The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-14_THE PRESERVE AT BLUFF CREEK - FILE 2 OF 2> ' 1 Planning Commission Meeting —April 18, 2006 Papke: Accepted. McDonald: Okay, is that acceptable? Okay. Any other comments. Okay, well the Chair has one, because we just went through this with amendments number 31 for Lots 1 through 5. Make the change that we discussed there. That those lots are still under discussion. II Keefe: Do you want to amend that to just, developer will work with staff regarding. McDonald: Yeah, I would accbpt an amendment saying that, so okay. So yeah, we will do that. The other ones you talked about 5. We're not going to change. 13 we did address so I think we've got everything covered. Any other comments or any other amendments anyone wants to add? Okay, seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. Keefe: We need a second. McDonald: Oh, I thought we had a second. Keefe: Second. McDonald: Sony. Getting a little bit ahead. V(01'141 F, C, 15 '1, 5 AKS CD6 Papke moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Rezoning the land within the Plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Planned Unit Development -Residential, PUD -R; approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; and approval of the Preliminary Plat for "The Preserve" creating 155 lots, 15 outlots and right-of-way for public streets, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated 3-17-06 subject to the following conditions: 1. The drainage and utility easement over the northern portion of Lift Station #24 must be vacated and filed upon final approval of the final plat. 2. The "Existing Conditions" plan must be revised to show the drainage and utility easement that was granted to the City and contain trunk sanitary sewer and watermain. 3. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that the proposed right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard meets Carver County's requirement. 4. The grading plan must identify the existing and proposed 100 -year floodplain. 5. Due to the anticipated timing of the final plat with respect to the timing of formal approvals from FEMA, the proposed lots that are within the current floodplain may be preliminary platted subject to FEMA approval of the LOMR. 32 E-4 Z U ONOa a STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for Rezoning of property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of 155 single family lots, 15 outlots, and private streets and public right-of-way; and Conditional Use Permit for alterations within the flood plain and development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District — THE PRESERVE. LOCATION: 1630 Lyman Boulevard APPLICANT: The Pemtom Land Company 7697 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55345 952-937-0716 b�6L Gayle & Lois Degler 1630 Lyman Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential — Medium Density (net density range 4.0 — 8.0 units/acre) ACREAGE: 79.86 gross acres 31.33 net acres DENSITY: 1.92 units/acre gross; 5 units/acre net SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a rezoning to PUD, subdivision and site plan approval to build 155 single family lots with a conditional use permit for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District as well as grading within the floodplain. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 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 site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed Project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The City has limited discretion in approving or denying conditional use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi judicial decision. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 2 of 22 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The property is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Residential - Medium Density as well as parks and open space over the Bluff Creek corridor. Appropriate zonings for this land use designation include Planned Unit Development — Residential (PUD -R), Mixed Low Density Residential, if twin homes (R4), Mixed Medium Density Residential (R8) or Low and Medium Density Residential (RLM). The applicant is requesting a PUD zoning with a single-family detached housing unit. While this is an applicable use in this zoning district, typically the City has seen the use of attached housing. This will be the first application of single family. The PUD prescribes the standards for development. Staff is recommending approval of the rezoning to PUD as the subdivision with the conditions. BACKGROUND On December 8, 2003, the City approved the 2005 MUSA Alternate Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). This document was intended to review and provide mitigation measures for all development within the 2005 MUSA area. At the time of development review, each property within the 2005 MUSA area is required to reimburse the City for their propositional share, based on the land area, of the costs for completion of the AUAR. This property is responsible for $14,365 as its portion of the 2005 AUAR. Below is a breakdown of the residential land uses and the number of housing units approved under the AUAR: Property Net # units units/acres De ler, Dean 40.0 n/a De le,r Gayle 30.0 240.0 8.0 Dorsey 30.0 240.0 8.0 Fox, Jeff 21.0 168.0 8.0 Fox Family 38.0 304.0 8.0 Town Country #2 30.0 135.0 4.5 Town Country #1 79.0 450.0 5.7 Peterson, Sever 42.0 120.0 2.9 Park 20.0 n/a Laurent 17.0 n/a 347.0 1,657.0 6.4 AUARAssumption 350 1,584 The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 3 of 22 The next table is a summary of the developments in the 2005 MUSA that have recently been approved. Development Gross Acres Net Acres Net Density Total units Liberty on Bluff Creek 91.02 39.51 11.24 444 Liberty at Creekside 36.01 13.54 10.64 146 Pioneer Pass 120 28.11 2.88 81 The Preserve 80 31.33 4.55 155 Total 112.49 Avg. 7.32 Total 826 Based on the AUAR there is an additional potential 758 housing units available. APPLICABLE REGUATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions (18-57 Streets) Chapter 20, Article IV, Conditional Use Permits Chapter 20, Article V, Floodplain Overlay District Chapter 20, Article VII, Planned Unit Development District Chapter 20, Article XXXI, Bluff Creek Overlay District REZONING The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 80 acres from A2 to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The project consists of 155 single-family homes. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit density clustering for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of density. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development and preserves the Bluff Creek corridor subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. • The plan should seek to establish sufficient land to provide a full range of housing opportunities. • The City will seek opportunities to provide transitions between different uses of different types. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 4 of 22 • Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the City to provide services. The proposed rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following housing goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • A balanced housing supply with housing available for people of all income levels. • A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life -cycle. • Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs. Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property: DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Sec. 20-508. Standards and guidelines for single-family attached or cluster -home PUDs. (a) Generally. Single-family attached, cluster, zero lot line, townhouses and similar type dwelling types may be allowed on sites designed for low, medium or high density residential uses by the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. (b) Minimum lot sizes. There shall be no minimum lot size; however, in no case shall net density exceed guidelines established by the City comprehensive plan. (c) Setback standards/structures and parking: (1) PUD exterior: 50 feet. (2) Interior public right-of-way: 30 feet.* *The 30 -foot front yard setback may be waived by the City Council when it is demonstrated that environmental protection will be enhanced. In these instances, a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet shall be maintained. (3) Other setbacks: Established by PUD agreement. (d) Protection and preservation of natural features. The applicant must demonstrate that the flexibility provided by the PUD is used to protect and preserve natural features such as tree stands, wetlands, ponds, and scenic views. These areas are to be permanently protected as public or private tracts or protected by permanently recorded easements. (e) Landscaping plan. An overall landscaping plan is required. The plan shall contain the following: (1) Boulevard plantings. Located in front yards shall require a mix of over -story trees and other plantings consistent with the site. Landscaped berms shall be provided to screen the site from major roadways, railroads and more intensive land uses. In place of mass grading for building The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 5 of 22 pads and roads, stone or decorative blocks retaining walls shall be employed as required to preserve mature trees and the site's natural topography. (2) Exterior landscaping and double -fronted lots. Landscaped berms shall be provided to buffer the site and lots from major roadways, railroads, and more intensive uses. Similar measures shall be provided for double -fronted lots. Where necessary to accommodate this landscaping, additional lot depth may be required. (3) Foundation and yard plantings. A minimum budget for foundation plants shall be established and approved by the City. As each parcel is developed in the PUD, the builder shall be required to install plant materials meeting or exceeding the required budget prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy or provide financial guarantees acceptable to the City. (4) Tree preservation. Tree preservation is a primary goal of the PUD. A detailed tree survey should be prepared during the design of the PUD and the plans should be developed to maximize tree preservation. (f) Architectural standards. The applicant should demonstrate that the PUD will provide for a high level of architectural design and building materials. While this requirement is not intended to minimize design flexibility, a set of architectural standards should be prepared for City approval. The primary purpose of this section is to assure the City that high quality design will be employed and that home construction can take place without variances or impact to adjoining lots. The PUD agreement should include the following: (1) Standards for exterior architectural treatments. (2) Prohibition against freestanding garages may be required by the City when it is felt that unattached garages will be difficult to accommodate due to small lot sizes. If an attached garage is to be converted to living space at some time in the future, the applicant will have to demonstrate that there is sufficient room to accommodate a two -car garage without variances to obtain a permit. (3) Guidelines regulating the placement of air conditioners, dog kennels, storage buildings, and other accessory uses that could potentially impact adjoining parcels due to small lot sizes. Required Standard Proposed Standards Lyman Boulevard 50 feet 50 feet Exterior Eastern 50 feet 50 feet (creek on west) (Perimeter) Setback Front Yard garage side 30 feet may be reduced to 20 25 feet feet Front Yard on comer lots 30 feet may be reduced to 20 20 feet feet Side Yard Established by PUD 5/10 feet minimum 15 between units The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 6 of 22 * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 30 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 30 percent site coverage. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The plat proposed 155 lots. The subdivision will be built in phases with the first phase adjacent to the new collector road, Bluff Creek Boulevard. There is a combination of public and private streets. All of the lots abut either the public or private streets. The lots meet all of the standards of the PUD. There is no minimum lot size although the average lot size is 8,000 square feet. The developer proposes six to ten home styles with three different options for each style (see attachments). The homes range in size from the smallest at 35' x 55' to the largest at 40' x 56'. There is room for additions, three -season porches or decks of approximately 600 square feet. The association should establish bylaws and covenants for regulating the placement of air conditioners, dog kennels, storage buildings, fences and other accessory uses that could potentially impact adjoining parcels due to small lot sizes as prescribed in the PUD ordinance. Two changes to the plat that the staff is recommending is the elimination of lots in two areas. Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 need to be eliminated to provide a larger private park. Based on the number of dwelling units and the PUD requirement for greater amenities, the park should have better visibility and be larger. The other area where lots should be eliminated is the area north of the Creek (Lots 1 through 5, Block 1). The majority of the lots are in the flood plain and are adjacent to the City's lift station which emits odors. Staff is proposing a trail head for the creek and a pond to handle additional runoff from the widening of Bluff Creek. The trail crossing in this area should provide the best access to the proposed trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard to provide access to the future school. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site contains a small wetland on the east side and several along Bluff Creek on the west side. The central portion of the site is generally the highest and the slopes along the north and east Required Standard Proposed Standards Rear Yard Established by PUD 15 feet Hard Surface Coverage * 30 % averaged over the entire site 30 % averaged over the entire site Wetland: Buffer and buffer setback 16.5 feet and 40 feet 16.5 feet and 40 feet Bluff Creek Primary zone boundary 40 feet with the first 20 feet as buffer 40 feet with the first 20 feet as buffer Minimum lot size none Average 8,000 square feet Public street 60 foot right of way 31 foot aved back to back 60 foot right of way 32 foot paved Private street 40 foot right of way 24 paved 40 foot right of way 28 paved surface * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 30 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 30 percent site coverage. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The plat proposed 155 lots. The subdivision will be built in phases with the first phase adjacent to the new collector road, Bluff Creek Boulevard. There is a combination of public and private streets. All of the lots abut either the public or private streets. The lots meet all of the standards of the PUD. There is no minimum lot size although the average lot size is 8,000 square feet. The developer proposes six to ten home styles with three different options for each style (see attachments). The homes range in size from the smallest at 35' x 55' to the largest at 40' x 56'. There is room for additions, three -season porches or decks of approximately 600 square feet. The association should establish bylaws and covenants for regulating the placement of air conditioners, dog kennels, storage buildings, fences and other accessory uses that could potentially impact adjoining parcels due to small lot sizes as prescribed in the PUD ordinance. Two changes to the plat that the staff is recommending is the elimination of lots in two areas. Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 need to be eliminated to provide a larger private park. Based on the number of dwelling units and the PUD requirement for greater amenities, the park should have better visibility and be larger. The other area where lots should be eliminated is the area north of the Creek (Lots 1 through 5, Block 1). The majority of the lots are in the flood plain and are adjacent to the City's lift station which emits odors. Staff is proposing a trail head for the creek and a pond to handle additional runoff from the widening of Bluff Creek. The trail crossing in this area should provide the best access to the proposed trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard to provide access to the future school. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site contains a small wetland on the east side and several along Bluff Creek on the west side. The central portion of the site is generally the highest and the slopes along the north and east The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 7 of 22 sides of the property are moderate; slopes along the west and south sides of the property are steeper. Lift Station #24 is in the northwest comer of the property and partially lies within a drainage and utility easement. Upon final approval of The Preserve, this lift station will be within a platted outlot that will be deeded to the City. The overhead power lines along the south side of Lyman Boulevard will remain. EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY The existing drainage and utility easement that Lift Station #24 partially lies within must be vacated and filed after final plat approval. This easement will not be necessary since the lift station will lie within an outlot that will be deeded to the City. Staff will process the easement vacation with the final plat. The existing 100 -foot wide (measured from the centerline of Lyman Boulevard) drainage and utility easement along the eastern 650 feet of the property will remain. This easement was granted to the Freeburgs and Dorseys in 1979 for underground drainage tile. The "Existing Conditions" plan must be revised to show the drainage and utility easement that was granted to the City and contain trunk sanitary sewer and watermain. Outlots containing public utilities — watermain, sanitary sewer and storm sewer that conveys runoff from a public street — must have blanket drainage and utility easements over the outlot. Private utilities (e.g. storm sewer that only conveys runoff from a private street) within outlots shall be owned and maintained by the association. The preliminary plat includes a 60 -foot wide south one-half right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard/CSAH 18. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that the proposed right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard meets Carver County's requirement. Public streets will be within a 60 -foot wide right-of-way. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The grading plan must identify the existing and proposed 100 -year floodplain. Due to the anticipated timing of the final plat with respect to the timing of formal approvals from FEMA, the proposed lots that are within the current floodplain may be preliminary platted subject to FEMA approval of the LOMR. These lots cannot be final platted until the LOMR is approved. Any grading within the floodplain will require a conditional use permit. The grading plan identifies five ponds within The Preserve; all proposed ponds outlet to Bluff Creek. Pond 1 lies in the northeast corner of the plat and will treat runoff from the northeast portion of the plat. Pond 2 is proposed on the northern portion of the property, east of Bluff Creek and will treat runoff from the north -central portion of the plat. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 8 of 22 Pond 3 lies in the northwest portion of the plat and will treat runoff from the five units west of Bluff Creek. The City may acquire additional ponding capacity for Pond 3 for a portion of Lyman Boulevard and to meet the regional ponding needs. These details will be finalized prior to final plat consideration. Pond 4 is proposed in the southwest corner of the plat. Pond 4 will treat runoff from the portion of the development that lies within 1200 feet north of Bluff Creek Boulevard and "Wetland A" on the east side of the property. Pond 5 lies south of Bluff Creek Boulevard, east of Bluff Creek. This pond is being constructed with the City's 2005 MUSA streets and utilities project and was designed to treat some runoff from this development. The developer's engineer has been working with Kimley Horn, the City's consultant for the 2005 MUSA project, to ensure that discharge to Pond 5 from the development is within Kimley Horn's design criteria. The storm sewer configuration will change slightly due to the proposed site plan changes. Catch basins on each side of all public streets must be no more than 300 feet apart. The proposed outlet for Wetland A must lie along the edge of the wetland. The storm sewer from Pond 1 must outlet to the wetland north of Pond 2 in order to maintain hydrology to the wetland. Storm sewer within Street J must be rerouted through the sideyards within Block 3 and outlet to Pond 2. The developer has submitted hydrology calculations for the proposed development for the proposed site for staff review. Hydraulic calculations must be submitted with the final plat submittals. All buildings must be demolished before site grading commences. A detailed grading plan review will be completed when the final, 50 -scale grading plans are submitted. The legend on the final grading plan must identify the lowest floor elevation. Storm Water Management The outlet pipe for Wetland A is proposed to extend into the wetland. The applicant must demonstrate that the outlet pipe installation and elevation will not impact the wetland. The emergency overflow (EOF) elevation and route for Wetland A are unacceptable. The existing overflow for this wetland is to the west and then to the north, outletting in the approximate location of Wetlands 1 and 4. The current overflow elevation is approximately 823.4. As proposed, the wetland would need to get to an elevation of 927.5 to overflow into Street A. In that event, the homes on adjacent to Wetland A would likely have water in their basements. The plans must be revised to provide a lower EOF and a path to the west for excess water that will not threaten proposed structures. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 9 of 22 The EOF path for Pond 1 around the end of Street J, immediately south of Lyman Boulevard, is not acceptable. The path should be revised to provide a more direct EOF route from Pond I to Wetland 4. The proposed sanitary sewer and storm sewer outlet in the vicinity of Pond 2 must be revised to ensure: 1. The runoff from the outlet will not compromise the integrity of the sanitary sewer; and 2. The sanitary sewer is not located below the normal water level (NWL) of Pond 2. The outfall from Pond 3 should not outlet upslope of the proposed trail. It is unclear why Pond 4 is designed to avoid impacts to the non -wetland drainageway that leads to Bluff Creek. The applicant should clarify this avoidance and, if possible, redesign the pond to provide additional storage and treatment in lieu of avoiding the drainageway. Storm water from the southeast corner of the site and the East-West Collector drains to Pond 5. Pond 5 must be constructed prior to the construction of all areas draining to it. Easements Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. Erosion and Sediment Control A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is needed for the development and must be completed prior to applying for the NPDES permit. It is recommended the SWPPP be submitted to the City and SWCD for review prior to final approval. Stable emergency overflows (EOF) are required for all ponds. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A standard detail should be shown on the plans. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets. Blocks 17, 18, 19, 20 show details of the storm sewer going to Pond 5. Details will be needed for a stable outlet and temporary sediment pond location for that area. 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 Slone Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days 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, The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 10 of 22 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. The applicant should be proactive in addressing potential run-on problems in the vicinity of the extreme southeast corner of the property. This would potentially involve vertically tracking equipment up and down the graded faces of the slope to increase roughness and prevent rilling. Similar practices should be used behind the homes along the central part of Outlot A. The plans should be revised to show all slope grades longer than 75 feet being broken up. Curbside inlet control details should be provided. Wimco-type inlet controls should be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of inlets. Also, there are several off road catch basins proposed on the site that will also need inlet controls, details are also needed for these. Typical building lot controls should be shown on the plan in a standard detail. These controls should include perimeter controls (silt fence), rock driveways, street sweeping, inlet control and temporary mulch after final grade and prior to issuing the Certificate of Occupancy. The proposed storm water ponds should be used as temporary sediment basins during mass grading. The pond should be excavated prior to disturbing up gradient areas. Plans should show the routing of water to the temporary basins, (Ponds 2, 4, 5) especially with the steep slopes and the proposed ponds below the hill. Diversion berms/ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. The outlet could be a temporary perforated standpipe and rock cone. An outlet detail for the temporary basins should be provided. 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 medium density residential development rates of $1,600/acre. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 40.46 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are $64,736. 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. Medium density residential developments have a connection charge of $4,400 per developable acre. This results in a water quantity fee of approximately $178,024 for the proposed development. SWMP Credits This project proposes the construction of four NURP ponds. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided to treat runoff. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 11 of 22 for areas that are dedicated to the City for ponding, parks, wetlands, or right-of-way for county roads or local arterial roadways. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $242,760. Other Agencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. RETAINING WALLS The plans identify a proposed retaining wall on the south side of Outlot B. The final grading plan must show the top and bottom of wall elevations. Any retaining wall four feet high or taller requires a building permit and must be designed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. UTILITIES The plan shows lateral sanitary sewer and watermain extending from the trunk utilities constructed with the 2005 MUSA project. Due to maintenance difficulty and infiltration potential, the lateral sanitary sewer west of Block 3 must be located away from the stormwater ponds so that an OSHA safe trench can be excavated. One option would be to extend the sanitary sewer along the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the sanitary sewer that will serve Block 1. The developer must work with staff to find the preferred alignment prior to City Council consideration of the final plat. The plan must be revised to show an 18 -inch diameter watermain on the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the east property line. Installation of this trunk watermain negates the need for the 8 -inch lateral between the northern edge of Outlot D to the existing trunk watermain. The developer will be reimbursed the cost difference between an 8 -inch lateral and the 18 -inch trunk watermain. The developer's engineer must submit a separate cost estimate for this watermain oversizing with the final plat submittals. To the maximum extent practicable, the trail along the east side of Bluff Creek must be within close proximity of the manholes for the existing trunk sanitary sewer. The lowest floor elevation of each unit must be shown on the utility plan. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed and abandoned during site grading and utility installation. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 12 of 22 The developer's share of the cost to prepare the 2005 MUSA AUAR is $14,365.00, which must be paid in cash with the final plat. The property has been assessed for the 2005 MUSA roads and water, and for Highway 101/Lyman Boulevard/Highway 312/Higbway 212. The principal and interest are deferred until the property is platted. The current principal and interest amounts are $310,999.03 and $162,976.08, respectively. These assessments can be paid with the final plat, or re -assessed to the lots and outlots for future development. If the developer elects to re -assess, a security must be issued prior to recording the plat for the outstanding principal and interest. The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, therefore the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. These fees are collected with the building permit and are based on the rates in effect at the time of building permit application. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment of these fees. STREETS The City will construct Bluff Creek Boulevard Improvements to serve the development in conjunction with public improvement project No. 06-05. The property within the plat will be specially assessed for this project. The City will include language in the development contract for The Preserve staring that the developer and fee owner waive any and all procedural and substantive objections to the project and the assessments. The development is subject to the arterial collector fee, which must be paid in cash with the final plat at the rate in effect at the final plat. The 2006 fee is $2,400.00/developable acre. The developer proposes to construct four, 31 -foot wide public streets within the development. Street A will extend north from Bluff Creek Boulevard and will terminate in a cul-de-sac on the north side of the development. Streets E and H will extend west from Street A and intersect approximately 600 feet west of Street A. Street H will extend to the east when the Dorsey property develops. Street M will extend south from Lyman Boulevard and will be extended to the west when the Dean and Lois Degler property to the west develops. The developer proposes to construct several 28 -foot wide private streets within outlots to serve the remainder of the development. Streets F and K must extend past Lot 6, Block 13 and Lot 1, Block 17, respectively to provide adequate space for a vehicle to back out of the driveway and turn into the street. Curbs on public streets will be high -back; curbs on private streets will be surmountable. The developer proposes to construct five-foot wide concrete sidewalks throughout the development along public and private streets. Staff recommends that the sidewalk along the The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 13 of 22 north side of Street H between Street A and Street I, and along the north side of Street E be eliminated. Sidewalks adjacent to private streets and within privately owned outlots can be used by the public. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Seven ag/urban wetlands exist on-site. Houston Engineering delineated the wetlands in May 2005. Wetland 1 is a 0.2 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the north central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland 2 is a 0.12 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the northwest portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland 3 is a 0.25 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the north central portion of the property. The wetland is located in a plowed field, so no vegetation was present. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland 4 is a 0.3 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the north central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin; however, the hydrology for this basin appears to be reduced from pre -development to post - development conditions. The applicant should revise the plan design to ensure adequate hydrology in the post -development condition. Wetland 5 is a 8.95 acre, Type 3 wetland located along the west central and southwest parts of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin in conjunction with this project; however, this basin is proposed to be impacted by the construction of the City's East-West Collector. Wetland 6 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass and black willow. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin in conjunction with this project; however, this basin is proposed to be impacted by the construction of the City's East-West Collector. Wetland -A (Wetland 7 in the delineation report) is a 1.65 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the east central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by smart weed and reed canary grass. The western portion of the basin has been repeatedly tilled and was planted with corn. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin; however, an adjoining property owner has questioned whether all or part of the basin is exempt under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). If the applicant wishes to pursue an exemption, the applicant will need to furnish information to substantiate the exemption request. Even if impacts would be exempt from WCA, they may not be exempt from the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. The emergency The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 14 of 22 overflow (EOF) elevation and route for this basin are unacceptable (see Storm Water Management section below). A wetland buffer with a minimum width of 16.5 feet must be maintained around all wetlands and wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures must maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge. Wetland Replacement Because no wetland impacts are proposed in conjunction with this project, no wetland mitigation is required. However, the applicant has shown two proposed wetland mitigation areas within the project area. These mitigation areas will be designed and constructed by the City in conjunction with the East-West Collector project. BLUFFS The applicant has evaluated the site for areas meeting the City's bluff criteria (i.e., slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet above the toe). No areas existing on this site meet the bluff criteria. BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT The City of Chanhassen established the Bluff Creek Overlay District by ordinance in 1998 to protect the Bluff Creek Corridor, wetlands, bluffs and significant stands of mature trees through the use of careful site design and other low -impact practices. This parcel is partially encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Bluff Creek runs through the western portion of this property. All structures should maintain a 50 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level of Bluff Creek. All structures must maintain a minimum 40 -foot setback from the primary corridor. No alterations are allowed within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. The 50 -foot setback, primary corridor boundary, 40 -foot structure setback and 20 -foot grading setback should be shown on the plans. The applicant has not provided details for the proposed trail crossing of Bluff Creek. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits must be obtained for all creek crossings. In addition, the trail alignment should be revised to cross Bluff Creek in the same location as the sanitary sewer crossing. Immediately south of the creek crossing, the trail intersection should be redesigned to avoid impact to the trees. In order to enhance the land within the Bluff Creek primary corridor, the applicant may undertake a wetland restoration of Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The restoration should include a vegetation management plan that addresses reed canary grass eradication and the establishment of native, non-invasive plants within the basin. Any proposed activities within these basins would require a wetland alteration permit. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 15 of 22 LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The applicant for The Preserve development has submitted tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations. Wooded areas within wetlands and the Bluff Creek Overlay District primary zone have been not been included in the canopy coverage calculations. The calculations are as follows: Total upland area (mcluding wetlands and BeoD) 59.1 ac. Baseline canopy coverage 3.8% or 2.2 ac. Minimum canopy coverage allowed 20% or 11.8 ac. Proposed tree preservation .2% or .1 ac. Developer does not meet minimum canopy coverage allowed; therefore the difference between the baseline and proposed tree preservation is multiplied by 1.2 to calculate the required replacement plantings. Difference in canopy coverage 2.1 ac. Multiplier 1.2 Total replacement 2.5 ac. or 109,771 SF Total number of trees to be planted 101 trees In addition, the applicant must increase canopy coverage to meet the minimum thirty percent required. The calculations are follows: Total reforestation area (11.8 —2.2 ac.) 9.6 ac. or 418,176 SF Required canopy coverage 384 trees (one tree provides 1,089 SF of canopy) The total number of trees required for the development is 485. Applicant has proposed a total of 509 trees. Additional landscaping required for the development includes buffer yard plantings along the east south collector road. The following table summarizes the minimum requirements: Applicant meets minimum requirements for the trees required within the bufferyard landscaping. No shrubs have been included in the landscape plan, but the large number of evergreens will be more effective at providing screening from the collector road than shrubs. Required Proposed Collector road, north side 9 overstory 9 overstory - bufferyard B, 850' 17 understory 57 understory 25' width 34 shrubs no shrubs Collector road, south side 3 overstory 4 overstory — bufferyard B, 300' 6 understory 24 understory 25' width 12 shrubs no shrubs Applicant meets minimum requirements for the trees required within the bufferyard landscaping. No shrubs have been included in the landscape plan, but the large number of evergreens will be more effective at providing screening from the collector road than shrubs. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 16 of 22 Staff recommends that buffer plantings also be added to the east property line. These plantings are not required but would provide a buffer from the future development to the east. By installing the plantings now, the buffer could become established prior to any changes to the east. A conservation easement should be recorded over the Bluff Creek Overlay District primary zone. The developer should work with staff to develop and install appropriate markers at lot lines to demarcate the primary zone. The applicant should submit a plan for the re -vegetation of any areas of grading within Outlot A. The plan should incorporate native plants and be consistent with the City's Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management Plan Appendix C. Special attention should be paid to areas with steep slopes (greater than 3:1). Staff recommends that the Hill Prairie planting list be used for the restoration. PARKS AND RECREATION This item is scheduled to appear before the Park and Recreation Commission on April 25, 2006. The final recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council after the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. TRAILS The development includes the construction of a significant section of the City's comprehensive trail system along Bluff Creek as the public amenity. The applicant will also construct "connector" trails from their housing development to access the Bluff Creek trail. The applicant will be reimbursed for the material costs associated with the public trail only. As the creek trail moves north it will cross the creek near the location of the City's lift station. The Park and Recreation Director is recommending a trail head at this location including a parking lot and a rest/view area. Staff is also proposing to utilize this area for stormwater ponding needs associated with future road projects. PARKS Approximately half of The Preserve neighborhood is within the one-half mile park service area of a 4 -acre public park proposed to be constructed in the Pioneer Pass neighborhood. The northerly half of the proposed Preserve PUD would not be located within the one-half mile service area of the Pioneer Pass Park. As a part of the community identity for the PUD, an association park should be located in Outlot H. In order to increase the viability of this open space feature and the overall PUD, staff is recommending that Lots 1 and 2, Block 11 be removed and the resulting space incorporated into the amenity area. FIRE MARSHAL In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention division, the following are the fire code or City ordinance/policy requirements. The plan review is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 17 of 22 A 10 -foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City ordinance #9-1. 2. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 3. Temporary street signs shall be installed at street intersections once construction of the new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota State Fire Code Section 501.4. 4. Fire apparatus access roads 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 State Fire Code Section 503.2.3. Submit proposed street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 6. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 7. An additional fire hydrant will be required to be located at the intersection of Block 18, Lot 16. BUILDING COMMENTS The Building Official has reviewed the proposed project and offers the following recommendations for conditions of approval: 1. The developer must submit a list of proposed street names for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 2. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. 3. A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 4. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 5. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 6. The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 18 of 22 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and the attached findings of fact: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Rezoning of the land within the Plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Planned Unit Development -Residential, PUD -R; approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; and approval of the Preliminary Plat for "The Preserve" creating 155 lots, 15 outlots and right-of-way for public streets, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated 3-17-06 subject to the following conditions: 1. The drainage and utility easement over the northern portion of Lift Station #24 must be vacated and filed upon final approval of the final plat. 2. The "Existing Conditions" plan must be revised to show the drainage and utility easement that was granted to the City and contain trunk sanitary sewer and watermain. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that the proposed right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard meets Carver County's requirement. 4. The grading plan must identify the existing and proposed 100 -year floodplain. 5. Due to the anticipated timing of the final plat with respect to the timing of formal approvals from FEMA, the proposed lots that are within the current floodplain may be preliminary platted subject to FEMA approval of the LOMR. 6. Any grading within the floodplain will require a Conditional Use Permit. 7. Catch basins on each side of all public streets must be no more than 300 feet apart. 8. The proposed outlet for Wetland A must lie along the edge of the wetland. 9. The storm sewer from Pond 1 must outlet to the wetland north of Pond 2 in order to maintain hydrology to the wetland. 10. Storm sewer within Street J must be rerouted through the sideyards within Block 3 and outlet to Pond 2. 11. Hydraulic calculations must be submitted with the final plat submittals. 12. The legend on the final grading plan must identify the lowest floor elevation. 13. All buildings must be demolished before site grading commences. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 19 of 22 14. The final grading plan must show the top and bottom of wall elevations. 15. Any retaining wall four feet high or taller requires a building permit and must be designed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 16. The developer must work with staff to find the preferred sanitary sewer alignment west of Block 3 prior to City Council consideration of the final plat. 17. The plan must be revised to show an 18 -inch diameter watermain on the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the east property line. 18. The developer's engineer must submit a separate cost estimate for the watermain oversizing along Lyman Boulevard with the final plat submittals. 19. To the maximum extent practicable, the trail along the east side of Bluff Creek must be within close proximity of the manholes for the existing trunk sanitary sewer. 20. The lowest floor elevation of each unit must be shown on the utility plan. 21. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed and abandoned during site grading and utility installation. 22. The developer must pay $14,365.00 in cash with the final plat for the pro -rated cost for the preparation of the 2005 MUSA AUAR. 23. The outstanding assessments — $310,999.03 for 2005 MUSA roads and water, and $162,976.08 for Highway 101/Lyman Boulevard/Highway 312/Highway 212 must be paid with the final plat or reassessed to the lots and outlots for future development. 24. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. These fees are collected with the building permit and are based on the rates in effect at the time of building permit application. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment of these fees. 25. The City will construct Bluff Creek Boulevard Improvements to serve the development in conjunction with public improvement project No. 06-05. The property within the plat will be specially assessed for this project. 26. The development is subject to the arterial collector fee, which must be paid in cash with the final plat. 27. Streets F and K must extend past Lot 6, Block 13 and Lot 1, Block 17, respectively to provide adequate space for a vehicle to back out of the driveway and turn into the street. 28. Curbs on public streets will be high -back; curbs on private streets will be surmountable. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 20 of 22 29. The sidewalk along the north side of Street H between Street A and Street I, and along the north side of Street E must be eliminated. 30. Sidewalks adjacent to private streets and within privately owned outlots can be used by the public. 31. Eliminate Lots 1 and 2 Block 11, and Lots 1 through 5, Block 1. 32. The applicant shall revise the plan design to ensure adequate hydrology for Wetland 4 in the post -development condition. 33. If the applicant wishes to pursue an exemption for impact to Wetland A, the applicant shall furnish information to substantiate the exemption request. The applicant is advised that, even if impacts would be exempt from WCA, they may not be exempt from the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. 34. A wetland buffer with a minimum width of 16.5 feet shall be maintained around all wetlands and wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. All structures shall maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge. 35. All structures shall maintain a 50 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level of Bluff Creek. All structures shall maintain a minimum 40 -foot setback from the primary corridor. No alterations shall occur within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. The 50 -foot setback, primary corridor boundary, 40 -foot structure setback and 20 -foot grading setback shall be shown on the plans. 36. The applicant shall provide details for the proposed trail crossing of Bluff Creek. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits shall be obtained for all creek crossings. In addition, the trail alignment shall be revised to cross Bluff Creek in the same location as the sanitary sewer crossing. Immediately south of the creek crossing, the trail intersection shall be redesigned to avoid impact to the trees. 37. The plans shall be revised to provide a lower EOF for Wetland A and a path to the west for excess water that will not threaten proposed structures. 38. The EOF path for Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a more direct EOF route from Pond 1 to Wetland 4. 39. The proposed sanitary sewer and storm sewer outlet in the vicinity of Pond 2 shall be revised to ensure: 1. The runoff from the outlet will not compromise the integrity of the sanitary sewer; and 2. The sanitary sewer is not located below the normal water level (NOVL) of Pond 2. 40. The outfall from Pond 3 shall not outlet upslope of the proposed trail. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 21 of 22 41. The applicant shall clarify the avoidance of the drainageway to be preserved during the construction of Pond 4 and, if possible, redesign the pond to provide additional storage and treatment in lieu of avoiding the drainageway. 42. Pond 5 shall be constructed prior to the construction of all the areas that drain to it. 43. Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 44. 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: Tie of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days 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. 45. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 46. The applicant shall be proactive in addressing potential run-on problems in the vicinity of the extreme southeast corner of the property. This would potentially involve vertically tracking equipment up and down the graded faces of the slope to increase roughness and prevent rilling. Similar practices shall be used behind the homes along the central part of Outlot A. 47. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $242,760. 48. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase U Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 49. The applicant shall demonstrate that the outlet pipe installation and elevation will not impact the wetland. 50. If recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission, park fees shall be paid as per City ordinance at the rate of final platting. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 22 of 22 51. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 52. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 53. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 54. A turf plan shall be submitted to the City indicating the location of sod and seeding areas. 55. Buffer plantings shall be installed along the east property line in the rear yards of Lots 7 through 16, Block 3 and Lots 1 through 5, Block 10. 56. Applicant shall remove Emerald Queen Norway maple from the planting schedule. The applicant shall substitute another species with approval from the City. 57. A conservation easement shall be recorded over Outlot A. 58. The developer shall work with staff to develop and install appropriate markers at lot lines to demarcate the primary zone. 59. The applicant shall submit a plan for the revegetation of any areas of grading within Outlot A. The plan shall incorporate native plants and be consistent with the City's Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management Plan Appendix C. Special attention should be paid to areas with steep slopes (greater than 3:1). Staff recommends that the Hill Prairie planting list be used for the restoration." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat. 4. Reduced Copy Site Plan. 5. Affidavit of Mailing. 6. House Plans. g:\plan\2006 planning cases\06-14 the presm6staH report preliminary pud.doc City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: That's out of order. Let's move forward now with the motion. Would somebody like to state a motion please. Councilman Labatt: Mayor I would recommend that we approve the rezoning of the land within the plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate, A2, subject to the following plans dated 3-17- 06, and the conditions 1 through 64 with deletion of 60 and 62. And 63 should be amended to changing the H to N. 64 will be the motion or the condition that Kate just stated with the list of to do's. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Roger Knutson: Mayor? That also includes approval of the conditional use permit? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Roger Knutson: And adopting the findings of fact as presented by the Planning Commission as your own findings. Co una � Councilman Labatt: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Is there a second? / Councilman Lundquist: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion? Questions or clarifications. Hearing none, let's proceed with the vote. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approve the Rezoning of the land within the Plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate District, A2 to Planned Unit Development -Residential, PUD -R; approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; and approval of the Preliminary Plat for "The Preserve" creating 155 lots, 15 outlots and right-of-way for public streets, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated 3-17-06, subject to the following conditions: 1. The drainage and utility easement over the northern portion of Lift Station #24 must be vacated and filed upon final approval of the final plat. 2. The "Existing Conditions" plan must be revised to show the drainage and utility easement that was granted to the City and contain trunk sanitary sewer and watermain. 3. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that the proposed right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard meets Carver County's requirement. 57 0 CITY OF CHANHAS3EN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952227.1100 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: 952227.1130 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.achanhassen.nmus MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Kate Aanenson AICP, Community Development Director DATE: May 8, 2006 �//- SUBJ: The Preserve — Planning Case 06-14 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval of rezoning of land from A-2 to PUD R for a single-family subdivision of 155 lots and 15 Outlots. The application includes a Conditional Use Permit to work within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations with the Flood Plain. ACTION REQUIRED City Council approval requires a majority vote of the City Council. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 18, 2006, to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 recommending approval of the plat. The Commission discussed the look of the garages with the proximity to the street and wanted to include a condition that the garage be decorative with window. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the Park and Recreation Commission met and recommended that the two lots be eliminated in the area of the internal park to make it a larger. In addition, the 5 lots on the northwest side of the creek be eliminated to provide for a larger storm water pond and a trail head. Layout of the proposed pond is included in your packet. Mr. Rick Dorsey, representing the "Dorsey property," has hired an Engineer to evaluate the connection to Lyman Boulevard. Mr. Dorsey has requested that a connection from the The Preserve development occur on Lyman Boulevard. Staff's position is that the access to Lyman Boulevard should be on the Dorsey site. Attached is a letter from Jim Benshoof (representing W. Dorsey) and emails from the City and County Engineer with their position on this access. Finally, included in the staff report are two other small lot PUDs in the city, North Bay a9d Walnut Grove. These lots range from 3,100 square feet to 4,000 square feet. The Preserve lots average 8,000 square feet. The lots will have adequate room for additions to the lot (see lot diagram). The summary and verbatim minutes are item la of the City Council packet The City of Chanhassen 9 A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. Todd Gerhardt The Preserve May 8, 2006 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the motion approving subdivision, rezoning, and conditional use permit as specified on pages 18 through 23 of the staff report dated April 18, 2006. ATTACHMENTS 1. Project location and drainage area map. 2. Regional Storm Water Pond. 3. Proposed connection to Lyman Boulevard. 4. Email from Roger Gustafson to Paul Oehme dated April 27, 2006. 5. Memo from Jim Benshoof to Paul Oehme dated April 13, 2006. 6. Lot sizes. 7. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated April 18, 2006. gAplan\2006 planning cases\06-14 the prmme\execu[ive summnry.dm s SrAm Pam [ UYMAN 0 CF,LA-1 CELL FjC-jUR-e 2: (Z-E-6/lO v/tt- 57DQNl Uiit17EK QDND .%VFF c9eeK FOP 0 Rcv �[./i ENEMY q.ISSIP OEViCE,y��gf OV T 1D $L r- C y R o�� 1 uta rc o o.a ❑[j �0 ,1 { �gz 9 0 acFi From: Roger Gustafson [mailto:rgustafs@co.carver.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 4:57 PM To: Oehme, Paul Cc: Bill Weckman Subject: RE: 2005 MUSA - Future North-South Connector Roadway Intersection with Lyman Boulevard Paul, I have reviewed your email that follows and its attachment. Bill Weckman, Assistant County Engineer, has also reviewed your email and has briefed me about his discussion with you about it. Based on my review and the comments of staff, I am in agreement with your opinion regarding the future street intersection location. Roger M. Gustafson, P.E. Carver County Engineer 11360 Highway 212 West Suite 1 Cologne, MN 55322-0300 952-466-5206 (direct) 952-466-5200 (general) 952-466-5223 (office fax) "The unauthorized disclosure or interceptions of e-mail is a federal crime. See 18U.S.CSEC.2517(4). This e-mail is intended only for the use of those whom it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under the law. It you have received this e-mail in error, do not distribute or copy it. Return it immediately to the sender with attachments, if any, and notify the sender by telephone." -----Original Message ----- From: Oehme, Paul [mailto:poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 8:55 AM To: Roger Gustafson Cc: Aanenson, Kate Subject: 2005 MUSA - Future North-South Connector Roadway Intersection with Lyman Boulevard Good Morning Roger, I would like to receive some feed back from you on a future access points on Lyman in conjunction with the 2005 MUSA area. As you are aware several development plans have been submitted for this area. The City needs to identify a preferred location for the north collector roadway. As I have indicated to you previously the City feels the preferred location for the north collector roadway is opposite the intersection of Sunset Trial. The AUAR for the 2005 MUSA identified the need for a roadway to connect Lyman Boulevard to the future Bluff Creek Boulevard. The AUAR indicated the north -south connector roadway would intersect Lyman Boulevard between Audubon Road and Powers Boulevard. With new developments being proposed in the 2005 MUSA, City staff needs to determine a preferred location for the north collector road at Lyman Blvd. A number of factors were considered to determining the best location for the new collector roadway intersection with Lyman Boulevard. These factors include: ✓ Existing topography ✓ Site lines and stop site distances ✓ Access spacing ✓ Existing intersections and driveways on Lyman Blvd. ✓ Proposed development plans and potential land use ✓ Existing and potential future roadway features along Lyman Boulevard. Based on these factors, intersecting the new connector roadway with Lyman Boulevard at Sunset Trail would be beneficial for a number of reasons. • This intersection location would provide a four -leg intersection at Sunset Trail and eliminate the need for another three -leg (Tee) intersection along Lyman Boulevard. • The intersection location would be approximately 1250 feet from Powers Boulevard and 2150 feet from Audubon Road, therefore providing adequate spacing between both intersections. • Based on a field visit, this intersection location appears to have adequate sight distance along Lyman Boulevard from both directions. The crest of the vertical curve on Lyman Boulevard is located just east of the proposed intersection location. It is anticipated the sight distance to the east could be increased if the crest vertical curve was lengthened at the time Lyman Boulevard is reconstructed. The Dorsey property, on which the north collector would be constructed, is not likely to be developed until 2011. Hopefully Lyman Blvd. would be improved prior to development of this property. • Based on topography south of Lyman Boulevard the location opposite Sunset Trail would be preferred for a north collector road. • The proposed Degler development west of this intersection is not recommended to accommodate a north -south connector roadway based on land use. Also, this development has been submitted to the City for review and a collector roadway through this development is not recommended based on several design restraints. Based on this information, the City's preferred intersection location for the north -south connector roadway is at the Sunset Trail intersection. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. The Degler development, The Preserve, is scheduled to be considered by the City Council on May 8th. Any feed back from you prior to the meeting would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Paul Oehme, P.E. Director of Public Works /Cdy Engineer City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ph. #952-227-1169 Fax. # 952-227-1170 Memorandum 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, Maple Plain, MN 55359 Wencl< Phone: 763-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 To: Paul Oehme, City ofChanhassen From: Jim Benshoof q0 ` Date: April 13, 2006 lI Subject: North-South Connector Road in 2005 AUAR Area Wenck File # 1611-04 PURPOSE As you are aware, we have been reviewing plans for development and roadway improvements in the 2005 AUAR area in the context of how these plans relate to future development on properties owned by the Dorsey and Fox families. This memorandum focuses on plans established through the AUAR for a north -south road to connect Lyman Boulevard with the planned east -west collector road. The urgency to address this subject at the present time arises because the City Planning Commission will be addressing proposed plans for the Preserve Development at their meeting on April 18. This proposed development has about r/4 mile of frontage on Lyman Boulevard. The current Preserve Development plans do not account for plans prepared by the City's consultant in August 2005, which show the north -south connector being aligned across the eastern portion of the Preserve property, with an intersection on Lyman Boulevard in the northeastern corner of the Preserve property. Considering the preceding points, it is highly important for staff and the Planning Commission to address plans for the north -south connector in conjunction with plans for the Preserve Development. This memorandum is intended to assist the City's considerations relative to the following three aspects of the planned north -south connector: • Location along Lyman Boulevard of the intersection with the north -south connector. • Basic alignment of the north -south connector south of Lyman Boulevard. • Location of the intersection of the north -south connector with the east -west collector, in relationship to the access road for the planned Liberty at Creekside Development. BACKGROUND As further plans are established for the north -south connector, it is important to account for prior studies and plans regarding this roadway. From information we have obtained and reviewed, principal prior steps in planning for this roadway are as follows: a) 2003 AUAR. On pages 2 and 3 of Appendix 5 for the AUAR (Traffic Analysis), the north -south connector road is described in a basic manner through the following sentences: "An east -west collector roadway is proposed to intersect Audubon Road at Butternut Drive and the proposed Powers Boulevard at the southwest -bound TH 212/312 ramp, which will be referred to as the Butternut Collector. A connector Memorandum to Paul Oehme, City of Chanhassen Subject: North-South Connector Road in 2005 AUAR Area Page 2 of 5 April 13, 2006 Road is proposed in the northeast quadrant connecting the Butternut Collector to Lyman Boulevard between Audubon Road and Powers Boulevard." Figure 2 in this document shows the north -south connector intersecting Lyman Boulevard about 1400 feet east of Audubon Road and about 800 feet west of Sunset Trail. b) 2004 Feasibility Report. Page 3 in this report includes the following statements regarding the north -south connector roadway: "the final horizontal and vertical alignment of the roadway will need to be coordinated with the future developers of the project area; ...... The roadway is proposed to be constructed with a two (2) lane section to the City standard 36 -foot width for commercial roadways with 12 -foot lanes and 6 -foot shoulders ...... It is proposed that an 8 -foot wide bituminous trail and a 6 -foot wide concrete sidewalk will be constructed along the roadway and that an 80 - foot wide right-of-way will be dedicated along the entire length of the roadway to allow for the construction of the sidewalk/trails.....We have assumed that this roadway will be built by the developer(s) of the area. No costs for these improvements are included in this report as developers will fund 100% of the associated costs." C) Undated drawing prepared by the Kimley-Horn firm with a sub -title, "Roadway Project Summary." This drawing may be correlated with the 2004 Feasibility Report because it lists roadway projects that are numbered in the same manner as the feasibility report. This drawing shows the north -south connector intersecting Lyman Boulevard at the property line between the Dorsey property and the Preserve Development site, about 1200 feet east of Audubon Road and 1000 feet west of Sunset Trail. d) Drawing prepared by the Kimley-Horn firm entitled, City of Chanhassen 2005 MUSA Area Expansion Improvements, City Project No. 04-05, East-West Collector Roadway. We understand this drawing was included in actions taken by the City Council on August 22, 2005, to approve engineering work for the east -west collector roadway. This drawing shows the north -south connector roadway to be aligned completely across the Preserve Development property. For most of the length, the east right-of-way line would be the property line between the Dorsey and Preserve properties. The intersection on Lyman Boulevard would be just west of the location shown in the drawing referenced in preceding point c). e) Current Proposed Plan for the Preserve Development. Contrary to preceding item d), the current proposed plan for the Preserve Development makes no provisions for the north -south connector roadway. For the portion of this site east of Bluff Creek, the current plan would provide no access on Lyman Boulevard. All access for this development area would be to/from the south (an intersection on the east -west collector road), except for a local street that would "stub" at the Dorsey property line and presumably be extended into the Dorsey property when that property develops. Memorandum to Paul Oehme, City of Chanhassen Subject: North-South Connector Road in 2005 AUAR Area Page 3 of 5 April 13, 2006 FACTORS AFFECTING LOCATION OF INTERSECTION ON LYMAN BOULEVARD As further plans are established regarding the north -south connector, it is important to consider factors that influence where this roadway could intersect Lyman Boulevard. Lyman Boulevard is a County State -Aid Highway, which functions as an A -Minor Arterial and has a current speed limit of 50 mph. Relative to engineering standards for Lyman Boulevard, the two factors that principally affect the location of a future intersection with the north -south connector roadway are as follows: a) Spacing of intersections along Lyman Boulevard. Considering the existing and future characteristics for this roadway, the County's standard is for intersections along Lyman Boulevard to be spaced not more closely than 1/, mile. b) Sight distances. Considering the 50 mph speed limit for Lyman Boulevard, engineering standards published by Mn/DOT indicate that intersections sight distances of at least 1,000 feet should be provided. This means that a motorist approaching Lyman Boulevard on the north -south connector should be able to see vehicles on Lyman Boulevard at least 1,000 feet to the east and west. From detailed sight distance measurements we performed, we determined that this minimum 1,000 foot sight distance presently only is available along the frontage of the Preserve site. East of that site, along the frontage of the Dorsey property, the hill that crests near Sunset Trail causes sight distance to/from the east to be less than 1,000 feet. We understand that plans for upgrading Lyman Boulevard likely will include lowering the crest of the hill near Sunset Trail to improve sight distances. However, since no engineering plans yet have been prepared for upgrading Lyman Boulevard, it is uncertain to what extent additional locations on Lyman Boulevard will meet the 1,000 foot minimum sight distance criterion in the future. NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES IF CURRENT PROPOSED PLAN FOR PRESERVE DEVELOPMENT IS APPROVED In our judgment, the following serious negative impacts would occur if the current proposed plan for the Preserve Development were approved: a) Such action would prevent implementation of the plan for the north -south connector as shown in the drawing associated with actions by the City Council on August 22, 2005, to approve engineering work for the east -west collector. As previously stated, the current plans for the Preserve Development include no provisions for the north - south connector. b) Implementation of the north -south connector could not occur until at least 2011. If the current Preserve Development plans were approved, the north -south connector would have to be fully aligned across some portion of the Dorsey property. As we Memorandum to Paul Oehme, City of Chanhassen Subject: North-South Connector Road in 2005 AUAR Area Page 4 of 5 April 13, 2006 understand, this property presently has an Ag Preserve designation, which cannot be changed to allow development and road construction until 2011. c) All the burden regarding right-of-way dedication and construction cost for this roadway would fall to the Dorsey property. In our judgment, this is an extraordinary burden on one property owner, considering the function of this roadway to serve the entire 2005 AUAR area. c) Provision of the roadway in the Preserve plans that would "stub" at the Dorsey property line virtually requires that development plans for the Dorsey property include a street that would connect with this street in the Preserve Development. Such a requirement causes a significant constraint on potential development plans for the Dorsey property. e) Opportunities would be lost to construct an intersection of the north -south connector roadway on Lyman Boulevard where existing sight distances are satisfactory. All remaining locations for a potential intersection have existing sight distances that are less than applicable engineering standards. We understand that planned upgrading of Lyman Boulevard will include sight distance improvements, but the extent of such improvements is uncertain at this time. f) The intersection of the north -south connector with the east -west collector would not be aligned with the planned access road for the Liberty at Creekside Development. Two significant benefits would be achieved if these two roadways intersect the east - west collector at the same location: 1) More convenient access would be provided for residents of the Liberty at Creekside development. These motorists would be able to proceed in a continuous manner across the east -west collector in traveling to/from Lyman Boulevard. 2) Safety and efficiency of traffic operations on the east -west collector would be improved. If the north -south connector were not aligned with the access road for the Liberty at Creekside development, motorists traveling between this development and Lyman Boulevard would have to operate on a portion of the east -west collector. g) A risk would arise for homeowners in the Preserve Development that the north -south connector would be constructed just inside the Dorsey property at its property line with the Preserve Development. If this were to happen, all the lots in the Preserve Development that abut the Dorsey property line would have roads both in the front and rear of their lots. Memorandum to Paul Oehme, City of Chanhassen Subject: North-South Connector Road in 2005 AUAR Area Page 5 of 5 April 13, 2006 RECOMMENDATIONS Considering the major negative consequences pertaining to the planned north -south connector road that would occur if the City approved the current proposed plans for the Preserve Development, we suggest that Planning Commission action on the current proposed Preserve Development plans be deferred in order to accomplish further studies regarding the planned north -south connector road. Three specific items we would suggest be included in such further studies are: a) Potential for this north -south connector road to be aligned through the Preserve Development property to intersect Lyman Boulevard either at the east property line or at another location to the west. b) Potential for the north -south connector to intersect the east -west collector at a location aligned opposite the access road for the planned Liberty at Creekside Development. c) Potential arrangements whereby the costs associated with "over sizing" this road to meet the City's collector standards, as compared to the standards for local streets, are borne by the City, instead of the individual property owner. I welcome any questions or comments you have about the points addressed in this memorandum and look forward to continued communications to seek outcomes for this north -south connector roadway that effectively meet the needs of the City and affected property owners. TL '3W 'Gll'dU '01'J35 A t/l MS 31LL A 3M 31� - 4GZE9l SA11 3.MDOatS _` LL V o rK,nr__4$ Ts9 5 4 i8 Ntc.ndx J 3h x.eui.w ' 8 S, o� z O b IIs U I N / M //^ rnfn w ; ,33 /a q�/ § "s a a gp�p§�tl5 Koo s8 s -L — _j J 1 q /� ' 3 xo.,,m ¢5 Wd§ S N p— _ k`s 4 U = I�•cN,.o/ / ,�p'1'/.s c °D s''�` a 1 $ . c .w = 3 —.T , �se� of l ^a4: 1 rc � �°'b`n\ � `3i1 ��_�. `\ .�•M s sok y N i11 i` W - t_—w A 5 s` •8 s z a\ xr '6" s = ` "�\ d ,.L`°'` 5• � ��. I a a y+ k € aa vi -- �mae, — ti r1 os �8 � • I $ I�M9 bM�f� �/ P -x I • _^ obi d 3�Yo _n�. n L ssiv c z N sus E ° -� � oa �Id r �•— � � / "nvs _.yi� w _r•' � 4 � e � m�^§ KK W> CC 1I ILL�� -- y-3.��•a�uc'.4Gw-ww 'D—;F. �:I az is�/1gaI1 °s Is�y& �Y�a$ Gn1—„M�SCs . l a/A -�ta�4-F0. a IMjp0N.P/,N MGOd' t �'�• ''�a ' i=AI,1 S• o„k '9Ya` g CID a -IS = R 6 fi IS m �t ,�„ izs.4u •t ; ;S 8 u.Nin.w R ryz Ia a K.It`n-FlF I$8a�ry� 1 \ V1 N ° rre 9c• �1 6 0) 00 'ZF L--Y^.'gw —� ki �^a � •.�i.. 8 �=Y= as �? ;fig O ��O�s. �gi ""� RI Ra r — — Z`ff — — �. = I "`i mal x�w'�w � \� � s N -s >� y s� .m� s, ae % ��< � � =•§� ..I •.'-„ p \X GTC- Ail llfli„M(r450Y= a 'O •q. �� A'i I I8 I •�, N-„„t,_�,IE g IRR a.s• �4 W'89 h J •,s\ V _, "% L--�.�w— L� �: � ro �' RI '•. N •. �gs�'s, �Rn,N'' „a'�O .s`• ^�� I ? �tF — . � By 4•.a °^ al11' f' �'1 � 8x8. 6—`LOISz � d ——w•�v�y �3 '�,0 +� ro ~�to-i4'.. �`°.11' 0� `f° � �' �.$ ZJ r — — �l ww� uu4w� � • .4 4 N 4�a ^' •' , � .P i'S °� M�` Q �.di'rQ �8 J 0 b 4 q 'b�OD .S^336MIY la J N tg."� ay '• '' le �+\�\ .s"f zY N Ai , ', O a'�a �^ qa s IT A 40 t 1 11co st est �a ��. ,.> �, ,• �o- < �.� l �' is,�•! g� _5S`�r 9,<r?0 P�\ a8t?•,'0)as'�/ =[vIfc� f� i,os •'^ ,% rrdGaun- `wsm_ R r � OD 4 In v WS a 18 ar<— ��/ Vv�Ot • a e 18R ^ G� / R �� e [ m btl a gid= o ¢�xa•o �`J 8 / z� ssS Sm w Y uC b1 YE A./1 •l "c ZONING LOT SIZE RSF 15, 000 s .ft. PUD -R SF detached 15,000 sq ft average 11,000 sq ft smallest RLM low and medium 9,000 sq ft single family density 7,260 sq ft twin homes R-4 mixed low density 15,000 sq ft single family 10,000 sq ft twin homes R-8 Mixed Medium 7,500 sq ft twin homes Density 5,000 sq ft town houses PUD -R detached or No minimum attached Page 1 of I Hennepin County Property Map Print Page Hennepin County Property Map READ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER INFORMATION Property ID Approximate Property Approximate Property Perimeter Area 20-028-24-41-0090 335 ft. 5,100 sq.ft. = 0.12 acres Property Address Market Value Total Tax (2006) 5916 RUSSELL AVE S MINNEAPOLIS, MN $205,500.00 $2,417.38 55410 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can c disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hen does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of information or its derivatives. Provided by Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department. http://wwwl3.co.hennepin.mn.us/publicparcelimage/Print.aspx?CMD=MT&INUGEUR... 4/28/2006 H z U I-1 04 P4 a H A W E"4 ISI Cn CITY OF CHANHASSEN STAFF REPORT PC DATE: April 18„ 2006 CC DATE: May 8, 2006 REVIEW DEADLINE: May 8, 2006 CASE #: 06-14 BY: AF, KA, TH, ML, JS, ST 07 PROPOSAL: Request for Rezoning of property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of 155 single family lots, 15 outlots, and private streets and public right-of-way; and Conditional Use Permit for alterations within the flood plain and development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District — THE PRESERVE. LOCATION: 1630 Lyman Boulevard APPLICANT: The Pemtom Land Company Gayle & Lois Degler 7697 Anagram Drive 1630 Lyman Boulevard Eden Prairie, MN 55345 Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-937-0716 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential — Medium Density (net density range 4.0 — 8.0 units/acre) ACREAGE: 79.86 gross acres 31.33 net acres DENSITY: 1.92 units/acre gross; 5 units/acre net SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a rezoning to PUD, subdivision and site plan approval to build 155 single family lots with a conditional use permit for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District as well as grading within the floodplain. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 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 site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The City has limited discretion in approving or denying conditional use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi judicial decision. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 2 of 23 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The property is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Residential - Medium Density as well as parks and open space over the Bluff Creek corridor. Appropriate zonings for this land use designation include Planned Unit Development — Residential (PUD -R), Mixed Low Density Residential, if twin homes (R4), Mixed Medium Density Residential (R8) or Low and Medium Density Residential (RLM). The applicant is requesting a PUD zoning with a single-family detached housing unit. While this is an applicable use in this zoning district, typically the City has seen the use of attached housing. This will be the first application of single family. The PUD prescribes the standards for development. Staff is recommending approval of the rezoning to PUD as the subdivision with the conditions. On December 8, 2003, the City approved the 2005 MUSA Alternate Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). This document was intended to review and provide mitigation measures for all development within the 2005 MUSA area. At the time of development review, each property within the 2005 MUSA area is required to reimburse the City for their propositional share, based on the land area, of the costs for completion of the AUAR. This property is responsible for $15,776 as its portion of the 2005 AUAR. Below is a breakdown of the residential land uses and the number of housing units approved under the AUAR: Property Net # units units/acres De ler Dean 40.0 n/a Degler Gayle 30.0 240.0 8.0 Dorsey 30.0 240.0 8.0 Fox, Jeff 21.0 168.0 8.0 Fox Family 38.0 304.0 8.0 Town Country #2 30.0 135.0 4.5 Town Country #1 79.0 450.0 5.7 Peterson, Sever 42.0 120.0 2.9 Park 20.0 n/a Laurent 17.0 n/a 347.0 1,657.0 6.4 AUAR Assumption 350 1,584 The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 3 of 23 The next table is a summary of the developments in the 2005 MUSA that have recently been approved. Development Gross Acres Net Acres Net Densi Total units Liberty on Bluff Creek 91.02 39.51 11.24 444 Liberty at Creekside 36.01 13.54 10.64 146 Pioneer Pass 120 28.11 2.88 81 The Preserve 80 31.33 4.55 155 Total 112.49 Av . 732 Total 826 Based on the AUAR there is an additional potential 758 housing units available. APPLICABLE REGUATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions (18-57 Streets) Chapter 20, Article IV, Conditional Use Permits Chapter 20, Article V, Floodplain Overlay District Chapter 20, Article VII, Planned Unit Development District Chapter 20, Article XXQ, Bluff Creek Overlay District REZONING The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 80 acres from A2 to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The project consists of 155 single-family homes. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit density clustering for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of density. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development and preserves the Bluff Creek corridor subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. • The plan should seek to establish sufficient land to provide a full range of housing opportunities. • The City will seek opportunities to provide transitions between different uses of different types. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 4 of 23 • Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the City to provide services. The proposed rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following housing goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • A balanced housing supply with housing available for people of all income levels. • A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life -cycle. • Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs. Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property: DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Sec. 20-508. Standards and guidelines for single-family attached or cluster -home PUDs. (a) Generally. Single-family attached, cluster, zero lot line, townhouses and similar type dwelling types may be allowed on sites designed for low, medium or high density residential uses by the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. (b) Minimum lot sizes. There shall be no minimum lot size; however, in no case shall net density exceed guidelines established by the City comprehensive plan. (c) Setback standards/structures and parking: (1) PUD exterior: 50 feet. (2) Interior public right-of-way: 30 feet.* *The 30 -foot front yard setback may be waived by the City Council when it is demonstrated that environmental protection will be enhanced. In these instances, a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet shall be maintained. (3) Other setbacks: Established by PUD agreement. (d) Protection and preservation of natural features. The applicant must demonstrate that the flexibility provided by the PUD is used to protect and preserve natural features such as tree stands, wetlands, ponds, and scenic views. These areas are to be permanently protected as public or private tracts or protected by permanently recorded easements. (e) Landscaping plan. An overall landscaping plan is required. The plan shall contain the following: (1) Boulevard plantings. Located in front yards shall require a mix of over -story trees and other plantings consistent with the site. Landscaped berms shall be provided to screen the site from major roadways, railroads and more intensive land uses. In place of mass grading for building The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 5 of 23 pads and roads, stone or decorative blocks retaining walls shall be employed as required to preserve mature trees and the site's natural topography. (2) Exterior landscaping and double -fronted lots. Landscaped berms shall be provided to buffer the site and lots from major roadways, railroads, and more intensive uses. Similar measures shall be provided for double -fronted lots. Where necessary to accommodate this landscaping, additional lot depth may be required. (3) Foundation and yard plantings. A minimum budget for foundation plants shall be established and approved by the City. As each parcel is developed in the PUD, the builder shall be required to install plant materials meeting or exceeding the required budget prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy or provide financial guarantees acceptable to the City. (4) Tree preservation. Tree preservation is a primary goal of the PUD. A detailed tree survey should be prepared during the design of the PUD and the plans should be developed to maximize tree preservation. (f) Architectural standards. The applicant should demonstrate that the PUD will provide for a high level of architectural design and building materials. While this requirement is not intended to minimize design flexibility, a set of architectural standards should be prepared for City approval. The primary purpose of this section is to assure the City that high quality design will be employed and that home construction can take place without variances or impact to adjoining lots. The PUD agreement should include the following: (1) Standards for exterior architectural treatments. (2) Prohibition against freestanding garages may be required by the City when it is felt that unattached garages will be difficult to accommodate due to small lot sizes. If an attached garage is to be converted to living space at some time in the future, the applicant will have to demonstrate that there is sufficient room to accommodate a two -car garage without variances to obtain a permit. (3) Guidelines regulating the placement of air conditioners, dog kennels, storage buildings, and other accessory uses that could potentially impact adjoining parcels due to small lot sizes. Required Standard Proposed Standards Lyman Boulevard 50 feet 50 feet Exterior Eastern 50 feet 50 feet (creek on west) (Perimeter) Setback Front Yard garage side 30 feet may be reduced to 20 25 feet feet Front Yard on corner lots 30 feet may be reduced to 20 20 feet feet Side Yard Established by PUD 5/10 feet minimum 15 between units The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 6 of 23 The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 30 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 30 percent site coverage. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The plat proposed 155 lots. The subdivision will be built in phases with the first phase adjacent to the new collector road, Bluff Creek Boulevard. There is a combination of public and private streets. All of the lots abut either the public or private streets. The lots meet all of the standards of the PUD. There is no minimum lot size although the average lot size is 8,000 square feet. The developer proposes six to ten home styles with three different options for each style (see attachments). The homes range in size from the smallest at 35' x 55' to the largest at 40' x 56'. There is room for additions, three -season porches or decks of approximately 600 square feet. The association should establish bylaws and covenants for regulating the placement of air conditioners, dog kennels, storage buildings, fences and other accessory uses that could potentially impact adjoining parcels due to small lot sizes as prescribed in the PUD ordinance. Two changes to the plat that the staff is recommending is the elimination of lots in two areas. Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 need to be eliminated to provide a larger private park. Based on the number of dwelling units and the PUD requirement for greater amenities, the park should have better visibility and be larger. The other area where lots should be eliminated is the area north of the Creek (Lots 1 through 5, Block 1). The majority of the lots are in the flood plain and are adjacent to the City's lift station which emits odors. Staff is proposing a trail head for the creek and a pond to handle additional runoff from the widening of Bluff Creek. The trail crossing in this area should provide the best access to the proposed trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard to provide access to the future school. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site contains a small wetland on the east side and several along Bluff Creek on the west side. The central portion of the site is generally the highest and the slopes along the north and east Required Standard Proposed Standards Rear Yard Established by PUD 15 feet Hard Surface Coverage * 30 % averaged over the entire site 30 % averaged over the entire site Wetland: Buffer and buffer setback 16.5 feet and 40 feet 16.5 feet and 40 feet Bluff Creek Primary zone boundary 40 feet with the first 20 feet as buffer 40 feet with the first 20 feet as buffer Minimum lot size none Average 8,000 square feet Public street 60 foot right of way 31 foot paved back to back 60 foot right of way 32 foot paved Private street 40 foot right of way 24 paved 40 foot right of way 28 paved surface The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 30 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 30 percent site coverage. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The plat proposed 155 lots. The subdivision will be built in phases with the first phase adjacent to the new collector road, Bluff Creek Boulevard. There is a combination of public and private streets. All of the lots abut either the public or private streets. The lots meet all of the standards of the PUD. There is no minimum lot size although the average lot size is 8,000 square feet. The developer proposes six to ten home styles with three different options for each style (see attachments). The homes range in size from the smallest at 35' x 55' to the largest at 40' x 56'. There is room for additions, three -season porches or decks of approximately 600 square feet. The association should establish bylaws and covenants for regulating the placement of air conditioners, dog kennels, storage buildings, fences and other accessory uses that could potentially impact adjoining parcels due to small lot sizes as prescribed in the PUD ordinance. Two changes to the plat that the staff is recommending is the elimination of lots in two areas. Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 need to be eliminated to provide a larger private park. Based on the number of dwelling units and the PUD requirement for greater amenities, the park should have better visibility and be larger. The other area where lots should be eliminated is the area north of the Creek (Lots 1 through 5, Block 1). The majority of the lots are in the flood plain and are adjacent to the City's lift station which emits odors. Staff is proposing a trail head for the creek and a pond to handle additional runoff from the widening of Bluff Creek. The trail crossing in this area should provide the best access to the proposed trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard to provide access to the future school. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site contains a small wetland on the east side and several along Bluff Creek on the west side. The central portion of the site is generally the highest and the slopes along the north and east The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 7 of 23 sides of the property are moderate; slopes along the west and south sides of the property are steeper. Lift Station #24 is in the northwest corner of the property and partially lies within a drainage and utility easement. Upon final approval of The Preserve, this lift station will be within a platted outlot that will be deeded to the City. The overhead power lines along the south side of Lyman Boulevard will remain. EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY The existing drainage and utility easement that Lift Station #24 partially lies within must be vacated and filed after final plat approval. This easement will not be necessary since the lift station will lie within an outlot that will be deeded to the City. Staff will process the easement vacation with the final plat. The existing 100 -foot wide (measured from the centerline of Lyman Boulevard) drainage and utility easement along the eastern 650 feet of the property will remain. This easement was granted to the Freeburgs and Dorseys in 1979 for underground drainage tile. The "Existing Conditions" plan must be revised to show the drainage and utility easement that was granted to the City and contain trunk sanitary sewer and watermain. Outlots containing public utilities — watermain, sanitary sewer and storm sewer that conveys runoff from a public street — must have blanket drainage and utility easements over the outlot. Private utilities (e.g. storm sewer that only conveys runoff from a private street) within outlots shall be owned and maintained by the association. The preliminary plat includes a 60 -foot wide south one-half right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard/CSAH 18. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that the proposed right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard meets Carver County's requirement. Public streets will be within a 60 -Foot wide right-of-way. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The grading plan must identify the existing and proposed 100 -year floodplain. Due to the anticipated timing of the final plat with respect to the timing of formal approvals from FEMA, the proposed lots that are within the current floodplain may be preliminary platted subject to FEMA approval of the LOMR. These lots cannot be final platted until the LOMR is approved. Any grading within the floodplain will require a conditional use permit. The grading plan identifies five ponds within The Preserve; all proposed ponds outlet to Bluff Creek. Pond 1 lies in the northeast corner of the plat and will treat runoff from the northeast portion of the plat. Pond 2 is proposed on the northern portion of the property, east of Bluff Creek and will treat runoff from the north -central portion of the plat. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 8 of 23 Pond 3 lies in the northwest portion of the plat and will treat runoff from the five units west of Bluff Creek. The City may acquire additional ponding capacity for Pond 3 for a portion of Lyman Boulevard and to meet the regional ponding needs. These details will be finalized prior to final plat consideration. Pond 4 is proposed in the southwest comer of the plat. Pond 4 will treat runoff from the portion of the development that lies within 1200 feet north of Bluff Creek Boulevard and "Wetland A" on the east side of the property. Pond 5 lies south of Bluff Creek Boulevard, east of Bluff Creek. This pond is being constructed with the City's 2005 MUSA streets and utilities project and was designed to treat some runoff from this development. The developer's engineer has been working with Kimley Horn, the City's consultant for the 2005 MUSA project, to ensure that discharge to Pond 5 from the development is within Kimley Horn's design criteria. The storm sewer configuration will change slightly due to the proposed site plan changes. Catch basins on each side of all public streets must be no more than 300 feet apart. The proposed outlet for Wetland A must lie along the edge of the wetland. The storm sewer from Pond 1 must outlet to the wetland north of Pond 2 in order to maintain hydrology to the wetland. Storm sewer within Street J must be rerouted through the sideyards within Block 3 and outlet to Pond 2. The developer has submitted hydrology calculations for the proposed development for the proposed site for staff review. Hydraulic calculations must be submitted with the final plat submittals. All buildings must be demolished before site grading commences. A detailed grading plan review will be completed when the final, 50 -scale grading plans are submitted. The legend on the final grading plan must identify the lowest floor elevation. Storm Water Management The outlet pipe for Wetland A is proposed to extend into the wetland. The applicant must demonstrate that the outlet pipe installation and elevation will not impact the wetland. The emergency overflow (EOF) elevation and route for Wetland A are unacceptable. The existing overflow for this wetland is to the west and then to the north, outletting in the approximate location of Wetlands 1 and 4. The current overflow elevation is approximately 823.4. As proposed, the wetland would need to get to an elevation of 927.5 to overflow into Street A. In that event, the homes on adjacent to Wetland A would likely have water in their basements. The plans must be revised to provide a lower EOF and a path to the west for excess water that will not threaten proposed structures. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 9 of 23 The EOF path for Pond 1 around the end of Street J, immediately south of Lyman Boulevard, is not acceptable. The path should be revised to provide a more direct EOF route from Pond 1 to Wetland 4. The proposed sanitary sewer and storm sewer outlet in the vicinity of Pond 2 must be revised to ensure: 1. The runoff from the outlet will not compromise the integrity of the sanitary sewer; and 2. The sanitary sewer is not located below the normal water level (NWL) of Pond 2. The outfall from Pond 3 should not outlet upslope of the proposed trail. It is unclear why Pond 4 is designed to avoid impacts to the non -wetland drainageway that leads to Bluff Creek. The applicant should clarify this avoidance and, if possible, redesign the pond to provide additional storage and treatment in lieu of avoiding the drainageway. Storm water from the southeast corner of the site and the East-West Collector drains to Pond 5. Pond 5 must be constructed prior to the construction of all areas draining to it. Easements Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. Erosion and Sediment Control A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is needed for the development and must be completed prior to applying for the NPDES permit. It is recommended the SWPPP be submitted to the City and SWCD for review prior to final approval. Stable emergency overflows (EOF) are required for all ponds. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A standard detail should be shown on the plans. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets. Blocks 17, 18, 19, 20 show details of the storm sewer going to Pond 5. Details will be needed for a stable outlet and temporary sediment pond location for that area. 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 Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days 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, The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 10 of 23 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. The applicant should be proactive in addressing potential run-on problems in the vicinity of the extreme southeast comer of the property. This would potentially involve vertically tracking equipment up and down the graded faces of the slope to increase roughness and prevent rilling. Similar practices should be used behind the homes along the central part of Outlot A. The plans should be revised to show all slope grades longer than 75 feet being broken up. Curbside inlet control details should be provided. Wimco-type inlet controls should be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of inlets. Also, there are several off road catch basins proposed on the site that will also need inlet controls, details are also needed for these. Typical building lot controls should be shown on the plan in a standard detail. These controls should include perimeter controls (silt fence), rock driveways, street sweeping, inlet control and temporary mulch after final grade and prior to issuing the Certificate of Occupancy. The proposed storm water ponds should be used as temporary sediment basins during mass grading. The pond should be excavated prior to disturbing up gradient areas. Plans should show the routing of water to the temporary basins, (Ponds 2, 4, 5) especially with the steep slopes and the proposed ponds below the hill. Diversion berms/ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. The outlet could be a temporary perforated standpipe and rock cone. An outlet detail for the temporary basins should be provided. 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 medium density residential development rates of $1,600/acre. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 40.46 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are $64,736. 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. Medium density residential developments have a connection charge of $4,400 per developable acre. This results in a water quantity fee of approximately $178,024 for the proposed development. SWMP Credits This project proposes the construction of four NURP ponds. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided to treat runoff. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 11 of 23 for areas that are dedicated to the City for ponding, parks, wetlands, or right-of-way for county roads or local arterial roadways. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $242,760. Other Agencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. RETAINING WALLS The plans identify a proposed retaining wall on the south side of Outlot B. The final grading plan must show the top and bottom of wall elevations. Any retaining wall four feet high or taller requires a building permit and must be designed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. UTILITIES The plan shows lateral sanitary sewer and watermain extending from the trunk utilities constructed with the 2005 MUSA project. Due to maintenance difficulty and infiltration potential, the lateral sanitary sewer west of Block 3 must be located away from the stormwater ponds so that an OSHA safe trench can be excavated. One option would be to extend the sanitary sewer along the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the sanitary sewer that will serve Block 1. The developer must work with staff to find the preferred alignment prior to City Council consideration of the final plat. The plan must be revised to show an 18 -inch diameter watermain on the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the east property line. Installation of this trunk watermain negates the need for the 8 -inch lateral between the northern edge of Outlot D to the existing trunk watermain. The developer will be reimbursed the cost difference between an 8 -inch lateral and the 18 -inch trunk watermain. The developer's engineer must submit a separate cost estimate for this watermain oversizing with the final plat submittals. To the maximum extent practicable, the trail along the east side of Bluff Creek must be within close proximity of the manholes for the existing trunk sanitary sewer. The lowest floor elevation of each unit must be shown on the utility plan. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed and abandoned during site grading and utility installation. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 12 of 23 The developer's share of the cost to prepare the 2005 MUSA AUAR is $15,776, which must be paid in cash with the final plat. The property has been assessed for the 2005 MUSA roads and water, and for Highway 101/Lyman Boulevard/Highway 312/11ighway 212. The principal and interest are deferred until the property is platted. The current principal and interest amounts are $310,999.03 and $162,976.08, respectively. These assessments can be paid with the final plat, or re -assessed to the lots and outlots for future development. If the developer elects to re -assess, a security must be issued prior to recording the plat for the outstanding principal and interest. The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, therefore the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. These fees are collected with the building permit and are based on the rates in effect at the time of building permit application. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment of these fees. STREETS The City will construct Bluff Creek Boulevard Improvements to serve the development in conjunction with public improvement project No. 06-05. The property within the plat will be specially assessed for this project. The City will include language in the development contract for The Preserve stating that the developer and fee owner waive any and all procedural and substantive objections to the project and the assessments. The development is subject to the arterial collector fee, which must be paid in cash with the final plat at the rate in effect at the final plat. The 2006 fee is $2,400.00/developable acre. The developer proposes to construct four, 31 -foot wide public streets within the development. Street A will extend north from Bluff Creek Boulevard and will terminate in a cul-de-sac on the north side of the development. Streets E and H will extend west from Street A and intersect approximately 600 feet west of Street A. Street H will extend to the east when the Dorsey property develops. Street M will extend south from Lyman Boulevard and will be extended to the west when the Dean and Lois Degler property to the west develops. The developer proposes to construct several 28 -foot wide private streets within outlots to serve the remainder of the development. Streets F and K must extend past Lot 6, Block 13 and Lot 1, Block 17, respectively to provide adequate space for a vehicle to back out of the driveway and turn into the street. Curbs on public streets will be high -back; curbs on private streets will be surmountable. The developer proposes to construct five-foot wide concrete sidewalks throughout the development along public and private streets. Staff recommends that the sidewalk along the The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 13 of 23 north side of Street H between Street A and Street I, and along the north side of Street E be eliminated. Sidewalks adjacent to private streets and within privately owned outlots can be used by the public. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Seven aglurban wetlands exist on-site. Houston Engineering delineated the wetlands in May 2005. Wetland 1 is a 0.2 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the north central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland 2 is a 0.12 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the northwest portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland 3 is a 0.25 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the north central portion of the property. The wetland is located in a plowed field, so no vegetation was present. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin. Wetland 4 is a 0.3 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the north central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin; however, the hydrology for this basin appears to be reduced from pre -development to post - development conditions. The applicant should revise the plan design to ensure adequate hydrology in the post -development condition. Wetland 5 is a 8.95 acre, Type 3 wetland located along the west central and southwest parts of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin in conjunction with this project; however, this basin is proposed to be impacted by the construction of the City's East-West Collector. Wetland 6 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass and black willow. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin in conjunction with this project; however, this basin is proposed to be impacted by the construction of the City's East-West Collector. Wetland -A (Wetland 7 in the delineation report) is a 1.65 acre, Type 2 wetland located in the east central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by smart weed and reed canary grass. The western portion of the basin has been repeatedly tilled and was planted with corn. No wetland impact is proposed for this basin; however, an adjoining property owner has questioned whether all or part of the basin is exempt under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). If the applicant wishes to pursue an exemption, the applicant will need to furnish information to substantiate the exemption request. Even if impacts would be exempt from WCA, they may not be exempt from the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. The emergency The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 14 of 23 overflow (EOF) elevation and route for this basin are unacceptable (see Storm Water Management section below). A wetland buffer with a minimum width of 16.5 feet must be maintained around all wetlands and wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures must maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge. Wetland Replacement Because no wetland impacts are proposed in conjunction with this project, no wetland mitigation is required. However, the applicant has shown two proposed wetland mitigation areas within the project area. These mitigation areas will be designed and constructed by the City in conjunction with the East-West Collector project. BLUFFS The applicant has evaluated the site for areas meeting the City's bluff criteria (i.e., slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet above the toe). No areas existing on this site meet the bluff criteria. BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT The City of Chanhassen established the Bluff Creek Overlay District by ordinance in 1998 to protect the Bluff Creek Corridor, wetlands, bluffs and significant stands of mature trees through the use of careful site design and other low -impact practices. This parcel is partially encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Bluff Creek runs through the western portion of this property. All structures should maintain a 50 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level of Bluff Creek. All structures must maintain a minimum 40 -foot setback from the primary corridor. No alterations are allowed within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. The 50 -foot setback, primary corridor boundary, 40 -foot structure setback and 20 -foot grading setback should be shown on the plans. The applicant has not provided details for the proposed trail crossing of Bluff Creek. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits must be obtained for all creek crossings. In addition, the trail alignment should be revised to cross Bluff Creek in the same location as the sanitary sewer crossing. Immediately south of the creek crossing, the trail intersection should be redesigned to avoid impact to the trees. In order to enhance the land within the Bluff Creek primary corridor, the applicant may undertake a wetland restoration of Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The restoration should include a vegetation management plan that addresses reed canary grass eradication and the establishment of native, non-invasive plants within the basin. Any proposed activities within these basins would require a wetland alteration permit. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 15 of 23 LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The applicant for The Preserve development has submitted tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations. Wooded areas within wetlands and the Bluff Creek Overlay District primary zone have been not been included in the canopy coverage calculations. The calculations are as follows: Total upland area ("dudit ®edamb mW Bcoo) 59.1 ac. Baseline canopy coverage 3.8% or 2.2 ac. Minimum canopy coverage allowed 20% or 11.8 ac. Proposed tree preservation .2% or .1 ac. Developer does not meet minimum canopy coverage allowed; therefore the difference between the baseline and proposed tree preservation is multiplied by 1.2 to calculate the required replacement plantings. Difference in canopy coverage 2.1 ac. Multiplier 1.2 Total replacement 2.5 ac. or 109,771 SF Total number of trees to be planted 101 trees In addition, the applicant must increase canopy coverage to meet the minimum thirty percent required. The calculations are follows: Total reforestation area (11.8 -2.2 ac.) 9.6 ac. or 418,176 SF Required canopy coverage 384 trees (one tree provides 1,089 SF of canopy) The total number of trees required for the development is 485. Applicant has proposed a total of 509 trees. Additional landscaping required for the development includes buffer yard plantings along the east south collector road. The following table summarizes the minimum requirements: Applicant meets minimum requirements for the trees required within the bufferyard landscaping. No shrubs have been included in the landscape plan, but the large number of evergreens will be more effective at providing screening from the collector road than shrubs. Required Proposed Collector road, north side 9 overstory 9 overstory - bufferyard B, 850' 17 understory 57 understory 25' width 34 shrubs no shrubs Collector road, south side 3 overstory 4 overstory - bufferyard B, 300' 6 understory 24 understory 25' width 12 shrubs no shrubs Applicant meets minimum requirements for the trees required within the bufferyard landscaping. No shrubs have been included in the landscape plan, but the large number of evergreens will be more effective at providing screening from the collector road than shrubs. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 16 of 23 Staff recommends that buffer plantings also be added to the east property line. These plantings are not required but would provide a buffer from the future development to the east. By installing the plantings now, the buffer could become established prior to any changes to the east. A conservation easement should be recorded over the Bluff Creek Overlay District primary zone. The developer should work with staff to develop and install appropriate markers at lot lines to demarcate the primary zone. The applicant should submit a plan for the re -vegetation of any areas of grading within Outlot A. The plan should incorporate native plants and be consistent with the City's Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management Plan Appendix C. Special attention should be paid to areas with steep slopes (greater than 3:1). Staff recommends that the Hill Prairie planting list be used for the restoration. PARKS AND RECREATION This item is scheduled to appear before the Park and Recreation Commission on April 25, 2006. The final recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council after the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. TRAILS The development includes the construction of a significant section of the City's comprehensive trail system along Bluff Creek as the public amenity. The applicant will also construct "connector" trails from their housing development to access the Bluff Creek trail. The applicant will be reimbursed for the material costs associated with the public trail only. As the creek trail moves north it will cross the creek near the location of the City's lift station. The Park and Recreation Director is recommending a trail head at this location including a parking lot and a rest/view area. Staff is also proposing to utilize this area for stormwater ponding needs associated with future road projects. PARKS Approximately half of The Preserve neighborhood is within the one-half mile park service area of a 4 -acre public park proposed to be constructed in the Pioneer Pass neighborhood. The northerly half of the proposed Preserve PUD would not be located within the one-half mile service area of the Pioneer Pass Park. As a part of the community identity for the PUD, an association park should be located in Outlot H. In order to increase the viability of this open space feature and the overall PUD, staff is recommending that Lots 1 and 2, Block 11 be removed and the resulting space incorporated into the amenity area. Update from the April 25, 2006 Commission meeting. The Park & Recreation Commission recommends the City Council require the following conditions of approval concerning parks and trails for The Preserve PUD: The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 17 of 23 1. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. Note: A percentage of park fees may be credited as a portion of any future compensation for the acquisition of developable lands in the area currently depicted as Lot 1. 2. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the `Bluff Creek Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Bluff Creek Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 3. Outlot H be enlarged through the addition of the land area currently depicted as Lots 1 and 2, Block 11. The resulting property to be utilized as a private association operated recreational and open space site. 4. Outlots A, B, L and H be conveyed to the city as public property by warranty deed. FIRE MARSHAL In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention division, the following are the fire code or City ordinance/policy requirements. The plan review is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. A 10 -foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City ordinance #9-1. 2. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 3. Temporary street signs shall be installed at street intersections once construction of the new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota State Fire Code Section 501.4. 4. Fire apparatus access roads 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 State Fire Code Section 503.2.3. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 18 of 23 5. Submit proposed street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 6. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 7. An additional fire hydrant will be required to be located at the intersection of Block 18, Lot 16. BUILDING COMMENTS The Building Official has reviewed the proposed project and offers the following recommendations for conditions of approval: 1. The developer must submit a list of proposed street names for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 2. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. 3. A final grading plan and soils report must be to the Inspections Division before permits can beissued. 4. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 5. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 6. The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and the attached findings of fact: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Rezoning of the land within the Plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Planned Unit Development -Residential, PUD -R; approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; and approval of the Preliminary Plat for "The Preserve" creating 155 lots, 15 outlots and right-of-way for public streets, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated 3-17-06 subject to the following conditions: 1. The drainage and utility easement over the northern portion of Lift Station #24 must be vacated and filed upon final approval of the final plat. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 19 of 23 2. The "Existing Conditions" plan must be revised to show the drainage and utility easement that was granted to the City and contain trunk sanitary sewer and watermain. 3. Prior to City Council consideration of the final plat, the applicant must provide documentation indicating that the proposed right-of-way for Lyman Boulevard meets Carver County's requirement. 4. The grading plan must identify the existing and proposed 100 -year floodplain. 5. Due to the anticipated timing of the final plat with respect to the timing of formal approvals from FEMA, the proposed lots that are within the current floodplain may be preliminary platted subject to FEMA approval of the LOMR. 6. Any grading within the floodplain will require a Conditional Use Permit. 7. Catch basins on each side of all public streets must be no more than 300 feet apart. 8. The proposed outlet for Wetland A must lie along the edge of the wetland. 9. The storm sewer from Pond 1 must outlet to the wetland north of Pond 2 in order to maintain hydrology to the wetland. 10. Storm sewer within Street J must be rerouted through the sideyards within Block 3 and outlet to Pond 2. 11. Hydraulic calculations must be submitted with the final plat submittals. 12. The legend on the final grading plan must identify the lowest floor elevation. 13. All buildings must be demolished before the second phase . 14. The final grading plan must show the top and bottom of wall elevations. 15. Any retaining wall four feet high or taller requires a building permit and must be designed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 16. The developer must work with staff to find the preferred sanitary sewer alignment west of Block 3 prior to City Council consideration of the final plat. 17. The plan must be revised to show an 18 -inch diameter watermain on the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the east property line. 18. The developer's engineer must submit a separate cost estimate for the watermain oversizing along Lyman Boulevard with the final plat submittals. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 20 of 23 19. To the maximum extent practicable, the trail along the east side of Bluff Creek must be within close proximity of the manholes for the existing trunk sanitary sewer. 20. The lowest floor elevation of each unit must be shown on the utility plan. 21. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed and abandoned during site grading and utility installation. 22. The developer must pay $15,776 in cash with the final plat for the pro -rated cost for the preparation of the 2005 MUSA AUAR. 23. The outstanding assessments — $310,999.03 for 2005 MUSA roads and water, and $162,976.08 for Highway 101/Lyman Boulevard/Highway 312/Highway 212 must be paid with the final plat or reassessed to the lots and outlots for future development. 24. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. These fees are collected with the building permit and are based on the rates in effect at the time of building permit application. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment of these fees. 25. The City will construct Bluff Creek Boulevard Improvements to serve the development in conjunction with public improvement project No. 06-05. The property within the plat will be specially assessed for this project. 26. The development is subject to the arterial collector fee, which must be paid in cash with the final plat. 27. Streets F and K must extend past Lot 6, Block 13 and Lot 1, Block 17, respectively to provide adequate space for a vehicle to back out of the driveway and tum into the street. 28. Curbs on public streets will be high -back; curbs on private streets will be surmountable. 29. The sidewalk along the north side of Street H between Street A and Street I, and along the north side of Street E must be eliminated. 30. Sidewalks adjacent to private streets and within privately owned outlots can be used by the public. 31. The applicant will work with staff to discuss eliminating Lots 1 and 2 Block 11, and Lots 1 through 5, Block 1. 32. The applicant shall revise the plan design to ensure adequate hydrology for Wetland 4 in the post -development condition. 33. If the applicant wishes to pursue an exemption for impact to Wetland A, the applicant shall furnish information to substantiate the exemption request. The applicant is advised that, even The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 21 of 23 if impacts would be exempt from WCA, they may not be exempt from the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. 34. A wetland buffer with a minimum width of 16.5 feet shall be maintained around all wetlands and wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. All structures shall maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge. 35. All structures shall maintain a 50 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level of Bluff Creek. All structures shall maintain a minimum 40 -foot setback from the primary corridor. No alterations shall occur within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. The 50 -foot setback, primary corridor boundary, 40 -foot structure setback and 20 -foot grading setback shall be shown on the plans. 36. The applicant shall provide details for the proposed trail crossing of Bluff Creek. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits shall be obtained for all creek crossings. In addition, the trail alignment shall be revised to cross Bluff Creek in the same location as the sanitary sewer crossing. Immediately south of the creek crossing, the trail intersection shall be redesigned to avoid impact to the trees. 37. The plans shall be revised to provide a lower EOF for Wetland A and a path to the west for excess water that will not threaten proposed structures. 38. The EOF path for Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a more direct EOF route from Pond 1 to Wetland 4. 39. The proposed sanitary sewer and storm sewer outlet in the vicinity of Pond 2 shall be revised to ensure: 1. The runoff from the outlet will not compromise the integrity of the sanitary sewer, and 2. The sanitary sewer is not located below the normal water level (NWL) of Pond 2. 40. The outfall from Pond 3 shall not outlet upslope of the proposed trail. 41. The applicant shall clarify the avoidance of the drainageway to be preserved during the construction of Pond 4 and, if possible, redesign the pond to provide additional storage and treatment in lieu of avoiding the drainageway. 42. Pond 5 shall be constructed prior to the construction of all the areas that drain to it. 43. Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 44. 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: The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 22 of 23 Type of Slone Steeper than 3:1 10:1 to 3:1 Flatter than 10:1 Time (Maximum time an area can 7 days remain open when the area 14 days is not actively being worked.) 21 days 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. 45. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 46. The applicant shall be proactive in addressing potential run-on problems in the vicinity of the extreme southeast comer of the property. This would potentially involve vertically tracking equipment up and down the graded faces of the slope to increase roughness and prevent rilling. Similar practices shall be used behind the homes along the central part of Outlot A. 47. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $242,760. 48. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase R Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 49. The applicant shall demonstrate that the outlet pipe installation and elevation will not impact the wetland. 50. If recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission, park fees shall be paid as per City ordinance at the rate of final platting. 51. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 52. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 53. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 54. A turf plan shall be submitted to the City indicating the location of sod and seeding areas. 55. Buffer plantings shall be installed along the east property line in the rear yards of Lots 7 through 16, Block 3 and Lots 1 through 5, Block 10. The Preserve Planning Case 06-14 April 18, 2006 Page 23 of 23 56. Applicant shall remove Emerald Queen Norway maple from the planting schedule. The applicant shall substitute another species with approval from the City. 57. A conservation easement shall be recorded over Outlot A. 58. The developer shall work with staff to develop and install appropriate markers at lot lines to demarcate the primary zone. 59. The applicant shall submit a plan for the revegetation of any areas of grading within Outlot A. The plan shall incorporate native plants and be consistent with the City's Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management Plan Appendix C. Special attention should be paid to areas with steep slopes (greater than 3:1). Staff recommends that the Hill Prairie planting list be used for the restoration. 60. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. Note: A percentage of park fees may be credited as a portion of any future compensation for the acquisition of developable lands in the area currently depicted as Lot 1. 61. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the `Bluff Creek Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Bluff Creek Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 62. Outlot H be enlarged through the addition of the land area currently depicted as Lots 1 and 2, Block 11. The resulting property to be utilized as a private association operated recreational and open space site. 63.Outlots A, B, L and H be conveyed to the city as public property by warranty deed." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat. 4. Reduced Copy Site Plan. 5. Affidavit of Mailing. 6. House Plans. gAplan\2006 planning cases\06-14 the preserve\staff report preliminary pud.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION Application The Pemton Land Company: Request for Rezoning of property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of 155 single-family lots, 15 outlots, and private streets and public right-of-way; Conditional Use Permit for alterations within the flood plain and development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The property is located at 1630 Lyman Boulevard — THE PRESERVE On April 18, 2006, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application The Pemton Land Company for a subdivision. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Planned Unit Development 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 The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A2. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low or Medium Density uses. 3. The legal description of the property is: The East Half of the South Quarter of Section 22, Township 116, Range 23, According to the Government Survey thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. 4. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a) The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b) The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. C) The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d) The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e) The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f) Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 5. 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; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant adverse 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. 6. When approving a conditional use permit, the City must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. The proposed development will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. b. The proposed development will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. c. The proposed development will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. d. The proposed development will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. e. The proposed development will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. f. The proposed development will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. h. The proposed development will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. The proposed development will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed development will not depreciate surrounding property values. 1. The proposed development will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Articles IV, V and VI of the Chanhassen City Code. 7. The planning report #06-14 dated March 18, 2006, prepared by Kate Aanen son, et al, is incorporated herein. 3 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Rezoning of property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of 155 single-family lots, 15 outlots, and private streets and public right-of-way; Conditional Use Permit for alterations within the flood plain and development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District — THE PRESERVE. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17`s day of April, 2006. CHANHASSEN PLANNING CONMUSSION M Its Chairman gAplan\2006 planning cas \06-14 the presen6findings of fact and recotnmendation.doc .l CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION ra_trAat MIN I Applicant Name and Address: The Panton Land Ca pary 7697 Anagram Dr. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Contact: Dan Cook Phone: 952-937-0716 Fax: 952-937-8635 Email: dancookftemtom.com Planning Case No. O (o - )T CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Owner Name and Address: Gayle and Lois Defiler 1630 Lyman Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Contact: rayl e nr I ni s Degl Rr Phone: 952-448-3685 Fax: Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment / $425 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit / $750 Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review /$2840 Site Plan Review (SPR)* 500+ 15/alit ]56x15 ✓ $2940 Subdivision' 600 + 15/alit 156x15 Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) Variance (VAR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment $200 Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) X ispowwnor for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** UP/SPRNACNARfWAP/Metes & Bounds SUB TOTAL FEE $ 7,155 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. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8'/z" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. **Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. 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. SCANNED PROJECT NAME: The Preserve LOCATION: 1630 Lyman Boulevard LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Attached TOTAL ACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: X_YES NO PRESENT ZONING: Rural REQUESTED ZONING: PUD, Medium Density Res. PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: MD Residential REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: MD Residential REASON FOR REQUEST: Subdivision for 156 Single Family Lots 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 speck 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. !N—,I, r. I F •.. 3 -16 -off Date SCANNED GApLANVorms0evelopment Review Application.DOC Rev. 12/05 # g � € : e J~g` 6g3g3gag g 5�aa s � �e.. 5 ei k3le!a33 Ie!€•d 'a X � � S i � � o 0 Pr� O Ax 71 a 10011 JFK_" , •j fll ^ € � e a ¢Y � �e� € �•` � e 7 ''fel �' ► �� 'a �� J �gl � l — a� �; wi J jla I I;'�� • L --L• JJ L _ 1 � ( 1 f • 1a({ { I iq LT � T•� �Lgvl lul w'I� ' L��—•�� L L _ l C�i^1J + I• 10011 w, / JFK_" , •j fll ^ € � e a ¢Y � �e� € �•` y ''fel �' ► �� 'a �� a� �; jla I I;'�� • 1 � ( 1 f 1a({ { 1 w, / e gs§ , •j fll ^ € � e a ¢Y � �e� € �•` y A h ` cE o. — T _ �— � s 0 0 Y K N O £ Q y p N m ytl p V pw3ys 3 vSv °sY£a E FaycEo �L'y C`�ca �'m osp S y.E L T E eQ otW Lq^c Y�O omYo�Y,79 yy qq O Y z Cy[y[ .'^. p� V O b �$Eq_s yummy �W'aaG �3s3 QQ� LCCA F C2 '�db 00 U� G^9.E (] C ii L E y O s 4 a i Preliminary Submittal The Preserve Chanhassen, Minnesota Prepared for: Pemtom Land Company 7597 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Contact Dan Herbst Phone: 952-937-0716 Fax 952-937-8635 Prepared by. aawc .sm Np __ w w F ] FARMi LplgTQlS d R.�mar I]ect nud e t number. wr�w 20031110 C -1. .ani,..e .,'.1, N Lew, Plat/PUD omoo aawc .sm Np ®oanm+ 2 w ER ] FARMi LplgTQlS d _ PNE WN— PWT 4 PNEuuluurc G%hDWG • Glomal Eaxma PLsx e --PA PREaNMMY O 0 PTE . R --- iu ew...' onewa a ITumwM qva9P I PNEWwi0M Pl.nWu 1a -- REINry OVNG n -RS POEUMNJUrf OWNOnS u wrr ...,nus PCu— - Preliminary Plat/PUD Submittal The Preserve u� wem e— � d u L d B� I rr; 10 n „iYUI % ,,-,,,c e'^ti.P"Kir K,�V"_illif] r F5 A s ¢N . 111461 ^a�5a• r it !z 3 l WWI iln;l 0120 K E rx-es>rwal--'�s �'y-=-=--- IL' ,a 3191J. "N0.,:1'i S�YICJ1LIl�ll:�.[vu,U IIC4^= tyz it !z 3 l WWI iln;l 0120 K E rx-es>rwal--'�s �'y-=-=--- IL' ,a 3191J. "N0.,:1'i S�YICJ1LIl�ll:�.[vu,U IIC4^= <� \ » xx \ AIR !_� %� - r�,k� \ \,�\ q �c¥ J. I p v: ( § /)) ( P-4 \ » xx \ AIR !_� %� - r�,k� \,�\ &� -)�, �c¥ J. I p v: II{| ! ■|,| x . \� � #� �m § m! --a~ � } ►| / \ ; E j � !! $ \ } ►| _ f zz$$,§Ar!$� NIX1-1 x a$ a�€ x a$ 3a�,y ) A A S.Y l� aAIM A'A: 4Ai 3 di iA da Ziff '��=Yj.Y Eg333 3 (133E ;,! 3 3(E¢•,#a Ygraa a� a,aa[[ e$E$EE[E�d dd s�%33'e,�Ca 9$ 1:;d[�+i� E.'.z Ee FE F�.dE $�id <i,9 � %'6 .*&'dd NIVISIF if I i I i E Ii =E' aE as ea�Z 3a - Ea --- --- < eZd a;•. S>. ...3.1 '.,Sa., e...,..3 „ llTP,✓....mt �s�:ii [. -5( .:3 oij ,; ii ,jf,% a IgBJ_ ;!n p- 00111 py 14i 8 fA; k�.RR;R€�RRRR€�R�R:R €RIX ��RRAE RR��RR��k F€R€ [ s e zs.aa <.a<zz aa- aaaa< aa.Y YaY as <az Y'aaaaaa .xz YEaazazsEaaE- —d%SI Fa3 �Y3.}ic33A C+Jded [Y 33,3lE 33333.2 i3 3k{3s 3 3£3EE £-� 3EE3363333333333-> C3 Y ( Yeae Y. d8 iA -A s sr i I A§ a ei ".:. E EEEaE 3i.3Elaa EEE .iaa2:a u, Y' :F 338 �Z F3YYB $� € -€E E -P ii 3P 5eeP@e3 z'z 3=r=}z` _3 c ,r a r— _ f zz$$,§Ar!$� NIX1-1 x a$ a�€ x a$ 3a�,y ) A A S.Y l� aAIM A'A: 4Ai 3 di iA da Ziff '��=Yj.Y Eg333 3 (133E ;,! 3 3(E¢•,#a Ygraa a� a,aa[[ e$E$EE[E�d dd s�%33'e,�Ca 9$ 1:;d[�+i� E.'.z Ee FE F�.dE $�id <i,9 � %'6 .*&'dd NIVISIF if I i I i E Ii =E' aE as ea�Z 3a - Ea --- --- < eZd a;•. S>. ...3.1 '.,Sa., e...,..3 „ llTP,✓....mt �s�:ii [. -5( .:3 oij ,; ii ,jf,% a IgBJ_ ;!n p- 00111 py 14i 8 fA; k�.RR;R€�RRRR€�R�R:R €RIX ��RRAE RR��RR��k F€R€ [ s e zs.aa <.a<zz aa- aaaa< aa.Y YaY as <az Y'aaaaaa .xz YEaazazsEaaE- —d%SI Fa3 �Y3.}ic33A C+Jded [Y 33,3lE 33333.2 i3 3k{3s 3 3£3EE £-� 3EE3363333333333-> C3 Y ( Yeae Y. d8 iA .EY a ei ".:. E EEEaE 3i.3Elaa EEE .iaa2:a E' -a :F 338 �Z F3YYB € -€E E -P ii 3P 5eeP@e3 z'z 3=r=}z` _3 c _ � s m _ _ �w(� �1 jti i 1`P.ti� 77 iFfa4 t I , h �dtn''jj b . k i | $|� \� ]j § !4| ( +�� np .!j!, ] 3d - « m §� ... � � � � - & t �§ § R ; § 2 \ \ � , z .1 ii•. e 9 u'4 1 z .1 ii•. e 1 � 1 � z u I c4 'l+:. P H ` rn O z .1 r i t \\ ''�1,• >3 I mee8ielS88iii pill u rtt; T ii 1 �•! fie. ;� �� -� , � - <iii#li€iiiii o Ofililiiliiiii ► ka 3i �a r e�Y ,tom i t \\ ''�1,• >3 I mee8ielS88iii pill u rtt; T ii 1 �•! fie. ;� �� -� , � - <iii#li€iiiii o Ofililiiliiiii ► r i t \\ ''�1,• >3 I mee8ielS88iii pill u rtt; T ii 1 �•! fie. ;� �� -� , � - <iii#li€iiiii o Ofililiiliiiii ► Hillis X w" R.—SRs31e"•B p All oil 9 1 K' aha~' U 3 e" ca's iy ter,' 1 f_ 4i I i \ � i e • '' � e 1 •i /l' __.__— 1 � ! '�35� $8.�p�p�tt3`t•f geg y 'Fal€do 5•!?3€ ,Y ;' •c � 5 wf � 1 111 II 1 le eee : axyz� — {e\/i��w! )., of •� ''_ i / )! J 1 1 22eP"e�q�je% I la a OB F g +/, �.� � ^�' � ��' < / iii � i I� I e� � i i�E'• — 11' €p Q ! J / , •! •S "; "! c }q `\I / P i 1� 512 s F�d"gad a3 ad r s P` I v, s 5 e! a � e8! ! L IN -------- __—_____ _ s c y-�- �_ __ ______ah CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on April 6, 2006 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 The Preserve — Planning Case 06-14 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 this (10* day of T 1 2006. Notal ublic "'a=*. KIM T. MEUWISSEN roc: Notary Public -Minnesota +s•-' My commission Expires Jan 31, 2010 {CANNED Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. THE PRESERVE: Request for Rezoning from A2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of approximately 80 acres into 156 single-family cluster lots; Site Plan Review; Conditional Use Permit for Proposal: development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; Wetland Alteration Permit for crossing Bluff Creek; and Variances — Planning Case 06-14. Applicant: The Pemtom Land Company Property 1630 Lyman Boulevard Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens Public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/06-14.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Kate Questions & Aanenson at 952-227-1139 or e-mail Comments: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit Comments: written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meetin . City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commerciaUndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, lease contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of thea enda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. THE PRESERVE: Request for Rezoning from A2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of approximately 80 acres into 156 single-family cluster lots; Site Plan Review; Conditional Use Permit for Proposal: development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; Wetland Alteration Permit for crossing Bluff Creek; and Variances — Planning Case 06-14. Applicant: The Pemtom Land Company Property 1630 Lyman Boulevard Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens Public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/clan/06-14.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Kate Questions & Aanenson at 952-227-1139 or e-mail kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit Comments: written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party Is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commerciaLmdustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an Item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokespersoNrepresentative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, lease contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. 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 Informal System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City dam not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement M distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic featuresit errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-22]-110]. The preceding cisdaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §666.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all darts, and agrees to defend, indertnify, and hdtl harmless the City from any and all claim brought by User. its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided. This map is neither a legally worded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map Is a completion of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shovm, 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 CM does not represent the the GIS Data can be used for navigational, traci ng or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or aedsion in the depiction of geographic features. h errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-22]-110]. The preceding disclaimer is provided "musnt to Minnesota Statutes §066.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that Ore City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all dams, and agrees to defend. indemnify, and hdtl harmless the City from any and all darn brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties wIach arse out of the users access or use of data provided. WILLIAM J & VICKY L GOERS RONALD W & CAROL M ENTINGER DENNIS & RUTH CHADDERDON 1601 LYMAN BLVD 8851 AUDUBON RD 8900 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9402 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9407 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8412 TIMOTHY C BOYCE & BARRY L & SUZANNE L LIBENGOOD CHARLES E JR & PATRICIA HANSEN TANA I ERICKSON 8950 AUDUBON RD 1561 LYMAN BLVD 8941 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8412 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9403 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8412 JEFFREY S & LEE ANN FRANZ GAYLE O & LOIS J DEGLER DORSEY & DORSEY 8950 SUNSET TRL TRUSTEES OF TRUSTS C/O RICK DORSEY CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9100 1630 LYMAN BLVD 14215 GREEN VIEW CT CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9402 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 -3042 AURORA INVESTMENTS LLC DEAN & LOIS DEGLER 5215 EDINA INDUST BLVD TRUSTEE OF TRUST SUITE 100 9111 AUDUBON RD MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55439 3023 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9412 PETERSONJACQUES FARM LAND CO NDI MINNESOTA FOX PROPERTIES LP C/O SEVERIN H PETERSON JR C/O PROPERTIES MN LLC 27990 SMITHTOWN RD 15900 FLYING CLOUD DR 7615 SMEME TANA LN EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -7911 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347 -4047 SUITE 160 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 -4700 AURORA INVESTMENTS LLC DEAN & LOIS DEGLER 5215 EDINA INDUST BLVD TRUSTEE OF TRUST SUITE 100 9111 AUDUBON RD MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55439 3023 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9412 Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet) The Preserve 1630 Lyman Boulevard Planning Case No. 06-14 City of Chanhassen 11 AIL ru,i 1114 is ELEVATION F -STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION G ELEVATION A -BRICK OPTION SHOWN ryland.com SCANNED 11-th 1.,1-VL1J VV hLL ELEVATION F- STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION A -BRICK OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION G RYLAND HOMES' ME nmaids Home B.Wl e ryland. ELEVATIONS P .I�IIIr runr is. •inm iuur lil\ .11 itl�� .• .urea....., ...un RYLAND HOMES' hmain'r1bm�Euilda W -F pm� THE PENNINGTON 9r. E L E V A T 1 0 N E ELEVATION G E L E VAT 10 N F ryland.com I l lli 1\V 1 l llilX_l' %-,# 1%_" ELEVATION H ELEVATION F ELEVATION G -STONE OPTION SHOWN rvland.com n,... asa+.T .F u. whin,. d�..�,� s S, C� f�a , � 0 1 rit 3U1VUM 1 ELEVATION E - STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION A ELEVATION F BRICK OPTION SHOWN ryland.com PWS, rye—. fi....Ejm o A.ag m. mope S Sd Camrbe fw dm RfINO Q 1 1 Ili iJl 1% -Li'l V l' 1LLL E L E V AT ION F - STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION G ELEVATION A - BRICK OPTION SHOWN ryland.com Pan, porn, T¢if aumu�bjm mc6� i .. S 5il Cwndor(nrdmik Q ELEVATIONS i B i RYLAND HOMES' Amaicis Home Buildcc 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: 952.22T1 160 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 d Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 7901 Park Place 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 September 16, 2014 Ms. Ann Thompson Deutsche Bank Trade and Risk Services 60 Wall Street / NYC60-2517 New York, NY 10005-2858 Re: Preserve at Bluff Creek — Planning Case 2006-14 Letter of Credit No. 839GC1000252 Dear Ms. Thompson: The above -referenced project has been completed in general conformance with the approved plans. Enclosed please find your original letter of credit along with an amendment dated October 6, 2010. We are now closing our files on this project. Sincerely, CITY OF CKa�t7ZAQatl Kate Aanenson, AICP Community Development Director KA:ktm Enclosures: Letter of Credit No. 839GC1000252 Amendment to Letter of Credit dated October 6, 2010 9.\plan\2006 planning mm\06-14 the prmerveVe release letter 09-16-2014.docx Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow SCANNED Oar. - a'^�11 Deutsche Bank 121 Deutsche Bank AG New York Trade and Risk Services 60 Wall Street / NYC60-2517 CITY G: New York, NY 10005-2858 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT MAR 1 6 2010 No. 839BGC1000252 ENGINEERING DEPT. Date: March 15, 2010 TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of The Ryland Group, Inc. and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 839BGC1000252 in the amount of $37,775.00 (Thirty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Five & 00/100 U.S.Dollars), available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank. The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. 839BGC1000252 dated March 15, 2010, of Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch'; b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen. c) Be presented for payment at Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch, 60 Wall Street, 25a' Floor/NYC60-2517, New York, NY 10005-2858 Attn: Trade Services, on or before 4:00 p.m. on November 30, 2010. This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be November 30 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by overnight courier or certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. Deutsche Bank IZI Page Two of Two Pages Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 839BGC1000252 This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the 2007 Revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 600. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. Very truly yours, Deutsche Bank New York Bre eynaldo a los Rey � son Asst. Vice President Deutsche Bank AMENDMENT TO IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: IZI Deutsche Bank AG NewYork Branch Trade Services 60 Wall Street/ NYC60-2417 NewYork, NY 10005-2858 No. 839BGC1000252 Date: October 6, 2010 By order of our principal, The Ryland Group, Inc. we, Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch hereby amend the above referenced Credit as follows: • Amount of Credit is decreased by US$13,425.00 to a neic balance not exceeding US$24,350.00. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged. This amendment is effected on the strength of your letter dated September 29, 2010. This amendment is to be attached to the original credit instrument, of which it is to become an integral part thereof. If you require clarification or discussion of any of the aspects of this amendment, please do not hesitate to contact Ann Thompson at 212-250-9639 or Rey de los Reyes at 212-250-9616. Yours truly, Deutsche Bank AG New York Branc eyn ae os Rey ompsoif— o ' e Asst. Vice President Status Report Monday, September 01, 2014 Plan 031 2 a"**''*' t 2000 a member 2000 T F S T F S M T W T F S 2 3 4 5 2 5 ..g...z...3 9..10 11 12.3...q ...5. _fi ..�...8 ..82� 13�i4 ��{516 �i] 181910��i i�12 1�3��14 15169 20 21 22 3 24 25 26 11 18 19 26 21 22735212819 91........ 2425 26 2128 Wm............... ................ ............................. ,n Securities IStart Due S P Category Description _ I 9 1 2014 9 1 2014 R1 LC -,819BGC1000252 Expires 11/30/10 (Replaces LC # 1506) Preserve at Bluff Creek Planning Case 2006-14 $24,350 (originally $37,775) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms. L.0 #1506 Expires 1/18/08 -REPLACED WfrH LC #839BGC 1000252 Preserve at Bluff Creek 1 st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms Notify Jill Sinclair 1127/07 - Received notice from bank cancelling LC as of 1/I8/08. Per Jill, LC must be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to VI Check status on 12/10/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18/09. Check status 11/15/08. Kim 1028/08 - Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. I.0 needs to be ruined through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8-15-09. Kim 8/17/09 - Notified Jill. 820/09 - Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 102/09 - Pa Jill, mailed letter to bank authorizing reduction to $37,775. Waiting for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received lata from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything. Kim 3/16/10 - Received Replacement Letter of Credit 839BGC 1000252 in the amount of $37,775 dated Math 15, 2010. Kim 7/6/10 - Per Jill, hold 1-C until entire project is completed. Check status annually on July 1st. Kim 928/10 - Received letter from Ryland Homes requesting reduction in letter of credit to $24,350. Jill Sinclair authorized reduction. Reduction letter seat of Deutsche Bank on 929/10. Waiting for confirmation of reduction. Check status 7/l/I 1. Kim 10/11/10 - Received Amendment in letter of Credit 839BGC 1000252 dated 10/6/10 decreasing amount by $13,425 to leave a new balance of $24,350. Kim 7/6/1 I - Notified Jill. Kim 7/7/11 - Pa Jill check status 7/1/12 (2nd and 3rd Additions still under construction). Kim 8/1/12-Notifiedlill. Kim 9/10/12 - Pa Jill check status 9/1/13. Kim 9/1/13 -Notified Jill. Kim 9/3/13 - Per Jill hold the L.0 until fall of 2014 when the two-year maintenance agreement for the site restoration is over. Check status 9/1/14. Kim 9/15/14 - Notified Jill. Per Jill, OK to release IG. Activity closed. Kim o�e 9+Ye014r8,44AM sarr P-Pv aY SCANNED Pal Meuwissen, Kim From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Kim, Yes, this can be released. Sinclair, Jill Tuesday, September 16, 2014 8:24 AM Meuwissen, Kim RE: Preserve at Bluff Creek Letter of Credit Jill Sinclair Environmental Resources Specialist City of Chanhassen 952-227-1133 From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 4:18 PM To: Sinclair, Jill Subject: Preserve at Bluff Creek Letter of Credit Jill, See your notes below and advise. Sorry I'm 14 days late in notifying you. Thanks! LC #839BGC1000252 Expires 11/30/10 (Replaces LC #1506) Preserve at Bluff Creek Planning Case 2006-14 $24,350 (originally $37,775) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms. LC #1506 Expires 1/18/08 -REPLACED WITH LC #839BGC1000252 Preserve at Bluff Creek 1 st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms SCANNED Notify Jill Sinclair 11 /27/07 - Received notice from bank cancelling LC as of 1/18/08. Per Jill, LC must be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to 1/18/09. Check status on 12/10/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18/09. Check status 11 /15/08. Kim 10/28/08 - Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. LC needs to be retained through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8- 15-09. Kim 8/17/09 - Notified Jill. 8/20/09 - Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 10/2/09 - Per Jill, mailed letter to bank authorizing reduction to $37,775. Waiting for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received letter from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything. Kim 3/16/10 - Received Replacement Letter of Credit 839BGC1000252 in the amount of $37,775 dated March 15, 2010. Kim 7/6/10 - Per Jill, hold LC until entire project is completed. Check status annually on July 1st. Kim z 9/28/10 - Received letter from Ryland Homes requesting reduction in letter of credit to $24,350. Jill Sinclair authorized reduction. Reduction letter sent of Deutsche Bank on 9/29/10. Waiting for confirmation of reduction. Check status 7/1/11. Kim 10/11/10 - Received Amendment to Letter of Credit 839BGC1000252 dated 10/6/10 decreasing amount by $13,425 to leave a new balance of $24,350. Kim 7/6/11 -Notified Jill. Kim 7/7/11 - Per Jill check status 7/1/12 (2nd and 3rd Additions still under construction). Kim 8/1/12 -Notified Jill. Kim 9/10/12 - Per Jill check status 9/1/13. Kim 9/1/13 - Notified Jill. Kim 9/3/13 - Per Jill hold the LC until fall of 2014 when the two-year maintenance agreement for the site restoration is over. Check status 9/1/14. Kim © Kim Meurvissen Sr. Cammunicudons/4dministrativeSupport Specialist 951-127-1107 %7neawissen (aiCi. chanhas sen. nin. us CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 91 Find us on Facebook 3 Status Report Sunday, September 01, 2013 PIan.OR6 Jul 2000 Au ust2 a tembar S..M T W T F S S M T W T !45 S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 1 2 55.1._9 .5...7..8...9..10345 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13'14 15 16 1] i0 11 12 13 14 13 15 11i8 19282122 2021222324 1718 19202122 23 2425 262] 26 2728 29 M 31 A 25 26 2128 2930...................... ..........._........... _... Securities [Stan.. . Due S P _ Category Description 1 9/1/2013 9/1/2013 F LC# 839BGC 1000252 Expires 11/30/10 (Replaces LC #1506) Preserve at Bluff Creek Planning Case 2006-14 $24,350 (originally $37,775) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms. LC #1506 Expires 1/18/08 -REPLACED WITH LC #839BGC7000252 Preserve at Bluff Creek Ist Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms Notify Jill Sinclair 11/27/07 - Received notice from bank cancelling LC as of 1/18/08. Per Jill, LC must be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to UI Check status on 12110/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18/09. Check status 11/15/08. Kim 1028/08 - Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. LC needs to be retained through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8-15-09. Kim 8/17/09 - Notified Jill. 820/09 -Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 10/2/09 - Per Jill, mailed letter to bank authorizing reduction to $37,775. Waiting for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received letter from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything. Kim 3/16/10 - Received Replacement Letter of Credit 839BGC 1000252 in the amount of $37,775 dated March 15, 2010. Kim 7/6/10 -Per Jill, hold LC until entire project is completed. Check status annually on July 1st. Kim 928/10 - Received letter from Ryland Homes requesting reduction in letter of credit to 524,350. Jill Sinclair authorized reduction. Reduction letter sent of Deutsche Bank on 929/10. Waiting for confirmation of reduction. Check status 7/1/11. Kim 10/11/10 - Received Amendment to Letter of Credit 839BGCI OD0252 dated 10/6/10 decreasing amount by $13,425 to leave anew balance of $24,350. Kim 7/6/11 -Notified Jill. Kim 7/711 I - Per Jill check status 7/1/12 (2nd and 3rd Additions still under construction). Kim 8/1/12 -Notified Jill. Kim 9/10/12 -Per Jill check status 9/1/13. Kim ............_...._......._......__..-.............. .......... ............................ .... .................................................................................. ;$ Im .............. e LaiS cerebpner�l Cwp. L1a 12 A 2 10 P S=SAP-PrW4 Vqe 1 Status Report Sunday, July 01, 2012 Plan.OR6 M 2000. August2000 to r2000 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F 5S 1 1 2 3 4 5 1-2' 2 3 4--5 6-]-- 8 6 7 8 9 16 11 12 3 5 5 7 8 9 t0 t -12.13 i4 15 13.14 15 16 17 18 19 10 '1.2 13 14 15 16 i] --i8 152E 2122 202132282415 26 1718.1920 2122 23 24 25 26 27 2a 29 V 28 26 30 .31....... 24 2, 26 27 28 29 30 31.. _.. _._. _.__... _......_......... _.... .. _. _.................. J Securities IStart Due S P .: .Category... Descriptor. 7/1/2012 7/1/2012 O LC #839BGC1000252 Expires 11/30/10 (Replaces LC #1506) Preserve at Bluff Creek Planning Case 2006-14 $24,350 (originally $37,775) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms. LC #1506 Expires 1!18/08 -REPLACED WITH LC #839BGC1000252 Preserve at Bluff Creek 1st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms Notify Jill Sinclair 11/27/07 - Received notice from bank cancelling LC as of 1 /18/08. Per Jill, LC must be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to 1/] 8/09. Check status on 12/10/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18109. Check status 11/15/08. Kim 1028/08 - Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. LC needs to be retained through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8-15-09. Kim 8/17/09 - Notified Jill. 820/09 - Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6115/10. Kim 102/09 - Per Jill, mailed letter to bank authorizing reduction to $37,775. Waiting for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received letter from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything Kim 3/16/10 - Received Replacement Letter of Credit 839BGC1000252 in the amount of $37,775 dated March 15, 2010. Kim 7/6/10 - Per Jill, hold LC until entire project is completed. Check status annually on July 1st. Kim 928/10 - Received letter from Ryland Homes requesting reduction in letter of credit to $24,350. Jill Sinclair authorized reduction. Reduction letter sent of Deutsche Bank on 929/10. Waiting for confirmation of reduction. Check status 7/1/11. Kim 10111/10 - Received Amendment to Letter of Credit 839BGC 1000252 dated 10/0/10 decreasing amount by $13,425 to leave anew balance of 524,350. Kim 716111 -Notified Jill. Kim 7/7/11 - Per Jill check status 7/1112 (2nd and 3rd Additions still under construction). Kim 8/1/12 -Notified Jill. Kim o pais nevebpnienl cap. ................................................... V1=12 r 8 50 . s=sups wwvb SCANNED Status Report Sunday, July 01, 2012 Plan.OR6 S M T W T F 1 4 ............. .x..8...9..70.11 _{2 4, 10 11 1293 14t$ t3.14 .i5�i6 �1`%�i8�fa X11 18192021 2021.22 23242$18 11 25 26 2] 29 '29 2728 29 JO 31 Securities (Stan Due S P Category Deacripficip _ - I ' 1 '-112 7.1201 F LC 4839BGC10002i'- Fspires 11,30/10 (Replaces LC #E506) Preserve at Bluff Creek Planning Case 2006-14 $24,350 (originally $37,775) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terns. LC #1506 Expires I/18/08 -REPLACED WITH LC #839BGC1000252 Preserve at Bluff Creek 1 st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terns Notify Jill Sinclair 1127/07 - Received notice from bank cancelling LC as of 1/18/08. Per Jill, LC most be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to 1/18/09. Check status on 12/10/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18/09. Check status 11/15/08. Kim 1028/08 -Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. LC needs to be retained through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8-15-09. Kim 8/17/09 - Notified Jill. 820/09 - Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 102/09 - Per Jill, mailed letter to bank authorizing reduction to $37,775. Waiting for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received letter from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything. Kim 3/16/10 - Received Replacement Letter of Credit 839BGC I (100252 in the amount of $37,775 dated March 15, 2010. Kim 7/6/10 - Per Jill, hold LC until entire project is completed. Check status annually on July 1st. Kim 928/10 - Received letter from Ryland Homes requesting reduction in letter of credit to $24,350. Jill Sinclair authorized reduction. Reduction letter sent of Deutsche Bank on 929/10. Waiting for confirmation of reduction. Check status 7/l/I 1. Kim 10/11/10 - Received Amendment to Letter of Credit 839BGC)000252 dated 10/6/10 decreasing amount by $13,425 to leave a new balance of $24,350. Kim 7/6/11 -Notified Jill. Kim 7/7/1 I - Per Jill check status 7/1/12 (2nd and 3rd Additions still under construction). Kim ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................... .................................................. .................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................... scam cacao. mm119311 ru s=eam n•wour ................................................................................ ................................................................................ .............................................SCANNED ......+ LStatus Report 7/1/11 PLAN.0132I M 20M Au ust 2000 Se tember 2000 M T W T F S S M T W T F S M T W T F 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 4. 5. 8--�- 8 6 7 8 9 10.11.12 13 4 5 6 7- 8 9 9 10 1112 13.14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10.1112 13 14 15 16 16 17 18 19 20 21.22 26 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 2122 23 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 21 28 29 30 3) 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3631 _....__.. .... .. _. ...... ..._ ...'.__._.. _._ V Securities Istad Due S P Category Descripson. 7/1/11 7/1/11 F LC#839BGC1000252 Expires 11/30/10 (Replaces LC #1506) Preserve at Bluff Creek 1st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $37.775 Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms LC #1506 Expires 1/18/08 Preserve at Bluff Creek I st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms Notify Jill Sinclair 11/27/07 - Received notice from bank cancelhng LC as of 1/18/08. Per Jill, LC must be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to 1/18/09. Cbeck status on 12/10/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18/09. Check status 11/15/08. Rim 10/28/08 - Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. LC needs to be retained through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8-15-09. Kim 8/17/09 - Notified Jill. 8/20/09 - Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 10/2109 - Per Jill, mailed letter to bank authorizing reduction to $37,775. Waiting for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received letter from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything. Kim 3/16/10 - Received Replacement Letter of Credit 839BGC1000252 in the amount of $37,775 dated March 15, 2010. Kim 7/6/10 - Per Jill, hold f.0 until entire project is completed. Check status annually on July 1st. Kim 9/28/10 - Received letter from Ryland Homes requesting reduction in letter of credit to $24,350. Jill Sinclair authorized reduction. Reduction letter sent M Deutsche Bank on 9/29/10. Waiting for confirmation of reduction. Check status 7/1/11. Kim 10/11/10 - Received Amendment to Letter of Credit 839BGC1000252 dated 10/6/10 decreasing amount by $13.425 to leave a new balance of $24,350. Kim ......_..........._...__..._...__._._.................................... ............................................................................................. ..................... ....... -......................................................................................... ... o MIOIOWS DweEpnwt ewp. tW1t/t0e1�g2 RA 5--slelue P=Pronry ECAHNED Pegs' RYLAND HOMES Transmittal Twin Cities Division _Mail _Courier _Other X FedEx 7599 Anagram Drive To: Jill Sinclair Eden Prairie, MN 55344 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard 952.229.6000 Tel PO Box 147 952.229.6024 Fax Chanhassen, MN 55317 From: Mark Sonstegard Date: October 8, 2010 Subject: Preserve at Bluff Creek 151 Addition, Planning Case No. 2006-14 With this transmittal, please find an Amendment to Irrevocable Letter of Credit reducing the Letter of Credit No. 839BGC1000252. Thanks Mark SCANNED CITY OF September 29, 2010 CHEMSEN 7700 Market Boulevard Reynaldo M. de los Reyes PO Box 147 Deutsche Bank AG New York Chanhassen, MN 55317 Trade and Risk Services 60 Wall Street / NYC60-2517 Administration New York, NY 10005-2858 Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax:952.227.1110 Re: Letter of Credit No. 839BGC1000252 Reduction Park & Remation Preserve at Bluff Creek lst Addition Building Inspections Planning Case No. 2006-14 Phone: 952.227.1180 Sincerely, Fax: 952.227.1190 Dear Mr. de los Reyes: Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Please accept this letter as authorization to reduce Letter of Credit No. Fax: 952.227.1170 839BGC1000252 in the amount of $37,775 by $13,425 to leave a remaining balance of $24,350. Please send written acknowledgement of this reduction at your earliest Fnlatlu Phone: 952.227.1140 convenience. Fax 952.227.1110 If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me by email at Park & Remation isinclair@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or at 952-227-1133. Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax 952.227.1110 Sincerely, Recreation Center CM OF CHANHASSEN 2310 Couper Boulevar27.1400 /1 Fax: 952.227,1404 /�6d J"tt� Planning & Jill Sinclair Natural Resources Environmental Resources Coordinator Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax:952.227.1110 JS:ktm Public Works 1591 Palk Road c: Mark Sonstegard, Ryland Homes Phone: 952.227.1300 F2x:952.227.1310 glpiant2006 planning case %0&14 the pre e* reduction letter 9-29-201OAm Senior Welter Rue: 952.227.1125 Fax:952.227.1110 Nib site wwwAchanhassennn.us Chanhassen is a Community for Lite -Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow SCANNED September 24, 2010 Jill Sinclair City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RCEIVED SEP 2 g 2010 CITY OF CHANHASSEN RYLAN D HOMES' TWIN CITIES DIVISION 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-229-6000 Office 952-229-6024 Fax ..ryland.com Re: The Preserve at Bluff Creek Landscape LOC # 839BGC 1000252 Reduction Request Dear Jill: As I stated in my last letter requesting a LOC reduction, Ryland Homes did not exercise its options to develop additional lots with Gayle Degler, the landowner and this past summer Ryland completed all the landscape within the property Ryland had purchased within The Preserve at Bluff Creek. Therefore, Ryland request our landscape surety be reduced down to the landscaping we install during this past summer plus 25%. Remaining Landscaping within it's one year warranty planted in 2010: (11) Foundation Landscape Packages @ $740 $ 8,140 (27) Blvd Trees @ $420 $11,340 Sub Total $19,480 Total Adding 25% $24,350 Currently the City of Chanhassen is holding a $37,775 Landscape LOC provided by Ryland homes for The Preserve at Bluff Creek development. Ryland request the LOC be reduced to $24,350. If you have any questions with this request, please call me at (952) 229-6007. Thank you for you time with this matter. Sincerely, / �v Mark Sonstegard Land Development Manager Ryland Homes, Twin Cities 90/10 ov, 40 WOW P SCANNED Transmittal Mail FedEx Courier X Other To: Gordy Stauff City of Chanhassen From: Mark Sonstegard Date: March 16, 2010 RYLAND HOMES Twin Cities Division 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952.229.6000 Tel 952.229.6024 Fax Subject: The Preserve at Bluff Creek LOC Replacements Gordy, With this transmittal, please find two replacement LOC's for The Preserve at Bluff Creek. • Deutsche Bank LOC 83BGC1000251 will replace Guaranty Bank's LOC 1429 which covered the 15` Addition improvements. Per your February 9, 2009 letter, the value of this LOC is set at $48,000. • Deutsche Bank LOC 839BGC1000252 replaces Guaranty Bank's LOC 1506 which covers The Preserves landscaping. Per Jill Sinclair's October 2, 2009 letter, the value of this LOC is set at $37,775. Please call me at (952) 229-6007 if you have any questions with these LOC's. Mark CITY OF RECENNEH�ASSEN MAR 1 6 2010 ENGINEERING DEPT. SCANNEC Status Report 6/15/10 PLAN.OR2 Jul 2000 a 000 on r 2000 S M T W T F S T F S T F 13 4 5 1 2 2 3 458-78 101112 �- 8. 9 9 10 1f 12 13.14 15 17 18 19 14 15 16 16 17 18 19 20 31 22 24 26,25 21 22 23 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 31- - - - 28 29 303031....._...... _._.__ ... __..... _... P Securities ]Start Due S P Category Description 6/15/10 6/15/10 P LC#1506 Expires 1/18/08 Preserve at Bluff Creek 1 st Addition Planning Case 2006-14 $122,601 (landscaping) Letter of Credit automatically renews for successive one-year terms Notify Jill Sinclair 1127/07 - Received notice from bank cancelling LC as of 1/18/08. Per Jill, UC most be renewed. Sent letter to bank requesting renewal of LC to 1/18/09. Check status on 12/10/07. KM 12/6/07 - Received letter from Guaranty Bank authorizing extension of LC to 1/18/09. Check status 11/15/08. Kim 10/28/08 - Per Jill, subdivision is still under construction. LC needs to be retained through the 2009 growing season. Check status 8-15-09. Kim 8/17/09 -Notified Jill. 8/20/09 -Per Jill, site is still under construction. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 10/2209 - Per Jill, mailed letter to bank authorized reducti to $37,775. Wa ng for confirmation from bank. Kim 11/30/09 - Received letter from FDIC indicating Guaranty Bank is in receivership and letter of credit is being repudiated. Per Roger Knutson, the city can request a claim form and file a claim but he is doubtful the city will receive anything. Kim C 2009 L.I. nwelapmenl Coq 119tlW at 1 se PM S= ea P.Rnnly SCANNED Page t Meuwissen, Kim From: Fauske, Alyson Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:48 AM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: Preserve at Bluff Creek Repudiation of Letters of Credit from FDIC Attachments: image001.jpg; image002.gif Mark has to go through corporate to get approval, so it will take a little time. From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:27 AM To: Fauske, Alyson Subject: RE: Preserve at Bluff Creek Repudiation of Letters of Credit from FDIC Alyson — Do you have an updated status on the cash escrows? KIM MEUWISSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1107 MAILTO: KMEUWISSENPCLCHANHASSEN.XI N. LS Find us on Facebook From: Fauske, Alyson Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 3:04 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim; Sinclair, Jill; Stauff, Gordy; Steckling, Jean; Aanenson, Kate Subject: RE: Preserve at Bluff Creek Repudiation of Letters of Credit from FDIC I just spoke with Mark Sonstegard at Ryland. He is working on getting cash escrows to us to cover the remaining securities. From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 1:17 PM To: Sinclair, Jill; Stauff, Gordy; Steckling, Jean; Fauske, Alyson; Aanenson, Kate Subject: FW: Preserve at Bluff Creek Repudiation of Letters of Credit from FDIC Per Roger's reply (see below) the letters of credit a now void. Should we attempt to request a proof of claim form and file a claim? Please advise. KIM MEUMSSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1107 MAI LTO: KMEU4YISSEN@Cl. CHANHASSEN. AIN. L`� ©Find u5 on Facebook From: Roger Knutson [mailto:RKnutson@ck-law.com) Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 12:05 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: Preserve at Bluff Creek Repudiation of Letters of Credit from FDIC The letters of credit are now void. Per the letters from the FDIC you can request a proof of claim form and file a claim but don't hold your breath. The city will very very likely get nothing. From: Meuwissen, Kim [mailto:kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 10:57 AM To: Roger Knutson Cc: Sinclair, Jill; Steckling, Jean; Stauff, Gordy Subject: Preserve at Bluff Creek Repudiation of Letters of Credit from FDIC Roger, We received the attached two letters from the FDIC today referencing two letters of credit the City is holding for The Preserve at Bluff Creek. Letter of Credit 1429 has a remaining balance of $48,000. Letter of Credit 1506 has a remaining balance of $37,775. As the project is not complete, these securities need to remain in place. Please review the attached letters and advise as to what steps the City needs to take in this matter. KIM MEUWISSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1107 hfAl LTO:KMEUW l SSEN@Cf.CHANHASSEN. MN. US ©Find us on Facebook FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED RECEIPT NO. -400 q tgz o Ooo 3 82S o ZS 81 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: 10105 — Guaranty Bank Austin, Texas — In Receivership Division of Resolutions and Receiverships November 11, 2009 RECEIVED NOV 3 0 2009 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Repudiation of Letter of Credit Letter of Credit #1506 dated May 22, 2007, between Guaranty Bank and The Ryland Group Closing Date: August 21, 2009 Claims Bar Date: Ninety Days From Date Of This Letter Dear Sir or Madam: On August 21, 2009, Guaranty Bank (the "Institution") was closed by the Office of Thrift Supervision. Subsequently, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was appointed as receiver of the Institution (the "Receiver"). Under the laws of the United States, the Receiver is charged with the duty of winding up the affairs of the former Institution. In order to achieve this goal, the Receiver is given the right under 12 U.S.C. Section 1821(e) to repudiate undertakings entered into by the Institution where it finds such undertakings to be burdensome and where such repudiation will promote the orderly administration of the Institution's affairs. The Institution's records indicate that you may be a party to the above -referenced Letter(s) of Credit. The Receiver has determined that the above-described Letter(s) of Credit are burdensome and that disaffirmance of said Letter(s) of Credit will promote the orderly administration of the Institution's affairs. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Receiver has elected to disaffirm the above -referenced Letter(s) of Credit to the full extent, if any, that it represents an enforceable obligation of the Institution or the Receiver. This disaffirmance shall only affect an obligation of the Institution or the Receiver, and is not a dissaffirmance on behalf of other parties, if any. You may determine that the Receiver's decision to disaffirm the above Letter(s) of Credit gives you a claim against the receivership. If so, you must file a Proof of Claim form with the Receiver no later than ninety days from the date of this letter. A Proof of Claim form may be obtained by calling (972) 761-8677. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for Guaranty Bank 1601 Bryan Street Dallas, TX 75201 Attention: Claim Agent If you have any questions concerning any of the matters discussed above, you may contact the Receiver at the above address. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver of Guaranty Bank Mark Randall, Receiver -In -Charge FDIC as Receiver for Guaranty Bank cc: Receiver -In -Charge: Mark Randall Claims Department Legal Dept: Lee Van Fleet CITY OF October 2, 2009 CIIANIIASSEN Planning Case No. 2006-14 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Ms. Juanita Vidal Chanhassen, MN 55317 Loan Administrator Engineering Guaranty Bank Administration 8333 Douglas Phone: 952.227.1100 Dallas, TX 75225 Fax: 952.227.1110 acknowledgement of this reduction at your earliest convenience- CrrY OF CHANHASSEN Recreation Center Coulter Boulevard Phon gal Phone:952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Jill Sinclair Flaming& Environmental Resource Specialist Nahrtal Resources / Phone: 952.227.1130 JS:kJ�n Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Warks c: Mark Sonstegard, Ryland Homes 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 gip1an\2006 pram ng cases\06-14 the prere eVc reduction 10-2-09.dm Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 9512.227.1110 Web Site wwvv.ci,chanhassen.mn.us Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Re: Letter of Credit 1506 Reduction — The Preserve at Bluff Creek Building Inspections Planning Case No. 2006-14 Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax. 952.227.1190 Dear Ms. Vidal: Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Please accept this letter as authorization to reduce Letter of Credit No. 1506 by Fax: 952.227.1170 $84,826 to leave a remaining balance of $37,775. Please send written acknowledgement of this reduction at your earliest convenience- Finance PFax:952..271110 Fax: 952.227.1110 If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me by email at isinclair@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or at 952-227-1133. Park & Recreation Plane: 952.227.1120 Sincerely, Fax:952.227.1110 CrrY OF CHANHASSEN Recreation Center Coulter Boulevard Phon gal Phone:952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Jill Sinclair Flaming& Environmental Resource Specialist Nahrtal Resources / Phone: 952.227.1130 JS:kJ�n Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Warks c: Mark Sonstegard, Ryland Homes 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 gip1an\2006 pram ng cases\06-14 the prere eVc reduction 10-2-09.dm Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 9512.227.1110 Web Site wwvv.ci,chanhassen.mn.us Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow September 29, 2009 Jill Sinclair City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: The Preserve at Bluff Creek Landscape LOC # 1506 Reduction Request Dear Jill: RYLAND HOMES` TWIN CmES DIVISION 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-229-6000 Office 952-229-6024 Fax www.rylcncltwincities.com Builder's License #20035443 Currently the City of Chanhassen is holding a $122,601.00 Landscape Surety for common area landscaping, irrigation, and foundation plantings within The Preserve at Bluff Creek development. As you may know, Ryland Homes did not exercise its options to develop additional lots with Gayle Degler, the landowner. Therefore development has been significantly reduced in size. To date, Ryland has completed all common area landscaping associated with the I' Addition and the tot lot park area associated with the 2°d Addition. At this time Ryland request a reduction in the current surety to $39,963 which reflects the amount of landscaping remaining to be completed. Remaining landscaping to be completed: (17) Foundation Landscape Packages @ $740 $12,580 (42) Blvd Trees @ $420 $17,640 Sub Total $30,220 Total adding 25% $37,775 Attached for your use is a site map of the Preserve noting which lots are "Occupied" or complete and which lots remain to be completed, "Available", "Sold", or "Quick Delivery". If you have any questions with this request, please call me at (952) 229-6007. Thank you for you time with this matter. Sincerely, Mark Sonstegard Land Development Manager Ryland Homes, Twin Cities I cc cc cc C O CW G 0 0 z U GuapriV BANK December 5, 2007 City of Chanhassen, Beneficiary 7700 Market Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: City Manager Re: Our Standby Letter of Credit No. 1506 Account of The Ryland Group For $ 122,601.00 Gentlemen: RECEIVED DEC 0 6 2007 CITY OF CF'AWHA%EN On November 26, 2007 we sent you a letter advising that the validity of the above referenced letter of credit would not be extended beyond its current expiration date of January 18, 2008. Please disregard the said letter. We hereby confirm that this letter of credit will be automatically extended to January 18, 2009 in accordance with its automatic extension clause. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at 214-360-1632 CC:Mark Sonstegard Land Development Manager Ryland Homes, Twin Cities Sent via FedEx GUARANTY BANK Naim: Juanita Vidal Title: Loan Administrator Cl: L'GC 0 6 2007 ENGINEER!%G DEPT. 8333 Douglas MEMBER Q Dallas, TX 75225 FDIC ,Mr 7 �.: e p f November 28, 2007 Juanita Vidal Guaranty Bank 8333 Douglas Ave. Dallas, TX 75225 n U Re: Letter of Credit No. 1506 Dear Juanita Vidal: RYLAND HOMES TWIN CITIES DIVISION 1599 Anagram Dn- Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-229-6000 office 952-229-6024 Fax w. 'ryland.com Builder's License #20035443 Ryland Homes was coped on your November 26", 2007 letter to the City of Chanhassen (attached) noting a 45 day notification of cancellation on Letter of Credit No. 1506. The LOC sill needs to be in place, therefore please renew the Letter of Credit No. 1506 for an additional year. Please call me at (952) 229-6007 if you have any questions. Sincerely, So to Mark S and g Land Development Manager Ryland Homes, Twin Cities CC: Andrew Lee, Ryland Homes City of Chanhassen Recreation Center Sincerely, 2310 Coulter BoulevardPhone: f Fax: 2.227.14400 Fax: 952.227.1404 (x�� Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Jill Sinclair Fax: 952.227.1110 Environmental Resources Specialist Public Worts 1591 Park Road JS:ktm Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Enclosures Senior Center g %planx2006 planning cases106-14 the preserve\landscape ice letter 1st addn renewal request.doc Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding bails, and beautiful parks. A groat place to live, work, and play. November 27, 2007 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Ryland Homes Mark Sonspegard 7700 Market Boulevard Land Development Coordinator PO Box 147 7599 Anagram Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ellen Prairie, MN 55344 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Re: Landscape Letter of Credit No. 1506 Renewal Request Fax: 952.227.1110 The Preserve 131 Addition — Planning Case 06-14 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227,1190 Dear Mr. Sonspegard: Fax 952.227.1190 Engineering The City of Chanhassen received a 45 -day notification of cancellation of the Phone: 952.227.1160 above -referenced letter of credit from Guaranty Bank. The letter of credit is due Fax: 95 2 22 7.11 70 to expire on January 18, 2008. The purpose of this letter of credit is to guarantee Finance all common area landscaping, irrigation, and foundation plantings. Since the Phone: 952.227.1140 project is incomplete, the City is requesting a new landscape letter of credit in the Fax: 952.227.1110 amount of $122,601.00 be issued with an expiration dated of January 18, 2009. Part & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 If you have any questions or concerns about this matter, please contact me. Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center Sincerely, 2310 Coulter BoulevardPhone: f Fax: 2.227.14400 Fax: 952.227.1404 (x�� Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Jill Sinclair Fax: 952.227.1110 Environmental Resources Specialist Public Worts 1591 Park Road JS:ktm Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Enclosures Senior Center g %planx2006 planning cases106-14 the preserve\landscape ice letter 1st addn renewal request.doc Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding bails, and beautiful parks. A groat place to live, work, and play. BuaoVBANK IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 1506 November 26, 2007 City of Chanhassen, Beneficiary 7700 Market Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attention: City Manager Gentlemen: Guaranty Bank's Letter of Credit No.1506 for the account of The Ryland Group, Inc. dated January 18, 2007 in the amount of $122,601.00 is due to expire on January 18, 2008. As you are aware, a 45 day notification of cancellation is a condition of this Letter of Credit. This is your official notification that Guaranty Bank has elected not to renew of Letter of Credit No.1506 and it will expire on January 18, 2008. If you should still require this Letter of Credit, please contact The Ryland Group, Inc. Cc: The Ryland Group GUARANTY BANK By: v(d"j Na Juanita Vidal Title: Loan Administrator RECEIVED NOV 2 7 2007 8333 Douglas MEMBER Dallas, Tx 75225 FDIC G.ia!an aTemplvinfantl company Date: January 18, 2007 IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NUMBER: 1506 Beneficiary/Seller: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Applicant/Buyer: The Ryland Group, Inc. 24025 Park Sorrento, Suite 400 Calabasas, CA 91302 Amount: Not Exceeding U.S. Dollars $122,601.00 One Hundred Twenty Two Thousand Six Hundred One and No/100 U.S. Dollars Expiry Date: January 18, 2008 At Our Counters We hereby issue in your favor this Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit, in the aggregate amount of One Hundred Twenty Two Thousand Six Hundred One and No/100 U.S. Dollars ($122,601.00), which is available by presentation of your draft at sight drawn on Guaranty Bank, having an address at 8333 Douglas Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75225, attention: Home Builder Finance Loan Support, 2ed Floor, bearing the clause: "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. 1506 of Guaranty Bank" accompanied by the original of this Letter of Credit and the signed statement addressed to us in the form attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by this reference. Notwithstanding anything set forth therein to the contrary, this Letter of Credit shall remain in force until the "Expiry Date" specified above. This Lettei of Credit sets forth in full the terms of our undertaking to you. Such understanding shall not in any way be modified, amended or amplified by reference to any document or instrument referred or related to herein and any such reference shall not be deemed to incorporate herein by reference any such document or instrument. The original of this Letter of Credit must be presented to us with any drawings hereunder for our endorsement of any payments effected by us. Partial Drawings are permitted. This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew, without amendment, for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be January 18 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by overnight courier, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. 8333 Douglas Ave. Dallas. T%75225 FDIC 1:21 _ SCANNED This Letter of Credit is irrevocable and is not transferable nor assignable If cancellation of this Letter of Credit is required before the expiry date stated herein as extended from time to time, the original of this Letter of Credit must be returned to us accompanied by the Beneficiary's Letter requesting cancellation in the form attached hereto as Attachment B. This Letter of Credit shall also be automatically reduced upon receipt by us of Attachment B. An amendment to this Letter of Credit will be issued to confirm this action. Except as expressly provided herein, this Letter of Credit is subject to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (current revision), International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. If you require any assistance or have any questions regarding this transaction, please call Linda Bryant at 214-360- 4874. Guaranty Bank By: Name: LindaBryant Title: Senior Vice President Director, Home Builder Finance Loan Support Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 1506 Attachment A Attached to and made a part of Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit No. 1506, dated January 18, 2007 issued by Guaranty Bank to City of Chanhassen (`Beneficiary") for The Ryland Group ("Applicant'). Statement The undersigned, being a Beneficiary under Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit No. 1506 (the "Letter of Credit') hereby certifies and represents that Buyer is in default of its obligation under that certain Agreement between Buyer and Seller, dated , 200_ Seller has given Buyer the attached written thirty (30) days notice to cure such default and Buyer has failed to cure such default within the aforesaid thirty (30) days cure period. Beneficiary By: _ Name: Title: SCANNED Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 1506 Attachment "B" (On Beneficiary's Letter head) Date: January 18, 2007 The Ryland Group, Inc. AND Guaranty Bank 24025 Park Sorrento, Suite 400 8333 Douglas Avenue Calabasas, CA 91302 Dallas, TX 75225 Atm: Home Builder Finance Loan Support, 2nd Floor Ref: Letter of Credit No. 1506 As Beneficiary of the above referenced Letter of Credit, we request that the following actions(s) be taken as evidenced by our initials and signature below: Please initial: Authorization: City of Chanhassen By: _ Name: Title: REDUCE the amount from EXTEND the expiry date from mS to CANCEL this Letter of Credit effective immediately. Enclosed herewith are the original Letter of Credit documents, including the amendments thereto. (Note: If any of these documents are not included with this letter, you must specify each missing document and explain the reason why they are not being retumed.) The Ryland Group, Inc. By: Name: Title: SCANNED JAN 2 3 ?Ori CITY OF CHANHA66Ei,, January 19, 2007 City of Chanhassen Jill Sinclair Environmental Resource Specialist 7700 Market Blvd. P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: The Preserve - Landscape Bond Jill, RYLAN D HOMES TWIN CITIES DIVISION 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-229-6000 Office 952-229-6024 Fax w .ryland.com Builder's License #20035443 Enclosed is Letter of Credit #1506 for landscaping at The Preserve at Bluff Creek 0 Addition. Please retain this letter of credit until the work is complete. Please contact me with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, �; Matt DuCette Ryland Homes Land Development Coordinator 612.366.0735 mobile 952.229.6059 office 952.229.6024 fax Enclosure (1) SCANNED ATTORNEYS' GARY C. WILKERSON, P.A. KYLE J. HEGNA, P.A. JEFFREY W. JACOBS TODD I. BAUMGARTNER CHRISTOPHER J. JOHNSTON MORGAN W. KAVANAUGH VIA U.S. MAIL Bob Generous, AICP City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 WILKERSON & HEGNA, P.L.L.P. A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW ONE CORPORATE CENTER 111, SUITE 300 7300 METRO BOULEVARD EDINA, MN 55439-2302 TELEPHONE: 952-897-1707 FACSIMILE: 952-897-3534 EMAIL: KHEGNAQWILKERSONHEGNA.COM OUR FILE NO. 24729 June 18, 2014 RE: 9111 Audubon Road –Planning Case #2006-14 PARALEGALS: JOANN K. BERG JOAN N. YOUNG KELLY A. GRANT MEAD JUN 19 2014 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Dear Mr. Generous: As you are already aware, I represent Mr. Gayle Degler and Mrs. Lois Degler. I am writing to confirm our conversation today whereby you agreed to allow the accessory structure located next to the city lift station (PID 250220800) to remain in place until the Property (the "Property") is developed. Further, upon any development of the Property, Mr. and Mrs. Degler have agreed to remove the structure. I appreciate your willingness to reach a mutual resolution. Please contact me should you have any questions. Very truly yours, WILKERSON & HEGNA, P.L.L.P. A— K egna KJH\rbs Cc: Client June 7, 2006 Riley Legal Advisor: Krebsbach and Haik, Ltd. 225 South Sixth Street. Suite 4320 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Purgatory 612 333-7400 Fax: 612 333-6959 B I u ff Creek Engineering Advisor: Barr Engineering 4700 West 77th Street Watershed District Minneapolis, MN 952 632-2600 Fax:x:95 952 832-2601 Web Site: http//www.rileypurgatorybluffcreek.org Mr. Steve Logan Ryland Homes 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Permit #2006-16: The Preserve: Chanhassen Dear Mr. Logan: The Board of Managers of the Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plans and grading and land alteration permit application as submitted to the District for The Preserve development in Chanhassen. The Managers approve of the grading and land alteration permit subject to the following conditions: I. All conditions as outlined in the attached General Provisions are applicable. 2- Because of the proximity of the development to Bluff Creek and potential impacts resulting from disturbance of 51 acres of the 80 -acre site, the District will require that a performance bond or letter of credit in the amount of $192,000 be submitted. This security will enable the District to install additional erosion control measures should it become necessary and/or restore disturbed areas on the site should it become necessary. This performance bond or letter of credit must be submitted to the District's legal advisor for review and approval. 3. The District will require a covenant be placed on the tide to Lots 1-6, Block 1; Lots 1-14, Block 6; Lots 1-7, Block 12; and Lots 1-13, Block 13 indicating that the low floor elevation for structures on these lots be set at a minimum elevation of 884 M.S.L. as shown on the plan prepared by Westwood Professional Services. This covenant must be submitted to the District's legal advisor for review and approval. 4. If the existing structure on the site shown to be razed is served by a private domestic water supply well, the well must be abandoned in accordance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Minnesota Department of Health criteria. A copy of the well abandonment certification must be submitted to the District's legal advisor otherwise the permittee shall certify to the District in writing that no private domestic water supply wells are located on the property. If you have any questions regarding the conditions of the District's permit, please call us at 952-832-2600. Sincerely, Ro C.Obermeyer BARB ENGINEERING Engineers for the District by the Board of Managers J�GIBLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT President .i w c: FaufHaik Mark Dillon Lori Haak✓ Justin Larson ::ODMA\PCDoCS\DOCS\247282x1 Board of Managers Howard Peterson Mark Dillon Conrad Fiskness Michael Casanova Erin Ahola Permit: #2006-15 Project Name: The Preserve: Chanhassen Approval Date: June 7 2006 General Provisions 1. All erosion control measures shown on the plans must be installed prior to commencement of grading operations and be maintained until all areas altered on the site have been restored. If silt fence is used, the bottom flap must be buried and the maximum allowable spacing between posts is 4 -foot on center. All posts must be either 2" x 2" pine, hardwood, or steel fence posts. If hay bales are used, all bales must be staked in place and reinforced on the downstream side with snow fence. The silt fence must be orange in color, which will be more evident and easier to locate for removal at the completion of the project. 2. All areas altered because of construction must be restored with seed and disced mulch, sod, wood fiber blanket, or be hard surfaced within two weeks from the completion of construction or no later than November 15, 2006. 3. Upon completion of construction and restoration of areas disturbed, the permit applicant is responsible for the removal of all erosion control measures installed throughout the site. 4. Street sweeping must be undertaken and completed on an as -needed basis. 5. At the entryway onto the site, a rock filter dike being a minimum of 2 feet in height and having maximum side slopes of 4:1 must be constructed. This rock filter dike will enable construction traffic to enter the site and also provide an erosion control facility. 6. The District must be notified in writing a minimum of 48 hours prior to commencement of construction. Upon receipt of this notification, a field inspection of the project site by the District's engineer will be undertaken to ensure that all erosion control measures have been properly installed. Construction cannot commence until this field inspection has been completed. 7. Upon completion of the project, the permit applicant is required to complete and submit the middle portion of the attached permit, indicating that the project has been completed. Upon receipt of this application, a field inspection of the site by the District's engineering advisor will be undertaken to ensure that all areas have been properly restored and that all erosion control measures throughout the project site have been removed. 8. The Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD), its officers, employees and agents review, comment upon, and approve plans and specifications prepared by permit applicants and their consultants for the limited administrative purpose of determining whether there is reasonable assurance that the proposed project will comply with the regulations and criteria of the RPBCWD and other state and federal agencies. The determination of the RPBCWD that issuance of this permit is appropriate was made in reliance on the information provided by the applicant. ::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS\247282\l I . 9. The grant of this permit shall not in any way relieve the permittee, its engineer, or other professional consultants of responsibility, nor shall it make the RPBCWD responsible for the technical adequacy of the engineer's or consultant's work. The grant of this permit shall not relieve the permittee from complying with all conditions and requirements of the permit, which shall be retained, by the permittee with the pemrit. 10. The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations. 11. This permit is permissive only. No liability shall be imposed upon the RPBCWD or any of its officers, agents or employees, officially or personally, on account of the granting of this permit or on account of any damage to any person or property resulting from any act or omission of the permittee or any of its agents, employees, or contractors. 12. In all cases where the doing by the permittee of anything authorized by this permit shall involve the taking, using, or damaging of any property, rights or interests of any other person or persons, or of any publicly owned lands or improvements or interests, the permittee, before proceeding therewith, shall obtain the written consent of all persons, agencies, or authorities concerned, and shall acquire all necessary property, rights and interest. 13. This permit is not transferable. The permittee shall make no changes, without written permission previously obtained from the RPBCWD, in the dimensions, capacity, or location of any items of work authorized by this permit. 14. The permittee shall grant access to the site at all reasonable times during and after construction to authorized representatives of the RPBCWD for inspection of the work authorized by this permit. 15. This permit may be terminated by the RPBCWD at any time deemed necessary in the interest of public health and welfare, or for violation of any of the provisions of this permit, unless otherwise provided in the special provisions. 16. Construction work authorized under this permit shall be completed on or before date specified above. The permittee may, in writing, request that the RPBCWD extend the time to complete the project and shall state the reason for any requested extension. 17. If dewatering is required and sump pumps are used, all pumped water must be discharged through an erosion control facility prior to leaving the construction site. Proper energy dissipation must be provided at the outlet of the pump system. ::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS\247282\1 2 A- . rLCAOU CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Applicant Name and Address: (21(LAN D t-\cM- -7s9q Aa ACIZA-� Deep Gbr" P¢.a121c M^j S_:e_3 ( Contact:E/&q�j SOLI,/VAN Phone: EZ -7_i;9- Gogh Fax: 99z- Z7 -q- Gozy Email: Planning Case No. af)— CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JUN 0 5 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Owner Name and Address: Contact: Phone: Fax: Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Nonconforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development' Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)' Subdivision' f iN,4 L PL 4 Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) Variance (VAR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign — $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" - $50 CUP/SPR/VAC/VARANAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEES �) S 6 Pd Cr`* 3089 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. `Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 ('.tif) format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. 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. SCANNED PROJECT NAME: P2 E S C Qy 1L LOCATION: T Goo" E2 Ly.ya ✓ Bc ✓� .4✓Av LeO J /l0 9 p LEGAL DESCRIPTION: EpsT H4LC o•F So -O%. asT YLJ Sem ZZ- T•—St1P Il6 2 Z 3 TOTAL ACREAGE: Ae-r�S WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: Q u e A.t✓ REQUESTED ZONING: d A (MIS 2 G 5 y g- cg PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: 02 Lo L REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: a-3 REASON FOR REQUEST: Citi °r L PLA' This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly 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 Tide, 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. Z�� Si nature of pi n Signature of Fee Owner GipLAMforms\Development Review Appliwtion.DOC 6.2- DG - Date 5-49 Date Rev. 12105 SCANNFp Riley 160 Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Web Site: http//www.rileypurgatorybluffcreek.org February 7, 2007 Mr. Matt DuCette Land Development Coordinator Ryland Homes 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Permit Modification #2006-16: The Preserve: Chanhassen Dear Mr. DuCette: Legal Advisor: Krebsbach and Haik, Ltd. 225 South Sixth Street, Suite 4320 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612 333-7400 Fax: 612 333-6959 Engineering Advisor. Barr Engineering 4700 West 77th Street Minneapolis, MN 55435 952 832-2600 Fax: 952 832-2601 RECEIVEV MAR 2 2 2007 CITY OF CHANHASSEN The Board of Managers of the Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the permit modification dated January 8, 2007 as submitted to the District for Permit #2006-16 for The Preserve development in Chanhassen. Based on our review of this permit modification request and the plans previously approved by the Board, the Managers eliminated Condition #3 of the District's June 7, 2006 approval which requires that a covenant be placed on the title to Lots 1-6, Block 1; Lots 1-14, Block 6; Lots 1-7, Block 12; and Lots 1-13, Block 13 indicating that the low floor elevation for structures on these lots be set at a minimum elevation of 884 M.S.L. All other conditions of the District's June 7, 2006 approval remain applicable. If you have any questions, please call us at 952-832-2600. Sincerely, bert C. Obermeyer BARR ENGINEERING CO. Engineers for the District ApprovS0 by the Board of Managers GAT Y -BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT President D te: ho c: Paul Haik Erin Ahola Lori Haak✓ ::0DMA\PCD0C!S\D0CSVA9047\1 Board of Managers Howard Peterson James Landini Kenneth Wend Michael Casanova Erin Ahola CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 06/06/2006 9:26:24 AM Receipt No. 0012200 CLERK: katie PAYEE: THE RYLAND GROUP, INC 06-14 THE PRESERVE ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 250.00 Total Cash Check 3099 Change 250.00 0.00 250.00 0.00 {CANNED Remarks: Kate, The enclosed information represents our preliminary PUD submittal for The Preserve. We anticipate that all the required information is included, but if you have need of any further information, just let me know. Thanks, Cory Meyer Delivery: Messenger - Rush (2 hr) cc: File, Dan Cook - Pemtom, Brian Sullivan - Ryland Homes N [1— Sf. Q YUER*" SCAMM TRANSMITTAL w.mave Professional SeFrnas 7699 Anagram Orae Eden Prairie. MN 553M n.nr 952-937-5150 FA% 952-937-5821 TOLL FREE 1.888-937-5150 ". Date: March 17, 2006 ERIAU WRP54hft*W.1WdPROOm ,ENE,Er. � Re: The Preserve O°d File 20031110 To: Kate R Aanenson CITY CF CHANHASSEN City of Chanhassen RECEIVED 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 MAR 1 7 2006 Chanhassen, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN P(A, NNING DEPT From: Cory Meyer Items: No Description 16 Full Size Plan Sets 1 8.5 x 11 Reduction 1 CD w/ .tif files 1 Application form, fees, and narrative Architecture streetscape, elevations, and floorplans I Stormwater Calculations Purpose: For your approval Remarks: Kate, The enclosed information represents our preliminary PUD submittal for The Preserve. We anticipate that all the required information is included, but if you have need of any further information, just let me know. Thanks, Cory Meyer Delivery: Messenger - Rush (2 hr) cc: File, Dan Cook - Pemtom, Brian Sullivan - Ryland Homes N [1— Sf. Q YUER*" SCAMM Breakdown of Fees The Preserve Planning Case No. 06-14 $425 Conditional Use Permit $750 Planned Unit Development $2,940 Subdivision ($600 + $15/156 lots) $2,840 Site Plan Review ($500 + $15/156 lots) $200 Notification Sign $50 Recording Fee (not included with submittal) $7,205 TOTAL FEE $7,155 Check No. 6944 SCANN.D CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 06-14 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, April 18, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for Rezoning from A2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of approximately 80 acres into 156 single-family cluster lots; Site Plan Review; Conditional Use Permit for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; Wetland Alteration Permit for crossing Bluff Creek; and Variances on property located at 1630 Lyman Boulevard — THE PRESERVE. Applicant: The Pemtom Land Company. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sere/vlan/06-14.htnil or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Email: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1139 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on April 6, 2006) CITY OF OF CHANHASSEN • • P 0 BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 03/20/2006 8:35:31 AM Receipt No. 0005673 CLERK: danielle PAYEE: The Pemtom Land Company 7697 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie MN 55344 The Preserve 06-14 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 6,955.00 Sign Rent 200.00 Total Cash Check 6944 Change 7,155.00 0.00 7,155.00 0.00 SCANNED DETACH AND RETAIN THIS STATEMENT THE PENTON LAND COMPANY IFNNOT COqR,RECHEDCHECK PLEASE NOT.' SIS IN ENT OF PROMPTLYM NO RECEIPT ...IHOEO_ BlloelOielivE+s� S.BODJ]bOiW wa� DELUXE -FORM WVCY-2 V-7 3/15/06 Development REview Application on Degler property CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT 7,155.00 Park a Recreation I have reviewed the above rezoning plan for the above project. In order to comply with Phone 9522.227 7.1110 Fax 952.227.1110 CITY OF or city ordinancelpolicy requirements. The plan review is based on the available CIIMIIIASSEN information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the Phone: 952.227.1400 appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. MEMORANDUM 7700 Market Boulevard Planning & 1. A 10 -foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, PO Box 147 trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. Phone: 952.227.1130 Chanhassen, MN 55317 TO: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Administration Phone. 952.227.1100 FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Fax: 952.227.1110 Fax 952.227.1310 PFax 952.227.1310 installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable nor to and installed. P P DATE: April 7, 2006 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1125 Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 SUBJ: Request for rezoning from A2 to PUD -R, subdivision of approximately 3. Temporary street signs shall be installed at street intersections once construction Web SRO 80 acres into 156 single family lots, site plan review, conditional use Engineering State Fire Code Section 501.4. permit for development within the Bluff Creek Overly District, wetland Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 alteration permit for crossing Bluff Creek and variances on property located at 1630 Lyman Boulevard — The Preserve. Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Planning Case: 06-14 Park a Recreation I have reviewed the above rezoning plan for the above project. In order to comply with Phone 9522.227 7.1110 Fax 952.227.1110 the Chanhassen Fire D artment/Fire Prevention division, I have the following fire code � g or city ordinancelpolicy requirements. The plan review is based on the available Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the Phone: 952.227.1400 appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. Fax 952.227.1404 Planning & 1. A 10 -foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, Natural Resources trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. Phone: 952.227.1130 This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by Fax 952.227.1110 firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City ordinance #9-1. Public Works 1591 Park Road 2. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be Fax 952.227.1310 PFax 952.227.1310 installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable nor to and installed. P P during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of Senior center protection are provided. Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 3. Temporary street signs shall be installed at street intersections once construction Web SRO of the new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us State Fire Code Section 501.4. 4. Fire apparatus access roads 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 State Fire Code Section 503.2.3. The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director April 7,2006 Page 2 5. Submit proposed street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 6. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. An additional fire hydrant will be required to be located at the intersection of Block 18, Lot 16. G:\safety\nftImv06-14 WILLIAM J & VICKY L GOERS . 1601 LYMAN BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9402 DENNIS & RUTH CHADDERDON 8900 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8412 CHARLES E JR & PATRICIA HANSEN 1561 LYMAN BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9403 FOX PROPERTIES LP 27990 SMITHTOWN RD EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -7911 AURORA INVESTMENTS LLC 5215 EDINA INDUST BLVD SUITE 100 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55439 -3023 RONALD W& CAROL M ENTINGER 8851 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9407 TIMOTHY C BOYCE & TANAI ERICKSON 8941 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8412 JEFFREY S & LEE ANN FRANZ 8950 SUNSET TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9100 PETERSON-JACQUES FARM LAND CO C/O SEVERIN H PETERSON JR 15900 FLYING CLOUD DR EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55347 -4047 DEAN & LOIS DEGLER TRUSTEE OF TRUST 9111 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9412 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O GREG STICHA PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -0147 BARRY L & SUZANNE L LIBENGOOD 8950 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8412 DORSEY & DORSEY C/O RICK DORSEY 14215 GREEN VIEW CT EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 -3042 NDI MINNESOTA LLC C/O HOVSTONE PROPERTIES MN LLC 7615 SMETANA LN SUITE 160 EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55346 4700 ®WSJ W #AHmWvj@OkD-00"8j Dob �b W31 l �3@r wor6ianerolnnnn ljl aa7 a nw ue wet Impression antibourrage et A sechage rapide www.avery.com® AVERY@ 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160® 1 -800 -GO -AVERY WILLIAM J & VICKY L GOERS 1601 LYMAN BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9402 DENNIS & RUTH CHADDERDON 8900 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8412 CHARLES E JR & PATRICIA HANSEN 1561 LYMAN BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9403 FOX PROPERTIES LP 27990 SMITHTOWN RD EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -7911 AURORA INVESTMENTS LLC 5215 EDINA INDUST BLVD SUITE 100 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55439 -3023 RONALD W & CAROL M ENTINGER 8851 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -9407 TIMOTHY C BOYCE & TANA I ERICKSON 8941 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8412 JEFFREY S & LEE ANN FRANZ 8950 SUNSET TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -9100 PETERSON-JACQUES FARM LAND CO C/O SEVERIN H PETERSON JR 15900 FLYING CLOUD DR EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55347 -4047 DEAN & LOIS DEGLER TRUSTEE OF TRUST 9111 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9412 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O GREG STICHA PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -0147 BARRY L & SUZANNE L LIBENGOOD 8950 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8412 DORSEY & DORSEY C/O RICK DORSEY 14215 GREEN VIEW CT EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 -3042 NDI MINNESOTA LLC C/O HOVSTONE PROPERTIES MN LLC 7615 SMETANA LN SUITE 160 EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55346 -4700 A213AV-09-008- L ®09 L 5 31tl1d W 3.L ®AraAv asn 909Ls ®AH3A\/ 6ulluud aaJ3 a6pnws pus wer SWMP FEE WORKSHEET DATE April 6, 2006 PLANNING CASE 06-14 PROJECT The Preserve Site Area in Acres 79.86 Collector ROW (2.91) Lyman Boulevard ROW (1.83) Outlot A (27.70) Outlot B (0.35) Outlot K (1.90) Outlot M (4.71) Assessable area 40.46 ZONING CLASSIFICATION WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre Medium Density Acres Total S 1,600.00 40.46 S 64,736.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 4,400.00 40.46 $ 178,024.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL, PRICE Storm water pond acre 0.5 $ 1,600.00 $ - Outlet structure each $ 2,500.00 $ - SWMP FEE $ 242,760.00 SWMP CREDITS $ TOTAL SWNIP FEE $ 242,760.00 DATE PLANNING CASE PROJECT SWW FEE WORKSHEET November 14, 2005 Degler East Farm Site Area in Acres 78.4 BCOD Primary Corridor (30.4) NWI Wetlands (1.2) Storm Water Pond (1.0) Proposed Collector ROW (4.7) Assessable area 41.1 WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 1,093.00 41.1 $ 44,922.30 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 2,705.00 41.1 $ 111,175.50 ;y,7:4JM3C.: ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 0.5 $ 1,093.00 $ Outlet structure each $ 2,500.00 $ SWI" FEE $156,097.80 SWMP CREDITS $ TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 156,097.80 Chanhassen MN 4b-• VOL - The same architectural elevation will not be used by homes directly across the street or adjacent. ®plp�xiitiov+ . hd lowed t Public Street Section A?Dae/jn %ML 4 W�K 31 SB ? bI varkim Ow m Not to Scale The Tradition Homes, built by Ryland, have been recently redesigned to provide updated features to the exterior and interior of the home. Some of the exterior improvements include a new design that reduces the number of garage doors by adding a third stall home with a tandem garage. We are also introducing a home specifically designed for a corner lot. The garage for this home is side loaded and placed at the rear of the home. Both of these improvements increase the visual appeal of the streetscape by reducing the dominance of garage doors as you move through the neighborhood. We have updated our floor plans to provide the amenities and living spaces that today's discriminating home buyer is requesting. They provide a carefree lifestyle that will appeal to families, professional couples and active adults. The Tradition Homes have three to four bedrooms and 2 1/2 baths. Many of the floor plans include a formal living room, formal dining room and eat -in -kitchen. The master bedrooms have a private bath and walk -in - closet. Additional bedrooms and living area are available in the optional finished basement. Enjoyment of the outdoors is provided with deck and sun porch options and numerous walk -out - homes with views of the natural features the site offers. Standard Color Upgrade Color Options Options Beige Champagne Cactus Cobblestone Champagne Granite Linen Sand mozell; Sierra Linen Silver Tan NEI I. Silver II FTF ACTION TAB To: Date: From ❑ FOR YOUR COMMENTS ❑ FOR YOUR INFORMATION ❑ FOR YOUR APPROVAL ❑ NOTE & RETURN ❑ TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ❑ NOTE & FILE ❑ CALL ME ❑ FOR YOUR SIGNATURE ❑ SEE ME ❑ ❑ REPLY & SEND ME COPY ❑ COMMENTS:, l �. Lw'I!I �i/r�� !JP FII�PIr%C(r 4�Soi �n 75e �cgi 7'/,:S +o.n,.� waS Pani'a� oma, �-c,nvv, Par`c< /and rb, c - boo) l cie,^ 7-4-c ca esc ? 0 7-11 e v1 -P .s i m C IL G? 1�7ei v d). >L -C & v ih a tre a n V o/7 L ¢3 Xr,H ] - p-4 e C --to wet -0 ® Copyright 1969, 19]0-urel Office Aids, Inc., Bronmlle. N 10� V.W.Eimlcke Assocl;, I ), o elle.N.Y., O6 Tel. (916) 337-1900 • Q4 �23 DisiribuleC in Canada solely by W. imicke Ltd., Peterboro h, Ontarq Tel. (705) 7434202 • Fax (705) 743-9994 PRINTED IN usA Form OA -4 his form is available electronically. ---------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------' CCC -517 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 11. COUNTY FSA OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS (Including Zip Code)1 (02-27-04) Commodity Credit Corporation I I i CARVER COUNTY FSA OFFICE 1 I 219 EAST FRONTAGE ROAD I TRACT REDISTRIBUTION FORM WACONIA MN 55387-1862 I I TELEPHONE NUMBER (Area Code): (952) 442-2106 i ------------------------------------------------------------ 1 2. STATE CODE 1 3. COUNTY CODE 1 1 27 1 019 1 ------------------------------------------------------------ 4. _______________________ _____________•___-_________4. FARM SERIAL NO. 1 5. TRACT NO. I 1 3581 I 11379 ___________ ____________________________________1 N0Ts: The authority for collecting the following information is Pub. L. 107-171. This authority allows for the 1 collection of information without prior 0MB approval mandated by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. ' ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________I The following statement is made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a). The authority for requesting the following information is the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. (Pub. L. 107-171). The information will be used I to determine eligibility for program benefits. Furnishing the requested information is voluntary. Failure to furnish the I requested information will result in denial of program benefits. This information may be provided to other agencies, IRS, I Department of Justice, or other State and Federal Law enforcement agencies, and in response to a court magistrate or adminis- trative tribunal. The provisions of criminal and civil fraud statutes, including 18 USC 286, 287, 371, 641, 651, 1001; 15 USC 1 714m; and 31 USC 3729, may be applicable to the information provided. I ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________I 6. TRACT ACREAGE I ____________________•_______________•-__-____________---•___-._•_•__--_-________________________________________________________I A. DCP CROPLAND 1 2.6 I ____________________________________•--___.___________---_______-_-__---_____-.___-________________________--__-_-__-___-_-.____1 B. EFFECTIVE OCP CROPLAND 1 2.6 I ------------- _------------------------------------------------- 1-___----_--_-.-•-__-___ i ----------------------------------------- C. CURRENT DOUBLE CROPPED ACRES I 0.0 I --------------------------------------------------------------- 1.__--______---__-__________ D. REQUESTED DOUBLE CROPPED ACRES I I ________________________________________________________________•______-_________-_________________________-____________________I E. CROP I F. CURRENT BASE I G. REQUESTED BASE I E. CROP I F. CURRENT BASE I G. REQUESTED BASE I ____________________I_____________________1____________ I......... _----------- i-------------------- I_____________________I �� IQf� I �. • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 7. OWNER'S CERTIFICATION I ----- .__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________I I understand that by signing this form I have made the tract redistribution decision shown in item 6 for the farm serial 1 number in item 4. I I also understand that all owners on this farm must sign form CCC -517. In the event that one or more owners of this farm fail I to sign form CCC -517. I understand that this form is null and void and the tract redistribution decision shown in item 6 is no i longer applicable. I ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________1 A. OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS (Including Zip Code) 1/1 1 B. OWNER'S IDENTIFICATION NUMBER I CITY OF CHANHASSEN I I 690 COULTER DR I 5331 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9683 I I I I I I --- -------- --- --- ------------------------------ '/ G. N U E OWNER I D. DATE (MM-DD-YYYY) �O U.; -------------------------------------------- ------------- Department -- e artment of Agriculture (USDA) II prohibits is dtscri mi nail on in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, eat(onal origin, gender, religion• age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all )rohib(ted bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille• large print. audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file i complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W. Whitten Building, 1400 Independence venue, SW. Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 68,?— OF_(_E F_ J ( ('�_ LRLOI STR) el_T&o USDA Carver County FSA Office 219 East Frontage Waconia, MN 55387 952-442-2106 FAX 952-442-5489 OWNERS CONSENT FORM owner of farm # in Q P,-Riya County do hereby certify that E= I ER will be operating my farm for the �s -dam crop year(s) on a cash lease basis By signing this statement, I agree that the above mentioned operator(s) will be receiving the farm program benefits applicable to the Direct and Counter -Cyclical Program (DCP) contract for the above stated crop year(s). I am aware of the fact that this DCP contract can be revised in the future. I this form is found to be inaccurate, the result will be forfeiture of all program benefits including loan eligibility for the farm. • - - __c i +4 n4- C hCA YI 1 % /I C ser) Dw i A4k) 5-317 41- oees33) Dwner's SS Number q L b Date 6-2- 227.137 Phone Number Operator's Signature articipation in programs administered by FSA is open to all eligible farmers regardless of race, color, age, sex, marital status, religion, 3ndicap, or national origin. Page 1 of 4 Aanenson, Kate From: Roger Knutson [RKnutson@ck-law.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 12:20 PM To: deblloyd@usfamily.net Cc: Gerhardt, Todd; Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Issues/Concerns - Ryland - THE PRESERVE Debbie, Staff has asked me to respond to some of your comments. The setbacks in 20-505 are general requirements that do not apply when specific requirements are specified. The setbacks in 20-508 not 20-505 apply to single family attached and cluster homes. The 30 foot front yard setback specified can be waived for environmental protection. Because this is a PUD, the deviation from standards does not require a variance but can be accomplished as part of the PUD process. The setback was reduced to 25 feet to move the homes away from the bluff on certain lot thereby better protecting the bluff. Although this protection element is not applicable to all lots, a uniform setback requirement was deemed appropriate. -----Original Message ----- From: Gerhardt, Todd [mailto:tgerhardt@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:46 AM To: Roger Knutson Subject: FW: Issues/Concerns - Ryland - THE PRESERVE Importance: Low From: Debbie Lloyd [mailto:deblloyd@usfamily.net] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:51 AM To: City Council; Gerhardt, Todd Cc: paulseng@juno.com; Aanenson, Kate; Gerhardt, Todd; Generous, Bob Subject: Re: Issues/Concerns - Ryland - THE PRESERVE Importance: Low Todd, I hereby request a copy of the appraisal for the purchase by the City for the 5 lots in The Preserve. I would like to pick up the copy today. (I'll followup this email with a call to confirm the time it will be ready.) In all materials I've read Bluff Creek Boulevard is a collector street for which we received MSA funds. Reducing the setback in this case as Bob eludes to has no environmental benefit, it only increases the amount of land that the builder can use. Town and Country is set back 50 feet from Bluff Creek Boulevard. Why a different STANDARD for the Preserve? Here's code: Sec. 20-505. Required general standards.f) The setback for all buildings within a PUD from any abutting street line shall be 30 feet for local streets and 50 feet from railroad lines or collector or arterial streets, as designated in the comprehensive plan, except that in no case shall the setback be less than the height of the building up to a maximum of 100 feet. The setback for all buildings from exterior PUD lot lines not abutting a public street shall be 30 feet except that in no case shall the setback be less than the height of the building upto a maximum of 100 feet. Building setbacks from internal public streets shall be determined by the city based on characteristics of the specific PUD. Parking lots and driving lanes shall be setback at least 20 feet from all exterior lot lines of a 5/30/2007 Page 2 of 4 'Ib Thank you, Debbie Original Message From: Generous, Bob To: debllovd@usfamily.net Cc: paulseng@juno.com ; Aanenson,_Kate; City Council; Gerhardt. Todd Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 8:43 AM Subject: Issues/Concerns Dear Debbie: Thank you for your continuing interest in the community. I would like to address some issues and concerns you expressed about the community in your email. Abra: The required setback is 25 feet from the north property line, which is the setback established in the Highway and Business Services District, BH. The property is zoned BE This project is located within the HC -1 District an overlay district which includes areas east of Powers Boulevard. In the HC -1 District, the underlying zoning districts control the setback. The additional setback requirements were originally adopted as part of Ordinance Number 212 on July 11, 1994 to apply to development west of the existing downtown. Over time, the design standards included in the Highway Corridor District were incorporated in the Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office - Institutional Developments of Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 7 of the Chanhassen City Code, which apply citywide. In deleting these standards from Article XXIX, Highway Corridor Districts, the clarification, i.e., sector heading of the HC -2 District, as to where the additional setback standards applied was omitted as part of the codification of the City Code. The original language is shown below (from Ordinance Number 212, approved July 11, 1994): DIVISION 2. HC -2 DISTRICT Sec. 20-1460. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of the HC -2 district is the same as the HC -1 district with certain modifications to the district standards reflecting that the area within the HC -2 district is not part of the City's central business district. Sec. 20-1461. District Application. The "HC -1" district shall be applied to and super imposed (overlaid) upon all zoning districts as contained herein as existing or amended by the text and map of this ordinance. The regulations and requirements imposed by the "HC -1" district shall be in addition to these established for districts which jointly apply. Under the joint application of districts, the more restrictive requirements shall apply. Sec. 20-1462. Building and Parking Orientation. The building and parking orientation standards for the HC -1 district shall apply, together with the following additional requirements: (a) On building lots that abut Highway 5 directly, the minimum building setback from the highway right- of-way shall be seventy (70) feet. The maximum building setback from the highway right-of-way for all buildings except single family residences shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet. No maximum building setback shall apply to single family residences. 5/30/2007 Page 3 of 4 (b) On building lots that abut either of the access boulevards parallel to Highway 5, the minimum building setback from the boulevard right-of-way shall be fifty (50) feet. The maximum building setback from the boulevard right-of-way shall be one hundred (100) feet. Thank you for pointing out that this point of clarification was missing. We will amend the ordinance to incorporate the HC -2 area within the body of the standards, rather than as a division heading. Ryland: The required setback from Bluff Creek Boulevard was established at 25 feet as part of the PUD standards for The Preserve. This 25 feet is primarily accommodated in the Outlots platted along Bluff Creek Boulevard with The Preserve subdivision. For those lots that directly front on Bluff Creek Boulevard, then the 25 feet would apply. These standards were clearly outlined in the development proposal review. This reduced setback was due to the design of Bluff Creek Boulevard as a local street, rather than a high volume and high speed roadway. Section 20-508 (c) (2) states: Interior public right-of-way: 30 feet.* *The 30 -foot front yard setback may be waived by the City Council when it is demonstrated that environmental protection will be enhanced. In these instances, a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet shall be maintained. However, in this instance, rather than 20 feet, a 25 foot setback was established. Another example of a local street setback on a collector street, but with a 30 foot setback within a PUD, is along Longacres Drive in the Meadows at Longacres and Woods at Longacres development between Highway 41 and Galpin Boulevard. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact me at (952) 227-1131 or via email at bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn us. M Robert Generous Senior Planner City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1131 bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us From: Debbie Lloyd [mailto:deblloyd@usfamily.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 7:06 AM To: Aanenson, Kate; paulseng@juno.com CC: City Council; Gerhardt, Todd Subject: Re: Issues/Concerns Importance: High Kate, These remain concerns. Why isn't code being applied or variances obtained in these cases? I know that these are all approved but the question is why ... clearly I believe it was stated that no variances were required for the Ryland development. 5/30/2007 Page 4 of 4 Abra I measured the setback from the edge of the pavement on highway 5 to the building - it's 50 feet. Code clearly states 70 feet and as you noted, no variance was approved. Sec. 20-1462. Building and parking orientation. (a) On building lots that abut Highway 5 directly, the minimum building setback from the highway right-of- way shall be 70 feet. The maximum building setback from the highway right-of-way for all buildings except single-family residences shall be 150 feet. No maximum building setback shall apply to single-family residences. Ryland Existing home Lot 23 is not set back the required 50 feet from a collector road. Interesting though that Town and Country subject to the same requirement is set back properly. I'm not addressing these by lot number as I it just gets confusing on what plan to uses A. The lot directly across the street from, and next to the model home and will have the same issue unless you either grant a variance or move the lot lines. B. The northern most lot along the collector street doesn't appear to have room to properly apply the 50 foot setback from the collector road, additionally it has double frontage so there should be an additional 10 feet in the back yard. I'd love to see how the home can fit on the lot, particularly how the driveway will work. Sec. 20-505. Required general standards.f) The setback for all buildings within a PUD from any abutting street line shall be 30 feet for local streets and 50 feet from railroad lines or collector or arterial streets, as designated in the comprehensive plan, except that in no case shall the setback be less than the height of the building up to a maximum of 100 feet. The setback for all buildings from exterior PUD lot lines not abutting a public street shall be 30 feet except that in no case shall the setback be less than the height of the building upto a maximum of 100 feet. Building setbacks from internal public streets shall be determined by the city based on characteristics of the specific PUD. Parking lots and driving lanes shall be setback at least 20 feet from all exterior lot lines of a PUD. Debbie -- USFamily.Net - $8.25/mo! -- Mphspeed - $19.99/mo! --- 5/30/2007 RYLAND HOMES' TWIN CITIES DIVISION 7599 Anagram Dnve Eden Prairie, MN 55344 May 24, 2007 952-229-6000 Office 952-229-6024 Fm Paul Oehme City Engineer/Director of Public Works City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: The Preserve at Bluff Creek Grading Plan Dear Mr. Oehme: w .ryland.com Builder's License 620035443 On April 16, 2007, Ryland received approval from City of Chanhassen Staff to begin grading on May 1, 2007 for second half of The Preserve at Bluff Creek, however it is my understanding that at the May 14i°, 2007 City Council meeting Mr. Rick Dorsey, property owner adjacent to The Preserve, had concerns related to the Grading Plan. One item in particular, Mr. Dorsey requested a review of the 12 ft. retaining wall adjacent to his property. On May 23rd I met with Mr. Dorsey on site to review the current retaining wall plans. After some discussion, Ryland Homes and Mr. Dorsey agreed that a 4 ft retaining wall with a 30 ft temporary grading easement from Mr. Dorsey would be in the best interest of both parties. However, this agreement is contingent on City approval and Mr. Dorsey's developer's approval. In addition, Mr. Dorsey also had concerns with the elevation of Mills Drive as it meets up with his property. The current grading plan has Mills Drive matching the current elevation at the east property line. Mr. Dorsey has requested the elevation be dropped, since this is the high point of his property and will more than likely be a cut area. Since Mills Drive is to be construction on a future phase of The Preserve at Bluff Creek, Ryland is in agreement that it could have a lower elevation. The new elevation would be set when construction plans come in for this future phase. Ryland will continue to work with City Staff on the above details. Please call me at (952) 229- 6007 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mark Sonstegard Land Development Manager Ryland Homes CC: Mr. Rick Dorsey Kate Aanenson, City Community Development Director Alyson Fauske, City Assistant Engineer of AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, MAY 8, 2006 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD 5:30 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Note: If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. A. Discussion of Plans for Redevelopment of the Lakeview Hills Property (verbal). 6:15 P.M. — BOARD OF REVIEW & EQUALIZATION B. Final Action on Appeals Submitted to the Board of Review & Equalization. 7:00 P.M. — REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance) PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff report. 1. a. Approval of Minutes: - City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 24, 2006 - City Council Summary Minutes dated April 24, 2006 - City Council Verbatim Minutes dated April 24, 2006 - Board of Review Summary Minutes dated April 24, 2006 - Board of Review Verbatim Minutes dated April 24, 2006 Receive Commission Minutes: - Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated April 18, 2006 - Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated April 18, 2006 - Park & Recreation Commission Summary Minutes dated March 28, 2006 - Park & Recreation Commission Verbatim Minutes dated March 28, 2006 b. 2006 Street Improvement Project 06-01: Call Assessment Hearing. C. Hidden Creek Meadows: Approve Development Contract Assignment. 6r d. 2005 MUSA Project 06-05: Approve Change Order to Engineering Contract. e. Approval of Temporary On -Sale Liquor License, Softball Tournament at Lake Ann Park, June 24 & 25, Chanhassen Lions Club. Item Deleted ** g. Call for Sale, 2006 G.O. Improvement Bonds. h. Approval of Extension to Variance 05-10, 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard, Laura Cooper. Approval of Moving the Polling Location for Precinct 3 from Discovery United Methodist Church to St. Hubert Church. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS 2. State of the Agency Report, SouthWest Metro Transit, Len Simich (verbal). PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Public Hearing on Lotus Lake Automatic Slow -No Wake Ordinance. 4. Item Deleted ** NEW BUSINESS 5. Green Gardens, 850 Flying Cloud Drive, Applicant: Keith Werner: Request for an Amendment to Interim Use Permit 96-2 for Expansion of the Wholesale/Retail Nursery Use. 6. The Preserve, 1630 Lyman Boulevard, Applicant: The Pemtom Land Company: Request for Rezoning from A2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of Approximately 80 Acres into 156 Single -Family Cluster Lots; Site Plan Review; Conditional Use Permit for Development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and Alterations within the Flood Plain; Wetland Alteration Permit for Crossing Bluff Creek; and Variances. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS A, ADJOURNMENT A copy of the staff report and supporting documentation being sent to the city council will be available after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday. Please contact city hall at 952-227-1100 to verify that your item has not been deleted from the agenda any time after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday. lf. Approval of Lease, Old Village Hall. 4. Liberty at Creekside,1500 Pioneer Trail, Applicant: Town & Country Homes: Request for Rezoning of Property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision with Variances of Approximately 36.01 Acres into 29 Lots, 5 Outlots, and Public Right -of -Way; Site Plan Approval for 146 Townhouses; and a Conditional Use Permit for Alterations within the Flood Plain and Development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. 1. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City Council. 2. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue. 3. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. 4. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request. 5. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houliihan's Restaurant & Bar, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the public are welcome. The Preserve Land Cost Calculations Gross Acres Net Residential Area Total Number Dwelling Units-- Purchase nits= Purchase Price Degler Closing Costs (Title) _ $1.5/k Broker Fee Engineering Fees (Estimate) Assessments SWMP Fees Total Costs Cost per Net Acre RYLAN D The Ryland Gnwp, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Contractor's lic # 2003544 ww .ryland.com 5/3/2006 r7ST-MIM 31.33 Ac. 155 $13,210,986 - $19,816 $700,000 $50,000 $1,782,054 $242,760 $16,005,616 $510,872 Area Calculations of City Desired Land Block 1 lots 1 to 5 Area 1.310 Ac. ROW 0.190 Ac. Outlot B (exclude esm't) 0.750 Ac. Total Area of Land for City 2.250 Ac. Purchase Price of Property ZTT,9,462 1Gsy26_gZ ,k 1. 310 s 21(,709.IL/ City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 21. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 am. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 am. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. The sale of seasonal merchandise consisting of pumpkin and Christmas tree sales shall be permitted from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 22. Exterior light sources shall be shielded. 23. No outside speaker system shall be allowed. 24. The use shall terminate one year following the availability of public sewer and water service. An annual review shall be made to determine compliance with the attached conditions. 25. The applicant shall work with staff to develop signage that will comply with city ordinances. 26. Stop signs shall be erected at the intersections of the driveways at Highways 101 and 212. 27. No equipment or vehicles shall be stored on the site with the exception of employee vehicles and equipment necessary for the operation of the nursery. 28. No outside storage of equipment and materials unrelated to the nursery business shall be permitted. 29. Storage structures shall not be used for retail purposes. A portion of the proposed storage structure may be allocated as office space to service wholesale customers. Storage of equipment and materials is permitted in these buildings. 30. No grading of the property shall be permitted unless a grading permit is obtained from the City. 31. The applicant shall work with MnDOT in examining the possibility of relocating the access point on TH 212 further to the west and providing a deceleration lane along westbound TH 212 in conjunction with the Highway 212 improvements. 32. All loading or unloading should be done on site and not blocking either Highway 212 or 101. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. _APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES INTO 156 SINGLE FAMILY CLUSTER LOTS; SITE PLAN REVIEW; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN TIE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT AND ALTERATIONS WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN; WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR CROSSING BLUFF CREEK; AND VARIANCES. 21 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Public Present: Name Address Jeff Fox 5270 Howards Point Road Rick Dorsey 1551 Lyman Boulevard Marcy Hillerman 7699 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie Gayle & Lois Degler 1630 Lyman Boulevard Justin Larson Westwood Professional Services Allan Klugman Westwood Professional Services Cory Meyer Westwood Professional Services Dan Herbst 7640 Crimson Bay Dan Cook 7697 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie Kate Aanenson: Thank you. The applicant, Pemtom is requesting to rezone a property that's been zoned A2 to PUD -R. For the approval of 155 lots and 15 outlots. They also approved a conditional use permit to work within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations of the flood plain. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this project on April 18`s, 2006 and did recommend 5-0 to approve the plat. There's quite a few things approved in the attachment, but what I'd first like to do is, instead of going back through some of the comments is to talk about the zone. How the zone got picked and how we came to the staff recommending approval of this project. Subject site. Just south of Lyman on the Degler property. The entire property as stated in the staff report, approximately 80 acres. And looking at the entire 2005 MUSA, and what has been approved to date. I did include in your packet a summary of what we put in the AUAR and what's been built to date. Just kind of to kind of tie that all back together, so we anticipated approximately 1,500 units and if this project was to be approved with 155, we'd be at approximately 800 units. So there was still over 700 units left available for the development of the two remaining parcels. The other parcels in the area that are not guided residential would be the Degler property and then included in the AUAR was some of the Laurent property. So in looking at this and looking at the whole 2005, the goal from the beginning was to try to preserve the creek corridor. That was the overriding planning principle was to preserve all this green space, and do something different that we hadn't used in the past in the city to preserve creek space. So looking at the land uses that, other developments that had come in already and trying to come up with something, a different style of housing. The developer went with the smaller lot. So with that, the challenge then was to, how to make that work and you know we looked at twin homes. Fourplexes and tried to accommodate something different on the site. Ended up with this single family lot size. And it's different application. Outlined in your staff report, just take a minute to take a look at, if it's possible, because it is zoned low density, medium density. Low density. There are several zoning options that could be applied to the property. One being the 15,000 square foot lot.. A very traditional subdivision lot. PUD -R single family and that we have also in the city. 15,000 square foot average. Excuse me, 15,000 square foot average. Yeah, average. 11,000 would be the smallest. We have some subdivisions that use that ... most recently seen on the Sever Peterson property. Again that's a 9,000 square foot single family home, or 72 for twin. R-4 which would allow the 15,000 square foot single family or a 10,000 for twin. The R-8 which would be a medium density, 7,500 square foot twin home or 5,000 for a townhouse, so that would be another appropriate zoning. Or the 22 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 PUD detached, which is what this project came where there's no minimum. So if you look at the average lot size that we put in your staff report, just under 8,000. The smallest lot being in there just shy of 7,000. You see that they're really far within the range of some of these other medium density zoning, so again you've got that choice. So again trying to find a different type of housing product meeting a different nitch if you look through the comprehensive plan, in looking at the different zoning options and now I'm on page 3 of the staff report. Talking about the zoning. What they propose on development compatible with the surrounding land uses. Again this property is similarly zoned, or excuse me, similarly guided with the property immediately to the west and the southwest. This would be the different zoning. The buffer, transition buffer you have for the industrial is the creek bed itself and that expanse across the creek. So with that, you know when we looked at providing again diversity for housing and, again I'm on the top of page 4 now just talking about the fact that we're trying to preserve that creek corridor. Rather than letting the lots go right up to the creek floor, we backed those off. Provided additional buffers outside the overlay district and putting that forward. So with that, this is actually north. I don't know if that's more helpful. With that we worked on putting together a plan, and there's actually a lot of iterations to this plan in itself. One in the fact that because it's a PUD -R, and now I'm on page 5 of the staff report going through. Put in here all the design standards or the requirements or code for 0, or excuse me. For a small lot, subdivision. Now this again is the first application. While we've had this in our code, the 1991 code was approved, we haven't applied this yet. We have used, and I included in your packet, out on North Bay, which was a Rottlund project. The lot sizes and in there they averaged 3,500 and the difference between this project and the North Bay project is, those units don't really have a yard. It's all common space. They have the property that their house sits on but there's not the common space. Then the next iteration of that was Walnut Grove. Again another Rottlund project. That's been well received, where they did the two different sizes with smaller lots. Again those are a little bit bigger but again they don't have individual lots where the house sits on the, the property rights fit along the house. There's not the, everything else is really common. So this takes it to a different level where we have a smaller lot but you actually have a back yard, and talk about that. So with this project you have a 2 car, with the option for a third stacked in, and a side yard, but you have a bigger lot. You do have your own space to put additions on. Now in the PUD itself, and again I'm on the bottom of page 5 for the setbacks or the setbacks from Lyman. Also from the eastern property line and then you've got a letter that says it meets a 100 foot, these are similarly guided properties, so the setback only needs to be 50 feet, but they're the same ultimate guiding. Not current zoning, so it does meet city code. So then the question was ... taken from your comments on the RLM and what was 5, excuse me, yeah the 5 and 10 to get the setbacks. They've also taken the comer lots and provided an opportunity for the side loaded garage. So there is room for expansion on these lots which is different than the ones in the Rottlund project where you probably wouldn't see any additions... opportunity for some porch or deck or even an opportunity for a swing set or those sort of things in your back yard. There's enough impervious surface. Again with this type of lot capitalizes on this project is that it takes the opportunity of the impervious surface outside of the Bluff Creek Overlay zone so you can balance that across the whole project, so that's the application of the PUD and what we said when we did the Bluff Creek Overlay District is we would apply that as a tool, so what that does is allow for the smaller lots to use those areas that are left in common open space to increase the impervious. So with the setbacks, the only other challenge is on the front yard and the side yard to get that look from the street, and the street profile itself, there are public streets just to get the access via the 23 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 collector boulevard. We hopefully we're going to bid here shortly, and then this is a public street so this would be a typical 60 foot right-of-way and then this is also a public street. The sidewalks will go along both sides of the public street and they're looping. All these sidewalks that are shown on this one, I think there's a little bit of excess sidewalk. We do have an improved modified sidewalk plan. We thought it was a little too intense. One of the other issues that came up at the Planning Commission and I know we discussed earlier at a work session on another topic is, when you have public space and you have a private space, excuse me. A private street getting access through a public trail, so we want to make sure that we work that out with the association, the covenants and that sort of thing so we do allow, especially for the high school, that there's an opportunity if people want to go through that neighborhood to provide that access. Mayor Furlong: Could you clarify that again? That issue. Where it... Kate Aanenson: Well really, we're going to have a structure coming across the creek Mayor Furlong: A trail crossing? Kate Aanenson: A trail crossing, right. So if you wanted to get somewhere else on the site and this, and some of this is coming through a portion onto a private street, that these would be public trails to allow people to get through to public access, so we're working through that in their covenants that we'll review and we want to make sure that that's something that wouldn't be amended in the covenants. It'd be a condition of approval. That it's just be in the homeowners association covenants that they would ultimately someday in the future eliminate... cluster that. Mayor Furlong: So are those part of the conditions of approval or is it part of the Kate Aanenson: Yes. It's part of the conditions. Mayor Furlong: You have it in the conditions. One of the conditions. Kate Aanenson: ...there's a couple of little ... like that and we want to make sure that we understand what the homeowner's association covenants and Planning Commission had a good discussion on and that's fencing. You know one of the things where you've got those small lots, that we don't have a lot of fencing ... what does that do? Certainly when you have a private lot, maybe have a dog, there may be opportunities for that so that's something we want to give some careful consideration to too and so they're working on that. How they want to address that. Whether they're more opaque type fencing or especially when you... just important to look at the fencing and certainly people that have to walk ... take that opportunity also to see that. So those are some of the things that we're looking at. As I mentioned the public streets are all 60 feet right-of-way with a 32 foot pavement width of 31. The private streets will actually be a 40 foot right-of-way and 28 feet paved. This is again the first application of this type. Use of a private street at this width. It does allow on street parking. Again that was one of the considerations of working with the developer. We worked the city engineer and myself worked a lot of different zones trying to figure a looping system where we had a public street that was a continuous loop 24 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 but that gives us in there for snow plowing and it gives a way in, a way out. And with that you go off the private streets, which would allow at that width. And then we also looked at spacing, kind of city wide we looked at the spacing. The feel. The closeness and the feel. Certainly they're going to be closer side by side but we looked at the other projects that we had in the city that have those narrow lot lines and we wanted to get a sense from the street, so one of the discussions that we had is that we wanted to have, again there is now with the PUD it's kind of contractual. We have gone as close as 20. We didn't want to do that. We're actually at 25 feet from the garage. That was a requirement they all be 20 feet. The only place there'd be 20 is if it's a comer lot. The other comer where you don't have a garage would be 20. But that gives plenty of depth for parking and then also you would have... As I indicated a third car garage... So with that, some of the things that we worked out. There is a trail. The park commission did review this project. One of the things that they recommended was that this play area be larger and there were two lots shown on there. The other thing that we're talking about is, there's 5 lots up in this area, so it's really topographically separated from the plat where they have some nice views. It's really not part of the association. Kind of a different feel. This road also goes into the industrial park. We don't want to kind of be just a hanging neighborhood that may not ... so we are working with them. The park commission recommended a trail head. One of the things the city engineer was looking at too was additional storm water pond that could be ... benefit. So this is Audubon, so this would be that pond coming out and that would provide some additional storage for ... of Lyman. So the issue there, which hasn't been completely resolved is obviously they'd like to get those plats and legitimate lots is kind of working out some of the compensation for eliminating these lots so that's still in discussion and we haven't resolved that yet and that would be something that we work out between now and final plat. The Planning Commission also discussed at their meeting, because of the garage, we talked about the feel from the street, that they were pleased with their looks and I'll let them go through all the different iterations of their architecture that was arrived with each product there's different views. But they wanted to make sure that the garages were all, not just the standard flat garage but it has an architectural relief to them, windows and those sort of things so they were high standard because it was a big presence out on the street, and to accommodate that. There are some steep areas that would require retaining walls, and most specifically in this area. Shown on the project is also some storm water ponding. There's also some wetland replacement that they are providing. The applicant is providing for wetland replacement for the Bluff Creek Boulevard and then just providing outside for, that would be actually the wetland that's going to be right in the middle of the round about between Sever Peterson's property and Town and Country piece. So with that I'll just take a minute and I did get, just want to comment that, and I'll let the city engineer talk specifically about some of the engineering comments... I'm on page 2. There was a question regarding the 100 foot buffer. Again when we saw these properties had a similar land use, so therefore it doesn't require a 100 foot buffer. Mayor Furlong: Eventual land use. Kate Aanenson: Pardon me? Mayor Furlong: Eventual land use? 25 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Now what they're zoned today, right and if it was to be anything besides low or medium on the property to the west, you'd have to go through a land use amendment which would have to be approved by the City Council. Mayor Furlong: Property to the east. Kate Aanenson: Excuse me, to the east. Property to the east, yeah. So right now we also have medium and low, so it's similar. So you want to go to a higher use. Commercial industrial, or go to a lower use, large lot and that would still ... The cul-de-sac lane. This would be the end of the cul-de-sac lane... Also talks about on page 3 that, I'm not trying to answer that but that's if, it makes this property unbuildable if this project's approved, again there's somewhat of a guided zone. I'm not sure whether that comment is true. They both had the same opportunity to come in at a similar, or higher. Again I went through all the zoning options that I presented to you. It could be something more vertical. They could do something clustered. There's a lot of zoning options for the Dorsey piece. So with that I'd like maybe Paul to take a few minutes to maybe go through the road issue, but I just did want to comment there was a couple corrections. I'll just go through this quickly. On page 23 of your staff report, this is the end of the conditions. Just for clarification. Number 60. It says depicted as Lot 1. It should says Lots 1 through 5, Block 5 and that's this area up in here that we're talking about. We're talking about the trail head. I'm not sorry, they're not on the screen. That's this area up in here where we're talking about where the trail head is. And then number 63 should be Outlots A, B, L and it should be N, not H. Yeah, because H is a private park and we don't want to take ownership of a private park. So with that you have our findings of fact included and all the conditions. Otherwise I'll tum it over to Paul. Paul Oehme: Thanks Kate. Mayor, City Council members. In review of the development we do have one cul-de-sac, I think it's to the 700-800 foot long cul-de-sac. We do have public streets that are 60 feet wide. 31 foot road width. 60 foot right-of-way and then on some private streets as well, but I guess for access purposes and for traffic access and routes, I think I'd like to turn it over to the developer and maybe if he could just give a brief synopsis of his plans, and we had also talked about some potential impacts with other access points, specifically by Lyman. Maybe if we could have the applicant address some of those internal ones, I could hit the access points on Lyman a little bit later after he brings up his issues I think internally. Mayor Furlong: Alright, any questions for staff at this point? There may be some. There may be some later. Councilman Lundquist: I think I'll wait until the presentation. Mayor Furlong: Alright, any questions at this time? If not we'll reserve the right to ask more questions later. At this point the applicant is here I know. Good evening. Dan Herbst: Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council, professional staff, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Dan Herbst at 7640 Crimson Bay in Chanhassen representing Pemtom. Also wanted to introduce some other people here this evening. I think you probably know Gayle and Lois Degler. The owners of the property are here this evening. We seldom can get Gayle's OR City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 father here. Any time there's a Twins game on, we kind of lose him... On Gayle's left is Lois and on Lois' left is Justin Larson. Planner, engineer with Westwood Professional Services. On Justin's left, I'd like for Allan Klugman to come up a little later and speak. Allan's a professional traffic engineer who represents both public and private interests throughout the state. On Al's left is Cory Meyer who is a landscape architect and planner with Westwood Professional Services. And behind him is Dan Cook, my partner and also on Dan's left is Brian Sullivan from the Ryland Group so if you have any specific questions on the home cost points, market, he'll be happy to come up and answer them. Anyway we want to thank you very much. You know more so than I do, this has been a long process for all of us. I think it was in 2003 that you approved the AUAR but before that I know you put tons of time into the comprehensive plan. Authorizing the AUAR. Going through the whole process and your staff has done a wonderful job on making it a lot easier for our type of people, the development community to come in and have you prepare all that work for us ahead of time. Transportation, wetlands. The Bluff Creek corridor and all the things that you spent considerable time and money on that process. It was deliberate. It was open. It was diligent and I commend you for all the work and your staff I know has done a wonderful job. Along with that we have had discussions with the Degler family. Dan and I probably going back over 15 years. Kind of watching this process and what makes the best sense for this piece of land, as to what else was evolving in the, so our vision for the property basically took in all the elements of your AUAR. Topography, the land, the wishes of the Degler's and then we also took a look at the marketplace and Chanhassen has got some wonderful estate type developments. Many executive type neighborhoods that we did with Lake Harrison and Settlers West. You also have a full mix of townhomes and detached homes with common lots. And you have coming on, as we were watching carefully, a lot of new townhome products that Town and Country and others are bringing on the marketplace. So looking at all the elements of the land we wanted to do something unique. We wanted to do something that's not been offered in Chanhassen before. Many of you have been out to Hennepin Village. We are doing a number of mixed products out there but our single family lots out there are substantially smaller, in fact 50% less and we were targeting a certain type of buyer in that entire mix, and probably when you watch the Planning Commission presentation and look at some of our notes from the Planning Commission meetings, that was, that Hennepin Village really evolved about from the Mayor, who's deceased. Mayor Harris coming to me and saying, Dan. We know you can go out there and do a Settlers Ridge or ... and make the same amount of money but we have about 11,000 more jobs in Eden Prairie than we have households and we want you to target for that working person. Not affordability, although we have 8 affordable housing units in there, and so we cut our lot size down to 4,000 so we have 5 different products out there. But we wanted to introduce to Chanhassen something very unique. So we doubled that lot size. Brian went to the drawing board. He came up with a housing product that solves the lot problem with townhouses and smaller single family homes and is adding their own yard. Adding some additional storage in the garage. If they want to they can actually have a 3 car garage, and I'll let Brian cover that if you want. So that's kind of was our vision for the property, and as you know you have your bluff overlay. You've got wetlands on the site. Topography and the trees, and I don't know, the more you want to take time to study this site, I think the more you'll appreciate the site itself. After you include your rights-of-way, your public streets, excluding our private streets, and you look at the bluff overlay. Bluff Creek overlay, almost 50% of the land will end up being in the public domain when that is all done, and that's extremely unique. Not only for the City to have, but for the residents to have. So I always, when 27 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 I drove over the hill and I looked at that property and I said something special has to be done here, so we didn't push the limit and try to maximize density with townhouses, which would be permitted under your guide plan. Your comprehensive plan. We wanted to do something different with our cluster housing plan. We wanted to do something different with a type of product that is unique to Chanhassen, and if you want to we can spend some time with Cory Meyer who worked very carefully with all of your staff and if you want him to spend 5 or 10 minutes, Cory's a planner and landscape architect. I'd like him to talk briefly about how he worked very carefully with your staff to come up with the plan that we have, and we're planning for. A couple of interesting items that I want to talk about relates to some comments I received by e-mail from Mr. Dorsey. In my 36 years in this business, this is the first time I've had a neighbor, after we were already down the road with a plan, come to us and come to you with an idea to actually change our plan without having a plan himself. And I will have had, we've worked well with neighbors in the past. We have a wonderful history of doing that. This kind of put us in a different position so I didn't want to stand up and defend that. I took all of his comments and I handed them off to the entire staff at Westwood and I told you I wanted to look at this from traffic. I want you to look at sight distance. I want you to look at our plan and I want Al Klugman, as soon as Cory Meyer is through answering any questions you have on how our plan evolved, to address I believe all the issues that are in the Dorsey memo to you and to me. Another interesting thing in the memo I think talking about not paying our fair share of fees, and I am a strong proponent of that. I always believe, as I told you before and anytime I've come before you, I'm never looking for a subsidy. We want to do the right thing or we want to be an asset to the community. Now if you look at what this site is generating, and I won't go in detail but just the fees and assessments, our fees, there's over $3 million dollars in fees that are going to be paid to the city to pay for the streets. To pay for their SWMP fees. The MUSA AUAR... and also $900,000 in park fees. In addition to this traffic will generate, using today's dollars which will increase... about a million, $100,00 and $300,000 in additional building fees so our total is about $4,200,000 in fees. If you want to put that on a per lot basis, that's almost $27,000 per lot that each one of these owners are taking back in the form of paying for their own streets and paying for the park and paying for all the requirements that you have to work through to approve this project and approve these building permits. Further, the site has a number of private streets and those private streets will not be the responsibility of the city to maintain. So in addition to all of the cost added benefits of this site, all the private streets will be maintained by the homeowners and association with added savings for the city. So unless you have any questions I would like to have Cory Meyer come up and briefly talk about the planning process and then I'd like Allan Klugman to address the specific issues of Mr. Dorsey. Mayor Furlong: Any questions at this point? Dan Herbst: Okay, thank you. Cory Meyer: Good evening Mayor, members of the council. My name's Cory Meyer, as Dan alluded to. I'm with Westwood Professional Services. I'm a landscape architect and planner and I worked diligently with staff and Pemtom and Ryland to put together this plan. And what I want to take the opportunity tonight is to just touch on a couple of key design elements of the plan. First, the main two elements are issues I want to talk about is how this type of development pattern is suited specifically for this type of site. And then two, how this 0 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 development pattern is going to create a unique neighborhood for the city. So first off, how is this development pattern specifically tailored for this site. What we've done, as Kate mentioned is we've taken a modified type cluster approach where we've taken a normal single family house, which would in other parts of the city typically be on a lot that's about twice the size. What we've done is we've taken that excess lot size, if you will. Taken it. Shrunken it down and placed it in common areas associated with the Bluff Creek Overlay District. What we were tempted to do is basically minimize the development footprint as much as possible. What minimizing the development footprint allows us to do is again preserve key areas associated for Bluff Creek Overlay District. Some additional wetland areas that are found on site. Some wooded areas. Just generally the natural environment kind of benefits as a whole specifically on this site by doing the cluster type approach. Tied in with the cluster type of approach is how we treat the roadways. We have private and public streets. Emphasizing the connectivity of them. We don't want to create dead end's more so than necessary. That things logically flow. You've got a sense of people visiting a neighborhood and a unique sense of how to navigate through the neighborhood. Things are laid out logically. Using public and private streets also allows the, our development to kind of flow better with the land and we're able to adapt better to the topography that's found on the site. How this development pattern is also specifically tailored for this site. As was mentioned, the city regional trail that's going to follow along the Bluff Creek Overlay District. What we've taken that opportunity to do is to bring the sense of a walkable community to this project. Where we've provided connections down to that trail. It's a unique opportunity that we want these future residents to take advantage of. And I also talked about the preservation of the wetlands and the wooded areas on the site. Again minimizing the development footprint allows us the opportunity to avoid those key environmental areas. So in the second part of that is how is this development pattern going to create a unique neighborhood for the city? As Dan talked about, we feel that the site of this topography and this character, that single family homes are the best fit for that. They evolved, are easily adaptable to the topography that's found on the site. We can also achieve, by doing the cluster approach, we achieve the density goals of the city without necessarily needing townhomes. So we made a strong effort in how we lay out the site to utilize it's character to the maximum. If you were to overlay the topography on our project, how the street pattern is laid out relates exceptionally well to the topography. The roads follow that. We've tried to maximize the number of homes that back out to the open space and embrace it, and where that's not the ability for those homes to back out to the open space, we've again created that walkable community so there's strong pedestrian connections so even people on the inside are easily and, easily adaptable to get down to the trail. As Dan mentioned, 50% of the site is in some sort of a public open space. That's a strong proponent of a cluster type of approach. Again minimizing the development footprint for houses to dedicate the amount of land area. So I guess in summary again, just to touch on those two key points that this development is tailored for this site. The environmental preservation. How we laid out the homes and the streets was done with careful attention to the land. This development is going to be unique neighborhood for the city. Given that the city's going to meet their density goals. They're going to gain single family households. The city's going to achieve the preservation of the Bluff Creek Overlay District which is so strongly in your comprehensive plan. And the future residents we believe are going to appreciate the sense of place that we're creating here. That this is a totally unique neighborhood and are going to be able to enjoy with thoughtful consideration how we've gone through tonight. So with that I'll tum it over to Mr. Klugman, unless you have any questions for me. R City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Any questions at this point? And I don't know if this would be a question for you from a planning or streets, but just a question I guess with regard to some of the private streets. It seems that most of them of them have a hammer head or some sort of turn around except is it Street F. And I was curious, I know we've had an issue in the past and these are not as small as some of the private driveways we have but nonetheless being able to have a service vehicle or other vehicle turn around without pulling into somebody's driveway. Was there a reason that's omitted or is that something that could be added easily enough? Cory Meyer: We have turn around's located on this street, this street and this. I guess this is the one you're referencing? Mayor Furlong: Yep. Cory Meyer: I guess in my opinion, that would be not that dissimilar from a typical dead end townhome type common driveway that I think there's like a magic number out there like 150 feet that a fire hose will extend to. So our thought is that, what we could do is just, that the fire truck could basically be at that intersection and still give, service the home at the end of that street. Mayor Furlong: And part of it's for convenience of the residents and also on Street J there's even less of a distance and you put a hammer head up there. Cory Meyer: We can look into that. If there's, what we're trying to do is work with the topography as much as possible. We can look into that issue. Mayor Furlong: See council's been presented with issues in past situations in the past so. So let's take a look at that and correct it. Cory Meyer: We'll take a look at it. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Probably just a little one. There may be other questions but as long as you're talking about layout I thought I'd bring it up now. Any other questions at this point? Councilman Peterson: One of the questions that I've got on the Bluff Creek Overlay District, when you articulated and we've got about 50% open space on the site. When you use 50%, are you using the buildable site or the whole land in itself? Cory Meyer: The whole land of itself. I mean if you look at our entire project is 80 acres approximately. Whether it's buildable or not, but at the end of the day the residents that are living there aren't going to really know if it's buildable or not. They're just going to know it's open space, and enjoy it as such so, that's our, how we like to phrase that as, it's open space. Kate Aanenson: It's probably closer to 15 acres that would be buildable. ca City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Councilman Peterson: So that being said, walk me through, just point it out on that map or another one, inside the buildable part of the site, and give me some sense as to what you've left open. Cory Meyer: I don't know if it shows up very well on the camera here but what you'll see, the white dashed lines here are the Bluff Creek, the primary district for the Bluff Creek Overlay District. So there's a maximum area, I think the exact number that escapes me right now but in A this area, outside this area is essentially outside of the Bluff Creek Overlay District that a normal development would likely utilize more than what we've found here with the cluster type approach. Councilman Peterson: ...the first dashed one. You lost me when you said, alright. Between there and there? Cory Meyer: I mean you have all this green area. Basically where the trail goes through, they're putting the city regional trail and then our developable area for the most part. Councilman Peterson: Okay. Cory Meyer: And Kate might have the exact number. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Yeah, it's closer to like 15 to 17 acres. Again the tool to, and go back to how we acquire within the Bluff Creek Overlay District is allowing you to transfer it out. Otherwise, so if you look at. These are, the houses in yellow are all the lots that abut a private street. It's just shy of 50%. And from what I showed him here ... but this darker black line is actually the creek itself. So the ... but the overlay district is actually ... so with this big gap that cuts through here, that's... And this other areas are topographically separated... Does that answer your question? Cory Meyer: Any other questions? Councilman Lundquist: Parking. On the private streets. In this condition I didn't see anything. I'm assuming it remains as no parking on those. Kate Aanenson: No. You can't park on those. Another example where we have parking on private streets would be Villages on the Pond. Those are all private streets. And at one of our first meetings with the city engineer was what we were going to require for ... on street parking. Now as I mentioned before, the public streets are the 60 foot wide with a 30 foot, and those will have the high back curb. And the distinction on the private streets, they'll have 28 foot wide of pavement width, even though 40 foot right-of-way and they'll have the surmountable curb, and that will allow parking at 28 foot. The city engineer recommended that that would be permissible for on street parking. Councilman Labatt: On one side of the road or both sides or how are we going to? 31 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Kate Aanenson: That's kind of how we do it now. If you have 2 people parking on a 31, it can be a problem, depending on the size of the vehicle, so I mean most people use good judgment on that but school buses trying to get by, that may be an issue but in evaluating this, the city engineer recommended that that would be adequate. Again that's how we looked at some of those. Councilman Lundquist: Paul, do we have streets existing, public streets that are 20. Didn't we just go from the standard changed a couple years ago from 28 to 30? I remember from Mghover, didn't we have something, I think the streets up there are 28 or yeah, something. Paul Oehme: There are streets in the city that are 28 feet, public streets. Parking on both sides. An example of a street that we just reconstructed, just off Laredo. That street is 28 feet wide too. We had to shrink those streets down to compromise with the residents out there to get a good product so. Councilman Lundquist: So when we talk about private streets, I mean I'm envisioning some of our town house things where we've got the narrower, okay. So this is. Paul Oehme: Typically those other developments, the townhouse units are 20 feet or 24 feet wide. Not the 28 that we're recommending. Kate Aanenson: Let me just add a clarification. In the PUD itself, in the parking section, when you do in the R-8 zone, it does require a wider street. If this was, back to your question for the townhouse, just like Paul indicated, the ordinance does allow you to go smaller. Typically that's what we see because we don't allow parking. Because we do allow parking, we're forcing them to do a wider pavement. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Yep, that's fine. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions at this point? Okay. Cory Meyer: I'll tum it over to Al Klugman who will address some of the issues that they have with the Dorsey memo. Allan Klugman: Good evening. Again my name is Allan Klugman. I'm with Westwood Professional Services. I'm a registered civil engineer. Within the civil engineering I mainly work in the transportation area. In addition to being a registered engineer I'm a certified traffic operations engineer so kind of my specialty. One of the things that we did hear, and I hope this will show up. As Dan mentioned, we did receive a sketch from the Dorsey people, and although it was a very rough sketch, we felt that we would give it the serious ... and try to respond and see what it would do to our site, and I believe... great detail went through some of the issues that quickly... what I'd like to do tonight is go through that memo. Certainly not word for word but on many of the key points I'd like to ... the way I understand it. Although you can certainly draw a line on a piece of paper and say that's the road, I think when we look at it in any degree as we can, we see in a hurry there's numerous causes... impacts on the site, and both Dan said in the introduction and I think Cory in his detailed comments, we really put a lot of work into this. 32 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Coming up with the street lay that fits this site and fits the topography, and I think you'll see in a hurry that trying to comment on the plan that the Dorsey people put forward, it just... So I'm just going to cut right to some of the points and if you have any detail questions. I'm going to be rather brief... We labeled them, the points with letters to just kind of highlight what we're talking about. And just right off the bat we looked at, when we looked at the proposed north/south road, this east line here, right, it's a very difficult intersection we labeled point A. ...boulevard at about a 45 degree angle instead of a perpendicular intersection we could establish with to the east with a regular alignment there, so right off the bat you see some problems. In addition... site layout in the business district... Just kind of going along the lines there, we then get to the point where introducing, or trying to introduce a road like this immediately gives us some double loaded houses with streets on both sides, which is really not what we're trying to achieve. And then we get into, and again I'm just going to keep talking quickly here. We get into some issues that you know upon careful look just come up right away that doesn't show up... There's significant wetland issues that would arise from this location. Point C here, there's wetland on this site that's shown right through there. D represents the intersection of the north/south connector proposed with this street. You have wetland and I don't even think that that intersection could be built so, it's just, it's not something that's practical at all. And then among the other things that this would do too, is it would impact the private park that we have showing as Point E, which would be the extension in this area. And then maybe a bigger point, stepping back a bit, it just takes away from the entire concept for development of clustering the houses. Reducing the impervious surface and the whole character of this development that we've been looking at. And then kind of going along even into the development, when we get away from some of those specific things and start looking at the lay of the land and the topography, those type of lots and it's a little bit away from my ... traffic engineering to site layout, but when we get into what we're labeling... G, the houses are well suited to be walkout lots would just be lost with this type of plan, so you can see kind of the domino effect... all the care and planning that went into creating this special site would just be taken away in a hurry. Finally as we looked to what would happen if we tried to accommodate a road like that as it's shown. As a connector road with the higher volumes, it's a little bit different design standards. It seems more ... those issues caused by the wider road and design standards. And then finally moving up mostly north of this site. By introducing the roads here, you're then left with ... at that intersection that's very well spacing ... do some more intersections than we'd like to see. It also takes away from our ability to do the type of housing Cory was talking about with the garages and driveways to the side, so it wouldn't he appropriate for this character. So again, taken away from the character and the site plan. And then finally I guess one more technical detail that wasn't addressed in the Dorsey memo. The touch down point for this is probably about the exact wrong place of where you want to put that due to the grade differential to lining it and the amount of fill it would need to accommodate that road so ... it goes on to say that, there's many, many points that on a very, you know very initial look at that, many things jump up and say that road isn't going to work there. It doesn't fit at all with the character of the development, and we just thought we'd start by... Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Paul, did you want to make, did you say you wanted to talk about some city perspective now? Do you want to do that now? 33 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Paul Oehme: Yeah, I think I emailed out Westwood's background last weekend on the layout that Allan just talked about. One other item that, in terms of access to, yes I think that access point right on the property line between Dorsey and Degler's is approximately about 1,200 feet away from Audubon and that is approximately a quarter mile spacing that the county potentially could allow. But in my estimation that's not a good location for an access, a collector road access. Potentially 1,800 units, 1,800 trips on this roadway winding at that particular location is approximately at a 5% grade. And with a turn lane at that location, could potentially have problems in wet and snowy conditions. Stop conditions. The future roadway, Lyman Boulevard is, will be at 50 miles per hour design speed so coming down a hill at a 5% grade could potentially be concern for the residents accessing at this particular location so. The other issues with that access point, I think I'll just leave them go for now. I can answer, stand for any questions too that you might have about the access or traffic in general for this development but. Mayor Furlong: Okay. I mean the underlying question here is where should the north/south connection be between the east/west collector and Lyman Boulevard, so I think we've heard from the developer how that would affect their development, but I think from the city standpoint, you know. Paul Oehme: Well it potentially could work there I guess but it's not the preferred location in my estimation. We had Mr. Dorsey and I did have a conversation a week ago or so, 2 weeks ago now, about potential other locations and what I got out of that conversation was, and from a staff perspective, there is another location for that north collector. Mayor Furlong: There is or is not? Paul Oehme: There is. And that would be at Sunset Trail. T'ing in at that location. From a traffic perspective, you always want to limit and consolidate access points. That allows us to do that tight T'ing at an access point. You know I did have a site visit out there. Took a look at it, and then I did have, and we did, the city did spend some time and some funds looking at that intersection too from a sight distance perspective to what we could, with the improvements to Lyman Boulevard, make a quality intersection function with improvements to Lyman Boulevard to meet that sight distance requirements. We do have Lyman Boulevard and we are continuing to work with the county on upgrading that section of roadway so, so we do have in our CIP I think for 2009. Mayor Furlong: In terms of matching up, Audubon comes down from the north. That's not at the eastern property line of this development? It's shown on the west? Paul Oehme: That is on the west side, yeah. Audubon is on the west. Mayor Furlong: To get to that line we'd have to cross the creek if we were coming up on this side. Paul Oehme: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: You have a picture? 34 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Paul Oehme: This is a drawing showing the traffic where the roadway alignment is, was proposed in AUAR back in 2003. The access point that you were referring to Mayor was at Audubon and it has always been envisioned that to serve the property west would T into Audubon at that location and a wrap around to Lakeview Drive there so. You know all the other access points to in this area are T'ing into other roadway, residential roadway or collector roadways to the east, or to the west we are, the east/west collector road, we'll be tying into Butternut to the west or you know we'll be tying into Powers Boulevard in the off ramp to 212 and to the south. That road will now tie into Bluff Creek Drive, Ting into the south there, so all the roads we're proposing right now would be tying into. Kate Aanenson: I just want to clarify too, because it's difficult to show but there is a creek, the creek and we looked ... so that's why this road has to stay on this side of the creek. Mayor Furlong: Show where the creek is. Todd Gerhardt: Why don't you show this map that shows the details. The fourth page in in the report. Mayor Furlong: We need about 3 more maps. Kate Aanenson: It doesn't show the road on it but this is the creek. So what they're showing is stopping short, so here's Audubon. So you have to stay on this side of the creek. This is where the lift station is. It's just on the east side of the creek so, what we're trying to avoid, because we talked about all the projects in here, is minimize creek crossings. That's been the goal. So we have ... with the boulevard. The other point I wanted to make when we talked about similar densities, you know the AUAR recommended this and this, a connection point on Lyman. One additional connection point, so the other thing is we don't know what's happening on the property, these two properties, so for example if it came in low density, then we would re- evaluate. Maybe there doesn't need to be a connection if it comes in low density. If there's a Sfd{ on request to do something different, higher density, then we'd have to evaluate that but right now, based on the fact that it was intended to show maximum development, that's what was built under the maximum for the lower end of the density and that's something that we would certainly evaluate and maybe similar to this one, that that connection would need to be made. But since we don't have a plan in front of us, we can't make that ... but we would certainly look at it. Again... using the traditional single family subdivision for example. If it went less than that, as I indicated before, it'd have to come back for a comp plan amendment. Mayor Furlong: When we were working through the AUAR, if I recall, there were a few things that were established when we approved that, and one of those were the touch down points or the intersections for the east/west collector. Both on Audubon and on Powers Boulevard. Was there a similar type of texture in terms of where the alignment to the east/west collector on the north or Pioneer Trail to the east/west collector? 35 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Right, I mean you saw this connection but as we saw when Pioneer Pass came in, it moved. They worked it into their development to provide access. They built, that's a minor collector. 80 foot wide. They're building that then as a part of development. Mayor Furlong: But that moved and. Kate Aanenson: Yes it did, yeah. To work in the development. Mayor Furlong: And to align with Bluff Creek Drive. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, to change again so there's that flexibility so again we can look at that too if it came in on the low end of the density. Paul Oehme: And just for the record Mayor, council. Zach did look at the access point at Sunset Trail too and basically this is the access point that the Degler site is right here. And the east property line to the Degler's is currently right there. You know to provide proper profile for sight distances at a 50 miles per hour road, the access point at Sunset Trail would have to be lowered approximately about a foot, so it's not a big impact to the roadway or to the connections to the south to make that, to make that intersection function properly. Councilman Lundquist: How far is it Paul from Sunset to what will be Powers extension? Paul Oehme: 1,250 feet. Not quite. Mayor Furlong: And what's your standard of what you're looking for, for a minimum? Paul Oehme: 1,200. Mayor Furlong: It's 1,200? Okay. Councilman Peterson: Go back to the previous map if you would Paul. Do we remember what the rationale was for that placement where it is now? Paul Oehme: You know the AUAR I believe it just stated that there should be an access point from Powers Boulevard over to Audubon. I think just kind of picked halfway inbetween. I don't think there was really any significant. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, the design speed, as Paul indicated before. Lyman's going to be faster than the Bluff Creek Boulevard, so they wanted to get those spacings between, kind of more equal distance because of the speed and the volume on Lyman so. With those traffic counts. Councilman Peterson: Is the, and I don't recall. The Plowshares development that's going in just about north of where that road is now. That will or will not have access to Lyman. Kate Aanenson: Will not. 36 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Councilman Peterson: So that's going through the Lake Susan Hills? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Osprey Lane. Paul Oehme: Yep, and stubbing a street to the east. Kate Aanenson: Providing a stub street to the property to the west of that. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Appreciate the information. Dan Herbst: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Mr. Herbst. Dan Herbst: If you would like any questions directed to the Ryland Group as to product type, target market, floor plan, I'll bring Brian Sullivan to the podium. Mayor Furlong: I think so. Brian Sullivan: Hi, I'm Brian Sullivan. I'm with Ryland Homes. We're thrilled and excited to be here. Ryland Homes has been in the Twin Cities market for about 10 years now and to my knowledge we haven't been in your fair city, so we're very excited about that. We've been working with Dan and his group for quite a while on the concept plan that we've come up with here and the concept plan and home style we're proposing here is something that we've been on for about a year now with the type of homes that we're proposing here. What we've been doing is, through our market research and realizing where land prices are and what people want and what people don't want, we see that there's a shift in the market a little bit. And one of the things that we realized is that everyone wants a 3 car garage. And then we go to the city people, like talking with Kate and Kate looks at a 3 car garage as across the front of the house and she goes, that doesn't look very good. Just having 3 car garage, 3 car garage, 3 car garage, all down the street here, so we started you know ... so what we started doing as we're thinking about this issue as to how best present our homes to the city, how to have the direct land cost continuing to escalate and how to best address and some internal, some issues that people have on the interior of the homes. We started re -thinking our product mix a little bit. What we did is we came up with this cluster home here that has been redefined on the inside. One of the things to mainly address issues with the city was how do we ... the appearance of our homes from the street as you're going through the neighborhoods, and what we did is, we designed a home that has a 3 car garage but the, from the front side of it, it looks like a 2 car garage. What we've done is we've stacked one of the garage stalls behind the other and what we've learned from our, kind of market research is that people want the third stall but they don't need to use it every day. They use it for storing their bicycles and their toys and the boat. The summer car. It may be a summer car... winter car so it's not something that you need to have every day, that third stall, garage doors open up to another bay. So when we came across that realization we were like well geez, we can go with a little bit narrower house, which means we have a little bit narrower lot, which means we can pay ... and see if we can come up with what is a fairly nice, nice looking subdivision here. And if you look at it, it's kind of a typical streetscape here. You can see what 37 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 we've done is we have about 8, we have 8 floor plans. Eight home styles that we're, 8 floor plans we're proposing here and each of those floor plans has 4 or 5, 3, 4, or 5 different elevations on the front of them. Some of them have brick on them. Some of them have stone on them. Some have just a porch out front. Some are prairie style... there's lots of different options so as home buyers come through, they can ... here this may be close to what you're thinking about here and we have a floor plan that goes inside that and... offering to the home buyer and have a very unique... The other thing that we've done is if you look at the corner, comer lots here. We've designed a house that's been designed for a corner lot there and, what it is, it's a, the garage on that is around, off around the back side of it there. So the garages are side loaded off the corner of the street there. What that does is it just helps, it also diminish the number of, the number of garage doors that are on the street there also. And if you go through our development here you'll see a fair number of corners there that we can use to put these on. We also have some of these other homes with the 2 car garages, will also fit on these garage corners because we have some setback issues we need to work with so there are, there is an option that will be ... garage doors facing the front. So that's kind of how we designed the homes there. We started looking at this, at how we can, we're looking at narrow lots. Somebody said well how do we get the narrow lots to work, and we ended up designing houses specifically for the narrower lots. It's not like we're trying to squeeze a bigger house onto a smaller lot... trying to get the site plan to work here and help with ... real unique neighborhood. As far as price point here, we're probably in the low, or actually I should say high $300's. Low $400's is kind of the base, starting point. Then they'll go up to 5-6. Maybe 6 when people start loading them up with sun porches and marble in kitchens and stainless steel amenities and things that people like to have so. We're kind of in the middle of things there and looking for a nice market segment. Sever Peterson's property to the south of us, he's got the large lots that are more of an executive style home. Town and Country stuff which is the lower level home for multi -family type of product. We're looking at something that's kind of inbetween the two... Not the real pricey guys. We're not the real cheap guys as far as the type of homes... So that's what we have, if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions. Councilman Peterson: Do you have any sense of how many different color palettes you're going to use when you drive through the neighborhood and is it going to be half a dozen or... Brian Sullivan: There are probably about half a dozen different color palettes there. A lot of the color will come from when people put brick and stone on the front of their house there. The siding tends to be in the earth tone colors. We've gone a little deeper on which way we call it deeper colors back there so we'll have some contrast between our lighter color and darker colors. See them popping out more as you go through here. One of the comments the Planning Commission had was about garage doors and the whole issue of whether or not they, were they going to be flat or ... one in the illustration here with, I had to go back and say no. We're showing raised panel doors here and plain doors with windows. Basically all of the garage doors, they have the texture of some paneling to them, and then as an option to kind of look at the elevation to go with some of the garage doors and windows... so that will also be a, one of the components. in City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: And I guess following up on the question of color, and looking at this picture here which I think is up on the table. And it's hard to differentiate the, I mean there are two that are the darker brown, and then the others look to be grayer or some sort of tan or something. Is there, are there more differentiating colors than what we're seeing on this plan? Brian Sullivan: ... that's probably a pretty close representation of what will be out there as far as colors. We're looking at, I'm trying to get some, there are some darker blues and there's some kind of reddish colors that we're looking at introducing here and I don't think you see those up there. There's also some greens also. But. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Any other questions for Mr. Sullivan? No? Very good, thank you. Councilman Peterson: Probably just one of staff as we're talking about garage doors. I know that staff is a proponent of adding character to the garage doors. Can we put in the approval that a certain... Kate Aanenson: Sure, and I think we want to follow up with some color too. A percentage of. We're comfortable with the mix we've got and looked at the ... but I think it's always better to be more restrictive so I think that would be when they come back for final plat that we ask for a color palette and that certain percentage. I think Planning Commission struggled with that too. And the standard one, when we do townhouse projects, we always ask for and it's our opinion that those add better value in a townhouse project. If this is a single family, typically we don't. All that's required, but I think it's fair because it's the PUD to ask... Mayor Furlong: I agree. I think asking for more on the colors. I guess my question is when do we do that? Can we defer that... Kate Aanenson: We can put in a condition then it comes back at final plat. That they show you the color palette. Mayor Furlong: That they work with staff. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, yeah. And then we could stick with the same, I think he's clarified that he has at least 4 colors and I think what we want to see is we're kind of moving right now towards the deeper colors to the lighter and I think that's... want to see the deeper greens and the ... more of a golden color. It's just deeper, richer colors. Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I think it's variety as much as picking colors but okay. So that's something we can include. To work with you to. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Okay, any other questions at this point? Okay, Mr. Herbst, is that it from your side? Dan Herbst: We want to thank you. Isis City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay, any follow up questions at this point for staff? If not, Mr. Dorsey requested to address the council and I'd certainly be interested in hearing his comments at this time. Rick Dorsey: Mayor, members of the council. I appreciate the time to speak with you this evening. My primary concerns, as you all know, have dealt with transportation. Access to the area. It's been a big part of it. The plan that's put forth, and can you zoom in on that please a little bit for me. Little more. The whole area here is what should be looked at. We're not looking at just one individual point. Concern with traffic flow. Mitigation of traffic on the eastern end of the property is something I've talked about numerous times. And while I haven't met with Mr. Herbst other than when I was notified his plan was going to come in front of the city, I've been very vocal in front of the council and I think you would go and find out the information as far as my concerns with that. The proposed alternative road that just showed up here this last week. I haven't seen this before. But I have looked at the option. Comes right across through the middle of my property. It will be a collector road. Last meeting at the Planning Commission meeting the Planning Commission said it wouldn't be acceptable for a collector road to go through the middle of the Pemtom property when it was brought up as an option over there. Likewise my property is zoned, or not zoned but guided similarly. I would expect that it wouldn't be acceptable to come through the middle of my property either. In addition to that, there will have to be, because there's not adequate road services provided in the plan for the Pemtom property, they have one access point at this time on the east/west collector with a 1,700 foot cul-de-sac. The way around that is if a temporary access point through my property. Somewhere about this point so you'd have to put another equivalent of a connector road coming across there to connect up with the connector. This doesn't really leave me with very desirable area of land to work with. For anybody who'd want to be a resident in this property. In the future and as far as having flexibility to design and plan building around collector roads, like I say. Planning Commission as well as staff made note of it. It isn't acceptable in any other project so, you know similarly I'd expect the same thing. Now traditionally, well before I go to traditionally. Let's go back to, this was planned for the east/west collector that the staff supported. The City Council approved final plan for back in August of 2005. Note the north collector's location. Is on the Pemtom project property. So it has moved since that point in time. No discussion had with myself whatsoever from the developer. When I found out about the possible move of it, about late October, early November, I discussed it with Paul and said that wasn't what we were anticipating, nor anything to the desire of what we might have. Now back at that time, why there's a problem today with the access point onto Lyman if at that point in time there wasn't a problem with it. In doing a little bit of research here, as far as distances. From the standpoint of location to nearest intersection, Paul had mentioned about 1,200 feet. I went out and measured it out. It was 1,185. And this one up here is actually 1,150, depending on at what point you stop at on a curve point there. They're similar distances. So the distance of, to one intersection or the other doesn't have an impact on the location. Now, the concern that I would have from looking at the whole picture, if I go back to this drawing here is, from the internal standpoint, the traffic, the location that's most central to the whole 2005 service area is right here. With that being the center point of the development, it would encourage mitigation of traffic because people coming out here, they're actually closer to Audubon than they are to Powers, which would encourage those going to Highway 5 to consider City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Audubon as an alternative. Likewise if they're going to downtown Chanhassen, they wouldn't have to put all the pressure on this intersection over here. This particular drawing here, coming out here, is only 1,200 feet from this intersection. This will be probably the busiest intersection outside of those on Highway 5 in the city. To try to mitigate some traffic away from that intersection would be prudent I would believe. From the standpoint of internally to my property there's also natural features there that provide limitations as far as future development. This is a fairly steep hillside along this side with low ground in here. The area along the road here is actually an embankment coming down onto my property which limits the access point to probably only this location as well. The one that's on, if it wasn't down here. As well the pond that's right here, from the house there's actually a hill. There's no land. There's probably about 25-30 feet maybe right down by the wet ground, so there's really nothing between here and here that's any further useable, so you'd have a little pocket here and two little pieces here that are of significance with this option. And it's not that something couldn't be built there but from the standpoint of a collector, you're not going to be able to build houses and have them back out of their driveways onto it. You're going to have to figure out another configuration. From the standpoint as well, while I don't purport to be an engineer, I trust that engineers have talents and skills and creativity and could come up, they can come up with a solution for dam near anything if you put the challenge to them, and enough money. And my drawing that I provided Paul with and he forwarded across was conceptual. And the idea there was to say how can we look at another alternative that keeps the bulk of this land here. The Fox and Dorsey parcels open and flexible so that development can happen. The idea, the exact locations matching up to those on the Pemtom plan, you know that is not necessarily what I was suggesting. I'm not sure actually how he's going to build those going down the hill here without some sort of major grading or retaining wall, but I'm sure it can be done. In any case the idea there was to utilize the collector as a buffer between properties. Very common. You have different types of usages and with different types of usages, you create senses of neighborhoods for those developments that are built. The issue of, the other issue that's there is in not having it here you preclude the opportunity for potentially, and while it's not part of the AUAR, a second intersection up at this point to provide access to the Fox property which is virtually landlocked at this point because they have a small segment right here that's a possibility. The rest of Lyman is not a possibility. All the way down Powers is not a possibility to get into their property, and if you come across, let's see. As you come across what was proposed for the east/west collector, the soonest intersection you could create coming off of Powers in this property is right about here which this is a wetland or proposed, considered to be a wetland. It hasn't been delineated yet. Providing very difficult access to that property. So precluding that one forces one here. So then where does the traffic go from the Fox property as well. Some of it maybe can come out this way. I have a significant asset sitting on the top of that hill, as many of you know. It's significant and it's something that I don't say that we're just going to give up. I would say that there's a good chance, depending on what goes on with the rest of the area around me, still single family could be an option. And with single family that could be 1 to 4 units an acre. 1 to 4 units per acre is different intensity. I've got use on this site and I don't know what it's going to be. It may be that. It may be higher. I don't know. There's no plan in place at this point. I'm at least 6 years out because of it being in the ag preserve. So in any case I would like to have opportunities. There's, it's reasonable to be able to put such a road along the property line. With the plan that's proposed by Pemtom today, I can't even put a road adjacent to my property line because the houses are backed up against it with a road on the other side of them, which would make 2 roads 41 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 on either side of those properties. So this is kind of a one sided situation right here. I believe precedent was set in dealing with Sever Peterson's property and Town and Country property when they originally had the road coming across Sever Peterson's property and put it across the two properties and split it down the middle. Splitting it down the middle does two things. It shares the amount of land that either party has to give up, and both parties will benefit from that road. It also shares the cost of that road, which probably will be in excess of a million dollars. So from the standpoint of in the future a road being needed, certainly if I never develop my property there'd be a problem with the Pemtom property. They're under serviced with roads. And so there would be a requirement or need for them to have some sort of access to another collector road. The opportunity is there to provide it. I'm not here to try and hold up their project but I do think it's fair and reasonable, if he was on the other side of the table, he'd be right here saying the same things I am to you, that fair and reasonable would be splitting it down the middle and both parties would benefit and both parties can contribute to it. One other note here, I also went and measured off on Powers Boulevard just to have an idea of distances between intersections and if you go up to the street here, starting up here at the, I believe it's Lake Drive West. From this point here to this point here at Lake Susan Hills is 960 feet. To go from that point to Powers Court is 800 feet. And then 1,160 between these two, so on country roads it's not unprecedented to have smaller segments between them. It's maybe what we would like to see is larger. Quarter mile is actually 1,320 feet so neither of the locations on Lyman would meet that criteria. The other issue that was there when I was looking at it and researched this was that sight distances are an issue today. Right now the first sight distance coming down is at that point, so from a standpoint of safety issues, that's the first point where you could put a road. Perhaps Lyman will get re -graded or rebuilt. It's been on the plans I believe since the 90's. Early 90's. Hasn't been built yet. I anticipate it probably will be built sooner than later but at the same time if I get to the table in 6 years and it's not built, what does that mean? There's no access point to Lyman Boulevard for me because I can't meet the state guidelines. Without rebuilding Lyman Boulevard. So in fairness, and I've heard that said many a times and I do believe that that would be the intention of all involved would be to look at it and say, from the benefit of the whole community, bring the traffic up to this point to help mitigate the traffic going through these neighborhoods would be something that should be certainly considered. To look at the area around this area here and trying to get some of the traffic away from it, and make sure it's not just instantly going to be a problem would be to look to again centralize it over here. So that's what I have to say right now. Again, I would look to the council to look at it fairly and I guess there's one other item dealing with ordinances. Again difference of opinion perhaps but the way the ordinance reads is if one property has a higher, intense use than another, and I have two dual guided uses. While they're the same, this property selected the higher usage. I still have dual guidance. It could be the lower. It could be my decision. Could be the city's decision. I don't know that. In any case I feel that my property should be protected to provide that. One other quick issue dealing with the buffer there, or the road being there. It does provide an ability for somebody to enter into one neighborhood or the other and have monuments and knowledge you're going into a different neighborhood. And as well, in the interim, until my property is developed, it is agricultural. There will be agricultural equipment operating on it. Chemicals being sprayed. Fertilizer being put on the ground, and a buffer of a road would certainly keep children from going across and into the field like it's their back yard. So those are the points of concern I have at this time. Any questions, I'd be happy to answer. 42 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Any questions for Mr. Dorsey? No? Okay, thank you. Comment for staff or, follow up comments. Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor. Just a couple real quick points here. We are trying to allow, the most flexibility in these designs. It's just hard to plan for flexibility when there's no design that we have in front of us, and we don't know exactly what to plan for. Let's see. Actually the north collector roadway that we had you know shown on this drawing here, again it's only approximation or it's our best stab at what potentially could develop. I think Mr. Fox or Mr. Dorsey had indicated an access point close to this location so we just kind of put something in there so. You know it's all flexible. We're not saying this is where it needed to go. We're recommending putting it there. I mean we're allowing that to be dealt with in the future and to have the property owners, the developers look at where a road potentially could best serve their development. The information that we had received from the Degler's and the Fox's. Mayor Furlong: Dorsey's. Paul Oehme: Dorsey's, I'm sorry. Had, you know this is one of the concepts that we had received and you know the access point that we had shown here before with the north collector roadway access from the adjacent property owner here, plus the access point someplace at Sunset Trail too so. We're trying to look at all these access points. Where do we tie these developments in that are being proposed at this time, plus try to plan for the future so we're, you know from a staffs perspective, we're trying to do our best and try to see what, plan for the future and try to accommodate the property owners and developer's wishes on how they think they can best develop their property. Let's see, one last point again with the, I'm showing on this drawing here. You know putting the north collector roadway where Mr. Dorsey had preferred it to go would go, is again it's at a 5% grade. I think from a staffs perspective and the traveling public you know, turn lanes on collector roadways at 5% grade, left turn lanes, it's not. You know there's other locations for those type of access points. Those are the type of access points that we should look at alternatively from steep grades like that, just from a safety perspective. Councilman Peterson: So 5% grade would be pre, pre Lyman reconstruction? Paul Oehme: Pre and post. Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry, what did you say? Pre? Paul Oehme: Pre and post. What we had looked at was sight lines at Sunset Trail and down to Powers Boulevard and where it potentially could tie into existing grades too. You don't want to, try to keep the grades at where they are because it just drives up the cost to change the grades. Todd Gerhardt: How much would you have to cut down from the hill if you were to try to eliminate the 5%? Paul Oehme: Significantly. 43 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Todd Gerhardt: I mean can you point on there where you'd have to Paul Oehme: Well, you know the existing grade is 5% right there. I mean I don't know what the magic number is to put in the access point there. 3% maybe that's the recommended grade for a 50 miles per hour collector roadway for tum lane. I don't know, it would be significant to make that access point work. Another issue that Mr. Dorsey had brought up too again was, maybe just going back to this map real quick. Putting an access point here would encourage more traffic to go up Audubon Road. Audubon right now is a city owned collector roadway. Powers Boulevard is a collector roadway. Four lane divided. That's where you know in staffs recommendation, that's where the traffic should be going out on the city collector roadway. Those are. Kate Aanenson: I just had one other thing to add, because I want to go back to the land use issue, and that's again we indicated if that came in, we believe we've interpreted the code correctly, as far as the buffer because it's similarly guided. Again if we would evaluate the same thing and Mr. Dorsey came in with a less intense and again the AUAR made assumptions based on the higher end because we use the most amount. We evaluate that and maybe a street wouldn't need to be connected to Lyman if they chose to go with the low end, and that's a possibility and we'd certainly evaluate that. So that connection wouldn't need to be made. Councilman Lundquist: Paul, Kate, if I heard you correctly before. Is it an accurate statement that the impact of the Pemtom development on the property to the east is a connection to public street. Whatever that one is coming across there, and then the east/west collector that goes through. Mayor Furlong: East/west collector, yeah. If I'm not mistaken, that is on the Fox family property. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. West, okay. But the property to the east of this development, and so really the east/west is our deal. That's the city driven so the public street going across there, connecting to the east from the Pemtom development. Kate Aanenson: Are you talking about this one? Councilman Lundquist: That one right there, yep. And then everything else to the east is essentially up to grabs, depending upon what happens. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Councilman Lundquist: So Kate, if I heard you before, depending on what goes on that property to the east, we may not ever have to make a connection to Lyman if it didn't want it or depending on what the use or what that ended up being. So is that? Kate Aanenson: That's fair. Councilman Lundquist: Fair that that could be anything? City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Well right now it's guided low or medium and if it was to come in something large lot estates, it's not guided for that. You'd have to do a land use amendment. Right now if it came in with low or medium, that's consistent with the comprehensive plan. If it came in for commercial, industrial, that again would take a land use amendment. At those two options, commercial industrial, they're probably more than confidently require that that connection be made. If it was to come in consistent with the comprehensive plan, low density, say single family lots, more than likely you could make the internal loops. You'd still ... all the access, because the volume wouldn't be so great on this street. It'd all be... Councilman Lundquist: When we talked about the AUAR, did we talk about how many connections it was going to be to Lyman? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, the one additional one besides. Councilman Lundquist: Besides that little loop street there. Kate Aanenson: This one here that... that ties back down. And then there's another connection in the AUAR that shows it approximately, yeah. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, so if in the future that one didn't happen, what would be the consequence there? Kate Aanenson: Well the AUAR said, based on traffic modeling, if you went underneath that model, which is what he's saying it may be a possibility, then we would evaluate that. More than likely it wouldn't be anything. Mayor Furlong: Would we have to redo the AUAR, amend that? Kate Aanenson: As long as we stay under the model. You know as we look at that, I'm pretty (55 confident based upon the future of single family home. If you look at what we've got with 5 units an acre here. We've got 155. Similarly number you'd probably be way under that. Maybe 80 lots. I can't imagine that... Councilman Peterson: Well that's one of the issues we talked about at Town and Country Phase II is that, some of us, if not most of us were concerned about the intensity or density of all ... sol think we've already proven that we're already going over our number of density. So I think if we do less, I don't think that's going to be an issue. Kate Aanenson: Right, yeah. Councilman Lundquist: So then back to, so really the impact on this project to the property, well for that matter to the west and to the east is one residential street. Kate Aanenson: Correct. 45 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Councilman Lundquist: We've got the part of that loop that will go from Audubon going to the west. And you've got this public street to be determined name going to the east. And those are the two connections and other than that the roadway's unaffected. Kate Aanenson: Correct. I just feel compelled to say something else for the record and that's, you know because when the city initiated the McComb study to look at, to be proactive, and the one thing we did learn in that, and I just want to put this on the record, is that if a lifestyle center, some additional commercial wants to go here, that developer is going to want that access. We feel it's prudent that we provide that opportunity on this site... We're trying to give them the flexibility. Councilman Lundquist: I want to make sure that we're not spending our whole evening talking about what might be on property to the west or the east with regard to this. My concern is, what's the you know, I don't want to hamper the property to the west or to the east for some future, and I think that by essentially putting one connection in each one, that's about as minimum, I mean zero is the only other choice, which doesn't seem likely that you're not going to connect them somehow, so to have one property, I just want to make sure that's just to clarify that. Okay. And then one other about the, I think what is Mr. and Mrs. Degler's driveway now, that, where that is a hammer handle down there. That not being a connection point just because it's too close to Audubon. Is that what the driver is there? Paul Oehme: Right, and it's a private street proposed. Councilman Lundquist: Ah yeah, okay. But primarily that one, I mean we can make it 3 feet wider but that would be it's just too close to Audubon, is that why you chose to have a hammer head there? Paul Ochme: Too close to Audubon and it's not recommended. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Just one clarifying question with regard to and I may have the applicant come back up. There was the issue, or Ms. Aanenson. We talked about setbacks. You made mention in your report that it's 25 feet setback from the right- of-way. Whether it's private right-of-way with a 40 or a public of 60. Kate Aanenson: Yeah it's the garage side. Mayor Furlong: On the garage side. Except for the corners where it's 25 and 20. Kate Aanenson: And 20. 20 would be the non -garage side. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: Because it gets very punitive when you've got that small a lot. It basically would eliminate that lot. EM City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: And I guess my question then is, as I thought and maybe this is a question then for the applicant. It sounds like some of the property, some of the comer lots were going to have a side garage. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: As opposed to the front. So are we going to see a differential between on that corner lot with that house 5 feet out in front... Kate Aanenson: That's what he indicated we're trying to work through those to see how that, there will be some differentiation on that. Mayor Furlong: Okay, which is usually along the ... okay but then the front of that house would be 20 which would be 5 feet closer at a comer than all the other homes on the street. Is that what we want? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Well, I think you know we're going to have to look at that carefully. Where those placements are and that's what I think what Brian was talking about too. Is how to address that because we want to encourage that, the side loaded, so looking at those lots, it's always our goal, the goal here is try to limit on this street here, try to get those interior streets. So we've shown those driveways that have access onto the public street, there's opportunity to the corner. Mayor Furlong: And maybe that's going, first of all how many are we talking about and second, you know I kind of like the idea of a side access as well, but I'm not. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I know what you're saying. There could be one house that's sitting closer. Mayor Furlong: And it's right at the corner. Where you going to have naturally more traffic, more cars. Kate Aanenson: Well and I think too, the design speed on these streets, because that was one of the things that we, you know you looked at too. It's a quite neighborhood. So you don't have long stretches where you can pick up the speed. I'm not sure how many exactly we have for the corner lots. Brian Sullivan: It's like 16 or 20 or somewhere in that range. Mayor Furlong: So about 10%. Little over. About 10%. Kate Aanenson: I understand what you're saying and we can look at that to see how we can work those through. 47 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Brian Sullivan: We're on this main road here. You know we have like a corner lot like right here. These corner lots, you're not going to have the corner house on those because we're going to have, these are going to be more a traditional mad because they're going to want to have a 3 car garage. This kind of the main road into our development here so you don't want to have a lot of 3 car garages on the main drive as we. Mayor Furlong: So you're saying that would be an example where you would have the side garage? Brian Sullivan: Where I would not have the side garage. Because the 3. Mayor Furlong: Oh, that lot facing towards the. Brian Sullivan: Yeah, 3 garage doors would be facing toward the street. I wouldn't want that there so, there will be situations mainly along this road. These corner lots along the main road that I don't, that we won't, we might want to have the, I wouldn't want to have the corner house on those lots there. Mayor Furlong: Are any of those then, are any of those situations where the, it's on a private street that it's going to be the 20 foot setback? Brian Sullivan: Yeah, on a private street the front of the house would be 20 feet. Mayor Furlong: From the 40 foot right-of-way? Brian Sullivan: From the 40 foot right-of-way. And with your garage on a comer would be the 25 feet. 25 feet. 25 feet from the right-of-way. Kate Aanenson: That was I believe one of the drawings in the perspective that showed the corner. I believe this one with the private street... Brian Sullivan: This right here would show what the. Kate Aanenson: So that would be the side loaded on the private. But what you're missing in context is I'm pushing forward on the other one. I think that's something that maybe we can ... and then when it comes back for final plat, you can see how that. I understand... one sticking out there. Mayor Furlong: Yeah, and I just want to clarify because I understand the concept but what does that mean when we apply it is what I'm trying to get my arms around. Kate Aanenson: Right... along the street. Mayor Furlong: So we'll take a look at that. Kate Aanenson: Yep. Hi City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Ahight. Impervious surface coverage. Overall it's limited to 30. We're taking advantage of the open space in the Bluff Creek corridor as part of that 30, and if I read the data information correctly, it said 27 is the current coverage ratio. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: On the lots themselves, did that calculation include that 600 square foot... Kate Aanenson: That's a good question. I'm sorry I missed that when I gave my presentation but we tried to come up, and that's something else we wanted in the homeowners covenants because if everybody maximized their lot, which we don't anticipate, but what we want to come up with and I put this in the staff report. We looked at there's approximately 600 square feet so if everybody used that 600 square feet we'll still be under it. It appears so. If they want to put, what we're asking them to put, also I talked about fences. Dog houses. We also want that to put, go into their association rules and. Councilman Labatt: And covenants? Kate Aanenson: Well restrictions too, that there's a certain percentage that they can maximize. Mayor Furlong: And I guess that's it. If 600 square feet for each of the homeowners is allowable and they still meet the overall coverage. Kate Aanenson: Yes, we believe that's kind of what we did for the math. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Obviously we want to avoid is variance requests on impervious surface because it's smaller lots to begin with. So is there, how are we going to deal with that? Is there a limit on a lot itself? Kate Aanenson: That's what I'm saying. The 600 per lot basis. Mayor Furlong: Is going to be the implied. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct. Mayor Furlong: Additional amount. So some of the footprints of the homes are different, are they not? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes. So not everybody's going put a deck on right away. Everybody's not going to have a dog run, those sort of things, so we'll have to evaluate that. What we've asked them to do is kind of come back with that minutia and we kind of worked that into the system so there's kind of a set rule that, how much square footage you can add on. To stay within that percentage. 49 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Without adding complexity, I think we should try to take a look at that now so that we have those rules there, and if it's in there... Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I did review that in the staff report but we're asking them to put that also in their bylaws and we'll put that in as a condition of approval so it's quantitative and prescriptive so people know what they're buying into. How much they have for additional yard space. Mayor Furlong: Another work with staff condition. Very good. Those are my questions. Any other questions at this point? Councilman Labatt: I've got one. Kate, the parking on the private streets. These are 28 foot wide streets. Kate Aanenson: Paved, yeah. Councilman Labatt: 28. And if a neighbor has a party, and they have 20 people over and they all come 2 per car, so we've got 10 cars parked out there. If they park on both sides of the road you're telling me that we can still get a vehicle through there? Paul Oehme: Yes. I mean you can't go in two directions but in one direction you'll be able to. Councilman Labatt: What is they park in both directions, then there's no way for an ambulance or a fire truck or a car to get through. Paul Oehme: You can get one through but not two. Yeah, you can get one through. Councilman Labatt: They can get one car through but if they park on both sides of the road. Mayor Furlong: If they get 8 feet to a car. Paul Oehme: Yeah, 8 foot to a car approximately, 10, 11 to 12 feet for a drive aisle. Todd Gerhardt: Parking stall's 9 by 18. Paul Oehme: Yeah, so 9, 18, so 10 feet. Councilman Labatt: So we're okay with that? Paul Oehme: 28 feet is a standard in some communities too for public streets. We happen to be 31 feet. Mayor Furlong: Now our public streets in this development will be subject to the same no parking rules. Paul Oehme: That's correct, right. 50 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Councilman Labatt: But the private streets aren't. Kate Aanenson: That's something we may want to look at. Councilman Labatt: What's to say if there's a problem here and there's private streets. Enforcement wise there's no, we have no stake. There's nobody that can go on there and ticket the cars and tow them other than the homeowners association. Mayor Furlong: Well and I guess the question is, what do we do elsewhere in the city? Councilman Labatt: I think we have a private, now don't get me wrong. I like what I see. I'm just. Mayor Furlong: It's something to look into. Councilman Labatt: This is only preliminary right? Kate Aanenson: Yes, and again some of the stuff we put in that we need to look at for the next level that we talk about are some of those details. Councilman Labatt: Okay, can you look at it? Kate Aanenson: Yep. I think that's a good point, yeah. And again, that's going to be the association that's going to plow those streets but they're also going to want to get people off so they can get to their houses but we can put a time period that they get it plowed and all those sort of things. Councilman Labatt: Okay. And then my only other comment is, I'm with you Brian on your thinking on this. That it's a great subdivision. It looks like. It's laid out nice. It does a nice job to preserve things. At the same we should think what's the entrance to the east. And I look at going back to what we went through last year with Yoberry Farms where we had Longacres coming in and Highover coming down and they both had touchdown spots so we had to maneuver things and I mean we're not reinventing the wheel here. Councilman Lundquist: This is longer than my cul-de-sac Councilman Labatt: So those are my comments. You know, it's, the parking thing I wanted to talk about and. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other thoughts, comments. Councilman Lundquist: Todd, you've been over there all night. How about approximate distance from let's say the middle of the development which is about where the totlot is to the park that's down on Peterson's project. 51 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Todd Hoffman: Approximately half a mile. Councilman Lundquist: You wouldn't happen to have a map, somebody wouldn't happen to have map that shows the whole area. There you go. It's the yellow area. Okay. Todd Hoffman: This would be the public park and approximately half of the Preserve development is within the one half mile service area to that location. Councilman Lundquist: And then the other half will be to the school when the school gets built. Todd Hoffman: To the school or utilizing the association facility. Councilman Lundquist: And then we have a trail connection from this development down to the park there? Todd Hoffman: Yeah, you'll either take the street trails or the creek trail, and then down to the park. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And are you guys getting nervous as we continue to put these private parks in there, that we're going to be in a Johnson situation someday where the hoa's are going to get tired of taking care of them and we're going to have to absorb them? Todd Hoffman: That has occurred on occasion. Not in the recent past but there's a couple parks in the city that have been that way. This small a size, probably something that we wouldn't consider taking over at a future date. Mayor Furlong: Something we probably would not take? Todd Hoffman: Would not. They would have to go ahead and resolve that conflict internally. If it ever arises. Mayor Furlong: I am responsible for the weeds. Councilman Lundquist: And mulch too. Councilman Labatt: And mulch inspector. Mayor Furlong: That's right. Okay. Other thoughts or comments on the overall development. Councilman Lundquist. Councilman Lundquist: I think as Mr. Herbst stated, that it's been a process as we go through and it's been, you know each one of these has it's unique issues and because they're developing kind of one at a time, rather than all together and things have gone, that there's always going to be some conflicts and some other things going on, but either with not knowing exactly what's going to happen to the east or to the west. We've talked a lot about you know Mr. Dorsey has done a nice job of presenting his issues and obviously we've been talking about a lot of that and 52 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mr. Fox to the east. You know to the west we've got a property to be developed eventually as well too, that we've got to be cognizant of, so I'm looking at that also. And as Mr. Labatt said before, I think we've done a good job there of trying to minimize those physical constraints of, because obviously to the east and to the west now, if we approve this layout, then that is a touch down point that will have to be matched regardless of what that development looks like. But in terms of restriction, that's about it right now and I think Mr. Dorsey makes some fine points of you know possibilities and potentials but right now, we did the Peterson and Town and Country piece on the property line because we knew that Peterson was there. We saw the preliminaries. We had the design. We had a chance to look at that, and you know not knowing what's going to happen on that east property, I'm not comfortable saying let's put a road anywhere on that east regardless of what happens there now because I wouldn't be comfortable putting it on the property line now because that may not only affect the Pemtom but it might affect what goes on to the east in the future as well, not knowing that, so I think I'd just as soon minimize the impacts to the east and the west, which this does with that one physical point there, and look at that. I'm glad to see the, something other than a townhouse. I mean these are still houses on a small lot but it preserves a lot of stuff so that's good to see and you know this is an area, it's still going to be very nice when we get down with all that open space so, I like that as well, and I like the difference in architecture too. It's also nice to see some break up there rather than boxes where we change a few small things here and there so, I'm with Councilman Peterson and Mayor on let's look at some, you know when we get further into the details on some of the color stuff and some of the you know, those architectural things to preserve that, but I'm confident that Mr. Herbst will do, and Ryland will do a good job there. Dan's got a good track record. I'm surehe wants to preserve that so, overall I think I'm in favor. I'm glad that, I think we've gotten to this stage on one of these where we might get it through on the first time instead of having it come back in 2 or 3 weeks and go after it again so. Not without issues certainly, and as we go forward with the rest of these, to the east and west, no doubt we will have similar issues going along with it. Hopefully I think we're kind of learning as we go what to watch out for and what to look out for so, there will be things coming up obviously to the east and west. We'll deal with them when they get there but again this one, about all we can do to minimize the impact on the surrounding properties, so I'm comfortable at the stage we're at. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Councilman Peterson. Councilman Peterson: I don't have much to disagree with Councilman Lundquist's perspective. I think that my adjective was the what if's. We're dealing with what if s tonight and there's a point where you just can't, you have to make a decision, and there are so many what ifs on the east side yet that for us to step back and say we have to leave everything to the east and you know, or let me put it differently. For us to decide, I came in tonight thinking well we have to decide where the north/south goes and I was uncomfortable with that, and clearly what I've heard tonight is we don't have to, nor should we. There's an inference now that there's a plausible space connecting to Sunset. I'm not at all convinced that's the right place to put it, but I don't have to make that decision tonight. And to that end, if the north/south collector I think will be back on another night deciding where that would go, if it goes, and I think that is better left for another night. To build that south, you know I'll rewind a bit. Again I am concerned about density. I think this is, what makes me feel about this site is, you know it is somewhat unique to the area and it's not a huge development. It's not 500 of these, and that makes me feel 53 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 a lot better in the size and scope of it. And I think if we address some of the minor things that we already talked about on some of the architectural and colors and that, that will relieve many of my concerns so I'm comfortable moving forward with this, being sensitive to the issues already discussed so. With that said I'd look for other comments. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anything else? Councilman Labatt: Well I said mine. I just would agree with Brian and Craig with their comments and it is a nice development and it's, I think it's, it's going to be a nice addition to our city in the south end. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. I won't repeat the comments made. I concur generally with those of councilman, all of them. Councilman Lundquist, Labatt and Peterson. And I will say that when I was first presented or saw this development a number of weeks ago, maybe even months ago now, I guess what I would best describe my reaction is guarded. It was not something from a density standpoint. Mr. Gerhardt's nodding his head up and down. We've had more than one conversation on this as we try to understand what's really being proposed here, and in looking at and listening and taking into account, not only the presentation tonight but what occurred at the Planning Commission. This is something that I've gained good comfort with. I think there's issues. We've talked about them tonight and setbacks, densities. Those are things that we talk about all throughout this area. But in terms of the product that is being proposed here, it is unique. I like uniqueness from a standpoint that it's not more of the same, and I think that's where this council struggled a little bit recently, and but doing something different is helpful and it makes it easier in the end to be able to move forward with it. I think that the layout here, in terms of the roads, Councilman Lundquist I think said it best. The points at which this development is touching other neighboring properties, we have one point I think with each of the neighboring properties, but for the Peterson property to the south, and that point on the east is clearly to be able to gain access to the Jeurissen property I believe it is over there. But a minimal impact but nonetheless something that this city has done many times over the years. Recently with Plowshares that was mentioned up to the north. We did it with Plowshares development on the old Mancino property. In fact it was a development that went through with the extension of Lake Lucy Road. Manchester if I'm not mistaken, that was stubbed up to that property that then created that connection. That was something that the developer had to deal with and they connected it and having driven through that connection the other day, just to see how things were going, it flows. So it's something that happens. I think running a road along the entire border, Councilman Lundquist I think said it best, would be more restrictive to the development to the east than a single road going in. And for reasons stated tonight here by the staff, in terms of where the best place is, we don't have to decide tonight but I can understand why there are arguments that say the best place is not at this development here so. I'm comfortable moving forward with trying to create a long list of work with staffs that we can enclose in here and to make sure we're all comfortable with that and get that included at this time. But I'm confident based upon the experience that we've had with Mr. Herbst and Pemtom that that can be a long list but it's nothing on there that's generally not be accomplished and so that provides some trust and confidence there. That these issues, minor in the overall picture, can still be addressed. So I'm comfortable with moving forward tonight, as we put something together and I think that this will be a unique development. It's a nice neighborhood within our city, to compliment the other 54 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 developments that we've already approved and those that we will likely see going forward. Any other comments or discussion? The motion I believe starts on. Councilman Lundquist: 46. Mayor Furlong: Page 46 and just for clarification here, there's a couple of items, and Ms. Aanenson, to make sure I get these correctly. The motion, or condition number 60 should include Lots 1 through 5, not just Lot 1. Kate Aanenson: I'd like to get some clarification on 60, 61 and 62. And that's the park commission's recommendation and we have in our condition of approval, 31 that says that we work with the staff to discuss eliminating 1 to 2. I think there's concurrence on that but we're negotiating on those outlots 1 through 5. Mayor Furlong: So we want to keep, so you're saying that there's some conflict with those? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, because the other one says they're eliminated and you know, so if you eliminate it, then we've kind of... Mayor Furlong: 31 provides better. Kate Aanenson: Right, so I think 31 works better, right. Mayor Furlong: So what do we have to do? Which one is that? Kate Aanenson: I think right now, if we just take 60, 61 and 62, and 63. Let's see. Those are just recommendations. Mayor Furlong: Do you believe that they're covered already... Kate Aanenson: They are covered. We already have full park and trail fees in there already, and then clearly if we want to leave in 63, because we do want those conveyed as public property, and that would be A, B, L and N, those outlots. We would want those conveyed as. Mayor Furlong: So strike H and insert N. Kate Aanenson: Yep. And then if we just put 60. Mayor Furlong: So you're saying 60, 61 and 62 are already covered in the other conditions? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. I think we should just strike those out because they conflict with our ability to negotiate to get that. 61? Todd Hoffman: The trail. Kate Aanenson: Oh, the trail construction, I'm sorry. 61 is probably not. 55 r City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong: 61 is. Kate Aanenson: Yep, so you want it in, correct. Councilman Lundquist: So you want 60 and 62 out. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. And that gives us the ability to negotiate with the developer right now. And then just one other point of clarification. Just so, the things that you wanted us to add and this may be 64. Maybe you were just going to do this Mayor, but what I've got from my notes is attention to the garage facades, including percentage of windows with color palettes, a minimum of four, that they come back with those. That we discuss private street, parking, maintenance and parking. Mayor Furlong: And winter parking? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, winter parking. Areas of future buildable area. That those be covered in, not only covenants but in the development standards itself. And then setbacks on the corner lots. And then the hammer head at Outlot, or the end of street. Mayor Furlong: Yes, and I just had turn around on all private streets... Kate Aanenson: That's fine, then we've got it covered. Mayor Furlong: Whatever the, yep. Kate Aanenson: Is that what you had? Mayor Furlong: That was my list. Anybody else have anything to add to that? That would be condition. Councilman Lundquist: 64. Councilman Peterson: But we're deleting, this would be. Councilman Lundquist: It still has to be 64. Todd Gerhardt: It doesn't have to be. Mayor Furlong: We can do anything, right Roger? Roger Knutson: That's right Mayor. Todd Gerhardt: Not that it would be successful. W City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 4. The grading plan must identify the existing and proposed 100 -year floodplain. 5. Due to the anticipated timing of the final plat with respect to the timing of formal approvals from FEMA, the proposed lots that are within the current floodplain may be preliminary platted subject to FEMA approval of the LOMR. 6. Any grading within the floodplain will require a Conditional Use Permit. 7. Catch basins on each side of all public streets must be no more than 300 feet apart. 8. The proposed outlet for Wetland A must lie along the edge of the wetland. 9. The storm sewer from Pond 1 must outlet to the wetland north of Pond 2 in order to maintain hydrology to the wetland. 10. Storm sewer within Street J must be rerouted through the sideyards within Block 3 and outlet to Pond 2. 11. Hydraulic calculations must be submitted with the final plat submittals. 12. The legend on the final grading plan must identify the lowest floor elevation. 13. All buildings must be demolished before the second phase. 14. The final grading plan must show the top and bottom of wall elevations. 15. Any retaining wall four feet high or taller requires a building permit and must be designed by an Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 16. The developer must work with staff to find the preferred sanitary sewer alignment west of Block 3 prior to City Council consideration of the final plat. 17. The plan must be revised to show an 18 -inch diameter watermain on the south side of Lyman Boulevard to the east property line. 18. The developer's engineer must submit a separate cost estimate for the watermain oversizing along Lyman Boulevard with the final plat submittals. 19. To the maximum extent practicable, the trail along the east side of Bluff Creek must be within close proximity of the manholes for the existing trunk sanitary sewer. 20. The lowest floor elevation of each unit must be shown on the utility plan. 21. The existing well and septic system must be properly removed and abandoned during site grading and utility installation. W City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 22. The developer must pay $15,776 in cash with the final plat for the pro -rated cost for the preparation of the 2005 MUSA AUAR. 23. The outstanding assessments — $310,999.03 for 2005 MUSA roads and water, and $162,976.08 for Highway 101/Lyman Boulevard/Highway 312 -lighway 212 must be paid with the final plat or reassessed to the lots and outlots for future development. 24. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. These fees are collected with the building permit and are based on the rates in effect at the time of building permit application. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment of these fees. 25. The City will construct Bluff Creek Boulevard Improvements to serve the development in conjunction with public improvement project No. 06-05. The property within the plat will be specially assessed for this project. 26. The development is subject to the arterial collector fee, which must be paid in cash with the final plat. 27. Streets F and K must extend past Lot 6, Block 13 and Lot 1, Block 17, respectively to provide adequate space for a vehicle to back out of the driveway and tum into the street. 28. Curbs on public streets will be high -back; curbs on private streets will be surmountable. 29. The sidewalk along the north side of Street H between Street A and Street I, and along the north side of Street E must be eliminated. 30. Sidewalks adjacent to private streets and within privately owned outlots can be used by the public. 31. The applicant will work with staff to discuss eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11, and Lots 1 through 5, Block 1. 32. The applicant shall revise the plan design to ensure adequate hydrology for Wetland 4 in the post -development condition. 33. If the applicant wishes to pursue an exemption for impact to Wetland A, the applicant shall furnish information to substantiate the exemption request. The applicant is advised that, even if impacts would be exempt from WCA, they may not be exempt from the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. 34. A wetland buffer with a minimum width of 16.5 feet shall be maintained around all wetlands and wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. All structures shall maintain a setback of at least 40 feet from the wetland buffer edge. 59 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 35. All structures shall maintain a 50 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level of Bluff Creek. All structures shall maintain a minimum 40 -foot setback from the primary corridor. No alterations shall occur within the primary corridor or within the first 20 feet of the setback from the primary corridor. The 50 -foot setback, primary corridor boundary, 40 -foot structure setback and 20 -foot grading setback shall be shown on the plans. 36. The applicant shall provide details for the proposed trail crossing of Bluff Creek. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits shall be obtained for all creek crossings. In addition, the trail alignment shall be revised to cross Bluff Creek in the same location as the sanitary sewer crossing. Immediately south of the creek crossing, the trail intersection shall be redesigned to avoid impact to the trees. 37. The plans shall be revised to provide a lower EOF for Wetland A and a path to the west for excess water that will not threaten proposed structures. 38. The EOF path for Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a more direct EOF route from Pond 1 to Wetland 4. 39. The proposed sanitary sewer and storm sewer outlet in the vicinity of Pond 2 shall be revised to ensure: 1. The runoff from the outlet will not compromise the integrity of the sanitary sewer; and 2. The sanitary sewer is not located below the normal water level (NWL) of Pond 2. 40. The outfall from Pond 3 shall not outlet upslope of the proposed trail. 41. The applicant shall clarify the avoidance of the drainageway to be preserved during the construction of Pond 4 and, if possible, redesign the pond to provide additional storage and treatment in lieu of avoiding the drainageway. 42. Pond 5 shall be constructed prior to the construction of all the areas that drain to it. 43. Drainage and utility easements (minimum 20 feet in width) shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 44. 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 Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days 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 Zt City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 45. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as -needed. 46. The applicant shall be proactive in addressing potential run-on problems in the vicinity of the extreme southeast comer of the property. This would potentially involve vertically tracking equipment up and down the graded faces of the slope to increase roughness and prevent rilling. Similar practices shall be used behind the homes along the central part of Outlot A. 47. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $242,760. 48. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase U Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 49. The applicant shall demonstrate that the outlet pipe installation and elevation will not impact the wetland. 50. If recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission, park fees shall be paid as per City ordinance at the rate of final platting. 51. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 52. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 53. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 54. A turf plan shall be submitted to the City indicating the location of sod and seeding areas. 55. Buffer plantings shall be installed along the east property line in the rear yards of Lots 7 through 16, Block 3 and Lots 1 through 5, Block 10. 56. Applicant shall remove Emerald Queen Norway maple from the planting schedule. The applicant shall substitute another species with approval from the City. 57. A conservation easement shall be recorded over Outlot A. 61 City Council Meeting — May 8, 2006 58. The developer shall work with staff to develop and install appropriate markers at lot lines to demarcate the primary zone. 59. The applicant shall submit a plan for the revegetation of any areas of grading within Outlot A. The plan shall incorporate native plants and be consistent with the City's Bluff Creek Natural Resources Management Plan Appendix C. Special attention should be paid to areas with steep slopes (greater than 3:1). Staff recommends that the Hill Prairie planting list be used for the restoration." 60. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Bluff Creek Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Bluff Creek Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 61. Outlots A, B, Land N be conveyed to the city as public property by warranty deed. 62. The following items are to be addressed at final plat: • Attention to garage door facades including n percent of doors with windows • Color palate (4 minimum) • Private streets and sidewalks, • Percentage of future boilable area, • Setbacks on corner lots • Turnarounds at the end of private streets. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: None. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Mayor Furlong: It was good to see library hours being expanded. Todd Gerhardt: Yep. Mayor Furlong: They're open now 1 believe on Sundays as well. Todd Gerhardt: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: They're open and more stable hours on the rest of the days of the week too so, that's good. Also good to use the usage. Any other discussion on the correspondence packet? If 62 The preserve CHANHASSEN, MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES NOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT HOLMDEL ELEVATIONS A E F G CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT - E' � s �'8�Tx' e4ts��d d �3�adeE � W G W co W 2 U SCANNED LEFT ELEVATION 02 .��., .•...,. euiNxee ll pra o�wo ua. wr+n orr.v .'ran. Rt. oaowa. 0,3 REAR ELEVATION �. iRpM FRONT ELEVATION A ALL SIDING 01;.. coa m+v o'riw, Yf.L CLrC. ary a rann. wv,x+seim 04 RIGHT ELEVATION 1 it r.,.. GT110 YWINMLVfO YV Lrf.t 05 ROOF PLAN EKTEml mim KEY FRAMING NpTE� vo<�.u� -<:E 1am'a�w D, Q W W � o.Mm orae wlurz `�-o.wo u�. wccn art.t .• ru.t� Rt..nrr.,o. a•r.v .•..nv. let exrvarw LEFT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION :•�02.�..03 ----e.-------- EXTERIOR TRIH KEY g XI -1 :T H° ,1 4G1 i \� uu�sam.w : a ' : i A } ROOF PLAN 05 .�.. M•. M1W ETOME Ell AMM WT. LEFT ELEVATION LO ��Vi - ulrill"i I.. 'my- iele�=ME s. � ■ ■ _I,Q� ■ ■ ■.moo- � I _ FRONT ELEVATION E o..rao ue. wrun art.L a' wni.let.wrMr-w 04 RIGHT ELEVATION .'•, •, In• • re STONE ELEVATION OPTION s r RRd11NG MOTE: n. uwo n rw< OC STRUCTURAL PORCH COLUMN V .L4L. N'. I'.W W 9 W lu W S I d 8 w., 3AN3S31ld 3H1 - szV SNOI1V�313 .firmed • �i � sJ ao 4]a 3p ��QW��I i �...w•. q�ei�.m r.¢vwo wr e.q .S3WOH a4VL ll LYO XL ni rs Z B � n I ��' li•--..T� I � c 2 mLLI d ° W 5 0d� vi �9 W a t 6 _ z O • 4 < a .z yq O 0. 6 ED z yyI Q I�I �W Q �yy� .w ..a 1 e W Q _ $W ��E4 -€g p��i J r�_ _ A � l\Iil II W YLL cc a W LL mii ii <•J ❑ 2 W !q ❑ ❑ W Ni I p J lu fit a 6 !� ❑ °C g3l� A $1 LL °= T o : w ! LL -i o0o O J .' LO en�t WpJ2-mlc_�N ` I e 11111111low— MINION III MMMOMMMIIIIIIIIIIIIN a ... `� t . �I�I�ilBlii , • frY - e e • vS: �� Ian �I�11-11 ■ �� ■ u1 • nIo : ■ r ■ p an ■■ . :C ■ ■ ■ e �'� iii uuunusalloll,■ ■ ■ Fill. p .�.■ I` IIIIII - n • � pp o loinsI: .�j��dt1 • _,_a,,� Ct ,1:�f n:=nnnntl '_IrPillllll�lllllllll .. C!4.=:� .c -n---_ T' 3AU3S3Ud 3H1 iW oz ezv NV -W TLLONd'1WS9 NIS "`°" °•s^ c �^=�'* �� .S3WoH aVVIM „� Dart _- i I I 1 I � .' I gel W 1 I I a j � !!!! I:1{ I �♦ � I I� i i , l i Q t LU LLI I 1 0 I8 I m I � I � i I I __J vae. wws mw Q LU • ¢5i i Wfrh I I * AA I I _ Z 12 L--------- --------- -------------' T ,.o.� O 1 F 0 1 a Z I o N 7- W. W f I x! �jE�j I iy9 i6a Il. lit!' 1 N Oe p= ; eps�Ot { p { leti ny4s yy4yy l�1#� 15!} 1yE9 a€'94�aj:{p noj�"2 £L �Clm = a TV 3AH383Vd Mil n NV�d a00�� 791 �•• .134W1ON av D f ii ut ASF y OUn: yy Be e�. SZito o, m ;;li•ppys p� E{y`� S3I .,a I I , r - F4 5 �vni �pd --a' -'--o- ¢O l mvj' , ,T.ob.uY,vi.-v.vvou .cnw. iF easu,novw.eazvav oov 1 c N , 91DIPi•iW ®IDMa-AI, a N0 OIL 5 i 3• § p' e a $ice a ` 3 p� Be • a. a . g y •li $ I 47 77a s I l Y P 3 ........ i q F2 'Ai p p 3 6 ,v, •e =z �: evy i 3 i S e p l ..w eawv aoo�l 'e. G v p • ,vva ®m,oa-au „ u MRSR viii , JIv J , 0 0 p LLL.I k' i +i+ a S3 �aI E5[ EpS = I- 6 Q11 A ipi gS7 �7yS ij 6 C FA ESE m—I- i 6 1z P :if i 9mill W¢ `99f � . �• 6 a a 5 O Be �1Y9�ii sEq��p Be�� i. ` v �9 = 3 .LL i. "w®'a.�°tea„•'° i c 16 Pill �- e 1 : �I ; !d p N e N• z dic 10 all '� o X11 lip I f I F O Sqe 1a a? e _____________________ ..� ��.y I C •� I� - 5 $ � � � �� m g6g IR•.6L' �$g T r 6 O m n Ir�p • w o !fib! wo gg ti S i - • e IRfa S§ i �: asiv can-vx.r O O t:� !f q woofnmm=1L N`OG. Te Y-f Y O F � a z S O s i s v % 0 O Z at'ige ». M AICD HOMES' WR _' "�� re HOLMDEL_•g 2nd FLOOR PLAN THE PRESERVE 21 1y CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER &HENNE'PIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 06-14 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearingonTuesday, April 18, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for Rezoning from A2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of approximately 80acres into 156 single- family cluster lots; Site Plan Review; Conditional Use Permit for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; Wetland Alteration Permit for crossing Bluff Creek; and Variances on property located at 1630 Lyman Boulevard - THE PRESERVE. Applicant: The Pemtom Sand Company. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on a tty's web site a www C1 c se�7 mn uV sere p ohm r1 atcity Hall durmg regular business hours. Ali interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Email: kaane son a� i h en Phone: 952-227- 1139 (PublishedintheChanhaemn Villager on Thursday, April 6,2006; No. 4644) Affidavit of Publication Southwest Suburban Publishing State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly swom, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 33IA.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No.y� yy was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition and publication of the Notice: abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz Laurie A. Hartmann Subscribed and swom before me on this day of , 2006 `S%C Notary Public RATE INFORMATION GWEN M. RADUENZ NOTARY RAW -MINNESOTA My Wmmisslon C Jat 31, 2010 Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter .................... $40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $11.51 per column inch SCANNED ()1..-14 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION 11 ' Application The Pemton Land Company: Request for Rezoning of property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of 155 single-family lots, 15 outlots, and private streets and public right-of-way; Conditional Use Permit for alterations within the flood plain and development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The property is located at 1630 Lyman Boulevard — THE PRESERVE On April 18, 2006, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application The Pemton Land Company for a subdivision. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Planned Unit Development 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 The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A2. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low or Medium Density uses. 3. The legal description of the property is: The East Half of the South Quarter of Section 22, Township 116, Range 23, According to the Government Survey thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. 4. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a) The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b) The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. C) The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. SCANNED d) The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e) The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f) Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 5. 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, e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant adverse 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. 6. When approving a conditional use permit, the City must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. The proposed development will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. b. The proposed development will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. c. The proposed development will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. d. The proposed development will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. e. The proposed development will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. f. The proposed development will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. h. The proposed development will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. The proposed development will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed development will not depreciate surrounding property values. 1. The proposed development will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Articles N, V and VI of the Chanhassen City Code. 7. The planning report #06-14 dated March 18, 2006, prepared by Kate Aanenson, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Rezoning of property from A-2 to PUD -R; Subdivision of 155 single-family lots, 15 outlots, and private streets and public right-of-way; Conditional Use Permit for alterations within the flood plain and development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District — THE PRESERVE. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 18'h day of April, 2006. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION "'t gAplant2006 planning cues\06-14 the pmm6findings of fact and recommendation.doc 4 Location Map The Preserve 1630 Lyman Boulevard Planning Case No. 06-14 City of Chanhassen ec"HO FINAL STORM WATER RUNOFF CALCULATIONS The Preserve at Bluff Creek 1St Addition Chanhassen, MN for: The Ryland Group 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Prepared by: Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Cry OFCHANHAPhone 952-937-5150, Fax 952-937-5822 RECEIVED JUN 02006 June 5, 2006 CHMHASSEN PL4WNG DEPT Project # 20031110.00 Josh Skogen PRELIMINARY STORM WATER RUNOFF CALCULATIONS Preserve Addition Chanhassen, Date I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a e ' tered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of A. La n. P.E. Va—terlo' SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The attached storm water runoff and treatment pond calculations are based on The Soil Conservation Service Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method incorporated into the software program Hydro CAD for Windows. Storm water ponds were incorporated into the project for both rate control and water quality. The goal for rate control on this project is to restrict the post developed peak runoff rate for the critical duration rainfall events with return frequencies of 2, 10 and 100 years to the existing peak runoff rate for the same respective events. The system was designed for water quality based on a 2.5 -inch precipitation event over the contributing drainage area. SITE CONDITIONS The site consists predominately of Type "B" soils; however, Type "A", "C" and "D" soils also exist in smaller areas within the site boundary. Curve numbers were obtained from "Technical Release 55: Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds." For existing conditions, curve numbers ranging between 60 and 81 were used for variable conditions extending from woodlands to contoured and terraced row crops in good hydrologic condition, respectively. For proposed conditions, a broader reach of curve numbers were used to model the site. These curve numbers ranged from 60 for woodlands to 100 for open water. Most of the site was modeled with a curve number of 75 for 1/4 acre residential lots with Type "B" soils. The remainder of the disturbed portion of the site was assigned a curve number of 98 for paved roads and roofs. Curve numbers remained unchanged for undisturbed areas. During pre developed and post developed conditions, all of the storm water entering the site is conveyed towards Bluff Creek. For pre developed and post developed conditions Bluff Creek was used as the design point to determine the rate of site runoff. The current hydrologic model does not take into account the impacts on the downstream flood plain elevation of Bluff Creek. Refer to the drainage map for the location of Outlet Design Point A. Tables 1 and 2 below show the existing and proposed site runoff being generated at Outlet Design Point A for the 2, 10 and 100 -year precipitation events. Wetland -7 currently discharges at an elevation of 920.8 feet above the North American datum. The existing discharge point is located to the east of the property boundary. The overland discharge conveys runoff south and ultimately into Bluff Creek. The proposed conditions respect the location and elevation of the discharge point. ROUTING Three treatment ponds are incorporated into the development. Located on the southeast portion of the property, Treatment Pond -3 is being designed by a separate consulting firm to accommodate area within the site as well as runoff from upland areas east and west of the site boundary. The additional runoff from the upland areas will be conveyed to the site through a subsurface drainage network located beneath Bluff Creek Boulevard. The design of Bluff Creek Boulevard and the underlying drainage network is being undertaken by a separate consulting firm. * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 SUMMARY All of the storm water treatment ponds propose to convey treated runoff to Bluff Creek. Treated runoff from Pond 1 is conveyed to Wetland -4, an adjacent wetland located to the north of Pond 1, via an 18" concrete pipe. In turn, Wetland -4 conveys the treated runoff overland to Bluff Creek. Treatment Pond -2 conveys runoff to Wetland -5, an adjacent wetland located to the west of Pond -2, through a 15" concrete pipe. Sequentially, the runoff is conveyed offsite by way of Bluff Creek. Table -3 below shows the normal water levels, the 2, 10 and 100 -year high water levels, the required and provided dead storage and the average depth for each of the three ponds. Wetland -7 collects storm water from rear yard drainage, upland area further east of the site and runoff from Drumlin Drive North in emergency overflow situations. In the event of a large storm, treated runoff from Wetland -7 is conveyed south via an existing overland outfall bordering the east property line. The outfall conveys runoff towards the ditch bordering the north side of Bluff Creek Boulevard. Ultimately, the runoff is conveyed onto Bluff Creek Boulevard and into its underground drainage network discharging at Treatment Pond -3. In the event the current overflow discharge point for Wetland -7 would not be respected by future development to the east of the property line, an alternative overflow point has been established within the site boundary. The proposed alternative overflow discharges at an elevation 921.0 feet above the North American Datum. This elevation continues to provide the necessary freeboard for the bordering lots during large storm events. The method of conveyance is carried out similar to the current overflow. Runoff from Wetland -7 is conveyed south to the ditch bordering the north side of Bluff Creek Boulevard and into its underground drainage network. Ultimately, the runoff discharges into Treatment Pond -3. WATER QUALITY Water quality is based on a 2.5 -inch precipitation event over the post -developed contributing drainage area. The ponds will incorporate a 3:1 slope to the normal water level, a 10:1 safety bench for a width of 10 feet below the normal water level, and maximum 3:1 slopes below the bench. Skimmer structures will be used for water quality to prevent floating oils and grease from entering the watershed. An analysis of each watershed can be found at the back of this report. RATE CONTROL The following tables summarize the existing and proposed peak runoff rates for the site. Table 1 — Existina Drainaae Area Design Point Drainage 2 -Yr. 10 -Yr. 100 -Yr. Area Discharge Discharge Discharge acre) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs A 104.8 41.01 118.33 269.78 Site Totals 104.8 41.01 118.33 269.78 * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 SUMMARY Table 2 — Proposed Drainaoe Area Drainage 2 -Yr. 20 -Yr. 100 -Yr. Design Point Area' Discharge Discharge Discharge acre) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs A 104.8 32.11 86.91 154.70 Site Totals 104.8 32.11 86.91 154.70 Table 3 — Treatment Ponds * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 2 -Yr. 10 -Yr. 100 -Yr. Required Provided Average Pond NWL HWL HWL HWL Dead Dead Depth (Elev) (Elev) (Elev) (Elev) Storage Storage (ft.) ac. -ft. ac. -ft. 1 876.0 876.6 877.4 878.5 0.56 1.01 2.54 2 869.0 869.8 870.9 872.5 1.14 1.41 2.15 * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 SUMMARY APPENDICES Appendix A Proposed Drainage Diagram Drainage Area Map 2 -Year Summary 10 -Year Summary 100 -Year Summary Appendix B Existing Drainage Diagram Drainage Area Map 2 -Year Summary 10 -Year Summary 100 -Year Summary Appendix C Water Quality Storm Sewer Design Micro Drainage Area Map WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 APPENDIX A (PROPOSED) Drainage Diagram Drainage Area Map 2 -Year Summary 10 -Year Summary 100 -Year Summary * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 Subcat Reach Aon Link Drainage Diagram for 040906 Storm (POST) Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 6/5/2006 HydroCAD wO 7.10 s/n 002351 0 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Westwood Sernces, ince \S c %1f Wvw PM Fw..v�MS53Y .�. �.�N Westwood �iw.r wT��Nwv1MON.OW. I -_ J..Y A la Das i it The Ryland Group 7599 A ,. TMV. Fdm Pr.irie, A4ivne.wa 55344 Cob 48 Now. 6elw. d'mq,.T GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TNN My Mao 651-454-0002 Y.. TW Er.a 1-800-252-1166 LEGEND DENOTES DRANAGE AREA BOUNOMY —900_, DENOTES TASTING CONTOURS x-980— DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS — — - — DENOTES WETLAND BOUNDMY R x'.r DENOTES EXSTNN SPOT ELEVATION ►►—® DENOTES PROPOSED STORY SEMEN The Preserve at Bluff Creek 1st Addition E ....n. Ninnc.otA 0' m, .310• 450' s -.r zmn��m/voTOAc 06/05/06 66ut z OP 2 Preliminary Post -Development Macro Drainage Plan 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 1 HydroCAD®7 10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Time span=5.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 381 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -1 P: Runoff Area=47.700 ac Runoff Depth>0.72" Flow Length=1,683' Tc=33.6 min CN=74 Runoff=24.37 cfs 2.842 of Subcatchment DA -2P: Runoff Area=9.600 ac Runoff Depth>0.82" Tc=10.0 min CN=76 Runoff=11.50 cfs 0.653 of Subcatchment DA -3P: Runoff Area=19.900 ac Runoff Depth>0.81" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=19.84 cfs 1.351 of Subcatchment DA -4P: Runoff Area=7.900 ac Runoff Depth>0.67" Flow Length=500' Tc=23.8 min CN=73 Runoff=4.71 cfs 0.443 of Subcatchment DA -5P: Runoff Area=19.700 ac Runoff Depth>0.97" Tc=20.0 min CN=79 Runoff=20.50 cfs 1.589 of Pond P-1: Peak Elev=876.60' Storage=54.459 cf Inflow --1 1.50 cfs 0.653 of 18.0" x 30.0' Culvert Outflow=1.74 cfs 0.573 of Pond P-2: Peak Elev=869.81' Storage=85.416 cf Inflow --19.84 cfs 1.351 of 15.0" x 30.0' Culvert Outflow --2.58 cfs 1.141 of Pond P-3: Peak Elev=871.88' Storage=222.372 cf Inflow --20.83 cfs 2.004 of 15.0" x 50.0' Culvert Outflow --2.97 cfs 1.635 of Pond W-7: Peak Elev=921.08' Storage=49.802 cf Inflow=4.71 cfs 0.443 of Outflow=1.47 cfs 0.415 of Link SITE: Inflow --29.99 cfs 6.191 of Primary=29.99 cfs 6.191 of Total Runoff Area =104.800 ac Runoff Volume = 6.879 of Average Runoff Depth = 0.79" 040906 Storm (POST) Type 11 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 2 HydroCAD@ 7.10 s/n 002351 @2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Subcatchment DA -1P: Runoff = 24.37 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 2.842 af, Depth> 0.72" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Area (ac) CN Description 26.000 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 13.000 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 3.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.000 60 Woods, Fair, HSG B 4.000 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.700 62 Row crops. C&T. Good. HSG A 47.700 74 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (fUsec) (cfs) 10.9 180 0.1583 0.3 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 9.4 120 0.1000 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 0.3 84 0.0714 4.3 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 1.1 184 0.0326 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 9.3 863 0.0093 1.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 0.1 24 0.0833 4.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 2.5 228 0.0088 1.5 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 33.6 1,683 Total Subcatchment DA -2P: Runoff = 11.50 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.653 af, Depth> 0.82" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Area (ac) CN Description 9.200 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.400 100 Pond NWL 9.600 76 Weighted Average 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 3 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment DA -3P: Runoff = 19.84 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 1.351 af, Depth> 0.81" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" _ Area (ac) CN Description 19.200 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.700 100 Pond NWL 19.900 76 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment DA -4P: Runoff = 4.71 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 0.443 af, Depth> 0.67' Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Area (ac) CN Description 5.400 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 0.500 81 Small grain C&T Good HSG D 7.900 73 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope min) (feet) (ft/ft) 22.7 300 0.0700 1.1 200 0.0330 23.8 500 Total Description 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps Subcatchment DA -5P: Runoff = 20.50 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 1.589 af, Depth> 0.97" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" 040906 Storm (POST) Type 11 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 4 Area (ac) CN Description 2.500 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers 8.000 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 1.000 100 Pond NWL 6.200 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 19.700 79 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Pond P-1: Inflow Area = 9.600 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.82" for 2 -Year event Inflow = 11.50 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.653 of Outflow = 1.74 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume= 0.573 af, Atten= 85%, Lag= 25.8 min Primary = 1.74 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume= 0.573 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 876.00' Surf.Area= 17,270 sf Storage= 43,785 cf Peak Elev= 876.60'@ 12.46 hrs Surf.Area= 18,305 sf Storage= 54,459 cf (10,674 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 81.8 min ( 946.6 - 864.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 872.00' 103,400 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismaticyisted below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 872.00 7,800 0 0 874.00 10,400 18,200 18,200 875.00 11,750 11,075 29,275 876.00 17,270 14,510 43,785 878.00 20,720 37,990 81,775 879.00 22,530 21,625 103,400 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 876.00' 18.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 875.50' S= 0.0167P Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=1.74 cfs @ 12.46 hrs HW=876.60' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 't-1 =Culvert (Inlet Controls 1.74 cfs @ 2.6 fps) 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70' Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 5 HYdroCAD@) 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Pond P-2: Inflow Area = 19.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.81" for 2 -Year event Inflow = 19.84 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 1.351 of Outflow = 2.58 cfs @ 12.75 hrs, Volume= 1.141 af, Atten= 87%, Lag= 39.8 min Primary = 2.58 cfs @ 12.75 hrs, Volume= 1.141 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 869.00' Surf.Area= 28,460 sf Storage= 61,330 cf Peak Elev= 869.81'@ 12.75 hrs Surf.Area= 31,004 sf Storage= 85,416 cf (24,086 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 105.7 min ( 974.1 - 868.4 ) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 865.00' 200,835 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 865.00 0 0 0 866.00 13,000 6,500 6,500 868.00 18,400 31,400 37,900 869.00 28,460 23,430 61,330 870.00 31,600 30,030 91,360 872.00 38,100 69,700 161,060 873.00 41,450 39,775 200,835 Device Routinq Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 869.00' 15.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 868.50' S= 0.0167'/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=2.58 cfs @ 12.75 hrs HW=869.81' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) t1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 2.58 cfs @ 3.1 fps) Pond P-3: Inflow Area = 27.600 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.87" for 2 -Year event Inflow = 20.83 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 2.004 of Outflow = 2.97 cfs @ 13.41 hrs, Volume= 1.635 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 76.2 min Primary = 2.97 cfs @ 13.41 hrs, Volume= 1.635 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 871.00' Surf.Area= 39,184 sf Storage= 186,588 cf Peak Elev= 871.88'@ 13.41 hrs Surf.Area= 41,718 sf Storage= 222,372 cf (35,784 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time=(not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 122.2 min ( 1,000.2 - 878.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 865.00' 446,619 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below (Recalc) 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 6 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 865.00 23,394 0 0 866.00 25,847 24,621 24,621 868.00 30,976 56,823 81,444 870.00 36,384 67,360 148,804 871.00 39,184 37,784 186,588 872.00 42,048 40,616 227,204 874.00 47,902 89,950 317,154 875.00 51,009 49,456 366,609 876.00 54,112 52,561 419,170 876.50 55,685 27,449 446,619 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 871.00' 15.0" x 50.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 870.50' S= 0.0100'P Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=2.97 cfs @ 13.41 hrs HW=871.88' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) t1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 2.97 cfs @ 3.2 fps) Pond W-7: Inflow Area = 7.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.67" for 2 -Year event Inflow = 4.71 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 0.443 of Outflow = 1.47 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 0.415 af, Atten= 69%, Lag= 27.8 min Primary = 1.47 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 0.415 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 921.00' Surf.Area= 73,200 sf Storage= 43,995 cf Peak Elev= 921.08'@ 12.66 hrs Surf.Area= 75,051 sf Storage= 49,802 cf (5,807 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 55.5 min ( 941.5 - 886.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 919.60' 129,008 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 919.60 0 0 0 920.00 10,565 2,113 2,113 921.00 73,200 41,883 43,995 922.00 96,825 85,013 129,008 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 921.00' 25.0' long x 25.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 Primary OutFlow Max=1.47 cfs @ 12.66 hrs HW=921.08' TW=871.82' (Dynamic Tailwater) t1=13road-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 1.47 cfs @ 0.7 fps) 040906 Storm (POST) Type 1124 -hr 2 -Year Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 7 Link SITE: Inflow Area = 104.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.71" for 2 -Year event Inflow = 29.99 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 6.191 of Primary = 29.99 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 6.191 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs 040906 Storm (POST) Type l/ 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 8 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Time span=5.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 381 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -1 P: Runoff Area=47.700 ac Runoff Depth>1.73" Flow Length=1,683' Tc=33.6 min CN=74 Runoff --64.97 cfs 6.866 of Subcatchment DA -2P: Runoff Area=9.600 ac Runoff Depth>1.89" Tc=10.0 min CN=76 Runoff=27.51 cfs 1.511 of Subcatchment DA -3P: Runoff Area=19.900 ac Runoff Depth>1.89" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=48.08 cfs 3.127 of Subcatchment DA -4P: Runoff Area=7.900 ac Runoff Depth>1.66" Flow Length=500' Tc=23.8 min CN=73 Runoff=12.86 cfs 1.093 of Subcatchment DA -SP: Runoff Area=19.700 ac Runoff Depth>2.12" Tc=20.0 min CN=79 Runoff=46.23 cfs 3.474 of Pond P-1: Peak Elev=877.37' Storage=68.987 cf Inflow --27.51 cfs 1.511 of 18.0" x 30.0' Culvert Outflow --6.72 cfs 1.402 of Pond P-2: Peak EIev=870.93' Storage=122.115 cf Inflow --48.08 cfs 3.127 of 15.0" x 30.0' Culvert Outflow --6.75 cfs 2.836 of Pond P-3: Peak EIev=873.08' Storage=274.170 cf Inflow --48.42 cfs 4.523 of 15.0" x 50.0' Culvert Outflow --7.12 cfs 4.004 of Pond W-7: Peak EIev=921.19' Storage=58.355 cf Inflow --12.86 cfs 1.093 of Outflow --5.56 cfs 1.049 of Link SITE: Inflow --83.72 cfs 15.108 of Primary=83.72 cfs 15.108 of Total Runoff Area = 104.800 ac Runoff Volume = 16.071 of Average Runoff Depth = 1.84" 040906 Storm (POST) Type 11 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 9 HydroCAD@ 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Subcatchment DA -1P: Runoff = 64.97 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 6.866 af, Depth> 1.73" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (ac) CN Description 26.000 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 13.000 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 3.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.000 60 Woods, Fair, HSG B 4.000 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.700 62 Row crops. C&T. Good. HSG A 47.700 74 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 10.9 180 0.1583 0.3 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 9.4 120 0.1000 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 0.3 84 0.0714 4.3 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 1.1 184 0.0326 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 9.3 863 0.0093 1.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 0.1 24 0.0833 4.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 2.5 228 0.0088 1.5 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 33.6 1,683 Total Subcatchment DA -2113: F'Runoff = 27.51 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 1.511 af, Depth> 1.89" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Area ac CN Descn tion 9.200 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.400 100 Pond NWL 9.600 76 Weighted Average 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 10 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment DA -3P: Runoff = 48.08 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 3.127 af, Depth> 1.89" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (ac) CN Description 19.200 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.700 100 Pond NWL 19.900 76 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment DA -4P: Runoff = 12.86 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 1.093 af, Depth> 1.66" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (ac) CN Description 5.400 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 0.500 81 Small grain C&T Good HSG D 7.900 73 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 22.7 300 0.0700 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 1.1 200 0.0330 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 23.8 500 Total Subcatchment DA -5P: Runoff = 46.23 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 3.474 af, Depth> 2.12" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" 040906 Storm (POST) Type 11 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 11 HydroCAX) 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Area (ac) CN Description 2.500 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers 8.000 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 1.000 100 Pond NWL 6.200 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 19.700 79 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Pond P-1: Inflow Area = 9.600 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.89" for 10 -Year event Inflow = 27.51 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 1.511 of Outflow = 6.72 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 1.402 af, Atten= 76%, Lag= 13.8 min Primary = 6.72 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 1.402 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 876.00' Surf.Area= 17,270 sf Storage= 43,785 cf Peak Elev= 877.37'@ 12.25 hrs Surf.Area= 19,627 sf Storage= 68,987 cf (25,202 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time=451.4 min calculated for 0.397 of (26% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 59.3 min ( 899.1 - 839.7 ) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 872.00' 103,400 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -fl) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 872.00 7,800 0 0 874.00 10,400 18,200 18,200 875.00 11,750 11,075 29,275 876.00 17,270 14,510 43,785 878.00 20,720 37,990 81,775 1 879.00 22,530 21,625 103,400 Primary 876.00' 18.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 875.50' S= 0.0167P Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean y OutFlow Max=6.72 cfs @ 12.25 hrs HW=877.37' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) ulvert (Inlet Controls 6.72 cfs @ 4.0 fps) 040906 Storm (POST) Type 1124 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 12 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Pond P-2: Inflow Area = 19.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.89" for 10 -Year event Inflow = 48.08 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 3.127 of Outflow = 6.75 cfs @ 12.62 hrs, Volume= 2.836 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 32.8 min Primary = 6.75 cfs @ 12.62 hrs, Volume= 2.836 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 869.00' Surf.Area= 28,460 sf Storage= 61,330 cf Peak Elev= 870.93'@ 12.62 hrs Surf.Area= 34,619 sf Storage= 122,115 cf (60,785 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 364.3 min calculated for 1.424 of (46% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 99.4 min ( 942.9 - 843.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 865.00' 200,835 cf Custom Stage Data (PrismaticjListed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 865.00 0 0 0 866.00 13,000 6,500 6,500 868.00 18,400 31,400 37,900 869.00 28,460 23,430 61,330 870.00 31,600 30,030 91,360 872.00 38,100 69,700 161,060 873.00 41,450 39,775 200,835 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 869.00' 15.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 868.50' S= 0.0167 T Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=6.75 cfs @ 12.62 hrs HW=870.93' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 6.75 cfs @ 5.5 fps) Pond P-3: Inflow Area = 27.600 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.97" for 10 -Year event Inflow = 48.42 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 4.523 of Outflow = 7.12 cfs @ 13.26 hrs, Volume= 4.004 af, Atten= 85%, Lag= 67.3 min Primary = 7.12 cfs @ 13.26 hrs, Volume= 4.004 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 871.00' Surf.Area= 39,184 sf Storage= 186,588 cf Peak Elev= 873.08'@ 13.26 hrs Surf.Area= 45,199 sf Storage= 274,170 cf (87,583 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 128.3 min ( 981.6 - 853.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 865.00' 446,619 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) -fisted below (Recalc) 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 13 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 865.00 23,394 0 0 866.00 25,847 24,621 24,621 868.00 30,976 56,823 81,444 870.00 36,384 67,360 148,804 871.00 39,184 37,784 186,588 872.00 42,048 40,616 227,204 874.00 47,902 89,950 317,154 875.00 51,009 49,456 366,609 876.00 54,112 52,561 419,170 876.50 55,685 27,449 446,619 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 871.00' 15.0" x 50.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 870.50' S= 0.0100'P Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=7.12 cfs @ 13.26 hrs HW=873.08' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 't-1 =Culvert (Inlet Controls 7.12 cfs @ 5.8 fps) Pond W-7: Inflow Area = 7.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.66" for 10 -Year event Inflow = 12.86 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 1.093 of Outflow = 5.56 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 1.049 af, Atten= 57%, Lag= 18.3 min Primary = 5.56 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 1.049 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 921.00' Surf.Area= 73,200 sf Storage= 43,995 cf Peak Elev= 921.19'@ 12.49 hrs Surf.Area= 77,696 sf Storage= 58,355 cf (14,359 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 704.8 min calculated for 0.039 of (4% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 42.3 min ( 900.4 - 858.1 ) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 919.60' 129,008 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 919.60 0 0 0 920.00 10,565 2,113 2,113 921.00 73,200 41,883 43,995 922.00 96,825 85,013 129,008 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 921.00' 25.0' long x 25.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 Primary OutFlow Max=5.56 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=921.19' TW=872.82' (Dynamic Tailwater) 't1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 5.56 cfs @ 1.2 fps) 040906 Storm (POST) Type l/ 24 -hr 10 -Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 14 HydroCAD@ 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Link SITE: Inflow Area = 104.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.73" for 10 -Year event Inflow = 83.72 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 15.108 of Primary = 83.72 ds @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 15.108 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 15 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Time span=5.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 381 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -1P: Runoff Area=47.700 ac Runoff Depth>3.16" Flow Length=1,683' Tc=33.6 min CN=74 Runoff=121.55 cfs 12.549 of Subcatchment DA -2P: Runoff Area=9.600 ac Runoff Depth>3.37" Tc=10.0 min CN=76 Runoff=48.99 cfs 2.698 of Subcatchment DA -313: Runoff Area=19.900 ac Runoff Depth>3.37" Tc=15.0 min CN=76 Runoff=86.31 cfs 5.586 of Subcatchment DA -413: Runoff Area=7.900 ac Runoff Depth>3.07" Flow Length=500' Tc=23.8 min CN=73 Runoff=24.36 cfs 2.021 of Subcatchment DA -513: Runoff Area=19.700 ac Runoff Depth>3.66" Tc=20.0 min CN=79 Runoff --80.10 cfs 6.013 of Pond P-1: Peak EIev=878.43' Storage=90.855 cf Inflow=48.99 cfs 2.698 of 18.0" x 30.0' Culvert Outflow --11.03 cfs 2.561 of Pond P-2: Peak EIev=872.48' Storage=179.594 cf Inflow --86.31 cfs 5.586 of 15.0" x 30.0' Culvert Outflow --9.98 cfs 5.207 of Pond P-3: Peak EIev=874.83' Storage=358.094 cf Inflow=86.16 cfs 7.972 of 15.0" x 50.0' Culvert Outflow --10.58 cfs 7.213 of Pond W-7: Peak EIev=921.33' Storage=69.247 cf Inflow=24.36 cfs 2.021 of Outflow=12.62 cfs 1.959 of Link SITE: Inflow=150.77 cfs 27.531 of Primary=150.77 cfs 27.531 of Total Runoff Area= 104.800 ac Runoff Volume =28.867 of Average Runoff Depth= 3.31" 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 16 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Subcatchment DA -1P: Runoff = 121.55 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 12.549 af, Depth> 3.16" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 26.000 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 13.000 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 3.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.000 60 Woods, Fair, HSG B 4.000 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.700 62 Row crops. C&T. Good. HSG A 47.700 74 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.9 180 0.1583 0.3 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 9.4 120 0.1000 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 0.3 84 0.0714 4.3 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 1.1 184 0.0326 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 9.3 863 0.0093 1.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 0.1 24 0.0833 4.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 2.5 228 0.0088 1.5 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 33.6 1,683 Total Subcatchment DA -2P: Runoff = 48.99 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 2.698 af, Depth> 3.37' Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 9.200 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.400 100 Pond NWL 9.600 76 Weighted Average 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 17 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Tc Length Slope 10.0 Description Direct Entry, Subcatchment DA -3P: Runoff = 86.31 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 5.586 af, Depth> 3.37' Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 19.200 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 0.700 100 Pond NWL 19.900 76 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope 15.0 Description Direct Entry, Subcatchment DA -4P: Runoff = 24.36 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 2.021 af, Depth> 3.07' Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 5.400 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 0.500 81 Small grain, C&T, Good, HSG D 7.900 73 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 22.7 300 0.0700 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 1.1 200 0.0330 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 23.8 500 Total Subcatchment DA -5P: Runoff = 80.10 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 6.013 af, Depth> 3.66" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" 040906 Storm (POST) Type 1124 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 18 Area (ac) CN Description 2.500 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers 8.000 75 1/4 acre lots, 38% imp, HSG B 1.000 100 Pond NWL 6.200 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 81 Row crops. C&T. Good. HSG D 19.700 79 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 20.0 Direct Entry, Pond P-1: Inflow Area = 9.600 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.37" for 100 -Year event Inflow = 48.99 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 2.698 of Outflow = 11.03 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 2.561 af, Atten= 77%, Lag= 14.5 min Primary = 11.03 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 2.561 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 876.00' Surf.Area= 17,270 sf Storage= 43,785 cf Peak Elev= 878.43'@ 12.26 hrs Surf.Area= 21,499 sf Storage= 90,855 cf (47,070 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 256.9 min calculated for 1.556 of (58% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 56.4 min ( 879.6 - 823.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 872.00' 103,400 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 872.00 7,800 0 0 874.00 10,400 18,200 18,200 875.00 11,750 11,075 29,275 876.00 17,270 14,510 43,785 878.00 20,720 37,990 81,775 879.00 22,530 21,625 103,400 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 876.00' 18.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 875.50' S=0.0167'/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=11.02 cfs @ 12.26 hrs HW=878.43' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) '16-1 =Culvert (Inlet Controls 11.02 cfs @ 6.2 fps) 040906 Storm (POST) Type 1124 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00' Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 19 HydroCADD 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Pond P-2: Inflow Area = 19.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.37" for 100 -Year event Inflow = 86.31 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 5.586 of Outflow = 9.98 cfs @ 12.68 hrs, Volume= 5.207 af, Aften= 88%, Lag= 36.6 min Primary = 9.98 cfs @ 12.68 hrs, Volume= 5.207 of Routing by DynStor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 869.00' Surf.Area= 28,460 sf Storage= 61,330 cf Peak Elev= 872.48' @ 12.68 hrs Surf.Area= 39,696 sf Storage= 179,594 cf (118,264 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time=299.4 min calculated for 3.799 of (68% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 125.8 min ( 952.9 - 827.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 865.00' 200,835 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 865.00 0 0 0 866.00 13,000 6,500 6,500 868.00 18,400 31,400 37,900 869.00 28,460 23,430 61,330 870.00 31,600 30,030 91,360 872.00 38,100 69,700 161,060 873.00 41,450 39,775 200,835 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 869.00' 15.0" x 30.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 868.50' S= 0.0167'/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=9.98 cfs @ 12.68 hrs HW=872.48' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L7=Culvert (Inlet Controls 9.98 cfs @ 8.1 fps) Pond P-3: Inflow Area = 27.600 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.47" for 100 -Year event Inflow = 86.16 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 7.972 of Outflow = 10.58 cfs @ 13.40 hrs, Volume= 7.213 af, Atten= 88%, Lag= 75.8 min Primary = 10.58 cfs @ 13.40 hrs, Volume= 7.213 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 871.00' Surf.Area= 39,184 sf Storage= 186,588 cf Peak Elev= 874.83'@ 13.40 hrs Surf.Area= 50,488 sf Storage= 358,094 cf (171,507 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 493.6 min calculated for 2.930 of (37% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 167.9 min ( 1,004.6 - 836.7 ) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 865.00' 446,619 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic]Listed below (Recalc) 040906 Storm (POST) Type 1124 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 20 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 865.00 23,394 0 0 866.00 25,847 24,621 24,621 868.00 30,976 56,823 81,444 870.00 36,384 67,360 148,804 871.00 39,184 37,784 186,588 872.00 42,048 40,616 227,204 874.00 47,902 89,950 317,154 875.00 51,009 49,456 366,609 876.00 54,112 52,561 419,170 876.50 55,685 27,449 446,619 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 871.00' 15.0" x 50.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 870.50' S= 0.0100'P Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean Primary OutFlow Max=10.58 cfs @ 13.40 hrs HW=874.83' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) t-1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 10.58 cfs @ 8.6 fps) Pond W-7: Inflow Area = 7.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.07" for 100 -Year event Inflow = 24.36 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 2.021 of Outflow = 12.62 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 1.959 af, Atten= 48%, Lag= 14.7 min Primary = 12.62 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 1.959 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 921.00' Surf.Area= 73,200 sf Storage= 43,995 cf Peak Elev= 921.33'@ 12.42 hrs Surf.Area= 80,941 sf Storage= 69,247 cf (25,251 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 285.3 min calculated for 0.947 of (47% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 35.9 min ( 876.7 - 840.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 919.60' 129,008 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 919.60 0 0 0 920.00 10,565 2,113 2,113 921.00 73,200 41,883 43,995 922.00 96,825 85,013 129,008 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 921.00' 25.0' long x 25.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 Primary OutFlow Max=12.59 cfs @ 12.42 hrs HW=921.33' TW=874.17' (Dynamic Tailwater) t--1 =Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 12.59 cfs @ 1.5 fps) 040906 Storm (POST) Type// 24 -hr 100 -Year Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 21 Link SITE: Inflow Area = 104.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.15" for 100 -Year event Inflow = 150.77 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 27.531 of Primary = 150.77 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 27.531 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SUMMARY APPENDIX B (EXISTING) Drainage Diagram Drainage Area Map 2 -Year Summary 10 -Year Summary 100 -Year Summary * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 Subcat Reach Aon Link Drainage Diagram for 031406 Storm (PRE) Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 6/5/2006 HydroCAM 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 02006 We3lrooG rtes. Inc. Ir T a ., I `T,.^4m�LM'1 Mc `.\r��,•rYF�—A�.I��Y1 4M� M1YJ ••T^ E� .rrwr �e�.y w3®N. iThe Ryland Group ry-mr.. m rz . A. L. �� ]599 Anagram Drive WeAfrrood „` OEA a71O3 0da, Praire. Miweora 553M Call 48 Hours before Gigging: GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twin C y Area 651-454-0002 Nn Toll free 1-800-252-1165 LEGEND DENOTES ORAl AREA BWNDARY --980 DENOTES EMSTING CONTWRS DENOTES EMSTING TREE LINE. DENOTES METLAND BWNDARY . YAY DENOTES E%ISTING SPOT ELEVATION The Preserve at Bluff Creek 1st Addition CNaeha...n MI. - 0 150' d(10' 451 >f -u abwnlGo.wr ew Ewe, 06/05/06 sNw 1 a 2 Preliminary Pre -Development Macro Drainage Plan 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 1124 -hr 2 -YEAR Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 1 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Time span=5.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 381 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -11E: Runoff Area=95.900 ac Runoff Depth>0.63" Flow Length=1,683' Tc=33.6 min CN=72 Runoff=41.01 cfs 5.016 of Subcatchment DA -2E: Runoff Area=8.900 ac Runoff Depth>0.72" Flow Length=500' Tc=23.8 min CN=74 Runoff=5.77 cfs 0.532 of Pond W-1: Peak Elev=920.76' Storage=23,175 cf Inflow --5.77 cfs 0.532 of Outflow --0.00 cfs 0.000 of Link SITE: Inflow=41.01 cfs 5.016 of Primary=41.01 cfs 5.016 of Total Runoff Area =104.800 ac Runoff Volume = 5.548 of Average Runoff Depth = 0.64" 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 1124 -hr 2 -YEAR Rainfall=2.70" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 2 Subcatchment DA -1 E: Runoff = 41.01 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 5.016 af, Depth> 0.63" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 -YEAR Rainfall=2.70" Area (ac) CN Description 75.600 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 15.300 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 1.500 62 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG A 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.500 60 Woods. Fair. HSG B 95.900 72 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 10.9 180 0.1583 0.3 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 9.4 120 0.1000 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 0.3 84 0.0714 4.3 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 1.1 184 0.0326 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 9.3 863 0.0093 1.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 0.1 24 0.0833 4.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 2.5 228 0.0088 1.5 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 33.6 1,683 Total Subcatchment DA -2E: Runoff = 5.77 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 0.532 af, Depth> 0.72" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 -YEAR Rainfall=2.70" Area (ac) CN Description 5.900 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.000 81 Row crops C&T Good HSG D 8.900 74 Weighted Average 031406 Storm (PRE) Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. H) droCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HvdroCAD Software Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description Type// 24 -hr 2 -YEAR Rainfall=2.70" Page 3 22.7 300 0.0700 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 1.1 200 0.0330 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 23.8 500 Total Pond W-1: Inflow Area = 8.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.72" for 2 -YEAR event Inflow = 5.77 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 0.532 of Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten=100%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 920.76'@ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 45,038 sf Storage= 23,175 cf Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 919.60' 25,160d Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below(Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 919.60 0 0 0 920.00 10,600 2,120 2,120 920.80 47,000 23,040 25,160 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 920.80' 30.0' long x 30.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs HW=919.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) t1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) Link SITE: Inflow Area = 104.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.57" for 2 -YEAR event Inflow = 41.01 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 5.016 of Primary = 41.01 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 5.016 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 11 24 -hr 10 -YEAR Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 4 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Time span=5.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 381 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -1E: Runoff Area=95.900 ac Runoff Depth>1.59" Flow Length=1,683' Tc=33.6 min CN=72 Runoff=118.33 cfs 12.669 of Subcatchment DA -2E: Runoff Area=8.900 ac Runoff Depth>1.73" Flow Length=500' Tc=23.8 min CN=74 Runoff=15.19 cfs 1.285 of Pond W-1: Peak Elev=921.01' Storage=25,160 cf Inflow=15.19 cfs 1.285 of Outflow --7.86 cfs 0.707 of Link SITE: Inflow-- 118.33 cfs 13.376 of Primary=118.33 cfs 13.376 of Total Runoff Area = 104.800 ac Runoff Volume = 13.954 of Average Runoff Depth =1.60" 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 1124 -hr 10 -YEAR Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 5 HydroCAD@ 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Subcatchment DA -1E: Runoff = 118.33 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 12.669 af, Depth> 1.59" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 -YEAR Rainfall=4.20" Area (ac) CN Description 75.600 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 15.300 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 1.500 62 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG A 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.500 60 Woods. Fair. HSG B 95.900 72 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity min) (feet) (ft/ft) (fUsec) 10.9 180 0.1583 0.3 9.4 120 0.1000 0.2 0.3 84 0.0714 4.3 1.1 184 0.0326 2.9 9.3 863 0.0093 1.6 0.1 24 0.0833 4.6 2.5 228 0.0088 1.5 Description Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fos 33.6 1,683 Total Subcatchment DA -2E: Runoff = 15.19 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 1.285 af, Depth> 1.73" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 -YEAR Rainfall=4.20" Area (ac) CN Description 5.900 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.000 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 8.900 74 Weighted Average 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 11 24 -hr 10 -YEAR Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 6 HydroCAD@ 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Tc (min) Length (feet) Slope (f /ft) Velocity (fUsec) Capacity Description (cfs) _ 22.7 300 0.0700 0.2 Sheet Flow, (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 1.1 200 0.0330 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, 2,120 2,120 920.80 47,000 Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 23.8 500 Total Pond W-1: Inflow Area = 8.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.73" for 10 -YEAR event Inflow = 15.19 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 1.285 of Outflow = 7.86 cfs @ 12.55 hrs, Volume= 0.707 af, Atten= 48%, Lag= 22.0 min Primary = 7.86 cfs @ 12.55 hrs, Volume= 0.707 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 921.01'@ 12.55 hrs Surf.Area= 47,000 sf Storage= 25,160 cf Plug -Flow detention time=224.9 min calculated for 0.705 of (55% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 104.0 min ( 959.4 - 855.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 919.60' 25,160 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below(Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 919.60 0 0 0 920.00 10,600 2,120 2,120 920.80 47,000 23,040 25,160 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 920.80' 30.0' long x 30.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 Primary OutFlow Max=7.48 cfs @ 12.55 hrs HW=921.01' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) t1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 7.48 cfs @ 1.2 fps) Link SITE: Inflow Area = 104.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.53" for 10 -YEAR event Inflow = 118.33 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 13.376 of Primary = 118.33 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 13.376 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 1124 -hr 100 -YEAR Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 7 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 002351 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Time span=5.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 381 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -1E: Runoff Area=95.900 ac Runoff Depth>2.97" Flow Length=1,683' Tc=33.6 min CN=72 Runoff=228.72 cfs 23.705 of Subcatchment DA -2E: Runoff Area=8.900 ac Runoff Depth>3.17" Flow Length=500' Tc=23.8 min CN=74 Runoff=28.33 cfs 2.348 of Pond W-1: Peak Elev=921.50' Storage=25,160 cf Inflow --28.33 cfs 2.348 of Outflow --46.61 cfs 1.771 of Link SITE: Inflow --269.78 cfs 25.476 of Primary=269.78 cfs 25.476 of Total Runoff Area = 104.800 ac Runoff Volume = 26.053 of Average Runoff Depth = 2.98" 031406 Storm (PRE) Type// 24 -hr 100 -YEAR Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 8 Subcatchment DA -1 E: Runoff = 228.72 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 23.705 af, Depth> 2.97" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -YEAR Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 75.600 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 15.300 81 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG D 1.500 62 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG A 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.500 60 Woods. Fair. HSG B 95.900 72 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 10.9 180 0.1583 0.3 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 9.4 120 0.1000 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 0.3 84 0.0714 4.3 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 1.1 184 0.0326 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 9.3 863 0.0093 1.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 0.1 24 0.0833 4.6 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 2.5 228 0.0088 1.5 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 33.6 1,683 Total Subcatchment DA -2E: Runoff = 28.33 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 2.348 af, Depth> 3.17" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -YEAR Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 5.900 71 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG B 2.000 78 Row crops, C&T, Good, HSG C 1.000 81 Row crops C&T Good HSG D 8.900 74 Weighted Average 031406 Storm (PRE) Type 11 24 -hr 100 -YEAR Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Page 9 HydroCAD@ 7.10 s/n 002351 @ 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 6/5/2006 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 22.7 300 0.0700 0.2 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.70" 1.1 200 0.0330 2.9 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 16.1 fps 23.8 500 Total Pond W-1: Inflow Area = 8.900 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.17" for 100 -YEAR event Inflow = 28.33 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 2.348 of Outflow = 46.61 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 1.771 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 1.6 min Primary = 46.61 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 1.771 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 921.50'@ 12.20 hrs Surf.Area= 47,000 sf Storage= 25,160 cf Plug -Flow detention time= 133.8 min calculated for 1.767 of (75% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 43.9 min ( 882.4 - 838.5 ) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 919.60' 25,160 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic�isted below(Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 919.60 0 0 0 920.00 10,600 2,120 2,120 920.80 47,000 23,040 25,160 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 920.80' 30.0' long x 30.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 Primary OutFlow Max=45.93 cfs @ 12.20 hrs HW=921.49' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 't1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 45.93 cfs @ 2.2 fps) Link SITE: Inflow Area = 104.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 2.92" for 100 -YEAR event Inflow = 269.78 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 25.476 of Primary = 269.78 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 25.476 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 5.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SUMMARY APPENDIX C Water Quality Storm Sewer Design Micro Drainage Area Map * WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. (952) 937-5150 Water Quality Analysis for: Pond 1 Input Variables Precip. Event 2.5 inch Area -(sq-CN Streets 1.4 98 Drives 0.3 98 B; = 0.00 F; = 0.00 1.25 (minimum) for 80% TSS Removal Rooftops, patios, sidewalks, or any other hard cover surfaces draining to pervious surfaces should be included in the pervious portion of the watershed - not as Bi. Note: Fi defaults to 0.2 if Bi --O.. Land Use Characteristics Soil G 1/4 acre lots, 38% CN 75 B Impervious Area (ac) 9.2 Pond @ NWL CN 100 Area (ac) 0.4 CN Area (ac) CN Area (ac) Wet Volume Storage (ac -ft) Average Eley Areas Area ac Inc. Cumm. Depth ft 872.0 7,800 0.18 0 0 0 874.0 10,400 0.24 0.42 0.42 1.75 875.0 11,750 0.27 0.25 0.67 2.49 NWL 876.0 17,270 0.40 0.33 1.01 2.54 Output Variables: Walker <_Select Model Total Area : 9.6 ac Weighted CN : 76 S : 3.15 (max. Soil Retention) Runoff Q: 0.70 inch (0.5 min. Runoff Depth) Sediment Volume: 0.00 inch (250 cf per acre of impervious) Runoff Volume: 0.00 ac -ft (Water Quality Volume) Design Volume: 1.01 ac -ft (Provided Treatment Volume) Target Volume: 0.56 ac -ft (Req. Treatment Volume) Water Quality Analysis for: Pond -2 Input Variables Nrecip. Event 2.5 inch 1.25 (minimum) for 80% TSS Removal Area (so CN Rooftops, patios, sidewalks, or any Streets 3.1 98 other hard cover surfaces draining to Drives 0.7 98 pervious surfaces should be included in the pervious portion of the B; = 0.00 watershed - not as Bi. Note: Fi F; = 0.00 defaults to 0.2 if Bi=O.. Land Use Characteristics Soil Group 114 acre lots, 38% CN 75 B Impervious Area (ac) 19.2 Pond @ NWL CN 100 Area (ac) 0.7 CN Area (ac) CN Area (ac) Wet Volume Storage (ac -ft) Average Elev Area (so Area ac Inc. Cumm. Depth ft 865.0 0 0.00 0 0 0 866.0 13,000 0.30 0.15 0.15 0.50 868.0 18,400 0.42 0.72 0.87 2.06 NWL 869.0 28,460 0.65 0.54 1.41 2.15 Output Variables: Walker <_Select Model Total Area: 19.9 ac Weighted CN: 76 S : 3.18 (max. Soil Retention) Runoff Q: 0.69 inch (0.5 min. Runoff Depth) Sediment Volume: 0.00 inch (250 cf per acre of impervious) Runoff Volume: 0.00 ac -ft (Water Quality Volume) Design Volume: 1.41 ac -ft (Provided Treatment Volume) Target Volume: 1.14 ac -ft (Req. Treatment Volume) Project: The Preserve CBMH 213 Rational Storm Sewer Design Tabulation Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Proj #: 20031110.01 Plan Date: 06/05/06 Frequency Storm (yrs) = 10 6.53 0.82 Comp By: cbg Comp Date: 06/01/06 Manning Coefficient = 0.013 935.75 Checked By: jai 930.99 3.06 Minimum Pipe Size (in.) = 15 7599 Anagram Drive 213 CBMH 211 0.14 0.42 Rainfall Data for Twin Cities Metro Area Only Eden Prairie, MN 55344 7.08 0.45 0.06 0.19 Intensity -Duration -Frequency Data Obtained From MNDOT 952-937-5150 6.47 15 11.56 9.42 193 935.75 FAX 952-937-5822 930.99 924.80 3.32 3.15 3.12 cover from top pipe Run Description 1 895.50 1 3.06 1 3.05 From From To To Area Up Sum Area Time of Pipe Time Selected Sum Intensity Q = Flow Slope Pipe Select Capacity Full Velocity Pipe Rim Elevation Invert Elev. Cover Prefix # Prefix # Inlet (Acres) Area Conc.(min) (min) Tot Tc "C" CXA CXA (IN/HR) Q = CAI % Dia(in.) Dia(in.) of pipe (fps) Length Up M.H. I Dn M.H. Up M.H. I Dn M.H. I Up M.H. I Dn M.H. CB 214 CBMH 213 0.28 0.28 7.00 0.08 7.00 0.45 0.13 0.13 6.53 0.82 1.00 6.93 15 6.46 5.26 26 935.75 935.75 931.25 930.99 3.06 3.32 CBMH 213 CBMH 211 0.14 0.42 7.00 0.34 7.08 0.45 0.06 0.19 6.50 1.23 3.20 6.47 15 11.56 9.42 193 935.75 929.39 930.99 924.80 3.32 3.15 L CB 1 212 1 CBMH 1 211 1 0.33 1 0.33 1 7.00 1 0.08 1 7.00 10.45 F 0.1510.151 6.53 1 0.97 1 1.001 7.37 1 15 1 6.46 1 5.26 1 26 1 929.59 1 929.29 1 925.09 1 924.83 1 3.06 1 3.03 1 CBMH 211 CBMH 210 0.21 0.96 7.00 0.16 7.42 0.45 0.09 0.43 6.39 2.76 6.40 7.70 15 16.34 13.32 126 329.39 921.32 924.80 916.76 3.15 3.12 CBMH 210 CBMH 207 0.00 0.96 7.00 0.09 7.58 0.45 0.00 0.43 6.34 2.74 4.30 8.27 15 13.40 10.92 61 921.32 918.63 916.76 914.14 3.12 3.05 CB 209 CBMH 208 0.54 0.54 10.00 0.27 10.00 0.30 0.16 0.16 5.65 0.92 3.00 5.87 15 11.19 9.12 149 923,00 918.63 918.50 914.04 3.06 3.15 CBMH 208 CBMH 207 0.31 0.85 7.00 0.12 10.27 0.45 0.14 0.30 5.59 1.69 0.50 10.32 15 4.57 3.72 26 918.63 918.63 914.04 913.91 3.15 3.28 I CBMH 1 207 1 CBMH 1 204 1 0.40 1 2.21 1 7.00 1 0.31 1 10.39 10.451 0.1810.911 5.56 1 5.08 1 4.50 1 10.34 1 15 1 13.70 1 11.17 1 205 1 918.63 1 909.28 1 913.91 I aU4.ei 1 3.Z?5 1 .3 it CB 206 CBMH 1 205 0.60 0.60 10.00 0.61 10.00 0.30 0.18 0.18 5.65 1.02 0.50 8.54 15 4.57 3.72 137 908.31 909.28 1 903.81 1 903.12 1 3.06 4.72 CBMH 205 CBMH 204 0.40 1.00 7.00 0.12 10.61 0.45 0.18 0.36 5.51 1.98 0.50 1 10.97 15 4.57 3.72 26 909.28 909.28 903.12 903.00 4.721 4.85 CBMH 204 STMH 203 0.43 3.64 7.00 0.40 10.73 0.45 0.19 1.47 5.48 8.05 2.50 13.72 15 10.21 8.32 198 309.28 1 902.55 1 903.00 1 898.04 1 4.85 1 3.07 1 CB 219 CBMH 218 0.52 0.52 7.00 0.10 7.00 0.45 0.23 10.23 6.53 1.53 0.50 1 9.95 15 4.57 3.72 23 900.92 900.92 1 896.42 896.30 3.06 3.18 CBMH 218 CBMH 216 0.47 0.99 7.00 0.36 7.10 0.45 0.21 10.45 6.50 2.89 0.80 1 11.57 15 5.78 4.71 102 900.92 899.99 896.30 895.49 3.18 1 3.06 CBMH 216 CBMH 215 0.60 2.60 7.00 0.43 10.66 0.45 0.27 1.10 5.50 1 6.04 0.40 17.37 18 6.64 3.76 1 97 899.99 901.27 895.17 894.78 3.11 4.78 CBMH 215 STMH 203 0.39 2.99 CB 1216AI CBMH 216 0.48 0.48 10.00 0.66 10.00 0.30 0.14 0.14 5.65 0.81 0.80 7.19 15 5.78 4.71 187 901.50 899.99 1 897.00 1 895.50 1 3.06 1 3.05 CB 202 CBMH 201 0.27 0.27 7.00 0.12 7.00 0.45 0.12 0.12 6.53 0.79 0.50 7.78 15 4.57 3.72 26 902.15 902.15 897.65 897.52 3.06 3.19 CB 217 1 CBMH 216 0.53 0.53 7.00 0.10 7.00 0.45 0.24 0.24 6.53 1.56 0.50 10.02 15 4.57 3.72 23 899.99 1 899.99 1 895.49 1 895.37 1 3.06 1 3.18 CBMH 216 CBMH 215 0.60 2.60 7.00 0.43 10.66 0.45 0.27 1.10 5.50 1 6.04 0.40 17.37 18 6.64 3.76 1 97 899.99 901.27 895.17 894.78 3.11 4.78 CBMH 215 STMH 203 0.39 2.99 7.00 0.22 11.09 0.45 0.18 1.27 5.41 1 6.88 0.50 17.49 18 7.43 1 4.20 1 56 901.27 902.55 894.78 1 894.51 4.78 1 6.34 MH k 203 CBMH 201 0.00 6.63 0.00 0.13 11.32 0.00 0.00 2.74 5.36 14.68 2.00 17.92 18 14.86 8.41 64 902.55 902.15 894.51 893.23 6.34 7.21 CB 202 CBMH 201 0.27 0.27 7.00 0.12 7.00 0.45 0.12 0.12 6.53 0.79 0.50 7.78 15 4.57 3.72 26 902.15 902.15 897.65 897.52 3.06 3.19 CBMH 1 201 1 CBMH 1132A 0.48 1 7.38 1 7.00 1 0.18 11.44 10.451 0.22 1 3.08 1 5.33 1 16.41 2.50 17.92 18 16.61 9.40 99 1 902.15 903.48 893.23 890.76 7.21 11.01 CBMH 132A STMH 132 0.53 7 91 7 0o n n9 11.62 0.45 024 3.32 5.30 17.57 1.40 20.49 21 18.75 7.79 44 903.48 905.31 890.56 1 889.94 1 10.94 13.39 CB 139 1 CBMH 138 0.33 0.33 7.00 0.21 7.00 0.45 0.15 0.15 6.53 1 0.97 0.50 8.39 15 1 4.57 3.72 47 1 929.21 1 930.32 1 924.71 924.47 3.06 4.41 STMH 138 CBMH 137 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.30 7.21 0.00 0.00 0.15 6.46 0.96 1.50 6.80 15 7.91 6.45 118 930.32 927.25 924.47 922.71 4.411 3.10 STMH 134 CBMH 133 0.00 1 3.87 0.00 0.14 8.20 0.00 1 0.00 1.74 1 15.12 10.70 6.50 12.76 1 15 16.47 1 13.42 1 113 914.70 907.51 910.21 1 902.89 3.05 3.18 CBMH 1 133 CB 229 CBMH 228 0.39 0.39 7.00 0.12 7.00 0.45 0.18 0.18 6.53 1.15 0.50 8.93 15 4.57 3.72 26 931.90 931.90r27.40 927.27 3.06 3.19 CBMH 228 CBMH 227 0.23 0.62 7.00 0.16 7.12 0.45 0.10 0.28 6.49 1.81 3.70 7.29 15 12.43 10.13 97 931.90 928.183.19 907.79 887.03 886.31 3.06 CBMH 227 CBMH 137A 0.07 0.69 7.00 0.27 7.28 0.45 0.03 0.31 6.44 2.00 1.50 8.95 15 7.91 6.45 103 98.18 926.6823.68 885.80 922.13 3.06 1 3.11 CB 1 226 1 CBMH 1137AI 0.58 1 0.58 1 7.00 1 0.12 7.00 1 0.45 1 0.26 1 0.261 6.537 1.70 1 0.50 1 10.37 15 4.57 1 3.72 26 1 926.68 926.68 1 922.18 1 922.05 3.06 3.19 CBMH 137A STMH 137 0.28 1.55 7.00 0.26 7.54 0.45 0.13 0.70 6.35 4.43 0.50 14.83 15 4.57 3.72 58 926.68 927.25 922.05 921.76 3.19 4.05 STMH 137 CBMH 135 0.00 1.88 0.00 0.30 7.80 0.00 0.00 0.85 6.27 5.30 3.90 10.79 15 12.76 10.40 186 927.25 919.09 921.76 914.50 4.05 3.16 CB 136 CBMH 135 0.42 0.42 7.00 1 0.12 7.00 1 0.451 0.19 1 0.191 6.53 1 1.23 1 0.50 9.18 15 4.57 1 3.72 26 1 919.09 919.09 914.59 1 914.46 3.06 3.19 CBMH 135 STMH 134 0.17 2.47 7.00 0.10 8.10 0.45 1 0.08 1 1.11 1 -6-1-7-T-6.86 5.80 11.04 15 1 15.56 1 12.68 73 919.09 1 914.70 1 914.46 1 910.21 1 3.19 3.05 CB 224 CBMH 223 0.30 0.30 7.00 0.10 7.00 0.45 1 0.14 1 0.141 6.53 0.88 0.50 8.09 15 4.57 3.72 23 921.64 1 921.64 1 917.14 917.03 3.06 3.18 CBMH 223 CBMH 222 0.46 1 0.76 7.00 0.18 7.10 1 0.451 0.21 1 0.34 1 6.50 2.22 4.10 7.72 15 13.08 10.66 114 921.64 916.88 917.03 912.33 3.18 3.11 CBMH 222 CBMH 220 0.21 0.97 7.00 0.07 7.28 1 0.45 1 0.09 1 0.44 1 6.44 2.81 3.00 8.93 15 11.19 9.12 41 916.88 915.70 912.33 911.11 3.11 3.15 CB 221 CBMH 220 0.33 0.33 7.00 0.10 7.00 1 0.451 0.15 1 0.151 6.53 1 0.97 1 0.50 1 8.39 1 15 4.57 3.72 23 915.70 915.70 911.20 911.09 3.06 3.18 CBMH 220 CBMH 134 0.10 1.40 7.00 0.04 1 7.36 1 0.451 0.05 1 0.631 6.41 4.04 3.50 1 9.95 15 12.09 9.85 25 915.70 914.70 911.09 910.21 3.18 3.05 lk STMH 134 CBMH 133 0.00 1 3.87 0.00 0.14 8.20 0.00 1 0.00 1.74 1 15.12 10.70 6.50 12.76 1 15 16.47 1 13.42 1 113 914.70 907.51 910.21 1 902.89 3.05 3.18 CBMH 1 133 1 STMH 132 0.13 1 4.00 7.00 0.07 8.34 0.45 1 0.06 1.80 1 6.10 10.99 4.50 13.81 1 15 13.70 1 11.17 1 48 907.51 905.31 902.89 900.71 3.18 3.16 STMH 132 CBMH 131 0.00 11.91 7.00 1 0.19 1 11.71 10.00 1 0.00 15.12 1 5.2827.00 0.80 26.74 1 27 27.70 6.97 79 1 905.31 1 903.97 889.54 888.91 13.25 12.54 CBMH 131 CBMH 128 0.51 12.42 7.00 1 0.19 1 11.90 1 0.451 0.23 1 5.35 1 5.24 28.02 1 0.90 1 903.97 1 903.50 888.91 888.15 12.54 12.83 CB 130 CBMH 128 0.41 0.41 10.00 0.26 10.00 1 0.30 1 0.12 1 0121 5.65 1 0.70 1 6.10 1 4.63 1 15 1 15.95 1 13.00 205 1 915.87 903.50 911.37 898.87 3.06 1 3.19 CB 129 CBMH 128 0.51 0.51 7.00 0.11 1 7.00 1 0.451 0.23 1 0.23 6.53 1 1.50 1 0.50 1 9.88 1 15 1 4.57 3.72 25 903.50 903.50 899.00 898.87 3.06 3.19 MH 128 CBMH 125 0.69 14.03 7.00 0.39 12.09 0.45 0.31 6.01 5.20 31.27 0.60 29.82 30 31.77 6.47 153 903.50 906.15 887.95 887.03 12.76 16.33B rC 127 CBMH 126 0.51 0.51 7.00 0.05 1 7.00 1 0.451 0.23 0.23 1 6.53 1.50 1 4.50 6.54 1 15 1 13.70 1 11.17 1 36909.17 907.59 904.67 903.05 3.06 3.10 CBMH 1 126 CBMH 125A 1 0.48 0.99 7.00 0.10 1 7.05 1 0.45 1 0.22 0.45 1 6.51 2.90 3.50 8.78 1 15 1 12.09 9.85 59 907.59 905.50 903.05 901.00 3.10 3.06 CBMH 1125AI CBMH 1 125 1 0.09 1.08 7.00 0.06 1 7.15 1 0.451 0.04 1 0.491 6.48 1 3.15 1.00 1 11.46 1 15 1 6.46 5.26 20 905.50 1 906.15 901.00 900.80 3.06 3.91 CBMH 125 CBMH 124 0.07 15.18 7.00 1 0.24 1 12.49 1 0.451 0.03 1 6.53 1 5.13 33.48 0.70 29.72 30 34.32 6.99 102 906.15 907.79 887.03 886.31 16.33 18.68 CBMH 124 CBMH 122 0.03 15.21 7.00 0.17 12.73 0.45 0.01 6.54 5.09 33.27 0.70 29.65 30 34.32 6.99 1 73 907.79 1 905.95 886.31 885.80 18.68 1 17.36 CB 123 1 CBMH 1 122 0.17 1 0.17 1 7.00 0.10 7.00 1 OA51 0.08 10.08 1 6.53 1 0.50 1 0.50 1 6.54 1 15 1 4.57 1 3.72 1 23 1 905.95 ( 905.95 1 901.45 1 901.33 1 3.06 1 3.18 CBMH 1 122 1 STMH 1 121 0.06 15.44 7.00 1 0.06 12.90 0.45 0.03 6.64 5.06 33.59 5.50 20.22 30 96.19 1 19.60 1 66 1 905.95 1 888.00 885.80 1 882.18 17.36 3.03 STMH 121 FES 120 0.00 15.44 0.00 1 0.25 12.96 0.00 0.00 6.64 5.05 33.52 0.26 35.81 36 34.01 1 4.81 1 71 1 888.00 1 869.00 869.18 1 869.00 15.49 0.00 NWL = 869.0 CB 119 1 CBMH 118 1 0.63 1 0.63 1 7.00 1 0.10 1 7.00 10.45 1 0.28 10.28 1 6.53 1 1.85 1 0.50 1 10.69 1 15 1 4.57 1 3.72 23 1 921.01 1 921.01 916.51 916.39 3.06 1 3.18 CBMH 118 1 STMH 117 0.30 0.93 7.00 0.11 7.10 0.45 0.14 0.42 6.50 2.72 1.00 10.84 15 6.46 5.26 34 921.01 920.52 916.39 916.06 3.18 3.03 STMH 117 CBMH 116 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.06 7.21 0.00 0.00 0.42 6.46 2.70 2.50 9.11 15 10.21 8.32 32 920.52 919.82 916.06 915.25 3.03 3.13 CBMH 116 CBMH 113 0.06 1 0.99 1 7.00 1 0.11 7.28 0.45 1 0.03 0.45 6.44 1 2.87 1 1.00 1 11.06 15 1 6.46 5.26 36 919.82 919.62 915.25 914.89 1 3.13 1 3.29 CB 1 115 1 CBMH 1 113 1 0.41 1 0.41 1 7.00 1 0.57 1 7.00 1030 1 0.12 10.12 1 6.53 -TOM 5.78 4.71 66 1 0.50 1 7.82 1 15 1 4.57 1 3.72 1 126 1 919.55 1 919.62 1 915.05 1 914.42 1 3.06 1 3.76 1 0.14 0.94 6.27 5.88 0.90 14.77 1 15 6.13 4.99 105 919.99 1 921.32 913.89 912.95 4.66 1 6.93 12.53 15 12.43 10.13 56 912.07 909.92 907.53 1 905.45 3.10 3.03 901.14 898.92 3.00 3.11 1 • � 1 : �� 0.59 11 1 1: 11 � 1 1: 1 1: �� 5.40 9.85 2.50 14.80 15 10.21 8.32 26 903.47 903.47 898.92 898.27 3.11 3.76 �CB 114 CBMH _ 113 0.35 0.35 7.00 0.10 7.00 0.45 0.16 0.16 6.53 1.03 0.50 8.58 15 4.57. _ 3.72 23 919.62 919.62 915.12 915.01 3.06 3.18 CBMH 113 CBMH 112 1 0.16 1.91 7.00 0.23 1 7.57 0.45 0.07 0.80 6.34 5.06 0.80 14.27 1 15 5.78 4.71 66 919.62 1 919.99 914.42 913.89 3.76 4.66 CBMH 112 CBMH 110 1 0.31 2.22 7.00 0.35 1 7.80 0.45 0.14 0.94 6.27 5.88 0.90 14.77 1 15 6.13 4.99 105 919.99 1 921.32 913.89 912.95 4.66 1 6.93 ®�� 15 1 12.92 1 1 1: 1 1: 11 1 1 11 � 1 1• 1 1• �� 14.74 15 1 6.46 5.26 12.09 9.85 112 916.11 26-T91622 911.46 916.11 911.72 5.87 15 1 6.46 1 5.26 0.22 3.001 7.00 0.09 8.81 0.45 0.10 1.29 5.97 7.69 3.70 12.53 15 12.43 10.13 56 912.07 909.92 907.53 1 905.45 3.10 3.03 901.14 898.92 3.00 3.11 1 • � 1 : �� 0.59 11 1 1: 11 � 1 1: 1 1: �� 5.40 3.34 1 15 1 12.92 1 10.5 0.24 2.78 1 7.00 911.46 6.93 3.21 0.11 1.19 6.02 14.74 15 1 6.46 5.26 12.09 9.85 112 916.11 26-T91622 911.46 916.11 911.72 5.87 15 1 6.46 1 5.26 128 926.31 921.32 921.81 0.24 2.78 1 7.00 911.46 6.93 3.21 0.11 1.19 6.02 149 921.32 916.11 912.95 12.09 9.85 112 916.11 26-T91622 911.46 916.11 911.72 916.70 3.06 3.18 1 107 0.24 2.78 1 7.00 911.46 6.93 3.21 0.11 1.19 6.02 911.46 3.06 3.22 CBMH 108 CBMH 1 107 0.24 2.78 1 7.00 0.19 8.62 0.45 0.11 1.19 6.02 7.16 3.50 12.33 15 12.09 9.85 112 916.11 912.07 911.46 1 907.53 3.22 3.10 CBMH 107 CBMH 105 0.22 3.001 7.00 0.09 8.81 0.45 0.10 1.29 5.97 7.69 3.70 12.53 15 12.43 10.13 56 912.07 909.92 907.53 1 905.45 3.10 3.03 CB 1 106 1 CBMH 1 105 J 0.40 1 0.40 1 10.00 1 0.76 1 10.00 0.30 1 0.12 10.12 1 5.65 1 0.68 1 0.50 1 7.34 1 15 1 4.57 1 3.72 1 169 1 908.92 1 909.92 1 904.42 1 903.58 1 3.08 1 4.91 CBMH 105 CBMH 104 0.11 3.51 7.00 0.24 10.76 0.45 0.05 1.46 5.48 7.99 2.20 14.01 15 9.58 7.81 111 909.92 905.58 903.58 901.14 4.91 3.00 CBMH 104 1 CBMH 103 0.22 3.73 7.00 0.11 10.99 0.45 0.10 1.56 5.43 8.45 3.40 13.19 15 11.91 9.71 65 905.58 903.47 901.14 898.92 3.00 3.11 CBMH 103 CBMH 102 0.59 4.32 7.00 0.05 11.10 0.45 0.27 1.82 5.40 9.85 2.50 14.80 15 10.21 8.32 26 903.47 903.47 898.92 898.27 3.11 3.76 CBMH 102 EX CBMH 48 0.10 4.42 7.00 0.11 11.16 0.45 0.05 1.87 5.39 10.07 2.50 14.92 15 10.21 8.32 53 903.47 904.25 898.27 896.94 1 3.76 5.87 Me. .w w I I I 1 I I I I I M` I I 1 N u I I s I II (L�a.�+ H _J�LJ Lmj Aw r 0 N n f4DIA Ertrting fgaogrppkP velhatl ddMeatioox ood � ertrtnq ut8iflm atoMed Nam omrx n c se.�wrtrsvu 0 N wsr xM fII� 3 ' �� mu wa vN43r.s,n \ awO I ! 1! INN rr— �8wb�.�.bl.Ztr 1 �� ) � 4 ` I I �- .`✓ `..M em tract aa. F\ / Typical Lot (Varies) "—• _ _\ — — / l �� — ,=' ' ----------T1i!yi*f [eItt Data_ — - al.sel Zook, StmdmW (YMknuma) E,&M, Zook, Rre' a0of A (Pude) 21.10 oo Lot Wdm O Setbock us• (60' f2µ) !1 1D_ taawa sF. �� W Street dimmsiana listed retamce back of curb. P ( T1o2x %YN d NLL, oM P 1) EAll street] to Aore curb and guffr m pr City IIo' (120' t/p.) afmaorea. dDrob.ge and Wit, nose amts skill be pr. i p_ o as requw.d by Me city. NMM o. Let Arm me lot dwl.0 . and rem oo M4 INm ms m o2Z`o nota R.Mr fa Me Fnd Plot and o ppprfk, data / enact lot dimonsims and N ormx m Unity Eoaemoot a 291 oc. O am m. c se.�wrtrsvu 0 N wsr xM fII� 3 ' �� mu wa vN43r.s,n \ awO I ! 1! INN rr— �8wb�.�.bl.Ztr 1 �� ) � 4 ` I I �- .`✓ `..M em tract aa. F\ / Typical Lot (Varies) "—• _ _\ — — / l �� — ,=' ' ----------T1i!yi*f [eItt Data_ — - al.sel Zook, StmdmW (YMknuma) E,&M, Zook, Rre' a0of A (Pude) 21.10 oo Lot Wdm O Setbock us• (60' f2µ) !1 1D_ taawa sF. �� W The "w" The Pemtom Land Company Preserve Is �� too 1497 Aaegrem Drina er •/D/K �� f♦� ras,r.arr Edm Ihefne, Mienade 5531{ Chmulh . Mv,emte Cdl b Hare before 69ginq. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TV City Area 551-151-0002 W. Td Ft. 1-600-252-1166 6E96T.t2YER: Pamhm Land Aire DO. 1691 n E P/OY1PMM, 0 MN 5$396 Prams (939) ME For (952) 7-M CootmtA' Danoo hWNf Nrbsf W,st /699 Ao /yEPNmdfaDfFi11wP/if.RSwLE-xOcQaqs:, /nc Edenme: (952 553M 2 (95Ntl. M) 931-5130 F.coo(952) 931-3622 CoofmE „LSIM L. X00' 200 30i axv-,dr�oi ow.: rnle 09117)06 mean. 3 OF 12 Preliminary Plat P'opoNd Zook, P(ID, (NO Res. R-8) ( T1o2x %YN d NLL, oM P 1) Lot Deem IIo' (120' t/p.) Total Rte Area 79.86 L oe.. WBot H (City Foexty) am oa NMM o. Let Arm 4504 Sq.Ft. ria^O9° ! Tofd R k R.QW. tam ae Ouftt Q 0, & H. 4 L. t N (P 'rola Sm tw) 184 m- Aro Lot Area ],195 Sq Ft Unity Eoaemoot - "ectbr R.O.W. 291 oc. O,vots F c k f (Misate Opel Space) am m. Frenl Yrd Setback 20' (P k or Pn""rote Stroet) T Setback Lha - Lywm BfM R.O.W. 1.83 ac. Q Nat K (Wetlmd Q Batter) 1.90 m. SI'de Yh t Setback 5/10' 05' Totd) (See D '.kpmmt WN) - Other Mtamd Public R.O.W. 6.11 m. Q•flat N (CRI Pooch,) 4.11 a. Sitle Yd'd Setback Carne. Lots 15' -Lot OMlanaiwe P o y auN Creek Oreday Otr c I9.8 x Q,Not 0 (M ofe Pok* Spore) 219 m. Ren Ymd Sado k 15" Eosthg g6Nr,ds (ootakfe BCW) 0.9 m. Toid Smwe Frndy Lots 155 Psimetr SetboN 30' —Lot NU Net Re.Mantld Area 2114 ac Cdtrctr Road Setback 25' Ste O ty (yoke) 194 mita/acre RbHmd Ruhr 16.5' Ap r. Lot Area Sit. O stty ( 0 559 uoits/ade sfmlf re Setback krn 8o61er 40' Setback (Told wits (155)/Nat resi Mo UN neo (21.14)) NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION aoeos , Site MPr.irous Cc, ,e 2149. The "w" The Pemtom Land Company Preserve Is �� too 1497 Aaegrem Drina er •/D/K �� f♦� ras,r.arr Edm Ihefne, Mienade 5531{ Chmulh . Mv,emte Cdl b Hare before 69ginq. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TV City Area 551-151-0002 W. Td Ft. 1-600-252-1166 6E96T.t2YER: Pamhm Land Aire DO. 1691 n E P/OY1PMM, 0 MN 5$396 Prams (939) ME For (952) 7-M CootmtA' Danoo hWNf Nrbsf W,st /699 Ao /yEPNmdfaDfFi11wP/if.RSwLE-xOcQaqs:, /nc Edenme: (952 553M 2 (95Ntl. M) 931-5130 F.coo(952) 931-3622 CoofmE „LSIM L. X00' 200 30i axv-,dr�oi ow.: rnle 09117)06 mean. 3 OF 12 Preliminary Plat e 2008 yhsteond Prahssbnd SrMaes, he Wt b Hmn l efre al99e9: GOPHER STATE ONE CALL •-, s.s' w.uP.w mend I Twln City Men 651-454-0002 I r, Mn. Tdl Free 1-6252-1166 I I I II II 11 I I "` I I OVILOTA I Irr��jj Ir�'� I I; I; I I S I I I I I I I I I I X%I I l \ \ I i e 7> II ! '� I D I D p I@ I I I \-\•`cea c, oe.w,r .eum4 1 ' 3. `' OVTLO! I I 1 1—m J•I I D M. I E_ I A I xw I aa. I 1 , // ..>r. I I I I I '• I I xw> I JL JL >I •I �I�I�I I I�I �I ��I �; I �I IOV/LOTJ �^ � "T>�\�) , `� _ B f Pemfmr Lend Co^Wony 7697 I r _.m. J LI�-�6 •-J fI ` �\ �'�� 1 � ��\/,\` m ` J J J��n� `/\\� \ / s' vai nj ♦ d� / � CmfMx0oamn is,e Eden Pa. NN 555344- lohis((951) 937-0116 Fox. (952) mat _J L_' w_J L_ _J 1 )^ ',� ( D ♦ -� ' I / l i t I �J _J ITr'-1J 1 d L- J L L J I J, I_JJ LII_ _711 JII LL_m�p> J L a.»'l i ` ./ / �` l 1 \\ ♦ I ' wesMom Profession") serdcex Inc t < i 7599 Anagram wl•e Ehn Prasie, NN. 55344 F.(931- I I r-1 r 1 r 1 r 7 r I9Y�rpiG i <e >�I 1 I a� • 1 j / for (951) 2)995821Z 31- I I • I 1 L I I 3 � // / � �V i p /'� < .m> ,u > �% _ I 1 _ , '^ // / Cmtact .Anes Lwsm 1 I �- � .� \,�� c >m+ \-�l < .m>� r�, / r -�!! rr �r -Ir �r �r rl \� a\�•) l /aBrcrnL � / \�-cnr ns.• 2 % Vi D V m+ ) <`'m+ ) J (%,.°.tel/ i asw � - I J , (( 1 I �� •v'wwe,,.e .face. \c. � \ � V � p r � _ I I r � r � r i I - < / / a , 1 11 � I � 1 \ I^ \` w...y nor :� _ ♦ xn.+ _ I _ 1 ' Y / z, . / / i^ i� °M°w` — ��7 /+ate• I >a� i :� I > D I ' i i �> . .. � �,,` / a, i 11 � ' � � _—// / ' � / � �\ It !�I \� It i __ \ — ✓r 1 I cram« .w.a %�'' �� \. f' : ✓ '`�2w fica9 ,aP�x :o�. \` i` fir, ".!'� `• / \ / \ _� OI/7LOTA � y ✓. pias' Weare e.nn )r� \ � — \•' \ , / / \ •'` a,x oe+. a nay 1h,sh 11, `-,w I Typical Lot (Varies) Y ems.. \ \ _ _ / 1 l / — ' - - - - -- Development Data sheet Esvtn9 Zonn9 Rural Totd Sngk f Ay Lots 155 Zwft Sftnd Y (M%ArNettw) ProgaroJ Zmng PUO, (MD Res, R-5) Net ReWdrdial Mea 1819 ac. Front Yrd Setback 20' House to ROw F _ latd SRe Mao 79.66 i n1. n' Orags Oms to Row r-g_g_____ see Dentia. (goss) raw ,rn;es/«re Total Pu61k Ray 11.17 e1. Ate Oeh efy ( t) S50 unity/ace (..20' to Gao9s p Cur-0rsec) _ _ I }aanage h - OWlacror Told) R.O.W 1.91 x (TOW units (155)Aer resiOmtid area (2alg)) s/1o' (rs' Esistng Colo phg vefl.d Odinebhimx and 1 utility Ecss—f Side rortl setbook esistn9 uf9ifin obtonetl /ram orhrx r ^ - Lynn BIN R.O.W. 1.83 as Site knpauous Cu•oba. side Yu-d Setback Camr Lots 10' ltouse/25' O ate, oars Sheet dmmaims Iq(N re/rmce Duck o/ arb(. i I } eho � Lee - Other Intend Public R.aw. 8.43 se. Sheets am m. Rer Yrtl Sef6 15' X Meymmf Ov(o) Pmt, BmN Geek Oro 0y, Dkbkf: 19.8 m. sklewalks 1.14 o1. Eosf Property Line stm50' _ t afnefs W saw cub mtl gaffe os Pr City I tlartlx -Let oknenNen Existing Wetlbnds (outside BCW) 0.9 o1.. Trails 1.19 n1.. Cdlecfr Ruud Setback S' �W' orvnage wtl utdit tS,Oppt SF. I Outiot A (P.Wo 16.89 x Homes & Do. 10.81 aC ftN BuNe Ia5' y eo girth-ts sheir be prontlM i —Let NwMr (BCC)% Traix WeBrM Wt., and Pmofi9) 0eed1 Imam s C-w she 1216 x (1171) ahucfra Sef6ack Gam IyeurN BvBw dQ' os re,seO by Me City The lot dmmsims and rens ch this plm are —Apprae Lot Arov Curbr B (crty FocdihY) am. Z.*, 8lmdrb (YFhams) oppro ofe. R<W 1' al to the Pman Plot d I Cutlet D. G L K. 8 M (Pivot. Streets) 35a o, Lot Wath e smack a5' (6o' tAs) 0' IID' 200' 30 supprtng echo for "act rot Wmmsims and _� Wtpts r E F, M G N (Prisete atm space) 315 oa. Let DIM Tor (1N1' t,p.) iaan,'t Pam D. stmt 3 (wtfine A arra.) 190 a Nn> tsh Lot Ana Baso sR.Et NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Outrot L (6ty Poednn9 At BC(k0) 4.71 v1.. A>ero9s Lot Area 7.924 51R. o a I\,e 03!]7/06 .-.. 3 on 72 The I ". rssnre4.rs+ss ..r�enra�. r•� psR� 1..r. Preliminary ru "'" �� "° The Pemtom Land Company Preserve �wr vmm, t5elk ]69] AnsBnm Drive Plat — �� N..s r L9f72 w m. r... Bdm Pnvie, Mimrote 55!41 OaMsseea, !41it�n�Y,e CITY OF CIMNSEN 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: 952.227.11 go Engineering Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax 952227 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 d Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952 227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 95M7.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us oc0- IL4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Kate Aanenson AICP, Community Development Director �� DATE: September 13, 2007 c,. SUBJ: Clarification of the Number of Lots within The Preserve �l i And Grading of the 0 and 2nd Additions Planning Case 06-14 Attached is a summary of the pertinent portion of the Planning Commission and City Council minutes relating to the number of lots which were approved for The Preserve development. Also attached are excerpt minutes pertaining to the subject. The entire minutes are available on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us under Agendas and Minutes. GRADING The Preserve at Bluff Creek 1 st Addition final grading plan includes a retaining wall along the east property line, approximately 280 feet long with a maximum height of 12 feet. The grading revisions for The Preserve at Bluff Creek 2nd Addition approved on September 10, 2007 now show a 245 foot long wall with a maximum height of seven feet. The Dorsey property to the east is higher than The Preserve development at this location. The grading changes resulting from the construction of this retaining wall will result in better drainage patterns on the lots adjacent to the wall. Specifically, steep grades from the back of the lots down to the building pad will be eliminated, reducing the likelihood of backyard drainage problems in the future. Construction of this retaining wall also allows for greater separation between the backyard drainage swale and the future homes. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS In order to clarify the number of lots within The Preserve development, staff has accumulated over 30 hours of time reviewing reports, minutes, plans, and having discussions with the developer and consultant. Our findings show that the development has followed the terms and conditions approved by the City Council between the preliminary and final plat. If you have additional questions regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to call me. acmum The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. The Preserve Lot Clarification September 13, 2007 Page 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Summary of Planning Commission and City Council Minutes. 2. Preliminary Plat dated 3/17/06. 3. Preliminary Plat with staff notes (in red) showing revisions. 4. Final Plat/Construction-Overall Grading and Erosion Control Plan dated 6/5/06. 5. Pad size graphic dated 6/19/06. gAplan\2006 planning cases\06-14 the preserve\Iloyd respons&over letter.doc On April 18, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for The Preserve, Planning Case No. 06-14. A discussion pertaining to Lots 1-5, Block 1, took place. Staff initially recommended these lots be eliminated. The Chair of the Planning Commission asked the applicant: "McDonald. Okay, then let me ask you this. You're okay with eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11. Dan Herbst. As long as we can pick those up someplace else in the project. What I'm trying to save is 155 homes. McDonald: Okay. And what you want us to maybe soften up in our language is Lots 1 through 5 and what I'm hearing from staff is that they're willing to continue a dialogue there to try to reach some kind of agreement. " The condition of approval stated: "The applicant will work with staff to discuss eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11, and Lots 1 through 5, Block 1." On May 8, 2006 the City Council reviewed the application meeting. The following was stated: "Kate Aanenson: .............. So the issue there, which hasn't been completely resolved is obviously they'd like to get those plats and legitimate lots is kind of working out some of the compensation for eliminating these lots so that's still in discussion and we haven't resolved that yet and that would be something that we work out between now and final plat ............. " "Kate Aanenson: I'd like to get some clarification on 60, 61 and 62. And that's the park commission's recommendation and we have in our condition ofapproval, 31 that says that we work with the staff to discuss eliminating I to 2. I think there's concurrence on that but we're negotiating on those outlots 1 through 5. Mayor Furlong: So we want to keep, so you're saying that there's some conflict with those? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, because the other one says they're eliminated and you know, so if you eliminate it, then we've kind of... Mayor Furlong: 31 provides better. Kate Aanenson: Right, so 1 think 31 works better, right. " Condition 31 which is being referred to in the above discussion stated: "The applicant will work with staff to discuss eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11, and Lots 1 through 5, Block 1." At both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings, the proposal was approved with 155 lots. Conclusion of discussions between staff and the applicant: Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, were eliminated to allow for a park and trail head. Outlot C, which was intended to be a private open space owned by a Homeowners Association, was converted into a lot and one lot was added to Block 4 for a total number of 152 Lots. The following pages contain discussions at both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings pertaining to Lots 1 through 5, Block 1. APHI 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting: PUBLIC HEARING: THE PRESERVE: REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM A2 TO PUD -R• SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES INTO 156 SINGLE FAMILY CLUSTER LOTS: SITE PLAN REVIEW: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR CROSSING BLUFF CREEK: AND VARIANCES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1630 LYMAN BOULEVARD, APPLICANT THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY, PLANNING CASE NO. 06-14. Papke: I guess I'll start. First of all, on page, I just have a question. A clarification question. On page 6 of the staff report, the second paragraph under subdivision review you state that Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 will be eliminated. Should that be, is that Block 11? Aanenson: Yes, that should be Block 11, thank you. Papke: Okay. It was inconsistent throughout. I just want to make sure I got that right. The other set you're talking about are Block 1, Lots 1 through 5, which is down along Street M. Now if, now this street currently goes, would go to nowhere in essence if this moves forward? Aanenson: Well our concern with that is, obviously there is some value attached to that but it ties into industrial Park, so for planning purposes you have a neighborhood, it has interesting views. Looking towards the creek, but we've also guided that property for industrial so you have all that industrial traffic. We talked about that loop road that would tie from here into Audubon. I'm just not sure that's the best place for a neighborhood, so we'd like to be able to work with the applicant and find some way to remove those lots. Papke: So if we do indeed, we move those lots, I would take it we would remove the, what was we called it, the eyebrow that goes in there? Aanenson: Yeah. Yes, because ultimately this street needs to provide access to the industrial park. Papke: Right. Aanenson: That was part of the AUAR and that would be privately built. That's approximately the touchdown point which was one of the issues that was in the letter about spacing and all that but from a planning perspective that eyebrow, those lots kind of sitting there, while they have good views, they're not really a part of the neighborhood. The association and we think it'd be better to put the pond, the trail head and some of those other features there and again it comes down to economics. Dan Herbst: ................... So if we take out the 5 lots here, which is part of our plan. I believe it was guided residential, we lose $750,000 that's got to be absorbed someplace else. There is a potential chance in the future with a market study going on, and I don't know if it's a long shot or a short shot. Kate can talk about that, that maybe some of the Degler West property could have some residential uses and this would tie in with that. We do not want to and we cannot afford to lose those 5 lots. The other 2 lots up in the open space area, we do want to allow that private park area to open up some more so we need to figure out, with your help, how we can keep 155 lots on this site. Otherwise the consumer is going to have the ramifications that I just mentioned to you. And everything is very costly in this business. We are going to pay at the time of plat, almost $900,000 to you in cash park fees. So to say I'd like a trail head and parking here, and at the same time you're extracting $900,000 from the site, there's something unfair about that you know. If the park is a half a mile down the way and you're asking us to pay park fees, and you're asking us to give to the public domain $7 million dollars of our land of 45 acres, I'm asking you to help us. We've got to come to a fair resolution. We need those 7 lots to make this neighborhood work. And if you want to be sensitive about what the consumer's going to have to pay here. So it's very important to us to maintain those lots .................................................... Dan Herbst: Okay. And then the critical one to us is, I think it's item 31. If you take those 7 lots out, you have all the ramifications I just brought to you and it makes it a very difficult project for us to do economically and... McDonald: Is this something that should be negotiated with staff? Aanenson: This is something that I made that clear at the beginning and I certainly appreciate Mr. Herbst. We know that there's an economic value but from the beginning when we worked on this project, I just want to make clear, we're talking about open space. You can't build in the creek. It always get thrown into the density but you can't build in the creek, so there's some value when we talk, it's a little inflated so we have to keep that in mind. Obviously we recognize, and I said at the beginning, there is value in those 3 lots, or 5 lots on that north side. We recognize that. Whether or not this property gets zoned to the other, on the other side, I don't know. You know we agree there's some economic value and that's why we say we'd like to work that out. You can give your recommendation or hold it in abeyance but I think that's something we still want to work out with them. There's not only the economic value, but we also, there's a lift station there that we think long term might be a negative impact to those homes too, and that's a concern for us. That becomes a city issue so we thought by... we have to obviously come to a reasonable solution there for economics so putting the ponding there. Putting the trail head provides an opportunity to not put houses in there, in a sub situation. Sub par situation and make them, I don't know if we can make them totally whole, but try to make them whole on the value of those lots and we'd like to still continue that discussion. Dan Herbst: Appreciate that discussion. Again I would still like to consider you to keeping those lots there on a, leaving on a conditional basis in the event the land is changed. Lift stations are behind multi million dollar houses on Lake Minnetonka. They're all around Lake Minnewashta. They're not a negative. They can be landscaped and screened, and that's, those 5 lots are very, very important to us so. McDonald: Okay, then let me ask you this. You're okay with eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11. Dan Herbst: As long as we can pick those up someplace else in the project. What I'm trying to save is 155 homes. McDonald: Okay. And what you want us to maybe soften up in our language is Lots 1 through 5 and what I'm hearing from staff is that they're willing to continue a dialogue there to try to reach some kind of agreement. Dan Herbst: Sounds good. McDonald: Okay, so what we can do is we can take out Lots 1 and 5 and put those as being still under discussion. Okay. Is that it then? Dan Herbst: Thank you very much. Papke moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Rezoning the land within the Plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD -R; approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; and approval of the Preliminary Plat for "The Preserve" creating 155 lots, 15 outlots and right-of-way for public streets, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated 3-17-06 subject to the following conditions: 30. The applicant will work with staff to discuss eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11, and Lots I through 5, Block 1. May 8, 2006 City Council meeting: THE PRESERVE, 1630 LYMAN BOULEVARD APPLICANT THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY: REOUEST FOR REZONING FROM A2 TO PUD -R• SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES INTO 156 SINGLE FAMILY CLUSTER LOTS, SI'Z`E PLAN REVIEW CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT AND ALTERATIONS WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN; WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR CROSSING BLUFF CREEK,• AND VARIANCES. Kate Aanenson: .................. One of the things the city engineer was looking at too was additional storm water pond that could be ... benefit. So this is Audubon, so this would be that pond coming out and that would provide some additional storage for ... of Lyman. So the issue there, which hasn't been completely resolved is obviously they'd like to get those plats and legitimate lots is kind of working out some of the compensation for eliminating these lots so that's still in discussion and we haven't resolved that yet and that would be something that we work out between now and final plat ................. Kate Aanenson: I'd like to get some clarification on 60, 61 and 62. And that's the park commission's recommendation and we have in our condition of approval, 31 that says that we work with the staff to discuss eliminating 1 to 2. I think there's concurrence on that but we're negotiating on those outlots 1 through 5. Mayor Furlong: So we want to keep, so you're saying that there's some conflict with those? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, because the other one says they're eliminated and you know, so if you eliminate it, then we've kind of.. Mayor Furlong: 31 provides better. Kate Aanenson: Right, so I think 31 works better, right. Mayor Furlong: So what do we have to do? Which one is that? Kate Aanenson: I think right now, if we just take 60, 61 and 62, and 63. Let's see. Those are just recommendations. Mayor Furlong: Do you believe that they're covered already... Kate Aanenson: They are covered. We already have full park and trail fees in there already, and then clearly if we want to leave in 63, because we do want those conveyed as public property, and that would be A, B, L and N, those outlots. We would want those conveyed as. Mayor Furlong: So strike H and insert N. Kate Aanenson: Yep. And then if we just put 60. Mayor Furlong: So you're saying 60, 61 and 62 are already covered in the other conditions? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. I think we should just strike those out because they conflict with our ability to negotiate to get that. 61? Todd Hoffman: The trail. Kate Aanenson: Oh, the trail construction, I'm sorry. 61 is probably not. Mayor Furlong: 61 is. Kate Aanenson: Yep, so you want it in, correct. Councilman Lundquist: So you want 60 and 62 out. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. And that gives us the ability to negotiate with the developer right now. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approve the Rezoning of the land within the Plat for The Preserve from Agricultural Estate District, A2 to Planned Unit Development -Residential, PUD -R; approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District and alterations within the flood plain; and approval of the Preliminary Plat for "The Preserve" creating 155 lots, 15 outlots and right-of-way for public streets, plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., dated 3-17-06, subject to the following conditions: 31. The applicant will work with staff to discuss eliminating Lots 1 and 2, Block 11, and Lots 1 through 5, Block 1. 1 I I JL tu.r liNIL ELEVATION F -STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION G ELEVATION A -BRICK OPTION SHOWN ryland.,. Nan,. pem. ,�auau wbjm,o clunge.ndww mvx. Sa S5 Caen forda.ik. m Q 1 HE UALU W LLL E L EVATION F- STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION A - BRICK OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION G Rua p:m, spxifiauw nbj � m clunge xidww nw¢ 5: SIa C odor im kak- ® Q THE HULMULL ELEVATION F ELEVATION E -STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION G -STONE OPTION SHOWN • rylmd.ct t r nr, rr IN IN iiv k3 1 "IN ELEVATION E ELEVATION G ELEVATION F �iar,d.<om P6,,. a,;a,.a.;roem., b� min r -u .. s'a S. c—fa dmu,. R� Q 1111 1\V 111L1x1' V1W ELEVATION H ELEVATION F ELEVATION G -STONE OPTION SHOWN cc= r*m-com Nana,pom,ape�ifa�im wEjmmclunge witlwu�muce Sae Sab CounSt•n lw deaia � 1�J Irit, JUMMII ELEVATION E - STONE OPTION SHOWN ELEVATION A ELEVATION F - BRICK OPTION SHOWN rylan�;.._ ese, ri�Tm6uum..ymcd.y..ahu..oua Sa S.IeCau�ub fa dm�l. RRA D Q trlt, �r�i��rt1,LL ELEVATION F -STONE OPTION SHOWN E L E V A T ION G ELEVATION A -BRICK OPTION SHOWN ryland.com ELEVATIONS a- nuul3l ,all 0 ills oil, is all set 11 , RYLAND Home A...ds time Builder IP�p I Imo' I / Nor Ron k �I ■_—�i' par an- ■No 1AA sr er w 1p. mus Em I ,� ray ■C'1! PI I yet) SFIlfN<81x lai■�e�e� F. „ . �z i, uu°�, ■■r gar■■:';■® 4 ■■ ■� 114r, 1 � If_1 �i6 'y l I 6 � ,; 71 - e� .Ivor t A Zea ■ I �,� iv jri 'iiAIABN INAIItl IIAI� '._ � IUTAIAI IIAAIitl OBfEi - _F s ! i , ��. .. i1AlA■tl IItlAIIN OAIAAI '�� '-•• 7. _- ItI IJPEJ 1 E 66 Cw��t case) — — — — —1 5"" I46 0 Y IVIG T//YK--re'�a_"sl�,q g2nje, 5464 4o moi' Ihcwe25es Gn&yoaoWvke t,$ yrloc " mo l en, tFI.64 Idt ��t case) 7(e Preserve CHANHASSEN,MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES HOME LINE TRADITIONS PflODUCT UNION ELEVATIONS A E F O CIT/ OF CHAWHA RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT 8 aiY�e•• d��cSEeB` Ye:E W lz W co W w M W F- V- SCANNE11 W W p pED 2m ID 1d VL7Y to r AiGnaq T+P+� M R�.bsd wnv4, a. �v.•n'ti w '�'w' a.e.o � w W W p pED 2m ID 1d VL7Y to r .a ® e �M MH �Inp�l�llll•I _ Ilhliiiillllllllll I • � ! ��R, ... � ;_•°° (IIIIIII - =; ; Illllllllllllel eoo� II II IIIII IIIII e I ,III llluu�innlg� III II�nu�iIIIIJI �-�I =� �-�til! 1.2 II �( Irnnnnrul ='h I�•11 Inn ulniln' — — L�■lI,I a ■■� °!(■■IIIIIII €_ l IIIIS` IIIIIIIIII -1 ullliilllnnnll�IIIIIII - Illlr ununo �� II � :_ _) I III e _ - I h♦ gllli nlll p II II I il_ jai al�r��rl _ ° ISI �i ■■IIIIIIII�■IIIINi ■■(IIIIIII■°.IIIIIII : ' =� Ir,•�.'II:'S'1 r/ILS ' � • � ' / �IL� •'I� • � • O 1-Ip I-I i!f r •ii p �h m nnnl�,,. p /jl Ing iil nnm�� 111.1 ° I Ilial 1:�i �I I!� IIIIIIIIII?I ♦ I - 1�Illllllllli' � � Ir 00 ---_ ,III --- �I� •� 1111111111 IIIIIIIIII ' I!I!II IIIII E p ° j (!911 IIIII 1 I .�31RL�it/STVC • ¢ F =IN qc =L O ".I -1d 4cc�s j mI > � W W o f ® all C 9 O m' C a a a - C if S 2 m ® m = _ > - - r a W I W I 'fP, W3 m ' m N O LO O ¢ o m m M C 9 �} o a ¢ \VI m KK EE N 2 m ® m = _ > - - r a W I W I 'fP, W3 WR N O LO O h 4 co 0 Lilt J' Z d o :I e i - IEt O L Q - b< g§j f0—, 0 t if §g M6ED \ m_ m Q� I O [a 0 of I < O m ^ 0 S �f- i" ty ttp�p m Lilt J' Z d o :I e i - IEt O L Q - b< g§j f0—, 0 t if §g M6ED \ m_ m Q� I O 0 of I < O m ^ 0 S �f- i" ty ttp�p m ure E I I ¢°a d 0 C dl 1 1 X l o'. 6 9 I b ( p6 I Nb f0—, 0 t if §g M6ED \ m_ m Q� 10 EB O Q I < O m ItIt ' RRF S I ty ttp�p m is I I yy�� d Q N I dl 2! it m �Q m m ttILLC tt-_ �S t p66 Z 9 I b ( p6 I t .i f0—, 0 t if §g O 6 s Q� 10 EB o ! z z I < O m , e _ I W i W I I J I j Y I - �Jj J i N I IfJ 2! it --1 ,d =00N iUN %Jrvv inCI I �_ NOLWO MIMS b p $p �E ^ I -M 1 I K y C g9ay - 6 w.w LTJ Ai+a•c mpe`b,p «„ 'NLCIN - 9 HSINU 919r wnw.iamwla•w o -o-. M.,S,em,e aux 9 nA41 d NOIN(1 SDWOH ONVIA-d r___—___------------ F______________, p I _ --_ -______ I 6 ' I I I J __J iy�i i N __-- I p, I I I �o 1111' • r. I Z _O 117A1 ' J•. I 1 Q 1 I 1 I m I I 1 1 O 1 r— qq I I 1 I s .r. ■� i I I I LL I {{aa iN r[S[S I ______----I—I x�f • 0� 3 I I 1� f -----------------------o •� I N __ m 1a j I i s I I I • n I I I W xrw jj I i n -- — I I I tl'1C1 xR I t 1 r jj ! i �1p{93 � il�I�e a3 771 |2�| R§DQ||| ��,,�, dnDG; | �■,�� ƒ v .mh &'�; |f | | ! ,] (j,, ■ ! �d G D it P )� §alp ,hh§e� |! §i |,Qg§! - 0 �� /�\�} - — -'` 9wn nNv-im _ 771 |2�| R§DQ||| ��,,�, dnDG; | �■,�� ƒ v .mh &'�; |f | | ! ,] (j,, ■ ! �d G D it P )� §alp ,hh§e� |! §i |,Qg§! - 0 a.. UHvONV1S ritr In1�Y1Vo>Y'y �iLLl ®os �v.n.yF.6�ntrsd V NOINf1 S9WOH aNv»b s.4 113 Nil c1 9 1 r II II s § II z a I I li J O = as it S LL aJ N w T O Y A 1 �E I! e, I ll '- ll ll l < Il J i R F O 'o O m II O W it V W t N O .6 .4 Olt s■ a 63 I .ais I a •c faE _; § S � 10 S i •-.a y m 4rmtor4-_.. 9 ! AE I Ci V R '� .nn eatwa cu �mL4a-su ,I p _i ♦atz- ail p 3 { _ ,• i• l I § Y7 sl�i R I .a -.L i aR ! i ! -3�WYi_ .I{• R l I gg I 9j P I f I i all, R J La R '� .nn eatwa cu �mL4a-su ,I p _i ♦atz- ail p 3 { _ ,• i• l I § Y7 sl�i R I .a -.L i aR ! i ! -3�WYi_ .I{• R l I gg 9j I i all, J La The preserve CHANHASSEN, MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES HOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT SPRINGFIELD ELEVATIONS A E F O CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PANNING DEPT 0 O � o, • ,I III�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ■■ 11 _ ��i IIIA EIIIIIIIIIIIIII o � ��!'I IIC::11-111111111 p _ �I'llllllllllllll '��—'�II O-�IIIIII mc-nnnmm� I` MEL■ �� ii ii O ME HIM] L. ISI ��nnnini, . IM] ►, ill+ `i`._._� .... 111 II �_- I ;�� • p O • 3AH3S3Hd 3H1 GN -011 -Vo 7 +S3WOH 34VU21 9 i1Y a Y F @ U. pl 0 0� + W s J W cc P e e I ®❑ ❑ 6 V'� [ W a .a` .�- w .... / �4 W z o F " F § o z 0 IK Q W R LL g t Z 4 0 r E 55 W g E Ro _ iF=y O a •^ Q > LU C=_� IM co) : W -L bg O :L Li oW + € 12Z 2 LU 13 1 ' d Q ❑ ❑� 0ED c A-1 J p y ❑❑❑Q e.eepp` u y tt :IN 3 3 LL °e W 2 1. �I W l �� o r--�-�'t--•��i � j � 'a 3 8 3AH3S3Hd 31,11 SNOUVA3 ;1Y a wool a t�i��Ni�ds v.o .S3WOH dW1JlZl LLa m ji a c Z ° a 'e W Ll? m > /� ❑D❑ W ui w , 1113 i1 El El El Fin m m ggw j Q.Ei o00 m QIm a; -C e Z / OwC O ED ® co lox p�c- E> € 9 F U RI � ,L _= J f E° p I rl i3 0 s W KilITom d =a W9 �,�.a•..,�.�,•., s . � W aka! u•. i.. .... � r �g Je Cy pm s a5 MMMIMM -mm �� 1 ... ... iilt■�firl � � O ■■ t a ■■ � � � :; � . ` °� pile Ilelll . e o 1 �' ■■ � -�I�II l,adl Ilul!! IIIII �� /. IIIII,,,:1111111111116111,.1 / OI111 111 / • ,,,,'' ■ 11 r��■ ,/��IIIII IIIII . ., ■ � ■ I �� I 111 IL1 r 1-1 � �i�� . i ! ■ ■ ■ ''-`O 11 ■i1 _ IIIIL-1111 +1-1 1.111 I I ip�.. i9i�! - = • ... r■ . ■ o , r . � IS. nnllllllll 7c . ■1. i 61 SII �. ` 1 o j�� IKI III ■, IH-IHr .. I, • 0 i�o I 11111 111 O I ..I ° Ini,ini i�1 0 NONE I t n nllllllllnm' e / • 111 MEMS I IIIII .Ifnnnlllllll _ �:�� ,'.• cl !4;' 0 e IIIIIIIIIIIII LW �� „l;�l-'` _I,�.: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �. ■■ b , �%/,! 91111111111'nllllllll I ; IIIIIIIIIII■IIIII . ° .I �//:�__� ..� I e Illllllllllillllllllll ■■ _ I -__ MEMO ■■ � O ��``_-=.� 'Illllllllullllllllll � .... • �_�IIIIIIIIIIIIII!IIIII ; i�1 � I IO ../ Illll�llllillll�i • - I� o 0 0- - eeoo sv U �o sMoav3w OUISAW eS3WOHaNV1M 0L VWr�Yx�»r NV1.1 'NLONd'1W99'Nld .. I I i I I 1 race lau.e `� L-1 IYJOV fIFeW I I I j I i I i i to I I 41 I c � .w. la�oev: uaueu ' ------------------- W � : I N i I I W I I eIGP' sue I I I I , , I • arouero-_.. 1' S j I I I I I I y - Ell �____ - LL 2 T O rr Y ¢¢ �E3 all rG�udo ♦road �oiae £ L Wev SMOO1/3M1 OIISANI Nv d aoo 7d 191 a.'dn9 PNY MI %{y Q� 'M .S3WOH 4V`dW 0 .0 LC m e gg 4 LL a•.. •• a s g W 4 02 $3 W m EEl: gt ed F4 3 FFx� < ! f f2 JF•' F "EEl3 •a�i 4EY{, SFiS $pi� JJ9i9 gyp di 2U9ycc zz 4 oC < D.y.. �. •. <ggg jj54z@fe d� J z=gg N <ag -it 2 ille1q,11101141pli zo 8F$ 11 b . t 6 ��@�� ea77e�aiila7a3�yFj�4 = h O i O r -° c Ir LL Y O R In O z 0 co J Q 221a z f LIP LL �y J � a ° J F U)T j9Y3 ru..r...r W3 ?— .row•aer.. oc." - a g �s , jai !,j 3�� .N tY R4 J 9��f �'ii • €€ 9 .v e 1 �� 4qq • �� !� � i 3� t`� - OTAi0 O f � ci�tli l..•r �, � IM _1 ulf�+k.�lwl LZ DAYM SIAOav3w OLLSAw NVId NOOIJPuZ .83WOH 4Vd M ,. . .b ...Y AF Ami Z B PC[) _O LPI [rNf! W[X [- a Y R e� W ' O N O H e-A eLb oa ra�wrr nr YQ1 PP[1 n�vr n, APF V T]l .G IL - 3 - R R �� a Z y� O � a G. Ss S LL . dN ew ka� fB bi ..wc S -IS � g O O[i R el�c, . - � 1 a awv ca[ww.ri I I A.f F- The Preserve CHANHASSEN,MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES HOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT SUMMIT ELEVATIONS A E F O CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PANNING DEPT !aa!{! qq 9 p!°lB4M�p EBF 84845 F:£? SCANNED W R W co W IL IL O O O �O' 11 �� '9' i�lllllllllll� . O ■■ �Iiiiil !9 I ■ ■¢��■ - .O, ,_III �� , ■ ■.:1 21, II 111111 . NONE ` ■■ III ■ t2 ■ ■ • IIIIIIIIIIIIIHI■ p O 4 I load ----- O. 0 o e000 � � , / -, IIIIII:::: r ° o �� i�-�,-SII - iii -■-i 0 _ • mt 3AV333Hd 3H11N3W3SV9 � - 43MSIN1� -" - (.n313 TV) JjWW £L w°w VVIV 3AH3S3Hd 3H1 S3WOHaNVWj LN TL u _ 2 c ra�34 ys 'g :4 ' g r a o o3ei `oa •• ;�: 111 ¢ s <o pr o� Yar = • ' tla E G ly1.N a.[tM n fL .UI G -.f Z 5 i s•4 Htic 4 f LPa_ .� k, otl tl a X .N 0'.L y9 f$ yyg EQ y:3�. ,,go 30N E14ljg@G�00 o Q M of is r 31 g7MM; IN e _ .. .cf • . f e ±5 Ef yq � LL< 4 T .o•. Q NG 3yee� G �a}a I 3 I I I ?� 1-- 6}i E 5 i r 33 E i- ,l[ e �1a • �} � � Ei'p ;9 3 E S E : E BEORanH �f �I o O a a.. o..�• L_W o HALL BATH ,OPTION aYhe�l�b Kill 02.. MIN Y'€ d{.I A4.1 O ru�u b�� Edd+ s 4 W y W I 4� ppF W tlmc I AwkI11 6 I I s !ISI rnl � I SECOND FLOOR PLAN A, F,01 G F I-- .�.• LU r GARDEN BATH OPTION a PLAN NOTES KEY. U O , 0 Z I r MIIM I�M,f..R Or.MM..uO~.� 2 Tr LM 77 I VV j iw�u.0 p Z i n LOFT OPTION 04 TIE SHOWER OPTION « .• . .nr e,um 05.. i w r P 3E js M��It�l r 1 �•�I[i ., i �I jI 4 I BEORanH �f �I o O a a.. o..�• L_W o HALL BATH ,OPTION aYhe�l�b Kill 02.. MIN Y'€ d{.I A4.1 O ru�u b�� Edd+ s 4 W y W I 4� ppF W tlmc I AwkI11 6 I I s !ISI rnl � I SECOND FLOOR PLAN A, F,01 G F I-- .�.• LU r GARDEN BATH OPTION a PLAN NOTES KEY. U O , 0 Z I r MIIM I�M,f..R Or.MM..uO~.� 2 Tr LM 77 I VV j iw�u.0 p Z i n LOFT OPTION 04 TIE SHOWER OPTION « .• . .nr e,um 05.. i w r P 3E js The Preserve CHANHASSEN, MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES HOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT RUTHERFORD ELEVATIONS AEF O CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT W D: W W 4 ¢ qa W i H u- IT • -4 1,TAPA, Ell ■■\'fie ��_ n Mail ■ ■ C �� n ■■ limo �=_VIII_! IIIIIII '■■■■ I IIIIIII O nnmuuun �lilllll O O ,- IIIIIII p 111!illllllllllll 'o' V°� �I III �IIIIII�•� ° Illllllll�,�lll�illlllll�' '_� �� ■■ �_ __ •_� a .... .... .E ❑_Ma"mmml NO �E=' III-I�II/I-III IIIIIIIIIII o - • -� ill�lllllllllllllllljl� o - �:.... nor w I .0 000 NOIldO 3N�15 g .0 �". �•�e �"°.`� ,. a..,wnn:. �00?�'SNOI1Vn3�3 IDDo g R j El [ r :EyIgp ®❑❑❑ o LL J C... Wo i gI ® i ® ❑ ❑ ❑ w_ ®❑❑❑ N 0 EIDDO IN EFL f ii ED LU �? Z % o0o p�i C j o00 � j g W F� J W a 186 0 9F I I I RG� I I I p �a m o iRRre oa I _ .�� -----' - �_ -® =a��' 'E 9:a co 0 a I sMoaraw 0118A -N-- ` •;„' .e�� •��•� 7d dOOa 'SNOIIV/�313 .sia a .aa°'.+a n• MWOH dWW LN •4 } `o �gII1 spy ®❑❑❑o u 3El O a ®❑❑❑ z -- J ®❑❑❑ El Ell ®❑❑❑ ° LL 9 z !' / o • 5e� ” � a 000 oc aa: } m LU 4 J o z z o ; LL rCL r_ EII ®s e m 0 t 9 i :�� O jo Ell I � Zill ■■ ■■ ED 1® �a a I ld =00N'SNOUVAA -l31 0. LO '3 �3 r .M ur nbi. S,aHad ten. wry mW�i rouaG� _.s m .ry w..�ntl LF AL fi1M �il ep I jo Ell I � Zill ■■ ■■ ED 1® �a a I ld =00N'SNOUVAA -l31 a E 4 0. LO '3 �3 Val a E 4 0. LO '3 �3 9Ma151N 81 SMOQr3N oI1SAN1 1N3w3sve a3 swig rn ------------- .93WOH a4VW 55pill s R syj[g ' gsz�zg k 8 %2%S�Fx ya �by F 3 Y8� 3 ` @0x ° tlRBR° 11M 1i . •e.a. r3 g kgl� §• 444 Y �gg o E *�. ZZ 14 let, 1-1111, O 2 O W t Q Z Q J a F mnMp 2 W LU W co 6 m O t W S N ; LL r O I • S 1 paO } I .tw tla a I �7� 0 . I I SL "2N �� sMOav3w 011SAw —" vA My b r+v�d aoo�� aNL The preserve CHANHASSEN,MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES HOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT PENNINGTON ELEVATIONS AEF O CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT SCANNI u— • _ MOM IMEMEMENEW OWN ING • 11 �� on p O O .... � �I p ��IIIIIIII� soon O r• uuu.,._ . ° M .�.!1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII� p . . ?� I iii Ih 1 O ■ 'oom •mom• J Ili�llllllllll liuu�i�� eeo� �jpjPju;�_ 11111111111, I IIIIIIIIIII ° \r�lilunnnLWW i linlllnm O O � I Y • IIS �� • � � • � gj 11�Rltfa�il ISI � .; '.. � ■,;i o =-- ■ ■ ■ millwSa o ISI :: ■ i i • '_� ■ ■ ■ aw ___� � ISI I :: ■ ■_■ G. ice■ Clf E�' ! ;I 4�In°3Nd31AR p �■ ■■ _ m 6NE�aYl�Ml:EAP VMS G��I—. p iindliJlYl�:e 9�. I =- o°=.1 Illlllll ��, oil . ,Yb:; �RIilhl o all ' - 9 0 0 4 ■■ Y �� • ' u ■■ ° o 111711�11q Ij�ji Ly IIIIIIIIIIiII'III I'Irl'Irl - "IIILII.11lhll I p iiilidr!i!i!la!r!Ih6!14L_L!r4!14 ° _�■ �� Iii= ■ ■ ■ I, • �,�■■� IIIIIIII�IIIIIIIJ 11= I- imni� mil_ ■ ... II— 11 ■■ IIIIIII 11111111 � mil= SOME] ■ ��. iii= ii ■ ■ ■ ` O p ■■ 111 i1i= n MM ��'' illlllll�IIIIIII i1i= n ,MMM 'llllll W� son, n no nil __�■Ims I;Ig,n 1i i'llihy'Ih4'lyy!il!r 18a�� I III�I��IIIIIIL� ��ii I ih Jdi4444�i4 ■■ O°��l ��'� Ilrl!I llllrl;cr rr ■■ ■■ � 'lljllllll.11llllllll llrlrrr-�' ° 11144444444'14;yJr4'a ■■M■ !1 mill i! , i!i!i!i �-•-�•- �' jjII i!i!i;i!;!!i� � ■G �Lra"III� I'I'I'I�IIIIiilil!1!lilrlIlllrll i?: •�� •�, IIIIIIIII illll!11111 III ;444r1r •.r ■■■■ MEMO lis rrll O MMEME EMS �11 EMO III it _■_I ■M ME I, EM MMI Ir6V!,! _ r.r..pp IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII, II �� 000" �r • 4 �1[ _ �� N • 9 � Ll SMoav3w OULSAW asr Nv�d lwsa aar+siNi� d N019NINN3d_ •'"'m .ate ti.� .S3WOH udYM a N a J J k l I I y I I I } F I � yae I V I o I a e � z I m I ; y I w I w U.r O irxsf� �%iow r �owo 0L SINOOY3N OIISAN M,�d aoo�� nYv .c� a O 3 g 2�q � 6 •hi lit '�{aydo5 g■2 i'1 SYriF�.3. il Qig? —�o� g331 g�B 3oE�paa89C 45 ��ggYgg�gyygggpyt€d3gyd �8y�� • i f ii II its -. �- � •.. . �. •4 if Hit 9 < eS f of .r r � n I f f o, a z� J� aLL Ir jig — oc or U.4co5 f i All LLY r O xw xi .uf w� raa v r i $ ` rf wnnr S�IiC ad .i,omnr i p�[ �u sMOavaw RyGpe • .p.a.+q 1. TO Wv'iV .M x�..W NolzDriiriiv=TA sngw a� �R'� M• lYM . p Yi J' I � 6 �f �_`��• � E --ii �` POPS) P•TI.0) a•ya i7P'n. wla a9n 1.101E PY[ iV'piY pY MYLAS .83wOH ty� i � e o a-.• 1 s . •r � 'IJII 6 fF vq �YYai - .N lit O <Y199�E1II { O � -_ •�� i3iC1.11 aCY _ l . .PI L -M 1 I ao z� a= J o a O O J gg Epil �X �� LL 01 Aa. ` � `I P1 � z i I Aa. O U W U) Tcl . p Yi J' I � 6 �f �_`��• � E --ii �` POPS) P•TI.0) a•ya i7P'n. wla a9n 1.101E PY[ iV'piY pY ty� i a-.• 1 s . •r � �YYai - �6 ;I� � -_ •�� i3iC1.11 aCY _ l . .PI L -M 1 I o gg Epil �X �� I �� ` � `I •+ovv sir v. z�w, u� I i I The Preserve CHANHASSEN,MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES HOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT CALDWELL ELEVATIONS I AEF O CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT SCANNED V 3AH3S3Hd 3H1 GNoilvn313 ntiv .=V.d w....�;:. E M S3W�1-IAdMA?I °G Wlli F- : IIII 2 : O y � ty LL T O °G Wlli F- : IIII 2 : O y � ty LL T O '••.i nye•, ar l6. • ]Cl�97v SIM 3AH3S3Hd 3H1 4•dea,.e .e,�� " SNOIIV/,313 •vu w..v.:.:la. TIEma-1vO .S3WOH CNYtAll ar •..g� Z± k yIkl I €yI 6E 6 a '� p vi ipF ± g yay i ® El El El® ❑❑❑ 8 ± G ®❑❑❑ W 3 ® ❑❑ o pi 11H El E03 0 El W yr O � L� < ❑ 0 O 0 f ± gg^ 0000 Q } I . r.a a r i cb W �9k 99� or a r C] 0 c u N ❑O(J i p < 4 000 000 r,a�a,� ..a 6 0 t r d m Y 6 L o'a�6 E 0000 xo �: d O e ��:IIIIIIII �II►,I -- III„,IIIIIIIIIILl n ■ U 0 gglo --= IIIIIIIIIIIIIII ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 0 0 eeoo � -!�■ o 14r1ema■� -- =.11111111111',-`I I1I� E�,:1111111111111� III` 1�. ,u�uuu„u�l 11 O II11111111H u[=d111111111� ■■ ISI - � �_- � ■� III��I��I� �__ m 120-4 -v - O �a oii e In-ni °:ISI ° O 11 nmiom '!II I n97 � WHIP If P -i ED ! §, ® ' �agw�! || Q � F �� S ■ � D IEDD $ 5=7 M- 0 � m , � § . WOH ��s_ ( % m ; {f ( w[ 2 �_ ' Z ■ ! / _ O ,. » §| 2 } OR E t q _ ID 0 & ° 11112E mn2ne I n97 � WHIP If P -i ED ! §, ' ED| || Q � �� S ■ � D IEDD $ M- 0 � m , � § § ( I n97 � WHIP If P -i 3AH393Hd 3H1 aM+19 "1W439 a3ti9lN1d H FORE 7-1ama-1v? .93WOH 4VYM aroi E ---------------------------- Is fag I I _�_ I I I I J I -1 to o � I a1 I 41 qXl 1 L__ I W I .. I I "JJJ ICY I I ' I_LI I I I I I I I 1 I I I I a IL IL L ----J F I ` ___J J I =%' I All 9 3 ?i c gg I In ''14 W Cl) I I 1 oni I z LL ____________________J S T O yy e 92 q p $ P 1 0 t� all `��tt1P91016 j��'9 I. isi iHoai volae bL 'T+1415 llV 3AH3S3Hd 3t! Ny_d aoo_T� isai� vrov w .S3WOH wvWI s° j$ 1t z: .. 413 i .. € S !!P F > J0 " 3 ;i ;9 F4H 133 a?gi z tY;! oo xq IR aI' LLI` u 'ea 3i s$ ie �a e` 6c g t 3 s$ �3 EE 5j° lEP 006 6e oil M �;�9lgj.. � r.w .rn✓a .H• b..c i .vl.-a gj9'��i s�9 N� i L • OO yrs =1LL Jill It q 9 ty � q axej it all LL �3R `I!FrL i {3 i T ib 8L 3AH3S3dd 3H1 --vsev Nv�d aoo�a arooas .S3WOH GSIVIM o n .,.e •-.c s -.a 9 i r S Y f o i• x j 9'S eg3 ^� �!a; s��g4t 10 pepygyj R = 3 a• a,c6 W �'@�§9Ri 't .� BB9 Rj yyy .N O-.. -J NL - li ONZ •�� G S SI q[�+�6�1j i ¢48+E(/� s g3 jpS! Ey A 5i C 6! .L -.Y Orc reeve x .1 � P f yid p MIN 1p & i4 j4 JAI as Z Q J a ,d 0 � 4Y 0 R � J LL e �z G I I 0 vane —JILL LU H O d O O N O i S FS f i S FS f The Preserve CHANHASSEN, MN PROJECT INFORMATION BUILDER RYLAND HOMES NOME LINE TRADITIONS PRODUCT ALPINE ELEVATIONS AEF 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2006 C"+NHASSEN PLANNING DEPT W D: W N W IY IL W s H 0— SCANNED maaie ix z 3AH3S3Hd 3H1 ^ s"••^ r�•5+�� 4N0I1Vn313 �"' -=�'m .S3WOH CNVW IN )# v t10 W11gatl 99F ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑❑o w: E1110 0000 �. 0000 °❑°o°°❑off z ® c F- LU � o00 ® m .ry 3 O l� O W W E ° I -. g ® Y OJ M LL< O j O .YI PA i clamv�lw3 awl M, g < 6 Y i E t °a e S Y Y ♦ �•a a a . O v � *1M '�`° " .e d.W3AH3S3Hd 3�� ..ne `G" ,�a,.wl,n.�,. � "�;�ra..�,p w�.e w .waw. �er�� ti��:��,.S3woHa� N I.b ]IWba loll .G L..VI I -Fl I'• 2 �l �� 2�3 - � FI -I1 e W m E I j ®❑❑ c ® 9 ®❑❑❑ +3 I ®❑❑❑El 1111 El Ocw ® O orb s ® ®❑❑❑ LL fmr v O U91\- O or I , I � gp all C i } Ee x W_asl 3 O - LL S y I 0 fl�r ♦YS� Q1iU F LL �` • • Fla Ji I'I . ` s 1 _ °i Pi e SENSE MEMISM p10p1 • ..,.r womNEI ij ._.... IIIIIIIIII :�■■■ a- MOEN MEN IMEI e}_Oa•T_O N111 e Vi=e=3 _ iid.O.aiavai5� ■■�` -_ -ice• I'_ MINEOMEN tel om ■■ ISI � e iii.��'! ��• 3:C S ■■ GdS'Cs.�: dip w Kilo p YYn. I �'►� � 1� ice`_ lir •. �► kAwo IMMUNEEgg M • —%I gip `��„ O:• O � O O rye c -•-:i, e i�ei e • IIIIII'��IIIII � ��`=s��a� e __n ' MIN IIIIIIIIIIIII '1 ■■ ■ ■ ■ ' ___ __ . _ _ ii ■■ logo - • � �-w. • wr wr ' e rrrrr �1 \� 111'IIL I�IIIIIIII Illc'=11111p��o�l' e; Iww�■'I��iw�1 ■■ e „ 111�11��..,�-fir ■■ —, a ��:i s?� ■■ • � �e ?;fie ■■ amour'_; NW ■■ Illwcp WNW r: • • F,. I �z.l U °'""`��9 "�•^;d,„�'�'•3A1l3S3Nd3H1 lr+3wasve aar+siNi� ssv .„ 7IV 3NId�y_ L.o , •S3WOH UNVIM M tll C W 4 F - O J t W J W .•,f - w h.-. .. O k s :°3 N uj LO z � r O • � FE y� E¢� �� ] � >a¢ tee 4M�$ Zito £ g A; k gpE E°�d y z �r k• 2� SSS pp 9��t" �. pip 4• � d J i" �4YR l ��p�4•��tl qo�d ° ok ��ia�k�k s SS ■ss�i 8 o�Y=��•�S 8 �� d� � � �� E �.�U. ell y ko g e a 8 lic C e3 9 ±EYY :ebf e •v...m iroaa x�roa f aniois ��v ml 3AFJ383Eld 3H1 —p vt*ev d 3NId�7 6 P» arn.•W.R,Wd .S3WOH agVLQ1 vw ■w yd� ¢ G•, I13 -- rr W e op °£ p s-_____t_ 10 �^�€O q��tlf = C W e S W• oleo < W Z of LL p J En y{y`� 3 s 9N j fi4 11 jai � ° • e�pB 19�y Yo �'• �i 3 Oe 0 X3�� 3:� `� sE1 E�,1ie a a gY Y g$ a2a4 .,� ��@°o - ii y C eYiYl 1 se � �in ��55��$ 5 �•3�i i ;��F�4�� 119�a� 892 i.l1.�.JF E:. 6 .E��.ege ,2:•�,.�.: w i � ' h ; 3 5. •'s Si - z9 4.4n i 3 w 1p 6Y1, a 38 BEe !� ge o6 Oa l U w r 0 3Al1383Hd 3H1 " W r z a o c 5 RQ 4 .w[ vr1 O ale 2yR s+ O i 30 _Z0 0 �1e @m. W = MO a S$;FeiS ee§ yF�1 3; !s eaufq IsP!� pc:i allO 'I F Ci @@SySFaf 3� 4g�¢S 4E �7 «« a WN €N)"i i� T 3a a e€ae Spt €p ;S rna ..�... C O ��.jls$'�5�4��I9 e S ole, Fes: i S �6 [[`e R F qN t S S�lI x $�3 iF�' d� S 5 HIM ut R 3j� W 38 e ! 4:9��5.'! �3S 9iE�:� 4;eu�i.3r o ❑ G z a J a cc O l..o J LL z a 2 O MJ O T O O.K y[e Et G I / � 9� � • ----- ----"� "'------------------- 4d u 5 3 <P e - e F6p.p` �WVL t•K 333 p �8� 3 S