Loading...
05-07-24 Agenda and Packet A.6:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER B.PUBLIC HEARINGS C.GENERAL BUSINESS D.APPROVAL OF MINUTES D.1 Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated April 16, 2024 E.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS F.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS F.1 Review R-8 and R-12 Zoning District Lot Standards G.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION H.OPEN DISCUSSION I.ADJOURNMENT AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2024 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, 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. 1 Planning Commission Item May 7, 2024 Item Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated April 16, 2024 File No.Item No: D.1 Agenda Section APPROVAL OF MINUTES Prepared By Amy Weidman, Admin Support Specialist Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations SUGGESTED ACTION "The Chanhassen Planning Commission approves its April 16, 2024 meeting minutes" SUMMARY BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION 2 ATTACHMENTS Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated April 16, 2024 3 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 2024 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Eric Noyes, Edward Goff, Steve Jobe, Jeremy Rosengren, Perry Schwartz, Ryan Soller, Katie Trevena. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner; Rachel Jeske, Planner; Eric Maass, Community Development Director; Jenny Potter, Senior Administrative Support Specialist. PUBLIC PRESENT: Mark Bliss 7333 Hazletine Boulevard Linda Paulson 7603 Frontier Trail ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: 1. PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT & OATH OF OFFICE Jenny Potter, Senior Administrative Support Specialist, read the oath of office for Katie Trevena and Jeremy Rosengren. 2. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR Eric Maass, Community Development Director, explained the election process for chair and vice-chair. Commissioner Goff suggested an individual should be on the Planning Commission for at least one year to serve as the chair. Commissioner Goff moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded that the Planning Commission elect Chairman Eric Noyes as the chair and Commissioner Steve Jobe as the vice-chair. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. 3. ADOPTION OF BYLAWS Eric Maass, Community Development Director, noted there were no revisions to the 2024 bylaws. He noted that the 2023 bylaws allowed for a change to the meeting time to 6:00 p.m. and for each public comment to be for five minutes. 4 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 2 Commissioner Schwartz suggested allowing the Planning Commission to have one work session per year to have informal discussion and whether this should be incorporated into the bylaws. Mr. Maass answered that it would be most appropriate to leave this request out of the bylaws to allow flexibility with the work session as necessary. Commissioner Jobe moved, Commissioner Soller seconded that the Planning Commission approve the bylaws. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. ORDINANCE XXX: AMENDING REGULATIONS OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS Rachel Jeske, Planner, presented background information on the short-term rental ordinance adopted in 2022. Ms. Jeske outlined the discussion and feedback with City Council prior to presenting this ordinance to the Planning Commission and reviewed the staff-proposed ordinance amendments. Chairman Noyes asked how the city staff handle property owners with more than one short-term rental in the city if one property does not meet the ordinance, but their other properties do. He asked if revocation was a property or an ownership basis. Ms. Jeske answered that each property has its own license and the violations run with the license. Commissioner Schwartz voiced concerns regarding short-term rentals and the impact on neighbors. He stated the 2023 complaints were regarding noise, parking limits, and property maintenance. He voiced that the new ordinance reduces the penalties and he asked for the reason. Ms. Jeske responded that a large percentage of properties did not receive complaints. Commissioner Schwartz commented that the ordinances should address the few property owners who do not comply or show concern for their neighbors. He provided an example of the complaints only being submitted at the time of the violation and provided an example of difficulties with this ordinance. Ms. Jeske responded that the example would fall within the ordinance. She commented that the ordinance would cover violations that do not actively impact a neighbor, such as the driveway being blocked when the neighbor was not even home. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the proposed increases of maximum vehicles being allowed to be parked on the property and the background reasoning for this change. Mr. Maass stated that it does not impact the regulations of the adults to be on the premise after the evening but limits the number of vehicles allowed. The current ordinance limits parking to garage spaces and a vehicle for each garage space, but it does not say the vehicles need to be in the garage space. He commented that the vehicles inside the garage do not have an impact on the 5 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 3 neighboring properties because they are not visible, but the maximum occupancy inside is still in place. Commissioner Schwartz voiced concerns about the number of vehicles parked in the driveway based on a resident’s complaint who shared a driveway with a short-term rental property. The resident was concerned because they could not access their property because of the number of cars parked on the driveway. Mr. Maass clarified that this ordinance referred to the number of vehicles parked overnight. Commissioner Jobe asked how to ensure the number of adults within the house, as the city would not see inside the house. Mr. Maass responded that the limit was based on the number of bedrooms. There would be two adults permitted per bedroom plus two additional guests. Commissioner Jobe provided a hypothetical scenario if law enforcement showed up to respond to a noise complaint and there was a set amount of people, would law enforcement keep records of the number of individuals present to verify. Mr. Maass answered that the city has worked with the ownership to access the rental records. The ownership is required to maintain a roster of who stays on the property. Chairman Noyes stated that the ordinances come to terms when there is a violation. The violations can still occur even if the correct numbers of individuals or cars are utilized. He stated that there have been a few minor complaints in the first year, but no licenses have been revoked. This shows that the ordinances provide protection for residents as appropriate. These ordinances are just receiving a few tweaks. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the ordinance is working, then why make these changes. Chairman Noyes stated that these changes might not be material but provide effective administration based on the visual checks of the rosters and the cars parked in the driveway. Commissioner Goff asked how to know the number of non-registered rentals. Ms. Jeske states that the host compliance software pulls up the listings that look like they are in the approximate area and compare photos on hosting websites to the Zillow listings. This alerts the city staff and they can send a letter about needing a license. Commissioner Goff asked if there was a fine for running an unlicensed rental. Ms. Jeske answered that there was not a fine, but the goal is to receive compliance. Chairman Noyes asked how many notifications the city received of unlicensed short-term rentals. 6 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 4 Ms. Jeske stated that there were four or five listings. A few of these properties applied for the license and a few properties were now long-term rentals or no longer rentals. Commissioner Goff suggested publicizing this ordinance amendment and asked how to file a complaint. Commissioner Rosengren questioned that the language in the proposed ordinance does not match what was stated. Instead, the ordinance stated that the complaint can only be filed while the nuisance is occurring, rather than when the nuisance is recognized. He requested clarification. Ms. Jeske answered that the intention was the same. The nuisance entails a violation, or it does not, and this is determined by the city staff. Mr. Maass stated that there were three terms to discuss – complaint, violation, and nuisance. He defined these terms and how the city staff responds to each of these terms. The city staff will review the language in the draft ordinance to ensure clarity. Commissioner Jobe asked if law enforcement is called to a short-term rental, the city staff was alerted. Mr. Maass responded that staff is notified of complaints and law enforcement action. Commissioner Schwartz asked what mechanism is in place for a neighbor experiencing a violation and how they could determine a path to respond to the violation. Ms. Jeske answered that the city website has a short-term rental page and a facts and question page. This shows all properties with short-term rentals and their respective parking and occupancy limits. Commissioner Schwartz answered that the information is available but stated that many residents are not aware of ordinances and projects in the city. He asked if the city should notify neighbors that they live near a short-term rental. Ms. Jeske responded that the city does not require a letter to be sent to the neighbors. The city staff found most of the time, neighbors do not know they live near a short-term rental. Commissioner Schwartz encouraged the ability to communicate short-term rental status to neighbors. Mr. Maass stated that the city invests in host compliance software. He stated that the city could consider notifying properties when a short-term rental license is approved and provide the steps a neighbor could notify the city of concerns. Commissioner Soller asked if this occurs with other licensing in the city. If a property owner decides to do something with their property, are they mandated to notify the neighbors. 7 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 5 Mr. Maass responded that a resident applying for a land use application that requires a conditional use permit or site plan, there is a statutory notification. If a resident applies for a liquor license, there is no adjacent property notification. He commented that the ordinance is working, and this review is more about the administration of the program. Ms. Jeske stated that a zoning permit that requires notice to neighbor is for bees and chickens. For this permit, the homeowner is required to talk with their neighbor and complete a notarized statement. Chairman Noyes stated that a short-term rental might be a different situation as the property owner might not live in Chanhassen. Commissioner Soller asked if every licensed property is publicly available. Ms. Jeske answered that there is a PDF on the short-term rental page on the city website. Commissioner Soller stated that there was one property that received 23 out of the 25 complaints and only 2 of those complaints resulted in a violation being issued. He commented that some individuals seek issues that might not exist. He stated the purpose of this ordinance is to encourage good neighborhood environment and there is no purpose for stringent regulation. Chairman Noyes suggested having a point-of-time reference to the violation language. Commissioner Soller agreed with the comment from Chairman Noyes. Mr. Maass stated that the ordinance aims to reasonableness. They want the ordinance to be measurable and will refine the language prior to bringing it to the City Council. He commented that if the Planning Commission passes the ordinance with proposed changes, it will go to the City Council who will decide what is ultimately included in the adopted ordinance. Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. Mark Bliss, 7333 Hazleton Boulevard, is the property owner who has encountered difficulty living near a short-term rental. He stated that the ordinance is not working. The short-term rental has had two violations, but he stated that the city has not enforced other complaints that he believed constituted violations of the ordinance. He voiced disappointment with the Planning Commission considering making the ordinance more lax. Chairman Noyes requested information about the lack of enforcement. Mr. Bliss stated that the city did not enforce the parking requirements. Linda Paulson, 7603 Frontier Trail, stated that Chanhassen is a city for life. There needs to be enforcement of the ordinance and neighbors should be aware if there is a short-term rental. She requested transparency. 8 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 6 Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing. Commissioner Goff asked if there was a path for resolution for Mr. Bliss. Mr. Maass stated that Ms. Jeske will administer the short-term rental program. The city received and reviewed complaints when Mr. Young-Walters departed. The city has extensive reporting of review of these complaints. He voiced concerns about shared driveways. Commissioner Schwartz stated that it is unfair for the neighbor of a short-term rental property violating the ordinance to jump through the hoops and not receive a resolution if the violations are accurate. He asked for the motivation for relaxing the ordinance. Chairman Noyes stated difficulty in understanding the differences between a nuisance and a violation. The neighbor might not be hurt, but there might be a violation of the ordinance. He requested clarification of the ordinance language. Commissioner Soller stated that the changes in the ordinance do not impact the issues at the property in question. He commented that concerns are not resulting in violations and questioned the solution to this problem. He asked whether these remediations were fixed recently and still need to take hold. Mr. Maass stated the changes listed on the work session slide were implemented gradually throughout the year. Commissioner Soller stated that the remediation with property owners is a good intent, but the city is still missing the mark if the complaints remain. He questioned what the actual solution is. Commissioner Jobe asked if the processes were correct and fair, while still supporting the ordinance. Commissioner Schwartz asked if any city had a short-term rental ordinance and experienced similar problems and decided to forbid short-term rentals. He asked if any cities have solved short-term rental concerns through a process. Mr. Maass answered that peer communities handle the complaints administratively and other cities have their city councils review complaints. Mr. Maass stated that if the City Council chooses to review them, the program can be administered that way. Commissioner Schwartz asked if other pathways have been successful. Mr. Maass responded that the complaints are not different, it is just who is reviewing the complaints. It could be slower if complaints are going through the City Council. 9 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 7 Commissioner Soller stated that the ordinance provides an appeal process for the licensee, but not for neighbors or residents. He asked if there is a balance to also support neighbors. He suggested building a governance process. Chairman Noyes stated that the property owner should be responsible for renters understanding the rules. Commissioner Noyes stated that the property owner should establish expectations for their renters. He asked whether there was information provided with the short-term rental contract. Ms. Jeske stated that there is a long list of stipulations on the short-term rental license and application. Commissioner Soller stated the city should empower residents. He encouraged striking through the violation timing bullet point. Commissioner Goff asked why the violation timing was included. Mr. Maass stated that if the city staff is not made aware of the violation in a timely manner, the city cannot react accordingly. The goal was to better utilize the software tool. Commissioner Schwartz stated that timely would be more appropriate language. Commissioner Soller suggested striking this language through so the City Council understands the concerns of the neighbors regarding short-term rentals. Commissioner Schwartz asked whether we would recommend the ordinance with changes to the timeliness language and a communication mechanism to neighbors near a short-term rental. Commissioner Jobe suggested including language to allow a process for a resident to address concerns that are not resolved. Chairman Noyes asked if there could be a motion and can provide guidelines for revision. Mr. Maass stated that the city puts out the newspaper and can include necessary information regarding tools to learn more about short-term rentals. Commissioner Soller moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the approval of the proposed ordinance amending the regulations of short-term rentals with the adjustment to strike through section C, subpoint 2 under violations, and recommending language in the staff procedurals to provide notification to adjacent property owners and define a process for aggrieved neighbors to appeal the decision of staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. GENERAL BUSINESS: 10 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 8 1. DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DESIGN STANDARDS DRAFT PLAN REVIEW Eric Maass, Community Development Director, gave a summary of the downtown design guidelines and design standards draft plan. Bryan Harjes, Vice President of HKGi, and Jeff Miller, Planner with HKGi reviewed the project purpose, design guidelines, and considerations for the site design, such as the landscaping, lighting, furnishing, service delivery and storage areas, and utilities. He provided an overview and the goals for the building design. He explained the goals of the streets, focusing on unifying the streetscape. He displayed the design features for different street locations. He explained the overview of the wayfinding regarding signage. Mr. Maass stated that planning documents are high-level, but when the survey crew is out there, they can better understand the needs of the project. The City Engineer has worked closely to determine the streetscapes. He stated West 78th is not on the city’s plan for reconstruction. There are multiple streets that require attention prior to West 78th Street. Mr. Harjes stated that the sign materials are based on the location of the sign and the proposed sign locations. Mr. Maass stated that the intent is to not install all of the signs in one year, but to install the signs while projects are being completed. The green locations for signs are subject to change. Commissioner Schwartz asked why these signs are not considered at the city’s boundaries with Eden Prairie and Victoria. Mr. Maass answered that the signage package is focused on the downtown, but the City Council can consider installing signage at the municipal boundary as well. Mr. Harjes stated that the design standards for the central business district are narrower. He read the purpose and intent of the design standards. He stated that the design standards apply to redevelopment in the central business district. He explained the requirements for parking downtown. He reviewed the building standards, including the massing and façade. Commissioner Jobe asked if there was a diversity of trees to be planted in case of changing climate and the infection of ash borers. Mr. Maass answered that the city ordinance requires species diversity. Commissioner Trevena asked if the guidelines would be encouraged if a property was completing a certain percentage of work. She asked if the guidelines would apply to a building that had significant renovation or if they would just be for new developments. 11 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 9 Mr. Maass responded that this would apply to any project that comes in for site plan review. If any existing property is renovated more than 10 percent, they require a site plan review. These specific guidelines are only applicable to properties in the central business district. Commissioner Schwartz asked for the real-world application of the guidelines. He asked if an architect would find the guidelines helpful or restrictive. Mr. Harjes answered that the guidelines are expansive, but they are not required. Mr. Maass clarified that the guidelines are not required, but the standards are required and need to be met. He stated that the advantage to the guidelines and standards is to provide predictability. The guidelines and standards are thought-out in hopes of preventing numerous variance requests. Mr. Maass requested feedback from other architects. Chairman Noyes stated that this provides a general direction for developers and helps to create a common ground as to what the city is looking for. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the main entrance for buildings where the parking is at the back of the building and whether the entrance would be near the parking lot or near the street. Mr. Harjes stated that the intent is to provide an entrance for the public but also possibly a secondary entrance at the parking lot area. Nothing prevents a business from placing an entrance in the parking lot, but the ordinance requires that the primary entrance is on the street side. Mr. Maass provided an example of the dual entrances at the medical arts building. Commissioner Soller asked about the approach for design guidelines for the City of Chanhassen. Mr. Harjes answered that the design guidelines are established from previous successful designs. This design is meant to guide the blending between public buildings and private development. Chairman Noyes asked who the intended audience is; the document tells people how design will happen. He asked how to use these guidelines as an informant to help the city feel connected to projects. Mr. Maass stated that this comment was a good reminder to include information like this in city communication pieces. This gives an idea to property owners what the city wants. This provides an indication of what Chanhassen would want. Commissioner Soller questioned if this information would only apply to streets downtown. He asked how these guidelines play into future development. 12 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 10 Commissioner Soller asked if there were guidelines for charging in the central business district. Mr. Maass answered that some communities require the conduit to be put in place if the project is large enough. He stated that private development recognizes the need and the demand. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the design standards require EV charging or to lay down the conduit. Mr. Maass stated the design standards would not dictate the number of EV stalls needed. Commissioner Trevena asked for the process to amend or make changes in the future. Mr. Maass answered that the process for the design standards would require the ordinance process to amend the requirements. He stated that the design guidelines are not adopted into the ordinance. He stated that as the city updates the comprehensive plan, it allows for a good marker to analyze the changes. Commissioner Jobe asked as the design guidelines are developed if this helps to recruit investors into the model. Mr. Harjes answered that in Chanhassen, it is more about getting the message out and setting the tone. He stated that there has not been specific identification for redevelopment sites. Commissioner Schwartz asked if there was a reason to not promote the design guidelines and standards to existing business community and prospective developers through different mechanisms to draw interest to the community. Mr. Maass answered that this is a good point and would apply to the Economic Development Manager. She brings awareness to the development community to mitigate and manage risks. Commissioner Goff stated that the city did a good job referring to other cities when developing standards. Commissioner Soller clarified that this is a draft plan. He asked for the timeline and asked if the draft was subject to major changes. Mr. Maass answered that this is a completed draft and that it would come back before the Planning Commission in May. Commissioner Soller asked whether this replaces something existing or is a set of specific amendments. Mr. Maass answered that the current ordinance has design standards by use regardless of city location. These design standards are specific to downtown. 13 Planning Commission Minutes – April 16, 2024 11 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MARCH 19, 2024 Commissioner Goff requested a revision to page 105. Commissioner Goff asked whether the clock tower would be on both sides. Commissioner Goff also asked whether the campus adhered to the central business guidelines. Commissioner Goff moved, Commissioner Jobe, seconded to approve the Chanhassen Planning Commission summary minutes dated March 19, 2024 as corrected above. All voted in favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: Chairman Noyes stated that the Chanhassen Villager is being eliminated. He asked what the publication strategy for the city would be when the publication no longer exists. Mr. Maass answered that the city is required to have a publication as the official newspaper for public notices. The City Council discussed the Sun Sailor as the official newspaper. Mr. Maass stated that the City Council approved the site plan and ordinance for the civic campus project. Phase one remains on track to begin construction following Memorial Day. Phase two would roughly begin in July 2025. During this phase, the senior center will be relocated. He commented that the Roers project was approved for the preliminary plat, site plan, and TIF plan on a 4-1 vote. Commissioner Schwartz asked if there was any potential to save the trees on the corner of the city campus. Mr. Maass responded that the city has identified which trees could be saved. Chairman Noyes asked if there would be any updates to Avenda. Mr. Maass answered that when the city receives land use applications, it will be presented to the Planning Commission. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Soller moved, Commissioner Schwartz 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 8:43 p.m. Submitted by Eric Maass Community Development Director 14 Planning Commission Item May 7, 2024 Item Review R-8 and R-12 Zoning District Lot Standards File No.Item No: F.1 Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director Applicant Present Zoning Land Use Acerage Density Applicable Regulations R-8 Zoning District - Sec 20-655 Lot Requirements and Setbacks R-12 Zoning District - Sec 20-675 Lot Requirements and Setbacks SUGGESTED ACTION No formal action suggested. General comments only. SUMMARY City staff has fielded development inquiries in the past for townhome or rowhome style developments at densities which would be appropriate for the R-8 and R-12 zoning districts. However, in reviewing the existing lot standards for those districts, staff has identified an issue with the city's current zoning ordinance standards in achieving those types of developments utilizing standard lot areas, widths, and depths versus having to rely on Planned Unit Developments (PUDs). BACKGROUND 15 City staff will provide examples of similar projects within the city that could have been permitted through the R-8 and R-12 zoning districts, and what lot areas, lot depths, and lot widths were approved in those developments, and how they compare to the city's existing zoning district standards. Following the discussion by the Planning Commission on May 7, staff has tentatively planned for a public hearing at the June 4 Planning Commission meeting to formally recommend revisions to the R-8 and R-12 zoning district lot standards. DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION No formal recommendation at this time. ATTACHMENTS 16