15-18 Findings of FactCITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE:
Application of Estate Development Corporation and Michael & Leah Glaccum for Rezoning and
Subdivision approval with Variance.
On July 7, 2015, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to
consider the application of Estate Development Corporation and Michael & Leah Glaccum for
rezoning of the property from Rural Residential, RR, to Single -Family Residential, RSF, and
preliminary plat approval to create four lots and one outlet with a variance from the bluff setback
requirement in that they propose to eliminate the bluff area on the property. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed rezoning, subdivision and variance
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 Rural Residential District (RR).
2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential Low Density use.
The legal description of the property is:
Beginning at a point in the center of the Public Road 331 feet East of the Quarter Section
corner between Sections 2 and 3, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th
Principal Meridian; thence North along a North and South road 331.8 feet; thence East
402 feet to Gust Johnson's land; thence South 2 degrees 20 minutes West 332.2 feet to an
East and West road; thence West along said road 385.5 feet to place of beginning,
situated in the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 116
North, Range 23 West, Carver County, Minnesota.
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 since the zoning is consistent with the land use designation of
the property, utilizes existing infrastructure and provides housing opportunities.
b. The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the
area, which are single-family detached houses.
c. The proposed use conforms to all performance standards contained in the Zoning
Ordinance, subject to approval of the bluff setback variance.
d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is
proposed since the use is similar to surrounding uses.
e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not
overburden the city's service capacity since adequate infrastructure is available to the
site.
f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the
property.
5. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible
adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings
regarding them are:
a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional
plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan;
c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm
water drainage are suitable for the proposed development;
d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by the
subdivision ordinance;
e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage;
f The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and
g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
1) Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
2) Lack of adequate roads.
3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
6. 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. The proposed variance eliminates a small area of bluff on the
site but preserves a larger natural area adjacent to the wetland at the bottom of the hill.
b. There are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance, which include
the fact that only a small area of the site is classified as bluff while the remainder of
the steep sloped areas can be altered on either side of the bluff. "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.
Development of the site for single-family homes is a reasonable use of the parcel.
Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone,
but permits the efficient and logical development of the site.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the landowner since only a minor portion of the site is classified as bluff.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality, but would
permit the development of homes similar to those in the development to the east,
which extend in to the steep sloped areas surrounding the wetland.
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, which
is not applicable to this development.
7. The planning report #2015-18 dated July 7, 2015, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is
incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Rezoning, and
Preliminary Plat with Variances subject to the conditions of the staff report.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 7a' day of July, 2015.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY
Its Chairman