Findings of Fact and RecommendationI3 -o-1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IILLM
Application of Oppidan, Inc. to Rezone approximately 14 acres from Agricultural Estate (A -2) to
Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R); Site Plan Review with Variances for a 155 -
unit Apartment Building; and a Land Use Map Amendment from Residential -Low Density and
Office, to Residential -Low and High Density and Office and Residential -High Density.
On April 16, 2013, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Oppidan, Inc. to rezone approximately 14 acres from
Agricultural Estate (A -2) to Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R); Site Plan Review
with Variances for a 155 -unit Apartment Building; and a Land Use Map Amendment from
Residential -Low Density and Office, to Residential -Low and High Density and Office and
Residential -High Density. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the
proposed rezoning preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard
testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A -2.
The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential -Low Density and Office.
The legal description of the property is:
That port of the Sodthwc,f Quarter u' :he Seathwes: Quarb.:r of Sc:tior, 10, Township 116,
Range Z? .ird the Serh wee' Qrtor±er of fl-e %or.hwest Cuar`.er of `ecticr 1.,, Township 116,
Rarge 23, J:x er Cc jr-, Virresota, described as follows:
8, -:hrrh at -ho 'I %,,,
' .arrer of said Section 10, It.r, =e or a a >- �sir-cd bearing of tiarth
d_,r _Jr riaatu 43
_cr�ds heat along the West lire o' soil
F _.r chat_`. Quarter, a
distance of ij2f, n�;
fl-ence South /9 degrees 32 rniri -e.
-,.ends East, a distance of
'77,7,' fcc,,; theree Sou +F
f', degrees 32 minutes 20 securdc
C� t a dls -,arce of 100.44 feet;
H,r -:. 7outF. 78 d grere
7.^ minute- z0 seconds Eas', n di -or
^.f .'4.'4 feet; thence
Sc -nth 74 degrees r it
i- i0 = .::nn'1.; Eos:, a di -anof
i - , t; thence South 47
de':n +•- 7 rrfnutns 20 -
.cond, Ea -, n distance of 7:5.4.5 ,it
- r -c Nor -.h °' degrees 42
mir ties 4C record- Lci_t,
a di -orra o` r4.58 feet- th nze -
j.1 _'earees '7 minutes 20
seconds East, a di,
c' 1 7, .2 'e =.t; dierce °cuth bd dears I I ' rain ��ies 20 seconds East,
a distance of 164.E i
t; `h _nr >- nth r. d -:r -- 1 / r.lr r ^s
4 conds Vest, a distance
of 824.'0 gtet to ft r
r +f -ply ri'It =way in :? Tr:rk Hi.h:.
-nt r ;rote North 85 dcaro,c.
A minutes 50 se':.rd
Jlorr rid rrr.h aiy rich of wcy,
a d1. -arc- of33,f, -8. fee -,;
ther;.a South 56 de.,rne�'
It r,it, cite L i J =. " :; ul:r
nd northerly right of way, a
distance of 153.9 e-_,
-1 -cr _ ,r .f 8' i r :: 51 r it rte.:;
-,.Dads !Nest along said
northerly right r v 1r n
9i =?a -" J LS.I t ,k .. t Ili
-' the Ncrtbwest Quarter of
Section 1., Tc,..r =rif
�gr'.r h r .rh 1 d u -
'ir w:rs :eC scr,onds West along
raid wcs, line e` tY P:Srth:,
C,iarr r, n littpn, �'i - .-
; the point of beginning. Thi;
tract corsairs 18.' acr -
c` lac d. r-, >r -r I_a -, and ;uP1 :-
rir7h`, of way it existing
rcun'.y road and vl -
«a1', J -1 a11 -inert. c' i�c r.rti
4. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible
adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings
regarding them are:
a) The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City
Comprehensive Plan.
b) The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of
the area.
c) The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance.
d) The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is
proposed.
e) The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not
overburden the city's service capacity.
f) Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the
property.
5. Site Plan Review
a) The proposed site plan is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's
development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping,
and other plans that may be adopted;
b) The proposed development is consistent with the site plan review requirements of
city code;
C) The proposed site plan preserves the site in its natural state to the extent
practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal, preserving as permanent open
space the land north of 78`h Street West and designing the site in keeping with the
general appearance of the;
d) The proposed site plan creates a harmonious relationship of building and open
space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a
visual relationship to the development;
e) The proposed site plan creates a functional and harmonious design for structures
and site features, with special attention to the following:
1) An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community;
2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of
the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and
neighboring structures and uses; and
4) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives
and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public
streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior
circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement
and amount of parking.
f) The proposed site plan protects adjacent and neighboring properties through
reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers,
preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately
covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring
land uses.
6. 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 granting of the variance is in keeping with the purpose and intent
of the zoning ordinance. The reduction of one internal parking stall due to
locating trash and recycling inside provides enhanced site design. While the
parking could be met through the use of compact parking stalls, the use of
standard size stalls is preferred.
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.
Finding: The practical difficulty with.the parking standard is that while it could
be provided, it would necessitate the use of exterior trash and recycling locations
or require the use of compact parking stalls which are not preferred.
C) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations
alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is not based upon economic considerations,
but is to permit the development to provide interior trash and recycling facilities.
d) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the landowner.
Finding: The reason for the request is to permit the trash and recycling inside the
building.
e) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The reduction of one interior parking stall will not alter the essential
character of the area. The site provides adequate surface parking to accommodate
required site parking.
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: This does not apply to this request.
The planning report #2013 -07 dated April 16, 2013, prepared by Kate Aanenson, et al, is
incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the project.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 16`h day of April, 2013.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
Its airman