15-16 Findings of FactCITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE:
Application of Arbor Glen Chanhassen, LLC and Gianetti Properties, LLC for a Concept and
Preliminary Planned Unit Development approval to Rezone from A2, Agricultural Estate District,
to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential; Subdivision approval to create 21 lots and 4
outlots with a variance for setbacks; and a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within
the Bluff Creek Overlay District, on 8.29 acres — Arbor Glen — Planning Case 2015-16.
On September 15, 2015, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Arbor Glen Chanhassen, LLC and Gianetti Properties,
LLC for concept and preliminary Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat approval with a
variance and conditional use permit for development of property. The Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on the proposed subdivision 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
1. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A2.
2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density use.
3. The legal description of the property is:
All that part of the northerly 730.00 feet of the North Half of the Southwest Quarter of
Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, as measured along the West line thereof and lying
westerly of the center line of State Highway No. 101. The centerline of said Highway No.
101 is described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of the Southwest Quarter
of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, a distance of 632.52 feet east of the Northwest
corner of said Southwest Quarter; the bearing of the North line of the Southwest Quarter is
assumed to be South 88 degrees 46 minutes 29 seconds East. Thence South 4 degrees 24
minutes 47 seconds West a distance of 413.72 feet thence on a tangential curve, concave to
the east having a central angle of 11 degrees 38 minutes 21 seconds and a radius of 1962.29
feet a distance of 398.62 feet. Thence South 7 degrees 13 minutes 34 seconds East tangent to
the last described curve, a distance of 217.65 feet thence on a tangential curve, concave to the
west having a central angle of 14 degrees 29 minutes 17 seconds and a radius of 1166.15 feet
a distance of 294.88 feet, more or less, to a point on the South line of the North Half of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and there terminating said point a
distance of 660.44 feet easterly of the Southwest corner of the North Half of the Southwest
Quarter.
All in Carver County, Minnesota and subject to all easements of record.
4. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible
adverse effects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) effects 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 this
chapter;
e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant adverse 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.
5. 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 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 subject to the granting of the setback variance.
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.
6. 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 construction of a single-family home is a normal use of the property in a
residential district, which is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the PUD -
R district being proposed. Providing adequate access to the site dictated the
configuration of the lots on the western edge of the development. This configuration also
forced the location of the buildings on the site, which require a variance to create a
suitable building pad.
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 alignment of the access road from Lyman Boulevard was established with
the development of the property to the north. The difficulty is that the house pad is
pushed further to the west, resulting in the need for a variance.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is not based on economic considerations alone.
The applicant desires to construct single-family homes on the site consistent with the land
use designation of the property.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The access to the site was determined with previous development approvals for
the property to the north.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality (similar home
sizes).
Finding: The homes proposed with the development will be compatible with existing
housing in the area. The houses to the west are set back approximately 75 feet from the
property line with a dense area of trees and shrubs.
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.
7. Conditional Use Permit
a. The proposed development will not be detrimental to or degrade the public health, safety,
comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. The proposed
houses are compatible with neighboring development. Storm water management will be
included as part of the development.
b. The proposed development will be consistent with the objectives of the city's
comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance subject to the variance approval on the
western two lots.
c. The proposed development will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to
be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general
vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area.
d. The proposed development will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned
neighboring uses.
e. The proposed development will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,
water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the
proposed use.
f. The proposed development will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
g. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or
the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare, odors, rodents, or trash.
h. The proposed development will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not
create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
i. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar
access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
j. The proposed development will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
k. The proposed development will not depreciate surrounding property values.
1. The proposed development will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in
the Conditional Use article.
8. The planning report #2015-16 dated September 15, 2015, prepared by Robert Generous, et al,
is incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve rezoning the
property from A2 to PUD -R; Preliminary Plat creating 21 lots and 4 outlots with a variance from
the perimeter PUD setback requirement; and a Conditional Use Permit to develop within the
Bluff Creek Overlay District.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this I51h day of September, 2015.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
Andrew Aller, Its Chairman
g:\plan\2015 planning cases\2015-16 arbor glenTindings of factdoc