5.

TO:

Shakopee Planning Commission

FROM:

Mark Noble, Senior Planner

DATE:

10/06/2016

SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING - Caselog #16-037: ?Conditional Use Permit, Variance,

and Preliminary Plat for Sarazin Village

Action Requested
Site Information
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Location:
Current Zoning:
Adjacent Zoning:

Lot Size:

MWF Properties, LLC

Eugene Hauer Trust
Northeast of Sarazin Street & Downing Avenue
Multiple Family Residential (R-3) Zone
North: Highway 169
South: Multiple Family Residential (R-3) Zone
East: Multiple Family Residential (R-3) Zone
West: Highway Business (B-1) Zone
10.51 Acres

Introduction
MWF Properties has made application for a preliminary and final plat of Sarazin Village,
as well as a conditional use permit for an over-height structure, and front yard setback,
side yard setback and lot width variances in the R-3 Zone. The proposed project would
consist of two multi-family structures; Phase I having 57 units and Phase II having 46
units. Access would be from Sarazin Street, located west of the project area.
Discussion
The site is presently vacant. The proposed plat contemplates the creation of two lots, Lot 1
for Phase 1 and Outlot A for future Phase II. There would be additional right-of-way
proposed, for the cul-de-sac improvement to Sarazin Street. Each phase would include
parking consistent with City Code requirements, consisting of surface and underground
spaces.

Structures greater than 35' in height in the R-3 Zone require approval of a Conditional Use
Permit. As proposed, this project would consist of four stories, with 3 floors of housing
and one lower level for underground parking. The height of the buildings are proposed at
40-8. The applicant has provided a thorough narrative of the project, explaining each of
the proposed requests, the rationale for supporting the request, and drawings to support the
proposal, including detailed sun/shadow studies. Those plans note the difference in
amount of sun light between buildings constructed at 35, and the proposed 40-8 bldgs.
(ranging between no effective difference to a net difference of 20 minutes of sunlight a
day). The developer has also provided a landscape plan, which focuses the majority of
plantings along the south and east property line, effectively buffering this site from the
adjacent residential developments. The proposed buildings use a variety of building
materials and colors and variations in the building faade in order to avoid a flat surface
appearance.
The 3 proposed Variances are somewhat the result of the desire to create two separate lots.
If the project had been proposed as one lot, there would be the need for a multiple
structures on one lot CUP; but would effectively eliminate the side yard setback Variance
and the lot width Variance. Due to extensive easement area on the northerly portion of the
property, the developer needed to keep the structures on the southerly portion of the lot,
utilizing that easement area for drive and parking space purposes. The front yard Variance
is a result of the need for additional Sarazin Street right-of-way, with all right-of-way
taken from the east as to avoid impact on the existing Target Store property to the west.
The Planning Commission is charged with making a recommendation to the City Council
on all of the applicant's requests. In cases where a conditional use permit or variance is
tied to a plat, the City Council makes final decisions on these actions. Additionally, the
Planning Commission only reviews the Preliminary Plat, with the Preliminary and Final
Plat to be considered by the City Council.
Planning staff did receive comments from several reviewing agencies, and have
incorporated those comments as conditions of the draft resolution. Planning staff has
included a condition that references compliance with the City Code design and
performance standard requirements as well.
Variance Findings:
Criterion 1
The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause practical difficulties
because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Practical
difficulties means the following:
1.A.

The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not

permitted by the zoning ordinance:

Finding 1.A. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner
not permitted by the zoning ordinance, with the structure located further back from
Sarazin Street than the multifamily residential structure directly south of this site.
1.B.
The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property;
Finding 1.B. The property is unique in that it has minimal frontage on a public street, but
consists of a significant number of acres for development purposes. The significant
number of easements further restrict the building locations
1.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner;
Finding 1.C.
The lot was not created by this developer, and the need for significant easement areas has
further restricted the use of this site for development purposes. It is one of only two
undeveloped R-3 Zoned parcels located in the City.
1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality;
and
Finding 1.D. The variances would not alter the character of the locality. By all
appearances, the proposed structures will function much like two compliant structures.
1.E.
The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic
considerations do not constitute a practical difficulty if reasonable use for the
property exists under the terms of the ordinance.
Finding 1.E. The request is not economic in nature, the variance requests allow for
construction of multiple family structures on property with setbacks generally similar to
other multiple family structures in the City.
Criterion 2
It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the
spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
Finding 2
The proposed variances would in keeping with the spirit and intent of
Chapter 151.
Criterion 3
The request is not for a use variance.
Finding 3
The request is not a use variance.
Criterion 4
Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will insure
compliance to protect the adjacent properties.
Finding 4
The conditions listed below for the variances will regulate the use of the

property by providing for ways of mitigating the impact of reduced setbacks and lot
width.
Criterion 5
Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet the following criteria:
Finding 5
(Not applicable since this property is not within the flood plain overlay
zone.)
Conditional Use Permit Findings:
Criteria #1
The use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity;
Finding #1: The Board has not received any evidence that the use will be injurious to
the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity, if conducted in accordance with
proposed conditions. The sun/shadow study reflects minimal impact on adjacent
properties, concerning amount of sunlight vs. shadow exposure.
Criteria #2 The amendment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses
allowed in the area;
Finding #2: The Board finds that the conditional use permit for an over-height structure
will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property.
Criteria #3 Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary
facilities have been or will be provided;
Finding#3: The Board finds that adequate utilities, access, drainage and other
necessary facilities have been or will be provided for the site.
Criteria #4 The use is consistent with the purposes of the zone in which the
applicant intends to locate the proposed use; and
Finding #4
The Board finds that this use is consistent with the purposes of the
Multiple Family Residential (R-3) Zone.
Criteria #5
Finding #5
Plan.

The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.

The Board finds that the use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission give a positive recommendation to the City

Council for the requests subject to the following conditions:

The following items need to be addressed/completed prior to release of the Final Plat for
recording:
1. Execution of a developers agreement, which will include provisions for security for
public improvements within the subdivision and payment of the Street and Utility
Fee and the Watermain Fee.
2. Payment of all Storm Water Management Plan Review Fees need to be made, as
required by the most current City of Shakopee Fee Schedule.
3. Payment of the Trunk Sanitary Sewer Charge and the Valley Industrial Park and
Valley Industrial Park II connection charges need to be made, as required by the most
current City of Shakopee Fee Schedule.
4. Payment of the applicable Trunk Storm Water Charge needs to be made, as required
by the most current City of Shakopee Fee Schedule.
5. Payment of the Sign Installation Fee needs to be made, as required by the most
current City of Shakopee Fee Schedule.
6. Payment of the Bituminous Sealcoat Fee needs to be made, as required by the most
current City of Shakopee Fee Schedule.
7. The applicant will submit a detailed contractors bid or detailed engineers estimate
for all public improvements associated with this subdivision.
8. The applicant will submit a detailed lot area drawing showing the total plat area, the
total drainage and utility easement area encompassing high water levels of publicly
maintained storm water basins, the total area of right-of-way, the total area of
conservation easements and outlots, the total area of public bituminous street and the
total area of each lot.
9. The applicant will need, at a minimum, conditional approval of the subdivisions
storm water management plan.
10. The applicant will submit a detailed geotechnical report to verify the infiltration rates
in appropriate locations.
11. Provide additional right-of-way in the cul-de-sac so it parallels the proposed back of
curb and gutter line.
12. Easements will be shown on the final plat as approved by the city engineer. They
include, but are not be limited to, the following:
a.Minimum drainage and utility easements for public sanitary sewer and storm sewer
systems need to be dedicated per Section 10.1 (A-D) of the City of Shakopee Design
Criteria. Easements for public utilities need to be centered on the alignments.
b.Provide a minimum of 15-feet of drainage and utility easement adjacent to the Sarazin
Street right-of-way.

13. Provide electronic files (AutoCAD and Portable Document Format PDF) of the
final plat to be recorded with datum on the Scott County coordinate system.
14. Park Dedication: Given the location of the development, cash in lieu of land is
recommended. Park dedication fees in the amount required by the City Code and
adopted City fee schedule shall be paid at the time of recording of the final plat.
15. Park dedication calculations are as follows: 57 units x $4,450/unit = $253,650.
However; per Resolution No. 7656 a portion of the park dedication fees were
waived. The amount required to be paid is $132,370.00.
The following items need to be addressed/completed prior to approval of a grading
permit, a street and utility plan and/or a building permit:
1. The applicant will closely coordinate the Sarazin Street improvements with all
tenants utilizing the existing access to the west.
2. The applicant will need final approval of the subdivisions storm water management
plan.
3. The applicant will obtain a NPDES construction site permit prior to any land
disturbing activity. PDFs of the coverage card and letter will be provided to the city.
4. The applicant will submit a detailed impervious surface coverage drawing with each
building permit adding impervious surface.
5. The applicant will grade the entire site, as proposed on the approved plans, in one
phase within one year from the date of approval of the grading permit application.
Grading is defined as bringing the site to the proposed finished grade with materials
deemed acceptable by the public works department, providing topsoil per city
requirements and applying seed, mulch and/or sod per city requirements and
providing an as-built record grading plan per Section 2.5 of the City of Shakopee
Design Criteria.
6. The applicant will line all rate control portions of storm water basins with a
minimum of two feet of clay from the bottom to the normal water level. However,
the city engineer can allow this requirement to be reduced to one foot if the material
meets certain specifications.
7. The applicant will work with the City of Shakopee to improve the downstream
channel to the existing storm water basin.
8. The applicant will install class IV fieldstone riprap and geotextile fabric at the outlet
of the proposed storm water basin.
9. The applicant will seed the sites storm water basin area with a native wetland
vegetation. The seed mixture, application and maintenance requirements will be
determined by the city engineer or their assign.
10. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer will be extended as necessary to accommodate
future development of all outlots.

11. No landscaping will be allowed in drainage and utility easements without written
permission from the city engineer. A detailed plan will be submitted clearly showing
how all lots will be served by private utilities. All applicable private utility
companies will need to review and approve this plan prior to its submittal to the city.
12. Prior to work in the MNDoT and Xcel Energy/NSP rights-of-way, permits will be
required. Provide a PDF of the approved permits and any encroachment agreements.
13. Prior to work in the Sarazin Street right-of-way, a permit will be required. Please
contact the senior public works technician for details.
14. Record plans need to be provided per the City of Shakopee Design Criteria, Section
2.5 and Section 11.2 (A-L). The record plans need to be submitted to the public
works department.
Additionally, the applicant shall comply with the following conditions:
15. The applicant will verify the proposed landscaping plan is in compliance with the
most recent version of the City of Shakopees Easement Fencing and Landscaping
Policy.
16. No landscaping will be allowed in drainage and utility easements, unless a detailed
plan is submitted clearly showing how the site will be served by private utilities.
Prior to submittal, all applicable private utility companies will need to review and
approve this plan before grading or tree removal takes place.
17. The Applicant must provide a landscape plan which meets the requirements of the
City Code Section 151.
18. A financial security in form of cash escrow or letter of credit must be issued to the
City, in accordance with Section 151.
19. Building design, number of units and parking spaces, and building materials must
match approved plans.
20. Building setbacks and building height must match approved plans.
21. A sidewalk connection should be added across the western drive or along the south
side of the westerly building to connect pedestrians with the trail adjacent to Sarazin
St.
22. The developer/applicant shall contact SPUC and install water and electric utilities
consistent with their requirements, as well as provide fees and agreements as
represented in the memo dated 09/09/16.
Action Requested
Offer a motion of a positive recommendation to the City Council of the preliminary plat of
Sarazin Village, conditional use permit for an over-height structure, and front yard, side
yard and lot width variances as proposed, and move its adoption.

Attachments
Project Narrative
Plat, Site & Landscape Plans
Elevations & Site Plans
Shadow Plans
Site Aerial
Engineering Memo
Parks & Rec Memo
SPUC Memo