Loading...
1c1. Lake Susan Hills 8th Addition Final Plat III 1c -f CITYOF --- 1 \ CHANHASSEN 1 \ . �\ — 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �'7 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 ---% I Action by City Administrator Endorsed Mod iti€d 1 MEMORANDUM pejec E�+ _ Dates Z — TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Date Su bm tied to Commission 1 FROM: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner Dete Submitted to Council 'f - 7- -12... 1 DATE: July 13, 1992 SUBJ: Final Plat for Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition 1 On June 25, 1990, the Council approved the preliminary plat for Lake Susan Hills West 4th 1 Addition for 159 single family lots with the following conditions: 1. All streets that are proposed for future connection shall be provided with a turnaround I which meets city standards with a barricade and signage stating that it is a temporary cul- de -sac and will be a future road connection. I 2. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping along the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the developer shall provide $150 per lot i for landscaping. 3. The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature vegetation located on I the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans required as part of the building permits. I 4. The applicant shall provide a registered engineer's report on soils, footings and structural design and a registered engineer's grading and drainage plan for the City Engineer and Building Department approval prior to issuance of a building permit on Lots 11 and 13, 1 Block 4. 5. All of the access points to the park land between single family lots shall either be paved 1 and signed that they are public access points. 1 a ft Or PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 Don Ashworth Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition ' July 22, 1992 Page 2 6. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of both looped streets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as park land dedication, not simply easements. ' 7. Trails /Sidewalks: The developer shall be required to provide trails /sidewalks as follows: ' a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along through streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time street improvements are constructed. b. A 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of Powers Boulevard shall be dedicated for future trail purposes. c. The above trails /sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged. 8. The applicant will be required to pay 50% of park dedication fees. There will be no trail fee required. ' 9. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans, shall provide a survey P P gP P Y showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the setback. ' 10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the 0. app t to o d p ty p ' necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the improvements. 11. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR, Watershed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer. 12. After grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent and Type II erosion control. 13. Type II erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areas. 14. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 15. The park area shall be graded as part of this phase and shall be consistent with the park plan being developed by Van Doren Hazard Stallings. The developer, at it's sole cost, 1 Don Ashworth 1 Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition July 22, 1992 I Page 3 shall grade the park areas in accordance with a timetable and plans to be furnished by the City. The City will develop park plans when the final park boundaries have been determined. 16. Grading along the plat boundaries shall be compatible with adjacent properties and existing off -site drainage patterns. 17. Truck hauling in and out of the site shall be limited to the proposed Lake Susan Hills 1 Drive access off of Powers Boulevard (County Road 17) at the south end of the project. 18. The applicant shall submit the final street and utility plans and specifications for staff I review and City Council approval. The applicant has submitted a final plat for Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition. The applicant I is proposing to final plat 36 single family lots. Attachment #1 illustrates the area being proposed for final plat approval. The applicant has met certain conditions of preliminary plat approval and the remaining conditions are more long term that will be enforced as part of the development contract. o for future connection shall be provided with a turnaround I 1. All streets that are proposed u p which meets city standards with a barricade and signage stating that it is a temporary cul- de -sac and will be a future road connection. This condition should be changed to state that Osprey Lane shall be barricaded and signage stating that, "This street will be extended in the future to Audubon Road." 2. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping along the entrances I and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the developer shall provide $150 per lot for landscaping. 3. The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature vegetation located on the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans required as part of the building permits. 1 This condition is no longer applicable. 4. All of the access P oints to the park land between single family lots shall either be paved I and signed that they are public access points. I 1 1 1 Don Ashworth Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition ' July 22, 1992 Page 4 5. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of both looped streets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as park land dedication, not simply easements. 6. Trails /Sidewalks: The developer shall be required to provide trails /sidewalks as follows: ' a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along through streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time street improvements are constructed. In areas where temporary street improvements are being accepted by the City, a temporary asphalt sidewalk may be installed with the understanding that it will be replaced by a permanent concrete sidewalk upon installation of permanent improvements. ' b. A 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of Powers Boulevard shall be dedicated for future trail purposes. This condition is no longer applicable. c. The above trails /sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged. 7. The applicant will be required to pay 50% of park dedication fees. There will be no trail fee required. 8. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans, shall provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the setback. ' 9. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the improvements. 1 10. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR, Watershed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer. This condition should be amended to state the applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR, Watershed District, MPCA, MWCC or any other governmental agency having jurisdiction. 11. After grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent and Type III erosion control. 1 1 Don Ashworth 1 Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition July 22, 1992 I Page 5 12. Type II erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence adjacent to sediment I basin and ravine areas. This condition should be changed to state Type III erosion control shall be installed adjacent to the sediment basin. 13. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards for urban I construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 14. Grading along the plat boundaries shall be compatible with adjacent properties and I existing off -site drainage patterns. • 15. Truck hauling in and out of the site shall be limited to the proposed Lake Susan Hills I g P F Drive access off of Powers Boulevard (County Road 17) at the south end of the project. This condition is no PP longer applicable. g GRADING AND DRAINAGE The overall site has been previously graded with the Lake Susan Hills West 7th Addition 1 therefore, no significant grading will take place with this phase. The storm sewer system designed for this phase will convey storm runoff to the existing storm I retention ponds located immediately to the east of the development. The retention ponds were previously designed and constructed to accommodate the additional runoff generated from this I phase. Storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year storm event are still needed to verify storm sewer sizing and number of catch basins throughout the development. Upon preliminary review of the construction plans and specifications it appears some additional storm sewer catch basins may be required. STREETS 1 The final plat follows the preliminary plat with the street layout configuration. Street grades range from 0.50% to 7.0% which is within the City's guidelines. Staff is concerned, however, 1 with the long stretch of 0.50% street grade. It has been the City's experience in the past, street construction with such a flat grade has caused numerous "bird baths" along the curb and gutters. In an effort to reduce the amount of bird baths and assist in the street drainage, staff recommends the minimum street grade be 0.75% where negotiable. 1 1 Don Ashworth Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition July 22, 1992 Page 6 According to the PUD agreement, 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along the through streets and constructed at the time the street improvements are constructed. The construction plans do not propose a sidewalk in this subdivision; therefore, it is necessary for the ' construction plans to be amended to incorporate a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk throughout the development except for Spoonbill Circle. ' UTILITIES The overall utility plan is relatively straightforward. The Fire Marshal has indicated the need for an additional two hydrants and relocating two proposed hydrants to accommodate spacing requirements. These spacing requirements will be addressed in the plan and specification review process. MIS CELLANEOUS ' The construction plans propose a storm sewer line along the southerly lot line of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4. Staff recommends that the drainage easement be increased from 10 feet wide to 20 feet wide to accommodate construction and maintenance of the said improvement. RECOMMENDATION 1 Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the final plat for Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition as shown on plans dated July 13, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. The final plat shall be amended to reflect a 20 -foot wide drainage and utility easement across the southerly 20 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4. 2. Two traffic barricades shall be installed at the south end of Osprey Lane. A sign shall also be posted indicating that this street shall be extended in the future. ' 3. 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along through streets within the development except for Spoonbill Circle. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time that street improvements are constructed. 4. Emergency overflow swale shall be graded along the east lot line of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 1 to insure maintenance of the neighborhood drainage pattern. 5. Erosion control fence (Type I) shall be included on the grading plan along the north line of Lot 1, Block 3. 1 1 1 Don Ashworth I Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition July 22, 1992 I Page 7 6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the public improvements. 7. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all the permits required by the DNR, I Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, etc. 8. All the street and utility improvements shall conform to City Standards for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City for review and approval." ATTACHMENTS I 1. City Council minutes dated June 25, 1990. 1 2. Location of proposed 8th Addition. 3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated July 22, 1992. 4. Map of future extension of Osprey Lane. I 5. Final plat dated July 13, 1992. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 Mayor Chmiel: Second. 11 Councilman Johnson: At that little ' cost, it's not worth going out to try to find a better bid that's for sure. Councilman Workman moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the Deloitte ro 0 to complete arbitrage. All voted in favor and the motion carried. P P sal PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 63.7 THE WEST SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 17, JUST R SOUTH T OF I LAKE I SUSAN F HILLS 2NDSANDC3RDD ON ' ADDITION, ARGUS DEVELOPMENT. Paul Krauss: The applicants are requesting approval to subdivide out 159 single ' far..ily lots without outlots to be dedicated for park. This is the fourth phase of the Lake Susan Hills PUD. The plat's average lot size is 14,700 square feet with over 50: having 15,000 square feet or larger as required by ordinance. The plat's generally consistent with the approved concept, PUD concept plan with ' changes stemming mostly from issues connected to topographic concerns and poor soils that were uncovered. Also this phase has 4 more lots than was originally prcrosed but conditions have been required to insure that when you take the whole PUD cumulatively, that the gross allowable number of homes, which I believe is 411 for the entire PUD won't be exceeded. The street layout is generally acceptable. Streets will be constructed in a phased program. To ' insure that everybody's aware that streets will be extended as they move into neighborhoods and buy lots, we will have streets paved up to their end. There will be barricades. There will be signs on those barricades that say the street's to be extended. In the short term though, the street layout, the chasing layout makes pretty good sense and doesn't leave us with extraordinarily long cal -de -sacs. At least we can live with that situation. There are some road grades in excess of 7: which is the City standard. We're recommending that the plans be revised to eliminate those. Grading will be significant. We b`liece it's generally reasonable. Although we note that some additional grading detailing is required on both the issues. e grading plan itself and related issue. _ ' _ ^ Lots 11 and 13 , Block 4 contain a steep wooded ravine that is senerally found in this area over here. Since it is a wooded ravine and since th =re are soils issues associated with it, we're recommending that the plat be revised to pull the homesites back from there. That can be done. You've got to ' maesag= the plat around somewhat. It will look a little different in that area but we think that it's worthwhile to preserve that feature. We're also requesting a tree removal plan so that we can attempt to save trees that are widely scattered around this site. Most of the site's been actively farmed and doesn't have a whole lot of vegetation on it. The applicant presented the plan to the Park Board wherein they were offering basically a larger amount of acreags than had been originally proposed in the concept. In exchange they were I looking for some concessions on the park dedication fees that would have been assessed. The Park Commission determined that the additional open space was not suitable for park due to soils, grades and drainage issues. They were willing ' to accept it as park however since it was adjacent to other land that they were sting to accept but they recommended that no reduction in park fees result from that. Details regarding drainage and the park continue to be worked on between staff and the applicant. We've got a goal of insuring that there's good access into the park and that the land is as useable as possible. The Planning Co misiion recommended that the preliminary plat be approved. Staff also r 21 1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 recommends approval with the conditions as modified by the Planning Commission 1 and outlined in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Paul, is there any reason why, even though preliminary coming in is not signed by a PE? Paul Krauss: None that I'm aware of. Maybe the applicant can explain that. We've been working with a registered engineer on the plat. Mayor Chmiel: I often times think that that's a requirement even in a plat. To know that there is that being done with that PE's number attached to it as indicated. Gentlemen, do you have any discussions as to what Paul has indicated thus far? Anyone wishing to address it? Just state your name please and where you're located. ' Brian Olson: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Brian Olson. I work with Argus Development. Joe Miller Homes is the home builder and he'll be the home builder throughout this whole 159 lots and will be phased at approximately maybe 3 or 4 different phases over the next 3 and 4 yeas. I've got a few points to kind of go over on a couple of the staff recommendetions and maybe we can have a little more discussion on the full meaning of them. Paul, is this the same staff report then as the Planning Cor:^ 5o it's all the same recommendations? Paul Krauss: Well there's one modification Brian. Condition 9 was modified by th Planning Commission such that the applicant shall provide calculations for City Engineering Department to demonstrate that the ponding area on Blocks 5 and 111 6 within t he parkland meets the 100 year storm. Erie Olson: Okay, as long as we're talking about that point there. It notes here in the staff report that they would like to see the holding pond located in 1 the north part of the proposed park area. Where it is right now as far as on the plan, it's in the lowest portion of the site and I believe when the original PUD was approved, it did go through the watershed district and they concurred with that location. We would prefer to keep it in that location. We in fact did meet with the engineering staff last week about that and they seemed to concur also that that's the best location for the pond. So I'd like to recommend that that condition be changed to allow the park to be located as'is. Councilman Johnson: This doesn't say it moves anymore. The new condition 9 doesn't say what the old condition 9 did. , Brian Olson: Okay. Cary Warren: Mr. Mayor, the engineering position on the matter as conveyed by ' Charles Folch, our assistant who was at the location of the pond, he acknowledged that the location of the pond for the north area but it was conditioned that there's a few concerns that we had that had to be addressed by the developer. First of all was the 100 year ponding limits. That was the condition you mentioned coming out of the Planning Commission as far as calculations for that. That needed to be defined so we could determine the , proposed or the impact on the proposed trail system for the park and second was an erosion control plan to deal with the overland drainage from the storm sewer cutlets at the north end. Finally was a culvert would need to be designed and 1 22 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 constructed under the proposed trail to connect overland drainage so they're all kind of interrelated but I don't want the impression to be that there's a blank check that engineering has written off on the location for the north side. There are some things that have to be dealt with here first. Brian Olson: That's correct. ' Paul Krauss: If I could expand on that too. There's a very real concern with the park and how it functions and that's why this issue's been raised. The pond that's being proposed by the applicant is down in there and most of the park ' property, active park area is down in here. What's happening though is that the pond in this location, if it's not designed appropriately, makes this area dedicated park property inaccessible. If the flood balance on this thing is too high, the trails that are going to run around there connecting the two parts of ' the parks and different parts of the subdivision, they're going to be impassable. That's why we have a real concern with how that drainage is handled. We had originally proposed it being up north there because that ' isolates that ponding area and allows for a continuous park. The drainage is the key relative to the recreational use. ' Brian Olson: And I agree with that. We worked it out at the Planning Commission and Park so that we are going to have those trails out of the water. Mayor Chmiel: One of the problems I have with that, these last rainfalls that ' we'vc had I've had too many calls at my home at different hours of the night and day coming out to say, come and see the amount of water that we have and where we have it. I think that's something that really has to be addressed. Brian Olsen: We'd really like to have a useable park next to our homes also. CoL:ncilman Workman: So you're agreeable for it to be located on the north side then? Brian Olson: We can't. If we have to move it to the north site, then we still have to build a pond in that location because that's the lowest part of the site and the watershed district is going to require it. As a matter of fact, I can't ever, get all the storm water drainage off of this property up to the north part of the site. Mayor Chr:iel: How's that oin to be addressed o g s d,essed then. ' Cary Warren: Well the calculations and such that need to be provided for us to evaluate it is the crux of that. l Brian Olson: See what we talked about at the Planning Commission and then also last week was the fact that the bounce area, the 100 year flood area can be a rather unusual shape. It doesn't have to be rounded like a park and we can keep ' it away, or a pond, and we can keep it away from the edges where the trails are planning on going. The very center there of that proposed pond area, it's somewhat shaded there I guess. That's about all the bigger that pond is going to be. It does not go way out into the area but the 100 year flood would. But ' we're going to work on that with the staff to make sure that the trails will be d ry. 23 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 Councilman Workman: How about the issue of making that north part, is that pond going to cut off them and make two sections of the park? Is that what you're getting at? Paul Krauss: Councilman Workman, that is the concern. Now it's really a design II problem at this point and it's up to the applicant to demonstrate to us that that's not going to happen. If they can do that, I guess we're comfortable with 11 it. If they can't, we're going to have to find another answer. Councilman Workman: And until we get the proper data we can't even consider it. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Okay. , Brian Olson: Also, on condition number 1. It talks about all street stubs to have a temporary cul -de -sac. Some of our street stubs that we're proposing are relatively short in length. Through the future phasing perhaps some of these won't even be 100 feet long without even any driveway access out onto it. And if that's the case, I would hope that perhaps we could just work with engineering department on that portion of the recommendation here on the report. Maybe leave it in his best judgment then as far as do we need a temporary cul -de -sac or not on that. Paul Krauss: We've discussed that in house and if there are in fact no homes on this stub street, we'd want it paved up to the property line but you put the barricade out at the street intersection to stop anybody from going down there. That would be acceptable to us. Cary Warren: As long as there's not a driveway access onto the street so they ha :e r,:.t a full street, we would go along with that. II "acr Chmiel: Staff is comfortable with that I guess. I don't have any real prob1cn. Councilman Workman: You're saying, I'm not sure I'm clear what you're saying. You aren't talking about on the cul -de -sac situation. You're talking about on the potential connection. Cary Warren: This is where the future road would be coming with a subsequent addition; as Brian has indicated. So long as we don't have a driveway... Mayor Chmiel: Would you want to continue this out Paul. ' Councilman Workman: On the north side. Brian Olson: On the very south there Paul, by the very southern cul -de -sac. , Paul Krauss: For example there's a stub street and this one is here. The street would be extended up to this point. All the homes are on this portion of the street and there is a cul -de -sac there. We would want this paved which would put a barricade out here. Councilman Johnson: It's got to be obvious that the street is going to continue , there sc people don't think they're on the end of the road and that they'll never havE a street on that side of their house. 24 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 Mayor Chmiel: Right. It eliminates a lot of problems as they come back. Friar Clson: The other thing would be point number 8. There was a lot of ' diccussion about building trails at the Planning Commission. I think the Planning Commission crossed out the paved portion of that recommendation. See I don't know if you're looking at the same recommendation that I am though. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think I am. Councilman Johnson: This still says paved and signed. Mayor Chn,iel: It does say paved and signed, yeah. Paul Krauss: To the best of my recollection, that wasn't changed. There's a reason for that and the reason is similar to the issues with road extensions. Cities have a devil of a time paving those trail connections at some point in the future when the park is developed. What we'd like to achieve is that we ' believe there's a connection right in here. That there be some paved access with a sign that says trail for park access so that as homes are developed arcur:d there, that those people are aware that that's the condition that's going ' to be in there and that might have to suffice for several years until the park itself is developed by the City. Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I discussed the park access on Chan Pond with one of ' the neighbors that bought the house next to the park access and both neighbors had sodded right up together. I said are you aware that you just sodded 5 feet cf city property. He said no. He had no idea. 1 don't which neighbor sodded 1 the park access but it'd be a few years probably before we can pave that access. There's some more work to be done on the park before it's reasonable but those tw neighbors would probably have something to say about it when we go to do t hat . Brian Olson: Okay, as part of this recommendation in here it says paved and /or si;ncc' so it would be okay if we just went ahead and signed those access points? 1 Paul Krauss: My conditions just says and. Gary Warren: On page 10. Paul Krauss: On page 10 which is the most recent one. Councilman Johnson: A slab of asphalt going nowhere doesn't make a lot of sense. If you had the sign at least there, the property owner can't say that he didn't know that there was going to be a park access there. Even if the sign said future park access. Or just said park access. As long as it's a straight shot. Now the one on Chippewa happen to goes so far and then turn and you really have to know, when you're walking on sodded grass, you don't know where that turn is or you're off the city property onto somebody's private property. Unless you bring a map. Brian Olson: One of the recommendations here was to plat all the park area and de?:cete it over to the City. That is fine. We would prefer just to put up the sign that would say that this is going to be a park area and it's in all our prc^:otional brochures and everything. And we are the only builder in there so 1 25 1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 we have tighter control on what we say to people. 1 Mayor Chmiel: In one section of this I read two different things which is one page 7. It says paved and /or signed and on page 10 it just says paved and signed. Gary Warren: Page 10 is the consolidation. Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Right. I think what they're looking at is basically having it as such. As being paved and signed. Unless Paul, do you have any other? , Councilman Workman: Well if it's paved, why does it need to be signed? Paul Krauss: I guess we've fought enough of these battles over the years to possibly indulge in a little bit of overkill. But clearly the intent is that people knou about what they're buying and if you feel the sign alone does it, we could live with that. We want something there on the ground. That's our preference. Councilman Johnson: It certainly does a lot more then we're got now at some of , these locations. Cary Warren: I would concur Mr. Mayor that the battles that we fight, even though we have signs and easements when we go to pave something, usually it's c,.crwhelming sometimes. The surprises and the position that staff gets put into to try to get these in. I would also opt for paving. Brian Olson: Mr. Mayor? May I ask on some of these other parkland connections that are to the north. How far as we talking about pavement because once it dose get Fa ved a little bit, you're citizens are going to want to see the rest , cf t`c trail built. So I guess I would just like to know how far we're talking boat. Paul KT— ..,se: Well we're talking about stubs. Getting past the homes from the public right -of -way. It's the City's obligation to develop the park in whatever timeframe the City can do that. Yeah, there may be a little bit of disappointment that that park is not built this summer or next fall or something but I still think that's preferable to not doing it at all and then having to fight the issues 2 or 3 years from now when we're prepared to develop the facility. ' Gary Warren: Once you get past the lot depth, I think that's what we're talking about. ' Mayor Chmiel: I think I agree with that. Brian Olson: As long as we're talking about some park issues. Before we can ' price out lots out here we really need to get what the proposed uses are going to be in this park and what the park plan is going to be. This is something that we've requested for almost 6 months now and I realize you want to see some king cr approval before you get into the real nuts and bolts on the park design. T`c :or.E thing though as part of our grading contract we've got to rough grade the w!olc park. And right now perhaps we are going to site grade that whole , 26 // Ciiy Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 park, or the whole property this fall and if we have to come back next year to do sore grading on the park. We've got to go through mobilization again on all the Equipment, we really need to get this whole project out there to kind of balance out by itself so we don't have to haul any dirt around. I'd really like ' to I g_;ess urge the City to get us a park plan as soon as possible. Also, what kind of grading that we're going to be kind of talking about. That's all. Mayor Chniel: Have we done that in the past? Gary Warren: Park plans? Mayor Chniel: Yeah. Cary warren: Chan Hills 3rd Addition. Curry Farms. We have generated park 1 plans and I agree with Brian as far as the need to accurately define what we mean by our grade because we've had some parks that have been left in a very rough graded state. ' Mayor Chniel: And we should get back to them with that. Gary Warren: While we're getting credits, we need to make sure what we're ' ge Priam Olson: See we will have our final grading plan into the City I think ' within 4 &.eeks. I guess just the last comment would be on condition number 17. ?hip hae to do with street grades at intersections and this is something that Charles in Engineering and myself and our engineer and Dave Hempel talked about ' at week. I guess Charles was willing to make some concessions to this just bassd or, we have a number of intersections that are so close together towards the sbuth part of our property there where it accesses out onto the county road. If you've driven by the site, you can notice that it really does kind of climb ' up rather significantly. What Charles is mentioning is not any accesses to the Coy.;t;> that would perhaps be shortened from this condition but some of the other onE,:. The T intersections. And I don't know if he's had a chance to talk to Cary about this or not but what I'd like to be able to do is at least this condition is just be able to work with the engineering staff on it. Mayor Chniel: Cary, do you have any problems with that? • Cary Warren: I don't know if I understood all of the left me documentation on the street specifics but Charles has grade issue that we were hold to the 7`c maximum that the City has. As far as the intersection and stuff, he didn't elaborate although on a note here he said, all streets with a reduced 32 maximum and 200 foot landing area at street intersections. Paul Krauss: I think I can add a little bit to that. I spoke to Charles about that late this afternoon. What he indicated to me is, when you have a short stub street over here. What we're likely to do is put a stop sign over here so that traffic coming down to the County Road and then stop, this being the thru movement. This thru movement didn't need to maintain the 3% grade but where traffic is coming to a stop it did so there is some flexibility in the standard. ' Whrever there's a stop sign, it's on that stop traffic flow that has the f 1 e x i '. i 1 i t y. 27 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 Cary Warren: We need the landing zones where the stop signs are obviously. 1 Councilman Johnson: I see the hardest one there is obviously the one coming off of Powers Blvd.. What's the grade on that one right now? Gary Warren: Well we're saying we could allow a 7% max. He will have to get a permit from the County which they will enforce their landing zone requirements. Councilman Johnson: So we don't show, there's no street grades shown on these caps we've got here. Drawings we've got here. Paul Krauss: There should be. There is a set. Brian Olson: There's only about 2 places in the plat where it was 8'c and there II were no grades over 8 %:. So really the difference between a 7% and 8% is 1 foot per 100. Gar> warren: We've gone along where we've got tree issues and some other 1 envircnr-ental concerns where we've gone to 10 %. I sure you remember like Near Mountain. Some of those. We didn't have those real impacts here that we felt that it would be warranted to go beyond the 7. but I think the intersections ' that erlan is asking for us to consider, we certainly can work with him and work out those details. Brian Clscn: The reason I'm asking this is that we are rather long on dirt on , this to make it all work. The less grading that we have in the streets and then also in the intersections, that means we have to take down that hill even more. We have even more dirt left over. Then also the County, we got an agreement with thE: for 110,000 yards to remove from the site and the grading plan was ba-_,d or. t'--t and now they're renigging. They would only like to do about yards. , Cary LJ3 - ren: Have you talked to MnDot about dirt? Briar Olson: Nc I haven't. Councilman Johnson: Talk to Eden Prairie landfill. I hear they're still buying dirt. 1 Brian Olson: They tested us. It didn't quite have the right amount of clay content. Almost worked cut. ' Councilman Johnson: ...buying at $4.00 cubic yard or something. Ludicrous amc.unt for dirt. Brian Olson: Now that was pretty much the only comments I had to make about it. The last thing is just about the park. We've heard that the parks commission didn't feel that it was suitable for any kind of park use and that was a part of the staff report that went to parks but there was quite a bit of discussion and I think the parks commission turned around and felt there was a lot of use for that area. The soils that are in there are not real bad soil. They're bad for building construction but not for parks. As a matter of fact, there's quite a of the sane soils that we have in our very western part of the plat that we've got to correct for home construction. If in fact we are allowed to have ' 28 I/ City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 more than 159 lots here, we would have utilitized that central area more thoroughly for single family residential but since we are limited at 159 lots, we chose to well let's take a look at all the best soils and then work around all that. We've had some trouble in cur first addition out there. Gary's pre:•aly are of a couple of the instances where there was some construction put through some bad soils and we got a couple problems with a couple houses. 1 But that's all I've got. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. The other question that I asked Paul, is there any reason wh> the PE has not signed this preliminary? Brien Clscn: He signed the cover sheet though. 1 Mayor Chmiel: None of mine are signed. Not the ones at least I have. Brian Olson: Okay. Maybe in the rush of getting it in in a hurry. 1 Mayor Chmiel: I prefer seeing that signature on there when they take their . e ,riews of this. Brian Olson: I'm sorry for that. I didn't realize that happened. C hmiel: May c�: •,;.,_.__• Okay, the other think that I see in staff recommendations was c the date ae you had May 10th of 1990. It should be so noted that the plans are 4- 16 -90. Thank you. Any discussion. CoJncilman Johnson: Well I'm going to hit this one with something I've hit I don't know how many preliminary plats with over the last 4 years. 3 1/2 years. Right sere in Section 18 of our Cede it requires that flood plain areas, loeatior, of wooded areas...and all that other good stuff be shown and once again 1 we g mother preliminary plat in here that doesn't show the wooded areas. 'ie,,'re talkir•g about these wooded areas along these ravines and I don't see it on the plat. I was fairly familiar with the area. Not even the cornfield ' part of the area. I didn't realize it went into any wooded areas and reviewing thie without the staff getting out there, I never would have seen it. It continues to upset me that plat after plat comes in where they conveniently fc,rget and this may be, since it's such a small area, maybe a little oversight but ir:other places it's been real convenient that the other plats from other deve1cp;:rs, that they didn't show the woods that they're going to clear cut. Fiore again they've got these ravines that we're talking about trees. I'd like 1 to see the requirements very plainly here in the book. I don't even like to look at they, when they don't have the minimum requirements. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Can you see that that's also part of it? Anything else? Councilman Workman: Are these streets yet unnamed or are they going to be Street A, E and C? Brian Olson: They're unnamed as of yet. Chr_e': Yeah, and that at some time should be on the plat as well. CoL. cilr,an Johnson: Are you looking for Workman Drive now? Clark got his Big 1 horn Ori.e in before he left. Chmiel Way? 29 1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 1 Mayor Chmiel: No. No thanks. Any other discussion? I guess I see all those 1 eiecific conditions as such with 1 thru 23 with other, the specific ones of... Councilman workman: I just have one quick question. Number 13. All building permits will, I think it's with patio doors as part of the building plan shall F-cvida a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the s :tback Doesn't it sound kind of vague? People are creative with decks. , Paul Krauss: Yeah, they can be and I guess we're not trying to inhibit design free2om. Counci. man Workman: Are we giving them a free permit to build whatever they 'want with this? Paul Krauss: No. No. We've had a number of problems in PUD's with decks. Pheasant Hills being a good example. Since last fall I've changed the proc.E`'ures adrninstratively where when patio doors are on a house plan, we look at the lot survey to rake sure a deck can go in there and if it can't, we tell th= tc take out the patio door. But this is just to clarify that issue and to ;-Lt tha ri°valcper on notice that you have responsibility to give us this survey ir,fo whenever you request a building permit. A standard deck is like 10 x 12. If somsbodv wanted to get more exotic and do something larger, that might r :t fit but as long as there was a legitimate use for that patio door, I guess we wc,L.ld be satisfied. 1 Cc.:7.f1an 2chnEon: I mean if you only had 3 or 4 foot to the building setback :.r7.' you war,te' to put in a door on there, it doesn't make sense. In fact I know tL .., � " C that iVGY C Put in patio doors and then only had 5 feet. Actually put �r a a..t to tf. property line behind a privacy fence. ::_.rkoan: Well I'd move approval with. , Mayor Chmiel: Okay, with the revisions as we said on there. Coun,.ilman Workman: With staff working with them on number 1, 4, 8, 17 in 1 ar',2;'ion to the Mayor's comment on the date. Chmiel As a preliminary plat. 1 Coun:i'_csn Workman: Yes. Councilman 3ohnson: I'll second that. I'd also like to ask one additional question. The storm sewer designs, there seems to be a long ways down some of these streets before they hit an intersector like between Block 6 and 7 on Street C. i ter goes a long ways. I see the engineer's left here. It goes all the u:.y, about 10 to 12 houses before it hits a storm sewer. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, that's maybe something Don that you could write to have ' Cary check. Ccur,Ci'c:an ?chnson: I mean that could be adequate. , Paul Krauss: In Cary's absence, it's something that we did note as well but we Lill get final design specs and they will have to justify that or put in 30 11 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 additional catch basins. Brian Clson: Just to kind of follow -up on that too. You know the engineering department did put me on notice as far as a real complete review on this whole plat. They are really kind of rushed on time and things so they did state that jaet because of the approval as is and things, things are probably going to pop up through the final plans and specs and things and we're aware of that. Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Preliminary Plat on Lake Susan Hills West PUD 4th Addition for 159 single family lots as ' shown on the plans dated 4 -16 -90 with direction to staff to work with the applicant on conditions 1, 4, 8 and 17 and subject to the following conditions: 1. All streets that are proposed for future connection shall be provided with ' a turnaround which meets city standards with a barricade and signage stating that it is a temporary cul -de -sac and will be a future road connection. C. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping air the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the ' developer shall provide $150.00 per lot for landscaping. 3. M applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature -.,station located on the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by ' streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans rec,...reo as part of the building permits. 4. T! applicant shall pull back the cul -de -sac servicing Lots 11 -13, Block 4 jc rc ova t r: building pads from the ravine areas. ' 5. The applicant shall provide a registered engineer's report on soils, rcotin;•s and structural design and a registered engineer's grading and drainage plan for the City Engineer and Building Department approval prior to issuance of a building permit on Lots 11 and 13, Block 4. An am d preliminary plat maintaining with at least 50% of the lots with 1J square feet or more shall be provided. 7. Designate the parkland as an outlot which will be platted as part of the first phase. ' B. All of the access points to the parkland between single family lots shall be paved and signed that they are public access points. 9. The applicant shall provide calculations for City Engineering Department approval to demonstrate that the ponding area proposed between Block 5 and 6 within the parkland meets 100 year storm requirements and that there is adsquate room for access between the north and south park areas. 10. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of both looped e'reets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as parkland ' d d:cat r , not simply easements. 31 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 H. Trails /Sidewalks: The development shall be required to provide trails/ 1 sidewalks as follows: a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along thru streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time street improvements are constructed. b. A. 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of Powers Boulevard 1 shall_ be dedicated for future trail purposes. c. The above trails /sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged. 12. The applicant will be required to pay 50 of park dedication fees. There will be no trail fee required. 13. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans shall rovide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to th= setback. 14. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and �rc.12 the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the Imp- ove ^ergt '. 15. T';e applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the 0NP, 1 Later shed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer. 16. T`.e ap lica -;t's engineer shall provide the City Engineer with calculations c.: { yirg the storm sewer, watermain and sanitary sewer pipe sizing. 17. rt intersections where the street grades exceed 3:, a landing zone with a ±r `. grade of 2% or less for a minimum distance of 200 feet shall be 12. ^ftsr grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched 1 to p-e. erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent. 1�. T 11 erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence 1 adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areas. 20. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards 1 for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 21. The applicant shall reduce street grades to comply with City Ordinance throughout the development (maximum 7%). 22. Pricr to es:signing street names, the applicant shall consult with Public 1 Safety for recommendations. 22. Par grading: The developer, at it's sole cost, shall grade the park areas 1 i- a:c : with a timetable and plans to be furnished by the City. The 32 1 1 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11 City will develop park plans when the final park boundaries have been determined. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. RECONSIDERATION OF A FINAL PLAT CONDITION FOR GREAT PLAINS GOLF ESTATES, DON ' HALLA. Paul Kraues: On July 10, 1989 the City Council approved the final plat for ' Great Plains Golf Estates which basically was designed to create three 2 1/2 acre lots which are shown down there in the extreme southern end of this plat and several large outlots. The plat was given preliminary plat approval in 1987 under the old ordinance which allowed 2 1/2 acre lots. The applicant was ' allowed basically to get his foot in the door and reserve the right to plat those lots. As you will recall, we've done this for a few other individuals as well and I believe he's been given a 5 year deadline to complete platting the property. The 3 lot division which was final platted is the first phase of the ultimate plan which was to plat 38 lots on 105 acres. I couldn't find a reduced transparency of that plat but we do have a full sized one over here that we ' could pass around. This represents the ultimate subdivision that was given preliminary plat approval. Stemming from the preliminary plat review, the final plat requirement was to dedicate 27 foot of right-of-way on both sides of TH 101 which was desiigned to allow for future road upgrading. The applicant did not wart to convey that easement and staff wouldn't release the plat so the plat's basically sat around for some time. At this point the applicant wants to proc_ed with final platting or recording the final plat and is requesting that ' that :.cr;ditien pertaining to the right -of -way dedication be removed. Staff is recerr.,sr:din; that the requirement be upheld. Although no plans are in the works to ca-rer,t_y upg -ado TH 101, both MnDot and city staff believe it's prudent to rese; the right -of -way since road improvements are going to be necessary. t -ue bcsically with everybody concerned. I would point out that the Ea:tern Carver County traffic study and the draft comprehensive plan transportation element have both identified TH 101 as a problem area. The 38 ' lot subdivision that has been approved will increase local traffic. It will create three new street intersections on TH 101 and also has many lots that have direct frontage onto the highway itself. Thus, there's apparently to staff, t! a significant benefit to be gained from the ultimate improvement of that highway for this subdivision. The applicant has indicated that he currently has tree stock located in the proposed right -of -way area. There's a high volume well in the future right -of -way and there's also a portion of a building. Staff does not object and I spoke to the City Engineer about this. We don't object to allowing these items to remain undisturbed within that easement area until some point in the future that the road is upgraded and then we'd like them removed at 11 the owner's expense. But I'd have to point out that in all likelihood the property is going to be subdivided prior to the highway being upgraded so most of these things would be removed anyway. The well possibly not but again we don't otjeet to leaving it in the right -of -way as long as it's clear that the responsibility for their ultimate removal lies with the property owner. Again, staff is recommending that the right -of -way condition be upheld. We are willing to consider or have it approved with a condition that would allow them to keep 1 those facilities located in the right -of -way. Mayor Chr!icl: Okay, thank you Paul. Any discussion? 33 1 ' ; - Cit.; Council Jun e 25, 1990 Dcr, Halla: Thant; you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I'm Dori Halla. Owner t 1 l s Nursery the er separate e c; Halls «. e-y ar:d th,. property owner which are s�para�e entiti�s. Address, 6601 Mohawk r, tall Mof ' Trail, Edina. As you know we've been out here in the city since 19:.2. Seen operating the nursery business. We are actually at this point only prcpocing to begin the subdivision which is three lots. I do not have any prc•`lec dedicating the development for the highway, the easement and so forth adjacent to these lots that are involved in the final plotting. I do have a problem with giving the land on both sides of TH 101 for plotting which may or ma never be done. I don't know depending upon conditions whether will in fact do the complete plotting. It is our intention to maintain 10 acres in the center for the nursery operation and not move out of this site completely. That has always been our intention. So to give up our well which is the same size, irrigation well that you use. 10 inch. 400 foot into the Jordan. Very expensive. You know the cost of replacing it. You install that type of well > To give that up in a piece of property which will be used for the nLreery seems very difficult for me to do. If we never subdivide anymore or plot anyr,cre in final plot program, it seems like it is asking a lot to be subdividing and plotting 7 1/2 acres and being asked to donate over 5 acres of lard which may or may not ever be involved with any additional subdivision. At the tit: that that subdivision is done affecting those lots, I can understand ..c!i - for that property. I have a hard time understanding it when we aren't doing that axes. I guess that's where I'm coming from. Certainly it does affect our trees. It takes one complete building out plus our pump. It will go -i:F' up adjacent, elimirate a lot of our parking at the nursery corner there. F-ly expansion to the highway I'm sure would not go to the west. It would go to the east. There would be no reason to make that corner any worse than it is nog:. So it seems at least on that corner where we want to maintain our 10 so 'F.' that's asking an awful lot. That's where I'm coming from and asking zt least at this point where we are doing the final plot on the 3 acres, I can underst=n:' that. But on the additional, we should take it as each area is asked T 1 Mc/c. .�. j : C�.•. _el Thank you. Counoilnar: 2chncen: Where is your well? ' Con Halls: It is right on the corner. Right about here. CoJn__I-:an ,,cf,nson: On the west side. , Don Halle: It should be shown on the buildings and so forth should be shown. 1 Mayor Chmiel: You're saying it's right about in here somewhere? Don Halle: That's our pump building here. This is another building right here. :.rid of :.curse if anything was to be done, the road would go this way. Now we have reserved this outlot right here to straighten out the road in the future. Thoae are the 4 lots that maintain the... 1 Councilman Johnson: You don't own this side? Only up to here? .e- Ch :ei Right. 1 c.uneils•a,. 'oh son: So who owns the gully? 34 ..,,,,.,-: -41"' .. -ire .- .a.7 - 4•A' 4 2 '. '&. :1 - ' ..4;61411.. ''; 4 Z it ' . - - k- - - ' - ' 111111 ' I t .,-,- . i --- aim kittl Z.__ tit ./ o wl ARBOR 11' BOULEVARD -1 ---__. kil pr , ..,,,,„ ,,,,,„,. . BOULE ,...._, s:to i 1111 i II 1 , 1 ) ROArl I V II op • RR S 7 IIIIIgSNV0, vi llOS, II 11. Ikit VI IF I I 1 I 1 0* %.i.c.., 5 SUS ' ....•. ...... irt I. A .. 1 C.- . ri PARK ... •..... rq- A.N N■S a . _ 01111PS Ze '--"-- 4,4...,. PWIM71 4 (1-. VONR I _--- .m.a........ 013 ?IMP, 4t, i 0 ' ognire# ri" 4.,*■ If ' ,ii ■- - 111■Sa t'''' aw Es alr. r L A A'E SUS " .:7)r6 - 0" # •■ ** I AL" 40 , > air if: ,./ * AI ■,e, ... _...- 4■... o CD e /' At:r11:/r 7 VIIPA-7 let V i . tilutIak blo vikvii : \ la . t 4 41 . 1111111111 Ill& ' sly* SCV) ° 1 I a 1 ' , , ! , ^k ■ , 4 4 4 / IP I gir0 41 fArj PARK 1 -, I _ i 1 i ° tail, A ., . Nebd fril .0". SLtbtC , .4/4-4... %A - ....... .... , :',....40 ...: " P''''" • !, 4 at *. v „, Es -,,-.., 14* • I I I 41111 1 ,..,';y: AWIP ■ a al.. i -1 MOD I % \ • N...• 1 7:‹ 4allor.: fr. ) olilk obilrigk 2111 • BO wo..1111 14 1 p. ital i / Lab tail 1 ; °"1 41 . 0. °* fA 0 AS:c" ■ A WZ.--" amimi ru 1 0 CO Z Ca . . 0 I Siumila I / V 4 114& 7.''' V INTZ ill NIP ..° ° s al . 1...et /11 1.11L. WI ••P__ # ■ i 0 44aV . . , Eatir,„ 9 , INC;IIF IP7 Cr FL MINGO DR ... • • . 4„ 1 A LJN:jud ak 4 v • - -vv ... 1 linIL il l II I am., _ COUR W VI' ..77 k •-• tli ..7"' \ • # 11>.11#/.1 1 .....• .- Ali a 1 Illi Iiii t 44 . 4 . _ . VA FR .1 CE fi E 04- It niuu Cif.. 4.3 0 • r ir . 4 , 7 1 \ , s ,., 1 CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner FROM:: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician A,V-, ' DATE: July 22, 1992 1 SUBJ: Review of Final Plat Submittal for Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition Project No. 91 -16 1 Upon review of the final plat submitted for Lake Susan Hills West 8th Addition prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated July 13, 1992, I offer the following comments and recommendations: i GRADING AND DRAINAGE The overall site has been Yeviousl graded with the Lake Susan Hills West 7th Addition 1 P therefore, no significant grading will take place with this phase. storm sewer system designed for this phase will convey storm runoff to the existing The sto y g p y g storm retention ponds located immediately to the east of the development. The retention ponds were previously designed and constructed to accommodate the additional runoff generated from this phase. Storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year storm event are still needed to verify storm sewer sizing and number of catch basins throughout the development. 111 Upon preliminary review of the construction plans and specifications it appears some additional storm sewer catch basins may be required. 1 STREETS The final plat follows the preliminary plat with the street layout configuration. Street grades t range from 0.50% to 7.0% which is within the City's guidelines. Staff is concerned, however, with the long stretch of 0.50% street grade. It has been the City's experience in the past, street construction with such a flat grade has caused numerous "bird baths" along the curb and gutters. In an effort to reduce the amount of bird baths and assist in the street 1 fir t4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 Kate Aanenson July 22, 1992 i Page 2 I drainage, staff recommends the minimum street grade be 0.75% where negotiable. According to the PUD agreement, 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along I the through streets and constructed at the time the street improvements are constructed. The construction plans, do not propose a sidewalk in this subdivision; therefore, it is necessary for the construction plans to be amended to incorporate a 5 -foot wide concrete 1 sidewalk throughout the development except for Spoonbill Circle. UTILITIES 1 The overall utility plan is relatively straightforward. The Fire Marshal has indicated the need for an additional two hydrants and relocating two proposed hydrants to accommodate I spacing requirements. These spacing requirements will be addressed in the plan and specification review process. I MISCELLANEOUS I The construction plans propose a storm sewer line along the southerly lot line of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4. Staff recommends that the drainage easement be increased from 10 feet wide to 20 feet wide to accommodate construction and maintenance of the said 1 improvement. 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 1. The final plat shall be amended to reflect a 20 -foot wide drainage and utility easement across the southerly 20 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4. I 2. Two traffic barricades shall be installed at the south end of Osprey Lane. A sign shall also be posted indicating that this street shall be extended in the future. I 3. 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along through streets within the development except for Spoonbill Circle. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time that street improvements are constructed. 1 4. Emergency overflow swale shall be graded along the east lot line of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 1 to insure maintenance of the neighborhood drainage pattern. 1 5. Erosion control fence (Type I) shall be included on the grading plan along the north line of Lot 1, Block 3. 1 1 1 Kate Aanenson I July 22, 1992 Page 3 1 6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the I necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the public improvements. 7. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all the permits required by the DNR, I Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, etc. 8. All the street and utility improvements shall conform to City Standards for urban I construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 1 ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • A VII 14 / ii , ..t. :=rte: 1 1 1 r a t / / 1 / N / �, f �� • i 1 1 / f X l / T �� r { ! _ / i -- r - - - � / / o > (\ (/' — —{ 1 ,-- ------d C ''' 16% I I \ I \ \ \ 1 1 \ • • , \ \\ 1 \ M I I I 1 \ b \\ `�\ • � \ � \ 112 -. / \ Eir 111 �! - � � 1 i ce / \ \ I • \ �. � �`. \ I _ �. - e . .. .. Ih Ca\ \ \ \ • 01 - . - , \ 1 r -.. N. N / - \ - \ \ \\ f \� ` \\ \\ y I \ I \ 1 \ \I \11 (- 1 ■ • . A.- - - - W • N _ ' / I "/ �\0 Ir \i > ., ; ".`,.' •;,Y, \1 \ \ III ; • I I j " �� \ • / / I / 111 \ • 1 \ \1 T 1 _ 1 \ • • I I v \\ \\ .. I / 1 / . ∎ \ \� \ 1 • �W w /�� 1 « ,,\ � \\ I • \ 1 / \\ \ \\ I • \I W \ \ l 1 - \ % 1 / \� \ / / 1 1 / i- I -� • ���� i� \\ \\ f � I I _1 11 \ \\ • 1 \ 2 1 N . ,% / 0 1 \ • - - it I •I \u7 •-• / f i 1 1 I / , 1 1 1 \ S e......... 1 .....4:7/ .