PC staff report fpr 7-17-18 - updated 8-3-18CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: July 17, 2018
CC DATE: August 13, 2018
REVIEW DEADLINE: August 15
CASE # 2018-12
BY: KA
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a general concept plan review for a Planned Unit
Development (PUD). The site is currently zoned Rural Residential.
LOCATION: 7141 Galpin Boulevard
APPLICANT: U.S. Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar
PRESENT ZONING: RR Rural Residential
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential 1.2 – 4 units an acre
ACREAGE: Approximately 188 acres gross DENSITY: 2.26 units an acre net
88 acres net
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The developer is requesting conceptual review to consider
rezoning from Agricultural Estate PUD Residential.
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION MAKING:
The Planning Commission is providing the City Council with comments and direction on the
Concept Planned Unit Development. Notice was sent to adjacent properties within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a general concept plan review for a Planned Unit Development
(PUD). The site is currently zoned Rural Residential.
BACKGROUND
In November 2017 the property was listed for sale by Comerica Bank; Trust NA, as personal
representatives of the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprises. On several
occasions the seller’s agents and members of Lennar have met with city staff to begin reviewing
the zoning standards and the best use for the property. In May of 2018 U.S. Home Corporation
entered into an Option Agreement to purchase the property. (from the developer’s narrative)
PROPOSED ACTION:
The Planning Commission provides observations and feedback to the City Council on the Concept
Planned Unit Development.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 2 of 13
Map of property
Parcel and Site Information
Parcel ID Taxpayer GIS
Acreage Land Use Current Zoning
256900030 PRN 8.95 Low Density
1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential
256900020 PRN 149.0 Low Density
1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential
250100100 Paisley Park
Enterprises Inc. 3.23 Low Density
1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential
256900010 PRN 20.78 Low Density
1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential
250100200 PRN 6.62 Low Density
1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential
Total 188.58
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 3 of 13
The surrounding land uses are included in the following table:
Subdivision Zoning Land Use Notes
South Royal Oaks RSF Low Density 13 acres-33 lots
West Woods at Long Acres PUD Low Density 97 acres-115 lots
Wynsong - shoreland district PUD Low Density 9.4 acres 4 units
North Ashling Meadows RSF Low Density 40 acres-51 units
Lake Lucy Ridge RSF Low Density 9 acres-17 units
East Lake Ann Recreational not applicable not applicable
Undeveloped Adjacent LAND
South Gorra Property Zoning Land Use Notes
Rural Residential Low Density 38 (25 net) acres- 50 units
Rural Residential Low/Medium 34 acres – 204 units
Rural Residential Medium Density 46 acres - 276 units
Rural Residential High Density 28 acres -336 units
The main access point to the development will be of off Galpin Boulevard. The plan proposes
connections from the Ashling Meadows subdivision streets of Topaz Drive, Ruby Lane and Lucy
Ridge Lane. An existing home that is on 2.62 acres at 7011 Galpin Boulevard is not included in
the subdivision.
ZONING DISTRICT
Low-density zoning options 1.2-4 Units an acre
Residential Single Family (RSF) requires 15,000 square foot lots. This zoning district would
cause the most the environmental impact to the site. In order to achieve the desire for a larger
preservation area next to the lakes, the most appropriate zoning would be either a planned unit
development (PUD) or residential-low and medium density (RLM). Both of these districts
require preservation of environmental features. It will be the city’s goals to ensure that the
request for either zoning meets the intent.
ARTICLE VIII. – PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
DIVISION 1. – GENERALLY
Sec. 20-501. – Intent.
Planned Unit Developments (PUD) offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through
the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows
for a greater variety of uses, internal transfers of density, construction phasing, and a potential
for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the
expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more
sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning
districts. It will be the applicant’s responsibility to demonstrate that the city’s expectation is to be
realized as evaluated against the following criteria.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 4 of 13
The applicant is pursuing the PUD Zoning. In their narrative, they have stated, “The use of the
PUD zoning also allows for greater specificity in the types, location and sizes of uses. The city has
the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more
sensitive proposal than would be the case with the other, more standard zoning districts. It is the
applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the city's expectations are to be realized as evaluated
by the city’s goals.”
Concept PUD – What is required?
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article VIII. – Planned Unit Development District, Division 2. –
Procedures
Sec. 20-517. - General concept plan.
(a) In order to receive guidance in the design of a PUD prior to submission of a formal
application, an applicant may submit a concept plan for review and comment by the
planning commission and city council. Submission of a concept plan is optional but is
highly recommended for large PUDs. In order for the review to be of most help to the
applicant, the concept plan should contain such specific information as is suggested by the
city. Generally, this information should include the following information appropriate to
the type of development, e.g., commercial, industrial or residential:
(1) Approximate building areas, pedestrian ways and road locations;
(2) Height, bulk and square footage of buildings;
(3) Type, number or square footage or intensities of specific land uses;
(4) Number of dwelling units;
(5) Generalized development plan showing areas to be developed or preserved; and
(6) Staging and timing of the development.
(b) The tentative written consent of all property owners within the proposed PUD shall be
filed with the city before the staff commences review. Approval of the concept statement
shall not obligate the city to approve the final plan or any part thereof or to rezone the
property to a planned unit development district.
(c) The final acceptance of land uses is subject to the following procedures:
(1) The developer meets with city staff to discuss the proposed developments.
(2) The applicant shall file the concept stage application and concept plan, together with
all supporting data.
(3) The planning commission shall conduct a hearing and make recommendations to the
City Council. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description,
description of request, and be published in the official newspaper at least ten days
prior to the hearing. Written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least ten
days prior thereto to owners of land within 500 feet of the boundary of the property
and an on-site notification sign erected.
(4) Following the receipt of the report and recommendations from the planning
commission, the city council shall consider and comment on the concept plan.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 5 of 13
The PUD process provides an opportunity to receive observation and feedback from other
jurisdictions, Planning Commission, City Council and residents of Chanhassen.
Summary of Request
The applicant proposal is requesting the Low Density Residential PUD Zoning.
Site Analysis
Gross area 188 acres
• Wetland Area 49 acres
• Galpin Boulevard ROW Area 1 acre
• Dedicated Public Park Area 50 area ( upland)
Net acres 88
Manage 1 Wetland Standards
• Buffer 30 feet
• Building Setback for Buffer 25 feet
• Accessory Building setback from the Buffer 15 feet
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 6 of 13
Proposed Lot standards:
North lots - Shoreline Overlay non-riparian lots 45
Width 90 feet
Area 15,000 sq. feet
OHW 75 foot setback
Bluff 30 foot setback
Local street ROW setback 30 feet
Impervious Surface 25 % lots with in the Shoreland District
Central Lots 102
Width 65 feet
Area 8,450 sq. feet
Front setback 25 feet
Rear setback 25 feet
Side setback 5 feet and 10 feet
Lot Coverage 35 %
South Lots 52
Width 55 feet
Area 6,000 sq. feet
Front setback 25 feet
Rear setback 25 feet
Side setback 5 feet and 10 feet
Lot Coverage 35 %
The developer has submitted a plan that uses the RSF Zoning District. While the plan is not
consistent with the Park Comprehensive Plan, the Developer has shown what they could achieve
applying the RSF (15,000 square foot minimum) zoning district. The total lots under this
proposal is 20.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 7 of 13
Planning Departments Comments
Provide a variety of housing types. Attached are Lennar’s Home Plans.
Engineering Comments
These comments are intended to identify major considerations for PUD plan approval based
upon a review by the Engineering department in response to a development plan submitted by
Lennar and received June 15, 2018. Engineering supports the “density transfer” plan.
• Tie the development design into the reconstruction project along Galpin Blvd. The city is
considering significantly changing the profile of roadway between Hunter Dr. and
Longacres Dr. The city would add an underpass in this area and adjust the existing
profile by filling between the higher areas near the intersections.
• Evaluate safe intersection design requirements and sight distances along Galpin Blvd.
• Detail trail connections through the development to Galpin Blvd and the existing park
system.
• Consider an access for city vehicles to the well house site along Galpin Blvd.
• Propose and coordinate property swap near the well site to facility proposed layout.
• Consider access along the MCES interceptor and their permanent easement to facilitate
maintenance of the sanitary pipeline. Show the permanent easement on the site plan.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 8 of 13
• Evaluate and maintain bluff stability along the northeast side of the site adjacent to Lake
Lucy.
• Communicate plan for bluff areas along north grouping of homes (90 lot area).
• Develop and communicate a detailed storm water plan.
• Identify sanitary and water planning meeting the city’s comprehensive plans.
• Identify wetland areas intended to be mitigated. Communicate plan to address mitigation
requirements.
• Detail right-of-way and street widths.
• Document proposed street grades.
• Detail areas intended for use of retaining wall systems and proposed wall heights.
Include information regarding intended block systems.
• Show building pad setbacks.
• Document mass grading intentions and site balancing.
• Identify grading coordination with the neighboring properties.
• Identify soil stockpile areas left after mass grading.
• Show streams and water flow conveyances along with their protection.
• Evaluate coordination with the proposed street connections to Topaz Dr.
• Identify naturally occurring features intended to be preserved.
• Provide traffic impact study in conjunction with the developer’s proposal.
• There is outstanding Assessments for the Lake Ann Interceptor
Water Resources Comments
• Water resources is strongly supportive of density transfer to preserve connected wetland
and woodland areas.
• An open space preservation narrative should also discuss wetland and water resource
protection. The importance of these spaces to the community goes beyond regulatory and
stormwater requirements.
• HOA (Master Association) required to maintain open spaces including permanent
stormwater best management practices, and buffers.
• Must include an open space preservation plan and permanent funding mechanism to
ensure maintenance and preservation of open spaces.
• Drain tile must be installed back of curb and all sumps connected per Chanhassen
Standards and Specifications.
• Developer is responsible for completing MnRAM assessments for all wetlands on the
property. MnRAMs must be approved by Chanhassen Water Resources Coordinator and
Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD).
• Approved MnRAMs are required to determine wetland buffer requirements, impacts, and
assessments.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 9 of 13
• Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) process must be completed for all proposed impacts.
A Notice of Decision for Boundary and Type is the only Decision that has been issued at
this time.
• All WCA conditions of approval must be completed prior to issuing a grading permit.
• All buffers and setbacks must be shown on plans.
• Buffer averaging must be shown on all plans.
• All lots must meet minimum buffer and setback requirements.
• All water resources, and water resource impacts must be shown on plans including
creeks, streams, riverines, and natural drainage ways. Not all water resources are
identified on the Wetland Delineation.
• The creek at the northwest corner connecting Wetland 2 to Wetland 1 must be preserved
as an open channel. No filling or piping is permitted.
• Crossings of natural channels must be in the form of bridges to allow for passage of
wildlife and native vegetation preservation.
• Shoreline and streambank restorations shall be incorporated into the plan whenever
possible.
• Wetlands, buffers, water resources, and stormwater BMPs must be placed in outlots
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 10 of 13
• All pervious surfaces must utilize native vegetative cover, deep rooted low mow/no
mow/turf alternatives, or approved landscape plantings. Landscape plantings include
woody vegetation, annual and perennial forbs, ornamental grasses, fruit/vegetable
gardens, and mulch.
• Irrigation systems are discouraged unless they prioritize stormwater re-use.
• Identify how green design practices will be prioritized to reduce environmental impact.
• Tree preservation and native habitat preservation credits should be discussed further with
the city and RPBCWD.
• Identify all wildlife corridors, and opportunities to incorporate wildlife corridors into
plans.
• No structure may be constructed or reconstructed such that its lowest floor elevation is
less than 3 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or emergency overflow of any water
resource. Note this standard varies slightly from the RPBCWD standard.
• Every effort should be made to locate any wet detention basins in low visibility locations.
Residents do not find these hard working, pollutant removal devices appealing. They are
critical to environmental health, function and public safety, however, these are not “water
features.”
• Consider aeration in wet detention basins to increase evaporation and reduce algal
growth.
• A master grading plan will be reviewed and approved for the development. Each lot
should also be reviewed by builder and staff to identify missed opportunities to improve
grading, drainage, erosion and sediment control, including impacts to adjacent lots.
• Provide pet waste facilities throughout the development that include biodegradable bags,
disposal containers, educational signage. Facilities must not be directly adjacent to water
resources. Facilities will be owned and maintained by HOA.
• Identify all public and private stormwater infrastructure, water resources, and drainage
pathways on adjacent properties.
• The proposed maximum lot coverage of 25% (shoreland overlay district), and 35% (all
other lots) is acceptable, however, the developer should limit this to 20% and 30%
respectively during the initial development of each lot. This will allow residents 5% lot
coverage to utilize for future patios, pathways, sheds, fireplaces, etc. This is a significant
issue in the city.
• Identify opportunities to incorporate pervious surfaces into lot coverage during
development.
• Applicant must provide the annual runoff volumes to each wetland for the pre- and post-
project conditions.
• The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
(RPBCWD) permits.
• It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received
from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers,
DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA,
etc.).
• Project must meet all stormwater requirements of the city and RPBCWD.
• Project will require stormwater management fees associated with city development
review and permitting process.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 11 of 13
• The city is in agreement with the RPBCWD comments identified in the Memorandum
dated June 29, 2018 titled ‘Proposed Single Family Residential Development Galpin
Boulevard Planning Case 2018-12.’ Any deviation from those comments are noted in this
document.
Landscaping Comments/ Tree Preservation
Existing conditions on site include maple/basswood (Big Woods) forest in the eastern and
northern sections of the property, a lowland floodplain forest in the center area, a mesic oak
forest in the central western half and mixed hardwood forest in the southwestern corner of the
site. The wooded areas cover a significant portion of the site. Aggressive understory species,
such as buckthorn, are present in the western half of the site and are starting to move into the
eastern half. There are significant, mature trees in all wooded areas with some of the largest
trees being white and red oaks and some maples.
Tree Preservation comments:
• Applicant will be required to provide a tree inventory for all wooded areas within/near
construction limits. Areas of preservation will not need to be inventoried.
• In either Scenario, the applicant will need to meet canopy coverage requirements for the
development. Preservation within the construction limits (small areas of tree groupings)
should be pursued in order to meet requirements. However, oak and maples are sensitive
to grade changes and if there is significant grading on site, then Scenario 2 would be
highly preferable for tree preservation.
• In either Scenario tree preservation along the north and south property lines adjacent to
residential areas will be recommended.
• The maple basswood in the eastern half of the site is of a better quality than the wooded
areas on the west side of the property due to a lesser impact by invasive species.
Protecting this forested area should be a priority and staff strongly recommends Scenario
Two for tree preservation for future generations.
• Linking wooded areas from Lake Ann and Greenwood Shores parks to the western side
of the lake will be highly beneficial for forest health, wildlife protection and habitat.
Landscaping Comments:
• Tree Preservation/Canopy Coverage requirements may incur reforestation requirements
for the developer, depending on preservation.
· When re-planting, the applicant shall use a diverse mix of species
• Bufferyard requirements will need to be met for the north, south, west and internal areas,
depending on density differences.
• Foundation plantings will be required for the Villa homes.
• In common areas/HOA lots:
· Preferable to have minimum mowed turf areas. Use prairie or no mow mixes in
low use areas
· Employ capture-and-use irrigation systems
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 12 of 13
Park Comments
At their June 26th meeting, the Park and Recreation Commission recommended that the City
Council acknowledged the Lennar Concept Plan 07 dated June 1, 2018 depicting 199 lots
clustered to the west central and north central quadrants of the property and preserving 50+/-
acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern quadrant
of the property as the preferred starting point for the design of a preliminary plat for the proposed
development.
Arguably, the now pending subdivision and development of this parcel of land has been one of
the most highly anticipated opportunities to create a quality housing community while
simultaneously preserving a large tract of public open space that guarantees the character and
integrity of Lake Ann Park will be preserved. More than a half dozen potential developers met
with city staff prior to considering how they would propose to develop this property and how
much they would offer the sellers as a purchase price. Lennar stated in that initial meeting that it
was their desire to bring forward a plan that was both viable and met the goals and requirements
of the city's guiding plans and ordinances. Now that Lennar has secured an option to
purchase the property, they have delivered two concepts for developing the parcel to the city. It
is staff's position that Concept Plan 07 succinctly captures the dual goals of creating
a quality housing community while simultaneously preserving a large tract of public open
space.
Planning Commission
Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12
July 17, 2018
Page 13 of 13
Park and Recreation System Initiatives – from the System Plan:
While the objectives and policies offer broad guidelines for park and recreation system
development, the following initiatives have been identified by city staff, the Park and Recreation
Commission, and citizens as key to completing the system and improving existing facilities to
meet needs today and over the next 25 years. Numbered initiatives correspond to efforts
depicted in Figure 6-8.
Parks and Recreation Facilities:
P-1. Expand Lake Ann Park to create a premier community park. Expansion of the park
would incorporate natural woodlands west of Lake Ann and would preserve views across
the lake, protect wildlife habitat, and preserve the community’s natural heritage. The
expansion would also allow for a loop trail around Lake Ann and a connection to Lake
Lucy.
P-2. Create a new ball field complex to meet demands created by increasing population.
P-3. Create neighborhood parks in the general locations identified on Figure 6-8 along
with development.
Fire Department
• Cul-de-sacs to deviate from minimum sizes for fire apparatus roads in fire code (96 feet).
• Fire hydrants put into area per code.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission provides observations and feedback on the Concept Planned Unit
Development along with the following comments:
1. With the Preliminary PUD, the developer shall address the comments in the staff report from
a. City Engineering
b. Water Resources Coordinator
c. Environmental Resources Specialist
d. Parks and Recreation
e. Building
f. Planning
g. Watershed District
g:\plan\2018 planning cases\18-12 galpin development - lennar\concept staff report.doc