4. Preliminary and Final Plat to Subdivide 1.45 acres into two single family lots, Ravenswood Estates Addition� CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
i
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
Preliminary and Final Plat to Subdivide 1.45 acres into two (2) single family
lots, Ravenswood Estates Addition.
1035 Holly Lane, Lot 6 Crane's Vineyard Park. The property is located on
the south side of Holly Lane.
Julie L. Sprau Owner:
2004 Scarborough Ct.
Chaska, MN 55318
612 -448 -1633
Merald & Elaine Krogstad
1035 Holly Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Single Family Residential
ACREAGE: 1.45 acres
DENSITY: 1.4 units per acre
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - City of Shorewood, Residential
S - RSF, Residential Single Family
E - RSF, Residential Single Family
W - RSF, Residential Single Family
Artio by City AdmhdrAar
Modifi
R*cte
Date Submitted to CommissiM
Date Submitted to Couna I
3 - �7- 9.S
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The lot contains a number of trees in the 10 to 16 inch diameter
range with several larger trees located on proposed Lot 1. A
dilapidated cottage and garage are currently located on the
property.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential - Low Density
(Net Density Range - 1.2 - 4.0 units /Ac.
PC DATE: 3/1/1995
CC DATE: 3/27/1995
CASE #: 95 -1 SUB
Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
Page 2
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting preliminary and final plat approval to subdivide an existing 1.45
acre parcel into two lots. Both lots meet the minimum width, depth, and area requirements of
the zoning ordinance. Lot 1 would contain approximately 22,879 square feet with Lot 2
occupying the remaining 36,387 square feet.
The existing 1.45 acre parcel, Lot 6 of Crane's Vineyard Park, includes a ten foot wide strip
of property which runs along the southerly boundary of Lot 9. This linear strip of property
provides access to Christmas Lake and will become part of proposed Lot 2. Use of this
property will be limited to the future owners of Lot 2.
Access to the parcels will be provided via a private street which will serve a total of four lots,
including the two proposed lots and the existing homes on Lot 9 and Lot 5 of Crane's
Vineyard Park. Twenty feet of the thirty foot wide private street easement will be located on
proposed Lot 1 with the remaining ten feet on adjoining Lot 9. The driveways will be
combined into one private street which will reduce the amount of impervious surface.
BACKGROUND
Crane's Vineyard Park was platted in September of 1908 and consists of nine lots. After
reviewing the original plat of Crane's Vineyard Park, it would appear that this area consists
of large lots (one acre or larger). However, a number of these lots contain more than one
home or principal structure. The two parcels adjacent to the proposed subdivision both have
more than one principal structure. Based on the total number of homes within Crane's
Vineyard Park, the proposed subdivision not only meets ordinance requirements but appears
to be compatible, from a density standpoint, with surrounding properties.
As mentioned above, the existing parcel, Lot 6, contains a ten foot wide strip of land which
provides access to Christmas Lake. This extension does not meet city standards with regards
to width of property at the shoreline, and there is insufficient area for dock setback. Staff has
reviewed the nonconforming status of this piece of property, as it pertains to future use of the
lake shore, and determined that a dock may not be maintained as a nonconforming structure.
A dock has existed on this parcel in the past, but has not been used on a yearly basis. During
the past several years it does not appear that any dock was used on this parcel. Therefore,
the dock has lost the legal non - conforming status and may not be returned to the water.
ACCESS
Access to the proposed lots will be provided via a private street from Holly Lane. The
common sections of this private street must be built to a (7) seven ton design and paved to a
width of twenty (20) feet. Preliminary grading plans shows Lot 1 served by a separate
' Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
' Page 3
driveway onto Holly Lane. In recent discussions with city staff, the applicant indicated that
' the driveway for Lot 1 will come off of the proposed private street. Staff is recommending
that proposed Lots 1 and 2 receive direct access from the private street only, and not Holly
Lane.
UTILITIES
According to the City's records, the existing cottage is connected to municipal sewer and
water from Holly Lane. Upon removal of the cottage the existing sewer and water lines will
have to be properly disconnected according to City standards. It is assumed that the new
dwelling on Lot 1 will utilize the same service line in the future. Lot 2, however, is not
currently provided with a sewer and water service stub. The applicant will have to extend an
individual sewer and water line from Holly Lane along the private driveway to service this
lot. According to the City's assessment files, this parcel was previously assessed for one
trunk and lateral water and sewer assessment. Therefore, the applicant or the builder of Lot 2
shall be assessed another trunk and lateral sewer and water assessment in the amount of
$8,124 (1995 rate). The City will credit back to the applicant or builder $2,500 against the
trunk and lateral water and sewer assessment for Lot 2 for construction of the individual
service line from the main line in Holly Lane to the property line. The assessment for the
lateral and trunk sewer and water line is payable at the time of building permit application or
the individual may petition the City to assess these costs and spread them over a four -year
period with interest.
An existing fire hydrant is located between the existing gravel driveway and the proposed
driveway expansion. The fire hydrant will have to be relocated to avoid conflicts with traffic.
At the same time, the individual sewer and water service for Lot 2 could be extended as well.
The cost of this work shall be the responsibility of the applicant. The City will need to
inspect the construction techniques when relocating the fire hydrant. A permit will be
required for this work.
LANDSCAPING /TREE PRESERVATION
The applicant estimates that the site is approximately 74 percent covered by tree canopy.
' City code specifies that the post development canopy coverage must be a minimum of 46
percent. A worst case scenario would permit the applicant to remove approximately 17,685
square feet of canopy area. Staff finds that the applicant will remove approximately 2,500
' square feet of canopy area. Based on this review, there are no forestation or replacement
planting requirements.
' The applicant will achieve a minimal loss of tree canopy by making use of a shared driveway,
minimizing grading, and by selecting appropriate building sites. In addition, a large number
of the trees are located in the required setbacks and will not be disturbed or removed as a
Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
Page 4
result of building construction. For the reasons stated above, staff is not requesting tree
conservation easements. However, staff is recommending that a home placement plan be
provided, as well a tree preservation plan, to ensure minimal tree loss. Staff will work with
the applicant in delineating tree protection zones and locating tree protection fencing.
Special attention should be given when removing the existing cottage as not to damage the
trees located near this structure.
GRADING
According to the grading plan, only minimal site grading will be necessary to accommodate
the home sites and construction of the driveways. On Lot 1 the plans show the driveway
accessing onto Holly Lane. Staff has the understanding the applicant has relocated this
driveway access off the private driveway (east lot line). The plans also show a power pole
located within the proposed driveway through the east side of Lot 1. This power pole will
need to be relocated to accommodate construction of the common driveway.
The site contains an existing cottage and garage that will have to be razed or removed from
the site. The appropriate demolition or moving permit will be required by the City. A
culvert is proposed for the new driveway on Lot 1 to convey drainage towards Holly Lane
where the ditch will convey the lot's runoff through an existing pipe system to Christmas
Lake.
DRAINAGE AND STREETS
Holly Lane in this location serves as the northern boundary of Chanhassen. The north side of
Holly Lane is within the City of Shorewood. Holly Lane consists of a narrow, sub - standard
24 -foot wide bituminous street. The street does not have curb and gutters or storm drainage
facilities. Storm water runoff is conveyed through a meandering open ditch section located
along the south side of Holly Lane until it reaches the existing gravel driveway on this site.
From there it is conveyed through an existing culvert system down to Christmas Lake. The
City's Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) proposes a sediment/nutrient trap to be
constructed adjacent to Christmas Lake downstream from this development to pretreat storm
water prior to discharging into Christmas Lake. Due to topographic constraints, staff feels a
better location for the sediment/nutrient trap would be on the parcel directly west of this
proposed development or on the north side of Holly Lane in the City of Shorewood. The
City has no plans at this time to develop this pretreatment ponding facility. The appropriate
drainage and utility easements are being conveyed with this plat to install storm sewers and
maintain the neighborhood drainage through the site. Staff recommends the applicant pay the
appropriate SWMP fees in accordance with City ordinance versus constructing any storm
water improvements. The SWMP fees were calculated as follows:
Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
Page 5
1. Water Quantity
1.36 acres at $1,980 per acre (single - family rate) _ $2,693.00
2. Water Quality
1.36 acres at $800 per acre (single - family rate) _ $1,088.00
A driveway culvert will be needed underneath the new driveway to maintain drainage through
the site. According to the city's SWMP, a 30 -inch diameter culvert is necessary. Staff also
recommends the use of riprap at the ends of the culverts to minimize erosion potential. The
existing driveway on the west side of Lot 1 which accesses Holly Lane for the existing
cottage should be removed and the ditch section restored along the entire portion of Holly
Lane.
The end of Holly Lane does not currently have sufficient turnaround space for public safety
vehicles or city snowplows. In an attempt to facilitate this, the applicant has followed staff's
recommendation and is providing additional right -of -way and a bituminous turnaround the
accommodate these concerns. Staff originally requested a 20 -foot by 40 -foot turnaround area;
however, after measuring this in the field, if the existing gate on Holly Lane is relocated
easterly approximately 15 feet, the 20 -foot by 40 -foot area could be reduced down to a 20-
foot by 25 foot paved area with a 30 foot right -of -way (see Attachment #7). The existing
gate prohibits access to Christmas Lake during the summertime. The gate is within the city
right -of -way and should be able to be relocated. The gate is temporarily locked during the
summertime with a city key; however, the Christmas Lake Homeowners Association
apparently has access to the lake via this driveway gate access point. The city uses this
access to service a lift station daily.
COMPLIANCE TABLE
BLOCK
LOT
AREA (SQ. FT.)
FRONTAGE
DEPTH
1
1
22,879
160
167
1
2
36,387
158
204
FINDINGS
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
Finding: The subdivision meets all requirements of the zoning ordinance and
the RSF, Residential Single Family District.
Ravenswood Estates '
March 1, 1995
Page 6 '
2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional
plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable plans.
3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm
water drainage are suitable for the proposed development;
Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the
conditions specified in this report.
4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this
chapter;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure.
5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage if the
necessary conditions are attached to the approval.
6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record.
Finding The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements,
but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements.
7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
b. Lack of adequate roads.
C. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
d. Lack of adequate off -site public improvements or support systems.
Finding The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban
infrastructure.
Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
Page 7
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
On March 1, 1995, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the preliminary
plat for Ravenswood Estate. The Commission recommended approval of the plat with
fourteen conditions.
Several issues pertaining to the use of the lake shore and drainage were discussed. The non-
' conforming status of the lake shore property and dock was reviewed by staff back in August
of 1994. At this time, staff indicated that a dock could be placed on this property based on
information received from the property owner. Prior to the Planning Commission meeting,
t staff received conflicting information which indicated that a dock has not been maintained on
this property over the years. In addition, the abundance of vegetation along the lake shore
and within the water would also lead one to believe that a dock has not been used in recent
' years. Based on this information, staff determined that a dock may not be used or installed
on this property because it is no longer considered a nonconforming use.
' An adjacent property owner raised some concerns regarding existing drainage problems along
Holly Lane. Staff met with the property owner following the Planning Commission meeting
to discuss these problems. Staff will be working with the applicant and adjacent property
' owner to attempt to resolve some of these issues.
As a point of clarification, the Commission attached a condition stating that the driveway for
' lot one should access onto the proposed private street and not Holly Lane. This condition
was attached to preserve the trees along the north side of the lot. Staff would like to point
' out that the 36 inch oak tree located in this area was incorrectly placed on the survey. The
tree is dead and has been removed from the property. Therefore, the driveway for Lot 1 may
be placed as shown on the grading plan or from the private driveway.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves the preliminary and final plat for Subdivision 95 -1, Ravenswood
Estates, subject to the plans dated March 20, 1995 and the following conditions:
1. Tree preservation and home placement plans shall be submitted at the time of the
building permit application for staff review and approval. Tree protection fencing
shall be incorporated on the site during construction and demolition to protect all trees
that are to be preserved.
Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
Page 8
2. The site plan documents should be revised to show driveway access to Lot 1 from the
proposed private driveway. Since the 36" oak was dead and removed, the driveway
access for Lot 1 may be from Holly Lane or the proposed private street.
3. The applicant shall obtain and convey the necessary cross - access or driveway
maintenance easement agreements between the new lots and the neighboring lots to
provide access to the newly created lots. The total easement width shall be 30 feet
wide.
4. The existing cottage and garage shall be razed or removed from the site within 30
days after the final plat has been recorded. The utility lines to the cottage shall be
properly abandoned in accordance with City standards. The applicant shall obtain the
necessary permits from the City.
5. Soil reports showing details and locations of house pads and verifying suitability of
natural and fill soils shall be submitted to the Inspections Division prior to issuance of
any building permits.
6. Full Park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit approval in the
amount in force at the time of building permit application.
7. The existing power pole along the east property line shall be relocated to avoid
conflict with the proposed private driveway.
8. Sanitary sewer and water service will have to be extended to Lot 2. The applicant
and /or builder at the time of building permit issuance shall be assessed another trunk
and lateral sewer and water assessment in the amount of $8,124 (1995 rate). The City
will credit $2,500 against these trunk and lateral sewer and water assessments if the
applicant or builder constructs the individual service lines from the main line to the
property line. If the City performs the work, no credits will be given.
9. The existing hydrant located in the northeast corner of the site shall be relocated to
avoid conflict with traffic. The City shall perform necessary inspections to insure
proper construction in accordance to City standards. A permit will be required from
the City for this work. The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with
the relocation of the fire hydrant.
10. Storm water quality and quantity fees shall be based in accordance to the City's
SWMP. The water quality and water quantity fees have been calculated at $1,088 and
$2,693, respectively. These fees are payable at time of final plat recording.
'
Ravenswood
Estates
March
1, 1995
'
Page 9
11.
The existing gravel driveway on the west side of Lot 1 which accesses to Holly Lane
'
shall be abandoned and the ditch section adjacent to Holly Lane cleaned out down to
the east property line of proposed Lot 1. All new driveways which cross the ditch
section shall have a 30 -inch diameter driveway culvert installed along with riprap.
'
12.
Type I erosion control fence will be required in conjunction with site grading or new
home construction in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
'
13.
Portions of the private street which services more than one homesite shall be
constructed with a bituminous surface 20 feet wide and designed to support 7 -ton per
'
axle weight vehicles.
14.
Storage of boats at the dock must be consistent with applicable city requirements
except those which have the legal non - conforming status. If the use of the dock is
discontinued for more than one year, the legal non - conforming status is lost.
15. If the applicant wishes to have a dock on the lake shore property, the applicant shall
submit evidence showing that a dock has been in use on the property since 1983. No
docks, moorings, or boat lifts shall be permitted on Lot 2.
16. The turnaround on Holly Lane shall be modified to 20' x 30' with a 30 foot radius on
the westerly side. The pavement design section shall be in accordance with the city's
urban street section."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application dated January 28, 1995
2. Plat of "Crane's Vineyard Park"
3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated February 23, 1995
4. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated February 20, 1995
5. Letter from DNR dated February 13, 1995
6. Letter and pictures from Pam Myers dated March 15, 1995
7. Modified turnaround
7. Minutes of March 1, 1995 Planning Commission meeting
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE ,
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937.1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION '
APPLICANT: v L A I � e__ L p, OWNER: M �'r OlI '� `0. n h✓'b 1' j_ -Ij ►ter lil I
i
ADDRESS: �� �1 (-4)- ke < ADDRESS: lo Hoh L
1
J �
TELEPHONE (Day time) �7f> 3 5� TELEPHONE:
1.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
11.
Vacation of ROW /Easements
2.
Conditional Use Permit
12.
Variance
3.
Interim Use Permit
13.
Wetland Alteration Permit
4.
Non - conforming Use Permit
14.
Zoning Appeal
5.
Planned Unit Development
15.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
6.
Rezoning
7.
Sign Permits
8.
Sign Plan Review
Notification Signs
9.
Site Plan Review
X
Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost"
$100 CUP /SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP
$400 Minor SUB /Metes & Bounds
10.
Subdivision
TOTAL FEE $
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must
Included with the application.
Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
8 X 11 " Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet.
NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. I
Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
PROJECT NAME zQa 116 rL CWOhj 15 7 k. eS
LOCATION YollY L a nz, 6 A , 4 , ha SS , / %/y - 53/�`
' LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ro o �— n
L^ o+ (Q . n J + l a ,
L-v-� "I . Cminis �n��lti!�d t
K PRESENT ZONING
REQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION )— O+/ a Ik7 S J^�S; g2vti h
' REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION )- a Lr S i 1`�i ✓'l11
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST I t7 ✓`2 C VV lof !S i J4-
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
' and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying
with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to' this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the
' authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
t understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility 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 best
of my knowledge.
' I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approval /permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records.
' Signature of licant qa te —
Signature of Fee Owner Date
Application Received on )/36 Fee Paid 4oD E:�rAoiJ Receipt No. �
i
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the
' meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Rask, Planner I
FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
DATE: February 23, 1995
SUBJ: Review of Preliminary Plat for Ravenswood Estates
File No. 95 -6 LUR
Upon review of the preliminary plat documents of Ravenswood prepared by Schoell & Madson,
Inc. dated February 6, 1995, I offer the following comments and recommendations:
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
According to the grading plan, only minimal site grading
home sites and construction of the driveways. On Lot 1
onto Holly Lane resulting in the loss of a significant oak
understanding the applicant will be relocating this drivewt
lot line) thus saving the 36 -inch oak tree. The plans also
proposed driveway through the east side of Lot 1. This f
accommodate construction of the common driveway.
The site contains an existing cottage and garage that A
site. The appropriate demolition or moving permit wi
UTILITIES
will be necessary to accommodate the
he plans show the driveway accessing
tree (36 -inch diameter). Staff has the
y access off the private driveway (east
show a power pole located within the
ewer pole will need to be relocated to
requi
d from the
According to the City's records, the existing cottage is connected to municipal sewer and water
from Holly Lane. Upon removal of the cottage the existing sewer and water lines will have to
be properly disconnected according to City standards. It is assumed that the new dwelling on
Lot 1 will utilize the same service line in the future. Lot 2, however, is not currently provided
with a sewer and water service stub. The applicant will have to extend an individual sewer and
water line from Holly Lane along the private driveway to service this lot. According to the City's
assessment files, this parcel was previously assessed for one trunk and lateral water and sewer
John Rask
February 23, 1995
' Page 2
' assessment. Therefore, the applicant or the builder of Lot 2 shall be assessed another trunk and
lateral sewer and water assessment in the amount of $8,124 (1995 rate). The City will credit
back to the applicant or builder $2,500 against the trunk and lateral water and sewer assessment
' for Lot 2 for construction of the individual service line from the main line in Holly Lane to the
property line. The assessment for the lateral and trunk sewer and water line is payable at the
time of building permit application or the individual may petition the City to assess these costs
' and spread them over a four -year period with interest.
An existing fire hydrant is located between the existing gravel driveway and the proposed
driveway expansion. The fire hydrant will have to be relocated to avoid conflicts with traffic.
At the same time, the individual sewer and water service for Lot 2 could be extended as well.
The cost of this work shall be the responsibility of the applicant. The City will need to inspect
' the construction techniques when relocating the fire hydrant. A permit will be required for this
work.
DRAINAGE AND STREETS
Holly Lane in this location serves as the northern boundary of Chanhassen. The north side of
Holly Lane is within the City of Shorewood. Holly Lane consists of a narrow, sub - standard 24-
foot wide bituminous street. The street does not have curb and gutters or storm drainage
facilities. Storm water runoff is conveyed through a meandering open ditch section located along
the south side of Holly Lane until it reaches the existing gravel driveway on this site. From there
it is conveyed through an existing culvert system down to Christmas Lake. The City's Surface
Water Management Plan (SWMP) proposes a sediment /nutrient trap to be constructed adjacent
to Christmas Lake downstream from this development to pretreat storm water prior to discharging
into Christmas Lake. Due to topographic constraints, staff feels a better location for the
sediment /nutrient trap would be on the parcel directly west of this proposed development. The
City has no plans at this time to develop this pretreatment ponding facility. The appropriate
drainage and utility easements are being conveyed with this plat to install storm sewers and
maintain the neighborhood drainage through the site. Staff recommends the applicant pay the
appropriate SWMP fees in accordance with City ordinance versus constructing any storm water
improvements. The SWMP fees were calculated as follows:
Water Quantity
1.36 acres at $1,980 per acre (single- family rate) = $ 2,693.00
' 2. Water Quality
1.36 acres at $800 per acre (single- family rate) = $1,088.00
John Rask
February 23, 1995
Page 3
A driveway culvert will be needed underneath the new driveway to maintain drainage through
the site. According to the City's SWMP, a 30 -inch diameter culvert is necessary. Staff also
recommends the use of riprap at the ends of the culverts to minimize erosion potential. The
existing driveway on the west side of Lot 1 which accesses Holly Lane for the existing cottage
should be removed and the ditch section restored.
The end of Holly Lane does not currently have sufficient turnaround space for public safety
vehicles or City snowplows. In an attempt to facilitate this, the applicant has followed staffs
recommendation and are providing additional right -of -way and a bituminous turnaround the
accommodate these concerns. Staff originally requested a 20 -foot by 40 -foot turnaround area;
however, after measuring this in the field, if the existing gate on Holly Lane is relocated easterly
approximately 15 feet, the 20 -foot by 40 -foot area could be reduced down to a 20 -foot by 30 -foot
paved area. The existing gate prohibits access to Christmas Lake during the summertime. The
gate is within the City right -of -way and should be able to be relocated. The gate is temporarily
locked during the summertime with a City key; however, the Christmas Lake Homeowners
Association apparently has access to the lake via this driveway gate access point.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The site plan documents should be revised to show driveway access to Lot 1 from the
proposed private driveway.
2. The existing cottage and garage shall be razed or removed from the site within 30 days
after the final plat has been recorded. The utility lines to the cottage shall be properly '
abandoned in accordance with City standards. The applicant shall obtain the necessary
permits from the City.
3. The existing power pole along the east property line shall be relocated to avoid conflict '
with the proposed private driveway.
4. Sanitary sewer and water service will have to be extended to Lot 2. The applicant and /or
builder at the time of building permit issuance shall be assessed another trunk and lateral
sewer and water assessment in the amount of $8,124 (1995 rate). The City will credit '
$2,500 against these trunk and lateral sewer and water assessments if the applicant or
builder constructs the individual service lines from the main line to the property line. If
the City performs the work, no credits will be given. ,
5. The existing hydrant located in the northeast corner of the site shall be relocated to avoid
conflict with traffic. The City shall perform necessary inspections to insure proper '
construction in accordance to City standards. A permit will be required from the City for
John Rask
February 23, 1995
Page 4
this work. The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the relocation
of the fire hydrant.
6. Storm water quality and quantity fees shall be based in accordance to the City's SWMP.
The water quality and water quantity fees have been calculated at $1,088 and $2,693,
respectively. These fees are payable at time of final plat recording.
7. The existing gravel driveway on the west side of Lot 1 which accesses to Holly Lane
shall be abandoned and the ditch section restored. All new driveways which cross the
ditch section shall have a 30 -inch diameter driveway culvert installed along with riprap.
8. Type I erosion control fence will be required in conjunction with site grading or new
home construction in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
9. Portions of the private street which services more than one homesite shall be constructed
with a bituminous surface 20 feet wide and designed to support 7 -ton per axle weight.
ktm
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
Diane Desotelle, Water Resources Coordinator
g: \eng \dave \pc \ravensw d.ppr
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Rask, Planner I
FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official w<
DATE: February 20, 1995
SUBJECT: 95 -1 SUB (Ravenswood Estates, Julie Sprau)
I was asked to review the proposed subdivision plans stamped "CITY OF
CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, FEB 07 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the
above referenced project.
Analysis:
Soils Report. A soils report showing details and locations of house pads
and verifying suitability of natural and fill soil is required for plan
review purposes.
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.
Recommendations:
The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval.
1. Submit soils report to the Inspections Division. This should be
done prior to issuance of any building permits.
2. Obtain demolition permits. This `should be done prior to the removal
of the existing buildings and before any grading or excavation on
the property.
B: \safety \sak \memos \Plan \ravenwd.jrl
STATE OF
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
' PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 551P�gNO.
772 -7910
' February 13, 1995
Mr. John Rask, Planner I
' City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
' RE: Julie Sprau Preliminary Plat, Christmas Lake (27- 137P),
City of Chanhassen, Carver County (City #95 -1 SUB)
Dear Mr. Rask:
We have reviewed the information (received February 8, 1995) for
the above - referenced project (NE1 /4, Section 2, T116N, R23W) and
have the following comments to offer:
1. Christmas Lake, a Public Water, is on the proposed site. Any
work below the ordinary high water level (OHW) of Public
Waters that changes the course, current, or cross - section of
Public Waters is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may
require a DNR permit. The OHW of Christmas Lake is 932.77
2. Christmas Lake (27 -137P) has a shoreland classification of
recreational development. The shoreland district extends
1000' from the OHW. The development must be consistent with
the city's shoreland management regulations. In particular
you should note:
a. The lots contain steep slopes. Topographic alterations
should be minimized in these areas.
b. The vegetation and topography should be retained in
a natural state in the shore impact zone. The
minimum shore impact zone is an area within 37 1/2'
of the OHW.
C. The structures on the lots should be screened from view
from Christmas Lake using topography, existing
vegetation, color, and other means approved by the city.
3. The lots do not appear to be within a designated floodplain.
4. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed
developments:
CITY OF CHAf%1HA!�SE14
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Mr. John Rask
February 13, 1995
Page 2
a. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken
during the construction period. The Minnesota
Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning
Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association
of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts)
guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed.
b. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000
gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the
contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations
permit. You are advised that it typically takes
approximately 60 days to process the permit application.
C. The comments in this letter address DNR - Division of
Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These
comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack
thereof for a particular project.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at
772 -7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
' Joe Richter
Hydrologist
JR /cds
c: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Kristen George
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gary Elftmann
Chanhassen Shoreland File
NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING
' PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
' Wednesday, MARCH 1, 1995
at 7:00 p.m.
' City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
1 Project: Ravenswood Estates
I Developer: Julie Sprau
Location: 1035 Holly Lane
Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your
area. Julie Sprau, the applicant, is proposing a preliminary plat to replat Lot 6 and the
southerly 10 feet of Lot 9, Crane's Vineyard Park into two single family lots of 26,954 square
feet and 36,387 square feet, on property zoned RSF and located at 1035 Holly Lane, Ravenswood
Estates.
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 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 John at 937 -1900, ext. 117. If you choose
to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the 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 February 16,
1995. n
Leland Jr. & Sharon George Barry & Patsy Calhoon Timothy Foster
1160 Holly Lane 6380 Pleasant View Curve 6370 Pleasant View Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Todd & Sharon Novaczyk
6371 Pleasant View Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Merald & Elain Krogstad
1035 Holly Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
John & Joyce Hagedorn
630 Carver Beach Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Duane & Georgia Smith
1125 Holly Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Arno & Donna Windsor
1150 Willow Creek
Chanhassen, MN 55317
George Adzick & Lisa Drill
1155 Willow Creek
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Bruce & Patricia Birkeland
1140 Willow Creek
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Jerry & Marjorie Medley
1145 Willow Creek
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Robert & Lois Bowen
c/o Briggs & Morgan
6275 Powers Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Miles & Maxine Lord
1009 Holly Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Pamela Myers
1115 Holly Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
*j x
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 1, 1995
Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Ledvina, Joe Scott, Ron Nutting, Nancy Mancino, and Ladd
Conrad
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff Farmakes and Diane Harberts
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer;
John Rask, Planner I; Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II; and Bob Generous, Planner H.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 6 AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 9
CRANE'S VINEYARD PARK INTO TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS OF 26,954 SQUARE
FEET AND 36,387 SQUARE FEET, ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT
1035 HOLLY LANE, JULIE SPRAU, RAVENSWOOD ESTATES
Public Present:
Name Address
Pam Myers 1115 Holly Lane
Julie Sprau 2004 Scarborough Court, Chaska
Deborah E. Grove Minnetonka
Mirald A. Kroupstad 1035 Holly Lane
Carl Zinn 5820 Ridge Road
John Rask presented the staff irpoit on this item.
Scott: Any other comments from city staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to make a
presentation or make some comments?
Julie Sprau: Noe I think John's adequately described it.
Scott: Okay, good. Thank you. This is a public hearing. May I have a motion to open the
public hearing?
Mancino moved, Nutting seconded to open the public healing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public healing was opened.
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Scott: If anyone would like to speak at the public hearing, please step forward. Let us know
your name and your address and let us know what's on your mind.
Pam Myers: Good evening. My name is Pam Myers. My address is 1115 Holly Lane. I'm
the adjacent homeowner. I have a question or two. My greatest concern has to do with water
runoff. Storm water runoff and I didn't see the 14 points, or the 14 conditions with regards to
this subdivide. I don't know if staff has ... or what the plan is for water runoff. If you know
the area, if you know Holly, it does come down from the top of the hill. The water runoff is
from Powers or 17 or 85, whatever you want to call it. It comes down the hill through
culverts that are larger at the top of the hill and get smaller as they come down the hill and at
the moment they come down to the bottom of the hill to my front yard. I've worked with
Mike Wegler terrifically well ... in attempting to open up culverts. To open up the water
runoff. With putting in two houses downstream from me, I have a feeling that they'll put in
fill for this property... the new lots there which would build up that lot and therefore have less
drainage downstream from me. I know that there is a plan, long range plan to do some storm
water runoff management in that neighborhood. I would guess this is the only open property
at the moment, so those plans might be for storm water runoff.
Scott: If we could, because you have a number of questions I can tell. Probably the place to
start, if we could have Dave Hempel, who is one of our city engineers, who's quite conversant
in that sort of thing and I guess the question being, given what you know about the
preliminary plat and the preliminary grading plan, what sort of things are going to be
occurring relative to grading and then also our water surface management plan that might help
everyone understand the situation a little bit better.
Hempel: Certainly Mr. Chairman. As ... the city has been contacted regarding the water
problem... Holly Road is a substandard city street. No curb and gutter. No storm sewer.
The current drainage pattern is through an open ditch section along the south side of the road
that meanders through the property that goes through a driveway culvert. There are a number
of culverts... along the street there resulting in the water backing up ... The city surface water
management plan has indicated a surface water pond in the vicinity of this subdivision. Staff
did look at requiring that the pond be built on the subject property but after reviewing the
site, and the number of trees, significant trees, we felt that a better alternative... would be to
the west on Ms. Myers property. Diane Desotelle, our Water Resource Coordinator has been
in contact verbally, over the phone with Ms Meyers regarding this. There are no plans set for
this storm water pond... actually a lower priority. There are projects... additional two home
sites in the neighborhood will not generate significant runoff to adversely impact the current
drainage situation that is ... there today. We are looking at increasing the driveway culvert
underneath the private driveway of this development to a 30 inch culvert which... We're
asking also that the existing driveway be abandoned and the ditch section through there be
2
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
restored to help the drainage. One other thing that remains at the request of the city was to
rework the ditch through this property down through the Myers' property too... '
Scott: Okay. Ma'am, does that help answer some of your questions regarding runoff and so
forth? '
Pam Myers: It speaks to the need for larger culverts and it speaks to the needs for the ,
drainage on the new property to actually be dug out which is...
Hempel: Just to clarify. We did look at this parcel for ponding but all the trees that are in
the front along Holly Lane there, we felt that it would be a waste to lose those trees. A
better site would actually be on your property where the property is lower and is void of
trees.
Pam Myers: This is my front yard.
Hempel: That's correct.
Pam Myers: May I show you my front yard?
Scott: Sure. Ma'am, if you could also help us out a bit. We have a preliminary plat map
here and if you could tell us, show us where you're located.
Nutting: Are you west of the proposed subdivision or east of the proposed subdivision?
Pam Myers: West.
Mancino: West, with the blue door?
Pam Myers: I beg your pardon.
Mancino: Are you west with the blue door? Do you have the blue front door?
Pam Myers: No. I have a white house.
Rask: Approximately right here on Lot 7. As I indicated before, Lot 7 actually has I believe
3 homes. Actually there's a home back here that sits somewhere in here. There's another
home that sits kind of up in here and then I believe Ms. Myers' home sits up here somewhere.
This would be the front yard I think where Dave would be, the pond.
3
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Scott: And how does that correspond with the pond? Actually the standing water that we see
in these pictures? And we'll pass them to you Dave so you can.
Pam Myers: ...the street where you can see the driveway. The driveway and the culvert are
under water. Adjacent to the new property.
Scott: Yeah, we'll get this over to Dave Hempel and kind of circle the wagons a little bit.
Mancino: You have a lake.
Scott: They call that New Years Lake is what they call that. Does that ring any visual bells
for you Dave?
Hempel: That would be approximately the area that we had proposed to excavate out as far
as easements for a storm water pond.
Pam Myers: That wouldn't be my choice for my front yard.
Mancino: Yeah. The other question I have Dave is a little bit about timing. You said it's
not a top priority. When you say that, are you talking 5 years? I mean doesn't this present a
public safety problem?
Hempel: I can't tell whether, what the storm frequency this would have been. 10 year storm
event or 25 year, 100 year. We've had a number of 100 year storms in the last few years that
would result in this type of flooding. Simply I guess we'd be looking at this type of
improvement probably within the next 5 years. Storm drainage ... and so forth. The other
thing is ... temporary fix to the whole problem. What really should be done is storm sewer
incorporated with the street construction, curb and gutter and eliminate the ditch section that's
currently out there. If that...
Scott: Yeah because I was looking, when I was down there it appears as if there's a lot of
untreated water that's going into Christmas Lake through that area so.
Mancino: Are there other options that your staff have looked into besides Ms. Myers' front
yard for a ponding site?
Hempel: For the time being, no. We've considered contacting the City of Shorewood to do a
cooperative project on the north side of the street. There's an existing wetland there that
maybe could be expanded to use for storm water treatment.
4
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Pam Myers: There is a pond ... that's correct.
Mancino: Okay. So you would look into that further as, okay.
Scott: Is there any, do you see any jurisdictional delays due to having two municipalities
involved in this potentially? I mean what's your experience been? I think we've only maybe
seen one or two plats that have come by that have had some activity with Shorewood.
Hempel: We've got a fairly good working relationship with the City of Shorewood. In this
same vicinity I believe we service their homes with city sewer and water as well so I think..
Scott: Okay. Well, we don't have concrete answers but that's one of the important parts of a
public hearing is that we can at least get some more information from residents and what we'd
encourage you to do is irrespective of what happens here this evening, to continue to follow
the project and you're free to contact, of course not only the commissioners but also members
of city staff and what we've found is that they're very eager to take the time necessary to get
the all information possible and try to make the best decision for everybody so.
Pam Myers: That's certainly been my experience... But a lake in my front yard is a fall and
spring event. It's not an every year event. The property as it stands, the undeveloped
property which is the ... is low. I presume putting in pads to build the houses means that the
developer understands that it's low... I also presume that means that that's going to be filled. I
don't know what the plan is for fill in that area but that would mean that there would be less
place for the water to go, which I would suggest would mean more back -up on my property.
Scott: Have you seen a grading plan for the proposed subdivision?
Pam Myers: No. I've seen a plat drawing. I haven't seen a grading plan.
Scott: Okay. Well, you can get those from city staff and also we'll have some extras at the
end of the evening but they'd be more than happy to sit down with you and explain, here's
what it looks like as far as elevations. Here's how it's going to change and at least allow you
to understand a little bit better what the impact might be.
Pam Myers: Any higher, I would suggest than it is, they would want it to be in order to
build there and not have water ... and as soon as they build, then there will be more water... I
have a second concern that has to do with the lot line. I currently am in conversation with
Rick Vogt about the survey. The survey line does not agree with my survey lines which my
survey was done a year or so ago. So that is not settled. That is not a settled issue. There's
an iron set in a corner that would divide the two lots, north and south that I believe is too far
5
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
west into my property. Along that property line I do have a 10 foot easement for that house
that's behind me on the part of Crane's Vineyard. And it would mean changing where that
driveway was for the easement. So it's important that that be settled before we move too far
along with approving the building. I appreciate keeping the trees. I think that's an important
part of the project and I appreciate your mentioning that and the developer considering that.
We also have peliated woodpeckers there and it would be nice even to have some of those
' older trees but we can't have both can we. To have the old ones and the new ones too. Did I
ask all my questions?
Irwin Stevenson: Well I think you need to ask what the Council's going to do in terms of
allowing properties to built that just spreads more water onto there because logic, it doesn't
take an engineer to figure that out...
Scott: Sir, if you wish, I think what we'd like to do is make sure that your comments are
recorded on the record. So if you'd like to step up and continue your comments, we'd sure
appreciate it.
Irwin Stevenson: Well, at the present time.
Scott: Excuse me sir. Could you please let us know who you are.
Irwin Stevenson: I'm a friend.
Scott: Could we have your name and your address for the record.
Irwin Stevenson: Irwin F. Stevenson, 110914 Von Hertzen Circle, Chaska, Minnesota.
Scott: Great, thank you.
Irwin Stevenson: At the present time, you saw the water that stands and goes over the road.
As she stated, not on a 100 year cycle. But pretty regularly. And also that same water, at
the present time we get some relief because it builds up on the property that we're now
talking about next door. And so it's ponded too at times. Now the logic is, if you're going to
build a house there, you're not going to, unless you're putting a submarine there, you've got to
do something besides raise the property. And also the logic to me would be that it doesn't
take an engineer to figure out that that water's going to go somewhere. And it's not going to
go uphill. It's going to go down into that ditch. There's no other place for it to go. So
therefore I would think it would be prudent to the Council, before approving something like
that, that Mrs. Myers knows what's going to happen to her property. It can only get worst. It
on
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
can't get better. And I don't think it would be fair to allow something that now you
deliberately say 5 years from now...that to me doesn't make a lot of sense.
Scott: Okay, good. Thank you very much. Would anyone else like to speak on this
particular item? Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing please?
Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public healing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Scott: Ladd.
Conrad: My only issue is drainage, which they've been talking about and I didn't see a
solution that I felt real comfortable with that will take care of the current problem. So I think
we need a solution.
Scott: Okay. So your thought is conditions.
Conrad: My thought is I'd table.
Scott: Okay.
Aanenson: Dave, maybe you can comment. There was a grading plan in the packet and it's
maintaining the pre - development runoff rate so it's not increasing. I mean Dave could maybe
elaborate on that more. I mean there's an existing condition out there. Whether this plat's
responsible to solve that problem, whether this plat were to go in or not, there's still a
problem out there so we're kind of looking at a bigger picture besides this plat. I think we
need to separate those two issues and maybe Dave wants to comment a little bit more.
Hempel: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. The grading plan ... only showed
minimal grading for the house pads built approximately 18 inches and provides surface
drainage away from the house pad. The current drainage situation out there is not going to
be, first of all improved with this development, nor is it going to worsen. A problem exists
out there ... it's been there for a number of years and as development continues upstream, more
valuable water in generated. So it's a much bigger project than this simple subdivision...
involves drainage storm sewer piping, ponding and upgrading of the street essentially to solve
the problem. And I was just going to add, by tabling this project would not solve any of the
problems.
Conrad: Well in the staff report Dave, that's sure not the impression I got, and maybe I read
it, and maybe I didn't read your notes carefully enough but under drainage and streets, it
7
' Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
seemed like the solution was to develop a pond and that was not going to happen. And
therefore, the way I read it, given the fact that that was not going to happen, we were not
improving, or not even maintaining the predevelopment runoff.
' Hempel: The initial runoff generated from two house pads and driveways is really minimal
compared to the overall runoff from the watershed that goes through this property. This
' property that's being subdivided is actually downstream and at the end of the watershed. The
surface water management plan showed a ponding somewhere in this vicinity to treat the
runoff prior to discharging into Christmas Lake. Not necessarily for quantity purposes but for
water quality purposes. So any type of storm sewer improvements we do will help ... the
situation but will not totally alleviate the problem. Storm sewers are designed typically for a
10 year storm event. Anything greater than that, we provide for emergency overflows to
prevent flooding of the homes and so forth.
Aanenson: Can I just add to what Dave was saying? They are being assessed storm water
fees to add to that project so we have, that's the purpose of the storm water plan. When we
adopted those fees as property subdivided to collectively get that money in order to do these
kinds of projects. So they are being assessed storm water fees for the eventual construction
of the pond in that area.
Conrad: Well again the way I read the staff report, it said we can't solve the problem. It has
' to impact it somehow. Has to. And therefore that's why I didn't feel comfortable with it.
Now if you tell me this is 1 /100 of the overall problem, or 1 /1000, then I may pay attention
but I don't know what it is I guess.
Hempel: One of the major problems out there is the downstream culvert for this subdivision.
It currently goes through Miles Lord. The culvert there I believe is only a 15 or 18 inch
diameter culvert which is severely undersized. We propose a 30 inch culvert through that
area. That is the restrictive device that is creating most of this backup into the upstream
properties.
Conrad: Yeah, but that's quantity and I'm talking quality I guess. So we can't really solve
the quality issue until we build a pond. That's the bottom line. So the bottom line, if I said
let's table it, you wouldn't come back with any solution other than the fact that in 5 years we
may have enough money to treat the water and therefore maintain the quality of the water in
Christmas Lake.
Hempel: Certainly, yes. We'd look at it from that standpoint. We'd also put it higher up on
the priority list if funding comes available.
8
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Conrad: Well, I'm not doing that but, there are a lot of priorities. I'll be interested in the
other commissioners comments. That's a tough one. My comment was, Joe is to table it but
thinking I'd get something better back. I'm not hearing that the staff has got a better solution
right now so I'm not sure how I'm viewing this.
Scott: Okay, Matt.
Ledvina: In talking about the ponding issue a little bit. We have approximately 10 feet of
elevation difference between the lake in that northwest corner of the property where the
ponding is occurring, so that tells me that that's over an average by 2% grade and you should
be able to get the drainage flow. So that tells me that there's some, like Dave mentioned,
restrictions of culverts, etc, that are making the problem worst because it should be able to be
done. I had some other questions about the situation with the dock. Now I'm not sure I
understand what the response of the applicant is regarding the letter that we have which states
the dock hasn't been in. Is it the applicant's contention that the dock has been in every year
for the last 12 years?
Rask: I don't know, maybe if he's here, Mr. Krogstad or his representative, maybe they can
answer that better than I could.
Ledvina: So, it would be good. I'd like to get that on the record if that really is the case.
Would that be possible? I mean you don't have to if you don't want to but I'd just like to
hear what your opinion is on the dock.
Scott: And this is an exception. Normally once the public hearing is closed, we do not have
input from the general public but in this particular case, it's an important enough piece of
information that we're making an exception.
Merald Krogstad: There's been a dock on the property since about 1900. It's used for about
35 years.
Scott: And you're Mr. Krogstad?
Merald Krogstad: Yes. I'm sorry. Then when my parents had it we rented out the cabins we
had back there and that picture show the dock in place. So I'm adjacent to the property so
sometimes we haven't had a dock in as it got older. In fact I haven't had a dock on my
property for the past 3 years because I'm too busy working in the summer to pay for the taxes
on it. That's why I'm selling it and so I don't have time to put out a dock all the time. But
we have had docks on and off. For 3 years they were putting in the sewer and they were
removing the sewer so I couldn't use the lake for 3 years. I hired a contractor to move ... and
0
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
then we had a dock up at that time. Then for several years a friend of mine put his boat
there and he had a little dock this past year but I haven't had my dock in repeatedly for 12
years but we have—over a period of about, probably 3 to 4 to 5 years. It had a dock there
when we bought it because it had a dock and we had lakeshore and we kept it and paid taxes
on it and not used it for the past few years for the same reason.
Scott: It's going to be real important for the purposes of the people who purchase the
property that it's substantiated as good as you can. Very important.
Merald Krogstad: ...after you pay taxes on it for 4 years...
Scott: I know we had a similar circumstance where this same issue came up and one of the
things that helped was there were some photographs I think somewhere from the Department
of Natural Resources or I think the Department of Agriculture with their aerial photographs
that were taken and that may be a source that you could tap into for your purposes as well,
and there may be some other things available too but those are very helpful to us when we
ran into this situation about a year ago. But if you have some pictures, I think probably the
best thing to do would be to show those to the city staff and then because it's going to be
important to do that. Thank you sir. Do you have some other comments?
Ledvina: I had a question regarding the driveway. The existing, or the driveway along the
east side of this parcel. Now that is an existing gravel driveway, is that right? Okay. Now
with your proposed plat they're proposing another bituminous driveway right along there so
essentially we're going to have 20 some feet of driveway or, are we getting together on this or
how is that going to work out?
Rask: Yeah, there will be approximately 10 feet where the existing driveway is now is
' actually on Miles Lord's property, Lot 9. There will be an additional 20 foot easement
provided next to that so you'll have a 30 foot wide easement. On the 30 foot easement you'll
have a 20 foot wide pavement width that will probably be on a combination of both of the
properties over that easement. The private street section of our ordinance, this type of
development does require that 20 foot pavement width built to 7 ton design.
' Ledvina: Okay so the access will be from the driveway that will be improved on Miles
Lord's property, is that correct?
' Rask: Partly.
Ledvina: Okay. Okay, well so he'll keep his edge of the pavement and then he'll improve it
' over on their side?
1 10
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Rask: Correct.
Ledvina: Okay. So they could...
Rask: The existing driveway comes in here. The easement would provide another 20 feet
here and I think it's their intention to make use of that existing driveway for the existing, that
area not to disturb any additional area than what they have to with the pavement widths.
Ledvina: It would seem to be a real beneficial thing not to have 30 feet of roadway right
there ... but I don't know, can we add a condition of that sort? I know we might be getting
inbetween two private individuals coming to terms.
Aanenson: A condition for what?
Ledvina: For having an easement over the existing driveway.
Rask: The easement will cover that existing driveway.
Ledvina: Has that already happened or is that in the process?
Rask: No, it's in the process. We've got an indication from the owner of Lot 9 that he is...
Ledvina: Do our conditions in the staff report guarantee that that will happen? Or no? Is it
appropriate for us to try to specify that?
Hempel: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. Condition number 3. The applicant
shall obtain and convey the necessary cross access or driveway maintenance easement
agreements to provide access to the newly created lots.
Ledvina: Okay. But that relates to the two parcels. It doesn't relate to the neighbor's
parcels, right?
Aanenson: We can modify it to include that language. To include the existing homes be
included in that...
Ledvina: Okay. Can I just add that in there? Okay. That was all I had.
Scott: Great, Nancy.
11
' Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Mancino: I just want to make the comment that I think all of us feel and Ladd has certainly
' said that we are concerned with the water quality in the area and as soon as something can be
done about it, the better and we would like to pass that on to City Council so as they
prioritize for their areas, their list throughout the city, that this is a very serious one. How
many homes are on this private drive?
' Rask: There will be a total of four. We're not including, there's two residences on Lot 9.
There's one up here on the lake and then there's, I believe it's a rental unit back there. The
existing driveway comes in like this and then here. So it'd be that rental unit, the existing
' house on Lot 5 and then the two proposed. We looked at a number of layouts here. We
looked at creating a flag lot. However, this would force a number of driveways. You would
have one driveway coming in for Lot 1. Another one for Lot 2 and then a third driveway for
' the existing home so we thought this combined driveway, or private street would be the best
way to reduce the amount of impervious surface.
' Mancino: Yeah. When you go and see the site, it certainly does and it kind of keeps the
character of the area. It keeps it that way with not as much road coverage. John, a question
for you. The back of the property, I want to say the north end of the property that we're
' looking at. There's, you know it kind of goes uphill and there's quite a few big trees on there.
Were you thinking about doing some sort of a conservation easement in that area because of
erosion, etc?
Rask: Yeah, I guess based on where they're showing the building pad, the slopes in this area
and the majority of those trees are within the required 30 foot setback from the rear property
line. That those trees would not be disturbed due to construction activity for clearing a
building pad.
Mancino: Sometimes you put a conservation easement to make sure that they stay there even
when a homeowner moves in and maybe wants to start taking them down. How do you feel
about that area? That slope area. Are they something that should stay permanent and help in
the conservation of that slope?
Rask: Certainly we did look at that. However, I think based on what was submitted, we felt
we were getting adequate protection. We felt they met the basic requirements of the
ordinance. In addition, you know I think the applicant's been very sensitive about the
location of the building pad as to reduce to a minimum the amount of trees being removed.
Mancino: The only other thing that I would like to add is that on recommendation number 2
which says the site plan document should be revised to show driveway access to Lot 1 from
12
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
the proposed private driveway which will result in the saving of a significant 36 inch diameter
oak tree. And those are all my comments.
Scott: Ron.
Nutting: I don't have any additional comments of substance I guess. On the drainage issue, I
guess I would opt for supporting staffs recommendation. As Ladd commented in his final
words, we're not going to come up with a solution over night and I'm not an expert in
drainage and so forth but I'm presuming staff has done their homework in terms of assessing
the additional amount of drainage that would be generated from this and not having a material
impact in and of itself on that so. I would be prepared to move it forward subject to some of
the modifications that have been addressed in Matt's comments and Nancy's.
Scott: Would you like to make a motion to that effect?
Nutting: Sure. I recommend that the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council
approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #95 -1, Ravenswood Estates, subject to the
plans dated February 6, 1995, and the conditions as noted in the staff report with the
following additions. Under recommendation number 2, added at the end of that sentence,
which would result in the savings of a 36 inch.
Mancino: Diameter oak tree.
Nutting: Okay. And Matt, was the, I'm trying to think. The easement issue we felt was
covered in the item number 3. Did you have any modifications to that?
Ledvina: Yeah. I would suggest that the language read, the applicant shall obtain and
convey the necessary cross - access or driveway maintenance agreements between new lots and
neighboring lots to provide access to the newly created lots.
Nutting: Yes, and also subject to the issue of condition number 15 which would require the
applicant to submit proof to staff with regard to the existence of the dock prior to, is it
January 1 of?
Rask: July 11, 1983.
Nutting: July 11th, 1983. Presuming at the discretion of staff in their evaluation of that.
Scott: So you want to have, by virtue of a friendly amendment, condition in there about
prioritization of the upgrade of the surface water treatment in that particular area?
13
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Nutting: I guess I'm not sure that condition, well. They're two separate. They're related but
I'm not sure that that condition makes sense putting in with this.
Scott: I'm thinking when people are going through the Minutes of this meeting, see people
tend to zero in when it says motion and then here are the comments. So maybe, I think what
I can do is I can just make, I'll make a comment at the end, after we vote on this so those
who read the Minutes will see that. Instead of having it buried in. I think it's too important
to be buried.
Nutting: I believe that's it.
Scott: Okay. Can I have a second? Oh, go ahead.
Mancino: I second.
Scott: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we pass along the staffs recommendation
subject to the conditions mentioned. Is there any discussion?
Conrad: Yes. I'm curious what item number 15 means in terms of the grandfathering.
Grandfathering means the dock has been in continuous use so Ron, you were asking the
applicant to prove that it has been in continuous use since 1983?
Rask: Yeah. That's a condition staff had recommended. What I indicated earlier was that
when we originally reviewed this we were under the impression, based on evidence submitted
by the applicant, that a dock had existed on this parcel for quite some time. Therefore it
could continue to be used as a non - conforming structure. However, recently we've received
some information that kind of contradicts that so what staff is asking is that everybody submit
the information they have. The applicant, any other concerned parties. We'll review that and
staff will make a decision regarding the non - conforming status.
Conrad: Which means the applicant should be able to prove what?
Rask: Prove that a dock existed on the parcel. This could be done either.
Conrad: Last year?
Rask: Yes. It has to exist every year since adoption of the ordinance.
Conrad: Okay. Was the motion made to indicate that?
14
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Aanenson: Yes. That was condition 15.
Conrad: Okay. That's the way you heard it?
Aanenson: That's the way.
Conrad: You're going to write it.
Aanenson: Yes. Ron just summarized it.
Conrad: With a dock goes 3 boats.
Aanenson: The issue here is because it's so narrow, they have to meet the dock setback zone
so that's why they're non - conforming. That's why we're saying that if they've had a dock,
they can continue to use the dock as long as it's always been in the water. If you don't have
it in. there for more than one period, you've lost your rights.
Conrad: Right. With a dock goes 3 boats overnight.
Aanenson: Right.
Ledvina: Just to further add to that. I would like to make a friendly amendment, in the event
that the dock is approved, I would like to amend condition number 14 to clearly state that if
the use of the dock is discontinued for more than one year, the legal non- conforming status is
lost.
Nutting: I'll accept that.
Scott: Okay. Is there any more discussion?
Nutting moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City
Council approve the preliminary plat for Subdivision 495 -1, Ravenswood Estates, subject to
the plans dated February 6, 1995, and the following conditions:
L Tree preservation and home placement plans shall be submitted at the time of the
building permit application for staff review and approval. Tree protection fencing
shall be incorporated on the site during construction and demolition to protect all trees
that are to be preserved,
15
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
2. The site plan documents should be revised to show driveway access to Lot 1 from the
proposed driveway which will result in the saving of a significant 36 inch diameter
oak tree.
3. The applicant shall obtain and convey the necessary cross - access or driveway
maintenance easement agreements between the new lots and the neighboring lots to
provide access to the newly created lots.
4. The existing cottage and garage shall be razed or removed from the site within 30
days after the final plat has been recorded. The utility lines to the cottage shall be
properly abandoned in accordance with City standards. The applicant shall obtain the
necessary permits from the City.
5. Soil reports showing details and locations of house pads and verifying suitability of
natural and fill soils shall be submitted to the Inspections Division prior to issuance of
any building permits.
6. Full park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit approval in the
amount in force at the time of building permit application.
7. The existing power pole along the east property line shall be relocated to avoid
conflict with the proposed private driveway.
8. Sanitary sewer and water service will have to be extended to Lot 2. The applicant
and /or builder at the time of building permit issuance shall be assessed another trunk
and lateral sewer and water assessment in the amount of $8,124.00 (1995 rate). The
City will credit $2,500.00 against these trunk and lateral sewer and water assessments
if the applicant or builder constructs the individual service lines from the main line to
the property line. If the City performs the work, no credits will be given.
' 9. The existing hydrant located in the northeast corner of the site shall be relocated to
avoid conflict with traffic. The City shall perform necessary inspections to insure
proper construction in accordance to City standards. A permit will be required from
' the City for this work. The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with
the relocation of the fire hydrant.
10. Storm water quality and quantity fees shall be based in accordance to the City's
SWMP. The water quality and water quantity fees have been calculated at $1,088.00
and $2,693.00 respectively. These fees are payable at time of final plat recording.
16
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
11. The existing gravel driveway on the west side of Lot 1 which accesses to Holly Lane
shall be abandoned and the ditch section restored. All new driveways which cross the
ditch section shall have a 30 inch diameter driveway culvert installed along with
riprap.
12. Type I erosion control fence will be required in conjunction with site grading or new
home construction in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
13. Portions of the private street which services more than one homesite shall be
constructed with a bituminous surface 20 feet wide and designed to support a 7 ton per
axle weight.
14. Storage of boats at the dock must be consistent with applicable city requirements
except those which have the legal non - conforming status. If the use of the dock is
discontinued for move than one yeas; the legal non - conforming status is lost.
15. The applicant is required to submit to staff for their review evidence that a dock has
been in use on the property since 1983.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Scott: This is going to the City Council on the, it's still scheduled for the 27th of this month?
Okay. Good. And just a comment with regard to surface water management. Obviously we
have some concerns there that we'd like to pass onto our folks at the City Council. And then
also when a decision is being made on the dock, please whoever is going to be involved with
that decision really has to take a very close look at how the decision was made on Schmidt's
Acres because in that particular situation the time frames were very similar. Early 1900's.
And also there was conflicting information from those who were interested in seeing the dock
versus those who weren't and there was antidotal information that was accepted but there were
no photographs available for each year so we have set a precedent in that particular issue and
I think we have to pay very close attention to it when you guys make a decision on this one.
Conrad: And Joe, what was the ruling on that?
Scott: That they kept the dock. The situations are extremely close as far as facts and so
forth, so I think that's a, we're always careful about when we make a decision on something
like this that it follows that the next time it's made, it's consistent.
Conrad: And that one had a 10 foot piece of lakeshore?
17
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1, 1995
Scott: No, it was 50 feet. Or no, 30? Yeah, it was non - conforming.
Conrad: I'm real uncomfortable with my decision.
Aanenson: The beachlot thing's a little bit different. We were trying to attach the
documentation to 1981. Okay. In order to maintain the legal non - conforming, he's got to
demonstrate that it's been in there every year. The burden of proof is.
Conrad: The burden is on him.
Aanenson: Exactly.
Scott: Okay, good. Thank you all for coming.
' PUBLIC HEARING:
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 5,052 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON
LOT 3, BLOCK 1, WEST VILLAGE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDMON. THE PROPERTY IS
ZONED BG, GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED AT 900 WEST 78TH
STREET, GENE HABERMAN, CENTURY BANK.
Public Piesent:
Name Address
Craig Hallett
983 Santa Vera Drive
Ken Brooks
Eden Prairie
Pat Giordana
Minneapolis
Sheldon Wert
Minnetonka
Bob Generous piesented the staff repoit on this item.
Scott: Okay, thank you. Any other comments from staff? Good. Questions or comments
from commissioners?
Mancino: I'll wait.
Scott: Okay, good. Would the applicant or their representatives like to make a presentation?
Yes sir.
18
3/15/95
Pamela I Myers
1115 Holly Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
612- 474 -1601
CONCERNS regarding storm water management:
1. Storm water run -off from Powers Boulevard settles in my front yard
with its salt, sand, and debris. I have attempted to landscape this area
with no success. I have attempted to plant grass seed, and have had sod
laid, only to have both regularly overwhelmed with debris, and resultant
weed growth.
Mike Wegler has regularly helped as much as he could to apply
temporary solutions to this storm water drainage problem. His crew dug out the
storm water drainage ditch 2 -3 times in the seven years I have owned this
property. One year his crew attempted to seed this ditch. The seed, of course,
could not take root; it was washed down stream to Christmas Lake. Last summer
his crew sodded this ditch. The sod is now under a layer of salt, sand, and
debris.
2. Storm water culvert pipes are larger in diameter up hill from my property,
therefore they're feeding a larger quantity of water into smaller pipes, so
that when the water arrives on my property it is flowing in quantity and
speed which the current pipe size cannot handle.
A I have been having annual conversations with the City staff for seven
years. Most recently I have talked with and corresponded with Diane Desotelle.
She has explained to me that there is a new Surface Water Management Plan
(SWMP) which will be implemented as funds allow.
3. The vacant lot currently at 1035 Holly Lane is also low. It also
accumulates standing water.
' This is the last vacant lot on Holly Lane. There is no other place for future
SWMP nutrient pond implementation. With plans to build two houses on this lot,
t there will no longer be open low land for the standing water. The water would
be forced into an unmaintained culvert, slowing the water runoff flow, from
' Powers Boulevard, resulting in forcing more water to accumulate in my front
yard.
3. I understand that the driveway for 1035 will have a 30" culvert,
which will feed into a 15" pipe.
I don't understand the purpose of this configuration in relationship to
storm water flow. I have requested a 24" pipe at the east side of my property,
and Diane has said this would not be allowed.
4. The 15" pipe which feeds directly into Christmas Lake is the smallest size
pipe in the entire hillside down from Powers Boulevard.
In addition, it is regularly clogged with debris. This regularly inhibits
drainage. The drainage which is inhibited is accumulating in my front yard.
CONCERNS regarding property line:
1. My landscaping plan includes straightening out the 10' driveway easement
access to Holly Lane by moving the entrance to the property line.
2. The surveyor employed by the developer of 1035 has placed a corner
stake about a foot too far west of the north -south line adjoining 1115.
I have notified the realtor. What is my next step?
' Ravenswood Estates
March 1, 1995
Page 9
11. The existing gravel driveway on the west side of Lot 1 which accesses to Holly Lane
' shall be abandoned and the ditch section adjacent to Holly Lane cleaned out down to
the east property line of proposed Lot 1. All new driveways which cross the ditch
section shall have a 30 -inch diameter driveway culvert installed along with riprap.
12. Type I erosion control fence will be required in conjunction with site grading or new
home construction in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
' 13. Portions of the private street which services more than one homesite shall be
constructed with a bituminous surface 20 feet wide and designed to support 7 -ton per
' axle weight vehicles.
11�1'Ft those whieh have the legal rion eanforming states. if the Use of the d0ek is
diseontintted for more than one year, the legal non eonforming stattis is lost.
15. if the appliettnt wishes to have a daek an th ittke shore property, the app4eant
sttbmit evidettee showing that tt daek has been in use an the property sinee 1983. No
docks, moorings, or boat lifts shall be permitted on Lot 2.
16. The turnaround on Holly Lane shall be modified to 20' x 30' with a 30 foot radius on
the westerly side. The pavement design section shall be in accordance with the city's
urban street section."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application dated January 28, 1995
2. Plat of "Crane's Vineyard Park"
3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated February 23, 1995
4. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated February 20, 1995
5. Letter from DNR dated February 13, 1995
6. Letter and pictures from Pam Myers dated March 15, 1995
7. Modified turnaround
8. Minutes of March 1, 1995 Planning Commission meeting
I
MILES W. LORD & ASSOCIATES
LAW OFFICE
t 600 West 79 Street • Americana Community Bank Building
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
(612) 333 -5673
' FAX (612) 937 -3501
' February 28, 1995
Mr. John Rask
t City of Chanhassen 1 s
690 Coulter Drive
' Chanhasse:n, MN 55317 WOJJ)
Re: Proposal to Subdivide by Applicant Julie Sprau
' Dear Mr. Rask:
' In their absence, my parents, Miles and Maxine Lord, have asked me to monitor
this proposal as it may affect them.
' We have worked with real estate agent, Carl Zinn, and have participated in some
of the plans relating to a driveway. In addition, I have reviewed the staff report.
' The purpose of this letter is to point out what I know to be an error in that report.
Under the heading "Background" the report states "Staff has reviewed the nonconforming
' status of this piece of property, as it pertains to future use of the lakeshore, and
determined that a dock may be maintained as a nonconforming structure. A dock has
existed on this parcel in excess of 40 years and may continue to be used as long as it
' maintains its `grandfather status.' "
' There has not been a dock there, based upon my personal knowledge, since 1972
and probably prior to that. I lived on that property from 1972 to 1975 and there was no
dock at that time. I also had the opportunity to observe that piece of property after I
' moved because my parents lived near and then at that site ever since. There has not been
a dock at the location indicated for at least the past 23 years during summer or winter
' months.
Our family welcomes the new neighbors. We only wish that the record factually
I portray the history of this property.
I RASK.LTR 02/28/95 3:23 PM
Mr. John Rask
February 28, 1995
Page 2
Thank you for your consideration.
tf
Very truly yours,
MILES W. LORD & ASSOCIATES
LAW OFFICE
i
�.
James F. Lord
RASKITR 02/28/95 3:23 PM