Loading...
3 PUD 275 Lake Drive EastJ PROPOSAL: LOCATION: APPLICANT: CITY O.F STAFF REPORT P.C. DATE: 4/21/99 C.C. DATE: 5/10/99 CASE: #85-1 PUD #99-1 LUP (1) A request for an amendment to PUD #85-1, Hidden Valley, to permit a church, office or residential use on Lot 1, Block 7; and (2) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend land use from public/semi-public to office. Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley, 275 Lake Drive East Family of Christ Lutheran Church Represented by Lotus Realty Services P.O. Box 235 Chanhassen, MN 55317 934-4538 PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential 3.6 acres ltl ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Lake Drive and Hwy. 5 S - PUD-R, Residential E - PUD-R, Residential W - BN, Neighborhood Business/Northcott Office WATER AND SEWER: Available to site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER: A' church with a parking lot exists on the site. The site slopes to the south and is at a Iower elevation than Lake Drive East. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Public/Semi-Public · , ~,, ~,~ ~ :_rie Ave ~ Ma~n p~ Ma!Ap~ St re~_~_ Hidden Valley PUD Amendment April 14, 1999 Page 2 BACKGROUND In 1985, the Hidden Valley Planned Unit Development (PUD) was approved with Lot 1, Block 7 being designated for a future church. In conjunction with the subdivision, the property was rezoned to P-l, the PUD residential district, from R-la. The city adopted a new zoning ordinance and accompanying map in 1987. It was at this time that the property was rezoned to PUD-R. This is the current zoning designation. The ordinance was amended to allow a church as a conditional use in the P-1 District. Although the site plan for Family of Christ was approved, a conditional use permit was not processed. Therefore, the church has a non-conforming use status. As long as the church remains, the non- confo~nity is a non-issue, but there is a cloud over the property. The purpose of the amendment/rezoning is to make the existing church a permitted use as well as provide other uses for the site. The Family of Christ Church's site plan was apProved in 1988 on Lot 1, Block 7. The existing church is one-story and 21 feet in height. The 'steeple is approximately 73 feet from grade. The zoning ordinance exempts steeples from the height limitatiOn. 'In this PUD, structures must not exceed 40 feet in height. The plans showed a second phase to the church including a classroom and sanctuary addition with parking just to the south of the existing church (see Attachment 2). The church additions were never constructed because it was determined that the additional space would not accommodate the future congregation. They felt a larger space would be needed. Since it was determined by the congregation 'that the existing site would not accommodate future growth, other sites for a new church were sought. A site in the Bluff Creek Corporate Center was found. It is located east of Bluff Creek Elementary and the Chanhassen Recreation Center. The PUD for this development was approved in 1998. At the April 7, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, the new Family of Christ Church's site plan was approved. The new church includes future growth space. The applicant seeks to amend the Hidden Valley PUD to permit office or residential (assisted living) use for this site. When the subdivision was originally approved this site was designated for a church only. The property to the north of Lake Drive East was designated for high density residential or commercial. At the April 7, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, the site plan for Northcott's office building was approved on this site. The remainder of the project, excluding the commercial site abutting Great Plains Blvd. and Lake Drive East, was proposed to be residential. Typically, churches are located in a zoning district that has other permitted uses such as OI, Office and Institutional District or even a mixed-use PUD. Churches with a conditional use permit in the RSF District would have limited options for redevelopment. Hidden Valley PUD Amendment April 14, 1999 Page 3 The impetus behind the amendment/rezoning is to consider other acceptable uses for the site in the event it is not purchased by a church. The applicant prepared background for the PUD amendment. This is included in Attachment 3; ' ANALYSIS This is a request to amend the PUD to allow for a Church, office or assisted living facility on Lot 1, Block 7, the Family of Christ Church site. When the development was approved, there was no discussion of an optional use for this site but a church. Unfortunately, the church is a portion of a much larger development which is primarily zoned for residential uses. The 2000 Comprehensive Plan guides this parcel public/semi-public, meaning municipal buildings, churches, camps and golf courses, so the plan for this parcel will have to be changed to "Office." The two additional uses selected for the site were selected from the permitted uses in the OI District. These uses are included in Attachment 4. If this site were to be rezoned to OI, uses such as a library, museum, hospital, community center or funeral home could locate on the site. However, staff had concerns about the compatibility of some uses with the adjacent residential uses. In terms of the uses proposed by the applicant, an assisted living facility will be the most compatible with the existing neighborhood and an office building not as compatible. When staff was reviewing this request and writing this report, two issues were foremost, spot zoning and adaptive reuse of the existing church. Staff did not want to amend the PUD simply to benefit the property owner and at the same time wanted to be flexible in allowing an existing building to be utilized differently than its original use or design. In order for staff to justify the amendments to the PUD and comprehensive plan it must be shown that the parcel has not been given special treatment, the changes are for the benefit of the entire community and the action complies with the comprehensive plan (Moskowitz and Lindboom, 1993). If the action or request does not' meet the three criteria, it can be deemed a "spot zoning." Spot zoning is "rezoning of a lot or parcel of land to benefit an owner for a use incompatible with surrounding land uses and that does not further the comprehensive plan" (Moskowitz and Lindboom, 1993). Staff reviewed the application in terms of the benefit to the entire community, not benefit to the applicant. An assisted living facility would serve the senior population, as well as the community by meeting housing goals. Staff has a difficult time recommending an office use, when more appropriate locations could be available throughout the community. The comprehensive plan designates this parcel as Public/Semi-Public. In order for the assisted living facility to be located on the site, the comprehensive plan will have to be reguided to "Office." Assisted living facilities/nursing homes are only permitted in the OI, Office and Institutional District. This designation would also permit an office use. Hidden Valley PUD Amendment April 14, 1999 Page 4 Adaptive reuse is "the development of a new use for an older building or for a building originally designed for a special or specific purpose" (Moskowitz and Lindboom, 1993). The city encourages the adaptive reuse of existing buildings through standards established as part of the business, office, institutional and industrial districts. The standards are included in Attachment 5. The church was constructed in 1988, so reuse is possible and recommended. It would be prodigal to allow this structure to be destroyed. Staff believes that if the use is compatible with neighboring properties every effort shOuld be made to reuse an existing building. The assisted living facility would be compatible with adjacent uses. Based upon the information submitted by the applicant, staff is not convinced that an office use would be compatible. This parcel is in the HC-1 District. When the site plan is reviewed for the redevelopment of the site, it must comply with the standards. These standards include high quality building materials and landscaping. Reference: Moskowitz, Harvey S. and Carl G. Lindbloom. 1993. The New Illustrated Book of Development Definitions. Center for Urban Policy Research, New Brunswick, NJ. AMENDMENT TO EXISTING HIDDEN VALLEY PUD STANDARDS The applicant has submitted standards for the redevelopment of the site. This is located in Attachment 6. Staff will only mention the standards that need to' be revised. Permitted Uses: The applicant would like the following to be permitted uses on the site: church/school, office and assisted living/nursing home. Staff supports the church and the assisted living use, but feels information is lacking to support the office use. The church is the existing use and is the most compatible. This may also include a school. The original site plan included future classroom space so a school would be in keeping with the intent. The assisted living facility is proposed to' be a maximum of 60 units. The units are proposed to be a maximum of 500 sq. ft. An assisted living facility would be a good transition and buffer between the single family residential and Lake Drive East. Staff believes that traffic Would not be as intense as the church/school because most of residents would not be operating/parking vehicles. The facility staff and family would generate the most parking demand. The zoning ordinance requires 1 space for 2 beds and 1 space for every 2 employees on the major shift for nursing homes. However, the ordinance authorizes decreased parking standards for projects that generate a decreased parking demands. The parking issue is discussed further under "Other Special Conditions?' The least compatible use proposed for the site is an office use because it would create.additional traffic and parking. An office use is very broad. A medical office would generate a greater amount of traffic than a real estate, office. The apPlicant has only provided a footprint of the Hidden Valley PUD Amendment April 14, 1999 Page 5 proposed office building without noting the total square footage or the probable type of office. Staff does not feel comfortable recommending approval of what may be an incompatible use. However, it is important to state the two benefits to an office use. The first is that office hours are usually only 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Secondly, an office might return this parcel to a taxable status. Other Special Conditions: The applicant has specified the setbacks that a possible redevelopment will have to maintain. Staff would like to clarify the required setbacks. The applicant indicates that the property has a rear yard. The site has two front yards because it abuts Lake Drive East and Hidden Court, but no rear yard. However, the ordinance requires a 50 foot setback between both a building and off- street parking and a residentially-zoned property. Along the eastern property line (side yard setback) the existing setback is 30 feet for the parking and 50 feet for the church. The standards state that structures can be a maximum of two stories. Staff would like to amend the standards to require that the height of all buildings not exceed 40 feet in height. This does not include accessory structures, which may not exceed one-story in height. Signage is also addressed in the standards. The applicant requests that a 24 sq. ft, monument sign be permitted at each entry off Lake Drive in addition to a 96 sq. ft., 12 foot tall sign. Staff recommends that only one 24 sq. ft. monument sign not to exceed 5 feet in height be permitted. The ordinance does not permit 96 sq. ft. monument signs. However, the sign plan will be reviewed at the time of site plan review. If a site plan review is not required, the applicant shall obtain a sign permit prior to installation. The standards indicate that parking for the church or office shall meet ordinance requirements. However, the applicant has stated that parking for the assisted living facility shall be .5 space per dwelling unit with proof of parking to be shown at the time of site plan review. The design standards do not address minimum lot size in the event the property is subdivided. Staff recommends that a minimum of one acre be maintained. This will limit the number of total parcels to three. Staff has revised the standards to specify the minimum width at 100 feet and minimum depth 150 feet. Staff supports the amendment to the Hidden Valley PUD to permit a church or assisted living facility on Lot 1, Block 7. Hidden Valley PUD Amendment April 14, 1999 Page 6 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends to thelcity COuncil that the Hidden Valley PUD #85-1 be revised to permit a church or assisted living facility on Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley as shown on the plans dated received March 19, 1999, and subject tO the following condition: 1. The development of the site shall comply with the design standards as amended." ATTACHMENTS 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Application · Original Family of Christ Church site plan History and Background of Family of Christ Church OI, Office and Institutional District Requirements Section 20-283, Adaptive Reuse of Buildings for Private Use Amendment to Hidden Valley PUD Standards with site drawings prepared by the applicant Staff revised design standards ' Property Owners List Letter from Neighbor g:\plan\ck\plan comm\foc pud amend.doc Cil¥ OF CHAI~H~SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (6~ 2) 93?4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT:_....~"~_.~_..//y_.~ ~lt"/,S~: J.~v~f"~'/'O.~ OWNER: ADDRESS: ~ R~ ~.a.~ ADDRESS: TELEPHONE (Day time) ~',,.~ z~/. z~,~' o5 TELEPHONE: 1., Comprehensive Plan'Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements Conditional Use Permit 12. L Variance 3,, .. Interim Use Permit 13., Wetland Alteration Permit 4. . Non-conforming Use Permit 14.. Planned Unit Development /~fm~jO/~ Z~ 15.: Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6, Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8.~ .... Sign Plan Review · Notification Signs 9. Site Plan Review 10... Subdivision · X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CU P/SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ /,,'3 ~. o e A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. T~venty.slx full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. ** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract 4 PROJECT NAMEL LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST 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, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. 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 have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed 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. The documents and Information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of AI;fpli~ / ,~/0')~'~'~"'~,,~-~' Date it~.~,al'ure of Fee Owner Application Received on ~--['~- ~ ~ Fee Paid ~/O0 Receipt No._t~-i~'Z~ The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be ava,able on Friday prior to the meeting., If not contacted, a copy of the report will be rnailed to the applicant's address. A narrative history of Family of Christ at our Lake Drive location and our rationale for re-zoning this property. Family of Christ Lutheran Church began in early April, 1980. Our first worship service was held on Easter Sunday in historic old St. Hubert's church in what was then downtown Chanhassen. Our use of that church came at a good time for that building because its long-term future was at that point uncertain. Family of Christ leased and maintained the building for nine years and thereby contributed to the preservation of one of the few historic structures in our city. By 1985, however, it was clear that our congregation was outgrow- Buying "Lot 1 Block 7, ing old St. Hubert's and we began a two- Hidden Valley Addition" year search for suitable property on which to build our own church. At the time the MUSA sewer line of buildable vacant land ended at Powers Boulevard. For a time we considered buying 60 acres at the northeast corner of West 78"' Street and Powers Blvd, but we were discouraged both by the cost and by city officials who also directed us away from other commercial, office/institutional, and industrial land. When the Hidden Valley neighborhood was being designed we opened negotiations with the developer, New American Homes, Inc. An advisor from our national church body urged us to buy a site of at least five acres, but in 1986 not one parcel of land of that size or larger was available and affordable - and acceptable for non-profit zoning - within the sewer line. The church advisor gave his approval to our purchase of 3.6 acres with reluctance, but city planner Barb Dacy, other city officials at that time, and the developer were enthusiastic. We completed the purchase and began the legal application for approved conditional use as a church within the Planned Unit Development (PUD). Subsequently we learned, in 1997, that this application had never been approved and filed by the City of Chanhassen, though we have documentation that our application and fee had been correctly submitted. This city oversight has been acknowledged by city planning director Kate Aanenson in a letter to us dated December 11, 1997. Even before we began planning and design of the present church we learned of the proposed re-routing of Highway 101. That route would have followed the approximate course of present Lake Drive but it cut both through our property and into the Hidden Valley neighborhood. Our church representatives sided with residents in opposing this design for Highway 101. The land from Hidden Court to Highway 5 and between Erie Avenue in Chanhassen Estates and Great Plains Boulevard would have a much different look and use today if new Highway 101 had been built. -1- Family of Christ's Lake Drive site and building were designed for expansion both to the south (a much larger and permanent sanctuary, plus offices and classrooms) and to the north (classrooms in a one- or two-story design). By 1992 a new Building Committee had been formed to begin designing this expansion. By that time we were conducting three worship services each weekend and our seven small classrooms were not enough for our growing Sunday School attendance. In reviewing growth pro- jections (both of community population Reality bites .... and conservative guesses about church growth) it quickly became clear to the Building Committee that the Lake Drive site was inadequate for Family of Christ's long- term use. Any way that we designed an expanded building on this site, parking was limited to about 150 spaces (we currently have 96). By building code, churches are limited to sanctuary seating of three times the parking capacity. Today church planners and some cities are using the formula of two-to-one because of activity and attendance patterns of today's families. Although three-to-one would permit a sanctuary of our originally-planned capacity of 450, building codes would not allow for any further expansion after that. Parking, code-required green space, surface-water ponding, and set-backs also limited possible building designs and configurations. The Building Committee and Church Council began to realize that while this site would allow for one expansion, it would not allow any more adjustments to accommodate our continued growth. We believe that as the City of Chanhassen and neighboring com- Unattractive options munities grow in population and as Fam- ily of Christ Lutheran Church continues to develop its outreach, membership, and programs, we need to look further into the future than a single building expansion which could be too small in another ten years. At that point, we feel, trying to sell a 20,000 sq.ft, building designed solely for church use with inadequate off-street parking would be much more difficult than re-zoning now and selling a functional multi-use building with enough open land for taxable development in a variety of uses. Before church leaders recommended the concept of relocation to the membership, we considered many other options: City officials suggested that Family of Christ buy residential properties on the west side of Erie Avenue in Chanhassen Estates. Building a two- or three-level parking ramp on our property. Razing the present building and starting over. -2- · Buying some or all of the land between Lake Drive, Highway 5, and the American Legion and re-routing Lake Drive East. (That land is zoned for commercial/retail use.) · Coming to agreement with buyers/users of that land for shared parking. All these ideas were discussed seriously and eventually discarded because of prohibitive costs, impact to the congregation and the neighborhood, the continued uncertainty of buyers and users of the property across Lake Drive, and the unlikelihood of city approval. Presently Family of Christ ' is a congregation approaching 1,000 in A "Seven-Day-a~Week" Church baptized membership and participation. With adequate space, we project a mem- bership within five years of 1,500. In church-planning jargon we are identified as a "mid-regional" congregation in contrast to a "neighborhood" or a "town" church. We draw families from Waconia & Victoria, Chaska, Excelsior, and western Eden Prairie as well as residents of Chanhassen, of course. Worship attendance during the school year averages 500-525 in four services each weekend. Church School enrollment is between 250 & 275. We are now experiencing the plateau of participation documented in many churches nation- wide when limited by space and delayed in addressing those problems. 80% of the time our 9:30 and 11:00 services are at or above the 185 attendance capacity. We have two Church School sessions on Wednesday evenings and three on Saturday and Sunday. We sometimes must turn down requests from community groups (and double- booked our own church groups) for space on week nights and Saturdays because of our scheduled activities. Our desire for more building space is because we are often a seven-day-a-week church. Even if we were to continue at our Lake Drive site, this level of activity (and its traffic and outdoor activity) would continue to increase. Current church planners are recommending that suburban churches with attractive programs, outreach, music, and worship activities "buy big" when purchasing land or relocating. Westwood Community Church is completing purchase of 40+ acres in Chanhassen. In Lakeville and Maple Grove churches are buying 30- and 40-acre parcels adjacent to their current properties, all tax-exempt. Family of Christ does not have the financial resources to make such purchases, but even if we did there are few properties of that size in the Highway 5 corridor which are traffic-visible and accessible and not zoned in the highest-taxed category, commercial/retail. Given the current climate of tax-concern in city government, we don't believe either citizens or city council are receptive to removing large blocks of land from taxable status. It was after a search of two years that we found a piece of property east of Bluff Creek School and the Chanhassen Recreation Center. Negotiating a purchase -3- agreement (which included legally-binding shared-parking easements with other even- tual users of adjacent sites) and getting city approval for our church relocation onto that PUD took 33 months. We believe our relocation to the Bluff Creek property is good stew- ardship of our church resources and good citizenship in our community. Good stewards, Good citizens We'll return these 3.6 acres of land/building to taxable status while removing only a little more than that, 5.77 acres, at Bluff Creek We'll be able to move forward in developing a long-hoped-for preschool and daycare facility considered for the Lake Drive site but postponed. In a space-starved community we can provide more room for non-church children's and adult groups (e.g. AA, Alanon, scouts, 4-H, ECFE, etc.) The Bluff Creek site will allow for our eventual build-out of 60,000 sq.ft. and provide up to 500 shared parking spots -- space adequate far into the future. If we're going to spend $2-$3 million of the congregation's money in a building project, the most prudent investment is in property usable for the long-term. In late 1997 we began to advertise for the sale of our present building and site. For almost a year we tried to market the property ourselves. In late 1998 we contracted with Brad Johnson of Lotus Realty for advice and direction. A number of existing or start-up congregations have been interested in buying our present church but they have been unable to afford it. The property was appraised in early 1997 at $1 million (the value of the land and the depreciated value of the 7,300 sq.ft, building). While we are willing to sell for less than the appraised value we do not believe it is fiscally responsible to the members of our congregation to sell at less than half the value. As does every family, our church family must manage its financial affairs prudently. To finance the new church building we have interviewed and applied For Sale: at several lending institutions which his- 7300 sq.ft. Building torically have made favorable deals with 3.6 acres Land Lutheran congregations. (Commercial institutions rarely are so generous to churches.) At this time the institution with the best financing and the willingness to make the largest loan is the Mission Investment Fund of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). In order to protect its own investment and to keep congregations from over-extending, a hard-and-fast requirement of this fund is that the 4t sale of present church property be closed before construction begins. In 1998 we negotiated and nearly completed a sale with a buyer who planned to construct two additional office buildings on this property. We were uncom- fortable over what we felt was that buyer's lack of interest in discussing his plans with our neighbors before approaching the planning commission for re-zoning, but the deal fell through mainly because of other factors, including price. At the present time we have a letter of intent and we expect a purchase agreement shortly from a buyer who will allow us to lease-back the church until we're ready to occupy the new building. Conditions of this agreement include (a) a purchase agreement between that buyer and a second party who will buy the property when we leave, and (b) re-zoning of this property to allow the second buyer to complete the purchase and to develop the property. Because the start of our new construction is dependent upon the Together, we can make this work close of the sale of our Lake Drive prop- erty, and that sale depends upon suc- cessfully re-zoning this property, it is important that we have the support of our neigh- bors as we approach the city planning commission and city council. We believe that the second buyer has envisioned a development on this site consistent with the Iow- impact use our church has made of this site -- perhaps even lower-impact than would be true if our church expanded fully on this site and expanded its children's, daytime, and weekend programs to maximum. As our community grows and changes so do our churches and other public institutions, our business, residential, and commercial neighborhoods. By planning carefully in support of our neighbors, Family of Christ intends to keep serving Chanhassen's families. By working together, our neighbors and our church' members can find agreeable solutions that let us move ahead with our plans and results in a positive benefit to the neighborhood and this good community. Nate Castens, pastor O = 934-5659 H = 934-7870 Randy Koepsell, building committee co-chair O = 828-7901 H = 934-1091 -5- BACKGROUND FOR REQUEST FOR PUD AMENDMENT In mid 1998 Lotus Realty was retained by the Family of Christ Lutheran Church to assist them. The Church was on the horns of a dilemma. Having determined after a thorough exploration, that the needs of the Church could not be met at its current location, the Church had purchased a new site Chanhassen. They had also arranged for financing for the construction of a new church building. However, the terms of their financing required that they must have closed on a sale of their existing facility before closing on the new financing. The Church had been trying to sell their existing site for close to a year. The most obvious purchaser of the property had seemed to be another church. Family of Christ had marketed the property to local churches and to the headquarters offices of the various denominations. Unfortunately, the size of the property had proven to be more or less in between the size which is affordable to small churches and the size which is sought by larger churches or rapidly growing churches. Thus, although the Church received some proffers from smaller churches, the suggested price was so much less than the appraised value, that the Church could not pursue serious negotiations. Lotus' marketing efforts have been based on the following assumptions: Sale of the site to another church is the best alternative. Other alternative uses needed to be pursued. As a result of its marketing efforts both for continued use as a chUrch and for other uses, Lotus came to the following conclusions and thus recommended and/or facilitated the following course of action: 1. Because any purchasing church would need to use the facilities once they had closed on a purchase, the need for Family of Christ to have closed on a sale prior to construction, would then leave Family of Christ with no place to function during the construction period. To resolve that problem, a bridge purchase agreement has been negotiated between Family of Christ Lutheran Church and Lutheran Brotherhood. Lutheran Brotherhood will close on the purchase and lease the building back to Family of Christ during its construction period on the condition that Lotus procure a take out purchaser from Lutheran Brotherhood at the end of the construction period and on the condition that the property be rezoned to permit additional uses of the property. Lotus has arranged to facilitate the first listed Lutheran Brotherhood condition with a take out purchase agreement, while continuing to seek church users. To meet the second condition, a modification of the PUD needs to be made because the current PUD does not provide for mixed use, vlotkp 2. Because marketing the Church on a broader basis brought forth interest on the part of purchasers whose uses were not acceptable to neighbors and/or would somewhat predictably not have received either rezoning or conditional use approval from the City, it was determined that in modifying the PUD to meet the conditions of the Lutheran Brotherhood contract, the amendment should limit the uses. 3. In order to avoid this same dilemma for future church users, assuming a purchase by a church, an amendment to the PUD should be made which would provide for future alternative uses. Unlike other church properties in Chanhassen where there is other underlying zoning which would permit at least one alternative use, the underlying zoning in this case is not entirely clear, although it appears to have been guided for High Density Residential under the 1990 Comprehensive Plan. That use, however is not entirely supported by the neighbors. Thus, an amendment to the PUD seems to be indicated for the above reason as well. 4. Through an apparent oversight, the Church was never actually issued its Conditional Use Permit, although it completed its application and met the requirements imposed by the City in order to obtain the permit. SpeCifying use as a church is included in the requested amendment to the PUD will remedy the oversight. Prior to submitting the formal application to the City of Chanhassen, we have held 4 informational neighborhood meetings. The first two were scheduled as alternative times for meetings with individuals who live immediately adjacent to the church. For the third meeting notices were sent to a geographical area which was essentially an area within 500 feet to the east, south and west of the church. There was little interest from the larger geographical area, with only about a half dozen people attending, most of whom lived immediately adjacent to the Church. The purpose of these three first meetings was to explain what was being proposed and to get feedback from the neighbors. The fourth meeting was a follow up meeting to the first three meetings, the purpose of which was to show them what would be presented to the City and to explain how their suggestions had been incorporated into the plans. Four of the neighbors have attended the meetings regularly. They have made requests regarding buffering which have been incorporated into the buffeting plans. Many of their requests relate to heights and locations ofberms and their landscaping as well as density of plantings in some areas &the berms. They understand the Church's needs; however, they would prefer that the property's use remain as a church. They believe that continued use as a church, event an expanded church, will cause the least disruption and will have the least impact on the value &their homes. The Church and Lotus have appreciated the opportunity for dialogue with the neighbors. The meetings have been without rancor and have been constructive. The Church appreciates the neighbors' concerns but must attend to its needs as well. Thus, in order to provide alternative uses with a minimum amount of disruption to the qualify of life &the neighbors and the least amount of impact on the value of their homes, the selection of uses was made on the basis of those with a low impact on the neighborhood. Office use subsides at 5:00 on weekdays and is very limited on weekends. Assisted living residential is not a nursing home with a high staff level; vlotkp however, the residents rarely have sufficient mobility to drive cars and thus has a very low parking requirement and minimal traffic. In one of the early meetings with the neighbors, it was pointed out that one of their real estate agents had advised them that uncertainty as to the use was detrimental to the resale of the nearby homes. This was an additional factor in deliberately selecting specific alternative uses. Thus, our proposal seeks to amend the PUD to provide for church, office and assisted living residential. It seeks to establish the guidelines for a peripheral landscape plan in order to provide certainty to the neighbors of a level of privacy and quality of design for the peripheral area. It leaves to final site plan approval the selection of the use and the creation and approval of the balance of the Site Plan, appropriate elevation drawings, grading plans, utility plans, a landscaping plan for the balance of the site as well as selection of plant materials and their exact locations within the new peripheral landscaping area. Approval of this requested PUD amendment will enable the Church to complete its approval process for its new facility and commence construction. It will provide a degree of certainty for the neighbors and it will provide a some certainty for a future purchaser of the property. It also establishes some of the guidelines for the City's approval of the future use of the property. ReSpectfully submitted by: LOTUS REALTY SERVICES, INC. vlotkp ZONING § 20-791 d. The minimum setback is fifty (50) feet when it abuts a residential district without being separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of-way. e. Buffer yards: The city comprehensive plan establishes a requirement for buffer yards. Buffer yards are to be established in areas indicated on the plan where higher intensity uses interface with low density uses. In these areas, a fifty-foot buffer yard is to be provided where the interface occurs along a public street, a one-hundred-foot buffer yard is required where the interface occurs on internal lot lines. The buffer yard is an additional setback requirement. It is to be cumulatively calculated with the required setbacks outlined above. The full obligation to provide the buffer yard shall be placed on the parcel containing the higher intensity use. The buffer yard is intended to provide additional physical separation and screening for the higher intensity use. As such, they will be required to be provided with a combination ofberming, landscaping and/or tree preservation to maximize the buffering potential. To the extent deemed feasible by the city, new plantings shall be designed to require the minimum of maintenance, however, such maintenance as may be required to maintain consistency with the approved plan, shall be the obligation of the property owner. Buffer yards shall be covered by a permanently recorded conservation easement running in favor of the city. In instances where existing topography and/or vegetation prOvide buffering satisfactory to the city, or where quality site planning is achieved, the city may reduce buffer yard requirements by up to fifty (50) percent. The applicant shall have the full burden of demonstrating compliance with the standards herein. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 14(15-14-4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 94, §§ 1, 5, 7-25-88; Ord. No. 136, §§lA, lB, 1-28-91) Sec. 20-775. Interim uses. The following are interim uses in the "BF" District: (1) Churches. (2) Reserved. (3) Screened outdoor storage. (Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90; Ord. No. 164, § 1, 2-24-92; Ord. No. 243, § 12, 2-13-95) Secs. 20-776--20-790. Reserved. - ...... Sec. 20-791. Intent. The intent of the "OI" District is to provide for public or quasi-public nonprofit uses and professional business and administrative offices. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-1), 12-15-86) Supp. No. 9 1232.1 § 20-792 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE Sec. 20-792. Permitted uses. The (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) following uses are permitted in an "OI" District: Schools. Churches. Public buildings. Post office. Fire station. Library. Museum. Health services/hospitals. Nursing homes. Community center. Public recreational facilities. Utility services. Professional, business, and administrative offices. Funeral homes. Commercial antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 25, 11-12-96) Sec. 20-793. Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in an "OI" District: (1) Parking lots. (2) Signs. (3) Temporary outdoor sales (subject to the requirements of section 20-290). (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-3), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 243, § 13, 2-13-95) Sec. 20-794. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses in the "OI" District: (1) Adaptive reuse of vacant public or private school buildings for private business uses. (2) Commercial towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 26, 11-12-96) State law reference--Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595. Supp. No. 9 1232.2 · ZONING § 20-811 Sec. 20-795. Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "OI" District Subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter: (1) The minimum lot area is fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet. (2) The minimum lot frontage is seventy-five (75) feet, except that lots fronting on a cul-de-sac shall have a minimum lot frontage of sixty (60) feet. (3) The minimum lot depth is one hundred fifty (150) feet. (4) The maximum lot coverage is sixty-five (65) percent. (5) Off-street parking shall comply with district setback requirements except: a. There is no minimum setback when it abuts a railroad right-of-way, except as provided in sections 20-1191 and 20-1192 pertaining to landscaping require- ments. b. There is no minimum setback when it abuts, without being separated by a street, another off-street parking area. c. The minimum setback is fifty (50) feet when it abuts a residential district without being separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of-way. d. The minimum setback is twenty-five (25) feet for side street side yards. The maximum height is as follows: a. For the principal structure, two (2) stories. b. For accessory structures, one (1) story. Minimum setback requirements: a. For front yards, thirty-five (35) feet. b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet. c. For side yards, fifteen (15) feet. d. The minimum setback is fifty (50) feet when it abuts a residential district without being separated from the residential district by a street or railroad right-of-way. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 94, §§ 1, 6, 7-25-88) (6) (7) Secs. 20.796---20-810. Reserved. ARTICLE XXII. 'FOP' INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT Sec. 20-811. Intent. The intent of the "IOP" District is to provide an area identified for large scale light industrial and commercial planned development. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-1), 12-15-86) Supp. No. 9 1232.3 ZONING § 20-284 (4) Stacking areas deemed to be appropriate by the city shall meet parking setback requirements. (5) No sales, storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles, snowmobiles, or all-terrain vehicles. (6) Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations. Facilities for the collection of waste oil must be provided. (7) Gas pumps and/or storage tank vent pipes shall not be located within one hundred (100) feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. (8) A minimum separation of two hundred fifty (250) feet is required between the nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a conditional use permit is being requested. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 17(5-17-1(1)), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 116, § 3, 1-22-90) Editor's note-Prior to amendment by Ord. No. 116, § 3, adopted Jan. 22, 1990, § 20-282 pertained to automotive service station. Sec. 20-283. Adaptive reuse buildings for private business use. ~ of Adaptive reuse of surplus or vacant public or private buildings for private business uses are subject to the following criteria: (1) Only nonretail business uses shall be permitted and all such uses shall be conducted only within an existing building; no outdoor storage or other outdoor business activities shall be permitted on the property except accessory parking and loading, and the use of the premises for recreational activities for which such facilities are designed. (2) Exterior alteration, except for approved signage, which indicates from the exterior that the building is being utilized for other than educational purposes shall be prohibited. (3) No noxious or offensive trades, services or activities shall be conducted within the building nor shall anything be done on any site which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the adjoining neighborhood by reason of unsightliness or excessive emission of odors, fumes, smoke, vibration, dirt, dust, glare, wastes or noise. (4) Business identification signage shall be limited to one (1) business directory-type sign which identifies only the names of businesses located within the building. (5) Off-street parking spaces and loading facilities shall be provided for each use, in a manner consistent with the minimum parking and loading requirements in this chapter for each specific use. In no case shall any existing parking or loading area be enlarged unless specifically approved by the issuance of a conditional use permit. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 17(5-17-1(3)), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-284. Drive-through bank facilities. Drive-through bank facilities and stacking areas shall be subject to the following require- ments: (1) They shall not be located adjacent to any residential lot lines. Supp. No. 9 1181 AMENDMENT TO EXISTING PUD Regarding Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley (Family of Christ Lutheran Church) The purpose of this amendment to the existing PUD is to provide specific alternatives for the use of Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley, consisting of 3.67 acres ("the Property") as follows: Permitted Uses: Church Including church-sponsored school. Office Professional and business office, non-retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20% of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Residential Assisted living at a density not to exceed 60 units at a maximum size of 500 square feet per unit. ' All other uses shall be prohibited. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the above definition, the Planning Director shall make the interpretation. Develooment Plans: The Property shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. With the exception of Plan C, the plans may be prepared, subject to City approval, in conjunction with Site Plan approval for a specific use and must be prepared and approved before commencement of the construction of any improvements on the site. Plan A: Plan B: Plan C: Plan D: Plan E: Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan Site Plans Concept Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area Final Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area Landscape Plan for Balance of Property Imorovements: The developer of the Property shall install and pay for the following: A. Storm Water Drainage System, which provides parking lot catch basins which will feed into the existing intake with no sediment or holding pond to be created on site. B. Landscaping and Site Restoration vlotkp Other 1. Soecial Conditions: The applicant will be required to enter into a Development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees to guarantee compliante with the conditions of approval. Setbacks: The following setbacks shall apply: Rear lot line: Building 50' Parking As currently exists; no additional parking Side lot line: Building 50' Parking No parking Lake Drive: Building 35' Parking 25' Hidden Ct.: Building 50' Parking 35' Interior lot lines: In the event the Property is subdivided, there shall be a zero setback requirement provided the requirements of City Code are met either through access easements or satisfactory Party Wall Agreements. Landscape requirements within the buffering areas are as set forth on the Concept Landscape Plan for Peripheral Area Dated March 19, 1999. The Concept Plan shall be used as a guide. A Final Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area shall be submitted as a part of the Site Plan review process and shall incorporate the following: All open areas shall be landscaped, rockscaped or covered with plantings or lawn material. The existing landscaping as labeled on the Plan C shall remain the same. There shall be landscaped, undulating berms at the rear, south and Hidden Court lot lines at the locations depicted on Plan C. The height of the berming shall range generally from approximately 965 feet as shown at the Site Section line to approximately 958 feet at the southeast corner of the site. Because the elevation of the Property is higher than the adjacent residential properties to the east, the highest berming shall be in that area. The height of the berm leading from the southeast corner to the intersection with Hidden Court and from the existing berm at the south edge of the driveway along Hidden Court shall undulate and be sloped so as to accommodate the height of the existing catch basin as shown on Plan C. Selection of species of plant materials and spacing thereof along the berms shall be made at the time of preparation and approval of Plans D and E and shall be made to complement the species used in adjacent landscaping as well as that used in Plans D and E, except that the spacing of plant materials on the berms which are behind adjacent residential properties to the east shall be at a density which will discourage pedestrians from standing on the berm and viewing down into the resident's yards and homes. vlotkp 4. Development Site Coverage and Building Height. a. The standard for hard surface coverage is 65%. b. More than one principal structure may be placed on the Property. The maximum building height shall be two stories. One steeple shall be permitted if the use includes a church. There is no maximum height restriction for the steeple. Building Materials and Design The intent is to create improvements which are compatible with the residential character of the immediate neighborhood and with the style and materials used in the existing church improvements. Any sketches or elevations submitted along with this application are schematic only and are not intended to be representative of any future improvements. Only the elevations submitted at Site Plan approval application will govern the construction of future improvements. All materials shall be durable and of high quality. Major surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass, stucco, architecturally treated concrete, cast in place panels, decorative block, cedar siding, vinyl siding in conjunction with support materials, or other approved low maintenance material equivalent as determined by the City. Color may be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Block shall have a weathered, polished, or broken face.' Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible-appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. Ail exterior process machinery, tanks, HVAC and mechanical equipment shall be fully screened with compatible materials. The buildings shall have interesting detailing compatible with the character of the immediate area. Ail walls shall be given architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping; there shall be no underdeveloped backsides of buildings. Architecturally aesthetic parapets and sloped roofs, or the appearance of sloped roofs when viewed from the sides of the buildings, shall be permitted. Provided this requirement is met and provided all roof mounted equipment is screened, there shall be no limitation as to the amount of non-sloped area when viewed from above any building. vlotkp Trash collection areas shall be screened and shall be considered an "accessory structure" as described above and shall not be permitted within the rear or side buffering areas. Access. No access will be permitted offHidden Lane. The number and location of access points offLake Drive shall be determined at Site Plan approval. 8. Storage. No outdoor storage shall be permitted. Signage. A sign plan shall be submitted as part of the Site Plan review process. One Project sign shall be permitted at each entry off Lake Drive, each shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area and each shall not exceed five feet in height. One monument sign will be permitted at the location indicated on the Concept Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area with a maximum display area of 96 square feet and a maximum height of twelve feet. Wall signs shall not be permitted. Building Directory signs, not to exceed 8' above the sidewalk, shall be permitted for Office Building use. 10. Lighting. Lighting of the parking and peripheral areas shall use fixtures and shields which direct the light away from adjacent residential areas. Light poles shall be limited to a height of 20'. 11. Parking. All parking shall be surface parking~ The parking stall requirement shall be: Church and/or Church and School: Office: Assisted Living: Per City Code Per City Code · 5/Unit, conditioned upon satisfactory proof of adequate parking In the event the City approves of an agreement, and such an agreement is entered into, which provides for the sharing of parking among and between the owner of the Property and the owner(s) of nearby properties, the number of parking stalls required on the Property shall be reduced in accordance with the terms of said agreement and the combined number of available parking stalls shall therefore permit an increase in the size of the building to be constructed on the Property. Except for the provision for Church usage within the PUD, the requirements of this amendment to the PUD shall not be in effect until such time as a Site Plan is approved for construction of an addition or additions to the existing Church building or the demolition of the existing church building and the construction of new improvements on the Property. vlotkp SIGN PLAN C CONCEPT LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR PERIPHERAL AREA ~P.U.D AMENDMENT PLAN ~FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH SITE LOTUS REALTY SERVICES,INC --. O}?ICE BU![,'i)!~:G - ' .-~ , ASSISTED LIVING ~, ~E DRIVI CATCH BASIN ~NEW BERM & LANDSCAPE EXISTING -t~ILIURCH LANQSCApE EXISTING BUFFER HOME ROAD HOME . P.U.D AMENDMENT PLAN F..AM_. !._L._Y_..QF_~HRIST LUTHERAN_._ .CHURCH SITE LOTUS KEALTY SERVICES,INC. STAFF REVISED The standards have been revised. All new information is in bold and outdated information has been struck through. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley (Family of Christ Lutheran Church) The purpose of this amendment to the existing PUD is to provide specific alternatives for the use of Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley, consisting of 3.67 acres ("the Property") as follows: Permitted Uses: Church Including church sponsored school. Office Professional and business office, non retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on site provided that no more than 20% of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Residential Assisted living at a density not to exceed 60 units at a maximum size of 500 square feet per unit. All other uses shall be prohibited. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the above definition, the Planning Director shall make the interpretation. Development Plans: The Property shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. With the exception of Plan C, the plans may be prepared, subject to City apprOval, in conjunction with Site Plan approval for a specific use and must be prepared and approved before commencement of the construction of any improvements on the site. Plan A: Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan Plan B: Site Plans Plan C: Concept Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area Plan D: Final Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area Plan E: Landscape Plan for Balance of Property Improvements: The developer of the Property shall install and pay for the following: A. Storm Water Drainage System, which provides parking lot catch'basins which will feed into the existing intake with no sediment or holding pond to be created on site. B. Landscaping and Site Restoration Hidden Valley Design Standards Page 2 Other 1. Special Conditions: The applicant will be required to enter into a Development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. Setbacks: The following setbacks shall apply: Rear lot line: Building 50' NO REAR YARD SETBACKS-two front yards Side lot line: Building 50' Lake Drive: Building 35' Hidden Ct.: Building 50' Parking As currontly exists; no additional parking Parking No parking 50' Parking 25' (existing); 35' (required) Parking 35' Interior lot lines: In the event the Property is subdivided, there shall be a zero setback requirement provided the requirements of City Code are met either through access easements or satisfactory Party Wall Agreements. Landscape requirements within the buffering areas are as set forth on the Concept Landscape Plan for Peripheral Area Dated March 19, 1999. The Concept Plan shall be used as a guide. A Final Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area shall be submitted as a part of the Site Plan review process and shall incorporate the following: ao All open areas shall be landscaped, rockscaped or covered with plantings or lawn material. The existing landscaping as labeled on the Plan C shall remain the same. bo There shall be landscaped, undulating berms at the rear, south and Hidden Court lot lines at the locations depicted on Plan C. The height of the berming shall range generally from approximately 965 feet as shown at the Site Section line to approximately 958 feet at the southeast comer of the site. Because the elevation of the Property is higher than the adjacent residential properties to the east, the highest berming shall be in that area. The height of the berm leading from the southeast comer to the intersection with Hidden Court and from the existing berm at the south edge of the driveway along Hidden Court shall undulate and be sloped so as to accommodate the height of the existing catch basin as shown on Plan C. Selection of species of plant materials and spacing thereof along the berms shall be made at the time of preparation and approval of Plans D and E and shall be made to complement the species used in adjacent landscaping as well as that used in Plans D and E, except that the spacing of plant materials on the berms which are behind adjacent residential properties to the east shall be at a density which will discourage pedestrians from standing on the berm and viewing down into the resident's yards and homes. Hidden Valley Design Standards Page 3 Development Site Coverage and Building Height. a. The standard for hard surface coverage is 65%. b. More than one principal structure may be placed on the Property. Co The maximum building height shall be two stories or 40 feet. One steeple shall be permitted if the use includes a church. There is no maximum height restriction for the steeple. Building Materials and Design The intent is to create improvements which are compatible with the residential character of the immediate neighborhood and with the style and materials used in the existing church improvements. Any sketches or elevations submitted along with this application are schematic only and are not intended to be representative of any future improvements. Only the elevations submitted at Site Plan approval application will govern the construction of future improvements. bo All materials shall be durable and of high quality. Major surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass, stucco, architecturally treated concrete, cast in place panels, decorative block, cedar siding, vinyl siding in conjunction with support materials, or other approved low maintenance material equivalent as determined by the City. Color may be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Block shall have a weathered, polished, or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. do All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible-appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, HVAC and mechanical equipment shall be fully screened with compatible materials. eo The buildings shall have interesting detailing compatible with the character of the immediate area. All walls shall be given architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping; there .shall be no underdeveloped backsides of buildings. Architecturally aesthetic parapets and sloped roofs, or the appearance of sloped roofs when viewed from the sides of the buildings, shall be permitted. Provided this requirement is met and provided all roof mounted equipment is screened, Hidden Valley Design Standards Page 4 Access. No access will be permitted off Hidden Lane. The number and location of access points off take Drive shall be determined at Site Plan approval. 8. Storage. No outdoor storage shall be permitted. Signage. A sign plan shall be submitted as part of the Site Plan review process. One Project sign shall be permitted at each entry off on Lake Drive, eaoh the sign shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area and each shall not'eXceed five feet in height. One monument sign will be permitted at the location indicated on the Concept Landscape Plan for Peripheral Buffering Area with a maximum display area of 96 square feet and a maximum height of twelve feet. Wall signs shall not be permitted. Building Directory signs, not to exceed 8' above the sidewalk, shall be permitted for Office Building use. 10. Lighting. Lighting of the parking and peripheral areas shall use fixtures and shields which direct the light away from adjacent residential areas. Light poles shall be limited to a height of 20'. 11. Parking. All parking shall be surface parking. The parking stall requirement shall be: Church and/or Church and School: Office: Assisted Living:. Per City Code Per City Code 5/Unit, conditioned upon satisfactory proof of adequate parking In the event the City approves of an agreement, and such an agreement is entered into, which provides for the sharing of parking among and between the owner of the Property and the owner(s) of nearby properties, the number of parking stalls required on the Property shall be reduced in accordance with the terms of said agreement and the combined number of available parking stalls shall therefore permit an increase in the size of the building to be constructed on the Property. 12. Lot Area. The minimum lot area shall be one (1) acre. The minimum lot frontage shall be 100 feet and lot depth 150 feet. Except for the provision for Church usage within the' PUD, the requirements of this amendment to the PUD shall not be in effect until such time as a Site Plan is approved for construction of an addition or additions to the existing Church building or the demolition of the existing church building and the construction of new improvements on the Property, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, APRIL 21, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE PROPOSAL: Request for PUD APPLICANT: Family of Christ Lutheran Church Amendment to Rezone Property LOCATION: 275 Lake Drive East NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicants, Family of Christ Lutheran Church requesting an amendment to the Hidden Valley PUD to allow church facilities, assisted living facilities or offices as permitted uses and to incorporate specific design parameters for future development of Lot 1, Block 7, Hidden Valley on property located south of Lake Drive East and east of Hidden Court, 275 Lake Drive East. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. make a recommendation to the City Council. The commission will then Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on April 8, 1999. Z w ,~ F-z w X Z ,.-, ~ ~ ',~o Oa::z ,I.-z OhO Z Z r,s~ rr~o f,..u X .zw~ O>~m 0 -r o w ~0m~ -- Z ~Z 0 0 z~ n--hz z~ uJ>w zw~ ~-5 ___co ..,,z, z ...1 Z uJZ I-..- '::D ~r'~ ZZ wWZ w T C) o0 ,,~Z ~oZ: ~0 (,,) Z>~ Z o >~ ~ ~w~ w~ -w ~< 0 < ~ ~z zo z T ~-~ n- ~Z ~TuJ 7~ NO2~ 0 m~.T 0 w'r~ rrO:~ wzw o~ ~z wO~ ZZLU On~ ~T Z ~Z ~o ~Wz zWz WZ W~ ~z z ~z o d~o ~ o w_~z · ~D eo f.D OLW ~>Z W ~C uJ (.,) o. ILl ~0 T ~z~ rrw~ -J Oz n ZW Z o ~ 5 z z ,.,.r z ~ >w .,J ~rOz o--.~ ~o~ Ozw >,, E~>W z_ ~w~ OoW TWT 031.Uz IIJ T · ,,~ w z o ~>,~ rri :~ uJ 0 ao r..~ za:~ ~ZuJ Oz~ 0 u..I ~ u.I ~. z '-r Z o~ o~m~0 0 I Z o~z~ o~ z~ ~z ~ oX March 27, 1999 Kevin Joyce, Chair City of Chanhassen Plannifig Commission 6990 City Center Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Commissioner Joyce: We are writing to express our concerns regarding the request for re-zoning made by Family of Christ Lutheran Church (275 Lake Drive East). We appreciate the Church's efforts to inform us of their plans. However, we believe that the proposed Office or Assisting Living uses are not in the best interest of the surrounding neighborhood and therefore not in the best interest of the community. We purchased our homes with the expectation that the church's property was zoned for church use and would retain that use in the future. The proposed alternative uses are likely to have a detrimental impact on the quality and character of our neighborhood and thus materially redtice our property vhlues. The Church appears to base its justification for the 'requested rezoning on questionable arguments. The Church's representatives have asserted in neighborhood meetings that they face a hardship because they are not able to identify another church that could.pay the desired price for their propertY so that they can make the necessary profit to finance a new church. Ifa homeowner in our neighborhood were unable to obtain a desired selling price so that they could finance a bigger home for their growing family, would the Commission accept that logic as a hardship allowing rezoning? We think not. It appears to us that the Church has identified the alternative uses primarily to meet tl~e needs of the buyer/developer so as to strike a deal that meets profit goals. Has the community identified a pressing need for these uses that cfinnot be. accommodated on other available land? The Church's agent also asserts that if the property is rezoned, the buyer/developer will never[heless continue efforts to resell the property to a church. We think that this is a/'use; the developer will have little incentive to sell to a church since the proposed alternative uses are likely to be far more profitable to the developer. The Church should not qualify for special treatment under the zoning laws simply because they are a Church. No one is guaranteed to make a profit on real estate or to receive the appraised market value when selling property. Some of us have taken losses on real estate in the past, so we fully sympathize with the Church. Nevertheless, we do not think it is fair for the Church to expect us to bear the burden of their situation. The Church's agent has asserted that the city ought to accommodate the Church's re~luest because the Church provides a community benefit. If that is the case, should we expect the IRS to recognize the resulting loss in our property value as a tax-deductible charitable contribution? If the Commission grants this request based on the logic of community benefit, we think it would amount to 'a kind of"public taking" of private property vfilue, akin to coercing us into making an in-kind contribution to the Church's building fund. We are not convinced that the Church has made all reasonable efforts to secure a buyer for its building. The Chanhassen Villager reports that, "According to several pastors, at least a couple of local churches are interested in buying the property" (March 25, 1999, p. 18). ffthe Church does not receive their hoped for selling price, it does not mean they will have to close their doors or leave town. Perhaps they will have to add another service and build their new facility in phases, or meet in a public building for a time while they save the funds for their new facility as other churches are doing. We all face similar kinds of temporary inconveniences fi.om time to time, which require sacrifice and perseverance to overcome. It hardly seems fitting that the Church should characterize these sacrifices as a community hardship compelling us to underwrite their move throhgh the devaluation of our neighborhood and property. For these reasons, we oppose the request for rezoning fqr any use other than PUD with conditional use for a church. We reserve the right to assert any additional arguments and statements of fact without prejudice in future proceedings regarding this matter. Sincerely, Lynn and Dave Jossi ' ., 250 Hidden Lane, Chanhassen April 8, 1999 'Craig Peterson, Chairman · City of Chanhassen Planning Commission 6990 City Center Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Commissioner Peterson: We are writing to express our concerns regarding the request for re-zoning made by Family of Christ Lutheran Church (275 Lake Drive East). The Church has been a good neighbor and we appreciate their efforts to inform us of their plans and solicit our input. However, we believe that the proposed Office or Assisting Living uses are not in the best interest of the surrounding neighborhood and therefore not in the best interest of the community. We purchased our homes with the expectation that the church's property was zoned for church use and would retain that use in the future. The proposed alternative zoning uses are likely to have a detrimental impact on the quality and character of our neighborhood and thus materially reduce property our values. The Church appears to base its justification for the requested rezoning on questionable arguments. The Church's representatives have asserted in neighborhood meetings that they face a hardship because they are not able to identify another church that could pay the desired price for their property so that they can make the necessary profit to finance a new church. Ifa homeowner in our neighborhood were unable to obtain a desired selling price so that they could finance a bigger home for their growing family, would the Commission accept that logic as a hardship allowing rezoning? We think not. It appears to us that the Church has identified the alternative uses primarily to meet the needs of the buyer/developer. Has the community identified a pressing need' for these uses that cannot be accommodated on other available land.'? The Church's agent also asserts that if the property is rezoned, the buyer/developer will nevertheless continue efforts to sell the property to another church. We think the developer will have little incentive to do so since the proposed alternative uses are likely to be far more profitable to the developer. However, the mere uncertainty about the future use of the land would result in an immediate loss in property value for surrounding neighbors. Although we believe in the value of the Church to the community, we do not think that qualifies it for special treatment under the zoning 'laws. No one is guaranteed to make a profit on real estate or to receive the appraised market value when selling property. We ourselves took a loss on real estate in the past, so we fully sympathize with the Church's situation. Nevertheless, we do not think it is fair for the Church to expect us to bear the burden of their situation. Basing this request on the logic of community benefit would amount to a kind of"public taking" of private property value, akin to coercing us into making an in-kind contribution to the Church's building fund. Would the IRS recognize the resulting loss in our property value as a tax-deductible charitable contribution? Given that Chanhassen is a growing community, we are not convinced that the Church will be unable to find another church to purchase its property. Recently, the Chanhassen Villager reported that, "According to several pastors, at least a couple of local churches are interested in buying the property" (March 25, 1999, p. 18). If the Church does not receive the hoped-for selling price, they could build their new facility in phases or meet in a public facility for a time while they save for their new building as other churches have done. We know that such a situation would pose a temporary inconvenience, but we do not think it qualifies as a community hardship compelling us to underwrite their move through the devaluation of our neighborhood and property. For these reasons, we oppose the request for rezoning for any use other than PUD with conditional use for a church. We reserve the right to assert any additional arguments and facts without prejudice in any future proceedings regarding this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, © Douglas and susan McCarthy 8001 Hidden Court, Chanhassen Phone: 937-7664