Loading...
10/03/1978 - City Council Special16 AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL OCTOBER 30, 1978 7:00 P.M. I. City Council - Planning Commission Workshop (Items for Discussion) A. Sign Ordinance B. Future Development of the Dayton -Hudson Property. C. Procedural & Policy Questions relating to how agenda items are handled once they are tabled by the Planning Commission Resolutions or action taken based on economic impat. D. Dedication of Public Properties (fire stations, schools, park land, etc.) E. Discussion of PUD concept. F. Other. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS (PLANNING COMMISSION) A. Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., for rezoning of approximately 80 acres from A, Agricultural to PD, Planned Development in Section 33. B. Dunn & Curry Real Estatement Management, Inc., for preliminary plat approval of Beacon Hills in Section 33. III. ADJOURNMENT. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1978 SUBJECT: JOINT CITY COUNCIL/ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP SESSION At the regular meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission held on Tuesday, October 24, 1978, several items were informally discussed by the Planning Commission members regarding subjects to be considered at the City Council/Planning Commission workshop session. Planning Commission members suggested six items as topics for discussion with the City Council. These items are listed on the attached agenda. Immediately following the workshop, the APC is scheduled to continue with the public hearing to consider the request of Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management Inc. for rezoning (A, Agricultural to PD, Planned Unit Development) and preliminary plat approval for Beacon Hills in Section 33. Since the Planning Commission and City Council have expressed concern about the overall concept and practice of PUD zoning within the City of Eagan, and more specifically how the concept relates to the proposed development of Beacon Hills, the Planning Commission felt that the PUD concept should be discussed as the last item at the workshop session. City Council members are then invited to remain for the presentation which will be made at the public hearing. The following is offered as background information on the agenda 'i" items suggested for discussion at the City Council/Planning Commission workshop. A. Since Ordinance 16 was revised and adopted in March, 1976p 171 there have been a number of applications heard before the Planning Commission and City Council pertaining to conditional use permits relating to the sign ordinance. A number of questions have arisen in the last two years relating to certain aspects of the sign ordinance and therefore this item is listed as a topic for discussion. APC/CC Memo Page Two October 27, 1978 B. Representatives of the Dayton -Hudson Real Estate Department (Land Management Division) have presented a concept to the City staff relating to future plans of the Dayton -Hudson property located in Section 1. The basic question that representatives of the Dayton -Hudson Properties have for the City of Eagan is whether the Planning Commission/City Council would consider changing the regional shopping center designation for that section to residential development and a much lesser type of shopping center designation. The City staff is reviewing the concept as presented by the Dayton -Hudson properties today for the first time and will have some brief comments to make at the meeting on Monday. C. Members of the Planning Commission would like to discuss a procedural and policy question relating to.how agenda items are handled once they are continued or tabled by the Planning Commission. Further, the question has arisen at both the Planning Commission and City Council level whether the effects of an economic impact can be used as a reason in approving or denying certain applications that are before the APC and City Council. A good example is the J.K.R. application for a community shopping center. D. The City of Eagan has required the dedication by developers of certain property for the purpose of public park land over the past'.several years. In some cities and other areas throughout the country, it is common to aquire by means of dedication property for use as fire stations and schools as well as other related community and regional purposes. Members of the Planning Commission would like to discuss the feasibility or practicality of consider- ing dedication of properties for public uses other than park land development. E. The remaining workshop agenda item relates to the discussion of the PUD concept. In recent weeks.the Planning Commission and City Council have been working with the existing PUD agreements as well as reviewing applications for new PUD zoning. A number of questions relating to how a PUD should be used, what is the purpose of a PUD, and other related questions have, been raised by members of the Planning Commission and City Council. Our Consulting Planner, Mr. John Voss, has prepared a brief memorandum that explains Planned Developments in anticipation of this discussion item. A copy of this memorandum is enclosed for background information to be used by each member of the Planning Commission and City Council. Public Hearings The two items listed under the Public Hearings are for consideration by the Planning Commission. At the meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 1978 the Planning Commission took action to consider these two items at the special meeting to be held on October 30, 1978. 4 ' • ?\PC/CC Memo Page Three October 27, 1978 The Planning Commission wanted to consider these items at the Monday night meeting for several reasons: 1. The items have been discussed at a previous Planning Commission meeting and therefore the details and proposal should not be time consuming. 2. Since both items relate to the issue of the PUD concept, it seems appropriate to reconsider the two applications following the discussion of the PUD concept by the Planning Commission and City Council. 3. Mr. Rod Hardy, representing Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.,.has informed the Planning Commission that the Centex Corporation, which is one of the nation's largest home builders, is considering acquisition of the entire Beacon Hills Development for the purpose of constructing single family homes. Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. is in the process of negotiating a contract with the Centex Corporation which both parties would like to exercise in early December. 4. Dunn & Curry Real Estate.Management Inc. has indicated that a representative of the Centex Corporation could be present to explain their plans and concept for building single family homes if the Planning Commission and/or City Council should desire such a presentation. To allow more efficient time manage- ment for both the Planning Commission and City Council, it seemed appropriate that Centex appear as part of the public hearing discussion relating to the rezoning and preliminary plat and provide a brief presentation regarding their development plans. The meeting is informal and coffee will be servedt.during the workshop session. ��C lmxr� . /4d c:S2 City Administratora PAUL H. HAUGE & ASSOCIATES, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN (ST. PAUL), MINNESOTA 55122 PAUL H. HAUGE BRADLEY SMITH �, October 26, 1978 TO THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION RE: Economic Considerations - Denial of Use Permits AREA CODE 612 TELEPHONE 454-4224 The first question is whether the Council may base a denial of a use permit on the fact that the approval of that use would cause competition with an existing business, thereby diminishing the value of the existing business. Ordinarily, competition is not the basis of denying the use of property that is legitimately zoned, if the developer complies with all other necessary ordinances and state law, and if those ordinances do not empower the Council to deny permits because of imbalances in land uses. In a case concerning Brooklyn Park, the Minnesota Supreme Court said: "We hold that the limitation of the number of one type of use in a particular area does not bear a sufficient relationship to the public health, safety, or general welfare of a community and that the denial of a special use permit for such a reason is therefore arbitrary. We make no prediction as to what our decision might be if the city's zoning code empowered the city council to deny permits because of imbalances that might be created by having too many filling stations, restaurants, night- clubs, grocery stores, or whatever in a given area, as- suming some reasonable standards for such decisions were contained in the code and that a comprehensive plan for future development was adopted by the city." Metro 500, Inc. v. City of Brooklyn 'Park 211 NW2d 358 (1953) Generally, restraints are placed on the development of a competitive business in the same general area by the mortgage lenders, lack of potential customers, etc. If the ordinance does grant the Council the power to deny use permits based on imbalanced land use, guidelines set forth in the ordinance must be used to avoid any appearance of an arbitrary or capricious misuse of discretion. The other question is whether the refusal of a use permit, when all other ordinances and state laws have been complied with, which has the effect of reducing the value of the land which was to be developed because it cannot be used in that manner, is an unconstitutional taking without compensation? Page 2 October 26, 1978 Advisory Planning Commission The general rule was cited in Czech v. City of Blaine; "For there to be an unconstitutional taking, a land owner must demonstrate that he has been deprived, through governmental action or inaction, of all the reasonable uses of his land. C.F. Lyth Co. v. Clark 491 F.2d 834, 838 (10 Cir. 1974); County of Freeborn v. Claussen, 295 Minn. 96, 203 NW2d 323 (1972)." The court in Holaway v. City of Pipestone, 269 NW2d 28 (1978), after restating the rule in Czech, added that: "(m)ere dimunition in market value is not such a demonstration, when a reasonable use of the land is permitted under the zoning ordinance and currently undertaken by plaintiffs. The result would be similar under the Federal Constitution. See Euchid v. Ambler Co 272 U.S. 365, 47, S. CT. 114, 71 L.Ed. 303 (1926). In that case, the land was presently being used for agricultural. In summary, to establish that there has been an unconstitutional taking, all reasonable uses of the land must be deprived. Mere dimunition of the value of the land by removing one possible use will not be sufficient to establish a taking. _ ....._ ... .. -l- PHH:cdg cc: Mr. Thomas Hedges -- MEMORANDUM -- To: The Honorable Mayor & City Council and Planning Commission City of Eagan From: John S. Voss Date: October 23, 1978 Subject: Planned.Developments At the joint meeting to be held on October 30th, 1978 between the Eagan City Council and the Planning Commission, one of the topics of discussion will be Planned Devel- opments. This memorandum is meant to provide a brief historical summary of the City's involvement with Planned Developments and to raise questions about how Planned De- velopments should be viewed in the future. BACKGROUND Planned Development provisions were first written into ordinances in the late 1960's. Therefore; communities have had less than 10 years of experience in dealing with Planned Developments and in many instances most of the experience relates to concept plans and agreements rather than with actual construction which has occurred within a Planned De- velopment District. The above generally describes what has occurred in Eagan. At present, there are several approved Planned Development Districts with corresponding agreements, but there has been very little platting or construction within Planned Development areas. Therefore, this.appears to be a good time to re-examine the City's attitude toward Planned De- velopments. Another factor affecting Planned Developments is the fact that there have not been many court decisions in Minnesota Related to Planned Developments during the past ten (10) years. Communities have approached Planned Developments in a very wide -variety of ways and the courts have not helped in narrowing alternatives. In Eagan, the approach that has evolved involves the following: 1. Planned Developments in the City generally have involved several acres and none have been approved for small (1 or 2 acre) tracts. 2. The underlying zoning generally has remained Agricultural and has not changed with the overlying zoning for a Planned Development. Memo to the Eagan City Council and Planning Commission October 23, 1978 Page 2 3. A Planned Development Agreement is required before a Planned Development is finalized. 4. With the initial approval of the preliminary plan for a Planned Development, the City only requires a "blob" concept plan, delineating uses rather than a detailed site plan for each area. Detailed site plans are approved by the City as each area is constructed. 5. The City has been very liberal in allowinq deviations from the Staging Plan (years of construction). This has been done by approving annual reviews. 6. The City has generally approved Planned Developments for a 10 to 15 year time period. None of the above are unique to Eagan. The manner in which'Eagan approaches Planned Developments is generally consistent with the approach in other communities, h owever, certain aspects may be approached differently. For example, Bloomington has begun to approve Planned Developments for very small tracts which can be de- veloped in a shorter period of time. They have experienced some frustration in having Planned Developments on the books for several years where no construction has occurred. PURPOSE OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT The purpose of a Planned Development is aptly described in Section 52.07, Subdivision 7 of the Eagan Zoning Ordinance. In this section, it states that the purpose of a Planned Development is, "to encourage, under appropriate circumstances, a more creative, varied and efficient use of land in the City of Eagan". This section also states that, "In considering any petition for such Planned Develop- ment District, the Planning Commission and the City Council, in the interests of carrying out the intent and purpose of this Section, shall determine whether or not such Planned Development will; a. Better adapt itself to its physical and esthetic setting and that of the surround- ing lands than does development of the underlying zoning district; b. Be feasible for the owner and developer economically to complete according to the proposed plans; and c. Benefit the community at large to a greater degree than would developmEot of the underlying zoning district. The above description was classical for the time in which it was formulated (1974). In the early years there were numerous illustrations in magazines of how more effi- cient use could be made of land by clustering uses and in lieu thereof of leaving large tracts of common open space. Since that time, however, Planned Development has klemo to the Eagan City Council '& Planning Commiss'ion October 23, 1978 Page 3 evolved to provide additional advantages; 1. Planned Developments can provide a "mini Comprehensive Plan" wherein the owners of large tracts can provide for more detailed planning than that which is provided under a City-wide comprehensive plan. 2. Planned development allows the City to enter into a contract with a developer therein guaranteeing street dedicaticns, park dedications, ponding dedications and similar commitments over large tracts of land. In turn, the developer also is assurred that he can put his land to certain uses and therein he can put together a more complete development proposal for financing. Planned developments can provide long-range commitments to a variety of housing in a given area thereby giving long-term assurances to the developer and pro- viding a variety of housing in several areas within the City. Planned Developments can generally make commitments to commercial usage and still leave the City with considerable discretion in approving the final development plans for each area. SUMMARY The record on what Planned Development will mean to the City of Eagan is by no means complete. Rather, the City is still in the formulative stage because there has been very little experience and very little case law in Minnesota to provide any type of definitive direction. As such, the City should pause periodically to reflect upon what Planned Developments have provided and where there are taking us. At present, Planned Development appear to have provided a much better alternative than the,past�wherein;.the•City.-was saddled with certain speculative rezonings with little ability to undo a mistake. Planned Development is far more flexible and also provides the City with a great deal of control right up to the time of actual con- struction because, under Planned Development, the individual site, landscape and architectural plans must be approved by the City Council. Planned Development has provided a certain amount of administrative headache because of the task of annual re- views and enforcement of agreements. However, to date, the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. The biggest challenge for the future, is to determine how and where Planned Devel- opments are to be used. There always is the temptation to use Planned Development for no other purpose than to gain deviations from the otherwise rigid requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The 7rr.ing 0rdinance in Section 52.07 Subd.7 as detailed above, is very explicit in laying the foundation for a Planned Develop- ment and these criteria or any revisions or additions that the City may want to add, should always be used for the basis before a new Planned Development District is created. 16 AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL OCTOBER 30, 1978 7:00 P.M. I. City Council - Planning Commission Workshop (Items for Discussion) A. Sign Ordinance B. Future Development of the Dayton -Hudson Property. C. Procedural & Policy Questions relating to how agenda items are handled once they are tabled by the Planning Commission Resolutions or action taken based on economic impat. D. Dedication of Public Properties (fire stations, schools, park land, etc.) E. Discussion of PUD concept. F. Other. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS (PLANNING COMMISSION) A. Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., for rezoning of approximately 80 acres from A, Agricultural to PD, Planned Development in Section 33. B. Dunn & Curry Real Estatement Management, Inc., for preliminary plat approval of Beacon Hills in Section 33. III. ADJOURNMENT. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1978 SUBJECT: JOINT CITY COUNCIL/ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP SESSION At the regular meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission held on Tuesday, October 24, 1978, several items were informally discussed by the Planning Commission members regarding subjects to be considered at the City Council/Planning Commission workshop session. Planning Commission members suggested six items as topics for discussion with the City Council. These items are listed on the attached agenda. Immediately following the workshop, the APC is scheduled to continue with the public hearing to consider the request of Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management Inc. for rezoning (A, Agricultural to PD, Planned Unit Development) and preliminary plat approval for Beacon Hills in Section 33. Since the Planning Commission and City Council have expressed concern about the overall concept and practice of PUD zoning within the City of Eagan, and more specifically how the concept relates to the proposed development of Beacon Hills, the Planning Commission felt that the PUD concept should be discussed as the last item at the workshop session. City Council members are then invited to remain for the presentation which will be made at the public hearing. The following is offered as background information on the agenda 'i" items suggested for discussion at the City Council/Planning Commission workshop. A. Since Ordinance 16 was revised and adopted in March, 1976p 171 there have been a number of applications heard before the Planning Commission and City Council pertaining to conditional use permits relating to the sign ordinance. A number of questions have arisen in the last two years relating to certain aspects of the sign ordinance and therefore this item is listed as a topic for discussion. APC/CC Memo Page Two October 27, 1978 B. Representatives of the Dayton -Hudson Real Estate Department (Land Management Division) have presented a concept to the City staff relating to future plans of the Dayton -Hudson property located in Section 1. The basic question that representatives of the Dayton -Hudson Properties have for the City of Eagan is whether the Planning Commission/City Council would consider changing the regional shopping center designation for that section to residential development and a much lesser type of shopping center designation. The City staff is reviewing the concept as presented by the Dayton -Hudson properties today for the first time and will have some brief comments to make at the meeting on Monday. C. Members of the Planning Commission would like to discuss a procedural and policy question relating to.how agenda items are handled once they are continued or tabled by the Planning Commission. Further, the question has arisen at both the Planning Commission and City Council level whether the effects of an economic impact can be used as a reason in approving or denying certain applications that are before the APC and City Council. A good example is the J.K.R. application for a community shopping center. D. The City of Eagan has required the dedication by developers of certain property for the purpose of public park land over the past'.several years. In some cities and other areas throughout the country, it is common to aquire by means of dedication property for use as fire stations and schools as well as other related community and regional purposes. Members of the Planning Commission would like to discuss the feasibility or practicality of consider- ing dedication of properties for public uses other than park land development. E. The remaining workshop agenda item relates to the discussion of the PUD concept. In recent weeks.the Planning Commission and City Council have been working with the existing PUD agreements as well as reviewing applications for new PUD zoning. A number of questions relating to how a PUD should be used, what is the purpose of a PUD, and other related questions have, been raised by members of the Planning Commission and City Council. Our Consulting Planner, Mr. John Voss, has prepared a brief memorandum that explains Planned Developments in anticipation of this discussion item. A copy of this memorandum is enclosed for background information to be used by each member of the Planning Commission and City Council. Public Hearings The two items listed under the Public Hearings are for consideration by the Planning Commission. At the meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 1978 the Planning Commission took action to consider these two items at the special meeting to be held on October 30, 1978. 4 ' • ?\PC/CC Memo Page Three October 27, 1978 The Planning Commission wanted to consider these items at the Monday night meeting for several reasons: 1. The items have been discussed at a previous Planning Commission meeting and therefore the details and proposal should not be time consuming. 2. Since both items relate to the issue of the PUD concept, it seems appropriate to reconsider the two applications following the discussion of the PUD concept by the Planning Commission and City Council. 3. Mr. Rod Hardy, representing Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.,.has informed the Planning Commission that the Centex Corporation, which is one of the nation's largest home builders, is considering acquisition of the entire Beacon Hills Development for the purpose of constructing single family homes. Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. is in the process of negotiating a contract with the Centex Corporation which both parties would like to exercise in early December. 4. Dunn & Curry Real Estate.Management Inc. has indicated that a representative of the Centex Corporation could be present to explain their plans and concept for building single family homes if the Planning Commission and/or City Council should desire such a presentation. To allow more efficient time manage- ment for both the Planning Commission and City Council, it seemed appropriate that Centex appear as part of the public hearing discussion relating to the rezoning and preliminary plat and provide a brief presentation regarding their development plans. The meeting is informal and coffee will be servedt.during the workshop session. ��C lmxr� . /4d c:S2 City Administratora PAUL H. HAUGE & ASSOCIATES, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN (ST. PAUL), MINNESOTA 55122 PAUL H. HAUGE BRADLEY SMITH �, October 26, 1978 TO THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION RE: Economic Considerations - Denial of Use Permits AREA CODE 612 TELEPHONE 454-4224 The first question is whether the Council may base a denial of a use permit on the fact that the approval of that use would cause competition with an existing business, thereby diminishing the value of the existing business. Ordinarily, competition is not the basis of denying the use of property that is legitimately zoned, if the developer complies with all other necessary ordinances and state law, and if those ordinances do not empower the Council to deny permits because of imbalances in land uses. In a case concerning Brooklyn Park, the Minnesota Supreme Court said: "We hold that the limitation of the number of one type of use in a particular area does not bear a sufficient relationship to the public health, safety, or general welfare of a community and that the denial of a special use permit for such a reason is therefore arbitrary. We make no prediction as to what our decision might be if the city's zoning code empowered the city council to deny permits because of imbalances that might be created by having too many filling stations, restaurants, night- clubs, grocery stores, or whatever in a given area, as- suming some reasonable standards for such decisions were contained in the code and that a comprehensive plan for future development was adopted by the city." Metro 500, Inc. v. City of Brooklyn 'Park 211 NW2d 358 (1953) Generally, restraints are placed on the development of a competitive business in the same general area by the mortgage lenders, lack of potential customers, etc. If the ordinance does grant the Council the power to deny use permits based on imbalanced land use, guidelines set forth in the ordinance must be used to avoid any appearance of an arbitrary or capricious misuse of discretion. The other question is whether the refusal of a use permit, when all other ordinances and state laws have been complied with, which has the effect of reducing the value of the land which was to be developed because it cannot be used in that manner, is an unconstitutional taking without compensation? Page 2 October 26, 1978 Advisory Planning Commission The general rule was cited in Czech v. City of Blaine; "For there to be an unconstitutional taking, a land owner must demonstrate that he has been deprived, through governmental action or inaction, of all the reasonable uses of his land. C.F. Lyth Co. v. Clark 491 F.2d 834, 838 (10 Cir. 1974); County of Freeborn v. Claussen, 295 Minn. 96, 203 NW2d 323 (1972)." The court in Holaway v. City of Pipestone, 269 NW2d 28 (1978), after restating the rule in Czech, added that: "(m)ere dimunition in market value is not such a demonstration, when a reasonable use of the land is permitted under the zoning ordinance and currently undertaken by plaintiffs. The result would be similar under the Federal Constitution. See Euchid v. Ambler Co 272 U.S. 365, 47, S. CT. 114, 71 L.Ed. 303 (1926). In that case, the land was presently being used for agricultural. In summary, to establish that there has been an unconstitutional taking, all reasonable uses of the land must be deprived. Mere dimunition of the value of the land by removing one possible use will not be sufficient to establish a taking. _ ....._ ... .. -l- PHH:cdg cc: Mr. Thomas Hedges -- MEMORANDUM -- To: The Honorable Mayor & City Council and Planning Commission City of Eagan From: John S. Voss Date: October 23, 1978 Subject: Planned.Developments At the joint meeting to be held on October 30th, 1978 between the Eagan City Council and the Planning Commission, one of the topics of discussion will be Planned Devel- opments. This memorandum is meant to provide a brief historical summary of the City's involvement with Planned Developments and to raise questions about how Planned De- velopments should be viewed in the future. BACKGROUND Planned Development provisions were first written into ordinances in the late 1960's. Therefore; communities have had less than 10 years of experience in dealing with Planned Developments and in many instances most of the experience relates to concept plans and agreements rather than with actual construction which has occurred within a Planned De- velopment District. The above generally describes what has occurred in Eagan. At present, there are several approved Planned Development Districts with corresponding agreements, but there has been very little platting or construction within Planned Development areas. Therefore, this.appears to be a good time to re-examine the City's attitude toward Planned De- velopments. Another factor affecting Planned Developments is the fact that there have not been many court decisions in Minnesota Related to Planned Developments during the past ten (10) years. Communities have approached Planned Developments in a very wide -variety of ways and the courts have not helped in narrowing alternatives. In Eagan, the approach that has evolved involves the following: 1. Planned Developments in the City generally have involved several acres and none have been approved for small (1 or 2 acre) tracts. 2. The underlying zoning generally has remained Agricultural and has not changed with the overlying zoning for a Planned Development. Memo to the Eagan City Council and Planning Commission October 23, 1978 Page 2 3. A Planned Development Agreement is required before a Planned Development is finalized. 4. With the initial approval of the preliminary plan for a Planned Development, the City only requires a "blob" concept plan, delineating uses rather than a detailed site plan for each area. Detailed site plans are approved by the City as each area is constructed. 5. The City has been very liberal in allowinq deviations from the Staging Plan (years of construction). This has been done by approving annual reviews. 6. The City has generally approved Planned Developments for a 10 to 15 year time period. None of the above are unique to Eagan. The manner in which'Eagan approaches Planned Developments is generally consistent with the approach in other communities, h owever, certain aspects may be approached differently. For example, Bloomington has begun to approve Planned Developments for very small tracts which can be de- veloped in a shorter period of time. They have experienced some frustration in having Planned Developments on the books for several years where no construction has occurred. PURPOSE OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT The purpose of a Planned Development is aptly described in Section 52.07, Subdivision 7 of the Eagan Zoning Ordinance. In this section, it states that the purpose of a Planned Development is, "to encourage, under appropriate circumstances, a more creative, varied and efficient use of land in the City of Eagan". This section also states that, "In considering any petition for such Planned Develop- ment District, the Planning Commission and the City Council, in the interests of carrying out the intent and purpose of this Section, shall determine whether or not such Planned Development will; a. Better adapt itself to its physical and esthetic setting and that of the surround- ing lands than does development of the underlying zoning district; b. Be feasible for the owner and developer economically to complete according to the proposed plans; and c. Benefit the community at large to a greater degree than would developmEot of the underlying zoning district. The above description was classical for the time in which it was formulated (1974). In the early years there were numerous illustrations in magazines of how more effi- cient use could be made of land by clustering uses and in lieu thereof of leaving large tracts of common open space. Since that time, however, Planned Development has klemo to the Eagan City Council '& Planning Commiss'ion October 23, 1978 Page 3 evolved to provide additional advantages; 1. Planned Developments can provide a "mini Comprehensive Plan" wherein the owners of large tracts can provide for more detailed planning than that which is provided under a City-wide comprehensive plan. 2. Planned development allows the City to enter into a contract with a developer therein guaranteeing street dedicaticns, park dedications, ponding dedications and similar commitments over large tracts of land. In turn, the developer also is assurred that he can put his land to certain uses and therein he can put together a more complete development proposal for financing. Planned developments can provide long-range commitments to a variety of housing in a given area thereby giving long-term assurances to the developer and pro- viding a variety of housing in several areas within the City. Planned Developments can generally make commitments to commercial usage and still leave the City with considerable discretion in approving the final development plans for each area. SUMMARY The record on what Planned Development will mean to the City of Eagan is by no means complete. Rather, the City is still in the formulative stage because there has been very little experience and very little case law in Minnesota to provide any type of definitive direction. As such, the City should pause periodically to reflect upon what Planned Developments have provided and where there are taking us. At present, Planned Development appear to have provided a much better alternative than the,past�wherein;.the•City.-was saddled with certain speculative rezonings with little ability to undo a mistake. Planned Development is far more flexible and also provides the City with a great deal of control right up to the time of actual con- struction because, under Planned Development, the individual site, landscape and architectural plans must be approved by the City Council. Planned Development has provided a certain amount of administrative headache because of the task of annual re- views and enforcement of agreements. However, to date, the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. The biggest challenge for the future, is to determine how and where Planned Devel- opments are to be used. There always is the temptation to use Planned Development for no other purpose than to gain deviations from the otherwise rigid requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The 7rr.ing 0rdinance in Section 52.07 Subd.7 as detailed above, is very explicit in laying the foundation for a Planned Develop- ment and these criteria or any revisions or additions that the City may want to add, should always be used for the basis before a new Planned Development District is created.