06-18-24 Agenda and Packet
A.6:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER
B.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
B.1 Chanhassen Bluffs Recreational Facility Project Update
C.PUBLIC HEARINGS
C.1 Consider a Variance Request for a Ground-Mounted Solar Array to be Located at 6251 Teton
Lane
C.2 Consider Ordinance XXX: Amending Conditional Uses in the Rural Residential (RR) Zoning
District
C.3 Consider Ordinance XXX: Amendment to the Children's Learning Adventure Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
D.GENERAL BUSINESS
E.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
E.1 Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated June 4, 2024
F.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
G.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
H.OPEN DISCUSSION
I.ADJOURNMENT
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 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,
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
June 18, 2024
Item Chanhassen Bluffs Recreational Facility Project Update
File No.N/A Item No: B.1
Agenda Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
Prepared By Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Applicant N/A
Present Zoning
Land Use
Acerage
Density N/A
Applicable
Regulations N/A
SUGGESTED ACTION
No formal action suggested.
SUMMARY
City staff will present an update on the Chanhassen Bluffs Recreational Facility project. This project is
proposed to be funded in part through a proposed local sales tax. That local option sales tax will be
going to a voter referendum in November 2024.
BACKGROUND
N/A
DISCUSSION
3
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
Chanhassen Bluffs Sports Complex concept renderings PC Commission
4
Chanhassen Bluffs
Community Center
Design Concepts
June 10, 2024
5
6
7
8
9
10
Upper Level Floorplan
11
Lower Level Floorplan
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Outdoor Patio for Restaurant
19
20
21
22
23
24
Field House
25
26
Graduation and Event Venue
27
28
29
Planning Commission Item
June 18, 2024
Item Consider a Variance Request for a Ground-Mounted Solar Array to be Located
at 6251 Teton Lane
File No.Case #24-07 Item No: C.1
Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS
Prepared By Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner
Applicant TruNorth Solar, LLC
Present Zoning Single Family Residential District (RSF)
Land Use Residential Low Density
Acerage 2.13
Density
Applicable
Regulations
Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances.
Chapter 20, Article 20-XXIII, Division 20-XXIII-10
Chapter 20, Article 20-XII “RSF” Single-Family Residential District
SUGGESTED ACTION
Motion that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the requested ground
mounted solar energy system variance for the construction of the system at 6251 Teton Lane subject
to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.
SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a variance from Division 20-XXIII-10 Accessory Solar Energy Systems,
which requires that solar energy systems shall be attached to a building or shall demonstrate by credible
evidence that such system cannot feasibly be attached to a building due to structural limitations of the
30
building. The applicant is proposing a ground-mounted accessory solar system located in the rear yard
behind the accessory structures on the property. The system would be setback 365 feet from the front
property line, 55 feet and 130 feet from the side property lines, and 55 feet from the rear property line.
The ground-mounted solar array would not be visible from any adjacent public right of way.
BACKGROUND
The property is located on the north side within the city of Chanhassen limits. The zoning district is
Residential Single-Family with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet, this property is 92,782.8
square feet in size (2.13 acres). The lot is wooded around the property which would serve as natural
screening for a ground mounted solar installation. The maximum permitted hard coverage is 30% by
code, and the proposed hard coverage after the installation is 12%.
DISCUSSION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and the adoption of the
attached findings of fact and action.
ATTACHMENTS
6251 Teton Lane development review applicaton
Site Plan
Variance Request Supplemental
6251 Teton Variance Staff Report
Findings of Fact
Affidavit of Mailing 24-07
Public Comment - Gerald Story at 6281 Teton Lane
31
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division – 7700 Market Boulevard
Mailing Address – P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) 227-1100 / Fax: (952) 227-1110
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Submittal Date: PC Date: CC Date: 60-Day Review Date:
Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply)
(Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application)
Comprehensive Plan Amendment ......................... $600
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Single-Family Residence ................................ $325
All Others......................................................... $500
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
In conjunction with Single-Family Residence .. $325
All Others......................................................... $500
Rezoning (REZ)
Planned Unit Development (PUD) .................. $750
Minor Amendment to existing PUD ................. $100
All Others......................................................... $500
Sign Plan Review ................................................... $150
Site Plan Review (SPR)
Administrative .................................................. $100
Commercial/Industrial Districts* ...................... $500
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:
(______ thousand square feet)
*Include number of existing employees: __________
*Include number of new employees:__________
Residential Districts ......................................... $500
Plus $5 per dwelling unit (_____ units)
Subdivision (SUB)
Create 3 lots or less ........................................ $500
Create over 3 lots ....................... $1000 + $15 per lot
(_____ lots)
Metes & Bounds (2 lots) .................................. $300
Consolidate Lots .............................................. $150
Administrative Subd. (Line Adjustment) .......... $150
Final Plat + $15 per lot .................................. $700*
*(Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)
*Additional escrow may be required for other applications
through the development contract.
Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC) ........ $300
(Additional recording fees may apply)
Variance (VAR) .................................................... $200
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
Single-Family Residence ............................... $150
All Others ....................................................... $275
Appeal of Administrative Decision........................ $200
Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) ................. $500
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
Notification Sign (City to install and remove) ...................................................................................................................... $200
Property Owners’ List within 500’ (City to generate after pre-application meeting) .................................................. $3 per address
(____ addresses)
Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) ....................................................................... $ per document
Conditional Use Permit - $50
Wetland Alteration Permit - $50
Variance - $50
Interim Use Permit $50
Easements (__ easements) $85
Metes & Bounds Sub (2 deeds) $250
Site Plan Agreement - $85
Vacation - $85
Deeds - $100
TOTAL FEE:
Section 2: Required Information
Description of Proposal:
Property Address or Location:
Parcel #: Legal Description:
Total Acreage: Wetlands Present? Yes No
Present Zoning: Requested Zoning:
Present Land Use Designation: Requested Land Use Designation:
Existing Use of Property:
Check box if separate narrative is attached.
32
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. If this application has not been signed b y
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application
should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this
application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I
further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to
any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Signature: Date:
PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of
the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may
be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to pr oceed with the
study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Signature: Date:
PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable)
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Section 4: Notification Information
Who should receive copies of staff reports? *Other Contact Information:
Property Owner Email______________________________ Name:
Applicant Email______________________________ Address:
Engineer Email______________________________ City/State/Zip:
Other* Email______________________________ Email:
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all
information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the
appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and
applicable procedural requirements.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A
written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your
device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital
copy to the city for processing.
33
34
DRAWN BYBFEQUIPMENTDC Power Optimizers: Qty 24, SolarEdge S500B DC Power OptimizersInverters: Qty 1, SolarEdge SE11400H-US Single Phase Inverter (240V) Modules: Qty 24, QCells: Q.PEAK DUO XL-G10.3/BFG 485 W3735 Dunlap Street NArden Hills, MN 55112(612) 888-9599PROJECT NO.81391ENGINEER APPROVALPROJECT INFORMATIONSize: 11.64 kW DC / 11.4 kW ACBuilding Service: 120/240 V, 1Ø, 3 WireUtility: Xcel EnergyAccount: 51-6611349-1Premise: 302350678Meter: 344991302Case Number: 05783242DESCRIPTIONSite DiagramRevision 00April 25, 2024PROJECTName: GARY A DOHSELocation: 6251 Teton Lane, Excelsior, MN, 55331 Phone: (612) 518-4010INSTALER NOTE:ARRAY TO BE OUT OF LINE OF SIGHT FROM HOUSE(UTILITY INTERCONNECTION):SECONDARY SIDENOTES:- No clearance issues.- Secondary Interconnection.- Utility Disconnect and Production Meter are readily accessible.- 24/7 unescorted keyless access shall be provided for all Xcel Energy equipment. DB2ftDistance from Bi-directional MeterExterior43' 7"13' 8"Main Service Conductors (Buried)B - Bi-directional MeterD - Utility AC Disconnect E - DC Power Optimizer (one behind each module) LD - Local AC Disconnect I - Inverter- Gas MeterN Legend:Buried PV Conductors (DC)Buried Conductors (AC)Buried Water LineProperty LineProperty LineProperty LineProperty Line250'ETeton LnTeton LnTeton Ln520' north to Lilac LnPROPERTY NOTES:- DISTANCE TO NORTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY: 55'- DISTANCE TO EASTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY: 55'- DISTANCE TO SOUTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY: 130'
- DISTANCE TO WESTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY: 365'- CITY SEWER AND WATER- NO WELL35
TruNorth Solar,LLC 5/22/2024
3735 Dunlap St.N.
Arden Hills,MN 55112
Representing Gary and Karen Dohse at
6251 Teton Lane,Excelsior,MN,55331
Written Description and Justification of Variance Request
The Dohses request permission to install a 11.64 KW DC Ground Mounted Solar array on the
Northeast area of their property located at 6251 Teton Lane,Excelsior,MN,55331.Please see
the attached documentation for the exact location and details about the project.
The City Code of Chanhassen currently restricts ground mounted solar when there is a
‘structurally feasible building’onsite.While the home can support the solar ‘structurally’,there
are other considerations to take into account when deciding on the best place to install a solar
array;mainly 1)Will snow load and snow management be an issue on this particular roof,and
2)Can a solar array on this roof create enough electricity to effectively offset any electrical
consumption from the utility?
Sec 20-58 General Conditions For Granting
a.Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan.
From DIVISION 20-XXIII-10 ACCESSORY SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
Sec 20-1093 Accessory Solar Energy Systems:
(a)Purpose.It is the intent of this section to meet the goals of the comprehensive plan and
preserve the health,safety,and welfare of the community's citizens by facilitating the safe,
effective,and efficient use of accessory solar energy systems installed to reduce the on-site
consumption of utility-supplied electric energy.The following solar energy standards specifically
implement the following goal from the comprehensive plan:
(1)Support residential and business solar development that maintains community
character.
-I believe the intent of this Chapter is to provide the installation guidance of solar arrays to the
citizens of Chanhassen.This is a clean new energy resource that Chanhassen appears happy to
embrace and that our customer is eager to implement.
b.When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance."Practical
difficulties,"as used in connection with the granting of a variance,means that the property
36
owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter.
Practical difficulties include,but are not limited to,inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar
energy systems.
-Section C of this Code (Sec 20-1093 Accessory Solar Energy Systems)has 7 Standards to abide by.
The installation of the Ground-mounted solar system for the Dohses abide by 6 of these 7
Standards.
Number (3)Location.Letter a is the section in which we are requesting a variance because we
have two difficulties complying with this Standard.
(3)Location.a.Whenever practical,all accessory solar energy systems shall be attached to a
building.If not designed to be attached to a building,the applicant shall demonstrate by credible
evidence that such systems cannot feasibly be attached to a building due to structural limitations
of the building.
Structurally:The roof of the home has six large valleys and a 5/12 pitch.For most of the last
20 years it has been necessary to roof-raked the roof several times in the winter because the
winter winds,coming out of the north and northwest,fill the valleys which often adds
considerable weight and creates ice dam trouble for our shingles and gutters.Solar panels on the
roof would make it impossible to roof-rake these valleys free of snow.The patio door area is the
only exit from the house to the backyard.It is located in the area of one of the large roof valleys.
If it isn't cleaned out,ice builds up because the sun melts the snow and then it freezes at night.
The water runs on the patio and the patio steps,making a real hazard for anyone using the
entrance.
Solar Access:We have attached a site diagram showing the location of several large trees just to
the south of the home.These trees shade the majority of the home’s roof,especially during the
months of October through April.The Dohse’s desire is to reduce their on-site consumption of
utility-supplied electric energy.In fact,they want to go beyond just reducing,they want to offset
their entire electric consumption with Carbon-free electricity to help ensure that the world their
grandchildren grow up in will be a healthier place.In order to do that,the solar must be located
in a shade-free area that will accommodate the 24 modules we propose to achieve that.To be
forced to use the house,or even part of the house that may be usable for solar part of the year
(Summer),severely limits the effectiveness of installing a solar system that meets the needs of
the Dohses.
c.That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
-While in the long run the ground-mounted solar will be a better economic choice,the customer
is actually paying more money now to install the ground-mount system as compared to installing
a system on the roof.The desire to put it on the ground was based on the concern of adding the
weight of a solar array on a roof that already gets extra weight every winter,the solar making it
difficult to clear valleys on the roof and the desire to install solar where it will work the best and
reduce the most carbon;in the sun!
37
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner.
- It is very common for properties in Minnesota to have several trees planted near the home on
the south side for summer cooling; which is great for comfort and saving energy but not so great
for solar. These trees came with the purchase of the property. The orientation and roof design
(several valleys), which cause snow to accumulate and increase loads in the winter,was designed
by an architect, which in hindsight, ended up being a poor design for the location.
e.The variance,if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
- The Ground-mounted solar array will not be visible from the road (Teton Lane) nor can it be
seen from the owner's home. Existing vegetation screens the array from surrounding neighbors.
The current geography of the land will not be altered;we utilize ground screws for securing the
foundation which rotate right into the ground displacing little soil. Glare from the non-reflective
glass will not be a nuisance to any surrounding properties because it is a non-issue.
f.Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes
Section 216C.06,subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
-Not Applicable
Thank you for considering our request. We appreciate your time and effort.
Regards,
Donna Pickard
TruNorth Solar, LLC
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Project:Solar Variance Request (Planning Case 2024-07)
Planning Commission Review Date: June 18, 2024
60 Day Action Deadline: July 16, 2024
Drafted By: Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner
Staff Report Date:June 3, 2024
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting a variance from Division 20-XXIII-10 Accessory Solar Energy Systems, they are
proposing a ground mounted accessory solar system located in the rear yard behind the accessory
structures on the property.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance.
LOCATION:6251 Teton Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 (Subject Property)
APPLICANT:TruNorth Solar LLC and
Gary & Karen Dohse
OWNER:Gary & Karen Dohse
CURRENT ZONING:Residential Single-
Family (RSF)
2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low
Density
ACREAGE:2.13 Acres
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
PROPOSED MOTIONS:
“The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the requested ground
mounted solar energy system variance for the construction of the system at 6251
Teton Lane subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of
Facts and Decision.”
48
6251 Teton Lane
June 3, 2024
Page 2 of 5
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether the proposed project meets
the standards in the zoning ordinance for a variance. The city has a moderate level of discretion with a
variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial
decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a variance from Division 20-XXIII-10 Accessory Solar Energy Systems,
which requires that solar energy systems shall be attached to a building or shall demonstrate by
credible evidence that such system cannot feasibly be attached to a building due to structural
limitations of the building. The applicant is proposing a ground mounted accessory solar system
located in the rear yard behind the accessory structures on the property.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances.
Chapter 20, Article 20-XXIII, Division 20-XXIII-10 Accessory Solar Energy Systems
Chapter 20, Article 20-XII “RSF” Single-Family Residential District
BACKGROUND
The zoning district is Residential Single-Family (RSF) with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square
feet, this property is 92,782.8 square feet in size (2.13 acres). The lot is wooded around the
property lines which would serve as natural screening for a ground solar installation. The
maximum permitted hard coverage is 30% by code, the proposed hard coverage after the
proposed installation is 12%.
ZONING OVERVIEW
Division 20-XXIII-10 Accessory Solar Energy Systems requires that solar energy systems shall
be attached to a building or shall demonstrate by credible evidence that such system cannot
feasibly be attached to a building due to structural limitations of the building. The City code does
not have measures or alternate regulations for external limitations such as shade from trees or
buildings that would allow for administrative approval of a solar energy system to be located on
the ground, if the structure the solar panels would otherwise be located on was deemed
structurally substandard.
49
6251 Teton Lane
June 3, 2024
Page 3 of 5
The ground mounted solar energy system will be located outside of the required setbacks from
the property lines as established by the Accessory Solar Energy Systems code and the
applicable Residential Single-Family code. The system will be setback 365 feet from the front
(West) property line, 55 feet and 130 feet from the side (North & South) property lines, and 55
feet from the rear (East) property line. The system will measure 13’ 8” deep and 43’ 7” wide. The
system will have a total height of 10 feet 5 inches, which is within the allowed 20 feet of height
for accessory structures.
ANALYSIS
1. “Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.”
50
6251 Teton Lane
June 3, 2024
Page 4 of 5
The requested variance fulfills the intent of the chapter through its screened design and is
found to be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
2. “When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
this chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to
direct sunlight for solar energy systems.”
The requested variance is due to practical difficulty of inadequate access to direct
sunlight caused by trees not planted by the homeowner that limit the square footage of
roof available for solar installation.
3. “That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.”
There is no financial gain or economic consideration for the proposed ground mounted
solar array compared to a roof mounted solar array.
4. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the landowner.”
The trees located on the property that hinder the solar installation on the roof are mature
trees and their proximity to the home creates a hardship as a result of the shading of the
roof not created by the landowner.
5. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.”
The applicant has proposed a location that is screened from view of the right-of-way by
the structures on the property. Additionally, the proposed location is screened from view
of the neighboring properties with vegetation.
6. “Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in M.S. §
216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter.”
The proposed ground mounted solar energy system is not an earth-sheltered
construction and therefore not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and the adoption of
the attached findings of fact and action.
51
6251 Teton Lane
June 3, 2024
Page 5 of 5
“The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the requested ground mounted
solar energy system variance for the construction of the system at 6251 Teton Lane subject to
the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”
52
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RE:
Application of TruNorth Solar LLC and the owners Gary & Karen Dohse for a ground mounted
solar energy system variance on a property zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF) –
Planning Case 2024-07.
On June 18th, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The property legal description as described in Exhibit A.
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Finding: The requested variance fulfills the intent of the chapter through its screened
design that maintains community character while allowing safe, effective, and efficient
use of solar energy. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
b.When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property
owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter.
Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems.
53
Finding: The requested variance is due to practical difficulty of inadequate access to
direct sunlight caused by trees not planted by the homeowner that limit the square footage
of roof available for solar installation.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding:There is no financial gain or economic consideration for the proposed ground
mounted solar array compared to a roof mounted solar array.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding:The trees located on the property that hinder the solar installation on the roof
are mature trees and their proximity to the home creates a hardship as a result of the
shading of the roof not created by the landowner.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The applicant has proposed a location that is screened from view of the right-
of-way by the structures on the property. Additionally, the proposed location is screened
from view of the neighboring properties with vegetation.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: The proposed ground mounted solar energy system is not an earth-sheltered
construction and therefore not applicable.
5.The planning report #2024-07, dated June 3, 2023, prepared by Rachel Arsenault is
incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Planning Commission approves the requested variance to install a ground mounted solar
energy system subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit must be obtained prior to any construction on the site.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed system
meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or
requirements may be required after plan review.
54
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 18th day of June 2024.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
Its Chairman
55
56
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
l, Jenny Potter, being first duly swom. on oath deposes that she is and was on
June 6,2024, the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City ofChanhassen, Minnesota;
that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice to consider a request for
a variance to install a ground-mounted accessory solar energy system at 6251 Teton Lane'
zoned Single-Family Residential District. Property Owner: Gary & Karen Dohse;
Applicant: TruNorth Solar, LLC 10 the persons named on attached Exhibit'A", b1'enclosing a
copy ofsaid notioe in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes
addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon: that
the names and addresses ofsuch owners were those appearing as such by the records ofthe
County Treasurer, Cawer County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records.
Jenny Po , City Clerk
Subscribed an
this 7 day
d sw31n to before me
of Jun .2024 AMY K. WEIDMAN
Notary Public-Minnosota
My Commlt loo Frplts. Jan 3r, m274(on6/msr'-,
Notary Public
57
Tax name
GREENLEAF PROPERTIES LLC
BRENTW&DIANEEFESTER
AMANDA M BLAKE
KENNETH F & PATRICIAJ GARVIN
JON RYAN KNOTTS
MARK SCHULTE
DANIELJ & PAMELAJ FELLER
CHRISTOPHER M HUBBY
KYLE A COOK
ELIZABETH RENEE HILLS O'CONNOR
JOHN WJR & SUSAN E KUNITZ
MATTHEW A MCGEE
LESLIE BLYAKHMAN
CHRISTIAN S & MAUREEN CONNERY
THOMAS MAY
GINA M WOLF TRUST
KAPO L LEW
STEPHANIE L ]OHNSON REV TRUST
CHUE HER
MOHAMED IBRAHIM
MICHAEL S BALLOU
CHANHASSEN CITY
CHAD N CASAROTTO
DAVID G & DIANN L JONES
GARYP&LEORAFMATTILA
CORY FLEMING
BRUCE F DREBLOW
RANDALL L & DIANE H SCHWANZ
GARYA & KAREN J DOHSE
MONICA A WIANT
MATTHEW K REGA
DANIEL SALAMONE, MEGAN SALAMONE
Tax add t2
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346.
CHANHASSEN, I4N 55377 -7527
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317-7527
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.7507
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7527
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.7508
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7508
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317-7527
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.7507
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7507
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7528
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9434
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317.9434
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317'
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9032
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9032
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9032
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331'
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9435
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331.9032
EXCELSTOR. MN 55331-9054
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9032
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331.9032
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-
Tax add t1
16940 SOUTH SHORE LN
6350 TETON LN
6421 BRETTON WAY
63S0 TETON LN
6370 TETON LN
6360 TETON LN
6430 BRETTON WAY
6380 TETON LN
6340 TETON LN
6431 BRETTON WAY
6441 BRETTON WAY
6398 TETON LN
6420 BRETTON WAY
6440 BRETTON WAY
6341 TETON LN
6339 TETON LN
6337 TETON LN
6410 BRETTON WAY
6250 POWERS BLVD
6260 POWERS BLVD
1155 WILLOW CREEK ST
PO BOX 147
1351 ITHILIEN
1329 ITHILIEN
1321 ITHILIEN
1311ITHILIEN
1145 WILLOW CRK
1377 ITHILIEN
6251TETON LN
1385 ITHILIEN
1391 ITHILIEN
1331 ASHTON CT
58
GERALD E STORY
ROBERT L RABE
ALEIANDRO FERRER.MACHUCA
DANIEL J & SANDRAA COLICH
ANN ELISE WARE
WILLIAM GRANT
CHARLES H & DONNA,' PICKARD
RONALD W & KIMBERLY A OLSEN
CHARLES A STRICKHOUSER
RICHARD E & CYNTHIA FROEHLING
LILIANN PROPERTIES LLC
DAVID TAFT
LEONARDE&ANNBWARE
SCOTT H &JOANNE R DAKE
LAWRENCE E & KATHLEEN M KERBER
6281 TETON LN
6307 TEION LN
6330 TETON LN
1321 ASHTON CI
6275 POWERS BLVD
1180 HOLLY LN
1215 LILAC LN
1140 WILLOW CRK
1150 WILLOW CRK
1328 ITHILIEN
1320 ITHILIEN
1275 LILAC LN
T225 LILAC LN
1336 ITHILIEN
6420 POWERS BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8331
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7528
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7527
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.7529
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9434
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331.9053
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9435
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.9435
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9032
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331.
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-9053
EXCELSTOR, MN 55331-9032
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.
59
Disclaimer
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used
as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city,
county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to
be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic
Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does
not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other
purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the
depiction of geographic features. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges
that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and
agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought
by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or
use of data provided.
«Tax_name»
«Tax_add_l1»
«Tax_add_l2»
Disclaimer
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used
as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city,
county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to
be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic
Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does
not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other
purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the
depiction of geographic features. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges
that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and
agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought
by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or
use of data provided.
«Next Record»«Tax_name»
«Tax_add_l1»
«Tax_add_l2»
Subject
Parcel
Subject
Parcel
60
Notice of Public Hearing
Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting
Date & Time:
Tuesday, June 18, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. This hearing may not
start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the
agenda.
Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd.
Proposal:
Consider a request for variance to install a ground-
mounted accessory solar energy system for property
located at 6251 Teton Lane
Applicant: TruNorth Solar, LLC
Owner: Gary & Karen Dohse
Property
Location:
6251 Teton Lane
A location map is on the reverse side of this notice.
What Happens at
the Meeting:
The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood
about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the
public hearing through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The applicant will present plans for the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Planning Commission
discusses the project.
Questions &
Comments:
To view project documents before the meeting, please visit
the city’s proposed development webpage at:
www.chanhassenmn.gov/proposeddevelopments. If you
wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact
Rachel Arsenault by email at rarsenault@chanhassenmn.gov
or by phone at 952-227-1132. If you choose to submit written
comments, please send one copy to staff in advance of the
meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Planning
Commission. The staff report for this item will be available
online on the city’s Agendas & Minutes webpage the
Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting.
Sign up to receive email updates about this or other projects. Go to
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/i-want-to/subscribe
City Review Procedure:
• Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings,
Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Variances, Appeals, and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning
Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any
interested party is invited to attend the meeting.
• Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These repor ts are
available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation.
The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will clo se the
public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affi rm or
modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission’s recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple
majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial.
• Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this stan dard.
Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the
process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting.
• A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to
meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested perso n(s).
• Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any
correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be
included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification.
Notice of Public Hearing
Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting
Date & Time:
Tuesday, June 18, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. This hearing may not
start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the
agenda.
Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd.
Proposal:
Consider a request for variance to install a ground-
mounted accessory solar energy system for property
located at 6251 Teton Lane
Applicant: TruNorth Solar, LLC
Owner: Gary & Karen Dohse
Property
Location:
6251 Teton Lane
A location map is on the reverse side of this notice.
What Happens at
the Meeting:
The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood
about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the
public hearing through the following steps:
5. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
6. The applicant will present plans for the project.
7. Comments are received from the public.
8. Public hearing is closed and the Planning Commission
discusses the project.
Questions &
Comments:
To view project documents before the meeting, please visit
the city’s proposed development webpage at:
www.chanhassenmn.gov/proposeddevelopments. If you
wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact
Rachel Arsenault by email at rarsenault@chanhassenmn.gov
or by phone at 952-227-1132. If you choose to submit written
comments, please send one copy to staff in advance of the
meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Planning
Commission. The staff report for this item will be available
online on the city’s Agendas & Minutes webpage the
Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting.
Sign up to receive email updates about this or other projects. Go to
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/i-want-to/subscribe
City Review Procedure:
• Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings,
Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Variances, Appeals, and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning
Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any
interested party is invited to attend the meeting.
• Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These repor ts are
available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation.
The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will clo se the
public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affi rm or
modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission’s recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple
majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial.
• Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this stan dard.
Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the
process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting.
• A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to
meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested perso n(s).
• Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any
correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be
included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification.
61
62
63
64
65
66
Planning Commission Item
June 18, 2024
Item Consider Ordinance XXX: Amending Conditional Uses in the Rural Residential
(RR) Zoning District
File No.Item No: C.2
Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS
Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director
Applicant Westwood Church
Present Zoning Rural Residential District (RR)
Land Use Residential Low Density
Acerage
Density
Applicable
Regulations Section 20-594 Conditional Uses in the Rural Residential (RR) Zoning District
SUGGESTED ACTION
Motion to recommend that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the
ordinance amending conditional uses in the RR zoning district.
SUMMARY
The city has received an application requesting an amendment to the city's zoning code that would add
"Group homes serving seven to 16 persons" as a conditional use to the Rural Residential (RR) zoning
district. The same use is currently a conditional use within the A-2 Agricultural Estate zoning district.
If approved, the Applicant intends to submit a future land use application for a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) that would allow for the expansion of Hope House which currently serves up to 6 people, as
limited by city code.
67
BACKGROUND
The A-2 zoning district has a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres which as mentioned above allows for Group
Homes serving between 7 and 16 person as a conditional use. The RR zoning District also has a
minimum lot size of 2.5 acres.
The A-2 zoning district has a stated intent of preservation of rural character while respecting
development patterns by allowing single-family residential development. The RR zoning district has a
stated intent to provide for single-family residential subdivisions intended for large lot developments.
Based on the similarities of the minimum lot size and intent of the zoning districts themselves it appears
reasonable to add "Group homes serving between 7 and 16 persons as a conditional use" to align with
what is allowed as a conditional use in the A2 district. The City's current zoning code allows "Group
homes serving six or fewer persons" in both the A2 and RR districts as permitted uses.
DISCUSSION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance
amending conditional uses in the RR zoning district.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance XXX - Amending RR zoning district conditional uses
68
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 20-594 of the City Code, City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, is hereby amended
as follows:
Sec 20-594 Conditional Uses
The following are conditional uses in an “RR” District:
(a) Churches.
(b) Group homes for seven to 16 persons.
(c) Private stables.
(d) Recreational beach lots.
(e) Towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___day of _____, 2024, by the City Council of the City
of Chanhassen, Minnesota
______________________________________________________________
Jenny Potter, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Published in the _________________________ on ______________________________)
69
Planning Commission Item
June 18, 2024
Item Consider Ordinance XXX: Amendment to the Children's Learning Adventure
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
File No.24-08 Item No: C.3
Agenda Section PUBLIC HEARINGS
Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director
Applicant
Present Zoning Planned Unit Development District (PUD)
Land Use
Acerage
Density
Applicable
Regulations
SUGGESTED ACTION
Motion to recommend the City Council adopt Ordinance XXX: Amending the Children's Learning
Adventure Planned Unit Development (PUD)
SUMMARY
The city is currently reconstructing Galpin Boulevard; and as part of that project the city needs to
account for stormwater management and mitigation.
The northwest corner of the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and W 78th Street is planned to be the
location of a stormwater facility. In conversation with the land owner regarding the acquisition of the
land area needed for the city stormwater facility, it was indicated that the PUD restriction was
something that, if lifted, would provide the land owner adequate incentive to provide the land area
70
needed for the stormwater facility.
In review of the PUD ordinance currently in place, along with the site characteristics of the parcel
including topography, suspected wetlands, Bluff Creek, existing sanitary sewer and easement, and
overall size/shape of the parcel, city staff is supportive of lifting the development restriction over that
area because the city's other ordinances related to wetland protection, tree protection, creek protection,
easement restrictions, and setbacks required by the PUD still provide the necessary protections to limit
development within those sensitive areas. Additionally, the PUD is intended to provide the city added
benefit that traditional zoning would not provide, and the city acquiring land for the purposes of
stormwater management is a benefit to the entire community.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Ordinance as presented.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance XXX - Amending the Childrens Learning Adventure Planned Unit Development
Public Hearing Notice to Sun Sailor - Children's Learning Adventure PUD Amendment
Current PUD Ordinance - Childrens Learning Adventure
Stormwater Easement Parcel sketch
71
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHILDREN’S LEARNING ADVENTURE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 606
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 606, Section 2, subsection b. “Uses” is hereby amended to read as
follows:
b. Uses
Permitted Uses in this zone are:
1. Community Center
2. Day Care – Establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and
children on a daily basis.
3. Health Services – Establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical
and other health services to persons in a clinical or outpatient basis.
4. Library
5. Museum
6. Office – Professional and business office
7. Private of Public Recreational Facilities
8. Schools
9. Utility Services
10. The property described in Exhibit B to the Planned Unit Development may only be
used for open space and public parks.
Accessory Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a permitted use)
1. Antennas, as regulation by Article XXX of this chapter.
2. Fences
3. Parking Lots
4. Play Equipment, Gazebos, etc.
5. Sheds
6. Signs
Section 2. Exhibit B within the above referenced PUD Ordinance shall be removed from the
PUD.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication.
72
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___day of _____, 2024, by the City Council of the City
of Chanhassen, Minnesota
______________________________________________________________
Jenny Potter, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Published in the _________________________ on ______________________________)
73
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING CASE NO. 2024-08
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, June 18, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen
City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider an amendment to the
Childrens Learning Adventure Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance.
Project documents for this request are available for public review on the city’s website at
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/departments/community-development/planning/proposed-
development-projects or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are
invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal.
Eric Maass
Community Development Director
Email: EMaass@chanhassenmn.gov
Phone: 952-227-1139
(Publish in the Sun Sailor on June 6, 2024)
g:\plan\2024 planning cases\24-08 children's learning adventury pud amendment\draft ph notice to sun sailor - children's learning adventure
pud amendment.docx
74
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 606
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE,
BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY
CHILDREN’S LEARNING ADVENTURE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is hereby
amended by rezoning the property described in Exhibit A to Planned Unit Development.
Section 2. The rezoning of this property incorporates the following standards:
a. Intent
The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD office institutional district. The use of the PUD
zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more-
sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for
development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards
outlined below. More than one principal building on the lot is prohibited. Construction of
additional principal structures will required a subdivision of the property. The PUD requires
that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design.
Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site.
Shared parking may be used within the development. Except as modified below, the
requirements of the Office and Institutional District (OI) shall apply.
b. Uses
Permitted Uses in this zone are:
1. Community Center
2. Day Care – Establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children
on a daily basis
3. Health Services – Establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and
other health services to persons in a clinical or outpatient basis
4. Library
5. Museum
6. Office – Professional and business office
7. Private or Public Recreational Facilities
8. Schools
75
2
9. Utility Services
10. The property described in Exhibit B to the Planned Unit Development may only be used
for open space and public parks
Accessory Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a permitted use)
1. Antennas, as regulation by Article XXX of this chapter.
2. Fences
3. Parking Lots
4. Play Equipment, Gazebos, etc.
5. Sheds
6. Signs
c. Setbacks
The following building and parking setbacks shall apply:
Setback building/parking (feet)
Galpin Blvd. 50/20
Highway 5 70/20
West 78th Street 50/20
Interior Lot Lines 0/0
West Perimeter Lot Line 30/20
The maximum hard surface coverage is 65 percent. Any one site or lot can exceed the 65
percent hard coverage requirement.
d. Building Height, Materials and Design
1. Building height shall be limited to two (2) stories and a maximum height of fifty (50)
feet. The Children’s Learning Adventure building shall be as specified in Section 3.2.
2. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural
standards and site design.
e. Alternative Access
1. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system.
2. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage.
76
3
Section 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN. The PUD must be developed and maintained in
accordance with the following development plan which is on file with the City and which is
incorporated herein by reference.
1. The plan sheets prepared by CEI Engineering Associates, Inc. dated March 20, 2015, sheets
C1 of 9 through C9 of 9 and Sheets L6 through L6.4, revised April 6, 2015, as amended by
the Site Plan approved by the City Council on May 26, 2015.
2. Architectural plans prepared by CASCO dated March 18, 2015, sheets A-1, AS1-1, exterior
elevations and site line study, and preliminary photometric plan sheets E0.1 and E0.2, as
amended by the Site Plan approved by the City Council on May 26, 2015.
3. Lighting at the top of the building is not included in the plan and is not permitted. Lighting
directed skyward is not permitted.
4. The illuminated sign inside the rotunda may be illuminated between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m. at a maximum of 5,000 Nits. During all other hours the illumination may not
exceed 500 Nits.
5. Signage must comply with the office institutional regulations with wall signs on the south
and east elevations of the building only.
Section 4. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the
aforesaid zoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office
for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for in this ordinance, and all of the
notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference
and made a part of this ordinance.
Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 2015, by the City Council of the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Denny Laufenburger, Mayor
(Summary Ordinance to be published in the Chanhassen Villager on July 2, 2015)
77
4
Exhibit A
78
5
EXHIBIT B
79
SW CORNER OF
SEC. 10, T. 116, R. 23N01°56'40"W 401.19175.14N47°18'16"
E
N47°18'19"
E
22.71N56°16'30"E114.28L=662.60 R=633.04
Δ=59°58'14"
C.BRG.=S77°17'27"W
C.=632.76S00°52'43"W139.92L=287.
9
7
R=773.
0
4
Δ=21°2
0
'
3
7
"N67°46'40"W9.39N22°13'10"E47.59W LINE OF SW 1/4 OFSEC. 10, T. 116, R. 23NW'LY ROW LINE
OF PARCEL 216
Prepared by:WSB Project No.Date:Prepared by:WSB Project No.Date:Drainage & Utility Easement Exhibit
PID: 250101810
Address: Unassigned
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
020055-000 8/25/2023
N
PARCEL LINE
0
1 inch = 200 feet
200
Graphic Scale (feet)
PERMANENT DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT AREA = 35,039 SQ. FT.K:\020055-000\Survey\Drawing\Easement\020055-000-V-ESMT-PID 25-0101810.dwg, 8/25/2023 11:02:44 AM80
Planning Commission Item
June 18, 2024
Item Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated June 4, 2024
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 June 4, 2024 meeting minutes"
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
RECOMMENDATION
81
ATTACHMENTS
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated June 4, 2024
82
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JUNE 4, 2024
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Eric Noyes, Steve Jobe, Perry Schwartz, Ed Goff, Ryan Soller,
Jeremy Rosengren, Katie Trevena.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner; Rachel Jeske, Planner; Eric Maass,
Community Development Director.
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Bryan Harjes HKGi
Vernelle Clayton Manager, Market Square and Colonial Square
Heidi Armstrong Resident on Kerber Boulevard
Bob Seward 8031 Cheyenne Avenue
TJ Hart 8670 Chanhassen Hills Drive
Reuben Kelzenberg Resident on Iroquois Street
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. REVIEW DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
Community Development Director Eric Maass introduced Bryan Harjes, HKGi, to review the
downtown design guidelines and design standards.
Mr. Harjes presented an overview of the design standards for the downtown area of Chanhassen.
He explained the different design standards for the area defined as downtown. These design
standards include landscaping, building materials, and lighting.
Mr. Maass highlighted the second requirement of exterior materials. He stated that they wanted
standards that provided flexibility for an architectural design that made sense with the building.
Mr. Harjes explained the design goals of streets along with the overall design. He detailed the
differences between the downtown mixed-use design guidelines and the downtown west
guidelines.
Mr. Maass commented that the design guidelines provide a framework for private development
in Chanhassen. The street guidelines provide standards for how the city will design its streets.
83
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
2
There are no plans to reconstruct West 78th Street because of this planning project. The treatment
of the intersection of Market Boulevard would adhere to these guidelines.
Mr. Harjes presented slides to showcase the existing conditions of West 78th Street.
Mr. Maass stated that the city considered the level of service for West 78th Street if the
westbound land was dropped to a single lane.
Mr. Harjes continued explaining the West 78th Street complete streets design and the 80-foot
right of way.
Mr. Maass commented that creating a bump out at the intersection would possibly allow the
opportunity to create more on-street parking or large planter boxes.
Mr. Harjes reviewed information about the various widths of right-of-way in the different areas
of downtown.
Chairman Noyes asked how future street changes relate to traffic signals or roundabouts.
Mr. Maass stated that the specific intersection control would be determined in the feasibility
portion of a road project.
Mr. Harjes commented that roundabouts need more space to accommodate. There were concerns
about additional acquisitions. They considered a smaller roundabout on Market Boulevard and
different traffic control measures for other intersections.
Commissioner Schwartz asked for the city’s philosophy on controlling traffic in specific
intersections.
Mr. Maass responded that the city’s goal is to balance the needs of each mode of transportation.
The consideration of traffic needs has impacted the discussion between downtown mixed-use
and downtown west.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if the city planned to install parking meters for on-street parking.
Mr. Maass responded that the city had not discussed parking meter installation.
Mr. Schwartz asked about Excelsior’s experience installing parking meters downtown, and he
commented that there would be increased traffic, but often parking meters annoy people.
Mr. Maass stated that the City Council has discussed this project multiple times and parking
meters have never been a consideration.
Commissioner Goff asked if the multi-use trail was always on the north.
Mr. Harjes commented that on West 78th Street, the multi-use would always be on the north side,
and on Market Boulevard, it would be on the east side.
84
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
3
Mr. Maass displayed a side-by-side image of West 78th Street and Market Boulevard.
Commissioner Goff suggested including directions on the figures.
Commissioner Soller asked why it was critical to include design guidelines for West 78th Street
when any projects would be completed quite a few years in the future
Mr. Maass responded that this document is intended to guide development now and into the
future. He explained the differences between the design guidelines and the city code. These
design guidelines would influence future discussions.
Commissioner Soller commented that this is a guide for the future, but engineers ten years from
now might not be held to these guidelines. He asked if the document would be evolving and if it
could be amended.
Mr. Maass answered that the guidelines could be amended through a process that would include
Planning Commission review, a public hearing, and City Council approval.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if a part of the document would be implemented into the
comprehensive plan.
Mr. Maass responded that planning studies are often referenced in comprehensive plans.
Commissioner Soller stated that structured parking seems to be the most preferred in
development. He asked if that guideline would persuade or prevent development. He
acknowledged that this was a guideline but would guide the vision for downtown development.
Mr. Maass stated that it would provide clarity to prospective developers, and they would know
the expectations from the start before investing time, money, or effort into a project.
Commissioner Goff asked if a developer went against the guidelines and if they would need a
variance.
Mr. Maass answered that they would not need a variance, but the guidelines show a preference.
This document would be helpful for those looking for financial assistance to make a project
viable.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if the document had been shared with prospective developers to
get their thoughts on the guidelines.
Mr. Maass commented that the guidelines were shared with architects since they often design the
buildings. He provided an example of revisions that resulted from comments from the architects.
Commissioner Trevena asked if there was any differentiation for structured parking for the
different types of buildings in the downtown district.
85
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
4
Mr. Maass responded that the idea is to limit surface parking as much as possible. If there is
surface parking, it is encouraged to be located in the rear or on the side.
Commissioner Jobe asked if there was a limit on the size of trucks allowed.
Mr. Maass stated that they require fire apparatus accessibility, which accounts for the large truck
traffic that would need to access the sites.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if they anticipated having indoor access to the building from
structured parking.
Mr. Maass responded that this would be dependent on the project. He explained that most
projects with public structured parking would be on the first floor and would be accessible to the
business or the sidewalk.
Commissioner Schwartz asked how many levels of structured parking there would be.
Mr. Maass answered that this would be dependent on the needs of the project.
Commissioner Soller stated that the access from the commercial area to the Central Business
District was non-existent. He asked if there was anything in the plans to connect these areas for
pedestrians or bicycles.
Mr. Maass demonstrated the two crossings over the railroad into downtown.
Commissioner Soller commented that to do pedestrian or bicycle crossing, you would have to go
all the way to Market Boulevard or Great Plains. He asked whether connectivity to the district
was important.
Mr. Maass used the map to show where the pedestrian overpass was located and explained how
it could create options for bike paths in the future.
Commissioner Schwartz expressed concerns about the safety of the pedestrian pathway being
next to the bicycle pathway.
Mr. Maass responded that there was not enough right-of-way to have two separate trails. He
stated that they were trying to accommodate bump-outs, through lanes, and different plants,
which did not leave room for two separate pathways.
Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing.
Vernelle Clayton, who manages Market Square and Colonial Square in Chanhassen, suggested
that when promoting the downtown district, it is not just West 78th Street. She requested
providing signage for additional streets beside West 78th Street. She stated most individuals drive
86
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
5
to the grocery store or appointments. She commented that retail succeeds based on the number of
cars that pass by the stores and voiced concerns about limiting traffic downtown.
Heidi Armstrong, a resident of Kerber Boulevard, asked what created this initiative to change, as
she appreciated the small-town feel of Chanhassen. Ms. Armstrong stated that Chanhassen does
not have many problems and voiced concerns about the tax impacts of these large changes.
Chairman Noyes summarized the discussion of the meeting, which focused on creating
guidelines, not a specific project.
Mr. Maass stated that the downtown development guidelines create standards for the Central
Business District, and he explained the current guidelines in place in the city. He agreed the
downtown is a special place, which prompted the creation of the guidelines so when or if
projects come forward, the requirements are clear.
Chairman Noyes clarified that there were no specific projects proposed downtown, but these
would create outlines for when projects do occur.
Bob Seward, 8031 Cheyenne Avenue, asked whether it was accurate that another 500-unit
apartment building was being constructed.
Mr. Maass explained that there was not a project that was building 500 multi-family homes but
clarified that there was a redevelopment project with the Country Inn and Suites that included
multi-family housing.
Mr. Seward voiced concerns about the traffic in Chanhassen with the redevelopment of
additional housing. He believed that there was drag racing occurring often on Highway 5 and
that police presence was limited. He expressed concerns that this would continually get worse.
TJ Hart, 8670 Chanhassen Hills Drive, provided an overview of positive attributes of the design
standards for the Central Business District. He encouraged the potential implementation of
reduced lane widths to ten feet for safety standards. He commented that two lanes encourage
faster travel and a curb-out in those areas would be more appropriate for the flow of traffic and
pedestrian crossing. He stated that the off-street parking mandates in the city code would be
difficult for smaller developers or businesses.
Reuben Kelzenberg, Iroquois, asked if it was a dead issue for Market Boulevard to line up with
Laredo Drive. He stated that it seems surprising that everything must be rebuilt. He encouraged
limiting street parking on West 78th Street to allow for easy snowplowing and traffic navigation.
Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Schwartz stated that many residents seem to be surprised about projects. He
suggested that the city makes efforts to communicate changes. He encouraged residents to reach
out about changes to better understand what was happening.
87
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
6
Chairman Noyes commented at a March Planning Commission meeting, they reviewed the
different communication types and frequency for projects in the city.
Commissioner Trevena explained that the Chanhassen website provides additional information
about ongoing projects in the city. She encouraged the citizens to be active.
Commissioner Soller voiced support for the future vision and what the guidelines might create.
He emphasized that these guidelines are for a long period. These projects are subject to market
forces. He stated that these guidelines are to make traffic efficient but asked for additional input
about this information.
Mr. Maass commented that West 78th Street does not have a complete sidewalk. He clarified that
businesses are crucial downtown. He explained the value of allowing for multiple means of
transportation downtown.
Chairman Noyes stated that it is difficult because these are guidelines for a specific subsection of
Chanhassen. It might be appropriate to slow traffic in certain areas of Chanhassen, but not
throughout the city.
Commissioner Jobe stated that the comment about on-street parking was valid.
Commissioner Trevena commented that overall, she is in favor of the guidelines but voiced
concern about the structured parking from a developer’s standpoint. She stated that structured
parking was expensive to maintain over time.
Commissioner Schwartz said that it was a great move for the city to create the guidelines to help
establish a vision for the city. He voiced concerns that business owners outside of the Central
Business District might be concerned with the money and focus on West 78th Street. He
encouraged the city to continue to help other businesses grow and succeed.
Chairman Noyes stated that there are no quick solutions but explained the necessity for the long-
term plan to continue to develop.
Commissioner Goff expressed favor for the plan. He stated that the guidelines were the first step.
If the plan does not work, a future planning commission will need to figure out the next steps.
Commissioner Soller provided positive feedback about revitalizing downtown in new ways. He
stated that other locations should not be neglected with signage.
Commissioner Schwartz stated there had been previous discussions of extending the signage to
different areas of Chanhassen to create a cohesive welcome to the city.
Commissioner Soller stated that residents could submit public comments that could be read if
they had additional thoughts to share.
88
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
7
2. ORDINANCE XXX: AMENDING LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS IN THE
R-8 AND R-12 ZONING DISTRICTS
Community Development Director Eric Maass presented an overview of the R-8 Zoning District
and the R-12 Zoning District. He explained the future land use map from the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. He reviewed the R-8 Zoning District’s proposed standards and current
standards. He reviewed the R-12 Zoning District’s proposed standards and current standards.
Commissioner Jobe asked about lot cover with the multi-family units.
Mr. Maass clarified that they are considering the impervious area in the overall lot.
Commissioner Jobe asked about stormwater runoff on these properties.
Mr. Maass stated that all these properties need to consider how to manage their stormwater
runoff accordingly.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if this ordinance would prevent developers from building homes
with a zero-foot front setback.
Mr. Maass stated that there was a 25-foot setback, which is approximately the size of a car. He
stated there could not be a building with a 0-foot setback unless they wanted to pursue a PUD.
There could be row homes, but there would need to be a yard.
Commissioner Schwartz questioned whether it would allow developers to impact the width of
private streets.
Mr. Maass stated that private streets are required to be 50 feet wide and would not be changed
with this ordinance.
Chairman Noyes asked who changes the zoning of a location in Chanhassen and asked how it
would be used by the city.
Mr. Maass explained that the city is required to update its comprehensive plan every ten years.
This determines the land use guidance, which would help guide the zoning. Properties can be
rezoned if they align with the land use guidance. There are only a handful of properties eligible.
Chairman Noyes asked what the potential for properties to be developed is, and how many
residents would be impacted.
Mr. Maass stated that city utilities impact which properties can be developed. He provided
examples of properties that could be developed for medium density. He commented that the
zoning designation would not change for any one property.
Chairman Noyes clarified that this ultimately changes the design of the properties.
89
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
8
Mr. Maass responded that this would facilitate the option of straight zoning for this type of
development.
Commissioner Soller asked for clarification regarding the minimum lot area. He asked if it was
1,500 square feet of a minimum lot area per dwelling unit and if the setback would be in addition
to this.
Mr. Maass explained the minimum lot frontage and lot area. He clarified that individuals could
not go below the required lot area or above the maximum lot coverage. He said that the higher-
density district would have greater lot coverage as a percentage because of the units being put in
the same amount of land.
Commissioner Soller asked if today the maximum lot coverage is 35 percent and if there was no
increase from 35 to 50 percent, would that still create the need for PUDs.
Mr. Maass stated that 35 percent of 1,500 square feet is 525 square feet of impervious lot cover.
This would be approximately a small garage. The increase of max lot coverage would allow a
reasonable-sized structure on a property. They can average the lot coverage over a development
and the HOA-managed green space and stormwater ponds can alleviate the lot cover of the
impervious area.
Chairman Noyes commented that these developments would have common walls due to the
nature of the development. This is where the density argument comes in.
Chairman Noyes opened the public hearing. There were no public comments.
Chairman Noyes closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Jobe moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded that the Chanhassen Board
of Appeals and Adjustments recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance
amending lot requirements and setbacks in the R-8 and R-12 zoning districts. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 7, 2024
Commissioner Goff moved, Commissioner Rosengren seconded to approve the Chanhassen
Planning Commission summary minutes dated May 7, 2024 as presented. All voted in
favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE:
Planning Director Maass updated the Commissioners on recent council actions, noting the
construction and site preparation would begin tomorrow.
90
Planning Commission Minutes – June 4, 2024
9
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Schwartz moved, Commissioner Goff 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 8:11 p.m.
Submitted by Eric Maass
Planning Director
91