Loading...
04-08-25 PC Agenda and Packet A.6:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER B.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS B.1 Planning Commission Appointment & Oath of Office B.2 Election of Chair and Vice-Chair B.3 Adoption of Bylaws B.4 Planning Commission - Commissioner Training C.PUBLIC HEARINGS C.1 Consider Ordinance Amending Chapter 20 Section XXX: Lot Requirements and Setbacks for the Residential Low and Medium Density Zoning District D.GENERAL BUSINESS E.APPROVAL OF MINUTES E.1 Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated March 18, 2025 F.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS G.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION H.OPEN DISCUSSION I.ADJOURNMENT AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2025 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 9:00 p.m. as outlined in the official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If, however, this does not appear to be possible, 1 the Chairperson will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. If a constituent or resident sends an email to staff or the Planning Commission, it must be made part of the public record based on State Statute. If a constituent or resident sends an email to the Mayor and City Council, it is up to each individual City Council member and Mayor if they want it to be made part of the public record or not. There is no State Statute that forces the Mayor or City Council to share that information with the public or be made part of the public record. Under State Statute, staff cannot remove comments or letters provided as part of the public input process. 2 Planning Commission Item April 8, 2025 Item Planning Commission Appointment & Oath of Office File No.Item No: B.1 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Amy Weidman, Senior Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION SUMMARY Per State Statute 358.05, the oath of office to be taken by members and officers of either branch of the legislature shall be that prescribed by the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, Article IV, Section 8. Every person elected or appointed to any other public office, including every official commissioner, or member of any public board or body, before transacting any of the business or exercising any privilege of such office, shall take and subscribe the oath defined in the Constitution of the state of Minnesota, Article V, Section 6. On Monday, March 24, 2025, the City Council appointed Ryan Soller, David Grover, and Michael Olmstead to the Planning Commission for three-year terms ending March 31, 2028. Jenny Potter, City Clerk, will administer the oaths of office. 3 BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION ATTACHMENTS David Grover Oath Michael Olmstead Oath Ryan Soller Oath 4 PH 952.227.11 00 •www.chanhassenmn.gov •FX 952.227.111 0 7700 MARKET BOULEVAR D •PO BOX 147 •CHANHASSEN •MINNESOTA •55317 OATH OF OFFICE I, David Grover,do solemnly swear to support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and to discharge faithfully the duties of the office of Planning Commissioner of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota to the best of my judgment and ability, so help me, God. David Grover Date: April 8, 2025 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8 day of April 2025. Notary Public 5 PH 952.227.11 00 •www.chanhassenmn.gov •FX 952.227.111 0 7700 MARKET BOULEVAR D •PO BOX 147 •CHANHASSEN •MINNESOTA •55317 OATH OF OFFICE I, Michael Olmstead,do solemnly swear to support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and to discharge faithfully the duties of the office of Planning Commissioner of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota to the best of my judgment and ability, so help me, God. Michael Olmstead Date: April 8, 2025 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8 day of April 2025. Notary Public 6 PH 952.227.11 00 •www.chanhassenmn.gov •FX 952.227.111 0 7700 MARKET BOULEVAR D •PO BOX 147 •CHANHASSEN •MINNESOTA •55317 OATH OF OFFICE I, Ryan Soller,do solemnly swear to support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and to discharge faithfully the duties of the office of Planning Commissioner of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota to the best of my judgment and ability, so help me, God. Ryan Soller Date: April 8, 2025 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8 day of April 2025. Notary Public 7 Planning Commission Item April 8, 2025 Item Election of Chair and Vice-Chair File No.Item No: B.2 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Amy Weidman, Senior Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION The Chanhassen Planning Commission motions to elect _______________ as Chair and _________________ as Vice-Chair. SUMMARY According to the Planning Commission Bylaws, Section 4.1-Election of Officers, at the first meeting in April of each year, the Planning Commission shall hold an organizational meeting. At this meeting, the Commission shall elect from its membership, a Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. Each member shall cast their vote for the member they wish to be chosen for Chairperson. If no one receives a majority vote, voting shall continue until one member receives the majority support. The Vice-Chairperson shall be elected from the remaining members of the same proceeding. 8 Eric Noyes - term ending April, 2026 Steve Jobe - term ending April, 2026 Katie Trevena - term ending April 2027 Jeremy Rosengren - term ending April 2027 Ryan Soller - term ending April 2028 Mike Olmstead - term ending April 2028 Dave Grover - term ending April 2028 BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION ATTACHMENTS 9 Planning Commission Item April 8, 2025 Item Adoption of Bylaws File No.Item No: B.3 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Amy Weidman, Senior Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION Motion to adopt the 2025 City of Chanhassen Planning Commission bylaws. SUMMARY Staff is suggesting minor revisions to the bylaws from its bylaws adopted in 2024. 1. Adding a city code reference for the establishment and appointment of the Planning Commission. 2. Modifying attendance language to account for potential extended leaves of absence while retaining the City Council's ability to remove a Planning Commissioner if it desires based on attendance. 3. Clarifying language related to holding a work session by the Planning Commission in the event of a lack of a quorum. 10 4. Clarifying that formal organization of the Planning Commission may occur at any meeting of the Planning Commission in the month of April each year. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the 2025 Planning Commission Bylaws as presented. ATTACHMENTS BYLAWS 2025 - tracked changes BYLAWS 2025 11 Adopted April, 8, 2025 1 BYLAWS PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CHANHASSEN The following bylaws are adopted by the City Planning Commission to facilitate the performance of its duties and the exercising of its functions as a commission established by the City Council on June 17, 1968 and pursuant to the provision of Subdivision 1, Section 462.354 Minnesota State Statutes annotated. SECTION 1 - DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES - PLANNING COMMISSION: 1.1 The Planning Commission shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council through carrying out reviews of planning matters. All final decisions are to be made by the City Council. The Planning Commission is established and members appointed by the City Council in accordance with City Code Section 2-46.03 1.2 The Planning Commission shall prepare a Comprehensive Plan for the future development of the city and recommend on amendments to the plan as they arise. 1.3 The Planning Commission shall initiate, direct, and review the provisions and standards of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations and reports its recommendations to the City Council. 1.4 The Planning Commission shall review applications and proposals for zoning ordinance amendments, subdivisions, street vacations, conditional use permits and site plan reviews and make their recommendations to the City Council in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. 1.5 The Planning Commission shall hold public hearings on development proposals as prescribed by the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. 1.6 - Establishment of Subcommittees The Planning Commission may, as they deem appropriate, establish special subcommittees comprised solely of their own members. 12 Adopted April, 8, 2025 2 SECTION 2 - MEETINGS: 2.1 - Time Regular meetings of the Planning Commission shall be held on the first and third Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 7700 Market Boulevard, unless otherwise directed by the Chairperson, in which case at least 24-hours’ notice will be given to all members. Regular meetings shall have a curfew of 10:30 p.m. which may be waived at the discretion of the Chairperson. All unfinished business will be carried over to the next regular Planning Commission meeting. When the regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, there shall be no Planning Commission meeting. 2.2 - Special Meetings Special meetings shall be held upon and called by the Chairperson, or in his/her absence, by the Vice-Chairperson or any other member with the concurrence of four other members of the Planning Commission, and with at least 48 hours of notice to all members. Notice of all special meetings shall also be posted on the official city bulletin board. 2.3 - Attendance Planning Commission members shall attend not less than seventy-five (75%) percent of all regular and special meetings held during a given (calendar) year, and shall not be absent from three (3) consecutive meetings. Failure to meet this minimum attendance requirement maywill result in removal from the Planning Commission at the discretion of the City Council. SECTION 3 - COMMISSION COMPOSITION, TERMS AND VACANCIES: 3.1 - Composition The Planning Commission shall consist of seven (7) voting members. Seven members shall be appointed by the City Council and may be removed by the City Council. 3.2 - Terms and Vacancies The City Council shall appoint seven members to the Commission for terms of three (3) years. Vacancies during the term shall be filled by the City Council for the unexpired portion of the term. Every appointed member shall, before entering upon the charge of his/her duties, take an oath that he/she will faithfully discharge the duties of his office. All members shall serve without compensation. 3.3 - Quorum 13 Adopted April, 8, 2025 3 Four Planning Commission members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Whenever a quorum is not present, no final or official action shall be taken at such a meeting. Members of the Planning Commission which are present may hold a work session in lieu of an official meeting. SECTION 4 - ORGANIZATION: 4.1 - Election of Officers At the first meeting iIn April of each year, the Planning Commission shall hold an organization meeting. At this meeting, the Commission shall elect from its membership a Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. Each member shall cast its vote for the member they wish to be chosen for Chairperson. If no one receives a majority, voting shall continue until one member receives the majority support. Vice-Chairperson shall be elected from the remaining numbers of the same proceeding. 4.2 - Duties of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson The Chairperson or in his/her absence, the Vice-Chairperson, shall preside at meetings, appoint committees from its own membership, and perform other such duties as ordered by the Commission. The Chairperson shall conduct the meeting so as to keep it moving rapidly and efficiently as possible and shall remind members, witnesses and petitioners to preserve order and decorum and to keep comments to the subject at hand. The Chairperson shall not move for action but may second motions. SECTION 5 - PROCEDURE: 5.1 - Parliamentary Procedure Parliamentary Procedure governed by Roberts Rules of Order Revised, shall be followed at all regular meetings. At special work session meetings, and when appropriate, the Planning Commission may hold group discussions not following any set Parliamentary Procedures except when motions are before the Planning Commission. SECTION 6 - PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6.1 - Purpose of Hearings The purpose of a hearing is to collect information and facts in order for the Planning Commission to develop a rational planning recommendation for the City Council. 6.2 - Hearing Procedure 14 Adopted April, 8, 2025 4 At hearings, the following procedure shall be followed in each case: a. The Chairperson shall state the case to be heard. b. The Chairperson shall call upon the staff to present the staff report. Required reports from each City department shall be submitted to the Planning Commission before each case is heard. c. The Chairperson shall ask the applicant to present their case. d. Interested persons may address the Planning Commission for a duration of up to five minutes, giving information regarding the particular proposal. e. Petitioners and the public are to address the Chairperson only, not staff or other Planning Commissioners. f. There shall be no dialogue among the Planning Commissioners giving information regarding the particular proposal. (The Planning Commission members may ask questions of persons addressing the Planning Commission in order to clarify a fact, but any statement by a member of any other purpose than to question may be ruled out of order.) g. After all new facts and information have been brought forth, the hearing shall be closed and interested persons shall not be heard again. Upon completion of the hearing on each case, the Planning Commission shall discuss the item at hand and render a decision. The Planning Commission, if it so desires, may leave the public record open for written comments for a specified period of time. h. The Chairperson shall have the responsibility to inform all the parties of their rights of appeal on any decision or recommendation of the Planning Commission. 6.3 - Schedule At meetings where more than one hearing is scheduled, every effort shall be made to begin each case at the time set in the agenda, but in no case may an item be called for hearing prior to the advertised time listed on the agenda. SECTION 7 - MISCELLANEOUS: 7.1 - Planning Commission Discussion a. Matters for discussion which do not appear on the agenda may be considered and discussed by the Planning Commission under the sections: Commission Presentations, Administrative Presentations, Correspondence Discussion or Open Discussion 15 Adopted April, 8, 2025 5 b. Matters which appear on the agenda as Open Discussion items will not be recorded as minutes. 7.2 - Suspension of Rules The Planning Commission may suspend any of these rules by a unanimous vote of the members present. 7.3 - Amendments Amendment of these bylaws may be made at any regular or special meeting of the Planning Commission but only if scheduled on the meeting agenda in advance of the meeting. 7.4 - Review At the first meeting in April of each year, these Bylaws shall be read and adopted by the Planning Commission. Chairperson: Date: April 16, 20248, 2025 g:\plan\planning commission\bylaws\bylaws 2025.docx 16 Adopted April, 8, 2025 1 BYLAWS PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CHANHASSEN The following bylaws are adopted by the City Planning Commission to facilitate the performance of its duties and the exercising of its functions as a commission established by the City Council on June 17, 1968 and pursuant to the provision of Subdivision 1, Section 462.354 Minnesota State Statutes annotated. SECTION 1 - DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES - PLANNING COMMISSION: 1.1 The Planning Commission shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council through carrying out reviews of planning matters. All final decisions are to be made by the City Council. The Planning Commission is established and members appointed by the City Council in accordance with City Code Section 2-46.03 1.2 The Planning Commission shall prepare a Comprehensive Plan for the future development of the city and recommend on amendments to the plan as they arise. 1.3 The Planning Commission shall initiate, direct, and review the provisions and standards of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations and reports its recommendations to the City Council. 1.4 The Planning Commission shall review applications and proposals for zoning ordinance amendments, subdivisions, street vacations, conditional use permits and site plan reviews and make their recommendations to the City Council in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. 1.5 The Planning Commission shall hold public hearings on development proposals as prescribed by the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. 1.6 - Establishment of Subcommittees The Planning Commission may, as they deem appropriate, establish special subcommittees comprised solely of their own members. 17 Adopted April, 8, 2025 2 SECTION 2 - MEETINGS: 2.1 - Time Regular meetings of the Planning Commission shall be held on the first and third Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 7700 Market Boulevard, unless otherwise directed by the Chairperson, in which case at least 24-hours’ notice will be given to all members. Regular meetings shall have a curfew of 10:30 p.m. which may be waived at the discretion of the Chairperson. All unfinished business will be carried over to the next regular Planning Commission meeting. When the regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, there shall be no Planning Commission meeting. 2.2 - Special Meetings Special meetings shall be held upon and called by the Chairperson, or in his/her absence, by the Vice-Chairperson or any other member with the concurrence of four other members of the Planning Commission, and with at least 48 hours of notice to all members. Notice of all special meetings shall also be posted on the official city bulletin board. 2.3 - Attendance Planning Commission members shall attend not less than seventy-five (75%) percent of all regular and special meetings held during a given (calendar) year, and shall not be absent from three (3) consecutive meetings. Failure to meet this minimum attendance requirement may result in removal from the Planning Commission at the discretion of the City Council. SECTION 3 - COMMISSION COMPOSITION, TERMS AND VACANCIES: 3.1 - Composition The Planning Commission shall consist of seven (7) voting members. Seven members shall be appointed by the City Council and may be removed by the City Council. 3.2 - Terms and Vacancies The City Council shall appoint seven members to the Commission for terms of three (3) years. Vacancies during the term shall be filled by the City Council for the unexpired portion of the term. Every appointed member shall, before entering upon the charge of his/her duties, take an oath that he/she will faithfully discharge the duties of his office. All members shall serve without compensation. 3.3 - Quorum 18 Adopted April, 8, 2025 3 Four Planning Commission members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Whenever a quorum is not present, no final or official action shall be taken at such a meeting. Members of the Planning Commission which are present may hold a work session in lieu of an official meeting. SECTION 4 - ORGANIZATION: 4.1 - Election of Officers In April of each year, the Planning Commission shall hold an organization meeting. At this meeting, the Commission shall elect from its membership a Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. Each member shall cast its vote for the member they wish to be chosen for Chairperson. If no one receives a majority, voting shall continue until one member receives the majority support. Vice-Chairperson shall be elected from the remaining numbers of the same proceeding. 4.2 - Duties of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson The Chairperson or in his/her absence, the Vice-Chairperson, shall preside at meetings, appoint committees from its own membership, and perform other such duties as ordered by the Commission. The Chairperson shall conduct the meeting so as to keep it moving rapidly and efficiently as possible and shall remind members, witnesses and petitioners to preserve order and decorum and to keep comments to the subject at hand. The Chairperson shall not move for action but may second motions. SECTION 5 - PROCEDURE: 5.1 - Parliamentary Procedure Parliamentary Procedure governed by Roberts Rules of Order Revised, shall be followed at all regular meetings. At special work session meetings, and when appropriate, the Planning Commission may hold group discussions not following any set Parliamentary Procedures except when motions are before the Planning Commission. SECTION 6 - PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6.1 - Purpose of Hearings The purpose of a hearing is to collect information and facts in order for the Planning Commission to develop a rational planning recommendation for the City Council. 6.2 - Hearing Procedure 19 Adopted April, 8, 2025 4 At hearings, the following procedure shall be followed in each case: a. The Chairperson shall state the case to be heard. b. The Chairperson shall call upon the staff to present the staff report. Required reports from each City department shall be submitted to the Planning Commission before each case is heard. c. The Chairperson shall ask the applicant to present their case. d. Interested persons may address the Planning Commission for a duration of up to five minutes, giving information regarding the particular proposal. e. Petitioners and the public are to address the Chairperson only, not staff or other Planning Commissioners. f. There shall be no dialogue among the Planning Commissioners giving information regarding the particular proposal. (The Planning Commission members may ask questions of persons addressing the Planning Commission in order to clarify a fact, but any statement by a member of any other purpose than to question may be ruled out of order.) g. After all new facts and information have been brought forth, the hearing shall be closed and interested persons shall not be heard again. Upon completion of the hearing on each case, the Planning Commission shall discuss the item at hand and render a decision. The Planning Commission, if it so desires, may leave the public record open for written comments for a specified period of time. h. The Chairperson shall have the responsibility to inform all the parties of their rights of appeal on any decision or recommendation of the Planning Commission. 6.3 - Schedule At meetings where more than one hearing is scheduled, every effort shall be made to begin each case at the time set in the agenda, but in no case may an item be called for hearing prior to the advertised time listed on the agenda. SECTION 7 - MISCELLANEOUS: 7.1 - Planning Commission Discussion a. Matters for discussion which do not appear on the agenda may be considered and discussed by the Planning Commission under the sections: Commission Presentations, Administrative Presentations, Correspondence Discussion or Open Discussion b. Matters which appear on the agenda as Open Discussion items will not be recorded as 20 Adopted April, 8, 2025 5 minutes. 7.2 - Suspension of Rules The Planning Commission may suspend any of these rules by a unanimous vote of the members present. 7.3 - Amendments Amendment of these bylaws may be made at any regular or special meeting of the Planning Commission but only if scheduled on the meeting agenda in advance of the meeting. 7.4 - Review At the first meeting in April of each year, these Bylaws shall be read and adopted by the Planning Commission. Chairperson: Date: April 8, 2025 g:\plan\planning commission\bylaws\bylaws 2025.docx 21 Planning Commission Item April 8, 2025 Item Planning Commission - Commissioner Training File No.Item No: B.4 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION No action; training only SUMMARY City staff will provide an overview of planning principles and provide an opportunity for new and existing planning commission members to ask questions of staff. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION 22 RECOMMENDATION No recommendation; training only. ATTACHMENTS 23 Planning Commission Item April 8, 2025 Item Consider Ordinance Amending Chapter 20 Section XXX: Lot Requirements and Setbacks for the Residential Low and Medium Density Zoning District File No.Item No: C.1 Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION Motion to recommend approval of the Ordinance amending Chapter 1, General Provisions of the City Code defining detached townhome dwellings and amending Chapter 20 amending lot requirements and setbacks for the residential low and medium density district. SUMMARY The city is proposing to add "Detached Townhomes" as a type of dwelling unit which is specifically defined by city ordinance and adding dimensional requirements associated with "Detached Townhomes." This is being proposed based on the existing and anticipated continued interest in detached townhomes as they offer a housing option similar to detached single-family homes but with reduced maintenance responsibilities. 24 The city has had this housing product developed previously under a Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval within Avienda. Attached to this case is a portion of the Avienda Detached Townhome site plan which includes dimensional setbacks. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the ordinance as presented. ATTACHMENTS Proposed Ordinance Example Detached Townhome Lots - Avienda Affidavit of Publication 25 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO: __ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1, GENERAL PROVISIONS CHANHASSEN CITY CODE DEFINING DETACHED TOWNHOME DWELLINGS AND CHAPTER 20, LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 1-2 of the City Code, City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, is hereby amended to include the following definition of detached townhouse dwelling: Dwelling, townhouses, detached means a structure having the characteristics of a multiple-unit townhouse structure that has been separated into single dwelling units at the common side wall, typically with structure dimensions that have a narrow front and deep side walls and are typically without windows or features on at least one of the side walls. Section 2. Section 20-645 of the City Code, City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, is hereby amended to read as follows with the double underlined language being proposed textual additions and crossed out language proposed language removals: Sec 20-645 Lot Requirements and Setbacks The Following minimum requirements shall be observed in an “RLM” District subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter: (a) The minimum lot area is as follows: (1) If a single-family dwelling is located on the lot, 9,000 square feet per dwelling unit. (2) If a two-family dwelling is located on the lot, 7,260 square feet per dwelling unit. (3) If a Detached Townhouse, Townhouses, and or multiple-family multifamily dwelling project is located on the lot, an average of 5,445 square feet per dwelling unit (b) The minimum lot frontage: (1) Single-family and two-family dwellings are 50 feet except that in the case of a lot that fronts on a cul-de-sac or on the outside of a curve on a curvilinear street, the width of the lot at the building setback line shall be 50 feet. (2) Detached townhouses, Townhouses and multifamily dwellings are 30 feet except that in the case of a lot that fronts on a cul-de-sac or on the outside of a curve on a curvilinear street, the width of the lot at the building setback line shall be 30 feet. (c) The minimum lot depth: 26 (1) If a single-family dwelling, the minimum depth is 110 feet (2) If a two-family dwelling minimum depth is 100 feet (3) If a detached townhouse, townhouse, or multiple-family multifamily dwelling development type, minimum depth is 100 feet (d) The maximum lot coverage is: (1) If a single-family dwelling, 35 percent. (2) If a two-family dwelling, 40 percent. (3) If a detached townhouse, townhouse, or multiple-family multifamily dwelling development type, 50 percent of the total development area. (e) The building setbacks from property lines are as follows: (1) If a single-family dwelling: a. For front yards, 25 feet. b. For rear yards, 2530 feet. c. For side yards, five feet on garage side and ten feet on house side. Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 feet. (2) If a two-family dwelling: a. For front yards, 25 feet b. For rear yards, 30 feet c. For side yards, ten feet where no common wall is located. (3) If a detached townhouse, townhouse or multiple-family multifamily dwelling: a. For front yards, 2520 feet b. For rear yards, 2530 feet c. For side yards of townhouses or multifamily dwellings, ten feet where no common wall is located. d. For side yards of detached townhouses, five feet on garage side and ten feet on house side. Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 feet. (f) The maximum height is as follows: (1) For the principal structure, three stories/35 feet. (2) For accessory structures, one story/15 feet. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this ___ day of 27 __________ 2025. Jenny Potter, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor (Published in the ___________________________ on ________________________________) 28 29 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION srATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNry OF HENNEPIN ss I do solemly swear that the noticg as per the proof, was published in the edition of the SS Mtka-Excelsior-Eden Prairie with the known ollice of issue being located in the county of: HENNEPIN with additional circulation in tle counties of: HENNEPIN and has full knowledge of the facts stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualffica- tion as a qualifred newspaper as provided by Minn. Stat. $331A.02. (B) This Public Notice was printed and pub- lished in said newspaper(s) once each week, for I successive week(s); the first insertion being on 03/27DA5 and the last insertion being on 0312712025. MORTGAGE FORECLOSI.JRE NOTICES Pursuant to Minnesota Stat. $580.033 relating to the publication of mortgage foreclosure notices: The newspaper complies with the conditions described in $580.033, subd. 1, clause (l) or (2). If the newspaper's known office of issue is located in a county adjoining the county where the mortgaged premises or some part of the mortgaged premises described in the notice are located, a substantial portion of the newspaper's circulation is in the latter county. By:.T Designated Agent Subscribed and sworn to or afftrmed before me or0312712025 Notary Public Rate Information: (l) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space: $999.99 per column inch CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Com- mission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, April 8, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Mar- ket Boulevard. The purpose of this hearing is to consider amending Chapters 1 and 20 of the Chanhas- sen City Code to define detached townhomes and conesponding dimensional requirements lor de- tached townhomos within the Res- idential Low and Medium Density District. The proposed changes are available for public review at City Hall during regular business hours or on the City's website at www.ChanhassenMN.gov/ ProposedOidinancos. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with r€spect to this proposal. Rachel Arsenauh Planner Email: rarsenauh@chanhassenmn.gov Phonei 952-227-1132 Published in the Sun Sailor March27,2025 1458658 Q;*r/hla *ilu** Ad rD 14586s8 30 Planning Commission Item April 8, 2025 Item Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated March 18, 2025 File No.Item No: E.1 Agenda Section APPROVAL OF MINUTES Prepared By Amy Weidman, Senior Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION "The Chanhassen Planning Commission approves its March 18, 2025 meeting minutes" SUMMARY BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION 31 "The Chanhassen Planning Commission approves its March 18, 2025 meeting minutes" ATTACHMENTS Planning Commission minutes dated March 18, 2025 32 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MARCH 18, 2025 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Eric Noyes, Jeremy Rosengren, Perry Schwartz, Ryan Soller, and Katie Trevena. MEMBERS ABSENT: Edward Goff, and Steve Jobe. STAFF PRESENT: Eric Maass, Community Development Director PUBLIC PRESENT: Linda Paulson 7603 Frontier Trail Allison Streich Executive Director, Carver County Community Development Agency Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. ORDINANCE XXX: DENSITY BONUSES AMENDMENT Eric Maass, Community Development Director, reviewed Housing Policy 1.7.2 from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. He said that the City Code would need metrics for how it is applied, but the City Code does not currently have any standards in effect. He said this had been in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for some years. He said that two development projects are interested in exploring this density bonus and they requested that the city clarify the information. He reviewed the 2040 Income Limits for the Metro Area at 80 percent Annual Median Income, 50 percent Annual Median Income, and 30 percent Annual Median Income (AMI). He explained the steps they took to draft the ordinance, which included research by reaching out to other cities to identify similar bonuses and they met with two private developers to gauge the usability of the ordinance. Mr. Maass explained that the second step was to draft ordinance section one and read the suggested language. He stated that he spoke with the developers about the usability and that developers sometimes find it difficult to find 80 percent AMI-eligible renters. He reviewed the developers' feedback about 60 percent AMI and that typically those projects require financial incentives in order to be viable. He explained that the Planning Commission suggested a contract to enforce the bonuses between the city and a developer. Mr. Maass explained the bonus units should be provided throughout the development, and they should be the same design, size, and materials as the market rate units. He stated that the unit type should be consistent with the rest of the development to create a variety of units. He said that the affordable units shall not be charged any fee that is also not levied 33 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 2 against market-rate renters. The City Council would have the sole discretion to approve or deny the requested density bonus. It could also be denied if the infrastructure adjacent to the development site is deemed insufficient by the city to support the increased density. Mr. Maass reviewed the ordinance timeline and explained that the Planning Commission would complete a public hearing on the draft ordinance and recommendation. He explained that they received public comments at the City Council, which he included in the packet. Chairman Noyes asked if there was a list of acceptable denial reasons. He asked if the city could deny a development to not oversaturate the market, or if it was specific criteria. Mr. Maass answered that the City Council had broad discretion over the approval or denial for a density bonus request. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the motivation for a developer to include the bonus units in their development. Mr. Maass responded that the incentive would be additional units. Although they would be restricted in the rents they could charge, certain sizes or scales of apartments would still have costs of maintenance and management. This would help spread the costs across units to make it more affordable for the whole building. Commissioner Schwartz asked if it could deem the project economically infeasible. Mr. Maass answered that they would not be required to incorporate the bonus units. Commissioner Rosengren asked if there was a floor of the number of units you could see per zone. Mr. Maass responded that the floor would be eight units per acre as that was the least dense zoning district that would be deemed eligible for a potential density bonus. Commissioner Rosengren said that smaller numbers of units would make certain parts of the ordinance difficult to comply with. He said it would be harder to maintain consistency in the unit layouts and distribution if there were fewer units. He expressed concern about the ability to comply with lower levels and if it would make sense to put a floor on it to help make the distribution more feasible. Mr. Maass said that Mr. Rosengren’s concerns made sense. He thought they could make the ordinance work with the developer in a smaller ordinance. He said he hesitated to put a floor of the base number of units per building because he did not have a strong basis for establishing the floor beyond the base zoning district density allowance. Commissioner Rosengren said they would rely on the approval mechanism to make sure a proposal fits within the parameters. Mr. Maass confirmed this information. Commissioner Trevena asked about the developers' interest and how many units they were contemplating. Mr. Maass answered that one developer showed interest in two different projects. He said one project was approximately 58 units, and the other was between 40 and 50. Commissioner Trevena asked about the city’s target for affordable units. Mr. Maass responded that the Metropolitan Council determines the gross amount of affordable housing required for the metro area and then distributes the amount to all the communities within the seven -county metro 34 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 3 and then requires cities to plan for providing that amount of affordable housing. They are given the opportunity through the land-use controls to create affordable housing for anything guided for anything at least eight units per acre net density. He did not have the specific numbers of affordable housing on hand in Chanhassen at this time. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the developer had to promote or advertise that they had affordable units within the development. Mr. Maass answered that they would make it known. Commissioner Schwartz asked if a prospective renter would know if they qualified for affordable housing. Mr. Maass answered that it was up to the prospective renter to know if they qualified for affordable housing. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the developer noticed that the applicant qualified for an affordable unit if the developer would likely notify the applicant that they were qualified. Mr. Maass responded that they would likely be incentivized to tell the individual that they were qualified. Commissioner Schwartz asked if there were not enough market-rate applicants to fill a development, the affordable units still had to remain available. Mr. Maass answered that the affordable units had to remain available for those who qualified for them. He explained that the building owner could not rent an affordable unit if the renter did not qualify for it. Commissioner Rosengren reviewed point six which said a household that was income eligible at initial occupancy can remain for additional rental periods if the income does not exceed 140 percent. He asked if someone living in the units had to prove their income each year. He asked if there was an ordinance that explained the compliance or if it was up to the tenant and the building management. Mr. Maass said that the city receives annual income statements for the individual renters within the affordable units to verify that they are within the AMI. The city would flag someone outside of the AMI. The renter would receive a period to find a new housing option when their income no longer complies with the AMI. Commissioner Rosengren said that the builder manager would collect the information from the tenant. Mr. Maass confirmed that the city’s role was verification. Chairman Noyes asked about future market-rate housing projects, if developers would be asked to consider affordable solutions. Mr. Maass answered that when a project is contemplated, they will check with the city staff about what to be aware of when it relates to the project. He said it was in the City Code, so they would share it with a developer who would be interested and eligible. Chairman Noyes clarified that it was not a requirement for them to do affordable housing. Mr. Maass confirmed that affordable units would not have to be provided with every market-rate project. Chairman Noyes said that the Metropolitan Council had encouraged an increase in affordable housing opportunities. He said that there had been pushback from communities on how the 35 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 4 Metropolitan Council approached the topic. He asked if this was the start of a path that would lead towards trying to comply with what they were asking for. Mr. Maass answered that the purpose of the ordinance was to follow up with a policy in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Soller commented that they feel compelled to decide because it was already strategically decided when the Comprehensive Plan was finalized. He said that the housing policy permits them to make an ordinance that puts policy in place, but the plan itself does not compel them to put the ordinance into effect. He said that the City of Chanhassen was not prescribed to do this ordinance. Mr. Maass explained that the housing policy was in the Comprehensive Plan and was reviewed by various commissions and the City Council and ultimately adopted by the city. He said that it was an aspirational policy, but it did not have teeth until it was a specific ordinance with specific rules and regulations. He said that the policy uses the word “may,” so the city has the choice to work towards the policy. Commissioner Soller said he viewed it as an exchange. They were permitting going over the zoning requirement in exchange with the developer following the affordable housing requirements that they set out in the ordinance. He said it seemed to be a common exchange that other cities in the metro area have put into ordinance. He asked what drove the decision around 80 percent AMI and where they landed on 80 since other metro cities had 50 or 60 AMI ranges. Mr. Maass answered that what drove the 80 percent was the feedback was for an opportunity for it to be a tool that does not require financial participation from the City, County, State, or Federal Government to offset the loss of rental revenue. They specifically said 80 percent AMI or less, in case someone wants to utilize the tool without asking for TIF from the city. Commissioner Soller clarified that it helps reduce the financial entanglement of the city. He said that the city would not be out anything financially, but it would be a net-neutral way that the city can incentivize affordable housing. He said that other tools to incentivize affordable housing would require financial participation. Mr. Maass confirmed this statement, and he said that they may still see requests of TIF, but the hope was that it created an opportunity where it did not always have to be a request. Commissioner Soller asked if the twenty years was a standard found in other ordinances. He asked if that was long enough to guarantee a long-term strategic position that favored affordable housing. He asked if the bonus units could go up to market rate after twenty years. Mr. Maass answered that the twenty years were based on the other policies from other cities that they reviewed. He said that housing stock that was not new was often more affordable than new housing stock built in the twenty years since. He asked Commissioner Soller to repeat his second part of the question. Commissioner Soller said that they see the value increase in the city and asked if twenty years was long enough. Mr. Maass responded that the longest range they saw in their research was twenty-five years. If the city thought that was important, they could increase the range. 36 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 5 Chairman Noyes said that Chanhassen was unique since they did not have a lot of land to develop. There would be a supply-and-demand issue at some point. Mr. Maass reviewed the information from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan with respect to the affordable housing need allocation. He said that Chanhassen’s 2021 to 2030 allocation of need was 806 housing units. He stated that 464 of those were at or below 30 percent AMI, 197 of those between 31 and 50 percent AMI, and 145 units were between 51 and 80 percent AMI. Commissioner Schwartz said that the 80 percent AMI was the threshold of people who would qualify for affordable housing. He said that was the smallest percentage of people compared to the 30 and 50 percent AMI. Mr. Maass said that the hardest housing to construct was the 30 percent, but it was difficult to find the 80 percent group. The sweet spot was between 50 to 60 percent since those individuals were often seeking affordable housing. Commissioner Schwartz said that the challenge was for the people in the 30 percent AMI bracket to find affordable housing. Mr. Maass confirmed this information. Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. Allison Streich, Executive Director at the Carver County Community Development Agency, expressed support for this ordinance. She thought this was a great tool to provide affordable housing. She said that when the community supports abundant housing, the whole community benefits. She stated that affordable housing allows people to live and work in the community. Chanhassen imports 94 percent of its workforce, so affordable housing allows more individuals to live in the community. She said that the housing cost burden in Chanhassen was relatively high. The housing cost burden is when a household pays more than 30 percent of their income to their housing expenses. She stated that Chanhassen has 21 percent of their rental households are cost burdened, and an additional 22 percent are significantly cost burdened and paying 50 percent or more of their income to housing expenses. Ms. Streich said that the demand for housing units in Chanhassen was 6,829 and they needed 169 subsidized units. She explained these units were for those with 30 percent AMI and they were the most difficult to find and build because they required so much subsidy. The demand for affordable rental was 152 units. Affordable rentals were considered 60 percent AMI or below. She said there was a demand for housing with income limits up to 80 percent AMI. Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive, stated she had a pre-written statement. She asked if the role of the Planning Commission was to question what was presented to represent the community’s interest or to rubber-stamp everything that was presented. She said that it should be to understand the ramifications of their decision which impact the entire community. She voiced appreciation for all the questions asked so far. She reviewed the CBD moratorium which was imposed on July 17, 2023. The community thought that the moratorium was established because of the uproar of building the venue apartments. She said that Roers Development submitted their plans to the city. The real intent of the moratorium was to prevent a retail drive-through from being built in a parking lot that was privately owned. She said that the community was misled. She said that 37 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 6 during the moratorium, the Planning Department introduced an amendment to the parking code for the CBD which reduced the parking requirements for Roers Development, which was before the development was known to the citizens of the community. She said that the third attempt at the development has caused the density bonus amendment to be considered, as discussed in the City Council meeting on March 10. She reviewed each question. One question was about sixteen cities being contacted by the Planning Department to see if they had a similar amendment. Only one city had a density amendment, which was Bloomington. She asked if they saw a visual of how many properties could be impacted by this amendment and what their adjacent neighborhoods were. She thought that it would be a valuable tool to understand the impact of the amendment. She said that notification of neighbors within 500 feet would only go out once an amendment was proposed. She voiced concerns about the drawbacks to existing neighborhoods and the impact on property values. She said that this amendment notification draws a strict parallel to the parking amendment. She said that the Bloomington Code specifically requires public health, safety, and general welfare. She read the PUD from the code, which stated that PUD offers enhanced flexibility to develop a site with the relaxation of most zoning district standards. The PUD zoning allows for a greater variety of uses, such as internal transfers of density, construction phasing, and potentially lower development costs. In exchange for this flexibility, the development plan must have a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal. She said that density within a PUD should be calculated on net acreage located within the property lines following the land use plans. She said that developers could double-dip with the flexibility of a PUD and an even higher bonus density. Linda Paulson, 7603 Frontier Trail, continued to discuss concerns. She said that there were other financial mechanisms to create affordable housing. She said a density bonus could harm property values and the general nature and feel of neighborhoods. She said the bonus density provides greater density than the code. She said that concerning the ordinance, she asked if income- eligible families included single people and if developers could use other tools and incentives along with a density bonus. She said that they wanted the City of Chanhassen to communicate about how it would impact neighborhoods. She said that it was ironic that the Chanhassen Mayor may be fending off other State of Minnesota proposed zoning reformed bills in the legislature that limited local decision-making. She said she had attended a lot of meetings, and the City Council discussed updating the 2050 plan. She expressed concerns with the Metropolitan Council, since they were unelected bureaucrats. She stated that the new Secretary of HUD eliminated the density housing destruction of the metro areas. He called for opportunity areas. She said that they did not need to deal with the HUD statistics, but she said they should get on track with the new rules coming out. She said it would be important to wait until what was coming up from the federal level so that Chanhassen can remain the great city that it currently is. She expressed the importance of holding off on the decision. Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing. Commissioner Schwartz said that 94 percent of the workforce coming into Chanhassen did not live here. He asked if it was because they could not afford to live here. Mr. Maass answered that there could be a myriad of different reasons, but it would be fair to say that there was a lack of affordable housing options to provide someone a chance to live and work in the city depending on their income. 38 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 7 Commissioner Soller asked if there were ripple effects if they started exceeding the density requirements by going up to 25 percent more. He asked if it would impact the infrastructure, such as parking or setback requirements. He said if a developer starts coming forward with a project that had a 25 percent increase but asked for a variance to build a structure that would comply, how the Planning Commission should think of it in terms of criteria. Mr. Maass answered that the project would have to meet the standard zoning district requirements. If a project had to request a variance and the aspect that was triggering the variance, they would not have a basis for the variance. Commissioner Soller asked if the variance would be in effect before the Roers Development would go through, that development would not be able to max out 25 percent of additional housing units because of the confinement of the property. Mr. Maass answered that the property would not have the capacity for 25 percent more units and they requested TIF, so the city had latitude on the architecture and unit count. Commissioner Soller asked if the ordinance puts all the approval and denial power in the hands of the staff. Mr. Maass responded that it would be in the hands of the City Council. Commissioner Soller asked when the decision maker was determining the decision, if the ordinance went far enough in specificity or if the ambiguous nature was more common which allowed more latitude for the City Council to evaluate based on the circumstances of the time. Mr. Maass answered that the geographic distribution allowed for specific metrics. He explained that he worked with the City Attorney to develop the language so that the City Council would have the sole discretion. Chairman Noyes asked if the City Council had sole discretion if it provided awareness and input from citizens regarding the project. Mr. Maass responded that any project would come under a site plan application, which required a public hearing that would allow for formal feedback. They also hold neighborhood meetings. Commissioner Rosengren said that a lot of cities have stronger language that requires developers to do these projects. He said that the language in this ordinance is not as strong, since it says ‘may.’ He stated it would be a way for Chanhassen to provide more affordable housing in a light touch way since it is not mandating anything. He stated it allows direct feedback for the City Council if they see things out of line. Commissioner Schwartz said that Chanhassen should do something. He said that the word may was a critical word in the ordinance. He said that Chanhassen has a role to serve the needs of all people and not to exclude people from the city with the fear that the quality of life would diminish. Chairman Noyes said it was a tool that they were putting in the toolbox. He said they needed continuous and easy ways for citizens to weigh in on projects. He said that people need the visibility to weigh in on these things, so he agreed with the definition of lightly dipping their toes into the option for affordable housing. He did not want hard numbers to require the use. He liked 39 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 8 that there would be a heavy analysis of any project that would request to utilize the density bonuses. Commissioner Schwartz said it was there for a developer to use if they chose to use it. Commissioner Soller said he was skeptical about 80 percent, but when he heard that there was a high demand for that range. He said houses were expensive in the City of Chanhassen. He thought that the AMI chart was helpful for people to understand. He encouraged them to erase the stigma around affordable housing. Chairman Noyes asked about the language being 80 percent or lower. He said if someone came forward with a project below 80 percent and the economics did not work if there would be consideration of a TIF request. Mr. Maass answered if a TIF request was made, it required its own public review process in addition to a plat process. Mr. Maass discussed the definition of inclusionary housing policy. He said that the policy required affordable housing, but this language did not make that requirement. He said that the example of 80 percent AMI was taken from the City of Shoreview. Commissioner Rosengren moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded that the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the Ordinance establishing regulations associated with density bonuses for affordable housing as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. GENERAL BUSINESS: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MARCH 4, 2025 Commissioner Trevena moved, Commissioner Rosengren seconded to approve the Chanhassen Planning Commission summary minutes dated March 4, 2025, as presented. All voted in favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Mr. Maass reminded the commissioners that the April 1 Planning Commission meeting has been rescheduled for April 8. He noted that Commissioner Schwartz and Commissioner Goff were finalizing their terms tonight. He appreciated their public service. Commissioner Schwartz thanked the Planning Commission for the time together. Commissioner Trevena noted that she would miss Commissioner Schwartz. 40 Planning Commission Minutes – March 18, 2025 9 Mr. Maass said that the April 14 City Council meeting would recognize all outgoing commissioners for their service. They were invited to take their name tags tonight for a memento. Chairman Noyes asked about the update to the Nez Perce Connection. Mr. Maass said that the Planning Commission by-laws allowed for discussion of items during specific sections of the agenda. They can ask these questions during the Administrative Presentation item. He said that it was an active land use application, so he requested that they do not discuss the question since the neighborhood was not made aware that it could be talked about this evening. Chairman Noyes said it could be discussed next time. Commissioner Soller asked if Chair Noyes’ term as chair was a one-year term or a two-year term. Chair Noyes stated they would vote on the chair in April. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the Lake Ann Golf Course. Mr. Maass answered that he did not think it was an active discussion. Mr. Maass said that the Chanhassen Community Center would have a neighborhood open house on March 25 from 5 to 7 p.m. hosted by the apartment developer for the Avienda project. The City Council will receive a briefing on this information on March 24. Chairman Noyes asked if the presentation would be made public after the meeting. Mr. Maass said that he could include any additional documentation in the agenda packet. The current documents are already included in the City Council agenda packet. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION: None. OPEN DISCUSSION: None. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Schwartz moved, Commissioner Trevena seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m. Submitted by Eric Maass Community Development Director 41