Loading...
4a & b Preliminary and Final Plat for property on Hopi Road C I TY 0 F PC DATE: 8/4/93 \ CUAIACEI'T CC DATE: 8/23/93 • CASE #: 93 -16 SUB 93- 6 VAC A : i i-Jaii:v STAFF REPORT 1 PROPOSAL: Preliminary and Final plat to subdivide 46,038 square feet into 3 single family 1 1-._ lots, and Vacation of a portion of Hopi Road. Z 1 Q LOCATION: Lots 372 - 384 and Lots 403 - 411, Carver Beach - At the junction of Nez Perce V J Road, Lake Lucy Road and Hopi Road 1 a a APPLICANT: Todd Owens I Q 6661 Nez Perce Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family ACREAGE: 43,156 square feet 46,038 square feet if include vacated right -of -way of Hopi Road Mon by City Administrator DENSITY: 2.83 units /acre ' 6ndorse� ✓ � A' ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - RSF, single family Reiecte� 1 S- RSF, single family YotP R d 0 Co mmission 9 3 Q l fil g y Date Submitted to Co �"� • E - RSF, single family W - RSF, single family Date Submitted to Council 8 -a 3 -93 W WATER AND SEWER: Water and sewer are available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site contains an existing single family residence, has some CJ) steep topography and heavy vegetation. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density r s 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TJO Addition I August 4, 1993 Page 2 1 BACKGROUND The city vacated a portion of Lake Lucy Road which abuts the northerly edge of the subject site I on January 8, 1990. The Lake Lucy Road vacated right -of -way originally was part of Vineland subdivision, located to the north of the subject site. The vacated right -of -way goes back to the I property from which it was platted. Therefore, the subject site will not gain any of the vacated right -of -way from Lake Lucy Road. I On August 4, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed this proposal. The report which was submitted to the Planning Commission differed from this report. The applicant had originally requested a different layout for the subdivision, which resulted in some lot area variances. The I variances were not supported, which lead the applicant to revise the plans. The basics, such as grading, tree loss, access, ....etc; remained the same. The only changes were in the lot area configuration. 1 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY I The applicant is requesting to subdivide 436,156 square feet into 3 single family lots. The parcel is located within the Carver Beach area, at the junction of Nez Perce and Lake Lucy Road. Access to lots 1 and 3 will be provided via Nez Perce Road. Lot 2 has the option of being I served from Nez Perce Road via a private driveway or from Hopi Road. Access from Nez Perce for Lot 2 is preferred by staff due to the topography and vegetation cover of the subject site. A single family residence occupies proposed lot 1. The residence is proposed to remain on the 1 parcel. The setback for the existing residence meets the minimum setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. All lots exceed the minimum lot area requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. The average lot size is 15,346 square feet. Sewer and water service to this area is available. I The applicant is also requesting to vacate a portion of Hopi Road, which abuts Lot 2. Hopi Road PP eq g P P is unimproved in this location. By vacating Hopi Road, Lot 2 will become a neck lot and will I have a 20 foot wide frontage on Hopi Road. The applicant has already included half (20') of the vacated right -of -way in Lot 2. Staff agrees to this since the vacation is supported by the City. 1 The majority of this site is heavily wooded. The applicant will custom grade the lots to insure minimum impact on the vegetation. The applicant also provided an inventory of all trees on site I as well as trees that will possibly be removed. An appropriate condition limiting tree removal will be included within the report. This condition will prevent any construction from taking place outside the proposed grading limits and subsequently preserving the trees. 1 Park and Trail fees for the newly created lots will have to be paid at the time of building permit issuance. 1 1 1 1 TJO Addition August 4, 1993 Page 3 Staff believes that this plat is a reasonable one and consistent with guidelines established by the I city's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. We find it to be well designed. We are recommending that it be approved with conditions outlined in the report. 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT The applicant resides at a single family residence on a 43,156 square foot lot located at the 1 intersection of Nez Perce, Lake Lucy Road and Hopi Road. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property into three single family lots, one containing the existing residence and two I vacant parcels. The subject site is bordered by three streets (Lake Lucy Road, Hopi Road and Nez Perce). In 1990, Lake Lucy Road, to the north of the site, was vacated by the City. Hopi Road, which abuts the easterly portion of the site, is unimproved and is proposed to be vacated I by the applicant. Nez Perce Road is improved and services the existing residence on Lot 1, Block 1. The applicant is proposing to service the newly created lot 2 from Nez Perce. Lot 2 has the option of being served from Nez Perce Road via a shared driveway with lot 3, or from Hopi Road. Staff prefers the shared driveway from Nez Perce option due to the topography and vegetation cover of the subject site. The applicant pursued acquiring half of the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way which was vacated by I PP P q g Y g Y the city. The original dedication of Lake Lucy Road came from the original Vineland subdivision (north of the subject site) and therefore, the vacated right -of -way goes back to the property north of the subject site. Since the property owners to the north want to retain the vacated right -of -way it cannot be included in the subject plat. Since staff is confident that the I vacation will be approved, we have allowed the applicant to add this additional square footage into the plat. Lot 1, Block 1 contains 15,022 square feet and contains the existing residence. The applicant 1 is maintaining the required setbacks for the existing structures from the new lot lines. Lot 2, Block 1 is a neck lot and contains 15,388 square feet. This square footage contains the vacated I strip of Hopi Road. The zoning ordinance states that neck lots must have 15,000 square feet. Lot 3, Block 1 contains 15,628 square feet. This square footage does not include area from vacated Lake Lucy Road. Both Lots 2 and 3 have the option of sharing a driveway from Nez , Perce Road. This option will require a cross access easement in favor of lot 2, over lot 3. Staff met with the applicant on site and agreed that Lots 2 and 3 should share a drive off of Nez Perce Road due to the lay of the land and the reduction of tree removal. If Lot 2 was serviced off of Hopi Road, more trees would be removed. 1 1 1 1 TJO Addition August 4, 1993 Page 4 1 LOT, BLOCK AREA WIDTH DEPTH SETBACK 111 LOT 1 15,022 SQ.FT. 120.18' 125' 30' FRONT ' 10'SIDE 30' REAR LOT 2 15,388 SQ.FT. 100' 165.23' 30' FRONT NECK LOT 20' SIDE 30' REAR 1 LOT 3 15,628 SQ. FT. 160.82' 146.42' 30' FRONT 10' SIDE 30' REAR STREETS /ACCESS 1 The access to the site has been looked at with staff and the applicant. Staff feels that the best access to the site is off of Nez Perce Drive. Access from Hopi Road would require significantly more tree removal than from Nez Perce Drive. Also, from a traffic standpoint, it is a much shorter route to have access off of Nez Perce Drive. Pursuant to City Ordinance, the applicant will have to construct a 20 -foot wide driveway access built to 7 -ton design for the common driveway portion. After the common driveway portion, the typical standard driveway would be constructed. 1 UTILITIES As the applicant has denoted in his narration, Lot 1 where the existing home is located is 1 currently hooked up to City sewer and water from Nez Perce Drive. Lot 3 can be serviced from Nez Perce Drive. However, due to the elevation of the sanitary sewer, the lower level of the house will require an injector pump. Lot 2 would be serviced from Hopi. In both cases the city 1 would be responsible for the extension of sanitary sewer and water lines to the property line. According to the City's records, the parcel has been previously assessed for one sewer and water connection and hook -up charge. Since the parcel is now being proposed to be subdivided into three lots, two additional sewer and water hook -up and connection fees should be assessed. The City's hook -up charge is currently $1,750 and connection charge is at $6,794.91 for 1993. Both of these fees would be payable at the time of issuance of building permit. In addition, these fees could be assessed back against the parcels. 1 1 1 1 TJO Addition August 4, 1993 Page 5 GRADING AND DRAINAGE 1 Due to the small size of the development, the increased runoff from the site is minimal. In lieu of any on -site retention ponds, staff recommends that the applicant be required to pay a cash contribution into the City's Surface Water Management Fund. Staff will calculate the cash contribution based on the City's Storm Water Management Fund. 1 The grading plans show only grading for the possible shared private driveway. The house pads are proposed to be custom - graded as the building permits are issued. The applicant has denoted I on a tree removal plan the anticipated limits of tree removal. The limits of tree removal shown on the plans appear reasonable with the anticipated home construction. TREE REMOVAL I On sheet 2 of the plans the applicant has provided a tree inventory and has shown the limits of tree removal. There is a total of 143 trees on Lots 2 and 3 which is where improvements will take place. The applicant has set limits of tree removal and has estimated that 20% (29 trees) I of the trees may be removed. If mass grading does not take place on the site, more trees may be saved. Specifically, the following trees are proposed to be removed from the site: Lot 2, Block 1 Tree number 1 10 -19 26 -30 35 Lot 3, Block 1 I 46 -47 66 -69 72 I 73 Shared Driveway 41 I 44 MISCELLANEOUS 1 Since the city will be extending the sanitary sewer and water service to the site, therefore, it will not be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract. Due to the extremely 1 small size of the project, detailed construction plans will not be necessary; however, a final grading plan should be submitted for City review and approval at the time of building permit 1 application. 1 1 TJO Addition August 4, 1993 Page 6 1 HOPI ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY VACATION. Hopi Road was created as part of Carver Beach subdivision. The vacated right -of -way will be divided between the subject site and the property to the east. Hopi Road is unimproved at this location and there is no intention by the City to improve the right -of -way. Therefore, the city 1 will support the proposed vacation. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE 1 On August 4, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed this proposal. The report which was submitted to the Planning Commission differed from this report. The applicant had originally ' requested a different layout for the lots that created variances. The variances were not supported, which lead the applicant to revise the plans. The basics, such as grading, tree loss, access, etc.; remained the same. The only changes were in the lot area configuration. Staff gave a verbal update of the changes and the Planning Commission felt comfortable with the revised plans. They approved the plans unanimously. RECOMMENDATION The City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approved the preliminary and final plat (#93 -16) for TJO Addition and vacation of a portion of Hopi Road as shown on the plans receive August 16, 1993, and subject 1 to the following conditions: ' 1. The plat approval is contingent upon the vacation of Hopi Road being approved by the City Council and at least 20' x 137.58' of the vacated right -of -way is combined with the subject property. 1 2. The applicant shall be permitted to remove only the trees as shown on Sheet 2. All other trees located on the site must be preserved and protected with snow fence located 11 times the drip line. Lot 2, Block 1 Tree number: 10 -19, 26 -30, 35 Lot 3, Block 1 Tree number: 46 -47, 66 -69, 72 and 73 Shared Driveway Tree number: 41 and 44 Staff shall work with the applicant to address the specific trees requiring removal, depending on the chosen access. The percentage of tree loss shall remain approximately the same as was first proposed. 1 1 1 TJO Addition August 4, 1993 Page 7 3. A grading plan for each lot shall be submitted to the City for review and approval at the I time of building permit application. 4. The ci ty shall extend sewer and water to Lots 2 and 3. Lots 2 and 3 shall be assessed 1 the sewer and water connection and hook -up charge in the amount of $8,544.91 (1993 balance). These fees shall be payable at the time of building permit issuance and may be assessed against the property at that time. 5. Driveway access for Lot 2 may be from Hopi Road or along the lot line of Lot 3 with I the appropriate cross access easements obtained before installation. 6. The applicant shall pay a cash contribution into the City's Storm Water Management I Fund. The fees shall be calculate by staff in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. 7. Full park and trail fees be accepted as a part of the platting of the TJO Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. Current park I and trail fees are $600 and $200, respectively. 8. A Professional Engineer, registered in the State of Minnesota shall be required to design I the foundation for the dwellings on Lots 2 and 3. 9. Staff shall evaluate the need for a stop sign at the intersection of Lake Lucy and Nez I Perce." ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff report dated August 4, 1993. 2. Planning Commission Minutes dated August 4, 1993. I 3. Revised Plans received August 16, 1993. 1 1 1 1 1 1 • .. • . _ i{ . ' . .t . D . 0 . . 0 a o _ o ° ° o o ° in ve re) 0 tv O O' LANE O 0 1 / J � ` � _ �, " _ CHR/ TMAS { _ 1 ENNEPIN1 Ceti � T ,; / p as - K " - RD # . . - �, _ MN Ili '1/ -- ' . SAKE , .. `; , ult ,��� . ii. i . V '‘ 1 I ..,-, _AN ' 4 -. ' ' ' 7 - 400: ' A9.04- / ".....- ; fr ( Al / , i \ .— e A * ' c'• ,fit" . A 11 11 - 4 " . . ii. % 4 1 � . \ , ill s CARVER � ` ♦i , str y lw i� , f f,CH )1110) PL 411a11:11.,,Ji I __ _ _ _ • t1 I • --" - VIOLET t RC / 40 _ 1 .. Ak - mIL'Ar:1,-.4.. - I : - Log ' - % --4 .. - ' , - i t , i- -t• --y -! 44Gir8 r t i ..___,_ ,.. L Cr ' _- = ..W� oR LOTUS 'C ql .7ii - ,, , ry 1 �' . .. ^ gi p - -- - - . \,;,t1.:7:-.1t__:: kili - Ili' 'Ill - " ‘ , - . -- Y\\' . - 1 , l , i t. .'1 t I * P.' ' : GREENWVO ∎ ♦ ' 4 --�- -� :. ;r I • � ��' t� � f 1 .. , Z SHORES 6 SCrilja \ ' ' VI -Iiigr 4 ,,, 1 . / . o N., , , E VF: .,..- f )( . • MEADOW �' , �� L A lY , \ At N G R E gar \--... \ --, . - • da m., ■ • ....,„ - : • 'T \r F ........ p � - ∎ • A - a ' 'WI.. 1 ,: lir • , ) R4 u--...1.v- x ,..1 ir 'ANN ,►! ' :"c_ � '" I I ` I. J CITYOF 1 0, CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I 1 FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer 1 DATE: July 29, 1993 1 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review of TJO Addition (6661 Nez Perce Drive) File No. 93 -17 Land Use Review Upon review of the preliminary plat prepared by Westwood Engineering dated July 6, 1993, 1 I offer the following comments and recommendations: STREETS /ACCESS 1 The access to the site has been looked at with staff and the applicant. Staff, along with the applicant, feels that the best access to the site is off of Nez Perce Drive as proposed. Access from Hopi Road would require significantly more tree removal than from Nez Perce Drive. Also, from a traffic standpoint, it is a much shorter route to have access off of Nez 1 Perce Drive. Pursuant to City Ordinance, the applicant is proposing a 20 -foot wide driveway access built to 7 -ton design for the common driveway portion. After the common driveway portion, the typical standard driveway would be constructed. 1 UTILITIES rr As the applicant has denoted in his narration, Lot 1 where the e existing home is located is currently hooked up to City sewer and water from Nez Perce Drive. The two proposed lots are proposed to be serviced from a common sewer line extended from Hopi Road. The common sewer service will wye at the south property line of Lot 2 for a stub for Lot 2 the remaining sewer line will extend up to Lot 3. The sewer lines through Lots 2 and 3 will be considered privately owned and maintained by the property owners. The sewer line located within the right -of -way of Hopi Road will be the City's responsibility for maintenance. Water service to the new lots will be extended from Nez Perce Drive. The applicant has 1 proposed the extension of a 2 -inch common water line along the private driveway. From 1 Z� ~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 Sharmin Al -Jaff July 29, 1993 Page 2 1 a water shut -off standpoint staff recommends that two individual 1 -inch copper service lines be extended from Nez Perce Drive for the two new lots in lieu of one 2 -inch common line. Both sewer and water services are proposed to be constructed within a proposed 20 -foot wide drainage and utility easement. I GRADING AND DRAINAGE 1 Due to the small size of the development, the increased runoff from the site is minimal. In lieu of any on -site retention ponds, staff recommends that the applicant be required to pay a cash contribution into the City's Surface Water Management Fund. Staff will calculate 1 the cash contribution based on the City's Storm Water Management Fund. I The grading plans show only grading for the private driveway. The house pads are proposed to be custom - graded as the building permits are issued. The applicant has denoted on a tree removal plan the anticipated limits of tree removal. The limits of tree removal shown on the plans appear reasonable with the anticipated home construction. MISCELLANEOUS 1 Since there will be extension of public utilities into the site by the developer, it is recommended that the applicant enter into a development contract and provide the City I with the necessary financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. The construction of the utility improvements shall be in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Due to the extremely small size of the I project, detailed construction plans will not be necessary; however, a final grading and utility plan sheet should be submitted for City review and approval. I According to the City's records, the parcel has been previously assessed for one sewer and water connection hook -up charge. Since the parcel is now being proposed to be subdivided into three lots, additional sewer and water hook -up connection fees should be assessed. 1 Staff has discussed this with the applicant in some detail. Staff agrees since the applicant is extending sewer and water lines into the parcel to both lots that the applicant should only be responsible for one additional connection charge in the amount of $6,794.91. Both lots 1 shall be, however, assessed the City's hook -up charge of $1,750. Both of these fees would be payable at the time of issuance of building permit. In addition, these fees could be assessed back against the parcels. I RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Two individual 1 -inch water service lines should be extended from Nez Perce Drive in lieu of the proposed 2 -inch common water service line. 1 1 1 Sharmin .Al -Jaff July 29, 1993 Page 3 1 2. Final grading and utility plans in accordance with the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 1 3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and supply the City with the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance of the conditions 1 of approval. 4. Lot 2 shall be assessed a sewer and water connection and hook -up charge in the , amount of $8,544.91. Lot 3 shall be assessed a sewer and water hook -up charge of $1,750. Both of these fees shall be payable at the time of building permit issuance and may be assessed against the property at that time. 1 • 5. The 20 -foot wide common driveway shall be installed before or concurrently with issuance of the building permit in the development. 1 6. The applicant shall pay a cash contribution into the City's Storm Water Management Fund. The fees shall be calculate by staff in accordance with the City's Surface I Water Management Plan. ktm 1 c: Charles Folch, City Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITYOF 1 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM TO: JoAnn Olsen, Senior Planner FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director ,% 1 DATE: July 29, 1993 • SUBJ: TJO Addition The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the TJO Addition on July 27, 1993. Mr. Todd Owens, the applicant was in attendance. A copy of the staff report presented to the commissioners is attached. Upon concluding their discussion that evening, the commissioners approved the following recommendation: "It is recommended that full park and trail fees be accepted as a part of the platting of 1 the TJO Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. Current park and trail fees are $600.00 and $200.00, respectively." All commissioners voted in favor and the motion was carried. 1 1 1 1 1 Is � PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER PRC DATE: July 27, 1993 C ITY OF CHANHASSEN CC DATE: \� 1 • HOFFMAN:k STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Vacation of a portion of right -of -way of Hopi Road and preliminary plat to subdivide a 50,443 sq. ft. parcel into 3 single family lots on property zoned RSF, TJO Addition. Z LOCATION: 6661 Nez Perce a. a APPLICANT: Todd Owens Westwood Professional Services c, 6661 Nez Perce 14180 West Trunk Highway 5 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 • PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family ' ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - RSF S - RSF E- RSF ' W - RSF, Nez Perce icc r—,, in COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: W Carver Beach Park, located across Nez Perce and to the south 600 feet., fulfills the city's park _- • requirement standards as identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan for the TJO Addition. ' UNIMINI COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN: The City's Comprehensive Trail Plan does not identify any trails immediately adjacent to this 1 subdivision. 1 Park and Recreation Commission July 27, 1993 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Parks and Trails r It is recommended that full park and trail fees be accepted as a part of the platting of the TJO Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. 1 Current park and trail fees are $600.00 and $200.00, respectively. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C ITYOF toi 0 i CHANHASSEN I i 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ii (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM I TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official k,....:_a v DATE: July 29, 1993 I SUBJ: 93 -16 SUB & 93 -6 VAC (TJO Addition) 1 Background: been asked to comment on the above referenced application. I have some concerns about I I have bee pp the steep slopes on the lots. Analysis: The slopes on lots 2 & 3 are about 23 %. Conventional foundation will not typically perform 1 adequately under this condition. Oversize footings, horizontal reinforcement with bond beams, vertical reinforcement with core fills and shear walls are elements which need to be considered I in the design of the foundation. A structural engineer is required to satisfactorily consider the necessity for these design elements. Recommendation: Staff recommends the following condition be added to the conditions of approval: 1 1. A structural engineer will be required to design the foundation for the dwelling onlots2 &3. 1 1 1 1 Is t45 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER I 7 ..rm*---,------44 --;;-..-.... ,i,.. \.: - --- i. -- =44, .;:."----- ,... ..._ • .44: . ' • - - _�.s. "' -! - _ ��ii••� $ _ 4. .. ". J - . � " ' Tr • - •!' _ - li�"` - . " ., •,. ._s _�, _ t s 1 ! - - — �' :i+• _ • - .. ; > y .1i, _ . � � . . a±+�.,....•. e_k _- .µ : r. - . _� ,1 '. yftso v Y yi v Q 1 • 4- • *1-'4*:k$ V " , \ ?.., 1.- 3 pi74% 0' araft: 0 CV . ..- ---1 •1011100 - • ili (10 041 illit- k'f 4 ' iS) 413 0 - • •-• r\ , ......"4" f ; K _ " &in f 1.4:12". 1.211CL - a 't It N .9 i ■t• ■ '75` i M / / / , ■14.141: .- 4 . \\ / 11 N R s b4 � O . ..„. 1111 di 1, 41111111 R\''' Ay p g p \ , 1 a t it , 4 -, ,7,; Aug", AI N \ (3A160 GN1IlHJIH) 41) p �ti C \ � i �� �� A c 4 $ . i 4. i'l la IN OF- N4 ,„?. wiral,.. ' - _7 co 0., v ,.. I _ c. mom mom r.,) ith■__ ___ iiii. Al" 132 UMW:" 0 it to a Z .. ' v r;1 1k i —i17 c Q Ct. II i.� r! 7 D 3 LIJ - �. 7 i J Q Z _ Cr M _ N r �s6i _ _ - ,NEZ _�s 7P���I •ftt '1/4". y 1 s w � S��.L . .v PERCE DRIVE m ;" -� - w�_s�■ "rip ri, _ N ` �� _ W.:mss h N =- � � Y v O OS ■ % � s►_ai MUNN - am ■ ; l��=a C \ 1.1 sow 11111111111111111110:MII • IV • \ MIMI ME EM N /_(.' •� W 4 0 3810 3'10N 3081 a R• � � rw�- = ....�■� 711, 1 1 " h . ►: E. L els� -4 -30 41 / e•-:; ' - 3111. II I a i allinilitW\sr-i 3 - fig ....,-, 1111111067- = - C Id in R } � s Q • P1 1 ..,. - I � __L 1 Tree Survey Table (for trees over $ iE M11111ic= - ■ t 1•11111r-111111111K._,=1111111 1111111101=111111 «a+lalES ^II 11E i AT SI »S i[31111•1111:: 1 =^M11111 1-11 MMIC.....!`.. I11111E 1.21 11 Illosemaal 11111111WZMI111111:. {11111111N i-�., Ili �: 11 21 INE- . -. :.„ �_1�. 3-1 `M . ii:;lMMON: P MN - : .MIER 1 i.31 MIME ll _'_ 11111•11-_ i _IL: M. © 1 i :32.•L1: 111•111NIMIEL :1_ MOM 2111•11111111101 Ima_ammone, __.--= . 1111111:141 MI_ 3ia� i - ;' �::_ gilt r'111■f1u7 MIIIIJ•1•111111111, 1 Kim ill .-.. 11=11:1111111111111111 •C• X1_1?;' -1 �,- ..r.. —'. — a 11111111111111111111_ , 111111K1:1111011111LEI: IIIKI2Emmimr?"1"."." IIMIIIIET.�""i 1•=1:1•11111111.: mmirilT"••71 211 ©= i :211 good 321 i ' �_r�=IMI �9� 291 Oak MAMMINED 104-3 27-2 1 : I �aZ� =MI 3 � ME 76.1 �i ... 7e•2 11 - . - ... 1 MINE:111111111111111L • .1111R 36 - Oa& T 30 Mope - I • 1 G ' lid Iiz �1 �:?" "'•'� 7 3:1 "".... i• 3011 clew >�: � '-' "- ' - 1 I i 351 = - —_ _-� 361 NI r>lamme f>111111EZ 3e! wimps s ] Is 7" I NOTES: 1 Multiple trunks from•aiagle soot have tree number first, walk Masks identified by second For example, 106 -3 is tree loonier. 146, tl>te 3rd trunk. 1 $WMMARY BY SPECIE: ii§asswood 63 44 I Elm 11 8 Maple 49 34 Oak 19 13 Pine 1 1 143 100 (individual trunks) 1 • s , • . 1 2 . \ • ss I it , i k.41 ... 0 IS 1 Nb NI • ' } PI li t , . ; 1 .14P4 1 • . ' s 2 i e . \ \ \ . . . • . e' .'1411).. ■'. . ' \ ' .1 1 • ' 9 ' ‘ , \ 1 . ! I I ' 1 \ k ' • \ . \ \ Fa il 1 • • ) . - 1 • j ' , \ , -: ; .' , 1 1 - - s• , ,.. , ..•., - . •, ... . , ' \ • ..., •, I .I 1 15 "r / ! . . ,. le - g , % • .: :. ... 1,4, • • , e ‘ • i i ../ • - ! ",. v , 1 i tir \ 1‘... .. . , ......, ... ., is9 • .' .1 ,,,,," r fr. . 1 1 41-r-"1 ••- e• \ ‘. v ‘ . \ t I • ■ , 0 - ! : • "J . . I . . . % . I -.. • ‘ \ , . , N• • 2 ..,' ( I s \ I, i t ii?,'"P4 :, N , A ' k't ,.-• \ 'N , . 0 , I ; _II : i I i 1 ° • 3 ) : .- V- ,. • s. \ - .. . iv i ‘ .... 4 v . / ii l s $ \ • • • ; • . . y .-L k ; 1/4.- “ 4 \n / \ ... I ...-- . • / `. %. • - \ • i . I / 4. 4 ,; • .P i i i : 4 , t v / \ • i ' /, ‘-, 4+. i . . , . .• / ..,. - ,...,„ , i z_-_, I- (.4 / '11; /43 .. /— •'-- / s . Ci • 1 / .0 / ' • . •.:,; •/, ....-• Irly Vt • t;4 / 1;: 0 . 9 ‘ 2 0 ,-. • •) .t . \ i 1 --' 1 . ' AR, • omi wk , ; : , , . 7, r i • ' / .1 si. . . . 1 — 177 , ( ,, . I s ... \ A„ I i's . ` /. s• .:-..- \ t; ... . . / `, Ss , • '.• \ v •• N. ‘ /. 4. No. • . ... / . ._/4, ' - Vr 111 • T ' 1 i 1 —.4-.• ' 1 , .. I ' •.. \ ... ,\ to . , • \ . . . %..$, ItA r 1 , ",...'. \ '' ( \ s ., ... ...# 4 . ...,. • 1 ,.. r 1 x - : • ... , 1 ,,., ...,,,,, .. Ito ,. • • / i I -1:: 4, . ; 1 .--- 1 1 ao y) (.., 1 I 0 .R \.. .- , x \ , • • , • iN le \ A. -' .1 . mak '',.'li ..., ‘ . - \--1 . • % ‘s: 4111 ....- : 1 1 ''', I • T 1 — ..- \ ;' # r - ,,,,- ) ' t , . 4, ..e , , i,. \ .. . 15 2 I ' \ , /I 1 1 <:: . k• , \ . e itC. )) . . , I t- 17 4, tit* \ . 'I, A. I • • i $ 1. -- 7•4010 44 t . ' 1 . , if I 11 , 1 1 • .. ' ..;..3 . , 1 1 . I. likb !. 1 I ... -.'" --- , , , 1 • y u_ 1 ! .0 1 0) . Cc 1 1 .. • , Original Plat ' I o loo i :... , 1 '.• - . .► lit 14 "fir ;01347-..4(r4/... T 1 . •• • • "V--.-. 111 t - - - - r--- - • 6 • .moo( •-• - (` - f '4 f •11 r--�1 • i 'Pk' • No * ..)4. I • _ , ' Alx ., ' * \',10% L ir , '-sh,..i.arme • - / . -$ - •80f,-,„ - -I. to 1 4 .Ez 1 -; 0 • *Ow 3,_: my.. I t& ,-. - .4,(VO.V .;* '4. N . gii■ I, • IN •. - i "Ilierfilk ' v''• itA . 1.\,••' s. - t til it i e i 3 0 p• 'Z ° ' •. i /,9iti Os- ,Lel, 1 . .....",. . . e f u l la . , ,....411:// 1•/ G • 4 tr z .ft ;scgr .h W w r K , 34 3 • `� ./ C • rl Piv ono" rri el VII I n-vi IT ' l ' rt • _ \ tip '-' . —". -: ile.O.Ait il III- 34-.........-...-..---.—.-- .................... r . ., '1".• V \ '.. , 2o.v.o•aa V s7:t -:a o o O — — —I— . ht.t.n.aa. 4o • oo 4 1 7 C �.1 t . _ ea .- . �, Nr° .1 1 1 . 6 73 0 Te • . w I I I 1 1 1 1 : I • Preliminary Gracing and Utlity Plan 11 i . , , \ t Chalm i t LAI , 11111r . ......1140■11114111011•111 111 ''''-"------...,_: • - . - 7 ad111111, ' .• ... ..... '. '.. '''' ".• " . - '-' - -- - ( / // , Ai low appirlimst----- °1•? ■ ... ............. i ■ ••■ ... ....... ...■ ....■. .• ,:•■•■••••"r "••,.... . ...‘...."-`,. 1 . • f ..- .■ ,......... 1....... . t".. 1111 I 1. I AIrttli . ' " IrliallOgr -7" .....- ....' 14.. . ..... ...... - -.....-- . , 1. ...........■:Are. Let "1 ...... . • . ,. RI sullw7 '' :\ ' . -• " 4116.Taii .1- ." \ \ \ ..... - 1 \ \\ e )--r3-44Z11,14.-... - ..........._ " 446 l '' ' ANN 111111111 u`. • - amons irsol I ' ----7 „. , 61■Eafift■ A i■ I 0 I I 1 W \ ° . - • 4114- 41 11 lihrti 7 ‘1 , ./' V tZe" ••■••••■,,,k ,- ‘ \ ........ 1 it ) ,- s• •■ ■ ' ' 1 ' '...... /.. -.... ....,'''' 7 . ■IdcileSP \ ..... .,.,./.et ..."7.4. ' S. • , • .. ‘ V vi * S., ' ■ ...1 ‘.. •.f. \ 0/ S .-- *--e" . ... . 1 .- ■,.. IL • G •''' 4.16.1r r . _ .a. 4 .., -- -....._ ye AL, Ov • "-( ... \ ' *< . 1;' ''.."''... ;---- -<---.- .../ ,...._ , • ... .."" ...:4 --- \ • / - At:: ..- ,• - ...% . - ' - , --- 1 ■ , . \ . A, illi ..400. , ■•' „ . *- ." . 441, 11.74- ..,......., _ , .‘ 7 • • - -;-- - I tO 1 .." ' 1. __ _.3. 7 \ / •■•' • ../\ 1 ...,.. . ..., .. t,.: . - . -- \ ......, ..... t ., No , , ... .„., . - .. ..._ ...„ ..„_. ..... ..... ..,.. .... ........ , . ..,, -- 3 ,..- - • s 1: ,,- \ ,. ... ., - "' .-- r 4 6 -. .1 s• . ' ...". ■ / -• - I" .. ,'''. . , .111, . / • - ' el.61 ". ..-• ,, .... — .— - 7 _ .__. _ . _.,_ ih. 4.... . . V 0 . _. # ert - V .-- ,- am. Mat 77 . % • am .110211147 . A r s # sle . / \ r moo, r • --- 7 111 _ .. _ _ _ _ _ _, • \\‘‘ __ r ,r. r r ."....-- pumpom / ...- ... • I •,. 1 0■ 0 , 04 ■■ 41•11111R felmill•S serreawrimmi . . ..0 . 10•••-•---- 111•10Tell IIIII•1Isill ONNITART IMPIIII ilbilifter wow - 0. '' ....• ' ••■••••••••■••• amiens .1101.11•19 mem Miss • arm r RC - • - ' — — ..1111111111M1111 =MA SOW IWO ..... 01111100111111 weenowr wl WI MIMI . 4 . • '''''''' =WINO rromear of ears wan I . 1 1 1 Id q \\0.../„.,-;00 I O I i • E I • •'• 1 • E I — 1 I g E 1 1 EF . • t ; _ E i // E .fr ... - E . E .r • w 1 • 1 _ E / �- / \ 1 • E e ` / • �R f/ / EE E w ■ ,� s a / r n , E fi E / it . X P I \ ‘ 1 ' I 1 Iti O ' . I 1 i ' / 40 ) 1 j al E •E `s ! / / 1 * -„ a rE E ` �� / / • .m a .t ft Ca Z i � l \ E 1 r ` _ _ • • Q a 1 ; ir4,# 4 v r : ' 1 %Imo - • • e 1 E :;g • •f L . s Igt o E E E �■ 1 E 3 IL i E I 1 t • E ._ 1 I 1 i a 1 13 s g I s 1 11 Todd Jay Owens 6661 Nez Perce Ave_ Chanhassen, MN. 55317 July 6, 1993 1 To: City Of Chanhassen Regarding: TJO Addition Project Summary & Narrative 11 S - uun max• r Project Name TJO Addition (Plat name) Location East of Nez Perce Ave. at the intersection of Lake Lucy Road_ Owner / Developer / Applicant Todd J. Owens 6661 Nez Perce Ave_ Chanhassen, MN_ 55317 Home Phone: 474 -2972 Office: 944 -9690 1 Site Planner. Surveyor, and Engineer Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 14180 West Trunk Highway 5 i Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Phone: 937 -5150 Contact: Tim Erkkila 1 1 1 jPgal Descripon Lots 372 thru 384 and lots 403 thru 411, Carver Beach, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. Proposed Legal Description - Vacated Lake Lucy Road The south one -half of Lake Lucy Road as dedicated on the plat of Vineland, according to the plat of record thereof, Carver County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the northwesterly extension of the southwesterly line of lot 372, Carver Beach, according to the plat of record thereof, and which also lies westerly of the northwesterly extension 11 of the centerline of Alder Drive (aka Hopi Road) as dedicated on said plat of Carver Beach_ Proposed Vacation - Alder Drive (aka Hopi Road) 1 The southwesterly one -half of Alder Drive (aka Hopi Road) as dedicated on the plat of Carver Beach, according to the plat of record thereof, Carver County, Minnesota, lying northwesterly of the northeasterly extension of the southeasterly line of lot 411 said Carver Beach_ Development Data 11 Zoning 1 RSF Site Area , Lots 372 -384 & 403 -411 43,156 (Carver Beach) Vacation of 1/2 of Lake Lucy Road 2,882 (aka Alder, aka Kiowa) Subtotal 46,038 s_f_ ' Vacated 1/2 of Lake Lucy Rd_* 4,405 Total. Area 50,443 s_f_ 1 Proposed Development Create 2 new 15,000 s_f_ lots for single family development ' adjacent to existing residence Lot 1 area (with existing residence) 15,831 s_f_ , Lot 2 area 15,000 s_f_* Lot 3 area 15,207 s_f_* * If I succeed in obtaining 1/2 of Lake Lucy Rd_, old R.O.W. 1 lot areas in lots 2 & 3 will be increased. 11 1 P ro j c t N arrat ± r 1 Introduction I have had numerous meetings and discussions with city staff, (mainly Sharmin Al -Jaff & David Hempel), in pursuing this project_ They have been exceptionally helpful and pattcnt with me throughout this learning experience as this is not my everyday business_ I have made every attempt to comply with their recommendations and requests_ 11 One of my wife's and my goals throughout this project has been to develop the property in a way that would have the least negative impact on the surrounding neighbors_ We have kept in touch with the surrounding neighbors from the beginning stages of this project_ We feel that the proposed plat accomplishes this goal_ Existing Conditions This property has been home to my wife and myself since we were married in 1979_ The existing home is an older home bordered by older homes on one side and new homes on two sides_ The property is an oversize lot for the area, an acre of heavily wooded land which slopes to the north_ The woods consist of many mature Maples, Oaks and Basswoods_ Description of Proposed Development Our land together with the vacation of Hopi allows enough area for three lots_ Lot 2 could be accessed from Hopi or Nez Perce and lot 3 could be accessed from further north on Nez Perce. The design solution we selected features a combined drive off Nez Perce which is at the high side of the building sites for custom walk out homes_ The common drive is preferred due to the fact that more tree removal would be required with the other options we looked at_ In creating this lot configuration we feel the need to include the neck area of lot 2 in the area calculations to get sufficient lot area and orderly lot lines_ All lots are at least 15,000 sguare feet and existing buildings comply with set back requirements_ Nate: The shed in lot 2 would be removed or moved to lot 1 depending on the wishes of the new owner of lot 1. ' Architecture I am not a builder or developer by profession_ My assumption is that the buyers of the lots would build quality custom homes of an upper scale similar to the quality of the Vineland Forest development which directly abuts our property to the north_ !' r 11 I/ Grading 1 On our plan we have shown grading for access drive only_ We have not shown building pad grading as that would be up to the new architecture chosen buy the new owners of the lots_ While we don't have a plan we have tried to identify potential impact in the tree survey_ Tree Preservation We estimate that approximately 29 trees out of 110 surveyed and identified trees over 6" diameter will be affected_ That calculates to 26% removed and 74% kept intact_ My goal is to work with the buyers of the lots to potentially save even more trees. Utilities I/ Lot 1 has water and sewer and will remain as is off Nez Perce. New lots 2 & 3 will receive water service from Nez Perce via 2" diameter common water service and we don't expect to disturb Nez Perce because water service is available on the east side of Nez Perce_ Sanitary sewer will come from existing manhole on Hopi and serve lots 2 & 3 via 6" PVC. Both services are proposed to put in 20' wide easements_ Gravity systems will be used_ Streets 1 No new streets are proposed_ As proposed, Nez Perce will provide access. 30' wide by 60' long easement for joint access is proposed for lots 2 & 3_ 20' wide 7 ton bituminous drive will be constructed as proposed by me in conjunction with house construction_ Street Vacation With this submission we are requesting vacation of 1/2 of Hopi Road abutting our property. This area is included in lot and area calculations. I have been working with my attorney and city staff on acquiring 1/2 of vacated portion of Lake Lucy Road which abuts the north edge of our property_ Chanhassen vacated this land by a resolution on January 8, 1990 and filed it with the county May 8, 1990. I attended the public hearing relating to this_ When I inquired of the council at the public hearing I was told that it was likely I would receive 1/2 of the vacated portion_ The land area is 4,405 square feet and is shown on our plat but not included in the lot configuration or area. If I acquire this land before the final plat the lot line between lots 2 & 3 will be adjusted slightly for an equitable distribution and to improve lot 2_ Wetlands - None on site or affected by project. 1 f P . ♦jam 1 ��1 ; • J _ `1 M► 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ., '� oc' ■ �r� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING o` ~ `' � — Wednesday, August 4, 1993, 7 :30 P.M. ■■ i � WW I City Hall Council Chambers I �" ' _/ 6 1 � . . � ti.:. J - . / P. 690 Coulter Drive '. . 044,' 044,' At. - Project: TJO Addition _ , � � R Developer: Todd J. Owens 1, s , * ,1 �� ''9 • 1 4/'' L ocation: 6661 Nez Perce - N ; �-i K � "" :1 1 1 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Todd Owens proposes to subdivide a 50,443 square foot parcel into 3 single 1 family lots on property zoned RSF and located at 6661 Nez Perce, TJO Addition, Todd Owens. 1 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 1 through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 1 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 1 Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. 1 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 Jo Ann at 937 -1900. If you choose I 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. 1 Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on July 22, 1993. I 1 ,al 0 1 1 1 Nicolette Randall Gregory & B. Peppersack David & Carol Zalusky 6680 Nez Perce Drive 940 Western Drive 960 Western Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Steven & Gloria Ray Chin Van & N. Nguyen Willard & N. Shoberg I 920 Western Drive 900 Western Drive 980 Western Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Betty Johnson Ramona Beckman E. & V. Keefer 1 6694 Nez Perce Drive 6670 Hopi Road 6681 Nez Perce Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Daniel & Karen Woitalla Nadean Collver Jeffery Braiedy & T. Falkosky 1 6689 Nex Perce Drive 6686 Nez Perce Drive 850 Western Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 James Cosgrove Craig & Kim Anderson Frank Lieble 6679 Hopi Road 6683 Hopi Road c/o Albert Otterdahl I Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 6715 Nez Perce Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 William & Maria Peden Victoria Sanchez -Boice Evelyn Prestemon I 6687 Hopi Road 6680 Deerwood Drive 6680 Deerwood Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Mrs. Leonard Larson Albert & Elaine Otterdahl City of Chanhassen 1 3033 43rd Avenue South 6715 Nez Perce Drive City Treasurer Minneapolis, MN 55406 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Bruce Schumann David & Marilynn Cook Mathias & Judith Jacobs 116 Elm Street North 941 Western Drive 921 Western Drive Lester Prairie, MN 55354 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 David & Linell Santella Steven & Yvonne Hayes Kenneth Morrill 881 Western Drive 6690 Nez Perce Drive 860 Hiawatha Drive 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 John Myskevitz A. & M.J. Klingelhutz Trust Brian & Syzanne Cooper 900 Hiawatha Drive c/o Aloysius & M.J. Klingelhutz 1000 Lake Lucy Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Robert & Teresa Drake Terry & Linda Barck Bennett & Sharon Morgan 980 Lake Lucy Road 960 Lake Lucy Road 1935 Wayzata Blvd. West Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Long Lake, MN 55356 'Todd & Gayle Lantto James & Susan Duchene Steven & Collette McKinnon 981 Lake Lucy Road 961 Lake Lucy Road 941 Lake Lucy Road 'Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 'Paul & Amy Hanson Boeck -Kevitt Partnership Frank & Marilyn Beddor lM921 Lake Lucy Road 7441 Jolly Lane 7951 Powers Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Crystal, MN 55428 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 6 aniel & Sharon Rogers Carter & Kim Kelly Donald Shearer & K. Poppitz 500 Nez Perce Drive 6580 Nez Perce Drive 900 Vineland Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Steven Jaiger Todd Cocallas James & Kari Ledin Vineland Court 860 Vineland Court 840 Vineland Court I 880 hanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 •chard & Nancy Hajt Craig 7 A. Gagnon David & Paula Donna 820 Vineland Court 861 Vineland Court 881 Vineland Court 'Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 'Douglas & Darlene Olsen Daniel & Janet Syverson Duane & Renelle Ulrich 901 Vineland Court 921 Vineland Court 6581 Nez Perce Drive 'Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Michael Mooney & J. Fishman Peter Ennenz & Caroly Pare John & Joanne Doyle 6530 Fox Path 6540 Fox Path 6550 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Frederich Bruno & M.A. Skalicky William & Ann Miller Jimmy & Mary Roane 1 6560 Fox Path 6561 Fox Path 6571 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 1 1 ARVER COUNTY ABSTRACT AND TITLE CO. INC. ES C ARVER C OUNTY (612) 448 -5570 201 Chestnut St. N. FAX (612)448 5155 A BSTRAC T 8 TITLE P.O. Box 106 Dale B. Kutter Chaska, MN 55318 David E. Moonen July 2, 1993 Todd Owen� 6661 fierce Dr. 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 According to the 1993 Tax Books in the Carver County Treasurers Office the following persons are listed as owners of the property within Carver County, Minnesota, which lies within 500 feet of the following described property: Lots 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379,. 380, 381, 382, 383, 384, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, Carver Beach, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Regstrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. I/ 1. Nicolette Rosel Randall 8. Ramona W. Beckman 6680 Nez Perce Dr. 6670 Hopi Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 2. Gregory & B. Peppersack 9. E. & V. Keefer I/ 940 Western Dr. 6681 Nez Perce Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 3. Donald W. & Carol M. Zalusky 10. Daniel J. & Karen A. Woitalla 960 Western Dr. 6689 Nez Perce Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 4. Steven & Gloria Ray 11. Nadean Marie Collver 920 Western Dr. 6686 Hopi Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 , 5. Chin Van & N. Nguyen 12. Jeffrey R. Braiedy & Tami L. Falkosky 900 Western Dr. 850 Western Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 6. Willard & N. Shoberg 13. James P. Cosgrove 980 Western Dr. 6679 Hopi Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Contract for Deed: Nadean Marie Collver 7. Betty M. Johnson 6694 Nez Perce Dr. 14. Craig A. & Kimberly Anderson I/ Chanhassen, MN 55317 6683 Hopi Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 II . II 15. Frank Lieble 26. David A. & Linell B. Santella II C/0 ALbert Otterdahl 881 Western Dr. 6715 Nez Perce Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 27. Steven P. & Yvonne M. Hayes II 16. William S. & Maria Peden 6690 Nez Perce Dr. 6687 Hopi Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 I 28. Kenneth A. Morrill 17. State of Minnesota in Trust 860 Hiawatha Dr. (no address given) Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 18. Victoria Lynn Sanchez -Boice 29. John D. Myskevitz 9390 Foxford Rd. 900 Hiawatha Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 -8684 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 19 . Evelyn A. Prestemon 30. A. & M. J. Klingelhutz Trust 6680 Deerwood Dr. C/0 Aloysius & M. J. Klingelhutz II Chanhassen, MN 55317 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Life Estate: Michael J. & Chanhassen, MN 55317 Paula Wegler 31. Brian P. & Suzanne R. Cooper il 20. Mrs. Leonard Larson 1000 Lake Lucy Rd. 3033 43rd Ave. S. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Minneapolis, MN 55406 II Contract for Deed: Kelly Ernst 32. Robert I. III & Teresa Drake 980 Lake Lucy Rd. 21. Albert & Elaine Otterdahl Chanhassen, MN 55317 • I 6715 Nez Perce Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 33. Terry A. & Linda J. Barck 960 Lake Lucy Rd. 22. City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, MN 55317 II C/0 City Treasurer 690 Coulter Dr. 34. Bennett & Sharon Morgan P.O. Box 147 940 Lake Lucy Rd. II Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 23. Bruce John Schurmann 35. Countryside Management 116 Elm St. N. 1935 Wayzata Blvd. W. II Lester Prairie, MN 55354 Long Lake, MN 55356 24. David & Marilynn M. Cook 36. Todd Michael & Gayle A. Lantto II 941 Western Dr. 981 Lake Lucy Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 I 25. Mathias & Judith Jacobs 921 Western Dr. 37. James P. & Susan M. Duchene 961 Lake Lucy Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 11 II II 38. Stephen David McKinnon & 49. Craig & A. Gagnon Collette M. A. McKinnon 861 Vineland Ct. 941 Lake Lucy Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 50. David & Paula Donna 39. Paul H. & Amy M. Hanson 881 Vineland Ct. 921 Lake Lucy Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 51. Douglas M. & Darlene K. Olsen 40. Boeck - Kevitt Partnership 901 Vineland Ct. 7441 Jolly Ln. Chanhassen, MN 55317 II Crystal, MN 55428 Contract for Deed: Nancy K. Raddahl 52. Daniel J. & Janet L. Syverson 921 Vineland Ct. 41. Frank Jr. & Marilyn A. Beddor Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 7951 Powers Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 53. Duane M. & Renelle R. Ulrich 6581 Nez Perce Dr. II 42. Daniel J. Rogers & Sharon K. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Peterson - Rogers 6500 Nez Perce Dr. 54. Michael R. Mooney & Jodi Fishman Chanhassen, MN 55317 6530 Fox Path I/ Chanhassen, MN 55317 43. Carter David Kelly & I Kimberly M. Kelly 55. Peter Ennenz & Carolyn E. Pare 6580 Nez Perce Dr. 6540 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 44. Donald S. Shearer & Karen M. Poppitz 56. John B. & Joanne S. Doyle II 900 Vineland Ct. 6550 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 45. Steven Jaiger 57. Frederick K. Bruno & Mari Ann Skalicky 880 Vineland Ct. 6560 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 46. Todd E. Cocallas 58. William P. Jr. & Ann K. Miller 860 Vineland Ct. 6561 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II 47. James T. & Kari L. Ledin 59. Jimmy M. & Mary E. Roane 840 Vineland Ct. 6571 Fox Path I/ Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 48. Richard Joseph Hajt & Nancy Ann Hajt 1 820 Vineland Ct. Chanhassen, MN 55317 II a te,. -0.��� ' rver County Abstract &Title Co., Inc. I/ This company does not assume any liability for the accuracy of this report. II II 11 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 18 II 19 . The street name, Alisa Court, should be revised to Alisa Lane to provide continuity. II 20. Staff is in support of a 10% street grade and therefore recommends approval of any necessary variances to allow the 10% street grade. II 21. The City will not permit open cutting of Audubon Road for the extension of utilities into the site. I 22. Access to the lots shall be from the interior streets and not Audubon Road. The corner lots (Lots 1 and 13, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 3; and Lot 2, Block 2) shall take access from Alisa Court and not Osprey 11 Lane. Driveway access to Lot 1, Block 22 shall be limited to the easterly half of the lot. 23. City staff shall evaluate the potential for relocating the storm water 11 pond as it exists on the plan, to the adjacent parcel to the east. 24. A conservation easement shall be placed on the following lots: Block 1, Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, 13; Block 2, Lot 4; and Block 3, Lots 1, 2 and 3. And that the applicant shall submit a new landscape plan that shows all trees being removed are being replaced by new trees. 11 25. If this shall become a permanent cul -de -sac, to make sure that we have the appropriate easements in place to cover it. II All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Conrad: This will go to the City Council August 23rd. Craig. I Craig Mertz: If anybody's going to throw away their packet... Conrad: Why don't you come up and collect them. PUBLIC HEARING: I PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE A PARCEL (50.443 SQ.FT.) INTO 3 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND LOCATED AT 6661 NEZ PERCE, TJO ADDITION, TODD OWENS. Public Present: Name Address II Todd Owens 6661 Nez Perce Jim Cosgrove 6679 Hopi Road Craig Gagnon 861 Vineland Court Renelle Ulrich 6581 Nez Perce Drive Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Vice Chair Conrad called the public hearing to order. r 1 Planning Commission Meeting 1 August 4, 1993 - Page 19 Conrad: Sharmin can g ou go through the staff report then in terms of the Y g P motion and tell us which ones are no longer applicable? And which one's you'd like to change. You know I don't know what's current. This is a recommendation not based on that plan. Yeah, just go through them and tel us if you're comfortable. Number 1 I assume still is. Al -Jaff: Remains the same. 1 Conrad: Number 2 is out. Al -Jaff: Number 2 is out. A variance is not required anymore. The tree removal could stay the same. Conrad: Could. 1 Al -Jaff: The grading will remain very similar. What we have done is, the" grading will remain the same as it was before. Therefore the same trees could be used as was before. Conrad: Okay. Point number 4. It seems like it should be the same. 1 Hempel: It may need to be adjusted slightly. Harberts: How do you adjust number 4? , Hempel: Individual water services shall be extended to each lot. Period." Conrad: Number 5. Individual grading plans, okay. 6. Development contract, same thing. 7. Hempel: That would be revised depending on who extends the sewer and watei to the property lines. If the city does it, then each lot would be assessed the $8,544.91. 1 Conrad: We're getting into a couple changes here. If anybody feels uncomfortable, we can always table it and have it come back. I haven't hi something that makes me nervous yet but again, if somebody says they...the driveway, number 8. Al -Jaff: This has a possibility of changing. Before we had a common driveway between Lot 3 and 2. The area that is shared between those two II lots is...7 ton design, 20 foot wide. If Lot 2 gains access off of Hopi. Todd Owens: That may be a correction. Hopi is down to the south... 1 Al -Jaff: I'm sorry. That they woudln't...then they wouldn't need the 20 • foot wide easement if they came off of Hopi. If there wasn't a shared driveway. So that now they have two options. They could come off of Hopill or they could come off of Nez Perce. If they got a cross access easement over Lot 3. 1 Harberts: Hopi Road is...we weren't very comfortable with having a common driveway... 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 20 Hempel: Maybe I can translate a little bit better. With this type of scenario here, Hopi is right over here. Vacation is for a strip of land up to here. We still have street access. The street is built down to this part of the development so the option to be left open for development on this parcel...driveway access through here or also if it betters suits the builder or the homeowner, to share a common driveway through an... Mancino: Do you have a preference? Does staff have a preference whether it's one way or the other? Harberts: I think based on our discussion we had...that's what I recall from that discussion. That's why we shied away from that common access. 11 Conrad: Okay. As I look at it, 9, 10 and 11 should probably be the same. I see no change that the plan would have on any of those. We'll open it up for public discussions. I wanted to go through these. Somebody's got to make a motion and I didn't understand what any of the staff comments were so. They're simple but I didn't write them down so if somebody's going to make a motion, think about it. Public hearing. We'll open it up to the developer. If he'd like to make some comments regarding the new plan or the staff report. Todd Owens: I am Todd Owens, the applicant and I'm not going to become a developer. This is my last time. It was fun when it started but it didn't progress that way. Anyway, the reason for the big change is I had a lengthy conversation on the property with Nancy and then she had translated that conversation onto Sharmin and this is the end result. And I think we've tried all along to comply and I want to thank Dave and Sharmin publicly for their patience with a rookie here. But we tried all along to comply with everything we could. We contacted neighbors ahead of time to discuss what we were doing and in the beginning that went well. I had one neighbor who in the end who had changed what we had originally talked about and I think he's here tonight to comment to that. And then I know I have one neighbor here who'd like to ask something about a stop sign at the corner that is on Nez Perce there. The tree, which it's a concern to us and I know Nancy had the concern when we were talking. With the new change, the way I've looked at it and in looking at the tree survey, and actually walking the lot, if the access comes from Hopi versus the cross access, it shifts the tree. In other words, certain trees are saved. It's a trade off. The trees just shift places. So I guess on that I'd be asking that we can work through that with staff. Our objective is to keep it as wooded, and I think anybody buying those lots, that's going to be their, that's the beauty of the lots is the trees. So thanks and I'll ' comment to any questions you have. Harberts: I have a question. Do you have any comment with regard to the ...recommended to leave the common driveway? 11 Todd Owens: I'm sorry, say that again? Harberts: Do you have any comment if the recommendation is to, it... allowing the common driveway? 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting 1' August 4, 1993 - Page 21 Todd Owens: It would be nice if the option was open to discuss with potential buyers. We want it approved and we want to move on. Our objective personally is, I'm an Owens and you're all aware of the Owens property situation. You know we're going to buy my folks house and our objective is to, we've lived here 14 years. I've lived in that house all my life previous from the 5 year old age. I grew up there. We cross country skied through Vineland Forest and Lake Lucy development long beforil they were around so I like the area. We've been there. We're going to stay. We're trying to move on. We'd like to have the option open but we're flexible. 1 Conrad: Good, thanks Todd. It's a public hearing. Other comments please. Jim Cosgrove: Hi. My name is Jim Cosgrove and I live on the other side oli Hopi Road. I am very opposed to vacating Hopi Road. I'm very opposed to access there. Hopi is a dead end right now. That's why I live at the end of the dead end. That's why I bought it. I've been there for 7 years and enjoyed the solitude. The quiet. The safety for children to not have car coming through there. I feel the time has been very poor on the developer's part. I'm very opposed to it. I'm opposed to the vacation. I have been there, I don't like the development's that gone on the last 7 years and I don't know what to say other than I oppose it and everybody's gone all around me as far as just incredible development. I understand that. That' part of the deal but I really want to put my foot down to vacation and try to save something for myself. Small lot which I have wooded and I am really, really will push for this. And I did not receive the agenda so I am somewhat unprepared. I just read it tonight. I don't know why I did II not receive it. Sharmin, I talked to you a couple weeks ago and I was supposed to get it. I don't know why I didn't so I'm sitting here reading all this stuff and I didn't even realize until tonight that there was a possibility of access to that lot. I don't know which lot it is but the II upper lot off of Hopi. I didn't even realize that was an option. So I have a lot of concerns. Here I am. Conrad: We do have your name as being. Jim Cosgrove: Yeah, it's Jim Cosgrove. 1 Conrad: Yeah. I was just going to say Jim, we do have your name as being something being delivered to your house. Aanenson: He got the hearing notice. I think he requested the staff report probably. Jim Cosgrove: So I'm sitting here reading this going, um and Todd did call me. He asked at one point if I opposed it. I feel like he should have written me a letter and a request. Not a phone call. Some things like that. Yes, I did change my mind on that vacation but I don't think I was II served properly either by a simple phone call. Thank you. Conrad: Okay, thanks. Other comments. 1 Craig Gagnon: Hi. I'm Craig Gagnon and I'm at 861 Vineland Court. I have the lot immediately to the north of this. And the Lake Lucy Road vacation!' 1 11 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 22 runs along my property line as does, well I think perhaps the ending part of the Hopi Road. I have not, I'm kind of a rookie to this as well and I have not seen or read the staff report. I have taken a look at some of the plans. I wonder about the Lake Lucy Road vacation and how that works. It would appear that half of that road would go to the new development. I'm not sure what happens to the other half of that road. Al -Jaff: The right -of -way for Lake Lucy Road was taken from Vineland only so, we have vacated our rights so if you would like to claim it, if you want to, you could proceed with that and the entire strip would be, the entire 33 feet would go back to you rather than half of it to Todd and the other half to you. 11 Craig Gagnon: I see. How would I go about doing that? Al -Jaff: Contact an attorney. I think it's a small claim court or I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with the procedure but it should be a very simple procedure. Craig Gagnon: I will do that and I'm interested in proceeding with that. That was my understanding that that might be an option and I don't know how to proceed but I will look into that. I would, in addition to that I would just simply like to express the concerns about the wooded nature of the land, as has been described. It is a heavily wooded lot now and given the house pad requirements for Lots 2 and 3, clearly that would impact the nature of that quite a bit. So I will look into the Lake Lucy Road vacation. Conrad: Other comments. • Renelle Ulrich: Hi. My name is Renelle Ulrich and I live at 6581 Nez Perce Drive to the north on Nez Perce. And I just wanted to let you know that Todd Owens has been very professional in dealing with me. I mean he's been very neighborly I guess. He's always made us very well aware of what he's been doing and it's fine with us as far as we're concerned because I sincerely think that anybody who buys that lot is going to try, is going to buy it to preserve the trees and to have a w000ded lot so that's not a major concern of mine. Also knowing that I've got the 33 feet of the vacated property gives me a little buffer to whatever they do. The only concern I have is that the corner where Nez Perce turns into Lake Lucy is a dangerous corner and if you're going to put a driveway there, you've got to put a stop sign at the same time. Anybody, you know that's a bus stop there. There's a lot of kids in the neighborhood and I came up during the other Nez Perce extension thing to express concerns about a stop sign. I'll sit down when there's a stop sign there. Until then I'll just keep coming back to everything and repeating that request. But otherwise that's my only concern. Otherwise I think it should go through. Conrad: Thanks. Dave, do you want to respond to a stop sign there? Hempel: Sure. We can certainly perform an engineering study. That's one of the requirements for placement of a stop sign or any traffic control device in a public right -of -way. I'd like to get the homeowner's name and telephone number and address and we can start an evaluation of that 1 Planning Commission Meeting 1 August 4, 1993 - Page 23 ' like to bring u intersection. I d also l e g P one other proposed improvement we have at that intersection. As you will notice the sight lines going around the curve is very difficult and the city was attempting at some point here ll to contact that property owner to see if we could work on getting a temporary construction easement and cutting back that bank that's out there. Build a retaining wall so we can open up the sight lines as you go , around the corner. Renelle Ulrich: That's going to create another concern because...they'll say hey. There's no cars and they'll zoom...At least today they are force" to slow down a little bit. Hempel: Curvature of the road also has something to do with it. You obviously can't take it too fast or you're going to go off the road. Craig Gagnon: I would support Renelle's... Conrad: Okay, good thanks. Thanks Dave. Anything else? Jim Cosgrove: When you guys were talking about the grading, I didn't understand that but I have some questions about the grading. If you do, i you wanted to have access off of Hopi Road, is that really a reality with the grade that's there existing? I mean that is a steep, and I didn't really follow what you guys were talking about... Hempel: Mr. Chairman. The grades are fairly steep on the parcel but they are manageable from a driveway construction standpoint. They will be somewhat limited as far as access. It will probably run parllel to the side of the hill. It's going to be well underneath of 1O% grade limitation. Jim Cosgrove: If that is a fact...now what would happen to my half of that with the grade if you put a driveway in there? Hempel: We just expand, or the property owner would just expand on whatever pavement section's out there and extend it to his garage. There' be no disruption to your driveway or the existing city street. , Jim Cosgrove: Right. So if you guys put a road down there, and if you... grade that would be going to the road to my property? Are you considering that? 1 Hempel: We would not be putting a road. Jim Cosgrove: Well access...to the property. 1 Hempel: A driveway. 12 -15 foot wide driveway from the existing street surface out there back to the new home. 1 Jim Cosgrove: Okay. And are you aware of the grades from the driveway onto my property? What that would be. 1 Hempel: There should not be any, we're not, the driveway would not affect your driveway. i 1 11 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 24 Jim Cosgrove: I understand that. You're talking about going from the end of Hopi Road, which is a dead end right now. Okay, right there. Hempel: Here's Hopi and here is your driveway entrance I'm assuming. Jim Cosgrove: Yes. Hempel: The driveway would be extended from this portion of the city street that's out there into the parcel. 11 Jim Cosgrove: Okay. Hempel: It would not disturb your driveway access. Jim Cosgrove: I understand that but it will take, are you aware of what the grade would be off of, the right side going into the property of the road. Mancino: Right at that corner. Jim Cosgrove: ...am I making myself clear? Yeah, right there. Hempel: Right here. The right side of the property. Anything to there? Jim Cosgrove: Yes. Hempel: It's well within city guidelines. Under 10% grade. Farmakes: The grade marks are on the plan that we're looking at here. Hempel: The contour lines of the property. Those little hash marks are 2 foot intervals. Farmakes: Okay, but I'm not using. Right where the cul -de -sac is there's a...what's the grade right there? Does it show that? 1 Hempel: That elevation there is approximately. Scott: I think it's 411. Farmakes: 410. It goes from 411 up to 406. Hempel: 1039 approximately. 1040 is the elevation. The elevation in the middle of the lot is about 1036 -1037 so it's about a 3 foot drop only. Jim Cosgrove: Are we talking the same thing? Hempel: According to the contours on these drawings. Jim Cosgrove: It's drastically different... Conrad: Okay, we'll make a note of that. 11 Jim Cosgrove: That is drastically different. 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 25 1 Conrad: Okay, good. Appreciate the comments. We should validate that and make sure that that is a possible access. Anything else? Any other comments? We're in a public hearing. Anything else? Is there a motion tc' close the public hearing. Mancino moved, Scott seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in II favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Conrad: Diane. We'll start out on your end. ' Harberts: I don't really have anything to add than what we've talked about here. I'm alright with the staff recommendation I guess along as everyone ' else is clear of what was changed. Conrad: Oh sure. Passes the buck. I'm okay if Matt's okay. There'd better not be any other contingencies. Matt. ' Ledvina: I guess I'm glad to see that the lots have been revised to eliminate variances. I wouldn't have supported any variances in this instance but as it's drawn I can see that this is a feasible plan. I thin"' the situation with the access off of Hopi represents an acceptable option. I think maintaining the option for the shared access is a fairly simple thing to do. And I think that can be worked out. As it relates to the 1 vacating the Hopi Drive, the area northeast of what exists now. I think that would be a good thing for the neighboring property owners because that would prevent that road from ever going through so I don't see why anybody" that's in that vicinity that's concerned about the number of cars would oppose that vacation. But whatever. I think that the property should be vacated to the homeowner there. Or the parcel owner. Dave, on condition number 4. I think can we just eliminate that condition? We said that... so eliminate number 4 then, okay. Number 8 then, 20 foot common driveway may be installed. Use the road may to identify that as an option or what would you recommend there Dave? ' Hempel: Maybe if I could just run through some of these conditions here. I'll throw them out to you and see how they sound. Delete condition numbe 4. Expand condition number 7 to read, the City shall extend individual sanitary sewer and water service to each lot, (Lot 2, Block 3). Lots 2 an 3 shall be assessed the sewer and water connection and hook -up charge in the amount of $8,544.91. Both of these fees shall be payable at the time II of building permit issuance and may be assessed against the property at that time. Ledvina: Can you back, I didn't get all of that. The city shall extend. II Hempel: Individual sanitary sewer and water service. Ledvina: Sewer and water to each lot, okay. Hempel: To each lot, (Lot 2 and 3) . 11 Ledvina: To Lots 2 and 3? Hempel: Right. 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 26 1 Ledvina: Okay. And then Lots 2 and 3 shall be assessed, okay. Alright. 1 Hempel: Condition number 8 modified to read, driveway access to Lot 2 may be from Hopi or a 20 foot wide common driveway across Lot 3 with the appropriate cross access and maintenance agreements. Cross access easements and maintenance agreements. Ledvina: You're on a roll Dave. Keep going. 1 Hempel: That would be it. Ledvina: Okay. And then one thing that's not, or I didn't find within the staff report is condition number 11 and I haven't seen that before. What's going on there? Hempel: That condition came from our building department due to the slopes on the downside of Lots 2 and 3. They felt that the soils and the steepness of the slopes may require engineered foundations. 1--Jaff: We have requested it before when we've had such steep slopes. But we haven't had such subdivisions lately with steep slopes so. 1 Ledvina: Okay. I would like to...statement for that condition to read, a Registered Professional Engineer, or a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota shall be required to design etc. And then Diane... Oh okay, Diane wanted to see a number 12 condition added that staff evaluate the need for a stop sign along Nez Perce. Or let's see. I guess at Lake Lucy. At the intersection of Lake Lucy and Nez Perce. If that 1 means a traffic study... That's all I have. Conrad: Okay, Joe. Scott: Only one comment. It's never a treat to get significant new information on a project at the Planning Commission but in this case, it worked out fairly well but I think you know where I'm coming from. I have 1 no other comments other than that. Conrad: Okay. Nancy. 1 Mancino: My only comment, and thank you for the redrawing of the development so that we don't have to, as I had told you on Monday night, I would also not have voted for the variance. I do think that on recommendation number 3, about the trees, there will be different trees depending on what access we use to Lot 2. For the tree removals. So that I would like it to read the same. That the applicant will be permitted to remove only the following trees and just so that staff and Todd get together after they've figured out what access that they will be using and keeping about the same percentage as we have here in this original one would be fine with me. So that you...the list exactly which trees are to be removed and which trees aren't. And that's all I have. Conrad: Okay, thanks Nancy. Jeff. 1 Planning Commission Meeting II August 4, 1993 - Page 27 a Farmakes: I don't like the shared driveway solution. I like the redesign of the property. I would prefer that the access be off of Hopi. It seems to be the logical access to the lot. If there is a gap there, depending oll the grade, or how you can do it of an area between the trees there with oaks on one side and basswood on the other. The oaks are quite a bit larger than the basswood and if you can slip it in inbetween there, it seems like there'd be little tree loss there. There are several reasons why I don't like shared driveway access. It seems to me again the criteri for that would be like a variance. There's no other way to develop that. On one hand it seems like a logical good use of multi use of property but II when you look at single family and how it works out, sharing that much of piece of property I think in the long run is not necessarily a good idea. This lot and layout is very similar to what's on CR 17 and Lake Lucy. There's kind of a goofy shaped lot with a shared driveway going to the bail lot and often they have kind of trucks lined up there. That person does some pick -up truck type things, construction work and they're lined up in there and it seems out of character to me to single family area. It's moil higher density type layout, although these lots are a little larger. As I said, I like the way that you've redesigned it because I would not have voted for the variance either. That's the extent. I have no objections toll the comments about the recommendation changes. Conrad: I have nothing to add except a comment. When we vacate property,' assuming we're just following standard procedures, right? Nothing exceptional that we're doing here. Okay. Any other questions? If not, I'd accept a motion. Ledvina: I would move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of II Preliminary Plat #93 -16 for TGO Addition as shown on the plans dated July 6, 1993 and those dated, or that plan dated August 4, 1993. And subject t' the following staff conditions with the modifications and additions to follow. Let's see. Condition 1 shall read as in the staff report. Condition 2 is eliminated. Condition 3, add the following language. The staff shall work with the applicant to address the specific trees requirinII removal, depending on the chosen access. The percentage of tree loss shal remain approximately the same. Condition number 4 removed. Condition numbers 5 and 6 as in the staff report. Condition number 7 shall be II changed to read, the city shall extend sewer and water to Lots 2 and 3. Lots 2 and 3 shall be assessed the sewer and water connection and hook -up charge in the amount of $8,544.91. These shall be payable at the time of , building permit issuance and may be assessed against the property at that time. Number 8 shall read. Driveway access for Lot 2 may be from Hopi Road or along the lot line of Lot 3 with the appropriate cross easements obtained before installation. Number 9 and 10 shall read from the staff II report. Number 11. A Professional Engineer, registered in the State of Minnesota shall be required to design the foundation of the dwellings on Lots 2 and 3. Adding a condition number 12. That staff evaluate the need for a stop sign at the intersection of Lake Lucy and Nez Perce. I think I got them. I don't know. Conrad: That's good. Is there a second? 11 Harberts: Second. II II Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 28 Conrad: Discussion. Ledvina moved, Harberts seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat #93 -16 for TJO Addition as shown on the plans dated July 6, 1993 and August 4, 1993 and subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat approval is contingent upon the vacation of Hopi Road being approved by the City Council and at least 20' x 137.58' of the vacated right -of -way is combined with the subject property. 2. Deleted. 3. The applicant shall be permitted to remove only the following trees (as shown on Sheet 2). All other trees located on the site must be preserved and protected with snow fence located 1 1/2 times the drip line. Lot 2, Block 1 Tree Number 10 -18, 29, 37 -39, 41, 42, 44, 98 Lot 3, Block 1 Tree Number 46 -68, 66, 68 -69, 72, 73 The staff shall work with the applicant to address the specific trees ' requiring removal, depending on the chosen access. The percentage of tree loss shall remain approximately the same. ' 4. Deleted. 5. Final grading and utility plans in accordance with the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and supply the City with the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance of the conditions of approval. 7. The city shall extend sewer and water to Lots 2 and 3. Lots 2 and 3 ' shall be assessed the sewer and water connection and hook -up charge in the amount of $8,544.91. These shall be payable at the time of building permit issuance and may be assessed against the property at that time. 8. Driveway access for Lot 2 may be from Hopi Road or along the lot line of Lot 3 with the appropriate cross access easements obtained before installation. 9. The applicant shall pay a cash contribution into the City's Storm Water Mangement Fund. The frees shall be calculated by staff in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. 11 10. Full park and trail fees be accepted as a part of the platting of the TJO Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. Current park and trail fees are $600.00 and $200.00 respectively. 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 4, 1993 - Page 29 11. A Professional Engineer, registered in the State of Minnesota shall be required to design the foundation of the dwellings on Lots 2 and 3. I 12. Staff shall evaluate the need for a stop sign at the intersection of Lake Lucy and Nez Perce. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Conrad: This item too will go to City Council on August 23rd. Thank you I all for coming in. PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES INTO 4 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERT ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 6301 CHURCH ROAD, CHURCH ROAD ADDITION, GREG REED in Public Present: Name Address 1 Greg Reed 6301 Church Road Jim Way 6641 Minnewashta Parkway Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Vice Chair Conrad called the public hearing to order. , Greg Reed: Yeah I'm the applicant, Greg Reed. I've been working with Kate on this and I think we've kind of settled this out the best way we could. We've kept the 3 new lots as large as possible. I will put a hydrant closer. I don't know how far you want closer to there. Because I still would like, I like the area. I want to build a house on Lot, that'd be Lo 1 I think. Yeah. So I want my access off of West 62nd Street there to eliminate a little bit less traffic on that private easement. That's all my comments. Thank you. Conrad: Okay, good. Thank you. Other comments. Anybody else? Anybody?" Jim Way: I own the lot right. Conrad: Would you give us your name. Jim Way: Okay. I'm Jim Way and I have that lot to the southwest. I just found out that it's not, that house there is not 2 feet from the road but guess 30. I don't have any specific objectives or anything to the proposed development. That private road you know does go down the north property II line and the only thing I'd kind of like to see some kind of tree line or some kind of something to separate it. Make it more private I guess from that, my lot there. Is that a possibility? Conrad: How do we do that Kate? Aanenson: Well we do have a, when it's abutting a street we do have a streetscape requirement. It's a 30 foot wide easement. 20 feet of that, 1