Loading...
1a-1. Lake Susan Hills final Plat CITYOF -- I ,v4 CHANHASSEN I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Action by Cit y A4;,;;rs'ra±tr 1 /lkitA Fs as. I MEMORANDUM f'` '" IITO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner Ot-' �- -- -- IDATE: September 19, 1990 __ _y 3- 0 SUBJ: Final Plat for Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition IOn June 25, 1990, the Council approved the preliminary plat for Lake Susan Hills West 4th Addition for 159 single family lots with Ithe following conditions: 1. All streets that are proposed for future connection shall be I provided with a turnaround which meets city standards with a barricade and signage stating that it is a temporary cul-de- sac and will be a future road connection. 2. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping along the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the developer shall provide $150 per lot for flandscaping. 3 . The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of I mature vegetation located on the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans required as part of the Ibuilding permits. 4. The applicant shall provide a registered engineer's report on g P soils, footings and structural design and a registered I engineer's grading and drainage plan for the City Engineer and Building Department approval prior to issuance of a building permit on Lots 11 and 13, Block 4. 1 5. All of the access points to the parkland between single family lots shall either be paved and signed that they are public access points. I6. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of both looped streets. Such continues to be required and should Ibe shown as parkland dedication, not simply easements. I Final Plat for I Lake Susan Hills 5th Addition September 19, 1990 ' Page 2 7. Trails/Sidewalks: The developer shall be required to provide trails/sidewalks as follows: a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along thru streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time street improvements are constructed. b. A 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of I Powers Boulevard shall be dedicated for future trail purposes. c. The above trails/sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged. , 8. The applicant will be required to pay 50% of park dedication fees. There will be no trail fee required. I 9. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans, shall provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the setback. ' 10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the improvements. 11. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR, Watershed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer. 12. After grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded ' and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent and Type II erosion control. ' 13. Type II erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areas. ' 14. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 15. The park area shall be graded as part of this phase and shall be consistent with the park plan being developed by VanDoren Hazard Stallings. The developer, at it's sole cost, shall grade the park areas in accordance with a timetable and plans to be furnished by the City. The City will develop park plans J Final Plat for Lake Susan Hills 5th Addition September 19, 1990 Page 3 when the final park boundaries have been determined. 1 16. Grading along the plat boundaries shall be compatible with adjacent properties and existing off-site drainage patterns. ' 17. Truck hauling in and out of the site shall be limited to the proposed Lake Susan Hills Drive access off of Powers Boulevard ' (County Road 17) at the south end of the project. 18. The applicant shall submit the 4th Additional final street and utility plans and specifications for staff review and City ' Council approval. The applicant has submitted a final plat for the second of three ' phases of the Lake Susan Hills West 4th Addition (Lake Susan Hills 5th Addition) . The applicant is proposing to final plat 14 of the remaining 116 single family lots. Attachment #1 illustrates the area being proposed for final plat approval. The applicant has met certain conditions of preliminary plat approval and the remaining conditions are more long term that will be enforced as part of the development contract. Engineering Comments The finished slope in the rear of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 1, will be at a 3 : 1 slope or greater and requires special slope stabilization such as wood fiber blankets. Wherever erosion control is required, Type III erosion controls shall be implemented. All disturbed areas shall be reseeded and mulched immediately upon completion of the grading operation. At the end of the extension for Flamingo Drive, a temporary turnaround must be ' provided with a barricade and signs stating that it is a temporary cul-de-sac and a temporary easement over the cul-de-sac must be provided. ' The storm sewer system is proposed to be constructed and extended to the detention pond in the park area as part of the 4th Addition. A large portion of this storm sewer is proposed to exist outside the 5th Addition and previous additions and plats. Therefore, a drainage and utility easement will be required for a portion of the storm sewer which falls outside of the platted right-of-way. This ' easement shall exist until such that the future addition is platted with the corresponding right-of-way and easements needed for the storm sewer system. The drainage and utility easement through the northeast corner of Lot 5, Block 1, shall be extended to the side lot easement line. 1 I Final Plat for 1 Lake Susan Hills 5th Addition September 19, 1990 Page 4 SUMMARY 1 The proposed final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat. A condition of the final plat for the 4th Addition was to have a revised preliminary plat submitted for the 159 single family lots. The applicant has not yet submitted such a preliminary plat and must do so prior to the 4th and 5th Addition final plat being released by the City. Another condition of the final plat for the 4th Addition was that truck hauling in and out of the site be limited to the proposed Lake Susan Hills drive access off of Powers Boulevard at the south end of the project. As of today, the applicant is not using this recommended access and is instead using the existing access to the north. Prior to the City releasing the final plat for the 4th and 5th Additions, the applicant must complete the access from Lake Susan Hills Drive to Powers Boulevard and use this access as the haul route. RECOMMENDATION I Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the final plat for Lake Susan Hills West 11 5th Addition as shown on plans dated September 19, 1990, with the following conditions: 1. All streets that are proposed for future connection shall be provided with a turnaround which meets city standards with a barricade and signage stating that it is a temporary cul-de- sac and will be a future road connection. 2. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping along the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the developer shall provide $150 per lot for landscaping. 3. The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature vegetation located on the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans required as part of the building permits. 4. All of the access points to the parkland between single family ' lots shall either be paved and signed that they are public access points. 5. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of 1 both looped streets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as parkland dedication, not simply easements. I I Final Plat fo r ' Lake Susan Hills 5th Addition September 19, 1990 Page 5 6. Trails/Sidewalks: The developer shall be required to provide trails/sidewalks as follows: a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along thru streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time street improvements are constructed. In areas where temporary I street improvements are being accepted by the City, a temporary asphalt sidewalk may be installed with the understanding that it will be replaced by a permanent ' concrete sidewalk upon installation of permanent improvements. ' b. A 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of Powers Boulevard shall be dedicated for future trail purposes. c. The above trails/sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged. 7. The applicant will be required to pay 50% of park dedication fees. There will be no trail fee required. 8. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans, shall provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the setback. ' 9. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the improvements. 10. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR, Watershed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer. 11. After grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent and Type III erosion control. 12. Type II erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areas. 13. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 11 I Final Plat l at for Lake Susan Hills 5th Addition September 19, 1990 Page 6 14. Grading along the plat boundaries shall be compatible with adjacent properties and existing off-site drainage patterns. 15. Truck hauling in and out of the site shall be limited to the proposed Lake Susan Hills Drive access off of Powers Boulevard (County Road 17) at the south end of the project. 16. The applicant shall provide the necessary easements for the storm sewer proposed to be constructed outside of the current 5th Addition plat, or previously 4th Addition plat, and the temporary cul-de-sac on Flamingo Drive. 17. The drainage and utility easement through the northeast corner of Lot 5, Block 1, shall extend to the side lot easement line. " ' ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council minutes dated June 25, 1990. 1 2. Location of proposed 5th Addition. 3. Memo from Charles Foich dated September 17, 1990. 4. Final plat dated September 19, 1990. I I I 1 I City Council Meeting June 25, 1990 II s Mayor Chmiel: Second. Councilman Johnson: At that little cost, it's not worth going out to try to find a better bid that's for sure. • II Councilman Workman moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the Deloitte proposal to complete arbitrage. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 63.7 ACRES INTO 159 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED ON �-.-� THE WEST SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 17, JUST SOUTH OF LAKE SUSAN HILLS 2ND AND 3RD ^,�✓ ADDITION, ARGUS DEVELOPMENT. IPaul Krauss: The applicants are requesting approval to subdivide out 159 single family lots without outlots to be dedicated for park. This is the fourth phase of the Lake Susan Hills PUD. The plat's average lot size is 14,700 square feet with over 50% having 15,000 square feet or larger as required by ordinance. The plat's generally consistent with the approved concept, PUD concept plan with changes stemming mostly from issues connected to topographic concerns and poor soils that were uncovered. Also this phase has 4 more lots than was originally ' proposed but conditions have been required to insure that when you take the whole PUD cumulatively, that the gross allowable number of homes, which I believe is 411 for the entire PUD won't be exceeded. The street layout is . generally acceptable. Streets will be constructed in a phased program. To insure that everybody's aware that streets will be extended as they move into neighborhoods and buy lots, we will have streets paved up to their end. There will be barricades. There will be signs on those barricades that say the street 's to be extended. In the short term though, the street layout, the phasing layout makes pretty good sense and doesn't leave us with extraordinarily ,; long cul-de-sacs. At least we can live with that situation. There are some 1 road grades in excess of 7x which is the City standard. 6te're recommending that the plans be revised to eliminate those. Grading will be significant. We believe it 's generally reasonable. Although we note that some additional ' grading detailing is required on both the grading plan itself and related drainage issues. Lots 11 and 13, Block 4 contain a steep wooded ravine that is generally found in this area over here. Since it is a wooded ravine and since there are soils issues associated with it, we're recommending that the plat be revised to pull the homesites back from there. That can be done. You've got to massage the plat around somewhat. It will look a little different in that area but we think that it's worthwhile to preserve that feature. We're also requesting a tree removal plan so that we can attempt to save trees that are widely scattered around this site. Most of the site's been actively farmed and doesn't have a whole lot of vegetation on it. The applicant presented the plan 1 to the Park Board wherein they were offering basically a larger amount of acreage than had been originally proposed in the concept. In exchange they were looking for some concessions on the park dedication fees that would have been assessed. The Park Commission determined that the additional open space was not ' suitable for park due to soils, grades and drainage issues. They were willing to accept it as park however since it was adjacent to other land that they were • going to accept but they recommended that no reduction in park fees result from that. Details regarding drainage and the park continue to be worked on between staff and the applicant. We've got a goal of insuring that there's good access into the park and that the land is as useable as possible. The Planning Commission recommended that the preliminary plat be approved. Staff also 21 11 .City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 recommends approval with the conditions as modified by the Planning Commission and outlined in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Paul, is there any reason why, even though preliminary ' coming in is not signed by a PE? Paul Krauss: None that I'm aware of. Maybe the applicant can explain that. , We've'been working with a registered engineer on the plat. Mayor Chmiel: I often times think that that's a requirement even in a plat. To know that there is that being done with that PE's number attached to it as indicated. Gentlemen, do you have any discussions as to what Paul has indicated thus far? Anyone wishing to address it? Just state your name please and where you're located. Brian Olson: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Brian Olson. I work with Argus Development. Joe Miller Homes is the home builder and he'll be the home builder throughout this whole 159 lots and will be phased at approximately maybe 3 or 4 different phases over the next 3 and 4 years. I've got a few points to kind of go over on a couple of the staff recommendations and maybe we can have a little more discussion on the full meaning of them. Paul, is this the same staff report then as the Planning Commission? So it's all the same recommendations? Paul Krauss: Well there's one modification Brian. Condition 9 was modified by the Planning Commission such that the applicant shall provide calculations for City Engineering Department to demonstrate that the ponding area on Blocks 5 and 111 6 within the parkland meets the 100 year storm. Brian Olson: Okay, as long as we're talking about that point there. It notes here in the staff report that they would like to see the holding pond located in the north part of the proposed park area. Where it is right now as far as on the plan, it's in the lowest portion of the site and I believe when the original PUD was approved, it did go through the watershed district and they concurred with that location. We would prefer to keep it in that location. We in fact did meet with the engineering staff last week about that and they seemed to concur also that that's the best location for the pond. So I'd like to recommend that that condition be changed to allow the park to be located as is. Councilman Johnson: This doesn't say it moves anymore. The new condition 9 doesn't say what the old condition 9 did. Brian Olson: Okay. Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, the engineering position on the matter as conveyed by Charles Folch, our assistant who was at the location of the pond, he acknowledged that the location of the pond for the north area but it was conditioned that there's a few concerns that we had that had to be addressed by the developer. First of all was the 100 year ponding limits. That was the condition you mentioned coming out of the Planning Commission as far as calculations for that. That needed to be defined so we could determine the II proposed or the impact on the proposed trail system for the park and second was j an erosion control plan to deal with the overland drainage from the storm sewer outlets at the north end. Finally was a culvert would need to be designed and ilj 22 • 1 ,City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 constructed under the proposed trail to connect overland drainage so they're all kind of interrelated but I don't want the impression to be that there's a blank - check that engineering has written off on the location for the north side. There are some things that have to be dealt with here first. Brian Olson: That's correct. Paul Krauss: If I could expand on that too. There's a very real concern with the park and how it functions and that's why this issue's been raised. The pond that's being proposed by the applicant is down in there and most of the park property, active park area is down in here. What's happening though is that the pond in this location, if it's not designed appropriately, makes this area dedicated park property inaccessible. If the flood balance on this thing is too I high, the trails that are going to run around there connecting the two parts of the parks and different parts of the subdivision, they're going to be impassable. That's why we have a real concern with how that drainage is ' handled. We had originally proposed it being up north there because that isolates that ponding area and allows for a continuous park. The drainage is the key relative to the recreational use. , Brian Olson: And I agree with that. We worked it out at the Planning Commission and Park so that we are going to have those trails out of the water. I Mayor Chmiel: One of the problems I have with that, these last rainfalls that we've had I've had too many calls at my home at different hours of the night and day coming out to say, come and see the amount of water that we have and where we have it. I think that's something that really has to be addressed. Brian Olson: We'd really like to have a useable park next to our homes also. 11 Councilman Workman: So you're agreeable for it to be located on the north side then? Brian Olson: We can't. If we have to move it to the north site, then we still have to build a pond in that location because that's the lowest part of the site and the watershed district is going to require it. As a matter of fact, I can't even get all the storm water drainage off of this property up to the north part of the site. Mayor Chmiel: How's that going to be addressed then? IGary Warren: Well the calculations and such that need to be rovi P ded for us to evaluate it is the crux of that. Brian Olson: See what we talked about at the Planning Commission and then also last week was the fact that the bounce area, the 100 year flood area can be a rather unusual shape. It doesn't have to be rounded like a park and we can keep it away, or a pond, and we can keep it away from the edges where the trails are planning on going. The very center there of that proposed pond area, it's somewhat shaded there I guess. That's about all the bigger that pond is going to be. It does not go way out into the area but the 100 year flood would. But we're going to work on that with the staff to make sure that the trails will be dry. 23 City Council fleeting - June 25, 1990 Councilman Workman: How about the issue of making that north part, is that pond It going to cut off them and make two sections of the park? Is that what you're - getting at? Paul Krauss: Councilman Workman, that is the concern. Now it's really a design I problem at this point and it's up to the applicant to demonstrate to us that that's not going to happen. If they can do that, I guess we're comfortable with it. If they can't, we're going to have to find another answer. Councilman Workman: And until we get the proper data we can't even consider it. Chmiel: Right. Okay. C iei: lg ht y. Brian Olson: Also, on condition number 1. It talks about all street stubs to have a temporary cul-de-sac. Some of our street stubs that we're proposing are relatively short in length. Through the future phasing perhaps some of these won't even be 100 feet long without even any driveway access out onto it. And if that's the case, I would hope that perhaps we could just work with engineering department on that portion of the recommendation here on the report. Maybe leave it in his best judgment then as far as do we need a temporary cul-de-sac or not on that. Paul Krauss: We've discussed that in house and if there are in fact no homes on this stub street, we'd want it paved up to the property line but you put the barricade out at the street intersection to stop anybody from going down there. That would be acceptable to us. Gary Warren: As long as there's not a driveway access onto the street so they , , have not a full street, we would go along with that. Mayor Chmiel: Staff is comfortable with that I guess. I don't have any real ' problem. Councilman Workman: You're saying, I'm not sure I'm clear what you're saying. You aren't talking about on the cul-de-sac situation. You're talking about on the potential connection. Gary Warren: This is where the future road would be coming with a subsequent ' addition as Brian has indicated. So long as we don't have a driveway.. . Mayor Chmiel: Would you want to continue this out Paul. ' Councilman Workman: On the north side. - Brian Olson: On the very south there Paul, by the very southern cul-de-sac. I • Paul Krauss: For example there's a stub street and this one is here. The street would be extended up to this point. All the homes are on this portion of the street and there is a cul-de-sac there. We would want this paved which would put a barricade out here. Councilman Johnson: It's got to be obvious that the street is going to continue there so people don't think they're on the end of the road and that they'll never have a street on that side of their house. i 24 i lir . City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 Mayor Chmiel: Right. It eliminates a lot of problems as they come back. Brian Olson: The other thing would be point number 8. There was a lot of ,I discussion about building trails at the Planning Commission. I think the Planning Commission crossed out the paved portion of that recommendation. See I don't know if you're looking at the same recommendation that I am though. IIMayor Chmiel: I don't think I am. IICouncilman Johnson: This still says paved and signed. Mayor Chmiel: It does say paved and signed, yeah. IIPaul Krauss: To the best of my recollection, that wasn't changed. There's a reason for that and the reason is similar to the issues with road extensions. ' Cities have a devil of a time paving those trail connections at some point in I the future when the park is developed. What we'd like to achieve is that we believe there's a connection right in here. That there be some paved access with a sign that says trail for park access, so that as homes are developed II around there, that those people are aware that that's the condition that's going to be in there and that might have to suffice for several years until the park itself is developed by the City. IICouncilman Johnson: Yeah, I discussed the park access on Chan Pond with' one of the neighbors that bought the house next to the park access and both neighbors had sodded right up together. I said are you aware that you just sodded 5 feet of city property. He said no. He had no idea. I don't which neighbor sodded the park access but it'd be a few years probably before we can pave that access. I! . There's some more work to be done on the park before it's reasonable but those I two neighbors would probably have something to say about it when we go to do that. Brian Olson: Okay, as part of this recommendation in here it says paved and/or IIsigned so it would be okay if we just went ahead and signed those access points? Paul Krauss: My conditions just says and. Gary Warren: On page 10. IIPaul Krauss: On page 10 which is the most recent one. Councilman Johnson: A slab of asphalt going nowhere doesn't sake a lot of sense. If you had the sign at least there, the property owner can't say that he IIdidn't know that there was going to be a park access there. Even if the sign said future park access. Or just said park access. As long as it's a straight shot. Now the one on Chippewa happen to goes so far and then turn and you I really have to know, when you're walking on sodded grass, you don't know where that turn is or you're off the city property onto somebody's private property. Unless you bring a map. Brian Olson: One of the recommendations here was to plat all the park area and dedicate it over to the City. That is fine. We would prefer just to put up the sign that would say that this is going to be a park area and it's in all our promotional brochures and everything. And we are the only builder in there so 25 II City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 we have tighter control on what we say to people. It Mayor Chmiel: In one section of this I read two different things which is one page 7. It says paved and/or signed and on page 10 it just says paved and signed. Gary Warren: Page 10 is the consolidation. 1 Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Right. I think what they're looking at is basically having it as such. As being paved and signed. Unless Paul, do you have any other? Councilman Workman: Well if it's paved, why does it need to be signed? ' Paul Krauss: I guess we've fought enough of these battles over the years to possibly indulge in a little bit of overkill. But clearly the intent is that people know about what they're buying and if you feel the sign alone does it, we could live with that. We want something there on the ground. That's our preference. Councilman Johnson: It certainly does a lot more then we're got now at some of these locations. Gary Warren: I would concur Mr. Mayor that the battles that we fight, even though we have signs and easements when we go to pave something, usually it's overwhelming sometimes. The surprises and the position that staff gets put into to try to get these in. I would also opt for paving. �l Brian Olson: Mr. Mayor? May I ask on some of these other parkland connections that are to the north. How far as we talking about pavement because once it , does get paved a little bit, you're citizens are going to want to see the rest of the trail built. So I guess I would just like to know how far we're talking about. , Paul Krauss: Well we're talking about stubs. Getting past the homes from the public right-of-way. It's the City's obligation to develop the park in whatever timeframe the City can do that. Yeah, there may be a little bit of disappointment that that park is not built this summer or next fall or something but I still think that's preferable to not doing it at all and then having to fight the issues 2 or 3 years from now when we're prepared to develop the facility. Gary Warren: Once you get past the lot depth, I think that's what we're talking about. Mayor Chmiel: I think I agree with that. Brian Olson: As long as we're talking about some park issues. Before we can 11 price out lots out here we really need to get what the proposed uses are going to be in this park and what the park plan is going to be. This is something • ' that we've requested for almost 6 months now and I realize you want to see some kind of approval before you get into the real nuts and bolts on the park design. 1 The one thing though as part of our grading contract we've got to rough grade the whole park. And right now perhaps we are going to site grade that whole II 26 City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 park, or the whole property this fall and if we have to come back next e do some grading on the park. We've n on ao 1 got to go through mobilization again on all 111, • the equipment, we really need to get this whole project out there to kind of Ibalance out by itself so we don't have to haul any dirt around. I'd really like 1 to I guess urge the City to get us a park plan as soon as possible. Also, what kind of grading that we're going to be kind of talking about. That's all. ' Mayor Chmiel: Have we done that in the P ast? ' Gary Warren: Park plans? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Gary Warren: Chan Hills 3rd Addition. Curry Farms. We have generated park plans and I agree with Brian as far as the need to accurately define what we mean by our grade because we've had some parks that have been left in a very ' rough graded state. Mayor Chmiel: And we should get back to them with that. Gary Warren: While we're getting credits, •we need to make sure what we're getting. ' Brian Olson: See we will have our final grading plan into the City I think within 4 weeks. I guess just the last comment would be on condition number 17. This has to do with street grades at intersections and this is something that Charles in Engineering and myself and our engineer and Dave Hempel talked about last week. I guess Charles was willing to make some concessions to this just based on, we have a number of intersections that are so close together towards the south part of our property there where it accesses out onto the county road. If you've driven by the site, you can notice that it really does kind of climb up rather significantly. What Charles is mentioning is not any accesses to the County that would perhaps be shortened from this condition but some of the other ' ones. The T intersections. And I don't know if he's had a chance to talk to Gary about this or not but what I'd like to be able to do is at least this condition is just be able to work with the engineering staff on it. Mayor Chmiel: Gary, do you have any problems with that? Gary Warren: I don't know if I understood all of the specifics but Charles has left me documentation on the street grade issue that we were hold to the 7% maximum that the City has. As far as the intersection and stuff, he didn't elaborate although on a note here he said, all streets with a reduced 3% maximum and 200 foot landing area at street intersections. Paul Krauss: I think I can add a little bit to that. I spoke to Charles about ' that late this afternoon. What he indicated to me is, when you have a short stub street over here. What we're likely to do is put a stop sign over here so that traffic coming down to the County Road and then stop, this being the thru I movement. This thru movement didn't need to maintain the 3% grade but where traffic is coming to a stop it did so there is some flexibility in the standard. Wherever there's a stop sign, it's on that stop traffic flow that has the flexibility. 27 City Council Meeting - June 9 Y 9 25, 19 0 Gary Warren: We need the landing zones where the stop signs are obviously. Councilman Johnson: I see the hardest one there is obviously the one coming off � � of Powers Blvd. . What's the grade on that one right now? Gary Warren: Well we're saying we would allow a 7% max. He will have to get a permit from the County which they will enforce their landing zone requirements. Councilman Johnson: So we don't show, there's no street grades shown on these maps we've got here. Drawings we've got here. ' Paul Krauss: There should be. There is a set. Brian Olson: There's only about 2 places in the plat where it was 8% and there , were no grades over 8%. So really the difference between a 7% and 8% is 1 foot per 100. Gary Warren: We've gone along where we've got tree issues and some other environmental concerns where we've gone to 10%. I sure you remember like Near Mountain. Some of those. We didn't have those real impacts here that we felt 11 that it would be warranted to go beyond the 7% but I think the intersections that Brian is asking for us to consider, we certainly can work with him and work out those details. ' Brian Olson: The reason I'm asking this is that we are rather long on dirt on this to make it all work. The less grading that we have in the streets and then also in the intersections, that means we have to take down that hill even more. We have even more dirt left over. Then also the County, we got an agreement with them for 110,000 yards to remove from the site and the grading plan was y J based on that and now they're renigging. They would only like to do about 80,000 yards. Gary Warren: Have you talked to MnDot about dirt? Brian Olson: No I haven't. Councilman Johnson: Talk to Eden Prairie landfill. I hear they're still buying dirt. Brian Olson: They tested us. It didn't quite have the right amount of clay content. Almost worked out. Councilman Johnson: ...buying at $4.00 cubic yard or something. Ludicrous amount for dirt. I Brian Olson: Now that was pretty much the only comments I had to make about it. The last thing is just about the park. We've heard that the parks commission didn't feel that it was suitable for any kind of park use and that was a part of the staff report that went to parks but there was quite a bit of discussion and I think the parks commission turned around and felt there was a lot of use for that area. The soils that are in there are not real bad soil. They're bad for building construction but not for parks. As a matter of fact, there's quite a few of the same soils that we have in our very western part of the plat that we've got to correct for home construction. If in fact we are allowed to have I 28 I -City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 more than 159 lots here, we would have utilitized that central area more f . thoroughly for single family residential but since we are limited at 159 lots, 111 we chose to well let 's take a look at all the best soils and then work around all that. We've had some trouble in our first addition out there. Gary's probably aware of a couple of the instances where there was some construction put through some bad soils and we got a couple problems with a couple houses. But that's all I've got. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. The other question that I asked Paul, is there any reason why the PE has not signed this preliminary? Brian Olson: He signed the cover sheet though. ' Mayor Chmiel: None of mine are signed. Not the ones at least I have. Brian Olson: Okay. Maybe in the rush of getting it in in a hurry. ' Mayor Chmiel: I prefer seeing that signature on there when they take their reviews of this. Brian Olson: I'm sorry for that. I didn't realize that happened. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, the other thing that I see in staff recommendations was ' changing the date as you had May 10th of 1990. It should be so noted that the plans are 4-16-90. Thank you. Any discussion. Councilman Johnson: Well I'm going to hit this one with something I've hit I don't know how many preliminary plats with over the last 4 years. 3 1/2 years. Right here in Section 18 of our Code it requires that flood plain areas, location of wooded areas. . .and all that other good stuff be shown and once again we got another preliminary plat in here that doesn't show the wooded areas. You're talking about these wooded areas along these ravines and I don't see it ' shown on the plat. I was fairly familiar with the area. Not even the cornfield part of the area. I didn't realize it went into any wooded areas and reviewing this without the staff getting out there, I never would have seen it. It continues to upset me that plat after plat comes in where they conveniently ' forget and this may be, since it's such a small area, maybe a little oversight but in other places it's been real convenient that the other plats from other developers, that they didn't show the woods that they're going to clear cut. ' Here again they've got these ravines that we're talking about trees. I'd like to see the requirements very plainly here in the book. I don't even like to look at them when they don't have the minimum requirements. ' Mayor Chmiel: Can you see that that's also part of it? Anything else? Councilman workman: Are these streets yet unnamed or are they going to be Street A, B and C? Brian Olson: They're unnamed as of yet. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and that at some time should be on the plat as well. Councilman Johnson: Are you looking for Workman Drive now? Clark got his Big Horn Drive in before he left. Chmiel Way? 29 I ', City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 It Mayor Chmiel: No. No thanks. Any other. discussion?cession. I guess I see all those specific conditions as such with 1 thru 23 with other, the specific ones of. . . Councilman Workman: I just have one quick question. Number 13. All building permits will, I think it's with patio doors as part of the building plan shall provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the setback. Doesn't it sound kind of vague? People are creative with decks. Paul Krauss: Yeah, they can be and I guess we're not trying to inhibit design freedom. Councilman Workman: Are we giving them a free permit to build whatever they want with this? , Paul Krauss: No. No. We've had a number of problems in PUD's with decks. Pheasant Hills being a good example. Since last fall I've changed the procedures adminstratively where when patio doors are on a house plan, we look at the lot survey to make sure a deck can go in there and if it can't, we tell them to take out the patio door. But thisis just to clarify that issue and to put the developer on notice that you have responsibility to, give us this survey information whenever you request a building permit. A standard deck is like 10 x 12. If somebody wanted to get more exotic and do something larger, that might not fit but as long as there was a legitimate use for that patio door, I guess we would be satisfied. Councilman Johnson: I mean if you only had 3 or 4 foot to the building setback and you wanted to put in a door on there, it doesn't make sense. In fact I know ' one that 's that way. Put in patio doors and then only had 5 feet. Actually put a deck to the property line behind a privacy fence. Councilman Workman: Well I'd move approval with. II Mayor Chmiel: Okay, with the revisions as we said on there. , Councilman Workman: With staff working with them on number 1, 4, 8, 17 in addition to the Mayor's comment on the date. I Mayor Chmiel: As a preliminary plat. Councilman Workman: Yes. ' Councilman Johnson: I'll second that. I'd also like to ask one additional question. The storm sewer designs, there seems to be a long ways down some of these streets before they hit an intersector like between Block 6 and 7 on Street D. Water goes a long ways. I see the engineer's left here. It goes all the way, about 10 to 12 houses before it hits a storm sewer. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, that's maybe something Oon that you could write to have Gary check. Councilman Johnson: I mean that could be adequate. 1 Paul Krauss: In Gary's absence, it's something that we did note as well but we will get final design specs and they will have to justify that or put in Ilj 30 ' • City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 additional catch basins. Brian Olson: Just to kind of follow-up on that too. You know the .engineering II _ department did put me on notice as far as a real complete review on this whole plat. They are really kind of rushed on time and things so they did state that just because of the approval as is and things, things are probably going to pop up through the final plans and specs and things and we're aware of that. ' Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Preliminary Plat on Lake Susan Hills West PUD 4th Addition for 159 single family lots as shown on the plans dated 4-16-90 with direction to staff to work with the applicant on conditions 1, 4, 8 and 17 and subject to the following conditions: ' 1. All streets that are proposed for future connection shall be provided with a turnaround which meets city standards with a barricade and signage ' stating that it is a temporary cul-de-sac and will be a future road connection. ' 2. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping along the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the developer shall provide $150.00 per lot for landscaping. ' 3. The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature vegetation located on the site. Areas of mature vegetation not impacted by streets or building pads shall be preserved with tree removal plans 11 required as part of the building permits. 4. The applicant shall pull back the cul-de-sac servicing Lots 11-13, Block 4 to remove the building pads from the ravine areas. . 5. The applicant shall provide a registered engineer's report on soils, footings and structural design and a registered engineer's grading and ' drainage plan for the City Engineer and Building Department approval prior to issuance of a building permit on Lots 11 and 13, Block 4. ' 6. An amended preliminary plat maintaining with at least 50% of the lots with 15,000 square feet or more shall be provided. 7. Designate the parkland as an outlot which will be platted as part of the first phase. 8. All of the access points to the parkland between single family lots shall be paved and signed that they are public access points. 9. The applicant shall provide calculations for City Engineering Department IIapproval to demonstrate that the ponding area proposed between Block 5 and 6 within the parkland meets 100 year storm requirements and that there is adequate room for access between the north and south park areas. ' 10. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of both looped streets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as parkland dedication, not simply easements. ' 31 I • City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 11. Trails/Sidewalks: The development shall be required to provide trails/ 11 sidewalks as follows: a. Five foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along thru 111 streets as shown on the attached plan. Sidewalks shall be completed at the time street improvements are constructed. I b. A 20 foot wide trail easement along the west side of Powers Boulevard shall be dedicated for future trail purposes. c. The above trails/sidewalks satisfy the City's trail dedication requirements and therefore, no trail fee shall be charged. 12. The applicant will be required to pay 50% of park dedication fees. There will be no trail fee required. 13. All building permits with patio doors as part of the building plans shall , provide a survey showing that a deck can be installed without a variance to the setback. 14. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the improvements. ' 15. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits required by the DNR, Watershed District and Office of the Carver County Engineer. 16. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City Engineer calculations ineer with calculat' n I1 1 verifying the storm sewer, watermain and sanitary sewer pipe sizing. 17. At intersections where the street grades exceed 3%, a landing zone with a street grade of 3% or less for a minimum distance of 200 feet shall be used. i 18. After grading, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 to 1 will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets or equivalent. 19. Type II erosion control shall be added along the proposed silt fence adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areas. 1 20. All street and utility improvements shall conform to the City's standards for urban construction. Construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 21. The applicant shall reduce street grades to comply with City Ordinance throughout the development (maximum 7%). , 22. Prior to assigning street names, the applicant shall consult with Public Safety for recommendations. - 23. Park grading: The developer, at it's sole cost, shall grade the park areas 1 in accordance with a timetable and plans to be furnished by the City. The IF 32 • IV/ . II -City Council Meeting - June 25, 1990 City will develop park plans when the final park boundaries have been Idetermined. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ��! RECONSIDERATION OF A FINAL PLAT CONDITION ESTATES. 0 CO DZTION FOR GREAT PLAINS GOLF E E DON r HALLA. f'�Paul Krauss: On July 10, 1989 the City Council approved the final plat for, Great Plains Golf Estates which basically was designed to create three 2 1/2 I acre lots which are shown down there in the extreme southern end of this plat and several large outlots. The plat was given preliminary plat approval in 1987 under the old ordinance which allowed 2 1/2 acre lots. The applicant was II allowed basically to get his foot in the door and reserve the right to plat those lots. As you will recall, we've done this for a few other individuals as well and I believe he's been given a 5 year deadline to complete platting the property. The 3 lot division which was final platted is the first phase of the 1 ultimate plan which was to plat 38 lots on 105 acres. I couldn't find a reduced transparency of that plat but we do have a full sized one over here that we could pass around. This represents the ultimate subdivision that was given I preliminary plat approval. Stemming from the preliminary plat review, the final plat requirement was to dedicate 27 foot of right-of-way on both sides of TH 101 which was designed to allow for future road upgrading. The applicant did not II want to convey that easement and staff wouldn't release the plat so the plat's basically sat around for some time. At this point the applicant wants to proceed with final platting or recording the final plat and is requesting that that condition pertaining to the right-of-way dedication be removed. Staff is ' _ recommending that the requirement be upheld. Although no plans are in the works to currently upgrade TH 101, both MnDot and city staff believe it's prudent to reserve the right-of-way since road improvements are going to be necessary. I That's true basically with everybody concerned. I would point out that the Eastern Carver County traffic study and the draft comprehensive plan transportation element have both identified TH 101 as a problem area. The 38 lot subdivision that has been approved will increase local traffic. It will I create three new street intersections on TH 101 and also has many lots that have direct frontage onto the highway itself. Thus, there's apparently to staff, there's a significant benefit to be gained from the ultimate improvement of that II highway for this subdivision. The applicant has indicated that he currently has tree stock located in the proposed right-of-way area. There's a high volume well in the future right-of-way and there's also a portion of a building. Staff I does not object and I spoke to the City Engineer about this. Ye don't object to allowing these items to remain undisturbed within that easement area until some point in the future that the road is upgraded and then we'd like them removed at the owner's expense. But I'd have to point out that in all likelihood the I property is going to be subdivided prior to the highway being upgraded so most of these things would be removed anyway. The well possibly not but again we don't object to leaving it in the right-of-way as long as it's clear that the • I responsibility for their ultimate removal lies with the property owner. Again, staff is recommending that the right-of-way condition be upheld. We are willing to consider or have it approved with a condition that would allow them to keep Ithose facilities located in the right-of-way. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Paul. Any discussion? • II33 I I 1 -4TH r -,ADDITION 1 •:•iy;7 :; 11 �1,1� 11111 IIIII 1 111111 III 1 'Vr� Iilil / eif,„*:i:::::::i:::i:.:.:ig I I 1 . •I II 44..:11, �_ �'� ilt ills 1, 111 ��, r � 11 1111111 21 •:}: i 7 VIM eir . r 416 ‘'4 • � & *TAIT- 4MR03' idelll N11111♦ 1 ♦ I I 4 ♦ 4 Mr . 1 1 I 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST 1 PLAT ADDITIONS r ATA..ICkM it I 1 I CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Sr. Planner FROM: Charles Folch, Assistant City Engineer DATE: September 17, 1990 ' SUBJ: Final Plat Review for Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition Project No. 90-16 ' The plat for the Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition consists of Lots 1 through 9 , Block 1 and Lots 1 through 5 , Block 2 and the extension of Flamingo Drive. This subdivision is located along the northern portion of the amended Lake Susan Hills West PUD situated between the two segments of the previous 4th Addition. This addition will extend Flamingo Drive approximately 800 feet to the south. Grading The existing topography for this addition displays a northeast to southwest gradient. The proposed grading plan (previously ' approved in conjunction with the 4th Addition) appears to maintain this drainage scheme. Special slope stabilization methods such as wood fiber blankets will need to be implemented in the rear lots of Lots 6 , 7, 8 and 9, Block 1 as grades are ' verging 3 :1 or greater in these areas. In an effort to coordinate the balancing of earth work in these ' areas, the applicant is proposing to also grade the area designated as the future 7th Addition. The proposed grading for the area south of the 5th Addition was previously approved to ' facilitate the installation of the storm sewer system extending to the ponding basin. This previously approved storm system for the 4th and 5th Additions is to be constructed to the ponding basin in an effort to reduce potential erosion problems between ' construction phases. As long as the grading along these boundaries is compatible with the adjacent properties and existing off-site drainage patterns, staff finds the grading proposal acceptable. 1z I Jo Ann Olsen It September 17, 1990 Page 2 i Erosion Control Erosion Control silt fence is proposed at strategic locations throughout the grading area. Type-III erosion control shall be implemented at all locations where slopes are 3 :1 or greater. All disturbed areas shall be reseeded and mulched promptly upon completion of the grading operations. Hauling g It is anticipated that any excess fill material from this grading phase may be disposed of at an off-site location. If this location is in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the disposal. Working Hours Working hours for the grading and hauling of this phase shall be limited to 7 : 00 AM to 6 : 00 PM, Monday through Saturday except on holidays . I Streets The street right-of-way width for the Flamingo Drive extension has been platted as 50 feet and is consistent with the previously approved PUD agreement for the existing Flamingo Drive to the I north. Street grades proposed for the addition are in accordance with City requirements. The proposed street width for Flamingo Drive is to be 31 feet back-of-curb to back-of-curb. Easements ' As mentioned previously, the storm sewer system is proposed to be constructed and extended to the detention pond in the park area as part of the 4th Addition. A large portion of this storm sewer is proposed to exist outside the 5th addition and previous addition plats. Therefore, a drainage and utility easement will be required for the portion of the storm sewer which falls outside of the platted right-of-way. This easement shall exist until such time that the future addition is platted with the corresponding right-of-way and easements needed for the storm sewer system. ' An easement will also be needed for the temporary cul-de-sac at the end of Flamingo Drive. This easement will be vacated upon platting of the future addition. The drainage and utility easement through the northeast corner of 11 Lot 5 , Block 1 shall extend to the side lot easement line. Jo Ann Olsen September 17, 1990 ' Page 3 Recommended Conditions 1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities to guarantee completion of the improvements . 2 . The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permits ' required by the DNR and Watershed District. 3 . The applicant shall provide the necessary easements for the storm sewer proposed to be contructed outside of the current 5th Addition plat or previously 4th Addition plat and the temporary cul-de-sac on Flamingo Drive. 4 . The applicant shall construct all improvements in accordance with the City standards for urban construction. 5 . Upon completion of the grading operations, all disturbed areas shall immediately be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes 3 :1 or greater will need to be stabilized with wood fiber blankets and Type-III erosion control . 6 . Grading along the plat and site grading boundaries for this addition shall be compatible with the adjacent properties and existing off-site drainage patterns. 7 . The drainage and utility easement through the northeast ' corner of Lot 5, Block 1 shall extend to the side lot easement line. ' jms c: Gary Warren, City Engineer Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician 1 1 1 1