6. Bluff creek estates, Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Wetland Alternation Permit i
0 C 1 T Y 0 F t
PC DATE: June 3, 1992 —
1 \ ` \ CHANHASSEN CC DATE: June 22,1992
CASE #: 92 -5 SUB,
I 92 -3 REZ 92 -6 WAP
1 STAFF REPORT
1 PROPOSAL: 1) Preliminary Plat to subdivide 61.45 Acres into 78 Single Family Lots
rY g Y
and one outlot
I 2) Rezoning of property from A -2, Agricultural Estate District to RSF,
Residential Single Family District
1 Z
Q 3) Wetland Alteration Permit
V
1 J LOCATION: North of Sun Ridge Court, south of Chanhassen Business Center, and
west of Audubon Road.
1 Q APPLICANT: Keyland Homes Rod Grams
14450 Burnsville Parkway 8640 Audubon Road
Burnsville, MN 55337 Chanhassen, MN 55317
1 PRESENT ZONING: A -2, Agricultural Estate District
1 ACREAGE: 61.45 acres (gross) 33.85 acres (net)
DENSITY: 1.27 u/a (gross) 2.23 u/a (net)
1 ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N - IOP; Chanhassen Business Center
I S - RR; Sun Ridge Subdivision
E - A -2; Agricultural Estate District
t-- W - A -2; Agricultural Estate District
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site
1 W PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The area has rolling hills. The majority of the site is being
1 — farmed. Mature elm trees are located along the north edge.
I (f� An existing single family residence, barn, and garage occupy the
northeast portion of the site. A Class A wetland and Bluff
Creek occupy the westerly portion of the site.
1 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential
1
' occupy the northeast portion of the site. A Class A wetland
and Bluff Creek occupy the westerly portion of the site.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting approval to subdivide a 61.45 acre site into 78 single family lots.
One of the lots will be occupied by an existing home. The balance will be available for new
construction. The site is located west of Audubon Road, north of Sun Ridge Subdivision, and
south of Ryan's Chanhassen Business Center. Access to the subdivision will be provided by a
loop road off Audubon Road.
All of the proposed lots meet the minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance with one
exception. Proposed , Lot 8, Block 2 is occupied by the existing residence and a garage.
Presently, access to this site is gained from Audubon Road. The garage will be located
approximately 20 feet from the rear property line. City ordinances require that any detached
accessory structure in excess of 400 square feet maintain a distance of 30 feet from the rear
' property line. The garage has an approximate area of 900 square feet. Mature maple trees
separate the existing garage from proposed Lot 5, Block 2, creating a natural buffer. We find
this intrusion into the rear yard setback acceptable, and recommend approval of the rear yard
setback variance for the garage. The Planning Commission was strongly opposed to the rear
yard setback variance, and recommended that the applicant adjust the property lines to
eliminate the variance.
' The Bluff Creek Estates site was located outside of the MUSA line until the recent MUSA
expansion that was approved by the Metropolitan Council in May of 1991. This area is in the
Bluff Creek Sewer Feasibility Area recently approved by the City Council. Sewer service to this
area could be available in the fall of 1992 at the earliest. Water service will also be available.
' The applicant is proposing to develop this area in four phases. The first phase would include
Lots 8 through 13, and Lots 18 through 23, Block 2, and Lots 18 through 25, Block 3. The
applicant would like to construct one model home located on Lot 9 of Block 2 for the Parade of
Homes, which begins the first week of September. This home is proposed to share the driveway
with the existing home, until such time when the proposed street to the south of Lot 9 is
constructed.
' Williams Pipe Line Company has a 75 foot wide easement that runs east and west through the
property. It is city policy, as well as utility companies, not to allow any structure to be
' constructed within an easement. Staff questions the design of two lots that abut the pipe line
easement (Lots 10 and 14, Block 2) due to limitations on the buildable area imposed by the
easement. Staff is recommending that the applicant demonstrate how a house and a deck could
be placed on these parcels without a variance. The applicant has submitted a model which
he plans on building on the subject lots. The house pad fits comfortably on these lots with
room for deck (See attachment #10).
Bluff Creek Estates
1
June 3, 1992 1
Page 3
The majority of this site is farmed and is devoid of vegetation except for a line of elm trees that
run parallel to the north property line, and some wetland vegetation along Bluff Creek occupying
the westerly portion of the site. Staff is recommending conservation easements to preserve these
areas. Tree preservation is a part of the proposed landscaping package.
The recently adopted Landscaping and Tree Preservation Ordinance states that all development
located on arterial and collector streets are required to provide streetscape landscaping. The
landscaping plan submitted by the applicant is in response to this requirement, and is of a very
high quality and exceeds the city ordinance standards.
There is a wetland on the site. This wetland includes the protected water course of Bluff Creek. 1
The wetland is not proposed to be altered, and is within a conservation easement in an outlot.
The Park and Recreation Commission is recommending that park fees be paid in lieu of park
land. They are recommending the city acquire ownership of Outlot A. This would allow for
continuation of the Bluff Creek preservation corridor which would ultimately extend from
Minnewashta Regional Park to the Minnesota River. The installation of an 8 foot bituminous
trail surface from proposed Road E to the rear of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3, where it
would provide access to the future trail, is also being recommended. In consideration for this,
it is recommended that the city give full trail fee credit to the applicant.
Staff believes that this plat request is a reasonable one and is generally consistent with guidelines
1
established by the city Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. We find it to be well
designed with only modest revisions being required. We are recommending that it be approved
with conditions as outlined in the report. 1
PRELIMINARY PLAT
The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 61.45 acre site into 78 single family lots and one
PP P P g g Y
outlot. The density of the proposed subdivision is 1.27 units per acre gross, and 2.3 units per
acre net after removing the wetland and roads. All the lots meet or exceed the minimum 15,000
square feet of area with an average lot size of 18,904 square feet.
The western portion of the site contains an outlot. This outlot is not a buildable lot, and contains 1
Bluff Creek and an associated wetland. The Park and Recreation Commission is recommending
that the city acquire ownership of Outlot A, allowing for continuation of the Bluff Creek
preservation corridor.
Staff notes that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and generally consistent
with the Zoning Ordinance.
1
1
1
Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
' Page 4
Streets /Access
' On September 14, 1987, the City Council approved the final plat request for Sun Ridge
subdivision located south of the proposed Bluff Creek Estates Subdivision. It was staff's
intention then to recommend that Sun Ridge Court be constructed with a 60 foot easement
reserved at the north of the radius of the cul -de -sac to provide future connection and access to
the property to the north (proposed Bluff Creek Estates). This would have been the ideal street
' design, however, the 60 foot right -of -way easement was never acquired. It was discussed in the
staff report, but the developer failed to convey it. Since the property has all been sold, there is
little possibility of obtaining the necessary easements without condemnation.
' Plans for Bluff Creek Estates a ose ro loo street with two access points on Audubon Road.
P P P
The access points appear to be well located to accommodate future extension east of Audubon
Road when development occurs on these lots. It appears the sight distance of the southerly
access is acceptable based on MnDOT's standards. The right -of -way is proposed at 60 feet
which is the city's urban standard. It is assumed the streets will be constructed to the city's
standard at a 31 -foot wide back -to -back street section. Street grades are not provided on the .
plans, however, based on contours, it appears the majority of the street grade will be under the
' 7% maximum grade per city ordinance, except in the area in front of Lots 24 and 25, Block 2.
It is recommended the applicant's engineer look at the grades to see if they can be reduced to
meet the city's ordinance. If the street grade is not able to be reduced, a variance will be
required. Staff feels confident that street grades could be negotiated to fall within the city's
guidelines.
According to the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study, Audubon Road is classified as a
collector class I street. It currently has a 66 foot wide right -of -way, but a 100 foot wide right -of-
way is ultimately required. The preliminary plat proposes dedication of an additional 17 feet of
' right -of -way to the existing 33 feet, together with an additional 20 foot drainage and utility
easement to facilitate trunk sewer and water improvements the city has proposed along Audubon
Road. Remaining right -of -way would be acquired when parcels to the east are platted.
' Proposed Lot 8, Block 2, contains an existing "Chaska Brick" house and a garage. Presently, the
horseshoe driveway for this house accesses onto Audubon Road. The garage is located
approximately 20 feet from the rear property line and faces north. It is recommended that access
to Audubon Road be eliminated for traffic safety reasons, and Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, share a
driveway off of the northerly loop street (Road E). A driveway cross access easement would
r then be required across Lot 7, Block 2. Notice of the cross access easement should be placed
in the chain -of -title for Lots 7 and 8, Block 2. This is an effort to reduce the amount of access
points accessing on Audubon Road. The Planning Commission felt that it may be
appropriate for the character of the property to have a driveway of some kind going out
to Audubon Road if it was acceptable from a safety standpoint and agreeable with
1 Engineering Department. Engineering staff has prepared drawings showing the acceleration
Bluff Creek Estates 1
June 3, 1992
Page 5 '
and deceleration lanes on Audubon Road. The driveway encroaches onto the proposed
lanes and is not desirable from Engineering's view point as it could cause a safety issue (See
attachment #9).
The applicant would like to construct one model home to be located on Lot 9, Block 2 for the
Parade of Homes, which begins in the first week of September. This home is proposed to share
the driveway with the existing home until such time when the proposed street to the south of Lot
9 is constructed. It should be pointed out that Lot 9, Block 2 should also gain its driveway
access off of the interior street (Road E) and not Audubon Road.
The southerly road access proposes an island barrier at Audubon Road. This island should be
removed. If the applicant is interested in having an entrance monument, we recommend that it
be placed along the adjacent lot's corner.
Audubon Road is constructed to rural standards with 24 -foot wide bituminous surface and six
foot gravel shoulders. North of Heron Drive, Audubon Road has been recently reconstructed into
a 44 -foot wide urban section with concrete curb and gutter and a trail system along the east side.
It is anticipated that in the near future, Audubon Road may be upgraded to urban standards as
development pressures warrant upgrading. The applicant should be aware that this development
may sustain some of the costs from the upgrading project in the way of special assessments.
As the final plat is prepared, detailed utility and street construction drawings should be submitted
to the City for review and formal approval. The roadway should be designed to the city's urban
standards.
The plat proposes development to take place in four phases. This phasing includes the street 1
construction as well. Phase one will include a portion of the south quarter of Road E, and all
of Road D. A temporary cul -de -sac should be constructed at the end of the first phase of Road
E until the road can be extended in the future. A sign should be placed on the barricades
indicating the future connection. Notice of the ultimate street extension should be placed in the
chain -of -title for the lots located in this vicinity. All road right -of -way should be platted in the
first phase.
The city's trunk sewer and water improvement project will include construction of an 8 foot
sidewalk along the west side of Audubon Road.
The Fire Marshal is recommending that the street names be approved by Public Safety. r
Landscaping and Tree Preservation
The recently adopted Landscaping and Tree Preservation requirements state that landscape
y p p g eq t a
buffer is required when a subdivision plat is contiguous with a collector street. Required
1
1 Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
' Page 6
buffering shall consist of berms and landscape materials consisting of a mix of trees and shrubs
and /or a tree preservation area. The plan identifies plant material locations along Audubon Road
as well as a single planting (2 Norway Maple). Appropriate financial security will be
required.
The Landscaping and Tree Preservation requirements state that it is the policy of the city to
preserve natural woodland areas throughout the city, and with respect to specific site development
'
•
to retain as far as practical, substantial tree stands which can be incorporated into the overall
landscape plan. Mature elm trees are located along the north edge of the site. There are also
some oak trees. The applicant is proposing to preserve these trees by limiting grading in those
1 areas.
Trees designated for preservation shall be protected by snow fence or other means acceptable to
the city. Protective measures must be located at or beyond the ground foot print of the tree's
crown. No fill material or construction activity shall occur within these areas. These measures
must be in place and inspected prior to the start of grading activity. At the city's discretion,
1 conservation easements may be required to protect designated tree preservation areas.
Staff is recommending that a conservation easement be established to protect trees located along
the north property line of the site. This would be accomplished by designating the conservation
area on the plat and through financial guarantees to ensure that the integrity of the easement is
maintained. Individual lots will be required to show the conservation easement on the plat. Staff
1 is also recommending that a tree survey be submitted so that even those tress outside the
conservation easement may be saved as much as possible (Sheet 3 of 5). The applicant is
intending to save some trees on Lots 1, 2, 3 and 5, Block 2, but staff does not believe that would
be possible due to location of future homes.
1 The northern edge of The site will be buffered by a 100 foot wide landscaped area from the
Chanhassen Business Center, as designated in the Comprehensive Plan.
' Grading/Drainage
The. overall development is proposed to be constructed in two phases with the initial phase
proposed along the easterly portion of the site adjacent to Audubon Road. Ultimately, the entire
site will be regraded along with construction of two retention ponds along the westerly edge of
the property. Since the retention ponds are located in the far westerly portion of the site (Phase
II), the initial phase should provide for an interim or temporary retention ponding to address
water quality issues and fulfill the city's storm water retention ordinance. The plans do not
reflect any interim ponding or sediment basins and it is assumed that the applicant will not be
constructing the entire storm sewer at this time. Therefore, it will be necessary for the applicant
to provide interim ponding with Phase I of this development.
1
Bluff Creek Estates 1
June 3, 1992
Page 7
1
The first phase of construction proposes grading the rear lots adjacent to Audubon Road to drain
southerly along Audubon Road to Bluff Creek. Audubon Road currently exists as a rural type
roadway with a ditch section. Any increase in the amount of runoff will create additional
turbulence and potential erosion problems downstream. It is recommended that the applicant's
engineer redesign and raise the lot grades to minimize the amount of runoff towards Audubon
1
Road. Eventually, Audubon Road will be upgraded to urban street standards with concrete curb
and gutters similar to just north of the site adjacent to Lake Susan Hills West 3rd Addition. It
would seem prudent to grade the lots adjacent to Audubon Road to be conducive with future
urban design standards, i.e. eliminate ditch section, build rear yards up to drain out to interior
street (Road "E ") where practical.
Street rades are not shown on the plans based on contours; however, they appear to be
g P Y PP
acceptable except along Lots 25 and 26, Block 2. The street grades in front of these lots appear
to exceed the city's ordinance of 7.0% maximum grade. Therefore, a variance may be required
unless the developer's engineer redesigns the street grade to fall within the city's guidelines of
0.50% to 7.0% grade. Staff believes this can be achieved. The proposed house pads in this same
area are approximately six feet above the street grade which equates to approximately 13% to
15% driveway grade which is extremely steep. Typically, the city requires that driveway grades
not to exceed 10 %. It is recommended that the developer's engineer redesign and lower these
lots so the driveway grades do not exceed 10 %.
Storm runoff generated from streets and lawns is proposed to be conveyed overland via surface
drainage to a series of storm sewers which will convey runoff into two retention ponds. The
applicant's engineer should submit design calculations for the storm sewer and retention ponds.
Storm sewers should be designed for a 10 -year storm event and retention ponds shall retain the
difference between the pre - developed and developed runoff rate for a 100 -year single storm
event. The outlet of the pond shall be designed to restrict the discharge to the pre - developed
runoff rate. Ponds shall also be constructed to "NURP" standards to improve water quality.
1
As part of Phase I construction, no storm sewer improvements are proposed to be constructed.
Road E becomes a very long street with no storm sewers. It is recommended that the applicant's
engineer provide an interim retention or sediment pond and storm sewer plans to deal with street
and lawn runoff.
Staff recommends the applicant supply earthwork calculations to the city to determine if the site
earthwork balances, or if the site requires material to be imported or exported. Staff requests this
information to determine if appropriate traffic signage will be required or if additional financial 1
security requirements are necessary.
1
1
1
' Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
Page 8
Utilities
1 Municipal sanitary sewer and water sewer currently is not available to this site. However, the
city has authorized preparation of plans and specifications to extend trunk sanitary sewer and
1 water facilities down along the west side of Audubon Road which will service Phase I of this
site. Phase II of the development will be serviced via a gravity sewer line from a proposed trunk
sanitary sewer which the city will be extending north from Lyman Boulevard adjacent to Bluff
' Creek. The applicant will have to cross over Bluff Creek in the future to extend sewer service
to Phase II. Depending on the city's trunk improvement project's scope and time frame, the
utility line may or may not be operational by October, 1992. The city's project will include
1 special assessments for both trunk and lateral sanitary sewer and watermain service to this
development. The preliminary plat is dedicating sufficient right -of -way and utility easements for
installation of the city's trunk sewer and water lines.
' The utility layout proposed on the utility plan sheet is fairly well laid out. Hydrant spacing may
be of concern to the Fire Marshal and require additional hydrants. The Fire Marshal's rule of
1 thumb for hydrant spacing is typically 300 feet apart. There are some areas that exceed this
limitation and will need to be modified. Watermain sizing is not given on the preliminary plans
and should be evaluated by the applicant's engineer. Detailed calculations demonstrating
' sufficient fire flow during peak demands should be supplied to the City Engineer for review.
Final construction plans may be prepared in conjunction with the final platting process. Utility
1 and street construction plans and specifications shall be prepared using the city's most recent
edition of "City Standard Specifications and Detail Plates."
In addition, in the same area, the proposed house pads are approximately six feet above grade
which equates to approximately 13% to 15% driveway grade which is extremely steep.
Typically, the city requires the driveway grades not exceed 10 %. It is recommended that the
' developer's engineer redesign these lots so the driveway grades do not exceed 10 %.
Storm runoff generated from streets and lawns is proposed to be conveyed through overland
' surface drainage and a series of storm sewers which discharge into two retention ponds. The
applicant's engineer shall submit design calculations for the storm sewer and retention ponds.
Storm sewers should be designed for a 10 -year storm event and retention ponds shall retain the
difference between the pre - developed and developed runoff rate for a 100 -year storm event. The
outlet of the pond shall be designed to restrict the discharge to the pre - developed runoff rate.
Ponds shall also take on water quality characteristics as developed by NURP standards.
•
Erosion Control
1 Plans propose erosion control along the westerly, northerly, and southeasterly property lines. It
is recommended that the proposed erosion control fence be the city's Type III along the wetlands
(Phase II construction) and Type I silt fence along the north and southeasterly portions of the
Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
Page 9 1
development (Phase I construction). Additional erosion control fence should be installed on Lots
7, 14 and 15, Block 3 as check dams, as well as, Lots 8, 10 and 11, Block 1. The side slopes
along the rear of Lots 1 through 5, Block 3 are steep, approximately 3:1. It is recommended that
an erosion control blanket be used on slopes 3:1 or greater throughout the development and that
all disturbed areas be seeded within two weeks after grading unless MNDOT's planting season
dictates otherwise.
Miscellaneous 1
The preliminary plat proposes 15 -foot wide drainage and utility easements over the storm sewer
lines proposed along the interior lot lines of the development (outside street right -of -way). It is
recommended that the 15 -foot wide easement areas be increased to 20 feet wide to ensure
adequate room for access and maintenance vehicles. The preliminary plat also dedicates a
drainage easement over Lots 7, 8, 10 and 11, Block 1 for a rear yard drainage swale. Staff
recommends that the drainage easement also be extended to include Lots 12 and 13, Block 1.
Easements 1
On the final plat, the following easements and right -of -way shall be indicated: 1
1. Dedication of all street right -of -way.
2. Conservation and drainage easements over all protected wetland and ponding areas.
Provide access easements to allow the city to maintain all ponding areas.
3. A 20 foot wide utility and drainage easements over all sewer, water, and storm sewer
lines located outside public right -of -way.
4. Conservation easements over all designated tree preservation areas.
5. Standard drainage and utility easements along each lot line. 1
6. Dedication of Outlot A to the City.
Park and Recreation
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the majority of the site as lying within the service area of
Power Hill Park, and as being on the service area fringe of Sunset Ridge Park, and the new park
acquired in Stone Creek. However, the railroad alignment to the north, Audubon Road to the
east, and a lack of trail and street connections present barriers to free access to these parks (see
Attachment 2).
1
1
1
1 Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
1 Page 10
Trails which are identified by the Comprehensive Trail plan in the area of Bluff Creek Estates
' are depicted on Attachment #2. Two north/south corridors are identified on or abutting to this
parcel. They are the Bluff Creek drainage turf trail, and the Audubon Road off - street bituminous
alignment.
1 The Park and Recreation Commission recommended the City Council require full park fees be
paid as a condition of approval of Bluff Creek Estates. Fees to be paid at the time of building
1 permit approval in the amount of the park fee in force at the time of building permit application.
' The preliminary plat identifies the western 19.7 acres of the site as an outlot. This entire area
is below the 100 year flood elevation and will contain a portion of the Bluff Creek Corridor turf
trail identified in the city's Comprehensive Plan. This outlot extends to the east in a bottle -neck
' fashion, abutting proposed Road E, allowing for pedestrian access from the residential street. The
second trail associated with this site is the proposed Audubon Road off - street alignment.
Through consultation with the city's engineering department, it has been determined that no
1 additional right -of -way is necessary if this trail is to be constructed west of Audubon Road.
The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that the City Council acquire ownership of
Outlot A, allowing for continuation of the Bluff Creek preservation corridor, and require the
installation of an 8 foot bituminous trail surface from proposed Road E to the rear of Lot 1,
Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3 as a condition of approval of this plat. In consideration for this, it
1 is recommended that the city give full trail fee credit to the applicant.
' Rezoning
The applicant is proposing to rezone the property from A -2, Agricultural Estate to RSF,
Residential Single Family. The area to the east and west are zoned A -2. Sun Ridge Subdivision
to the south is zoned RR, Rural Residential. The property is bordered on the north by the
recently rezoned PUD by Ryan Construction for the Chanhassen Business Center.
' The 2000 Land Use Plan shows this area designated for development as Low Density Residential,
1.2 - 4.0 units per acre. The applicant's proposal has a gross density of 1.27 units per acre and
2.3 units per acre net after the streets and wetlands are taken out.
This area is in the new MUSA area. The sewer service will be from the new Bluff Creek service
area system. The feasibility for this sewer and timing was recently approved by the City
Council. At the earliest, sewer could be available to this site in late fall.
' Staff is recommending that this area be rezoned to RSF and the rezoning is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
I
Bluff Creek Estates I
June 3, 1992
Page 11 1
COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - RSF DISTRICT
Lot Lot Home Home I
Area Width Depth Setback
Ordinance 15,000 90' 125' 30' front/rear I
10' sides
BLOCK 1 1
Lot 1 19,600 92' 175
Lot 2 16,500 84' 165 I
Lot 3 15,000 145/102 127.5 1
Lot 4 18,880 103 185
1
Lot 5 16,900 53 145
Lot 6 26,450 61 145 1
Lot 7 23,000 61 186
1
Lot 8 20,500 106 175
Lot 9 16,400 126 129
Lot 10 18,700 87 185
1
Lot 11 22,550 82 210
Lot Lot Lot Home I
Area Width Depth Setback
Lot 12 17,700 88 175 I
Lot 13 15,600 88 168.5
1
Lot 14 15,000 90 167
I
Lot 15 15,000 90 167
. 1
1
I Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
1 Page 12
Lot 16 15,000 90 167
1 Lot 17 15,000 90 167
I Lot 18 15,000 90 167
Lot 19 22,150 118/175 157
1
BLOCK 2
I Lot 1 15,900 108/160 152.5
1 Lot 2 16,300 67 162.5
Lot 3 28,400 58 165
I
Lot 4 25,300 57 150
1 Lot 5 16,000 57 155
I Lot 6 17,600 105/180 170
Lot 7 22,800 234/110 227
1 Lot 8 32,550 155 221 20 *
I Lot 9 35,700 155/165 218.5
Lot 10 21,050 105 156.5
1
I Lot Lot Lot Home
Area Width Depth Setback
Lot 11 17,300 98 192.5
Lot 12 18,550 100 190
I Lot 13 17,900 98 170
II
Bluff Creek Estates
u ee
June 3, 1992
Page 13 1
Lot 14 17,300 74 170
Lot 15 22,000 54 165
Lot 16 19,000 61 159 1
Lot 17 15,000 72 154 i
Lot 18 15,200 106 145
Lot 19 15,100 100 147.5 1
Lot 20 15,300 110/140 142.5
1
Lot 21 18,700 241 145
Lot 22 15,200 105 145
Lot 23 15,200 105 145
1
Lot 24 15,000 119 147.5
Lot 25 16,900 152 160 1
Lot 26 15,500 118 170
1
Lot 27 17,000 95 180
Lot 28 16,650 116 197.5 1
Lot 29 29,500 137 232.5
1
Lot Lot Lot Home 1
Area Width Depth Setback
Lot 30 22,700 195 240 1
Lot 31 22,550 90 250
1
Lot 32 26,600 90 280
1
1 Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
1 Page 14
Lot 33 19,800 119 265
Lot 34 17,600 131 245
1 BLOCK 3
I Lot 1 20,150 118/98 150
Lot 2 15,850 81 157.5
1 Lot 3 16,000 81 157.5
1 Lot 4 15,300 95 152.5
Lot 5 15,100 98 157.5
1 Lot 6 22,100 53 187.5
I Lot 7 22,900 58 180
Lot 8 26,150 635 155
I Lot 9 15,700 98 147.5
I Lot 10 15,000 134 137.5
I Lot 11 16,500 153/145 137.5
Lot 12 15,800 111 127.5
1 Lot 13 23,400 78 220
1 Lot Lot Lot Home
Area Width Depth Setback
1 Lot 14 24,600 82 230
I Lot 15 16,600 85 175
Lot 16 15,600 80 155
1
I
III
Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
Page 15
Lot 17 15,000 100 150 '
Lot 18 15,000 100 150
Lot 19 15,500 80 155 1
Lot 20 18,250 88 180
1
Lot 21 27,950 80 200
Lot 22 18,150 82 175 1
Lot 23 15,000 85 146
1
Lot 24 15,000 103 145
Lot 25 15,250 223 139 1
* Variance required: Proposed Lot 8, Block 2, contains an existing "Chaska Brick" house and
I
a garage. Presently, the driveway for this house accesses onto Audubon Road. The garage is
located approximately 20 feet from the rear property line and faces north. City ordinances
requires any detached accessory structure in excess of 400 square feet to maintain a distance of
I
30 feet from the rear property line. The garage has an approximate area of 900 square feet.
Mature maple trees separate the existing garage from proposed Lot 5, Block 2, creating a natural
buffer. We find this intrusion into the rear yard setback acceptable and recommend approval of
I
the rear yard setback variance for the garage. The Planning Commission was strongly opposed
to the rear yard setback variance and recommended that the applicant adjust the property
lines to eliminate the variance.
I
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT
I
The site contains a Class A wetland according to the Department of Interior Wetland Inventory
Map. The area of the wetland is approximately 19.70 square feet and is located in the western I
portion of the site in Outlot A.
The City Code requires that development within 200 feet of a Class A wetland shall receive a I
wetland alteration permit. No alteration is proposed as part of this plat request. The wetland has
Bluff Creek traversing through its center. Vegetation predominant in the area is reed canary
grass. As stated earlier, there is to be no alteration of the proposed wetland. Building pad
I
locations exceed the required 75 foot setback and are in fact, located in some cases, in excess
of 160 feet. There will be adequate area for sheet flow from the proposed housing pads to
eliminate impurities reaching the wetland area.
1
1 Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
1 Page 16
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
' The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on June 3, 1992. Some of the issues that were
raised at the meeting were in connection with the rear yard setback variance. The commission
felt there was no justification for granting the variance and that the applicant should adjust the
property lines to eliminate the variance.
A second issue was in regard to the horseshoe driveway for the existing "Chaska Brick"
residence. Presently, the horseshoe driveway accesses onto Audubon Road. Staff had
recommended this driveway be eliminated for traffic safety reasons, and Lots 7 and 8, Block 2,
' share a driveway off of the northerly loop street (Road E). This is an effort to reduce the amount
of access points accessing on Audubon Road. The Planning Commission felt that it may be
appropriate for the character of the property to have a driveway of some kind going out to
1 Audubon Road if it was acceptable from a safety standpoint and agreeable with Engineering
Department. Engineering staff has prepared drawings showing the acceleration and deceleration
lanes on Audubon Road. The driveway encroaches onto the proposed lanes and is not desirable
from Engineering's view point as it could cause a safety issue (See attachment #9).
In general, the Planning Commission was satisfied with the proposal, and recommends approval
of the application with minor changes to the conditions of the Preliminary Plat.
' RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motions:
Wetland Alteration Permit
' "The City Council approves Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -6 with the following conditions:
1. All wetland areas will be protected during construction by Type III erosion control. The
' erosion control shall be maintained in good condition until the disturbed areas are
stabilized.
2. The wetland area remain undisturbed.
3. The applicant shall receive a permit from the watershed district.
' 4. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Subdivision #92 -5 and Rezoning #92 -3."
' REZONING
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
Bluff Creek Estates 1
June 3, 1992
Page 17
1
"The City Council approves Rezoning #92 -3 property A -2 to RSF:
1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract containing all of the conditions of
PP P g
approval for this project and shall submit all required financial guarantees. The
development contract shall be recorded against the property.
2. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Subdivision #92 -5 and Wetland Alteration
Permit #92 -6."
PRELIMINARY PLAT
"The City Council approves Subdivision #92 -5 as shown on the plans dated May 4, 1992, with
u variance of 20 foot rear yard setback for a garage for Lot 8, Block 2, and subject to the
• following conditions:
1. All storm sewer drainage pipes should be designed for a 10 -year frequency storm utilizing
a rational method. Storm drainage retention pond, detention areas and outlet piping shall
be designed for a 100 -year frequency, 24 -hour single event using the "SCS Method"
established for use in Minnesota. The discharge rate shall not exceed the pre - developed
runoff rate. Ponds shall also be designed to "Nurp" Standards.
2. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the current
edition of "City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates." Detailed street and utility
construction plans and specifications shall be submitted for City Council approval.
3. The applicant shall apply and obtain permits from the Watershed District, DNR and other
appropriate regulatory agencies and comply with their conditions of approval.
4. Watermain systems shall be designed to ensure adequate fire flow for the site. Design
calculations shall be submitted to the City Engineer to verify pipe size.
5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the
PP P tY P
• financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract.
The final plat shall be contingent upon the City Council authorizing and awarding a
public improvement project for the extension of trunk sanitary sewer and water facilities
to service the site.
6. All lots shall access from interior streets and not Audubon Road. Street grades shall not
exceed the 7% maximum street grade per City ordinance. A deceleration/acceleration
lane shall be provided on Audubon Road. The center island shall be deleted from the
southerly access street (Road E). The existing driveway to the site shall be relocated to
access from the northerly loop street through Lot 7, Block 2. A cross- access easement ,
Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
1 Page 18
shall be conveyed to Lot 8, Block 2 with the understanding that the Planning
1 Commission feels that it may be appropriate for the character of the property to
have a driveway of some kind going out to Audubon Road, but that it will be the
burden of the applicant to get to the City Engineer and see what they can work out
between the Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
7. The final plat shall be amended to include expanding the 15 -foot wide drainage and utility
easements to 20 feet wide and extending the drainage easements through Lots 12 and 13,
Block 1. The following easements shall be provided:
1 a. Dedication of all street right -of -way.
b. Conservation and drainage easements over all protected wetland and ponding
areas. Provide access easements to allow the city to maintain all ponding areas.
c. A 20 foot wide utility and drainage easements over all sewer, water, and storm
sewer lines located outside public right -of -way.
1 d. Conservation easements over areas designated by staff.
e. Standard drainage and utility easements along each lot line.
f. Dedication of Outlot A to the City.
' 8. All necessary permits shall be obtained from the pipeline company for any grading or
construction activity within the pipeline easement.
1 9. Fire hydrants should be spaced approximately 300 feet apart throughout the subdivision
in accordance with the Fire Marshal's recommendations.
10. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored with seed and disc -
mulched or wood fiber blanket within two weeks of completing site grading unless
MNDOT's planting dates dictate otherwise. All areas disturbed with slopes of 3:1 or
1 greater shall be restored with sod or seed and wood fiber blanket.
' 11. Until Phase II improvements are completed, interim sediment and/or retention ponds shall
be constructed and maintained by the applicant to accommodate Phase I storm runoff.
The applicant shall amend the grading plan to take into consideration the runoff from
' the back yards for Phase I to accommodate future upgrading of Audubon Road (urban
design). The grades on Lots 25 and 26, Block 3 shall be redesigned so the driveway
grades do not exceed 10 %. The applicant shall supply earthwork calculations for both
' phases to the City Engineer for review. Erosion control fence along the westerly portion
•
Bluff Creek Estates
June 3, 1992
Page 19
of the development (Phase II) adjacent to the wetlands shall be the City's Type III.
Additional erosion control fence (Type I) shall be installed on Lots 7, 14 and 15, Block
1
3 and Lots 8, 10 and 11, Block 1 as check dams.
12. Outlot A shall be deeded to the city. In consideration for this, full trail fees will be
credited. An 8 foot wide bituminous trail shall be constructed from proposed
Road E to the rear of Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 3.
13. The applicant shall convey to the City a temporary street easement for the temporary cul-
de -sac at the end of Road E. In addition, a sign shall be installed on the barricades
stating that the street will be extended in the future. All street right -of -way for all plat
phases to be dedicated with phase I platting.
14. The developer shall acquire the required utility construction permits from the PCA and
Minnesota Department of Health.
15. The applicant shall meet the conditions of the Rezoning #92 -3 and the Wetland Alteration '
Permit #92 -6.
16. The applicant should work out with city staff to provide whether or not Lots 10 and
14 in Block 2 are in fact buildable between the Planning Commission and the City
Council Meeting.
1
17. Trees designated for preservation shall be protected by snow fence or other means
acceptable to the City."
1
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memo from the DNR dated May 12, 1992
2. Memo from Todd Hoffman dated May 19, 1992.
3. Memo from Minnegasco dated May 13, 1992.
4. Letter from Dave Hempel dated May 27, 1992.
5. Memo from Mark Littfin dated May 7, 1992.
6. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated May 13, 1992.
7. Memo from Williams Pipe Line Company dated May 14, 1992.
8. Planning Commission Minutes dated June 3, 1992
9. Exhibit showing acceleration and deceleration lanes in relation to the existing
driveway.
10. Proposed residence for Lots 10 and 14, Block 2.
11. Preliminary plat dated May 4, 1992.
'` x
A STATE OF Mk �` ^
l
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES'
PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106
II 772 -7910 FILE NO
May 12, 1992
II Sharmin Al -Jaff
Planning Department
I City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
I RE: BLUFF CREEK ESTATES, PRELIMINARY PLAT, CASE 92 -5 SUB, 92 -3
REZ, AND 92 -6 WAP, BLUFF CREEK, CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER
COUNTY
1 Dear Ms. Al -Jaff:
We have reviewed the site plans dated 5/4/92 (received May 7, 1992)
I for the above- referenced project (N 1/2, NE 1/4, S.22, T.116N,
R.23W) and have the following comments to offer:
I 1. Protected watercourse Bluff Creek is on the proposed site.
Any activity below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation,
which alters the course, current or cross - section of protected
II waters or wetlands, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and
may require a DNR protected waters permit.
The OHW for Bluff Creek is the top of the bank. Please
II contact this office if there is any question about whether
proposed activities will be within Bluff Creek and we can make
arrangements to determine the OHW .
1 2. There is a large wetland fringe on Bluff Creek that is not
under DNR jurisdiction. The U.S Corps of Engineers should be
consulted regarding pertinent federal regulation for
I activities in wetlands. In addition, impacts to these
wetlands should be evaluated by the responsible governmental
units (the city and Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed
;t.
I District) in accordance with the provisions of The Wetlands
Conservation Act of 1991.
II 3. Portions of the site are within the Bluff Creek shoreland
district and the floodplain district. The project must be
consistent with the city's. shoreland management regulations
and the floodplain regulations of the city and watershed
1 district. No DNR concerns with shoreland management or
floodplain regulations were noted.
II 4. It appears that most of the stormwater is routed through
settling basins, which is good. We would object to having the
stormwater routed directly to the creek or wetland.
II AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
' 1
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff
Bluff Creek Estates
May 12, 1992
Page 2
5. There should be some type of easement, covenant or deed
restriction for the properties adjacent to the wetland areas.
This would help to ensure that property owners are aware that
the wetlands cannot be altered without appropriate approvals
or permits.
6. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during
the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site
Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of
Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil
and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their
equivalent, should be followed.
7. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 1
gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR
appropriations permit is required. You are advised that it
typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit
application.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-
7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments.
Sincerely, 1
Ceil Strauss 1
Area Hydrologist
cc: Bob Obermeyer, Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek WSD 1
Vern Reiter, USCOE
Wayne Barstad
Chanhassen general file 1
1
1
1
1
CITY OF
E PRC DATE: May 19, 1992
CHANHA!II CC DATE:
\,
�]y • HOFPMAN: k
1
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat of 61.45 acres into 78 single family
lots and one outlot; Rezoning from A2, Agricultural
II Estate to RSF, Residential Single Family; and Wetland
Alteration Permit for development within 200 feet of a
wetland, Bluff Creek Estates.
Z
Q LOCATION: Located south of Highway 5 on the west side of Audubon
Road (see Attachment #1).
II 1.!
Q APPLICANT: Keyland Homes
14456 Burnsville Parkway
Burnsville, MN 55337
1
PRESENT ZONING: A2, Agricultural Estates
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - IOP, Industrial Office Park
S - A2, Agricultural Estates
E - A2, Agricultural Estates
W - A2, Agricultural Estates
1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan identifies the majority of
the site as lying within the service area of Power
I Hill Park, and as being on the service area fringe
of Sunset Ridge Park, and the new park acquired in
Stone Creek. However, the railroad alignment to
I Lime the north, Audubon Road to the east, and a lack of
0 trail and street connections present barriers to
free access to these parks (see Attachment #d).
1 I!! COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN: Trails which are identified by the
Comprehensive Trail plan in the area of
Bluff Creek Estates are also depicted on
' Attachment #1. Two north /south corridors
are identified on or abutting to this
parcel. They are the Bluff Creek
drainage turf trail, and the Audubon Road
1 - off - street bituminous alignment.
1
'
Bluff Creek Estates
May 19, 1992
Page 2
BACKGROUND 1
This item was initially reviewed by the Park and Recreation
Commission on January 28, 1992. The information presented to the
Commission that evening and the corresponding minutes are attached.
This item was scheduled for additional review in February, but was
subsequently removed from the agenda. Since the Commission's
initial review of the proposal, the city has finalized the
acquisition of the 8.6 acre park site in the Stone Creek
development. 1
PARK
The City has the ability to acquire approximately 3 acres of park
property (comparable to Greenwood Shores Park), or a portion
thereof, if we wish to. If acquisition of developable parkland was
pursued, however, the city would forfeit all or a portion of the
$39,000 in park fees which would be generated from this
development. I do not advocate the pursuit of park property in
this case for three main reasons: 1
1. The portion of this site on which homes would be constructed
lies wholly within the park service area of Power Hill Park,
and partially within the service area of Sunset Ridge Park.
The new park in Stone Creek, once connected to Bluff Creek
Estates via trails, will also be utilized to some extent. The
barriers to travel mentioned earlier impact these service
areas to a degree; but future trails, and additional
residential street construction will lessen their effects.
However, increasing vehicular traffic along Audubon Road will
off -set these improvements somewhat.
2. Outlot A, as identified in the preliminary plat, is comprised
of 19.7 acres of property wholly within the flood plain of
Bluff Creek. Via a trail connection being provided by the
applicant, this area will meet a variety of desired open space
needs. 1
3. The number of individual park sites operated by the city is
relatively high. Acquisition of an additional small park site
would perpetuate this phenomenon.
PARK PROPERTY RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
the City Council require full park fees be paid as a condition of
approval of Bluff Creek Estates. Fees to be paid at the time of
building permit approval in the amount of the park fee in force at
the time of building permit application.
1
1
1
Bluff Creek Estates
May 19, 1992
Page 3
' TRAIL
As mentioned, the preliminary plat identifies the western 19.7
acres of the site as an outlot. This entire area is below the 100
year flood elevation and will contain a portion of the Bluff Creek
Corridor turf trail identified in the city's Comprehensive Plan.
This outlot extends to the east in a bottle -neck fashion, abutting
proposed Road E, allowing for pedestrian access from the
residential street. The second trail associated with this site is
' the proposed Audubon Road off - street alignment. Through
consultation with the city's engineering department, it has been
determined that no additional right-of-way is necessary if this
trail were to be constructed west of Audubon Road.
S TRAIL RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
that the City Council acquire ownership of Outlot A, allowing for
continuation of the Bluff Creek preservation corridor, and require
the installation of an 8 ft. bituminous trail surface from proposed
' Road E to the rear of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3 as a
condition of approval of this plat. In consideration for this, it
is recommended that the city give full trail fee credit to the
applicant.
1
1
1
r
1
r
1
1
1
,........ 4 Ar - Ai A 1 4 . A .
pli 1
. 4 •
ai o ft 111/1 111, IIN gm 4 ..„‘,.....___ r _ '� _ . • , • ,. N.INIF .. II = OULEV -
• c .; SCHOOL S ITE• w ;(
I ill
O.
ft., • w ..... ; 1 01
. 1!. La. 1- ■0 1 , a ,"‘%.
• 0 twilit
: . 410t , .,,,,
•
•
ID 0 4104
1 411. fp �
a til f � r��
1 `. r r v.� / 1 ti.; .- _. , , , ow Inill 1 y ''' sS`' - I • o .',"111.‘F.vj
I NI i
_ 1 , Mill!, ,,,, y - Mil ridE •
� HANS HAGEN HOMES= / V ii-P . 410 Ilifr'reittz.;:71
-', , ., jo' G , VA,AV.• aniW r .%
. . . . , , ;P Pi '
&- . ,_■- % __ - . /e- \ AMAMI' if
---- v. O tr-r2r/w r till r ..
)6_
-_. i" `i BLUFF CR gilati N
L
0
.z.1 0 • . cv, mr! 1
ID
c EXISTING `�
N 9000 TRA /SIDE • 1 -r Z EC
.. r. WORM PRoPOsEe , _ _ :,.
• • • • • TRAIL/SIOEM►ALtl
8LuFF CREEK TRAIL
9100 CORR w
•
5
/C i s
1
CITY OF
`i CHANHASSEN
c 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Park and Recreation Commission
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator �.
DATE: January 23, 1992
SUBJ: Pending Subdivision Reviews
a. Bluff Creek Site
b. Hans Hagen Homes
This item was prepared to afford the Commission the opportunit y to
look ahead at above mentioned potential developing sites in
Chanhassen. Both sites are proposed single- family developments and
are adjacent to or in close proximity to the recently reviewed
Chanhassen Business Center (see attachments #1, #2, and #3). The
impact of these proposed subdivisions in the areas of fees, parks,
trails, trail corridors, open space and natural resources is
significant. Portions of the borders of both sites include areas
designated for trails. The Bluff Creek site contains property
' through which the Bluff Creek Corridor Trail will travel (see
attachment #4). Both sites are isolated from existing neighborhood
parks, however, the Bluff Creek parcel is partially within the
service area of Power Hill Park (see attachment #5).
To date, only preliminary discussions have been held with the
owners and developers of these properties. Upon receiving a
,• preliminary application of subdivision, these items will be brought
back to the Commission for detailed analysis.
•
•
1
1
1
�� PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
•
HANS HAGEN HOMES tN
•
:, :t. ' •,... ' ,' , :,; - ' r., ^ i/ch P /o /7 — I / , – . - ;-1 a` , `; 11 1'1'1., ' \✓ S,-- �' ' / i ^ 1•:,� 1.1 v _,1
' , r _ -- `, • `1 ,_��i . - '% j --� -, V•-, ,�
/II II'-� �V P• , 1 I .,r i '` -- f / , , :; �' \,' ` ,_ •iL { { -,` t -% _ • 1 , :
v „I ;'r -\ " rte M I \' :.1 '' , -` � �- t � � ,__ � �] `.-- '-- �:, -_• , I 1 \� " •
1 • l!. \ ` • 't (1 ..r.."'” J/ .... ' ' \\ r• 1 ,r. \ , . \ ` - /i - ` .. , y _ F_�. z : � , w• , i I t \
'
; 1,..1' r , ` ' � - I ,I ` � ' -'• .. - - %.'i .-1' I .// w• \ / `r 1 \ • \ ••.. ; \'.. • \ \ . 'V, E \,1 IS' r f-- `‘ \ `\ i
1 ' , •'1 • r 1 ,r . -- I 1 / \ _ _ C 1 � g yp 1
11 � t j.,: 1 , • , ,,
. ',. / ���_' : /';i / = < `- \ \ :' - - iagr- \ Ili , 1 1 � "" � \_" _ ' ,\
1 / ` \ - - I� t /w•• \ / -1 / - ` ,
II / . / . ,. . Mill OP / l• '" -� „` -P- _ \ ,7 \ _ `\\ \ - ' - / / � r {\ � / 1 . f _ \ "6\i'
' 1 ; I � \ i
I 1 111 �•.� ` at r _ _ _ _ 1,s _ l: ■ ; ' \ ' / , / Ci - I / '', / 1 - - - __ ' r ,,;. /. •
� i , ;',,,•1/4/?..''. ....•;,/,,,3-,.;;;•15......1:,..----•_;--,..t.11:-..--.._ 7 .-_� l r \ \ 1 \ � , • ,.� - ,""f�.�..�.�,(� - - - 'i , , ' - ice " • ' 1 1 i r _1 / / L 7, / /"/ ~ f • T \ . 1 1 \ \1 11 1 I/ 1 /, i - ' . ( � , „ - `J _ _' - '
7"
\ \ 1 \ ` I. i , ' • , / � `� 11 1 � , f 1 1 1 i�1ttil t 'y 1 1 1 / ,• ' � l `\ 1 I ` 1 '�' / ` i �?1- / f
' �•• , 1 /' 1 ( • \er •� ` rr ,/, 04„:...w. 1 1 1 111 ; ' „11+ ,,, , , s f - E ZJ , ;; _ I1 / ,• -- .
1 1 I- ti ,1 � � . "`` ` -ti / '/ , .• �� ••f'-t � �- r / -� ` 1 f , 1 f i � 'l, . a \ 1� !,'/,/ ,r - _ i I \`-- 11 • , \` • 1 \ I \ ,: ' '
� 1 `14; � � ` r / �I l r r.' b' : ' l/ / . " \ I 1 ..1' 4;;1 1. - /'' , f 41 / � �.,/1 . 4 , % r -' �/ , ` J�•t 1 , \ i
III '•.�'����� -•? rI �' 1 A .1\ , , q�'' . 1f, �` /- J , ^ 1' �'% r Tf _ / 1.01 - ..' l , . •
,�\I ^.A1‘ \ �.' .7, ' / • a. ” \ __ _ e , ' _ . _ / I , / f - _ _ _- - /r ) h 1 l \ 1 1 1 1 •
� \till . \\ \� ! l � { � - /. J 1 «""
(� `_
1 \ \ . ^ �_ , • = j / - -" .i• �: /-� _� --
.,.. 1 % 1io,� „\ 1 ! / , . \ J V` - 1 " 'y ' // , .,__ If ', - - -� �� ` � \ \��• i o \ �` / / � ` l\ i ` • \I'
' - 'V ,. - 1 1 1„ ,.. . .: -_ y
\\ �2 — � \. \ 'I � - - j2 J_ . _ , i _�/ i t • . R j if . �' , \/\ - `'. \ s , - ♦ 1* w r 1 y J ` 1 1, ice \ .4... �. . / ` `•-�`��_ ' r '� ,1.' 7 w , `,. , 1 �1
1 • \ • ^` _ Sy ' ` • r `_ / en T / 1 -_ ' , • !+\ /r -/. f.•
1 : •
%.11-
1 • J2 I \ `\\ ; ' 1 / \ \ 1 I � (' 0 • ). fvv ,<;-___ -' / i > : y. •
i , •\ ..... N I \ .`:-.1 V /i ••<-_-..,/- - \ it •
t, % 1 1 l "� • , «., 7. !., w , 1,.0 " \ •. x �,s .. f . V •' • �� I / % i \1,,1' 1. -�; , ''
\� \ 1 .Y \ I; '� / j am
- killik
IIIIII OM 111111 M = NM MN IIIIIII I MI IINI • S UM MN MI IIIIII Elli M
ew
i ,
A ri 6 1 C • D Ey
• -44 r pie- _a "n' r -- .r... -. _
Mr
/ 41144, ."' E �� r � IPr
litif : "'
I I . ig .162
•
•
• ! ... A ,..„ a StA k 'Won.. ipir
ice. ..11V r
• •
' ' ' • _�
1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ..Y _L _ " :
•2 ` .' .... • I—
�_ • _. r _
WY CO' — • _
Trail Plan - + .. •= �~
1
.....d
'-- Walkway /Bikeway �-• 1 • - .
.•••• Nature Trail �J le _ •_
• ® •
- ,—
Connection Points ..-1 - .. '
- - -.� ,: S. SIP
1 .
SIPS,
li
..
-•� `�
'• L; !, / 11 1 11 1
I lase - 1889
i _
•
•
•
1 I 45 •
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
- January 28, 1992 - Page 37
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
II
A. LAKE ANN PARK UTILITIES AND PICNIC /RECREATION SHELTER UPDATE.
Hoffman: Item a is to discuss briefly the utilities which went in at LakJ
Ann Park. As you've driven by you've seen the big...trenches. The wire is
down to the beach location. They've got the 3 1/2 inch forcemain sewer II
line over to a lift station in Greenwood Shores. B & D will come in and
restoration work and install the lift pumps and all those types of things
in the spring. Picnic /recreation shelter was taken back. Approval for
readvertising for bids for the City Council at their first meeting in i
January. Those advertisement for bids are going out this coming week in
the Villager and the construction bulletin. We open bids the third week •
February and hold my breath for a reasonable bid. The target zone right
- now is that it needs to be below 240 in order for it to be approved by th
City Council. Last bids came in at 5280,000.00.
Lash: But there's been alterations right?
II
Hoffman: Correct. There were some minor alterations in an attempt to
bring the costs down and hopefully this bidding climate now in the spring"
is much better than it was last fall. Our economy is somewhat weak.
Hopefully we have a better bidding climate as well as people will be hungr
for work. If all things work out right. The schedule is there.
Unfortunately this would put a completion date right at the end of the
beach season so we would have a nice beautiful, brand new building to close
down the beach.
II
Lash: Maybe we need that big Labor Day, our first annual Labor Day
celebration. Have Oktoberfest there.
II B. PENDING SUBDIVISION REVIEWS:
Hoffman: Item 10(b) is of interest, particular interest to the Commission
ThE fit Et , these are just information on pending subdivision reviews.
These developers have been in. Talked to the Planning staff. Discussed
park issues. Trail issues. Easement issues with staff. Preliminarily
bringing them to you this evening for some discussion. Especially on the
Bluff Creek site. These folks are real tentative. If the Commission is
going to want some park property, they want to know that so they can try t
incorporate that into their plan. Or if we want to take fees, that sort o
thing. This really brings about, the entire next area of development.
This quadrant of the city was developed with the business park, Lake Susan
Park and then Lake Susan Hills West and Chanhassen Hills back on the map. II
So that section has been developed. The next one which is coming in is
this entire ring... Essentially with agricultural fields or a large lot
residential now... Chan Business Park was recently reviewed by the
Commission and that's coming around. The Bluff Creek site which we're
II
discussing this evening is this particular location. As you'll notice,
I don't know if the topo shows through on the map...it goes from very high
ground on this end, breaks about here and drops essentially right on top oll
creek so it's a very odd site in that there is a lot of grading... That's
a concern of the developers...very little flat, high ground... Hans Hagen
Homes is the other one which is in for development. Again it's single
II
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 28, 1992 - Page 38
family residential in this entire area. Initial discussions have centered
around flag lot as being a 7 acre park. It's very wooded down in this
section with a hill coming up... It does have some flat area right in this
area... The other issue which needs to be addressed here is the trail
corridor coming down to this other segment. You have a section of it right
on the Bluff Creek site. We also want to obtain a connection from the Hans
' Hagen site down to this trail and by- pass...get onto the Bluff Creek trail.
And the Comprehensive Trail plan does identify trail segments around this
entire piece so as these subdivisions touch the adjoining roads, we need to
take a look at securing the necessary easements as well there to provide
for those trails in the future. Hans Hagen was in with the Planning
Director. Their initial development plan, site plan. It's not going to
fly so they're back out for redeveloping their site plan. Bluff Creek, I'd
' _ like to take a further look at. To get your directions. Take a look at
your site map so you know where this is. The service area of Power Hill
Park does touch this site and a potential service area of the Hans Hagen
park would service this site. It's approximately 75 homes which is e
difficult number. It's on the fringe of if you had a 125 homes, I feel the
Commission would feel a great need to incorporate some type of active park
site within that development. If it was 50 homes, we could certainly get
' by without it. 75 homes on a site which is very small, we can take about 3
acres. We have the obligation or the right to take about 3 acres of park
property. If we take 3 acres of park property here and create another
' small neighborhood park that we need to go out and maintain, and is it in
the best interest of the city to forego the park fee in this instance? As
you can see, this is about the break line of the bluff back up in here.
They just have to just continue the lots down in this area, in this
' remaininc,...Bl.. Creek when they encompass that trail. That portion of
the trail and this section may indeed just be a huge outlot. The thing
that we continually need to protect is naturally a developer comes in and
' they want to give you that outlot for park credit. The City ordinance says
that that's nct acceptable. Anything below the'high water mark just is
not, cannot be calculated into park credits so you have a battle right off
the bat. If the Commission felt that we needed to take 3 acres of this
' high oround, you can bet they're going to be before you pleading their case
on why they would not like to see that happen. So again so I can get back
to the people working on this particular site, this evening I'd like to at
least get your feelings on what you think on parkland and access to
recreational facilities as it deals with the Bluff Creek site.
Pemrick: What are they coming as the lot sizes here with 75 homes?
Hoffman: Can you pick it up on there?
' Pemrick: I can't. I have a hard time reading these things.
Lash: It looks like they're 16,000.
' Andrews: About a third of an acre roughly.
' Hoffman: Yeah, 15 to 20. Most of them are in right around 15.
Lash: How many sites are there in the Hagen?
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 28, 1992 - Page 39
II
Hoffman: Hans Hagen? 1
Lash: Yes. •
Hoffman: 140. 157. Something of that nature. 150 for a ballpark number,
Pemrick: Is that the same again? About a third of an acre.
Hoffman: In that site, no. They'd be about 6 doubles so about 6 acres. I
That flag lot up there is just over 7 and in our initial conversations, it
would be basically a wash. They would be willing to give 7 acres for the,
dedication.
Pemrick: I'm just thinking with that small lot, the 75 homes, I think the"
should have a park.
Lash: I do too.
Pemrick: I don't think they should borrow from someone else because that
reall, cramped.
Lash: How far would it be? See I would not consider Power Hill to he II
acceptable beca,,se if this area is now going to be developed with homes and
businesses, Audubon is going to be a substantial enough road that I
wouldn't he comfortable with children having to cross Audubon. In an
uncc•ntrclled intersection there wouldn't be any intersection there. To ge
to Power Hill. How far would it be from Bluff Creek if we had a sizeable
park in the Hagen site, how far would it be if there was a fairly easily
accessible trail between the two neighborhoods.
Hoffman: It would be within the half mile but it would certainly not be a
after school walk every day to go over to the neighborhood park. It would
be more of a special trip type of operation. Obviously there is going to
be considerable open space on this site simply because of the outlot that'
going to be there so the developer has to, site constrictions says they
have to put all their houses on this end and leave this end open. So there
are but they have to buy the entire piece. So then we want to take 3 acres
from them. We need to identify and obviously if we want an open field it''
got to be up on the high portion.
Andrews: All the prime land.
II
Hoffman: Yep. As all developers say, it's the prime land. It's going to
sell the best for them and you're going to take 3 acres. Essentially we'r
going to lose about $30,000.00 in park fees to buy that 3 acres or in
excess of that and we're going to need to identify a location where we'd
like to see that park and get back to them. Prior to redesigning their
site plan, they'd certainly want to come in before the Commission II officially on February 28th to present their case in that regard and then
it would take action from the Commission to proceed further.
Lash: Could you point out the outlot again?
II
II
II
IF Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 28, 1992 - Page 40
Hoffman: The low lying area would all be in this point. That's
essentially the high water mark down would just be grass, open area down to
the Bluff Creek watershed. Again each neighborhood and city has a focal
point. Whether it be a neighborhood park or a school or grassy open area
or big woods. Kids from this neighborhood are going to go down in that
outlot and play and if that fills the recreational requirements of that
' neighborhood, and we benefit by taking $40,000.00 in park fees, that's
great. If we feel it not, then we need to take a look at acquiring
additional land.
Schroers: What I would like to see here is a more clear overview of this
proposed site and how it fits into the area around. I mean it's difficult
when you're looking at these itty bitty squares and things here to get a
real good feeling of what's around. Logistically it's kind of hard. I'd
like to know right exactly where Sunset Ridge Park and Power Hill Park and
stuff fit in proportion to this and it seems to me this might be an
opportunity to capitalize on generating some fees. Some funds that we
could put to use in other places. It may be a good opportunity to acquire
some money rather than property but I just don't have a good feeling when I
lock at this as to how it all fits in.
-- t to make one comment and that is, if 75 homes go in there
wl, no pal K, I can guarantee you there will be somebody up here saying we
' don't have anyplace for our kids to go and play. You know you're going to
hear that. But I don't think we need 3 acres either. I guess I feel we
cou_. - ' meet the needs here with maybe something closer to a half or even an
' acre which is a totiot and a hoop to shoot baskets or something like that.
Lash: At least you have an open area. Throw in some playground equipment.
' The, cr cc there and fly a kite. They can shoot some hoops or they can
have iuct s quicky baseball. When you have just a third acre lot, you
can't pay anything on a third acre lot and even with the high water line
becE here, that's somebody else's property. Even if half of them think
' it's fire for the kids to go back there and play and the other half don't
ha,'e kids or whatever and they don't want the kids there, it's marshy half
the year and the grass gets real tall. They can't go back there and play a
game of ball or anything. So if we could pick a site that is high enough
so we could develop it and it would fill our needs but it would be more one
of the undesireable lots. Say one that backs up to Audubon. Maybe that's
' one that wouldn't be as desireable for them to develop or it would be one
of the last ones for them to develop anyway. Take one that's a peculiar
shape : like say 1 and 3 even. If you put two of them together, you'd have
almost a square but if you look at them both individually, they're both
' kind of pie shaped. That's kind of an odd shape for a lot to try and build
a house on and it hacks up to Audubon. So maybe those are two
disadvantages that we could use in our favor. Although they're at the end
of a cul -de -sac which is nice for people, it'd really be nice for a park.
Schroers: It's possible that if you go, if you do something like you're
' suggesting that you could cash out on a deal. You could use 1 acre of
property. Collect fees for the other 2 acres and use those fees to
purchase the equipment to put on that property and have a wash.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
AM
January 28, 1992 - Page 41
Koubsky: Todd, do we know what Chan Business Center is doing? This abut"
there? I mean like your park location would abut the Chan Business Center.
We have trails that were proposed there.
Hoffman: Chan Business Park has the large outlot as well which runs nort
and south over the creek area. Right where the trail will go through.
It's essentially a commercial /industrial center with there's a 100 foot
buffer zone on the south side of their property which is on the north sid,
of the Bluff .Creek site. And there's a potential trail to run east and
west on that upper site.
Koubsky: So that might be a good place to abut a park would be on a 100
foot easement.
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: And' that also would make it more undesireable for someone abutting
the business.
Schroers: This is going to come up in front of us again I presume.
Hoffman: Correct.
Schroers: Can we ask that next time, is it possible to fit this into a
better o.,erla;' of the area so we can see how things are laid out a little '
bit better than this?
Hoffman: Okay. I simply brought this to you just as a pending subdivisic,
just SC you can get som idea. The site plan does show it hopefully in
sore context to Hans Hagen and Chan Business Center, the Bluff Creek site
and then it a 1 s. ; shows Power Hill Park and Outlot G. Just some words on, I
recently we've been looking at subdivisions and we're land grabbing and
that's gc'od. Vacant land is the first and irreplaceable to a park. The
money can come later but if we forego park fees on this site, we forego
park fees on Hans Hagen, there's going to be a year down the line where
we're nct goinc to have a capital improvement program simply because we
have no revenues coming in. ...or we take a minimal amount of the
revenues, we're going to be left holding the bag.
Schroers: Well that's exactly what I was saying with this density. This
looks like a reasonable opportunity to collect some dedication fees and in
still be able to provide something adequate for the community. Not
something that's only adequate but something that. would be acceptable.
Hoffman: It's a real tricky balance. We don't want to end up with anothe1
Pheasant Hill where we spend $170,000.00 to try and meet their needs. But
park service areas were set up for a reason and that's to accomplish what
is a comprehensive park plan and what is identified as meeting the needs.
5o again, I have mixed direction to give to the developer. I'll take that
to tho=se folks and we'll bring it before the Commission again in February.
Lash: You know another option that they may be more inclined to accept
would be, a couple of the lots that are right by the high water level and
then we'd end up with a.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 2S, 1992 - Page 42
Koubsky: A hill.
Lash: Well.
Hoffman: If you want a play area, we need to take something on the
I easterly third or easterly half.
Koubsky: I guess I think each area needs some sort of playground. It may
be an acre. I don't think we need 3 acres or whatever but I think they're
' far enough away from existing parkland. They've got roads and a railroad
track there. They each need some sort of area.
Lash: I think we need to look at each one individually. At the physical
characteristics and this one has several I think. You're looking at
Audubon. You look at the railroad track. You look at the fact that
there's a business center abutting it. It's kind of secluded as it is
right row.
Koubsky: Because we'll also have Sunset Ridge Court there and Timberwood.
' We'll have the school going north of it but they have bigger lots but they
don't hG,'e playground facilities.
' Schroers: Do you have what you need on item (b) now Todd?
Lash: What is the minimum that, I know that there was sort of some kind of
a pclic estaLlished at one time about the minimum that we would take for a
neiohbcrhood park. Just so staff didn't have to go out and maintain 50,000
half acre park=_ all over town.
Schroers: It was 5 acres originally.
Lash: Now we're talking about 1 acre.
1 Hoffman: One acre is half of the size of Carver Beach playground.
Schroers: You can't really do much more than a totlot. What else could
you do besides a totlot. If you put in a totlot, what else do you put in
there?
11 Pemrick: Volleyball.
Koubsky: Some open area.
' Schroers: Yeah, we could put in volleyball. Picnic table.
Hoffman: You're not gaining that much more open area than a backyard in
this area. That's the word of caution. We don't want to create, you know
40 more subdivisions of this nature come into the city, do we want 40 one
acre parks within our city?
Schroers: No, I think we're better off looking at trail easements and
connect them to a park that's more substantial that's going to serve the
area rather than give each little nook it's cranny. Definitely.
Park and Pec Commission Meeting ,
January 28, 1992 - Page 43
Hoffman: It's an issue which needs to be addressed because of the I
accessibility and that type of thing. Bluff Creek corridor would provide
access, safe access to the Hans Hagen site. We could negotiate with that
site and acquire land closer to this site. Closer to this end of the
corridor. Open space and that trail, it's not a traditional play structure
which we identify with but it does provide recreational activity that pie
of it. r
Schroers: Well we did want some diversity in our parks. We don't want
them all to be the same thing. I guess there's nothing wrong with just II
having a green space and an open area and it doesn't have to be overly
developed. It can just be maybe maintained to a point where-people can
create their own type of fun there. I mean keep the noxious weeds down.
some mowing and that sort of thing and just give them space so they can d
whatever they wart to do.
Pemrick: How about requiring larger lot sizes?
II
Hoffman: Back to the Planning Commission.
Perrric k: What do they say?
II
Hoffman: - 71e, ' 1 i go through that and they have the ordinances set .. .
Erickson: Todd, how far did you say that this Bluff Creek is from the Ha ill
Hagen? That proposed 7 acre park.
Hoffman: The walk from the Bluff Creek site would be just over a quartet
mile. It's within the half mile service area. You could go north through
the CDC site underneath the railroad tracks. Take an immediate left them
and go abc jt half a block and you're at the Hans Hagen site. Their
original proposal put an on street trail through a portion and then you
cross tht ravine and you're up into the park area.
Erickscr:: You say it'd be about a quarter mile? I
Hoffman: Yes, just over a quarter mile.
II
Schroers: I don't think that's an unreasonable distance to get to the
park. I mean at some point in time you have to take responsibility for
yourself. If you feel that your children are too small to go that quarter !
of a mile by themselves but you think they ought to go there, then you've
got to take them there. I mean you can't dump a park on everybody's
doorstep where everybody can look out their window. 1
Erickson: Plus it's not really a quarter mile across Audubon or something
.like that.
II
Hoffman: It may not happen. The Bluff Creek site may develop fully in 4
years and Hans Hagen may be 10 years down the line so we need to deal with
that issue. It's something when you're in a developing city, you just
can't control.
II
IF Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 28, 1992 - Page 44
Lash: If that's the route we decide to take, let's make sure we have some
kind of an access site that's not going between two lots through to the
' Hans Hagen area to get to the park for these other people.
Schroers: Our service area was set up to be a half mile wasn't it?
' Hoffman: Yep. This will be within the half mile as Power Hill will be on
the fringe district. I'll lay that out for you.
' Schroers: I think that's something we can work with.
Berg: Plus if you build close enough on that end, on the other side, the
other people from Hans Hagen could use the school if it's built too.
They'd have access to the facilities there, if it was built there.
Horfms,n: Okay. Anything else?
Lash: Do we need a motion on this thing?
Hoffman: N: D.
Schroers: Okay, we beat item (b) to death. Quite an indoctrination for
' these guys.
Berg: This is normal right?
Schroers: No. Sometimes we bleed a little more.
C. STATUS REPORT, SKATING RINKS.
Ruegemer: Just to give you a real brief, tell you what's happening with
the skatir rinks in Chanhassen. We did have a mid- winter warm spell right
after the first of the year where it did get really nice out. Typically
unseasonatle for January but it did do the skating rinks very much good.
Basicall; what it did do is we had to close down the rinks because they
' were getting very slushy and very dangerous to skate on. Virtually it did
create a...almost we had to start over again. 5o what we really did hope
for was to get some colder weather in, as we did and park maintenance crews
did shave and get the ice back to where it was functional again. We opened
up back again January 25th and we have been open since that time.
Hopefully with weather cooperating that we can, this week is going to be
warm again the way it sounds. Up to 40. 38 tomorrow and 40 by the end of
the week so hopefully we can squeeze through this week and get to where our
target date of the 16th of February, weather permitting.
Lash: How do you set that target date?
Ruegemer: It's just kind of an approximation.
' Lash: It'd be nice if you were going to have an approximation, to have it
after energy break.
Ruegemer: I think that's the middle of February too.
1
I D
1
' 3
i Ro • u
1
O i - y t O a p i po �' i J • i
O TO '`
ft
en 1"- " .).
1
,-/'',' ‘...‘ . / / ;; (2 ._ __ ;,_, , -- ' -- , , \ ,..,7 . .f : U ._ 4\ , , Li_ IL.._,..,_ / ,
.{:-
' b,-- - -jr / ..,_i -, -■— s ------e ' , i
- ?, /''.� ; c -, � a - --/ ( 1 •
�, -.rte •
11 , �. - `� � :.1
-=--------=. � ----___ - --.
'/_ C a . . \ to c
P • " / � '� . /- ‘,•', • rZ -ice--\ - - --- -- / �^ _ }
may J�.� / / I - �— — — —
-` ��., I _
� " \� - C � �/—��— ,—,. 1 = • � \ : dam^
.� r w
. r‘ ‘-,
I f, 5-,- Ft.., e\i.
_,
.,__ : . f..
('' : / , I CN i .f. 6- ! t "- - ' --- -___
/ ti ' ci. li :: () -' 1 fl .--- ) ------ ) ,?A
--; :;) fr.:.! ; ! ( ---'-N
3 �r tl e J 3i _' �. ; ' jt —' '-", }I �
1:111.1:1•P J11113:121 i ` _� = �._.._ 0111;iiih t i:li- -,4., I is � ,V /T�r i,Vw/ /Triii`` 1 .„/ Q
•
I "'3 ;; 3 it it • _'
r .. z \ 1_. ,..... ' , : 1 1 . lit
S
z B LUFF CR ESTATE. EM ' =-- James R. HiII, inc. 1
- EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TREE INVENTORY
i o `�-' o v ow, RONNERS / ENG�NEEQS /SURVE
b - KEYLAND HOMES 7n- • "K.. ?wog c1. •o •4 • wasvul... •fat
' I...S.4ll •••■•• •v•a.na1. 0. ••11 - a_1_...' Vi-011041.• ••••?•f.. 1
■
I 1
' I — - - -- - - --
i
• � j - 4� r,,�j l m
Ij: �c x
I , ' ,1 1,1 1 ' • i !r �_ �f;
1 , t ? n
I � I :1>: 1 ` 1.1 (•I H Z F 11
. I I rn ,
PI 0 r . c ' , j a�' Fq wri. " .._ • ".- J ' t. 'i t; ' . >,,,
z .. ', '
c. ! O
� __ f j am - --:-4_ � ' .. •
4 ∎ S j g ■
s .. . j I •• 8 . : c
s i
• \<... ; . 7 j /... ,. — —
�. j
la
E v € : I ? . —� I y 1 1t Y' : ' t 1• '
\^ \ is r' t I i o ' B "t - - - --
Ig
2 -....'\ \ \ _______., . \ . .. - ..„,_ I T- A.. .1. . ..---
;S:1 ,;t-----.-1----• i , ' j _ ti • - a I�. • a j"
' . 1 [ 6 i -. —z-,-
� r L. E L —
i:1 .: j ?Ill ii f I -7:‘-' s
!e t F
1 I (fi�I t Fj a 1 I! - - _ �
i1� {i i - — -- -7 I - -
if a1;;J FI tC
40111 :� ` /�
1 g l t _a: .� 1�.1..�J 1
1 6 7 3 6 itf e i t -
= '"ba6" ° °O� .. .•, S -.- -- ..
�• 3i `
F Fi1 i$"' c : L ^ on r0 7 s •\ r � q
4 4 is -7 0
• :E:- '_ zsz
I •
$ II BLUFF CREEK ESTATES
, x I I 1.7,•..,3 �r. _ _ = James R. Hi
II, inc.
Q b PRELIMINARY PLAT & PHASING PLAN =--_= PLANNERS i ENGINEERS
E I I I I I N KEYLAND HOMES r ac�J ar MO• t3• io .3 • NEE t FORS
• •a.• ...SWILL. ••w• ILL.. r ..... _.1Q�_.S VT..?.O.. ••t!30.34.
i , , ■ ,
I - ______.— L. .
II
is -
I \ 1
■
1
•
1
•
1
(5 D l.'
='r..- o -. ii 3:
- 0 G /\..- k . -- 1
1
.- m-:. ,.)y. ,%,. ,,, -,.. :.,,
.. N L i>75..)-- - _-,--\--e-i_
= 0- .E. , , .., . 7 ,,. .
�_ / \,... i .° b b �.' I
1 ( I $
J I <. -- III _ i ii \ !'. -
-- i 1 1 , Y -• ? 1 I
1
! v NT 0 1 ,--''.::::. '
\ \ a---__.-1------7 oa T—� L` @ 6 ` � �.
• rn
‘7, I •:," •-• --- b -- ----------: ----C\ ki-- _ I .. — R ° Csi.7 tea.\ \
o
i — 's
o ���e ��Sy��� �' : s ic O --- �'!
T "'� '_ G� ° 1
,„
0
r -- -- _ ,
____ I- - -�``— 1
o
i
4
C a ' y - - r
f I E l i f ri9ili 't! it 1`.
F
fb t.1 ? i,,q, if 11 ii qi iiii t 'Id
1 1p ifli'i $ 1 1
3 r q �
thlp k l ..,:, - z t i,.l - , 11,1.1; 2
' 1'.
S I ■ ESTATES
: BLUFF CREEK ES
l d 1 ! • - .. , S Ja me s R. Hill, Inc. •
w ^ ^ " � - : i PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
8 - +« R ONNERS ENGUlEERS St>iNEroR
• I K E .'AM O HOMES we. r• .o .: • MAWSKar..• ••a
'4." ,,,,..,,,,,t • •v.•lvllll, v. 4 }. • • p. tp.• r .} I•Pt }..
1
' -
;q I
_i
1 .
1 1/ . ....- - -,\ .1
-
a ... ,
•••-■-•-- ___ Z . . ••,- ___
— --------- ----.-4- ,
i , -,-/----.-------- ------
. • _sr.,' --- -: — ------- 11
I — — — —
__ ....
t
------ 's.
\ _
i .
_.--
I : • l
'1
- -.
. • 1 . 1
_
1 - --- - . - -- 0
- --
. b _
: a 2 rl il
• I; - -
___
i
. . rif /-
_ - ,e
,/ v ' -- t'-:, \ • . —r ii
..-----;
C
1
- .
---------•,--; \! I ...
‘i - -:-.„. -__, _ -----_ -
-43 ‘litt- . ... , :,..... - 1...-..; ,- -- - LL7---_-_____ --------.. -------_,-
1
-'. .
7/ _ . a .. - N i t-4.- . ;--:- /41.‘,....,.......\- -- - - - - F <
• • f......„ „,...--" ---- .. -- .,.. , 41 . 4 ■, . , , ;,,..-....,„.,
- -. - - -
, 1 WA ,,.... J t r- -',4 - -_ *' 7 ,41 l' • ; i *
itr.-: la Mat 41‘, OW z .
I -
- - .
s ' / ,
," /
//
•-. • -
t•f_ RPM". - -- s '•: - --. - t' 1 L,:: _ *
` . _
— 4 11 . MIK
2r
140 • - 1 ::
L.'''. •••••••••--., " ''' ,,P •••10401rt. -41 411141p.r, 41 4111,r4p2- - -, ---....-:: s ‘ ' ,._
... 0.---t- litek fa '9' 4fk •
t,•'. :;..7 s -V# 11 • < -041t1 °. 1 409 - ' ,r .4. \ w //^
-----'--C--' • / /\. • .. ,...„--- ..-- -- — 3 " - ---' ?" / 4 I R 7 j 'W 4 --;\ N yl, ''. / — — — —
7 7
.• i O.- „......-. pA ,-!-,. __:., .-_-__ --.. -,.(,
,,..,..., . ,.. -, ,_ . . , ,.,,,, • _ ...... , ... (ilt,s.u.- . If \
1
- ,., ... . 0. \ i .110.4.! ? 1 ■ s
/ / 7 , ,--/ / 5 .e -, •;/:'k ' k•,..-7—,--\--f - • - eV' 4) '/. \_ , .N 'L .
. . ,
---- I A\ s'i• 1
,ij /
1 ■
. 1 I'.... 14111; ' -:"••• d'iNgter ' :a2valt „.-v /
) ,,.: . • 0" 41110r \ . N
\ 1 IVIFfik
..• •••' •'• \ • 1 ■ • - . .k; .1.-'-IZ4 4V
I C (y ' " NU 4 -'-- -. 111: cp
• i ,i/ , I ,I; :.. k -....„ •
., • ,. 1a.._.4. ---‘ '7'• '
, _ Ntaaill16-1111 ;
„ i
, 1, . \ '',:. r-,. : ,- • .... 0 • ,.
- • ••• - . ' -: — — — —
111
- / / \ \ • ,::-; IA • ! I 'IL_ kw 41..4 i ........- ,.
.: . 1 / ' N. :.,,,, \ , \\ • V 7 i 'l , r
j
i / \ - 4 • i
• , • 4 , ...
wi r--P - r• - ■ . : ,.... ..
t •
I ----':-7 - . ' -- - :• - .\ \ -.' ‘ . ti....',‘.„-trimatiii •iw -L . kliP - -- N
..,-,-., -- - .‘ -, •- _ --,,,::: . , c , • ,-.-, .....A.... „....„ 4. 1_ I - .rlikoptorff ' .
'II- ',.. ":,-. _ , • N'.,:: - — -r-''' rai r f -r -,:- c-71,-...;-- , '-- -It ..:-.:
. •••-zo / (
-,7 ,, ! / , -• • -, . . 8 ..,_--, ,.l . C. 0 J
, ' , ,"' ':-__-., . ' .-'--..•• - -_, . , ...,. 0 - '. %, - ' ,i' fii ....‘ .
i• -•-..• .• ,, ,„ •/=, , •- - • .,. ,.: , •-• ,- i lart
I .//, ---(=, ' : -,• ;., ', " . -', - /.-- , —
, • • " -
------.7--.....__ -
: , •
- ---- ---....
....._.: ; , , . , _ _..._ •_ -.._ _
•
, .• • _ – I" ' 1 0 -- --- ,
I -',-1. • '
' ‘C ;' ''' ' I •
-• 1 ,..:: .: • :
. ,
r . , , " •
• ' - • L r P .
, t; f. - -- .- ' ---_ ---.■,
' 7,C . ' . - . ' : -• .. _ , . .- -- - „ -
. \
e •
. -.
. -
, • : , - .CZi , .. -) ' , -- . :. , •
- -
. - -
'.. .,j.-...... s.____ _ . __
..,--- -
( . .7 .. • --- '-L? - :
Y ---s--.. - • / -------.----------'
1
I •-
.II f. -...F=..-..-_,z • 1 • .
-:x
illii ..f i5
I
I i i
I I
tNem.■!
.1
••• ; ..1 ; '
BLUFF CREEK ESTATES
...,
•
I II( James R. Hill, inc I
I Iil
3 ' : c l• ' '' ; PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN ..,;:-.:::;::
a 4,;'• "
1 ' ! KEYLAND MONIES r..7.:".:. PLANNERS / ENGINEERS / SUPNEroFrS
'11■.2..."•••• MO N• C , • *V • 1 • 110.3w.t.L... IS Sr
I= . 1=1 NM • MN MN = MI NM N IIIIIII E MI IIIII MI NM NM MI =
-
I I I I / 1 U 1i
a y
I I ,.1-.. I 1, ri.:1 S! I , !Wilt 11 l 1 // N
-__!_ I I I I/ = W iN
I 1 / I D \ q I 10 I q I q I la I n !{ 1• 1 t2 E • i
• 1 ► �Z •
J W •
i
•
1
• � 1 1 1 I I I E g ` I W
1 1 ► 2
. 5 ROAD C • • "r = 1 D. F
• I I / • .. I "INN,. I j 0071.07 • 1 \ / 'Z ` ' M ' I I j� x (] 1 i i '' i
j ! O `�- I! n M 10 � —� — ' IIi IIII► .__._..._._.
1 1 i ,,=.....,_
2.: 2 1 1
'' .----I . . ■ d rillff.. -.....,
•
/7 \ \ - 26 .
14 / 1 w Ix 1
I a 1 I Y wH Oa
N �I Z -
yI I Ix `� 1 I + WN O•
= S z
�� W • >"
/I , y Z W
I [0 [L Y.
1-1H1 4RIP I r• _-� — •►•0.032: SANITARY SINE* . MC[ 1•••• i
,•303 I.Ylu.r urt•
J W
- - 1 1 J ? , • 3 . / la / r I v I b I 1. \ xo \ ! J I - ' •- r•arostoN.rE: CO
1 I Et
_ /
.41K• WY. I rswu YTS .,,x:r rwu
r•r.x, 1 /'`\ / // ►
I / / / ( Nu.,,.N,.n II
,. / , _ t0.
• /1
D.IE
N a -••sx
•E NI f10.s
Soo. ..0
S[•EC .•D4[1 AO
o
• i IaI{
boo ft( •O
•
•
s..t(tlol 5
Minnegasco' •11
A Division of Arkla, Inc.
May 13, 1992
1
Ms. Sharmin Al -Jaff
Planner 1
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re: 92 -5 SUB, 92 -3 REZ, and 92 -6 WAP '
Bluff Creek Estates
Audubon Road
1
Dear Ms. Al -Jaff,
Enclosed are the prints for this project indicating that Minnegasco does not have facilities
in the area of this plat. We do have facilities at Audubon Road and Heron Drive. Natural
gas service is available to the proposed plat from the mains on Heron drive subject to the
1
rules and regulations in effect at the time of application. No additional gas main
installations are anticipated at this time unless the developer /builder requests gas service.
Minnegasco has no objections to this proposal. Should ou have any questions please contact
Y Yq P
me or the Sales Department.
Sincerely,
Y
6,,2411/
Richard J. Piton, P.E.
Senior Administration Engineer
Engineering Services
612- 342 -5426
pc: Mary Palkovich '
Jim Kwak
1
1
700 West Linden Avenue
P.O. Box 1165
Minneapolis, MN 55440 -1165
1' .
CITYOF
I � CHANHASSEN
1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
�f (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1 MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I
I l�
FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician /�
1 DATE: May 28, 1992
SUBJ: Review of Preliminary Plat for Bluff Creek Estates - Keyland Homes
1 LUR File No. 92 -10
1 Upon review of the preliminary plat, grading, drainage and utility plans prepared by James
R. Hill, Inc. dated May 4, 1992, I offer the following comments and recommendations.
1
Grading and Drainage
1 The overall development is proposed to be constructed in two phases with the initial phase
proposed along the easterly portion of the site adjacent Audubon Road. Ultimately, the
I entire site will be regraded along with construction of two retention ponds along the
westerly edge of the property. Since the retention ponds are located in the far westerly
portion of the site (Phase II), the initial phase should provide for an interim or temporary
I retention ponding to address water quality issues and fulfill the City's storm water retention
ordinance. The plans do not reflect any interim ponding or sediment basins and it is
assumed that the applicant will not be constructing the entire storm sewer at this time.
I Therefore, it will be necessary for the applicant to provide interim ponding with Phase I of
this development.
I The first phase of construction proposes grading the rear lots adjacent to Audubon Road
to drain southerly along Audubon Road to Bluff Creek. Audubon Road currently exists as
a rural type roadway with a ditch section. Any increase in the amount of runoff will create
1 additional turbulence and potential erosion problems downstream. It is recommended that
the applicant's engineer redesign and raise the lot grades to minimize the amount of runoff
towards Audubon Road. Eventually, Audubon Road will be upgraded to urban street
1 standards with concrete curb and gutters similar to just north of the site adjacent to Lake
Susan Hills West 3rd Addition. It would seem prudent to grade the lots adjacent to
1
t4.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff 1
May 28, 1992
Page 2
Audubon Road to be conducive with future urban design standards, i.e. eliminate ditch
section, build rear yards up to drain out to interior street (Road "E ") where practical.
Street grades are not shown on the plans based on contours; however, they appear to be
acceptable except along Lots 25 and 26, Block 2. The street grades in front of these lots
appear to exceed the City's ordinance of 7.0% maximum grade. Therefore, a variance may
be required unless the developer's engineer redesigns the street grade to fall within the
City's guidelines of 0.50% to 7.0% grade. Staff believes this can be achieved. The proposed
house pads, in this same area, are approximately six feet above the street grade which
equates to approximately 13% to 15% driveway grade which is extremely steep. Typically,
the City requires that the driveway grades not to exceed 10 %. It is recommended that the
developer's engineer redesign and lower these lots so the driveway grades do not exceed
10 %. 1
Storm runoff generated from streets and lawns is proposed to be conveyed overland via
surface drainage to a series of storm sewers which will convey runoff into two retention 1
ponds. The applicant's engineer should submit design calculations for the storm sewer and
retention ponds. Storm sewers should be designed for a 10 -year storm event and retention
ponds shall retain the difference between the predeveloped and developed runoff rate for
a 100 -year single storm event. The outlet of the pond shall be designed to restrict the
discharge to the predeveloped runoff rate. Ponds shall also be constructed to "NURP"
standards to improve water quality. 1
As part of Phase I construction, no storm sewer improvements are proposed to be
constructed. Road E becomes a very long street with no storm sewers. It is recommended
that the applicant's engineer provide an interim retention or sediment pond and storm sewer
plan to deal with street and lawn runoff.
Staff recommends the applicant supply earthwork calculations to the City to determine if
the site earthwork balances or if the site requires imported material or to export. Staff
requests this information to determine if appropriate traffic signage will be required or if
additional financial security requirements are necessary.
1
Utilities
Municipal sanitary sewer and water sewer currently is not available to this site. However,
the City has authorized preparation of plans and specifications to extend trunk sanitary
sewer and water facilities down along the west side of Audubon Road which will service
Phase I of this site. Phase II of the development will be serviced via a gravity sewer line
from a proposed trunk sanitary sewer which the City will be extending north from Lyman
1
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff
May 28, 1992
Page 3
1
Boulevard adjacent to Bluff Creek. The applicant will have to cross over Bluff Creek in the
1 future to extend sewer service to Phase II. Depending on the City's trunk improvement
project scope and timeframe, the utility lines may or may not be operational by October,
1992. The City's project will include special assessment for both trunk and lateral sanitary
' sewer and watermain service to this development. The preliminary plat is dedicating
sufficient right -of -way and utility easement for installation of the City's trunk sewer and
water lines.
' The utility layout proposed on the utility plan sheet is fairly well laid out. Hydrant spacing
tY Y P P tYP Y Y P g
may be of concern to the Fire Marshal and require additional hydrants. The Fire Marshal's
rule of thumb for hydrant spacing is typically 300 feet apart. There are some areas that
exceed this limitation and will need to be modified. Watermain sizing is not given on the
1 preliminary plans and should be evaluated by the applicant's engineer. Detailed calculations
demonstrating sufficient fire flow during peak demands should be supplied to the City
Engineer for review. Final construction plans may be prepared in conjunction with the final
' platting process. Utility and street construction plans and specifications shall be prepared
using the City's most recent edition of the City Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
1 Streets
' The preliminary plat proposes a loop street with two access points on Audubon Road. The
access points appear to be located to accommodate future extension of the street east of
Audubon Road. It appears the site distance of the southerly access is acceptable based on
' MnDOT's standards. The right -of -way is proposed at 60 feet which is the City's urban
standard. It is assumed the streets will be constructed to the City's standard 31 -foot wide
back -to -back street section. Street grades are not provided on the plans, however, based on
1 contours, it appears the majority of the street grades will be under the 7% maximum grade
per City ordinance except in the area in front of Lots 25 and 26, Block 2. It is
recommended the applicant's engineer review the grades to see if they can be reduced to
meet the City's ordinance. Staff feels confident that the streets grades could be negotiated
to fall within the City's guidelines (0.50% to 7.0 %).
1 According to the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study, Audubon Road is classified
as a Collector Class I street. This type of street requires a minimum right -of -way of 100
feet. Audubon Road currently exists with 66 feet of right -of -way, 33 feet on each side of
centerline. The preliminary plat proposes dedication of an additional 17 feet of right -of -way
to arrive at half the necessary right -of -way together with an additional 20-foot drainage and
utility easement to facilitate trunk sewer and water improvements the City has proposed
along Audubon Road.
1
1
I
Sharmin Al -Jaff
May 28, 1992
Page 4
1
The site currently contains an existing "Chaska" house which driveway accesses onto
Audubon Road. It is recommended with Phase I construction the driveway access be
eliminated from Audubon Road and relocated to access the northerly loop street (Road E).
A driveway access easement would be required across Lot 7, Block 2. Staff feels this would
be a safety improvement by reducing the amount of access points along Audubon Road.
It should also be pointed out that Lot 9, Block 2 should also gain its driveway access off of
the interior street (Road E) and not Audubon Road.
The southerly road access proposes an island barrier at Audubon Road. This island should
be removed. If the applicant is interested in having an entrance monument, we recommend
that it be placed along the adjacent lot's corner. A deceleration and acceleration lane
should also be constructed along Audubon Road in conjunction with this development.
Audubon Road is constructed to rural road standards with 24 -foot wide bituminous surface
1
and six foot gravel shoulders. North of Heron Drive, Audubon Road has been recently
reconstructed into a 44 -foot wide urban section with concrete curb and gutter and a trail
system along the east side. It is anticipated that in the near future, Audubon Road may be
upgraded to urban standards as development pressures warrant upgrading. The applicant
should be aware that this development may sustain some of the costs for the upgrading by
means of special assessments.
Erosion Control 1
Plans propose erosion control along the westerly, northerly and southeasterly property lines.
It is recommended that the proposed erosion control fence be the City's Type III along the
wetlands (Phase II construction) and Type I silt fence along the north and southeasterly
portions of the development (Phase I construction). Additional erosion control fence should
be installed on Lots 7, 14 and 15, Block 3 as check dams, as well as, Lots 8, 10 and 11,
Block 1. The side slopes along the rear of Lots 1 through 5, Block 3 are steep,
approximately 3:1. It is recommended that an erosion control blanket be used on slopes 3:1
or greater throughout the development and that all disturbed areas be seeded within two
weeks after grading unless MNDOT's planting season dictates otherwise.
Miscellaneous
The preliminary plat proposes 15 -foot wide drainage and utility easements over the storm
ry
sewer lines proposed along the interior lot lines of the development (outside street right -of-
way). It is recommended that the 15 -foot wide easement areas be increased to 20 feet wide
to insure adequate room for access and maintenance vehicles. The preliminary plat also
1
1
1
•
Sharmin Al -Jaff
May 28, 1992
' Page 5
dedicates a drainage easement over Lots 7, 8, 10 and 11, Block 1 for a rear yard drainage
swale. Staff recommends that the drainage easement also be extended to include Lots 12
and 13, Block 1.
1
Recommended Conditions
' 1. All storm sewer drainage pipes should be designed for a 10 -year frequency storm
utilizing a rational method.
' 2. Storm drainage retention pond, detention areas and outlet piping shall be designed
for a 100 -year frequency, 24 -hour single event using the "SCS Method" established
for use in Minnesota. The discharge rate shall not exceed the predeveloped runoff
rate. Ponds shall also be designed to "NURP" standards.
3. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the
current edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed
' street and utility construction plans and specifications shall be submitted for City
Council approval.
4. The applicant shall apply and obtain permits from the Watershed District, DNR and
other appropriate regulatory agencies and comply with their conditions of approval.
5. Watermain systems shall be designed to ensure adequate fire flow for the site.
Design calculations shall be submitted to the City Engineer to verify pipe size.
6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the
financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development
contract.
7. All lots shall access from interior streets and not Audubon Road.
8. Street grades shall not exceed the 7% maximum street grade per City ordinance.
9. A deceleration /acceleration lane shall be provided on Audubon Road.
10. The final lat shall be amended to include expanding the 15 -foot wide drainage and
P xP g g
utility easements to 20 feet wide and extending the drainage easements through Lots
r 12 and 13, Block 1.
1
1
1
Sharmin Al -Jaff 1
May 28, 1992
Page 6 1
11. All necessary permits shall be obtained from the pipeline company for any grading
I
or construction activity within the pipeline easement.
12. Fire hydrants should be spaced approximately 300 feet apart throughout the
subdivision in accordance with the Fire Marshal's recommendations.
13. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored with seed and
I
disc- mulched or wood fiber blanket within two weeks of completing site grading
unless MNDOT's planting dates dictate otherwise.
14. All areas disturbed with slopes of 3:1 or greater shall be restored with sod or seed 1
and wood fiber blanket.
15. The developer shall provide adequate access easements for maintenance rP u ose to
P
the proposed retention ponds.
16. The final lat shall be contingent upon the City Council authorizing and awarding
P g P tY g g
a public improvement project for the extension of trunk sanitary sewer and water
facilities to service the site.
I
17. Until Phase II improvements are completed, interim sediment and /or retention
ponds shall be constructed and maintained by the applicant to accommodate Phase
I storm runoff.
18. The applicant shall amend the grading plan for Phase I to accommodate future 1
upgrading of Audubon Road (urban design).
19. The grades on Lots 25 and 26, Block 3 shall be redesigned so the driveway grades 1
do not exceed 10 %.
20. The applicant shall supply earthwork calculations for both phases to the City I
Engineer for review.
21. The center island shall be deleted from the southerly access street (Road E). 1
22. The existing driveway to the site shall be relocated to access from the northerly loop
street through Lot 7, Block 2. A cross- access easement shall be conveyed to Lot 8,
Block 2.
23. Erosion control fence along the westerly portion of the development (Phase II)
,
g YP P (
adjacent to the wetlands shall be the City's Type III. Additional erosion control
1
1
1
1 Sharmin AI -Jaff
May 28, 1992
Page 7
fence (Type I) shall be installed on Lots 7, 14 and 15, Block 3 and Lots 8, 10 and 11,
1 Block 1 as check dams.
I jms /ktm
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
1
1
111
1
1
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CITYOF
CHANIIASSEN
- r
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 r
MEMORANDUM r
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal r
DATE: May 7, 1992
SUBJ: 92 -5 SUB, 92 -3 REZ and 92 -6 WAP
Bluff Creek Estates, Keyland Homes
1
Comments and /or requirements:
1) Relocate the two fire hydrants as shown on plan.
2) 10' clear space around fire hydrants. r
3) Street names must be approved by Public Safety.
4) Please indicate radius cuts from Audubon Road to proposed
road F.
r
cc: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
Jim McMahon, Fire Chief
Bob Moore, 1st Assistant Chief
Richard Wing, 2nd Assistant Chief
1
r
r
r
r
ti PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
9.29096;:5 G962.9 :CC" 11,'3111.5 +u a )11i•5�.. •"6 Ls,.
•
�,.
..•�1,� Moog `•� s S3WOH ONV�A 3)1 m g
S80A3AynS/ 203m0N3 / Sl13NNT1d - " ° ` O ' ' . „ a
11 `v NVld All'1I1f1 � A ki `dNIWll3Fld • " p W
'DUI �111H • S N N355•HNVND _ O O C�
1 w S31b1S3 )133FJO ddfll8
v f
_ a
II ti'' C _ _ =F
i ��
b . ��
r 3 Q.
o i'l
I
1
a
__,....___
____..
1 �p F. .....
.. , , ,
b -- 2 a • -' . O \ \
•
/1 - 4 - i ---- :,; . E:1 1 - -� \
:— - i
i F■X
i .
,L:--c\ I- -,\:—
\1/4% 1 t a; .
.. 2 1 : ''' T" \ ,. i ......,,,,,
F . _
- i : -11 ., :'
01101k „
'I
., o c J
I
I •
I
I I
I
I
I 1
„ma
.--- • I 1 1 •
/ 1
. .
' I I I L) ,„. i F•
•
0
•
I a / /
.,..„0,.....; r.:,,... . % q
1 .•:. 35 4-n 1 w.u...:tst:Ar. /
1 !
I .,---,--r- ,....,-, _4 4/.__4;-,„r, „L., 7" ■ S..,
. “. ..
I
1. ;-- 12 44 13 14 1 5 16 t? .4 19 .4 19 44 ;„ - C4 g • I':
. , _--- - 1 - . ;6 1 i s---,== 1 Z a .
'.••■ - - KORN' 6 1. ;
2650 2' .. --''': •1 . 1 . , Li) . " ■.-
i •
•
•
• •
■ • •
of 0.1 9: • Orl - -....•
4. 5'.. , •-• 1 .--,- 0
It 1i •I• ,i
._ . .09,,59., ',•••.,99,, •,,,900 100000 .5.0000 1.0000 i MOOD., .156002 I.. 22,50.1 :
1
!
1 ,..„..,... ___ ./ 1 -
CU ,, , z.
. Q.
e , i i r...---r,..P.•
.777 . ..3 , -,.....7.,...'1
L'..... f
,
■ i 50' ' ROAD E / 1 1 ."• ..--: ":),,. • I I
.31 9 -. .• ik -I, !
1 ,
. o
, ' 5 ;‘. .., ...................„....... .,- - .---.-----
I . ...
i , N .- , _ •
. . .....,,,, \ ' . - 1' .. • '" 1 , 'CHANHASSE
/ 111 ' 1 1 .. ■Ai
: I : T ' .1'. ' . `4, 194000 . ,, •
,,...0., 15.5000 A R . A A ,,, 2 22,800.1 , : v .. . - i , , 1
' •1 .1 . 41. 1 ', .
: I : . 1., .1.11000 ... • •4' ■I i. ' , •-- • - , - - • I 1 42 '4• i
I - ; •
. , .
,. . I , , 4 ,;,,,<\ 3 'V •\ \ F \ y";
.,,:, .,,,,, .5.00001 op • .2 12,9000
, . T I
,., ... ,
2.....: ‘ 33 34 : 1 I 2 16 , 1:: :' ' : . 7,... *C"'"5?.4 0 8 E:1 52,5500 ,•• .,,, I
caAe„, __1 __.4 , • : .„, ,•!.;(.zzl.,: _-_-_•,!
. i , OUTLOT A i Y .... 1 , 6,5000 /
I ' E23 • I 19 ' ' . , ■ i ' r 1 ?
i
20,400.1 A: 233000 9 /5..-.S• • 4 ; . I V -. 0 . t% i, • • ;,‘ • • F..! " .F.
I \ 32 ,, 2 3 4 14 ',„ 35.700 ..t :d ... - „... ....-- - 7 - s . • ;;',... 1..
■ 1 ■ to-5 . .,,,, .54 T. i ,..„..
t • C9' - k
' 7 la 3 .4 12 ' • II T .0 ---)_,_ _ _ 1 .....
__. .......... ,
.....„,.......-7!--...„,......,- _____ i •.,/
: 1 i... __ ._._.-._.,-_7_3_. ''...••A-..'L.A.,12-,...al...50..3L-1...''-'-'. ''..-:"..' ' 4 . / s... '21°6" :::. 31
_-J ------
. _ , •-•, •
"
ie, •,., • 211.50:47
'''`, 2 ;,-..,
.5000 •• 17,,00d. 10,55 • 17.3000,, 21,0500. .o.........i-Vf:
1 ' I •
„••
2/\1, 20,00 s1.
T2,
- 144 II IS 0005.50 '
i•
LOCATION MAP 4
/ 0.5500 • .610 0 ,......A ,,____ ...., -___... _____ . 7 ,f 2, :-,
_t•
4.
i
A
' 2
.„ . 0,....._ ,
et
? 2. ,..
154. ,. ,.. .7 : -:',.) Ilk
Z
1
1 ..
...... .
2,0 ac•22
• I.• • . is,0000 4 '1 I
, •
3 W ,
• '
. / m000“ ,9,9 • , ,, It000 k ,,
.• . ' " 0
., .3.3•30., ; / 1
P,. 1; •. 24 I ,
` - u l Z S
-..,
116.500al ., .:, . 15.00 ,, r ,. . : j 137 i 1 . 15 ; r, „..5.0
1 /- En t:
' 4 .31000 / ..?,• .. 0 s 15000 s 5 1010 4 % .g ,y,
2 . • I • • R A. , 1-• i X w ...
.• / :4 •A .
\
15.000•;Nr , / 114 Q (IC ca n r
1.100 1Y , • i.Y.•45 PEI1 GAOSS AC , 0 .
Ui 0
• 10.
i --- !”, „„....... 4% 15,900• 1 :* i 5000. 1 ' 5200 0 ' I .5. 200 .•-• max,. • .. • A I
15.020 3. r c..4:,.... c t(c
- „, I W 50 A':
U.I Zn o•-aa•
..., .• 'IN. . , I .., .. I , /
. 1 (... 1 .01 A L!...:1,6....
-k ,, ?..,- ... 1,,,, , 1570010 2 ,6 12 , -' 9150of . 0
I 6 00•14 AC Lu « 4 A Z
•-- -_... - --- 0 2 . 2
2340s 1 4. 1.12,14.42 l .7) 4010.1.• 20014•IL . IL I. .. T 0 • CI- i-
-,..; ,-. . •S ',-, i 56t(1)- a.IRA(. LT‘ •3112.o. rf...31 2 ...,E . it S. j t . ,.. 4
22.1000 ', Sy .• f • 'f
•• .• •o• ••• 44 / mirm.i01.1 ...07 2/2.1. AI Si MACY . 5. U- >• i `1,'
\ 1 ,
,' r ••
e'• i' ..
1 2 1..): 2/11•111 A 501.1064 • ILI CC
\ ',;,,,,:•:.... ,,,,,,,„ ,. 66,50, / 2425007161•00411 11.6002 i , 15. 000 15,13000 .15.500 21 ' ID.2502 1 / 41 ...:1114,2• --I Z
1:
7 ' \ 14 , , 45/ .6 I IT I 18 I 19 \ 20 \ 2
; • e 0 s 3 ..
-- - .
-
tl A:. ID
• ./ 1 CC ''
I r: :.•:.-..:,- •,:::. ...:'.:'12.C.7: / ,
• 01.11 .:3
a.
PHASING PLAN / / , - /
/ /
/ / / . .0., 1 A.1. 601 0041N.DONS Il run 2>
PHASE 1/-•• -.--• PHASE 1 / \ / 9 1 / / / 1 ARL SuBA. C1 10 1144. D.4 I
2 ,,,,..., I 2111121 II 11Y C110
1 1 / ,0 / / / 1 . , 2.2, 0 044. I• DT Ai 110 I. 1•02.
,
I \ ■ _.. / .. E N. L MING, INC 5 0 I
• 2 • ''''.... ' / / / / 4 9 I
I • ....• '2'2 n•-. , /
..... SUNR1DGE / 220012 142
I
4TH ADD-. ."..• , / ' -. - .7- -. -7 - / 1 . - -
.:1 • I f
I . ". • o . ' - ' / , /.. , . i ' L : 2 . 1 -:." . : i ii•
■ - . 1 " '
1 1_ . ... Cm 044 . 742 • $22 W. Ap61.11 N
I
t 41 . • WM,
Ann
1 "-------- 7. -- • -. --.. •,----..--,-...--- : nut tun 4 . Nom". Gm a Sal.c. 9 tamp a• .4 nose II ..... C. . • 3 ..
1,2 2 ,212 4 , 4•22inotp....th 4 • 44 2,222........
3RD ALM.;
• -, -•. = - .....,- , I .i... 1 Ccrunneno at. 422.22, cunn 22 saw ncnrou: Out,. 4 0 2 Nt nuas, 6. ,e. 1-•• ,,,
..1 .1,3■411 d..0,, WV, • (InLOYfd JI i ,1170•1 hl 4 ertd ,01 Cli 1
7 :: ' 7 ' .. ...L .... '''''' ...:: i 4. 414 44 . 1 , 4■•• • ....... cr.........,, Sown I my.. 3 I ntnoe• Co nt.t.no• I an ... . T•o•nn
• anutro a no GI tod co eo Sanovas. cane. co .2 Dcanesse Gnu. 22 . Nunn, L ..... •
.__- -
.....-....-./.-7•....:2 .1 / TYPICAL OPAINAG2 a.m.... SD 422,42 03 nouns OD wow, Nen a atun• ...• f t• DI .1 1..t en 22.32.
4 on •••• to an ennuue one. unn • an,....1 SI mow*. to ------ n I .3., at a....22.. et SC.,. I 1566
• 0 ----- Y EASE1444T5 TV 2 0 ion . In nuo.32.21.• • Yu Ltsa, soon al anaa • i a,...0 ou .6,0,4 • 2.2.. 1•1111111611111•141........
000 Lull... oe ovten• SunOS adunon 1...22.3.U• ult.., 2.0. Dna., Et 3.2 .1 0 100 200 . • 0 4 NO
na • Duet an.. >UN. mcn I a., 'No.' lown, NOM a rs,et, .. no., 1 utc2n • 2 21..
• nun. 4 551311.144 .T4 Donn.. 4.0 Dennunt °now ol . 02,14•41 ...on. and
.2 nu oun Donn., 221 2 T 7 .,
4 2.2........ . ' ...7'..K.
I •
I -
MN Ell an •1111 SIN 1111111 INN MI MI NB 1N111 11111 MI/ UM 111111 MI 11.1 all Ell
.
1 1 .
• CITYOF
1 II
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. SOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, M4NNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
r
1
I MEMORANDUM
DATE (mm /dd /yy): 05/13/92
II TO: S:.axn i.. Al J ff TITLE /TO: Planner I
THROUGH: TITLE /THROUGH:
II FROM: Eteve A. K,rchY;a:, k- TITLE /FROM: Building Official
SUBJECT: 92 5 S_B, 92 -3 REZ, and 92 -6 WAP; Bluff Creek Estates
Ihavt the following comments and recommendations on the proposed development.
1. The lowest floor elevation and garage floor elevation for each dwelling
II
should be shown on the grading plan.
2. The Inspections Division must receive copies of final approvals for
all corrected lets from the project's geotechnical engineer before building
permits will be issued.
II 3. The t•;peline easement should be shown on individual certificates of
survey.
1
1
1
1
1
1
.f
to 41, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 1
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(612)937 -1900
1
Date: May 5, 1992
To: Development Plan Referral Agencies
From: Planning Department By: Sharmin Al -Jaffa Planner I 1
Subject: Preliminary plat of 61.45 acres into 78 single family lots and one outlot; rezoning from A2
Agricultural Estate to RSF, Residential Single Family; and wetland alteration permit fo
development within 200 feet of a wetland, located south of Hwy. 5 on the west side o
Audubon Road, Bluff Creek Estates, Keyland Homes.
Planning Case: 92 -5 SUB, 92 -3 REZ, and 92 -6 WAP
8 ,
The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with thel
Chanhassen Planning Department on May 5, 1992.
In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review,`
we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on
traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need fo
acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where.
specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency
concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Connission and City Council. 1
This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on June 3, 1992,
at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your
comments by no later than May 18, 1992 . You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting ifl
you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated.
1. City Departments 9MN Dept. of Natural Resources
• Ca. City Engineer 8, Company 1
b. City Attorney W Ali or United)
lc.' City Park Director
L8.^ Fire Marshal le is Company
./Building Official NSP or MN Valley)
!22Watershed District Engineer 10. DOWDEN Cable System 1
fi Soil Conservation Service 11. Roger Machmeier /Jim Anderson
4. MN Dept. of Transportation 12. U. S. Fish and Wildlife
5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers er County Engineer 1
L 14 Other Williams Pipeline
1
WILLIAMS Ir
PIPE LINE COMPANY
ONE OF THE WILLIAMS COMPANIES, /N C.
' 2728 PATTON ROAD
ST PAUL, MN 55113
1/ May 14, 1992
Sharmin AL -Jaff
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147
' Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Project #1566
Bluff Creek Estates Development
N1/2, NE1 /4, Sec. 22
T116N R23W, Carver Co., MN
WPL Tract #7344
Dear Ms. Al -Jaffa
This letter is to confirm that Williams Pipe Line Company (WPL) is
in receipt of the plans regarding project #1566, Bluff Creek
Estates Development, in Chanhassen, Minnesota. I have forwarded
the plans to our engineering department in Tulsa, Oklahoma, for
review and comment. All plans must be approved by WPL's
engineering department before construction /excavation can begin.
Williams Pipe Line has one line that traverses the area in
question, that being our #6 -12 inch petroleum products pipeline.
All plans concerning excavation and construction on or near our
easement must include the following warning:
WARNING!!!
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS PIPELINE(S1!
Before Excavating Contact:
Tom Smith, Right of Way Coordinator
Northern Region
' Williams Pipe Line Company
2728 Patton Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(612)633 -1555
As per your request WPL can set up a time with our line locator in
the area to flag and stick the line for depth.
11 Sincerely,
Thomas C. Smith
ROW Coordinator cc: J.K. Myers
Northern Region C.K. Danchertsen
1 MAY 18
PHONE (612) 633 -1555 C:T
OF , F "
1 Or CH!' r
DOUGLAS J & C BARISNKY WAYNE & CINDY BONGARD I
O GARD MAR ON MICHEL
8731 AUDUBON RD 8831 AUDUBON RD 8941 AUDUBON RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317'
R W& C M ENTINGER CHARLES W MATTSON ROGER A & G SCHMIDT 1
8851 AUDUBON RD 2870 WHEELER ST N 8301 GALPIN BLVD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ROSEVILLE MN 55113 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1
GERALD & L GUSTAFSON AUDUBON 92 CAHN -LAND PARTNERS 1
8341 GALPIN BLVD C/O LARS AKERBERG 200 HIGHWAY 13 W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 P 0 BOX 158 BURNSVILLE MN 55337
CHASKA MN 55318 1
MERLE D & JANE VOLK HOWARD & L JOHNSON JAMES & BARBARA NELS
16925 CO RD 40 8250 GALPIN BLVD 591 HERON DR
CARVER MN 55315 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
1
CHARLES & DEBRA OLSON ARGUS DEVELOPMENT INC MICHAEL J & J COCHRANE
1581 HERON DR 18133 CEDAR AVE S 1751 SUN RIDGE CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 FARMINGTON MN 55024 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1
DONALD & MARSHA WHITE GERALD & KARLA ALVERY MARK & DEBRA LAASER 1
8850 AUDUBON RD 1831 SUNRIDGE CT 8037 ERIE AVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1
JEFFREY & GAIL MOODY 1
10334 ENGELWOOD DR
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
IF Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 19
Aanenson: Then on the boats on land, that would be included in total
number of boats?
1 Emmings: Well yeah. I was afraid, yeah.
Aanenson: Well canoe rack, we're assuming you can put 6 canoes in there.
I guess we can put it that way. Is that what you're assuming?
Emmings: Yeah, I'm assuming that the canoe rack is. Any boat that's not a
powered boat. A sailboat's fine. A 12 foot fishing boat is fine. I think
we lived through that when we talked about canoe racks originally. Canoes
are fine but not boats with motors.
Conrad: And you agreed with the power lifts?
Emmings: Yeah. And the rationale there is the lift is just one way to
dock your boat and why get into it.
Ahrens: Is there a second?
1 Erhart: Yeah, I'll second it.
Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that
the Pleasant Acres Non - Conforming Recreational Beachlot be allowed to have
two docks, one 96' x 67' in length and the second one 96' x 12' in length,
with space for 10 motor boats to be docked, continued use of the boat
launch, parking, chemical toilet, motor vehicle access, and swimming beach.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1 PUBLIC HEARING:
BLUFF CREEK ESTATES, KEYLAND HOMES LOCATED SOUTH OF HWY 5 ON THE EAST SIDE
OF AUDUBON ROAD:
A. REZONING FROM A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATES TO RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE
FAMILY.
B. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 61.45 ACRES INTO 78 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
C. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 200 FEET OF A
WETLAND.
Public Present:
Name Address
II Dave Johnson 821 Creekwood
Gayleen Schmidt 8301 Galpin Blvd.
Rod Grams 8640 Audubon Road
I Gary Horkey 3471 So. 173rd, Jordan
James R. Hill 2500 CR 42, Burnsville
Richard Schuller 2724 Isle Royale Court
1 Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
1
Planning Commission Meeting ,
June 3, 1992 - Page 20
II
Ahrens: Sharmin, I have a question about, on page 2 of your report where
you talk about Williams Pipeline Company with their 75 foot easement. And II
you state that, the third sentence down. Your questioning the design of
two lots, Lots 10 and 14, Block 2, that they're buildable. What about all
the rest of these lots? Like I guess Lots 11 thru 13 also and 29 and 30. 1
Al -Jaff: Usually when we look at a parcel, we make sure that you can place
an average home with dimensions of 40 x 60 feet. You can place a 40 x 60 II
feet on those parcels.
Ahrens: On these other ones?
II
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Krauss: If I can add too Commissioner. The easement is useable as rear
yard area. The home just can't be in it or a deck can't be in it but
gardens, yards, possibly even play structures I suppose can be within that
area. 1
Emmings: How deep is the pipeline?
Al -Jaff: Normally it's 3 feet.
II
Krauss: The pipeline itself?
Al -Jaff: Yes. II
Emmings: Is that all?
II
Al -Jaff: When we spoke to the pipeline company, they said becuase this
area has been farmed, they might have lost some soil but normally it is a
depth of 3 feet. '
Ahrens: But there's no problem with Lots 11 or 13? They could fit a
40 x 60?
II
Al -Jaff: We don't foresee problems with it. Unless they decide to build
extremely large homes which then we would recommend that they find
different sites.
II
Ahrens: I hope the City makes sure that there are signs put up in their
backyards warning them not to plant trees back there.
II
Al -Jaff: Williams Pipeline usually sends their staff to meet with people
that live along the easement to educate them about problems that might take
place if they should dig in that easement.
Ahrens: This is a public hearing. Is the applicant here?
II
Hill: Madam Chair, if I may. Jim Hill. Consultants for Keyland.
Ahrens: Sure, would you like to step up to the microphone please. 1
II
r Rlanning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 21
Jim Hill: Madam Chair, Jim Hill. Consultant for the applicant and the
applicant here is represented by Gary Horkey who's a principle of Keyland
Homes and Dick Schuller who is their sales and marketing director who will
speak to the two lots that staff had concern about. Show you how their
homes can fit on those lots. 10 and 14. And then Rod Grams, the fee owner
who'd like to speak to you about the homestead driveway. If we may.
Dick Schuller: We had an opportunity to meet with staff here a few weeks
ago. She gave us a chance to look at this and suggested that we come up
with a couple, some plans that would fit on the lot. What we did is we had
the engineering company... And the line that you see across the front
there is the setback in front of the house and your 10 foot setbacks on the
side. The line in the back is a 10 foot setback along the pipeline
easement. Now an FHA loan you'd need to be 10 feet away from that easement
because all these homes are, in the range where they're really not going to
be getting that basic financing so conventional financing you can bring
your house all the way up to the dotted line. So we're within 10 feet away
from that closest point. 10 feet away from the easement line.
Ahrens: What about a deck on that?
Dick Schuller: The deck would be on the west side but you're also 10 feet
away so you're 10 feet plus whatever this space is which is a good another
10 -15 feet on that side so you could put a real large deck there. This is
the house that one of our nicer homes that we'd be building. This is the
plan that. This would be the sketch if we got it platted out on Lot 14.
So it would be real easy for us to be able to build that house on that lot.
We don't see that as a problem at all.
Ahrens: Why does the City see that as a problem?
' Dick Schuller: It's really difficult to see sometimes on a small picture
so we've measured it out.
' Ahrens: Sharmin?
Al -Jaff: We didn't think that you could fit a house easily on it. It
would be a tight squeeze.
Ahrens: What do you think of what he's saying here?
Al -Jaff: What are the dimensions on it?
11 Dick Schuller: I had a little picture of it. This house here is 60 feet
wide and the deck on it is 34 feet. So it's not as deep of a house as 40
foot. That makes 60 of the different although when I think she originally
drew that up there was a concern about this 10 feet. Trying to stay 10
feet away from that back easement line. That really isn't a requirement on
a conventional home so as long as we don't need to stay within, as long as
we go up to the easement line... But it's just less of a concern because
' of that.
Krauss: It's our position that the developer has an obligation to
demonstrate that the lot's buildable in a reasonable manner. In this case
1
Planning Commission Meeting ',
June 3, 1992 = Page 22
it appears that he's done so. I would ask you to let the condition stand II
and we would work on this a little bit more prior to City Council. You
konw I don't think they're doing that in this case but if you can squeeze
certain building footprint onto a limited site and it doesn't mean that it
has a great deal of flexibility. In this case it looks like there is ampl
room. And I guess keep in mind though that again that utility easement is
a great deal of open space. It is not, I mean it's the termination of a II
buildable area but it's not the termination of useable space. But we'd
like to research that a little further.
Ahrens: Okay. 1
Dick Schuller: That would be your one lot. This would be the footprint on
that one house. The other one is just, even easier for us to work on. Thell
garage would be on, right there. We have movement left and right...street
real well and then curves the way... Lots of space for decks out in the
back on the left side here. Or we could put the house around here I/ directly...
Ahrens: Would you like to address any of the other conditions set forth i
the staff report?
Jim Hill: Madam Chair, the Keyland Homes accepts the report except for the
comment regarding the two lots which they've shown they can build on. And II
then Rod Grams would like to address the driveway on the homestead. The
other conditions are acceptable.
Ahrens: Thank you. 1
Jim Hill: I think he said he only has an hour to talk about that driveway.
Rod Grams: I've only got an hour.
Ahrens: You do? 1
Rod Grams: To keep you here. Thanks. I'm Rod Grams. I currently live on
the homestead and as most of you I don't know maybe are familiar with the
house, it's a Chaska brick farm home and it has a lot of historic value in
the area and we've gone to great lengths in this project to try and
maintain that historic value of the house. Part of the Planning or in my
view is we've tried to put it on a larger area because of the uniqueness of
the house to blend in with the rest of the subdivision. But to take away
those two driveways would destroy the character I think of the way the
house sits now on the site because it wouldn't then match with the other
three homes along the same street. So what I'm proposing is that the
driveways be allowed to remain as they are because it is only for the one
house. And again it would stabilize or maintain the integrity of the site
as it is and the way the house is there now. So if you take those
driveways out and to push it off to the back I think would not maintain the
integrity that is there now.
Ahrens: Do you see the driveways following the westerly lot line of 8 and 1
7? Lots 8 and 7.
1
1
IF Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 23
Rod Grams: No. I would like to see them stay where they are. The
existing.
Ahrens: Where is it now?
Rod Grams: They come out to Audubon Road. And like I say, it's only for
the one house so I mean you wouldn't get that much traffic from it but to
just leave the site as it is. Because to take the driveways out and to
change it, it would also change the whole apperance of the house and it
' wouldn't.
Conrad: Why would it do that?
Rod Grams: Because of the way it's setting there now. I think the way the
house is and the historical preservation efforts that have been made of all
the houses in that area. So I think to take the driveways out, I mean you
would change the whole appearance of what it is now. And we've gone to
great lengths to try and keep the house and to keep it and to blend into
this subdivision but it's unique and it should stay that way from the rest
of the subdivision.
Conrad: The driveway comes from Audubon and it goes straight up to the
front of the house?
Rod Grams: Correct. Between the house and the garage there on the side.
' Ahrens: It was a safety issue the city was concerned with right?
Al -Jaff: Correct.
11 Rod Grams: But it's there now.
Ahrens: But there aren't the other two roads. That Road E and Road D.
What's the minimum on a collector road?
Hempel: Access we consider 500 feet. I'd like to point out that Mr.
Grams, is there in fact two accesses to that lot?
Rod Grams: Yes.
Hempel: It's a horseshoe type driveway at this time so actually it's two
driveway entrances to that lot.
11 Ahrens: Do you want to maintain the horseshoe?
Rod Grams: It's been there all along, yes. I mean it's been there for, it
was build in 1900's so I mean.
Erhart: Yeah but you're tearing down the barn right?
11 Rod Grams: That's right.
Erhart: So I mean you aren't leaving it the same.
1
Planning Commission Meeting A,
June 3, 1992 - Page 24
Rod Grams: But we are trying to preserve the house the way it is. And thel
house is unique and to take it away and try to move the driveways out, then
you're trying to take a nice big old brick farmhouse and trying to conform
it to a lot where we're going to be building a newer house so it's not the ,
same. So we're just asking that the uniqueness that is there now, to stay
there the way it is.
Hempel: If I may add another point. We will be requiring deceleration andll
acceleration lanes into and from site and that may also impact the driveway
access to the existing house there.
Ahrens: I'm kind of confused about your vision of access to Lots 7, 8 and II
9. The City's. Sharmin, in your staff report you said it should be
pointed out that Lot 9 should also gain it's driveway access off the II interior street Road E. Are you expecting then that all three lots, 7, 8
and 9 have access off of Road E?
Krauss: No, I don't think that's ever been proposed. We would typically 1
put a condition in there just to make sure that that doesn't happen.
Erhart: 9 is the temporary one right? 1
Al -Jaff: Correct. That's when they will build a model home. It will be
sharing the existing driveway. That's where Road E goes then.
II
Dick Schuller: The reason we... This road right here, we're going to be
trying to be into the Parade of Homes this fall. Our concern is that this
street may not be ready yet so we were hoping to be able to come 1
temporarily off of Audubon through Rod's driveway to get to our house.
When this street comes in, then this driveway's going to go here across
from Audubon... So that would just be temporarily that will be hooked
up...just for a month until, and we're not even sure that that will be the II
case. It depends upon how long or where we're at on the street.
Emmings: There's nothing that keeps you from putting in a paved driveway II
over that easement? That's fine is it?
Ahrens: Williams Pipeline allows a paved driveway over that?
II
Al -Jaff: Yes they do.
Jim Hill: Madam Chair if I may. Exhibits indicate that driveways... II
Rod's talking about the homestead maintaining his own driveway along with
the Chaska brick home and not take away the individual access as there are ,
some other Chaska homes, brick homes on Audubon and not as proposed by
staff to bring a driveway from here.
Rod Grams: We want it to remain. I mean if it does have historical value II
and to have it retain that is important I think. I think the access there II
is going to set it apart.
Ahrens: Okay. Anything else? Thank you. Would anyone else like to 1
address the Commission?
II
II
•
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 25
Erhart moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
I/ Ledvina: One thing that I noticed as I was going through the information
here. I have some questions regarding the variance that was proposed for
that building. I'm wondering if staff could explain how the situation
meets the criteria for a variance because frankly I don't see specifically
why it's being proposed.
Krauss: Well, this explanation is not going to fall within the normal
legal context of a variance, which frankly was the reason that I wanted to
get a range of variances reviewed by the Planning Commission instead of the
Board of Adjustments. The Board of Adjustments is very good at taking a
variance in it's usual hardship context for a garage or for a deck or you
know, to make a lot buildable. What they're less adept at doing is taking
a proposal, a development proposal in total, you know that does this thing
work? Is this variance not so much a hardship but does it reflect the way
this property should reasonably be developed. And in this case we thought
it did. I mean theoretically you can bump property lines further out to
eliminate the variance. Conversely you can, or alternatively you can
require that the garage be torn down and moved. I mean we've done that. If
the garage is not in great shape, we've had that done in the past too. But
in this case there's a tree line back there. It lends itself to be the
appropriate place for the property line. Moving the property lines
significantly raised some problems with interior lots further in. So while
' I can't tell you that it's a traditional hardship, it does fall within the
realm of things we've considered at times in the past. So I hope that,
that probably didn't put your mind at ease.
Ledvina: You know I look at the issue as far as the vegetation is
concerned and in the winter there isn't vegetation and you can see thru
tree lines. Our activities, our approvals at this point don't in the
' future prevent those trees from dying or being taken out. I see the issue
with maybe contrasting building styles with an older shed or garage there
with newer style houses on, I'm not so certain that that really works
together and I'm wondering if we should try to separate that as much as
possible by the ordinance. Is there another mechanism we can use besides a
variance to allow this type of situation?
' Krauss: Short of not catching it in the first place, no. There really
isn't. I mean it does exist. Now again, there are alternatives and the
alternatives do include bumping the line or tearing it down. I'm looking
at the lot right behind it. Lot 5 is a 16,000 square foot lot and it's
possible that we could kick the lot line around a little bit to mitigate
that. I'm not sure we can eliminate it.
11 Ledvina: That would make that lot 14,500 roughly. 14,500 feet and that
would be less than if you took it off the whole map.
Krauss: No, it's 16,000 now.
Ledvina: Right. You could just do that along the southeast part of that
lot line.
•
Planning Commission Meeting 11
June 3, 1992 - Page 26
Krauss: We can sure look at trying to do that.
Ledvina: Yeah, I would be against the condition for the variance. I just II
don't believe that it meets the intent of, or the letter of the variance
and I think some alternatives should be investigated for that. Otherwise I
really didn't have any other comment.
Emmings: I agree that we should do something other than a variance. Maybe
we can be more flexible. I still think though...and I think if something
can be done to eliminate granting variances, it should be done. If they II
make that lot in back a little smaller, I'd rather have it that way. As
far as the driveways go, I guess I don't know how much distance there is
between the ends of the two ends of the U and particularly to the one to
the south would be more concern. There's only one person going to be using
that driveway so it isn't a lot of use but would you regard that as being
unsafe or too close?
Hempel: It sets kind of an example for the other 5 homes also that are
• adjacent to Audubon Road which someday will be developed also. Their
access on a horseshoe driveway, granted it may be single use or whatever
but they do generate average 8 to 10 trips a day. It's an additional curb II
cut along the road and it may also impact an acceleration lane and so
forth.
Ahrens: What's the speed limit on that road?
Hempel: Right now it's 45. Actually it's probably a rural standard, south'
of Huron Drive it's probably 50 mph. There's a crest there however with
some sight distance but eventually when the road is urbanized, similiar to
what was done north of this development where it made the 4 lanes with curb'
and gutter and so forth, use is intensified. More curb cuts out there.
Speed limit may be reduced to 35 or 40 eventually.
Emmings: Does the County have anything to say about the number of accesses,
onto that?
Hempel: No. This is not a county road. This is a city street. '
Emmings: I guess what I'm trying to get you to commit to is, do you think
that it's a bad situation? A situation that should be avoided by us? '
Hempel: We believe it is, yes. Or at least limit the driveway down to one
access.
•
Emmings: That was my next question. If we take out the U and just give
him a single drive in, would that make you feel any better?
Hempel: Every little bit would help. '
Krauss: If I could put into context. I don't remember the exact amount of
traffic that's being forecasted by the Eastern Carver County Study but I
thought it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 6,000 to 8,000 trips a day.
Emmings: For? '
1
IF Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 27
Krauss: When this area is fully developed. TH 101 right now is 10,000
trips a day so if that puts it, you can get a feel for that. So 50%-60% of
what you see on TH 101 today is going to be the ultimate traffic on Audubon
Road.
Emmings: Another alternative might be to give them one driveway and put a
driveway easement across TH 7 and put that in our pocket in case it's ever
deemed to be a hazard?
' Krauss: You can certainly use that as a fall back position but those
things tend to, if they're not utlitized at the outset, they typically
won't be. Also, as Dave points out, we do have similar situations with the
Chaska brick homes across the street. Now they're all sitting on 5 and 10
acre lots. In fact, the developer of Lake Susan Hills.
Hempel: Joe Miller Homes.
Krauss: Joe Miller Homes is talking to us about the possibility of
developing directly across the street from the north road. And that one is
a Chaska brick home. It's Willy Molnau's. And we've even seen a concept
for that one and as I recall, I thought it was going to access internally
off the new street.
11 Hempel: I've never seen it I guess.
Emmings: It's hard sitting up here to know whether this is dangerous or
not dangerous. I think as a general rule we should limit the number of
accesses onto Audubon but I can see the point of wanting to maintain the
driveways since everything is oriented that way and my position on this
' I guess would be that we go along with the, I'm going to have to go with
the City Engineer and say that the driveway is going to have to go out
through Lot 7, unless the applicant can convince the Engineer from now
until the City Council, that it's a safe thing to do. That's all I've got.
Conrad: For our front yard width, what do we do? Especially on
cul -de -sacs. It has to have a 90 foot width at what kind of setback from
the road?
Al -Jaff: 50 feet setback.
Conrad: And all these do meet that?
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Conrad: There are a lot of narrow lots here and fairly deep. The square
footage by the depth. But I guess I don't have a concern with that. I am
struggling, I don't think we should grant a variance that was for the out
building or the garage. But I am struggling with the curb cut for the
farmhouse. And I kept looking for another way to design this and I can't
do it in 5 minutes. I have a tendency to want to grant one curb cut for
the Lot 8. My concern is the, what is necessary for safety for Road E and
D and I don't know that right now. Therefore, my tendency is to go along
with Steve's motion until the applicant can sell our engineer on the safety
1 and the engineer knows the acceleration and deacceleration lanes. I think
Planning Commission Meeting 1
June 3, 1992 - Page 28
the farmhouse orients to the road. I guess that tends to sell me that it II
should have Audubon access but I'm going to go along with a motion similar
to Mr. Emmings to allow the applicant to. I'm concerned about safety and 11
need the applicant to be talking to the engineering department on that one
That's all.
Ahrens: Any discussion? 1
Erhart: Yeah I do have some. Maybe I'm tired and crabby but you know,
for 6 years I've been trying to get a plan on this Bluff Creek Greenway.
Six years ago a development came in and put houses where I thought we
should have preserved a corridor. We were real lucky back then because
that development never got built. We all committed at that time to lay ou
a plan so when south Chanhassen got developed, and properties which includ
Bluff Creek came in, that we'd have a plan. I walked out there this
afternoon and I had no foggy idea where, in walking around that property,
where the backs of those houses are going to be relative to this greenway 1
corridor. I'm looking at it and looking at the contours. I hope it
doesn't interfere with the vision that I share with a lot of people on this
greenway. But after this thing gets approved, the worlds not going to moll
it. I hope all of you, we got it on the action tonight and I don't
understand why the Park and Rec, who is spearheading this effort? Park and
Rec or is it us or who?
Krauss: Park and Rec has really taken this and hopefully is running with
it.
Erhart: Running with it?
Krauss: There is no plan that exists. We have been taking land to get till
trail corridor in.
Erhart: I'm not talking about a trail corridor. We're talking about a
greenway here.
Krauss: Well the greenway is there Tim.
Erhart: Maybe your idea of there and my idea of there might be two 1
different things.
Krauss: I think you've got a substantial amount. That's the half of the 1
greenway that happens to be on this property. The other half is on the
other side. The creek channel itself is way up there.
Erhart: Okay, the line that you cross, does that include what's currently"
tilled also today down there?
Krauss: Yes. Part of that is. 1
Rod Grams: No, the line falls just about...
Erhart: So the tilling would be on, it's under the high water mark or
above it?
1
IF Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 29
Rod Grams: Some of it goes below...
Erhart: Well, I'm not asking to hold this up but I think we'd would use
this to tell us.
Al -Jaff: We were out there and.
Krauss: We're a little confused. I mean Rod lives there and obviously
knows the place a lot better than we do but we were convinced that there is
' tilling in this corner. And then when we get up on the Ryan piece, I know
that some of that area...
Rod Grams: A lot of that is meadow grass right now. There might be some
tilling...
Krauss: But in any case, there is a substantial amount of land being
reserved so that we not only have green space. Frankly the green space
there, it is not, we're talking about a ditched creek in this area and I
think at some point in time the city's going to want to come in and do tree
planting and whatever else along there.
Erhart: Right, and what you've got to have to do that is you've got to
have enough high land so the trees will live. You can't plant oak trees
and maple trees in a wetland. That's my point here.
Krauss: That is true. But a lot of this area is out of the wetland
proper. It's mostly in the flood plain. 100 year flood plain.
Erhart: I couldn't relate this plan to that and that's why I think it's
' important that we get in and we, just like we're doing on TH 5. You know
everybody who lives north of TH 5 wants to get this TH 5 defeined. Well I
want to, for 6 years have wanted to get this Bluff Creek greenway defined
so when we got plans, we could actually compare it to some elevations and
say, okay. Yeah, this is reserved for a future greenway and we're not
going to have people's properties and we may have to buy that land at that
time but today I'm real concerned that we don't know what we're doing and
I can't tell.
Krauss: Well I'd certainly support the idea of the Planning Commission
stating a desire to have a specific plan developed for the corridor. You
11 know we have gone on record of going to the Park Board and asking for just
that and there is a meeting on June 18th that has, a special meeting that
has to do in part with the potential of a golf course. But the other part
of that agenda is Lance Neckkar from the University who's worked with
Bill Morrish and us on the TH 5 matters, did a design for a Bluff Creek
Park that was featured at the Minneapolis Art Center. I have not seen it
' yet myself but he submitted that for design competition and I'm kind of
hopeful that that's going to get the ball rolling to do just what you're
asking.
Erhart: Yeah, that's my concern. In the future when the city, you know we
all talk about preserving open space and to me this is the perfect example
of doing that. In order to get what I envision as a Bluff Creek Park,
Planning Commission Meeting 1
June 3, 1992 - Page 30
you're going to have to have trees on either side as a buffer between the II
trail and the developments along the park.
Krauss: Yeah, clearly that's the case and clearly that's not available in,
this area. It would have to be planted. But while I can't.
Erhart: It's high landed. The question is, is there adequate upland to II
plant oaks and maple and stuff with this plan? Between the backs of the
houses.
Krauss: Based upon what I know now, I'd have to say yes there is. And II
again, we're talking about land that might flood every 50 to 100 years.
Erhart: That won't kill trees. 1
Krauss: While unfortunately Tim, I can't show you the plan for Bluff
Creek. I know that at a staff level we have some very firm ideas as to
what that might embody and we've taken, you might recall on the Ryan
development we took that outlot with the island in it and the creek that
has the only mature trees left south of the railway tracks. We're working"
with the railroad to get the underpass. The Hans Hagen development fits
into that concept and we've been working to get that further north and then
with MnDot so there's a lot of things happening. There just is not a plan
showing how it's going to work. 1
Erhart: Well I just ask that we get on with this. I would ask that the
Commission consider this and if the Park and Rec isn't moving on it, that II
we assume responsibility and get on with it. Maybe take that later on in
discussion so let me go ahead with this. Should we be doing anything here
today to provide utilities to Lot 1, Block 1 in Sunridge Addition? We
should have in our mind when that lot gets developed, that that be an urball
lot. Let it be divided into 4 or 5 logical lots and get it on the tax
rolls.
Krauss: We have not been requested to do that. We spoke, I mean I think II
we spoke to the person that bought it. That does cause a problem. That is
the problem that we've been telling people about that Timberwood's going t
face and Sunridge Court's going to face. That you have one lot, two lots
left that are going to attempt to be rezoned. Remember this is not RSF
land. But at the bottom end of a large lot, rural cul -de -sac is somebody'
going to sooner or later request urban density. That's a tough one. I'm
not certain the city's going to look on that kind of thing favorably. I'm
sure the neighbors, reasonably sure the neighbors wouldn't. I don't know
if that's a reality. 1
Erhart: I'm not trying to decide that today. I'm just asking.
Krauss: As far as the ability to serve? ,
Erhart: Ability to put in sewer and water into that lot. Are we doing
anything today that would... 1
Krauss: I guess I'd defer this some to Dave. My understanding is that
there is a utility easement that comes down through that area and we could I/
' Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 31
possibly look at terminating something there.
Hempel: I was just going to point out that utility service to these
phases, Phase 1 will be served from the sanitary sewer line...extending
down Audubon Road on the west side which will serve approximately an area
here to, from Audubon Road to approximately here. The remaining area west
11 of there will be served at a later date or next year I guess when the trunk
interceptor is brought up along Bluff Creek and then crosses across Bluff
Creek to service that area. Because of the lay of the land, it drops off
' very severely, elevation wise, it doesn't work without bringing this line
across from Bluff Creek. So at that time we can make a provision. They
are providing a drainage utility easement across here. I believe it was
for the watermain extension and storm sewer in this area to stub out
sanitary sewer lines to service in the future these lots.
Erhart: Okay, so there is an easement there?
11 Hempel: There is an easement in Sunridge.
Erhart: What about this development? Is there an easement here?
Hempel: Yes. They are providing a 7 1/2 foot each side and we're
recommending that be increased to a 10 foot wide each side.
Erhart: Okay. So if somebody wanted to come in and petition to get that
moved into the MUSA line, they have the provisions to hook in?
Krauss: It is within the MUSA line.
Erhart: No, Lot 1 isn't.
Krauss: Yes it is...
Erhart: No, I'm talking about Sunridge. Oh it is? Okay. Alright, so he
can get access to sewer and water?
Hempel: That's correct. With future phases. With this first phasing, no.
Erhart: What are we doing, Pa ul or Sharmin what are we doing on water
. 1 g o er
quality with regard to I guess our swamp committee. Basically trying to
ensure that every development has post runoff that's equal to pre runoff.
What are we doing in this plan to assure that? It wasn't clear to me.
We're not adding any holding or any retention ponds or anything.
Hempel: With this first phase, they are not providing any interim storm
sewer ponds, retention ponds. The ultimate plan does provide two retention
11 ponds on the westerly portion of the development. If you look at the
grading plan provided there, it will show two small retention ponds.
Erhart: Okay. Now is that discussed in here?
Hempel: We have made mention of it in the staff report, yes. In fact in
the conditions of approval I believe it's also stated.
11
1
Planning Commission Meeting ,
June 3, 1992 - Page 32
Erhart: Okay. The lots backing up to Audubon Road Sharmin, are they,
given that they're double sided lots, do they meet all the standards
regarding depth and setbacks? 1
Al -Jaff: Yes.
Erhart: Okay, so we're sure that there's adequate room to put in this
landscaping that they've shown here, which the way it looks on this drawing
is great. But is the drawing what we're really talking about doing here? mi
Krauss: We would commit them to this landscaping plan the same as any
other developer.
Erhart: Yeah. It doesn't look like they're going to have much of a back,"
well it looks like their whole back yard is going to be wooded the way this
looks. Is there a berm there at all?
Al -Jaff: No, there isn't.
Erhart: No berms. Our ordinance does not require, or our new landscaping"
ordinance does not require a berm there?
Krauss: It's either /or or both to accomplish the goal of providing
screening.
Erhart: And you're satisfied?
Krauss: They're doing quite an extensive landscaping plan.
Erhart: Alright. Well I didn't notice the berm although I missed the II ponds so. Okay, I agree with Steve and Matt there. You know as much as
I'd like to, it doesn't make sense to worry about the 20 feet. I just
think we can start getting into a habit of allowing variances just... make
sense. That's the problem but it's also what's right with our system of
ordinances. I would agree that we should try to keep the things meet the
ordinance. Thought I was done didn't you? Okay, now we get to this
conservation easement. I noticed in the Minutes you didn't take that up all
the last meeting. Or did we?
Krauss: No we didn't. You asked that it be.
Erhart: Yeah. And I know I've asked that we do this and I'm not going to
get into detail tonight but I've got a couple questions. Help me. What d
you mean by a conservation easement on what is a finch row of trees. What
does that mean? What is this conservation easement going to say?
Krauss: Well, you know unfortunately I have a copy of the conservation II easement on my desk upstairs. It basically says that the developer's not
allowed to remove it and it even says, as I recall, that the homeowner can
thin and maintain and remove diseased trees. Otherwise, the trees are to
remain.
Erhart: He can't take trees out? Or thin, does that mean? Is that
the terminology that's used? 1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 33
Krauss: I don't recall exactly. I mean I'm hoping that Roger's
terminology is more explicit but I don't recall.
Erhart: Well, the point I wanted to get into the discussion was that I
guess I am of the belief that a homeowner has the right to do what he wants
with his trees and we shouldn't get ourselves in the position here of
essentially defining people's lives so strictly that we go in and tell them
what trees he can remove in his yards. I don't want to get into that
discussion here because it's not the subject on the agenda but again we're
' asking for that and I think we need to really think that out. Now in this
case, are we talking about conservation easements just on the., it seems to
be at the discretion of the staff. Are we talking about easements just on
the trees along the north boundary?
Krauss: Yes. We considered doing it on other trees that are highlighted
as being preserved in this plan but we reasonably didn't think that they
11 stood much of a chance.
Erhart: Okay. If we're going along the north boundary, I guess I don't
have a problem because they're in the back yards but once again, I think
it's a subject we need to discuss because I think we need to think it
through and we're starting to see a lot of these things and to the extent
that the one development we actually changed our setbacks to preserve trees
and quite frankly, I just don't, why we have a problem with developers,
used to have problems with developers cutting down trees. Most of them
don't do it today. We had one and I'm all for holding them to the fire but
when we get to the homeowner, that's where I want to have this discussion.
So I'm okay with as long as we stick to the north area. I think it's
impractical to get in and try to, this tree control thing so. The Park and
' Rec recommended that the city acquire ownership of Outlot A. And it
appears to be, then change to where we're asking the developer just to turn
over Outlot A to the city. Is that, does the process seem equitable? Or
is that we're just doing that or what is our city's, what is the process
for making these things equitable?
Krauss: This is our means of preserving the Bluff Creek corridor. In
terms of equity, first of all we're talking about land that has marginal
values since it's all in the flood plain and can't be developed anyway.
Secondly, there is a cost offset and as I recall, the Park and Rec
Director's report is that in exchange for the land, they are not going to
be required to pay trail dedication fees.
Erhart: But then it adds in, they're putting in a., I'm a little confused.
Aren't we asking them to actually put in a trail?
Krauss: No. We're asking them to put in a stub of a connection. What
that does is it's to provide access from this development to the future
trail system that the city has to develop.
Erhart: Alright, so we're not asking them to put in some trail that we
haven't really defined yet?
Krauss: No.
11
1
Planning Commission Meeting II
June 3, 1992 - Page 34
Erhart: Okay. Why did we ask the developer to remove the island that he II
was proposing on...?
Hempel: We delete them for maintenance purposes. Vehicular access to it II
and so forth. Snowplowing reasons. They're essentially in the way.
They're a maintenance problem if there's landscaping and so forth on it.
Typically what goes in them is a landscape monument with a light shining or�
it or something like that. A more appropriate place for that would be on a
lot corner entrance. One of the corner entrance.
Erhart: What do other cities? You know Eden Prairie has got a number of I
them.
Hempel: Some cities have them. Some don't. II
Ahrens: Have you ever seen what our snowplows do to the curb? They
destroy them. Ours are destroyed every single year. Curbs and gutter. 1
Hempel: It's hard on our trucks too when they hit them.
Ahrens: Huge chunks of concrete out every single year. It seems like the II
need really expansive space in order to move the plows around, and they
don't even make it then. 1
Erhart: Well again, maybe that's something we need to discuss outside this
development but again, I think they add character to the city. I hate to
see it, just reject them cart blanche without some kind of value decision."
I'm not an expert and that's not the kind of thing I'm going to decide by
myself but again I would hope that we're just not throwing them out without
some due consideration because I think they do give it some character and
again, after or before we maybe recess tonight, if anybody's interested in"
discussing it, then we should throw it out and do it so. Right now, help
me understand this. The City trunk sewer and water improvement project
will include construction of 8 foot sidewalks along the west side of
Audubon Road. Yet the trail coming down to this development is on the eas
side. How does that all work out?
Krauss: I don't know that any of us can adequately explain that. There II
were two separate public improvement projects that occurred. We had a
group of residents that fought having a trail put in. Made it cross over."
I don't know. Dave, do you have anything? .
Erhart: We've decided there's going to be a cross over?
il Krauss: There's actually several.
Al -Jaff: There will be two. 1
Erhart: Oh, you're kidding.
Ahrens: Back and forth across Audubon Road?
II
Emmings: How many trips a day?
II
II
11
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 35
Hempel: Originally it was proposed to have a trail, the trail system down
along the east side of Audubon Road with the original Audubon Road
improvement. However, I believe the Council felt at the time that there
would be no use for a trail south of Huron Drive because there was really
no development south of there. And so at that time they felt to leave it
out until future development warranted it. I believe with Ryan Business
Center, there was a trail proposed. Sharmin, is it on the west side?
Ryan's Construction... It also looped back through the business center, if
I'm not mistaken.
' Erhart: So we do have a plan for a trail. Once you get from Park Road
along the east side, is that the way I see that?
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Erhart: What is this on the west side then?
Krauss: The original Audubon Road improvement plan, if I recall correctly
two years ago, was supposed to put the trail down the east side of Audubon.
Area residents fought that. There were some trees located in the right -of-
way that would probably have had to be removed. Trail work put in as
proposed. There's a consequence the City Council didn't put any trail in
at all in that area.
Erhart: Now that's developed? Is it too late to get a trail in there now?
Krauss: The road project that had the trail attached to it is finished.
Erhart: Yeah, I mean we still can get a trail on the undeveloped land next
' to it perhaps or not?
Krauss: When that land develops, yes.
Erhart: Okay. Well, alright. Outlot extends to the east, okay so that's
the trail. On page 10, that's the trail you're talking about. Okay, I
guess that's all. Again just a couple points here. The Park Commission's
recommending that no development occur in the wooded area. What does that
mean?
Al -Jaff: Disregard that.
Erhart: This is driving a point with me. We're getting some and I'll tell
you what. I planted more trees in this city than anybody ever has but we
are getting to the point where we're tree nuts. The idea of not putting
them in, the urban forest is something that's alive and over 30 years
people do plant trees and today, I've read someplace recently again where
because of urbanization there's less trees in our city. That's a bunch of
crap. There's less trees in this city when it was farmland. There's a lot
more trees here today than there was 50 years ago. It's a living thing and
trails are something that you put in and trail easements are permanent
hundreds of years. The idea of not putting in a trail because there's a
tree is crazy. And not putting in decent setbacks because there's a tree
is crazy. Those are permanent. Trees are something you can plant and in
30 years you've got a shade tree. This city's going to be here 100 years
1
AM
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 36
and 200 years so we're setting a pattern here. I think we've got to realli
evaluate where we're going with this tree stuff. So I think that's all the
things I've got.
II
Ahrens: That's it for you?
Erhart: That's it. 1
Ahrens: Do you have anything specific on the wetland alteration permit or
the rezoning? Sharmin, on page 11. The lot width and page 12 and 13.
There's a number of them that appear to be less than the required 90 feet.
Ai -Jaff: Those are on cul -de -sacs. If you take the setback of 30 feet, II
then you would meet the 90 foot width required by ordinance.
Ahrens: Okay, so every single one of these that's under, it goes on page II
14 and 15, it seems like a lot of lots here. I count 29 lots.
Al -Jaff: They're either on a cul-de-sac or on a curve and the ordinance
allows it. 1
Ahrens: Okay. Do you have a condition in here, maybe I just missed it
about the applicants demonstrating to the staff that a house and deck can il
be placed on those two lots?
Al -Jaff: It should be in the preliminary plat.
Ahrens: Maybe I missed it. I/
Krauss: We believe there was one that probably dropped out in the editing II
process. There should be one.
Ahrens: Okay, and that should be in there?
II
Krauss: Yes.
Ahrens: And also I think we should have a condition that all driveways in I
the development not exceed 10% grade. This seems to be an issue with
several of the driveways right?
Al -Jaff: It's in condition number 11. II
Ahrens: Okay. Is there a question for any of the other lots besides Lots 11
25 and 26? Maybe we should just in general put. Because it's not just
those two lots we're concerned with. It's any lot in the development.
Al -Jaff: Correct. 1
Hempel: It appeared based on the contours that they provided that those
were the only two lots impacted at this stage but if further modifications II
are done, so it's known that 10% is our maximum grade.
Ahrens: On page 6 of your report, Sharmin you talk about protective
measures being implemented for using snow fences and other means during thel
IF Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 37
construction period. Do you have that in there? On page 6, your second
full paragraph?
1 Al -Jaff: I don't have it as a condition of approval.
Ahrens: And it should be. I have kind of a cryptic note in my notes here
and I'm not sure what I'm talking about but someplace in your report you
talk about redesigning and raising lot grades to minimize runoff toward
Audubon Road. That's in here as a condition? If not, it should, be.
Hempel: Condition number 11, I think one of the sentences could be
expanded.
1 Ahrens: Pardon me?
Hempel: On condition number 11, midway through it. The applicant shall
amend the grading plan for Phase 1 to accommodate future upgrading of
Audubon Road. That's where it was implied the back yards should be graded.
Ahrens: Maybe we should make it more specific because the concern seems to
be pretty specific about the runoff. I agree with everyone here who said
there should be no variance. I think that's a good idea. The driveway
access, I think we should somehow try and have a driveway access there. I
don't think the main goal of the city is just to make sure that cars travel
as quickly as possible down roads. As long as we're building residential
neighborhoods along collector streets, I think that we should be concerned
with what they look like and how liveable they are and the character of the
city.
1 Erhart: I didn't follow your recommendation.
Conrad: What'd you say?
Ahrens: That there should be a driveway. We should allow a driveway.
Conrad: A curb cut?
Ahrens: A curb cut, yeah. A driveway out to Audubon Road.
Erhart: Just leave it the way it is.
Emmings: Single or U?
Ahrens: It doesn't matter to me. I mean whatever can be worked out with
the engineering department. I don't see that the horseshoe, it hasn't been
proven to me that that's a dangerous situation so.
Emmings: Has it been proven that it's safe? I mean in his opinion.
11 Hempel: It may be safe at this time but we're looking long range down the
road. Down the way as the road capacities are reached.
Ahrens: But also as the road capacity is reached, the traffic slows down
right?
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
June 3, 1992 - Page 38
Hempel: The speed limit changes, yes. Typically it probably would in that
area somewhat. Still there'd be some concerns with turning movements into
the driveway and so forth.
Ahrens: How many trips a day do you think Mill Street has down at
Excelsior? Where CR 17 ends up. And there's curb cuts all along that
street. There doesn't seem to be any problem. They get a lot of traffic."
You know what I'm talking about?
Krauss: They also have lots of speed traps along there. 1
Hempel: 30 mph I believe too.
Ahrens: 30 mph, yeah. Okay. I don't have anything else. Is there a I/
motion?
Conrad: Let me ask one more question because I'm confused about the trail"
on Audubon. On this parcel. Where is the trail on Audubon?
Al -Jaff: West off Audubon Road.
Conrad: Okay, it's close to the tree.
Erhart: On the street? 1
Al -Jaff: It's part of the public right -of -way. It's not on the property
and the landscaping is being installed on the property. 1
Ahrens: Kind of like Lake Lucy Road.
Conrad: And is that the way we've been doing trails? That the city has II
been developing the trail?
Krauss: It's actually been a combination of either it's in the right -of- II
way or occasionally there's a separate easement provided. Within the
downtown sidewalk system and Market Square here is not going to be in the
public right -of -way. It wasn't originally in the public right -of -way. It
was in an easement, off street. It's really a matter of how wide the
right -of -way is and can we accommodate it within it. In this case we can.
Conrad: And who's responsibility has it been to build the trail? 1
Krauss: We have done it with public improvement projects.
Hempel: As we upgrade the section of street to urban standards, we would II
include the trail section at that time. In some cases however we have made
the developer actually go back. Or include it in his project to build it II
at this stage.
Conrad: I have a recollection that we have done that. So we are doing it il
two different ways.
Hempel: I believe in this area because it's kind of a piece meal, we have
development down here. We have no development up here yet so you're going 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 39
to have a stranded iece of trail out here with no connection inbetween
P I
think that's where staff believes that the trail system will be built under
an improvement project with the upgrade of Audubon Road.
Erhart: At 50 feet it'd have to be on street right?
Hempel: It would be within the street right -of -way, yes.
11 Erhart: It would be on the inside of the curb.
Hempel: It would be between the curb and the property line.
11 Erhart: Oh it would be on the outside of the curb like a sidewalk then?
Hempel: That's right. Typically it falls one foot inside of the property
11 line on the right. One foot towards the street.
Erhart: 50 feet gives you adequate?
Hempel: Yes.
Emmings: Mr. Grams has left and don't we have a standard condition that in
11 the year an approval is given to a plat, the applicant has to declare
himself a Democrat? Haven't we used that before?
Ahrens: That was one of the conditions that was left out too.
Emmings: We'll add that in.
1 Ahrens: Steve, you're making a motion right?
Emmings: Sure. I'll approve that the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -6 with the conditions
contained in the staff report.
11 Conrad: I second.
Emmings moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -6 with the following conditions:
1. All wetland areas will be protected during construction by Type III
erosion control. All erosion control shall be maintained in good
condition until the disturbed areas are stabilized.
2. The wetland area remain undisturbed.
1 3. The applicant shall receive a permit from the Watershed District.
4. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Subdivision #92 -5 and
Rezoning #92 -3.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Ahrens: Motion on the Rezoning.
1
Planning Commission Meeting Al
June 3, 1992 - Page 40
Conrad: I move that the Planning Commission approves Rezoning #92 -3,
property from A -2 to RSF per the staff report's two conditions.
Erhart: I'll second. 1
Conrad moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Rezoning #92 -3 property from A -2 to RSF with the following I/
conditions:
1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract containing all oil
the conditions of approval for this project and shall submit all
required financial guarantees. The development contract shall be
recorded against the property. 1
2. The applicant shall meet all conditions of Subdivision #92 -5 and
Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -6.
I/ All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Ahrens: Do we have a motion on the Preliminary Plat? 1
Emmings: I'll move that the Planning Commission recommends the City
Council approve Subdivision #92 -5 as shown on the plans dated May 4, 1992
subject to the following conditions. I'll stop right here and emphasize
that I'm striking the language granting a variance. It will be all the
conditions in the staff report. With regard to condition number 6, that
deals with the driveway for Lot 8 going out to Road E over Lot 7. I would"
move that that language be retained in here with the understanding that we
feel that it may be appropriate for the character of the property to have a
driveway of some kind going out to Audubon Road, but that it will be the II
burden of the applicant to get to the City Engineer and see what they can II
work out between now and the time of the City Council hearing. With regard
to condition 11. Joan raised an issue that I didn't understand with regar
to runoff. Making something more explicit about runoff going out to
Audubon Road and I want that one changed to be more specific to take into
account the comments that she made, which will be in the record. There
• will be an additional condition number 16, that between now and the time oil
the City Council hearing the applicant should work out with city staff
whether or not Lots 10 and 14 in Block 2 are in fact buildable. And then
an additional condition number 17 related to the language on page 6 of the ll
staff report having to do with trees designated for preservation as was
also pointed out by Joan.
Erhart: Before someone seconds. I have a question. The last one on the II
tree conservation easement. That's what Steve?
Emmings: That's on page 6. The second full paragraph be added as a
condition that the trees designated for preservation shall be protected by II
snow fence.
Erhart: Could I ask you to change 7(d) where it says conservation 1
easements over all designated tree preservation areas to conservation
easements over areas as designated by staff. Would you agree to that?
1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 41
Ahrens: What's the oint of the change of language?
P 9
Erhart: Because now you're requiring essentially to have a conservation
easement over every colored area on this map. And Paul's already said that
he doesn't plan on doing that.
Krauss: And I think that's mentioned in the staff report too.
Emmings: Okay, that's what 1 meant.
Erhart: Alright, then I'll second it.
11 Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #92 -5 as shown on the plans dated May 4, 1992 and
subject to the following conditions:
11 1. All storm sewer drainage pipes should be designed for a 10 year
frequency storm utilizing a rational method. Storm drainage retention
pond, detention areas and outlet piping shall be designed for a 100
year frequency, 24 hour single event using the "SCS Method" established
for use in Minnesota. The discharge rate shall not exceed the
predeveloped runoff rate. Ponds shall also be designed to "NURP"
standards. All storm retention ponds shall be constructed to NURP
standards.
2. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance
with the current edition of "City's Standard Specifications and Detail
Plates ". Detailed street and utility construction plans and
specifications shall be submitted for City Council approval.
11 3. The applicant shall apply and obtain permits from the Watershed
District, DNR and other appropriate regulatory agencies and comply with
their conditions of approval.
4. Watermain systems shall be designed to ensure adequate fire flow for
the site. Design calculations shall be submitted to the City Engineer
to verify pipe size.
5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and
provide the financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms
of•the development contract. The final plat shall be contingent upon
the City Council authorizing and awarding a public improvement project
for the extension of trunk sanitary sewer and water facilities to
service the site.
' 6. All lots shall access from interior streets and not Audubon Road.
Street grades shall not exceed the 7% maximum street grade per City
ordinance. A deceleration /acceleration lane shall be provided on
Audubon Road. The center island shall be deleted from the southerly
access street (Road E). The existing driveway to the site shall be
relocated to access from the northerly loop street through Lot 7, Block
2. A cross access easement shall be convenyed to Lot 8, Block 2 with
the understanding that the Planning Commission feels that it may be
appropriate for the character of the property to have a driveway of
1
Planning Commission Meeting .M
June 3, 1992 - Page 42
some kind going out to Audubon Road, but that it will be the burden of'
the applicant to get to the City Engineer and see what they can work
out between the Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
7. The final plat shall be amended to include expanding the 15 foot wide II
drainage and utility easements to 20 feet wide and extending the
drainage easements through Lots 12 and 13, Block 1. The following
easements shall be provided:
a. Dedication of all street right -of -way.
b. Conservation and drainage easements over all protected wetland and
ponding areas. Provide access easements to allow the city to
maintain all ponding areas. 1
c. A 20 foot wide utility and drainage easement over all sewer, water
and storm sewer lines located outside public right -of -way.
I/
d. Conservation easements over areas designated by staff.
e. Standard drainage and utility easements along each lot line. '
f. Dedication of Outlot A to the City.
8. All necessary permits shall be obtained from the pipeline company for II
any grading or construction activity within the pipeline easement.
9. Fire hydrants should be spaced approximately 300 feet apart throughout'
the subdivision in accordance with the Fire Marshal's recommendations.
10. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored II
with seed and disc - mulched or wood fiber blanket within two weeks of
completing site grading unless MnDot's planting dates dictate
otherwise. All areas disturbed with slopes of 3:1 or greater shall be
restored with sod or seed and wood fiber blanket.
11. Until Phase II improvements are completed, interim sediment and /or
retention ponds shall be constructed and maintained by the applicant til
• accommodate Phase I storm runoff. The applicant shall amend the
grading plan to take into consider the runoff from the back yards for
Phase I to accommodate future upgrading of Audubon Road (urban design)"
The grades on Lots 25 and 26, Block 3 shall be redesigned so the
driveway grades do not exceed 10%. The applicant shall supply
earthwork calculations for both phases to the City Engineer for review"
Erosion control fence along the westerly portion of the development
(Phase II) adjacent to the wetlands shall be the City's Type III.
Additional erosion control fence (Type I) shall be installed on Lots 7
14 and 15, Block 3 and Lots 8, 10 and 11, Block 1 as check dams. 1
12. Outlot A shall be deeded to the city. In consideration for this, full
trail fees will be credited. An 8 foot wide bituminous trail shall bell
constructed from proposed Road E to the rear of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot
1, Block 3.
1
1
11
Planning Commission Meeting
June 3, 1992 - Page 43
I 13. The applicant shall convey to the City a temporary street easement for
the temporary cul -de -sac at the end of Road E. In addition, a sign
II shall be installed on the barricades stating that the street will be
extended in the future. All street right -of -way for all plat phases to
be dedicated with Phase I platting.
il 14. The developer shall acquire the required utility construction permits
from the PCA and Minnesota Department of Health.
I 15. The applicant shall meet the conditions of the Rezoning #92 -3 and the
Wetland Alteration Permit #92 -6.
II 16. The applicant should work out with city staff to provide whether or not
Lots 10 and 14 in Block 2 are in fact buildable between the Planning
Commission and the City Council meeting.
II 17. Trees designated for preservation shall be protected by snow fence or
other means acceptable to the City.
II All voted in favor and the motion carried.
II PUBLIC HEARING:
INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR EARTH WORK /MINING OF A GRAVEL PIT, LOCATED AT 100
FLYING CLOUD, TOM ZWIERS, MOON VALLEY AGGREGATE.
11 Public Present:
Name Address
II Richard and Gayle Vogel 105 Pioneer Trail
J.E. Brill, Jr., Esq. 100 Washington Avenue So., Mpls, 55401
II Tom Zwiers 9390 26th Street, Lakeville
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item and went through the
City Attorney's Findings of Facts.
I Erhart: In this case, how do you know when you excavated below the water
table?
II Krauss: Well, we looked at the possibility of putting in a single
elevation. A not to exceed elevation but in the City Engineer's opinion,
11 the ground water elevation was fairly variable across the property.
Erhart: A lot of changes.
1 Hempel: Sample borings can be taken to determine what the water level is
in a specific area there. It's kind of to document the water table. Water
tables do fluctuate with seasons so it is a difficult to pin point a
II certain elevation. You do receive modeled soils after just a couple feel
underneath the surface in some areas in fact. So it is a difficult answer
to give at this point but we feel by random borings to determine the water
table would give us a significant benchmark if you will.
II
II
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL • ii
July 7,1988 DESIGN POLICY AND CRITERIA 5- 2.0(21)
Figure 5 -2.05A
� -- '� 15:1 Grading Taper
1
f Highway f
TURN ■411. LANE `
111/4 1
I lann
pneeda r Contractors option no ` \ E10'
f
p additional compensation 15:1 Taper Striping t O . 1 - 1, ` t 1
O width— __I, �, L/7` Id I
2:1 Tape variable 7 Variable '
180' Typical 300' Typical 1 g
1
Z
PLAN VIEW RIGNT TURN LANE
1
Highway
I
14' Turn Lane
12' 12' Turn Lane 1.5'
Min. 3" Curb & Gutter
.015'18. -.- . —a. Topsoil
0.07111 0.02' /R+
. , + - aserapaam .
1
S ubgrade 0.015'/11.
1st stage construction Ain -reins Conc. Pav't (6" min. 1
Aggregate Base 1
RIGID TURN LANE
t Highway L 1 41/4.'—
12' 12' Turn Lane �1.5' 14' Turn ne
Edge Striping .�' Max. Curb & Gutter
1 1
0.027f t. �. 1
015' /It �� 0.02 /IL -r Min. 3" I
Subgrade 0.015'111
See Road Design 7 -5.0, Flexible Pavement Design,
for structural thickness. If less than mainline
structure thickness provide additional granular
material to match thickness of mainline.
1
FLEXIBLE TURN LAI:f
1 Highway
1
Ins 12' o 1T Turn Lane 1
r 14' Turn Lane
ew
3.0 Curb & Gutter
6. , M 1
" ' ( Edge Striping _ I .. orflL _ �e
O15'Itt y 0.0.07/ft. + Min. 3" �� ���������
.. re ���������������� //i Topsoil
••• d:l �i�
Subgrade 0.015A.
1st stage construction See Road Design 7 -5.0, flexible 1
Pavement Design, for structural thickness
RIGID MAINLINE AND FLEXIBLE TURN LANE
1
RIGHT TURN LANES
1
Figure 5 -2.05A
1
1
U G C -1 -C1 m 1 V ; �/
1 � _ is
• '---,... ..."' %., . ..,
•
1 irr":' •
• IL . - -.... 6 ° C ° c y , ..._ ...,;)
.,.
%--..„ ...... ..... ......••••...
... ,-,.- .... ,
..... . /1.
........•
..
. . .
6:. 1 \ ...... , .
ii .............. ,... • , • .
...........
c "`s 1
, 0 . ,.
1 Z _ ,._
,.:-.1 .....--
.,. .,................ _.
.- p
' 1 t'
�. '.
•
I 4
- 472. N a GS.
"› :. VI \ A bi
E.
1 z r' j ,.... q�� o . ; -..
r\ .) 1 ' . : 6 `
,.. • Sri
Ma MT
______(,.:. ......
1
JAMES f Hal INC. M1 .
��� ..-.7- 6p� x �loT"�: ��
•
. S ? : D EGiELER4
•
•
•
d ... Aso _� IV X71 s - NI ...s 1 - . \, . '
rp s
•
.1 -\ %.. .. ,.? • .,
. rn.. : 1
.. T. .. .... .. .% : .;
1
1r g/s--6-.. 1
. ell_12_ ...5.- „
•
•
Gz S ti il
• _
• 01
. .
966 c
• V - _ .
ao
/ -- ..-1 • I I.
1
• . . % -7 — 0 I
: I EiS6 ..... c.. *** c. " .:- a i .:..- ... • co. I t
1
•
.. 0 Z . --. Il r
7 ;
• ■ . 't Ex t _7-; . - . O O . ..T....‘i ....
..
•
D tZ ‘ v � Ny s - -- W -0
1
J . d- , O' �X
•
•
:- .41 1 1
_ __ ___ ..... , %a%
.. -41144 DAr ice, .
4ir ....
7 _7) ... .44 ---- --- --. -- -- - . ................. ... .. ... .. . .
ft . . - -.
- E. „lap rti I Z. fyktat .
Cau'TI NovS LAwa1 ACcEL QATION : LPcr • E.
=NO ivi .......
•
1
KEY IA N D w • field
10 ,........... lia
I 14 0 til C S ..-..;4•.±.--.:: • •
,- - 2..- .
Executive Collect=
,,..„.i
1
- -• • - . 1 1P,. A .e , s- I. ... 4 -
' - - . , :a‘fili . ' -
Y • ti -iir, ..;....\ .
'•'. : - -• ';' -
--- •_---- - --,.--;-,.-.., , s„, s.
7 .::sk- ,' - •.::..., • . e l e /- • .,,,,, _____ -. 77 , ,- ,..,,,_. , ,:,.,_,
••,',-.• . , .,... VI, . . ..• __ ''....i....' -- -/-- F.- -- .-f - .; 1 1ki• -.:'' 4:"
•.. ..'. .; ' ' - ... -- .,....1 .:',!■., ' ..'..'..:'.--,---.._--z--116,_____ __-_-_- _ ,.. ,, IliVi....1:,.....N.O. ........
- .. --' =--- - - - ,',7,;;• ,' 1 1.VA• ••••::' ''r, .J .
I . . .
."......;.!;_i_.......t.t4;,.. , . . -,....,... , .....„.:,...
. •ifit h . .,...... „. _ 7,. ,, /LIZ.- , . e ..„ • • ..i
17 " I .. ' - r.":=.--•••••••••Zr; /4"..”.. ..'"‘ - b .,rp.
\ N... 2 4 - ...•■• ■.•-• ams =lb : ,T.',111i - 1 - I '. -.HI m ill liA111 . .7 ... •
t' • .. , ,
...NT . 7 .:3 .. ‘ .... I - 'I' id IT: ' MN MI .= II= 2.1 =, iiii% •..1. 4_40...,..
4 , .„...,_,.,...„._.„,,„....- - „ . .
. r,..,. = .-_, - 1 .. _-- - 9 F ... i !J U. ...... 1 — ,.., = .
I , t ,,, :4._, , ,, , ,, , ..._• ,•,-----"--"-- ; :......."-- 0. ■ WO =ma PIM =.. Him 11 1 MM., = ..7,' . 4-13r , -. .. #,..
.„,., ;v. ,. , pi .....,...- .-- _ _ — - --T.-_. u- • 5,-.:.- .... .--: . -.. ...Z mo■• r r 1.= - _. ' 'IN. =
; ii - V•••• 1 *; '"'•-•""'""'".."' .....,... z ;!-Z = ' — "' mom - = 1 I I mum
. ,....■■.. Ar _ c . ... --"..-""--- 1 ":"' a ' =mom il 1■1=1 1 1
ININE Mims= •••• , I. sow= iii iii■ft..... ." ; t ,
• s... : ..• • p s Li 4 )1 •
. • ' 4.14, ;5:71 ... ..6........'..' ...or ■:4 . ' . ' in tk - ZIWC . .''' - .4 . •
C. s• -' .'
.4._ • - - . am _
'•":4!" .....,:,....---,,,-----,,,..., ...e..re. • .... _no. • ........ , „ . .i.,= =, ii . 1 ...jai - 1 , .. ir ..... - : , laallaillifill.i0 . i. ,, , , ' : :., ... a■
I ,I= ■rar .....
. 4/1-',' = ' I - . al-7;o-- z.-7-.P.-..-..
, , •
4:: . ■:,,-:' 4 E DD0D0000 LI 2 ; =--= 7 T-IJ• =..---.::_ Et! c,... "
,
0 ,_,,_,,,__, s 0 . 0 ,= = ._ -- it,----2_,_,_-a. 1, ' r i ...,---. /
r { ' ,
- ..-::. •■• ,,,..-.
r'e".7.1...7, !F- =
II ''. " DD000000
- -- - INE. II • ....., ,,..... ume
ow • ..._ -- :^r . • -a., .' "r: ..________ -,■• MI- am Lai
......0 ■,.........- Aw■ wi girl ,--
_„.smencimemainamme IiII -Ein,--...--- - - fil - . -. (-":.-
- - , • PIM -..
ELEVATION A . 46:4 t...* , le • :.,_5
At\ ISI:... .
I _ ,
10- - -• " ' 4. '; 7 7 S= - ..,':.i.r, r ' '.."."''''"••••••
-
2 Story/4 Bedrooms
1255/2337 SQ. FT.
3472
1 FLOOR PLANS ON REVERSE SE
I : :'
, 4t- - f.,4i-- s',F4-...` . .....4-:,,,.... .:.-..... - V' -0::
.- - • ?: 'r..' . .
„. - .-
.7 ..i....., ..-... , 7. ...•,, ;NI: 1. .
' ' . - 'V • .
. - If . ' ...-- - - ...X -,-.. '''',' ' - - . • _:-.: r . _ , -,.
•• " . • - ' • • f'-= •- ______
• - - •
1
.T.LI .. • 0 r -: , ../
i tch:: . " 1_ ..,■... 1. --- .■..
'V, *
IVI- IXIsmill 0 - --- 1 •-
- .:" - .. - • - -- si■se
-- --
..4.• j -J -J -J--J -j j-j -- 1 -f I -I-J -1 1 ; ' 1 4M M ; iii; [:. -.--_''. - - 1 1111 MI iiii ii - i` - .
-- --.. . • ___- -- -,-. -- -.
_.'=-- • = , . . _...._
1 -• nn i .
i
. I. - • • • • 4 . ,:".."••• ''. . - .-___E: • , - . • ..;12 14•1
r=i_. 1 4 l.„-
. • - ..3:TJZ --I, T - - = Tr. '_L ! :-." ' ' •
2 i ---, . -o.: 1
- - - . -10.44 -..---...1- - • . _i ...1...J_J „4015",. -__„.„ ..-- -. IU .1 n im.......:_ . --.. . •
...................... ..
.
--„.
,_.
I _
ELEVADON B • ROUGH CEDAR FRONT AND BRICK INCLUDED Ed.EVAT)OKI C .
, .
t: • , - ..,"ydalk....*;
. ..git*VF ' _ ..,.: . ,-.:,- " " %%6115' ' ' V: ' Ir -.-:,•, : , :'''• 7: 9. i
- , ....,- e - -- ='•=A-..,.;= ?•11 ,... To.,:
. 4„,...,,,,„ .• -...4* •...
- , ..x,..„ - ' – • - Ea „' ,[ r -
I .. - '' - • L'• ,L.•'--;• '• . _' '-' '•.= 7 ' 11. --4 igATE:
-, .. ,... s •.- -__. _,,m-i . = LE _. — •:.=_: L • -'*.— ----7211 ! i I ' ,,--* 1 ! !. ' ti : I i 1
' - . ' • - --------- --- ._
,) 11
_----._-_—fi,,---__-7------z- 1.
„....,....
•
'" -"' ....J.:D'D -----= . -------1 L L ------ E----- . - ------ : .;•:. -J-J-J-J-J-_I_J
. - -__ ._ Q.:3saii., A _ -- - ..... -.- , ' ''Ir - , -
nwat..
.--
--___......4...- , ....,! ,.: L ..,..‘ . ..
A
.. - .
• =.4L. - 4,24 • ' - '•
' .
1 ELEVATION E ROUGH CEDAR FRONT AND BRICK INCLUDED EIEVABON r ROUGH CEDAR FRONT INCLUDED
. %.
Airketed by ,
.,.
LIK AND JOAN SCHULLER • Bus. (612) 890-0304
11121 T
EQUAL HOUSING
ilQ4 IFFAN
REALTY IN'
mommil■,
Ml■NM
I '''' '''.... OPPORTUNITY , , ■....,
I ) D
WINFIELD FLOOR PLANS 2 Story /4 Bedrooms . '
1255/2337 SQ. FT.
1
DECK
1
10' x 10'
SRNIN
G ROOM
KITCHEN 9x12 FAMILY ROOM '
11x4 LAUNDRY 1 17x15 F
1
�-
ki.,,m,
� �
DINING ROOM 1 ...t i UVING ROOM 1
12x12 15x13
GARAGE _
22x21 FOYER
1
/ • /
1
MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1
___.-- ---...._ ____- -......._
1 I - X. C 00 1
j MASTER BATH In BEDROOM
1 I O f - BATH 01 12x13 ....... 1
00 I
MASTER _ - - 0
1
BEDROOM
12 x18 —1\/
BEDROOM 1
...... 12x12
BEDROOM
12 X10
1
UPPER LEVEL PLAN
1
1
1 1
if 10 to0
1
"MM a"M. •1
1,
Osf.:21,9 • .
o
. z
1 60-r'N
15,250s
� Mo
1 '
3 - 146
32 ,o i . , 1
31 1
- - - elm... " ...P 1. ammiP ..11P • •I400 • L
i 0%
' ‘ Coto
— ......= .......... 14 I i
1
-1 --- "M. ‘ ...". .. "°M. "Mfa. 4M1 7 ' T
i \ \a ,30 i5,:: It
• `, !.7 1 - I
\ - 1
-14 \ 1
22,OOOs.f.\"�' \ I 1
h
60'/Z. . I
1 o - 1
�- 1
0
Al
1