1c. Preliminary Plat Approval, Tim Erhart It ,
ill
P.C. DATE: July 20 , 1988
C I TY O F C.C. DATE: Aug. 3 , 1988
I \1 Y CHANHASSZN CASE NO: 88-18 SUB
' Prepared by: Olsen/v
ii
i .
STAFF REPORT
I PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 76 .5 Acres Into
• a 10 Acre Parcel and a 66.5 Acre Parcel
I 12. . ,_
IV LOCATION: 775 West 96th Street
: .T .t,.._2//L-122../__.
rate a ;
APPLICANT: Tim and Dawne Erhart ti 7!?-o1c._
9:11 775 West 96th Street i'a:C
Chanhassen, MN 55317 q-/z- _____
I
PRESENT ZONING: A-2; Agricultural Estate
IACREAGE: 76 .5 acres
DENSITY:
IADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N- A-2; vacant .
IS- A-2 ; single family
QE- A-2; single family and open space
If." ' W- A-2; vacant agricultural
IW WATER AND SEWER: Water and sewer is not available.
iPHYSICAL CHARAC. : Open area - agricultural.
1 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Agricultural
II
1
w
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
-, - -
..., _
I : .
97„1 min
'
cr cz:), Ae .1 i.).., B ":EyA R 41"D a t
w 1
I - b _ ;;
cr
R. 18 II
I ME
O
MM U irj ..4 1 e ,
1 .. c,
A2 '
I ., . PUD-R
,. .._,,v.
0...i. 1 )
I ., It -.. `k■ .- .......
I__ . .
....
' .°9v tag ,—SF
I
. '4' ■ Min
( , ■4 ilm,‘ . ,
I/ /. " ,-
1 ■Ogip-------7- _ .
• , ,
//
I
.
,
/-
Ii.. I
IIIN,
i. .....
voli _
...ILL
(71 FAIL C. . 14 PONO
11-219N: E •
Z.....'" .. (C---
c
f■
/I
I i
i.4.2 L..- :'"
0114
' , . . co
I
- 1 ”..
e
. I 0
111— *4
&
.4,
As i ............ i •
I'''
, 4.
W
C M
1p -'. — 411■ 0 /
..-■......„ CREEKW000 -Ar/
-
\ ....
. ...,...
..-.17 :
froce.c5r.4, fidir4, ,,A,..A:.,Irc:‘,
Rif.41.4 AA
Ie.- a'' '4.•."V- 101 MI tys•
iph..- --/0'1 ••■••■••■■■• ••■ . _diala
ett I x
_ -.,,.. ,ffi,.,..z illPr.' . ,•<‘‘.46 ....,,.41..47f
. , ,.,...'
. r .. ,... ..-._,,..•• 4,,14- ;;,---i.),i":
. • ."—"?T' s.l.'7.‘..4-it4V,' `"--: .-: -.
r
Erhart Subdivision
July 20, 1988 I
Page 2
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS i
The Subdivision Ordinance requires platting of any lot in the
rural area which cannot be further subdivided.
Rural lot regulations requires a minimum lot area of 2 .5 acres
and a maximum density of 1 unit per 10 acres . I
Each created lot must provide two acceptable septic sites .
REFERRAL AGENCIES 1
Public Safety Director Attachment #2
Asst. City Engineer Attachment #3
ANALYSIS I
The applicant is proposing to subdivide 10 acres from a 76 .5 acre
parcel. The remaining 66 .5 acre parcel will remain as is and is
not proposed to be developed.
Parcel A meets all of the requirements of the rural lot regula-
tions and of the A-2 District. Parcel B also meets the minimum '
requirements of the rural lot regulations and the A-2 District.
As the preliminary plat is now, both Parcel A and B will become
platted lots . It was the intent of the applicant to only plat
Parcel A and leave Parcel B unplatted. The plat should be
amended to show Parcel A and maintain the remaining acreage as a
metes and bounds description.
The applicant had soil borings performed on Parcel B but two
approved septic sites have not been confirmed. Since the pro-
perty is being split Parcel B will have a separate legal descrip-
tion and could be sold and developed as a single family lot.
Therefore, staff is recommending that the applicant provide the
necessary information locating two approved septic sites on
Parcel B.
Streets
In the attached memo, the Assistant City Engineer addresses
street right-of-way. The Assistant City Engineer is requesting a
30 foot roadway easement along the south boundary of the subject
site. The land south of the subject site is already platted
( Pioneer Hills) or cannot be subdivided. Therefore, it will oe
difficult to obtain the remaining 30 foot easement necessary for a
street. Staff is recommending that the applicant provide a 30
foot roadway easement to the Worm property and a 60 foot roadway
easement west of the Worm property (Attachment #4 ) .
I
Erhart Subdivision
July 20 , 1988
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the
following motion:
' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision
Request #88-18 as shown on the plat stamped "Received June 30 ,
1988" and subject to the following condition:
1 . Prior to final plat approval, it shall be shown that Parcel B
has two acceptable septic sites . "
2 . The applicant shall provide a 30 foot roadway easement along
the southerly boundary of the subject site to the westerly
' boundary of the Worm property and a 60 foot roadway easement
along the southerly boundary of the subject site west of the
Worm property.
' PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The applicant requested that the Planning Commission table the
application until additional information on septic sites, roadway
easements and Park and Recreation action could be provided.
STAFF UPDATE
On August 8 , 1988 , Drs . Machmeier and Anderson visisted the sub-
ject site and determined that there is area for two septic sites
should the 66 . 5 acre parcel be developed (Attachment #6) . The
Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposal on August 9 ,
1988 . Attachment #7 reviews the action taken by the Park and
Recreation Commission.
The applicant met with staff to discuss the recommended 60 foot
roadway easement along the southerly boundary of the property.
It was discussed that a future street through the subject pro-
perty, which would connect with Pioneer Hills to the south, would
not be located in a straight line between the two properties due
to the topographical restraints . Staff had recommended the 60
foot easement to preserve an access for future road connections .
Because there are many outstanding issues which impact the ulti-
mate location of a road through the subject property, the City
may wish to wait until the 66 .5 acre parcel is proposed to be
subdivided before reserving a roadway easement. If and when the
1 66 . 5 acre parcel is subdivided (platted) , the city has the right
to acquire road right-of-way as part of a plat.
The applicant is willing to provide a 30 foot easement up to
' Flintlock Trail for future road connection to Pioneer Hills .
If only a 30 foot roadway easement is provided, the city would
have to acquire the additional 30 feet necessary from the DeJoode
property and Lot 4 , Block 1, Pioneer Hills for a road to be
installed.
I
Erhart Subdivision
July 20 , 1988
Page 4 I
The Planning Commission and City Council should determine whether they
feel a 30 foot roadway easement to Flintlock Trail is adequate or if
the full 60 feet should be reserved. The subject parcel developed
( 66 .5 acres) can be subdivided at this time. The DeJoode and Pioneer
Hills property cannot be subdivided until sewer and water is available
and they can meet the Zoning Ordinance requirements . '
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following 1
motion:
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision Request
#88-18 to plat one 10 acre parcel and maintain a 66 . 5 acre parcel as a
metes and bounds description with the following conditions:
1 . The applicant provide an amended plat creating Parcel A (10 acres)
as Lot 1 and maintaining Parcel B ( 66 .5 acres) as a metes and
bounds description.
2 . The applicant provide at least a 30 foot roadway easement along
the southerly property line up to Flintlock Trail .
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission unanimously approved the recommendation as
recommended by staff. The Planning Commission felt that the 30 foot
easement to Flintlock Trail was adequate and that a 60 foot easement
was not required at this time.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Subdivision Request #88-18 to plat one 10
acre parcel and maintain a 66 . 5 acre parcel as a metes and bounds
description with the following conditions :
1 . The applicant provide an amended plat creating Parcel A (10 acres)
as Lot 1 and maintaining Parcel B ( 66 .5 acres) as a metes and
bounds description.
2 . The applicant provide at least a 30 foot roadway easement along
the southerly property line up to Flintlock Trail.
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Excerpt from City Code.
2 . Memo from Public Safety Director dated July 6 , 1988 .
3 . Memo from Asst. City Engineer dated July 13 , 1988 .
4 . Plan showing proposed roadway easement.
5 . Application.
6 . Report from Machmeier dated August 9, 1988 .
7 . Memo from Lori Sietsema dated August 10 , 1988.
8 . Reduced preliminary plat stamped "Received June 30 , 1988" .
9 . Planning Commission minutes dated August 17, 1988 .
I
I
§ 18-36 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
DIVISION 2. PLATTING PROCEDURES
Sec. 18-36. Generally.
Notice requirement and procedures set forth in this chapter in excess of those required q ed by
state law are directory. Failure to comply with such procedures will not invalidate the
' proceedings.
(Ord. No. 33-D, § 4.3, 2-25-85)
Sec. 18-37. Exemption.
' (a) The city clerk shall certify that the following conveyances are exempt from platting if
the new and residual parcels meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance for a
buildable lot and are on an existing public street.The applicant shall furnish the city a survey
' prepared and signed by a registered land surveyor for review:
(1) Dividing a platted lot to add a portion of the lot to an abutting lot;
' (2) Dividing a metes and bounds parcel to add a portion of the parcel to an abutting
parcel;
' (3) In areas outside the Metropolitan Council's 1990 urban service area, the separation
of a parcel into two(2)or three(3)parcels if all resulting parcels are capable of being
further subdivided into buildable lots under the zoning ordinance.
(b) The city council may approve a metes and bounds subdivision of a platted lot into two
(2) lots in areas inside the Metropolitan Council's 1990 urban service area if both resulting
' lots meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance and abut an existing public
street. To the extent possible, the new boundary line shall be parallel to a previously existing
lot line.The city council shall hold a public hearing on the proposed subdivision after notice of
the date, time, place and purpose of the hearing has been published once in the official
newspaper, and a proposed development notification sign has been erected on the subject
property by the applicant,both at least ten(10)days before the date of hearing. Written notice
' shall also be mailed by the city to the applicant and all owners of record within five hundred
(500) feet of the outer boundaries of the subdivision. Failure to post a proposed development
notification sign or to give notice or defects in the notice shall not affect the validity of the
proceedings. At least three (3) weeks prior to the hearing the applicant shall submit to the
city:
' (1) A survey(prepared and signed by a registered land surveyor);
(2) A list of property owners within five hundred(500)feet of the boundaries of the parcel
' to be subdivided;
(3) Except as waived by the city, all information required for plats. �/ 17,%t�
(Ord. No. 33-D, § 4.2, 2-25-85) di n
' 1000
I
1
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
1
MEMORANDUM '
TO: Barb Dacy, Planning Director 1
FROM: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
SUBJ: Planning Case #88-18 SUB 1
DATE: July 6 , 1988
I have reviewed the above plan from a public safety
perspective and at this time I have no input. It appears
that three (3 ) dead end streets will be available to service
this piece of property. However , a change in present
accessibility is not indicated and therefore, public safety
response will not be significantly altered if at all .
r
1
i
1
1
1
44 7-
1
1
1
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
N1/41,0
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
' MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer
DATE: July 13 , 1988
SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for 775 West 96th Street
111 Planning File No. 88-18 SUB, Tim Erhart
This 76 .5 acre site is located at the westerly end of West 96th
Street and is composed of a rolling topography with mature vege-
tation scattered throughout the site.
Sanitary Sewer
This site is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service
' Area (MUSA) and does not have access to municipal sanitary sewer.
Watermain
' Municipal water service is not available to the site. The
existing residence is presently served from a private well .
' Access
The existing residence receives access from a long driveway which
extends to West 96th Street. If Outlot B is ever subdivided,
access should be acquired from Flintlock Trail or Homestead Lane.
On July 6 , 1987, the City Council approved the final plat for the
adjoining Jeurissen subdivision contingent upon Jeurissen dedi-
cating to the City a 30-foot roadway easement along its north
boundary. This easement would help facilitate the extension of
West 96th Street to the west should the need occur ( refer to
Attachment 1 ) . It is likewise recommended that a 30-foot roadway
easement also be dedicated to the City along the southerly boun-
dary of the Erhart plat to facilitate the future extension of
West 96th Street .
' Grading and Drainage
' The plans do not propose any grading or drainage changes to the
site.
Planning Commission
July 13 , 1988
Page 2
It is therefore recommended ,
e ded that the preliminary plat for the
Erhardt Subdivision dated "Received June 11, 1988" be approved
upon the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide the City with a roadway easement
along the southerly 30 feet of the entire Erhardt plat prior
to final plat approval.
Attachment '
1. Location Map of Jeurissen Subdivision.
1
1
OM I= NM — NE I N. — ow •• I _
...-4 44_,
741111C
Er* --
4. II &
.'915, Itt a
,,,,iiti
____
______ _ - '� -
TIM ERHART -) •
_ c / �PAND 1
, ___)4 _7) e T
0/
PROPOSED EASEMENT
) � W. 96_T H ST RE E T ,'
EXISTING
tatakv EASEMENT ,_
AA JEURISSEN ----- --7
di - .
cc
I- 0
u_ .••••., -- •
t , x .. .
... - AIL ( C.R. 141 ° _ _ _
. . . : . . , L.
-: :-. ..... ..-. I L •
.../ .2 ,Q.
0\'
Q
n�
DE
aoj1
. ,.....kLA I I
„TM ('- - -- (
I '
v NM
c e lh
TIM ERHART
si- �� POWD I I
N.r e*°11i
4_ F
of
> PROPOSED EASEMENT 1 w 1961TH1
ST RE IT I
L....... 1". EXISTING I
v
•
'JAD EASEMENT
t �
JEURISSEN
! ....., ... .
RAIL ( C. " . 14 .
LL
JQ.
Y
7N....2
i
is.- 0)
No we ma — I- r — — — — — — i
' 1 ,,, ,,I. Q '- 4._. :/- £- / g/..<_
sy',`ia� /1/C r.a" "T4-4-IL
I LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
II (612) 937-1900 -�-
APPLICANT: / /m Pad,? UA I f OWNER: 1 t"t ( f) (4,,J Ale= 47;/0q/A41
IADDRESS Sa,,,. ` ADDRESS -71S ' c.J 5G fit, s-°.
CI, 4 t,r_,v r, /14— s'~J^Jr 7
I
TELEPHONE (Daytime ) L/fit*- rs/Zip Code
TELEPHONE t7e'1J "7i 3 Zip Code
IREQUEST:
Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development
IZoning Appeal Sketch Plan
Preliminary Plan
Zoning Variance Final Plan
Zoning Text Amendment N, Subdivision
Land Use Plan Amendment �, Platting
Metes and Bounds
Conditional Use Permit
Street/Easement Vacation
II
Site Plan Review
Wetlands Permit
IPROJECT NAME
PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION A .N
IIREQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION f-1
PRESENT ZONING /a —$
II REQUESTED ZONING i v 1
IIUSES PROPOSED A ,-,
SIZE OF PROPERTY 9, q a C of S
ILOCATION
REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST R f 1 %,,;,,EJ r,r S e t rr:U16 t-)•�,.,e. A' .--;_
IILEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary)
Y
I
II II'S
y s+ v..). • ,
City of Chanhassen 1 ),
Land Development Application
II
Page 2
FILING INSTRUCTIONS :
II
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 . I
FILING CERTIFICATION:
II
The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies
that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all
II
applicable Cit Ordinances .
I II Signed By A /
Applicarr _ Date c(4/(F■�
II
The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been II
authorized to make this application for the property herein
described .
Signed By Date I
Fee Owner
,J is-- tT.<. •
t:'�!'/
'' -4--, , ,' --4,� (A.,
Date Application Received t!-=�e-a `�'
il
Application Fee Paid �00 . �� y
r�
City Receipt No. �f�(.,�, . t �.,
II
* This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/
Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their II
meeting .
I
I
1
R RESOURCE ENGINEERING
Roger E. Machmeier, P.E. James L. Anderson. C.P.S.S.
29665 Neal Avenue 3541 Ensign Avenue, North
' Lindstrom, MN 55045
(612) 257-2019 New Hope, MN 55427
(612) 593-5338
EVALUATION OF SITE AND SOILS DATA
FOR
ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM
FOR
TIM ERHART SUBDIVISION
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
' by
ROGER E. MACHMEIER, P.E.
' JAMES L. ANDERSON, C.P.S.S.
August 9, 1988
SPECIALISTS IN ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT
EVALUATION OF SOILS AND SITE DATA FOR
ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM
FOR TIM ERHART SUBDIVISION, CHANHASSEN
Erhart owns a total 80 acre parcel , 10 acres of which will ,
be subdivided off with the existing house and buildings. In
order to conform with Chanhassen Subdivision Regulations, two
suitable sites for an onsite sewage treatment system need to be
identified on 70 acres . A soil boring was made on a knoll
approximatly 500 feet west of the house. Texture in the top '
foot was loam, grading to a clay loam soil. Due to the recent
rains, the soil moisture was present to a depth of '
approximately 24 inches. Below this depth the texture was a
loam or clay loam. Some mottling may possibly be present
although this condition was difficult to detect because of the
dry soil conditions. The entire knoll appears to be of the
same land form and there is easily area available for two soil
treatment units for an onsite sewage treatment system for an '
individual home site.
The purpose of our site investigation was to determine
only that two potential sites for a sewage treatment system are
available on the 70 acres. Should this total area be
subdivided in the future, it will be necessary to provide '
additional soils information for each proposed lot.
Some soil data were submitted which were collected in
1985. These data did not seem to correspond with the data ,
plotted on the map which was sent to us since boring numbers
and identification did not match. The 1985 soil data should
I
IF
Tim Erhart Subdivision Page 2 of 2
not be considered suitable for any future evaluation of this
' area nor should the soil data which we collected be suitable
for the design of an onsite sewage treatment system.
On the west portion of the 70-acre tract, there appears to
be a low area, possibly a wetland. There are also a number of
drainageways on the acreage in which the soil is likely mottled
at shallow depths. On any future proposed subidivisions the
' area will need to be carefully laid out so that each of the
proposed lots does have two sites which are suitable for the
' installation of an onsite sewage treatment system.
I hereby declare that I am a certified Site
Evaluator and Onsite Sewage Treatment System
Designer (Certificate No. 845) as designated
by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and
that this site investigation was conducted by
' me or under my direct supervision.
^. .
J es L. Anderson, C.P.S.S. �^
' I hereby certify that I am a Registered
Professional Engineer in Minnesota (Reg. No.
6745) and that this site investigation was
' conducted by me or under my direct
supervision. I also declare that I am a
certified Individual Sewage Treatment System
Designer and Site Evaluator (Certificate No.
530) as designated by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency.
•
1 .1 , , ))10a/YLOOkl
Roger E. Machmeier, P.E.
REM/jjm
CITY TF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Assistant City Planner
FROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator
DATE: August 11 , 1988
SUBJ: Erhart Subdivision
The Park and Recreation Commission recently reviewed the sub- '
division proposal submitted by Tim Erhart. The Commission has
identified natural trail segments within this subdivision along
the south and east sides , and across the northwest corner.
Mr. Erhart, who has been very instrumental in identifying natural
trail segments within the southern part of Chanhassen, has asked
that the acquisition of these trail easements be postponed until
the time of development. Two of the sections of trail identified
are located along a field road and a driveway. Mr. Erhart felt
that acquisition of the easements would be more appropriate when
we know exactly how the property would develop.
In the meantime he plans to continue to maintain the trails and
allow pedestrians to use them.
The Park and Recreation Commission unanimously voted to recommend
that park dedication fees be acquired in lieu of parkland and
that the trail easements along the south and east sides, and
across the northwest corner be required at the time of develop-
ment. ,
I
•
at
NE CC
/Of th,
north fine offhe N%2 of the NE%4 Seel
/ ---- N 89"49'4/"E 2700 84---- Co
Co ti
Mor,
PI
kOr BLUE SO/L TEST
P-2 f 5-2 8-1
Llik 2-SLUE SOIL TEST RED 5O/L TEST
h
(12 ft oport). 1 °
m
°
Q
. V
V
0
EAST H
�b0 003 p3E 276 26 h
EAST 6 Z ' Z
R
2/073--- - 3
h
5 Q C
I sNo I Dm "eo
0 u
PARCEL A
(9.9e6 4c
u
s-
0
o o
p
° o 0
I o° U1 u
PARCEL No
( 66.554 ACRES ) B r_ 4
tys )
i
+--2376.98--"
--- --338.02--
. W 1 ----N89°43'34"w 27/5 00---- I I
Ql - south hoe of the N%2 of the NE/4 / PARCELLS
i
Q That part of the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 26, '
\ , / / Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, except that part
described as follows:
M. MN Mel _I / �' !-encj l.Rl tw 77 a-''.',11.111 or "OM
.''
Planning Commission Meeting
IAugust 17, 1988 - Page 11
C
Conrad : I 'm glad you' re doing that . I 'd prefer you to come back. Any II
other comments on this one? I didn' t let you folks to my right talk about
this one a great deal , but anything else? I
Emmings : I think I 'd look at the same thing that Bryan did. I think we
should make a motion to table it. We should also have the City Attorney 11
look at it and maybe Bryan could just outline what he' s been scribbling
over there because I think we can impose the 50 foot easement but I think
we should get a legal opinion on that because that' s going to make it real
simple for them. I
Batzli moved , Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission table this II matter in order for the Westside Baptist Church to determine whether they
want to rearrange their site plan and also move that the staff has the
City Attorney review whether a 50 foot setback is required in the RR
district in this case and the setback is defined as a roadway easement.
II
The definition of easement includes both public and privately held rights .
All voted in favor and the motion carried .
Olsen: And just for the record, we did not have a current address for
them. I had to call somebody to get their reports to them. I 've talked
with them by phone.
II
Dacy: The point being that what he represented is not exactly true as to
when he received that report.
I
PUBLIC HEARING: '
"-"\k-
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 76 . 5 ACRES INTO TWO LOTS OF 66 . 5 AND 10
ACRES ON PROPERTY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATES, AND LOCATED AT 775 WEST
96TH STREET, TIM ERHART.
IPublic Present :
Karen Hasse 630 West 96th Street I
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report.
II
Conrad : It ' s hard for me to understand the 30 and 60 foot easement Jo
Ann. If you could graphicly help us . I
Olsen : It' s in the rural area so any roadway easement right-of-way would
have to be 60 feet. We did obtain 30 feet when the Worm property came
I
through, the Jeurissen and Worm property so what we are requesting from
the applicant is the additional 30 feet that would be necessary to provide
us with the 60 foot and it would jog up. Typically you would want it to
continue straight across . What we' re saying is that these properties , the II
only time you can acquire that right-of-way easement is when the property
is platted and these two pieces of property can not be subdivided until
II
Planning Commission Meeting
August 17, 1988 - Page 12
C
11 sewer and water is available so if, in the future, this property is
subdivided, we do need a street access to Flintlock Trail , you would have
' to acquire 30 feet is you don' t have the . . .on the Erhart side.
Conrad : Who would have to acquire it?
' Olsen : The City.
Conrad : And that road would benefit them because they would be
' subdividing? Why would that road benefit them?
Olsen : If these properties subdivided when sewer and water was in, then
' they could . . .
Conrad : We could get the other 30 feet but until they do, all we can do
is. . .them and the City would pay for them?
' Olsen : Right. If the subject property, since it has so much acreage,
this could subdivide before sewer and water and if it is found that a
1 street to here is necessary to connect it up to this property, the street
improvement would benefit the Worm property.
Conrad : If he wants to subdivide the property to the north, we can force
him to provide the additional easement at that time?
Olsen : Right .
' Conrad : We' re not locked out of it? If he is wanting to develop and the
neighbors to the south are not, we can get our full 60 feet if we want to?
If he subdivides . Right now he ' s only wanting to give the 30 because he ' s
obviously not interested in subdividing . I don ' t know if it ' s not obvious
but he' s not interested . He ' s not trying to give up more than he needs
to.
Olsen: Right . It' s usually the road is split .
Conrad: Right, because it is benefit to both sides . I guess I just want
to make sure that we' re not locked out . The City is not locked out of
getting additional right-of-way.
Chairman Conrad called the public hearin g to order .
' Karen Hasse, 630 West 96th Street: When you talk about easement for the
roadway, does that also mean an easement for any trailway system would be
delayed until subdivision can take place on that present acreage?
' Olsen : They' re two different subjects actually. What the Park and Rec
Commission did decide not to require any trail easements at this time
either until the property is subdivided .
Tim '
Erhart: I 'd like to make my presentation. I just wanted to repeat
for anybody here, the purpose of the subdivision is only because, we
Planning Commission Meeting
August 17 , 1988 - Page 13
bought the property on a contract for deed 8 years ago and the balloon
payment is due in April which requires us to get a mortgage. Today, with
the foreclosure laws that the State of Minnesota passed a couple years
ago, banks will not provide mortgages on any piece of property over 10
acres in size because they can not foreclose on it. So what we've had to
do, just apply for a mortgage is to go through the subdivision process
which is what this is. To carve out the area around the house of 9.9
acres so when we go in to apply for a mortgage, we have to show them a
house and less than 10 acres . We have no intenion of subdividing or
selling the 10 acres or anything at this time. We' re simply following the I
rules that the State and mortgage companies have provided . I agree with
the comments that you had Ladd on that easement. I think either us or any
of the neighbors on West 96th Street really particularly want a street
extended beyond where it is so I don ' t think anybody is saying they want
it. I think it' s logical at this time, as long as we ' re doing this
process , to pick up the 30 feet which is traditional where there could be
someday I suppose a street when sewer and water comes in. I think that 11
makes perfect sense. If someday somebody wanted to go in and subdivide
the whole thing , they would put a whole pattern of streets in there that
would be somewhat in line with that in mind to build. . . along the street
property.
Batzli moved , Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted II
in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Emmings : I guess I would be in favor of there being a 30 foot easement '
from the east property line over as far as Flintlock Trail . I guess it
makes sense to me to pick that up at this time not knowing what ' s going to
happen in the future so at least we've got that much because it looks like I
a natural connection. The only thing I 'm wondering about is if it
shouldn ' t go all the way down to that Homestead Way so that whole think
potentially would be looped but I guess for now, I don ' t see any reason to
do a 60 foot easement. I think if we have 30 feet down the trail that' s
good enough. That ' s all I ' ve got.
Batzli : Did we get the amended plat? Did your condition 2 disappear that I
you used to have?
Olsen : No , we don' t have the amended plat .
Batzli : I agree basically with what Steve said. I agree that we should
get a 30 foot easement and up to Flintlock Trail seems appropriate and
we' ll be able to hook back in.
Wildermuth : Staff recommendations look appropriate .
Headla: Appropriate.
Conrad : Me too. Any motion?
Planning Commission Meeting
' August 17, 1988 - Page 14
C
Wildermuth moved , Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision Request #88-18 to plat one 10 acre parcel and
maintain a 66 . 5 acre parcel as a metes and bounds description with the
following conditions:
1. The applicant provide an amended plat creating Parcel A (10 acres) as
' Lot 1 and maintaing Parcel B (66.5 acres) as a metes and bounds
description.
2. The applicant provide at least a 30 foot roadway easement along the
southerly property line up to Flintlock Trail .
All voted in favor and the motion carried .
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GARDEN CENTER ON 3. 7 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED
BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND LOCATED ON WEST 78TH STREET JUST WEST OF REDMOND
PRODUCTS , JAY KRONICK, AND
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GARDEN CENTER AND HOLDING POND
WITHIN A CLASS B WETLAND ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND
LOCATED ON WEST 78TH STREET JUST WEST OF REDMOND PRODUCTS , JAY KRONICK AND
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
Public Present :
' Name Address
' Jay Kronick Applicant
Gene F. Ernst 122 West 6th Street , Chaska
' Barbara Dacy presented the staff report.
Jay Kronick: I 'm the applicant, Jay Kronick. I ' ll start out by saying
' that most of the changes to the existing site plan that staff is
recommending . . . The berm along the parking area with the hedge would need
some cuts in there that . . .access to the parking lot. . . . I 'd also like to
mention that I 've agree to provide a screen where the mulch and bags of
' fertilizer will be stored. The plan does not show that presently. There
is an additional impact . . .across the railroad tracks . That would take the
form either of some kind of fence right next to the building . . .would rest
' between the screen . . . A couple of minor changes from what I have shown on
the site plan. The exterior lighting as proposed, there ' s one high sodium
fixture proposed . Otherwise I ' ve proposed some soffit lighting along the
' front which is directed straight down , medium intensity. The gravel road
which back from the parking area to the north is to be constructed by the
City primarily for access to the storm water pond to be constructed back
there. I ' ve discussed with the engineering staff the appropriateness of
' using that for my own business use and not for customer use and I don' t
think the plan mentioned that . I included . . . I also am concerned with
the traffic and the appearance of the site. I chose to locate in
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I