Findings of Fact
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE:
Application of Epic Development XVI, LLC request for rezoning from Agricultural Estate
District, A2, to Planned Unit Development – Residential, PUD-R; Preliminary plat approval
creating 13 lots and one Outlot with a Variance for a private street and more than four homes
accessing a private street; and Conditional Use Permit for development within the Bluff Creek
Overlay District.
On May 2, 2006, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Epic Development XVI, LLC for a Planned Unit
Development to permit a 12-unit twin home project. The Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on the proposed Planned Unit Development 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.
3.The legal description of the property is: See Exhibit A.
4.Rezoning
a.The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of and has been found to be inconsistent with the following City
Comprehensive Plan policies:
Land Use Policy: “Encourage low density residential development in appropriate
areas of the community in a manner that reinforces the character and integrity of
existing single-family neighborhoods while promoting the establishment of new
neighborhoods of similar quality.” The proposed development does not reinforce the
character of the adjacent development since it does not maintain the lot sizes, housing
orientation, rhythm and spacing of that development.
Housing policy: New development shall be discouraged from encroaching on vital
natural resources or physical features that perform essential protection functions in
their natural state. The proposed development encroaches in to the Bluff Creek
corridor.
1
b. The proposed use does not conform with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance for Planned Unit Developments since it does lead to a significantly
higher quality development nor a more sensitive development than would have been
the case with the use of other more standard zoning districts. The environmental
sensitivity is provided through the enforcement of the Bluff Creek Overlay and
Wetland Protection standards.
5. Subdivision.
a. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the zoning ordinance, since it does not
comply with the minimum standards of the Agricultural Estate District, A2, standards
which the property is zoned;
b. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with all applicable city, county and regional
plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan as specified in item 4. a.
above;
c. The proposed subdivision does not make adequate provision for water supply, storm
drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by
the subdivision ordinance since it does not adequately accommodate storm drainage and
flood protection measures;
6. Variance (Private Street and more than four units on a private street).
a. The requirement for a public street is not a hardship. A reasonable use of the property can
be achieved with a public street. Economic consideration alone are driving the request for
a private street. The purpose of the private street is to increase the number of lots. A
public street could be developed as part of the proposed development.
7. Conditional Use Permit. When approving a conditional use permit, the City must determine
the compatibilty of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses.
a.The proposed development will be inconsistent with the objectives of the city's
comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance as specified in findings 4 a. and b. above.
b.The proposed development is not 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 since it does not maintain the spacing
and rhythm of that development..
c.The proposed development will not be aesthetically compatible with the area since it does
not maintain the spacing and rhythm of that development and appears overly dense.
2
d. The proposed development will not meet standards prescribed for Planned Unit
Developments as provided in finding 4.b. above.
RECOMMENDA TION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the Planned Unit
Development for Galpin Crossing Twinhomes.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 2nd day of May, 2006.
3
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL A:
That part of the southwest Quarter of the southwest Quarter of section 10, Township 116, Range
23 and the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of scction 15, Township 116, Range 23,
Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest comer of said section 10; thence on as assumed bearing of North 1
degree 56 minutes 40 seconds west along the West line of said Southwest Quarter, a distance of
1026.89 feet; thence south 79 degrees 32 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 177.77 feet;
thence south 86 degrees 32 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 100.40 feet; thence south 78
degrees 32 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 194.14 feet; thence south 74 degrees 32
minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 150.00 feet; thence south 47 degrees 17 minutes 20
seconds East, a distance of 75.43 feet; thence North 82 degrees 42 minutes 40 seconds East, a
distance of 74.98 feet; thence south 58 degrees 17 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 84.58
feet; thence south 89 degrees 17 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 164.63 feet; thence south
18 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds west, a distance of 824.19 feet to the northerly right of way
line of Trunk Highway 5; thence North 85 degrees 54 minutes 50 seconds West along said
northerly right of way, a distance of 33.08 feet; thence south 56 degrees 40 minutes 55 seconds
West along said northerly right of way, a distance of 158.95 feet; thence North 85 degrees 54
minutes 50 seconds West along said northerly right of way, a distance of 518.22 feet to the west
line of the Northwest Quarter of section 15, Township 116, Range 23; thence North 1 degree 37
minutes 50 seconds West along said west line of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 9.12 feet to
the point of beginning.
which lies northwesterly of that particular northwesterly right-of-way line of Parcel 216, as
shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OFWA Y PLAT
NO. 10-08, recorded as Document No. 265755 and as amended on MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 10-14, recorded as
Document NO. 279658, described as follows:
commencing at the southwest comer of said section 10; thence on an assumed bearing of North 1
degree 56 minutes 40 seconds west, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said section
10, a distance of 401.19 feet, to a particular right-of-way line of said parcel 216 and the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence North 47 degrees 18 minutes 16 seconds East a
distance of 175.14 feet, to an angle point in said right-of-way line; thence North 47 degrees 18
minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 22.71 feet, to a point of curvature in said right-of-way line;
thence easterly a distance of 662.60 feet, along a non-tangential curve concave to the south
having a radius of 633.04 feet and a central angle of 59 degrees 58 minutes 14 seconds and
having a chord of 632.76 feet which bears North 77 degrees 17 minutes 27 seconds East to an
angle point in said right-of-way line; thence North 56 degrees 16 minutes 30 seconds East, not
tangent to said curve a distance of 114.28 feet, to an angle point in said right-of-way line; thence
North 22 degrees 13 minutes 10 seconds East, along said right-of-way line, a distance of 116.13
feet and said line there terminating.
4