Loading...
1e. Great Plains Golf Estates, Final Plat CITY OF e., G CHANHASSEN 1 _ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager a__-�/LS/FS FROM Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner sF,te ,t„J 1 DATE: March 23 , 1988 ,J, , _ 1 SUBJ: Great Plains Golf Estate Final Plat Extension In a letter dated March 11, 1988 , Don Halla has requested an extension for final plat approval for the Great Plains Golf 1 Estates subdivision (Attachment #1) . The preliminary plat for 37 single family lots was approved by the City Council on July 6 , 1987 (Attachment #2) . State statute requires a final plat to be 1 approved by City Council one year after preliminary plat appro- val. Therefore, the final plat for the Great Plains Golf Estates subdivision would have to be approved by City Council by July 6 , 1 1988 . The subject property is currently the site of Halla Nursery. The applicant wishes to extend the one year deadline for final plat 1 approval to allow the nursery operation to continue. The appli- cant has been in contact with staff and has discussed the possi- bility of platting a first phase within one year and maintaining 1 the remaining portion of the property as an outlot for future phases of development. 1 RECOMMENDATION Staff feels a one year extension to the final plat deadline will provide the applicant with the time necessary to prepare a final 1 plat for the first phase, a phasing plan for the remainder of the site and obtain the finances necessary to file and develop the first phase. 1 Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves a one year extension to the final plat 1 approval deadline for the Great Plains Golf Estates subdivision until July 10, 1989 ( second Monday in July, 1989 ) . " 1 ATTACHMENTS 1 . Letter from Don Halla. 2 . City Council minutes dated July 6 , 1987 . 11 ‘../, O A ._ '` ' PS .E. "` 4DSCAPENTRAcTORSGROWERINC I s' i° I'L�''ALUE'Sd MAILING ADDRESS I oaaa� 1O0OG real Plains Blvd. Chaska, Minnesota 55318 100 Acre Growing Range• 3 Miles South of Chanhassen on HWY 101 (612) 445-6555 I March 11, 1988 I Joanne Olsen City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Driver I P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Ms. Olsen, 1 I would appreciate it if you would request of the city council that they give us an extension for final plot approval for our site located on Highway 101 and Carver County 14. I As you know in the preliminary plot request I did state at that time that we would like to delay the final plot and the subdivision as much as possible I as I still wish to maintain the sight as a landscape nursery operation. Secondary, I do not have the $35,000.00 cash to immediately expend to do Ithe final plot and engineering right required. Your cooperation and consideration are greatly appreciated. Smite ly, � � � 1 Don E. Halla, President Halla Nursery, Inc. I I I MAR 1 /I 1988 1 CITY OF CHAIVrirt"aL.•A ' "THE PLACE TO GO FOR PLANTS THAT GROW" I YOUR "NATIONAL LANDSCAPE AWARD"WINNING NURSERY FOR DESIGNING & PLANTING ..r• ADE TREES_' EVERGREENS-• OWERINO-C • R,It 'W,a.��` RL • . • i, �e $. ;i P . s '• ="i S • c - TA_ • }C"i ° • , f`{ y n„, }., 7c - t: r 7 City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 Iljr- with the recommendations that have been provided and move on. Councilman Johnson: Does the developer have a problem? Acting Mayor Geving: I'm not worried about the developer. Let's worry about ' the Council. Can we make a motion on the recommendations provided to us by Staff with the agreement that we just made on the lot widths. Does anyone want to make that motion? Councilman Bo ' yt moved, Councilman�Horn seconded to approve the final plat for Curry Farms, Phase 1 stamped "Received June 16, 1987" subject to the following conditions: 1. Execution of a development contract and submission of financial securities. 2. Execution of the required conservation easements. 3. Identification on the plat to show that side lot line easements are five feet width. All voted in favor and motion carried. Acting Mayor Geving: The directive to the Staff is that we review, have Staff go back and take a look at the setback and bring it back to us and also bring back Block 4 on a potential Consent Agenda. We don't need to see it again other than on the Consent Agenda. ' t REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 105 ACRES INTO 37 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF TH 101 AND CR 14, DON HALLA. ' Acting Mayor Geving: Let me say one thing to the Council and to the Staff before we move into this area. Tonight we are discussing a lot of subdivisions. They are really crucial for what happens in these subdivisions ' are going to be the way the City looks for years to come. I'm most concerned about a very important issue and that is where our trails are going to be connecting all of these subdivisions and I want Staff to specifically understand my direction to you is in every subdivision make this provision for the trail connection. i know this goes to the Park and Rec people but insist upon giving us a recommendation so that these will eventually all link and look like some kind of a system. Not just jagged and irregular pieces. Okay, do we all understand that? That's really a crucial point to me. Moving on then, let's go onto item 5, Mr. Halla's subdivision. Jo Ann Olsen: The property is located south of CR 14 and on the east and west side of TH 101. It's split into two parts. It's single family. They all have at least 2 1/2 acres and 90 feet of street frontage on the lots. The Planning Commission approved the subdivision. The first time it went in front of them it was tabled because of the street issue where they had private drives rather than public streets for each lot. They then came in with this new proposal with a public street going to the center of the eastern half of 27 1 City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 the subdivision. It avoids the easement issue which is on the southerly portion of the property but it does still provide frontage for all the lots I:- that is proposed in the subdivision and the highway department has approved the location. All the lots had the septic sites approved by the City's consultants. With this new alignment of the road, they had to provide a new alternate site. The Planning Commission approved of the realignment of the Ir road and the proposed subdivision with the condition that these new soil types be accepted by the Soil Consultant. Also, the first plan had an outlot located approximatley in this location on Lot 13 which is now Lot 13. The II purpose of the outlot was to allow for the straightening of TH 101 should that ever be proposed in the future. What Staff is now recommending is approval of the subdivision that all lots shall have the area that was once outlot A to now be designated unbuildable area. Staff is recommending approval of the II subdivision with the conditions set in the report. If you would like I could read through those. ` Acting Mayor Geving: No, it's not necessary. We all have your report. II Planning Commission action as is noted is fairly straight forward. I think at this time I think we'll hear from the developer. However, I think it would encumbant upon the developer or Mr. Halla, is there a representative here? II Are you speaking for yourself? Don Halla: Yes. 1 Acting Mayor Geving: Is there anything you would like to say? Tell us about ii your development. Don Halla: The purpose of course of our development coming in at this point is really to preserve the value of our property. It is not my desire but I feel forced into doing a subdivision at this point in time. I have been very I straight forward about it. My ideas and my concept is to drag my feet. Doing the least that I can so I can remain in the nursery business but rather than having the value of my property reduced by three-fourths, I felt that it was II pertinent that we did this at this time. Still I'm not looking to really come back in here and do a complete development like we just saw a few minutes before. I would like the opportunity to drag my feet and stay in the nursery business and keep it more rural which, as I understand, is really what the II Coucnil and the Planning Commission wishes it to be. That's all. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. Councilman Horn: Really I only have one concern with this proposal. It looks II like a nice layout. My concern though is that's a very bad corner on TH 101. Is there any plans to straighten that out and while we precluded a plan to II straighten it out, what's being proposed? It looks to me like this proposed road that comes just around the corner has a very short sight distance. Gary Warren: There aren't any plans from the State as far as TH 101 is I concerned but I think it's all tied in to the TH 212 and TH 101 has become obviously very important to us. We have reserved the corner there as part of our condition pursuant to the outlot now so that we could take steps if necessary to improve that corner. 28 II II t i.r CI 1 City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 Councilman Horn: Is that enough? Gary Warren: I think short of having the feasibility done on it, I think this will give us enough to give us a reasonable sight distance curve instead of the sharp angle that we have at this point. Councilman Horn: This proposed road just to the north of the sharp bend is not going to interfere with any change in that area? Barbara Dacy: Gary, I don't know if you've gotten the revised plat in your packet. You've got the original one. ' Jo Ann Olsen: It should not impact that at all. It would still allow for that intersection to connect with TH 101. ' Councilman Horn: The lower cul-de-sac. Jo Ann Olsen: This would all become land that would have to be extended. ' Councilman Horn: That's my only concern. Councilman Boyt: This is my both sides of TH 101 situation. Have you decided which side of TH 101 the trail is going to go down? Carol Watson: We already have some trail easement along the west side of TH IlL 101. However, after you cross CR 14 and you start up around that curve, the west side of TH 101 is not a nice place for a trail unless you're a gopher or something like that so then we had a consideration of having the trail then switch to the east side of TH 101. It is however not a particularly nice ' place to have people walking and biking and crossing TH 101 either. So it kind of got left like that because we didn't know what plans there were to change TH 101. I think we were leaning more towards leaving the entire trail on the west side and having to come up with some configuration where the trail could be done on the west side of TH 101. It may be steep in the base but crossing TH 101 did not seem like a very viable possibility. People walking pets and bicycles and children and all these things. As these developments add quite a few people to these trails, and Eden Prairie has such an extensive system not far from here at all. However, they're going to cross TH 101 to get to Eden Prairie section at the Pioneer Trail there you are going to cross. Councilman Boyt: You may have meant this in the recommendation but the way the recommendation reads, it says off-street trails along TH 101 and my only thing I would suggest with this development is that we have that clearly ' stating both sides of TH 101 until this gets resolved. At that point then we would take one of those easements and release the other one. Carol Watson: I think we were kind of leaning towards the west side simply because we already own a trail easment down TH 101 further on the west side of TH 101. We already have some easement. Councilman Boyt: Mr. Halla, would you be agreeable to giving us an easement on both sides until we can clear this matter up? 29 1 t I 1 City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 Don Halla: I don't see that it should be any problem. Councilman Boyt: I would like to thank the Planning Commission representative, you guys did great work straightening out some of the issues here. Acting Mayor Geving: I tend to agree with your comments on the trail I specifically at this time because we really don't know which is the best route. If the Hallas would agree to do that I think that would be a good move. II Carol Watson: It's kind of a muddy issue because since you're going to cross TH 101 to connect to Eden Prairie because they come in on Pioneer Trail II towards Chanhassen. We either cross at Pioneer Trail and TH 101 and have some kind of a controlled crossing or something like that where we can stay on the west side. Councilman Johnson: I've got one major issue and a couple quickies. Council II recommendations item 5 and item 11 are no longer valid because they would be okay if we were using the June 1st addition of the blueprints but we're using II the July 2nd. In one case the road has already been moved and in the other case there is no Lot 9 or 10 anymore because Lots 9 and 10 are now 4 and 5 and that condition has already been met basically. The other thing is on what is II now called Lot 13 and it's part of condition 3 that the Outlot A shall on the June 1st preliminary plat shall be deemed unbuidable. This is part of both Lot 5 and Lot 13. As such, the remainder of Lot 13 is less than 2 1/2 acres and as such all of Lot 13 would be deemed unbuildable. I have a solution II though. If we move the road just sljghtly north and curved it, you've got a problem with that? Don Halla: MnDot has a problem with that. It has to go where it is. That's II the spot that MnDot wants it. They feel that's the least problems for accidents. I Councilman Johnson: You mean coming 60-70 feet up the road, they got a problem with that. Don Halla: They got a problem with that because it drops too quickly on the II vertical sight distance problem. David Halla: Let me explain that to you because I was out there with MnDot. II They go out there with a ruler and set that ruler at 37 or 38 inches and at a certain speed limit that's on that road in that designated area you have to have so many feet of clear view and it's done very scientifically. If you've II ever seen them do it you can't argue with it because it's so practical and logical it comes right out. If they say that's where it has to be, that's where it has to be because you have to have so many feet of clearance at that II mile per hour. Councilman Johnson: I have no problem with that. What I'm trying to do is ( II make sure that Lot 13 is buildable. 30 1 II 4 4 11 City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 ;//////'1 Barbara Dacy: I think what you could recommend is that the westerly 160 feet of Lot 13, that's still leaves 625 feet for future resubdivision and adequate Iarea for the two septic system sites. We'll go back and double check that but the westerly 160 feet ,of that was the original area that we looked at as part of Outlot A. ICouncilman Johnson: But that leaves it well under 2 1/2 acres in Lot 13. be an easement until a decision for TH 101 is made so 13 becomes buidable but they can't build out where they may realign TH 101. f I Acting Mayor Geving: Gary do have a comment on Y you that? I would like to have your comment on that, the recommendation. IIGary Warren: If you just want to call it a roadway easement instead of a unbuildable outlot? ICouncilman Johnson: It wasn't designated as an outlot, then all of 13 would be unbuildable. IIBarbara Dacy: The westerly 160 feet. Gary Warren: The original intent was to put it as an outlot and reserve that IIportion of it. Councilman Johnson: These plans don't show it as an outlot. li Barbara Dacy: But because of the realigned road arrangement, in order to get the 2.5 acres and so on, the Planning Commission's recommendation was to II reserve the westerly portion of that as unbuildable. You can describe it by easement or a deed or some type of restriction as a part of the title for that lot. We can work out the legal means. IGary Warren: As long as we restrict it I've got no problem. Councilman Johnson: I don't want to take out a lot that's got 13 1/2 acres to I it because at some time in the near distant galaxy or something we're going to actually change TH 101 there and put a bridge across that crevice. Don Halla: Originally there was a discussion that they were going to do that I for a year so give them time to see that there was ever going to be a need or anybody would ever agree to do that. That was the original. II Councilman Johnson: We're trying to get the State to look at TH 101. They don't want it. Acting Mayor Geving: Let's come to some conclusion. ICouncilman Johnson: The last issue was well sites, I had some concern on the well sites being downgrading it, not from downgrading it topographically but II hydrologically downgrade the groundwater where the septic systems are going. Primarily on Lots 10 through 13. I don't know what the ground water is there. . .. My experience is it's probably heading down toward the creek and the river II 31 1 I. 7 (111 City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 there so it's probably headed south unless they've got some really unusual drainage in there. Jo Ann Olsen: The soil consultant definitely looks at all the drainage patterns. Councilman Johnson: The drainage pattern on top of the earth does not match II the drainage pattern under the earth and a slight movement like this. All I want to say is let's be careful on those well sites there. I think there may II be a chance that we'll have septic systems contaminating your own wells. It depends upon how deep you put the wells of course. Don Halla: I think a lot of the difference here is between the original plan II and this one, the street moved to the north. I would think the houses would move to the north and satisfy your problem. Councilman Johnson: That's exactly right. You had those houses a long ways I back. A lot of driveway. I double anyone would actually go. Don Halla: That's because the roadway used to be on the south. II Acting Mayor Geving: Any more problems, concerns? Councilman Johnson: No, I think we've made good progress. I agree with this II Councilman Horn moved, Acting Mayor Geving seconded to approve Subdivision ill Request #86-31 as shown on the preliminary plat dated July 2, 1987 subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant receive access permits from MnDot and Carver County. II 2. - The final plat shall provide for a roadway easement dedication of 27 feet on either side of TH 101 and 17 feet on the south side of CR 14, II east of TH 101. • 3. What was shown as Outlot A on the June 1, 1987 preliminary plat shall II be deemed as a roadway easement until the realignment of TH 101 is determined. 4. Provision of a 20 foot trail easment for off-street trails on both I sides along TH 101 and CR 14. 5. All street improvements shall conform with City standards for rural I construction. 6. Acquisition of a drainage easement through Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block II 2 coincident with the ravine and ponding area. 7. All slope areas in excess of 25% shall be restricted from any and all building and grading activities. ' 32 13 /City- Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated as necessary for placement of all utility improvements. Approval of •the final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan by the City, Watershed District and DNR and compliance with all conditions. 10. Approval of the preliminary plat is conditioned upon two soil ' treatment sites per lot where any sites have been changed due to the II realignment of the street and readjustment of lot lines. I All voted in favor and motion carried. REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 8.5 ACRES INTO 15 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED AT 6239 IICHASKA ROAD, ROBERT SOMMER. — — Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant is proposing 15 single family lots. The site is II located between Chaska Road and Murray Hill Road. It is zoned RSF, Single Family. A11 the lots have 90 feet of street frontage and at least 15,000 square feet of lot area. The Planning Commission approved the subdivision. They did table it once though for Staff to review with the applicant if a road I could be developed off of Chaska Road rather than off of Murray Hill Road. The neighborhood objected to the Murray Hill Road access because of the hill It going to the north. They felt that the sight distance was poor and that the increased traffic would be a hazard. The applicant did propose an alternate plan which I'll show in just a minute. It altered the site almost com leted because of the steep slope. Staff and the Planning Commission both P I recommended that that not be approved. Another item that they had concern about was with the outlots and the Planning Commission recommended approval that the outlots be offered to the neighbors to the north and the south and that if that isn't an option that they do become part of Lot 15 and 3 so the ICity would not be responsible for maintaining them. Another issue is the Park and Recreation Commission, they had not reviewed it at the time of the Planning Commission meeting. They have since then and they are requesting I that a trail easement be provided along Chaska Road and also along the utility easement up to the cul-de-sac and then they are going to be working with the applicant and the property owners to the south to locate an area for an II easement to go through to access the school site. Again another issue is the road access. The Engineer and Staff visited the site to see if it does have adequate sight distance. To the north it has approximatley 300 to 400 feet of sight distance. To the south it has approximatley 200 to 300 feet. There is II adequate sight distance and Staff felt that the street proposed would be adequate. We also felt that the additional lots onto Murray Hill Road would not be a negtive impact. The other issue was that the lots did not conform II with the surrounding lots. The area, the lots in the surrounding neighborhood are larger from 30,000 on up. Staff had to stress the point that this subdivision is meeting the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance and although they are not the approximate size as the existing lots, they are meeting the requirements of the ordinance and technically it can not be denied because of that. So those are the main issues that the Planning Commission IIhad and were addressed and again the Planning Commission did recommend 33 II ,