Loading...
1b. Rook Place, Michael Lynch: Final Plat.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF -. CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner H DATE: August 12, 1996 Action by City Administrator Endorsed —L y Modified P,ejecte Dat 7 - _ e_ Pate Submitted to Commission Date Submitted to Council SUBJ: Final Plat Approval for Rook Place, located at 6630 Horseshoe Curve BACKGROUND On June 10, 1996, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Rook Place Subdivision # 96- 9, as shown on the plans dated April 13, 1995, subject to the following conditions: 1. The right -of -way for Horseshoe Curve shall conform with the neighborhood. Staff requested an additional 10 feet of right -of -way to accommodate future improvement of Horseshoe Curve. The City Council voted not to require the additional right -of -way and allow it to conform with the rest of the neighborhood. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plan will be required for Lot 1, Block 1 at time of building permit application. This condition still applies. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for Surface Water Management Fees accordingly to local ordinances. Currently, the single - family rate is $2,780 per acre. These fees are due at time of final plat recording. This condition still applies. 4. Full park and trail fees be paid in accordance with City Ordinances. This condition still applies. Don Ashworth August 12, 1996 Rook Place Final Plat ' Page 2 S. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of all grading limits near trees , before grading can begin. Applicant will submit to the city proposed tree fencing locations. This condition still applies. ' 6. The applicant must submit tree preservation plans or new canopy coverage calculations taking into account the additional loss of at least six trees. Reforestation may be required. ' This condition still applies. 7. The existing garage does not have to be removed until after construction of the new ' garage. The shed setbacks must also be brought into compliance prior to recording of the plat. The applicant shall escrow the cost of removing the garage with the City. Should ' the applicant fail to do the work, the City will remove it. The garage must be removed within 30 days after the new garage has been built. Also, no building permits will be issued for the new lot unless the garage has been removed. ' This condition still applies. 8. Building Official conditions: a. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, ' using standard designations and indicate the lowest level floor, entry level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. This condition has been met. ' b. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading or ' construction on the property." This condition still applies. ANALYSIS - The applicant is requesting final plat approval to subdivide a 1.08 acre parcel into two single family lots. Lot 1 will be available for future construction. The site is bordered by Horseshoe Curve on ' the east and west. Single family homes are located along the north and south of the property. The site will be accessed via Horseshoe Curve. The property is zoned RSF, Residential Single Family. Ej 1 r� J Don Ashworth August 12, 1996 Rook Place Final Plat Page 3 The density of the proposed subdivision is 1.8 units per acre. Both lots meet or exceed the minimum 15,000 square foot of area. Lot 1 is proposed to have an area of 19,478 sq. ft., and Lot 2 will have a total area of 27,659 sq. ft. There is an existing garage on proposed Lot 1 and a shed on proposed Lot 2. Both structures must be moved. The shed is a nonconforming structure since it is built on the side property line. This nonconformity will increase through the subdivision by not giving the structure a rear yard setback. The shed must be located 10 feet from the side lot line and five feet from the rear lot line. The Park and Recreation Commission recommended full park and trail fees be paid as a condition of approval. Staff notes that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - RSF DISTRICT Lot Lot Home Area Width Depth Ordinance 15,000 sq. ft. 90' 125' Lot 1 19,478 sq. ft. 311.19 125' Lot 2 27,659 sq. ft. 147.98 1427 LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION Home Setback 30' front /rear 10' sides 30' front 10' sides 30' front/rear 10' sides ' The applicant has submitted tree inventory and removal plans for the proposed one -lot subdivision. According to the applicant, existing tree canopy coverage is 42% or 19,890 sq. ft. For low density residential development with a 42% coverage, the required minimum coverage ' after construction is 35% or 16, 467 sq. ft. The applicant is proposing to remove 3,420 sq. ft. leaving exactly 35% coverage. However, after inspecting the site and reviewing development plans it appears that more trees will be removed than what is depicted on grading plans. At least six trees are very close to and one is within the proposed grading limits. The applicant will need to show plans for preserving these trees. If the trees are removed, the applicant will exceed the Don Ashworth August 12, 1996 Rook Place Final Plat Page 4 minimum canopy coverage required for the site and be required to replace inches lost at a rate of 1.2 times the canopy area lost. Preservation of the trees has not been adequately addressed by the applicant and must be discussed before city approval. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site sheet drains in a southwesterly and southeasterly direction. Some of the slopes on the site are fairly steep. Very little grading will be necessary to construct a dwelling on the new lot. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control and tree preservation plan should be required at time of building permit issuance for City review and approval. Drainage from the site appears to be minimal. With construction of the home, the neighborhood drainage pattern will have to be maintained. Drainage swales are proposed around the rear of the house. Depending on the exact home placement, these drainage swales may or may not be needed. These items will be further reviewed at time of building permit issuance. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEES In accordance with City Ordinance, each new subdivision is subject to Surface Water Management Fees (SWMP fees). The ordinance exempts existing households from this charge. The newly created lot will be subject to surface water quality and quantity fees in the amount of $800.00 and $1,980.00 per acre, respectively. These fees are due and payable at time of final plat recording. I TTILITTE S Municipal sewer and water service is available to the lot from Horseshoe Curve. The existing home is currently connected to City sewer and water as well. Depending on previous assessments, the new lot may be subject to sewer and water hookup fees. STREETS The streets in this area are fairly old and substandard in comparison to today's standards. The right-of-way width is currently 30 feet wide which is significantly deficient compared to today's 60 -foot right -of -way standard. Staff believes that an additional 10 feet of right -of -way should be dedicated with the final plat on both Horseshoe Curve streets to attempt to bring the subdivision into conformance. In the future these streets will be upgraded and additional right -of -way will also then be needed. The additional right -of -way will not prohibit the building on the lot given the setback requirements. On June 10, 1996, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for the n 0 u Don Ashworth August 12, 1996 Rook Place Final Plat Page 5 ' subdivision. On the issue of the additional right -of -way, the City Council voted not to acquire the additional right -of -way and allow the road to conform with the rest of the neighborhood. ' DEMOLITION PERMITS Existing structures on the property which will be demolished will require demolition permits. Proof of well abandonment must be furnished to the City and a permit for septic system abandonment must be obtained and the septic system abandoned prior to issuance of a demolition permit. ' STAFF RECOMMENDATION ' Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: ' "The City Council approves the final plat for Rook Place Subdivision # 96 -9, as shown on the plans dated received July 12, 1996, subject to the following conditions: ' 1. The right -of -way for Horseshoe Curve shall conform with the neighborhood. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plan will be required for ' Lot 1, Block 1 at time of building permit application. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for Surface Water Management Fees accordingly to ' local ordinances. Currently, the single - family rate is $2,780 per acre. These fees are due at time of final plat recording. 4. Full park and trail fees be paid in accordance with City Ordinances. 5. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of all grading limits near trees ' before grading can begin. Applicant will submit to the city proposed tree fencing locations. ' 6. The applicant must submit tree preservation plans or new canopy coverage calculations taking into account the additional loss of at least six trees. Reforestation may be required. ' 7. The existing garage does not have to be removed until after construction of the new garage. The shed setbacks must also be brought into compliance prior to recording of the plat. The applicant shall escrow the cost of removing the garage with the City. Should ' the applicant fail to do the work, the City will remove it. The garage must be removed r Don Ashworth August 12, 1996 Rook Place Final Plat Page 6 within 30 days after the new garage has been built. Also, no building permits will be ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council minutes dated June 10, 1996. 2. Final Plat and Grading plans dated received July 12, 1996. issued for the new lot unless the garage has been removed. 8. Building Official conditions: a. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading or construction on the property. 9. COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - RSF DISTRICT Lot Lot Home Home Area Width Depth Setback Ordinance 15,000 sq. ft. 90' 125' 30' front /rear 10' sides Lot 1 19,478 sq. ft. 311.19 125' 30' front 10' sides Lot 2 27,659 sq. ft. 147.98 1417' 30' front /rear 10' sides ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council minutes dated June 10, 1996. 2. Final Plat and Grading plans dated received July 12, 1996. 1 1� L City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 Mayor Chmiel: Well we have to make a policy... Councilman Senn: Do we have enough information to make a policy? I mean it seems to me this... neighborhood put together a solution that everybody ... and agrees to and then present it back to us and then we have to decide whether we want to go ahead and do the public improvements on it or not. Wouldn't that be? Councilwoman Dockendorf: But it's not going to make sense to have a neighborhood meeting unless you... something about dollars. Councilman Senn: But it's not our dollars is what I'm trying to say. If it's a public improvement project, we should be involved in that decision? Are they willing spend $50,000.00 or are they willing to spend $20,000.00 to solve it? I mean it seems to me you may as well find that out right up front. It doesn't do us any good to sit here and say it's going to be this and they say we don't want to spend the money. I mean unless you're ... city writing out a check for this and I don't necessarily see that. Mayor Chmiel: Well depending if the city followed through with the developers plans. Councilman Senn: That's part of the information we don't have. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a recommendation by Council? To go ahead and meet with the residents of that specific area and come up with a conclusion. Councilman Senn: Talk about the alternatives. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, I'd like to see the city facilitate a neighborhood meeting to discuss all of the issues and... Mayor Chmiel: Okay. With that as a motion, is there a second? Councilman Senn: Sure. Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Senn seconded to direct staff to conduct a neighborhood meeting to discuss the alternatives for the Pinewood Circle drainage problem. All voted in favor, except Councilman Berquist who was not present to vote, and the motion carved. PRELE IINARY PLAT OF LOT 51, PLEASANT VIEW AND A PORTION OF VACATED ROOK PLACE RIGHT -OF -WAY (1.08 ACRES) INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS OF 19,478 SQ. FT. AND 27,659 SQ. FT. AND A VARIANCE TO THE RIGHT -OF -WAY WIDTH REQUIREMENT; 6630 HORSESHOE CURVE, ROOK PLACE, MICHAEL LYNCH. Sharmin Al -Jaff: This site is bordered by Horseshoe Curve on the east and west, and a single family home to the north and to the south. This is a very simple subdivision. The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 1.08 acre parcel into two single family homes. One of the main issue here is ... public right -of -way width. Currently Horseshoe Curve has a right -of -way of 30 feet. This is a subdivision that was created in 1910 so it definitely pre -dates the ordinance and all the requirements. They went before the Planning Commission and requested that additional 10 feet. The Planning Commission felt that there is an established width throughout the neighborhood and they recommended that it be maintained. It was a condition of approval at the time and they 28 City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 changed that. That was condition number 1. After the meeting, we spoke to the engineering department and they requested that we put that condition back in the staff report and request that the Council approve it. Therefore you'll see two sets of conditions. One from Planning Commission and the other one from staff. The second issue relates to an existing garage. This existing garage will be located on the newly created lot. Staff recommended that the garage be removed since accessory structures are not permitted alone on a parcel. The Planning Commission recommended that that structures remains until such time when the new garage is built. We don't have a problem with that. However, we added some language that requires the applicant to escrow cash in case the work is not done. The city would be able to go in and complete the work. Also we put in a deadline on when the structure would be removed and that's 30 days after the new garage has been built and completed. Again, it's a very simple subdivision. We are recommending approval with conditions listed under staff recommendations. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Sharmin. Mr. Lynch. Mike Lynch: Mike Lynch, 6630 Horseshoe Curve. This is one of these evolutionary problems... where there are existing lots in neighborhoods... Staff and I worked ... and the concern of my neighbors is of course back ... flavor of the neighborhood, the character of the neighborhood. The practicality of the neighborhood from the standpoint of privacy and so forth, not be breached so ... but that's what we need to discuss tonight. The operative language from the staff report is that streets in this area are very old and substandard. As compared to a new subdivision in width I'm sure. Road care... serviceability, access by fire or water workers that come daily to our lift stations. There's no problem as far as that's concerned. Certainly nobody in the neighborhood has ever come to City Hall and said, hey guys come out and widen our road. We don't have that inclination in the neighborhood. The second operative language is, in the future these streets will be upgraded. I think maybe there's going to be a problem if that is pursued. The only potential, technical reason I heard that might require an upgrade would be storm sewer, although the ... there are no problems of that nature. My lot is the last in the neighborhood that is potentially available for subdivision so basically if the existing right -of -ways aren't changed, we still have our ... 30 foot width. Why should we not do this? Pleasant View is a road from nowhere to noplace. There's no reason for thru traffic. That's one reason why you move there. Most of us, and you recognize names like Cunningham, Hanson, Conrad ... we've lived there since long before Don got gray hairs. As staff noted ... all the easements now are 15 feet. This dates from the turn of the century when it was originally platted and I was amazed to find out that the road is not where it's platted, by the way. It's migrated since 1910. Nobody seemed to notice. ...and these are really mature trees so through the length of the ... if you were to go with a 10 foot, you'd lose about 50 mature trees. We're talking 12 inch and above. I think City Council is 8 inch and above. The grades are steep. This is ... these red marks are grades that are in excess of 30% and have ... and if you widen the road, that's got to come from somewhere and someone's going to wind up with a tall wall there. The existing hedges now, the neighborhood ... and that's the green marks. I have lilacs and some of my hedges that have 12 inch bases and that's the major feature of the neighborhood as far as ... both visual and also... The existing garages. There's 11 garages. Some that have been put in as recently as 2 or 3 years ago that are between 5 and 20 feet from the road. These little squares that are numbered, that's the number of feet from the side of the existing road so for those of you who have eyes like mine, this is 15, 15, 20, 20, 20, 8, 8, 8, 10, 5, and 5. It's my understanding that if such an easement was exercised, that ... so you don't have a flat lot where you can just pick the garage up and move it over and set it back down. Won't work. There are existing retaining walls now that are modern and up to snuff where the purple marks are and of course those would come out. Can I answer any questions? Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Mike. Any questions of the applicant? 29 1 C City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 Councilman Berquist: So you're contesting the, I mean I don't have any problem with leaving the 30 foot street in. The city... department was saying that trying to reconstruct the road within that 30 foot right -of -way and maintaining a 30 foot roadway would be difficult. Charles Folch: Or even probably... constructed at the current width without a widening just for equipment to move around. What they'd need to do is be on private property and we need an easement. We don't have adequate right -of -way. Mike Lynch: ...don't understand because that road was constructed and all the easements were run down the middle. This is a major ... and the present 30 foot easement was perfectly sufficient for that. I mean we didn't lose our hedges. We didn't lose our trees. We didn't have ... so why is it different now? Charles Folch: The road is a rural section. If it's ever upgraded to an urban with curb and gutter and storm sewer, it's going to go on the outside and that's where you run into problems. Councilman Berquist: I mean practically I can't, I have a very difficult time swallowing the concept of turning that into an urban street. I mean unless something catastrophic happen that wiped out everything there. What's the likelihood of that ever, I mean why would, from a practical point of view would we even wish to impose that on the neighborhood? Charles Folch: Who knows at a future point in time when the road condition gets to a point where maybe the neighborhood would like to see something done with it, either re- surfaced or reconstructed or whatever, those may be options they'd consider at that point in time for future Council, future staff. The benefits in terms of having an urban section versus rural probably isn't that much of a benefit. Maybe these property owners and the type of neighborhood they're saying they have but in terms of life of the road, having concrete curb and gutter actually does increase the life of the road by being able to get the drainage off the roadway and have it conveyed along the edge of the roadway and the storm sewer systems and things like that. Again, that may not be a consideration or benefit to the property owners out there but I guess at this point, what staff is saying who knows what the future holds at some point in time down the future. It's been our policy, in similar situations with other lots ... where we've got additional right -of -way at this time, in case there is future right -of -way because if we don't get it now, and you need it in the future, determine in the future that you need it, you buy it in the future. You pay for it. So that's all we've been doing here is just continuing with consistency with the policy that we have. Councilman Berquist: ...it's up to us whether we choose to take them? Charles Folch: Well what I'm saying is, if we don't take it now and we need it later, we buy it later. Councilman Berquist: I guess I don't have a problem with that. I drove down there today and I, if I lived in that neighborhood and someone came in and told me they were upgrading the street to an urban street, or even redoing it with 30 foot and putting curb and gutter in, I'd raise as much cain as I possible could. I would like it at all and I don't, I mean it's a simple subdivision. Asking for the additional 10 feet I think is unnecessary, although I understand the concerns for the future. I just can't see it happening. Mike Lynch: Can I make it clear to you that that ... right -of -way has no bearing on the subdivision. u City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 Councilman Berquist: No, I understand that. I have a couple other questions that I had written out. One concerns the requiring of escrow of demolition costs for the existing garage. You know it occurred to me that there's enough of an impetus to have the garage torn down by the lack of a building permit being issued until the garage has been removed. Again, that's something else I don't see the reason behind. And then from a question of curiosity, what would happen if you wanted to come in and use that garage, the existing garage with the dormers as a garage for the new residence? Mike Lynch: The condition's too bad. Councilman Berquist: Okay. So it's a question of the structural integrity of that particular garage. And that decision was made for demolition based upon the condition of the garage? Kate Aanenson: The ordinance requires them to not have an accessory structure without a permanent structure Councilman Berquist: So if someone comes in here and they want to subdivide a lot and they have a perfectly good garage sitting on site, they'd have to dismantle it only to put it back together? Kate Aanenson: ...but we don't want to encourage somebody to use it as a dwelling... Councilman Berquist: The way the report was written, it seemed as if it was a . just the way it is. There's no mention of the condition of the structure whatsoever. Kate Aanenson: ...if someone leased it and used it as boat storage... Councilman Berquist: Okay. That's the extent of my questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I think the right -of -way should just be grandfathered in for the rest of the neighborhood... I too thought the escrow of the demolition was a little, I don't know. A little too insofar as ... I don't know, do you have a problem with an escrow? Mike Lynch: In light of all the other changes that were made and the give and take, I wasn't going to say anything about it. I can afford it. It's a nuisance. But you know, if this is the way it needs to be done, alright. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I guess that's the extent of my comments. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: I guess my only bone of contention was whether we go along with staff recommendation for the additional 10 feet. I personally don't see ... that would turn into an urban road but I think Charles does make a compelling argument. If 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 years from now something happens and you don't have that 10 feet, there could be a whole lot more hassle than if we had that 10 feet now. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark. 31 r n 1 C 0 City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 Councilman Senn: I wish the road could stay the way it is. Charles, I understand your point. I mean our action on taking this to 40 feet doesn't have anything to do with ... one way or the other. I mean that's the simple reality ... some time in the future should it ever become necessary. Charles Folch: Or just be aware of that. That if we don't get it now... Councilman Senn: My question on the escrow is why are you tying, when you're saying the old garage can stay up for 30 days or whatever after the other one. I mean you're saying you don't want the... effectively until after the garage issues are resolved? ...by tying it to the building permit? Sharmin AI -Jaff: Correct Mike Lynch: Can I respond? Legally, according to the statutes, before this actually gets platted out and transferred, the building should be out. So what we asked staff was, we've got a lot of storage in there and we would like, when we get the lot sold. Get some money. Build a new garage up on top of the hill. Move all ' the stuff up there. If there's some way we can work this out, and they said yeah ... tie it into the building permit, though ) can't get a building permit... ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess the only thing that sort of is a real bone of contention, I think everybody is in agreement that Horseshoe Curve, that that 10 feet of additional right -of -way should be struck, and we would just renumber those all the way down. Rather than 8, you would go to 7. ' Councilwoman Dockendorf: Or just take the Planning Commission number I and... Mayor Chmiel: You can do that too. Sure. ' Councilwoman Dockendorf: Then we have it in writing. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I really don't have any questions in regard to this. It seems perfectly clear. The other, that was one of the other discussions. I kept reading this myself. The only reason that you're saying, not that the proposal being... the city would then have those dollars in hand. Do we pay any interest on it? I'm trying to look at ... but if that's the particular case, I don't think Mike you have any real problems with that either. So if we started it here, you're going to start it with every other one that comes along so I would think that that probably should stay. I know Mike will take care of it, as far as I'm concerned. ' Councilman Senn: Maybe Mike will take care of it but we can't count on. Mayor Chmiel: Everybody in the entire city saying they will. Councilman Senn: You can't count on us being here tomorrow... Mayor Chmiel: So with that, I would ask for a motion. ' Councilman Senn-; I will move approval with the reduction, to the 30 feet... language and leaving the rest the way it is. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second? 1 32 City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Doelcendorf seconded to approve the preliminary plat for Rook Place Subdivision #96 -9, as shown on the plans dated April 13, 1995, subject to the following conditions: 1. The right -of -way for Horseshoe Curve shall conform with the neighborhood. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plan will be required for Lot 1, Block 1, at time of building permit application. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for Surface Water Management Fees accordingly to local ordinances. Currently the single family rate is $2,780.00 per acre. These fees are due at time of final plat recording. 4. Full park and trail fees be paid in accordance with City Ordinances. 5. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of all grading limits near trees before grading can begin. Applicant will submit to the city proposed tree fencing locations. 6. The applicant must submit tree preservation plans or new canopy coverage calculations taking into account the additional loss of at least six trees. Reforestation may be required. 7. The existing garage does not have to be removed until after construction of the new garage. The shed setbacks must also be brought into compliance prior to recording of the plat. The applicant shall escrow the cost of removing the garage with the City. Should the applicant fail to do the work, the City will remove it. The garage must be removed within 30 days after the new garage has been built. Also, no building permits will be issued for the new lot unless the garage has been removed. 8. Building Official conditions: a. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and indicate the lowest level floor, entry level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. b. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading or construction on the property All voted in favor, except Councilman Berquist who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Mayor Chmiel: And I think I know your reasons. Councilman Berquist: I just don't like. I think the escrow just complicates it and it's unnecessary. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe we can look at that and get it done in another way. Is there any possibility of that Kate? Kate Aanenson: We said if you want to take it off there.. Sharmin Al -Jaff: We have no problem with that. 33 r City Council Meeting - June 10, 1996 Kate Aanenson: We just want to make sure the garage gets torn down. Councilman Senn: I understand but how much are we talking about? To demo that garage can't be more than a couple thousand dollars. Councilman Berquist: I'm sure it's not but that's the point. ...you've got to make a deposit. You've got to track it. You've got to write the check. You've got to refund it. I mean it's a logistical can of worms that doesn't necessarily have to be done. Councilman Senn: We should change our procedure in ordinance then. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and that's something I think we can look at. Let's move on to item number 10. _METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, RICE LAKE MANOR INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, 8591 TIGUA CIRCLE, RICE LAKE MANOR ESTATES, BARRY MCKEE. Sharmin Al -Jaff: This site is located southwest of Rice Marsh Lake and west of Tigua Lane. This is a metes and bounds subdivision. The applicant is requesting to subdivide 7.05 acres into two single family parcels. Parcel A will be available for future construction. Parcel B contains a single family home. The new home will be serviced via a private driveway, which is going to be shared with an existing home as well as the neighboring property to the north. Both parcels meet all the minimum requirements of the ordinance. Staff is recommending approval with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you. (Due to the poor quality of the taping, the following discussion was not picked up on tape. The Council discussed the condition relative to the fence which is to be brought into compliance and moved onto the subject property, and asking for legal clarification from the City Attorney. After discussion the following motion was made.) Councilman Senn moved, Councilman BeMuist seconded to approve the Metes and Bounds Subdivision 996 -8, Rice Lake Manor Estates, as shown on the plans dated Received April 12, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1. Tree preservation fencing must be installed around the perimeter of the building site, 20 feet from the proposed pad, before grading or excavation begins. No trees will be permitted to be removed except those within the building pad and 20 feet from the pad. Also, one tree will be required in front yard setback area. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit on Parcel A, a detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and tree removal plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 3. The applicant shall dedicate to the City drainage easements over all wetlands and drainage ditches. The drainage easements shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for Surface Water Management fees pursuant to City ordinance. 5. Extension of sewer and water service to the new lot will require a permit from the City's building department. 34 n