4 Minnewashta Creek Hills 05-25
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Administration
Phone 952.227.1100
Fax: 952.227.1110
Building Inspections
Phone: 952.227.1180
Fax 952.227.1190
Engineering
Phone 952.227.1160
Fax 952.227.1170
Finance
Phone 952.227.1140
Fax 952.227.1110
Park & Recreation
Phone 952.227.1120
Fax 952.227.1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone 952.227.1400
Fax 952.227.1404
Planning &
Natural Resources
Phone 952.227.1130
Fax 952.227.1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone 952.227.1300
Fax 952.227.1310
Senior Center
Phone 952.227.1125
Fax 952.227.1110
Web Site
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
if
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM:
Sharmeen AI-Jaff, Senior Planner 'lb.
O'.-lY'
August 22, 2005
DATE:
SUBJ:
Preliminary Plat to Subdivide a 1.4 Acre Lot into Three (3) Single-Family
Lots with a Variance, Minnewashta Creek Hill- Planning Case 05-25
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval to subdivide 1.4 acres into
3 single-family lots and a variance to serve the property via a private street, Minnewashta Creek
Hill.
ACTION REQUIRED
City Council approval requires a majority vote of City Council present.
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 2, 2005 to review the proposed
development. The Planning Commission voted 6-1 to approve the proposed development.
HISTORIC VALUE
The home on this site is rumored to be the second oldest house in Carver County, built in 1859.
Staff contacted Carver County Historical Society and was informed that the existing structure is
located within one of the early settlement areas, but could not confirm that it is the second oldest
home in the County. We were also told that the structure does not appear to be on any listing of
significant structures.
Over the years, there have been numerous additions and updates made to the house. The
applicant provided photos to show the many additions made to the home.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the motion approving the preliminary plat with a variance as
specified in the staff report dated August 2,2005 beginning on page 13.
A TT ACHMENTS
1. Photos and letter from the applicant dated July 21,2005
2. Findings of Fact.
3. Staff Report dated August 2,2005.
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated August 2,2005.
5. Plans.
g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-25 minnewashta creek hills\executive summary.doc
The City of Chanhassen. A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a channing downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place fo live, work, and play.
DATE:
Wednesday, July 21, 2005
FROM:
Connie Villari, L.S.
Cornerstone Land Surveying
200 E. Chestnut St., Suite 200
Stillwater, MN 55082
TO:
Sharmeen AI-Jaff
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317-9683
RE:
Follow up on items addressed in the public hearing and by staff
subsequent to the planning commission meeting and public hearing.
Sharmeen and City Staff;
We would like to take this opportunity thank staff for their assistance in our plan
development process and address a few items brought up during the public hearing and
by staff subsequent to the hearing.
First, we are sympathetic with neighbors concerns regarding the new private road
entrance onto Minnewashta Parkway. Although we have kept safety considerations in
mind throughout the design process - including closing 1 of 2 existing driveways,
utilization of the southerly drive which maintains the greatest separation from existing
Linden Circle and the greatest existing sight distance with only 1 flanking retaining wall,
we briefly discussed the new drive with your engineer and feel that we can work with her
to improve visibility. We will work with her on options towards this goal including one
or more of the following remedies: lowering a portion of the wall directly adjacent to the
drive entrance, slightly reducing the grade of the drive, and adding signage.
Seconds, staff asked for some house options which would fit on proposed Lot 2, as well
as a turn around in the driveway. We have submitted several house plans with 2 Y2 to 3
stall garages from existing plans books to show that a house is feasible. As we
mentioned each of the homes proposed here will be a custom home designed specifically
to fit the width, depth, impervious surface limitations and grades of this subdivision.
Undoubtedly, the custom home will be even more appropriate for this lot than the
examples submitted. We have specifically elected not to add a turn around on this lot.
At 46 feet from front of garage to private drive, the driveway on this lot is significantly
shorter than the other 2 lots. We feel that the private drive is close enough to provide
ample back up and turning room while keeping impervious areas to a minimum. A drive
of this size will also accommodate at least 3 guest parking spaces within the driveway.
Suite #BIOO, 200 E. Chestnut Street, Stillwater, MN 55082/ Phone: 651-275-8969, Fax: 651-275-8976, Email: cvcsls@mcleodusa.net
Third, the historic value of the existing home was brought into question. Although we
know the house is quite old, it is not on the National Historic Register and does not
appear to be on any listing of significant structures as mentioned in the Centennial Book
or upon initial research with the Carver County Historical Society. We feel that
alterations made to this building over the years have degraded its value as a
representative structure of its era. We have furnished photographs of a few of the
modifications including porch and garage additions, structural problems and interior
changes dating from the 1970's. The owner has repeatedly expressed the extraordinary
measures taken to maintaining this structure in a safe and functional form. We will
provide written comments regarding recent maintenance and repair efforts and related
costs if requested by staff.
Fourth, engineering recommendations. We have reviewed the engineer's
recommendations in the original staff report for realignment of the utilities serving this
site. We have no problem with her suggestions and will work with the city engineer's
office to revise plans, upon approval of the layout and design of the lots based on final
horizontal and vertical drive location.
Weare happy to address additional staff concerns as they arise and will make ourselves
available via phone, email or meeting as necessary. Please contact me if you have any
questions. Thank you again for your assistance.
Regards,
COt1W p. iiI/v;
Connie Villari, L.S.
CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING
Suite #8100,200 E. Chestnut Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 / Phone: 651-275-8969, Fax: 651-275-8976, Ernail: cycsls@rncleodusa.net
~
z
-<
u
~
~
~
~
-<
-<
~
-<
Q
~
~
~
rJ'J.
PC DATE: August 2, 2005
w
CC DATE: August 22, 2005
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
REVIEW DEADLINE: August 30, 2005
CASE #: 05-25
BY: AI-Jaff
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat to Subdivide a 1.4 Acre Lot into Three (3) Single-Family Lots with a
Variance, Minnewashta Creek Hill
LOCATION:
Lot 1, Block 1, Minnewashta Creek First Addition, 6560 Minnewashta Parkway.
APPLICANT:
Tim and Mary Colleran
6560 Minnewashta Parkway
Excelsior, MN 55331
952-484-4255
tcollera@dohentvhro.com
Robert Rick
4700 Otter Lake Road
White Bear Lake, MN 55110
612-805-5773
brickii@comcast.com
PRESENT ZONING: PUD-R, Planned Unit Development-Residential
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density (Net Density 1.2 - 4.0 units per acre)
ACREAGE: 1.4 acres
DENSITY: 2.1 Units per Acre Gross
2.1 Units per Acre Net
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Subdivision of 1.4 acres into 3 single-family lots and a variance to
allow a private street to serve the development. Notice ofthis public hearing has been mailed to all
property owners within 500 feet. Staff is recommending approval of the request.
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving
or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards
outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City
must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed
project meets the standards in the Subdivision Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively
high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established
standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 2
PROPOSALISUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to subdivide 1.4 acres into 3 single family lots. The property is zoned
Planned Unit Development-Residential (PUD-R). The site contains a single family home which is
proposed to be demolished. Access to the site is gained via an existing "U" shaped driveway off of
Minnewashta Parkway.
The variance in this application is to allow a private street to serve this development. The
subdivision ordinance requires a variance be granted in order to allow a private street. Staff is
recommending approval of the variance to minimize grading and tree loss. This issue is discussed in
detail later in the report.
Staff has been working with the applicant for several months. Several development scenarios were
examined. Staff directed the applicant to show how the site would develop if a public street was
constructed.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 3
Exhibit B shows the site served via a public street. This concept mass grades the site, removes most
of the vegetation and utilizes retaining walls, which the use of a private street avoids.
0-EXHIBIT B PROPOSED LAYOUT WITH CUL DE SAC
I
I \(
/
I
,
I
r--
I
I
.
I
\
~
\
\
The proposed subdivision has an average lot size of 20,457 square feet with a resulting gross and net
density of 2.1 units per acre. The site is located west of Minnewashta Parkway and south of Linden
Circle. All three lots meet the minimum area, width, and depth requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. The site has mature trees which the applicant is making an effort to preserve.
In reviewing this plat, staff examined the width of the right-of-way for Minnewashta Parkway. The
current right-of-way is deficient in width. The ordinance requires an 80-foot width. The existing
right-of-way is 66 feet wide. Any improvements or additional needed right-of-way was acquired
with the improvements of Minnewashta Parkway in the early 1990' s. Staff is recommending no
additional right of way be dedicated.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 4
In summary, staff believes that the proposed subdivision is well designed. Minor revisions will be
required. We are recommending that it be approved with a variance to allow a private street with
conditions outlined in the staff report.
BACKGROUND
Minnewashta Creek First
Addition
On May 5, 1976, the plat of
Minnewashta Creek First
Addition was filed with
Carver County. It created
three (3) lots and 2 outlots.
Lot 1, Block 1 contained a
single-family home (subject
site proposed for
resubdivision). Lots 1 and
2, Block 2, were created for
single-family homes.
Outlot A was reserved for
future subdivision and
Outlot B was created to act
as a beachlot.
Minnewashta Creek
Second Addition
On April 26, 1979, the
plat of Minnewashta
Creek Second
Addition was filed
with Carver County.
This subdivision
replatted Outlot A,
Minnewashta Creek
First Addition into 36
lots to house single-
family homes. The lot
areas ranged from
12,665 square feet to
38,850 square feet
with an average lot
size of 18,899 square
feet.
MNNE\NABHTA' ~~< t-IHST ADDITID\I
~
~
, 'VPlIIl'"
(,,_,___ .._,___---","~.:.~a:t~-~~~
~iot"q' .::r::r-,.....I-"_......:- ,,"\'li'!Itii" ,,_.. 4'.:-
..~.-.,""._.....t
_.a.. _"....~._ r
. -_.~.."'~.
MINNEWASHTA
CREEK
SECOND .'
ADDITION//....
~ :.
Outlot B
.-t.l't'''._=-=-l:,J~
;if'~t~, _-">.X
.....-.n___
~. -~~ 10
~::~~~g[~~~~~~~Z:
""''''........-.,....''''''....,..
"''''-''''''''-''''-',
::;::::......-=::....~.O;;:'.:::::~"i...~=:..~..~'"
::",..I:;::r:;~~," "" ;<".. .-..... -.."".--__
,/'
~~~i:t:~~4E."'-
14\~~:=:'.''''
;;}.;i/~'
~~..~=~ ...,....,....., Q ~ii
'~~ '~., ~;I,
('#-9'
~f-j<tJ
..~~~~~
j{m.r.~,a..Jo., ~~~~
\_./1..,,,",-- ~K~
~~ "IU~
~;:'_._:.~:~=:,.
.,s:;!!;;:...._ ..,-<,...~.!!LdU
"i':""~~
"/~~7;~~~,
';$;.~~~
~trl~~~~~~
~~f,~~;~:i~:~~-
'- ::~~~~~~~~~-
, ~'~"."-=~i~"'~
~_-""""'-,",t,. .
.~-,
!:'":'~-::=,~~,:z.::. ':.~- -.. '''I.........
"l== '
Minnewashta
Creek Third
Addition
On May 28,1982,
the plat of
Minnewashta Creek
Third Addition was
filed with Carver
County. This
subdivision replatted
the most westerly six
lots of the
Minnewashta Creek
Second Addition into
twelve (12)
twinhome lots. Two
of these lots were
consolidated and
contain a single-family home. This subdivision reduced the average lot size for Minnewashta
Creek Second Addition from 18,899 square feet to 16,594 square feet.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 5
PRELIMINARY PLAT
_r_"""~'" ....
PLAT Ffl.[ NO. 'W
no.,...._
MINNEWASHTA CREEK
THIRD ADDITION
~~-~;':"';;".
:~-:s:r~"~-.:."''''''':-;~:'''
&~~~~=
lr~"'.i~-
---~".--:~.~::' ~-'-~,..;
~~=7~-;;~""-'J~
':i:;;,ti:~-:]~:::Ji"__
~~.--.-.........
::;~~~t!:a~.p~~~~
:r.=m::<<.:=o,.,==", - "~~~.J./t,~,
~~~~19~~
~m::'~'"~""
~"_':I::'.~"-#:~;::':,I.,....,
IDKl ~~t~i
:~~~'?:$.r:--E~t~:'.#~r!!J
w_ it!~~'.m
.._.1.."......._,
'l;;"'ts
ItiiiiJ ~~:~4.,
ll:i.._~
.._..:.7l:"6::...~,:~;:::C"_-""""
- .".- --
___.......'.....__.._._n
E!'J!"l"'::::,!;\,~ _
~~~~:';~iu:u
'JC..r:<.":a.lj.~..........,,-....'G:;."1'A/io
~;'-:_"-~'-
.-.-.-.---- ^...
-..,-....... ~
C'-E ;:~f;;:~;~::; ~l.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 1.4 acre site into 3 single-family lots. The gross and net
density of the site is 2.1 units per acre. All three lots exceed the minimum 15,000 square feet of
area, with an average lot size of 20,457 square feet.
All three proposed lots meet the minimum width and depth requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. One issue that is of concern to staff is the hard surface coverage on these lots. The
applicant performed calculations based on a 25% hard surface coverage. Typically, Planned
Unit Developments allow a 30% hard surface coverage, however, since this parcel is within
the Shoreland Management District, it may not exceed 25 % hard surface coverage. Staff
requested the applicant provide potential house plans that could be built on this site. The
applicant submitted five layouts. They are attached to this report (Attachment #4).
however, siflce the existing zoning is Plaflfled Unit Developmeflt, the hard surface coverage
should be 30%. l\S such, the site coverage area on each lot will increase by 5%. Also, the
applicant is showing the homes set back 30 feet from the private street right-of-way/easement.
This development is in the shoreland management district which requires a 20-foot setback from
the private street.
Staff notes that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and generally consistent with
the Zoning Ordinance.
WETLANDS
There are no wetlands on this site.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 6
LAKES
The proposed project is within 1,000 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHW) of Lake
Minnewashta and is therefore within the lake's shoreland district. Lake Minnewashta is
classified as a recreational development lake by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(DNR). The minimum lot size is 15,000 square feet and the minimum lot width is 90 feet.
GRADING. DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL
The 1.41-acre site currently has one single-family home amid numerous significant trees. The
existing house and driveway will be removed.
The developer's engineer submitted a site plan with a cul-de-sac designed to meet the City
standards for a public, local street. To achieve this design the majority of the site would have to
be graded and 60% of the trees would have to be removed in order to construct the cul-de-sac.
Due to the environmental sensitivity of the site, the developer proposes to construct a 20-foot
wide private street within a 30-foot wide driveway, drainage and utility easement. This proposal
requires mass grading of approximately half of the site to construct the private street, resulting in
saving 80% of the trees. The developer proposes custom-graded lots for all three lots, therefore
detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans must be submitted with the
building permit for each lot. As-built surveys for each lot must also be submitted before a
Certificate of Occupancy will be issued.
The site currently drains from the southwest to the north and to the east. The proposed drainage
pattern is consistent with the existing drainage pattern and will not increase the surface area
draining to the existing single-family property to the north. The developer has submitted
drainage calculations for the existing and proposed conditions, which indicate that the proposed
development will not significantly increase the amount or rate of runoff from the site.
The developer is required to extend private storm sewer from the existing 27-inch trunk storm
sewer within Minnewashta Parkway to the site. This storm sewer will capture runoff from the
proposed private driveway and from the front yard of Lot 2. The driveway grade must be
adjusted so that runoff from the driveway will sheet drain to the east. The grades east of the
proposed private drive must be adjusted to provide a drainage swale along the east side of the
driveway to the proposed catch basin.
The plan does not identify any retaining walls. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high
requires a building permit and must be designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State
of Minnesota.
Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. All disturbed areas, as a
result of construction, shall be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to
minimize erosion. A 75-foot minimum rock construction entrance must be added to the entrance
that will be accessed during construction. If importing or exporting material for development of
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 7
the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route
and traffic control plan.
The grading plan should be revised to show silt fence down slope of all disturbed areas.
Chanhassen's standard detail for silt fence (Plate 5300) should be included in the plans.
Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed
soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to
the following table of slopes and time frames:
TVlJe of Slope
Steeper than 3: 1
10:1 to 3:1
Flatter than 10:1
Time
7 days
14 days
21 days
(Maximum time an area can
remain open when the area
is not actively being worked.)
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil
areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system,
storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems
that discharge to a surface water.
Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street
sweeping as-needed.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEES
Water Quality Fees
Because of the impervious surface associated with this development, the water quality fees for this
proposed development are based on single-family residential development rates of $1,093/acre.
Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 1.41 acres, the water quality fees associated
with this project are $1,541.
Water Quantity Fees
The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average
citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition,
proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Single-
family residential developments have a connection charge of $2,705 per developable acre. This
results in a water quantity fee of approximately $3,814 for the proposed development.
At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $5,355.
Other Agencies
The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies as
necessary (e.g., Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase IT Construction Site Permit),
(for dewatering)) and comply with their conditions of approval.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 8
UTILITIES
The developer shall also extend storm sewer from the existing storm sewer manhole within
Minnewashta Parkway at the south end of the property. The upstream storm sewer structure shall
have a catch basin cover and a three-foot sump.
The developer proposes to extend 6-inch lateral sanitary sewer from the existing stub within
Minnewashta Parkway to the proposed manhole within the private driveway. The as-built utility
information for this area does not show a sanitary sewer stub at this location. The utility plan
identifies a 4-inch wet tap from the existing 12-inch trunk watermain within Minnewashta
Parkway and installing 4-inch lateral watermain to the south side of the private drive.
The lateral sanitary sewer and watermain connections to the existing trunk utilities must be north
of the proposed private drive. The developer shall extend 8-inch lateral sanitary sewer from the
existing manhole (top elevation 951.23 '). The alignment of the lateral sanitary sewer within the
site shall be similar to the original proposal; however, a manhole must be installed wherever a
bend is proposed in the sanitary sewer. Individual sanitary sewer services must be 6 inches
diameter.
Six-inch lateral watermain shall be wet tapped from the existing trunk utility. A gate valve must
be installed immediately west of the wet tap. The lateral watermain within the site shall be
similar to the original proposal. A hydrant is required at the end of the proposed watermain for
flushing purposes.
Both the lateral watermain and sanitary sewer will be publicly owned and maintained. Additional
drainage and utility easements may be required based on the revised utility plan. Easements shall
be minimum 20 feet wide centered over each utility.
The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and watermain within the site,
therefore the sanitary sewer and water lateral charges will be waived.
According to the City's Finance Department records, the parcel was previously assessed for one
sanitary sewer and water hookup; therefore, sanitary sewer and water hookup charges must be
paid for two lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458.00 for sanitary sewer and $2,955.00
for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the
parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of
SAC units assigned by the Met Council.
The existing sanitary sewer and water services to the existing home must be removed or properly
abandoned.
Public utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest
edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications must be submitted at time of final plat. The applicant is required to enter into a
development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a
letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 9
final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained,
including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, MCES, and Watershed District.
STREETS
Minnewashta Parkway is an A Minor Connector as identified in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
The one-half right-of-way requirement for Minnewashta Parkway is 40 feet. The existing one-
half right-of-way ranges from 40 feet on the north side to 33 feet on the south side. Any
improvements or additional needed right-of-way was acquired with the improvements of
Minnewashta Parkway. Staff is recommending no additional right-of-way be dedicated.
The developer proposes to construct a 20-foot wide private drive to serve the three proposed lots.
The private drive will intersect Minnewashta Parkway at approximately the same location of the
southern access point of the existing horseshoe driveway. The maximum grade of the private
drive shall not exceed 10%, as shown on the plans.
The driveway easement must clearly stipulate that the owners of Lots 1-3, Block 1, Minnewashta
Creek Hill shall own and maintain the private drive and the private storm sewer north of the
private driveway.
PARK DEDICATION
TRAILS
PARKS
The three homes proposed for
Minnewashta Creek Hill will
have convenient access to
Roundhouse Park located less
than one-half mile to the south
of the property. The park is
eight acres in size and features a
public swimming beach, fishing
pier, ice rink, warming house
and shelter building, playground,
basketball court, open field,
picnic area, benches and trail.
A popular section of the City's comprehensive trail system is located at the front on each of the
proposed lots. This trail section travels along Minnewashta Parkway from Highway 5 to
Highway 7, extending to the east at Highway 7. This trail will serve as a convenient pedestrian
access from the new homes to Roundhouse Park.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 10
TREE PRESERV A TIONILANDSCAPING
Approximate tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations for the Minnewashta Creek Hill
development as shown using a private drive are as follows:
Total upland area (including outlots) 61,371 SF
Total canopy area (excluding wetlands) 30,315 SF
Baseline canopy coverage 50 %
Minimum canopy coverage allowed 35 % or 21,480 SF
Proposed tree preservation 35% or 21,795 SF
The developer meets the minimum canopy coverage allowed and no reforestation plantings are
required.
No bufferyard plantings are required along the adjoining properties since they are of equal
zoning. Plantings are required along Minnewashta Parkway, but the existing trees to be
preserved provide a buffer complimentary with the neighboring properties and are acceptable as
bufferyard plantings.
Location Required Proposed
Buffer yard B- 2 overstory trees 5 existing overstory trees
Minnewashta Pkwy 4 understory trees
4 shrubs
COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - PUD-R DISTRICT
Lot
Area
Ordinance Min 11,000
A vg. 15,000
BLOCK 1
Lot 1 23,474
Lot 2 20,778
Lot 3 17,119
Lot
Width
Lot
Depth
Home
Setback
90'
100'
50' front/30' rear
10' sides
90'
319'
50'/30'
10'
50'/30'
10'
50'/30'
10'
92.4'
264'
94'
222'
SUBDIVISION - FINDINGS
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the PUD-R, Planned Unit
Development-Residential and the zoning ordinance if the private street variance is
approved.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 11
2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans
including but not limited to the City's comprehensive plan;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with the comprehensive plan and
subdivision ordinance.
3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm
water drainage are suitable for the proposed development;
Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions
specified in this report
4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this
chapter;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure.
5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental
damage subject to conditions of approval. The proposed subdivision contains
adequate open areas to accommodate house pads.
6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record.
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but
rather will expand and provide all necessary easements.
7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
b. Lack of adequate roads.
c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
Finding: The proposed subdivision will have access to public utilities and streets.
VARIANCE
Section 18-57. Streets. (r) Private streets serving up to four (4) lots may be permitted in the A2,
RR, RSF and R4 if the criteria in variance section 18-22 are met and upon consideration of the
following:
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 12
( 1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a
public street. In making this determination, the City may consider the location of
existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of
wetlands.
(2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public
street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area, improve access, or to
provide a street system consistent with the comprehensive plan.
(3) The use of a private street will permit enhanced protection of the City's natural
resources, including wetlands and protected areas.
Staff reviewed the two possible plat layouts for the site. Staff believes that the best option from a
safety and environmental standpoint is the private street option. The option of a public street and
cul-de-sac serving the parcel requires severe grading of the site. The plans show retaining walls
and the loss of approximately 30 trees. The final option of a private street serving three lots is the
most environmentally friendly with minimal retaining walls and yet does not add any additional
access points to the site off of Minnewashta Parkway but rather eliminates one of the existing
access points.
Staff is recommending approval of the private street.
V ARIANCE FINDINGS
Sec. 18-22. Variances.
The City Council may grant a variance from the regulations contained in this chapter as part of
the plat approval process following a finding that all of the following conditions exist:
VARIANCE FINDINGS WITHIN SUBDIVISONS
The City may grant a variance from the regulations of the subdivision ordinance as part of the plat
approval process following a finding that all of the following conditions exist:
1) The hardship is not a mere inconvenience.
Finding: The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. The proposed private street preserves
significant site features.
2) The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or typographical
conditions of the land.
Finding: The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape and
topographical conditions of the land.
3) The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to
other property.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 13
Finding: The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally
applicable to other properties due to the unique site features.
4) The granting of the variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is
in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan.
Finding: The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public
welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance,
and comprehensive plan. The applicant is proposing to access the site via a private street.
This option will minimize grading and tree removal as well as provide less potential conflict
with vehicles on Minnewashta Parkway.
The applicant's request is reasonable. Staff is recommending approval of this request.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff- The Planning Commission recommends the PlanaiFlg Commission City Council adopt the
following motion:
"The PlanFliFlg CommissioFl r-ecolllflleRds approval of City Council approves the preliminary plat for
Planning Case 05-25 for Minnewashta Creek Hill for three lots and a variance to allow a private
street as shown on the plans received July 20, 2005, subject to the following conditions:
1. Environmental Resources Specialist Conditions:
a. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed at the edge of grading limits prior to any
construction. Fencing shall be maintained until construction is completed.
b. Any preserved trees removed will be replaced at a rate of 2: 1 diameter inches.
2. Park and Recreation Conditions:
a. In lieu of any land dedication, full park fees shall be collected at the time of platting.
With the one existing home, the total park fee for Minnewashta Creek Hill will be
$8,000.
b. Additional trail construction is not required as a part of this project; however during
demolition and construction, the existing pedestrian trail shall be protected and
remain open. No construction equipment shall be parked on or use the trail as a
staging area during construction. In addition, all match points encountered on the
trail for demolition and/or construction shall be professionally constructed.
3. Detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans must be submitted with
the building permit for each lot.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 14
4. The driveway grade must be adjusted so that runoff from the driveway will sheet drain to
the east. The grades east of the proposed private drive must be adjusted to provide a
drainage swale along the east side of the driveway to the proposed catch basin.
5. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
6. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. All disturbed
areas, as a result of construction, shall be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after
grading to minimize erosion.
7. A 75-foot minimum rock construction entrance must be added to the entrance that will be
accessed during construction.
8. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant
will be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan.
9. The developer shall also extend storm sewer from the existing storm sewer manhole
within Minnewashta Parkway at the south end of the property. The upstream storm sewer
structure shall have a catch basin cover and a three-foot sump.
10. The lateral sanitary sewer and watermain connections to the existing trunk utilities must
be north of the proposed private drive. The developer shall extend 8-inch lateral sanitary
sewer from the existing manhole (top elevation 951.23').
11. A manhole must be installed wherever a bend is proposed in the sanitary sewer.
Individual sanitary sewer services must be 6-inch diameter.
12. Six-inch lateral watermain shall be wet tapped from the existing trunk utility.
13. A gate valve must be installed immediately west of the wet tap.
14. A hydrant is required at the end of the proposed watermain for flushing purposes.
15. Additional drainage and utility easements may be required based on the revised utility
plan. Easements shall be minimum 20-feet wide centered over each utility.
16. According to the City's Finance Department records, the parcel was previously assessed
for one sanitary sewer and water hookup, therefore sanitary sewer and water hookup
charges must be paid for two lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458.00 for
sanitary sewer and $2,955.00 for water-main.
17. Public utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
18. Detailed construction plans and specifications must be submitted at time of final plat.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 15
19. The applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the
necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee
installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval.
20. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but
not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, MCES, and Watershed District.
21. The driveway easement must clearly stipulate that the owners of Lots 1-3, Block 1,
Minnewashta Creek Hill shall own and maintain the private drive and the private storm
sewer north of the private driveway. The private street must be built to a 7-ton design, 20-
foot width. The developer will be required to submit inspection reports certifying this.
22. Water Resource Coordinator Conditions:
a. The grading plan shall be revised to show silt fence down slope of all disturbed areas.
Chanhassen's standard detail for silt fence (Plate 5300) shall be included in the plans.
b. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1.
All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope
Steeper than 3:1
10:1 to3:1
Flatter than 10: 1
Time
7 days
14 days
21 days
(Maximum time an area can
remain open when the area
is not actively being worked.)
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as
a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or
other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
c. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and
street sweeping as-needed.
d. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $5,355.
e. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies as necessary (e.g., Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II
Construction Site Permit), (for dewatering)) and comply with their conditions of
approval.
23. Building Official Conditions:
a. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division
before building permits will be issued.
b. Demolition permits must be obtained prior to demolishing any structures on the site.
c. Separate water and sewer services must be provided for each lot and must have a
separate connection to the public sewer or to a manhole which is connected to the
public sewer.
Minnewashta Creek Hill
Planning Case No. 05-25
August 2, 2005
Page 16
d. Curb box valves cannot be located in driveways.
e. Permits are required for retaining walls. Walls over four feet high must be designed
by a professional engineer.
f. The developer must submit a proposed name for the private drive.
24. Fire Marshal Conditions:
a. The new proposed private street will need a street name. Submit name to Chanhassen
Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval.
b. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must
either be removed from site or chipped.
c. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a
new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code
Section 501.4.
d. A fire apparatus access road shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
load of fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all weather driving
capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3."
25. The applicant will work with staff to address the issues of safety of the private street
accessing onto Minnewashta Parkway, drainage towards the lake, and providing
appropriate parking and turn around areas.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact.
2. Application.
3. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing.
4. Potential house plans.
5. Preliminary plat dated "Received July 20,2005".
g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-25 minnewashta creek hills\preliminary plat report pc.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE: Application of Minnewashta Creek Hill Subdivision #05-25
On August 2, 2005, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting
to consider the application of a Preliminary Plat to Subdivide a 1.4 Acre Lot into Three (3)
single-family Lots with Variances, Minnewashta Creek Hill.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development which was
preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all
interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned PUD-R, Planned Unit Development-Residential.
2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential- Low Density (1.2-
4.0 units per net acre).
3. The legal description of the property is Lots 1, Block 1, Minnewashta Creek First
Addition.
4. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven
possible adverse effects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) effects and
our findings regarding them are:
a) The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
b) The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and
regional plans including but not limited to the City's comprehensive plan;
c) The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to
topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation,
susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the
proposed development;
d) The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm
drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other
improvements required by this chapter;
1
e) The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
f) The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and
g) The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if
any of the following exists:
1. Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
2. Lack of adequate roads.
3. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
4. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
5. Variances. The City Council may grant a variance from the regulations
contained in this chapter as part of the plat approval process following a finding
that all of the following conditions exist:
a) The hardship is not a mere inconvenience.
Finding: The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. The proposed private
street preserves significant site features.
b) The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or
typographical conditions of the land.
Finding: The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings,
shape and topographical conditions of the land.
c) The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally
applicable to other property.
Finding: The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not
generally applicable to other properties due to the unique site features.
d) The granting of the variance will not be substantially detrimental to the
public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter,
the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan.
Finding: The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to
the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this
chapter, the zoning ordinance, and comprehensive plan. The applicant is
proposing to access the site via a private street. This option will minimize
grading and tree removal as well as provide less potential conflict with
vehicles on Minnewashta Parkway.
6. The planning report #05-25 SUB/Planning Case 05-25, dated August 2, 2005,
prepared by Sharmeen AI-Jaff, et aI, is incorporated herein.
2
RECOMMENDA TION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the
Preliminary Plat with variances.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 2nd day of August, 2005.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
VIi Sacchet, Chairman
g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-25 minnewashta creek hills\findings of fact.doc
3
Planning Case No. 05 - d5
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
JUL 0 1 2005
CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT
PLEASE PRINT
Applicant Name and Address:
~=0It:~~~ I<J
~vh( k &wI'" 1;1u " /1;"'; .15/10
Contact: ~h rucJ...- ~
Phone: 411.: ~"'-5~j Fax: b5j- 4-~- ~~~J
Email: fJ'" rJUl iJ &1Yn ca&t CtJm
Owner Name and Address:
~~ a..~ )\1~:f c.. /k,h(l
. 1M) 1~1'lL lJ&:h.h P:Jf'/tJ,Jay
~'a~ \..,,((~ MN cE;~~al (
Contact: "Ii ~. Co I~~,.J
Phone: 1152.-42A -42.&5 Fax:
Email: t-~UCl..N'-d.~g db ~hYD .(0'YlI\.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements
Interim Use Permit
/' Variance z..vo.-
Non-conforming Use Permit
Wetland Alteration Permit
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review
-X- Notification Sign*
Site Plan Review*
x ~w for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost***
UP/SPRN AC~ AP/Metes & Bounds
- $450 inor SUB
TOTAL FEE $ 11.1~~ ~
~SUbdivision* 300.
An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to
the public hearing.
* Twenty-six (26) full-size ~ copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W' X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet
along with a dlaital COpy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format.
** Applicant to obtain notification sign from City of Chanhassen Public Works at 1591 Park Road and install upon submittal of
completed application. $100 damage deposit to be refunded to applicant when sign is retumed following City Council approval.
*** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract.
ICArtNeD
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME:
LOCATION:
~5~O
l1{n~W)6htl (~#it/s
M, ~ni tJJ(J~Jrb- fJrtWdv
/ '
MI I\r\(.WA$h.-k . tf'e.e;/A.- f.~~ ddJA~~
~+~ bl~1_
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
TOTAL ACREAGE: -t . ~ \ ~t.tQ.S
WETLANDS PRESENT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REQUESTED ZONING:
YES
/
NO
?lAD R
PUP~
f I ~ l"\ ~~J Ll v,\'d- Cftvd~4 ~ td~O \
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION:
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION:
~ ~
~ih 1& 0Nv~\';y(
~l~ha)
l.~ ~'1
~ ~61 Y
/
REASON FOR REQUEST:
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
This is to certify that I am. making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership
(either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person
to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
61J-Sk
date I
1( ~I o{"
Date
G:\plan\forms\Development Review Application.DOC
Rev. 4105
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE
ST ATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on July
21, 2005, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that
on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for
Minnewashta Creek Hills - Planning Case No. 05-25 to the persons named on attached
Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and
depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage
fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such
by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate
records.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
thi~ day of ~v.L. {
~
,2005.
\.~.~
Notary Publ c
KIM t MEUWISSEN ,
Notary Public-Minnesota
My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010
......
C)
c
:;
CD
:E
c)s
c.-
.- U)
a.. U)
ftS._
CDE
:J:E
.20
:cO
::JC)
D.c
-.-
o c
CD c
o.!!
~D.
Oc
ZCD
U)
U)
ftS
.c
c
C'Cl
.c
U
C)
c
:;
CD
:E
c
C)o
c.-
._ U)
a..U)
ftS.-
CDE
:J:E
.20
:cU
::JC)
D.c
-c
o C
CDftS
0-
._ D.
-
o c
ZCD
U)
U)
C'Cl
.c
c
ftS
.c
U
-g 0> -g ~
c .co-
o -.c"O
N C'Cl - ~ C'Cl
~_ E 5~..92
0> 0 ~ .g ~=
e ti ~ :; 'a; ~
a. '0- c 0 c.:
. c >'0>C'Cl
"OC_ E.c.c
>0C'Cl :E . -u
alUJ+:: .'-
-O>c - ~.EEo>
ii) 0 ~ ~ 0 .!; e -5 ~
..lit: c._ c - 0>
~ C'Cl (/) 0 11I.8 - 0;-
C'Cl '':; 0> 0 - ::J C (/)
E ~ C'Cl a: m..c (/) 0..- 01
c:i 0 > E ~ i'o.!; ~ .!;
00-50>0 CC'"
o r--. .- E '0 -8 '':; 'n; E ~
,:..:r--.~::::= d'iiC'Clo>.o-O>=O
-COJ: .c
1tj~.QQ;~ :>. ~.c0_-
10 .00> .!a > Q) ~C'Cl ~ .2 0 01 ~
>0>Q) >--c~
OE'-'" CD.o"O'--
o "000 Co "::Jc:;.c
C\J~.g:t:::a:l a._CDa.C'ClOCl
C\Juen~-= c=(/)_::J
oJ - ,s .Q c 1: ~ .....: e
Ci) 'u '0"0 ~ ~ :g ~ ::::: ::J ~ -5
~ c ~ ~:: C'Cl "0 - 0 0"'0 01
~ 5 ~ lij ~ ..lit: ~ ~ g ~ ~ c.'2
U.E- c.2 c (/)E o_(/) (/) C'Cl
;;; _ _ a. :;;:; a: .!; .= c a. c 1: 0>
C'ClC'Cl(/)a:-=_~LL.2:;C'Cl_.c
"OIO>,IO~ ..lIt:-a.o-o
(/) ::Jo O>oo>ca =::J=
O>~O" ~.o(Oo>go>a.o.o
::J:t::: 0>::> 10 0 10 ~-.c a..o::J
l-ua:a.oa:(OUq:I-C'ClC'Cla.
G)
E ..
j:: g
0/:1;
S~
a:l 0
0...1
~
ii:..
-
~fa
c .~
~3
D.~
:>.c
1::0
Q);
o.a:l
o (,)
... 0
11....1
iij
o
o
0.
o
...
11.
-g o>-g~
c .cO-
O -.c"O
N C'Cl - ~ C'Cl
:>. - ::J00>
t_ .c 0.0_
0> 0 (/) .o.c_
0.'- C'Cl C'Cl Cl=
e iii ~ ::J '(j) ~
0.'0- 0> 0 c.=
c >'0>C'Cl
~ 5ca ~ E.c.c
m(/)+:: ~ cD~-U
ii)~55 ~ :8~~~U)
..lit: c:2 ..lit: g.- ~ - a.
~C'Cl (/) 0 III .8:: o;S
E C'Cl '':; 0> ~ - ::J C (/)
~ C'Cl a: .... = (/) 0..- 01
..: >, - cii)
..... 0 c ..- '0'0.- O>.!;
00-50>0 CC'"
Or--.'-E 0 -8',:;'-E~
,:..:r--.~gE d.. 'ii~,so>=
-COJ: CD.c.oO.c_.E
1tj ~ .Q a; ~ >. III
10 .00> .!a > Q) ~ ~ .2 0 01 ~
>0>Q) > >--c~
o E .- 0'" -t: CD .0 "0 '':; -
o "0 0 C'Cl ..::Jc::J.c
C\J~.g'-C-m a. CDa.C'ClOCl
~ en.... '2= (/) _ ::J
C\JU ::>J: ,Soc1:(/).....:e
Ci).-'O"00.c+::o-O>o.c
;:!oc..J'O>ce (/)'01II-0::J0>-
~. > C'Cl "0 - 0"'0 01
~ 5 ~ lij ~ ..lit: ~ ~ g ~ ~ 0.'2
_U.Ea: c.2 c (/)E o_(/) (/) C'Cl
;;; - - :;;:; a: .!; 'LL= c e- c 1: ~
C'ClC'Cl(/)a:-=t::~ .2::JC'Cl-~
-g == ~ 0' 1OC\J 0> 0 ~ -; a.,g "5,g
0>.:":0" ,.o(Oo>go>a.o.o
::J :t::: 0>::> 10 0 10 ~ - .c 0..0 ::J
l-ua:a.oa:(OUq:I-C'ClC'Clo.
G)
E
j::c
.....2
....-
S ~
a:l 0
0...1
~
ii:,;.:
g fa
co2
~3
D.~
:>.c
1::0
Q);
o.a:l
0(,)
... 0
11....1
iij
o
o
0.
o
...
11.
- '<:t 0> ._
(/) a. ::J ('I) .c ::
0> 0 0"- -
(/) - .0"- 0 E
(/) (/) C'Cl~.8-~Q)Q)~
t5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0> ~'> :: J: .5
0> (/) C'Cl~0c\,80e.!!;:Q;
.0.....: '0 ~ a. 0> 10 0 0 a. J: ~ Q)
~o c o.oEO>oCO>=-cE
o..~ 0 - ('I) 0 _ 0 c'S; ... =
"0 9 'iii 01.. (/) C'Cl ::J 0 > 0 ,g C
0> - (/) .!; '<:t 0:::: 0 0> :::: -1:: Q).2
(/)0.0,- a;0-C'Cl>'>C'Cl ::0
oo>=E 0>-..lIt:-,_C'Clen-0:::t0
a..c.o E .- '-.c 0.--
O-::Jo EE's<(.o Q)cDE
c. c a.u 0> ni 0 (/) - .... r--. E
o 0> .c _ c ::J _ 01= .
0> (/).c 0> -o.c m co2.!; a:lOOO
.c c-.c o>e::! (/) E E o.iDU;""=
15 ~a. oE :C;c 0 co .~ ~ c a; O>E Q) ~ ~
05cn::JC'Clo>.c -N.5
~'E-= C'Cl .0 ~ o.c (/).!a o>j::::::: c
.~ 0> "00> "0 (/) 0::J >. en (/) _ .c :.: c
~ 0> _C'Cl.-_ ~a:l
L. (/) > c.c:!:: O.c -_ c=-
0> ~.- 8 ~ 0> .,s c~ 0 OJ: 11.
~a.~(j a.o>'c~co>'iii_Q)
=0> o>:EC'ClOoO>O(/)a:lJ:
C'~ ~ .!a .c 0:2 0 .~ E C'E Q) -
C'Cl 0> Cl -0> ClIL O>(/) ~ E ~ E .5 _0
o>cCoc o>C _~O"O -
.~ C'Cl (/) 'S .....: ..:;.c as _ 0 C'Cl 0 C ...
Cl.2 - '" 0 (/) ::J g> - (ij c c U 0 .2
- a. cO>o> .8"0 0 a. =. 0>'- 0> Q) =
o>.c.;:;o -~ -C'Cl::::-.c-"
.~ 9- E 0 ~ c ca .c 0 (/).- c -,g .....
'u .-:::: _ I - 0> ~ 0> 0 a:l ~
:::: 0> E:o l..I. <u >..~ = ~ E _ = a:l
's.co::JO>~>'C'CleE:t:::t::(/)a:l-g
enl-ua.-5 ::Ju:t:::"O a., E C'Cl.!:!? ia'"
o c(/)O>.oa.a. ::J
>. >. 0 .- ~ ::J 0> 0 Q) J:
""':C\iC':i'<i :!::.o~-50(/)"Oo.o1-
0Cl
C C
Q).-
0.-
a.Q)
a:l Q)
J:==
-Q)
a:lJ:
.c-
::a;
0/:1..
o 0
ct:
o Q)
;E
XlE
::J 0
00
......'<:t 0>
a. ::J ('I) .c .~
~ 0 ~;: - E
(/) Ci) C'Clr-:.0.80> ~
(/) 0> - 0> C\J - >.:2 S Q) C
.....: ::J (/). cC\J 0> o.>.-J:.-
o ~ C'ClEoc\J80oe.!!;:::i
0> '0 0> c:i. 0> 10 0 0.J: ~ _
.0.....: a. Eo>.cO>=-cE
~o c -go_oc.-...=
a. .~ 0 Cl .. (/) C'Cl ::J 0 ~ 0.0 C
"0 e 'iii .!; '<:t 0:::: 0 0> :::::: Q).2
~a...!a ii)0-C'Cl>'>C'Cl"'::0
o 0>._2 E 0>-..lIt:-,_C'Cl-0_0
.- '-.cen o.CD.-
g.-5.g ~ E E ,s <( . 0 Q) cD E
a.~ c o.u 0> ni 0 c !!l - c,'" r--. E
00> .c -.....- =.
0> (/).c 0> -o.c $ co2.!; a:l08
.c c-.c ~~.~ E ~~~u;;i...
:::::~E::: _ - _c-EQ)O~c'
Oo.oc O>(/)::J<UO>~ .cN-
". -c -= C'Cl .0 ~ o.cen (/).!a 0> I- ::::: c
> ::J>. (/)_.c :':c
0>0>"0"0 (/)0 _C'Cl.-_ ~_
.~ 0> 0> C .c:!:: O.c - _ c = -=
0>~'~8 ~O> .,Sc~ooJ:D.
>0.0>_ a.o>'c~co>'iii_Q)
O=~o o>:';::C'ClOoO>O(/)a:lJ:
c'~ ~ .!a -5 '0 :g 0 .~ E c'E Q) -
C'Cl ~ 01 0> OILL 0> 0 E ~ E .5 0
O>CC'ClC o>.!;.c~@O"Ooc:
>C'Cl '':; .(/)~OIo>::::OC'ClUOO
'Olo(/)C'Cl- ::J::J-C'Clcc -
_ = C 0> ~ .8 "0 0 A.,: 0>'- 0> Q) =
.- a.o>.c..;;._= ~....C'Cl(/)::::-c.c-:::....
". a. E 0 c C'Cl.c 0 .- -.........
>C'Cl .2l5.C'ClI-0>=3E0>0Si
1ij ~ ~:g 0> ~ ~~'e E:t::: ~;.~-g
OOl-ua.-5 50 c a.d> E C'Cl.~ a:l ~
>. >. O.!a ~ .g g. g. Q) J:
""':C\iC':i'<i :!::.o~-50(/)"Oo,g1-
0Cl
C C
Q)-
0.-
0.Q)
a:lQ)
J:==
-Q)
a:lJ:
.c-
::a;
0/:1..
0.:!l
c c
o Q)
;E
Xl E
::J 0
00
en -15 C) ~
C m 0 Cm 0 ~
o 5 ~~~ ~5 0 ~ ~~
~ (; ,g.!!! [ ; - 'E ~~ ~ .2! ; ~
m.2!al -8C:~ 0:0 Bc(c .2- c~~
~;~ ~~~ .2!~ &~! ~~ 1'1
-goo E-:ca>.> i-a;o 'C":;; ~(.)
.!!!:8; ~e 8. mt:~ . m15.l!! ~ l!! ~ g,~
GlOl.o iD~0~['2-~5E8'E 5~ 0""g
~i~ ~~~E~E~~ ~ ~ ~~!!!
u)~S ~mm'2>-m~.!!!~€ i-~ cg=
~.2!~ '21~~~15.~52[ ~~ ~~~
=>,gll ~=5~j'~.~!2.-g~ E~ ...~al
I~E O~~~~~~-8EOl ~o g-E
Sc..~ ~li~~:aQ)~o_.5 .E~ (l)O~
S:.2! ~~m0~IE~~~ 1~ 8.2!c
-g~= ~d~~~s8~~~ ~~ ~~g
~~o -BooOco--cn 0_ '6-~
caiGld>'EGl-.!!ll=m:::~m.2! <.>rJJ c~c
C~Q)c~Q)o'C~E~~~_ ~. ~O=
OS-~SE~'C~'C~,~~S Q)~ 8~~
~~~~ic&~~iQ)~~~ ~~ ~=~
CEliS E Q..~ m 01 5l E ~ 91 E ~ 0 g. 'U'" ~ g
o'CcQ)-(I)~c~caQ)o 0 ~~ -c
~i~5~'~~i~Q)~~~! o~ ~S~
0E~~mES.2!l!!'8Em~<.> -~ ~al.!!!
~ c( ~ i -g O'C 0 >-~.g ~ a.~ -g:5 ~"O 0..
~mi~TIU~~~c~-Eo ~Ol ~i.2!
ClJ'tJo. CO)Q)::3 alc:00..c '-C cue::_
a: 0 0 0 .- C 0. 0.= Gl m C <.> 0 ~ i5 m .- ...,
cO,--~'Eo U0EO,-cn 0... ~Q)v
ca"O~i~CQ)!~::3"O~~(I) .g& ~~S
~~~~~~D;uo~~g=~~Q)e D=5
G)U)Q)f:O =0 rtlEo..se:w.!a"O :J~o
-_~-~m~ob- 0. Q.$mo Q.cm
~~~~~~E~Gc6:=~Q)E~2 !i~
(l)EQ)>c..c(Q)~C1J~U)rtI"OS-cu,- -~~
E"O'-iQ ~~~'~~(I)~..c~EB ~._~
Q)i~o.CU~~C~O~~o05Q)..c oa~
~ E g"O g ~ ~.~:::: ~.! .~ ~ e 8 ~ .~c;;-..c ~ g
i~~*~i~'~Eg~~~{5~~c~~~~
>~~~~~~ g~~mnE=~!00-~
Q) a:: (; 2 ~ >'(;i E U ~ 0 ~ ~ SO 5 - ~ .!a g.c
~ ~ >..5: = ~ -g 8 >. n; g ~ Q)'- ~ ~ E c. E:o ~
'E>~~c~mm:~'2~E~-m~~E~.-
.. :J .~ u :i 0 ~ E .c c; ~ 2 ~ ~ ;:.E g. 0) * 8 g> ~
~~wc t~E~~EQ)~ OaQ)Q)Q)a~~
~~~~~R~B~~~~i~~~tE~~~~
~CC.0;~~!Q)-U~W~O~00CCC.5:
glE~i~~~g~~i$~~al~;~.!!!~m
~ OE 00~~~0m~Sc~omc~c.o
Q. 000 0.5 ~ 't: c a. ~..c _ (j) U).- ~ ~ CD as CD 8.~
c"U ~ 8.C'd o~ 0'0 U).c .... e!J::::: J::::: '...
~00 Co. ~cc-cS-~~0~~_0~
~~~gg!~O~~.~giS~~~8~m~~
~'~~~Q.miGlEEumm~09C'O~8Gl
~.oNC&=m~~8E>-~2f!!amm~~>-E
~~~~~~~5s!8B~~~~~~K~~g
0.. ...
uj Q) -a C) g?
5 = c~; 'E~ 0 ~ ~2
~ '0 ~.!! c. ~ :: 1: >.:=: ~ Q) ; g
Q:;Q)-o cuc:as n:O t'UC:~ .2= c.cc:
.=:: == Q) -g Q) (I) ~ oQ <{ i3 Q) ~ Q) .0 0
<{Q)~ Q)>m !O a..... ~Q) ~i=
-g.eg E~m cu~> ~~ ~ "C.~ ; ::IJ~
.!!! m m E e 8. m t: ~....: Gl 15. ~ ~ ~ ~ g,:z
-Dn O~, ~asoas.cE- ~o as_a
Q)C) u~oasC.-~-8C: 0- (I)-C:
~~g ~as~EoE0~ E ~ ~=Q)
ooas.! CUQ)CO"O Q)-5~,g't: ~~ ~gs
mQ)'~ -g.~S~~a5~(I)C'd '0= ~~C
=>-;n ~~'5 E,g E~ 05 i m ~ 80
E",a; c=Om~~'->-CO 5~ ... al
-~E g~~~~m~-8Eoo ~o g~E
~ ~ -~-Q)~. Q) C 0(1) ~as
_0.", ~"'~:6i5mEo-,- -ca 0UC
c~m E~~ o~E~ec '00 lm
-m~ 0~~0ES8cm; ca- ~5c
-g~= ~~(I)~~S ~~~ ~~ =o~
~i~ 'E1i~.!!lI=~~'~:m 800 gt;8
~~m~mm<.>~~Eca~~5 ~. ~8.=
00~~.cE~~='2~ms~ ~ca 8Glca
~18m~ci;~Gl~~t'i ~~ b~OO
'2E~EQ.~m~~E~~E~ og. uE2
8~~~~~5~Q):!~b~ ~~ Q)~~
u)~'i;m~II~IE1l1fi ~, ~~~
~ c( >- ~ -g 0 ~ <.> >- ,g 0 15.~ 15 2'.0 ~
~mi~!U~~~'2~-E,g ~Ol ~il
~ 8 g. O'-.~ ~ in : ~ g 8 0 5 ~ m.5 ti
;~~;I~~I~~~~'~ .~~~ ~.8~
-c-m_ca.o~8~c<.>~91Olm --c
~~ca'cO:_$ cm=-~~ ~ .ojO
S ~ l!!.5 ,g m jOb.!!! E 8:~ ~ 'i ~ '8 i c <.>
~~~~I~E~uu)::~mEI,g l,gm
0Em>-Q.c(Gl~m~0ca~:6-S~ Nm
~"O"''t:c. =iJ::..-~CI)U).c.oc:o (I).!ilc
~i~~as~!c:~~~~~~~~~ ~I~
~E~~nm~g....:m~~~08m9~~~a
~< ~ m a; ~ ~ 'n - i <.> ~ ~ m 0 5!
ic~i~~~~~~~...~5~~~I~~!
a;l~ s :~I E8.~: ~ g.~u g5 ~.~~.2!
~ ~ b.5 5 .!!! '2 8 b ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ f!! € 0. ~ 'E :s
c~u~c.o~mu'2c~~~~~~alo~~
~~~ 'c(~~E~m~2~(/)~Smi~O~~
"'Q).cC 08.>0 :6E!- o-CJ)~E!Q ::J
ilcl!!'~~ ~<'>000-S'E:2:E8. s.g8TI
.C:c.0;!~!~-oiw~o::J(I)OCcCE
gl~~i:~~~jl!!~~~~I'8iil'.8
0: u)~ ~.5 ~ ~ '2 Q.~ -~ ~ 00 -m ~ lil ,g :ir ~ m 8.~
~~0UC~8.~OlcOgS"'0~~~5~0'g
.!!! :!i1 ~ o,g i ~ ~8.'2 f:z ~ 0 ~ .~ ; ~ 8'~ i l!!.5
~'~~~~mmmE~8mm~09cn~~i
~.oNC"'=0~~8E C>0~mm~~ E
>-~m.!!!8:S.2!~~m8~S~~Ncl!!~iD~0
=(/)a:~~(/)~==~ U~~Q.0c(~Q.m~0
0.. ...
Disclaimer
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This
map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal
offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only.
The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this
map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational,
tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in
the depiction of geographic features. tl errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107.
The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ~466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and
the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly
waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold hannless the City from any and all claims
brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the use~s access or use of
data provided.
<<NAME1"
<<NAME2>>
<<ADD1 ))
<<ADD2,)
<<CITY)) <<STATE)) <<ZIP))
Disclaimer
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not Intended to be used as one. This
map Is a compilation of records, information and data located In various city, county, state and federal
offices and other sources regardng the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only.
The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this
map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational,
tracking or any other purpose reqliring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in
the depiction of geographic features. tl errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107.
The precedng dsclaimer Is provided pursuant to Minnesota StaMes ~66.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and
the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be Hable for any damages, and expressly
waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold hanrless the City trom any and all claims
brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the use~s accass or use of
data provided.
<<Next Record))<<NAME1>>
<<NAME2>)
<<ADD1 >>
<<ADD2>>
<<CITY>> <<STATE>> <<ZIP>>
Public Hearing Notification Area (500 Feet)
Minnewashta Creek Hills
Planning Case No. 05-25
6560 Minnewashta Parkway
CityofChanhassen
Subject
Site
Lake Minnewashta
THOMAS & MARY ALLENBURG
6621 MINNEW ASHT A PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
CHARLES F & VICKI LANDING
6601 MINNEW ASHT A PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
RICHARD E & ELIZABETH BELLERT
TRUSTEES OF TRUST
6641 MAPLE RD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
LAUREANA VOUNG BOUALOUANG
3884 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MEGAN J CARLSON
C/O GARY & MAUREEN CARLSON
3891 62ND ST W
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
PATRICIA B CHARNEY
3861 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
CRAIG R & MARY L COURTNEY
3901 CRESTVIEW DR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
KENNETH C DURR
4830 WESTGATE RD
HOPKINS MN 55345
KEVIN T & MAUREEN S FARRELL
6541 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JOSEPH J & JEANIE B FROEHLlNG
3840 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
CRAIG LOREN ANDERSON &
TERI LYNN ANDERSON
3830 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MICHAEL J BARNES &
TAMARA A DEVOS
3840 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JEFFREY R BERGE &
DENISE E ZOELLMER
3856 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
BRIAN R CARLSON
3828 MEADOW CT
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
STEPHEN A & SANTINA CASTER
3861 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
TIMOTHY J & MARY T COLLERAN
6560 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
HARRY A & CHRISTINE A DRAHOS
3911 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
STEVEN & LAURIE ERICKSON
3850 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
VINCENT & JANICE FEUERSTEIN
3880 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DAVID C & LISA A GAUPP
3870 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
LEE R ANDERSON
TRUSTEE OF TRUST
6651 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DIANNE E BARTZ
3881 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
BLAKE L BOGEMA
3841 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
GARY CARLSON
3891 62ND ST W
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JOHN D & ELIZABETH W CHANDLER
6580 JOSHUA CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DALE H COLLINS
10758 130TH ST
GLENCOE MN 55336
HARRY M JR & ELAINE R DUNN
PO BOX 343
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
ANTHONY SANTO FARINA &
JILL CHRISTINE FARINA
6590 JOSHUA CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DOUGLAS L & DENISE S FOOTE
3871 LESLIE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
PAVEL & OLGA L GLUSHENYA
3891 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
SCOTT A & KRISTIN A GUNDERSON
6570 KIRKWOOD CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
KEVIN R & MARY E HOFFMAN
6631 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JEFFREY F JEWISON &
LISA J WECKWERTH
3842 MEADOW CT
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
WILLIAM H & KIMBERLY A KOHMAN
3780 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
BRUCE W & ANGELA K LEACH
3910 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
THOMAS R & KAREN C LONDO
3764 LANDINGS DR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
RANDALL A & LISA M MAYER
3831 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
STEVEN P & SHEILA A MCSHERRY
6571 KIRKWOOD CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MINNEW ASHT A CREEK
HOMEOWNERS
C/O NANCY NARR
3950 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JOHN W & NANCY A NELSON
3891 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
WAYNE M HARTUNG &
TONI R JOHNSON
6330 CHURCH RD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
RICKY W & HEIDI S HUEFFMEIER
6551 KIRKWOOD CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DANA L JOHNSON
6671 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
KEITH R & JODI L KORINKE
6310 CHURCH RD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DAVID C & SUSAN C LOCKWOOD
3810 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MARK F MACPHERSON
6301 CARTWAY LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MARK W & JULIE W MCARTHUR
3765 LANDINGS DR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DALE F & RUTH M MENTEN
6630 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
PATRICK L & BONNIE C MONAHAN
3801 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
LARRY L & LISA M NELSON
3860 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
HEIRS & ASSIGNS OF SCHMID'S
ACRE TRACTS
CHARLES R & CYNTHIA HULTNER
3900 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DALE E & LINDA J KEEHL
3841 62ND ST W
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
STEVEN C & JANET A LARSON
3861 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
LORI J LONDO
6640 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JAMES E & PEGGY A MARKHAM
6520 KIRKWOOD CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
WILLIAM J & KARl L MCREA VY
3790 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
CRAIG C MILLER
6450 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
VICTOR Q & DIANE T MORAVEC
TRUSTEES OF TRUST
3821 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
RALPH A & SHIRLEY A NELSON
3800 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
TIMOTHY M & MARY K O'CONNOR
14692 GLEN EDEN DR
NAPLES FL 34110
ARTHUR R & SUSAN C ORNELAS
6576 JOSHUA CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MARK D ROGERS &
MARY KNUTSON
3851 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
TOD E & SUSAN M SCHILLING
3911 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JEANIE ANN SEEHOF
6561 KIRKWOOD CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DEAN A & JACQUELINE P SIMPSON
7185 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
TERRANCE SR & SANDRA
THOMPSON
3820 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
BRADLEY E & KAREN J VONRUDEN
3910 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DIRK J & MARGARET E YOUNG
3830 MAPLE CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MARION A OLIN
6540 KIRKWOOD CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MARK ORTNER
3920 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MICHAEL R RYAN &
ELLEN J HEM-RYAN
3850 MAPLE CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DAVID A JR & RHONDA J SCHOELL
2301 SARAH ROSE LN
REEDSBURG WI 53959
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MOMCILO SPASOJEVIC &
SMILJANA SPASOJEVIC
3771 MEADOW LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
TERRANCE LANE TOLL
6250 CARTWAY LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
JAMES A & JEAN WAY
6641 MINNEWASHTA PKY
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
MICHAEL P & LORI B ZUMWINKLE
7250 HILLSDALE CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ROBIN S O'MEARA
3814 MEADOW CT
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
KEVIN R & JULIA E PROHASKA
6424 LANDINGS CT
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
THOMAS & LINDA L SANDER
3921 LINDEN CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
KATHY A SCHURDEVIN
3921 ASTER TRL
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DANIEL M & CHRISTINE A SIEWERT
3901 LESLEE CRV
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
DAVID W & JULIE ANN TERPSTRA
6581 JOSHUA CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
TONKA THEATRE INC
PO BOX 337
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
BRIAN L & BILLIE M WINDSCHITL
6591 JOSHUA CIR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331
Two-Story Homes
First Floor: 1,562 sq. It
Second Floor: 1,384 sq. It
Total: 2,946 sq. ft.
Bonus Space: 232 sq. ft.
Bedrooms: 4
Bathrooms: 2'h
Dimensions: 52' - 0" X 41' - 0"
Foundation: Crawlspace
'2-\ 3 L. ~J prll\l
lMMU'
SECONO FLOOR
..
{'NOOKCi. __,
~, l}',r.,': :.~~ .... L-~~-~. '
.':. i. 0~'.."'."." '~~~'~1' .. ,
:i:! " ~ ',,, :
';1 1:/ 1
1" ~7; a<.'t'!.'~J~."~.
... t. "..
J.$:.....
~~'
. .
GARAGE
, ';':j'i :1
,-.~,'\ Of" I I
.'~~""~.
FIRST FLOOR
<D
8R. 2l; l:tJ;;'B:J1t3.
.CO. '..' ......, : .' NUS R
~1': ;.; r~ 1 '.-"~'
;i~' . .~,.,..
~!!!
:/J" '" .... .... :[L
.'.1.'..... ...........';~,.'..:.......
t"" ..<>~..,,,..,
, -- - .. . - - - , ~, t1:;,~::
- .
""'1 BR. 4
. MASTEIt 8R. . L ,.
..... J . "'0'''''''''
,.:rn~ Wl...~~~)l.-'" - ·
::" - ., ~ .",;;, .,_ "'~ . >!o_'~
,. ,);~.~" l~ O!<. ... r,'.. _ .
' "~/-:!"" ~
L~':::./ 1"1 "~~,~
1 ~ '~ :::,,=,,
r-'O+"'l J
DlNNG :: JJ;,"kiL
I un).....O \I ( ('
t:~l.;~'~~;-~
@
22.0S
-too-t pn Y\ t
First Floor: 1,204 sq. It.
Second Floor: 1,264 sq. It.
Total: 2,468 sq. It.
Bonus Space: 213 sq. It.
Bedrooms: 3
Bathrooms: 2 y,
Dimensions: 35' . 0" X 63' - 0"
Foundation: Crawlspace
@
First Floor: 1,501 sq. ft.
Second Floor: 921 sq. ft.
Total: 2,422 sq. ft.
Bedrooms: 3
Bathrooms: 2~
Dimensions: 52' - 0" X 36' - 0"
Foundation: Unfinished Walkout
Basement, Crawlspace
."1':0 STORAGE
..:: "'-.
GARAGE
1-
BASEMENT
The contemporary look of this modern COWltry design is both impressive and unique.
Enormous windows brighten and enliven every interior space.
5"'2-1< ~:. 2/84 +0,1- Pf,,\t.
or
,_J IT} " :::, -,
i( KIT.
: : ~ '3TiIK~':
NOOK
G-m
..1 .. ':'._1
~
~~'~RJ'
. -.,,',
...----.---
\ e, '72. fw+ pn Yl-t
~"
'Lc.~..
CRAWlSPAU
.. . 'F'. 5:n'o.T:" .i;ii~ "\AMII:V ~
"'" J" (0\ ~ ". ^ ..', f1
UViNC'RM ......~. L. c.~.-oJ
,~,~ ~ '1 ,,( ..'
,
~.----
SECOND fLOOR
DEN
l.)'6 x '~_'?
.
DECK
fiRST flOOR
5t't\. c,cr 2,001 and 2,500,,(1 ,t
Lower Level: 127 sq. ft.
Main Level: 1,744 sq. ft.
Upper Level: 470 sq. ft.
Total: 2,214 sq. ft,
Bedrooms: 3
Bathrooms: n
Dimensions: 53' .0" X 44' .0"
Foundation: Crawlspace
eet.:., _n 2,001 and 2,500,' ':
(1)
~ SHOf
,
,
GARAGE
UPPER LEVEL
~_.~
~ LOWER LEVEl
MAIN LEVEL
C0
First Floor: 934 sq. ft.
Second Floor: 1,108 sq. ft.
Total: 2,042 sq. ft.
Bedrooms: 4
Bathrooms: 2 'h
. 'r~ 4.r" '" 4 I.' _- 2010 (' ot n-1'I I.
Dimensions: 44' .8" X,r _ 0" .)" 10 t"O r" L.
Foundation: Unfinished Basement
SECOND flOOR
/0 ~ 22.
FIRST FLOOR
'0
~z ~~ 1i i
~u j'i " ~
-0 cr~ ~ I
"'0 :5! e
~..; 0
~.5:; 'l; ~
Il.U :i.=!. ~ l
I- ~~~~
= I-X ! ~
~8~~ 'l;
ON eN ~ .2 ~
~ j~~ i .. I
u e~ 1
.s ~j ~ e
~ IC.!! 11 ~
j ~ ..
1 ~s .
'"
e'a~ ~ . . i
-" t
...J .. >'^ c =
~.a,.;i ~ I " 0 ::I
:i jq 0 " ;:
...J ll~: ~ 0 ~.
z C ..
......c~ z i e :;; e
i .
R! -fi e 11 ul
- I '" ~ i If ! i ~
::c ;]~~ I 'l; 18 I
); -:.. ~ I,,: ~
~lii i I I i ifio i!
~ I~ i zz
~;':~ i i If f il I! i ~~ ~
u "'.
~ vEli ~ 18 -E I!
0 u ig 8 u o ,
~ ~ i~ i ~ ~ i g :1 ~ U
UJ g ~~:!; u " :;:-1 I~ =- 5 " 21=
Z !'50"l:l ~ '::8 If u ~ 0 ::2
z ~ .N .z ~~ i lli
UJ i ! ~i: ~ I ~ ~l I:! -5" lil .sj IJ
I ~ fl 0 ~~
::E~~c 0 c .3 ~ ~~
~ "
~;:a z .. ~.!! I~
" I Ii i.~
0 ~ e I~ ~ ./;-5 ~
:~~5 u .
U ~ ~ " , S) $ I
:I: i5ii.s ~ ~ 0 i ~ 0 ~ 0 -"- ~
u u u u :=0 u -.
<C
~
::c
Vl ...l e :E ~
. " I!l~
~ .s ]~ 11 ~ i
'l; 11 fJ ",0
Ii u.! ~N
i 0 ~ <....c~q
i-= e 1'" ~~i8~
.l! ~ 8& ~j'5$j
s=: NE
UJ ~ -:;~ ji ~;=~i
:{i . ~tl"'=""
~l! ~i -" :;~~~~
.. 'l;
Z ]~ . '" .!! 8 ~l i! 'l;
H j 5 1:1 ;~~j'" ~
..,- ::IS oS:.s.!
Z ~! :El .2 I
ji i ~. ~. ~~- ~~'!~!
e'l; ~ u~ ~J ,.~ H..U
::; .;a ~~i~.5 ~
- 5 ~~ !~ .
~ u-" 52 "tI!!~l Eoi
::I.: g ~~ ! Hi
"'~ -~ ~iS ~-~
.. ze I !i &fi-':=i i~
Eu u z. e=
u ~ i~ .. !~j~j~ 1~
l!! l!!~
H ;a ] ..-
~ ~ .eE S ' iS~:JN :; 1~ II
il~ ifi . 11 11'; I! I iii~~ifi
"u ~'l; ~ l~ .lis
-. .... i! ..~:s~ofi
~i ::! -:t H!j ;1 ~-
ii: n ! Ii I. ;~
.."l) ~ H ~ e" "a..... !!l .'"
~~ II ~t I; I f~~ ...s1;i ;II.: 51
u G... ~_.!_c If H
Ill- ~ ,.., ~-5 ~ ~ ;L ~S:Ji.si I
f~ i& i~ Ii' Oil ~~
w& ~ . cli l~~i~i
llIe 0.2 ~I!j ~ ~ ~I h Ii ;1 i~ E
j!:o ii~ '" j~i~:s I~
z H l e. S
~~ z Ili it ~=
i ::Ii ;'.!!ei-5&
ilj"5 I u II ~E e
..: ~~ 1; .J i!;, ... ,~ ~ilS:S! ... ~!
"'; ~ ~ "'~ ..", ,,- "'~ V
~; lS 5~ n Zil :::i~'a.:c ~o :iii
ii i; ...l l!;~ is ~~-g..iji ~ l!!..l H/
~l "" S"l) " " ~S .eu S:f:~!i ~8 .e.
S ~ll je u 11 ..J It ~~ UJu
~3! s-! il fJ ~~ =i:.!l;l~Ci lAu z~
Ou
I-~
Vl~
0:::)
UJ~
f z~
o:::~
<+ +>8 S
~
UJ
1:
III
N
U.
o
t;
UJ
1:
III
'0
~z
~u
-0
.....0
~..;
...u
...J
...J
-
::r:
~
UJ
UJ
~
U
~
::r:
Vl
~
UJ
Z
Z
-
~
/"
/"
"~I /"
/"
/ /" ~:
/./" ,",:~ ,oJ, '
...-1 F,~..f~r.;:;)
HO.
(t~
:~!
o
~
:t..
~~
~~
-'~
!5~
0",
Z'"
<w
.""
,,<
<
~
o
).
I
~~~
u~..!.
I~~~
~~~o
~~..a;
i!i2~~
i~9~
;~~i
i~l~
/
/
/
/
/
- - _/-
/ ,'~~f:r.
,.; :", :;H: ,:'j ~~~;;;:iOf'i
. :::'iHf:~\' '<:/ .!.\:,. ",
:",., r:i~~"
:'''.'. :'.:..:," 'J 0f:.,;;rr.<:
. (C.:;.:....~~.
----
t..,
---
--
t~
-
.-/
-\
\
/
/
/
I
I
--
":
,~
'"
~
'"
l:
III
N
U.
o
N
jol
1 i .Ill
1 I -'d
i ! 1~1;
i fi :IO{
! .. ~f
~ ~ ~~ i
~~ j :'i!~
i a! I; i
j~ j lil
o .
t;
'"
l:
III
/
y/"
~
../'
/"
~:
"
"
"
;:!
\.1,
. .
f~!
...........
...........
...........
I,.
~"2.'"
..
'0')
"
'"
<<
:~:..
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD-R
LOCATED AT 6560 MINNEW ASHTA PARKWAY. MINNEW ASHT A CREEK HILLS.
APPLICANT ROBERT RICK (FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TIM & MARY
COLLERAN). PLANNING CASE NO. 05-25.
Public Present:
Name
Address
Steve Larson
Tim Colleran
Kevin Mattson
Robert Rick
Connie Villari
Mr. & Mrs. Gil Laurent
Ruth Menten
Mary Knutson Rogers
Julie Ann Terpstra
Marcia Ortner
Michael J. Barnes
Brian L. Windschitl
Jim Markham
Greg Greenwood
R.W. Hueffmeier
Anthony Farina
3861 Leslee Curve
6560 Minnewashta Parkway
8566 Drake Court
4700 Otter Lake Road, White Bear Lake
1257 Winslow, West St. Paul
24760 Cedar Point Road
6630 Minnewashta Parkway
3851 Leslee Curve
6581 Joshua Circle
3920 Linden Circle
3840 Linden Circle
6591 Joshua Circle
6500 Kirkwood Circle
6501 Kirkwood Circle
6551 Kirkwood Circle
6590 Joshua Circle
Sharmeen AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Sacchet: Thanks Sharmeen. Do we have questions for staff? Jerry.
McDonald: I have a question. On the lot itself, where the private road is starting, right now
there's a retaining wall at that point that's roughly 5 feet, 6 feet tall and you've got quite a
variance there on the front. The whole thing is held back right now by a retaining wall. The
road to come in there, is that going to go up on a grade or are we talking about leveling out all
that area and bringing it down to street level?
AI-Jaff: If we can, if I may ask Alyson to answer that question.
Morris: The proposed grading plan which is shown Exhibit A, proposed layout, it does show
that the retaining wall will remain at approximately a location they don't shown. We can get
some clarification where that, if that will change but just looking at this right now they're
showing that that will stay.
McDonald: Okay.
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: That's it? Okay. Question from staff. There is some discussion about right-of-way of
Minnewashta Parkway so what I understand it's not the same on the two sides of the road.
There's enough right-of-way that it's not a concern, is that an accurate understanding?
AI-Jaff: That's an accurate understanding.
Sacchet: Then, and you touched on, you make this correction about the hard surface coverage.
So they're currently at the 25%, which is the maximum they can be with this drawing.
AI-Jaff: Well and that's what we asked them to show us. Show us what you can get with a 25%
hard surface and that's what they came back with.
Sacchet: So they're trying to fit in to that. And then the driveway, the setback. So we're
actually telling them they should be closer to the private road.
AI-Jaff: Correct.
Sacchet: And the reason is that there would be less impervious or.
AI-Jaff: That would be an option, yes. I mean there would be.
Sacchet: Because I'm just trying to understand why we would require that, yes.
AI-Jaff: Well it's an option. Right now when they drew these plans they were assuming that the
required setback is 30 feet from the edge of the.
Sacchet: So 20 would help them.
AI-Jaff: Would definitely help them.
Sacchet: Thank you. That's the questions I have. That's it for questions? Alright. Thank you
Sharmeen. With that I'd like to invite the applicant. Do we have an applicant here? If you want
to come forward and just tell us if you have anything to add. You may want to move the
microphone towards you please. State your name and address for the record.
Robert Rick: My name is Robert Rick. I live at 4700 Otter Lake Road in White Bear Lake,
Minnesota. First of all I'd like to thank staff. It was a pretty good process to start off and work
through things and tried to keep in mind staff's wishes as best we could. I really only have a
couple things to add, and the entire process was with kept in mind trying to minimize the impact
on the current lot so, and we did, you know I think we came up with a fairly good game plan.
The reason we do not have finished drawings, finished concepts, the type of builders that I'll be
working with on this development, they're design build architects and so they'll bring a client
who would like a specific type of home.
Sacchet: To be custom type?
2
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Robert Rick: To be custom. These are going to be 3 custom home sites. I'll name a few names
of folks that I'm actually working with who have potential interest in this. Delahay Homes.
Peter Bren. TJB. Keith Waters. Marquette and Lee. Charles Cudd. These are luxury tour
home names. Pretty well known. Very well known for you know blending in with communities.
Improving communities so that's in keeping with what we're trying to do, so obviously trying to
enhance the value of the property in the neighborhood. I think that's it. I just want to reserve the
right to be able to answer questions along with my engineer Connie Villari as well...
Sacchet: It's interesting you mention custom home. You're comfortable with that restriction
that was just pointed out with the middle lot, having kind of a small pad to work with. You don't
think that's going to cause an issue?
Robert Rick: It actually you know small, 2,000 square foot is not...
Sacchet: It's not teeny yeah, but.
Robert Rick: And it will lend itself, the middle one to more of a villa type home is what the
upper end folks would call it, but it's certainly fair enough size yet. And staff had mentioned if
you pull the house forward, you do gain some area there. And again you know, most of these, I
don't know this again because I don't have customers in hand, will be multi story. They're
going to be 2 or 3 stories so 5,000 square foot home is not a little home so.
Sacchet: Right. Alright, do we have any other questions from the applicant? No? Okay, thank
you very much. Appreciate it. Now this is a public hearing. If anybody would like to come
forward and address this proposal that's in front of us here, this is your chance. Please come
forward. State your name and address. Let us know what you have to say.
Tim Colleran: My name is Tim Colleran. I'm the current owner at 6560 Minnewashta Parkway
and I just wanted to thank all the neighbors for coming out in support of the development and I
look forward to all your comments and we'll see you at the beach.
Sacchet: Any other comments to this? Yes.
Ruth Menten: My name is Ruth Menten. I live at 6630 Minnewashta Parkway. We've lived on
Minnewashta Parkway since, in the 1970's. This house has been a landmark house. I thought
that it was a historical, historically registered house. I'm not sure. It's going to be a sad day to
watch that house go down if this gets approved. One concern I have is the traffic that will be
coming out across the trail. Most of our houses are private lots. We have one exit out onto the
parkway and since we added the walkway or the trail it's got more people walking, bicycles and
all that kind of thing. This is going to have 3 homes coming out onto one driveway which is
going to be a road I guess. And it's a blind sight because the walls, retaining walls go up quite
high and so I'm a little concerned about the traffic issue and the pedestrian issue.
Sacchet: Okay. Is that something, you're our new city engineer. I haven't met you yet. Hi.
Would you want to say something to that please?
3
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Morris: This site is adding 2 single family homes to the site. You look at the amount of traffic
entering and exiting this private drive and it's not a significant amount. The driveway grade, as
shown on the plans will be 10% maximum which is according to city code so that's also to make
sure that there's adequate sight distance for them to see any pedestrians coming through there.
McDonald: Can I ask a question because that's my concern when I was asking about you know
where this is at. You're creating a canyon. That's what I don't understand on this driveway. It's
a very good point. As you come down, you're talking about taking out the retaining wall there
and at that point it's got to be 5 feet high.
Morris: No, the retaining wall will remain.
McDonald: But you're going to take out part of it to put the new private street in. The current
driveway follows the lot line to the west, so that driveway is going away. Now you're going to
create a new driveway towards the middle of the lot and there's a retaining wall there. So the
driveway's going to have to go through a retaining wall.
Sacchet: Isn't it close to where the old one was?
McDonald: No. I went out there and looked and you look at the drawings where the current
driveway, where the circular driveway is and the one there to the west follows the lot line.
Sacchet: Do you want to come forward?
Robert Rick: The new private street is going to follow the path of the current driveway.
McDonald: But that's not what's shown in this drawing because according to where the
driveway's at now in the documents, it follows the lot line and comes off.
Sacchet: It's the lot line of the middle one...so it's the lot line of the middle lot that it follows,
not the edge one.
McDonald: Okay. Okay, so it would follow the current driveway.
Robert Rick: Yeah, and basically what we're going to actually do is probably again to minimize
impact to the current one, we'll probably pull up the far end of the driveway but vegetate in that
area. Not necessarily destroy the retaining wall that leads down towards the path there. Just
block the entrance. And actually we use the south entrance on staff recommendation. Naturally
it started from the north, so thinking that we were pulling away from the right-of-way on, I'm not
sure of the name of the street there but.
McDonald: Okay, well at least that driveway that does alleviate the problems of sight lines and
everything so, okay. Thanks.
Sacchet: Okay? Public hearing is still open. If somebody else wants to come forward, please do
so.
4
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Jim Markham: Hi. My name is Jim Markham. I'm the President of the Minnewashta Creek
Homeowners Association. We have an association that is to the, would be the north side of the
Colleran's home and we, our concern is our beachlot which is across the street. Right now they
have access to easement of walking across our beach and what our concern is that, are they going
to have all 3 homes going to have that access or not. We right now feel that we have too many
people already in our beach and we really don't want to have that. We have taken a vote and
decided that we did not want to have them come into our homeowners association so that they
could use our beach, but they do have, the one home, the Colleran's home does have access to
cross our beach and we're just concerned that all, they're going to get 3 homes now having that.
That's our concern why we're here.
Sacchet: Yeah, I don't think that's something that is addressed by the staff report. Is that
something you want to say?
AI-Jaff: We have spoken to the city attorney regarding this issue and he has repeatedly said that
it's a private matter. There are by-laws to homeowners association. We do not enforce them.
Private covenances are private covenances.
Sacchet: It's up to the homeowners association.
Jim Markham: So they would have to come to us to get 2 more easements is what you're
saying? If 3 homes are allowed on that lot, that you're saying that 1 has easement right now and
the other 2 would have to come to get permission to come across our beachlot?
Aanenson: Again it's a private matter. We're not commenting on it either way.
Jim Markham: Okay. So this is something that we'll have to take up with, in a private situation
with them.
Aanenson: That's correct.
Jim Markham: Okay. Well that's why we're here. That's our concern.
Sacchet: Okay, understand. Sorry we can't help you with that one. Anybody else wants to
address this item? Yeah, looks like we have more. Please come forward. State your name and
address please.
Brian Windschitl: My name is Brian Windschitl. I live at 6591 Joshua Circle, which is, covers
probably 2/3 of the back side of this property. I don't know how accurate of a tree survey we've
done on there. I don't know anybody's looking at it but they seem to have the trees all placed
away from these little boxes that are here but my concern is what's going to be left of that when
the custom homes come in. They're not going to be a little square box like that. A lot of these
trees, you just drive on the drip line and they'll be dead a year later. They'll say they're not
going to take them down but by the time they get all the work done around there, they'll be
losing those and. And then the other concern I have is, I'm sure you have height requirements.
5
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Right now I can sit on my deck and see the lake. When you fill that in with 3 homes, I mean I'll
be looking at people's back yards with no trees in them, so I guess I would like you to maybe
take a look at that out there and see if that tree survey is accurate you know, because there's 150
year old trees there that can't be replaced so.
Sacchet: Right. Do you want to address that Sharmeen?
AI-Jaff: Sure. We did go out to the site verified the location of the trees as far as what is shown
on the plans and what will be preserved. Typically prior to any grading taking place on the site,
we make sure that tree preservation fences are up.
Sacchet: In terms of the size of the building pads, how much flexibility does a builder have?
AI-Jaff: Remember the 25% hard surface coverage with these sites. So it's to your advantage to
stay as close as possible to this front portion of the lot. We had highlighted all the significant
trees. We highlighted all the significant trees. The majority of the area right here really is open.
It does not contain that many trees. They are closer in this portion of the site as well as around
the parameter. There will be.
Sacchet: About half a dozen.
AI-Jaff: 5 tree, 6 trees that will come out with this building and 2 trees that will come out with
that.
Sacchet: So that is pretty reliable and has been verified.
Brian Windschitl: Well my question is, is how accurate is that tree survey? I've lived there 26
years. I don't see that tree in that bottom left hand comer. So I guess the question is, are they
survey trees or that somebody just kind of scribbled them in there?
AI-Jaff: No, they're surveyed trees.
Tim Colleran: I can name them...There's Alfred and Betty and Charlie.
Sacchet: Yeah, I mean obviously is it 100% accurate? Probably a slip here and there. But
generally they're actually pretty good those tree surveys from my experience. And ultimately
what Sharmeen also pointed out is that when before any cutting and grading starts, staff will go
out there, the city forester will go out there and actually deal with it on site specifically making
an effort to preserve and then put the protective fencing up and all that. That's the city forester is
somebody who knows how close you can go without damaging.
AI-Jaff: Also it's not to the owner's benefit to lose any trees because at this point if they said
they are going to save these trees, every time they lose them they have to replace them with
double the inches.
6
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: Okay. So there's a penalty in the mitigation. How about the height? You addressed
the height.
Al-Jaff: Maximum height of a building cannot exceed 35 feet.
Sacchet: 35 feet max.
Al-Jaff: From the shoreland management as well as in the residential single family district.
Sacchet: So that's something that's regulated.
Brian Windschitl: 35 feet is the highest point, meaning...
Al-Jaff: At the mid-point.
Brian Windschitl: Mid point?
Sacchet: Like if you have an angle with the middle of the slope. Is that right? Yeah. Okay.
Thank you Sharmeen for addressing that. I hope that answers at least somewhat what your
question is.
Brian Windschitl: Well I guess my only question, we're looking for approval here tonight with
some boxes there you know. What, at what point keeps them from coming way back? How far
back from the access is the setbacks?
Sacchet: Well, they're very limited. It's my understanding through that 25% hard coverage
requirement. We didn't want to put a lot of driveway on there because then they won't have any
room for a house.
Brian Windschitl: ...30% instead of the 25%.
Sacchet: No, that was actually what Sharmeen mentioned was a mistake on our part.
Brian Windschitl: That was a mistake?
Sacchet: Yes. It's the 25 is actually accurate. Okay? So I think I wouldn't be concerned that
they get further in, unless they want to just put a little shed out there and then you can see around
it. That's to your advantage again too.
Brian Windschitl: And side setbacks are 10 feet now?
Sacchet: Yeah.
Brian Windschitl: So basically...
Aanenson: Mr. Chair?
7
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: Yes.
Aanenson: If I could have him come to the microphone. It's very difficult.
Sacchet: Yes, would you like to step up to the microphone once more if you have further
questions because it's hard to hear for everybody.
Brian Windschitl: No, I'm good.
Sacchet: You're good. Alright. I think there was somebody else itching to get up before. Are
you still itching to get up?
Anthony Farina: My name's Anthony Farina. I'm at 6590 Joshua Circle. I am not directly
adjacent to the property. However standing in my back yard I can see the property. My question
to the planning committee is, why do we have to do this? What do we get out of this?
Obviously we know what the Colleran's and the developers are getting out of this. Is a dollar
sign. If you drive down Minnewashta Parkway, it is a park like atmosphere. Couple of the
builders that the developer Rick had said are custom builders, yes. But there's also a couple of
them who have built several homes. What's a custom builder? 100 homes? Or 5 homes? When
you drive down that parkway... And standing in my back yard I'm going to have 3 towers, 35
feet high. There's not one home in our neighborhood that's 35 feet high to midpoint.
Completely different than everything else that's going to be there. And I would hate to see, like
someone else stated, the nostalgic and the prestige of that area get thrown in with every other
development type atmosphere that's out there. And we see it every day. All the development in
Chanhassen, everywhere around us, and that's great. Population growth. We want that. Several
different reasons. But you're taking a house that's been there since 1850 plus, and you're going
to make it into everything else and we don't have much of that left in our neighborhoods. So I
encourage you to think about that and realize that this is just not the 3 houses or the 1 property
owner that's affected. It's every neighbor around there plus that whole parkway when we have
families and guests coming down there and seeing all this going on and these towers of 5,000-
6,000 square feet. They are completely out of place. Thank you.
Sacchet: Well what do we get out of this? Hopefully some friendly, lovely new neighbors right?
Do you want to address that?
Robert Rick: Yeah, I'd like to make.
Sacchet: Well do you want to step forward, if you've got a comment. That way people can hear
better.
Robert Rick: I just want to make a statement that I think not more than 500 feet away from that
is the Minnewashta Landings, Ken Durr's development and there are homes there in excess of $3
million in value and probably 8,000 or 10,000 square feet so it's, we mayor may not, but it's a
stone throwaway. It's the first development as you come down south on Minnewashta Parkway
off to the east. So it's not unlike some homes in the very close proximity so.
8
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: And I did want to make a comment to your question too, or to the point you made I
should say. As I mentioned when I opened the meeting our task is to look at to what extent do
the proposals that are brought before the city apply to the ordinances and regulations of the city.
I mean in a crisp way I would answer your question, it's the property owner's right to use the
property within the city's regulations and as the proposal clearly states, it shows they are within
the guidelines in terms of size of lot and so forth. We're not looking at the specifics of the
buildings. We're looking at the subdivision part at this point and that simply is a landowner's
right to do that if the parcel is big enough. Did you want to add something? I saw you itching to
try and get up once more or.
Anthony Farina: And I understand that it's the landowner's right and the property and the
development that they were talking about is I think uniquely designed because when you drive
down Minnewashta Parkway, obviously in the middle of the winter when the leaves are off you
notice that there are very large homes there. But in the summer, tree foliage, it's difficult to see
that unless you actually drive down that subdivision. Down that street. Lakeside's a different
story. You see those 3 story, 5 to 4 story homes without a doubt obviously in the middle of the
lake. Here we're all directly affected because we're in our back yard. Okay. Everybody in the
back yard of that neighborhood has the exact same home. Here also our beach is directly across
from that too. So I understand that it's the Colleran's right to divide that, which they feel fits in
the requirements. But to make it work and make it look like the rest of the homes, it just, I do. I
don't know the rest of them, I feel it's going to be an eyesore, even though it's going to be a
beautiful custom 5,000 square foot home. To the neighborhood so.
Sacchet: Well, we'll have to be patient to see how it looks like, right?
Anthony Farina: I mean it's totally up in the air what exactly it's going to look like.
Sacchet: Right. At this point we're not looking at that aspect. I mean you're right about that.
Yeah Kurt.
Papke: Question for staff. Several homeowners have commented on the historical nature of the
building. There was nothing in the staff report concerning that. Could you please clarify what
the historical status of the building is.
AI-Jaff: It is not on the historic registers listing. The home was built in the mid 1800's and I've
heard that, I have not been able to verify this but I've heard that it's the second home in Carver
County.
Sacchet: So it does have significance from that angle, even though it's not formalized. Yes
please, you wanted to add something. The public hearing is still open.
Larry Nelson: I'm 3860 Linden Circle and just an interest to me is that Chanhassen doesn't have
a preservation association. Kind of similar to other cities around the area like Victoria and
Excelsior. Chaska. I don't know if you can comment on that.
9
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: Is it something you can something about Sharmeen?
Larry Nelson: I don't think that there's anything in Chanhassen that has a chance to protect a
home like this that has the history and.
Sacchet: I think a home has to be on the historical register. It has to be registered. It has to be
listed in order for it to be protected historically.
Sacchet: Then it would apply. . .
Larry Nelson: But I think in this situation as us as neighbors we don't have somebody standing
behind us, and of course I chose to live in the wonderful city of Chanhassen, which I love but if
this was in Chaska we'd have somebody standing behind us. From their historical society from
Carver.
Sacchet: Even there I would think it would have to be registered on the historical register.
Larry Nelson: So I'd just like to see you take on consideration that it is a pretty big landmark.
One other question, just to verify the engineer seems to be mention that there were 2 houses. Or
is there 3?
Aanenson: 2 additional.
Morris: 2 additional homes.
Larry Nelson: 2 additional homes you said.
Sacchet: Total of 3.
Larry Nelson: Back to the lake rights. I've just been totally confused on what this all means
with lake rights. They really have and where that's going to continue from there. Where would
we continue now? Everybody says it's a private matter.
Sacchet: Correct. That means we don't intend to get involved from a city side with that.
Larry Nelson: Okay, and what side would us, where, what side should we get involved with
then? It's a private matter but our association.
Sacchet: Amongst the owners.
Larry Nelson: But in the past I'm sure you've had a lot of experience with places being split, or
places being developed like this where there's 3, or 2 or 3 where there's 1 piece of property that
has lake rights. You must have some type of history and what has happened before with it. Do
we?
Sacchet: I wouldn't know.
10
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Aanenson: We've done other ones in associations, yes.
Larry Nelson: But the thing is, from my understanding, they're not really a member of our
association. Am I correct on this? You come up and help me with this...
Aanenson: Again that is something we're not going to, we're silent on that matter. We're not
going to get into.
Larry Nelson: No, no, but I'm just asking that you.
McDonald: Well if I could address your question.
Larry Nelson: Yes, thank you.
McDonald: It's a private matter. It's a contract. It's a contract issue. The city's already said we
have nothing to do with your contract. If you cannot negotiate it out between yourselves, your
only recourse is to take it to court. It is not a city issue. It is a contract matter. So whatever your
contract says, whatever the easements say, that's what governs your negotiations.
Larry Nelson: Are we satisfied with that?
McDonald: Yeah, there's nothing we can do and it's not part of our charter to get into that.
Larry Nelson: Thank you.
Sacchet: Thank you for your comments. Do you want to say something? Please.
Mary Knutson Rogers: I'm Mary Knutson Rogers. I live at 3851 Leslee Curve. Ijust have a
question to allow the south side, okay going here. The driveway, does that have to be widened in
order for that developer to just have one car.
Morris: Correct. I think it's going up. They were proposing a 20 foot wide bituminous surface.
I think the existing is somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 feet so it'd be widened by 8 feet.
Mary Knutson Rogers: And then this home, what's the distance there from the lot line?
Morris: 10 feet.
Mary Knutson Rogers: Just 10 feet.
Aanenson: That's the ordinance. Until you see a building permit we wouldn't know for sure. I
mean that's what it has to be at a minimum. It could be more.
Sacchet: Thank you.
11
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Ruth Menten: I'm back again. I would like you to really consider the safety of the cars. I know
you said it's only 2 lots going but in actuality it's 3 lots that will be up there. And when there's 2
average cars per family and that's for people who are young and if you have families you know
there's teenagers that have, you have to have teenagers here. So let's figure that 2 cars, that's 6
cars coming out of that one driveway with a low vision. I don't know ifthere's some way you
can take and get better vision. Put mirrors up or stop lights, I don't know but it's driving you
know across the walkway and I just, the safety issue is a big thing for me.
Sacchet: Is this a situation where mirrors are needed? Can you comment to that Alyson please.
Morris: Based on going out to the site and looking at the sight distance, cars are safely exiting at
that point already. It's just a matter of driver caution going down there and having due care
when they enter onto the street. It's similar to, although you would have tree loss off the one
private driveway there, it's similar to single family lots exiting onto a street. It's just simply a
matter of driver care and attention.
Sacchet: So you would think that common sense should be able to mitigate it sufficiently? You
want to add something?
Ruth Menten: Ijust wanted to add something. It also is on an incline. It isn't flat like the piece
of paper you're looking at. We're looking at an incline too so Ijust really want the council to
consider the safety and the developer's to consider the safety if this should go through.
Sacchet: Okay. Good point. Finally we get to you. You've been going up and down a couple
of times haven't you.
Mike Barnes: My name is Mike Barnes. I live at 3840 Linden Circle. I'm off on the north side
of the property. And my concern has to do with the drainage. Is there a limitation on how much
height can be added to the property. You know everything kind of tends to come between my
house and both of my neighbors houses and I'm just somewhat concerned that with the new
properties here that there will be more drainage coming down and that I might have flooding
problems.
Sacchet: Generally there should actually be less. Alyson, do you want to address that please.
Morris: That's correct, thank you Chair. The developer's engineer was required to do a drainage
analysis of this site. Minimal increase in peak discharge through the site. You're the site
directly north?
Mike Barnes: I'm the second one back.
Morris: Okay.
Mike Barnes: I would be this one.
12
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Morris: Okay. As far as increasing drainage, looking at where the proposed homes can be at this
setback, it would not increase. The drainage pattern goes from the southwest, at the back of the
lot that goes to the north and then it starts to spread out towards Lake Minnewashta. Looking out
there you see where the high point is. It's a gradual slope. They're not proposing to change that
area at the back.
Mike Barnes: Yeah, I guess my concern is with the 3 homes there that it won't flow towards the
front anymore. Everything in the back that was flowing around will now flow off my way
because my house is built on a hill, instead of coming down. So that's just my concern with it.
Morris: Again you look at, it depends on the pitch of the roof. The proposed house style.
Position of eaves. We could ask the builder to be.
Sacchet: Be sensitive.
Morris: Very sensitive to that and look at placement of the eaves.
Sacchet: Alright. Anybody else wants to address this item? Yep.
Janet Paulsen: Janet Paulsen again. Ijust want to have, make a statement about private streets
and especially this private street. I don't know if you're all aware you're not allowed to park on
a private street so the guests of these 3 homes cannot park there. And Lake Minnewashta
Parkway, not allowed to park on either side of that so where are the people supposed to park?
Aanenson: Sharmeen, you want to show them?
AI-Jaff: They will be able to park within the driveway. There's a turning lane here. You can
have a couple of cars on there.
Sacchet: Okay. So we believe that is sufficient parking space?
Janet Paulsen: And sufficient for a fire truck?
Sacchet: What happens with the fire truck?
AI-Jaff: Our Fire Marshal did look at this and concluded that this is adequate for their purposes.
Janet Paulsen: I have a private street next to me at the end of Laredo Drive and I watch my
young neighbors struggle trying to turn around and have their delivery trucks turn around.
Mostly they end up parking on the public street to do that. I think private streets require a
variance because they do cause difficulties for the people living around them for parking. And
for turning around. For turning around a boat trailer. Camping trailer, anything. And delivery
trucks, I know lots of people living on private streets have complained about them. That their
property is being, especially if they're the last lot, to turn around. So it should be stated
specifically that there's a big enough turn around for all that. Not just a little back up space.
Thank you.
13
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: Good point. Thanks Janet.
Janet Paulsen: Oh, and one more thing. Does this PUD require a 30 foot front yard? Do you
know?
AI-Jaff: We are requiring today's standard be imposed on this portion of the Planned Unit
Development. Majority of the homes have the 30% and so on and so forth. We're requiring a 50
foot front yard setback.
Janet Paulsen: Okay thank you.
Sacchet: Thank you. Anybodyelse? Jerry.
Jerry Paulsen: Good evening. I'm Jerry Paulsen, 7305 Laredo Drive. There was concern
expressed about blocking your view. Between the lake and the new houses. The housing
regulation says the maximum height is what, 35 feet or?
Sacchet: Correct.
Jerry Paulsen: I can show you a house on Big Woods that's 43 feet from ground to peak because
the height of the house is based on a measurement of a gable height. So if you have a high
pitched roof, in effect you can have more than a 35 feet. I can show you how...
Sacchet: Yeah, I think that was actually clarified. That's the mid point of the gable that we're
measuring, so you're right. It could go to the tip of the gable could be higher. Any other
comments? Otherwise I'll close the public hearing. Yes. Yes, certainly you can do that.
Absolutely.
Connie Villari: My name is Connie Villari with Cornerstone Land Surveying and I've been
referred to as the engineer but actually I'm a licensed surveyor, so just want to clarify that. And
I'd like to take a few moments to answer some of your questions, specifically about the safety
issue. One of the things that staff first commented on when we came to them discussing this lot
was, if this is going to be subdivided they wanted to see one entrance rather than two which
currently exist on the property. In the name of safety we took a look at both entrances. On the
south side there's only a retaining wall on the north end. If you take a look at this, there's no
retaining wall down here, so the sight is slightly, if it is, if you can call it an impairment, it would
only be an impairment on the north side. Not on the south side. The other side, or on the other
driveway... so that's part of the reason why we chose that. We also chose the driveway that was
farthest away from Linden to keep a separation between the streets that are existing, to try to
maintain as much safety as possible. So it's one direction and I understand your concerns and
perhaps we can take a look at that with the final design if we have a couple other changes. We'll
have the engineer review that specifically. Couple other questions were about the drainage. One
of the things that we're trying to do is maintain drainage towards the front between the houses so
we're trying to make sure that the water is traveling across a great deal of grassy area or
vegetated area and we're trying to keep that, keep swales between the houses and that sort of
14
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
thing to minimize any impact that's there. Again the rear of the lot, these are, it was difficult to
design a plan for a development like this because they are going to be custom homes. It's a lot
easier to go into a site such as the one that was presented before this where you're changing
everything and you're designing everything from scratch. We're doing the best we can to fit in
with the neighborhood that's there. We're trying to keep the grades as close to what's naturally
there now as possible. We're trying to keep the street grades as close to the drive that is there
now. However that appears to exceed the 10% slightly so we're going to have to abide by city
standards. So part of the impetus of keeping the houses back 30 feet is to maintain the grades
that are existing as much as possible. Another question was about the private drive and access
and turn around's and one of the things we tried to do is provide a realistic image of what
somebody would want a home to look like with a driveway. To get realistic numbers for our
percentages. And we've shown turn around's on both the north and the south house to kind of
help those people back out of their driveways because it is an issue. And so we have talked
about it so... The final design of the homes may be different but we're trying to be realistic with
our development calculations and so that's why we've shown those on there. Trying to take that
into consideration. I think I've tried to hit most of your questions. As far as accuracy of the tree
survey, all the trees were located in the field. If there's an extra one there, it was an oversight
but they were verified by two people in the field so it would be an error and I will check on it and
the person that was in charge of the survey.
Sacchet: Thank you very much. Good comments.
McDonald: I've got a question.
Sacchet: We'll get to you in a second.
McDonald: Excuse me, ma'am. Since you're the engineer or surveyor, can you tell me how
high is the current house?
Connie Villari: The current house is at, let me just double check. It's at about.. . and I can get
another plan, but it's shown here at 967.7.
McDonald: No, I'm talking about from the ground up. You know we've had a lot of discussion
about.
Connie Villari: You know I'm not sure. That is not a measurement we did. Perhaps the
homeowner has an idea. I'm not sure.
Tim Colleran: It would just be a guess.
McDonald: I'll accept a guess.
Tim Colleran: It's a two story with a pitched roof. It's tall.
McDonald: Okay.
15
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: Alright. There's still somebody there.
Greg Greenwood: I'm Greg Greenwood. I live at 6501 Kirkwood Circle. I'm not even close to
their property but I live back in the association area. But my concern is, we, you're going to
move the houses 10 feet up now that they have that grade basically for, you know to make that
25% if I hear what you're saying correctly. So shorten their driveways by 10 feet. That's, we're
moving all the properties up where all the slab space is.
Sacchet: Isn't that drawing actually using 30?
AI-Jaff: That's not the reason why. They're showing it at 30...
Greg Greenwood: At 30 so they can move it up. So that sounds like they're cutting off some of
the driveway.
Sacchet: That's the idea.
Greg Greenwood: Okay, so as part of the parking and turn around section that I'm kind of
concerned about, is we walk down to the beach every day. Or every time we use it. There's
going to be that much more traffic if one of these guys has more than 2 people in their driveway,
or 2 cars come to their house. So that's going to be that much more traffic that they're going to
have to park on Linden Circle basically, up and down that road. And that's going to increase the
traffic and the amount of kids that are up there already too. I mean we've got people zooming
through there that don't live there as well, that don't know that we have small kids and what not
around there.
Sacchet: So it's about the safety, okay.
Greg Greenwood; Yeah, big time. Okay, and we've got small kids that live right up on that
corner that the people would turn around at.
Sacchet: Appreciate your comment.
Greg Greenwood: So thank you.
Sacchet: Thank you. Anybody else? If not, I'm closing public hearing and bringing it back to
the commission for comments and discussion. I'll start on this end with Mark.
Undestad: Well, I guess I mean your comment again, it's, they get harder as they get into the
neighborhoods here. It looks to me as if, I mean staff has worked with them. They've covered
what's required in their program there. I can see some of the concerns for the increased traffic
on there. It sounds like Alyson has looked at that and it doesn't seem to be an issue right now. I
understand the numbers and the feelings out there but when it comes down to the requirements
and meeting them, I guess it's from my...around with the cul-de-sac up there, I think they've
done a good job of changing the driveway around. It will save some more trees and move the
16
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
buildings around and I understand, I think each individual home site would then come back,
wouldn't it prior to another, as they get. Would the homes come. in or no?
Aanenson: No. They would just come in for a building permit and then we'd review that.
Sacchet: We wouldn't see it.
Aanenson: You wouldn't see it. We would just internally check the building permit.
Undestad: Okay. That's it.
Sacchet: Thanks Mark. Any comments Debbie?
Larson: Well I'm quite familiar with the area because we have friends that are part of your
association and invite us to the beach so I've been there on a few different occasions and I drive
that street and I certainly understand your concerns about the additional traffic. However,
typically when I come in on that road I come from 5 and houses that I see along the parkway
seem very in line with what they're planning on doing here so it's kind of a continuation. It's not
necessarily changing, you know to me it's lake view property, or so it appears anyhow. I don't
really have a problem with putting up beautiful homes in an area like that and I tend to support
what they're planning on doing. I think it's a good improvement. It brings everybody up as far
as their property values.
Sacchet: Thanks Debbie. Jerry, any comments?
McDonald: I've got a couple but yeah, when I first looked at this I made the mistake on the
driveway. I was concerned about that too because what I was afraid we were going to create
islands or blockage as far as getting in and out of the private drive. I like the private drive
concept over the circle because you know after looking at it you would have had to have done
quite a bit of work there which I think would have destroyed a lot of the property. Yeah, we're
having a problem. There are these lots around the city that are available for development and as
long as they meet the code, I don't see much choice but to grant them. And this particular
development seems to have worked through all the problems. They've come through a couple
solutions working with staff. Yeah, I would support this at this time.
Sacchet: Deborah.
Zorn: I would also support this. It's difficult and concerning that it's a beautiful house and that
would be destroyed throughout this process. But it does meet all of the ordinances and the
couple concerns I do have would be the parking and the turn around on the private drive. And
also that middle lot being at the 25% hard coverage surface right now, and this would be a later
issue for whoever develops but there will be no space for any other type of landscaping or other
things. So that issue will come, issue will come at a later time. So I would have to support this
at this time.
Sacchet: Thanks. Kurt.
17
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Papke: I find myself unusually conflicted over this one. I think the developer and the owner
have done a great job of coloring within the lines. I think you've done a good job of preserving
trees, which I normally support. But in this particular case I cannot be a party to demolishing the
second oldest house in Carver County and so I intend to vote against this proposal. However I
think this is a quasi judicial decision and I will not make a motion to deny the request and so I
just suggest that someone else make a motion to approve it and I will simply be allowed to vote
against it because I am ethically opposed to this.
Sacchet: Well, I don't have too much additional wisdom to add from what we've heard. I do
think we touched on three very crucial aspects in all the comments and you well addressed it
from the developer's side. The safety of the access to the street. I think it's definitely something
I like to see the developer work with staff to do everything possible to put the most safe solution
in there with that private street access onto that parkway. And it looks like you already did it.
Make some efforts with that and maybe explore, make really sure you've exhausted all
possibilities with that. Similar with the drainage concern that was brought up from the neighbor
to the north. You already addressed that obviously trying to have the drainage patterns
maintained. That it drains toward the lake but just put some extra attention on that as well. And
then the parking and turn around space aspect to really, I actually would like to highlight those 3
items in a condition, something like applicant shall work with staff to put particular attention on
those 3 aspects. I'm with you Kurt about this being the second oldest house in Carver County is
a real shame to demolish it. However I don't think we have any legal foundation whatsoever and
to step into that space we have not, we don't have jurisdiction. We don't have a case per se. So
other than knowing a little bit about it, I don't think there's much more I can do about it because
it comes down to property owner's rights which are very fundamentally entrenched in the
Constitution of the United States.. . and all these wonderful things, but one thing that founders of
this country particularly anchored in as well is the rights of property owners and so that's in your
hand as far as I see it. So with that I do have to state, as it was stated before, this is from the
ordinance regulation from anyone in the city is a very clean proposal and the additional of the
private road definitely preserves the significant, significantly larger part of nature than a public
road would, so from what I consider our task as Planning Commission it seems a clear case that
we need to support this. With that I'd like to have a motion.
McDonald: I'll do a motion. But before I do that, you had asked about adding some things.
Sacchet: We can do friendly amendment.
McDonald: Okay. I'll make the motion that the Planning Commission approve the preliminary
plat for Planning Case 05-25 for Minnewashta Creek Hills for 3 lots and a variance to allow a
private street as shown on the plans received July the 20th and subject to conditions 1 through I
believe 24.
Sacchet: Yep. We have a motion. Is there a second?
Larson: Second.
18
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
Sacchet: We have a motion and a second. I'd like to propose a friendly amendment. That
would be I guess number 25. Applicant shall work with staff to maximize safety aspects of the
access of the private street onto Minnewashta Parkway. To minimize, how do we say that? To
maximize drainage pattern be maintained flowing towards the lake, and putting special attention
on parking and turn around space within those lots. Is that clear enough?
AI-Jaff: Yes.
Sacchet: Alright. Is that acceptable Jerry? Since you're the man with the motion.
McDonald: Okay, and I have a question. Number 3, does that take care of what you want to do
for drainage?
Sacchet: Not fully.
McDonald: Okay. I have no problems with it. That's fine.
Sacchet: Okay. So we have a motion. We have a second. We have a friendly amendment.
McDonald moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
the preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-25 for Minnewashta Creek Hill for three lots and a
variance to allow a private street as shown on the plans received July 20, 2005, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Environmental Resources Specialist Conditions:
a. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed at the edge of grading limits prior to any
construction. Fencing shall be maintained until construction is completed.
b. Any preserved trees removed will be replaced at a rate of 2: 1 diameter inches.
2. Park and Recreation Conditions:
a. In lieu of any land dedication, full park fees shall be collected at the time of platting.
With the one existing home, the total park fee for Minnewashta Creek Hill will be
$8,000.
b. Additional trail construction is not required as a part of this project; however during
demolition and construction, the existing pedestrian trail shall be protected and
remain open. No construction equipment shall be parked on or use the trail as a
staging area during construction. In addition, all match points encountered on the
trail for demolition and/or construction shall be professionally constructed.
3. Detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans must be submitted
with the building permit for each lot.
19
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
4. The driveway grade must be adjusted so that runoff from the driveway will sheet drain to
the east. The grades east of the proposed private drive must be adjusted to provide a
drainage swale along the east side of the driveway to the proposed catch basin.
5. Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
6. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. All disturbed
areas, as a result of construction, shall be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately
after grading to minimize erosion.
7. A 75-foot minimum rock construction entrance must be added to the entrance that will be
accessed during construction.
8. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant
will be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan.
9. The developer shall also extend storm sewer from the existing storm sewer manhole
within Minnewashta Parkway at the south end of the property. The upstream storm sewer
structure shall have a catch basin cover and a three-foot sump.
10. The lateral sanitary sewer and watermain connections to the existing trunk utilities must
be north of the proposed private drive. The developer shall extend 8-inch lateral sanitary
sewer from the existing manhole (top elevation 951.23').
11. A manhole must be installed wherever a bend is proposed in the sanitary sewer.
Individual sanitary sewer services must be 6-inch diameter.
12. Six-inch lateral watermain shall be wet tapped from the existing trunk utility.
13. A gate valve must be installed immediately west of the wet tap.
14. A hydrant is required at the end of the proposed watermain for flushing purposes.
15. Additional drainage and utility easements may be required based on the revised utility
plan. Easements shall be minimum 20-feet wide centered over each utility.
16. According to the City's Finance Department records, the parcel was previously assessed
for one sanitary sewer and water hookup, therefore sanitary sewer and water hookup
charges must be paid for two lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458.00 for
sanitary sewer and $2,955.00 for water-main.
17. Public utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
18. Detailed construction plans and specifications must be submitted at time of final plat.
20
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
19. The applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply
the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to
guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval.
20. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but
not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, MCES, and Watershed District.
21. The driveway easement must clearly stipulate that the owners of Lots 1-3, Block 1,
Minnewashta Creek Hill shall own and maintain the private drive and the private storm
sewer north of the private driveway. The private street must be built to a 7-ton design,
20-foot width. The developer will be required to submit inspection reports certifying this.
22. Water Resource Coordinator Conditions:
a. The grading plan shall be revised to show silt fence down slope of all disturbed areas.
Chanhassen's standard detail for silt fence (Plate 5300) shall be included in the plans.
b. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1.
All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Tvpe of Slope
Steeper than 3: 1
10:1 to 3:1
Flatter than 10: 1
Time
7 days
14 days
21 days
(Maximum time an area can
remain open when the area
is not actively being worked.)
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as
a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch
or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
c. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and
street sweeping as-needed.
d. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $5,355.
e. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies as necessary (e.g., Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II
Construction Site Permit), (for dewatering)) and comply with their conditions of
approval.
23. Building Official Conditions:
a. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division
before building permits will be issued.
b. Demolition permits must be obtained prior to demolishing any structures on the site.
c. Separate water and sewer services must be provided for each lot and must have a
separate connection to the public sewer or to a manhole which is connected to the
public sewer.
21
Planning Commission Meeting - August 2, 2005
d. Curb box valves cannot be located in driveways.
e. Permits are required for retaining walls. Walls over four feet high must be designed
by a professional engineer.
f. The developer must submit a proposed name for the private drive.
24. Fire Marshal Conditions:
a. The new proposed private street will need a street name. Submit name to
Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval.
b. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must
either be removed from site or chipped.
c. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of
a new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code
Section 501.4.
d. A fire apparatus access road shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
load of fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all weather driving
capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3."
25. The applicant will work with staff to address the issues of safety of the private street
accessing onto Minnewashta Parkway, drainage towards the lake, and providing
appropriate parking and turn around areas.
All voted in favor, except Papke who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1.
Sacchet: So we have 5 to 1 and we already heard why you're opposing. So this goes to City
Council on the 22nd of August and there the decision will be made on this. Thank you very
much.
APPROV AL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Papke noted the verbatim and summary minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting dated July 19,2005 as presented.
Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:30 p.m..
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
22
z
W
III
III
<C
J:
Z
<C
J:
U
i
~t;;; 2:::
I1E.. ~~
ti ..t~ III ~zi
~ Hh ~Ssi;
8 5~~j ~ ~S~!
+
~~
)Z
iJ
~ (0
8 UU
+
He
"::I 0
z ~z g
o ~z 1IO
~ :H'I
~ h~
t; ~5 ~
5 ~~ 9
g: ~~ a:
+
+
L1JU
z~
Ou
I-~
111>
ffi~
z~
o::~
· 8~ +
lid !
.. I ~~.
~ m I
~ fH h
~ f~~l "d
lj !hl I
+
Ii
~
!g
..
~ ~I
'^ n
+
I~
Vi
z
o
~ j!!'
~ ~i
+
I'ill ! !
~ Jd~ ~ ~
v ;h.1 ; ~
~ ; mId I I
lil
~~"*' o.
~i ; 2
~
Ij I ! ~~.~
:~ .,,,.
iW ~ i 2~;~
.~ .. ~l ! ~ ;1 S!~"N
z I~ i ~ I;i!
~ ~ i !f 9. :!
~ II ~
; III ~ 0 ~m
~t 5
+ + .; .. + +
...J
...J
-
:r:
~
LLI /
LLI
~
U
<(
~
:r:
Vl -
<(
~ I
I
LLI I
Z -..j
---
Z ---
---
I
- I
~ r-J
I
I
-...)
---
---
---
-l
I )
I
_J
~
- -\ --,
,-- \
\ \
+
/
---
^
/ '-
'-
"-
"-
'>
/
/
/
/
. l ~
1 Ili!1
I I lid!
~ ! I Ih~!
!f ~ -i .~'~I
~ ! ~i ml~
+
,
r-
I
I
~
l
r-
I
L..,
I
C
j ~ ~z
5 I !i:5
~...
~
~
~
I ~ ~
i i ::
;;;
u
..
6 !!
Q,I...o;-
Ii 1;1!;;
~ ~i'
H_~r
~ \~W
~
w!
~
~
z
UJ
VI
VI
<
:c
z
<
:c
u
.
...J
...J
-
:c
~
L1J
L1J
~
U
<(
r-
:c
Vl
<(
~
L1J
Z
Z
-
~
~
~f-
iiE
t.. .. j; ffi
.. .....~~ ~
~~~~J-'S
8 ~~~~ ~~
+
n
)Z
o
~ (0
8 UU
+
HO
~o 0
z <::l 0
o I;:Z 0
>- ~i ~
~ ~oi ~
~Q .
g ~~ ci
6' lDU":
g: :~ 0:
+ +
11' <
UIl ~
.. lh~'
~ ~n J
~ If! Ii
~ to!' "~I
tl !hl I
+
Ii
~
I
~~
..
~ it
+
~5
~~I
!i~1
.i!
~:l:!
+
:~
I
~
.. ;
~ i
~ ~
u u
~ i
;;;! I
~
" .:
Z !i
!2i .:,
!f
. ~ ~
~ li~~1
~ I~I~~
i! ~i;l!
~ ~ I Ilh!
o ~ _; -~~~~
i ~ ~5 i~h!
; .1 .~~h
~
~~I;i~! U~I
hhh~ a~l~
I r.J1 ~q
.. I . OIiJ . I~;I
~= -h~
~ h ~~ I Ii I ~~!~
~ InhhnlllU
!-;t.
i i ! e
~; I ~ I
il; i i ii I
.. ~~ ~ I ~ h .. -I
~~ i il I! ~~ Z 9~
i Ii II b h 1111;
g
~
I
U
'e
h
~.
I!
uJ
J~I
181
.:Ii
l!; Hi
z.:h
N !~~
+
+ . .
it
51 !;2
;;
2
.
J
< ~
+ +
+
+
+...: ...; ... .... +
/
/
/
',---, /
\:- / "~
,-,
'#~#
,.,
,.,
,.'
"'
--~-_....-
---
---
~~
;:'~
'-:-----
','
~:: [~.."
.&~,
~
,~
~~
~
~
LLJU
z~
Oli
f-~
V1~
0:::)
LLJ~
z:l
o:::~
.. 0 z
u~
5
~~ i"
:li~ I
..~ I
h --or--'
Oil!
s~
2
~
--~-..,
I
I
I
,"
,
eee
,',...;
=!o "
~~il
~ ~~id
~ill
~
'"
<
'"
=>
o
~
~
1!
Q
~
~
+
e
ee,
"!ee
~!. "
::1 ~ ~II!
9 i.~
!i~lq
~ill
ee
:,fCr'
~~.:
j I~I;!
9 ~~ili
~ill
wi
1- I i~
:fO-
Ol
If
I i
d
+
;ij
u
..
c5 !!
~ ~!5
~ ~;.
H.5~
~8U
~
sn
~.~
I~.
H
i'
I!l
~..!.
~~2
i2~
~~d
~Q~~
(1)<9.
m~
~.
~!
',B
1:,
'I'
II ~i
II
SI
Iii
II'
Ud
0-EXHIBIT A PROPOSED LAYOUT WITH PRIVATE ROAD
\ \ / ~ f!
~ / ~n~
~ ( '~
J I (
'lr.
----
I
------
------
/
I
I
!---
I
I
Cl..........
I ------
I
\
\
\
'--
\ -.
\
\
TOTAL OF 11 TREES IMPACTED (BASED ON CURRENT HOUSE PLACEMENT)
o 30 60
r\.r\....J
.
NORTH
SCALE: 1 INCH = 60 FEET
"'---
~.
..
-
Suite #8100
200 east Chaslnul Strael
StlIlwater, MN 55082
Phone 651.275.8969
Fax 651.275.8978
dtl-cals@
mcleodusa
.net
..-
CORNERSTONE
LAND SURVEYING. INC
0- EXHIBIT B PROPOSED LAYOUT WITH CUL DE SAC
Ii
I
i
I !
I
%
,
~
t--
I
I
0........
,---
I
\
\
\
'---
\
\
~
~
~
,.
~
---
---
/
I
I
\
\
\
I
~
-1
TOTAL OF 27 TREES IMPACTED (BASED ON CURRENT HOUSE PLACEMENT)
o 30 60
i\r\...J
.
NORTH
~.
n
-
Suite #8100
200 East Chestnut Slnlel
Stillwater, MN 55Oll2
Phone 651275.8969
Fax 651275.8978
dft-csls@
mcIeodusa
.net
SCALE: 1 INCH = 60 FEET
..
CORNERSTONE
LAND SURVEYING. INC
\