Shakopee council delays vote on Bluff View PUD amendment after questions about bluff preservation

The Shakopee City Council on Feb. 18 heard detailed debate over an amendment to Planned Unit Development District 10 (Bluff View) and voted to table the ordinance to the council’s March 4 meeting.

The amendment would add density and a preliminary plat allowing up to 247 single-family homes in the Windermere area north of Latour Avenue and adjacent to the SVU water tower. Council member Lara made the motion to adopt Ordinance 2025-001 approving the amendment; Lara later withdrew the adoption motion and the council voted to table the matter to the March 4 meeting to ensure a full council and to prepare required findings.

The discussion centered on whether the proposal preserves the bluff line and public access to views. Council member Whiting said he could not support the plan as presented because “it looks like they’ve utilized much of that bluff line for backyards,” a departure from earlier council direction to preserve the bluff for public use. City staff responded that the developer is dedicating a portion of the bluff to the city and that the city already owns another portion; staff said 15% of the area guided as park and open space will be set aside and conveyed to the city as part of the PUD.

City staff member Kerski told the council the project cannot move forward until sewer and water are extended to the site by the adjacent development, meaning homes are contingent on utilities being brought to the location. Brian Tucker, a representative of Summergate Development, said the plan was designed to “hit that sweet spot, where we’re minimizing the number of single loaded streets … and still achieve part of what the city was hoping to get, which was some open view shed through there.” Tucker added the developer worked with staff to preserve connected trails and public access through donated parcels.

Mike Sewell, representing D.R. Horton (the proposed builder), described the housing products planned for the site and said the builder anticipates pricing that reflects current market conditions; he discussed one-level homes (“Freedom” homes), two-story traditional models and smaller “cottage” homes. Sewell told the council that a one-car garage product is being offered as an option and that the builder expects many buyers to choose two-car-garage plans; he noted market and material-cost pressures have pushed prices higher.

Council members raised several points they said must be clarified before a final vote: the effective width of the portion of bluff being conveyed (councilors described some mapped strips as appearing narrow on the exhibit), whether Street 6 could be shifted to increase the public view corridor, the trade-offs between smaller lots and higher front-facing design standards, and stormwater management (staff confirmed Outlot B is the stormwater basin). City Administrator Reynolds clarified the city is working on an appraisal to acquire the remainder of the bluff using park development fees.

Action and next steps: Council member Lara withdrew the adoption motion and a substitute motion to table the ordinance to the March 4 meeting carried by voice vote. The council directed staff to return with the item at the next meeting with prepared findings and any additional clarifications members requested.

Votes at a glance: The council took the following formal actions related to this portion of the agenda during the Feb. 18 meeting: a motion to adopt Ordinance 2025-001 (the adoption motion was withdrawn), and a motion to table the item to the March 4 meeting (the motion passed by voice vote).

Why it matters: The amendment affects the Windermere neighborhood and a planned continuous bluff/open-space corridor described in the comprehensive plan. Council members stressed the trade-offs between adding housing density and preserving publicly accessible bluff and trail amenities.

Community context: Staff said the project will not be buildable until sewer and water are extended by the neighboring development; the city is negotiating to acquire additional bluff acreage through park development fees. The council asked for clearer mapping and findings before taking a final vote.

Ending note: The item will return to the March 4 council meeting for further consideration with a full council and additional staff-prepared findings and exhibits.