Loading...
8. Ersbo Addition Preliminary Plat & Wetland Permit I " - O• � I TY O F P I. DATE: Nov. 1, 1989 C.C. :87::: 5:' 1989 CASE 1 � 88-7 WAP Prepared by: Olsen/v 1 t STAFF REPORT il I PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 5.06 Acres into 7 Single Family Lots "- ,;- IWetland Alteration Permit for Development Within Z 200 Feet of a Class A Wetland ` Q IV LOCATION: 1211 Lake Lucy Road J 1 1.1.. � APPLICANT: Richard Ersbo William Engelhardt Associates Q 1211 Lake Lucy Road 1107 Hazeltine Blvd, Suite 48( IIChanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318 ■ PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family 1 ACREAGE: 5. 06 (gross) acres 4 .42 (net) acres . I DENSITY: 1.38 lots per acre (net) kW SY atY 6fdorsed i%/tW Administn F ADJACENT ZONING Modified II AND LAND USE: N- RSF; single family Rejected Dee /I-1S-S7 S— RR; vacant Date Submitted to Commission 1 QE— RSF; single family gate Submitted to Council 2e I1- -0 Q W- RR; Class A wetland 1 W WATER AND SEWER: Sewer and water is available to the site. (... PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site contains one single family I residence with a swimming pool and a steep slope from the middle of the site towards Lake Lucy Road. 1 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential ' , '"n'r NIP I o I.�; iLLB _ K Ø1ct 1.mi. pr \ - ,N, AM./ 12 114,...a 1 bpi, 'Ai lij AR Will pr's Mi.: ` 7 i ati °�dA o i ••;I : 7 GOt111Ti• ��� �� 9111111111kIrlilit nit bit • 1111111101r1"12 T I )3116 I ! IIPMPIT MM LE.W •7 TH STRUT 1 2 c rizaj !� tt tt j tk.. Itii taliEllgal FI, • . ii.,:iimj .. E'elt ■ MUNI NW .*. to 700 mu iv = ■ W .■ :, , II■ M- seal :. --P 11 • 1.LAKE LU C Y E � � i� ?I� ��< . , %�=% �II ` ■L , , Vi r 5011: a LA 1n,, `` L, Ai ,� , !T t : to ,seal�.�./;. 00 �' �4`. , '.. - iiiiiiiiiiiiiir *I37:4; "I2 :es o `" ` • ■ 1 �. RSF LAKE ANN o RD Iiii R - ICIL . . I R1 ' • • R4 1 RR . x II • R 1 2 R1 III 2 ■ `� - . - U ' =OU EVAR. rte. - ', 11 Ersbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 Page 2 BACKGROUND ' On June 13, 1988, the City Council approved the preliminary plat - for Ersbo Addition (Attachments #1 and #2) . The lot con- w , figuration of the 1988 approved plan contained 4 new single family lots with a fifth lot containing the existing single family residence. The site was serviced by a 50 foot wide right- of-way from Lake Lucy Road along the northern half of the pro- perty on the western edge of the site. A full street standard cul-de-sac serviced the four new lots and a 50 foot easement south of the dedicated 50 foot right-of-way serviced the existing single family residence. The preliminary plat also provided a 5Q foot easement located east of the cul-de-sac which could serve as a future connection to the property to the east. The approved II plat was filed with Carver County and the applicant was in the process of having the property developed. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY I The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat for City approval. According to the applicant, he is requesting approval of a new plat because the cost to make the necessary improvements to the previously approved plat was such that he could not afford to develop the property. It should also be noted that the origi- nal plan would have created only 4 new homesites while the current plat will create 6 . The new plat proposes to serve the site with a 300 ft. long cul- de-sac off of Lake Lucy Road directly across from existing Arlington Court (Curry Farms) . The cul-de-sac will service six new single family lots. The existing single family residence will be located on the seventh lot and serviced by the existing bituminous driveway along the westerly edge of the property. All of the lots meet the minimum requirements for lot area, depth and width, except for Lot 1, Block 2, which contains the existing single family residence. Lot 1, Block 2 is a flag lot with only 30 feet of street frontage containing the existing bituminous driveway. Therefore, a variance to the lot width requirement of 90 feet is required for Lot 1, Block 2. The original plat approved a substandard lot width of 50 feet for the lot with the existing house. A variance was not required although the lot really had only 50 ft. of paved frontage, the undeveloped right-of-way ran parallel to the lot. Thus it was technically in compliance with City standards. Staff supports the variance and revised plat for several reasons. The original approved plat runs the street right-of-way along the western edge of the site. A careful review of currently available information indicates that this road could not be constructed without significantly impacting an adjacent wetland and requiring the removal of a forested bluff line. The approved alignment also would not have served many potential homesites since the wetland would be on one side and the bluff line on the other. Staff has also reviewed overall access to surrounding IS Ersbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 Page 3 properties and concluded that the original roadway configuration did not adequately provide service for those lots and, in fact, ' raised a number of additional problems that are detailed in the report. Finally, we note that the current layout is not substantively different than the reality of the original, ' approved plan. When we look further at Lot 1, Block 2 we conclude that there is not much opportunity for further sub- divisions that would result in additional homes using the driveway to access Lake Lucy Road. This is due to the location of the existing home and swimming pool and prevailing grades. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at the November 1, ' 1989. Most of the discussion was focused on access issues. The discussion focused on means to serve Lot 1, Block 2, the large lot containing the existing home. There was some desire to see ' the need for two curb cuts for the plat eliminated. This would be accomplished by somehow relocating the driveway to enter onto Eagle Circle cul-de-sac rather then directly onto Lake Lucy Road. Staff indicated that this may be possible but is made difficult due to prevailing grades in the area. Further discussion covered the potential of Lot 1, Block 2, which contains 92 ,394 square feet, to be further subdivided and if subdivision were to occur, how could access be provided? Staff indicated that subdivision potential is limited by the location of the existing home, swimming pool and existing grades. Upon further investigation, we found that there is a potential for serving the lot with a new ' street running along the southern property line. An illustration of this alignment is attached to this report. ' The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit. They added a 5th condition that requires compliance with conditions of the associated sub- , division approval. They recommended approval of the subdivision on a 3 to 2 vote subject to staff' s recommendations. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the developer has revised ' the plat to respond to several of the conditions relating to revised engineering design standards for utilities, drainage and the street. In conclusion, the plat is generally well designed and is in compliance with virtually all applicable standards. It is essen- tially a modification of an approved plat with the primary change being revised access that in our opinion results in a more reasonable roadway pattern on this lot and for surrounding par- cels. Since the plat is located within 200 ft. of a Class A wetland, an alteration permit is required. We note that the current plat has significantly less potential for impacting the adjacent wetland. Staff is recommending that the plat and ' wetland alteration permit be approved with the variance to allow 30 feet of lot front for Lot 1, Block 2, subject to appropriate conditions. JIM 1 11 Ersbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 Page 4 Access The original plan illustrated a new public street called Arlington Avenue running south from Lake Lucy Road over the western 50 ft. of the site. The right-of-way would have only been improved over approximately the northern 160 feet whereupon it would turn east and end in a cul-de-sac that would serve the four new home sites that were then being proposed. Additional right-of-way was reserved to extend the cul-de-sac to the east to serve an adjacent property. Arlington Avenue could theoretically be extended south at some point in the future to accommodate additional lots. The current plat is considerably different in that the Arlington Avenue right-of-way would be vacated and a new cul-de-sac referred to as Eagle Circle would run south from Lake Lucy Road and would only serve the six new home sites that would result from the current plat. The existing home would continue to utilize a driveway to Lake Lucy Road that is contained in a 30 ft. wide "neck" . Staff worked with the developer to insure that the Eagle Circle right-of-way is directly in line with the existing Arlington Court right-of-way to provide for a safe four- way intersection. Staff supports the new access positions for several reasons, least of which are problems which have become evident with the original street layout. Based upon data that we currently have, the Arlington Avenue right-of-way would probably have been dif- ficult to extend to the southern perimeter of the plat to serve future home sites. It is evident that there is a significant grading problem in that construction activity to build the street would likely result in serious impact to the adjacent Class A wetland as well as destruction of a number of trees on a wooded bluff line through which the alignment runs. The roadway would also be expensive to construct since it could not have any homes along the western side due to the presence of the wetland. Staff is also concerned with the original proposal that the Eagle 111 Circle cul-de-sac, which was shown off of Arlington Avenue, could ever be extended to the east as indicated. The goal of extending the street to the east would be to service adjacent lots between this site and Powers Boulevard in order that the number of curb cuts on both streets could be minimized. However, the alignment that was approved would have resulted in the running of a new street within 15 feet of an existing home located east of the Ersbo Addition and would have also resulted in the double fronting of lots between Eagle Circle and its extension and Lake Lucy Road creating an undesirable residential environment. During the past week, the City has obtained aerial topographic maps that will be presented to the Planning Commission when this item is reviewed. From these maps we have concluded that the best means of serving the area is to allow the Ersbo Addition to 1 be accessed as proposed while working to combine driveways and/or create a new cul-de-sac to service lots to the east as they are Ersbo Subdivision/WAP ' November 1, 1989 Page 5 subdivided. We also believe that when the MUSA Line is extended ' and adjacent properties are subdivided, there may be an oppor- tunity to bring in a new street from Lake Lucy Drive looping east to Powers Boulevard with the alignment dropping down from Lake ' Lucy on the west side of the wetland. The proposed new 300 ft. long cul-de-sac uses street grades ranging from 2 . 2% to 6 .6% which are acceptable by City standards. The proposed paved cul-de-sac bubble should be increased from a 40 ft. radius to a 42 ft. radius to meet City standards. Final plans and specs should be developed for staff approval. Existing ' street right-of-way granted under the orignal plat will need to be vacated. Utilities City water service is available from Lake Lucy Road. An existing 6 inch line has been installed under Lake Lucy to the northeast ' corner of the property and can provide adequate service. Staff is recommending that the water system be looped to serve future developments to the east and to provide adequate levels of ser- ' vice. Therefore we are recommending that a watermain extension be stubbed between Lots 2 and 3 to the southeast corner of the plat. Sanitary sewer service is provided by an existing 6 inch ' line extending onto the property from Lake Lucy Road. This line is inadequately sized to accommodate the project and needs to be upgraded to an 8 inch size from the existing manhole in Lake Lucy Road. The fire hydrant located at the south end of the cul-de- sac needs to be provided with a 10 ft. clear radius. Grading/Drainage ' Site grading is quite extensive with the existing hillside being cut back to allow the construction of the cul-de-sac and building pads. The amount of disturbance, however, is very closely aligned with the grading plan that was approved with the original plat. Staff is recommending that the grading plans be accepted with a series of modifications as follows: ' 1 . To construct drainage swales around each of the homes to make sure that water is directed around the house pads. 2. The plans illustrate a berm in the Lake Lucy Road right-of- way. This berm cannot be allowed in the right-of-way and should be removed from the plans. Staff believes the con- , cept of a berm along the right-of-way is a valid one, however, and encourages the developer to relocate it onto his property. 3 . An erosion control plan acceptable to staff is required before grading work can be initiated. Type 3 erosion ' controls must be supplied along the western elevation to pro- tect the adjacent wetland. I Ersbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 II Page 6 4. While the grading is virtually identical to the original II plan, we note that there is some tree loss that will be experienced along the hillside. Prior to initiation of II grading, staff wants to walk the site with the developer' s engineer to make modifications to the grading plan that may be required to protect trees and to establish a no cut line for trees that are to remain. Grading plans may be modified II by staff in the field to protect trees where possible. The site naturally drains to the west into the adjacent wetland. II Plans call for utilization of a storm sewer system to perpetuate the natural flow. Catch basins in Eagle Circle will intercept the flow directing it into a sedimentation basin on Lot 6 . It Iwill then outlet into an additional pipe into the wetland. Staff finds the drainage plan to be adequate, however, there are several modifications that are required. Based upon directives of the Planning Commission, staff is recommending: I 1. That the sedimentation pond be provided with a skimmer device. I 2. Plans illustrate the outlet for the sedimentation pond running north the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way rather than II discharging directly into the wetland. Outlet pipes should be realigned to directly run water into the wetland. Additional engineering detail is required, however, based upon current plans it appears as though the applicant may II need to obtain a drainage and utility easement for the pipe and outlet from an adjacent property owner to realign the pipe. 3. Project approval by the Watershed District is required. I Park Dedication Fees This plat has been reviewed by Park and Recreation staff in a I manner consistent with the original approval, a cash dedication is recommended. I Wetland Alteration Permit The subject parcel is located adjacent to a Class A wetland. 1 This wetland is protected by the City and by DNR. The proposed development directs runoff from the site to the northwest corner of the property into a holding pond and then discharges runoff II into the adjacent wetland. Although a small amount of runoff is being generated by the development, the proposed pond location will benefit in removing sediment from the runoff prior to it I entering the Class A wetland. The discharge runoff from the pro- posed site will occur across the adjacent property into the Class A wetland. Therefore, a drainage easement shall be necessary II from the property owner prior to final plat approval to insure IIErsbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 Page 7 Ithat the proposed drainage plan can be accommodated. In addition, a permit from the DNR will be required for construction to allow runoff Iinto the Class A wetland. The proposed preliminary plat actually decreases impact to the Class I A wetland over the existing approved plat in that the the improved street is being removed from adjacent to the Class A wetland. Easements I . The following easements and right-of-way should be provided. I1. Right-of-way for Eagle Circle. 2 . Request the City Council vacate right-of-way for existing streets Iand easements approved under the original plat. 3 . Utility easements are required for the proposed watermain and sanitary sewer alignments including the watermain stub between ILots 2 and 3 to the eastern property line. 4 . Drainage and utility easements are required over the pond and I storm sewer pipes on Lot 6 , Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; and based upon final engineering design may be required over an adjacent parcel to the west. I5 . Standard utility easements around the perimeter of each lot. Compliance Table ICOMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ILot Lot Lot Home Area Width Depth Setbacks I 15,000 90 125 30' front, 20' rear, 10 ' side Block 1 I Lot 1 15, 547 117 132 N/A 2 17,565 140 132 N/A 3 15,840 105 129 N/A I 4 17,230 106 160 N/A 5 16,800 110 131 N/A 6 16,981 116 137 N/A IBlock 2 Lot 1 92,394 30* 257 65 ' front I 80' east 100 ' west 130 ' rear I * Variances Required - Variance to allow 30 ' of frontage on Lot 1 , Block 2. I Ersbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 1 Page 8 RECOMMENDATION - WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT ' Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped "Received October 11, 1989" , subject to the following conditions: ' 1. Acquisition of a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner. ' 2. Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. I 3. Creation of a storm water retention pond in the northwest corner of Lot 6 , Block 1. 4 . Installation of Type III erosion control between the develop- 1 ment and the Class A wetland. 5. Compliance with conditions of Preliminary Plat #87-36 . " ' RECOMMENDATION - PRELIMINARY PLAT ' Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision #87-36 as presented on the plat stamped "Received October 11, 1989", with a variance to allow a 30 foot lot width on Lot 1, Block 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide final detailed plans of the streets and utility improvements. 2. Lots 1 and 6 , Block I are to gain access solely by driveway to Eagle Circle. Access to Lake Lucy Road is prohibited. A notice of this limitation should be placed in shared title of both lots. 3. Provide final erosion control plans acceptable to staff. Type III erosion control will be required along the western perimeter of the site adjacent to the wetland. Prior to the initiation of grading, staff will walk the site with the developer to mark out trees designated for preservation. Staff will modify the plans as required to improve tree pre- servation efforts. Drainage swales are to be provided around each of the homes. The berm located in the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way is to be relocated onto Lot 1, Block 1. r Ersbo Subdivision/WAP November 1, 1989 Page 9 ' 4 . Provide final drainage plans for approval by City Staff. Watershed District approval is required. 5 . Easements to be provided: a. Right-of-way for Eagle Circle. ' b. Request the City Council vacate right-of-way for existing streets and easements approved under the original plat. ' c. Utility easements are required for the proposed watermain and sanitary sewer alignments including the watermain stub between Lots 2 and 3 to the eastern property line. d. Drainage and utility easements are required over the pond and storm sewer pipes on Lot 6 , Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; and based upon final engineering design may be required ' over an adjacent parcel to the west. e. Standard utility easements around the perimeter of each ' lot. 6 . Enter into a development contract with the City. 7. Compliance with the conditions of Wetland Alteration Permit #88-7. " ATTACHMENTS 1. Revised drainage and grading plan dated November 1, 1989. ' 2. Revised preliminary street grades, sanitary sewer and water- main plans dated October, 1989. MEM I �J ....../. , ' , , ♦sue- ` , ' v • •, , 1 , / • / / / . // , ' ',, • ; ,• ,. • ,k ,, , • i i,, 0 ,Z4.... C \ la. ' '//t, _I. r ' M1 ! '� .' . Sri ; I to N `` - , / /' • / ,o' ,' . I. ` C;_ -_.A,-7,..•••• ';r/., 'I III•;r;' r•r rte,41..,/1.., 'i i' lb i �`. , _ .. .. ` -ode` .6i` �/ I �. • •/�. t. I, ,• ♦ �� 09 ' • /i/ • • L--t \ 'e....\- i6g. ' . • • i T ■ 1 '-__\ -- ' --• , - ".' .G' k' . / • `' ` ` - — - _ - ,-� •' •\` ' �' V'+' . , ' t , /.. L. - ---'1- - ' _ --- . , ^ +' / p / 1 --•.. ti r� • .''' ` . i'_ , Oil / •i 1.� 1 , i t. 1 ; P m}�� //;' a ,i-- 1■ I . t -/ j .T — --- /-1 ! / i E ' '--.: , / .2-'i, - _ 4 - - /+ i, P 1 ,' I i o' / 1 / I 1 I r CO(0 I I r, ' I o - ee _ �s ! 1 o� • / r= t s m. 1 r as � 1« / of a ,-r, i °£ , min "� i r N_ 1,' {� r j j �• Of ∎- *i t i L4 - --1 r r q _„-Ar.- i t l -, ilit---A4L............. I 0. oe, -- • y�t'Liar do atm r iMgelliiiiiirli511,womiali4, / `� ---• • may. %' .' .._ _ _.? ,' • 4 I I - i i 1 ' 1 II•�' rl 1 I lo�n°c! M N1 4 LUCY - , - ROAD - . . , - - ' -• M I N 1 a, \ S . t O.L. WETLAND 1 lo• 'I JONN CLARK , ti r` i ' t ■NN ,!EN{ r 'All ,is 11 N N I v) 4 ,. fr --- 1 • W •ca i N �— soo--+- W ". r ACATED /i W I P. 145 V al j W of■I, —• —�_I i � 'f`r�� "� 11 � ► 1 . 6 N J a, "WIN " W I/4, NE.I/4, SW V4 ` Mali.1�- K""rs y ` .�9 V SHENENDOA • R L. PETERSON . ' s •-- n� i 81t 97,P 319 Z?r --- r,' HARD OR7TENGLAD �o�ar ;~ , :r s; _ _ �+ 215 0.. - ... VY , " I I' " - - , T• N JAMES C *AVI$, a Nt1AA,!96 7 r r I!-6 ,�"i i r.i I 1 I I r •} I.0O, " uT L 2.9C.. ©� `�" O :YLVE:iTkR TR Us + 2 XNt IRO, R 103 I I so Y ;r 1 RoPosg•D STl�' �� °` — I a� u , W,, I' 1 , 3O IEW1S WuITALLA m • z 2 O 1 \, 1 ----- -__ 2 3 11 \ 12 II / •' 4 1 • 3 4 Mill w w ION w w • w / w r w I w Amp • — — I• I I • ;` 3315 55 1'\ j-EDGE &,ININOUS . - o0 I -.LAKE `LOGY '\, ROAp �•\Q 1 S --- e 'I to—, --_..4 4..1 00 137.82 "---. t `` a .,)•,/....1.. 11--4 I I� 1p � __I u I 125 25 -Z�- ---=-------)`'r i1 1 '' ■∎ 1 1 ; - - -'01� I , 1 ,In II 1 I /' ;4 r-- I • I g, I m �; ,m t I i 1. ' I I•11 , % 1 i1„I -1(1___!,-' I I E1 1 I g 1 I 'I �r 1- % m' I I 1 1 I ; ,1 N o1 ' I YYY . �( I 1 /Ito 0�'1 I1 I t , , 0 i r 7 --'— / , 1 i 1 ' 1 I • / L-/---yrna2--- • - . 1 1 1 /'i P /' Xg s, 1� _ �-1- I >. I' I / I ,/ NI,. ' .-1 io I I I i / / BID 41° I / or ,' /' 1 N a 1 I 11 d ;' air / �\ , 1 • 1 1 I 1 I / / ,,c..)• •q, o\ 1 1 1I •1 1 / -i. --- 1 - --- \ \ I.a1 /, .0 ,r1' , ,q 'jam- ----- i i I t I 1 1 I , .q4 1 , fie' '/'Opp -:'9pp0%'- —__ —-- /E-) K. . j� I r • 0. / ' ♦s/,'/�., '� �, .0,7, �\ _�\ Iso \s \• ;: � / I/ r— ;moo, p • 1 1 0 I i i ' - ,- I '/ u —.. i TI B94 1-7‘ --fl-a3----- - -- --- _I , ' • / 304.80 '' " ( ) s. I 1 I I I II 1 I i \ — \ N s. V \ V RII1rh1l was ' I : ;mmO t.14 5 ar' r. r. a .1 X r. I 334 36 ., naro�ar M7 / M"'"1 ) i azIN i• ihrIM141.0.7=. IHEMIWIIIMIMI,lililppr.\s, Afamir r ; , / I 111/1// 1 / \ \ \\ \ I \ \ \\ \ I / / / % � \ \ \\ I I , /// ..... i,_ ri &I 1 \ \\ III ,� i' .�� 1\\Q . III i r //// \\ \i l I 1 1 / 1 t . .I I I I I l/ - - 1 1 I I I /�l , , - � , I a- I / I I I I 1 1 11 �1 I I I i III I1 \I1 � I i i . — I II\ilIl\t\j\1rrrr r ))// am ) I , r. _. I \\\ \\\e I = I\ \\ \\ \ \\\\ \\ \ / _ \\ \ 11, l \ \ 9 I \\\\ t1` ` 11 \)\1 I 14\ OVERALL AREA PLAN \\\\, - �. 'it' 4 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 1989 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. . ' MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steve Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Jim Wildermnth and Brian Batzli ' MEMBERS ABSENT: Annette Ellson STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning and Jo Ann Olsen, Senior I Planner PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 5.06 ACRES INTO 7 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND LOCATED EAST OF POWERS . II BOULEVARD AND JUST SOUTH OF LAKE LUCY ROAD, RICHARD ERSBO. Paul Krauss presented the staff report. Conrad: Are you the applicants? _ Richard Ezsbo: As far as changing the name, we' ll comply with North or I South or whatever you want to call it. Krauss: You can come up with whatever the name is as long as it' s 1 Arlington something. Conrad: Any other comments based on the staff report that you have? Erhart moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Wildermuth: After looking at this, I agree with the staff recommendation with the impact on the wetland. . .double frontage issue. . . I have one question. Jo Ann how close is this flag lot driveway coming to the wetland? Olsen: The existing driveway and it's probably about anywhere from 50 feet " to the edge. Krauss: Based on the aerial it might even have been at one time. . . Here's !' the existing driveway as it comes down. You can see the wetland vegetation comes quite close to where the driveway is but it's not going to encroach any further. ' Olsen: They're not doing anything to the existing conditions. Batzli: But they'll be grading on the east side of the driveway? I Olsen: Yes. 1 • 1 • Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 2 Krauss: The grading will take place in this vicinity. IOlsen: There will be a holding pond also constructed. Wildermuth: There won't be any new grading? It will be an upgrade of the existing driveway? Krauss: The driveway will remain exactly as it is. Wildermuth: Okay. So nothing will happen there? That's all I have. Batzli : The first time we looked at this, we had some sort of skimmer Idevice didn't we going into the holding pond? Olsen: Right. That was an added condition and what happens is that it's a DNR protected wetland so it also has to go through a permit process with I that. We usually when the plans and specs come in, that's where they add that if it's necessary. If the DNR wants it. If the Watershed District wants it. The engineering department did not feel it was necessary at this time but it's something that we usually add. Batzli : I guess I was wondering why we wanted it the first time and not this time I guess was my question. IOlsen: It seems like that was added at the Planning Commission level last time. g Emmings: Isn't it condition 4 under the preliminary plat? IOlsen: Yes. Batzli : Okay. I guess I was looking for it in the Wetland Alteration Permit. Sorry. Is it supposed to be in the preliminary plat rather than the wetland alteration permit? Olsen: It's part of the drainage easement that's on the plat also. Krauss: The preliminary plat would have the development agreement attached to it and that's the means by which we are sure that it's installed. Batzli: Do we normally or did we normally kind of start a trend where approval of one was conditioned upon approval of the other and in compliance with each other that we don't have those? Okay. My last I question, and I agree pretty much with what Jim said. The drainage easement. Is that to the wetland then? I Krauss: Yes. The outlet pipe is supposed to outlet directly into the wetland. Batzli: Should it clarify then which property owner they need the drainage Ieasement from? The adjacent property owner to the west? Krauss: To the west. I I Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 3 1 Batzli: Okay. That's all I have. I Emmings: I'm wondering about the potential for development of Block -2. What if they wanted to develop that later on into more lots than one?, It's " a big piece. Krauss: You're correct. It is quite a large piece and someday somebody may want to do just that. However, the house is quite large and there's also a large pool adjacent to it that fill up a lot of ground. There's a free standing garage. The driveway comes up there and what you have is relatively steep topography around it that eliminates much of the useable II ground. This property's probably not subdivisable unless the home As removed which we believe there' s a potential for it but right-of-ways in the future and if in fact that does happen, we could consider sharing the . I same common private driveway upgrading it because there probably is not , another means to access the top of the hill. Emmings: Let me ask, we've got this private driveway and the road is, that " lot, there's 138 feet in there and then you get to the roadway. I can' t remember what we do on spacing of roads along the road like this. What's the standard we're looking for? ' Olsen: It's more with the subdivision main drives itself rather than individual driveways. Krauss: You're looking at regulating the street intersections. Emmings: We've also talked about driveways that. . . I Krauss: One of the things that we did with this plat is we had it redrawn so that this street aligned with Arlington Court to the north. The original proposal had a skewed intersection. The separation, if that was another street going in there we'd have a problem with that. Emmings: I guess kind of putting those two things together, the fact that I this is a big parcel back here. The fact that someone may want to develop it someday whether they want to now or not and the fact that you'd have streets so close together there, it just seems to me that the sensible thing to do is to have an access off that cul-de-sac. At least an easement. I think their entrance to their property ought to come off that cul-de-sac but if they prefer to keep the driveway they have, I would care as long as for the future there was some sort of easement maintained off the end of the cul-de-sac back to Block 2. I know that's going to screw up their lot pattern but I think it ought to be there. As far as, I'm just curious that it would actually be less confusing to have the name of that II street be the same as the street to the north. That doesn't meet the common sense test here as I sit here but is that really true that it's easier for the emergency people? I Krauss: Jo Ann and I were talking about this. I'm basing this on my working with the police and fire services in other communities over the years where they tell you that if they have a fire call in, oftentimes they I 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 4 1 might just hear the Arlington and not Court or Place and they want to go to ' that one place where that Arlington is and they want to know it's either north or south. What we have here is a common intersection. It's a 4 way intersection. The confusion would be if it's Arlington to the north, Lake Lucy to the east/west and something else to the south. There's a continuity rationale there to have one place that's called Arlington; Emmings: Well I'll have to go with your professional experience but it seems to me, if this is the only Eagle whatever it is in Chanhassen, that would make it very distinctive and real easy to find but I don't know. But that's my only comment is the access and then off that cul-de-sac to Block 2. ' Erhart: My understanding is that we're looking for a variance fora flag lot? You indicated at a previous meeting that you felt our ordinance, we ' ought to look at changing our ordinance to allow flag lots. Maybe you • could give us 60 seconds on that. ' Krauss: The older philosophy was that flag lots or neck lots were inappropriate. That the way to serve properties is to require that they have the full frontage on a public right-of-way. Generally that works very well if you're developing along a grid street system in an area that's 1 pretty flat. What we have in Chanhassen and what you have in a lot of your western suburbs is some very interesting topography that makes it difficult and often inappropriate to run public streets in every place. At the same ' time you've got a lot of ground that's inaccessible or relatively inaccessible through public rights-of-way that provides otherwise ideal home sites. There is plenty of land. They're serviceable. They're ' secluded. You don't have, if you have a front yard right behind somebody's back yard. There are ways in which to do that: At the same time too, there are ways in which the ordinance can be amended to require a fairly high standard of service for those driveways. Particularly if more than one home is using it. We can guarantee that it's built properly. That it's maintainable. That it is maintained. That• it's plowed and that it can provide adequate emergency vehicle service. All things being equal, it would be my recommendation that the City looks at revising the ordinances to legitimize the standing somewhat of neck lots in those situations simply because we do believe that they're oftentimes the most sensitive way of serving a piece of ground. There is the existing complication that one part of the ordinance allows it at the present. The other part doesn't. Erhart: Minnetonka allowed them with restrictions? Krauss: Yeah. I'll get into that. It's quite a long discussion but yes, we did and it was a process that was refined over a period of years. 1 Upgrading the standards by which driveways were built. Erhart: You feel that this one would pass the Minnetonka standards? Krauss: It certainly would with the one house. More issues would be raised if it was subdivided in the future but that could be dealt with as well. Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 5 1 Erhart: In the past Chanhassen's negative position on flag lots have been based on what reasoning? ' Krauss: Jo Ann, maybe you could. • Olsen: I'm sorry. Erhart: Why don't we like flag lots I 'm trying to say? Olsen: Well some of the reasons that Paul was pointing out or some of the controls he could add to the ordinance were some of the reasons because we didn't have that where the Public Safety, a lot of the flag lots do just I have small driveways that are not maintained that the fire trucks couldn' t get into and things like that and that was the reasoning. If you had the 90 feet right up on the street, then there's access there. Someway they would be able to get to it. + � Erhart: Another reason would be the number of access points along Lake Lucy Road. Essentially here you've got 2 access points at 137 feet whereas' if this back lot was. . . Emmings: Then you'd have a third one at 117 feet. ' Erhart: Yeah, another one so every 130 feet you've got an access on there whereas if the Lot 1, Block 2, is that what it is Block 2? Yeah. Was served with the cul-de-sac that would eliminate another access point. Krauss : Yeah, and I would disagree with that at all and normally if it were possible. Well , if I thought it were easy to combine the curb cuts, I ' would normally recommend that that's the case. • What you've got over here though is a fairly significant change in elevation. I'm not saying it makes it impossible to do it but it makes it difficult to do it. That cul-de-sac is up, it's elevated up above the driveway. That driveway's coming off a hill and you can see through the grading over here that you'd actually have to come down the hill and then go back up it again at a fairly significant grade to make the cul-de-sac. Erhart: I' ll just give you my ideas because it's as much the developer as it is ours. Again, I've only looked at this for 10 minutes and the ' developer or the owner has looked over this thing for months so maybe my ideas are naive but my immediate but reaction would be that bringing the street down slightly. Use this space to bring these lots down further south and bring the cul-de-sac down maybe out in this area. I think he still has room for the 6 lots but you could access the driveway off the cul-de-sac which would end up down in this area and that does not require you to have a steep grade in the street. It seems to me that would make these lots more valuable if you backed into these wetlands. Again, I'm just looking at a piece of paper doesn't give you a whole lot of insight into that but I somewhat agree with Steve in that for the future of all ' those homeowners and actually for yourself, not having to maintain the long driveway, it would seem to be to everyone's advantage to have that come off the cul-de-sac if there's a practical way to do that. Assuming there's no practical way, I guess I wouldn't and in light I guess of what your Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 6 I experience is Paul and the fact that we're going to have a discussion on ' flag lots, I guess I'd probably go along with recommending the variance but hesitantly. Going on, you've satisfied whereas in the past we were looking for access over to the east and you've satisfied we don't need that? That would not be useful? Krauss: Well , let me say that we think that access to serve the ro erti p p es to the east is still an issue. We just don't think that this is the way to ' resolve it. The road as was proposed, the road extension really in our view is inappropriate. A 15 foot setback from somebody's front door for an existing home doesn't work very well unless you assume that home's going to ' be removed. In creating a line of double frontage lots along Lake Lucy also raises some significant reservations. Erhart: This pond, are we creating this pond on Lot 6? • Krauss : Yes. ' Erhart: Okay. The applicant has been made aware of all the Fish and Wildlife recommendations for the pond? Krauss: . . .to a small retention pond. ' Erhart: It's just too small? I uess that's all I can think of right 9 g t n ow. Conrad: Steve, what were your comments on serving the future " development? Would you go through that? 1 Emmings: I guess my notion was just that if there's potential for that land to develop. It's a big piece and it's within the MUSA and as land becomes more valuable, if you wind up doing any kind of a development back there and I think you can foresee that there's certainly a possibility, that would mean then that a road would have to take the place of that bituminous drivway and you'd have, for one thing you'd have double frontage lots. You'd be creating double frontage lots in the existing development that we're looking at tonight and you'd wind up with a road access, well if you could, you'd wind up with the accesses onto Lake Lucy that are very close together. Potentially one where the driveway is, Eagle Circle and then maybe even one immediately to the east there so it seems to me that the reasonable thing to do would be to preserve an easement off the end of the cul-de-sac back to Block 2 at this time whether you use it or not but just in the event that there's development there in the future. ' Conrad: Paul, what's your reaction to that? Krauss: I don't disagree with the theory behind that. The problem I see with it is right here you've got a 12 foot cut. Anything we do to lower this cul-de-sac is going to make the cut more severe and we've already had, ' there's not a lot of trees up there right now but we've had some language put in about tree preservation there. There's another 12 foot cut approximately over there. There's really no practical way to come right through here up the hill. If you were to go with something like that, the only way to do it would be something along the lines that Tim was I Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 7 suggesting which might be to roll off at some point back onto that driveway . because that driveway goes up a more gentle grade. I Conrad: So that property to the rear Paul , how are we going to service that if it does get split up? ' Krauss: At this point with the way the ordinance is structured, you don' t have to serve it. You are serving it with the existing driveway. You don't have to further subdivide it. It's somewhat difficult to guess at the future. I can show you this but unfortunately it just doesn't reproduce very well . If you want to come over and take a look at it. This was the composite that we put together because it really was the only way to see it. What you've got is the home. Here's the top of the hill. Here's where they're excavating out the top of the hill to put in the - cul-de-sac. Here's the grade and you can see how the driveway starts coming up the grade right there and there's a pretty significant bluff overlooking the wetland. This whole area, this corner here is really not part of that hillside and is probably not developable. The home, the swimming pool and the garage are pretty centrally located and. . .against subdividing it unless they're all removed. Erhart: This is all high ground over here? ' Krauss: This is all high ground back here. Erhart: How would that be served? Krauss: The MUSA line comes through here right now. What we were thinking , and we haven' t had a chance to illustrate this is we were looking I at if the MUSA line's expanded and if this property is subdivided bringing in another public street as a cul-de-sac or a thru street and coming back down through here. ' (The commissioners were carrying on separate coversations at this point during discussion.) Richard Ersbo: I sit up on a hill that would be almost impossible for the cul-de-sac to go there. If you look over the back there, I have a drop down a hole about 40 feet and I 'm sitting up higher than that. To put a cul-de-sac from where that. . .I'm sitting on a big hill. It's not flat. Well went over this whole thing about 10 times already and this was the most feasible way we could do the whole thing. This is the third time we were going to have this approved. Krauss: Let me say this. If I thought development was it not emminent but realistic on that parcel, we would try to do something to access it ' possibly a different way at this point. What we would make that determination is that we respect. . .opinion but what's more important to us if you look at the ground as easily developable. In our opinion, this I ground isn't up here for a variety of reasons. The placement of the home and the grades being the most significant. Richard Ersbo: It'd be easier to put a ski slope down this. ' I Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 8 Conrad: My only comment is on the wetland alteration permit. It's more the process than this particular application. Normally, are we still having the applicants fill out a form for a wetland alteration permit? ' Olsen: We have that when they're actually going to be affecting or altering the wetland itself. We do give that form out. A lot of times the applicants don't have the knowledge to fill it out. It gets pretty detailed. When it's a larger subdivision that they really are going to be putting ponds within it and they have the services, we do still have them fill that out. This one we did not. ' Conrad: I guess just as a general point, I think we have to go through that process because Jo Ann you understand it but over the years I think it's been adapted to what kind of works and we don't know what that is. This particular application just triggered the thought again that I 'm not seeing the real application. If it requires a permit, I guess I 'm interested in seeing the application unless you persuade me, I understand what you're doing but I guess I 'd like to go back through the mechanics of ' that process and typically what we had been doing Paul is that we'd have technical documentation, whether it• be DNR or Fish and Wildlife or whatever, accompany it or a report coming back from one of those experts ' that made us feel good. They were really helping us interpret our ordinance is basically what they were doing. But I'm not seeing that anymore so I 'm not sure what we should be doing and maybe Jo Ann, given all her time here, is pretty comfortable but I'm kind of lost again because my first reaction here was what are we doing to the wetland and how does it impact our ordinance and obviously not much but I don't know that. So I guess to our list of things to do, I kind of want to review the process. I ' don't know that we need to recreate anything but it's more the process sometime so at least I understand where we're going again. I have no other comments on this other than the street name. I guess I 'm with Steve. I ' would think a special name called Eagle Circle would be clearer than a Court, Circle, Lane. That seems harder for me. If I were driving a fire truck, I'd rather find the only Eagle Street in town than one that I might be confused on but again, that's not my area of expertise. ' Krauss: I used to drive the fire truck. In a community like ours or others in which I've worked, when it's all said and done. The City's fully developed and you have 400 cul-de-sacs, it's hard to remember where they all are but if you prefer what we can do is just delete any reference to that condition now and we can consult with the fire marshall before it goes to the City Council and get a final reading on that. Conrad: Any more discussion? Is there a motion? Batzli: I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped Received October 11th? Mine doesn't say October 11th though. I don't think. Is ' there a different plan for the wetland? My plan's stamped like October 26th or something. Conrad: Yeah, mine too. Planning Commission Meeting 11 November 1, 1989 - Page 9 Batzli: Was there a separate set of plans? Emmings: It says as presented on the plat and it wouldn' t be would it? Batzli: Okay, well October 26th I' ll say for now, 1989 subject to the following conditions . Conditions 1 thru 4 with the following added to the end of condition 1. The words "to the west" and a new condition 5 which reads compliance with conditions of Subdivision #87-36. ' Emmings: Second. Batzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request 188-7 as presented on the plat stamped October 26, 1989 and subject to the following conditions: , 1. Acquisition of a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner to the west. ' 2. Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 3. Creation of a storm water retention pond in the northwest corner of Lot 6, Block 1. 4. Installation of Type 3 erosion control between the development and the II Class A wetland. 5. Compliance with the conditions of Subdivision #87-36. ' All voted in favor and the motion carried. Conrad: Is there a motion on the preliminary plat? Wildermuth: I move the Planning Commission approve Subdivision #87-36 as presented on the plat stamped October 11th with a variance to allow a 30 foot lot width on Lot 1, Block 2 and subject to the conditions 1 thru 6. Batzli : I'll second it. I think the plans are again October 26th, not October 11th. Wildermuth: I'll make that October 26th. Batzli: And we don't want to say something like changing the name of the II street designated Eagle Circle to something approved by the Public Safety Department. Is that just going to be handled between. . . Wildermuth: . . .check with the Fire Chief. Conrad: It's not here is it? 11 ' Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 10 Batzli : No. It would be y' something they'd do. Conrad: I'm just happy keeping it out of here unless you want to put it in. Batzli: That's fine as long as they, I remember seeing something actually from the Fire Chief or somebody at the Public Safety saying that they didn't want the same names in different locations in the City but I don't ' recall them saying anything about this instance. Do we want a condition 7 indicating compliance with the wetland alteration permit? Emmings: Yeah. ' Wildermuth: It'd probably be a good idea. Wildermuth moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision Request #87-36 as presented on the plat stamped "Received October 26, 1989" with a variance to allow a 30 foot lot width on ' Lot 1, Block 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Provide final detailed plans of the streets and utility improvements. ' The plans should be modified as follows: a. Increase the paved cul-de-sac radius to 42 feet. ' b. Replace the existing 6" sanitary sewer to Lake Lucy Road and utilize an 8" line exclusively to serve the plat. ' c. Extend water main service between Lots 2 and 3 with a stub ending at the east property line. ' d. The fire hydrant at the end of the cul-de-sac is to be provided with a 10 foot clear radius. ' 2. Lots 1 and 6, Block 1 are to gain access solely by driveway to Eagle Circle. Access to Lake Lucy Road is prohibited. A notice of this limitation should be placed in shared title of both lots. 3. Provide final erosion control plans acceptable to staff. Type III erosion control will be required along teh western perimeter of teh site adjacent to the wetland. Prior to the initiation of grading, ' staff will walk the site with the developer to mark out trees designated for preservation. Staff will modify the plans as required to improve tree preservation efforts. Drainage swales are to be provided around eafch of the homes. The berm located in the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way is to be relocated onto Lot 1, Block 1. 4. Provide final drainage plans for approval by City Staff. Provide a ' skimmer device on the sedimentation pond. Redirect the pond outlet directly into the wetland providing the City with such easements that may be required to cross an adjacent property. Watershed District approval of the plat is required. I MI Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 11 5. Easements to be provided: ' a. Right-of-way for Eagle Circle. b. Request the City Council vacate right-of-way for existing streets and easements approved under the original plat. c. Utility easements are required for the proposed watermain and sanitary sewer alignments including the watermain stub between Lots 2 and 3 to the eastern property line. d. Drainage and utility easements are required over the pond and storm " sewer pipes on Lot 6, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2 and based upon final engineering design may be required over an adjacent parcel to' the west. e. Standard utility easements around the perimeter of each lot. 6. Enter into a development contract with the City. 11 7. Compliance with the conditions of Wetland Alteration Permit #88-7. ' All voted in favor except Erhart and Emmings who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. Conrad: And the reasons? Emmings: I think I set them forth enough. It seems to me that this plan could be modified by moving that cul-de-sac along the contour or something. I think it's short sighted to have the only access to that large lot in the I rear come along that existing driveway. Conrad: Tim, your feelings? ' Erhart: Pretty much the same reasons. I guess I don't strongly oppose it but I'd sure like us to try a little harder to find a way to avoid having that driveway between those lots. Lot 6, 5 and 4 and that wetland and also ' to avoid future problems with access in the Lot 1, Block 2. Conrad: Paul, in terms of future use of that driveway that access the back I lot, there's no way that the City has to restrict it's use. Krauss: You can't bind the actions of future Councils either. Wildermuth: The topography is going to pretty well restrict the use right? Conrad: Probably. ' Emmings: Give me a bulldozer. 1 I Planning Commission Meeting November 1, 1989 - Page 12 Krauss: At this point in time Mr. Chairman, the only way to get additional ' building back there is to come back and ask for additional variances. The way things are structured right now and that's certainly nothing that. you have to automatically have to approve. ' Conrad: I think it's imporant and obvious things change and Planning Commissions and Councils change but I think it has to be a real clear message that, at least as I voted in favor of this, it was pretty much with ' the assumption that that back parcel would not be changed. Now you may sell and that' s obviously your right and that future developer or whatever could do whatever but I just don't, I would not be of mind to allow any increase traffic on the current one driveway going back but there's really no way to enforce that posture to my knowledge. Anyway, any other comments? ti ' ! PUBLIC HEARING: • ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE WITH REGARD TO ' ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM LOT SIZE FOR CHURCH DEVELOPMENT AT 15 ACRES. Paul Krauss presented the staff report. ' Conrad: It's a public hearing. It was published. Peter Beck obviously knows that this is an item. I kind of thought he'd be here. Wildermuth: It didn't give any reaction to it which I'm surprised at. Conrad: And he is still under retainer? Olsen: I showed him the ordinance when Roger first had drafted it when it had 25 acres. When he was still involved with Eckankar, with the ' development contract and such and that didn't concern them. Conrad: So the public notice was sent to Peter or was it sent to Eckankar or how? 11 Krauss: I think it was sent to Peter. ' Conrad: And we would send it to him versus the property owners? Olsen: It just was given to him because he happened to be in the office the day I received it actually. Conrad: Are we comfortable that that's.. . ' Krauss: Legal notice is published in the official newspaper. Conrad: And there is no other policy stating that we individually identify tthose that are impacted by the Ordinance? Olsen: We've done it in the past. I . . . �� �� ,t . �� i I CiTY 0 F ‘ r. ..,t, „ ',.. . ... .nv ���N� 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 -^~ (612) 937-1800 _. I' �� MEMORANDUM I. TO: JoAnn Olson ' ^ FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Inspector ` 1 ' DATE: August 22, 1989 RE: Ersbo I I Comments and recommendations: Fire hydrant shall be located at end of cul-de-sac with I a ten-foot clear radius around hydrant. ML: lw I I I I I I 1 I v ~~ 1 � CITY OF • cHAINBILosEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician'.'‘ DATE: October 27 , 1989 1 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Ersbo Addition File No. 87-36 Subdivision Upon review of the preliminary p lat, g radin g p lan, street and utility plans dated October , 1989 , submitted by William Engelhardt Associates, INc. , I offer the following comments and recommendations . 1 Sanitary Sewer Plans propose connecting to City sanitary sewer from Lake Lucy 1 Road at the northeast corner of the plat. An existing 6-inch service line was previously extended to the property for a single house hookup. The plans should be modified to include replace- ment of the existing 6-inch line with an 8-inch line from the ' existing manhole in Lake Lucy Road. Watermain 1 City water service is available from Lake Lucy Road. An existing 6-inch line was previously stubbed across Lake Lucy Road to the northeast corner of the plat and will provide adequate water supply for this plat. Plans propose approximately 400 feet of dead-end watermain. It is desirable to loop the water system for future development and improved water service to this sub- division. Therefore, the watermain should be extended between Lots 2 and 3 to the southeast corner of the plat. Roadway The plans propose a 300-foot cul-de-sac off of Lake Lucy Road across from Arlington Court with street grades ranging from 2.2% to 6. 6%. The proposed street is a 31-foot wide back-to-back urban section within a 50-foot right-of-way. The cul-de-sac is designed with a 40-foot radius . To be consistent with the City ' s standard cul-de-sac design, the 40-foot radius should be increased to 42 feet. 1 Jo Ann Olsen , October 27 , 1989 Page 2 I Previous plans for this subdivision made allowances for a future street access to the south. However, it is felt due to the existing terrain and adjacent wetland, access to the south would not be feasible from this parcel . Grading and Drainage The plans propose grading over a majority of the site which will include removal of some trees. The hillside is proposed to be cut approximately 12 feet to provide for house pads . Slopes along this hillside are proposed at 3:1 . It is recommended that drainage swales be constructed between all house pads and the upstream sides of the lots to help direct drainage around and away from the proposed house pads . Earth berms are proposed along Lake Lucy Road within the proposed right-of-way. These berms should be relocated outside the right- of-way. Proposed drainage from the development will follow the natural ' drainage path towards the wetland west of the plat. A storm sewer system will convey storm runoff via pipe into a detention pond located on the northwest corner of Lot 6 which outlets via pipe into the adjacent wetland. The outlet pipe should be realigned to direct runoff into the wetland instead of the Lake Lucy Road right-of-way. The applicant may need to acquire a drainage easement across the property west of the plat to accomplish this . Due to the small size of this detention pond, staff feels that no skimmer control device is necessary unless the DNR or Watershed District requires one. Based on drainage calculations supplied by the applicant, it appears the pond is adequate for maintaining the predeveloped runoff rate and pro- viding adequate storage for a 100-year storm event. Erosion Control The plans propose erosion control along the north and west peri- ' meters of the plat. The erosion control type is not specified on the plans. Due to the potention impact on the adjacent wetlands, it is recommended that Type III erosion control be installed. Recommended Conditions 1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of the public improvements. 2. The applicant shall pursue acquisition of a drainage easement across the parcel to the west of the proposed plat for drainage purposes. Jo ann Olsen October 27 , 1989 Page 3 I 3 . Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house ' pads and upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. I 4 . The plans should be modified to include replacement of the existing 6-inch sanitary sewer service stub with an 8-inch line from the existing manhole in Lake Lucy Road. ' 5 . Lake Lucy Road shall be restored to the pre-existing 9-ton road section ( see attached section ) including any fabric and/or drain tile which may be present. All pavement ' markings shall be re-established, i .e. trail. 6 . The earth berm shall be relocated outside of the proposed right-of-way. 7. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) . 8 . Wood-fiber blankets shall be used to stabilize all slopes greater than 3:1 . 9 . All street and utility construction shall be in accordance with the City ' s standard specifications for urban construc- tion . 10 . The cul-de-sac radius should be increased to 42 feet. 11 . Erosion control shall be Type III . 12 . Construction plans for street and utility installation shall ' be submitted to the City Engineer for approval . 13. Lot 1 and Lot 6 shall not be allowed driveway access to Lake Lucy Road. 14 . Plans shall provide concrete valley gutter across Eagle Circle at Lake Lucy Road. 15 . Extend watermain to southeast property corner between Lots 2 and 3 for future looping of system. i I I -�---- -..: ' • cA3uRED FROM FINISHED GRADE TO TOP OF WALL• STATION SITE r i ,. -- _ RETAINING WALL DETAIL NO SCALE N • 0 t • ---7 ' • R/W • c..7 • • i ; ' i • W • RD. 74' R.O.W. STA 1.0 34+55.63 R/W 5 63 TO CO. RD. 117 4' • • BIKEWAY TRAFFIC LANE ' 4' I TRAFFIC LANE BIKEWAY 111 .�' `� 81TUMIN CURB 1.46' ROFILE GRADE �' 3 . ` • a e--OIS ` � 1�— i• ( � ,�_ .OIS% i /1 v2 , __._._._..._._Tfiowmijnaugi■........................ ,A.��----------- ! / -...% •� • �_ rr 1/2 / I I/2" BITUMINOUS WEARPcSURSE (MN/DOT 234() BACKFILL WITH : TUMINOUS TACK COAT (MN/DOT 2337) SUITABLE MATERIAL GROUND LINE 2"BITUMINOUS BINS • COURSE. (MN/DOT 2331) BITUMINOUS TACK COAT (MN/DOT 2357) 2"BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE (MN/DOT 2331) 12w AGGREGATE BASE (CLASS Z GRAVEL 100% CRUSHED QUARRY ROCK.) 3' GRANULAR MATERIAL ABOVE SUBGRADE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC GEOTEXTILE FABRIC ONLY TYPICA SECTION— LAKE U CY ROAD EN all EN MN EMI MI MI NM MN 1111111 Mil ma am '` CR •> uv CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED OFFICIAL COPY APR 1919 s COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. I CHANIOSSEN FRANKING Off, CITY OF CHAN ' PRELIMINARY PLAT-NO. *_ BATE SUBMITTED /�k. I AI�PVD.PLAN.COMh. 'I� • 4. APPVD.COUNCIL Zl� °f. isi i46 ilt 1 "' , 7 - r % i \ lw�.1$1 of f T ,A , / , ` \ J (1 ' . .t.,.r{ � , ) - ' ' -0. i1 ; 11 ; i. ' r ‘ .1(gib „,,,/:0400‘.• '. i / ,.„ \ ' a . M Z., to,.:!i r:r; , xicri . ' t oe . , - -- = il/1 1 I • 41't.i'l: t \ ./ ' 111 ---4''' rit / -)- ' '' ' r/ i % L.—---,000 i ' / l' —111-1', `,43 .‘''' pilr_iiir lin, .... i l I •. . ,1;''i ;,...,, 4/11111 .7 . 4 t .7 i r„. $c....,,ev,r 1 \ kv„,._1002 rt:::- ‘ .). • ' ii >..__ _it ,_Ifr , . ' A iii __v._40T (ii" i i ' ' I • -- �� ' 1 // _ • `` Nt_-�,' ~ �`0 g\ ii•Gt. /I. ',' L / , L a ,, ?....„,;.,/,‘ , • ..! t.. ,...--- 0 0 0 '1 1 / / // :,: /L-- ,,•).4./_c"ch?-i1 , I b, 010 ° II Z 1 100 f `I . . I . ' N, \\ E r ,‘..5- 0 1 c ,\ \ _\ . �'YESTEAD --ter— » MIL ._ -. /vL . 1 ; , ,.,,..,-' 1 . . , _, CITY OF ? °\ 1 i _ I CHANHASSEN 1 e•_ `\ ' . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �"7 (612) 937-1900 1 March 20, 1989 II Mr. Richard Ersbo 1211 Lake Lucy Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 ' Re: Ersbo Addition ' I , Dear Mr. Ersbo: .. It has come to staff' s attention that the final plat for Ersbo I Addition has been filed with_ Carver County prior to specific con- ditions of final plat approval being met. Specifically, the development contract and the financial security must be provided II to the city and recorded with Carver County prior to any building permits or construction taking place on the site. Attached is a copy of the development contract which was approbed II by the City Council on July 25, 1988. As you can see there are blanks that need to be filled in which your engineer can help you with. Please contact either me or Gary Warren, City Engineer to fina- lize the development contract and submit the security. Also, 1 note if any property is sold prior to completing the above steps, the new owners will be required to consent to the recording of the development contract. 1 Again, the lots will not be able to be developed until these are received and recorded by the city. II Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, I -.)O/ -1 ) Jo Ann Olsen 1 Assistant City Planner JO:v I cc: Gary Warren Development contract file 1 II 1 ; ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated , 1988, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ("City") , and RICHARD ERSBO, a widower and not remarried (the "Developer") . 1 1. Request fbr Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for ERSBO ADDITION (referred to in this Contract as the "plat") . The land is -legally described on the attached Exhibit "A". 2. Conditions of Plat Approval. The City hereby approves the ' plat on condition that the Developer enter into this Contract and furnish the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The plat shall be developed in ' accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. With the exception of Plan A, the plans may be prepared, ' subject to City approval, after entering the Contract, but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control. The P lans are: ' Plan A--Plat dated by , 19 , prepared Plan B--Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan dated , 19 , prepared by 1 Plan C--Plans and Specifications for Improvements dated , 19 , prepared by r07/06/88 I 4. Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: ' A. Sanitary Sewer System B. Water System ' C. Storm Water Drainage System D. Streets E. Concrete Curb and Gutter s F. Street Signs G. Street Lights i H. Site Grading I. Underground Utilities (gas, electric, phone, CATV) ' J. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments K. Surveying and Staking 5. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements by November 30, 1988. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, ' it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 6. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this ' Contract, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $ . The amount of the security was calculated as 110% of the following: Sanitary sewer $ Watermain $ -2- r On-site storm sewer Streets $ Street lights and signs $ Erosion control' $ Engineering, surveying, and inspection $ TOTAL COST OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS $ This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on ' the use of the security. The security shall be subject to the approval of the City. The security shall be for a term ending December 31, 1988. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this Contract. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the draw shall be used to cure the default. With City approval the security may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security be reduced to a point less than 25% of the original amount until all improvements are complete and accepted by the City. 7. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following address: 1211 Lake Lucy Road, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317. Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand ' delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317. -3- 8. Other Special Conditions. A. A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. B. The Developer shall pursue a utility easement across the parcel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. ' C. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 1 D. The Developer shall maintain the 50 foot right-of-way and driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. E. The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. ' F. The Developer _shall exert all due care to minimize destruction of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing 9 ton road section specifications. , G. Two 20 foot utility easements shall be provided as described previously as part of the final plat review process. ' H. The Developer shall provide storm sewer calculations which verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. I. The Developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District. J. Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3: 1. K. The Developer shall be responsible for daily on and off site cleanup caused by construction of this site. ' L. The Developer shall meet the following conditions concerning the wetland alteration permit: ' 1. Creation of a storm water retention pond on the northwest corner of Lot 1. 2. As part of the plans and specifications for utilities, the Developer shall create a culvert drainage solution beyond the holding pond which is acceptable to the property owner to the west and to the City. -4- r MEM I ' 3 . Approval of a permit shall be obtained from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. ' 4 . Developer shall comply with the conditions of subdivision approval No. 87-36. 9. General Conditions. The general provisions of this Contract are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: (SEAL) .i tre - ilt n, Mayor ' BY: Don Ashworth, City Manager DEVELOPER: RICHARD ERSBO 11 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) ' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1988, by Thomas L. Hamilton, Mayor, and by Don Ashworth, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority ' granted by its City Council. ' NOTARY PUBLIC 1 1 -5- i 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1988, by RICHARD ERSBO, a widower and not remarried. NOTARY PUBLIC v DRAFTED BY: Grannis, Grannis, Farrell & Knutson, P.A. - 403 Norwest Bank Building 161 North Concord Exchange South St. Paul, MN - 55075 - (612) 455-1661 1 1 -6- CONSENT ' , fee owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this day- of , 19 i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ' ( COUNTY OF - ) ss. ' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19 , by 1 NOTARY PUBLIC ' DRAFTED BY: Grannis, Grannis, Farrell ' & Knutson, P.A. 403 Norwest Bank Building 161 North Concord Exchange South St. Paul, MN 55075 (612) 455-1661 -7- 1 I CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Right to Proceed. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewerflines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary I security has been received by the City, 3) the plat has been recorded with the County Recorder's Office of the County where the plat is located, and 4) the City Engineer has issued a written letter that the foregoing conditions have been satisfied and then the Developer may proceed. I 2. Phased Development. If the plat is a phase of a multi- phased preliminary plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of ' subsequent phases if the Developer has breached this Contract and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. 3. Effect of Subdivision Approval. For two (2) years from the I date of this Contract, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless I -8- 1 required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law the City may ' require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Contract. 4. Improvements. The improvements specified in the Special 1 3 Provisions of this Contract shall be installed in accordance with City ' standards, ordinances, and plans and specifications which have been prepared and signed by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Waste Control ' Commission and other agencies before proceeding with construction. The 1 Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspectors and a 1 soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The ' Developer or his engineer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties 1 concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. Within sixty (60) days after the completion of the 1 improvements and before the security is released, the Developer shall 1 supply the City with the following: (1) a complete set of reproducible Mylar as-built plans, (2) two complete sets of blue line as-built plans, 1 -9- 1 (3) two complete sets of utility tie sheets, (4) location of buried fabric used for soil stabilization, (5) location stationing of all I utility stubs, and (6) bench mark network. 5. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, I employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 6. Erosion control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion control -plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. The City may impose ' additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it I deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No be development will ' P allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control -10- ' needs to be maintained until vegetation cover has been restored, even if after construction as been completed and accepted. After completion of construction the City will remove the silt fences. To pay for the ' removal, before the City signs the final plat the Developer shall pay the City a fee of $1. 00 per foot of silt fence that is required to be ' constructed in accordance with the erosion control plan for the plat, Plan B. ' 7. Clean up. The Developer shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. ' 8. Acceptance and Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion and acceptance by the City of the work and construction required by this ' Contract, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property. After completion of the improvements, a representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developer's engineer will make a final inspection of the work with the City Engineer. Before the City accepts the improvements, the City Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and the Developer and his engineer shall submit ' a written statement attesting to same with appropriate contractor waivers. Final acceptance of the public improvements shall be by City Council resolution. 9. Claims. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others that work required by this Contract has been performed, the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, ' materialmen, or others are seeking payment out of the financial guarantees posted with the City, and if the claims are not resolved at I -11- 11 1 least ninety (90) days before the security required by this Contract will expire, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant to Rule 22 , Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in 1 an amount up to 125% of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, 1 discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Coutt, - except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attorneys' • 1 fees. 10. Park and Trail Dedication. Prior to the issuance of 1 building permits for residential construction within the plat, the Developer, its successors or assigns, shall pay to the City the park and 1 trail dedication fees then in force pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinances and City Council resolutions. 11. Landscaping. Unless the lot already has one tree on it, 1 the Developer shall plant a tree on every lot in the plat. Suitable trees include: 1 Maples Ash Linden Basswood Green Ash Birch Honeylocust Ginko (male only) Hackberry Kentucky Coffee Tree Oak Other species of trees may be approved by the building inspector. Trees which can cause a public nuisance, such as cotton producing trees, or can be a public hazard, such as bug infestation or weak bark, are 1 prohibited. The minimum tree size shall be two (2) inches caliper, either bare root in season, or balled and burlapped. The trees may not 1 -12- 1 11 be planted in the boulevard. The Developer shall sod the front yard, boulevard, side yards to the rear of the structure on every lot, and ' drainage ways. Weather permitting, the trees, sod, and seed shall be planted before Certificates of Occupancy are issued for a lot. 12. Warranty. The Developer warrants all work required to be performed by it against poor material and faulty workmanship for a period of one (1) year after its completion and acceptance by the City. All trees, grass, and sod shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer shall post maintenance bonds or other security acceptable to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 13. Lot Plans. Prior to the issuance of building permits an acceptable Grading, Erosion Control, and Tree Removal Plan shall be submitted for each lot as required in the Special Provisions, for review ' and approval by the City Engineer. Each plan shall assure that drainage is maintained away from buildings and that tree removal is consistent with City Ordinance. 14. Existing Assessments. Any existing assessments against the plat will be respread against the plat in accordance with City ' standards. 15. Street Lighting. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall pay the City a fee of $200. 00 for each street light _ installed in the plat. The fee shall be used by the City for furnishing ' electricity for each light for twenty (20) months or until homes have been built on each lot in the plat, whichever first occurs. 1 -13- 11 r 16. Street Signs. All street name and traffic signs required by the City as a part of the public improvements shall be furnished and installed by the City at the sole expense of the Developer. 17. Responsibility for Costs. 1 A. The Developer shall pay an administrative fee in conjunction with the development of the plat to cover the cost of City staff time and overhead. The fee shall be calculated as follows: 1 i) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is less than $500, 000, three percent (3%) of construction costs; 1 ii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is between $500, 000 and $1, 000, 000, two II percent (2%) of construction costs; iii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is over $1, 000, 000, one and one-half percent (1 1/2%) of construction costs. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall deposit with the City a fee based upon construction estimates. After construction is completed, the final fee shall be determined based upon actual 1 construction costs. The cost of public improvements is defined in paragraph 6 of the Special Provisions. B. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer 1 shall reimburse the City for all out-of-pocket costs incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting development of the plat. 1 C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for 1 damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. 1 -14- 1 1 D. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this ' Contract, including engineering and attorneys' fees. ' E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction, including but not limited to the issuance of building permits for lots which the Developer may or may not have sold, until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. F. In addition to the charges and special assessments ' referred to herein, other charges and special assessments may be imposed such as but not limited to sewer availability charges ("SAC") , City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building ' permit fees. 18. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the ' Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such ' work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. -15- 19. Miscellaneous. , A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the pre-construction meeting for installation of public improvements. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the acceptance of the II public improvements unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. II C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this , Contract by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, ' sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the II remaining portion of this Contract. F. Delays. If building permits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes ' all resulting liability and costs from delays in completion of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, ' Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents, or third parties. G. Occupancy. Unless approved in writing by the City ' engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is -16- issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface. H. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City ' shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, ' signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. ' I. Release. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property . After the Developer has ' completed the work required of it under this Contract, at the Developer's request the City will execute and deliver to the Developer a release. J. Insurance. Developer shall take out and maintain until ' six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of ' Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death ' shall be not less than $500, 000 for one person and $1, 000, 000 for each ' occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $200, 000 for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of $1, 000, 000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days advance written notice -17- . 1. of the cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any disclaimer for failure to give the required notice. K. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be 11 - deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right' to~ • I y: exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy: L. Assignability. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect II even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any ' part of it. M. Construction Hours. Construction equipment may only be I operated in the plat between 7: 00 a.m. and 6: 00 p.m. , Monday through Saturday. Operation of construction equipment is also prohibited on the I following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Labor Day, July 4th, Christmas Eve Day, and Christmas Day. -18- I I 1 fr' I 50ft. �-- RIGHT OF WAY I 1 i _ 1 I I t. 1 r f F I F t . I I t s P l I I i r L S 1 I LAKE LUCY ROAD I ATTACHMENT 3 f i CHANHASSEN I CITYOF ; . N k_.N,,,f 1 :`' - .:',. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 January 12, 1989 1 1 Mr. Richard Ersbo 1211 Lake Lucy Road 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 and 1Mr. Willis Gilliard 516 Morgan Avenue No. Minneapolis, MN 55405 1 Dear Gentlemen: This is to confirm that the City Council at the January 9, 1989, I meeting approved the final plat for Ersbo Addition subject to the following conditions: 1 1 . A final landscaping plan shall be submitted as part of the development contract providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. I 2 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial II sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements. 3 . The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- II cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. 4. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house 1 pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 5 . The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. II 6 . The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruc- ' tion of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing 9-ton road section specifications. • 7 . The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which 1 verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. 1 . 1 January 12, 1989 Page 2 ' 8 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District. 9 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3:1. ' 10. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction of this site. ll. Park and trail fees shall be required at time of building - - permit application in lieu of parkland dedication. ' 12. Compliance with the conditions of the Wetland Alteration Permit #88-7. The next step in the process is to execute a development contract ' with the city. The City Engineer prepares the development contract. The development contract must be approved by the City Council. Upon execution of the development contract, the letter ' of credit and all other administrative fees must accompany the contract. Easement documents for dedication of the road ease- ments to the east of the proposed cul-de-sac and along the western border of your property will need to be prepared for each of these easements by your surveyor. Attached to assist you in finalizing your project is a checklist to accomplish execution of the development contract and receiving plan and specification ' approval for the construction of the street and utilities . The plan and specification review process will require prepara- tion of the construction plans certified by a registered civil engineer. These plans are the construction drawings that need to, be approved by the Engineer Department as well as the City Council. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ' Stephen Hanson Planning Director ' SH:v • I Don Ashworth January 4, 1989 Page 2 ' 8. Two 20-foot utility easements shall be provided as described previously in this report as part of the final plat review process. 9. The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and ' all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. 10. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of ' the Watershed District. 11. Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3:1. 12. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site ' cleanup caused by construction of this site. 13. Park and trail fees shall be required at time of building permit application in lieu of parkland dedication. 14 . Compliance with the conditions of Wetlands Alteration Permit No. 88-7. The final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat and the applicant has amended the plat in conformance with con- ditions #1, #5 and #8. The additional conditions will be complied with as part of the development contract and building permit process. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Ersbo Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. A final landscaping plan shall be submitted as part of the development contract providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements. 3. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. ' 4. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 11 o 0. seiriii4 7' - '1,7534-4,..„_svillr Winn -LW • gini -T *„kik off,„,,LvAii ... Ire - :w Ili I "';' t a lartell° II° Wes• , i,P4 WI gi?MN Ms W 111TH STREET J MIMI c ".r -1 i - i ‘N Away% L. ,r�C r„\ - A R.-, ,,, ii,...----- .A 1p... Fortr9ra w v -4,04v.oNCRI04, p! ...'. '''' 1 c\ 1111111L111111.1 illir;4)., :. va■ *Ay . at 11 It) itt:fat. ZPO■ La-a • ti is ; k . ' arataillin WM= Ida ° ' -in. w mm4111 .11 F S' " •u:::16: 1:7 IP, Mk LAKE LUCY ®E le �►� N 1�", %-ice ion 44 �.Veli 0 Iii ■ 11/. x, ziii .: �_ A allinalillV‘ s""" a - "k$ i 1 Q V "" t RSF 1 ,, �: LAKE ANN ''D F - t RD • . . R �` -� R1_�J , - - . R4 RR .• 1111 Wm Iiimilit II • R eit R12 R12 - : • - i• =OU EVAR• 5 ,,,,......m • _ mi W _ , ... BG .r ir, 51731-LSAt 111EIME - Le . an _t . 44ftiii6 i . 4� "''��A► • MI allk, I%\ 7_pSi4/ „la ,,, t il I ifiliva 4 MillE4 ° . .. dir4 . .- . - r.tt , :. , • . , • e `` \ . will y*Illei 1 );‘ rIOW11:� �%: F• ■ '� W. •T TM STREE T J 1.1 c 1/.� M 1 / - is %:% ) r Is. YougNis D. ,:. . vrii . 77, „ _ , t , % „Ian efr Ira. 4%, Alt I / 11 J,• ���a■■-■ -. ►R< T. -MI LAKE LUC Y � �� •• "� "' '�� Ao RD .., .._..---:. iv 6,..., �. Al I. Ill r ill if or::-; Nagji4:- zz LA into Ai IM'Hair a It%Valta• I..' ‘%-'■\P Z. 000 (_ \\ , to ! // ./ Al‘ Q RSF al ( LAKEANN\ • RD I R R4 R1 ' RR •A i 1 R12 R12. . ARBaRE UM :OU EVARD - 2... / . k i - •( BG CITYOF 1 . CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 15, 1988 1 Mr. Richard Ersbo 1211 Lake Lucy Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 and 1 Mr. Willis Gilliard 11 516 Morgan Avenue No. Minneapolis, MN 55405 Dear Gentlemen: 1 This is to confirm that the City Council at the June 13, 1988, meeting approved the subdivision request based on the plans stamped "Received April 19, 1988" and subject to the following conditions: 1 . A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to 1 final plat approval providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. 2 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with 1 the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties 'to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements. 3. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- to €tie'east"of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. 4. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 5 . The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and 1 driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 1 6 . The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN r j 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA,;5317 (612) 937-1900 June 15 , 1988 ' Mr. Richard Ersbo 1211 Lake Lucy Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 - I and Mr. Willis Gilliard 516 Morgan Avenue No. Minneapolis, MN 55405 ' Dear Gentlemen: This is to confirm that the City Council at the June 13, 1988, meeting approved the subdivision request based on the plans ' stamped "Received April 19, 1988" and subject to the following conditions: ' 1 . A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. ' 2 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties-to guarantee proper installation of these public ' improvements. 3. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- - - to t1 e' east"of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. 4. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 5 . The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a 1 public roadway. 6 . The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. -• =- y .. _ Lam.... :.,. June 15, 1988 Page 3 western border of your property. Your surveyor will need to pre- pare a description for each of these easements . Also attached to assist you in finalizing your project is a checklist to accomplish approval of the final plat, execution of the develop- - ment contract and receiving plan and specification approval for the construction of the street and utilities. As we discussed at the Council meeting, the plan and specifica- 111 tion review process will require preparation of the construction plans ceritified by a registered civil engineer. These plans are the construction drawings that need to be approved by the Engineering Department as well as the City Council. , Please feel free to contact me regarding a meeting to review these steps so that you are fully aware of what is expected of you. Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Silicerer;, 4 f( A& Barbara Dacy tCity Planner BD:v Enclosure • 1 1 r June 15, 1988 1 Page 3 western border of your property. Your surveyor will need to pre- pare a description for each of these easements . Also attached to assist you in finalizing your project is a checklist to accomplish approval of the final plat, execution of the develop- 1 ment contract and receiving plan and specification approval for the construction of the street and utilities. As we discussed at the Council meeting, the plan and specifica- tion review process will require preparation of the construction plans ceritified by a registered civil engineer. These plans are the construction drawings that need to be approved by the 1 Engineering Department as well as the City Council. Please feel free to contact me regarding a meeting to review these steps so that you are fully aware of what is expected of you. 1 Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me. $ipcere1y, / 4'U Stc & Barbara Dacy 1 I City Planner BD:v 1 Enclosure • 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 ' - ,* .mot r.1li ; 1-11.47 „=ice � _ate �r ',44k:4. apiLml ar MI5 . - me III en , f4I RINON[GK 0 a!&" ___-a'4'kIi- W r . I P ,:a J R ,4,- , .rte -I / o I it' I 1:114'T 4 ,.., IR o a .._____ ...„. Loom. NW it7/111 i.„,immormiistaN , 3 i .1, , _ Iiir-1_ TA W. •7 TM STREET _� c f 7.1:,-.mbi �� � M. r! A wr 1,* r r , 1.-t..- ir- 136■14 um inc,40,4..1),„ "NO .■■ '-Virt,.► rr^,1'11 II u _ 1 . .-.p i.! ���� .0m 1 LAKE LUCY �� j�:o a,.4. = A�� � R D �,D ma m Or ii l: 47,..="Z �l/IINIIINN�� Ai 1h Cali NE ii tri17.=.?..,Ati: 'ril L A 610 A -,,,:;_.,.....x. tr.I ,I I■41 •4ii... .tI .V ii.S 000 1 r•� `, LAKE ANN RSF , RD 1 I , _ R R4 R1 ' . • la IIII RR R12 gi , R12. Mr J ■ • " = . • ' =OU EVA : i 1111111 ' I W .-- BG/ t Wic IV% , rIIM ��`_ iiiii% ,,. t __A7F ST �4 �� l� J RMA iri,- a NB I ■r, 0„ R ia ______ i : a iliiiiiiiimt-Nr- -, I I won. NW ■ w MIIII'"__ 1 i "1-01 ii INTRIT111151111111 ea W. s7 TM STREE t f IC r WV N ii . .1 . we lilt* ---% .- EMI IP Mgr 1 ',iv e%)..v17410_.g f°!," 1\ r OW ALUM IVO AV 1 I 6 Y 0 Ltall rir ti 1 . ii bill. ■ -i�"+v T^�' � LAKE LUCY ®E �� i �g rr • 1 . a'.j / /CIA J �kiL . '':,. :� 1/4� L. , /11111/111iin 1.1 vitt& f;.I. .4; 00 c.c. IA* 1 ` e' v c �, d. , Ii 1' y LAKE ANN RSF RD m 1i R - - R4 R1 ' . 1 RR - 1 . R12 1 R12. . ARB.RE UM :OU EVA; • �. gG 'iI W Ersbo Subdivision/WAP May 18, 1988 Page 3 The two lots abutting Lake Lucy Road are double frontage lots. The Subdivision Ordinance requires reservation of a ten foot screening easement. A berming and landscaping plan should be submitted to provide screening of these two rear yards. This screen should not extend into the area where a small stormwater pond is required to be created (see Engineering report) . RECOMMENDATION 1 Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision Request #87-36 as shown on the plat stamped "Received April 19, 1988" subject to the following conditions: 1 . A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements. 3 . The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. I 4 . Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads . 5 . The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 6 . The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. ' 7 . The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruc- tion of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing 9-ton road section specifications . 8 . Two 20-foot utility easements shall be provided as described previously in this report as part of the final plat review process. 9. The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which , verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. 1' . Ersbo Subdivision/WAP May 18, 1988 Page 3 ' The two lots abutting Lake Lucy Road are double frontage lots . The Subdivision Ordinance requires reservation of a ten foot screening easement. A berming and landscaping plan should be submitted to provide screening of these two rear yards. This screen should not extend into the area where a small stormwater pond is required to be created (see Engineering report) . RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the ' following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision • - Request #87-36 as shown on the plat stamped "Received April 19, 1988" subject to the following conditions: ti 1 . A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to ' final plat approval providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. 2 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements. 3 . The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole ' located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. 4 . Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house ' pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 5 . The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and ' driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 6 . The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. 7 . The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruc- tion of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing 9-ton road section specifications. 8 . Two 20-foot utility easements shall be provided as described previously in this report as part of the final plat review process. 9 . The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. r 1 Ersbo Subdivision/WAP May 18, 1988 Page 5 Discharing of the runoff will occur across the adjacent property owner' s land. A drainage easement should be obtained from the property owner prior to final plat approval to insure that the proposed drainage plan can be accommodated. DNR has notified staff that a permit will be required for 1 construction of the proposed discharge into the wetland. RECOMMENDATION 1 Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: ' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request No. 88-7 as presented on the plans stamped "Received April 19 , 1988" subject to the following conditions: I . Creation of a stormwater retention pond on the northwest corner of Lot 1 . 2 . Acquisition of a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner. 3 . Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources . 4 . Compliance with the conditions of subdivision approval No. 87-36 . ' PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the 1 request as recommended by staff except that condition #2 was amended as follows: 2 . The applicant will work with staff to create a culvert drainage solution beyond the holding pond which is acceptable to the property owner to the west and to the city. ' CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve Wetland 1 Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped "Received April 19, 1988" and subject to the following con- ditions: I 1 . Creation of a stormwater retention pond on the northwest corner of Lot 1. ' 2 . The applicant will work with staff to create a culvert drainage solution beyond the holding pond which is acceptable to the property owner to the west and to the city. r Ersbo Subdivision/WAP May 18, 1988 Page 5 Discharing of the runoff will occur across the adjacent property ' owner' s land. A drainage easement should be obtained from the property owner prior to final plat approval to insure that the proposed drainage plan can be accommodated. ' DNR has notified staff that a permit will be required for construction of the proposed discharge into the wetland. RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the ' following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request No. 88-7 as presented on the plans ' stamped "Received April 19 , 1988" subject to the following conditions: t 1 . Creation of a stormwater retention pond on the northwest corner of Lot 1 . 2 . Acquisition of a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner. 3 . Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 4 . Compliance with the conditions of subdivision approval No. ' 87-36 . PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request as recommended by staff except that condition #2 was amended as follows: ' 2 . The applicant will work with staff to create a culvert drainage solution beyond the holding pond which is acceptable ' to the property owner to the west and to the city. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION ' It is recommended that the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plat stamped "Received April 19, 1988" and subject to the following con- ditions: 1 . Creation of a stormwater retention pond on the northwest ' corner of Lot 1 . 2 . The applicant will work with staff to create a culvert drainage solution beyond the holding pond which is acceptable ' to the property owner to the west and to the city. I 1 CITY OF II -: - 4 , CHANHASSEN k r '' 1 1461k1V; -- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 4. (612) 937-1900 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission 1 FROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer DATE: May 12, 1988 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Ersbo Subdivision 1 Planning File No. 87-36 , Ersbo This site is located on the south side of Lake Lucy Road approxi- 1 mately 500 feet west of County State Aid Highway 17. The five- acre site is comprised of an open rolling field with an existing I home located on the southerly portion of the site. Sanitary Sewer Municipal sanitary sewer is available to the site by an existing 1 8-inch sanitary sewer line which has been installed from CSAH 17 to 450 feet west on Lake Lucy Road. It is recommended that the 1 applicant pursue a 10-foot utility easement across a portion of the property to the east such that the manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated (refer to Attachment 1 No. 1) . The depth of the proposed sanitary sewer in the proposed cul-de- sac is approximately 6 feet deep. Those portions of the sanitary I sewer which have less than 8 feet of cover shall be properly insulated. A 20-foot utility easement should be provided along the easterly 1 property boundaries of the two easterly lots to facilitate possible future development. Similarly, a 20-foot utility ease- 1 ment should be provided along the common lot line of the two southerly lots to facilitate future development to the north (refer to Attachment No. 2A, B, and C) . Watermain 1 Municipal water service is also available to the site by an I 18-inch watermain which exists along the north side of Lake Lucy Road. The plan does propose a 300-foot dead-end watermain. Although this is typically avoided wherever possible, location of 1 1 1 � CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 " (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer • DATE: May 12, 1988 1 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Ersbo Subdivision Planning File No. 87-36 , Ersbo 1 This site is located on the south side of Lake Lucy Road approxi- mately 500 feet west of County State Aid Highway 17. The five- acre site is comprised of an open rolling field with an existing home located on the southerly portion of the site. Sanitary Sewer 1 Municipal sanitary sewer is available to the site by an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line which has been installed from CSAH 17 1 to 450 feet west on Lake Lucy Road. It is recommended that the applicant pursue a 10-foot utility easement across a portion of the property to the east such that the manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated (refer to Attachment No. 1 ) . The depth of the proposed sanitary sewer in the proposed cul-de- sac is approximately 6 feet deep. Those portions of the sanitary sewer which have less than 8 feet of cover shall be properly insulated. A 20-foot utility easement should be provided along the easterly property boundaries of the two easterly lots to facilitate possible future development. Similarly, a 20-foot utility ease- 1 ment should be provided along the common lot line of the two southerly lots to facilitate future development to the north (refer to Attachment No. 2A, B, and C) . lWatermain l Municipal water service is also available to the site by an 18-inch watermain which exists along the north side of Lake Lucy Road. The plan does propose a 300-foot dead-end watermain. Although this is typically avoided wherever possible, location of 1 Planning Commission May 12, 1988 Page 3 Recommended Conditions 1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements . ' 2. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. 3. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. 4. The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 5. The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. 6. The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruc- tion of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing 9-ton road section specifications. 7. Two 20-foot utility easements shall be provided as described previously in this report as part of the final plat review process . 8. The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. 9. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District . 10 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3:1. 11. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction of this site. ' Attachments 1. Sanitary Sewer Diagram ' 2. Easement Diagrams (A, B & C) 3. Right-of-Way Diagram 1 ' Planning Commission May 12 , 1988 Page 3 Recommended Conditions ' 1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public ' improvements . 2. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole ' located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. , 3 . Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house , ' pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. , ' 4. The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 1 5 . The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. ' 6 . The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruc- tion of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing 9-ton road section specifications. ' 7. Two 20-foot utility easements shall be provided as described previously in this report as part of the final plat review process. 1 8. The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer system capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process. 9. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of ' the Watershed District . 10 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3:1. 11. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site ' cleanup caused by construction of this site. Attachments 1 1. Sanitary Sewer Diagram 2 . Easement Diagrams (A, B & C) 3 . Right-of-Way Diagram 1 i I 1. 1 � _ ;; � _ 155 t ...i ...t i' . i : l. V 2r.-4.." ' . Sn'Th_i--1 1 , : ) t , ; ittk . dtt iii‘ A, . ,rn:t i ,-,: . 0 , , , ■..., /'7%. / i, , vc.4/ plk- rIc 1 ., --- ,-,- � ��p� ems` .. ; 0 i '• .... , ..r..f.e... -.77:: ; 1.1% A . k ,,._ , 1!F ' !4 !IIIIIM ::.4,40 ..4.-1 ! / '4:7.1.1116.6.°;1111.111.1.157' 1 : / I ) tti f ,.I o • ./ • � / - il --LEfk-.,- - je0 . i 41114111,41110p .e",.'',.1r:.. . \ , . I c.;.: TrOpt V) ›- ,- - * 1 ;' la . -■-lirr . Imillik..-- IP NON ____:. -, ,,. ; • i N. t; --7r - ,, IA %I, )1. ..., 41 ;4 , .4106--4 lipPli k ----__PC 1 ...-----4-.--11. 1 i ; ! 't 1: ______;‘ t______/ 6 t ,/ _ t tg, -4 ___- - —_, A _; , , / ,,', i ' - 4 2,"i - . • 0 V••••,-..... --°°..°*.\:} i • . )41...- 6:■•••....t. , /I . 1 —7 --'7-- , ____L: . , • :-., \ .,..,. „. .... .. . , ! . N I. i Q ii, ■t-'t;40 ifik 7 %.<)/ . .,. • „ ' 19 \ ,.=-.--\ '� i ,� 2 0 F T.• M.E N - r-I'l • . / , 0. / i �_ ?. I 1 / / // ,/ ' El ig)(N, .........ii 1 • c) . ` o I v. b���0 `oo o ce)6 ; I ZA I 1 __ _ __ _ ■ I. l/I ■ sn7) 1 ,fr..:..., ) 0, , : -tk- ., 3, .: 77 A. : . ,I / / I t 7-1• i'.r lit, , ,4 / i / / l /J y '/1 >000° 1 t - ' 0 4. 1 id.,•••=0" egteics- , , ._ ..r .7_,, , , .....: ... /kr At) , te..?.. ,; ! 3 . 1 y N-4 • to, 'I). ' / . ,1 MU _t.. ` i/ r /' 'i y / ...... -' r• t / i, .0., _4_, ia. i : .- 4 i AV .� -� _ ,�j .,.t lk' ! " •, ••.- ••:.c ',. JCkI. 7 ) • : . . .- f'•-- // -1 / ', ;/ • i $_ .` ru` ',-. - . .:, I -J ..„_., -,L,-..- ". 4 ,.,,ITM 7°' 7 k v ; .),:_. ,--- • 1 :: ,; ir tillWP":- '' A )6.. c:), 1 1 �• 1 -t 1 / 1r '. „....„ „ ..,),„ 1 ,,.. _ ,..,, .,,. ...,.ia.... I. i •' . 0 / ,I...r/ . ,.. , ' '� t j`S 1 / t ` tom.• Y j�/ ; \ I f 1 , • - 1 fft , . i ii ) N , . \b/----- -\\-- -- -...., i 1 _ iziA) & �'� / ' + 20 FT.•-EAS 1MEN ..•. / • ! ' •/ / r /11 F // / -w. - ....... __Aill . ,.... go sir c-4.191 1 c" IMIlim '7.. 0 • 0) 1 1C)6) e , I . - o � 1 j V ' 1 • • ,- .. . , . 7,-,„=„• = y , 1-11-1 i :-. ... 4 _ c....„ it. f ;I,. A $ =. ,,„ e.:,... ..,„ / : /s si il-. ':-.'112-,...,--,:--- _. 1,0; • 7 , iff i. , • Iti ) > • - IP 1 11 - I •.:. •• . , .... . t •, : , •1 .1 '6 , - T • / ... -,,,t - _ 1 ---, ) 44.... ... . r . .r • . • I .„---79/ ' :-,t ..- i •4001! %Is s4-•ic,%, ' , , , 0,4 .9, , . . . , . f , -,lietiogfia. 00. , ,, .• ..... ...,-,.. , , , . , r, .. ,,,,... t. ...., • I P .,••-•-•-- .•0°°°\ II Zt 1 • \ ' ' I 1 / •. : , i, - • I ...--.... \ , - .. ....-- , ,.....t. ; . i ■ I :1 '''ilL"‘'41 . ' /. • . 1 II 1 ' ■ k,/ , i tg , , , D / >,:/' // ,, • \ / ;c_ Ii, ./' 0 1...t / t<i/ • 7 . Y\ . MI ' PI / 1 j r t 07 • i:f------;------>i / t col,i ;! 10%0 DO rst i I ‘ 1 / / ///0„0■7-1490 . 1 . '9 1 / ' 1 / / / • ,, / , -- ■ j,--.._'.,._ / - — .......1■00 -..dilla II 4 / i3 1117./.2.H7 -- , - , _ / 0 -. ..., io/ /, l' / Ili / 0 0 , . I 111- I 1 n, ritily( a 411 „I (..0),.... , ,....\6 . ..9,vci•-‘AA- ' k" I \ i : t \ ;?' -. 1 • i \ ‘ /45:60 1 a , \. I;;Air N.)„ ■ —57-41t2 --- • -... ./ 4 .. ... I ..... ....----- -..._ --- V... ' . - I 1 i . 1 /S. a I , 1 0, 5C.. 1 i I _.__ 1 CITY OF _so CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ' (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Dacy, City Planner JJ FROM: Steve Madden, Fire Inspector��( - - DATE: May 5 , 1988 SUBJ: Ersbo, Subdivision Request 87-36 and Wetland Alteration Permit No. 88-7 Upon review of the site plan for Ersbo, I request a turnaround ' area on the main street entering the area (Uniform Fire Code, Division II, Section 10 .207[A] ) . If you have any questions, please contact me. 1 1 I City of Chanhassen I 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 11(612)937-1900 Date: May 2, 1988 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies II From: Planning Department By: Barbara Dacy, City Planner I Subject: Preliminary plat and wetland alteration permit request to create 5 single family lots on 5 acres located south of and adjacent to Lake Lucy load opposite Curry Farms subdivision II Planning Case: 87-36 SUB and 88-7 4JAP (Ersbo) The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was II filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on April 25, 1988 . In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission II and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and pro- posed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring II 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 II recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning II Commission on May 18. 1988 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than May 11, 1988 . You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. II Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. i. City Departments MN Dept. of Natural Resources T.' City Engineer /-6-.`------ Telephone Company II C b. City Attorney (NW Bell or United) City Park Director (a Public Safety Director (5) Electric Company II �.) Building Inspector (NSP or MN Valley) /a1.) Watershed District Engineer 10. DOWDEN Cable System II (3;,.•'Soil Conservation Service 11. Roger Machmeier/Jim Anderson 4. MN Dept. of Transportation 12. U. S. Fish and Wildlife D O le 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 13. Carver County Engineer �' ` `'r3 13Vil - REGION V1 I #, 6�:� Minnegasco 14. WATERS 1.\ -�' o t v /0 — /3/ � — iYo Other s, C..� — No S A ore �•�-.a co--N c.e r-✓t 7'f t�a G�iO/a,:._ �-a-,ti c2/--r! _ fro S Gr,� eAl `Syar- j - &i,,41-4. f- nee di C)fY1R ProkeAW W 4r f €r — No v41/ 1,e p ¢rJ o /0- /3/ AJ 11 LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION I CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 0 APPLICANT: y • , _ • - "Sp OWNER: e �fi,-- 1 ADDRESS /II/ /t4„,.›,/ 2/c 1?,, ADDRESS II Zip Code Zip Code TELEPHONE (Daytime) 34- /2-922, TELEPHONE y7 y! �"! REQUEST: IIZoning District Change Planned Unit Development 1 Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment X Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment • Platting ' Metes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation I Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME I PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION --, I t / \ ..- .,2(-=- _`_` aA.' ..J.— z > t,a .1 ' , IREQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION ct,i4A-e_ PRESENT ZONING RS F IREQUESTED ZONING -A- USES PROPOSED `, ' ` 1i-,^ £ _t.,(', ' 4 ., I SIZE OF PROPERTY _ S.4 } ILOCATION REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST II ILEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary) 1 , I City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 , FILING INSTRUCTIONS: 1 This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and : II plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the City Planner to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. II FILING CERTIFICATION: I The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all applicable City Ordinances . Signed By Date II Applicant _ II The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been I • authorized to make this application for the property herein described. II Signed By 2 �. (..L/V- Date lU -‘- S7 Fee Owner II 1 Date Application Received 10 (ID 6r7 1 Application Fee Paid ,5-27 . City Receipt No. i 1 * This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/ Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their I meeting. 1 11 (psi. • ■ lio, ttr W '' •pl ,0 6Ittsr r 1 6. P4 I I . or i- _ t .. \ .../--- c --/- — --/ -r=? -':--:- •--;- L)- / A ttf IZ \ 7:41..EZ5i.0 f --... •-. ■- •''''i.\ / - , \ \t--..7.\, -7 7140.$ I ■...., _.----... . . - • 7 eif iir sit—, \L N. 1 \ , _... , N*9 Nien I i •AN: L__ ' . . - - ii i .r il I 'n, 1 '' ) ; I . i I ,p . , , ...... /., .•,,,..,„•, , , I '.1.;;! -r V ' 1 ihq ! ":'‘) i. .. . .) , I '• 1 , 1 1 22 Fzl: ; I \! P(1,,,,.:„..■1(#:-. \ / • : i / I/ ..., ct . , •, t t i 1 . fs , -1, /. t• . / A i . t. ' . -,,,;r.„...........07 , , 1 •4 ,,,'-1.-..... z I ----s / .F • 1,, II. . . t:, , / • 1 1 at .-:‘ , ill I ' / K,4000■11100.1.61° 4' -Z.. I ///' 11" r 'I ' -s V I A I J • / , IIII . (s .,•-•- \---1---' / , ...11;--4P, i of ....r.waRis, -...4$7,•,..- • V —--- \ / .'• lor,N,---, \ , \ I / 1 : t • • ,, 4 ' '-: e% , - fi ct \ 1 / I ' -' --:to-', ' • ''' ' '' A „ pt $ekta:r \.---- ,, 1 4'I': -1' :', .*I' I=• • 7 la, — \-- ,, III - . . • I i :•—,. -,..- --- ....=-11,--- i C .1.'i. ti, ' Air • - -1111 - II) minnow.% 414 r , ; .I • ' 7' / -4.-_. kteli0 t. t I i r . , (Act ..ot' ,, ,--7- Zeitemo;d070.if t• ,----->, --, ., t i ; , ckk ./' I ege I .. "."- ,,,,,,■,,, , 006. ! (s4 ■ I I ,• 14-i •"1 •",• .,„...• • 41,7,-.-...\ , , / • , V ,,...„,.._A_ "....4,f.,:,' ,-- -a, ., \ en ‘,?,,:. I . • A ' , !\ sl ‘ (1/4 / , / 111 (70 1 11 f • 0 / ,;,'" / , ',./ ,,- . : 04+ I I .. % . : ii----c, col- co CA 9,1 I 11 7; /f4P. b I 6) / \ 0 i- i // ,, ,•/ /4 ..„,. . /\ 1 /// °21 - - 0, -- ■./01" x..." I - • ■ ----1 --- e.'1) It.A. jtt) 1 1 C5c) e si I i 1 . , 1 \ N \ • I L, •, . /-----------------_ 5 I .,\.\ \ 1 ■.... . -,..7.2--... _ \ .--c-- -4- 1 1 \ - ---- - 'I ts.t.■: N. I V\ H ........ _- —— I I , • ( ; MOIL Y' ` o�.. 6 2MIN ` Tr K a _ o CI '41 1' ,j l'.,.1...**-. . •� I� avzisit*:‘, *:. /7: .s!,-;,',A., , $. �, 1 19 =:i' �� ,y . :.,. ^ ii TON / ''` �( i. COURT p 18 / �;r•. 1 ; 15 '� � i,4,4,-: . .. �y 9 14 Q /' , 1" .( ., ',,f e 4 / .., •-,,4. .::: I A ii 2 6 4/100 , . aL -i' (LI 1 0 0 (Vacated BLACKSTAD 1r$,1: .� 'I Ili 0 73 11 E 411_ a 2 HELEN ADDITION I f v` ) 4761 of,J IL) I -1 (� �y�11 4 7 6 O 1 2 3 1 50 .50 I !1,, 4 ' r M f - - / Out/ 4,(, 112 J / ! .rte JOHN CLARK FI r 1.� tKIOt,P2tt a+ r IJ �~ • . _ a r I- '1 1 � ;; rt • 12 m _, 3 200 Cr 'r' n r 14/, / Jer 11r Z- o;�i' /` 0 of N a : ct. `LI 'N - i Q, J j .� E7+�ADOAH CIRCLE MASA UNE; f • -190 --+ iJ 1 - R.L. PETERSON I I , 0 BK 97, P 319• O , Q. "'� ' - . RICHARD ORT5VBLAD a =d��14 BK117, P175 :� ' • A� . �t 1\ \ \ \ \GN EPi ,t 215 "�>�r�TT I � - 14,1- .-. O I I • tU.1- c H JAMES C. RAVIS r- ` BK 144, P 96 r- 1 1 I i r� II �• o ; 1' -I-150 --+- 1 ik o. 1 t x CARV SYLVESTER TRUTNAU • OK 140, P 103 50 o _ 29 s- LEWIS A. WOITALLA a • Z 2 2 . 8K95, P235 ` , D =,_ o� s 2MIN ` Tr, K, • o �! - 5 Z \t Q ilk;. IL-. ' 10 1 1 20 ' 7. i. C , Pil!I' la Tti 1 9 . A COURT /, '�. N U T c 18 ; 4 ,.7„ , , .1„,.,I t , 1 13 9 g '7 ',' / -.// - .- 4 ,OP: l' . 12./ 41 0 411Pir M'J y, 2 15 �� i� 6� 0 9 •• ,a�� 100 • '.r z. 0 (Vacated BLACKSTAD K o > 2 HELEN ADDITION �:_' ' p 8 5 ' c r JACQUES - I I �1 ' I�,�y� � z G •) to 4 re 7 6 O 1 2 3 50 50 t 1IP 1 - ' i M M -- - — -- -- r -- -r' - -�— 1 M u0 , U ( I ,1 2 tip. 1 2 . O lri A-C-4507— *--' .,i - rigta: I I JOHN CLAR a' r �� M dK IOd,P AR ca 1 '-- to -- -- (-Jere of r - w N r � 1 � t e a w 200 ->' a,/��I// �, ci ti:Q Cs.) w 'O, • N' 0.) v °r "x co V16" . 0 Le = ;� WY :,gFF az 1 �m J �p,l� 1 w m I 10PHENE DOAH CIRCLE r TOI I 1 3--190 I — — _• • If 1 Is —P. . 1 of"I .. R.L. PETERSON ' o •t BK97 P319. a ^^ t 1 p' . RICHARD ORTEIVBLAD a k l i . . - BK117, P175 �° ' «,.aX. '� \\ \ \ \ \GEK I t '��I�` » - ` »---- - 215 ��wh. ._ t w� - m n JAMES C. RAVIS .- r- �—'--- a 8K 144, B 88 i 1 , r"---- k O » -150 —y- i .il�d6 p Tx CARVER SYLVESTER TRUTNAU ° .... I. 8K 140, B 103 ,� 28 • M } rvj Illp LEWIS A. WOITALLA Z 2 27 BK95, P235 I I I> •I‘ CITY OF t1/4 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Dacy, City Planner 1 FROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: May 16 , 1988 SUBJ: Park and Recreation Commission Action on Ersbo Addition The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the Ersbo Addition proposal at their May 9th meeting. The Comprehensive Plan does not call for park land in this area and trails are in place along Lake Lucy Road. The Commission felt the City should retain enough room within the street right-of-way of the cul-de-sac for an off street trail in the event that it becomes a through street. The Commission unanimously recommended that park and trail dedication fees be accepted in lieu of park land and trail construction. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I a Park and Recreation Commission 111(: May 10, 1988 - Page 2 REVIEW SITE PLAN FOR ERSBO ADDITION. Hoffman: This is a proposal for a subdivision of a 5 acre site into 5 ' single family lots. It's located south and adjacent to Lake Lucy Road opposite the new Curry Farms development . The applicant is Richard Ersbo. Present zoning, residential single family. It's 5 acres again and you can see the adjacent zoning there. Existing parks currently serving this area are Curry Farms Park which is under development at this time and Carver Beach Playground which is existing . An on-street bike trail is located on ' both sides of Lake Lucy Road abutting this proposal . The Comprehensive Plan does not call for additional parkland in this area . Recommendation, this is a small subdivision with lies within the service area of existing parks and on-street trails exist along Lake Lucy Road . Therefore, it is the recommendation of this office to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of land and trail construction. With this map you can see exactly what they' re proposing. Lake Lucy Road, Curry Farms development is back 1 over in this area . The existing home and road comes in down here and the existing home is in this area. What they are proposing is to subdivide this whole acreage into 5 lots and put 4 new ones coming in with a cul-de-sac. Lake Lucy Road has the on-street trail on both sides. Curry Farms is over here and then Carver Beach Playground is over here. Schroers: Would the access then be off of Lake Lucy Road or off of the ' existing road? Hoffman : The access right here would be off of the existing right-of-way. So the access to these homes would be off Lake Lucy. Schroers : Okay, but it comes in along what would be the west side there and then goes in? Hoffman: Correct. It comes in and the existing road is shown here. Hasek: Todd, what' s the potential of any development happening south of that? Is that one right on Lake Lucy? ' Hoffman: No it 's not. Hasek: But there is land to the south of that? Hoffman: I 'm not sure if there's a blow-up of that area on there or not. Yes, it shows it on there. Hasek: There ' s potential that there could be development behind them then? Mady: Also, is that a pond or is that more of a slough right there? lcHoffman: It' s a marshy area. It's not really a pond. Lowland area. It' s probably a foot to 2 feet deep at the deepest . Hasek: What I 'm thinking is the possibility that maybe at some point that land behind there might be developed and this might become part of a loop 1 ID Park and Recreation Commission May 10, 1988 - Page 3 C road that might go through there. Maybe there' s a loop road that does something like that. Maybe what we should do is take an easement along one side or the other of that road . ' Hoffman: If this has the potential of continuing through? Hasek: Yes. Through and down and actually coming back onto Lake Lucy Road at some point or over to Powers Blvd. . I don't know if it would ever get through there but it might come back. I really believe that if it ever did develop, it would probably go right back onto Lake Lucy Road to the north so maybe it ought to be looked at with the potential of an easement by staff on either one side or the other and I guess I 'd like to - make a motion that staff take a closer look at the potential for development of land surrounding this and the possibility of a trail easement along one side or the other of the north/south road into this project. Hoffman: I do not have the information on the potential for additional development there to the south. Hasek: I think you can see though that there' s a fairly substantial amount of land that might want to be developed. He does show an access going to his property and he may want, at some point in the future connect 4: to something else. ' Hoffman: Yes , because it' s kind of a dead-end piece there that you' re probably not going to get access off of Powers Blvd. real easily. ' Mady: One of those lots is the lot that . . .owns . Schroers: They have a lot but I think that the property that I know that I Klingelhutz pointed out to me that he owned was much further down Lake Lucy Road. In fact over towards CR 117 where they' re proposing coming through with that boat access . I just have a question, Ed did your motion, to accept the recommendation as it is but then to add checking in II on the easement? Hasek: I think rather than make a motion on the suggestions by staff , I just simply said that maybe it needs to be looked at a little bit more closely and it ought to come back before us. It might be something that was skipped. If we take cash in lieu of and trails. Schroers : That' s what I was wondering. If you' re directing staff to do that then it' s not written in the motion. Hasek: Let' s go with staff ' s recommendations and also to ask them to investigate as indicated in the motion. Hasek moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland and ' trail construction and directing staff to take a closer look at the potential for development of land surrounding this subdivision and the Iwo • II. . ' Park and Recreation Commission IMay 10, 1988 - Page 4 C Ipossibility of a trail easement along one side or the other of the north/south road into this project. All voted in favor and motion carried . I IREVIEW SITE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT SITES LIMITED. - Hoffman: Item 4, a subdivision of 11 acres into 5 industrial lots. The I location of this one is west of and adjacent to Audubon Road and north of the railroad tracks. Present zoning is A-2, Agricultural Estate and Industrial Office Park acreage is 11. 09 acres . Adjacent zoning and land use is stated there. Existing parks, there are no parks in the immediate I area however, this area is served by Lake Ann and Lake Susan parks . Lake Ann is real close and used quite extensively by the industrial park already. Comprehensive Plan, the Comp Plan does not call for parks in I this area. The Comp Trail plan calls for an off-street trail along Audubon Road . Background of this proposal , this proposed development lies at the west end of the industrial park and is part of Zone 4 on the I recreation section in the Comprehensive Plan. Zone 4 calls for parkland to serve the development needs of development taking place along TH 101 and around Lake Susan. As the needs of this area are being met with the parkland dedication of Lake Susan Hills West and Chanhassen Hills , I parkland is not needed from the proposed Audubon West development. The trail plan identifies a need for a trail along Audubon Road which we have requested a trail easement along the west side from developments both I north and south of this proposal being the McGlynn development and then the Graham property to the south. This alignment should be continued . It's the recommendation of this office to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland and trail construction and to request a 20 foot Itrail easement along the west side of Audubon Road. I Hasek moved , Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland and trail construction and to request a 20 foot trail easement along the west Iside of Audubon Road. All voted in favor and motion carried. REVIEW REQUEST TO RELOCATE TRAIL EASEMENT, HIDDEN VALLEY. IHoffman: Recently the City was contacted by United Mortgage Corporation requesting that the City consider realigning the trail easement through I the Hidden Valley development located just west of Chanhassen Estates along the south side of Lake Drive East and the east side of TH 101. You all know where this area is. The area down behind McDonalds. Over here ik- is Chanhassen Estates. The easement that is in question, originally the trail was located along the utility easement. This would be Rice Marsh Lake with all the wetland in this area . Those people came in requesting that that trail easement be moved farther south to get it out of those I people' s backyards as far as possible without trying to get into the wet area. What Lori sent back to them was as long as we took that easement to put the trail on there because it' s already all platted, if you go ahead 1 . . . ,..: .n _ ,,.....z......... w.y -.+J- 1tisida�:S:. . _.., „rI..;,2145+ 1 Planning Commission Meeting May 18, 1988 - Page 11 PUBLIC HEARING: ' RICHARD ERSBO, 1211 LAKE LUCY ROAD, PROPERTY ZONED RSF, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND LOCATED SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO LAKE LUCY ROAD: A. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO CREATE FIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. ' B. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO DEVELOP WITHIN 200 FEET OF A CLASS A WETLAND. The staff report was waived as there was no public present besides the applicant. Emmings: Have you seen the conditions that the staff has put on this? Richard Ersbo: Yes. Emmings: Do you have any problems with those conditions? Richard Ersbo: No. Emmings: Do you have anything you'd like to add to the staff presentation? Richard Ersbo: No. Erhart moved, Ellson seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Batzli : I guess I 'd like to recommend that we include the staff report by I reference into our Minutes of the meeting here since we get the staff report on record . I didn' t have a whole lot of questions . I thought the conditions were appropriate except for this one storm water retention pond . Were we going to talk about the within 200 feet of a wetland? Since we're talking about storm water retention ponds, I guess I was kind of curious as to exactly where that was going to be. Dacy: That' s going to be located in the northwest corner of this lot ' right in here. Batzli : Is that going to be similar to the one we talked about last time? I Dacy: No, this is much bigger in scale and character. It' s much smaller than that one. ' Brown: As a matter of fact , staff had originally looked at not having storm water retention pond simply for the fact that the increase in run- off due to the rooftops of the homes due to the cul-de-sac really wasn' t adding a whole lot of additional flow. However, on the other side of the coin obviously we can' t ignore the sedimentation process that occurs in a holding pond before discharging out into the wetland. The pond is going to be very minimal in size. More to answer the question, I don ' t know at • Planning Commission Meeting May 18, 1988 - Page 12 this point , something we can cover through the plans and specs phase of it but it's going to be very minimal at best. We had to at least extend the courtesy to the Watershed District since they' re in charge of evaluating water quality. Batzli : That part I guess that I didn' t get yet is that your requirement that they receive a drainage easement from the adjacent property owner . Where's adjacent? Which one? Brown: That would be to the east . Batzli : But in your report you say the drainage is directed to the west so you' re saying that instead of directing it. . . Dacy: He' s right . It' s west . It' s the easement going into the wetland from the culvert. It's on the west side. ' Batzli : I 'm confused now. You' re draining things to the west correct? Brown: Correct. iBatzli : So your acquisition of a drainage easement is to the east? Brown: There are two easements in question here. Number one, the easement to the east is strictly, it states in condition 3 that the applicant shall pursue a utility easement. It has nothing to do with the drainage and our motive for that . . . iBatzli : I 'm in agreement with your utility easement. I 've only been talking about the within 200 feet of a Class A wetland. Who do you want ' to get at the drainage easement from? Erhart: Doesn ' t that property drain through there now? Brown: The property does drain through there now but the applicant has shown on their plans, since this is the property boundary line here, over here this parcel is owned by Mr . Ordenblad and this pipe is shown extending onto his property and therefore the applicant again has the responsibility of providing the City with either some sort of easement document or revising his plans such that his pipe stops here at the property boundary. No way that he can extend that pipe into somebody elses property. Batzli : He' s got a culvert going under the road then? Brown: Yes. Batzli : So that' s going to drain his holding pond into the next door neighbor's property? Brown: Correct. Dacy: Into the wetland. MIN I 1 Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 13 Brown: Into the wetland. However, it will be at the predevelopment runoff rate. Batzli : So you want the easement just because the pipe sticks out of the II property a little bit? Brown: If the applicant wants to pursue that, yes . We would like to have that pipe extend out to the edge of the wetland. However, if it comes down to a hard situation and they can' t reach an agreement, then we' re certainly willing to look at a revision of this plan. 1 Wildermuth: It looks like the easement requires about 30 feet. Brown: Correct. 1 Batzli : I guess I would like to clarify what we' re trying to do there. I would rather make a strong recommendation that we would like to see that it goes to a certain point and he work with staff or the adjacent property owners. That' s it. Wildermuth : I agree with Brian that we should word that just a little bit 1 differently. Other than that, I have no other questions. It looks like the staff report all of the requirements for the subdivision are 11 satisfied. Ellson: Nothing here. It looks fine. Erhart: That 's the only thing I had was again, I think we should change item 2 to basically say to work with staff to create a drainage solution that will be acceptable to both the City. Otherwise I think it' s great. Emmings: I don' t have anything either . . .so is there a motion on this? Ellson moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision Request #87-36 as shown on the plat stamped "Received April 19 , 1988" subject to the following conditions : 1 1. A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval providing screening on the two double frontage lots adjacent II to Lake Lucy Road. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvement. 3. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the parcel to the II east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. 4. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and II the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from Planning Commission Meeting May 18, 1988 - Page 14 the house pads. 5. The applicant shall maintain the 50 foot right-of-way and driveway as ' shown in Attachment No . 3 until such time as the proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 6. The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. 7. The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruction of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road shall be to the existing ' 9 ton section specifications . 8. Two 20 foot utility easements shall be provided as described ' previously in this report as part of the final plat review process . 9. The applicant shall provide stormsewer calculations which verify the preservation of the pre-developed runoff rate and all storm sewer ' capacities as part of the plans and specifications review process . 10. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the ' Watershed District. 11. Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1. I12. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction of this site. IAll voted in favor and motion carried . ' Erhart moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Wetland Alteration Permit Request #88-7 as presented on the plans stamped "Received April 19 , 1988" subject to the following ' conditions : 1. Creation of a stormwater retention pond on the northwest corner of ' Lot 1. 2. The applicant will work with staff to create a culvert drainage ' solution beyond the holding pond which is acceptable to the property owner to the west and to the City. 3. Approval of a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural ' Resources . 4. Compliance with the conditions of subdivision approval No. 87-36. All voted in favor and motion carried. I 1 ,Planning Commissi Meeting September 27 , 19'" -6- 11 That would give us an opportunity to go to Council and talk to them about the proposal and what we are trying to do and get an idea as to whether it would fly. Members were polled as to their feelings on recommending the Council 11 rescind the resolution. Dick Matthews - With the lakes there it should have sewer. Tim Stone - I think there are a variety of other planning considerations besides the financial base of the city that come intro play here and I have to swing with Dick, I feel uncomfortabIL concerning this project. Jerry Neher - I would like to see it postponed until such time as the sewer is imminent. Hud Hollenback - I agree. Walter Thompson - I'll agree. Roman Roos - It is pretty much unanimous on the resolution. We would II postpone any-'further action until there is some Status of the sewer. That would be the recommendation of the Planning Commission to the Council. I y Bob Waibel - In all fairness to the developers , that 911721 applies only to planned unit developments . There is a possible alternative route where they ask for rezoning to a subdivision classification. In other words they drop below the 24 lot minimum threshold for the planned unit development. That would involve another rezoning in ' the unsewered area. SKETCH PLAN - RICHARD ERSBO: Mr. Ersbo is proposing to subdivide I approximately 1.5 acres into four lots . The property is located on the south side of Lake Lucy Road and is zoned R-1A. All of the lots shown are deficient in lot area. Bill Brezinsky - He has shown a 60 foot right-of-way coming into the property. That can be reduced to 50 feet . Although the Subdivision Ordinance does require a 60 foot • right-of-way radius for the cul-de-sac, this is such a short cul-de-sac that we would recommend that a variance be given to reduce that to a 50 foot radius . The lots are under 15,000 square feet. We feel with this reduction in the width of the right-of-way and by shifting the lot lines between ' Lots 1 and 2,and 3 and 4 to the south he will be able to pick up four lots that' have 15,000 square feet in area. As far as the status of Lake Lucy Road, our indicatiol are that the most right-of-way that will be needed in the future is 80 feet. Right now there is 66 feet. We would recommend that they dedicate a seven I foot right-of-way easement on the north side of Lots 1 and 4. Hud Hollenback moved to hold a public hearing on October 25, 1978 , to consider the Ersbo subdivision request. Motion seconded by Tim Stone and unanimously approved. ' 'Planning Commissi( Meeting October 25, 1978 -4- Roy Barke - In talking to all of the people I have always stated that if I am a problem I would like you to tell me so that we can work together to eliminate the problem. I don' t want to become the scape goat for every problem in the neighborhood but I have always stated I would actually ' assist the people to either attach a filter to the source of it or to remedy the situation. Even without the tower I have been on the air in different antenna' s which are less efficient which do cause more problems with interference and I have been on the air since the first part of June and I have had no complaints in that area. ' When you look at amateur radio or any type of transmitting the higher the antenna the less problem you are going to have. You do have a limitation on how high you can go ' and that type of thing but what I do have is at a reasonable height so that I don't have that problem as much as I would if I had to go down to a real small antenna which is almost on the ground or a wire antenna along the house which would be a greater risk for the neighborhood. Walter Thompson moved to recommend the Council grant a conditional ' use permit for the erection of an amateur radio transmission antenna at 6901 Shawnee Drive and that the setback will be such as the height of the tower and antenna will not fall outside the lotline. The permit ' will be subject to review upon complaints by neighbors. Motion seconded by Tim Stone and unanimously approved. PUBLIC HEARING ' SUBDIVISION AND REZONING - RICHARD ERSBO Roman Roos called the hearing to order at 8 :10 p.m. with the following interested persons present : Richard Ersbo Bob Petersen Wendell Gravelun The Assistant City Planner read the official notice as published in the Carver County Herald. ' Mr. Ersbo submitted a revised plan showing recommended changes to the City Engineer. The Assistant City Planner _did not receive a copy. Dick Matthews moved to close_ the public hearing. Motion seconded by Walter Thompson and unanimously approved. Hearing closed at 8 :15 p.m. ' SUBDIVISION AND REZONING - RICHARD ERSBO: -Dick Matthews moved to table action until November 9, 1978, to give staff time to review the revised plan. Motion seconded by Pat Swenson and unanimously ' approved. RILEY/PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: The watershed district has ' requested all proposals of one acre of larger be sent to them for review and comment. • 1 i HI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4.„,, , .,;,,..,, t it ty e 1 CITY OF 4 I - 1 - - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 I a,. : MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager %-y_�q--- FROM: Steve Hanson, Planning Director 0 T :e.: :.,::: .: c -;�:ss;on C� IDATE: January 4, 1989 a. ---- L:Ln:.1i /- 9 - i5 I SUBJ: Final Plat Approval, Ersbo Addition File No. 87-36 Subdivision I The preliminary plat for Ersbo Addition was approved by the City Council on June 13, 1988. This approval was subject to the following conditions: I1. A berming and landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval providing screening on the two double Ifrontage lots adjacent to Lake Lucy Road. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial I sureties to guarantee proper installation of these public improvements. I 3. The applicant shall pursue a utility easement across the par- cel to the east of the proposed plat such that a manhole located 20 feet south of Lake Lucy Road may be eliminated. I4. Drainage swales shall be provided between the proposed house pads and the upstream slopes to provide adequate drainage around and away from the house pads. I5. The applicant shall maintain the 50-foot right-of-way and driveway as shown in Attachment No. 3 until such time as the I proposed north/south road is extended to the south as a public roadway. 6. The watermain shall be jacked under Lake Lucy Road. I7. The applicant shall exert all due care to minimize destruc- tion of Lake Lucy Road. All restoration on Lake Lucy Road Ishall be to the existing 9-ton road section specifications. I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' Planning Commissi4 Meeting October 25, 1978 -4- If - Roy Barke - talking to all of t y In to g the people I have always stated that if I am a problem I would like you to tell me so that we ' can work together to eliminate the problem. I don't want to become the scape goat for every problem in the neighborhood but I have always stated I would actually ' assist the people to either attach a filter to the source of it or to remedy the situation. Even without the tower I have been on the air in different antenna's which are ' less efficient which do cause more problems with interference and I have been on the air since the first part of June and I have had no complaints in that area. When you look at amateur radio or any type of transmitting the higher the antenna the less problem you are going to have. You do have a limitation on how high you can go and that type of thing but what I do have is at a reasonable ' height so that I don't have that problem as much as I would if I had to go down to a real small antenna which is • almost on the ground or a wire antenna along the house ' which would be a greater risk for the neighborhood. Walter Thompson moved to recommend the Council grant a conditional use permit for the erection of an amateur radio transmission antenna at 6901 Shawnee Drive and that the setback will be such as the height of the tower and antenna will not fall outside the lotline. The permit will be subject to review upon complaints by neighbors. Motion seconded by Tim Stone and unanimously approved. PUBLIC HEARING ' SUBDIVISION AND REZONING - RICHARD ERSBO Roman Roos called the hearing to order at 8:10 p.m. with the following interested persons present : ' Richard Ersbo Bob Petersen Wendell Gravelun The Assistant City Planner read the official notice as published in the Carver County Herald. Mr. Ersbo submitted a revised plan showing recommended changes to the City Engineer. The Assistant City Planner.did not receive a copy. ' Dick Matthews moved td close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Walter Thompson and unanimously approved. Hearing closed at 8 :15 p.m. ' SUBDIVISION AND REZONING - RICHARD ERSBO: -Dick Matthews moved to table action until November 9, 1978, to give staff time to review the revised plan. Motion seconded by Pat Swenson and unanimously ' approved. RILEY/PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: The watershed district has requested all proposals of one acre of larger be sent to them for ' review and comment. • r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1