The URL can be used to link to this page

11. Rezoning of property within city zoned A2, Agricultural to RR Rural Residental District . II 1 CITY •••■■■ i 1 CHANHASSEN • . I690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 :a, .r ,, :..� ,�,_,.., A,,, r:_ .___.✓ !A. MEMORANDUM � j' - ---_`. _'° I t..: TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager '. . - 19 y1 -Ali & , -;-,:;skin IFROM: Kathy Aanenson, Planner II � ... _�___. ...y DATE: September 19, 199 5-R3- 9i. II SUBJ: Rezoning of Large Lot Subdivisions Zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to RR, Rural Residential, First Reading IANALYSIS The City currently has nine large lot subdivisions located outside II of the MUSA line and zoned A2, Agricultural Estate. The Planning Commission has discussed rezoning the large lot subdivisions from A2 to RR for the zoning requirements to better reflect their character. The following are the large lot subdivisions and an Iattached map shows their location: 1. Timberwood Estates I 2. Sun Ridge Addition 3. Country Hills 4. Pioneer Hills I 5. Lake Riley Woods North 6. Riley Lake Meadows 7. Deerbrook 8. Great Plains Golf Estates I9. Hesse Farms INTENT The intent of the A2 District is preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single family II residential development. The intent of the RR District is to provide for single family residential subdivisions intended for large lot developments.. The nine large lot subdivisions, currently located in the A2 District meets the intent of the RR District more II so than the A2 District since they are single family residential subdivisions that are large lot developments identified as a neighborhood separated from the surrounding agricultural land. I I n NB 4 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 A2 to RR Rezoning September 19, 1991 Page 2 COMPARISON OF USES BETWEEN A2 AND RR DISTRICTS Permitted Uses ' All of the permitted uses are the same between the two districts except that arboretums are permitted in A2 and not the RR District. Since an arboretum will not be proposed within the large ' subdivisions, the rezoning will not affect the sites in regards to permitted uses. Accessory Uses Accessory uses are similar in both districts. Accessory ' agricultural buildings and private stables are accessory uses in the A2 District but not in the RR District. Storage building is an accessory use in the RR District but not the A2 District. Accessory agricultural buildings are used in relation to ' agricultural use and will not be necessary in a large lot subdivision. Private stables are a conditional use permit in the RR District which would still allow a large lot owner the opportunity for a private stable but would require a public hearing and notices to neighboring properties of such a request which is appropriate for a single family subdivision. Therefore, the rezoning would not significantly change the accessory uses ' permitted in the districts and appropriate accessory uses for large lot subdivisions would still be permitted. Conditional Use Permits The RR District allows private stables as a conditional use permit ' which is an accessory use in the A2 District. As mentioned above, a private stable is more appropriate as a conditional use in a large lot subdivision. Of the remaining conditional uses, similar or the same for both the RR and A2 Districts, are commercial ' kennels, stables or riding academies, churches and recreational beachlots. ' Interim Use Permits There is a much more extensive list of interim uses permitted in ' the A2 District than is in the RR District. The following is a list of the interim uses in the A2 District which are not permitted as interim uses in the RR District: ' 1. Bed and breakfast establishment 2. Mobile homes 3 . Mineral extraction 4. Churches 5. Wholesale nursery • 1 I A2 to RR Rezoning September 19, 1991 Page 3 I 6. Electrical substation 7. Golf and driving range with or without miniature golf The majority of these interim use permits would not be appropriate in an RR District, such as mineral extraction, commercial transmission tower, wholesale nursery, etc. These conditional uses are more appropriate in an agricultural area which is not developed with single family homes. Therefore, by rezoning the large lot subdivisions from A2 to RR, the city would be preserving their character as a single family subdivision by removing the possibility of an inappropriate use being proposed within the subdivision. Lot Requirements and Setbacks The lot requirements and setbacks for both the A2 and RR District are exactly the same. Therefore, the rezoning of the properties would not result in any change in their lot requirements. I SUMMARY Staff has notified all of the lot owners mentioned in the large lot ' subdivisions which would be reviewed for rezoning from A2 to RR District so that they are aware of what the City is considering. It will be made clear to the property owners that this is a city initiated project that was discussed when the city was reviewing limiting contractor's yards in the city and realized that the city has a number of large lot subdivisions and a more liberally zoned district but have the characteristics of a single family subdivision of which the zoning regulations should reflect. Upon comparison of the uses of the two districts, it appears that rezoning the large lot subdivisions from A2 to RR is an appropriate step and that it would be limiting the possibility of uses which would not conform with the large lot subdivisions, yet continuing to allow appropriate uses of the area. ' Some concern may be raised from residents regarding the status of Green Acres Assessment. In speaking with Orlin Schafer, Carver County Assessor, he stated that residential zones do qualify for Green Acres. Those lots that qualify or meet the criteria under the A2 zoning would also qualify under the RR zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE This item was on the Planning Commission agenda August 21, 1991. ' A public hearing was held but the item was tabled because the Commission asked that staff to add the West 96th Street area and 1 1 1 1 A2 to RR Rezoning September 19, 1991 Page 4 ' research any other additional/similar subdivisions. The Commission also directed staff to omit Great Plains Golf Estates from the rezoning. ' The West 96th Street area and the Jeurissen Addition were notified of the public hearing and the intent to rezone the property. ' Another letter was sent to all property owners under consideration for rezoning. ' Pursuant to a request from the Commission, staff requested Orlin Schafer, Carver County Assessor, to attend the meeting and be available to answer any questions regarding the impact of the rezoning on tax policies. The intent of this rezoning is to protect the large rural lot subdivisions from possible undesirable uses. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on August 21, 1991, and continued the hearing until September 4, 1991, ' so that changes could be made to the rezoning. At the first hearing in August, the Planning Commission recommended that the Great Plains Golf Estates be eliminated from the rezoning proposal and the area known as West 96th, Street and the Jeurissen Addition be included. At the September 4, 1991, meeting the Planning Commission voted ' unanimously to recommend approval of Rezoning #91-9 for property zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate to RR, Rural Residential District for the 10 areas listed in the report. ' Orlin Schafer, the County Assessor, attended the meeting and addressed the concerns about property taxes. He stated that the assessment of the property is based on the use of the land and not ' the zoning. There were several residents from the West 96th Street area. They ' voiced the concern that they felt since their area was already built out, they did not need the additional protection that the rezoning would provide. Furthermore, they were concerned with the fact that under the RR District they would now have to get a ' conditional use permit for a horse stable. A horse stable is a permitted use in the A2 District. The Country Hills area, which includes 5 lots plus 4 additional lots in the area, also wanted to remain zoned A2 for the same reasons as the West 96th Street area. ' The Planning Commission considered the merits of excluding these two areas and felt that even though they were generally developed they should be included in the rezoning. Staff feels that Country A2 to RR Rezoning September 19, 1991 Page 5 Hills and the West 96th Street area could be excluded from the rezoning without deviating from the intent of the rezoning, which is to protect the integrity of large lot rural subdivisions. We note that both subdivisions appear to have a different character than the larger and newer A2 subdivisions such as Timberwood and Lake Riley Woods. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves Rezoning #91-9 for property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to RR, Rural Residential District for the following subdivisions: ' 1. Timberwood Estates 2. Sun Ridge Addition 3. Country Hills 4. Pioneer Hills 5. Lake Riley Woods North 6. Riley Lake Meadows 7. Deerbrook 8. Hesse Farms 9. West 96th Street Area 10. Jeurissen Addition" ATTACHMENTS 1. Map of subject sites. 2. Planning Commission minutes dated September 4, 1991. 3. Planning Commission minutes dated August 21, 1991. 4. Letter to affected property owners. 1 1 • 1 N -I � ;" r -IT • igte .4Pr , Ira if - _7- ;f f - ' - I , y by..F: W a _ Ar it- r 7iii .. leeileV :-711-100. ,"- • iTirltriiit .IL-10- • • ii-sst• �� 'f r� RSF RD ', B 'lipid! . , k. • 44r ''' r --- i , h '1 tlrYt: — wit_A 41,t INV, r ,,, , !' z° " RR — RD ;' F trx. - "•. r, . e , s . .. ■ a.- 4 tL moor ■ ',:`,.-.1livirtLert.,''' _PUD—R 2 R12, t ,J ! sass" •:i_ii 1 -0 ,. r ,• •1 — �r :•p_ ... ... : Ili •� _ ` `�' s ... `'3 e sass,.....u.. $i:3 '' e'. ',01:4: `' i■ - r. •f.- ''to '� j tsar MAI l� sass Al !�-. ,. ^ :` RD . a.r[11 —rl- - 'CAI ter` l�► _ t �� w. 1 _ j 4 . I CHAM IASSEN ' . - r' �/ UD:R RD i ZONING MAP •' I �/ N ) / ',7 ' L .wr 1w RSF "`[' I CHAMMASSEN RevsEDJAmoinio ENCENEJENN i CEPT. M _J .. ,-- ._ .;,'v:,:/ :.. �e • s »:: LEGEND I , „ .:, `" _ Al GRICULTURAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT ....•- �� /w✓ .r. •° - -- •<. `�"y'.'"`' �' 5 A2 GRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT '" •S - • - y;• BR URAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT .. -_ _. / '� '� "�� "' - R6 INGL£-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ° ` '• \. v.:;> R4 MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT l :`'Sf <'`!.: :;: RS MIXED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT C. :• R12 NIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT E"+•'• C RN EIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT I �� .;; ;? :?::_ r - '�:'y'<;'<f• BR IGHWAY AND BUSINESS SERVICES DISTRICT 1 I �- B.1`- - CB ENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT D • "'`•`• BG ENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT J '':.;:;',:;•<:. :•:`...;:::�y`:{.:''';;:;, BF FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT °`''{'.` '•:i' ��```' '` i • JI OFFICE i INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT •0 .:fir?; '.''` ..-r• (OP INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARR DISTRICT : :$.t> :y;;.,k��i•••"k`'it>, IA , 1 ,::r .,:. ..: '. PU CANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT fS�•.•:.< __ NB ATURAL ENVIRONMENT LAKES ££ • RD ECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LAKES - - i '`�4''`'` ''= •t+-Y - _` .r. -- - C NE v I i - ��► A2 .• • i° �-, I i , = i i i i I 1 1 1 + I I i I CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING I SEPTEMBER 4, 1991 Chairman Emmings called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad, Steve Emmings and Jeff Farmakes MEMBERS ABSENT: Annette Ellson, Joan Ahrens and Brian Batzli , STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner; Kathy Aanenson, Planner II; Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I; and Dave II Hempel , Sr . Engineering Technician PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT TO RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Public Present: Name Address I Ronald & Linda Landin 710 West 96th Street Wes & Carol Dunsmore 730 West 96th Street Karen Hasse 630 West 96th Street Matt Thill 9610 Meadowlark Lane Orlin Schafer Carver County Assessor Kyle -)lvin 701 West 96th Street Mar , laser 8037 Erie Avenue Dot. . _ ar i ns ky 8731 Audubon Don white 8850 Audubon Cheryl Hobbs 8850 Sunset Trail Kathy Aanenson presented an update of the staff report on this item from the last meeting. Chairman Emmings called the public hearing to order . Wes Dunsmore: Wes Dunsmore over on West 96th Street. I guess I wasn't aware of this even going on until last week . We got a notice on it . Ours 1 is one of them that,was added, West 96th Street. I was wondering why it was added when nobody that 's affected on our street even requested it? Emmings: This was motivated by the Planning Commission. That's us up ' here . When we were doing the Comprehensive Plan and we 've been doing some other things , it seemed to us that the RR classification, that the rural subdivisions fit better in the RR classification than they did in the A-2 classification and so we asked the planning staff to come forward with a proposal to make that change. Wes Dunsmore: Well our neighborhood is an old one. It's well established. " There 's no development going on in there . Any of these things that you people are concerned with, beds and breakfast , cemeteries and wholesale nurseries and stuff have nothing to do with it and I guess I can't ever foresee that coming into our neighborhood. Emmings: Do you see this adversely affecting your neighborhood in any way? " Planning Commission n Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 2 11 Wes Dunsmore: Well it does. I look to this. I see no benefit. The only I thing there 's a disbenefit to us by the fact that now we've got to get a CUP if we want to do some agricultural buildings . We 've got horses. Several people on our street have horses or whatever and I can see it in I the long run too maybe if some of the people, and I know there's a few on the street that are looking to retire in the next 10 years or so and maybe sell . That whole neighborhood is like a little hobby farm neighborhood. That 's what attracts people out there. They like a few acres. If all of a I sudden this is going to put a binder on us where we can't have the horses or you can 't have the pole barn or whatever , that could really affect our market value down the road. And it 's going to cost us what? $75.00 if we I want to apply for a CUP and right now we don't even need that . I think it's $75.00 and then you wait on it but I can't see any benefit and I 've got the neighbors here that signed a petition that we are in favor . That ' we do not want it . Emmings: Alright . Have you presented that petition to the City? I Wes Dunsmore: . . No. I went to the Jeurissen neighborhood too and I believe that 's just George and then Chuck and Sandy. It's just two houses and they 're on the end of our street . I 've got the signatures and stuff here . IEmmings: Sure , why don't you give them to Pau) . I Wes Dunsmore: But I guess I want to make that feeling clear here that Hobo,-; in our neighborhood that I 've talked that's going to be effected by this interested in doing it . We like it the way it is and everything is I work_ . . We 'd like to leave it that way. Now I understand where all these other ;;eighborhoods are there's a lot of development going on and you 've got to make rules and regulations and stuff now but there 's nothing on our street anymore to be developed. There 's maybe one lot right there on ' TH 101 . I guess if they put a cemetery in, that's fine. That 's quiet with me . I 've got no complaints . Emmings: Here comes our quorum. IWes Dunsmore: I guess that 's the main point I want to make here is that we are a well established neighborhood. The oldest one around there I think I and we are not interested in being changed. We'd like to leave it agricultural . Thank you . I Emmings: A couple points that he brought up. As far as having horses, the change in the zoning wouldn't affect that . Is that correct? Aanenson: Continual use? IEmmings: Yeah. They could continue to have horses but if they wanted to build a structure , an accessory structure like a pole barn, like he said to Ihave the horses in, then they would need to come in for a permit for that now under RR where they don't have to under A-2. He 's right about that right? Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 3 Olsen: Agricultural buildings . . .if they want more horses , they would have to come in . If they want to expand over the number of horses that they've ' got which was one of their concerns. Emmings: Okay. The West 96th neighborhood has brought in a petition saying they don't want this change . Alright, is there anybody else here who wants to be heard on this? Don White: Yes, Don White, 8850 Audubon Road. I heat my home with a heat pump system that uses well water and it's a pump and dump arrangement where the discharged water flows out into the creek but goes across the lower end of the property . I know in some more recent zoning that type of system has' been excluded and I 'd just like some clarification to make sure that that existing system would still be permitted under the proposed changes. Krauss: There is no city ordinances or regulations that I 'm aware that ' specifically deal with that . Now the DNR is regulating those things these days. If you 're pumping over a certain amount of gallons, you need some sort of a withdrawal permit from them and they're getting much more restrictive on that . But we did not regulate that to the best of my knowledge and we 're not proposing to change that at all . Don White: Okay, thank you. Matt Thill : My name is Matt Thill . I 'm from 9610 Meadowlark Lane . That 's' in Riley Lakes Meadows . We have horses and we went through a lot of trouble and expense to get that okayed with the city and I guess I wouldn't want to add any restrictions to having horses in that rural area . You know if the property were to change hands, if new people would like to bring horses in for that kind of reason . I know that there's other issues in • the rezoning that have brought this up but just from that standpoint I 'd really like to see horses not restricted anymore than they are. We have never had a problem with any of the neighbors. None of the other neighbors !' in our neighborhood have horses and we try to be proactive about it and ask them to make sure that they're happy with the way we're keeping them and stuff like that . And everyone 's real happy . Sometimes their kids are down " there and stuff like that. I really think it's a compatible use and I don't think you should have to get a permit and have to take a chance on that . I guess if I were trying to sell it to someone and they knew that there was a conditional use permit, maybe that might not be so clear . They ' might move on to another property. So thank you. Cheryl Hobbs: I 'm Cheryl Hobbs and I live on Sunset Trail which is Country Hills and I have three questions. First of all , Country Hills is about 4 houses on Sunset Trail . Would you be rezoning just one side or one portion of that street? ' Emmings: I don't know the answer . Krauss: Jo Ann , you 're probably most familiar with how the neighborhood ' lays out . Olsen: Country Oaks? ' 11 Planning Commission Meeting 11 September 4 , 1991 - Page 4 Krauss: Country Hills . Cheryl Hobbs: It 's a deadend street and there are . Emmings: Do we have an overhead here of this? Olsen: Is that the one off of Audubon? Cheryl Hobbs: Off of Lyman. Olsen: Where it 's just a street that goes straight up? ' Cheryl Hobbs: Yes. ' Emmings: Could you point that out on the map so we 're sure , we 're sure we know what you 're talking about . ' Olsen: I think it was our intention to do all of the, both sides of the street . Cheryl Hobbs: The actual part that was subdivided and which is called Country Hills is like 3 or 4 houses . Olsen: It 's on the west side . ' Cher' Hobbs: And the other neighbors didn't get a notice of this so I figu d the reason was because they weren't part of it which means half of the yeet where the homes that were there the past 15 years would be zoned one way and then another section would be zoned another way. Emmings: Apparently we don't know but that 's something we probably should ' look at . Your 's is the newer of the sides? Cheryl Hobbs: Right . This would be the portion that was subdivided . Emmings: Would you happen to know the name of the subdivision that created the lots on the other side of the street? ' Cheryl Hobbs: It probably didn't have a name. It's just. Olsen: Isn 't there just like one lot? ' Cheryl Hobbs: No. There would be 2 or 3 homes. Olsen: On the east side? Cheryl Hobbs: Yes . And then my other question. Yeah I think would be important to me if you knew what you were subdividing or changing. And I then my other question is , I 'm coming in here with a feeling that I would rather that you didn 't make this change because it seems to me that it's taking away a lot of your options of what you can do with your land. I 'd II like to ask you what benefits there would be outside of maybe having more control over what your neighbor puts up. What benefits would it have to me as a landowner to have it rezoned? I I . Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 5 Emmings: I don't know . Do you want to answer that? Aanenson: Well we talked about that last time too. The mobile homes . Cemeteries . The pole barns . Those issues . Wholesale nurseries . Cheryl Hobbs: But I mean me as a landowner . If I didn't care what my I neighbor put up. Why would I want it to be changed? Emmings: Then there probably isn't . Conrad: Yeah, then there's no benefit . The idea is you do care about what your neighbor puts up and that 's what a lot of the other areas that are , inteested in this zoning change , they're positive about it because then they have some control over what goes in next to them. That's what makes them nervous . Right now they don't have that control and that's why the logic, of shifting the zoning is there. Cheryl Hobbs: . Okay. Well I guess the , you know my feeling is this area is ' rural and we don't have a problem. We're insulated. We have plenty of trees and vegetation and I don 't see that we have this problem in this area . My third question is, if this has anything to do with the MUSA line now being moved, which we are not included in , and if we're looking down the road to having sewer and water someday and being able to subdivide part . You know make 2 or 3 building spaces , how does this affect it? Which way would we be better? To have it as agricultural or? I Aanenson: The same minimum lot size , 2 1/2 acres so . Krauss: I 'm not sure that it matters. If you were going to subdivide your " property when sewer and water becomes available , you have to rezone it again to RSF which is our single family district elsewhere in the community . 1 Emmings: Regardless of which zoning you have . Krauss: Regardless whether it's A-2 or RR. The only problem could be , again if one of these uses that people were concerned with, mineral extraction or the cemetery or mobile homes or whatever was located on adjoining property, then it would probably make your property somewhat morel difficult to develop and sell . But I don't know whether that's a possibility or not . We can't sit here and tell you these things are definitely going to happen if we don't do this tonight . There's just a chance that it will . As far as this being tied into the MUSA line, I think " the Planning Commission's request actually predated the MUSA line moving by quite a bit . It had nothing to do with that . It was simply that we had these basically rural subdivisions sitting out there and we have some of them that are zoned RR and some are zoned agricultural and they allow some different things and it was just a desire to have that corrected . Cheryl Hobbs: Okay, thank you . Emmings: Thank you . ' 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 6 Mark Laaser : My name is Mark Laaser . We currently live in Chan Estates but I 've recently purchased a lot on Sunridge Court and our intention in buying that piece of land was to eventually build a stable there for horses . I need a , I 'm just asking a point of clarification. What does the I change in status mean in terms of having horses? I 'm a fairly new resident to the area and I 'm totally naive to these classifications. ' Aanenson: You need a conditional use permit for horses. Mark Laaser : And a conditional use permit means exactly what? Krauss: A conditional use permit, it's not a guarantee. It 's not a sure fire thing that you'll get it. It basically opens it up for public comment . There are some standards against which conditional use permits ' requests are weighed. Does it impact other properties? Is it something that '- consistent with the neighborhood? Those sorts of things. A public hea- 3 is held and neighbors are notified and their concerns are taken ' int _ :count . And based upon that , we make a recommendation to the Pl _ rig Commission . They vote on a recommendation at the City Council and it 's ultimately their call . ' Mark Laaser : As to whether or not to allow people like us to build a barn and have horses and that kind of thing? Krauss: Yes. Mark Laaser : Well is there a grandfather provision to this such that if we IIalready own the land , even though we haven't erected a barn yet . Krauss: No , the grandfathering applies if the building was up and in use, it would certainly apply in that case . 1 Mark Laaser : If we tether a horse on the property now? IKrauss: You can tether one . Mark Laaser : So in other words we 'd have to go through that whole process if this change , because I 'm assuming that our parcel on Sunridge Court Ithere is included in this group of 10. Krauss: Is that the north parcel? 1 Mark Laaser : Well I can show you here on the map that I have in my hand. ' Aanenson: I think Sunridge is , yeah . Mark Laaser : It is included? Okay. Alright, thanks. I would object to it then on that basis . IErhart: In the RR district, is there any maximum size to a building that can be erected for use as a horse stable? IIKrauss: As an accessory building there's a size limitation I believe as to how much yard area you can occupy . I Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 7 Olsen: It 's 30% of the rear yard . • Erhart: Is there any difference between A-2 and RR in that regard? I Olsen: No . In all the other residential districts we 'swithced it so there 's a maximum of 1 ,000 square feet but in the RR and agricultural district it 's just 30% of the rear yard. Erhart: So if you get the permit you essentially could build an agricultural building . There 's no restriction on that . Krauss: Right . There is another twist that we should point out and it's not specifically related to the zoning ordinance but rather than building code . You can build an agricultural building in an agricultural area and you don 't even need a building permit for it . State law exempts them from getting a building permit requirements. Now I would assume that my in interpretation of it is that , if you're going to get a CUP approved , you would also then need a building permit in the RR district . Emmings: Is there anybody else who wants to address this? Is there a , motion to close the public hearing? Conrad moved, Erhart seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in II favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Emmings: Tim , have you got any comments on this? I Erhart : I guess I don't understand, there 's a list of 9 things here. If I owner - 2 1/2 acre , 5 acre lot . If I owned a 2 1/2 or 5 acre lot , there 's II 9 th_ •;s here that I wouldn't want occurring next to me. I thought that 's what we were trying to accomplish here because we have had our share of these here . I mean we 've had, well I 'll just take some examples. Commercial transmission tower that we just approved out in an A-2 area . Well had people in here from Timberwood complaining about that and that was 3/4 of a mile away . Krauss: There was also testimony from Sunridge Court residents that they I objected to that. Erhart: Which is even further away. You had problems with the neighbors I at Northwest Nursery complaining about their operation across the street and they 've got a small lot. Electrical substation. Do we have any minimum sizes on a lot for these electrical substations. If somebody could ll buy an existing 5 acre lot and come in and put in an electrical substation, is that true? Krauss: I suppose that's theoretically correct. ' Erhart: So this lot that 's apparently , according" to Wes , which is available on the end of West 96th Street could be an electrical substation as long as it 's zoned A-2 . Krauss: Correct . • I Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 8 Erhart: It could be a golf driving range . Cliff Simon's got enough land there that you could make a golf driving range. So I guess I 'm really surprised that there 's some negative reaction to what seems to be just a proposal to enhance the protection offered to people in lot sizes under 10 11 acres in general if you look through the whole group including Hesse Farms . On the other hand, the existing stable users really have no problems unless they want to expand at which time they could come in and ask the neighbors to come in and comment which seems to be there and pay $75.00. Given that you don't expand your stable everyday, I 'm not sure that 's such a burden. So again I 'm a little surprised at the negative reaction on it. There 's no limit to the size of building they can build. Only limited by what the II neighbors might object to. I guess if it was really out of place I suppose they 'd object but if it 's in an area with hobby farms, I don't know why they 'd object so much . I guess I still tend to believe that we're offering a lot of protection here and I 'm not sure. I guess I 'm speaking to West 96th Street . I think we agreed at the last meeting, all the rest of them were approved so I guess I 'm still inclined to proceed with it . I think the problem with West 96th Street is you've got one side of the road is I hobby farms and the other side is smaller lots without horses so it's kind of the same situation as Cheryl . . . I guess I 'm inclined to proceed with it . It seems to me it offers protection with very little adverse impact on II it . Emmings: Okay . Ladd? 1 Conrad: I guess I echo Tim's comments. It seemed like the thing that homeowners there would like but they don 't . Do we have any rationale for kicking the West 96th group out of this zoning change? Is there any logic Ifor the zoning change not applying to them? I haven't come up with it . Emmings: The only one I thought of is that it 's all built up. There's only one empty lot so the potential is probably less but still it could happen with these other uses to come in there. I Carol Dunsmore: Excuse me . Could you speak into the microphone . We can't hear you . Emmings: I 'm not saying anything important anyway. All I said is the only ' rationale that . Carol Dunsmore: It 's very important to us. tEmmings: The only rationale I could think of for excluding West 96th Street is it 's essentially built up and of course that doesn't stop somebody from buying one of the places that are there. Tearing it down and I putting in some of these uses that maybe the neighborhood, that we thought maybe the neighborhood would like to have some control over . But that 's the only rationale I could think of that would make it different because I I think most of the ones we 're dealing with are places where there are some houses but there 's still a lot of empty lots. A lot of empty large lots. 1 Conrad: I 'm stuck on this one because we've got most properties that we 're talking about subdivisions would like this. We deal with neighborhoods all the time , every 2 weeks we deal with neighborhoods talking to us about why 1 Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 9 1 are you letting that into our neighborhood. That's literally 4 hours every" Wednesday night we listen to that . This seems like some protection that I would like if I were there . And I can understand the nervousness of somebody saying hey, conditional use permits for a stable is not a guarantee and I understand that. I would be nervous too. I wouldn't like II if I had a stable , I wouldn't like that taken away. So I guess my decision is whether to kill the whole thing right now or to go along with it . I guess the wishes of the rest of the neighborhood. I 'd be interested in what the rest of the, I wish there were more Planning Commissioners here II tonight to sway me because, I think it's a tough issue. Emmings: Do you want to try and swap Ladd Jeff? Conrad: Yeah , sway me Jeff . Farmakes: How many of the listing here that we have 1 thru 10, how many II residents were notified in total? Do you have a tally on that? Krauss: It was quite extensive . It took quite a while to make the mailing" list up. Conrad: Hundreds? J I Aanenson: Yeah . 150 . 200 . Farmakes: And of that group, how many would you feel that were in the 1 hobby farm area? Emmings: What is that? I Krauss: That 's kind of fuzzy though. That's oftentimes you 're getting a subjective question as to what the owner perceives their property is and how they use it . Arguably some of the folks in Timberwood might believe they have a hobby farm because they have 5 acres and a big tomato patch. I think some of the individuals on 96th Street have probably tend to more what you think is a hobby farm. Farmakes: That's what I 'm trying to do. I 'm trying to get an idea of what's on here . Krauss: I don't have a number for you but most of the lots are in the Lake Riley Hills or something like that which is, there was a whole slew of these subdivisions that came in 1986 and 1987 for the most part trying to II get a jump on the change of the City Code down to 1 per 10 acres zoning. All those are what I would classify as, including Timberwood, as a more traditional rural subdivision and not a hobby farm area. That's most of the lots. Farmakes: The next question that I have is , we talked a bit about taxes before or about getting a response . Did you get a direct response on that? I read something in here but. Krauss: We 've got better than a direct response. We have the man himself . " Orlin Schafer , the Carver County Assessor is here tonight and can directly answer your questions . Planning Commission Meeting 11 September 4 , 1991 - Page 10 Emmings: Let 's make sure we understand what question's being asked. We 're wondering is there going to be a change . Is there a tax consequence associated with a change from A-2 to RR for the people who live in these? Farmakes: That 's correct. Orlin Schafer : That 's your basic question. Whether or not zoning influences value and consequently taxes. Farmakes: The previous hearing that's what most of the questions were in regards to . IOrlin Schafer : Right. It 's similar in circumstances to the MUSA line change . The fact that the line changed didn't change values to the I property. Use dictates value of property. If you now have in these areas, if you now have 10 acres or more , you can qualify for the agricultural classes as we see agricultural . Emmings: So it was the agricultural classes, Green Acres, what 's commonly referred to as Green Acres? Orlin Schafer : Right . Or just outright without the Green Acres protection you can have agricultural . Agricultural use a•T,d we appraise it and ultimately tax it in that light . By the same token we have people within I the context of the city that are in a commercial zone that now have agricultural class by our office on their property because the use is still agricultural . They're maintaining a cropping procedure . That is a truck farming type of operation and due to the income generated and so forth, the 1 use of the property , it dictates that it qualifies for agricultural use and we continue to carry it that way on the book. And appraise it and assess it that way . Property right across the street does not carry that and is I assessed extremely high in comparison. So looking at the zoning strictly from a tax perspective or the impact it would have on my office and our outlook on the future values of that property, up front I would say there 'd be no impact . Somewhere down the line someone in these areas is going to Iwant to subdivide . It happens. It 's nice to have the idea that you 're isolated . That your a hobby farm or that you're rural and that you'll always be that way but that very rarely remains the case. Somewhere along I the line economic pressures or whatever it might be changes that and people request subdivisions. If you really don't have the zoning and those protections that you're eluding to earlier in place at that time, you 're I opening up a whole can of worms and then we have some negative impacts as we view property. Not demeaning mobile home courts or manufactured housing situations . If one of those would be constructed in an area , the surrounding property is definitely impacted by it and that could be very I much of a negative impact . And so those are the things that you're looking at . We really don't care how you rezone the property, we look at the use of the property. So if you leave it A-2 and move a mobile home I court or something in there or a recreation facility of some kind into that and impact the adjoining properties , we will look at the impact it has just as if a manufacturing plant was built in the middle of a residential area IIand you made a conditional use permit . Granted it or something and that plant had an adverse affect on the residential area around that . We compensate those people for that act on your part. So we react to the 11 I . Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 11 1 conditions as they exist . Not as we anticipate them to be . I Emmings: Right . And that 's because you're oritentation is to the value of the property and not to the zoning classification? Orlin Schafer : That's correct. And if property is properly zoned, and if you do not put unreasonable restrictions on this rural res class , there should be no impact whatsoever on these small tract owners. I question the ll ability to build an agricultural building of any size without some restrictions. I don't see that anywhere else in the township. I would wonder why you would want to allow it here. Even if it were a stable or whatever . I think you do have to have some control over structures, whether they're agricultural or whatever regardless of where they're being built. You have to have road setbacks . You have to have all those things that conform to any other zoning class. And unless you 're really limiting II these people , I would see no adverse impact at all due to the fact that it changes from A-2 to RR . If a tract owner out there, and we do have a couple because I 've been contacted by them. If they 're in an agricultural pursuit at the present time , and we have them classed ag and they get the II benefits of the ag calculation. The ultimate calculations . They can continue to receive that . We have no problem with that. I 've advised II everyone that 's asked me about it or questioned it to apply for the Green Acres classification to protect their interest in the ag classification. As we ree it, it has nothing to do with the zoning because if you wanted to cha' = that to non-ag use , their Green Acres would be meaningless because II the, ce not conforming to zoning law. But if zoning would allow an agri:. .itural use in a residential area , I would see no problem with it . They are entitled to the Green Acres classification if they can qualify. Anything else? Conrad: Did Don Halla call you just last week? Orlin Schafer : He was one of those people that called, yes . Conrad: And last week , or two weeks ago he made an issue that he was ' deprived of his Green Acres status . I thought he did didn't he?_ He had some issue . Olsen: Dave Halla . 1 Emmings: That wasn't Don. That was Dave. Conrad: That was Dave. 1 Orlin Schafer: There are some other impacts in that situation because they II have a rather large tract that they've subdivided and there are some other . That 's an individual situation that really I don't know how zoning would impact it one way or the other because they've chosen to do what they did . We reacted to what they did. And a couple of their lots were changed in value simply because they had chosen to improve them. I mean that's normal . That would happen regardless of what they were zoned. So those kinds of things . For the most part they still qualify for Green Acres . Right . I Planning Commission Meeting 1 September 4 , 1991 - Page 12 Emmings: Okay , thank you Orlin . ' Farmakes: The last thing I 'd like to say on this is you made the statement I believe that you wanted the freedom to do what you wanted on your ' property that you have now before this zoning is changed. And you also mentioned that you have a next door neighbor who 's looking to retire soon and may want to subdivide his property and that restricts him and might affect the value of his land. Is that the statement that you made? IWes Dunsmore: No. Not subdivide. Just sell his place period as it stands right now . ' Farmakes: I thought you said subdivide . The thing that worries me about this is it doesn't take a person who can read into a crystal ball to look I and see that an urban city is just over the horizon coming towards you. I guess what we 're trying to do here is plan ahead for that . It certainly gives the city some basis to plan and develop orderly rather than to deal on a crisis basis . When somebody puts in something to your next door I neighbor that you just can't live with and you come into the city and you look for some justice to be done . What you consider to be an okay use is not necessarily what your neighbor thinks is an okay use. And because I several of you are fortunate enough to have several acres between you , what your neighbor does across the way maybe doesn't concern you very much but at some point in time that city is going to come up over the horizon there . ' You 're not far away from it and it seems to me that based on the amount of peop . that have been notified here , it's hard for me to say that those peon shouldn 't be afforded that protection because of the amount of peop.. _ that are here tonight and have based a legitimate concern about I their useages for their land. Horses and so on. I can understand that . It's one of the reasons we moved out here . IWes Dunsmore: Can I say one more thing? Farmakes: Sure . I Wes Dunsmore: I know what you're saying here is you're trying to give us this protection . There's nobody here says we want it. We all say we don't want it . Including the people that signed that. Everybody knows what this I is . The City is not going to surround us unless they can fill in lakes behind us and next to Tim and bulldoze out TH 101 and Pioneer Trail . They're not going to encroach. . . We know the protection you're trying to I give and you 're doing it for neighborhoods that were started in 1984 on up. We 're back in the 60's in our neighborhood and there isn't going to be any more development there. And I can't believe right now that the City would let me put a cemetery on my place if I wanted to. Do you think that'd be ' okay if. I go out there and start a cemetery or a mobile home park? Or do you think the city might step in and stop me right now. ' Conrad: You would have the right to do it. Wes Dunsmore: I could do that? Emmings: Is that a permitted use? Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 13 Krauss: It 's a conditional or interim use so there would have to be a public hearing . Emmings: Even in the A-2? , Wes Dunsmore: So they could stop me right now without changing. They already are protecting me right now without changing my zoning so I really can't do what I want right now in agricultural or residential . I can't believe somebody'd let me put a cemetery or wholesale nursery without coming before the City Council or Planning Commission or somebody to try and stop me . Maybe they would stop it but what we're doing is the people I that are here that signed that petition say thank you for the protection but we don't want it . We want to stay ag. Cheryl Hobbs: Could I say something too? I appreciate the protection . Emmings: Maybe you 'd tell us your name . First of all , what was your name? Wes Dunsmore: Wes Dunsmore. West 96th. Emmings: And your 's ma'am. ' Cheryl Hobbs: Cheryl Hobbs. Maybe' we are more concerned with our freedom than our protection . The freedom to do what we want . Resident: Can I interject one thing? Emmings: No , I think this is getting a little out of hand. We closed the public hearing . Maybe what we 'll do is finish the comments up here and if / there are people who've got some further comments , maybe we'll let you come back up. ' Farmakes: I think I 've said my comments. I still think that this is a good thing . Perhaps we can review that issue on the 96th Street . If the city wants to look at that and the homeowners. If they're on the far end II of the land useage as far as the size of acres, it 's not in my back yard. But I still don't think that the issues that we talked about, we deal with issues of land all the time here and freedoms to use your land. If I put I in, to use a hypothetical issue. If somebody wants to put in pigs next door to you or a nuclear waste dump, you have to draw a line as to where freedom ends as far as land use goes because we all live next to one II another . Some of us live farther away than others but I don't think that if this designation is changed that it really is going to be that restrictive on your freedoms. Emmings: For my point of view, I was looking at this primarily as right ' now we 've got , we're a community that's moving from kind of a rural character where we 've got the northern half is rapidly becoming very urban and the southern half we've got sort of more of a rural character but we 've got these housing developments springing up in there with large lots. When you look at that trend, there 's large lots now. Those lots may be subdivided in the future. We don't know but the trend is towards a more urban kind of situation and it seems to me that housing developments like these subdivisions belong in a residential category rather than an Planning Commission Meeting 1 September 4 , 1991 - Page 14 agricultural one . If somebody wants to come in as the last lot in a rural subdivision with large lots and they want a stable in there and none of the neighbors want it , they probably won't get it but I think we want to be I sure that they come in and we give those neighbors something to say about it . I know if I were in a rural subdivision and my neighbor wanted a stable, I wouldn't want it but that's just me. On the other hand I guess , so I think this is a reasonable thing to do. The only thing that makes me I uncomfortable is in the 96th Street case, I'm not comfortable saying you need this protection if you're out there saying you don't want it. To some extent . We hear that a lot of times . We didn't ask you for this . Why are I you doing this to us? We do have to think in a little broader terms than just what you desire but I think that it may be a situation where if everybody in the subdivision doesn't want it , maybe they ought to be able to opt out . Maybe we could have a provision in there that says if they can I get everybody to sign something saying they don't want to be RR , leave them A-2. I don't think that 's likely to happen . I Erhart: If I can address that point. I think in the first place I have a number of my neighbors here. I personally don't really care . I 'm not worried about these things either . But we started this process looking as I you say in general with all of the 2 1/2, 5 acre lots we've got in the city to offer some protection that was already here . I mean this RR district existed for many years and quite frankly I guess I 'm going to vote for this becaus I think it 's good planning and that 's what we're supposed to do I here uite frankly , from a political standpoint the process is due at the Cou meeting and if the Council says gee whiz. It appears that there's a m, : ty or 100% or whatever they want to view it, that doesn't want to I be i his , I don't care . So in a sense if this petition represents you don't want to be in it and Council looks at that and says that 's the political will of that neighborhood, I 'm fine with that too but I think from a planning standpoint , I guess I 'm going to vote for it because I 'm Istruggling with the same thing you are. Emmings: Yeah , okay. Now you've heard our comments and there are a couple I hands going up back here that wanted some comments. If you 'd make them brief. I Matt Thill : Matt Thill , Meadowlark Lane. Mr . Dunsmore was talking about some of the older neighborhoods that may not have a problem. I think some of the newer neighborhoods may not either because they have really restrictive covenants . You can't put mobile homes . You know radio towers . ' More than one accessory building or any accessory building over 850 square feet . There are a lot of restrictions in some of the newer neighborhoods including mine. And livestock, that came up. You can't have that in my ' neighborhood other than horses. No businesses. Only one accessory building and the other structures. The other thing about this is that you have to buy the lot and you hope that you can get horses but you've plunked I your money down by the time you apply for the CUP, So I guess a perspective buyer would want to know up front and you really couldn't say . Emmings: I suppose you could buy it contingent on approval too. IMatt Thill : Thank you . Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 15 Marlin Edwards: Marlin Edwards . I live at Audubon and Lyman Road. My problem is just as the city needs to plan, so homeowners need to plan and before I ever bought my 11 acre lot at the intersection of Audubon and Lyman , I came in and talked to city planners about the long term plans for that property and I was told that they had recently extended the existing zoning which allowed A-2 for that category of property from the year 2000 to the year 2010. So before I ever bought the lot I came in and talked to the city planners . I figured that out . I am using it agriculturally. planting trees there. I want to have a nursery there. I realize I could apply for an exemption. Emmings: Are you in one of these subdivisions? ' . Marlin Edwards: Yes I am . Emmings: Which one? ' Marlin Edwards: Sunridge Court . Emmings: Okay . Marlin Edwards: So just as the city needs to plan, homeowners need to plan . The City has no accountability . People come and go . The City chances it 's rules . I made very conscientious plans. Went through all the pr:-- channels to figure out what the City's long term plans are . Now tr:, ange plans. I don't know when I apply for Green Acres. I don't knc. w long it will be before the city will change regulations and disallow me to have Green Acres . Emmings: That 's State law . We can 't . Is that right Orlin? Marlin Edwards: Did you not mention though that it was possible for example Green Acres protection would not protect someone if the city regulated that agricultural uses were not longer even appropriate in that area? Orlin Schafer : I don't think. This is what I meant. If you put unreasonable restrictions on and said that an agricultural use would not be permitted in this type of subdivision, then 'you're affecting value of ' property . It would be feasible if you no longer qualified for the Green Acres. You can get Green Acres in downtown Chanhassen if you qualify . They have no control over that . ' Marlin Edwards: I guess my issue is just as I understand the City's need to protect the interest of new homeowners, I feel the City has a responsibilty to protect the needs of people who've gone through all possible recourse to establish what the City's plans are . People need to plan as well as the City needs to plan and I 've been very disturbed with the city's trends in the 3 years I 've owned that property. I had to go and ' have it reclassified A-2. As soon as I built a house on it it was rural residential and now you 're disallowing the A-2 and I imagine the Deglers see the writing on the wall too. I don't feel good about the trend because !' I believe people who planned to have certain uses ought to have that respected by the City. That 's just not how 'growth goes I guess. Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 16 ' Emmings: Alright , thank you . Erhart: It 's not clear to me , what effect the is on. ' Emmings: We should probably , you know anytime that we can talk to people about long term, we should probably have to give a warning that long term is about 3 months here because I think that's about it today. Yes ma'am . Carol Dunsmore: Carol Dunsmore, West 96th Street. I 'd like to direct my first question to Ladd . Because you walked in after my husband spoke , he I made some excellent points about why West 96th Street and the Jeurissen Addition should be eliminated from this rezoning and I feel that you cannot make an informed comment or decision after not hearing his talk . I 'm sad ' that you didn 't hear it because he gave some excellent . Emmings: Well why don 't , if you feel that's important enough, let's do a recap . ICarol Dunsmore: But my other comment was, I have a petition here that 12 out of 17 homeowners on our street says no , we do not want it . Object means no . N 0 and 12 out of 17 and it 's sad to see that the Planning Commission is not listening to the residents. `That 's what I thought the put _ hearing was for . To listen to the residents. Take in their co' ,s and it sounds like it's all hogwash . That you don't even care I now . ;ou 're just going to pass something because you think it feels good. It 's not affecting you. It's affecting us . ' Emmings: Right , and I guess my comment there to you would be, if notice went out to 150 people . We 've heard negative comments from a very small proportion of those really and there are times also when we pass things ' here that may not be wanted by a majority of the people but they are things that have to be passed for certain reasons . You know regulations. Nobody wants to be forced to pump their septic system every 3 years and to tell us who 's doing it . We put people through a lot of problems with that . Nobody ' with a septic system really wanted to do that but we made them all do it . So there are times when we have to do it. I 'm not sure this is the same kind of issue . I 'm not saying that but, why don't you tell , if you could quickly recap your comments. Wes Dunsmore: Again, I 'm Wes Dunsmore. I don't mean to take up the whole ' night here . Emmings: No, we asked you to. I Wes Dunsmore: Well thank you . I guess all I 'm just saying is that we , our neighborhood is old and established and I realize there's got to be rules and regulations . I know I work for the City of Eden Prairie 20 years . I I know how this stuff goes but we are established and I cannot see where we can possibly subdivide down there because most of it is lowland behind us and all that and I can't see , never 's a long time but I can't see where II we're going to be bringing in anything new in there or anything else. I think it 's going to stay the same . If somebody's house burns down, they 're just going to rebuild it . That's all there 's going to be . There 's going Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 17 to be no golf course there or any of these 9 or 10 issues here that you people are concerned with allowing in there . Like I said on the end there , I can't believe that I could go in there right now and put in a cemetery and so on . I think the people here would stop me and I think that's a reasonable request. We're already developed. I can't see any of this coming in . There's no way . Whether it's allowed right now, I can't see that you people would let me do that . I think that 's almost justified enough there . I didn't even talk to everybody on the street . Everybody that I did talk to last night signed that petition. A lot of people weren't home . So thank you. Emmings: Yeah, thank you . Alright , is there any more comments up here? I Erhart: It wasn't clear to me how this affected the fellow with the wholesale nursery . Krauss: Well a wholesale nursery is an interim use and requires public hearings and all that . Erhart: But he already has it. Krauss: Well as I understand it , I 'm pretty sure I know what lot it is . ' There 's some agricultural use going on just oft of Lyman in Sunridge Court . That 's a permitted use in the RR district . ' Erhart: What is? Krauss: The continuing of the agriculture is a permitted use in the RR district . Erhart: Raising trees is considered? ' Krauss: Yeah , so there is no implication. Now if there's a desire to build a large barn or have a feedlot or something else, yes. Then it would' impact it but to the best of my knowledge , I think I 'm familiar with which lot we 're talking about , it shouldn't impact it at all . By the way too, Commissioner Farmakes, you asked how many people we sent notices to. Kathy was counting that up . There was 204 notices sent out. ' Farmakes: I just want to make sure I've got that right . There are a total of 17 and you had 12 on your petition? ' Carol Ounsmore: There are 17 houses. . .and there's 12 now. Emmings: Alright . Is there a motion? ' Cheryl Hobbs: Are you going to find out about that street. . . Emmings: What? Oh. I think what we're going to have to do on the issue I you raised . Let 's see , that was Country Hills? Farmakes: Both sides of the street. ' 11 Planning Commission Meeting September 4 , 1991 - Page 18 ' Emmings: Yeah . I think they 'll have to take care of that between now and the City Council meeting. Thank you for bringing that up. Erhart: I 'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Rezoning #91-9 for property zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate to RR, Rural Residential District with the 11 subdivisions listed in the report. Emmings: I see 10. ' Erhart: Okay , yeah. There's 10. . Emmings: I 'll second it . Is there any discussion? ' Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Rezoning #91-9 for property zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate to RR, Rural Residential District for the following Subdivisions: 1 . Timberwood Estates 2 . Sun Ridge Addition ' 3. Country Hills 4 . Pioneer Hills 5 . Lake Riley Woods North 6. Riley Lake Meadows II 7. Deerbrook _ 8. Hesse Farms 9 . West 96th Street Area ' • 10. Jeurissen Addition All voted in favor and the motion carried. IEmmings: This will go to City Council when? Olsen: 23rd . IEmmings: September 23rd and follow the issue there. Our action is not a final action . It 's a recommendation to the City Council and you have every I right to politic all you want between now and then with those folks. They will make the final decision. PUBLIC HEARING: I ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CREATE A BLUFF LINE PRESERVATION SECTION TO THE CITY CODE. I Chairman Emmings waived the staff report and called the public hearing to order . I Emmings: I wasn't able to make it to the visit to this property out on Hesse Farms . Did anyone who was here go? Olsen: Tim and Jeff did. Emmings: Okay , what did you guys see out there? 1 I , CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ' AUGUST 21 , 1991 Chairmen Emmings called the meeting to order at 7 :40 p .m . . I MEMBERS PRSENT: Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad , Annette Elison , Steve Emmings , Brian Batzli , Jeff Farmakes and Joan Ahrens II STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen , Senior Planner ; and Kathy Aanenson , Planner II PUBLIC HEARING: I REZONING OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY ZONED A2 , AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT TO RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT . I Public Present: Name Address I Jane A . Poulos Lot 12 , Deerbrook David M . Halla 10095 Great Plains Blvd . II Eric Podevels 200 South Shore Court Bjorg & Jerry Hendrickson 900 Homestead Lane Don Halla 10 ,000 Great Plains Blvd . II Mark Halle 770 Creekwood Mark Danielson 11150 Sumter Circle Charlotte Morrison 1051 Homestead Lane Blair Bury 5537 Co . Rd . 4 , Minnetonka 55345 II Sunil Chojrr 7480 Long View Circle Kathy Aanenson presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Emmings called the public hearing to order . David Halls : I 'm David Halla . I sold part of this property to my brother 1 here when I retired . I kept 10 1/4 acres for myself . Now we 've been out here before this was even a city . When it was still a township . Now of I course when it became a city it had all of these people come in and all this bureaucracy to run everything but these people in the Planning Commission don 't represent the people . They represent their own political little aim . The things that we 've been doing with these large acreages haven 't interferred or caused conflicts with other people. But now they 're coming in and wanting to change the way we do things and I don 't think they have a right to do that . But they 're going to ram it down our throat and III think this hearing is probably going to turn into a dog and pony show just to legitimize their way of coming in the back door and changing things without allowing the people to have a say . And I don 't think that 's right . I know the past history of Chanhassen , you people rubber stamp everything- I that the Planning people come in and do and that isn 't right . Emmings: It isn 't true either . II David Halla : Well , a lot of it has been in the past . And you know when you come out and invest a lot of money in property 30 years ago and then you have people come in here and now want to tell you how you can use that property , then it doesn 't become a democracy anymore . I take strong II Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 2 objections to them coming and doing that . Another thing , you 've got this bluff rezoning thing . Now when I built my house out there , I built my house right' on the edge of the bluff . I would like to know how these people in the Planning Commission get the expertise to tell a homeowner • or a developer how far to have a setback . They don 't know the ground conditions in each area . I 'm sure they're not that smart . I think each location has it 's own uniqueness . Now my house is built approximately 5 feet from the edge of the bluff . I would have never built it that close if I had thought that I 'd have had a problem but it took a D6 dozer 3 days to dig the basement . That 's how hard the ground was . I haven 't had any problems with erosion . I haven 't had any problems with runoff . I even bettered it . I took and planted crown vetch on the hillside which grew a ' real good ground cover and prevented erosion but now they come in with this rule and say you have to build the houses 30 feet back . Of course I understand mine 's grandfathered in but the point of it is , we 've got too 11 damn much government . You know a little common sense like the Village Fathers in the township went a long ways . But now it doesn 't seem that common sense prevails . We 've got people coming in here with their own little ideas and not representing the interest of the people and wanting to ram it down our throat . The same thing with changing this from A2 to Rural Residential . EmmingE : What effect does that change? David Halla : It 's going to increase the taxes . It 's going to increase your taxes and already we 're being taxed out of house and home . Emmings : And how will it increase your taxes? David Halla : Well they 're going to take away the Green Acres classification when they go to Rural Residential . EmmingE : Is that true? Aanenson: No that 's not . I didn 't mention that but that is in the memo . I did speak to the Orlin Schafer at the County Recorder 's office and he IIsaid that the underlying zoning is not the criteria for Green Acres . They have a checklist of criteria , one of those being acreage . 5 acres I believe and the use that they 're using has nothing to do with it . It could I he RSF and still quality for Green Acres so the underlying zoning is not the criteria that they use . David Halla: But years ago I used to run registered Angus cattle out there and I had a pretty good sized herd . They change this from A-2 to R Residential , that 's not going to be allowable anymore . 1 Emmings : That 's right . Is that right? David Halle : And that certainly was an agricultural use . IEmmings : Can he run cattle if he 's changed to RR? Aanenson: Agricultural says that they can have cattle and if he continues to have it , he can . I Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 3 Emmings : So that 's not right either . David Halla : Yeah , but not if they change it from A-2 to RR . Aanenson: No , agricultural is still a permitted use and cattle is one of II those criteria . David Halla : But it 's going to increase the taxes when you go from A-2 to II RR . Emmings: Is his property one of the ones that is being changed from A-2 toll RR? Krauss: It is but there 's something that I 'm not certain of here . What 's confusing me is 3 years ago I believe the Halla 's had approved a 5 year variance to the ordinance that changed to 2 1/2 acre lots when the Lake Ann agreement with the Metro Council . We gave a couple of variances for plats . Preliminary plats that were filed and they were given at least 5 years to I come in and final plat the property . This is the first time tonight that we 've heard , well it 's in a letter from Don Halle that there 's no intention to subdivide the property I think I read until the turn of the century . That is not the understanding that we had with them 3 years ago . If that II in fact is the position , then we will assume that this is rural land not subject to the subdivision and there won 't be any inherent grandfathering for those 2 1/2 acre lots . We 're more than willing to do that . I Emmings : Okay , so if they don 't want that land changed to RR , they could say they 're not planning to develop the property . Get out of the arrangement that presently exists and keep it agricultural . Is that what you 're saying? Kraus,: Sure . I Emmings: Alright , so they basically have a choice to go one way or the other? Okay . So we 've addressed two concerns of yours is the tax and using it for agricultural purposes . Do you have any other specific problems with changing it or can you tell us how else you think this might negatively affect you? The change from A-2 to RR . David Halle : I sold this property to my brother when I retired from the business . Emmings : So it 's his problem? David Halle : It 's his problem with the subdivision. However , , the 10 1/4 acres that I 've got are divided into 3 lots that go with the subdivision . Now I don 't intend to develop that into 3 lots . Whomever I sell it to , and I hope I can sell it and get the hell out of Minnesota as soon as possible but whomever I sell it to then has the priviledge of developing those other two lots into additional acreage out of this 10 1/4 acres . So if my brother wants to drag this thing out and procrastinate , that 's his business but then I become the victim if he doesn 't perform . I Emmings : And how does the change from A-2 to RR affect any of that? I Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 4 II David Halla : Well first of all , they may be telling you here , these people in the Planning Commission that the taxes won 't increase but I 've talked to • I those people down there at the Assessor 's office and they have told me that when you change it from the agricultural to Rural Residential , the tax is different than what it is on the agricultural rate . IEmmings : Okay , and who 'd you talk to there? IDavid Halla : I talked to Scott , it starts with .a W the last name . Olsen: Winter . I David Halle : Winter? And I also talked to the main Assessor . In fact we had a real go around here a while back . I went down when my brother did this final plot on the subdivision because I am still involved in that to a I degrc and I hand carried the papers in there and saw that all the taxes were paid and everything and it went through to the registar and all of this and I was about to go out the door and the accounting office , the gal I called and said hey Mr . Halla . Come back here . So I came back and she said you owe $750 .00 for Green Acres change . I said what do you mean Green Acre; change? And he said , well he said according to the assessor you only have a 2 1/2 acre lot . I said what do you mean I 've only got a 2 1/2 I acre lot? I said I 've 10 1/4 acres . I said that qualifies me for Green Acres . She said no , it 's been changed . So I went over to this young fella who did th€ changing in the Assessor 's office and I said what did you do I changing this back here? I said I was over here talking to you not more than 10 minutes ago and I says now , I says I 'm telling that I have to pay $750 .00 for the Green Acres classification . I said that 's wrong and you flat out lied to me . I said you were the one who did it . I said this is I your initials isn 't it? He said yeah . I said okay . I said why didn 't you tell me you had done this? And so then the head assessor came along and he looked at it and he said , you 're right . He said we made an error and he I went across the street to the accounting office and told her . He said hey . He said he 's got 10 1/2 acres here . Not 2 1/2 . He said you had no right doing that . And so they changed it all back but that 's the same thing that IIwe 're talking about here . When you change it from A-2 to Rural Residential that changes the classification and the tax base . Now if these people want to increase the taxes on everybody that has large land , why don 't they have enough guts to come out and say it instead of coming in the back door? IEmmings: As a matter of fact , in the information they gave us , there 's information here that they talked to Orlin Schafer who 's the Carver County I Assessor and he says that the residential zones qualify for Green Acres and that lots that qualify or meet the criteria under A-2 would also qualify under RR . That 's the information we 've got from staff that they got from the County Assessor . Now you 're saying something quite different . I don 't I know . David Halle : They 've told me that if you change .it from the agricultural I classification to rural residential it 's a different tax base and they 're going to assess you at a higher tax rate . I think these people know that . If they don 't know it , they 're confused . I " Planninj Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 5 Aanenson: The misunderstanding is the lot size . I think what Orlin said is there 's a minimum 5 acre lot size so if someone 's zoned RR and has 5 acres , they can apply for Green Acres . Emmings : I thought it was 10 . Aanenson: Maybe it 's 10 . So if he has 10 then he 's fine . So whether you 're 2 1/2 and you 're A-2 , then you couldn 't get it . If you 're 2 1/2 ' acres in RSF you couldn 't get it . It 's the lot size . Not the zoning designation . The lot size . David Halle : Yeah but what you don 't understand young lady is that large I acreages are still Green Acres until it becomes less than 10 acres in total . So like in my brothers situation where he 's got 100 and some acres . Emmings : I think she 's saying the same thing you are . 1 David Halle : Yeah , he can sell off all of those lots individually until he gets down to less than 10 acres . At that point or it has to be 10 I contiguous acres . So after it becomes less than that , then they go into this rural residential rate which is a higher classification . So if they cone in here and want to do this on these large acres and change it from A-2 to rural residential , you 're going to increase the tax rate no matter what they are telling you . I mean that 's the bottom line.. Emmings : Okay , and I guess you 've raised some questions here . Our ' motivation in doing this . Now this move was motivated by us sitting up here . Whe ," we wei e working on the Comprehensive Plan there were some issues that came up and it seemed to us to be a good idea to change subdivisions in the A-2 to RR . We thought it was better for the subdivisions . Not motivations about taxes . No motivations about anything else . Just that it seemed like it fit better than it does in A-2 . Now it may be that and I guess I 'd still like to know if you feel , right now you have control over a parcel that potentially could hold 3 houses where now there 's c.ne . Is that right? David Halla : Correct . Emmings: And it 's presently A-2? 1 David Halla: Correct . Emmings : And I guess my question to you is , will the change from A-2 to RR II adversely affect you? Not your brother . Not everybody but will it affect you negatively? David Halla : Yes it will because it will increase my taxes going from A-2 1 to PR . Emmings: And you think that will happen , once this is passed you think that will happen immediately regardless of what you do with the development of your land? ' Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 6 I David Halla : That 's correct . And that 's why I am adamantly against it and I I think seine of these large parcels of land that are set apart that are unique 111- e my brother 's situation there with a nursery where it 's landlocked with the golf course on one side . With the canyons on the other side . That 's not going to have a negative effect on the surrounding areas because it 's kind of like an island in itself . It has natural boundaries that surround it that 's separated away from the other residential so . It 's just like the Graffunder that moved down there . Now he was a city slicker- that come out of Bloomington . Emmings : I was a city slicker from Minneapolis . IDavid Halla : Well okay . When Dave Teich 's pigs would squeal up there at his house , he 'd come up there and holler at him that his pigs were squealing . When I had my cattle out there and in June the cows get in 1 heat . That 's when the, cycle comes . The bulls beller . Well he was always calling the Sheriff up and saying Halla 's bull are bellering . So finally I told the Sheriff , I says tell him if he wants to come down and put a muzzle I on that 2 ,000 pound bull , to go ahead and do it . I mean I think some of these things are a little bit asinine to come in and say hey , we 're going to categorically change all of this stuff now from A-2 to Rural I Residential . Limit the use on everything when some of these areas are unique amongst themselves . I think you have to judge each individual area . You just can 't categorically go across the board and say hey . This is right for everybody . IEmmings: Let 's back up . You said limit the use . This won 't _limit the use of your land cr do you feel that it will? IDavid Halla : I feel it will . It 's already spelled out in here certain things that they wanted it limited to . IEmmings : And whet way do you feel that it will limit the use of your lent? Again , let 's stick to your land for purposes of your comments because I want to know if it 's going to harm you . . ilDavid Halla : Okay . I used to run cattle out there . Now if I go and put cattle back on that land again and I 've got all the squeeze chutes and the I scales and the corrals and the pins and all of that are in there . If I go and put cattle on that Land again and they say that you can 't run it agricultural and it 's rural residential . Well rural residential won 't classify for running cattle . IEmmings: Okay , we covered this once . IIResident : You couldn 't build the shed for the cattle though . Emmings : That 's true . You can 't build the accessory buildings that I sometimes you have associated with farm use . That 's true . That is a way it would limit your use . • David Halle,: Right . But the main thing is that I know that going from A-2 Ito RR is going to increase the taxes and we 've got enough damn taxes right now . The only other thing that I 'm objecting to is this classification of Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1°91 - Page 7 the bluff setback . Now I think that has to be addressed individually . Emmings : Wait a minute . Can you hang around because we 're going to address that individually in- just a few minutes . That 's the next item on the agenda so why don 't you hang around and give us your comments on that . David Halle : Alright , fine . Thanks . Emmings : Is there anybody else that wants to be heard on this? Yes sir . Mark Danielson: My name 's Mark Danielson . I have a lot over in Lake Riley Meadows and my concern is too about the taxes . To me it doesn 't make sense that if you 're going to go from agricultural zoned area, to something that 's called a residential that the taxes are going to stay the same . I think that we as property owners need to have an assurance from somebody that taxez may go up but we 're not going to be in a classification that 's going to jump us up . The other thing is at Lake Riley Meadows there 's only a couple of lots left and I don 't think that anybody 's going to come in there and put a cemetery in it and I would assume that if it 's zoned A-2 they can 't just go in and put a cemetary in . They 've got to come in and talk to the commission or whoever before that can be done . Some of the things about buildings or stables or that type of thing , I would think that that would h .ve to ce before a commission and I think it does say that there 's some variance for that and that 's keeping with the large lot development . If co,mcbcds' wants to have horses , that 's nice . It would make sense to me , at least from my perspective and where we have a lot , that each one of these areas be looked at to see where there 's a potential problem . Obviously there must have been some reason that you decided that maybe these should be RR versus A-2 . Whether it was a specific problem that you had with fear that somebody was going to come in and want to do something , • but some of these areas , especially if there would be a change in the taxes , are basically developed . I don 't know as well the other large lot areas but I can speak for our area on that . Thanks . I Emmings : Than you . Anyb6dy else? Charlotte Morrison: My name 's Charlotte Morrison . I live in the Pioneer I Hills area and I just want to tell you that I 'm happy that you 're changing this and I think in the long run it will be beneficial to us and I know that things can be put on these lots without getting permission for it that " might be detrimental to neighborhoods and I just wanted you to know I 'm happy . • Blair Bury : My name is Blair Bury . I have a lot in Timberwood and my concern also is the possible tax increase . I have to agree we have plenty of taxes now and I really don't appreciate any more if we don 't need it . think the limitations are reasonable that are on there now and I think that 's everybody 's concern is going to be the tax change . I agree . They 're going to have to go up but I think the mil rate should stay constant if we can . ' Sunil Chojar : My name is Sunil Chojar . I have a lot in Timberwood Estates . It 's only a lot at this stage . My question is , how is it going to impact the large size that is already existing here? Can they be I Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page S further subdivided or what 's going to be the effect of A-2 to RR with our sizes . ' Aanenson: It 's the same minimum lot size . Same setbacks . 2 1/2 acres . The same setback requirements in both zones . Emmings: Okay . So on items you 're mentioning , there 's no difference between the A-2 and the RR? Sunil Chojar : So the size is going to stay the same? Emmings : The size is going to stay the same . ' Sunil Chojar : Thank you . ' Don Halla : Good evening ladies and gentlemen . I 'm Don Halle . I 'm cone=rn-'i sb-ut changes that would affect the nursery business . If you read mY letter , you incorrectly read or stated what I said in the letter . Our intention was to stay in the nursery business in this area and not to be forced to subdivide . But in fact I was forced to go into 2 1/2 acre lots because I had just purchased the property from my brother . Taking into concidcration the cost and the value of the land with the anticipation that it would remain at 2 1/2 acre lot sizes . Then it was determined that it was changed to 1 lot per 10 acres . In order to preserve the value of my land end n_ t lose 3/.i of it , I was forced to come in with a subdivision for 2 1 / ' acres . It was not something I wanted to do . It was something that was forced upon me by economics by a purchase that had just been done and then a change in zoning ordinances had put me in a box . We have tried and I asked permission to drag my feet as much as possible . I think you know ' that , cc• I c u1d remain in the nursery business . We have met all the rules and regulations . We have given up property for road easements , etc . . We have three lots that have been subdivided and when you talk about Green Acres �:s w:rc back charged in Green Acres prior to the subdivision even going in . Pric7 to the 2 1/2 acre lots happening and that was done because it we::, deLermine:2 that we were going to do it in the future so we would lose our Green Acres advantage of those areas and we were charged at regular lot values . Supposedly January 1 when the subdivision takes place , you 're supposed to be appraised on January 1 . We actually had it signed by the city sometime I believe in February or March . It wasn 't registered until that time . Our land values actually were looked at and the Green Acres removed as of January 1 because they anticipated us doing it sometime this year which is incorrect but it was done and nobody 's reversed it and we 're pa,•ing taxes on the higher rate . So how that preserves Green Acres for other people and how it would be involving them , I don 't know . It did adversely affect me personally . As far as the intention of subdividing and I so forth and continuing with the project , I only want to do so as rapidly as you folks force me to do so . It is my intention , as I have said right along , to star in the nursery business . Maintain probably at least 10 acres or 12 acres for my nursery operation in the center core of this . Any 1 changing from A--2 to RR could adversely affect my ability to put up building_ and so forth that are needed to operate in the agricultural method that we have been operating on . We still would continue to grow II plant material . We still have those plans on doing so . I am only doing the subdivision and I will only do the subdivision in order to preserve the II " Plannine Commission ission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 9 1 value of my property . Based upon putting myself in the box of having paid way too much for the property if all I 'm able to get is 1 lot in 10 . And that 's , I think the letter is self explanatory . Even now we have really growing on almost 2 1/2 of the 3 acres area is still in agricultural . It 's still in trees , shurbs and evergreens . We still harvest it . We have lost II the Green Acres on those two lots that are still being used for agricultural purposes , even though they are right attached to the rest of the nursery and are being used for agricultural purposes . I think RR changing would probably make this even worse . I don 't know . I don 't know II the exact ramifications of that but if it 's already happened under A-2 , I certainly think it would get worse under RR . So I would prefer to keep it , the way it is and of course at this point there 's nobody else living there that it affects except one person and that 's Mark Halla . Well actually two . Dave Halle would also be in that area . Any questions? Emr,ingc : Are you going to stay around? They may have questions for you I later . Yes sia . Mark Hel_le : My name is Mark Halle and I 'm currently the only resident at II Great Plain= Golf Estates . I own the one lot that is sold and Don does have a pcint that it 's currently being used for mainly nursery use . The other two lots that have been subdivided are 100% nursery use at this time Of course Es everyone else is concerned about taxes , I am as well . There 's no need to get them any higher than they have been and we 're all hoping to keep them as low as possible for as long as possible . I also have concerns that I want to stay in the nursery business as well . It 's been a family operation for a long time . We 've been here from the time the City started . Sasicel l; a township to a city . We 've helped employ quite a few citizens . We Easically are a sanctuary in ourselves . We 've got the natural boundaries . As has been pointed out , we grow the trees . Basically it seem= to re that we 're an ideal thing for a city to have . A working nursery is open space that you didn 't have to take from a developer . You didn 't have to fight for it . It seems to me you 'd want to preserve it as long as possible . I don 't personally believe that 's going to continue if we convert to Pr . We have enough problems as it is under A-2 and forced to subdivide as Don has pointed out . Some of the things don 't seem right . It seems like we 're growing a method that in a sense doesn 't make a lot of sense . Growth is important but I think it needs to be a little bit better planned and organized and each individual area needs to be evaluated ' separately as an individual area . We 'd like to maintain our nursery operation . We think it 's a plus for the city of Chanhassen but obviously we can 't do that if we 're not allowed to put up a truck building if we need ll to store our equipment and keep it maintain . . .increase rapidly because out in the weather things age quicker . Certainly you understand that . You wouldn 't want to park your car outside in the winter if you didn 't have toil The sam-s thing with us . We need to have the -ability to do that . We don 't need to pay the extra taxes and I guess the change in time is a good one and I 'm all for it but it needs to be done at the end of it all . Once ever, thi n_ is developed . I don't really think that in this city I think II things are watched carefully enough . There isn 't going to be a- problem with someone coming in and doing something that you really didn 't want to be don• that was that big a problem . Little things may come through . I may put up a shed on my property that my neighbor doesn 't like . It 's not a major deal and in time that can be changed by the City ordinances but I II Planning Commission Meeting Auguc:t 21 , 1991 - Page 10 ' don 't L-cli_ vE to change it ahead of time is the right move . I think once the areas are more developed that it might make more sense . Unless you 're going to point out separate places and areas and say okay , these are exempt from these changes and that may be something you want to look into as well . That 's where I stand . Emmings: Okay , thank you . I 'd like to ask the staff if there 's a reason maybe to distinguish Great Plains Golf Estates from the rest of them that are listed here on the basis that we 've got an operation going on that property which is the nursery operation going there whereas in the rest of ' these we 've mostly got a lot of houses or just land sitting empty waiting for houses to come without agricultural use . I think they might have a point abc _rt being able to erect buildings for their operation . So is there some kind of a basis here for distinguishing Great Plains Golf Estates from the rc_t cf th ce? Krause : LJcll Great Plains Golf Estates is different from the rest in that ' for tha it doesn 't exist yet . It 's only been preliminary platted . it 's in active use which this change might affect . Krause : It could conceiveably . You know it was our intent in putting it in with t L,e rect of the subdivisions wasn 't any part of a grand conspiracy . 11 It was t H_ fact that it was a rural subdivision much as the way the others were . If thcrc- some desire to keep it out of that designation until additional subdivision occurs or if it occurs in that time period as been ' oLa; e:; t '-He Council , that 's fine with us . We have no secret or otherwise agenda Wa did go to the point of contacting Orlin and we 've done in the past , I think you 're aware we had him testify at the Comprehensive Plan on sons= ? t� ' similar types of issues . He confirmed for us that this in and of itself will not raise taxes . Of course Orlin would always then say tha t.-: _ _. :7;rc, alwa;'s going to go up as property values . . . If it would put grinds at ease , we could have him at your next meeting or the City Council mectirj or get something from him in writing . Erhart. : Can I ask a question? ' Emmings : Yeah . Erhart : When 's a subdivision a subdivision? 1 Krauss: Well , that 's real difficult to say on the Halla 's request . ' Erhart : I mean at what point in the process does it become a? Krauss : 1'c'll it 's been final platted . We accepted the final plat a few months ago which platted most of it into outlots and knocked off the three lot': c i_oeg, the road into the golf course . Erhart : I 'm referring to the either 20 or 30 lots . IOlsen : They 're an out-lot . They 've been platted as an outlot . Planning Commission Meeting Augu:t 21 , 1Y'1 - Page 11 I Don Hall. ' We only platted 3 out of 35 . Erhert : really Halle Nursery really isn 't a subdivision as yet? I Emmings : Well there 's been a plat that 's been approved and filed and it is a subdivision plat so I think it is a subdivision . That 'd be my guess . Do you knee-7 Ahrens It is if it 's a final plat . I Emmings : That makes sense to me but it 's still , it feels like it's different to mF_ and I just wonder if that , do you think that the factual difference that we 've been talking about here would be a reasonable basis for distineuishing that one from the rest of these? Kraut__ : I think so . I mean clearly all the others are either fully developed or b€ corning so . And it would be probably reasonable to leave thell Halls in it 's current state until or if they decide to proceed with the full euHflivision . I Emmings : O '- . Is there anybody else? The public hearing 's still open here . Is there anybody else here that wants to speak on this? II Erhart moved, Ahrens seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed. Erhart : I think this is a real good ordinance . I think from what I 11 unccrst .-r ` th_ purpose was to protect those people who are in rural subdivisions . So I also think it doesn 't make really any sense to throw II Halle ' : into t tai _. . It doesn 't serve the purpose we 're setting out to do . so . The c.nl thing I had is I think we missed a couple . What is West 96th II Kraus: : To the best of my knowledge that 's a condition that pre-dated any thing . Erhart : It 's a bunch of 1 and 2 and 5 acre lots all essentially in a II subdivision . Why wouldn 't we throw that in here? Protect those lots as well . II Krauss: Conceiveably you could although if the Halla 's character argument has some validity . West 96th Street area is a little bit different than most of the rural subdivision that we have . They 're larger lots to the best of m/ knowledge . I know there 's a number of people that keep a lot ofil horses out there . We can include it . Erhart : Some are 1 acre . One side of the road they 're almost all 1 acre I and the ether side they 're . Krause : They 're pioneers . 1 Erhart : I just assumed that we would include that since it 's basically the same average density as all the rest of them . I suppose we haven 't notified them . I guess my point would be , I guess I assumed that they II IPlanning Commission Meeting August 22 2c.',91 - Page 12 II would he incluc'ed . I would suggest that we table it until we notify them . II Unlers we can find if they have some objection because I think it 's the same cha tcr . In fact along the street it 's actually much higher density . The lot width is only 150 feet there . For all the other ones it 's at least 160 or 200 so in a sense it 's actually more dense . Those are • II my comments . Conrad: I like the ordinance . It makes sense . It protects people who are ' moving into large lots . I agree with leaving the Great Plains Golf Estates out of this . It 's a different animal altogether at this point in time . I don 't know what triggers bringing it under . Back into this ordinance . I Somebody has to tell me when that 'occurs and I guess I 'm still interested in the tax . Don said he 's seen the tax . The implications of this and by no means was this intended to change tax rates . It 's intended to protect pc-epic . People the.t are moving in and the people that want to experience 1 the ,--oral aca an., that 's why we 're doing this . I 'm sure there are better LJa> s to r mon..y . So I guess I 'd like to see the Assessor at the City Cour:cil mEetinc5 and talk to the City Council about the implications of this IIwhen this con's, to their table . That 's all . Ennsings: On Ladd's question when this question might arise . Assuming Great Plains Golf Estates were left out . The question is then when will we. IIrecc.r icy- rezoning it RR? And now whenever they want to develop something , they 're going to be bringing in an outlot with a plat right to subdivide it into lots and we 'd have an opportunity to consider the Iquestion ,L that point . Would that be right? Okay . Annette? Elleen : I think it makee. sense . I don 't know that we communicate enough I to tk peop1a what we 're motivated behind here . I know that I remember thinLir.: ' r I lived in Timbc-rwood I wouldn 't want a mobile home moving in ric t n=> t to me and right now it could and I couldn 't do anything about it . nd:• I right have a 5250 ,000 .00 house and there 's a nice mobile home ' .,ittr.; there . And we were looking at it from the standpoint that a lot of peop: c <.iE cut there trying to be spread out and trying to have homes and it 's nc t set up to protect homeowners . That 's why I appreciated Charlotte II mcnt ; n:- th..t . We did a had job of communicating our intentions I think ma, be in that letter so . As far as the qualification for Green Acres and things like. that , I agree with Ladd and Tim and everybody that what we need , " to do is bring in the County since we 're getting two different people 's reports and I 'm not doubting every person believes what they heard was right . You know David heard from one person and we heard from another as far as the City so let 's get him in here and find out . Like Mark was ' talking about maybe it 's not , it 's based on the same , what they 're basing the tax en is the same . We won 't be able to promise that rural residential versus A- 2 will never rise next year but they should always be based on the I same thing . So if one rose so would the other anyway but . When we did this wa thought boy , there 's a lot of people out there that could have some nasty things coming right behind their backyard and they wouldn 't have anythinD to say about it and we couldn 't stop it . , It doesn 't matter that Iit comes forward and we don 't -like it . The law would allow those people to have that and we couldn 't do anything about it so we had good intentions . And I agree with the nursery but I also think that somehow it has to trigger going back into it if it 's no longer; used for that purpose . Not F i r,_w I guess . II Planning Commission Meeting II " August 21 , 1991 - Page 13 11 Emmingc Okay . Brian? Batzli : I agree entirely with Ladd 's comments and I also agree with Tim all that if there are additional areas in the city that fit into this kind of a mold , that we should take a look at them and I would love to be at the Council meeting to hear the Assessor tell the Halla 's why they were apparently treated somewhat differently . 11' Farmakes : I think it 's a good piece of city ordinance . People deserve protection when they move into that type of situation . I think one person 's dream may be another person 's nightmare . When you exercise or come and- say that , we 've seen this before that if you buy a piece of property or if you 've been here for many years , you should have a special right to utilize that property . That goes to a certain point . That 's why they ha I Planning Commission Meeting IIAuisust 21 1991 - Page 14 Aanensor, He works at Green Giant , yes 1 Ahrens Did you read this? 1 Batzli : Yeah . Ahrens: I guess if we 're going to consider special uses for a special 1 category for Great Plains Golf Estates , if other subdivisions have active commercial nurseries on their property , maybe we should exempt them too . Emmings: I think the difference here is , I 'm not sure but I think the II difference is , Halla 's have basically their entire property in a large operation . This guy 's got one lot in one subdivision that he says he 's got an intensive agricultural business . I don 't think that . . . 1 Aenensor : H 's an anomaly . He was concerned that he would be able to continue what hs 's doing to the property because he 's different than II everybod; else in the subdivision and he was saying , you know if this gets , can I continue to use this? Are my neighbors going to be concerned? Emmi r Ark the answer is yes he can . Correct? 1 Aanc nson Right . 1 Ahrens : his concerns are unfounded? Emmings: Well his concerns aren 't unfounded but this isn 't going to hurt IIit . TLi :. isn 't going to affect him in any negative way . I don 't think . Ahren: : Well , I 'm going to recommend approval of this zoning change too because I think it 's a good idea with the exception of , with excepting out 1 Great Plains Golf Estates for the reasons everybody else has said . I think there 's _2 lot cf misinformation about the taxes and I think it would be good fer Ever> body to show up if Orlin Schafer does show up at the City 1 Council out of him . i me� ._i n� . .some answers Emmings: Okay . And I don 't have anything new . I think it 's a good thing to do . I think the tax question has to be answered and I think that can be 1 done at the City Council . The only question that 's come up is whether we ought to table it to be sure we 've included all the subdivisions that ought to be included or should we send it along and amend it later . I guess I Idon 't know . Conrad: City Council can open it up for public hearing can 't they? 1 Krauss : They generally do . Conrad: Yeah . So we could table it here and bring it back or we could 1 vote on it and send it along to the City Council with the fact that . Krauss : I should add though the official , the legislative public hearing 1 is held by you so we could not add another subdivision . Conrad: Couldn 't? I I " Planning Ccr,mission Meeting August 21 , 19 1 - Page 15 Krauss: WE could not . That would have to come back through you Emmings : I wonder if , do we think it 's just one? I Olsen: Yeah . I don 't think you really have much else down there . It 's just in the A-2 district and I don 't know of any other ones like Tim 's . Emmings : My only thought would be that if we move it along having a public " hearing for one we 're adding is not going to take that long and we won 't have to -renotify everybody that 's here . That 's my only thought Tim . Erhart : Sc- your recommendation would be what? I Emmings: You can do what you want . Erhart _,:_ _n t follow you . I Emmings : Will it be. quicker for us or will it take less time for us to - move it along nc:: and just have a public hearing later on the individual one we 're considering adding? Otherwise we 're going to have to renotify e,ve. : :> . Erhart : We could do that? I Aancr -:- : Sure . You could always rezone property at any time . Erh,ert whet do ; eu went the motion to be then? ConT :i. Ti_at 'c , _u , choice . , , ea yo,! 're saying we move to approve it and then that comes bacL? Emmin ,- : I th nk those are our choices . Either we table it or we move it along a e: then later on if we want to add something , we can always . Erhart : How long is it going to take to discuss this the next time around? If I move thct we leave the Great Plains Golf Estates out , is it going to take that much time on another Planning Commission meeting? I Conrad: Shouldn 't . Emmings: Don 't know . Erhart: Let me try that one . I 'll move to table the ordinance at which time we can review additional subdivisions and ask that Great Plains Golf Estatee be removed from the proposed ordinance at that time , Batzli : Second . I Eming : Alright , ie there any discussion? CoriraJ : Yeah . I just would .want to make sure that those that are here I that are tracking the item , and I 'm sure the Halla 's will follow it but I 1 Planning Ccmmission Meeting Augu:.t ? , '_?^.1 - Page 16 ' wh: n we table it and bring it back , it 's a way that people lose sight of where it is in the process of moving it up to the City Council . So is there an official mechanism of making sure that these folks are aware , other than the city paper , when it goes to the City Council? IAanenson: If you want us to renotify everybody , we can do that? There 's a couple hundred people . ' Erhart : Okay , so if we table it tonight we have to notify everybody that we notified again? Ahrens: Do we have to renotify? Aan_nson : He 's asking us to track it that way . 1 Ahrens. : i n 't publication sufficient? , it is but again it 's one of those things that keeps people out cf touch . You 've got to be kind of diligent . Eih r '_ : If you have a continuation of a public hearing , that 's something wc 'vc done . Emminc_ Yea`, . ' C; a> , do ES everyone have to be notified then? Kr : • ; o..j movi n; on? Em-,,i . No , he 's saying if we table it and just continue the public hear i n- to th: next time it comes up on our agenda , do you have to renotify ' everybody that was notified for this meeting? Kraua_ • t.! =11 we probably would be because the notice that we sent them ' told them that it would be at the Council on an appropriate date . That 's not the wor _ thing . We don 't object to doing it . Emmings: No , we 're just asking what happens . ' Conrad: So when we reopen the public hearing , we have to recommunicate to everybody . Big deal . And then when it goes to the City Council , people would be aware of it only through our official paper . I guess they 're motivated enough to track it that way . That always bothers me . When we send along here to City Council , they know what day it 's going but that 's ' maybe a minor issue . Erhart : This here doesn 't bother me about' it too much because a lot of times, w: '11 talk about zoning changes , we generally have two public ' hee.r r;v. anyway I believe . We commonly have had 'two public hearings . Got a moti r . Emmin`s : Alright , any other discussion on the motion? E' ls_ . I y what it is . I Planning Commission Meeting August 21 , 1991 - Page 17 Emmings : To_ table . U Erhart moved , Batzli seconded to table the Rezoning #91-9 for property zoned A-2 to RR for staff to review any additional subdivisions and to remove Great Plains Golf Estates. All voted in favor except Emmings who opposed and the motion carried 6 to 1 . Conrad: So it 's going to be tabled everybody that 's here . Be brought back t for one other subdivision and I guess the message is , you 'll get a message _ about it but to track , to watch for it in the City paper so you know when it goes to the City Council . , • PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CREATE A BLUFF LINE PRESERVATION SECTION TO II THE CITY CODE . Public Present: I Name Address Nancy Le,�!Pat Blood 10500 Great Plains Blvd . Jim Sulerud 730 Vogelsberg Trail , Ari Fuad 6645 Cherokee Trail , Eden Prairie Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane Jane A . Poulos Lot #12 , Deerbrook David M . Halla 10095 Great Plains Blvd . Bjorg & Jerry Hendrickson 900 Homestead Lane , Don E . Halla 10 ,000 Great Plains Blvd. Mark Halla 770 Creekwood Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Emmings , called the public hearing to order . Ari Fuad : My name is Ari Fuad . I own a lot in Hesse Farm Addition . The west side . I think it 's the last lot on the bluff in that subdivision . All the rest have houses on them already so I 'm the only one who 's really affected by this . I think one reason, I bought the lot a year ago and one II reason it hasn 't been developed yet is because the obvious site by the road . is , though it 's on the bluff it doesn 't have any view of the valley because of trees immediately between that site and the bluff and I don 't know what limited clearing means but there 's some substantial trees there . Unless you can cut down a lot of big oak trees which I wouldn 't want to do anyway , you couldn 't appreciate or you don 't get any benefit from that site . This property is 11 acres and it runs down the whole length of the bluff . All the way down to a railroad bed which has just been taken out and perpendicular or running the length of the lot is a ridge . When I bought the property a year ago I walked down there . This is actually an existing road that maybe Hesse may have put in sometime or somebody put in many years ago that runs down this ridge . The attraction of the lot to me was another potential site and Jo Ann went and looked at it and said what this , ordinance is trying to do was prevent development of such sites within the bluff . The site may not actually be buildable if it 's indeed a sandy soil there though I believe , from the evidence , walking down this roadbed where • .i • L9 O I '.. -�a �E.UEE�A �� A" ie 2yP "LANDSCAPE DESIGNERS, CONTRACTORS, GROWERS" INC. f. Y2.. 3 II `�!�,0 ". `� 10,000 Great Plains Blvd.,Chaska,Minnesota 55318 1 3 Miles South of Chanhassen on Hwy.101 Phone 612-445-6555 II August 21, 1991 IIDear Planning Commission Member, I . I respectfully request that ou eliminate nate Great Plains Golf Estates I subdivision from the proposed rezoning. I had just purchased the nursery property from David Halla at a price which reflected future development of 22 acre size lots when you decided to change the zoning to 10 acre per lot Iin unsewered areas. My intention was not to sub-divide the property until after the turn of the century as I choose to remain in the nursery business. 1 You now propose additional changes in zoning which could increase the difficulty of remaining in operation. We have now been a member of the Icommunity for over 30 years supplying jobs and beautification to many of its citizens. We are landscape designers, contractors and growers along I with our garden center and wholesale nursery operation. We have, in the past few years, spent a considerable amount in updating and beautifying our premises. In our advertising we call ourselves a landscape arboretum, which Iis grammatically correct, along with the garden center and nursery. At this time we have only developed 3 lots and my intention is IIto develop the balance only as fast as the' city forces me to do so. At this time 22 of the 3 sub-divided lots are still in nursery production. RR zoning adds substantial restriction on our present and future plans which would affect no one but us. Contrary to your letter I' have found I that the green acres tax provision is eliminated when sub-dividing even though the use remains agricultural. We respectfully request that you eliminate Great Plain Golf Estate sub-division from any rezoning. 1 Sncerel _ y�rf/� i / . ?., j .r.�.i Don E. Halla I "THE PLACE TO GO FOR PLANTS THAT GROW" YOUR "NATIONAL LANDSCAPE AWARD"WINNING NURSERY.FOR DESIGNING & PLANTING I SHADE TREES • EVERGREENS • FLOWERING CRABS • FRUIT_TREES • FLOWERING SHRUBS • HEDGING • GROUND COVERS • FERTILIZERS LANDSCAPE CONSULTATION INSECT CIDES ± MMG • URGE TREE MOVING • INSURANCE CLAIMS • DESIGNING 9/3/91 - I I , THE UNDERSIGNED, OBJECT TO THE REZONING OF WEST 96th STREET FROM A2 (AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT) TO RR (RURAL RESIDENTIAL 1 DISTRICT) : III NAME ADDRESS I a&W)Oadai-yatt_ 71D Jj P6 J--4 1 - b''-r;.> 4- - 700 Ce.), 71'4-e S—c, I VI •. A�i L- ..A,_. Z `t, 0 .. .r: L cam._ . c4,;ietz. 42gia. ,) !io.?�_9d .11'`' . 1 I f,z,_ S „--,..--/ -73/ L} .1614 37- 4-- /6477r- ‘oo e,i '.6 _c 7- I i Goff - qV 4 1 e=aJ.-,e4 -- e..,f sue. I 1;; ) AlAileril /O P6 , 4, .e356 z` .,;_� moo G " 7e" s ; 1 ,- r-e-C.. ( 7,:. 0 a, c/0- 1 e 27.w( j - Jo f I go,p02./eio •.__97.-.4e4e4tee....e. 63, c.i, 2 .714 1 c-_-_1,--._:,_; fel - -------1-4. 4,,,,,,,,, 7,70 1,(..)e 96, '''--&- ,/ F 2a7 �, 9 I 7/L_ //ae-J,e__ 63o a. 96-44 I I 9/3/91 I I , THE UNDERSIGNED, OBJECT TO THE REZONING OF THE JEURISSEN ' ADDITION FROM A2 (AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT) TO RR (RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) : 1 NAME ADDRESS 1 Li‘o w 96 = G��t � 7o 6/ — 111 -"LEI 1 12,4 9 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i .4az . 9,i99/ I i 1 i ' Ace=4)??& Oha a„,,,4 : C° &e.ez4.1I Lt - L It .P..cwx/.Ofatl ■ /� 'tar �,.�..T ( WI s t a,Y /f Xi 2Le 2 CcYLf.°,Cdtadfes�Fr� -ni,446etaine /..)ed %dee, NA"' a 4 et..zt 4 A °AC,- Cht,• -ejv - A/6 de lizz. aietat k ,d-fe7ne, ifiaa . ' #.04.4...e. ezi.-7244,42, Avite.,401 „,,,,„„ 0,44., I .Gi 9�s zYue��u ^��/�� .1 a, o/i.e.ae,/t.t 6usi A#nw 7na.f.P�t aid� .Gc. I eafree.„0 ,a-it a.loit� ke'li - 1 ,,cyCa� ew ca+e. tfane � � 0 � '✓ 04iSPOm — YZCU��,�y� & GL / ' �,, 4 �'€4iXdt i `GM ,, ..,----,z,i , , iteXeI Pet tae, 1 / i / „j,/ • / I dea-a& vaal ,oita. tee;fit a.,,to6 I ,E' /dot WtSMoor,ofeee--4,Z 7o u. a�Sf. ��q N+ e - I Post-Ir brand fax transmittal memo 7671 loot p,' ► / II Kathy Aanenson ,Q F'°'" l City of Chanhassen Co. �� 690 Coulter Drive • P.O. Box 147 D. t . •sln' C ° 36 g-3//5 IChanhassen, MN �°��l/2--437.-5-739 Ps" Fax (612) 937-5739 IIDear Kathy Aanenson: As I am unable to attend the city council meeting this evening, I . I feel it necessary to document my position on the proposed rezoning of A2 property to RR. Prior to acquiring my property in the summer of 1989, I took the time to check with Orlin Schaeffer about II property tax rates and with JoAnne Olson about long-range zoning plans. JoAnne informed me that the city was forcing residential growth to occur west along Hwy. 5 and that the plans to continue current zoning of the property I was considering purchasing had I recently been extended from the year 2000 to 2010. It is with these reassurances that I purchased the property with the intent of conducting my intensive agricultural business of breeding new Ivarieties of vegetables and fruit trees. . within a year I was required to justify to the county Property Taxation Office, the continuation of A2 zoning for the property. II Again, barely a year later, I am back in the same position. The difficulties of the city in making even remotely-consistent long- term plans has profound impact upon the lives and businesses of its I citizens. While I am sympathetic about the difficulties of making long-term projections in rapidly-developing areas, I do not feel that the city has a reciprocal concern for the disruptions caused Iby its vacillating zoning plans. Orlin Schaeffer informs me that I am eligible for Green Acres protection on my property, and I am in the process of filing forms II to obtain such. I am not yet fully informed about the extent and limitation of existing-use protection afforded by such classification. However, given the degree of effort and concern 1 I exhibited in determining the compatibility of my plans with city long-term plans before purchase, I wish I could feel the city regarded me as more than a vassal subject to feeding its appetite IIfor growth. I also feel that some of the stated uses excluded from property rezoned RR are not only in conflict with my original interests, but I also inconsistent. Certainly a commercial kennel or stable is far more affrontive in a residential area than any wholesale of trees produced from my breeding nursery? If I am unable to continue my II originally-intended uses of my property despite Green Acres protection, you will find me an outspoken opponent of your rezoning plans. II Marlin Edwards, Ph.D. 8950 Audubon Rd. II CITY OF 11, I ,,vF 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 104) CHANHASSEN (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 August 23, 1991 Dear Property Owner: On Wednesday, September 4, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. , the Chanhassen , Planning Commission will continue the public hearing for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council regarding the rezoning of large lot subdivisions currently zoned A2 to RR. The meeting will be held in the City Council Chambers at 690 Coulter Drive. This rezoning request is being initiated by the Planning Commission. It came out of discussions the City had when reviewing limiting contractor's yards in agricultural areas. They realized that the city has a number of large lot subdivisions that are currently designated A2 which could allow uses that are not desirable in a residential neighborhood. The intent of this proposed rezoning is to preserve the character of large lot subdivisions as single family neighborhoods by removing the possibility of an inappropriate use being proposed within them. The city has discussed rezoning the large lot subdivisions from A2 I (Agricultural Estate District) to RR (Rural Residential District) . Currently there are 11 existing large lots subdivisions that are being considered for rezoning. These subdivisions include: 1. Timberwood Estates 2. Sun Ridge Addition 3. Country Hills 4. Pioneer Hills 5. Lake Riley Woods North 6. Riley Lake Meadows 7. Deerbrook 8. Great Plains Estates 9. Hesse Farms *10. West 96th Street Area *11. Jeurissen Addition * Recently Added to List The intent of the A2 District is the "preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single family residential development". The intent of the RR District is Is , �41, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER August 23, 1991 Page 2 "to provide for single family residential developments intended for large lot subdivisions". All of these subdivisions meet the intent of the RR district more than the A2 district in that they are neighborhoods with a different identity from the agricultural areas in which they are located. The permitted uses would remain the same in each zone. Accessory ' uses, including agricultural buildings and private stables, are not permitted in the RR zone. Both of these types of uses are more typical of an agricultural area. Private stables require a conditional use permit in the RR zone so application could be made ' for that use. The request would require a public hearing and notices to neighboring properties. Existing stables in the rezoned area would be grandfathered in. ' There are a few other conditional and interim uses allowed in the A2 district that would not be permitted in the RR district. These include: 1. Bed and Breakfast establishment 2. Temporary Mobile Homes 3. Cemetery 4. Commercial Transmission Tower 5. Wholesale Nursery 6. Electrical Substation 7. Golf and Driving Range 8. Group Home for 7 to 16 persons 9. Mineral Extraction The majority of these use permits would not be appropriate in an RR District, such as mineral extraction, commercial transmission ' tower, wholesale nursery, etc. The remaining use permits that are similar or the same for both the RR and A2 Districts are commercial kennels, stables or riding academies, churches and recreational ' beachlots. If you have any questions regarding this proposed rezoning, please feel free to contact Kathy Aanenson in our Planning Department at ' 937-1900. Sincerely, (26.09A2e420 Paul Krauss ' Plannin g Director PK:KA / : I '1 1 i September 15, 1991 Mayor Don Chmiel 1 7100 Tecumseh Lane Chanhassen, Mn 55317 Your Honor: We 7is'z to protest any change in the zoning of the West 96th Street area . 11 It is our belief that any change from the current zoning of A2 to RR would be detrimental to the value of our property and the spirit of our neighborhood . Therefore, we respectfully request that you deny the 1 recommendation to change the West 96th Street area from A2 to RR zoning. 1 Than': you for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, ,17V-;7-71-27-7/ Milt and Lila Hinson 1 700-West 96th Street Chanhassen , Mn 55317 1 1 1 i i 1 1 720 WEST 96TH STREET CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 September 14, 1991 1 Mayor Don Chmiel 7100 Tecumseh Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mayor Chmiel: i We are writing this letter to express our viewpoint on the rezoning from A2 (agricultural estate) to RR (rural residential) . 1 We find no problem with the first nine areas listed, as they are not presently totally developed; however, we believe the West 96th and Jeurissen additions should not be included on this rezoning. We are interested in the continued preservation of rural character. This is the only reason we moved to Chanhassen six years ago. We purchased our five acre hobby farm and have, over the years, had horses, chickens, ducks and geese. it is important for "city children" to have access to the "real farm life" that we presently maintain. Another reason we purchased this five-acre "farm" was as an investment toward retirement. If this rezoning were to take effect, we know our land value would be lowered by thousands of dollars -- who would want to buy a barn in good condition and four acres of fences pasture if they could not put livestock on it? We also believe that this rezoning would bring N[Q benefits to us. I believe that there are still some politicians who are honestly , concerned with their constituents' feelings -- we only hope that you are among that shrinking group. Sincerely, 4?e2f2, ;;;7 Rollin W. Fahning L nda Fahning I :lkf I I 1 'I 11 8850 Sunset Trail Chanhassen, Mn. September 18, 1991 Dear Mayor Chmiel and City Council , We are writing regarding an item that is supposed to be on your Sept. 23 agenda. . .the rezoning of several 21 acre subdivisions from A2 (Agricultural Estate) to RR (Rural Residential) . We request that you do not rezone our neighborhood of COOntry Hills . One of us attended the planning commission meeting on Sept.4 to question this rezoning. It became clear that the members of 11 the commission were not familiar with Country Hills, nor were they aware that it consists of just 5 lots that would be surrounded by homes and property that would still be zoned agricultural . Yet they still voted to rezone all proposed developements, giving the reasons that it would "protect the property owner" . We feel that the potential uses of our property 'would be limited by this rezoning, and that we certainly would not receive the anticipated protection since all of the land surrounding these 5 properties is still agricultural. We are asking that the Council do two things. #1 . Consider each subdivision individually. If some areas requested rezoning, consider them separately from those who have not. Country Hills has a rural character with sufficient screening and is very well suited to an agricultural zoning. ' #2 . Please visit Country Hills (Sunset Trail) so at least you know what it is and why you may choose to rezone it. ' At this time, We see no benefit to us to have our property rezoned. We do see limitations being placed on these 5 property owners. Thank you for your consideration. I ncer- , Walt & Cheryl Hobbs I 11I I I September 18, 1991 Mayor Don Chmiel I 7100 Tecumseh Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Dear Mayor Chmiel , We wish to address our objection to the City of Chanhassen rezoning West 96th Street ( including the Jeurissen Addition) from A2 (Agricultural ) to RR (Rural Residential ) . This item will be on the City Council agenda of 9/23/91 . II We moved into this area because of the "farming" type atmosphere of the neighborhood. We have horses and an "agricultural" type building which was erected in 1986 . We object to this rezoning because of the following reasons: 1 . OUR PROPERTY VALUE WOULD BE LOWERED EXTENSIVELY. When we I would put our hobby farm up for sale, any interested party having horses or would like to obtain horses would not look at our property after learning they would have to: A. Obtain a Conditional Use Permit at a cost of $75 .00 ; B. Wait 6-8 weeks for a decision to be made by staff & Council ; C. and, have no guarantee that their request for horses and/or a barn would be permitted. I We currently have a 2 acre pasture and an attractive 2 stall building for our horses . Who would want to buy our property for anything other than to have horses and other animals? 2 . Our neighborhood does not compare to the other 9 subdivisions listed. A. Our neighborhood was built in the 1960s. All 9 subdivisions were platted in the late 1980s . B . All the lots on West 96th Street are developed. There is no room for golf courses, cemeteries, etc. C. West 96th Street is an established neighborhood. We are not young and growing, so we are not concerned about new uses in our area. I 1 1 Page 2 9 I D. Our neighborhood has had horses since its origin in the 1960s . There has not been any complaints from ' residents regarding horses in the neighborhood. E . Our neighborhood was added on to this list as a last minute thought by a Planning Commissioner. The residents of West 96th Street & the Jeurissen Addition 1 were not notified of the 1st Planning Commission meeting of 8/21/91 on this subject. We did not request this change and feel the rezoning has no benefit for us. 1 3. We will be submitting to the Council a petition with 16 of the 17 homeowners on West 96th Street (including the 1 Jeurissen Addition) stating that the residents oppose this rezoning. The quote from the homeowner who did not sign petition is " I don't care one way or the other" . 1 Thank you for taking the time to listen to the concerns of the residents of West 96th Street. We are sure you understand why we are concerned about not having our property values lowered. 1 Sincerely, ia1/44.9)%4:02-1 Wes Dunsmore & 'Carol Dunsmore 1 730 West 96th Street Chanhassen, MN ,/,01,C4 1:24.44PW / 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1