H-1.b.i. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Discussion - Land Use Requests "- Jbt,
CITY OF C HANHASSE N
Chanhassen is a Community for Life-Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow
Land use Requests
There two requests for reconsideration of proposed land use designation.
The city has received two requests for consideration of designated land use as a part of the update to the
2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Tim and Diane Erhart are requesting two issues. One is removal of an area from the Bluff Creek Overlay
District, approximately 3.2 acres which is currently guided low density. The second request is for a dual
guiding of the property for High Density Residential and Office. Following is analysis for your
consideration.
Letter from Mr. Erhart—amended request
After further consideration in addition to our recent request to modem the Bluff Creek Overlay District
Map as it relates to land east of Powers Blvd we additionally request a change to type of use permitted.
We request that the area adjacent to Powers Blvd be dual guided. Currently the area is guided
office/industrial only. We believe that an alternative good use would be high density residential. The area
is well served by the nearby TH#212 intersection, accessed via Powers Blvd. We understand that a bus
station will be constructed in the immediate area as well.
A residential use would allow residents use of the extensive trail system (planned) in the area as well as
convenient access to Fox Woods Preserve.Moreover, residents would have access to Bandimere Park by
a nature trail. We also believe that offices would also allow use of the outdoor activity provided however
it could be that high density residential may even provide more opportunities for people to enjoy.
History of the site
• Bluff Creek Overlay District created in 1998 (See attached Overlay District code)
• 3 acres re-guided with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan from Low Density to Office
O Land use amendment to allow 7 additional acres medical office.
Q A medical office plan was given site plan approval in 2009 but was never constructed.
Erhardt Acres gross Land Use- Office Land Use High Denisty
Existing land use Requested land use potential sq.ft. 8-16 units an acre
potential units
9.5 acres 9.5 +3.2= 12.7 166,000 sq. ft. 101 -203 units
PH 952.227.1100• WWWA.Chanhassen.nln.Us• FX952.227.1110
7700 MARKET BOULEVARD • PO BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN • MINNESOTA 55317
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 2 of 18
Original request from Mr.Erhart
Introduction
Thanks for taking the time to discuss our request to reexamine and update the Bluff Creek
Overlay District(BCOD) ordinance mapping as it applies to our property in south Chanhassen.
The specific area of concern is the approximate 20 acres adjacent to the south east quadrant of
the TH #212 and Powers Boulevard interchange.
To assist with the discussion, we have prepared several maps one of which shows the general
area bordered by Powers Blvd to the west, Lake Riley to the east, Lyman Blvd to the North and
W 96th St. (extended) in the south. This area consists of approximately 360 acres. Two detailed
maps are also enclosed which focus on 20± acre area where the BCOD applies.
First Request: Remove Erhart Property from Bluff Creek Overlay District.
Purpose of First Request:
The Introductory sentence of the BCOD refers to the Bluff Creek Watershed Area. Starting with
the second sentence and all references thereafter the term Bluff Creek corridor is employed. IT is
clear from a reading of the BCOD ordinance that the intent is to apply development restrictions
to "land areas abutting and in the vicinity of the (Bluff Creek) watercourse and its tributaries"
(sec. 20-1552). To emphasize the focus on proximity, the word corridor is used four times in the
Purposes section of the ordinance. The Ordinance also purposed to "Foster the creation of a
greenway connecting Lake Minnewashta Regional park and the Minnesota River Valley". In
addition, other sentences are included that clearly indicated that this ordinance was intended to
be applied to the corridor(and some cases a tributary)but not all lands in the Bluff Creek
watershed or lands at a distance from Bluff Creek.
The Bluff Creek watercourse lies nearly one quarter mile from the nearest point of our property,
which demonstrates that our property is not "in the vicinity of Bluff Creek". Second, a four lane
highway(Powers Blvd) separates our property from the Bluff Creek Corridor. Third, there are no
tributaries of Bluff Creek on our property. In fact, there are not tributaries east of Powers Blvd.
All water leaving the area east of Powers Blvd flows through pipes and road ditches, all man-
made devices.
Conclusion:
Having our land included in the BCOD is inconsistent with the stated purpose and intent of
BCOD and therefore is a misapplication of the ordinance. Therefore, we request that our land be
removed from the BCOD.
Second Request: If the city cannot agree to remove our land from the BCOD then:
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18,2017
Page 3 of 18
1. Adjust the Primary Zone line to a position where one can clearly distinguish why the line
would be placed in such a location. In other words, there would be one or more features
of the land that differentiate one side of the line from the other side. This is in contrast to
the arbitrary location of the line as it is now and where no one can differentiate one side
from the other.
2. Adjust the BCOD boundary lines such that only those areas with permanent natural
features such as bluffs, wetlands, and buffers between conflicting land uses are included
within the primary and secondary zone.
3. Guide the entire 12.7 acres within the proposed BCOD limits illustrated on the maps to
office, industrial or institutional use.
4. Guide the 1.8 acres directly south of New Street for public use and relocated storm pond.
Purpose of Second Request
1. Amending the current plan and BCOD limits will allow the best use of the 12.7 acre area
site (titled Fox Office Campus). Its location and direct access to the TH#212/Powers
Blvd interchange makes this area ideal for office, industrial, or institutional use.
2. Convert the 3.2 acre area currently guided residential to office, industrial or institutional
use as this area can only be accessed through the area already guided for such use.
3. Retain the existing natural area(RIM pond and north/south wooded hill) which serves as
a buffer between future residential development to the east and the planned office park to
the west.
4. Maintain the existing(private) trail connection between a future trail head at New Street
(see map) and Fox Woods Preserve. This trail runs through the center of the wooded
buffer area. Once development occurs this trail will be designated for public use.
5. Provide space for community facilities including a trail head and trail head parking at
Powers Blvd directly south of New Street.
6. Allow space for the relocation of the existing storm pond to the south side of the New
Street (map).
7. Provide space for a planned lift station intended to serve the area south of Pioneer Trial
8. Provide parking and service access to the lift station's stationary equipment.
Bluff Creek Overlay District
Knowing where to apply the development restriction of the Bluff Creek Overlay District
Ordinance (BCOD) to a property depends primarily on what is included in the Primary and
Secondary Zone and what is not. The ordinance is then applied to all areas of property which lie
within those zones. This specifically determines how the property within the BCOD can be used,
what areas are"undevelopable"vs. "developable", what value the property is to the current
owner and future users, and what tax generation capacity will result for the city when developed.
Which such significant impact, it is critical that the boundary be laid down with great care and
thoughtfulness and with some sense of consistency based on other similar lands within the city.
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 4 of 18
Most importantly, there must be scientific analysis applied (inferred but not described in the
ordinance) to objectively determine the boundaries of the BCOD.
At the time the BCOD ordinance was adopted, the Primary Zone boundary was established
generally through the use of aerial photographs as no "on the ground" survey and/or data was
available for scientifically determining the limits of the zone. The intent(Section 20-1555
Boundary delineation)was that as properties come up for development the landowner was to
provide field data to assist the city in making a determination of the line's final location.
While this process seems to be well intended, the ordinance, while describing the kind of data
requested, is basically silent on how to use the data to establish the actual location of the
delineating line (the one exception is sec 20-1551 which deals with slopes specifically stating
that area exceeding 25% slope should be preserved). No additional guidance or process is given
that would allow one or more individuals,by applying the ordinance's guidelines, to make
similar and consistent determinations of the boundary line's location. It is our view that it should
be inherent in any standard that two reasonably experienced people applying the same standard
would come up with essentially the same conclusion. This is hardly the case with the BCOD.
As a result, this lack of definition leaves it up to the sole discretion of the city staff as to where
the BCOD is established. This arbitrary process could lead to many substantial disagreement, as I
believe it has in the past.
We submit that there must be some"standard" established, which when applied results in a
consistent determination as to the location of the BCOD boundary lines. It is also our view that
the primary criteria for determining this boundary should be permanent features such as
topography and existing wetlands rather than plant cover, a fence or the edge of a field. Nor
should it be based on an existing road or previous use such as agriculture or a building site.
These things are most often created by human activity and change over time. Moreover,
employing tree coverage is problematic as it also changes over time and penalizes the landowner
who cultivates the property for agricultural production would be able to freely develop the
property as there would be no tree cover due to his actions (and subsequently no BCOD). I
believe this is unfair and contrary to the spirit of the ordinance.
That said,where existing tree cover combine with a specific typographic feature forms a buffer
between two conflicting land uses, tree cover may be considered a factor in establishing the
line's location. Trees simply by themselves are not a reason to include land in the Bluff Creek
Overlay District. Typography and wetlands are much more permanent land features and better
define what an appropriate use of the land is for generations to come.
Use of topography and wetlands allow for more obvious and conclusive locations of such
boundaries. Areas where level or gently slope abruptly change to a steep and prolonged slope are
obvious points of separation and should be applied as logical boundary lines as city ordinances
are already established such definitions in code.
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040 -Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 5 of 18
Obvious point
of delineation
Level or gentle Slope greater than 25%
sloping terrain
- - r
Wetland boundaries are established easily through surveying, something that is already required
of every development and should be used to establish boundary line locations as well.
We submit that these two criteria(extensive slopes and wetlands) should be the dominant factors
used to establish the boundary line locations for this application of the BCOD.
Neither the original location of the primary line(generated by aerial photos) nor the adjusted line
(Fairview Clinic project) demonstrate any topographic or wetland features that would distinguish
one side from the other. We therefore submit a proposed new location (described on the enclosed
maps and below) which demonstrates and obvious location for the Primary Zone boundary. This
location clearly exhibits a natural boundary condition where measureable difference exists
between what is "inside"the primary zone and what is "outside".
This proposed line is located where terrain changes abruptly from a rolling terrain to a steep
extended slope.
sY"°Q'
FW'
♦ J 13 Y
8M LMT
-- 32xrac M"OVEDFAMIEIY I Proposed
d scan uw�7 gut{er
1
Area
r
� i : � + � .e tnw•� �
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040 -Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 6 of 18
Conclusion Regarding Request Number Two
1. The area in question lies directly adjacent to the Interstate 212/Powers Blvd interchange
which includes excellent access to the intersection. The area also exhibits great view from
the east bound traffic on TH 21. This makes the area ideally suited for office or industrial
or institutional use.
2. It provides a beautiful setting for users as they are surrounded on three sides by park land.
3. We believe the current BCOD boundary line shown on the current city mapping for the
area is unscientific and arbitrary and should be revised to comply with some reasonable
standard or at least exhibit obviousness as to why it is located where it is.
4. The 3.2 acre area now guided residential is adjacent to the 9.5 acres guided
office/industrial. The only access to the 3.2 acre area is through the 9.5 acre area and in
our view should be guided for office/industrial and/or institutional as well. Moreover, the
area is rather noisy due to traffic from TH#212 making it undesirable for residential use.
5. The 3.2 acres identified on the enclosed map represents an ideal location for a multi-story
office building and its required parking area. It adjoins the 9.5 acre parcel guided
office/industrial and offers a unique site line from eastbound TH 212 traffic.
6. Allows the construction of office space similar in size to Fairview but moved further to
the north and east. This provides for greater separation of uses between the large lot
residential area to the south. This movement also eliminates the requirement for removal
of part of the steep hill which would also then require the construction of a long 12ft high
retaining wall (included in the Fairview plan). Lastly it also eliminates the need to build a
parking ramp as approved with the Fairview site as adequate space for surface parking is
made available with the addition of the 3.2 acres.
7. The 1.8 acres south of the new street would be used for the trail head leading to Fox
Woods Preserve, trail head parking, the relocation of the existing storm pond and a
planned sewer lift station. The proposed trail head parking can also serve as access to the
lift station.
8. It appears that currently the city intends to use this 3.2 acres as additional park land rather
than use the land for its best suited purpose. Even without the 3.2 acres in question,
approximately 52.5% of the 360 acres located in the vicinity is already designated as
open space and is intended to be used by the public as park or wetland. Addition another
3.2 acres of highly developable and potentially tax generating property to an already
expansive natural area will add little noticeable value.
9. The plan shown includes a trail connection to Fox Preserve at two points, starting from
the trail head at New Street. This route is completely wooded and overlooks the five acre
Rim pond to the east and is screened by threes from the proposed office and parking area
to the west. It also contains a smaller pond between the"Y" of the trail on the north end.
The development of the 3.2 acres as office/industrial will have no negative impact on this
trail connection and its amenities. In fact, such a development can easily include internal
connections to the Fox Preserve and area trail system. Including the 3.2 acres as park
does not in any way add to the already great experience that this trail provides.
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040 - Land Use Amendment Request
July 18,2017
Page 7 of 18
10. Lastly the majority of the 3.2 acre area in question is currently used for agriculture as is a
majority of the 9.7 acres already guided office/industrial. This allows easy transition from
the current use to office, industrial or institutional use.
F'H.LQ( n( PROVF t) SI _- f'l AN
-01
' ♦ 141- • � 4,� �C * e `,fes
Op T
it, c j
sit �)
r- — ?fir.. r r
"^•^' POWERS GROSSING PROFESSIONAL CENTER —_
CIIANIIA!:SI:N.MN
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040- Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 8 of 18
T
CONCEPT SKETCH PLANt,;
�►�� +ice„���"��
Opt
r;
♦ i `� �� �c-s,x'� �l-'r �� iT
dot o \ !� - ...... ..
4v�
POWERS
--”"'".+...w^'e"^►-.awe _ r ���. __ _ _. .,... .
Fox WOODS OFFICE PARK
' CHANHASSF.N.MN
Staff response to the Bluff Creek Designation
7 10
Ali&W - 61�, s r' •
rte-sc e s • 1t
.4 f
e-o
er F)
As can be seen, this area contributes to Bluff Creek. At one time,this area drained overland to Bluff
Creek. With urban development,the drainage has been confined in certain areas to pipes and culverts.
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 9 of 18
The drainage pattern on top of the bluff takes local drainage and directs it west towards Powers
Boulevard. It also serves as the EOF for the large water body immediately east of the wooded area.
Lastly,there is a mitigation area located northerly on the property.
Part of the discussion should be about the effects of urbanization on
channel characteristics and flow hydraulics. As the area tributary to
Bluff Creek is converted from prairie and woodland conditions to I
urbanized conditions,the following occurs:
1. Base flow is decreased which leads to a failure to support aquatic
vertebrates. _ - .y
2. The flashiness of the flows increase as water is directed to the
creek faster than under natural conditions.
3. The duration of the elevated flows is increased. Even with the installation of detention ponds, it still
leads to a longer duration of peak flows even if the peak flow is decreased from an urbanized condition
without ponds.
4. All of this leads to increased scouring,head cutting, escarpment formation and sediment loading and
deposition.
5. This increased sediment load falls out of suspension downstream and leads to an embedded condition
meaning there is a diminished fish habitat as the small riffles formed in the cobbled substrate disappear.
This also leads to an increase in water temperature and a decrease in transitivity of light and reduced plant
and plankton production.
It is for this reason that we look at the entire watershed and not just that which is immediately adjacent to
Bluff Creek.
To facilitate the preservation of the natural resources on this property,the city proposed the dedication of
a conservation easement over the primary zone north of the proposed access road and east of the office
building.
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18,2017
Page 10 of 18
ApproxInate Area of Conservation Easement
Abut IY.IO'11
U.
u -
PI
j
,� 1.Y►�M1/Iil l.y
4!
,
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18,2017
Page 11 of 18
BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT EXHIBIT j
14
• � i'' f;'� ti f
-Y S,
�s T� j C
S IIS'
CAI
> V s
Westwood ERHART PROPERTY
CHANHASSEN,MN
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040 -Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 12 of 18
o
am
G r
,'y♦. 'iR�. 1
,'rid •.l• !77`Y.1,4.,
nLA ,�y Y
r- *
I
i
City of r
i
1� 1 IF
Chanhassen
2030 Land Use Plan
t._.I COMMERCIAL
OFFICE
OFFICE INDUSTRIAL
MIXED
.r u
RESIDENTIAL LARGE LOT
(2.5 Acre Minenum 1110 WAcre)
RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY
(Net density 1.2-4 WAcre)
RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY 'b
(Net density 4-8 WAcre)
RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY __
(Net density 8-16 WAcre)
AGRICULTURE
PARKS OPEN SPACE
rj PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC -
S C { K S C
BLUFF CREEK PRIMARY CORRIDOR K t K CK t
POTENTIAL SUPPORT COMMERICAL
t t t
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18,2017
Page 13 of 18
Staffs response to request
1. Taking 3.2 acre out of the overlay district is premature as with the recent Avienda request. The
applicant withdrew their request and will make a request as of a site plan review
2. Duel guiding 9.9 - 12.7 acres to High Density or Office would permits up to 112-203 units.
Based on the housing study we have sufficient land guided for high density.
LAND USE TABLE IN 5-YEAR STAGES
I
Fsisting and Planned land Use Table(in acres)
Allowea Density
Within Urban Service Area Ranve iousin2 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Change 2015-2040
Minimum Maximum
Residential Land Uses
Low Density Residential(developed) 1.2 4 3,829 3,900 4,175 4,451 4,506 4,522 693
Low Density Residential(vacant) 881 717 442 166 41 -
Medirml Density Residential(developed) 4 8 300 313 349 387 443 499 199
Medium Density Residential(vacant) 199 186 1 150 112 56 -
High Density Residential(developed) 8 16 68 100 130 190 249 289 221
High Density Residential(vacant) 149 189 159 99 40
Meted Use Primarily Residential*(developed) 8 20 27 39 47 54 56 58 31
Mixed Use Primarily ResideFti-al* vacant31 19 11 4 2 -
C/I Land Uses Sq.Ft
Commercial(developed) 1/400 206 215 252 290 309 328 1 122
Commercial(vacant) 1 122 113 76 38 19 -
Indrstrial(developed) 1/500 646 752 762 773 808 843 197
Industrial(vacant) 1 197 91 81 70 35 -
Office(developed) 1/300 53 62 133 201 240 280 227
Office(vacant) 227 218 147 79 40 -
Mixed Use Primatily C/1*(developed) 1/400 30 38 52 67 77 86 56
Mixed Use Primarily C/1*(vacant) 56 48 34 19 10
ctrve
Publie/Semi Public Land Uses
Institutional 1204 1,204 1,204 1,204 1,204 1,204
Parks and Recreation 438 457 1 457 457 477 1 477 39
Open Space 944 9441 944 944 994 1,019 75
Roadway Rights of Way 1 1,237 1,237 1,237 1,237 1,237 1,237
Utility -
Railroad
Airport -
Subtotal Semered 10,844 10,842 10,842 10,842 1 10,842 10 842 1,860
Outside Urban Service Area Minimum Maximum 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Change 2015-2040
lot size lot size
Earge Lot Residential 2.5 na 948 948 948 94802TO892,089
Agriculture land use 882 882 882 882
Subtotal nseNere 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830
Undeveloped
Wetlands(within land use designations) - 2,089 2,089 2,089 2,089Open Water,Rivers and Streans 2059 2,059 2,059 2,059Total 14 763 14 761 14 761 14 761 2)
I
Request from Halla's
There are two sites that are being requested for consideration for a land use change
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18,2017
Page 14 of 18
Golf Course Acres gross Current Land Use Requested Land Use
Low Density 1.2-4 u/a High Density 8-16 u/a
Halla Family LP 45.04 85 — 150 units 360—720 units
Mark Halla 12.21
Halla Family LP 12.06 25.87 31 -103 units 207—414 units
Maryanne White 1.69_
Ar►dersen Development-representing the Ron Halla Family
Daniel J.Andersen
3540 Montgomerie Ave
Deephaven,MN
55391
613-812-3324 - t�fetSA h>' R ►a Pe".c..
December 19,2016
RE., Halla Property Located at-10000,Great planed BLVD(Highway 101)and 495 Pioneer Trail
Future comprehensive plan amendment for both locations,This comp plan will be describer}as
EAST AND WEST.The reason for this description Is we believe the use in both locations should be a like
kind application.
In its current state the nursery brings an industrial look and feel whereas the golf course fits in its
location well, but is underutilized for a long-term delivery,
It is our intention to bring continuity to these locations as it seems to be a main intersection that has
more potential for public use.
In looking through the city of Chanhassen we wanted to address the need for a product delivery of a
luxury apartment living, combined with public access.
We feel that what is being proposed does not currently exist in the greater Chanhassen area.With
Highway 101 and Pioneer Trail being a very busy intersection,a high end single family use has no merit,
moreover,there are plenty of different single family representations present,
This concept will show that open space is important to the community and allows the open space to
have a public use and opportunity for walking trails,tennis courts(possible a tennis club not shown on
concepts),basketball courts,and batting cages.As one can see we have kept what we feel is the start of
a wonderful community asset currently in the driving range on the west portion of this proposal.
i
- Y A
ir1�^. .,
► "
r
a �
ra �
asaa q
„ Fa ParktZft
�.
{
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040 - Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 16 of 18
F
of
nhassen `1 d Use Plan
[9- COMMERCIAL
rQ�{-�! OFFICE
CM OFFICE INDUSTRIAL
MIXED
r9 RESIDENTIAL LARGE LOT(2.5 Acre Minimum 1110&Acre) -
rq
Y
RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY
(Net density 12-4&Acre)
RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY
)Net density 4-8 tdAc(e)
d RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY .cT�
(Net density 8-16&Acre) c~
AGRICULTURE
O S!
PARKS OPEN SPACE
PUBLIC SEMI PU13LIC S_s._-vi..X• _S{_ s--•' "�h'�
t ti S S K Y C S 1
BLUFF CREEK PRIMARY CORRIDOR
S S S S S SL S
POTENTIAL SUPPORT COMMERICAL
a �
7
P.N
v
am' o�
T C1c
3-p TK�7f �pr� I4Uu 6!z Y+n 38� y c Iz�vIG
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040-Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 17 of 18
1
tom.oaA-
U,T1T��Dl�s��
�,,, �sssw cert:arz-�3zy �-1�-�u.
t
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan 2040 -Land Use Amendment Request
July 18, 2017
Page 18 of 18
i
Staffs response to request
i
Based on the housing study we have sufficient land guided for high density
gAplan\2040 comp plan\land use requests\erhardt and halla.docx
i
I