Loading...
1k. Findings fo Fact, Convesco, Oak View Heights I - r CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager ' DATE: June 26 , 1989 II � i'C. SUBJ: Oakview Heights Townhomes On June 13, 1989, the City Council tabled action on this item to 1 allow the City Attorney' s office to prepare "Findings of Fact" documenting the basis for denial. Attached please find such. Approval is recommended. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 !x_ I LAW OFFICES GRANNIS, GRANNIS, FARRELL & KNUTSON I DAVID L.GRANNIS- 1874-1961 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TELECOPIER: DAVID L. GRANNIS,JR. - 1910-1980 POST OFFICE Box 57 (612)455-2359 VANCE B.GRANNIS 403 NORWEST BANK BUILDING ELLIOTT B. KNETSCH I MICHAEL J.MAYER VANCE B GRANNIS,JR.* 161 NORTH CONCORD EXCHANGE TIMOTHY J BERG PATRICK A. FARRELL SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075 DAVID L. GRANNIS,III ROGER N. KNUTSON TELEPHONE(612)455-1661 I DAVID L. HARMEYER *ALSO ADMITTED To ° «o by '1'i� tr ink PRACTICE IN WISCONSIN -�C.i�l ;,i �I�` _I(..�I$.� v�• I June 15, 1989 V" .r-cit'r I Mr. Don Ashworth �ca.' SuL::ttcd to ^^la,.,;IV rl Chanhassen City Hall 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 ::n c•,n,°,e.". ,L. ,_..i:::t I Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 :)-6-17 RE: Oakview Heights Townhomes I Dear Don: Enclosed please find Findings of Fact and Decision I concerning the application of Cenvesco, Inc. for rezoning. Very - , , I RAN S, GRANNI , FARRELL & 41 UT •► •.A. I :Y: Roger N. Knutson IRNK:srn Enclosure cc: Jo Ann Olsen I I I I I -.'_--La Jb.L) I JUN 19 1989 • ,:I r OF CHANHASSI . IN ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ' IN RE: ' Application of Cenvesco, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT for Rezoning AND DECISION On June 12, 1989, the Chanhassen Cit y Council met at its ' regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of Cenvesco, Inc. for rezoning property from "R-12" High Density ' Residential to Planned Unit Development. The Planning Commission ' has reviewed the proposal. The City Council now makes the following: ' FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned "R-12" High Density ' Residential. 2 . The legal description of the property is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". ' 3 . Section 20-501 of the Zoning Ordinance directs consideration of six (6) factors in considering a rezoning to Planned Unit Development. The six (6) factors and our findings regarding them are: ' a) . Variety. Within a comprehensive site design concept a mixture of land uses, housing types, and ' densities. The proposal does not have a mix of land uses, housing types, or densities. The proposal is for 132 townhomes. b) . Sensitivity. Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes, and other minimum requirements, and performance standards associated with traditional zoning, planned unit developments can maximize the development potential of land while remaining sensitive to its unique and ' valuable natural characteristics. The proposal does not provide added protection to the environment. The proposal would eliminate many mature oak trees. c) . Efficiency. The more efficient use of land and ! public services, consolidation of areas for recreation, reductions in street lengths, and other utility related expenses. The high density of the proposal would result in certain cost savings for providing utilities and the ! like. d) . Density. An increase/transfer for density may be allowed at the sole discretion of the city utilizing the following factors: (1) The area where the density is transferred must be within the project area and owned by the proponent. (2) Density transfer in single family detached ! area will be evaluated using the items listed in Section 20-504, subsection (b) . Density transfer eligible for multiple family areas are not permitted to be applied to single family areas. (3) Density transfer for other projects other ! than single family detached development shall be evaluated based on the standards in Section 20-504, subsection (c) . (4) In no case shall the overall density of the development exceed the gross density ranges identified in the comprehensive plan. Increased density is not warranted because the proposal does not create sufficient open space to warrant the high density. e) . District Integration. The combination of uses which are allowed in separate zoning districts, such as: (1) Mixed residential allowing both densities and unit types to be varied within the project. ' (2) Mixed residential with increased density acknowledging the greater sensitivity of PUD projects. -2- I .. . . (3) Mixed land uses with the integration of compatible land uses within the project. ' Mixed uses are not proposed. f) . Parks and Open Space. The creation of public ' open space may be required by the City. Such parks and open space shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan and overall trail plan. ' The proposal does not create sufficient parks and open space to accommodate the number of people the project would house. 4. The proposal would not create a higher quality development than allowed under the current "R-12" zoning. The proposal does not meet the density and limitations on impervious surfaces required in the "R-12" district and does not provide offsetting amenities to make up for these deficiencies. ' 5. The current zoning provides a viable economic use of ' the property. 6. The planning report dated May 17, 1989, including ' attachments, and the Planning Commission minutes at which the proposal was reviewed are incorporated herein by reference. ' DECISION ' The proposal to rezone the subject property to Planned Unit Development is denied. ' this ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen day of , 1989 . ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor ATTEST: Don Ashworth, City Manager -3- I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1