowed only by interim use permit by the city council. 2. The following conditions will apply to wholesale and retail nurseries: 1. The site must be on a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. * Powers Boulevard is an arterial road. Eagle Ridge Road is a collector road. 2. The minimum lot size is five acres. * The site is 75 acres. 3. All storage and yard areas as well as buildings must be set back 50 feet from public or private road rights-of-way, and 300 feet from an adjacent single-family residence or a minimum of 50 feet from a side lot line, whichever is greater. * There are no proposed storage areas. Trees shall be spaded from the growing areas and removed from the property. 4. All outdoor storage areas must be buffered from adjacent properties. Buffering may be accomplished using berms, fencing, landscaping, natural topography, or increased setbacks. The city council may require storage areas to be completely screened by 100 percent opaque fencing or berming. * There will be no storage areas. Trees shall be spaded from the growing areas and removed from the property. 5. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The city council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. *Due to the surrounding residential homes, hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday – Friday; 9:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. Saturday; and no Sunday operation. 11 Page 8 of 9 6. Light sources shall be shielded. * No lighting is proposed. All operation shall be during daylight hours. 7. No outside speaker systems shall be allowed without approval from the city council. * No speakers are proposed. 8. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Prior to the permit expiring, the applicant may request an extension to the interim use permit by submitting a new application. The renewal application will be subject to all city ordinances including any new ordinances enacted after the original approval. * The termination date shall be 10 years from approval, due to violation of conditions of approval or with the subdivision of the property. 9. One wall sign not to exceed 90 square feet and one monument sign not exceeding 24 square feet in size or eight feet in height shall be permitted on the premises. The council may further restrict the size and location of signs if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. * No signage is proposed. PERMITS Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained including but not limited to Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, Carver County, and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. UTILITIES City utilities are not available at present to the property. The nursery shall utilize a private well for its water. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the interim use permit to operate a wholesale nursery (Oak Creek Nursery) for ten (10) years or development of the site, whichever comes first, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall operate the nursery tree growing operation as shown in the Oak Creek Nursery Map dated 12/19/2022. 2. The applicant shall annually renew their nursery stock grower certification and provide the City a copy of their nursery stock grower certificate. 3. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday – Friday; 9:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. Saturday; and no Sunday operation. 12 Page 9 of 9 4. The applicant shall provide the city construction plans for the proposed accesses to the site for review and approval by the City prior to the commencement of wholesale nursery operations. 5. Any vehicle tracking onto public rights-of-way from the site shall be the responsibility of the property owner to remove and clean immediately after the occurrence, or no later than the same day of the occurrence. If the city is required to remove and clean tracking at any point from the site, the property owner shall reimburse the city for any expense incurred to remediate the issue. 6. All disturbed areas shall be restored at the time of removal of the tree stock to prevent site erosion. The applicant shall prepare a detail or plan on how the tree holes will be restored for City review and approval. The plan may include the following: filling the hole with common excavation; adding 6 inches of topsoil; adding a specific seed mix or replanting with trees; adding erosion control blankets or other ground stabilizer; and watering and maintaining as needed. 7. No grading or planting is allowed within the first 20 feet of the Bluff Creek Primary Corridor, nor within any wetlands or wetland buffer areas. 8. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained including but not limited to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District and Carver County. And adoption of the findings of fact and recommendation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Project Narrative 4. Public Hearing notice and mailing list 13 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Tim Erhart for an Interim Use Permit to operate Oak Creek Wholesale Nursery. On March 7, 2023, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Tim Erhart for an interim use permit to operate a wholesale nursery for the property located at 775 W 96th Street. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed conditional use which was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A-2. 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential Low Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is: Outlots D, E, F, G and H, Erhart Farm, Carver County, Minnesota, and Lot 1, Block 1, Butternut Ridge Addition, Carver County, Minnesota 4. Use Standards: a. The proposed use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city since it will primarily be a tree growing operation with minimal access for tree spading and removal. b. The proposed use will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance. A wholesale nursery is permitted by the zoning regulations as an interim use until the development of the property consistent with the comprehensive plan. c. The proposed use will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. The use shall continue the tree growing operation on the property with minimal access for tree spading and removal. 14 2 d. The proposed use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. e. The proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. f. The proposed use will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Public water will not be used for the tree growing operation. g. The proposed use will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. h. The proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. The proposed use will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed use will not depreciate surrounding property values. l. The proposed use will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Article IV of the City Code. 5. The planning commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the council shall issue interim permits only if it finds, based on the proposed location, that: a. The use meets the standards of a conditional use permit use standards set forth in section 2-232 of the City Code. b. The use conforms to the zoning regulations. c. The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district. d. The date or event that will terminat e the use can be identified with certainty. e. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. f. The user agrees to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for permission of the use. 15 3 6. The planning report #2023-03 dated March 7, 2023, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the interim use permit subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 7th day of March 2023. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY:___________________________________ Its Chairman 16 -03 COTMUN|TY DEVELOPMENT DEPART ET{T Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevad Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-110O/ Fax: (952) 227-1110 Subrnittal Date *cnlorcnAttuAssrtt APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW b PC Clate:a CC Date:)3 6GDay Rwieiv Oate: (Reter to the afirlpdate Adtcs,io,l Cher;Hisf lq Bquhd sub/,l,ital tufomsiiott tH mui a@,npely this af,icatln) n Comprehensive Plan Amendment......................... $600 E Conditional Use Permit (CUP) E Single-Family Residence ...................-........... $325 ! rut ohers....... ..................... $500 E Subdivision (SuB) ! Create 3 lots or |ess........................................$300 E Create over 3 |ots.......................$600 + $15 per lot( lots) E lvhtes & Bor.rnds (2 lob)..................................S3fi) ! Consolidato 1ob..............................................$150tr'lnterim Use Permit (lUP) $325 ss00 fl eOminisraWe Subd. (Line Adjustsnent).........I ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence.. Eirut ourers......E Final Plat + $15 p€r lot .$150 s700' f| Rezoning (REZ) E Planned Unit Development (PUD) . ! Minor Amendment to existing PUDI att ourers E Sign Plan Review................................................... $150 I Site Pbn neuew (SPR) fl Administrative ..................... $100 E Commerciaulndus&ial Districts'...................... $500 'lndude number of 9!E!49 qnployees: 'lndude number of 49!! employ€€s: tr Metes & Bounds SuMivision (2 deeds) "'"I:,1';tff;l'3f;fffS,y"0rc"""' n zoninsAppsar '(lndudes $450 escrow for attomey costs) 'Additbnal esdw rnay ba Equir€d lo. dl6 apdication8 thrcWh ttE &vsbpl,loot cortract. ! Vacation of Eas6ments/Right-of{^,ay (VAC)........ $300 (Additiimal ,ocording fees rtay apdy) I Variance (VAR)$200 $150 $275 $200 $s00 D Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) ! Single-FamilyResilenceE ntt ottrers n Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) s750 $100 $500 El Residential Disricts......................................... $500 Plus $5 per dwelling unit ( units) p Homou- siln (cly to l.Etd dd srove)..........--.............'... $200 n Property Owners' List within 500' (city to generate after prB-application rneetihg) ....... v Escrow for Recording Ooalments (check all that E Conditional Use Permit Permit tr Vacation ?\addresses) $3 per address $50 per document ,d ! Site Plan Agreement ! Wetland Afteration Permit Easements ( easements) ! OeeOs TOTAL FEE: Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) Section 2: Required lnformation Description of Proposal: Property Address or Location:AJE llL.-zt-LL Parcel #:15tq1 DZqo Total Acreage:15 ,to Wetlands Present?.L tng: Present Land Use Designation , Qu ta) b4,"iL Requested Land Use Designation: Existing Use of Property: [f Cnect uox it separate narrative is attacfi H Erh,(<rLegal Description: Present Zoning: 17 Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, sub.iect only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the app€al p€riod. lf this application has not beon signod by the proporty owner, I hav6 attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter p€rtaining to this application. I will keep mysetf informod of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I furthor undersiand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certiry that the information and exhibits submitted are true and conecl. Contact Phone: Cell: Fax: Date: PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, hav6 full l6gal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subiect only to the right to obiect at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may b€ charged for consulting fe€s, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certiry that the information and exhibits submitted are lrue and conect. Name:Contact: Phone:Address a6ll N an &o \ ,.- -r. lr L a rt{.At 2 -a63 - 6'' 1r Cityistatezip:Cell: Fax:Email:t( Signature:Oate: PRoJECTE+l€ill{Ensfth{i}#b) Name Contact: Lt't"?8L's+tlL City/State/Zip:Cell FaxEmail€L VUho should receive copies of staff reports?'Other Contact lnformatlon: El Pmp€rty Own€r E Applicant El EngineerpOtrer Email tcrl^,, ^,t/, a l e lc(t',/^.t Email Name: Address Ema City/Statezip: Email:Email INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT:Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicablo City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this apdication, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and conf€r with the Planning Deparunent to determine the sp€cific ordinance and applicabl€ procedural roquiroments. A determination of completeness of the application shall b€ made within 15 business days of apdication submittal. A wriften notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. copy to the city for processing. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital No*. Address: crty'/statozip: E-oil. Signatur€: l.1.,-- btVl-t1 ?? Addr6ss: Phone: Section4: Notification lnformation 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Tax name Tax add l1 Tax add l2 Siteadd City Mn ZipBRYAN PRANGE                            1171 HOMESTEAD LN  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 1171 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN 55317CARISSA E HAVERLY                       750 96TH ST W  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 750 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317CHARLES E & SANDRA R WORM TRUSTS        760 W 96TH ST  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 CHANHASSENDANIEL G ARLIG ETAL                     710 96TH ST W  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 710 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317G&M LAURENT FAMILY LTD PTRSHP           23655 ZINN AVE  PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372‐8885 1371 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN 55318GREGORY M FALCONER                      720 W 96TH ST  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 720 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317JAMES L BROWNELL REV TRUST              1190 HOMESTEAD LN  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8612 1190 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN 55317JASON PAUL HOLTHUS                      9315 EAGLE RIDGE RD  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐2708 9315 EAGLE RIDGE RD CHANHASSEN 55317JOHN JENSEN II                          1181 HOMESTEAD LN  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 1181 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN 55317JOHNNIE J & ELAINE A MEYERING           1050 HOMESTEAD LN  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8634 1050 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN 55317JONATHAN NYKANEN                        9317 HAWKCREST CT  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9317 HAWKCREST CT CHANHASSEN 55317KEVIN J & PATRICIA A ELLSWORTH          9601 FLINTLOCK TRL  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8605 9601 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN 55317MARK A METZ                             9701 FLINTLOCK TR  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8637 9701 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN 55317MATTHEW E HOTCHKISS                     9307 HAWKCREST CT  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐4859 9307 HAWKCREST CT CHANHASSEN 55317MATTHEW JOHN SWANSON                    9305 EAGLE RIDGE RD  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9305 EAGLE RIDGE RD CHANHASSEN 55317MEGAN A STEWART                         9700 FLINTLOCK TRL  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9700 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN 55317RICHARD A & BETTY A DERHAAG             711 96TH ST W  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 711 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317RONALD L & KOLLEEN M BROWN              9650 FLINTLOCK TRL  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8605 9650 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN 55317SHARON NICOLE ESTRADA MORA              9651 FLINTLOCK TRL  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9651 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN 55317STATE OF MINNESOTA ‐ DOT                395 JOHN IRELAND BLVD  SAINT PAUL, MN 55155 CHANHASSENSTEPHEN JAPUNTICH                       9297 HAWKCREST CT  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9297 HAWKCREST CT CHANHASSEN 55317TIMOTHY A & DAWNE M ERHART              9611 MEADOWLARK LN  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8695 775 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317VINOD VARMA                             9325 EAGLE RIDGE RD  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9325 EAGLE RIDGE RD CHANHASSEN 55317WESLEY & CAROL DUNSMORE                 730 96TH ST W  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 730 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317WILLIAM DENNIS JOHNSON                  9600 FLINTLOCK TRL  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8605 9600 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN 55317WILLIAM F & MARY E HEINLEIN             721 96TH ST W  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8603 721 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN 55317WILLIAM G & ELIZABETH M AHERN           1191 HOMESTEAD LN  CHANHASSEN, MN 55317‐8613 1191 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN 55317 25 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 February 23, 2023 City of Chanhassen c/o Bob Generous Senior Planner 952-227-1131 Delivered via email: bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Re: Development Review Comments: Oak Creek Nursery IUP Located within outlots D, E, F, G, H of the Erhart Farms Plat in the City of Chanhassen; PID 251570290 Thank you for the opportunity to review the development proposal in the City of Chanhassen. Consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and County Codes, and other official controls of the County, the following are comments and recommended conditions of approval and as potential requirements for any necessary permits to be issued for the project: 1. A response letter to this memo is not required by Public Works. 2. Access to the development will be from the western terminus of W 96th St Ln which intersects with Eagle Ridge Rd 1/3 mile west of W 96 St intersection with Hwy 101. a. There is no proposed access onto CSAH 17 with this development. 3. No Transportation Impact Analysis is required from Public Works. a. There are no significant impacts to Hwy 101 as a result of this development. These are the County’s comments at this time. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please contact the staff noted below: Jack Johansen Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works 952.466.5283 jjohansen@co.carver.mn.us Angie Stenson AICP Transportation Planning Manager 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 26 Planning Commission Item March 7, 2023 Item Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated January 17, 2023. File No.Item No: D.1 Agenda Section APPROVAL OF MINUTES Prepared By Jenny Potter, Sr. Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION "The Chanhassen Planning Commission approves its January 17, 2023 meeting minutes." SUMMARY BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION 27 ATTACHMENTS Planning Commission Minutes dated January 17, 2023 28 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2023 CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chair Noyes called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Eric Noyes, Kelsey Alto, Erik Johnson, Perry Schwartz, Ryan Soller, Edward Goff. MEMBERS ABSENT:None. STAFF PRESENT:MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner; Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer, Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Keri & Cordell Mack 6621 Minnewashta Parkway Peter Eskuche 18318 Minnetonka Blvd, Wayzata Mary Van Beusekom 6610 Rocky Island, Excelsior GENERAL BUSINESS: 1. Chair and Vice Chair Positions Senior Planner Al-Jaff stated that former Chairman Mark Von Oven was elected to City Council. While the Vice Chair acts as the Chair during the absence of the Chair, the Planning Commission must appoint a new Chair and Vice Chair to serve until April so that there is someone to serve as backup for the current Vice Chair. A new election will be held on April 4, 2023. Commissioner Schwartz moved, Commissioner Goff seconded to nominate Commissioner Alto as Vice Chair. Commissioner Alto moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded to nominate Commissioner Noyes as Chairman. All voted in favor and the motions carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 6621 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME Associate Planner Young-Walters gave a presentation on the item, noting the Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and replace with a new single-family home and patio; they are also proposing a designated guest parking area that encroaches into the city’s right-of- way. The Applicant has noted it is unsafe to back out on to Minnewashta Parkway and the road does not allow on-street parking. The Applicant also noted they are improving the non- conformity with regards to the lake setback by moving the house further back from the lake, and 29 Planning Commission Minutes – January 17, 2023 2 that the constricted building pad does not allow for building on the lot without setback variances. They also propose vegetative buffers and rain gardens to offset. Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer noted the proposed plans show increased impervious area and one concern is that the storm water would run directly into Lake Minnewashta. The Applicant proposed a vegetative buffer and two rain gardens; Staff’s assessment is that increase in impervious surface cannot be offset by those improvements as they are required within the city nonetheless. He spoke about the parking pad within city right-of-way and noted Engineering cannot be in support due to Article 17-5 of the City Ordinance. Engineering feels there is adequate room on the site for parking and a turnaround. Mr. Young-Walters spoke about practical difficulties and noted staff supports the requested front and shoreland variances, as the width of the lot does not provide a viable building pad. Regarding the driveway, the Applicant would have reasonable use and quite a bit of off-street parking even if the segment that encroaches into the right-of-way were removed. The four-car garage accommodates parking with four cars in front of the garage plus another three cars. Mr. Young-Walters noted the driveway is decreased from existing and the home footprint has increased by 1,800 square feet. Staff believes there is reasonable use on this parcel without the requested lot cover variance. Staff recommends approval of the setback variances and denial of the requested lot cover and parking area variances. Cordell Mack, Applicant, shared about his family’s 25 year history in the area noting the concept is to build a home that keeps their family and extended family near. He appreciates city staff’s involvement with the complexity on the property. Mr. Mack noted the family lives in the current home and they know what it is like trying to move cars around so a 16-year-old can exit the property safely onto Minnewashta Parkway. He shared about the difficulties with snow removal due to limited setbacks and the difficulties in moving the cars around to exit the property and the lack of off-street parking. They have lived this reality and are not asking for “wishes” that are not practical. Mr. Mack spoke about excessive speeds and industrial trucks using the road and stated they must get this right to enter and exit the property safely. He noted this is trying to accomplish a project that is minimal to their family needs, that they can grow with, they can keep their children around them, and provide safety. Peter Eskuche appreciates staff’s work on this project and noted the biggest “miss” is the fact that it is a very low lot and they cannot have a basement. To accommodate mechanical storage they must make it up in the garage and cannot build a three-story house and still meet the conforming building height. In analyzing the driveway, the circle drive that is currently there is very challenging, and he demonstrated that the current design allows every garage stall and guest spot to back out and exit safely. The additional space for the house is due to the lack of basement and is a practical difficulty. Mr. Eskuche noted the Applicant accommodated the City’s recommendation and pushed the house toward the street which pushed the car stalls toward the street, as well. He spoke about the rain gardens and vegetation noting the Applicants are trying to mitigate everything hardcover so that it is not going into the lake. Regarding scale of the house, there is data that shows local cities’ such as Minnetonka whose permits show an average house size of 4,300 square feet; this house is slightly larger than that and is a multi-generational house. He believes the house is in the spirit of the Code and is reasonable. 30 Planning Commission Minutes – January 17, 2023 3 Commissioner Alto understands how frustrating parking is and asked if that is a top priority, and if it is the number one concern, why did they purchase a home on a street that did not have street parking? Mr. Mack replied they honestly did not know how big of an issue it would be until living in the home. Commissioner Alto asked if moving from a four-car turnaround to a three-car turnaround would make a large difference to the Applicant. Mr. Mack does not know. He noted it is not just where the car is placed but where the other car is and whether a car can safely back up without hitting two other cars while exiting. It is a rubix cube and he knows there is need for ample space and flexibility with younger drivers around their property. He noted they want to be collaborative and find solutions with the city; they are focused on the function of having a property that works well. Commissioner Schwartz noted allowing this exception in the right-of-way would open the floodgates with everyone wanting an exception. He thinks the burden is on the Applicant to conform to City Code to the greatest extent possible. He asked if there is way to put their heads together that would work for the family and conform to City Code which would be the best approach. Mr. Mack noted if the spirit of the project is understood and it is literally about the right-of-way issue, they are more than happy to accommodate and collaborate on that. His only comment is that this is a unique property. Commissioner Soller wonders about some space being eliminated in the parking area. He also wants to think about the hardcover variance as that is potentially the toughest one. Mr. Mack noted if the concern is around the overall lot coverage that is much more of a threshold issue that will determine the outcome of the project. Commissioner Alto understands Lake Minnewashta lots are extremely unique and challenging and noted the Commission has to be consistent in the way they are handled. Approving things like this is how they continue to get larger and larger houses with lot covers and it snowballs. She wants to be sure the next person doesn’t ask for 10% lot coverage and then the next person asks for 12%. Ms. Alto asked what 7% looks like in this case? Mr. Young-Walters noted it would be substantial and provided context onscreen showing the existing home and the expanded footprint which is an approximately 1,800 foot increase an almost doubles the footprint of the home. He noted about 450 square feet of that expansion is offset by the removal of other hardcover on the property. The homeowner could make additional redesigns (remove additional patio, use a deck over grass) but they could not get the 3,700 square foot footprint while maintaining the 2,500 square foot driveway. 31 Planning Commission Minutes – January 17, 2023 4 Commissioner Schwartz asked about the difference between a rain garden and retention pond. Mr. Henricksen replied a rain garden has some sort of infiltration and native planting and does not hold water while a retention pond holds water. Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. Mary Van Beusekom, 6610 Rocky Island Lane, would like to know if the building would interfere with her view of the lake. Mr. Young-Walters believes the peak of the roof is in the mid-thirties, approximately 35 feet. He does not know the fall of that property relative to her home. The Applicant is not requiring a height variance as the height proposed is permitted under City Code. Mr. Young-Walters noted the city received a note from a neighbor (included in the packet) who expressed their support for the requested variance and noted the challenges with parking and snow storage. Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing. Commissioner Soller asked about precedence with the right-of-way and asked if any other variances encroach into the right-of-way on Minnewashta Parkway. Mr. Young-Walters replied in the negative, not to his knowledge. There are non-conforming encroachments such as a house to the north where a turnaround may go into the right-of-way a few feet. He would have to do some homework to determine whether it is illegal or legal non- conforming. Two have non-conforming dual accesses creating a U-shaped driveway, one of which was required to be removed as part of a variance for a garage expansion. Within the city, the Horseshoe Curve variance is the only time he is aware of the city granting a parking pad in the encroachment and staff was not in support for many of the same reasons as with this application. Commissioner Soller asked regarding hardcover, does the city see many variances granted greater than 1.13% lot cover? Mr. Young-Walters replied in the affirmative, however it requires a huge amount of context. One property was granted a 3% lot cover variance but was a 1,600 square foot property and lot cover was required to be removed. On Red Cedar Point, one will see variances going into the 30% range, however lots there are substandard and half the size of City Code. In his opinion, going by percentage is not the best metric because it is inter-related with lot size. Chair Noyes noted this calculation is approximately 1,332 square feet larger than existing. He asked how many on the lake have been seen that are 1,332 square feet? Mr. Young-Walters needs to do research to give an intelligent answer. He noted 1,300 is a lot and it is pretty rare that the city gives variances over 30%. Typically it is because of a smaller lot. He does not recall ever seeing a total lot cover in the 7,000 range as an eligible variance. He 32 Planning Commission Minutes – January 17, 2023 5 clarified that staff would support a 1.13% lot cover variance which is the extent of the existing non-conformity. Commissioner Soller asked about the uniqueness or hardship of not having a basement on the lot. Mr. Young-Walters replied staff believes a house of reasonable size can be constructed within the confines of the Code. Chair Noyes believes residents need to have the opportunity to use and develop their properties. However it must be within the guidelines the city has put together. He realizes this lot has practical difficulties, however every time they talk about lakeshore property, they are talking about practical difficulties. Chair Noyes noted they could set a precedent here that creates an avalanche situation because this is a big variance. He thinks there could be some room to look at redesign efforts and make the house smaller; he stated 1,300 square feet is a lot and this is a mammoth house. Commissioner Alto agreed. Commissioner Soller clarified three stories is out of the question due to the height. Mr. Young-Walters replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Goff feels for the homeowners but noted the Commission cannot set a precedent. Commissioner Alto moved, Commissioner Goff seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the requested 7.13% lot cover variance, denies the requested variance for a parking area in the right-of-way, approves the requested 30-foot shoreland setback variance, approves the requested 13-foot front yard setback variance, and approves a 1.13% lot cover variance for the construction of a home and patio, subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED DECEMBER 6, 2022 Commissioner Goff noted the summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated December 6, 2022 as presented. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE: Mr. Young-Walters shared the city has rolled out the short-term rental licensing with four sent in so far. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Alto moved, Commissioner Goff seconded, to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. 33 Planning Commission Minutes – January 17, 2023 6 Submitted by Sharmeen Al-Jaff Senior Planner 34 Planning Commission Item March 7, 2023 Item Year End Review and 2023 Work Plan File No.Item No: F.1 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations City Code section 2-46.03 (e) Reports SUGGESTED ACTION Review and make recommendations for 2023 activities. SUMMARY Annually, the Planning Commission reviews activity from the previous year as well as prepares a preliminary work plan for the upcoming year. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Please review the report and prepare any additions or corrections that should be made prior to 35 forwarding to City Council. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission may provide additional items to review/research or additional projects to undertake in 2023. Any other projects that the Commission would like to see staff address will be added to the list. Subject to Planning Commission concurrence, staff will forward this report to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS 2022 Year In Review 2023 Work Plan 36 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Chanhassen is a Community for Life -Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner DATE: February 21, 2023 SUBJ: 2022 Year in Review and 2023 Recommended Work Plan BACKGROUND As required by the City Code section 2-46. 03 (e) Reports: The Commission shall make an annual written report to the Council containing the Commission recommendation for the ensuing year. Staff estimates an April 1, 2023, population of 26,514. The 2020 Decennial U.S. Census population was 25,947. The city's 2010 Decennial Census population was 23,952. Below is a summary of items the Planning Commission reviewed in 2022 as well as possible work projects for 2023. If there are additional items, projects, or research the Planning Commission would like to undertake for 2023, please provide direction to staff. 2022 REVIEW Planning staff reviewed nine fewer development review applications in 2022 than in 2021, 17 versus 26. Included as part of these applications were one site plan review, four subdivisions, one Planned Unit Development amendment, and seven variances, which resulted in 16 cases being reviewed by the Planning Commission. In addition, the Commission reviewed 18 Code amendments. One Planning case was a metes and bounds subdivision, which is reviewed by City Council. Building Permits In 2022, the city issued building permits for 48 dwelling units, which was approximately 25 percent of our projected housing growth for 2022. We are projecting a two percent (2%) increase (approximately 200 units) in total housing stock for 2023. As can be seen in the average residential building permit data for the 2000s (71 single-family and 93 attached units), there is currently sufficient approved single-family residential lots available for development with a lot inventory of 69 platted single-family lots, but a deficiency of attached single-family lots with 53 lots available. Given this inventory, preliminarily approved housing developments and current housing demand, the city should not be able to achieve its housing projection. PH 952.227.1100 • www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us • FX 952.227.lll0 noo MARKET BOULEVARD · PO BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN · MINNESOTA 55317 37 Planning Commission Community Development Annual Report February 21, 2023 Page 2 Other Permits Bee Permits – 1 Chicken Permits – 5 Temp Events – 27 Seasonal/Special Sales – 5 Special Events – 2 2023 WORK PROGRAMS Staff The Planning Division will be reorganizing due to the retirement of Kate Aanenson, the Community Development Director, Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner, and Jill Sinclair, Natural Resource Specialist. Short Term Rental On October 10, 2022, the city adopted requirements for short term rental, section 20-961 of the Chanhassen City Code. Short-term rental is defined as rental of residences for periods of less than 30 days. The city will begin licensing short term rental properties in early 2023. Development Review •The Avienda Lifestyle Center PUD at Highway 212 and Powers Boulevard was approved in 2018, grading was completed in 2022, a 39-unit cottage home development was given final approval in 2022, the road network will be paved in 2023 and additional multi- family and commercial development (site plans) will be reviewed in 2023. •Industrial development will be reviewed along Highway 5 west of Audubon Road. •New commercial and residential projects will continue on an in-fill, lot-by-lot basis including potentially redevelopment of existing commercial areas in the downtown. City Code •With the adoption of the Local Water Management Plan on December 10, 2018, and the hiring of a water resources engineer as the Water Resources Coordinator, staff will assist in the drafting revisions to the wetland ordinance and the surface water management requirements of City Code. •The city will need to make numerous minor code corrections and revisions, including a review of the sign code, that staff has been compiling over 2022, which will be brought forward in 2023 for adoption. 38 Planning Commission Community Development Annual Report February 21, 2023 Page 3 Comprehensive Plan The city is required by the Metropolitan Land Plan Act (MN§473) to update our Comprehensive Plan every ten years. The City of Chanhassen is designated by the Metropolitan Council as an Emerging Suburban Edge Community. The city adopted the 2040 Comprehensive Plan on February 10, 2020. •In 2021, the city reviewed and approved revisions to the roadway functional classifications, which were submitted to the Metropolitan Council. The map amendment was deemed inconsistent with the current 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) (as amended). Dell Road south of State Highway 5 to the city limits is classified as another arterial, and the amendment misidentifies the road as a major collector (which is inconsistent). Additionally, the Engineering Department would like to include additional roadway segments and connections deficiencies. •Staff will bring chapters of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to the Planning Commission for discussion and review in conjunction with our long-range planning. Miscellaneous Staff will provide periodic items for long-range planning as the hearing schedule and time permits. Some items in addition to the Comprehensive Plan include housing demands and trends, demographic statistics, mixed-use development, sustainable development, retail landscape, development trends, redevelopment issues, transportation projects, electric vehicle charging stations, senior-friendly cities, etc. A joint Aging, Economic Development, Environmental, Parks, and Planning Commissions tour may be scheduled for late summer 2023. ACTION The Planning Commission may provide additional items to review/research or additional projects to undertake in 2023. Any other projects that the Commission would like to see staff address will be added to the list. Subject to Planning Commission concurrence, staff will forward this report to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS 1.Permits and Inspections 2.Development Review 3.Community Development Mission Statement g:\plan\planning commission\annual reports\2022 year in review 2023 work plan.docx 39 1 PERMITS and INSPECTIONS BUILDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT The Building Division contains two support staff, one building official and four inspectors. Eric Tessman is the Building Official for the city. The inspectors review building plans for compliance with building codes, inspect buildings under construction, and enforce property maintenance issues. Support staff issue the building permits, schedule inspections, receive all permit applications and distribute building plans for city review. 40 2 In 2022, the city issued no permits for projects with building permit valuation in excess of one million dollars. However, there was a $633,000 valued permit as well as a $800,000 valued permit. The city issued 1,491 permits worth $30,151,606 for residential additions and remodeling in 2022. Historically, we average 1,167 such permits. Commercial and Institutional Construction There were no significant, new commercial, industrial or institutional projects in 2022. The total valuation for all new commercial, industrial and institutional projects in 2022 was $2,091,474. Tennant finish and remodeling activity had 59 permits with a valuation of $11,952,955. New Single-Family Home Construction Year Permits Average Valuation Total Valuation Average New Single-Family Home Values Excludes Land Cost 2022 48 $552,525 $26,521,191 2021 98 $503,774 $49,369,812 2020 68 $411,529 $27,984,000 2019 40 $637,390 $25,495,591 2018 49 $406,275 $19,865,000 2017 55 $420,195 $22,798,000 Inspections 2022 Building Inspection Activity 2022 Building Activity Residential Building Permits 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total Residential Single-Family 15 10 14 9 48 Residential Townhomes 0 0 0 0 0 Apartments/Senior Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 Total Residential 15 10 14 9 48 Year Building Inspections Mechanical Inspections Plumbing Inspections Total Inspections 2022 3,775 1,619 1,655 7,049 2021 6,732 1,368 1,430 9,530 2020 3,413 1,171 1,323 5,907 2019 3,467 1,708 1,667 6,842 2018 2,863 1,425 1,551 5,839 2017 2,583 1,490 1,405 5,478 41 3 Commercial Building Permits 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total New 0 0 0 2 2 Redeveloped 0 0 0 0 0 Remodeled 9 21 20 22 72 Total Commercial 9 21 20 24 74 A significant amount of the building permit activity, totaling _ permits, which occurred in 2022, was due to household remodeling and addition construction, and building re-roofs which resulted from summer thunderstorms. Available Lot Inventory (End of Quarter) 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Single-Family Lots 77 88 75 69 Residential Townhome Lots 53 53 53 53 Total Available Lots 130 141 128 122 Total Permit History 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Single-Family 49 40 68 98 48 Townhomes 56 28 0 0 0 Apartments/Senior Facilities 268 0 0 110 0 Commercial 72 76 70 74 61 Total Number of All Permits 445 144 138 282 109 42 4 Residential Building Permits Issued Year Single-Family Duplex Townhouses Apartments Dwelling 1981 22 2 24 1982 19 2 21 1983 60 8 36 104 1984 108 34 24 166 1985 189 38 20 18 265 1986 246 8 8 262 1987 289 2 32 323 1988 352 26 34 412 1989 307 14 62 383 1990 197 197 1991 191 191 1992 228 Attached Single-Family* 228 1993 251 16 267 1994 269 110 379 1995 216 197 65 478 1996 170 37 207 1997 177 97 274 1998 263 162 425 1999 187 88 277 2000 124 34 162 320 2001 85 44 100 229 2002 54 246 300 2003 59 94 243 396 2004 76 16 92 2005 60 24 0 84 2006 89 42 48 179 2007 65 86 18 169 2008 28 38 66 2009 71 14 85 2010 71 30 101 2011 106 62 168 2012 107 78 185 2013 89 86 0 175 2014 57 96 0 153 2015 80 24 0 104 2016 48 0 76 124 2017 55 12 0 67 2018 49 56 268 373 2019 40 18 0 58 2020 68 0 0 68 2021 98 0 110 208 2022 48 0 0 48 Average 126 62 62 203 43 HOUSING PERMITS 544 1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PLANNING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT The Planning Division consists of the Community Development Director, three planners and a natural resource specialist. The Planning Division saw extensive shakeup for 2023 with the retirement of the Community Development Director, Senior Planner and Natural Resources Specialist. Planning staff enforces the zoning ordinance, reviews building plans, prepares current and long-range plans for the community, discusses development potential for individual properties, reviews development proposals and coordinates this review with other departments and agencies, prepares reports for the Planning Commission and City Council, provides information about the community to businesses, property owners and the general public, performs research projects and writes ordinances and resolutions. 45 2 There were 16 cases reviewed by the Planning Commission. Planning Cases TYPE 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 5 Yr. Avg. SIGN PERMITS 62 36 16 56 53 45 VARIANCES 9 10 10 17 7 11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 3 1 1 2 0 1 INTERIM USE PERMITS 0 1 1 4 0 1 REZONINGS 1 0 1 2 0 1 SITE PLAN REVIEWS 3 5 2 2 1 3 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS 4 1 4 0 1 2 SUBDIVISIONS 4 4 1 6 4 4 VACATIONS 1 3 2 2 2 2 WETLAND ALTERATION PERMITS 1 1 0 0 0 0 CODE AMENDMENTS 6 24 5 14 18 13 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS 1 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 95 86 43 105 86 88 Residential Subdivisions CASE # PROJECT NAME GROSS ACRES NET ACRES TOTAL UNITS GROSS DENSITY NET DENSITY 2021-12A Earhart Farm 117.14 11.6 19 0.49 1.64 2022-02 Cunningham 2nd Add. 3.36 3.29 2 0.6 0.61 2022-08 Goodman Homestead 1.38 1.38 1 0.72 0.72 TOTALS 121.88 16.27 22 0.18 1.35 46 3 Site Plan Review Planning Commission Attendance 2022 Project Location Developer Building Square Feet Acres Type of Use SRI #2022-04 10500 and 10520 Great Plain Blvd RSI Marine 80,000 8.33 Four 20,000 sq. ft. boot storage buildings TOTAL 80,000 8.33 47 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS Final Plat GROSS ROW WETLAND/MISC.PARK NET TOTAL GROSS NET CASE PROJECT NAME Approved ACRES ACRES PRIMARY/ACRES LAND ACRES UNITS DENSITY DENSITY POND ACRES SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 93-1 SUB Highlands of Lake St. Joe 5/8/1995 36 0.4 11.54 0 24.06 33 0.92 1.37 93-4 SUB Windmill Run 6/14/1993 17.92 3.37 0 0 14.55 35 1.95 2.41 93-8 SUB Royal Oaks Estates 6/26/1993 13 2.2 0 0 10.8 23 1.77 2.13 93-10 SUB Lotus Lake Woods 9/28/1995 4.47 0.32 0.3 0 3.85 7 1.57 1.82 93-11 SUB Oaks of Minnewashta 7/24/1995 35.83 9 3 8 15.83 45 1.26 2.84 93-12 SUB Tower Heights 7.1 0.6 0 0 6.5 13 1.83 2.00 93-14 SUB Shenandoah Ridge 9/13/1993 11.5 3.5 0 0 8 20 1.74 2.50 93-15 SUB Church Road 8/23/1993 3.3 0 0 0 3.3 4 1.21 1.21 93-16 SUB TJO 8/23/1993 1.06 0 0 0 1.06 3 2.83 2.83 93-25 SUB Minger Addition 8/8/1994 9.95 2.08 0 0.15 7.72 17 1.71 2.20 94-1 SUB Minnewashta Landings 6/13/1994 19.7 1.7 0 0 18 27 1.37 1.50 94-3 SUB Olivewood 6/8/1998 25.95 4.6 14.8 0 6.55 8 0.31 1.22 94-4 SUB Shadow Ridge 9/12/1994 15.99 2.15 1.9 0 11.94 17 1.06 1.42 94-5 PUD Mission Hills/Single-family 10/24/1994 7.1 0 0 0 7.1 16 2.25 2.25 94-7 SUB Woodridge Heights 3/10/1997 37.9 3.67 6.7 0 27.53 46 1.21 1.67 94-8 SUB Creekside 5/8/1995 39.5 4.2 5.7 5 24.6 44 1.11 1.79 94-10 SUB Brenden Pond 11/28/1994 23.3 3.6 7.2 0 12.5 21 0.90 1.68 94-13 SUB Pointe Lake Lucy 4/10/1995 18.15 1.63 5.62 0 10.9 19 1.05 1.74 94-15 SUB Hobens Wild Woods Farm 11/28/1994 1.87 0 0 0 1.87 3 1.60 1.60 95-10 SUB Forest Meadows 10/9/1995 20.2 2.2 0 5 13 19 0.94 1.46 92-4 PUD Meadows at Longacres 5/9/1994 95 10 24 0 61 112 1.18 1.84 93-2 PUD Trotters Ridge 8/23/1993 32.5 7.44 5.6 0 19.46 49 1.51 2.52 91-3 PUD Willow Ridge 3/23/1992 30.3 4 8.39 0 17.91 37 1.22 2.07 92-1 SUB Stone Creek 2/22/1993 81 10.04 0.96 8 62 141 1.74 2.27 92-4 SUB Ithilien Addition 7/27/1992 9 1.8 0.9 0 6.3 17 1.89 2.70 92-5 SUB Bluff Creek Estates 8/24/1992 61.45 7.9 19.7 0 33.85 78 1.27 2.30 93-3 PUD Woods at Longacres 6/27/1994 96.77 13.1 10.87 0 72.8 115 1.19 1.58 93-6 PUD Springfield 5/12/1997 80.8 20.2 0.5 5.3 54.8 134 1.66 2.45 95-3 SUB Lake Lucy Estates (Whitetail Cove)12/14/1998 16.36 2.08 4.86 0 9.42 17 1.04 1.80 95-20 SUB Knob Hill 5/20/1996 8.35 1.1 0.66 0 6.59 12 1.44 1.86 95-21 SUB Dempsey Addition 1/8/1996 5.11 0.04 0.96 0 4.11 7 1.36 1.70 95-22 SUB The Frontier 10/14/1996 8.9 0.09 0.2 0 8.61 9 1.01 1.05 96-2 SUB Oak Ridge of Lake Minnewashta 5/6/1996 11.8 2.1 0 0 9.7 23 1.95 2.37 96-3 SUB Slather Addition 4/8/1996 1.22 0 0 0 1.22 2 1.64 1.64 96-4 SUB Melody Hill 9/9/1996 4.57 0.73 0 0 3.84 10 2.10 2.60 96-7 SUB Arundel 1.32 0 0 0 1.32 2 1.52 1.52 96-8 SUB Rice Lake Manor Estates 7.06 0 1.24 0 5.82 2 0.28 0.34 96-9 SUB Rook Place 8/12/1996 1.08 0 0 0 1.08 2 1.85 1.85 96-15 SUB Black Walnut Acres 6/24/1996 3.28 0 0 0 3.28 1 0.30 0.30 96-18 SUB Song Addition 7/22/1996 8.3 0 1.75 0 6.55 1 0.12 0.15 97-1 SUB Highover Addition 8/11/1997 48.99 13.83 2.83 0 32.33 54 1.10 1.67 97-11 SUB Monson, Sunridge Addition 5 0 0 0 5 2 0.40 0.40 98-1 PUD Lynmore Addition 7/12/1999 6.39 0.83 2.12 0.64 2.8 8 1.25 2.86 98-10 SUB Eric Peterson 6.32 0 3.59 0 2.73 2 0.32 0.73 99-3 SUB Nickolay 3.7 0 0.91 0 2.79 2 0.54 0.72 99-4 SUB Brozorick 1.44 0 0 0 1.44 2 1.39 1.39 99-5 SUB Smith Hill Addition 5/10/1999 1.33 0 0 0 1.33 2 1.50 1.50 99-10 SUB Arrowhead Development 10/23/2000 0.91 0 0 0 0.91 2 2.20 2.20 99-11 SUB Sandy Point 12/13/1999 1.47 0 0 0 1.47 2 1.36 1.36 00-1 SUB Marsh Glen 7/24/2000 13.41 1.45 1.91 0 10.05 19 1.42 1.89 00-2 SUB Lucas Igel Addition 7/23/2001 1.09 0 0 0 1.09 2 1.83 1.83 00-3 PUD Summerfield 2nd Addition 10/23/2000 5 0.95 0 0 4.05 10 2.00 2.47 00-8 SUB Arvidson's Addition 11/27/2000 2.47 0 0 0 2.47 4 1.62 1.62 00-9 SUB White Oak Addition 10/9/2000 3.4 0.6 0 0 2.8 5 1.47 1.79 2000-15 Ashling Meadows 4/9/2001 40.03 6.39 4.78 0 0 28.86 51 1.27 1.77 2001-3 Big Woods 8/27/2001 6.3 1.1 0 0 0 5.2 9 1.43 1.73 2001-6 Tristan Heights 6/11/2001 1.15 0 0 0 0 1.15 2 1.74 1.74 2001-10 Lake Lucy Ridge 5/28/2002 18.57 2.4 7.16 9.01 17 0.92 1.89 2002-2 Knob Hill 2nd 7/22/2002 7.59 1.22 0.57 0 0 5.8 9 1.19 1.55 2002-4 Hidden Creek Estates 7/22/2002 22.28 3 8.5 0 0 10.78 20 0.90 1.86 2002-2 PUD Vasserman Ridge 7/22/2002 68.76 8.69 27.92 1.94 0 30.21 84 1.22 2.78 2002-6 Boyer Lake Minnewashta Add.8/26/2002 13.59 1.26 2.34 3.25 6.74 10 0.74 1.48 2002-7 Willow Ridge 3rd Addition 5/28/2002 2.09 0 0 0 0 2.09 2 0.96 0.96 2003-7 Countryside 6/14/2004 5.93 1.02 0.58 4.33 10 1.69 2.31 2003-12 Burlewood 12/8/2003 5.17 1.75 3.42 9 1.74 2.63 04-10 Walnut Grove 2nd 6/14/2004 3.09 0.5 1.1 1.49 4 1.29 2.68 04-05 Settlers West 7/12/2004 44.56 4.17 0 16.13 24.26 48 1.08 1.98 04-03 Kenyon Bluff 4/12/2004 2.16 0.24 0.37 1.55 3 1.39 1.94 04-23 Lotus View Addition 1/10/2005 2.83 2.83 2 0.71 0.71 04-26 Frontier 2nd Addition 8/23/2004 2.61 0 0 2.61 5 1.92 1.92 04-31 Hidden Creek Meadows 6/13/2005 19.24 2.02 5.96 11.26 21 1.09 1.87 04-36 Pinehurst 3/14/2005 27.62 4.28 0.14 23.2 41 1.48 1.77 04-43 Yoberry Farm (Highcrest)4/11/2005 35.79 5.54 4.53 0.39 25.33 57 1.59 2.25 05-02 Crestview 5/9/2005 3.36 0.6 2.76 5 1.49 1.81 g:/plan/Past,Present,Future/density 1 48 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS Final Plat GROSS ROW WETLAND/MISC.PARK NET TOTAL GROSS NET CASE PROJECT NAME Approved ACRES ACRES PRIMARY/ACRES LAND ACRES UNITS DENSITY DENSITY 05-05 John Henry 4/11/2005 1.19 1.19 3 2.52 2.52 05-08 Fox Den 4/25/2005 2.77 0.64 2.13 6 2.17 2.82 05-14 Lake Harrison 7/12/2005 62 6.17 20.9 1.53 4.42 28.98 38 0.61 1.31 05-21 Frontier 3rd Addition 7/25/2005 0.77 0.77 2 2.60 2.60 05-25 Minnewahsta Creek Hills 8/22/2005 1.4 1.4 3 2.14 2.14 05-26 Harvieux Addition 9/29/2005 1.99 0 0 0 0 1.99 3 1.51 1.51 05-36 Bluff Creek Twinhomes VOID 05-37 Stonefield 4/10/2006 17.63 2.23 15.4 30 1.70 1.95 05-44 Christianson Sub #05-44 4/10/2006 1.05 1.05 2 1.90 1.90 06-02 Eidness Metes & Bounds 1/23/2006 2.18 2.18 2 0.92 0.92 06-10 Boulder Cove 9/25/2006 13.69 1.95 1.23 10.51 39 2.85 3.71 07-02 The Arbors 4/9/2007 19.83 3.05 0.9 15.88 22 1.11 1.39 07-03 Fox Hill 7/9/2007 1.69 0.3 1.39 3 1.78 2.16 07-07 Gauer 4/23/2007 1.09 1.09 2 1.83 1.83 07-09 Lotus Woods 7.6 0.9 0.29 0.5 5.91 11 1.45 1.86 09-01 Apple Tree Estates 6/8/2009 7.43 1.04 0.65 5.74 7 0.94 1.22 09-02 Senn Metes & Bounds 23-Mar-09 3.66 3.66 2 0.55 0.55 10-09 Pioneer Pass 9/13/2010 63.4 10.52 17.58 0 8.71 26.59 94 1.48 3.54 10-12 Lakeview (Reflections at Lake Riley)2/28/2011 50.48 6.86 19.85 4.83 18.94 66 1.31 3.48 12-16 Wynsong 1/28/2013 9.37 2.3 7.07 4 0.43 0.57 2013-04 Fretham 15th Addition 8/26/2013 2.29 0.1 2.19 4 1.75 1.83 2013-09 Bluff Creek Woods 8/26/2013 3.57 0.78 2.79 3 0.84 1.08 2013-12 Preserve at Rice Lake 8/12/2013 13.22 1.66 7.56 4 16 1.21 4.00 2013-13 Camden Ridge 9/9/2013 22.93 4.62 1.27 3.5 13.54 58 2.53 4.28 2013-18 Lake St. Joe's Cove 9/9/2013 4.04 0.97 0.15 2.92 8 1.98 2.74 2014-02 Hummingbird Heights 1/27/2014 1.667 0.93 0.737 2 1.20 2.71 2014-06 Arbor Cove 6/9/2014 3.26 3.26 4 1.23 1.23 2014-08 Fretham 19th Addition 1.51 1.51 4 2.65 2.65 2014-09 Boulder Cove 6/9/2014 13.38 2.42 2.86 8.1 31 2.32 3.83 2014-12 Black Walnut Acres 2nd 5/27/2014 2.4 0.37 2.03 1 0.42 0.49 2014-18 Vistas at Bentz Farm 10/27/2014 19.645 2.04 7.88 9.725 15 0.76 1.54 2014-30 2061 W. 65th Street Metes & Bounds 11/24/2014 0.69 0 0 0 0.69 2 2.90 2.90 2014-36 2631 Forest Avenue Metes & Bounds 12/8/2014 2.57 2.57 2 0.78 0.78 2015-08 Redstone Ridge 5/26/2015 2.74 2.74 4 1.46 1.46 2015-16 Arbor Glen 7/24/2017 8.49 3.9 4.59 18 2.12 3.92 2015-18 Glaccum 9/14/2015 3.12 0.86 0.44 1.82 4 1.28 2.20 2016-09 Anthem on the Park 8/22/2016 8.96 1.81 1.84 5.31 12 1.34 2.26 2016-13 Foxwood 7/25/2016 43.55 4.68 20.86 18.015 46 1.06 2.55 2017-06 Lotus Woods 7/22/2019 1.16 0.11 1.05 2 1.72 1.90 2017-15 Fawn Hill 8/28/2017 11.64 1.11 4.45 6.08 10 0.86 1.64 2007-02 The Arbors 2nd Add.3/26/2018 2.08 2.08 3 1.44 1.44 2018-10 3861 Red Cedar Point 7/9/2018 1.024 0.14 0.884 2 1.95 2.26 2018-13 Glendale Drive Homes 8/26/2019 2.297 0.155 2.142 5 2.18 2.33 2019-01 The Park 8/12/2019 158.45 5.94 9.93 40.33 90.7 11.55 55 0.35 4.76 2019-01 The Park 2nd 1/27/2020 38.42 3.95 0.3 21.1 13.07 57 1.48 4.36 2019-01 The Park 3rd 12/14/2020 10.02 1.95 8.075 26 2.59 3.22 2019-01 The Bluffs @Lake Lucy (The Park 4th)9/14/2020 32.41 3.81 2.17 12.67 13.76 31 0.96 2.25 2019-13 Berrospid 11/9/2020 2.02 0.06 1.96 3 1.49 1.53 2019-17 Boylan Shores 6/22/2020 2.71 0.06 0.75 1.9 3 1.11 1.58 2020-06 Ann Nye 5/26/2020 6.4 0.12 3.84 2.44 2 0.31 0.82 2020-12 901 Carver Beach (Chaparral)5/27/2020 2.4 0.005 0.9 1.495 2 0.83 1.34 2020-22 Deer Haven 5/10/2021 2.81 0 0 0 0 2.81 4 1.42 1.42 2021-09 2300 Melody Hill Rd 5/10/2021 1.3 1.3 2 1.54 1.54 2021-12 Erhart Farm 6/13/2022 117.14 3.29 25.11 76.45 0.69 11.6 19 0.16 1.64 2021-15 Eagle Bluff 8/9/2021 4.1 0 2.5 0 0 1.6 2 0.49 1.25 2022-02 Cunningham 2nd 6/13/2022 3.36 0.07 3.29 2 0.60 0.61 2022-03 Morin withdrawn 2022-10 Fox Hill 2.47 0.364 0.141 1.965 4 1.62 2.04 SUBTOTAL 2,177.06 261.00 374.23 146.28 174.63 1,220.92 2,523.00 PERCENT 12.0%17.2%6.7%8.0%56.1%AVG 1.16 2.07 MULTI-FAMILY 94-5 PUD Mission Hills/Multi-family 47.18 11.6 5.87 0 29.71 208 4.41 7.00 94-18 PUD Autumn Ridge 28.13 4.29 0 0 23.84 140 4.98 5.87 92-3 PUD Oak Pond/Oak Hills 24.19 2.09 1.8 0 20.3 141 5.83 6.95 94-7 SP Prairie Creek Townhomes 4.6 0 0 0 4.6 24 5.22 5.22 87-3 PUD Powers Place 9.7 0 0 0 9.7 48 4.95 4.95 95-7 SP Lake Susan Hills Townhomes 7.29 0 0 0 7.29 34 4.66 4.66 95-8 SP Centennial Hills 2.2 0 0 0 2.2 65 29.55 29.55 95-1 PUD North Bay 52.1 2.92 8.66 26.38 14.14 76 1.46 5.37 96-3 PUD Townhomes at Creekside 7.03 2.18 1 0.21 3.64 25 3.56 6.87 96-4 PUD Walnut Grove (sf, sm lot + twnhouses 05/27/97 49.8 6.81 0.2 0 42.79 247 4.96 5.77 g:/plan/Past,Present,Future/density 2 49 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS Final Plat GROSS ROW WETLAND/MISC.PARK NET TOTAL GROSS NET CASE PROJECT NAME Approved ACRES ACRES PRIMARY/ACRES LAND ACRES UNITS DENSITY DENSITY 99-9 SPR Lake Susan Apartment Homes 6/28/1999 9.9 0 0 0 9.9 162 16.36 16.36 99-19 SPR Powers Ridge Apartments 12/11/2000 21.34 0 1 0 20.34 344 16.12 16.91 99-2 PUD Arboretum Village 5/14/2001 120.93 21.59 26.29 2.9 16.9 53.25 342 2.83 6.42 2001-13 SP Presbyterian Homes 10/14/2002 5.11 0 0.3 0 0 4.81 161 31.51 33.47 04-01 Highlands of Bluff Creek 6/15/2004 6.52 0.86 1.8 3.86 16 2.45 4.15 05-11 Liberty on Buff Creek 3/27/2006 91.02 11.45 40.06 39.51 407 4.47 10.30 06-14 The Preserve at Bluff Creek 6/26/2006 79.86 10.85 34.31 0.35 34.35 153 1.92 4.45 06-05 Gateway Place 2/27/2006 6.2 0.25 0.38 0 5.57 48 7.74 8.62 06-18 SouthWest Village 9/9/2013 2.773 1.547 0 0 0 1.226 36 12.98 29.36 06-26 Lakeside 10/23/2006 26.29 1.74 4.06 1.44 19.05 101 3.84 5.30 2012-15 Beehive 10/22/2012 2.2 2.2 25 11.36 11.36 2015-01 Riley Crossing (Mission Hills Senior)2/12/2018 8.64 8.64 150 17.36 17.36 2017-12 West Park 7/24/2017 9.8 0.79 9.01 64 6.53 7.10 2017-11 Venue 12/10/2018 4.02 4.02 134 33.33 33.33 2020-02 Moments of Chanhassen 2/24/2020 3.5 0.34 3.16 48 13.71 15.19 2021-04 Lake Place 1/25/2021 3.68 3.68 110 29.89 29.89 2021-22 Avienda Townhomes 10/24/2022 16.86 1.53 4.88 5.88 4.57 39 2.31 8.53 SUBTOTAL 650.863 78.967 127.6 8.13 50.81 385.356 3,348 PERCENT 12.1%19.6%1.2%7.8%59.2%AVG 5.14 8.69 TOTALS 2,827.93 339.97 501.83 154.41 225.44 1,606.27 5,871 PERCENT 12.0%17.7%5.5%8.0%56.8%AVG 2.08 3.66 g:/plan/Past,Present,Future/density 3 50 5 CHANHASSEN POPULATION Number Increase % Increase Met Council 1960 CENSUS 3,411 1970 CENSUS 4,879 1,468 43% 1980 CENSUS 6,359 1,480 30% 1990 CENSUS 11,732 5,373 84% 1995 ESTIMATE 15,588 3,856 33% 2000 CENSUS 20,321 4,733 30.4% 20,321 2005 ESTIMATE 23,652 3,331 16.4% 22,518 2010 CENSUS 22,952 -700 -3%22,952 2015 ESTIMATE 24,655 1,703 7.4% 25,194 2020 CENSUS 25,951 1,296 5.3% 26,700 2021 ESTIMATE 26,271 320 1.2% 2022 ESTIMATE 26,399 128 0.5% 2023 ESTIMATE 26,514 115 0.6% 2025 PROJECTION 27,262 863 3% 2030 PROJECTION 28,656 1,394 5% 31,700 2035 PROJECTION 30,469 1,813 6% 2040 PROJECTION 31,589 1,390 5% 37,100 51 6 DEVELOPMENTS Erhart Farm (PC #2021-12A) A 19-lot subdivision with multiple outlots to the west for future development. The entire site is 117 acres. However, the final plat for the first phase consisted of 19 lots with a net acreage of 11 .6 acres. Outlot B contains a wetland and Outlot C contains stormwater ponding. The development will connect Eagle Ridge Road to West 96th Street. In the future, Eagle Ridge Road will connect to Powers Boulevard. 52 7 Cunningham 2nd Addition (PC #2022-02) A two-lot subdivision with a variance for the use of a private street on 2.81 acres 53 8 Goodman Homestead (PC #2022-08) A lot consolidation or replat subdivision on 4.1 acres. 54 9 RSI Marine (PC #2022-04) A mixed use Planned Unit Development (PUD) which would facilitate the construction of four 20,000-square foot boat storage buildings. The entire site is 8.33 acres and results in a floor area ration of 0.22. 55 56 Planning Commission Item March 7, 2023 Item City Council Action Items File No.Item No: F.2 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Jenny Potter, Sr. Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION SUMMARY BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION ATTACHMENTS 57 City Council Action Update 58 City Council Action Update Monday, January 23, 2023 6730 Golden Court – Metes and Bounds SUB – APPROVED Monday, February 13, 2023 Fox Ridge Estates (Formerly Fox Hill) Final Plat – APPROVED Extend Variance Request for 3703 South Cedar Drive - APPROVED Minutes for these meetings can be viewed and downloaded from the City’s website at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us, and click on “Agendas and Minutes” from the left-side links. 59 Planning Commission Item March 7, 2023 Item Discussion on Lot Cover Variances File No.Item No: I.1 Agenda Section OPEN DISCUSSION Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION SUMMARY During a previous meeting the Planning Commission had several questions about the extent and type of lot cover variances that the city has historically issued. Staff has compiled a spreadsheet that contains relevant information about ever lot cover variance that has gone before the Planning Commission since 2004. This spreadsheet will provide the background and context for a discussion on lot cover variances. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Key takeaways: 60 35 lot cover variances requested of which 7 (20%) have been denied, and 6 (17.1%) were approved only after further action was taken to reduce the extent of the requested lot cover variance. 24 of the 35 (68.5%) had non-conforming lot cover, and 12 of those 24 (50%) were required to reduce the pre-existing lot cover. An additional 3 of the 24 (12.5%) had their variance denied 11 requests were received for properties over their districts minimum lot size. Of these 11, 8 (72%)were denied and 2 (18%) were required to reduced the existing non-conforming lot cover. The 5,800 sq. ft. is the largest lot cover variance approved as measured by total square footage (a property with 7,215 sq. f.t had a request to increase to 8,064 sq. ft. denied). The average change in lot cover from existing is 165 sq. ft. The average final square footage for a property requesting a lot cover variance is 3,701 sq. ft. 45.02% is the largest percentage of lot cover approved by the city. The average change in lot cover from existing is 2.76%. The average final lot cover percentage for a property requesting variance is 30.05% The average size of a lot requesting a lot cover variance is 12,920 sq. ft. RECOMMENDATION Please review the attached spreadsheet and send staff any questions that you believe may require research prior to the meeting. Our goal is to provide you with as much general information on the topic of lot cover variances as possible. ATTACHMENTS Lot Cover Variances 61 Lot Size Min Lot Size Overagesq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. % sq. ft.% Sq. ft.%%04‐07 3637 South Cedar 11,761 20,000 4,704 40.00% 4,704 40.00% 0 0.00% 15.00% Approved with condition that new home note exceed existing 40% lc.05‐10 9015 Lake Riley Blvd 12,936 20,000 3,415 26.40% 3,363 26.00%‐52‐0.40%1.00% PC tabled 7.86% (1,016 sq. ft.) before approving 1% (129 sq. ft.)05‐18 380 West 86th St 15,180 15,000 4,437 29.23% 3,974 26.18%‐463‐3.05%1.18% PC denied 4.23% (653 sq. ft.), CC Approved 1.18% (179 sq. ft.)05‐32 8491 Mission Hills Cir 20,595 15,000 6,614 32.11% 5,148 25.00%‐1,466‐7.12%0.00% Initial request of 4.5%(926 sq. ft.) was denied by PC, CC denied 2.76% (568 sq. ft.)05‐34 8005 Cheyenne 12,803 15,000 3,721 29.06% 3,721 29.06% 0 0.00% 4.06% Applicant acquired nearby land and reduced driveway to keep nonconforming static, without this would have been an 11.12% (1,249 sq. ft. ) variance.06‐04 3633 South Cedar Dr 15,196 20,000 3,454 22.73% 4,162 27.39% 708 4.66% 2.39% Initial 6.05% (919 sq. ft.) PC denied, CC approved 2.39% (363 sq. ft.)06‐31 3735 Hickory Rd 5,991 20,000 1,588 26.51% 1,734 28.94% 146 2.44% 3.94%07‐19 2101 Pinehurst Dr 19,423 15,000 4,513 23.24% NA NA 0 0.00% 0.00% 7.4% (1,437) denied by PC, 3.3% (641) denied by CC.07‐20 2081 Pinehurst Dr 20,307 15,000 5,056 24.90% NA NA 0 0.00% 0.00% Initial 4.6% (932 sq. ft.) tabled, revised 2.6% (527)denied08‐24 3830 Maple Shores Dr 28,100 20,000 7,215 25.68% NA NA 0 0.00% 0.68% 3.7% denied by PC and CC09‐15 3625 Red Cedar Point 6,770 20,000 0 0.00% 2,525 37.30% 2,525 37.30% 12.30% Total excludes portion of road on property.09‐17 2111 Pinehurst 18,000 15,000 4,478 24.88% NA NA 0 0.00% 0.00% PC and CC denied 1.38%11‐07 10036 Trails End Rd. 15,847 15,000 3,922 24.75% NA NA 0 0.00% 0.00% 4.3% (681 sq. ft.) denied by PC and CC12‐07 6561 Troendle Cir 15,323 15,000 5,010 32.70% 4,888 31.90%‐122‐0.80%6.90%13‐15 960 Carver Beach Rd 6,024 15,000 0 0.00% 1,855 30.79% 1,855 30.79% 5.80%14‐21 960 Carver Beach Rd 6,024 15,000 1,848 30.68% 2,048 34.00% 200 3.32% 9.00%14‐27 9015 Lake Riley Blvd 12,900 20,000 3,324 25.77% 3,676 28.50% 352 2.73% 3.50% Initial request of 4.2% (541 sq. ft.) was denied by PC, 3.5% (451 sq. ft.) was approved by CC14‐32 7015 Sandy Hook Cir 12,632 15,000 2,827 22.38% 3,499 27.70% 672 5.32% 2.70% PC denied 4.8% (606 sq. ft.), CC granted 2.7% (341 sq. ft.)16‐11 3627 Red Cedar Point 11,656 20,000 3,970 34.06% 3,473 29.80%‐497‐4.26%4.80%16‐22 6845 Lake Harrison Cir 17,927 15,000 4,441 24.77% NA NA 0 0.00% 0.00% 8.14% (1,459 sq. ft.) denied PC, 4.2% (753 sq. ft.) denied CC17‐05 1392 Ithilien 14,810 15,000 4,525 30.55% 4,345 29.34%‐180‐1.22%4.30%17‐20 7221 Erie Ave 8,529 15,000 2,417 28.34% 3,066 35.95% 649 7.61% 9.00% Initial request of 12.4% lc (1057 sq. ft.) was tabled by PC and applicant required to redesign to reduce lc percent and vacate alley to increase lot size to 9,010.17‐21 204 78th St West 8,981 15,000 2,538 28.26% 2,380 26.50%‐158‐1.76%1.50%18‐01 3617 Red Cedar Point 9,203 20,000 3,353 36.43% 3,319 36.06%‐34‐0.37%11.00% Lapsed18‐04 7555 Walnut Curve 14,283 15,000 3,776 26.44% 4,266 29.87% 490 3.43% 4.90%18‐07 1110 Lake Susan Drive 11,263 11,200 3,013 26.75% 3,157 28.03% 144 1.28% 3.00%19‐03 3617 Red Cedar Point 9,203 20,000 3,353 36.43% 3,257 35.39%‐96‐1.04%10.40%19‐10 6641 Minnewashta Pkw 15,950 20,000 4,777 29.95% 4,466 28.00%‐311‐1.95%3.00%19‐11 3713 South Cedar Drive 9,545 20,000 2,809 29.43% 2,561 26.83%‐248‐2.60%1.83%19‐14 690 Carver Beach Rd 6,000 15,000 1,258 20.97% 2,040 34.00% 782 13.03% 9.00%20‐17 7727 Frontier Trail 8,819 15,000 1,756 19.91% 2,822 32.00% 1,066 12.09% 7.00%20‐19 7016 Dakota Cir 14,451 20,000 3,879 26.84% NA NA 0 0.00% 1.84% Withdrawn, staff was recommending denial of 3% lot cover variance which was a 163 sq. ft. new lc.21‐25 3703 South Cedar Drive 5,899 20,000 2,798 47.43% 2,656 45.02%‐142‐2.41%20.02%22‐01 3711 South Cedar Drive 7,687 20,000 3,151 40.99% 3,119 40.57%‐32‐0.42%15.57%22‐17 6621 Minnewashta Pkw 22,194 20,000 5,800 26.13% 5,800 26.13% 0 0.00% 1.13% 7.13% (1,332 sq. ft.) denied by PCExisting LC Approved LCCase AddressNotesChange62