The URL can be used to link to this page

8. Harstad Companies Preliminary PlatI i !I CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: Feb. 2 1994 CC DATE: Feb. 28, 1994 CASE #: 93 -11 SUB By: Aanenson:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 37 Acres into 57 Single Family Lots' LOCATION: North of Kings Road, west of Minn"ashta Parkway to the Victoria City Limits APPLICANT: Harstad Companies Robert B. Morehouse 2191 Silver Lake Road 4410 Highway 25 New Brighton, MN 55112 Watertown, MN 55388 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family ACREAGE: 37 acres (gross) /34.2 acres (net) DENSITY: 1.7 units per acre ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - RSF, Single Family S - RSF, Single Family E - RSF, Single Family W Victoria WATER AND SEWER: Available to the Site Action by City Administrator fbndo Jr/ y W P' ModifSe Otte Submitted to Commissiorl Date Subbm:tted to Council PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site has a varied topography with the high point running north and south through the center of the plat. There is a significant stand of trees in the northwest comer of the site. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 2 ' PROPOSAL SUMMARY Harstad Companies is requesting approval to plat 37 acres of property into 57 lots and 3 outlots. The property is located north of Kings Road and south of the Stratford Ridge Subdivision and the Hallgren property. There are three underlying parcels in the proposed subdivision: Ziegler, Wenzel and Headla. This property is currently zoned Residential ' Single Family (RSF). The City of Victoria borders the western limits of the subdivision and Lake Minnewashta borders the eastern property limits. ' This identical subdivision was proposed by Heritage Development and appeared before the Planning Commission on July 21, 1993. At that time the Planning Commission recommended denial of the subdivision. The subdivision was subsequently withdrawn and never appeared ' before the City Council. There are several major areas of concern that staff still has with this subdivision as proposed. ' The Kings Road right -of -way was never conveyed to the city and the only right to use is based on the city's past maintenance practices. Based on a staff field check it appears that the gravel road use is 20 to 23 feet wide. The developer has surveyed the road and located the existing Kings Road right -of -way. They have provided additional property to create a 33 foot right -of -way for the access road. In order to make this road meet city design standards, a 60 foot right -of -way is required. ' The Parks and Recreation Commission meeting held on January 25, 1994 reaffirmed the recommendation that was made at their June 22, 1993 meeting recommending the location of ' 1.7± acres of land at the northeast corner of Kings Road and Minnewashta Parkway. The applicant has chosen to ignore this recommendation and proposes a 2.4 -acre park in the northwest corner of the site. There is a significant stand of trees in this area the city would ' recommend a tree survey be completed. Other concerns that staff has with the plat is that there are 20 lots that are deficient in lot area or frontage requirements, 3 lots have access on to Minnewashta Parkway, which is against city code (Sec. 18- 57[1]); and provisions for storm water retention is deficient. Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision only if all conditions can be met. To date, the applicant has been completely unwilling to address any of the concerns. �I BACKGROUND - Proposed Plat Harstad Companies is requesting to plat 37 acres of property into 57 lots. The property is located north of Kings Road and south of the Stratford Ridge Subdivision and the Hallgren property. There are three underlying parcels in the proposed subdivision: Ziegler, Wenzel and Headla. This property is currently zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). The City of Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 3 Victoria borders the western limits of the subdivision and Lake Minnewashta borders the eastern property limits. A portion of the Ziegler property is located south of Kings Road. , This parcel is 199 feet wide and approximately 500 feet deep, and a large ;portion of this property is undeveloped because of wetlands. All adjacent zoning to this site is RSF except for the land in Victoria which is zoned rural density, 1 There on the site except for the wetland or unit per ten acres. are no wetlands this adjacent to Lake St. Joe which affects one lot. There are two large parcels adjacent to Future needs ' development, the Headla's and the Hallgren's property. access to ;hese parcels to be considered as a part of this plat. The site has a varied topography, changing in elevation over 40 feet. The high point of the site runs north and south through the center of the parcel. The site is primarily grass with a few scattered trees. There is a mature stand of trees located on the northwest corner of the ' site. This area is currently proposed on the plat as a 2.4 acre park to be dedicated to the city. Access to the park site is proposed via a 21 -foot wide 160 -foot long trail.' I The subdivision includes 57 building lots with 3 outlots. Outlot A is located at the intersection of Kings Road and Street 'B." This lot is being proposed fora storm water Dings pond. Outlot B is the remaining portion of the Ziegler property south of Road. This ' 1.5 acres will be landlocked by the creation of a lot on the front portion of the parcel. Outlot B is also part of a large wetland adjacent to Lake St. Joe. Outlot C is less than one -half acre ' (19,439 square feet) and is located adjacent to Lake Minnewashta and Mnnewashta Parkway. This lake front is not large enough to for a recreational beachlot. The area qualify minimum standards for a beachlot are 200 feet of lake frontage with 30,060 square feet of lot area. This property has insufficient lot area. Therefore, the property does not qualify for ' a beachlot. Lake St. Joe is just to the south of Kings Road. The lake has been designated as a Natural ' Environmental Lake by the DNR. Compliance with the Shoreland Regulations would mandate that all lots within 1000 feet of the shoreland must have a minimum of 20,000 ' square feet with a 125 -foot lot width (Sec. 20- 477[b]). The RSF standards, which is the underlying zoning, requires all lots to be a minimum of 15,000 square feet with a front yard lot width of 90 feet for the front yard. Lots 1 -3, Block 2 have direct access onto a collector street. This is against the city's subdivision regulations (Sec. 18- 57[1]). There are 20 lots identified in the � compliance table , that do not meet the minimum square footage requirements or lot width requirements. The plat will have to be modified to ensure that all lots meet the subdivision regulations. Bill Thibault, the Planning Consultant with the City of Victoria, has reviewed the site plan and made the following comments: Kings Road should be extended, and 4 it is not, the E Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 4 provision for a road running north and south along the westerly property line should be considered. Staff is recommending that Kings Road be extended to act as the collector street for this subdivision. LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION There is a significant stand of trees shown on the proposed park dedication property, just south of the Hallgren property. The developer proposed to develop this as park. This area is not acceptable for a park and the area will need to be platted into lots and blocks. This area will likely be platted when the park is moved. Staff is recommending that a tree survey (Sec. 18 -40, [2f]) be done. This information will help to determine the best lot layout in order to preserve the trees. Streetscape, as per the city's landscaping ordinance, shall be required along Minnewashta Parkway and Kings Road (Sec. 18-61[5]). GRADING & DRAINAGE The City half - section maps indicated a 33 -foot wide right -of -way for Kings Road. However, after further research by the city attorney's office, it appears the City has not been conveyed the necessary right -of -way as shown on the half- section maps. The city attorney's office has advised in cases such as this where the existing gravel road has been maintained (i.e. snow plowing, grading, etc.) by the City for over six years the public right -of -way for Kings Road generally be limited to the travelled portion of the land along with the shoulder or any land utilized as support for public right -of -way. In this situation, Kings Road has been maintained by the City for over the six -year period. The width of Kings Road varies from 20 feet to 23 feet, thus limiting the public right -of -way use to this area. The existing roadway meanders back and forth within the 33 -foot wide strip of proposed right -of -way. At the west end of Kings Road the roadway is entirely outside the 33 -foot right -of -way. Construction of the full roadway width will require acquisition of temporary and permanent easements for street, utility and drainage purposes by the applicant. The preliminary grading plan proposes to grade the entire site. Due to the size of the parcel, it is anticipated that the applicant will proceed with several phases in order to complete the overall development. In conjunction with upgrading Kings Road the grading appears to extend between 50 and 100 feet into the Carlson, Borris and Scott properties located south of Kings Road. This is excessive from an engineering standpoint and staff recommends that the street grades be adjusted in an effort to minimize disruption to the adjacent parcels or employ other means to reduce grading limits i.e. retaining walls. The proposed street grade (8 %) on Kings Road in front of the Carlson property exceeds the City's ordinance (0.50% to 7.0 %). Staff believes the grades should be adjusted to meet the City's requirements. Harstad Companies j Feb. 21, 1993 Page 5 DRAINAGE AREAS The site is divided into two drainage subdistricts with the westerly one quarter of the site draining west into wetlands located within the City of Victoria. These wetlands are part of the Lake St. Joe basin and drain into Lake St. Joe from the west. The City's subdivision , ordinance requires the surface water discharge rate from the subdivision be retained at the pre - developed runoff rate for a 100 -year, 24 -hour storm event. The storml drainage plan should also be analyzed by the applicant's engineer in order to meet the City's Surface Water , Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP calls for a sediment and nutrient pond in the south central portion of the site to pretreat approximately 16.5 acres of runoff (SIWMP drainage area LM A7.4). Ponding must meet National Urban Runoff Pollution (NURP) standards before it , is discharged off -site. Ponding locations are flexible, however, the City prefers that the number of ponds be kept to a minimum for maintenance purposes. The applicant's engineer should supply detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year storm event land provide ponding calculations for retention ponds in accordance with the City's ordinance for review and approval. There are three areas of concern on the proposed g ro osed drains a plan that should be addressed. 1. Approximately 12 feet of fill material at lot 1, block 3 lying south o Kings Road ' adjacent to Lake St. Joe to make it a buildable lot. It appears that Ithe storm sewer proposed along the west side of this lot does not pretreat the runoff from Kings Road to NURP standards prior to discharging into Lake St. Joe. The grading plan shall be ' revised showing adequate on -site retention ponds to meet or exceed the City's water quality and quantity standards in accordance with the SWMP. 2. The proposed grading plan will increase the amount of contributing drainage area to the City of Victoria by approximately 2.1 acres. This will increas, the required down the gradient ponding facilities in Victoria. It is required to retain runof at pre - developed runoff rate for a 100 -year, 24 -hour storm before it is discharged off site. I 3. The storm sewer plan proposes a series of catch basins to collect storm water runoff generated from the street and lots. The runoff will be directed to two discharge points. One point is on lots 2 and 3, block 5 which drains west into Victoria as 2 The is retention on Outlot A. , discussed in number above. other point a small pond the small retention pond on Outlot A will then overflow through al,culvert system underneath Kings Road and discharge into Lake St. Joe. It is reco' ended that an along , additional storm sewer line be proposed to collect backyard drains;e lots 14 through 17, block 2. 1 n Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 ' Page 6 UTILITIES ' The site is capable of being serviced by municipal sanitary sewer and water by extending utilities from Minnewashta Parkway along Kings Road. The plans should provide utility ' stubouts for the adjacent undeveloped parcels to the north, south and west. Upon quick review of the utility layout, it appears that fire hydrant placement will need to be ' revised. Fire hydrant spacing should be in accordance with the City's fire marshal's recommendations. Typically, fire hydrants are spaced 300 feet apart. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the street and utility improvements will be required for review by staff and City Council approval in conjunction with final plat approval. The street and utility improvement shall be constructed in accordance with the City latest edition of the Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements and conditions of approval. As with other typical city developments, the moisture content in the soil is relatively high and the City has employed the use of draintile behind the curbs for improving both road sub -base drainage as well as providing a discharge point for household sump pumps. The applicant should be aware that the City will be requiring with the street and utility construction to include a draintile system. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and drainage areas lying outside the right -of -way. The easement shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. The City will also require that all ponding areas be designed to provide access for maintenance equipment. The design shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. EROSION CONTROL The grading plan does provide minimal erosion control measures (Type I); however, adjacent to all wetland areas the erosion control fence should be Type III. All site restoration and erosion control measures shall be in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. ' STREETS Access to the development is proposed via Kings Road which is a narrow gravel roadway between 20 to 23 feet wide. Kings Road will need to be upgraded to urban standards to adequately address traffic and ordinance requirements (Sec. 18- 57[b]). The City's urban standards consist of a 31 -foot wide back -to -back bituminous street section with concrete curb E PARK AND RECREATION The subdivision proposed a 2.4 -acre park located on the northwest corner of the site. This area has a significant stand of trees. The city had considered acquiring the Hallgren property ' for park purposes. As this subdivision evolved, and through the comprehensive park planning process, it was determined that a more suitable location for a neighborhood park for this area was adjacent to Minnewashta Parkway. , Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 7 and gutter. According to the ordinance right -of -way shall be 60 feet wide. On Kings Road the applicant is proposing to dedicate 33 feet of the normally required right -of -way. The 33 ' feet of right -of -way is not acceptable. The site will eventually be connected into existing Country Oaks Road to ithe north once the Hallgren parcel develops. On the east exists a combination of parcels (Headla/Wenzel) which could be further subdivided. Access to the Headla/Wenzel parcels should be considered at this time. The Headla parcel abuts Stratford Lane which is only constructed for , approximately 250 feet west of Minnewashta Parkway. When Stratford Riidge was platted an Outlot B was created for future extension and deeded to the Stratford Ridge Homeowners Association versus the City. Ms. Hallgren gains access to her property through/over this ' Outlot. There are a couple of different ways to access the Headla/Wenzell parcels. One option would be to create a "T" intersection on Stratford Lane and loop a Ifuture street south "E" to tie back into "C" street. Another option would be to extend Stratford . ane to street , with a future street/cul -de -sac stubbed south into the Headla parcel. The residents in Stratford Ridge have expressed objections to the extension of Stratford Lane to the west. Another option would be to extend "C" street east to the Wenzel parcel with the intention of a cul-de- sac and the Headla parcel would have two lots adjacent Stratford Lane and the remaining parcel served via a private driveway. In any event, access to the surrounding parcels should be addressed. Approximately one -half of the necessary right -of -way along Street "E" is proposed to be dedicated (27 feet). Unless Street "E" right -of -way is increased to meet city requirements (60 ' feet), Lots 1, 2, and 3 must be platted as outlots. The city will not issue building permits for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 until Street "E" is constructed to its full width and the entire width City. Until is done, these lots be (60 feet) of right-of-way-has been dedicated to the this shall platted as an outlot. Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 face Minnewashta Parkway and staff anticipates these lots propose access from the Parkway. Minnewashta Parkway is classified as a collector street. The subdivision ordinance prohibits direct vehicular or pedestrian access from lindividual lots to ' such streets or roadways (Sec. 18- 57[1]). PARK AND RECREATION The subdivision proposed a 2.4 -acre park located on the northwest corner of the site. This area has a significant stand of trees. The city had considered acquiring the Hallgren property ' for park purposes. As this subdivision evolved, and through the comprehensive park planning process, it was determined that a more suitable location for a neighborhood park for this area was adjacent to Minnewashta Parkway. , I' �_ � Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 8 On January 25, 1994, the Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed Harstad Subdivision for consideration of park and trail development. The northwestern portion of the city had been identified as park deficient by the City's Comprehensive Plan. As the previous applicant's (Heritage) subdivision development evolved, the city retained Hoisington - Koegler Group to draft park studies for three defined areas on the plat. A park site 10 acres in size was selected for the southeast corner of the site. This proposal was submitted to the Park and Recreation Commission. At their meeting, the Park and Recreation Commission made the following recommendation: PARK: It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council approve the subdivision concept site plan as presented, with the inclusion of acquisition of lakeshore property. The acquisition of the park to be accomplished through park dedication (approximately 2 acres) and purchase (approximately 8 acres) ' contingent upon City Council approval. Full fee credit is to be granted as a part of these negotiations. - I TRAIL: It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council require as a condition of approval of the proposed Heritage Subdivision a 20 -foot trail easement connecting to the proposed cul -de -sac north of the park, in addition to the construction of such a trail segment from the cul -se -sac to the park. The applicant shall be compensated for such construction through the reduction of trail fees at a rate of $12.00 per lineal foot. The remainder of the trail fees to be assessed equally among the proposed 43 lots. This motion was carried unanimously. The Park and Recreation Commission revised this plat under the Heritage Subdivision on June 22, 1993. The applicant was made aware of the fact that the recommendation from the commission. The applicant has decided to submit a plat that they feel meets the park dedication requirements of approximately 2 acres. This park area is located in the northwest corner of the plat. Staff has informed the applicant that a plat that does not have staff support or carry forward the Park and Recreation Commission recommendation which is to locate the park north of Kings Road and just west of Minnewashta Parkway. A portion of the property being proposed for park purposes includes Outlot C which is approximately 480 ± feet of Lakeshore on Lake Minnewashta. This property is very narrow, being separated from the main proposed park site by Minnewashta Parkway. The area is 19,439 sq. ft. This property wasn't included in the applicant's concept plan of the park. Todd Hoffman, the Park and Recreation Director, is recommending that this area be included as a part of the park, to be maintained as a small, low impact swimming beach, City Code does not allow the applicant to utilize this area as a recreational beachlot. By taking ownership, both the new development and existing neighbors benefit. I� Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 9 , i Park and Recreation therefore would not support this plat as submitted, and would recommend that the plat be revised to show the approximate 2 acre park at the northwest ' corner of Kings Road and Minnewashta Parkway. COMPLIANCE TABLE Block 1 Lot Area (15,000 s.f. required) Street Frontage (95' Required) I Lot Depth 125' Required) Lot 1 15,021 118 127 Lot 2 15,021 118 127 Lot 3 15,021 118 127 Lot 4 15,049 118 127 Lot 5 15,039 100 j 150 Lot 6 15,000 100 150 Lot 7 15,000 100 150 Lot 8 15,000 100 150 Lot 9 15,000 100 150 Lot 10 15,000 100 150 Lot 11 15,000 100 150 Lot 12 15,000 100 150 Lot 13 15,496 49170* 150 Block 2 Lot Area (20,000 s.f. required) Street Frontage (125' Required) Lot Depth 125' Required) I 23,084 184 127 20,987 124* 149 27,387 169 184 MLot 23,359 105/195 147 22,382 156 147 23,440 116* 203 I II Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 10 Lot 7 21,421 139 153 Lot 8 21,690 150 143 Lot 9 23 44/112* 152 Block 2 Lot Area (20,000 s.f. required) Street Frontage (125' Required) Lot Depth 125' Required) Lot 10 20,609 99* 212 Lot 11 20,029 95* 211 Lot 12 20,949 100* 212 Lot 13 21,072 127 173 Lot 14 20,932 130 162 Block 2 Lot Area (15,000 s.f. required) Street Frontage (90' Required) Lot Depth 125' Required) Lot 15 15,067 93 162 Lot 16 15,040 93 161.5 Outlot A 21,146 226 88 ** Lot 17 16,661 90 136 Block 3 Lot Area (20,000 s.f. required) Street Frontage (125' Required) Lot Depth 125' Required) Lot 1 29,567 199 149 Block 4 Lot Area (20,000 s.f. required) Street Frontage (125' Required) Lot Depth (125' Required) Lot 1 22,456 116* 199 Lot 2 20,263 127 180 n Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 11 Lot 3 21,960 127 196 Lot 4 19,901* 90* 218 Lot 5 20,264 90* 225 Lot 6 20,250 90* 225 Lot 7 20,250 90* 1 225 Lot 8 22,592 110* 197 Lot 9 29,541 83/174 222 Lot 10 23,016 67/98* 194 Lot 11 23,582 69/96* 191 Lot 12 20,792 120 165 Lot 13 16,200* 90* I 180 Lot 14 16,200* 90* 180 Lot 15 15,067 (15,000 required) 90 (90' required) 141 Lot 16 14,940* (15,000 required) 90 (90' required) 166 Lot 17 14,940* 90* 166 Lot 18 20,003 121* 166 Lot 19 20,067 119* 166 Block 5 Lot Area Street Frontage j Lot Depth (20,000 s.f. required) (125' Required) (125' Required) Lot 1 20,030 126 161 Lot 2 15,145 92 162.5 (15,000 required) (90' required) Lot 3 15,007 92 163.5 (15,000 required) (90' required) Lot 4 15,070 92 (15,000 required) (90' required) 1 u L� n J 17 L 1 LI Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 12 Lot 5 15,002 91 168 (15,000 required) (90' required) Lot 6 15,085 44170 154 (15,000 required) (90' required) Lot 7 18,245 30 *(flag) 148 * Lot is deficient in minimum square footage or minimum lot depth or width PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On February 2, 1994, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed subdivision. The Planning Commission concurred with the staff's recommendation for denial of the subdivision as proposed with the reasons outlined in the staff report. There were several neighboring property owners at the meeting although no one spoke at the hearing. On Wednesday, February 23, 1994, staff met with Paul Harstad, the developer, to review the status of the plat. At this meeting, it appeared that there is movement to resolve the issues that would redesign the plat to meet the standards of the city. The applicant is requesting that if the Council were to recommend denial of this plat that they would instead table the item. The applicant would then not have to submit a new application but rather revise the plat to meet city standards. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council denies the request for Harstad Companies Subdivision #93 -11 based on the following findings: 1. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the following Zoning Ordinances: J J a. Chapter 20, Article VII Shoreland Overlay District, Sections 20 -476 and 18-60- - There are 20 lots that are deficient in lot area or frontage requirements. b. Section 18- 57(1)- -Three (3) lots have direct access on to a collector street. C. Section 18 -57- -Kings Road and Street "E" are not consistent with the city's Street Design Standards. d. Section 18- 63 - -The drainage plan is inadequate to accommodate runoff generated from the subdivision. Harstad Companies Feb. 21, 1993 Page 13 f e. Sections 18 -40 and 18- 61 - -The applicant has provided insufficient data to review the adequacy of the subdivision; specifically, for determination of tree preservation and potential environmental damages. f. Section 18- 79-- Parkland Dedication- -The applicant has ignored the city's Park and Recreation Commission recommendation for parkland dedication. ATTACHMENTS i 1. Memorandum from Dave Hempel and Diane Desotelle dated JanuAry 26, 1994. 2. Memorandum form Steve Kirchman dated January 21, 1994. 3. Letters from Dave Headla dated July 8, 1992, and JoAnn Hallgren dated July 10, 1993. 4. Letter from Jim Walston dated July 13, 1993. 5. Letter from Paul Harstad dated February 23, 1994. 6. Planning Commission minutes dated February 2, 1994. FEB 23 1 94 16:12 TO 612 937 5739 FROM HARSTAD COMPANIES T -980 F.02 Harstad Companies ' City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 J Dear City of Channhassen: Harstad Companies is interested in developing the parcel of land located off Minnewashta Parkway and Kings Road. Recently Chanhassen's planning staff recommended denial of the preliminary plat as proposed by Harstad Companies, and the planning commission subsequently agreed with staff's recommendation and denied the plat. The plat is currently scheduled to be considered before the City Council on Monday, February 28, 1994. Harstad Companies met with City staff on Wednesday, February 23, 1994 to discuss alternative designs for the proposed subdivision, including location of the proposed park along Minnewashta Parkway. During that meeting, staff suggested that we table consideration of the plat as previously submitted. Harstad Companies agrees to remove the plat from the a genda for the upcoming City Council meeting provided the Council records in its minutes that the plat, as previously submitted, would not be approved. Pending further agreement can be during the sum discussion, reached that r of 1994. 1 sincerely, � I LJ HARSTAD COMPANIES Paul W. Harstad Harstad Companies is hopeful that an will allow development of the parcel CITY OF CHANHA " I SBN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Kate Aanenson, Sr. Planner FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer Diane Desotelle, Water Resources Coordinator DMD DATE: January 24, 1994 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review - Minnewashta Subdivision LUR 94 -2 GRADING & DRAINAGE The City half - section maps indicated a 33 -foot wide right -of -way for Kings F further research by the city attorney's office, it appears the City has not necessary right -of -way as shown on the half- section maps. The city attorne} in cases such as this where the existing gravel road has been maintained grading, etc.) by the City for over six years the public right-of-way for Kinj limited to the travelled portion of the land along with the shoulder or any lat for public right -of -way. In this situation, Kings Road has been maintained the six -year period. The width of Kings Road varies from 24 feet to 23 f public right -of -way use to this area. The existing roadway meanders back 33 -foot wide strip of proposed right -of -way.: A# the west end of Kings l entirely outside the 33 -foot right-of-way. Construction of the full roadwa acquisition of temporary and permanent easements for street, utility and drai applicant. The City did receive an inquiry from the applicant to pe improvement project to construct Kings Road. However, nothing has pr( Staff is waiting to meet with the applicant to ,discuss the issues involved project to upgrade Kings Road. A 429 public improvement project requirE public hearing and authorization by the City Council to commence conde which would take a minimum of 90 days after the project was ordered. E Dad. However, after been conveyed the s office has advised (i.e. snow plowing, s Road generally be d utilized as support by the City for over et, thus limiting the ind forth within the .oad the roadway is r width will require cage purposes by the corm a 429 public ceeded at this time. n performing a 429 > a feasibility study, :tnation proceedings - pending on exactly n 1 where the existing roadway (Kings Road) is located in relation to the property line of the ' development will determine how much additional right -of -way would be necessary from the property owners to the south. If the existing roadway lies on the adjacent, parcel to the south, Kate Aanenson January 24, 1994 ' Page 2 ' then it will only be necessary for the applicant to dedicate with this plat the necessary right -of- way to arrive at a 60 -foot wide corridor. ' The preliminary grading plan proposes to grade the entire site. Due to the size of the parcel, it is anticipated that the applicant will proceed with several phases in order to complete the overall development. In conjunction with upgrading Kings Road the grading appears to extend between ' 50 and 100 feet into the Carlson, Borris and Scott properties located south of Kings Road. This seems excessive from an engineering standpoint and staff recommends that the street grades be further reviewed in an effort to minimize disruption to the adjacent parcels or employ other ' means to reduce grading limits i.e. retaining walls. The proposed street grade (8 %) on Kings Road in front of the Carlson property exceeds the City's ordinance (0.50% to 7.0 %). A variance would be required. Staff believes the grades could be adjusted to meet the City's requirements. ' DRAINAGE AREAS The site is divided into two drainage subdistricts with the westerly one quarter of the site draining ' west into wetlands located within the City of Victoria. These wetlands are part of the Lake St. Joe basin and drain into Lake St. Joe from the west. The City's subdivision ordinance requires the surface water discharge rate from the subdivision be retained at the pre - developed runoff rate ' for a 100 -year, 24 -hour storm event. The storm drainage plan should also be analyzed by the applicant's engineer in order to meet the City's Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP calls for a sediment and nutrient pond in the south central portion of the site to pretreat approximately 16.5 acres of runoff (SWMP drainage area LM A7.4). Ponding must meet ' National Urban Runoff Pollution (NURP) standards before it is discharged off -site. Ponding locations are flexible, however, the City prefers that the number of ponds be kept to a minimum for maintenance purposes. The applicant's engineer should supply detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year storm event and provide ponding calculations for retention ponds in accordance with the City's ordinance for review and approval. There are three areas of concern on the proposed drainage plan that should be addressed. ' 1. Approximately 12 feet of fill material at lot 1, block 3 lying south of Kings Road adjacent to Lake St. Joe to make it a buildable lot. It appears that the storm sewer proposed along the west side of this lot does not pretreat the runoff from Kings Road to NURP standards ' prior to discharging into Lake St. Joe. It is recommended that the grading plan be revised showing adequate on -site retention ponds to meet or exceed the City's water quality and quantity standards in accordance with the SWMP. ' 2. The ro osed grading plan will increase the amount of contributing drainage area to the P P g gP g g ' City of Victoria by approximately 2.1 acres. This will increase the required down 1 Kate Aanenson January 24, 1994 Page 3 gradient ponding facilities in Victoria. It is required to retain rune runoff rate for a 100 -year, 24 -hour storm before it is discharged I 1 at the pre - developed ' site. 3. The storm sewer plan proposes a series of catch basins to collect storm water runoff generated from the street and lots. The runoff will be directed to itwo discharge points. One point is on lots 2 and 3, block 5 which drains west into Victoria as discussed in number 2 above. The other point is a small retention pond on Outlot A. the small retention pond on Outlot A will then overflow through a culvert system underneath Kings Road and discharge into Lake St. Joe. It is recommended that an additional storm sewer line be proposed to collect backyard drainage along lots 14 through 17, block 2. UTILITIES The site is capable of being serviced by municipal sanitary sewer and water from Minnewashta Parkway along Kings Road. The plans should provide 1 adjacent undeveloped parcels to the north, south and west. If the applica in Kings Road they could request the City reimburse them for a portion of Kings Road as the adjacent parcel connects to the utility system by m charge. This would require City Council approval. Upon quick review of the utility layout, it appears that fire hydrant pla revised. Fire hydrant spacing should be in accordance with the recommendations. Typically, fire hydrants are spaced 300 feet apart. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the street and utility i required for review by staff and City Council approval in conjunction wi The street and utility improvement shall be constructed in accordance with of the Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant will be r( development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial installation of the public improvements and conditions of approval. by extending utilities itility stubouts for the Lt installs the utilities the utility costs along ,ans of a connection will need to be fire marshal's )rovements will be final plat approval. City latest edition ired to enter into a curity to guarantee As with other typical city developments, the moisture content in the soil is relatively high and the City has employed the use of draintile behind the curbs for improving both road sub -base drainage as well as providing a discharge point for household sump pumps. The applicant should be aware that the City will be requiring with the street and utility con ,truction to include a draintile system. I The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right -of -way. The easement shall be a minimum of r � u i�1 1 1 Kate Aanenson January 24, 1994 Page 4 20 feet wide. The City will also require that all ponding areas be designed to provide access for maintenance equipment. The design shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. EROSION CONTROL The grading plan does provide minimal erosion control measures (Type I); however, adjacent to all wetland areas the erosion control fence should be Type III. All site restoration and erosion control measures shall be in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. STREETS Access to the development is proposed via Kings Road which is a narrow gravel roadway between 20 to 23 feet wide. Kings Road will need to be upgraded to urban standards to adequately address traffic and ordinance requirements. The City's urban standards consist of a 31 -foot wide back -to -back bituminous street section with concrete curb and gutter. According to the ordinance right -of -way shall be 60 feet wide which the plans propose. On Kings Road the applicant is proposing to dedicate 33 feet of the normally required right -of -way. The City would be required to acquire the additional 27 feet by condemnation proceeding in conjunction with a 429 improvement project. If the City Council does not order the project then the applicant would not be able to proceed unless they acquired the necessary right -of -way from the adjacent parcels to the south of Kings Road or the applicant could rearrange their plat to dedicate the entire 60 feet of right -of -way on their parcel and install the necessary street and utility improvements. The site will eventually be connected into existing Country Oaks Road to the north once the Hallgren parcel develops. On the east exists a combination of parcels (Headla/Wenzel) which could be further subdivided. Access to the Headla/Wenzel parcels should be considered at this time. The Headla parcel abuts Stratford Lane which is only constructed for approximately 250 feet west of Minnewashta Parkway. When Stratford Ridge was platted an Outlot B was created for future extension and deeded to the Stratford Ridge Homeowners Association versus the City. Ms. Hallgren gains access to her property through /over this Outlot. There are a couple of different ways to access the Headla/Wenzel parcels. One option would be to create a "T" intersection on Stratford Lane and loop a future street south to tie back into "C" street. Another option would be to extend Stratford Lane to "E" street with a future street/cul -de -sac stubbed south into the Headla parcel. The residents in Stratford Ridge have expressed objections to the extension of Stratford Lane to the west. Another option would be to extend "C" street east to the Wenzel parcel with the intention of a cul -de -sac and the Headla parcel would have two lots adjacent Stratford Lane and the remaining parcel served via a private driveway. In any event, access to the surrounding parcels should be addressed. i Kate Aanenson January 24, 1994 Page 5 , Approximately one -half of the necessary right -of -way along Street "E" is proposed to be , dedicated (27 feet). This should be increased to 30 feet. The applicant should be aware building permits will not be issued for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 until Street "E" is, to its full width and the entire width (60 feet) of right -of -way has been dedicated to the City. ' i Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 face Minnewashta Parkway and staff anticipaies these lots propose access from the Parkway. Minnewashta Parkway is classified as a collector street. The ' subdivision ordinance prohibits direct vehicular or pedestrian access from individual lots to such streets or roadways. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i 1. Upon completion, the developer shall dedicate to the City the utilhties and street within all public right -of -way and drainage and utility easements for permanent ownership. Maintenance access routes shall be provided to all storm water ponding. The routes are , subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. i 2. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completing site grading unless the City's Best Management Practice Handbook planting dates dictate otherwise. All areas disturbed with slopes of 3:1 or greater shall be restored with sod or seed and wood fiber blanket. 3. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in acco dance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detailed Plates Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council ' approval. 4. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies ' (i.e. Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, DNR) and comply with their conditions of approval. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 6. The right -of -way for Street E should be increased to 30 feet. No building permits shall be issued for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 until the full 60 -foot wide right -of -way on "E" street is dedicated to the City and the street is constructed to urban standards I Kate Aanenson ' January 24, 1994 Page 6 7. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year storm event and provide ponding calculations in accordance with the City's ordinance for the city engineer to review and approve. The grading plan shall be revised to incorporate storm water retention ponds in accordance to the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. In addition, the grading plan shall include lot and block numbers as well as house dwelling type with lowest floor and garage floor elevations. 8. Fire hydrants shall be incorporated per the City Fire Marshal's recommendations. Fire hydrants shall placed a maximum of 300 feet apart. ' 9. The applicant shall have soil borings performed on the site and submit a soils report to the City for review. 10. Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 shall be prohibited to take direct access from Minnewashta Parkway. These lots should be reconfigured to access an interior street or Kings Road. 11. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right -of -way. The easement shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. ' 12. The applicant shall submit plat drawings signed by a professional engineer in the State of Minnesota. 13. Access to Headla and Wenzel parcels should be considered. 14. Preliminary and final plat approval shall be contingent upon upgrading Kings Road to urban standards. The applicant may dedicate the full 60 -foot wide right -of -way and ' construct Kings Road or formally submit a petition to the City requesting the City to conduct a 429 improvement project. However, if the City fails to authorize the project, ' then the plat should be denied. ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer File No. 93 -15 LUR ' gAeng\deve\harstad.ppr CITY O 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official DATE: January 21, 1994 SUBJ: 93 -11 SUB (Hardstad Companies) Background: I have reviewed your request for comments on the above referenced planning case, and have some items that should be added as conditions of approval. Analysis: In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Locations of the proposed house pads are not shown on the preliminary grading plan. Locations of proposed pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) should be shown for proposed dwelling types. These standard designation$ lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process: Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval. 1. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval. 2. Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed house pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. t u 7 0 7 0 0 �1' 2 Dear Kate Aanenson: July 8, 1993 ' City Planner City of Chanhassen This letter is in reference to the Heritage development plan on Minnewashta Parkway and the extension of Stratford Lane to the west. First of all let me say that expressing my opinion has been somewhat difficult for it adversely affects my three neighbors. They have been a positive addition to the neighborhood and one of them probably has been responsible for the nesting of bluebirds this year. The problem, I believe, is an area that previously was designated as an outlot (that is 50 feet wide and extends from Stratford Lane west to the Hallgren property). The neighbors have been using most of it as lawn, which means it has been very well maintained. I feel it is in the best interest for the City of Chanhassen and the immediate area to have Stratford Lane extend from Minnewashta Parkway on the east to the Hallgren property on the west, connecting to the appropriate road design used in developing all 49 acres. Rationale for my opinion is: 1. A few years ago when Stratford was being planned, the city planning department had a study completed to layout the entire area. The plan was submitted to the Planning Commission and the Council. All three groups agreed that that was a good plan and the results were documented. That plan had a road coming down from the north, Kings Road fed development from the south, and Stratford Lane would service the 49 acres from the east. Part of the considerations, as I remember, were there would be way too much traffic coming off of Kings Road onto the Parkway if Stratford Lane did not go through. As far as I know, no new information has come up and nothing has changed. Why should we not have Stratford Lane go through as planned? Why should we pay for studies, go through deliberate planning, have the appropriate groups agree on the direction, and then later arbitrarily change direction? 2. I remember reading through the abstract several years ago on this area. The 12 acres owned by Ms. Hallgren, has an easement across the Stratford outlot. Now if Stratford Lane doesn't go all the way through, and the Hallgren property is developed, all the lot owners from the Hallgren property have access to the outlot. The result being I have a semi - private alley on my northside. One that no one is responsible to maintain, but used by the area residents. Currently, people other than Ms. Hallgren are using this outlot, but I believe Ms. Hallgren is maintaining the road. 3. I have lived here for over 30 years and plan on staying here for many more years. The point being I have a definite long term interest in how this area is developed. I want this area in ten years to look like a pleasant, well organized place to live. Having a 50 foot wide Stratford , Lane that is only 100 yards long, neck down to a gravel dead end alley is not positive aesthetics. That certainly would have a negative effect particularily on my home as well as other homes near by. Would any of , you feel comfortable with an alley going along side the length of your property? 4. On a pratical matter, there can be a very real problem in!the winter ' after a large snowfall. The gravel road is maybe 15 feet wide, and immediately on the south side of theroad I have a chainlink fence just inside my property. On the northside of the gravel road, there is lawn and some parking places. Ms. Hallgren has been very considerate in not ' blowing snow my way, for it would bring down the fence as the snow settles. However, if the snow goes to the north, it goes on the parking places and lawn. A 50 foot wide street has adequate room forl,snow , placement. i Ms. Hallgren would like to see Stratford Lane extended to the west and I ' hope she indicates her position in a letter. I believe looking at the site would be of great benefit and welcome any calls for any of you to come over and look at the road extension and ' see what it does to my neighbors. Thank You. ' I Sincerely, David R. Headla 6870 Minnewashta Parkway (its shaping up) Excelsior, MN 55331 474 -7269 cc: Hallgren I 1 July 10, 1993 1 Kathryn Aanenson - Senior Planner City of Chanhassen ' Dear ids. Aanenson: This letter is to support the Planning Commission's original ' plan to extend STRATFORD LANE westward to my property.... giving access to my 12 acres and also access to the western portion of the Headla property and on to the rest of the ' Heritage Development acreage. When Stratford Ridge was first developed, I had just lost my husband, and I felt vulnerable. Any change that would affect my property made me feel threatened and I was opposed to the extension of Stratford Lane. ' Now, 6 years later, I feel the extension of Stratford Lane as originally planned would be very beneficial for the future development of not only my acreage, but for the acres that ' are south of me. I am definitely IN FAVOR of this road concept. z Sincerely, ' Jotlnn nallgren 6860 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 474 -8315 z I i CAMPBELL KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. At t, Arno , x I i Mr. Dave Hempel City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: City of Chanhassen —Kings Road Our File No 12668/292 Dear Dave: (N'14 ;_.;;;; FaN tH'14i2 -; ;i, Enclosed please find correspondence from Carver County Abstract & Title Company, Inc. dated July 7, 1993 regarding the status of Kings Road lying westerly of MinnewashtalParkway. Please note that the Abstract Company searched the records for any conveyances creating easement rights in the name of the City of Chanhassen and were unable to locate any such conveyances. In a case such as this, the public's right -of =way for Kings Road is generally limited to the travelled portion of the land along with the shoulder and any lands utilized as support for the public right -of -way. After you have received this correspondence, please contact me to discuss this matter further. CITY Of CHANHASSER Very truly yours, WLS N UD CAMPBELL, KNU , S JUL 14 195- & Fucas, ENGINEERING DEPT. ' James R. alston! JRW:rlt Enclosure 13K Corporme Center Curve 4' Eagan, MN 551_'1 � I CITY OF CHA NHASSEN M COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937 t)EVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT Harstad CZ 0 ' Robert B. Morehouse, Agent for owners ' ADDRESS' Road ADDRESS: 4410 Hy. 25 New Brighton, MN 55112 Watertown, MN 55388 636 -3751 TELEPHONE: 446 -1991 TELEP ro ay time) -- CoMprehenstve Plan Amendment ii x,' SubdMalo n 'l , Use Permit 12. _„ Vacatlon of ROW /Easements Cond o 3. �^ Grading /Excavation Permit 13. Variance 4. — Interim Use Pernilt 14. Wetland Alteration Permit 6.._.,,,,. Notifioatlon Signs t6.__.._ Zoning Appeal 18. Zoning Ordina�noe Amendmern Planned Unit Development Rezoning 17. Piling Foes /Attomey Cost - (Collected etR e r . approval of item) Sign Permits Consultant Fees Sign Plan Revew 10, s h e Plan Review T FEE $ 1,405. ' A list of all property owners within 5o0 feet of the boundaries of the property' muet Included with the application. Twenty- slx size JQIMW copies of the plans must be submitted. SW X 11" Redueed copy of for oath plan sheet. • NOTE •When multiple appiicat1 are processed, the approprtate fee shati be charged for oaCh appiloatlon. PROJECT NAME~ Minnewashta Subdivision LOCATION Kings Road and Minnewasta Parkwa j LEGAL DESCRIPTION Attache I , I PRESENT ZONING Residential Single Family1 i REQUESTED ZONING No than e PRESE LANG USE pEStGNATtpN OR ell Rras n 'a F. A.IESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION ' REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Preliminary plat application for 57 lot Single Family Development ' This application must be completed In full and be typewrixen or dearly printed and must b accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordlnance provlslons. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinanoa and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certity that I em making application for the described action by the City and than f am responsible for complying wilt) all City requirements wth regard to this request. This application should be processed In my name and 1 am the party N the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of c.. -h;p (e?ther copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or p1hase agreement), or t am the person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this applicl�tlon. I .yseif informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progre�s of this application. I further unders:Lr�., that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, faaslbMy studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and Information I have submitted, are true and correct to the boil of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be valid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval / permh Is granted within 120 days w h the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original doc returned to City Halt Records December 6,� 1993 Date OrT Data Application Received on Foe PW Receipt No. ' fir 1 This application will be considered by the Planning Commisslon /board of Adjustments gild Appeals on NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Wednesday, February 2, 1994 7:30 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers a 690 Coulter Drive I Project: Minnewashta Subdivision ' Developer: Harstad Companies o r Location: North of Kings Road, COLOR ' West of Minnewashta r . Parkway TH Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Harstad Companies is proposing to subdivide 37 acres of property into 57 single family lots located on property zoned RSF, Residential Single Family and located north of Kings Road and west of Minnewashta Parkway. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Kate at 937 -1900. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning Department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on January 20, 1994. EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EX7SIOR MN 55331 1 LOUIS/LUANN GUTHMUELLER TIMOTHY J. FISHER RED. CEDAR COVE TWNHOUSE 7095 RED CEDAR COVE 7099 RED CEDAR COVE P.O.�BOX 181 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 1 KEVIN & CYNTHIS CUDDIHY ALLIN & SHIRLEY KARIS RO ERT & DEBRA PIROLLI 3900 STRATFORD RIDGE 3920 STRATFORD RIDGE 39 STRATFORD RIDGE 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 GARY & NADINE NELSON RALPH & P. KARCZEWSKI WARREN & JANET RIETZ 7048 RED CEDAR COVE 7054 RED CEDAR COVE 7058, RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 NICHOLAS &DEB JACQUEZ DAVID & A. PRILLAMAN COY & SANDRA SHELBY ROBERT & JUDY ROYER 3981 STRATFORD RIDGE 7064 RED CEDR COVE 7068 RED CEDAR COVE 7074 RED CEDAR COVE EX i LSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 JOHN & SARAH MANEY BERNARD & ALYCE FULLER DONALD &. B. BTITERMANN 1 7078 RED CEDAR COVE 7075 RED CEDAR COVE 708 RED CEDAR COVE BR 7 OKLYN PARK MN 55443 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EX7SIOR MN 55331 1 LOUIS/LUANN GUTHMUELLER TIMOTHY J. FISHER RED. CEDAR COVE TWNHOUSE 7095 RED CEDAR COVE 7099 RED CEDAR COVE P.O.�BOX 181 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 1 KEVIN & CYNTHIS CUDDIHY ALLIN & SHIRLEY KARIS RO ERT & DEBRA PIROLLI 3900 STRATFORD RIDGE 3920 STRATFORD RIDGE 39 STRATFORD RIDGE 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 JEFFREY & JANICE ADAMS W. SCOTT MORROW & NSTYON V. ERLLD 3960 STRATFORD RIDGE CYNTIA M. HOUSE 4000 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3980 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 NICHOLAS &DEB JACQUEZ TERRY &BONNIE LABATT KEITH &KATHRYN BEDFORD 1 4001 STRATFORD RIDGE 3981 STRATFORD RIDGE 396 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EX i LSIOR MN 55331 1 WILLIAM J. MUNIG CHARLES & C. CRUICKSHANK I DOUGLAS & JANET REICHERT 1 6850 STRATFORD RIDGE 3921 STRATFORD RIDGE 8707 KILBIRNIE TER. EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BR 7 OKLYN PARK MN 55443 t 1 STEPHEN & ERIN KILON HAROLD & ELAINE TAYLOR KEVIN & SUELLYN TRITZ 3881 STRATFORD RIDGE 3861 STRATFORD RIDGE 3851 STRATFORD RIDGE RD 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXC MN 55331 1 STRATFORD RIDGE HOA MARK & JULIE GRUBE C"G & LINDA MACK C/O KEITH F. BEDFORD 3931 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE 3941 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE 3961 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EX�ELSIOR MN 55331 , EXCELSIOR MN 55331 .i LOREN H. BEAUDOIN r 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE XCELSIOR MN 55331 IL OREN L. BENSON & EROME M. BACH C/O NORWEST BANK, TRUSTEE ' 6TH MARQUETTE MINNEAPOLIS MN 55479 -0046 I JEFFRY H. HALLGREN & MICHELLE GEORGE 355 HIGHWAY 7 'EXCELSIOR MN 55331 LINDA A SCOTT & SUSAN E. MORGAN 4031 KINGS ROAD 'EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JOHN P. BAUMTROG 7141 MINNEWASHTA PKWY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BRUCE & JENNIFER LINN 4001 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 LEE & JUANITA HARVEY 7120 KINGS ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JENNIFER J. HALLGREN 375 HIGHWAY 7 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 LOWELL & J. CARLSON R. 1 BOX 822A EXCELSIOR MN 55331 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION METRO SQUARE BUILDING ST. PAUL MN 55101 TODD & FRANCIS BOYCE 4011 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BARBARA B. WILSON 7050 KINGS ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 KRISTIN & JERRY KORTGARD 3901 GLENDALE DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 DAVID & MARGARET BORRIS 4071 KINGS ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 DARYL & DEBRA KIRT 7600 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ' MARK & DONNA MALINOWSKI JAMES & ARLENE CONNOR HOLY CROSS LUTHERAN 7250 MINNEWASHTA PKWY 3901 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD CHURCH OF MINNESOTA ' EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 4151 HIGHWAY 7 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ' LEE ANDERSON PLEASANT ACRES HOA ' RT. 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JOANN HALLGREN 6860 MINNEWASHTA PKWY. EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JAMES & R. BOYLAN 6760 MINNEWASHTA PKWY. EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ' JAMES & JEFFREY KERTSON 6810 MINNEWASHTA PKWY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ROBERT MOREHOUSE ' 4410 HIGHWAY 25 WATERTOWN MN 55388 KENNETH & DUANE E. LUND 395 HIGHWAY 7 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 DAVID HEADLA 6870 MINNEWASHTA PKWY EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 RLK ASSOCIATES 922 MAIN STREET HOPKINS MN 55343 TERRY FORBORD LUNDGREN BROS. 935 EAST WAYZATA BLVD. WAYZATA, MN 55391 J CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 2, 1994 Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Ledvina, Joe Scott, Jeff Farmakes, and Nancy Mancino MEMBERS ABSENT: Ladd Conrad and Diane Harberts i STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner; Bob Generous, Planner II; and Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY. Public Present: Name Address JoAnn Hallgren William J. Wiele Larry Wenzel Dave Headla Keith Bedford Charles Cruickshank Jeffrey Adams Bonnie & Terry Labatt Harold Taylor Janet Carlson Sue Morgan Linda Scott Jerry L. Kortgard Allen Karls Paul Harstad 6860 Minnewashta Parkway 6860 Minnewashta Parkway 6900 Minnewashta Parkway 6870 Minnewashta Parkway 3961 Stratford Ridge 3921 Stratford Ridge 3960 Stratford Ridge 3981 Stratford Ridge 3861 Stratford Ridge 4141 Kings Road 4031 Kings Road 4031 Kings Road 3901 Glendale Drive 3920 Stratford Ridge Harstad Companies Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Scott: Okay. This looks almost identical to the same subdivision or prelIininary plat that was 1 ' i i i proposed, I think we looked at this in. July? ' Aanenson: June. Scott: June of last year. Did you make the applicant aware of your objections to the ' preliminary plat? Aanenson: They were given the original staff report with our recommendation of denial on ' the. Scott: But did the applicant come back to you offering to adjust lot sizes, re- situate the ' proposed park, provide any alternatives for access to the three lots that abut Lake Minnewashta Parkway? Have they responded in any way to those? I n J u Aanenson: The one issue that they did respond to, as you recall the issue on Kings Road ... the only right -of -way we have through there ... So they did establish where that line was ... and from that line have gone, gotten 35 feet of right -of -way. So that's one issue that we ... resolve. As far as the other issues... Scott: Okay. So we haven't gotten a response from the applicant, or are they basically of the opinion that this is the way it is? Scott: Okay. Any other questions? Aanenson: Yeah, except the location of the right -of- way... Mancino: ...100% identical to the way it was presented last June. Have there been any changes whatsoever? I'm kind of reiterating I guess. Aanenson: Except for the Kings Road. Mancino: Except for that, okay. Ledvina: The lot sizes, street layout, everything is the same, right? Scott: Yeah, because Matt pointed out that the plans that we received in our packets are dated 6/7/93 so that probably would indicate. Any other questions or comments from the Planning Commissioners. Would the applicant or the representation choose to address the Planning Commission? Please state your name and your address. Paul Harstad: I'm Paul Harstad of Harstad Companies. Our office address is 2191 Silver Lake Road in New Brighton. We are aware that we resubmitted the plat with very little, if any changes and frankly as a representative of the company I'm here to tell you that that was done intentionally. It was intentionally done because, as we understand it there are, of what Fa U Planning Commission Meeting - February 2, 1994 we consider the two larger issues, namely the park and I suppose the righ -of- -way, but mostly the park. We were informed that the park, there were a number of differnt options and the purchaser- developer suggested this as one of the three options and got the, ball rolling in ' terms of the design aspect of the project and then brought it to the city and was rejected on that ground, among the others. In fact in the literature of the staff reports) I believe by the Park Commission, it says that final plat approval will be denied unless this change regarding the park takes place. If that's to be done, then we consider it a condemnation case and it is no longer in my hands, or frankly my company's hands. It will be in the lawyer's hands. So , that's our intent and that's the reason behind it. I'm sorry that the people+ that were notified for the public hearing have to waste their time going through this again. It's not our intention to inconvenience people. I Farmakes: Are you stating that your sole intent on bringing this back again, it's your belief that the only stated objection to this plan was the park issue? ' Paul Harstad: I'm aware that there are a number of different issues with the lot layout and that sort of thing that frankly are somewhat common in developing these �hings. I'm sure the , Planning Commission is aware that these things happen frequently. But we made a decision not to even go ahead with making any changes until we resolve the larger; one, namely the park. There was no sense in our wasting the engineer's time, or really even the staff's time , in re- reviewing the plat. Scott: Any other questions or comments? Thank you very much. This is a public hearing and could I have a motion to open the public hearing? Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and ' the motion carried. The public hearing was opened. Scott: If there's anyone here, if they'd like to speak in favor of or again s� this particular , preliminary plat—state your name and your address and if you happen to lave any exhibits that you'd like to bring, we have a couple of cameras. We'll try to help you position your , exhibits so they can be shown for the record. So, if anybody would like io speak, please come forward. Ledvina moved, Mancino seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and ' the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Scott: Comments? Matt. Ledvina: Well, this is the same plan so I share the opinions that the staff1has regarding many ' 3 � ' L 1-� t Planning Commission Meeting - February 2, 1994 of the deficiencies. I don't know that it's appropriate for me to comment on the park issue. I don't have a good feeling for all the information and the philosophy of the requirement for that and we defer generally to the Park Commission on those items so I guess beyond that I don't have anything else to say. Scott: So you would support the staff recommendation for denial? Ledvina: Yes. Scott: Okay. Jeff. Farmakes: I support the staff recommendation of denial. I Scott: Nancy. 1 0 Mancino: Ditto. I also support the staff recommendation for denial. Scott: Okay. I also support the staff recommendation for denial. Can I have a motion please? Mancino: I move that the Planning Commission deny the request for the Harstad Companies Subdivision #93 -11 based on the following findings, which is 1 with a, b, c, d, e, f, which are all the staff's recommendations. Scott: Okay. Is there a second? Ledvina: Second. Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to deny the request for Harstad Companies Subdivision #93 -11 based on the following findings: 1. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the following Zoning Ordinances: a. Chapter 20, Article VII Shoreland Overlay District, Sections 20 -476 and 18 -60. There are 20 lots that are deficient in lot area or frontage requirements. b. Section 18- 57(1). Three (3) lots have direct access onto a collector street. c. Section 18 -57. Kings Road and Street "E" are not consistent with the city's Street Design Standards. 9