Loading...
04.08.2025 PC MinutesCHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 8, 2025 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Eric Noyes, Steve Jobe, Jeremy Rosengren, Ryan Soller, Mike Olmstead, Dave Grover, and Katie Trevena. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner; Eric Maass, Community Development Director; and Jenny Potter, City Clerk. PUBLIC PRESENT: Lindsey Button 1655 Hemlock Way Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive Linda Paulson Chanhassen ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: 1. PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS & OATH OF OFFICE Jenny Potter, City Clerk, administered the oath of office for Commissioner Grover. Ms. Potter administered the oath of office for Commissioner Soller. Ms. Potter administered the oath of office for Commissioner Olmstead. 2. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR Eric Maass, Community Development Director, stated that the first meeting in April was often when administrative tasks were completed. Mr. Maass suggested that it could be a good idea for the previous chair to continue in the role of chair since Mr. Maass would be on parental leave for a portion of the summer. Commissioner Jobe moved, Commissioner Soller seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission motions to elect Chairman Noyes as Chair. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6-0. Chairman Noyes recused himself from this item. Commissioner Trevena moved, Chairman Noyes seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission motions to elect Commissioner Jobe as Vice Chair. All voted in favor and the Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 2 motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6-0. Commissioner Jobe recused himself from this item. 3. ADOPTION OF BYLAWS Mr. Maass said that the bylaws are reviewed annually, and staff are recommending that the bylaws clarify the Planning Commission could still meet in a work session if they did not have a quorum. Previously, the bylaws said if a Planning Commissioner missed three consecutive meetings, the City Council would need to remove that commissioner. He recommended changing the language to read that the City Council could remove that commissioner, but it was not a requirement. Commissioner Jobe moved, Chairman Olmstead seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission motion to adopt the 2025 City of Chanhassen Planning Commission bylaws. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7-0. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION – COMMISSIONER TRAINING Mr. Maass provided Planning Commissioner Training. The Chanhassen Planning Commission holds the role of an appointed advisory body by the City Council. The Planning Commission makes recommendations related to the city’s zoning code and comprehensive plan. The Planning Commission was the designated the “Board of Appeals and Adjustments” and are the decision- making body on variances to the Zoning Code (Chapter 20), which could be appealed to the City Council. He introduced the staff members through photographs, including himself; Samantha DiMaggio, Economic Development Manager; Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner; Rachel Jeske, Planner; Jamie Marsh, Environmental Resource Specialist; Joe Seidl, Water Resources Engineer; Mackenze Grunig, Project Engineer; Manuel Jordan, Consultant Forester; and Breanne Rothstein, Consultant City Planner. Mr. Maass explained land use, which included what could go where, residential densities, and housing types by density for Chanhassen. He explained that the land use map is updated every ten years. He discussed the relationship between zoning and land use, stating that once a land was guided, they were eligible for zoning. He said that the land use designation and zoning designation would be noted in staff reports. He said that a subdivision would need to be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan, and that properties might be eligible for an up guidance or a change in zoning designation with specific changes on the site. He reviewed the triangle of discretion, explaining that the Planning Commission would work from the bottom of the triangle and up. He described the Comprehensive Plan, noting that it was to be updated every ten years and was meant to be a resource guide for the community and for development. He summarized the zoning map and zoning code, commenting that it was to encourage orderly development and that it should be regularly analyzed and updated. He said that a subdivision application had to be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan. He explained the subdivision applications and stated that the city had some discretion but was applying what Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 3 was in the zoning code. He stated if it met the standards in the City Code, the city would approve the Preliminary Plat. He reviewed the Conditional Use Permit and said that the city was allowing a use to occur but would recognize that it might have an additional impact on neighboring properties, so there would need to be conditional use standards. He reviewed variances and explained that it was a quasi-judicial decision. He explained the site plan review and building permits and stated that they had the least amount of discretion for these two topics. Mr. Maass summarized the Roberts Rules of Order, noting that the staff would look for a motion and a second. After that, the Chair would ask for additional comments and then a vote on that motion. He reviewed how to amend the original motion with a friendly amendment. Mr. Maass explained that an agenda item with a public hearing would be introduced by the Chair, and the staff would present a report and ask for any comments. When the Planning Commission reached a point where the introductory questions were satisfied, they would open a Public Hearing, where people would state their name, address, and state information. Mr. Maass explained that the goal of the Public Hearing was to take in information, and once the Public Hearing was closed, they could ask the staff for information regarding the questions. Commissioner Soller stated that the applicant sometimes presented material during the public hearing. He asked what the appropriate process was. Mr. Maass answered that the applicant should present their information before the public hearing after the staff presented their information. Mr. Maass said that the Planning Commissioners would hold a discussion together. He discouraged direct conversation with the audience back and forth since it degraded the quality of the discussion. He said that the staff was there to follow the decorum. He reviewed the Planning Commission handout that provided a guide to the audience for the Public Hearing process. He explained that they hoped to translate the Planning Commission handout into Spanish and Somali. He encouraged the two new Planning Commissioners to ask any questions to the staff. Commissioner Olmstead asked about when different items came to the Planning Commission. Mr. Maass answered that the Subdivision Application would come before the Planning Commission following when the staff received the application, and it was deemed complete, and a staff report was completed. The Planning Commission would then review it and provide a recommendation. Commissioner Jobe asked if they would provide translation services at the meeting. Mr. Maass answered that he would look into this information. Mr. Maass said that the League of Minnesota Cities provides a webinar-based training for Planning Commissioners, and he would be willing to sign up anyone interested for the opportunity. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 4 1. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 SECTION XXX: LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY ZONING DISTRICT Mr. Maass reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment for detached townhomes. He said that the Planning Commission has the recommending authority over Chapters 18 and 20, but Chapter 1 is also included in the discussion since it included definitions. He reviewed the definition of detached townhomes from Chapter One and showed examples of detached townhomes in the Avienda Project. He explained that the Avienda Project was a Planned Unit Development, and the detached townhomes were specifically negotiated. He stated that the City Staff received interest in detached townhomes in the past. He said one project currently under review was Pioneer Ridge, which offered to allow for detached townhomes. This project was reviewed by the City Council. Mr. Maass noted that it is not encouraged for the city to enact or change the City Code for one project, but he said that they are reacting to broader market desires. He displayed images of the detached townhome from the Avienda Project. He reviewed the ordinance and explained what language was added and what language was reviewed. He reviewed the language for the building setbacks and said that they recommended an increase to 30 feet for rear yards for single-family dwellings. He said they recommended detached townhomes would have a front yard setback of 20 feet and a rear yard of 30 feet. Chairman Noyes asked about the change for the front yard setback. Mr. Maass answered that the front yard setback was to allow for additional cars to be parked in front of a garage, but shifting the setback to the rear would provide greater distance between the rear of the two buildings. Chairman Noyes asked how a sidewalk would be considered in the measurement. Mr. Maass responded that the staff was comfortable with a 20-foot setback since there would be additional space with the right-of-way that would be available for parking if needed. Chairman Noyes asked if they needed to be more prescriptive for clarity. Mr. Maass responded that it read the building setbacks from property lines are as follows, to provide more information. Commissioner Jobe asked why they were not doing setbacks for two-family dwellings as well. Mr. Maass answered that the two-family dwellings were often a duplex. He said that the density was getting greater, so they recommended the front yard setback. Commissioner Soller asked about the rationale for changing it to a single-family dwelling. Mr. Maass responded that they often hear that the rear yard setback was inadequate, so they suggested a nominal increase. He said if they would prefer it to be 25 feet, they were not opposed. Commissioner Soller asked if someone was to build a deck, they might have issues with the increase for the setback. He asked if this applied to existing structures. Mr. Maass answered that the zoning district was for residential low-medium district. He said that they did not have vacant lots zoned residential low-medium, and it only applied to the existing structure. He said there would not be issues making changes to accessory structures, but the rear yard setback would apply if they wanted to add on to the existing home. Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 5 Commissioner Soller asked if it was specifically within RLM. Mr. Maass responded that it was within RLM. Commissioner Grover asked if the detached townhome category was something that other cities defined as well and if they compared the definitions to other cities. Mr. Maass responded that other cities had provisions for detached townhomes in their ordinances, and the proposed setbacks and lot sizes were consistent with the requirements of other cities. Commissioner Rosengren inquired about Section A and noted that the plurality did not match, suggesting the deletion of the extra 's'. He also asked if the ordinances had undergone an additional review process. Mr. Maass responded that the staff and the City Clerk reviewed the information and would make that update. Commissioner Soller asked about the definition and said he wanted it to be thorough. He asked if any of the other dwelling types were defined so specifically to that degree in the City Code or if other dwelling types were defined. Mr. Maass answered that the City Code had other dwelling units defined. Commissioner Soller confirmed that legal had looked at the definition and if it was distinguished from the other dwelling types in the RLM. He was concerned with words that were gray such as typically. He wanted to be sure things were properly defined. Mr. Maass stated that the legal team had defined this and approved the definition. He said that the word typically provided design flexibility for a detached townhome to help with the aesthetic. Commissioner Rosengren asked why there was not a historical definition for a detached townhome. Mr. Maass answered that it was previously provided for in the PUD process, but the staff continues to receive interest. The detached townhome is a newer product. Chairman Noyes reminded those who came forward for the public hearing to state their name and address. Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Lindsey Button, 1655 Hemlock Way, voiced appreciation for the discussion on the specific variance. She said the setback made sense when a development did not exist, but there should be language when an RLM backs up to low-density housing, and there should be increased setbacks for two different zones. She said she understood that this variance made sense within an RLM, but when it connects with a low-density housing area, there should be a different language. She provided an example of Pioneer Ridge, which would be built behind her house. She said if there was a 30-foot setback from her property line, with a six-to-ten-foot berm, a swale for water drainage that would be twelve feet, which would only give residents about two feet of usable yard. She encouraged extra consideration. Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 6 Mr. Maass reminded individuals that the public hearing and discussion was for the Planning Commission to consider adopting a definition for detached townhomes and adopting lot requirements and standards for detached townhomes within the residential low-medium district. He said they provided an update to the Pioneer Ridge District, which depending on how the ordinance was adopted and the lot requirements, there would be potential that the Pioneer Ridge project would be deficient. He said that they were not to review or recommend a variance to a project. He wanted to clarify what was being considered by the Planning Commission and recognized that it was a complicated process. Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive, said she misread the agenda, and she thought it was a discussion and that there would not be any ordinance changes proposed tonight. She said that they have seen changes in the code come through because of particular developments. She stated that the amount of space left in Chanhassen to build was limited and the code had served the city well to date. She did not want to see changes because of particular developments, or they should apply for a variance. She said that if you write ordinances in accordance with the law and make them sound and reasonable, like not impacting your neighbor, it would be better. She said if you adopt a big change across the city, residents would not be aware of it. She said that they did not need changes to setbacks in other properties today. Linda Paulson, Chanhassen resident, said that many people moved to Chanhassen for a specific reason. She said that there were not a lot of buildable places left. She said if they considered an ordinance change, it would have a domino effect on places nearby. She said that there were good people around the city. She asked if the city was willing to be packed like sardines and voiced for consideration. She asked if they wanted to be Eden Prairie West or a fancy Richfield. She said it was a beautiful city, but the decisions that they made would impact the future of the city. Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing. Commissioner Soller said that the Comprehensive Plan prescribed smooth transitions between different zones of density and asked if it was applied within the code. He asked if it was not in the code, where it would go, and how they would apply it later. Mr. Maass responded that the City Code had buffering requirements between different land use designations. He said that it was required of projects and that there was a chart with the subject property land use designations and what it was adjacent to, and different buffer yard types based on the adjacency. He said when the adjacencies were least similar, there were greater buffer requirements. He said the goal was to set up similar adjacencies next to each other. Commissioner Soller asked if this existed when RLM was adjacent to RSF. Mr. Maass answered that RLM was a unicorn. The city allows for residential low-medium land guided for low-density residential and medium-density residential. He said that the buffer requirement was based on the land use designation, so the buffering requirements would apply. Chairman Noyes said they were not changing the long-term plan tonight. He said that they were considering another option as far as a type of housing that could happen within the zoning district. He stated he appreciated the commentary to make sure that they were not changing how Chanhassen was put together. He said that was not what was happening tonight, but they were Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 7 presenting a popular option. He said they saw requests for this option in PUDs and that it was a popular product within the community for people who wanted to downsize to a smaller house. Commissioner Olmstead provided a personal example of his brother who lived in Elderwood in Chaska. He said the numbers for the proposed detached townhomes were like those in Chaska. He said that they were improving on the spacing from examples he had seen in Minnesota and California. He thought that the detached townhomes were a good change and required less maintenance while opening additional houses for families. Commissioner Jobe moved, Commissioner Trevena seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission motions 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. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. GENERAL BUSINESS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MARCH 18, 2025 Commissioner Soller moved, Commissioner Trevena seconded to approve the Chanhassen Planning Commission summary minutes dated March 18, 2025, as presented. All voted in favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Commissioner Olmstead and Commissioner Grover recused themselves from this item. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION: Mr. Maass updated the Commissioners on new projects, noting the city received an application for the Santa Vera Apartment Project Phase Two. He said that it would come before the Planning Commission in May. He said that they are proposing to construct a three-story apartment building on the back side of the existing property. He said that they received the submittal for the Avienda apartment building, but it was still under staff review for completeness. He said it would maybe come to the meeting in May or June. He said that they issued a building permit for the east building for the Roers Development and that the west building was still working on outstanding planning comments. He thought it would be ready to go in the next week or two. They were hoping to start an excavation on the site around April 21. Commissioner Soller asked if there was a way to inform the Planning Commission about the Santa Vera Apartment, since there were new Planning Commission members. Mr. Maass said he saw one sketch plan for the site that never went forward, but there were initial meetings and discussions. He said the current PUD allows for an apartment building but does not allow for townhomes or detached single families. Those options would require a PUD amendment, which Planning Commission Minutes – April 8, 2025 8 asked for a deviation from the City Code. He can provide background information, but the current product is a different project type. He stated they would still have a traffic study. Mr. Maass said they were coming forward for a site plan approval. They were already in a PUD, and the density was established by the lot area. Chairman Noyes said that there would be a gathering at Hackamore Brewing tomorrow to say goodbye to previous Planning Commission members. Mr. Maass said that there would be a quorum, but no business would be discussed. They had the gathering posted on the tack board. OPEN DISCUSSION: None. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Rosengren moved, Commissioner Trevena seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m. Submitted by Eric Maass Community Development Director