Loading...
09.02.2025 PC item MinutesCHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 2, 2025 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Eric Noyes, Steve Jobe, Jeremy Rosengren, Ryan Soller, Mike Olmstead, Dave Grover, and Katie Trevena. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner; Eric Maass, Community Development Director; Rachel Jeske, Planner; and Joe Seidl, Water Resource Engineer. PUBLIC PRESENT: Deena Laugen Pioneer Trail Joy Gora Chanhassen, MN Linda Boerboom 2020 Clover Court Eric Reiners Eden Prairie, MN Logan Stein Plymouth, MN Andrew Altstatt Lakeville, MN C Henson Prior Lake, MN Scot Lacek Chanhassen, MN PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. CONSIDER A VARIANCE FOR A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 3630 HICKORY ROAD (PLANNING CASE #25-13) Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner, reviewed Planning Case #2025-13 for rebuilding a garage at 3630 Hickory Road. She stated that the location was in the Red Cedar Point Neighborhood and was zoned residential single-family with a low-density residential land use. She noted specific lot attributes, including that it was 0.24 acres, 40 feet wide, bisected by Hickory Road, and was platted in 1913. She noted that the lot size is smaller than what is required by today’s standards. She explained the layout of the proposed garage, which would take the place of the existing garage. The expansion portion beyond what currently exists results in a variance that needs to be approved in order for the garage to be constructed as proposed. She said that the side setbacks were the same as the current setbacks. She reviewed the variance criteria and stated that the proposed garage met the criteria. Commissioner Jobe asked about the ten-foot drop on the topographical and if there would be any special landscaping built into the plan. Mrs. Arsenault answered that topographical changes Planning Commission Minutes – September 2, 2025 2 would be addressed in the building plans, but any structures with the variance would have to meet the setbacks proposed in this variance plan. Chairman Noyes said that the owner is doing what they can reasonably do with the property, so the proposal seems the best way to go about it. Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing. Commissioner Jobe moved, Commissioner Rosengren seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the requested decreased side yard setbacks, 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 7 to 0. 2. CONSIDER A SITE PLAN AND VARIANCE FOR A MEMORY CARE FACILITY AT 1620 ARBORETUM BLV (#25-10) Rachel Jeske, Planner, stated that Planning Case #2025-10 would go before the Planning Commission tonight and the City Council on September 22. She stated that the proposed development location is zoned high-density residential now and in the 2040 Land Use Guidance. She stated that the Moments of Chanhassen project was approved in January 2020, and the Eden Springs proposal was applied for in August 2025. She reviewed the proposed communications, including the proposed development sign placed on the property, an email sent on various dates to the proposed development's email group, postcards sent to neighbors within 500 feet, and a public hearing notice posted in the Sun Sailor. Ms. Jeske summarized the level of city discretion in approving or denying a site plan and noted that it was a quasi-judicial decision. She reviewed the definition of a continuing care facility and the standards required by the city. She noted the proposed architecture and the landscaping and stated that the planting plan did not meet the planting diversity requirements and would need to be updated before final construction plan approval. She commented that the proposed lighting plan meets the standards, and the proposed light pole height was less than 35 feet. She commented that the project requested a variance for the front yard parking setback and the wetland setback. She stated that the applicant proposed 30 parking spaces, including two garage stalls. She reviewed the variance standards and provided additional details about the variance requests. She noted that Riley Creek was located along the northern edge of the site, and that a reasonable solution was to average the buffer around the wetlands and reduce the setback in return. The second variance request was the reduced parking setback, and the applicant noted that they would provide adequate screening to accomplish the intent of the ordinance, but the wetland made it difficult to meet the 25-foot setback in the front of the property. She provided an overview of the utilities and stated that sanitary and water main services were located adjacent to the site. She commented that staff would require the water main to be looped within the site